UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧

Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: pegasus on February 20, 2016, 12:35:47 AM

Title: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on February 20, 2016, 12:35:47 AM
This thread is for posts which wandered off topic on other threads.

4636
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on February 20, 2016, 02:13:11 PM
Quote from: pegasus on February 20, 2016, 12:35:47 AM
This thread is for posts which wandered off topic on other threads.
I have thought for a while that a small topic index would be of use.

I seem to be having quite major problems with the forum software since I upgraded to Windows 10.  A lot of features that worked before have ceased to work now.

One of those is the Search feature.  If I search for something I know for certain exists, I get told there is nothing.  Hence I have a propensity towards topic drift, simply because I cannot find the right one.

I don't know exactly what the top 10 or top 20 topics would be, but surely the dogs, Smithman, Tannerman, Operation Grange and PJ/Gonçalo Amaral would be in there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 20, 2016, 02:25:01 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 20, 2016, 02:13:11 PM
I have thought for a while that a small topic index would be of use.

I seem to be having quite major problems with the forum software since I upgraded to Windows 10.  A lot of features that worked before have ceased to work now.

One of those is the Search feature.  If I search for something I know for certain exists, I get told there is nothing.  Hence I have a propensity towards topic drift, simply because I cannot find the right one.

I don't know exactly what the top 10 or top 20 topics would be, but surely the dogs, Smithman, Tannerman, Operation Grange and PJ/Gonçalo Amaral would be in there.

Being facetious by nature SiL I thought a starter for 10 would be good.
Dogs...........some swear by 'em others at 'em. Hard to see why K9s have been used for 30 years or more if they are so kin useless.
Smithman...... some think is he is a figment of the imagination. O.G. don't however if one was to believe what DCI Andy said in October 2013
Tannerman.... greased by DCI Andy over two years ago. Consign to the bin.
O.G...remains on going but with reduced staff since the back end of last year (October I think). Was that because they were within an ace of arrests (four months ago?!) or just winding down.
P.J.... still doing something but we don't really know what. They have primacy however.
Sr Amaral.... yesterday's man; nuff said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on February 20, 2016, 02:33:00 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on February 20, 2016, 02:25:01 PM
Being facetious by nature SiL I thought a starter for 10 would be good.
Dogs...........some swear by 'em others at 'em. Hard to see why K9s have been used for 30 years or more if they are so kin useless.
Smithman...... some think is he is a figment of the imagination. O.G. don't however if one was to believe what DCI Andy said in October 2013
Tannerman.... greased by DCI Andy over two years ago. Consign to the bin.
O.G...remains on going but with reduced staff since the back end of last year (October I think). Was that because they were within an ace of arrests (four months ago?!) or just winding down.
P.J.... still doing something but we don't really know what. They have primacy however.
Sr Amaral.... yesterday's man; nuff said.
To be honest, I was thinking of a sticky with topics and a link to the correct thread, a sort of forum sitemap.

Wandering off topic (can one on this thread?) the latest info on Tannerman was Dec 2015, when in a very curious response, SY said they were still looking for more info on him, and the public should follow that line of thinking.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 20, 2016, 03:15:08 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 20, 2016, 02:33:00 PM
To be honest, I was thinking of a sticky with topics and a link to the correct thread, a sort of forum sitemap.

Wandering off topic (can one on this thread?) the latest info on Tannerman was Dec 2015, when in a very curious response, SY said they were still looking for more info on him, and the public should follow that line of thinking.

Tell us more. I missed that on the Met website; where is it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfred R Jones on February 20, 2016, 03:38:20 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on February 20, 2016, 02:25:01 PM
Being facetious by nature SiL I thought a starter for 10 would be good.
Dogs...........some swear by 'em others at 'em. Hard to see why K9s have been used for 30 years or more if they are so kin useless.
Smithman...... some think is he is a figment of the imagination. O.G. don't however if one was to believe what DCI Andy said in October 2013
Tannerman.... greased by DCI Andy over two years ago. Consign to the bin.
O.G...remains on going but with reduced staff since the back end of last year (October I think). Was that because they were within an ace of arrests (four months ago?!) or just winding down.
P.J.... still doing something but we don't really know what. They have primacy however.
Sr Amaral.... yesterday's man; nuff said.
Have you considered a career in stand up?  You really are a hoot and a half.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 20, 2016, 03:53:02 PM
Quote from: Alfred R Jones on February 20, 2016, 03:38:20 PM
Have you considered a career in stand up?  You really are a hoot and a half.

The truth frequently is droll.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on February 20, 2016, 03:54:12 PM
This was wandering off topic on another thread, but IMO is interesting, so have put it here
Quote from: pathfinder73 on February 18, 2016, 01:54:41 PM
There's the watch on the 4th May. Shame he can't tell the time  - 10:03 where did you get time from Mr McCann  8)--))

(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/4May2007/gerry-mccann-missing-british-3-year-old-girl-madeleine-mccann-in-portugal-ZfHyz3.jpg)
That photo is not on the 4th Pathfinder, it's on the 5th, IMO.
Have you noticed there were two different men alternately carrying that baguette.
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on February 20, 2016, 04:12:58 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on February 20, 2016, 03:15:08 PM
Tell us more. I missed that on the Met website; where is it?
I have no reason to think it is on the Met website, unless you can point me at a section for FOI requests.

It is on the CMoMM forum, in the section on FOI requests.

Mr Bennett submitted an FOI.  For some reason SY decided to respond, but not as an FOI, rather as Business As Usual.  I do not know what SY BAU means.  I thought it was to not provide a running commentary on Operation Grange.

Mr Bennett's first question was whether the public should now discount the Tannerman sighting, and cease to send information on it.  The gist of the reply is that the public should continue to send information re Tannerman.  I take this to mean Tannerman is not done and dusted.

Mr Bennett's second question was whether the public should now cease to send information re Smithman.  The gist of the reply is that the public should continue to send information re Smithman.  I take this to mean Smithman is not done and dusted, whatever that should actually mean in this instance.

Mr Bennett published the response in full, so precise details such as date of response, wording of questions, wording of answers and the name of the person responding and his role/position within SY are all transparent.

If you wish to check it out, please visit CMoMM FOI section for yourself.  I'm not sure what forum policy here is to links to there and equally, I do not wish to cut and paste material from there to here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 20, 2016, 05:08:58 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 20, 2016, 04:12:58 PM
I have no reason to think it is on the Met website, unless you can point me at a section for FOI requests.

It is on the CMoMM forum, in the section on FOI requests.

Mr Bennett submitted an FOI.  For some reason SY decided to respond, but not as an FOI, rather as Business As Usual.  I do not know what SY BAU means.  I thought it was to not provide a running commentary on Operation Grange.

Mr Bennett's first question was whether the public should now discount the Tannerman sighting, and cease to send information on it.  The gist of the reply is that the public should continue to send information re Tannerman.  I take this to mean Tannerman is not done and dusted.

Mr Bennett's second question was whether the public should now cease to send information re Smithman.  The gist of the reply is that the public should continue to send information re Smithman.  I take this to mean Smithman is not done and dusted, whatever that should actually mean in this instance.

Mr Bennett published the response in full, so precise details such as date of response, wording of questions, wording of answers and the name of the person responding and his role/position within SY are all transparent.

If you wish to check it out, please visit CMoMM FOI section for yourself.  I'm not sure what forum policy here is to links to there and equally, I do not wish to cut and paste material from there to here.
Thanks SiL. I had seen that a while ago and couldn't make up my mind about it. The Met playing it with a straight bat saying "still send us anything you got" ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 20, 2016, 05:13:15 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 20, 2016, 04:12:58 PM
I have no reason to think it is on the Met website, unless you can point me at a section for FOI requests.

It is on the CMoMM forum, in the section on FOI requests.

Mr Bennett submitted an FOI.  For some reason SY decided to respond, but not as an FOI, rather as Business As Usual.  I do not know what SY BAU means.  I thought it was to not provide a running commentary on Operation Grange.

Mr Bennett's first question was whether the public should now discount the Tannerman sighting, and cease to send information on it.  The gist of the reply is that the public should continue to send information re Tannerman.  I take this to mean Tannerman is not done and dusted.

Mr Bennett's second question was whether the public should now cease to send information re Smithman.  The gist of the reply is that the public should continue to send information re Smithman.  I take this to mean Smithman is not done and dusted, whatever that should actually mean in this instance.

Mr Bennett published the response in full, so precise details such as date of response, wording of questions, wording of answers and the name of the person responding and his role/position within SY are all transparent.

If you wish to check it out, please visit CMoMM FOI section for yourself.  I'm not sure what forum policy here is to links to there and equally, I do not wish to cut and paste material from there to here.

confirms another one of my assertions that Tannerman has not been eliminated
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on February 20, 2016, 05:55:14 PM
Quote from: davel on February 20, 2016, 05:13:15 PM
confirms another one of my assertions that Tannerman has not been eliminated
Davel do you mean the man in SY's blurred photo is not Tannerman?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on February 20, 2016, 06:00:50 PM
Back to the photo from Pathfinder. And the 2 baguette men. One obviously is the resort manager. The other is the car driver, who did he work for?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on February 20, 2016, 06:14:05 PM
I intended this thread strictly only for discussions that originated on another thread and got thrown off for being off-topic.

 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on February 20, 2016, 06:52:18 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on February 20, 2016, 05:08:58 PM
Thanks SiL. I had seen that a while ago and couldn't make up my mind about it. The Met playing it with a straight bat saying "still send us anything you got" ?
I'm really not sure.

At first, I thought it was clear communication that both Tannerman and Smithman were still in the frame.

Then the FOI v Business as Usual bit percolated through.  Why not answer an FOI under FOI law?  Why claim there is a Business As Usual terms of engagement?

In reality, it could be a lot of things.  OG dodging an FOI request for operational reasons.  Someone dodging an FOI request to prevent the reality being told.  Other options.

Hmmm, very curious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on February 20, 2016, 06:57:34 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 20, 2016, 06:52:18 PM
I'm really not sure.

At first, I thought it was clear communication that both Tannerman and Smithman were still in the frame.

Then the FOI v Business as Usual bit percolated through.  Why not answer an FOI under FOI law?  Why claim there is a Business As Usual terms of engagement?

In reality, it could be a lot of things.  OG dodging an FOI request for operational reasons.  Someone dodging an FOI request to prevent the reality being told.  Other options.

Hmmm, very curious.

Basically they didn't answer the FOI just gave a routine statement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on February 20, 2016, 08:06:52 PM
Quote from: pegasus on February 20, 2016, 03:54:12 PM
This was wandering off topic on another thread, but IMO is interesting, so have put it hereThat photo is not on the 4th Pathfinder, it's on the 5th, IMO.
Have you noticed there were two different men alternately carrying that baguette.

The photo on the website said 4 May but that wasn't the reason I posted it. I wasn't finding a pic of baguette man.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on February 21, 2016, 04:00:57 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on February 20, 2016, 08:06:52 PM
The photo on the website said 4 May but that wasn't the reason I posted it. I wasn't finding a pic of baguette man.
IMO the original caption if you found it would probably say 5th May.
In exposay images the baguette is carried sometimes by JH and sometimes by a different man. Who did he work for? And do you agree the photo you posted is just before the 2 large bags were moved out of the apartment?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 06:00:40 PM
As I've said before, this witness is a truthful accurate and valuable source -

"JULY 6 ... Miliband (the new Foreign Secretary) phoned Gerry to offer support."
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/09/kate-healy-mccann-diary.html

You can see the actual 18 minute call here, at 15:43
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/oa/OA_VOD/OA_11_VOD_Page_121.jpg

But on what date was the call that lasted over an hour?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on March 10, 2016, 07:26:39 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 06:00:40 PM
As I've said before, this witness is a truthful accurate and valuable source -

"JULY 6 ... Miliband (the new Foreign Secretary) phoned Gerry to offer support."
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/09/kate-healy-mccann-diary.html

You can see the actual 18 minute call here, at 15:43
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/oa/OA_VOD/OA_11_VOD_Page_121.jpg

But on what date was the call that lasted over an hour?

Dyou mean 15:14?

What hour plus long call?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 10, 2016, 08:06:48 PM
Quote from: pegasus on February 21, 2016, 04:00:57 AM
IMO the original caption if you found it would probably say 5th May.
In exposay images the baguette is carried sometimes by JH and sometimes by a different man. Who did he work for? And do you agree the photo you posted is just before the 2 large bags were moved out of the apartment?

What do you find significant about the baguette?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on March 10, 2016, 08:15:52 PM
Quote from: Carana on March 10, 2016, 08:06:48 PM
What do you find significant about the baguette?

I was just about to post on this...but my question was about " baguette man"...i doubt if the filling was tuna and sweetcorn or ham and tomato comes into it at all
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 10, 2016, 09:21:23 PM
Quote from: mercury on March 10, 2016, 08:15:52 PM
I was just about to post on this...but my question was about " baguette man"...i doubt if the filling was tuna and sweetcorn or ham and tomato comes into it at all

Maybe it had a secret camcorder filling? ;)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 09:30:27 PM
Quote from: mercury on March 10, 2016, 07:26:39 PM
Dyou mean 15:14? ...
Yes sorry the 6 July call from the new foreign sec to GM was at 15:14

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on March 10, 2016, 09:35:46 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 09:30:27 PM
Yes sorry the 6 July call from the new foreign sec to GM was at 15:14

How dyou know that anyway
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on March 10, 2016, 09:38:03 PM
Quote from: Carana on March 10, 2016, 09:21:23 PM
Maybe it had a secret camcorder filling? ;)

doubt it...anyway i thought baguette man was john hill? PF will let us know when he comes on and if reads....

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 10, 2016, 09:43:12 PM
Quote from: mercury on March 10, 2016, 09:38:03 PM
doubt it...anyway i thought baguette man was john hill? PF will let us know when he comes on and if reads....

If we're talking about the guy seen from the back with a plastic bag and a baguette, I thought it looked John Hill as well. Not sure what's supposed to be intriguing about it (baguette / man).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 09:58:26 PM
Quote from: mercury on March 10, 2016, 07:26:39 PM
... What hour plus long call?
Only because you asked Merc, here it is -
"Gerry once spoke to him for more than an hour about the situation"
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/local-news/mccanns-sos-to-miliband-1-1281209

Here's how to work out what date and time that hour+ call was. The info comes from DH so the call was very probably in the short period he was involved. That places the call in the few days before, or after arguido status happened.

But didn't some other spokesperson assure us that after arguido status happened there were no calls with the top level of the UK government?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 10:00:37 PM
Quote from: mercury on March 10, 2016, 09:35:46 PM
How dyou know that anyway
From KM diary Merc, an accurate and truthful source.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 10, 2016, 10:08:25 PM
I can't see an hour-long call, or am I looking in the wrong place?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on March 10, 2016, 10:09:35 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 10:00:37 PM
From KM diary Merc, an accurate and truthful source.

It doesnt say in the diary they spoke for 18 mins??? And seeing as two of the fields in the phone  records are blank , in your link you gave, not sure where to start or why youre asking when the hour plus call happened and why it matters
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 10:16:48 PM
Quote from: Carana on March 10, 2016, 09:43:12 PM
If we're talking about the guy seen from the back with a plastic bag and a baguette, I thought it looked John Hill as well. Not sure what's supposed to be intriguing about it (baguette / man).
See photos, he was accompanied that morning 5th by two different helpers Carana. The baguette was carried sometimes by one helper, sometimes by the other. One is easily identified (resort manager), but the other is completely un-named.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 10:22:33 PM
Quote from: mercury on March 10, 2016, 10:09:35 PM
It doesnt say in the diary they spoke for 18 mins??? And seeing as two of the fields in the phone  records are blank , in your link you gave, not sure where to start or why youre asking when the hour plus call happened and why it matters
The only call on 6 July that fits KM's accurate description, is the 18 minute call at 15:14 Merc. This is the foreign sec calling GM to offer his support.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on March 10, 2016, 10:35:48 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 10:22:33 PM
The only call on 6 July that fits KM's accurate description, is the 18 minute call at 15:14 Merc. This is the foreign sec calling GM to offer his support.

Why? Why wasnt it  the 18:26 one lasting 24 mins?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 10:37:40 PM
Quote from: Carana on March 10, 2016, 10:08:25 PM
I can't see an hour-long call, or am I looking in the wrong place?
The only one I've found so far is on afternoon 8th Aug Carana.
But of course that would be ludicrous as it is in the arguido period when we've been assured there were were no such calls.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 10, 2016, 10:53:08 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 10:00:37 PM
From KM diary Merc, an accurate and truthful source.

Since someone involved in this whole case is a criminal, I can only assume you have decided that everyone named is truthful and anyone Unknown is a liar?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 11:19:10 PM
Quote from: mercury on March 10, 2016, 10:35:48 PM
Why? Why wasnt it  the 18:26 one lasting 24 mins?
18:46 isn't redacted, 18:14 is Merc, I'm assuming redaction was of whitehall landlines.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 11:24:09 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 10, 2016, 10:53:08 PM
Since someone involved in this whole case is a criminal, I can only assume you have decided that everyone named is truthful and anyone Unknown is a liar?
Not at all, I'm literally just trying to solve the case Slarti.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on March 10, 2016, 11:26:23 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 10, 2016, 11:19:10 PM
18:46 isn't redacted, 18:14 is Merc, I'm assuming redaction was of whitehall landlines.

Ok, thers also anther "redacted" one on that page


I forgot what your query was btw, oh yes, when was the over an hour one made, who said there was one?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 12:13:01 AM
DH said there was a call with foreign sec of over an hour but he didn't say the date Merc.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 12:15:16 AM
Now here's a chance to demonstrate your eye for faces and skill in figure drawing from unusual angles.
Do you recognise anyone here?
http://i843.photobucket.com/albums/zz357/JillyCL/JillyCL001/gmc1.jpg
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 11, 2016, 12:34:08 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 12:15:16 AM
Now here's a chance to demonstrate your eye for faces and skill in figure drawing from unusual angles.
Do you recognise anyone here?
http://i843.photobucket.com/albums/zz357/JillyCL/JillyCL001/gmc1.jpg

Is your quiz open to anyone or just for Sadie?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 11, 2016, 12:48:13 AM
Quote from: pegasus on February 21, 2016, 04:00:57 AM
IMO the original caption if you found it would probably say 5th May.
In exposay images the baguette is carried sometimes by JH and sometimes by a different man. Who did he work for? And do you agree the photo you posted is just before the 2 large bags were moved out of the apartment?

The carrier bag in JH's hand appears to contain a lot more than the other guy's carrier. Also, one baguette looks significantly longer than the other.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 01:46:23 AM
Quote from: misty on March 11, 2016, 12:34:08 AM
Is your quiz open to anyone or just for Sadie?
Anyone Misty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 02:03:04 AM
Quote from: misty on March 11, 2016, 12:48:13 AM
The carrier bag in JH's hand appears to contain a lot more than the other guy's carrier. Also, one baguette looks significantly longer than the other.
Both men are carrying the same baguette Misty. The real question is why are they carrying it? It's absurd. Even the pope doesn't have an official "carrier of the baguette" following him around, and he certainly doesn't have two. The answer is that the baguette is irrelevant. So what are they really doing?  Maybe arranging something by mobile and waiting for agreement from PJ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 11, 2016, 02:09:36 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 02:03:04 AM
Both men are carrying the same baguette Misty. The real question is why are they carrying it? It's absurd. Even the pope doesn't have an official "carrier of the baguette" following him around, and he certainly doesn't have two. The answer is that the baguette is irrelevant. So what are they really doing?  Maybe arranging something by mobile and waiting for agreement from PJ?

Do you have timings on those 2 pictures?


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 02:14:51 AM
Quote from: misty on March 11, 2016, 02:09:36 AM
Do you have timings on those 2 pictures?
There are more than 2 pictures Misty. Lunchtime 5th IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 11, 2016, 02:44:09 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 02:14:51 AM
There are more than 2 pictures Misty. Lunchtime 5th IMO.

Is it possible JH had bought them some provisions for lunch from the supermarket, brought them up to Gerry & then he, Kate, the twins & Fiona were walking back to the new apartment accompanied by man no.2?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 12:14:38 PM
Quote from: misty on March 11, 2016, 02:44:09 AM
Is it possible JH had bought them some provisions for lunch from the supermarket, brought them up to Gerry & then he, Kate, the twins & Fiona were walking back to the new apartment accompanied by man no.2?
One report says some had lunch at tapas on 5th Misty. BTW to get permission to enter crimescene and remove all possessions only about 37 hours into the investigation must have taken some arranging?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 11, 2016, 12:25:41 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 12:14:38 PM
One report says some had lunch at tapas on 5th Misty. BTW to get permission to enter crimescene and remove all possessions only about 37 hours into the investigation must have taken some arranging?

Had it been sealed as a crime scene?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 12:44:27 PM
Quote from: Carana on March 11, 2016, 12:25:41 PM
Had it been sealed as a crime scene?
It was certainly an investigation scene which had keep out tape around it and was being guarded by the GNR (see photo taken morning 5th). But somehow permission was arranged to enter the investigation scene on morning of 5th and remove everything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 11, 2016, 12:47:41 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 12:44:27 PM
It was certainly an investigation scene which was being guarded by the GNR, but somehow permission was arranged to enter the investigation scene on morning of 5th and remove everything.

Did the PJ ever tell the GNR not to allow anyone in who wasn't from the forensics team?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 12:54:21 PM
Quote from: Carana on March 11, 2016, 12:47:41 PM
Did the PJ ever tell the GNR not to allow anyone in who wasn't from the forensics team?
IMO the GNR would let in only PJ and people with permission from PJ, and IMO that is probably what the mobile calls were about Misty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 11, 2016, 01:11:21 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 12:44:27 PM
It was certainly an investigation scene which had keep out tape around it and was being guarded by the GNR (see photo taken morning 5th). But somehow permission was arranged to enter the investigation scene on morning of 5th and remove everything.


Yes, I agree that there was tape and a GNR chap. However, there was no CSI protocol back then. One was only even launched in Feb 2009.



Today, at the Polícia Judiciária’s School, in Lisbon, a crime scene practises manual is launched, establishing rules on how to enter, how to mark the investigators’ passage, how to photograph and/or draw a crime scene, among other procedures. “The potentialities in the collection of a certain type of residues are incommensurably different today from what they were years ago”, said Carlos Farinha, according to whom “nowadays the level of collection of elements on location is scarily superior”. Hence, he adds, the need to “reorganise and think about the manner to proceed on a crime scene”.

I don't have the link to hand, but the source is:

20 May 2009
PJ Laboratory receives 24 thousand requests per year

by Joana de Belém
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 01:24:00 PM
Thanks Carana. Yes the PJ have since greatly improved their CSI protocol. But even in PDL 2007 it was fairly good, because the PJ did see the need for forensics and insisted the family move out so that forensics could be done. Much better than a more recent UK case where those measures were not taken.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 11, 2016, 03:12:56 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 11, 2016, 01:24:00 PM
Thanks Carana. Yes the PJ have since greatly improved their CSI protocol. But even in PDL 2007 it was fairly good, because the PJ did see the need for forensics and insisted the family move out so that forensics could be done. Much better than a more recent UK case where those measures were not taken.

You mean the UK have bumbling incompetent policemen too? Well I never.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 12:08:15 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 11, 2016, 03:12:56 PM
You mean the UK have bumbling incompetent policemen too? Well I never.
No, not bumbling incompetence. The PJ and the Met are both highly competent. The point is that lessons can be learnt from cases after they are solved, and CSI practices improved, I'll give you an example soon.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 12:35:35 AM
Example of how police can learn lessons from a solved case, to improve CSI in other cases.
The Met case of missing person in New Addington (where the many experts reportedly included our SIO).

Event: People were allowed to continue living in the property for the following nights and days.
Lesson: Move all residents out of the property to alternative accommodation.
Event: It was assumed the property had been completely searched.
Lesson: Never assume the property has been completely searched even if people tell you it has been.
Event: The entire search was based on an assumed timewindow of leaving property.
Lesson: Never rely on an assumed timewindow - it may be completely wrong by hours or more.
Event: Over-reliance was placed on one reported sighting of the missing person leaving the property.
Lesson: Never base a whole investigation on one sighting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 12, 2016, 12:48:01 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 12:35:35 AM
Example of how police can learn lessons from a solved case, to improve CSI in other cases.
The Met case of missing person in New Addington (where the many experts reportedly included our SIO).

Event: People were allowed to continue living in the property for the following nights and days.
Lesson: Move all residents out of the property to alternative accommodation.
Event: It was assumed the property had been completely searched.
Lesson: Never assume the property has been completely searched even if people tell you it has been.
Event: The entire search was based on an assumed timewindow of leaving property.
Lesson: Never rely on an assumed timewindow - it may be completely wrong by hours or more.
Event: Over-reliance was placed on one reported sighting of the missing person leaving the property.
Lesson: Never base a whole investigation on one sighting

At what stage does a missing juvenile become a possible victim of a crime within the home?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 12:54:00 AM
Quote from: misty on March 12, 2016, 12:48:01 AM
At what stage does a missing juvenile become a possible victim of a crime within the home?
Crime scene investigation should gather facts without making any assumption of what the solution will be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 12, 2016, 01:05:53 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 12:54:00 AM
Crime scene investigation should gather facts without making any assumption of what the solution will be.

The problem may arise from determining what constitutes a crime scene. 

Making the assumption that the home of a 'missing juvenile' is the crime scene may be premature and the usual presence of a liaison officer pre empts undue disturbance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 12, 2016, 01:09:53 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 12:54:00 AM
Crime scene investigation should gather facts without making any assumption of what the solution will be.

Do you not think that by moving people out of the home there is a risk the possible area of incriminating evidence is extended?
In the TS case, the thimble was well & truly on the thumb. I'm struggling to think of another case off the top of my head where a child's cadaver was hidden in the last known domain during an extensive police search.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 01:17:02 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 12, 2016, 12:55:30 AM
(snip)..When they looked at their phones it showed neither had used their phone in Portugal until after 11pm on 3 May... (snip)
That's inaccurate, for example her phone had an undeleted record before 11pm, and his phone had a deleted record after 11pm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 01:40:28 AM
From an ocean club exchange phone there was a dial-up internet connection for 30 minutes, from 1:45am to 2:15am that night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 02:00:24 AM
Quote from: misty on March 12, 2016, 01:09:53 AM
(snip) ..struggling to think of another case ... (snip)
Zyia, Misty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 12, 2016, 02:09:29 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 01:40:28 AM
From an ocean club exchange phone there was a dial-up internet connection for 30 minutes, from 1:45am to 2:15am that night.

What relevance do you place on that? There was an 80 minute dial-up connection on 3/5 at 1021 hrs & 2 others shown during daytime 4/5,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 02:19:02 AM
Quote from: misty on March 12, 2016, 02:09:29 AM
What relevance do you place on that? There was an 80 minute dial-up connection on 3/5 at 1021 hrs & 2 others shown during daytime 4/5,
Only posted it because another poster mentioned internet access.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 12, 2016, 02:50:50 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 02:00:24 AM
Zyia, Misty

Thanks, just read it. Hardly surprising they didn't find her quickly - bit of a mess. Very sad for the little girl, who was probably dead before anyone realised she was missing. At least the cadaver dogs were effective.
Can't find the complete conclusions of the autopsy - I presume it was treated as an accident as I don't see any further reference to homicide charges?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 03:11:05 AM
Quote from: misty on March 12, 2016, 02:50:50 AM
Thanks, just read it. Hardly surprising they didn't find her quickly - bit of a mess. Very sad for the little girl, who was probably dead before anyone realised she was missing. At least the cadaver dogs were effective.
Can't find the complete conclusions of the autopsy - I presume it was treated as an accident as I don't see any further reference to homicide charges?
Yes it would be interesting to see the autopsy result but I can't find.
IMO it was an accident - children are known to fall asleep in odd places - possibly crawled under pile of clothes in closet, fell asleep, possibly choked on something???

Another example: Elisa (took 17 years to find).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 12, 2016, 03:37:36 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 03:11:05 AM
Yes it would be interesting to see the autopsy result but I can't find.
IMO it was an accident - children are known to fall asleep in odd places - possibly crawled under pile of clothes in closet, fell asleep, possibly choked on something???

Another example: Elisa (took 17 years to find).

Yes. we discussed that one a while ago - a very well-hidden corpse.
I know you are concerned about the missing manhole cover. My concern is the lift shaft.
However, as both SY & the PJ have been absolutely silent about this case for months, I think whatever they are doing merits more than a woke and wandered agenda.
I'd dearly like to know why Amaral is so rattled about the Paraguay issue. It's surely got to be more than just his appeal. Time will tell, we all hope.
Night, Pegasus.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 09:55:39 PM
Please explain your lift shaft concern Misty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 10:37:41 PM
Were there any lengthy phone chats between GM and top-level UK government peeps in Sept 2007 after arguido day?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 12, 2016, 11:05:33 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 12, 2016, 09:55:39 PM
Please explain your lift shaft concern Misty.

Just as a method for concealment of a cadaver. There's no mention of cadaver dogs carrying out lengthy examinations of other blocks or their elevators.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 12, 2016, 11:21:12 PM
Quote from: misty on March 12, 2016, 11:05:33 PM
Just as a method for concealment of a cadaver. There's no mention of cadaver dogs carrying out lengthy examinations of other blocks or their elevators.

What lies beneath?

The apartment block is built on a slope.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 12, 2016, 11:42:57 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 12, 2016, 11:21:12 PM
What lies beneath?

The apartment block is built on a slope.

Yes, that's been bugging me for years. I've been told by an architect that there would almost definitely be a void underneath. I can't remember the explanations of the various options, but certainly a likely one would have been to have a crawl space as it would be cheaper, and would also allow access for any major works.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 12, 2016, 11:56:32 PM
Quote from: Carana on March 12, 2016, 11:42:57 PM
Yes, that's been bugging me for years. I've been told by an architect that there would almost definitely be a void underneath. I can't remember the explanations of the various options, but certainly a likely one would have been to have a crawl space as it would be cheaper, and would also allow access for any major works.

It is quite a hilly area.  Casa Liliana certainly has a crawl space ... don't know about block 6 ... but block 5 would almost certainly have room for one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 12, 2016, 11:58:22 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 12, 2016, 11:56:32 PM
It is quite a hilly area.  Casa Liliana certainly has a crawl space ... don't know about block 6 ... but block 5 would almost certainly have room for one.

Yes, with more room under the 5A side (if I remember correctly what I was told).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 13, 2016, 12:07:15 AM
Quote from: Carana on March 12, 2016, 11:58:22 PM
Yes, with more room under the 5A side (if I remember correctly what I was told).

The builder of casa Liliana got in touch with the police to inform them about the construction.  One would have assumed had there been access to 5A they would have checked that out too.  But the dogs didn't check there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 12:10:49 AM
Quote from: Carana on March 12, 2016, 11:42:57 PM
Yes, that's been bugging me for years. I've been told by an architect that there would almost definitely be a void underneath. I can't remember the explanations of the various options, but certainly a likely one would have been to have a crawl space as it would be cheaper, and would also allow access for any major works.
The 5A bathroom has no outside wall. So the drainage pipe from the toilet and bath must go under the floor of another 5A room to get to the public drains outside. Is that pipe buried in a solid concrete floor making it non-repairable? Or is it in an underfloor void?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 13, 2016, 12:33:58 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 12:10:49 AM
The 5A bathroom has no outside wall. So the drainage pipe from the toilet and bath must go under the floor of another 5A room to get to the public drains outside. Is that pipe buried in a solid concrete floor making it non-repairable? Or is it in an underfloor void?

Well, that's what I've been wondering about for ages. Would there have been a need to access such a void during the general works at the time?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 12:47:53 AM
Quote from: Carana on March 13, 2016, 12:33:58 AM
Well, that's what I've been wondering about for ages. Would there have been a need to access such a void during the general works at the time?
No. The works were all further south and on public roads only not under buildings.

Back to floor of ground floor of Block G5 - what would have been the most efficient way to construct it?
Maybe there's a void with no access?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 13, 2016, 02:05:47 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 12, 2016, 11:56:32 PM
It is quite a hilly area.  Casa Liliana certainly has a crawl space ... don't know about block 6 ... but block 5 would almost certainly have room for one.

Anything built on a hill ... and block 6 is at its western end anyway, has to have some sort of void underneath ... unless the builders have gone to the expence of filling it all in.  I doubt they will have done

And the void would be usefull for repairing plumbing, drainage etc.     I wonder where the entrances to the voids are?

As suggested above, maybe there are no entrances?   But it seems sensible that there would have been.   I wonder if the voids are individual or all joined together into one massive space?   Structurally that might be difficult, but not impossible with pillars underground to support the structures above.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 06:04:08 PM
In stairwell is an inspection cover but probably just for electrical supply?
http://www.justpamalam.co.uk/hg/1/h11/Imagem3%20275%20(Large).jpg
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 13, 2016, 06:16:11 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 06:04:08 PM
In stairwell is an inspection cover but probably just for electrical supply?
http://www.justpamalam.co.uk/hg/1/h11/Imagem3%20275%20(Large).jpg

Thanks Pecasus, that is a possibility, but rather small maybe?

I had wonderd if there was a small door positioned out of sight under the rear outside steps to one of the apartments.  If the void was one big one, only one door would be needed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 07:19:55 PM
Quote from: sadie on March 13, 2016, 06:16:11 PM
Thanks Pecasus, that is a possibility, but rather small maybe?

I had wonderd if there was a small door positioned out of sight under the rear outside steps to one of the apartments.  If the void was one big one, only one door would be needed
No sign of any door or vent on face of 5A Sadie, and this is where the drop is deepest
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/73may13/port29513MADELEINE_APARTMENT.jpg
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 13, 2016, 07:34:40 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 07:19:55 PM
No sign of any door or vent on face of 5A Sadie, and this is where the drop is deepest
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/73may13/port29513MADELEINE_APARTMENT.jpg

I don't think there would be an entrance in that wall, pegasus, the steps are behind and looks it very solid to me ...

I think it is more likely to be under the inside staircase where the laundryman apparently saw a person lurking.  An entrance wouldn't have to be very big.  Could possibly give access to the lift mechanism as well, although I have seen engineers elsewhere working directly into the shaft.

(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/73may13/mirror29513Mario-FernandoStair.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on March 13, 2016, 08:00:11 PM
John Wayne Gacy rides again !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 13, 2016, 08:14:24 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 07:19:55 PM
No sign of any door or vent on face of 5A Sadie, and this is where the drop is deepest
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/73may13/port29513MADELEINE_APARTMENT.jpg
I am not thinking of the main south facing wall of the flats, but have you had chance to look at the western end of the outside staircase going under the actual stairs but then opening up ito the void?


Otherwise I think that it is very possible that Brietta has something with it maybe being right under the main staircase inside.   The small hatch you showed looked rather too small to me ... but it is possible, I guess.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 10:34:05 PM
(Answered here to avoid wandering off topic)
Quote from: Brietta on March 13, 2016, 03:17:40 PM
(snip)... you mention high powered phone calls ... from whom to whom??
I don't know but I have two interesting questions Brietta
1. Were there any phonecalls between father and any top government minister(s) or similar, in the period which starts when arguido status began (7th Sept) and ends when Mr Amaral was removed (Oct 2nd)?
2. In the unlikely event that there were, were any calls to/from Viana do Castelo?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on March 13, 2016, 10:46:44 PM
Gerry rang martin grimes boss! Lol

Love to be fly in the wall on that one
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 13, 2016, 11:16:28 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 10:34:05 PM
(Answered here to avoid wandering off topic)I don't know but I have two interesting questions Brietta
1. Were there any phonecalls between father and any top government minister(s) or similar, in the period which starts when arguido status began (7th Sept) and ends when Mr Amaral was removed (Oct 2nd)?
2. In the unlikely event that there were, were any calls to/from Viana do Castelo?

DM did a TV interview on 8/9/2007.
Disclosure of private phone calls was not deemed in the public interest under one of the many FOI requests.
Now do you really think he, CM & A N Other contrived to get ONLY GA removed from the case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 11:19:59 PM
Quote from: mercury on March 13, 2016, 10:46:44 PM
Gerry rang martin grimes boss! Lol

Love to be fly in the wall on that one
Was that between arguido day and the day someone arranged for Sr Amaral to be removed Merc?
Anyway I doubt Mr Grime's boss was working in northern Portugal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 11:30:21 PM
Quote from: misty on March 13, 2016, 11:16:28 PM
DM did a TV interview on 8/9/2007.
Disclosure of private phone calls was not deemed in the public interest under one of the many FOI requests.
Now do you really think he, CM & A N Other contrived to get ONLY GA removed from the case?
Yes Misty, in the north, what time?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on March 13, 2016, 11:32:38 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 11:19:59 PM
Was that between arguido day and the day someone arranged for Sr Amaral to be removed Merc?
Anyway I doubt Mr Grime's boss was working in northern Portugal.

Dont know, Iwas just mentioning it and wonderng why
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 13, 2016, 11:45:25 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 11:30:21 PM
Yes Misty, in the north, what time?

Please don't ask me to look for the video clip - there are 119 matches for DM on the JH site.
Why is the time critical?
I noticed Fox News & The Guardian were also reporting from the same place re. the arguidos on 7/9/2007, which indicates the main focus of news was in Viana at that time. not PdL.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 14, 2016, 12:14:33 AM
(answered here because was off topic elsewhere)
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 13, 2016, 05:50:44 PM
8)-))) (snip) He wasn't wearing a jacket when SB saw him. (snip)  I even surprise myself sometimes at the perfection @)(++(*
Does that perfection stretch to actually reading the original portuguese statement by SB, and looking up the word "camisa" in a dictionary and noticing that it can mean either "shirt" or "jacket" Pathfinder?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 14, 2016, 12:18:45 AM
Quote from: mercury on March 13, 2016, 11:32:38 PM
Dont know, Iwas just mentioning it and wonderng why
I was just skimming through the phone records for calls of 1hr+ Misty that's all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 14, 2016, 12:31:37 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 14, 2016, 12:14:33 AM
(answered here because was off topic elsewhere)Does that perfection stretch to actually reading the original portuguese statement by SB, and looking up the word "camisa" in a dictionary and noticing that it can mean either "shirt" or "jacket" Pathfinder?

Wearing beige trousers and darkish top maybe a jacket or blazer. MS
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 14, 2016, 12:59:24 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 14, 2016, 12:18:45 AM
I was just skimming through the phone records for calls of 1hr+ Misty that's all.


You're looking at the one at 1342 hrs on 8/9/07 for 1hr 15 mins? Another call to same number at 1602 for almost 15 mins?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 14, 2016, 01:10:47 AM
Quote from: misty on March 14, 2016, 12:59:24 AM


You're looking at the one at 1342 hrs on 8/9/07 for 1hr 15 mins? Another call to same number at 1602 for almost 15 mins?
and another earlier in opposite direction. Probably just a minor advisor.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 14, 2016, 01:29:38 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 14, 2016, 01:10:47 AM
and another earlier in opposite direction. Probably just a minor advisor.

My eyes are killing, so I'm not looking for the earlier record now.
What is it in the number that makes you sure there is a political connection? Surely someone would have ensured it was blacked out?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 14, 2016, 08:59:10 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 14, 2016, 12:14:33 AM
(answered here because was off topic elsewhere)Does that perfection stretch to actually reading the original portuguese statement by SB, and looking up the word "camisa" in a dictionary and noticing that it can mean either "shirt" or "jacket" Pathfinder?

I've been informed that "Camisa" means a shirt.

"Camisa is shirt and nothing else. Camisola is more vague and can be a sweat shirt, eventually a light jacket. This is a camisola."

(http://s18.postimg.org/gcvzx5wu1/jacket.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 14, 2016, 10:58:57 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 14, 2016, 08:59:10 AM
I've been informed that "Camisa" means a shirt.

"Camisa is shirt and nothing else. ....(snip)
Commonest meaning is shirt however it can mean jacket or sark etc
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 14, 2016, 11:08:51 AM
Quote from: misty on March 14, 2016, 01:29:38 AM
My eyes are killing, so I'm not looking for the earlier record now.
What is it in the number that makes you sure there is a political connection? Surely someone would have ensured it was blacked out?
I never said it was, just noting a 1h+ that's all, and as you say it's not redacted so probably of no importance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 14, 2016, 12:14:20 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 13, 2016, 10:57:05 PM
For reputation of solving cases quickly see http://www.vogue.co.uk/news/2013/04/04/may-2013-vogue-true-crime . And forget smart city suits and ties and polished dress shoes, I like to see investigators in forensic gear like this http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/23/article-2375165-1AF09630000005DC-388_634x428.jpg (and BTW that was a case of transportation by a pedestrian).
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 13, 2016, 11:26:36 PM
But no latex gloves like seen in a draw.
A guest's latex gloves in the guest bedroom had nothing to do with the case Pathfinder. Do you have any more observations on photo?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 14, 2016, 05:51:21 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 14, 2016, 10:58:57 AM
Commonest meaning is shirt however it can mean jacket or sark etc

I was told dark shirt like in the translated files. SB was questioned by SY.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 14, 2016, 09:26:40 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 14, 2016, 05:51:21 PM
I was told dark shirt like in the translated files. ...(snip)
Have you ever looked at the original page in the files Pathfinder?
It's in portuguese. There is no english translation of it in the files.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 14, 2016, 09:43:16 PM
Quote from: misty on March 14, 2016, 01:29:38 AM
My eyes are killing, so I'm not looking for the earlier record now.
What is it in the number that makes you sure there is a political connection? Surely someone would have ensured it was blacked out?
Checked all the relevant phone records and there are only 2 calls of 1h+.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 12:15:13 AM
How many times did top government peeps take time out while abroad in USA and Portugal attending important meetings, to speak on phone with an ordinary parent of a missing child like KN?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 15, 2016, 12:28:12 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 12:15:13 AM
How many times did top government peeps take time out while abroad in USA and Portugal attending important meetings, to speak on phone with an ordinary parent of a missing child like KN?

That's an unfair comparison as there were no mobile phones back in those days & telephone reception from the US to UK was terrible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 12:52:54 AM
Quote from: misty on March 15, 2016, 12:28:12 AM
That's an unfair comparison as there were no mobile phones back in those days & telephone reception from the US to UK was terrible.
Fair enough Misty. Next question - how many times did top government peeps take time out while abroad in USA and Portugal attending important meetings, to speak on phone with GM?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 15, 2016, 01:45:21 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 12:52:54 AM
Fair enough Misty. Next question - how many times did top government peeps take time out while abroad in USA and Portugal attending important meetings, to speak on phone with GM?

Are you referring to pre-arguido or post-arguido status period?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 02:08:41 AM
Quote from: misty on March 15, 2016, 01:45:21 AM
Are you referring to pre-arguido or post-arguido status period?
Here's a pre-arguido example Misty
"even breaking off from important talks in Washington to telephone"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 15, 2016, 02:36:58 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 02:08:41 AM
Here's a pre-arguido example Misty
"even breaking off from important talks in Washington to telephone"

I can understand lots of pre-arguido phone calls, bearing in mind the CM connection to DM & all things governmenty. It's the post-arguido contact which would perhaps be harder to understand.
 Is being made an arguido in Portugal classed in the same way as being arrested (I think of RM & how the consulate was told not to offer him any help) which would totally restrict any type of special treatment, just provide basic advice & minimal aid (see https://www.gov.uk/help-if-you-are-arrested-abroad/y/portugal).

Are you expecting me to go through all those phone records (please..... nooooooo) when I've already seen calls to Holland, Germany, South Africa, America & can't make sense of half the phone number data?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 03:01:44 AM
Quote from: misty on March 15, 2016, 02:36:58 AM
I can understand lots of pre-arguido phone calls, bearing in mind the CM connection to DM & all things governmenty. It's the post-arguido contact which would perhaps be harder to understand.
 Is being made an arguido in Portugal classed in the same way as being arrested (I think of RM & how the consulate was told not to offer him any help) which would totally restrict any type of special treatment, just provide basic advice & minimal aid (see https://www.gov.uk/help-if-you-are-arrested-abroad/y/portugal).

Are you expecting me to go through all those phone records (please..... nooooooo) when I've already seen calls to Holland, Germany, South Africa, America & can't make sense of half the phone number data?
IMO RM got less consular support because of dual nationality.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 05:31:06 PM
Which is more important? Reducing nuclear arsenals, or a tapas tourist?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 15, 2016, 05:34:27 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 05:31:06 PM
Which is more important? Reducing nuclear arsenals, or a tapas tourist?

¿Qué?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 15, 2016, 06:13:48 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 05:31:06 PM
Which is more important? Reducing nuclear arsenals, or a tapas tourist?

No chance the reporter was being over-dramatic?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 06:15:45 PM
Quote from: Carana on March 15, 2016, 05:34:27 PM
¿Qué?
A very good speech on nuclear non-proliferation was given at the Carnegie Institute on 25 Jun 2007 Carana.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 06:23:03 PM
Quote from: misty on March 15, 2016, 06:13:48 PM
No chance the reporter was being over-dramatic?
The reporter was directly quoting the words of a source close to the parents Misty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 15, 2016, 06:34:50 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 06:23:03 PM
The reporter was directly quoting the words of a source close to the parents Misty.

So they spoke with Margaret Beckett before they started on DM?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 08:00:26 PM
"Regular calls" Misty (Express).
He pleaded with her to try to "improve the way the investigation and the search were being handled" (Book).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 15, 2016, 08:42:42 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 08:00:26 PM
"Regular calls" Misty (Express).
He pleaded with her to try to "improve the way the investigation and the search were being handled" (Book).

Is there proof of those regular calls in the phone records before she was replaced? ( A yes or no will suffice)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 10:00:16 PM
Quote from: misty on March 15, 2016, 08:42:42 PM
Is there proof of those regular calls in the phone records before she was replaced? ( A yes or no will suffice)
Problem is most top level calls have number redacted Misty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 15, 2016, 10:18:48 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 10:00:16 PM
Problem is most top level calls have number redacted Misty.

Do I need to look to see if there is evidence of that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 10:33:21 PM
Quote from: misty on March 15, 2016, 10:18:48 PM
Do I need to look to see if there is evidence of that?
You won't find the numbers of TB MB GB and DM Misty they are missing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 15, 2016, 11:11:20 PM
(journalist to Leveson Enquiry) "the convention was that, although unidentified specifically in the article, Mr Mitchell would at times, and on his request, be referred to as a ’friend close to the McCanns’ or ’a family spokesman’ when our quotes were attributed."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 15, 2016, 11:28:00 PM
The calls were probably exchanged via CM's phone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 16, 2016, 12:16:31 AM
Quote from: misty on March 15, 2016, 11:28:00 PM
The calls were probably exchanged via CM's phone.
But how would that work for CB's call on 8 May 2007? Or MB's call on 9 May 2007? CM wasn't even in Portugal. Anyway didn't he state that GB had GM's mobile number?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 16, 2016, 12:50:55 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 16, 2016, 12:16:31 AM
But how would that work for CB's call on 8 May 2007? Or MB's call on 9 May 2007? CM wasn't even in Portugal. Anyway didn't he state that GB had GM's mobile number?

There were 4 redacted incoming numbers on 4/5, so no, obviously not conducted via CM's phone.
I don't know what was going on, what GM's connections were. Maybe Jon Corner was right - the story wasn't really about Madeleine, but if so, then no amount of speculation is going to provide us with information which is classified. Perhaps the truth of the case really is stranger than fiction, yet it doesn't explain the actions of so many in Luz.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 16, 2016, 01:10:18 AM
Quote from: misty on March 16, 2016, 12:50:55 AM
There were 4 redacted incoming numbers on 4/5, so no, obviously not conducted via CM's phone.
I don't know what was going on, what GM's connections were. Maybe Jon Corner was right - the story wasn't really about Madeleine, but if so, then no amount of speculation is going to provide us with information which is classified. Perhaps the truth of the case really is stranger than fiction, yet it doesn't explain the actions of so many in Luz.
On 23 May trip to Fatima CM was in car with them but the 2 top level calls from UK were direct to GM mobile.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 17, 2016, 03:54:50 PM
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/oa/OA_VOD/OA_11_VOD_Page_107.jpg
On 23 May the first call from Chancellor of Exchequer is the one at 10:16 10:28 (14 minutes long).
Second call from same is either the one at 14:21 (5 minutes long) or the one at 14:59 (14 minutes long).
(edited to correct time of first call)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 17, 2016, 04:16:59 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 17, 2016, 03:54:50 PM
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/oa/OA_VOD/OA_11_VOD_Page_107.jpg
On 23 May the first call from Chancellor of Exchequer is the one at 10:16 (14 minutes long).
Second call from same is either the one at 14:21 (5 minutes long) or the one at 14:59 (14 minutes long).

You don't think it's a call from the British Ambassador/his office?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 17, 2016, 04:27:43 PM
Quote from: misty on March 17, 2016, 04:16:59 PM
You don't think it's a call from the British Ambassador/his office?
(BTW I've corrected the time of the first call to 10.28).
The 23 May 10:28 call with redacted number is definitely from the Chancellor of Exchequer Misty.
GM received this call just before arrival at the Fatima shrine.
Have you not read the account by KM? It's a truthful and valuable source.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 17, 2016, 04:47:17 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 17, 2016, 04:27:43 PM
(BTW I've corrected the time of the first call to 10.28).
The 23 May 10:28 call with redacted number is definitely from the Chancellor of Exchequer Misty.
GM received this call just before arrival at the Fatima shrine.
Have you not read the account by KM? It's a truthful and valuable source.

I've just dug it out & read the relevant page (I just looked at Pamalam before), and, yes, Kate does say that Gerry received a call of support from GB seconds before they arrived at the Fatima shrine, so 10.28 fits. Somehow I doubt that GB would ring again that day. It was CM's first full day - maybe he had been busy setting up contacts, maybe some were calls from the British Ambassador re. meeting the following day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 17, 2016, 05:51:51 PM
Quote from: misty on March 17, 2016, 04:47:17 PM
I've just dug it out & read the relevant page (I just looked at Pamalam before), and, yes, Kate does say that Gerry received a call of support from GB seconds before they arrived at the Fatima shrine, so 10.28 fits. Somehow I doubt that GB would ring again that day. It was CM's first full day - maybe he had been busy setting up contacts, maybe some were calls from the British Ambassador re. meeting the following day.
Ah but if you had read KM's full account Misty you would know he did also phone GM a second time that day, and it was in the afternoon. IMO this second call was probably at 14:59 (again 14 minutes long). So that's possibly two 14 minute calls in one day?

Look at the first phone talk with Obama - during which were discussed
(a) the joint efforts to confront the global economic crisis,
(b) the situation in Gaza,
(c) the urgent need to make Afghanistan a priority.
That call was about 15 minutes long

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 17, 2016, 08:31:27 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 17, 2016, 05:51:51 PM
Ah but if you had read KM's full account Misty you would know he did also phone GM a second time that day, and it was in the afternoon. IMO this second call was probably at 14:59 (again 14 minutes long). So that's possibly two 14 minute calls in one day?

Look at the first phone talk with Obama - during which were discussed
(a) the joint efforts to confront the global economic crisis,
(b) the situation in Gaza,
(c) the urgent need to make Afghanistan a priority.
That call was about 15 minutes long

I can't find the reference to the 2nd call on 23/5 in the book or in Kate's diaries.

Going totally in another direction - what do you know about the nursery school located opposite block 4? I can't believe I've never known about it until today.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 17, 2016, 08:39:31 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 17, 2016, 05:51:51 PM
Ah but if you had read KM's full account Misty you would know he did also phone GM a second time that day, and it was in the afternoon. IMO this second call was probably at 14:59 (again 14 minutes long). So that's possibly two 14 minute calls in one day?

Look at the first phone talk with Obama - during which were discussed
(a) the joint efforts to confront the global economic crisis,
(b) the situation in Gaza,
(c) the urgent need to make Afghanistan a priority.
That call was about 15 minutes long

Is this tongue-in-cheek, Pegasus?

Do be aware that some in the conspiracy brigade will take it as trooo fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 17, 2016, 09:33:49 PM
Quote from: misty on March 17, 2016, 08:31:27 PM
I can't find the reference to the 2nd call on 23/5 in the book or in Kate's diaries.

Going totally in another direction - what do you know about the nursery school located opposite block 4? I can't believe I've never known about it until today.
GB definitely phoned GM twice on 23 May Misty. We would never had known this were it not for KM. An excellent reliable and honest source.

Re the school again the same source mentioned it 2007. BTW it is called Centro Infantil da Vila da Luz and is run by CASLAS.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 17, 2016, 11:04:10 PM
Quote from: Carana on March 17, 2016, 08:39:31 PM
Is this tongue-in-cheek, Pegasus?

Do be aware that some in the conspiracy brigade will take it as trooo fact.
No tongue in cheek Carana. I certainly believe she is telling the truth in stating he phoned GM just before they arrived at Fatima shrine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on March 17, 2016, 11:13:17 PM
Quote from: pegasus on March 17, 2016, 11:04:10 PM
No tongue in cheek Carana. I certainly believe she is telling the truth in stating he phoned GM just before they arrived at Fatima shrine.

So not an accepted "[ censored word ] trooo factoid"

though many may be its best not to throw the baby out with the bathwater always
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 18, 2016, 12:35:30 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 17, 2016, 09:33:49 PM
GB definitely phoned GM twice on 23 May Misty. We would never had known this were it not for KM. An excellent reliable and honest source.

Re the school again the same source mentioned it 2007. BTW it is called Centro Infantil da Vila da Luz and is run by CASLAS.

https://youtu.be/CNXqChAVCkY

Not sure if this is suggestive there were no calls between GB/GM prior to 23rd May or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 18, 2016, 01:03:44 AM

Pegasus has just proved a point, I found a video clip which supports his point.

My attention is now focussed on the school. That opens up a whole new dimension & I can't believe it's never been discussed before.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 18, 2016, 01:29:26 AM
Quote from: mercury on March 18, 2016, 01:11:40 AM
I said he remnded me when he WAS  a PROVEN liar, good luck with your school whatever thats about if you care to share or get a room
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id166.html
(scroll down to almost bottom of the page)


Extract from Kate's diary.

1. The following people were heard?
 
(I) teachers and all other officers of the school across the street from our apartment;
(II) all staff working in the Ocean Club Tapas bar / restaurant;
(III) [text cut]

=====================================================================

As there was a school across the road (nursery there according to local paper), I wonder how much extra pedestrian traffic there was during daylight hours & also whether any evening activities were on offer?
School = children = potential paedophile interest.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 18, 2016, 01:59:35 AM
Quote from: misty on March 18, 2016, 12:35:30 AM
https://youtu.be/CNXqChAVCkY

Not sure if this is suggestive there were no calls between GB/GM prior to 23rd May or not.
IMO yes, the first calls from the Chancellor of the Exchequer to brit tourist GM were on 23rd May 2007. These 2 calls were the result of an email sent to him from PDL very early that morning.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 18, 2016, 02:20:51 AM
Quote from: misty on March 18, 2016, 12:35:30 AM
http://youtu.be/CNXqChAVCkY
(snip)
A certain spokesperson may be slightly overstating his own importance, because despite having been to meetings at number 10 he had never actually spoken directly with GB.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 18, 2016, 03:12:57 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 18, 2016, 02:20:51 AM
A certain spokesperson may be slightly overstating his own importance, because despite having been to meetings at number 10 he had never actually spoken directly with GB.

Were you a member of Blair's cabinet, Pegasus? Just asking......lol.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 18, 2016, 03:17:19 AM
Quote from: mercury on March 17, 2016, 11:13:17 PM
So not an accepted "[ censored word ] trooo factoid"

though many may be its best not to throw the baby out with the bathwater always
Trooo factoids Merc - two prime ministers and two foreign secretarys spoke by phone with GM.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 18, 2016, 03:25:16 AM
Quote from: misty on March 18, 2016, 03:12:57 AM
Were you a member of Blair's cabinet, Pegasus? Just asking......lol.
I would have walked out if I was, Misty. The source for CM never having spoken directly with GB, is CM.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 18, 2016, 03:40:57 AM
CM stated (see clip from RTP program 2 Nov 2007 http://youtu.be/CNXqChAVCkY )

"Since arguido has happened, there has been no government contact"


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 18, 2016, 03:47:10 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 18, 2016, 03:25:16 AM
I would have walked out if I was, Misty. The source for CM never having spoken directly with GB, is CM.

I find the CM remark a little ambiguous. He must have had some personal contact with TB/GB prior to this case hitting the headlines (or what was all the fuss about Coulson & Cameron). I took it to mean he didn't have direct contact about this matter but as the below is "one of them there translated thingys" I'm just not sure.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id255.html
Investigation may last a year Expresso (no online link)
 
It is in the experience of Clarence Mitchell that the McCanns put their trust to regain public opinion
 
Maria Barbosa
29 September 2007
Thanks to 'maya' for translation
*snipped*
A: Every time that a British subject has problems abroad Consular assistance is offered. As it was regarding a missing child and not the theft of documents, the help provided by the Consul of Portimão was greater. Since the case dominated the media, The Foreign Office, in London, thought of me because I had experience as a reporter and I knew key English people. It wasn't Tony Blair nor the present Prime minister, Gordon Brown, that sent me. I am not their spokesperson nor do I call them asking for advice.

Q: But you were responsible for the projection of the McCanns in the media at a world scale. The fact that you worked for the British Government facilitated this...

A: In Portugal there has been a wrong image created about me. I was the Director of the Government's Media Monitoring Unit. Their work, about 40 people, and their function is to control what gets printed in the press. Every morning I had a meeting with the Prime Minister's spokesperson at 10 Downing Street and we discussed any developments. I didn't get to speak to Gordon Brown directly. Everything that I have been able to do for the McCanns has been through my computer and my mobile.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 18, 2016, 03:55:42 AM
@Pegasus
I'm not sure quite where you are trying to go with all this.
Jill Renwick was the one who knew GB's brother and may well have initiated the contact.
CM comments suggest he was there purely for the McCanns yet he may have had to protect the interests of our government at the same time despite the PM not having sent him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 18, 2016, 04:02:38 AM
He had never spoken with GB directly- that's what he said. Anyway he can't claim any part in arranging the calls in  first week from PM's OH and FS.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 18, 2016, 04:11:13 AM
Quote from: misty on March 18, 2016, 03:55:42 AM
@Pegasus
I'm not sure quite where you are trying to go with all this.
Jill Renwick was the one who knew GB's brother and may well have initiated the contact.
CM comments suggest he was there purely for the McCanns yet he may have had to protect the interests of our government at the same time despite the PM not having sent him.
His sole responsibility was to the government.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 18, 2016, 08:30:50 AM
Quote from: misty on March 18, 2016, 03:47:10 AM
I find the CM remark a little ambiguous. He must have had some personal contact with TB/GB prior to this case hitting the headlines (or what was all the fuss about Coulson & Cameron). I took it to mean he didn't have direct contact about this matter but as the below is "one of them there translated thingys" I'm just not sure.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id255.html
Investigation may last a year Expresso (no online link)
 
It is in the experience of Clarence Mitchell that the McCanns put their trust to regain public opinion
 
Maria Barbosa
29 September 2007
Thanks to 'maya' for translation
*snipped*
A: Every time that a British subject has problems abroad Consular assistance is offered. As it was regarding a missing child and not the theft of documents, the help provided by the Consul of Portimão was greater. Since the case dominated the media, The Foreign Office, in London, thought of me because I had experience as a reporter and I knew key English people. It wasn't Tony Blair nor the present Prime minister, Gordon Brown, that sent me. I am not their spokesperson nor do I call them asking for advice.

Q: But you were responsible for the projection of the McCanns in the media at a world scale. The fact that you worked for the British Government facilitated this...

A: In Portugal there has been a wrong image created about me. I was the Director of the Government's Media Monitoring Unit. Their work, about 40 people, and their function is to control what gets printed in the press. Every morning I had a meeting with the Prime Minister's spokesperson at 10 Downing Street and we discussed any developments. I didn't get to speak to Gordon Brown directly. Everything that I have been able to do for the McCanns has been through my computer and my mobile.

I wish the original could be found as I'm nearly certain that there's a translation issue. I think the original would have been "controlar" which has been translated as "control". That is one of the meanings, but it can also mean to monitor, which makes more sense it terms of what he is likely to have actually said.



À UE cabe a responsabilidade de controlar e aprovar a implementação dessa ajuda.
The EU has a responsibility to monitor and approve the implementation of this aid.
http://en.bab.la/dictionary/portuguese-english/a-controlar
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 18, 2016, 08:39:03 AM
CM was seconded to the FO for that initial period, wasn't he? Having someone to help deal with the media scrum when there has been intense media interest in a UK-related event overseas, has happened before but I can't find the article for the moment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on March 18, 2016, 08:40:42 AM
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Clarence Mitchell

Mr. Morley: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether Mr. Clarence Mitchell was seconded by his Department to act as an official spokesperson for the family of Madeleine McCann. [202007]

Mr. Jim Murphy: Clarence Mitchell was seconded to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, from the Central Office of Information (COI), for a period of 25 days in May 2007 to provide assistance with the media to the family of Madeleine McCann. He resigned from the COI in September 2007.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080507/text/80507w0012.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 18, 2016, 01:29:05 PM
" He had to return to his government role, and others handled the McCanns’ PR. But even then, he says, the family still called him for advice in his own time. ‘We had bec­ome friends,’ he says. ‘But I couldn’t help them beyond the odd phone call, bec­ause officially the Government couldn’t be seen to be involved.’ "
http://www.prweek.com/article/769746/profile-clarence-mitchell-spokesman-mccann-family

Does anyone remember this old sketch?

"Ah hah! Well if you were still a government employee and you were advising them, then by definition the government was still advising them. Ah Haaaaaahhh! Gotcha!"

"No you haven't!"

"Yes I have!"

"Not necessarily. I could have been advising them in my spare time."

I've had enough of this
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 18, 2016, 01:49:51 PM
Quote from: Carana on March 18, 2016, 08:30:50 AM
I wish the original could be found as I'm nearly certain that there's a translation issue. I think the original would have been "controlar" which has been translated as "control". That is one of the meanings, but it can also mean to monitor, which makes more sense it terms of what he is likely to have actually said.



À UE cabe a responsabilidade de controlar e aprovar a implementação dessa ajuda.
The EU has a responsibility to monitor and approve the implementation of this aid.
http://en.bab.la/dictionary/portuguese-english/a-controlar
Agreed Carana, IMO what CM said is "monitor", not "control".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 21, 2016, 01:50:21 AM
"I met Gerry ... It was a circumstantial meeting at Leicestershire Police station. At the time I was working as part of the Consular Assistance Group" (source: CM statement in PJ files)

"circumstantial"?

What would Jim Royle say about that?




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 21, 2016, 02:12:46 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 21, 2016, 01:50:21 AM
"I met Gerry ... It was a circumstantial meeting at Leicestershire Police station. At the time I was working as part of the Consular Assistance Group" (source: CM statement in PJ files)

"circumstantial"?

What would Jim Royle say about that?

Is "circumstantial" correct in the twice-translated sense?
What would Jim Royle say? I never really watched the Royle family, found it a it boring.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 21, 2016, 02:18:32 AM
Quote from: misty on March 21, 2016, 02:12:46 AM
Is "circumstantial" correct in the twice-translated sense?
What would Jim Royle say? I never really watched the Royle family, found it a it boring.

'Circumstantial' doesn't make sense to me ... maybe 'coincidental' fits a bit better?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 21, 2016, 02:30:33 AM
Quote from: misty on March 21, 2016, 02:12:46 AM
Is "circumstantial" correct in the twice-translated sense?
What would Jim Royle say? I never really watched the Royle family, found it a it boring.
The portuguese in the files is "Foi um encontro circunstancial"

BTW "at the time" is correct but actually secondment to the COI had occurred only  a handful of hours before this meeting IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 21, 2016, 02:35:19 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 21, 2016, 02:30:33 AM
The portuguese in the files is "Foi um encontro circunstancial"

BTW "at the time" is correct but actually secondment to the COI had occurred only  a handful of hours before this meeting IMO.

The original statement is not there, Pegasus. I don't know of any Englishman who would use the phrase "circumstantial meeting"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 21, 2016, 02:37:28 AM
Quote from: Brietta on March 21, 2016, 02:18:32 AM
'Circumstantial' doesn't make sense to me ... maybe 'coincidental' fits a bit better?

Congratulations, Mrs Moderator.  ?{)(** 8((()*/

We'll try to behave on the late shift for you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 21, 2016, 02:55:19 AM
Quote from: misty on March 21, 2016, 02:37:28 AM
Congratulations, Mrs Moderator.  ?{)(** 8((()*/

We'll try to behave on the late shift for you.
Does that mean a coincidental meeting on May 21st, with a person whom one's new boss of a few hours has coincidentally been in touch by phone with since May 9th?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 21, 2016, 03:01:45 AM
Quote from: pegasus on March 21, 2016, 02:55:19 AM
Does that mean a coincidental meeting on May 21st, with a person whom one's new boss of a few hours has coincidentally been in touch by phone with since May 9th?

Eh?
Have you put the right quote in the wrong box or the wrong quote in the right box?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on March 21, 2016, 03:21:55 AM
Quote from: misty on March 21, 2016, 03:01:45 AM
Eh?
Have you put the right quote in the wrong box or the wrong quote in the right box?
Yes my mistake with quotes Misty.
Back to that statement, is it possible the original english was something like "deliberate meeting" or "preplanned meeting" and it got mistranslated by the police translator into the incorrect portuguese "um encontro circumstancial"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 27, 2016, 08:31:46 PM
according to the stats there are 100 + guests watching...but when we look at each individual topic guests total less than 10...whats going on...perhaps the mods could tell us
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on March 27, 2016, 09:07:09 PM
Quote from: davel on March 27, 2016, 08:31:46 PM
according to the stats there are 100 + guests watching...but when we look at each individual topic guests total less than 10...whats going on...perhaps the mods could tell us

I asked a similar question three years ago on the Bamber board but didn't get a satisfactory answer. It's a mystery, so don't worry unduly!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on March 27, 2016, 09:13:34 PM
You'd need to count the number of guests on every single thread IMO past and present?, as sme guests read very old threads too
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 27, 2016, 09:18:34 PM
Go to Home page.
Scroll to bottom.
Users online. Click on members & guests. There you will find which topic each member or guest is currently viewing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 27, 2016, 09:47:00 PM
Quote from: misty on March 27, 2016, 09:18:34 PM
Go to Home page.
Scroll to bottom.
Users online. Click on members & guests. There you will find which topic each member or guest is currently viewing.

Thanks, very useful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 27, 2016, 11:09:31 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 27, 2016, 09:47:00 PM
Thanks, very useful.

Pleased to agree with you, Slarti

Thanks misty, could be very useful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 27, 2016, 11:22:04 PM
Pathfinders signature line

Quote
Smithman carrying a child in his arms checked his watch after passing the Smith family and the time was 10:03. Both are still unidentified 8 years later.
[/b]

When are you going to verify how you KNOW this Pathfinder?

You cant KNOW this unless you are Smithman. 

If you can't prove it, then you should apologise and remove it.



IT IS MALICIOUS PROPAGANDA against Gerry Mccann.       
Deliberate, it seems


Please explain or remove it.

Thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 27, 2016, 11:42:55 PM
Both are still unidentified 8 years later.

I could prove the 10:03 time in a reconstruction with the Smith family. Only one of them said in their statement that they knew the time they left Kelly's Bar on 3 May 2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 28, 2016, 02:51:12 AM
http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2013/08/us/oldest-cold-case/


An interesting read, with several parallels to the Madeleine case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 28, 2016, 12:39:30 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 27, 2016, 11:42:55 PM
Both are still unidentified 8 years later.

I could prove the 10:03 time in a reconstruction with the Smith family. Only one of them said in their statement that they knew the time they left Kelly's Bar on 3 May 2007.

Please justify your statement in your avatar, that Smithman looked at his watch and it was 10.03.  Each time you post, you are spreading disinformation Pfinder ...


Hitler is credited with saying "Tell a big enough lie, tell it often enough, and it becomes the truth.= "Propaganda personified."   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 28, 2016, 01:09:30 PM
Quote from: sadie on March 28, 2016, 12:39:30 PM
Please justify your statement in your avatar, that Smithman looked at his watch and it was 10.03.  Each time you post, you are spreading disinformation Pfinder ...


Hitler is credited with saying "Tell a big enough lie, tell it often enough, and it becomes the truth.= "Propaganda personified." 

Looks more like Colombo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on March 28, 2016, 11:40:25 PM
Quote from: sadie on March 28, 2016, 12:39:30 PM
Please justify your statement in your avatar, that Smithman looked at his watch and it was 10.03.  Each time you post, you are spreading disinformation Pfinder ...


Hitler is credited with saying "Tell a big enough lie, tell it often enough, and it becomes the truth.= "Propaganda personified." 

PF like yourself btw Sadie, has only ever posted what their theory is, they are not spreading "hitleresque propaganda" steady on hey?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 01, 2016, 11:31:47 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2016, 10:20:33 AM
According to Carpenter the T9 were all seated a while before 9pm;
At approximately half past eight, Gerry and Kate and their group of approximately ten people were already seated at their table, which was so close to ours that it was possible to converse with them
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN-CARPENTER.htm
8:30pm can't be accurate, because three of the T7 didn't arrive at tapas until about 9pm.
Maybe SC has all his times out by about 30 minutes?
So add 30 mins to his remembered times and maybe the C family left Tapas at about 9:50pm just before KM check?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2016, 11:49:15 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 01, 2016, 11:31:47 AM
8:30pm can't be accurate, because three of the T7 didn't arrive at tapas until about 9pm.
Maybe SC has all his times out by about 30 minutes?
So add 30 mins to his remembered times and maybe the C family left Tapas at about 9:50pm just before KM check?

This sound reasonable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 01, 2016, 12:01:31 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 01, 2016, 11:49:15 AM
This sound reasonable.
Yes SC and his family left Tapas about 30 minutes later than he remembered IMO.
Just like PS and his family left Dolphin about 30 minutes later than he remembered.
People relaxing having a nice family meal in a restaurant do not watch the clock or rush.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2016, 12:14:49 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 01, 2016, 12:01:31 PM
Yes SC and his family left Tapas about 30 minutes later than he remembered IMO.
Just like PS and his family left Dolphin about 30 minutes later than he remembered.
People relaxing having a nice family meal in a restaurant do not watch the clock or rush.

I can't tell you what time I woke up this morning, so time differences are not a problem for me.  And I certainly don't look at the clock if I hear a noise.

You come up with some really good stuff, plodding away quietly, never causing a problem and never being unpleasant.
Well done, you.  You deserve much more credit than you get.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 01, 2016, 12:31:16 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 01, 2016, 11:31:47 AM
8:30pm can't be accurate, because three of the T7 didn't arrive at tapas until about 9pm.
Maybe SC has all his times out by about 30 minutes?
So add 30 mins to his remembered times and maybe the C family left Tapas at about 9:50pm just before KM check?

MO said Kate left the table at 9:50 but unfortunately SC never said if the voice was male or female. That would narrow down the possibilities.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2016, 12:49:32 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 01, 2016, 12:31:16 PM
MO said Kate left the table at 9:50 but unfortunately SC never said if the voice was male or female. That would narrow down the possibilities.

You do well as well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 01, 2016, 04:51:11 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 01, 2016, 11:31:47 AM
8:30pm can't be accurate, because three of the T7 didn't arrive at tapas until about 9pm.
Maybe SC has all his times out by about 30 minutes?
So add 30 mins to his remembered times and maybe the C family left Tapas at about 9:50pm just before KM check?

Why do you decide that Carpenter was wrong as opposed to the T9?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 03:00:24 AM
A new question no-one ever asked before.
What is the absolute latest possible time the child could have still been in the apartment?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 03:11:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2016, 04:51:11 PM
Why do you decide that Carpenter was wrong as opposed to the T9?
I have not solved this one yet Misty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 02, 2016, 01:46:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2016, 04:51:11 PM
Why do you decide that Carpenter was wrong as opposed to the T9?

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN-CARPENTER.htm

*snipped*

DCF: Yes, is there anyone you remember that night, did you see anyone in the area'

SC: No.

DCF: At what time did you go to bed'

SC: Almost immediately, we put the children to bed because it was already quite late for them, humm... about half past ten, yes, about half past ten (inaudible).

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

Work backwards from 10.30pm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 02:12:00 PM
Quote from: misty on April 02, 2016, 01:46:53 PM
(snip) Work backwards from 10.30pm.
Working back from 10.30pm, here's a possible timeline.
Probably the c family left restaurant one or two minutes before KM left restaurant to check her children.
KM's check, and her run back towards restaurant, and the rush of 7 people from restaurant, all happen during the c family's walk home. And just before getting home mrs c hears the first searcher who headed east (GM), shouting the girl's name.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 02, 2016, 02:14:20 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 02:12:00 PM
Working back from 10.30pm, probably the Carpenter family left restaurant one or two minutes before KM left restaurant to check her children.
KM's check, her run back towards restaurant, and the rush of 7 people from restaurant, all happen during C family's walk home. And just before getting home she hears the first searcher who headed east (GM?), shouting the girl's name.

Kate should be the only one shouting for Madeleine on her check so it should be her voice Mrs Carpenter heard.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 02:22:50 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 02, 2016, 02:14:20 PM
Kate should be the only one shouting for Madeleine on her check so it should be her voice Mrs Carpenter heard.
If KM shouted from apartment before running back to restaurant, it was not audible at the restaurant, therefore it was not audible near the c family apartment.

IMO mrs c heard the very first searcher to go east along the start of the lobster route, which was GM.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 02, 2016, 03:03:28 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 02:22:50 PM
If KM shouted from apartment before running back to restaurant, it was not audible at the restaurant, therefore it was not audible near the c family apartment.

IMO mrs c heard the very first searcher to go east along the start of the lobster route, which was GM.

Not necessarily, Pegasus.  One of the first things Kate did on discovering her disappearance was to look out of the window for Madeleine.  In my opinion it would have been logical for her to scream Madeleine's name while doing so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 03:09:47 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 02, 2016, 03:03:28 PM
Not necessarily, Pegasus.  One of the first things Kate did on discovering her disappearance was to look out of the window for Madeleine.  In my opinion it would have been logical for her to scream Madeleine's name while doing so.
Good thinking Brietta - shouting out of child's bedroom window which faces north would certainly be inaudible at restaurant, but IMO would also be inaudible near c family's apartment. I show you map of c family walk home ...

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 02, 2016, 03:35:22 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 03:09:47 PM
Good thinking Brietta - shouting out of child's bedroom window which faces north would certainly be inaudible at restaurant, but IMO would also be inaudible near c family's apartment. I show you map of c family walk home ...

Sound waves travel and bounce in odd directions and are affected by many factors.

Stephen was concentrating on negotiating crossing the road because of the parked cars and heard nothing.  His wife may perhaps have been more receptive.
It would be interesting to be able to read her first statement for comparison with his ... particularly as he seemed concerned about some "the truthful recording of the facts and that they could have had some distortions by what you have read about the event."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 02, 2016, 04:15:59 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 03:09:47 PM
Good thinking Brietta - shouting out of child's bedroom window which faces north would certainly be inaudible at restaurant, but IMO would also be inaudible near c family's apartment. I show you map of c family walk home ...

She didn't say that in her statement. Let's stick to the facts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 02, 2016, 04:38:29 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 02, 2016, 04:15:59 PM
She didn't say that in her statement. Let's stick to the facts.

Don't you think if you were sticking your head out of a window to look for someone in similar circumstances ... the logical thing would also be shouting that person's name as loud as you could?

The statements are not 'action replays', nor were they verbatim or recorded in video or audio.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 05:01:30 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 02, 2016, 02:14:20 PM
Kate should be the only one shouting for Madeleine on her check so it should be her voice Mrs Carpenter heard.
OK that is possible, CC hears KM shouting just after she discovers the apparent disappearance from the apartment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 02, 2016, 05:15:07 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 02, 2016, 04:38:29 PM
Don't you think if you were sticking your head out of a window to look for someone in similar circumstances ... the logical thing would also be shouting that person's name as loud as you could?

The statements are not 'action replays', nor were they verbatim or recorded in video or audio.

Of course it would be normal but there is nothing normal in their actions that night. Leaving children in an unsecured apartment next to two main roads is hard for many to believe and then tampering with the crime scene (window/shutter) before the police arrived much later are two facts that stand out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 05:20:32 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 02, 2016, 05:15:07 PM
Of course it would be normal but there is nothing normal in their actions that night. Leaving children in an unsecured apartment next to two main roads is hard for many to believe and then tampering with the crime scene (window/shutter) before the police arrived much later are two facts that stand out.
Who did CC hear shouting in your theory PF?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 02, 2016, 05:48:54 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 02, 2016, 05:15:07 PM
Of course it would be normal but there is nothing normal in their actions that night. Leaving children in an unsecured apartment next to two main roads is hard for many to believe and then tampering with the crime scene (window/shutter) before the police arrived much later are two facts that stand out.
If they had gone for dinner earlier than 8.30pm, then describing the roads as "two main roads" is something I might well agree with.

By the time supermarket Baptista closed at 8pm that evening, these were quiet roads, a fact that is possibly important in understanding the incident.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2016, 05:50:27 PM
Steve Carpenter saw 'cars' (plural) to his left when he left the Tapas complex. Cars were parked there between 21.10 and 21.40 according to one witness;

When he arrived there, by vehicle, at around 21:10, he remembers that next to the Tapas reception, he saw a vehicle, dark blue in colour, with Portuguese license plates. Although he cannot be definite, he believes it was a Fiesta or Focus. The deponent furthers that is was not a small car, and for this reason it could very well have been a Focus and not a Fiesta. He tells that he does not remember any sticker indicating that it was a rental car. Inside the vehicle he saw no one.
. After parking his vehicle...........

 Later, at around 21:40, he left the restaurant passing through the same esplanade where moments before, he had seen the same table occupied by the three couples, empty, who had left in the meanwhile various items, principally clothing. He was told by his colleagues that the child who had disappeared was a child of one of those couples;
. When he left, he noticed that the dark blue vehicle was no longer in its location
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ARLINDO-PELEGA.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 02, 2016, 06:01:48 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 05:20:32 PM
Who did CC hear shouting in your theory PF?

If she heard shouting it connects to Kate at around 9:50. If not it connects to the one who removed her but I doubt he/she would be shouting for people to hear before committing a crime.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 10:28:07 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 02, 2016, 06:01:48 PM
If she heard shouting it connects to Kate at around 9:50. (snip)
Good we agree on that PF.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 10:46:27 PM
Quote from: misty on April 02, 2016, 09:42:32 PM
(snip) I'll be interested to hear  someone's take on a conversation between 2 burglars concerning "what to do about the child"
Misty do you mean "why did you bring her here?"
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/488487/EXCLUSIVE-Potential-key-witness-McCann-case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 02, 2016, 11:00:21 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 10:46:27 PM
Misty do you mean "why did you bring her here?"
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/488487/EXCLUSIVE-Potential-key-witness-McCann-case

No. I meant a conversation which may have taken place soon after the wannabe burglars discovered the target property contained a child and they were forced to scarper without entering.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 11:10:29 PM
Quote from: misty on April 02, 2016, 11:00:21 PM
No. I meant a conversation which may have taken place soon after the wannabe burglars discovered the target property contained a child and they were forced to scarper without entering.
It is very possible there is a burglar or pair of burglars out there, who opened that shutter and window, saw children inside, scarpered PDQ, and had nothing to do with the subsequent disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 02, 2016, 11:18:40 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 11:10:29 PM
It is very possible there is a burglar or pair of burglars out there, who opened that shutter and window, saw children inside, scarpered PDQ, and had nothing to do with the subsequent disappearance.

You have a plausible theory which started the chain of events. Do you not agree that the theory stalls at the point the burglars scarper?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 11:25:55 PM
Quote from: misty on April 02, 2016, 11:18:40 PM
You have a plausible theory which started the chain of events. Do you not agree that the theory stalls at the point the burglars scarper?
It doesn't stall. The chain of events continues logically.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 02, 2016, 11:43:05 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 11:25:55 PM
It doesn't stall. The chain of events continues logically.

Please continue.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 11:44:14 PM
Imagine burglars opened shutter and window, saw children inside, and scarpered PDQ, but also imagine hypothetically there was no disappearance of the child.

The next checker would obviously find the window and shutter open and the child not on her bed - where would the child be do you think?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 02, 2016, 11:52:05 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 11:44:14 PM
Imagine burglars opened shutter and window, saw children inside, and scarpered PDQ, but also imagine hypothetically there was no disappearance of the child.

The next checker would obviously find the window and shutter open and the child not on her bed - where would the child be do you think?

The next checker did not notice the child was missing from her bed. The child could have
a)been hiding in or behind furniture
b)been locked in the bathroom
c) gone out the front door/patio door to seek help.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 12:04:03 AM
Quote from: misty on April 02, 2016, 11:52:05 PM
(snip) The child could have
a)been hiding in or behind furniture
b)been locked in the bathroom
c) gone out the front door/patio door to seek help.
Yes the main point is that following an interrupted entry attempt at the window of the the exact room the child was in, it is not at all surprising that the child was not on her bed.

If the child had been found safe and well, she would have been found either outside, or self-concealed in a different room.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 03, 2016, 12:07:27 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 12:04:03 AM
Yes the main point is that following an interrupted entry attempt at the window of the the exact room the child was in, it is not at all surprising that the child was not on her bed.

If the child had been found safe and well, she would have been found either outside, or self-concealed in a different room.

The child was not found safe & well in the circumstances you list.
What is the next logical step in your chain of events?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 12:18:32 AM
Quote from: misty on April 03, 2016, 12:07:27 AM
(snip) What is the next logical step in your chain of events?
After burglar opens shutter and window, sees child moving inside, and scarpers....
the next logical deduction is (the event would be simultaneous actually) the child flees to another room.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 03, 2016, 01:06:14 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 12:18:32 AM
After burglar opens shutter and window, sees child moving inside, and scarpers....
the next logical deduction is (the event would be simultaneous actually) the child flees to another room.

Why didn't the next checker & subsequent searchers find the child?
Why didn't the child reveal herself when she heard familiar voices?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 01:47:13 AM
Quote from: misty on April 03, 2016, 01:06:14 AM
Why didn't the next checker & subsequent searchers find the child?
Why didn't the child reveal herself when she heard familiar voices?
If no-one had opened the window and shutter, the child would have stayed on the bed.
But if someone did open the window and shutter, the child would have run to to another room at least.
The next logical step is to ask a question. Which scenario has the greatest risks?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 03, 2016, 01:58:34 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 01:47:13 AM
If no-one had opened the window and shutter, the child would have stayed on the bed.
But if someone did open the window and shutter, the child would have run to to another room at least.
The next logical step is to ask a question. Which scenario has the greatest risks?

A third party opening the shutter & window posed the greater threat to the children's welfare.
Please continue. The scene discovered by Kate did not indicate panic or disturbance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 02:14:45 AM
Quote from: misty on April 03, 2016, 01:58:34 AM
A third party opening the shutter & window posed the greater threat to the children's welfare.
Please continue. The scene discovered by Kate did not indicate panic or disturbance.
It's essential to get this comparision right first
1. Running scared to another room at least.
2. Laying on a bed not scared.
Which has the greatest risks?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on April 03, 2016, 02:19:34 AM
So much speculative discussion about a possible burglary thatended up in abduction..thought this was a fact based forum...seen enough rubbish for another night
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 03, 2016, 02:42:12 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 02:14:45 AM
It's essential to get this comparision right first
1. Running scared to another room at least.
2. Laying on a bed not scared.
Which has the greatest risks?

Running scared.
What risk did she encounter that prevented her from revealing herself to the next checker?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 02:56:31 AM
Quote from: misty on April 03, 2016, 02:42:12 AM
Running scared.
What risk did she encounter that prevented her from revealing herself to the next checker?
I haven't exactly worked that out yet Misty.
Randomly looking at just one of many risks - and starting first with the laying on a bed scenario - how high is the bed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 03, 2016, 03:06:26 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 02:56:31 AM
I haven't exactly worked that out yet Misty.
Randomly looking at just one of many risks - and starting first with the laying on a bed scenario - how high is the bed?

!8" as it appears to be the same height as the bed under the window.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 03:16:40 AM
Quote from: misty on April 03, 2016, 03:06:26 AM
!8" as it appears to be the same height as the bed under the window.
So if no-one had opened the shutter and window, and the child remained laying on the bed, the maximum distance it was possible to fall would have been about 18 inches.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 03, 2016, 03:25:52 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 03:16:40 AM
So if no-one had opened the shutter and window, and the child remained laying on the bed, the maximum distance it was possible to fall would have been about 18 inches.

The chest beside the bed would make a normal roll & fall impossible (unless the child's head was positioned further down the bed), therefore probably ruling out a head injury.
In panic circumstances & semi-darkness, it is possible a child would clip its head on the corner of the chest if attempting to leave the bed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 03:41:59 AM
Quote from: misty on April 03, 2016, 03:25:52 AM
The chest beside the bed would make a normal roll & fall impossible (unless the child's head was positioned further down the bed), therefore probably ruling out a head injury.
In panic circumstances & semi-darkness, it is possible a child would clip its head on the corner of the chest if attempting to leave the bed.
If no-one opens shutter and window, and child stays on bed, maximum possible fall distance 18 inches, and fall destination is easily visible.
If someone opens shutter and window, and child runs to another room,  ...?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 03, 2016, 03:48:06 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 03:41:59 AM
If no-one opens shutter and window, and child stays on bed, maximum possible fall distance 18 inches, and fall destination is easily visible.
If someone opens shutter and window, and child runs to another room,  ...?

Back of the sofa, approx 36".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 03:51:48 AM
Quote from: misty on April 03, 2016, 03:48:06 AM
Back of the sofa, approx 36".
and visibility of fall destination .... ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 03, 2016, 08:32:06 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 03:41:59 AM
If no-one opens shutter and window, and child stays on bed, maximum possible fall distance 18 inches, and fall destination is easily visible.
If someone opens shutter and window, and child runs to another room, ...?

If Madeleine runs to another room, would there not be disarray of the bedclothes to show she had left in a hurry ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 03, 2016, 08:42:03 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2016, 08:32:06 AM
If Madeleine runs to another room, would there not be disarray of the bedclothes to show she had left in a hurry ?

I think so and if she had met with an accident I think an intruder would have left as quickly as possible, without her.  When found lying injured by her parents or their friends I think the alarm would have been raised immediately, they would have assisted as medical practitioners and would have called emergency services immediately.

In neither circumstance would she have been spirited away, particularly as there was absolutely no evidence of disturbance or assault in the apartment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 03:27:41 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2016, 08:32:06 AM
If Madeleine runs to another room, would there not be disarray of the bedclothes to show she had left in a hurry ?
The covers were disarrayed, also she was possibly on top of the covers.

If a 3 yr old child, home unsupervised, at night, parents gone out, sees and hears someone opening their bedroom shutter and window from outside, the child will definitely run urgently to another room.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 03, 2016, 09:14:26 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 03:51:48 AM
and visibility of fall destination .... ?

Child would not climb on top of sofa if intention was to hide behind it.  Young children tend to stay low to hide, so there would be little risk of injury.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on April 03, 2016, 09:15:50 PM
Quote from: misty on April 03, 2016, 09:14:26 PM
Child would not climb on top of sofa if intention was to hide behind it.  Young children tend to stay low to hide, so there would be little risk of injury.

You haven't been around much, have you. &%&£(+ &%&£(+
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 03, 2016, 09:43:00 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 03, 2016, 09:15:50 PM
You haven't been around much, have you. &%&£(+ &%&£(+

Would you rephrase that, please, into a context I can understand?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on April 03, 2016, 09:48:06 PM
Quote from: misty on April 03, 2016, 09:43:00 PM
Would you rephrase that, please, into a context I can understand?

So have you been grabbed by the algorithms then ? @)(++(* @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 03, 2016, 10:16:48 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 03, 2016, 09:48:06 PM
So have you been grabbed by the algorithms then ? @)(++(* @)(++(*

Not when I last checked, approx 30 mins ago. 8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on April 03, 2016, 10:17:47 PM
Quote from: misty on April 03, 2016, 10:16:48 PM
Not when I last checked, approx 30 mins ago. 8)--))

Down Mexico way I presume. *&*%£
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 03, 2016, 10:27:52 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 03, 2016, 10:17:47 PM
Down Mexico way I presume. *&*%£

Good grief, no. North of the border.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 04, 2016, 12:19:31 AM
Quote from: misty on April 03, 2016, 09:14:26 PM
Child would not climb on top of sofa if intention was to hide behind it.  Young children tend to stay low to hide, so there would be little risk of injury.
Behind the right end of the sofa is a likely place to hide, because it is next to the only light left on, when the parents went out for a meal.
However, what if a burglar opened the child bedroom shutter and window, child ran away from that into lounge, and heard the chat just beneath the lounge window, and tried to signal for help?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 04, 2016, 12:58:16 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 04, 2016, 12:19:31 AM
Behind the right end of the sofa is a likely place to hide, because it is next to the only light left on, when the parents went out for a meal.
However, what if a burglar opened the child bedroom shutter and window, child ran away from that into lounge, and heard the chat just beneath the lounge window, and tried to signal for help?

If the settee was away from the window, the child would have been able to stand behind it, partly open the curtains but then discover that the shutters were down. (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P9/09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2309.jpg Foto 7 PJ forensics 4th May)
If the settee was very close to the window, as per the PJ crime scene photo taken that night, the child would have had to visibly disturb the curtains before accessing the window, only to discover the shutters down. In those circumstances, there was insufficient room for her to topple over & down the back. There were also no forensics to indicate blood or tissue loss relating to the child at that precise location.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 04, 2016, 01:43:05 AM
Is there any evidence that the shutters of the lounge window were shut?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 04, 2016, 01:58:38 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 04, 2016, 01:43:05 AM
Is there any evidence that the shutters of the lounge window were shut?
There is no evidence they were open.
1. The shutters were photographed in the closed position the next day.
2. The curtains were photographed in an almost closed position by CSI a few hours after the disappearance. There does not appear to be any light visible through the window. It would also perhaps be unusual to draw the curtains but leave shutters in a raised position to be lowered later.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 04, 2016, 11:02:52 PM
Quote from: misty on April 04, 2016, 01:58:38 AM
(snip) The shutters were photographed in the closed position the next day (snip)
Do you have a link for that photo please Misty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 04, 2016, 11:06:03 PM
It is probably crucial for Amaral's theory (child climbs up on back of sofa because she hears father chatting just below lounge window) that the shutter is open?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on April 04, 2016, 11:09:12 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 04, 2016, 11:06:03 PM
It is probably crucial for Amaral's theory (child climbs up on back of sofa because father is chatting just outside lounge window) that the shutter is open?

From Amarals book and tv documentary I never got the impression his "theory" was written in stone, it was more like a possibility amongst others, just an example of what may have befallen the child
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 04, 2016, 11:19:11 PM
Quote from: mercury on April 04, 2016, 11:09:12 PM
From Amarals book and tv documentary I never got the impression his "theory" was written in stone, it was more like a possibility amongst others, just an example of what may have befallen the child
I take it back, in Mr Amaral's documentary, when the child climbs on the back of the sofa, the lounge window shutter is closed. (Source: A Verdade Da Mentira film 48m17)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 05, 2016, 12:14:01 AM
Do we know exact height above lounge floor of the inside windowsill of lounge window?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 06, 2016, 01:15:23 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 05, 2016, 12:14:01 AM
Do we know exact height above lounge floor of the inside windowsill of lounge window?

Around 36" I would say. Settee is low back, around 30", windowsill appears about 6" higher.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 06, 2016, 01:29:34 AM
Quote from: misty on April 06, 2016, 01:15:23 AM
Around 36" I would say. Settee is low back, around 30", windowsill appears about 6" higher.
Around 36 inches for the windowsill is interesting Misty.

In that still from Mr Amaral's video the sofa is positioned a long way from the window, making it look like the sofa back is less high than the windowsill. IMO the sofa back is about the same height as the windowsill .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 06, 2016, 01:48:54 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 06, 2016, 01:29:34 AM
Around 36 inches for the windowsill is interesting Misty.

In that still from Mr Amaral's video the sofa is positioned a long way from the window, making it look like the sofa back is less high than the windowsill. IMO the sofa back is about the same height as the windowsill .

It's from the Eddie & Keela video on our forum.
(see Wilyboo has had a change of name on YouTube)
I tried using the floor tiles as a guide, that still gave a figure of about 34". My settee back is 34" & it's higher than the average modern settee.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 06, 2016, 05:31:25 PM
(from other thread)
Going back to square one without assumptions, could the the problem be rewritten as "a child left the interior of the apartment sometime between about 7.15pm 3 May and an undetermined later time/date"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 06, 2016, 06:07:29 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 06, 2016, 05:31:25 PM
(from other thread)
Going back to square one without assumptions, could the the problem be rewritten as "a child left the interior of the apartment sometime between about 7.15pm 3 May and an undetermined later time/date"?

I do not go with the thinking that Madeleine was missed by those who searched the apartment after the alarm was raised.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 06, 2016, 06:31:51 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 06, 2016, 06:07:29 PM
I do not go with the thinking that Madeleine was missed by those who searched the apartment after the alarm was raised.
It has happened in many other cases Brietta..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 06, 2016, 06:48:17 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 06, 2016, 06:31:51 PM
It has happened in many other cases Brietta..

(http://i3.dailyrecord.co.uk/incoming/article1838619.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/An-Police-handout-picture-of-the-squalor-in-Kim-Haineys-flat.jpg)

A little boy's body lay under the rubbish visible in the above photograph, and for obvious reasons was not immediately seen when the premises were eventually entered.

The McCann holiday apartment was sparsely furnished and had been searched by family, friends and outsiders including the police.  There was no loft - there was no cellar and no other obvious hiding place.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 06, 2016, 06:54:46 PM
What an awfully sad case that was in Paisley Brietta I had not seen it before.
The discovery was made by grandparents who then called police.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 06, 2016, 06:56:21 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 06, 2016, 06:31:51 PM
It has happened in many other cases Brietta..
Where on earth do you think she was in the apartment then, when it was searched by the McCanns, their friends and police officers?  And is she there still in your view??
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 06, 2016, 07:13:40 PM
Quote from: Alfred R Jones on April 06, 2016, 06:56:21 PM
Where on earth do you think she was in the apartment then, when it was searched by the McCanns, their friends and police officers?  And is she there still in your view??
The 10.00pm onwards inside search by a few people was incomplete and assumed an awake child.
The 11.15pm inside search by one GNR officer was incomplete and assumed an awake child.

There are many known cases where an indoors search by relatives and by police assumed an awake child and therefore failed to find an asleep child. The child can be asleep almost anywhere - in a wardrobe, in a kitchen cupboard, under a bed, under a bean bag, in a suitcase, under a pile of clothes, in a chest of drawers, and the relatives and police fail to find them. Those are all real cases. Answer to your last question Alf = no.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 06, 2016, 10:30:59 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 06, 2016, 07:13:40 PM
The 10.00pm onwards inside search by a few people was incomplete and assumed an awake child.
The 11.15pm inside search by one GNR officer was incomplete and assumed an awake child.

There are many known cases where an indoors search by relatives and by police assumed an awake child and therefore failed to find an asleep child. The child can be asleep almost anywhere - in a wardrobe, in a kitchen cupboard, under a bed, under a bean bag, in a suitcase, under a pile of clothes, in a chest of drawers, and the relatives and police fail to find them. Those are all real cases. Answer to your last question Alf = no.
So you think she was asleep in the apartment when everyone was looking for her? What happened when she woke up then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 07, 2016, 12:39:34 AM
Quote from: Alfred R Jones on April 06, 2016, 10:30:59 PM
So you think she was asleep in the apartment when everyone was looking for her? What happened when she woke up then?
IMO the search inside after 10pm by a very small number of tourists and employees, and the search inside at about 11.15pm by just one policeman, were only for an awake child. You can see this in phrases like "just in case she is cowering in a cupboard" (KM book) which makes the assumption of looking only for an awake child.  Some other people wanted to search inside but didn't because they were told things like "yeah she's not here" (FP rog) and "'no, no, she's not here, she's not here" (CP interview). 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 07, 2016, 12:54:22 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 07, 2016, 12:46:25 PM
The sofa was pushed up against the wall and the curtain was now trapped. Evidence from dog alerts was found under the tile where the sofa was now covering!  It couldn't be up against the wall with a child lying behind it.
What if the sofa was at 11.15pm was still a few inches away from the wall?
What if the GNR officer did not pull it out further to look behind it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 07, 2016, 02:04:43 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 07, 2016, 12:39:34 AM
IMO the search inside after 10pm by a very small number of tourists and employees, and the search inside at about 11.15pm by just one policeman, were only for an awake child. You can see this in phrases like "just in case she is cowering in a cupboard" (KM book) which makes the assumption of looking only for an awake child.  Some other people wanted to search inside but didn't because they were told things like "yeah she's not here" (FP rog) and "'no, no, she's not here, she's not here" (CP interview).
You didn't answer my question.  What happened when she woke up then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 07, 2016, 02:10:27 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 07, 2016, 01:44:08 PM
"Eddie alerted in the small garden in front of the apartment."  Did he?

Or is there confusion between what is front and what is back?
The apartment has only one garden.
Eddie in the garden alerted slightly to a flowerbed under a climbing plant.
Also alerted slightly at the same climbing plant while sniffing through the railings from the balcony .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 07, 2016, 02:21:27 PM
Quote from: Alfred R Jones on April 07, 2016, 02:04:43 PM
You didn't answer my question.  What happened when she woke up then?
I don't have an answer to that Alf. There have been many real cases where a non-awake child in the residence is missed by civilians and even by police searchers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 07, 2016, 06:21:55 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 07, 2016, 02:21:27 PM
I don't have an answer to that Alf. There have been many real cases where a non-awake child in the residence is missed by civilians and even by police searchers.
Is "non-awake" a euphemism for "dead" in this case?  I'm trying to figure out your theory but it remains as oblique as ever!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 08, 2016, 01:59:47 PM
Quote from: Alfred R Jones on April 07, 2016, 06:21:55 PM
Is "non-awake" a euphemism for "dead" in this case?  I'm trying to figure out your theory but it remains as oblique as ever!
In all but one of the cases I mentioned of indoor search missing a child, luckily the child eventually was found asleep (alive) in the residence that had supposedly been "completely" searched earlier, and the exception is a case where the child was sadly not alive when found about 12 hours later under a very large pile of clothes in the "completely" searched residence. It's oblique because I haven't worked out what happened yet Alf.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2016, 03:55:11 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 08, 2016, 01:59:47 PM
In all but one of the cases I mentioned of indoor search missing a child, luckily the child eventually was found asleep (alive) in the residence that had supposedly been "completely" searched earlier, and the exception is a case where the child was sadly not alive when found about 12 hours later under a very large pile of clothes in the "completely" searched residence. It's oblique because I haven't worked out what happened yet Alf.

There is no doubt that there have been occasions when premises have been searched and a missing person's body has been overlooked.
I don't think that is the case in the McCann apartment.  My reasoning for that is it was a sparsely furnished holiday apartment with few opportunities for a body to lie unobserved or where a body could be hidden from view.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 08, 2016, 04:39:47 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 08, 2016, 03:55:11 PM
There is no doubt that there have been occasions when premises have been searched and a missing person's body has been overlooked.
I don't think that is the case in the McCann apartment.  My reasoning for that is it was a sparsely furnished holiday apartment with few opportunities for a body to lie unobserved or where a body could be hidden from view.
Sparsely furnished with 4 beds 2 cots 2 chests of drawers 3 coffee tables 1 telly 1 fully fitted kitchen 1 complete set of patio furniture 1 sideboard 1 dining table 6 dining chairs 1 complete bathroom suite 1 cane chair 2 sofas and 4 built in wardrobes?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 08, 2016, 04:44:25 PM
No doubt it was done, but is there any mention of beds being moved and lifted  to ensure that she was not concealed under or inside of them?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 08, 2016, 04:51:47 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 08, 2016, 04:44:25 PM
No doubt it was done, but is there any mention of beds being moved and lifted  to ensure that she was concealed under or inside of them?
Yes there is mention in the statements of looking under beds.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2016, 05:06:35 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 08, 2016, 04:44:25 PM
No doubt it was done, but is there any mention of beds being moved and lifted  to ensure that she was concealed under or inside of them?

My children did a bunk on one occasion.  On discovering them missing from their beds I found them curled up fast asleep in the linen cupboard.  They had been watching a documentary on dust mites and decided they weren't sleeping in beds crawling with these creatures ... so the linen cupboard???

I found them quite quickly ... but believe me, the adrenalin rush on finding one's children gone would have ensured there was not one centimetre of of the house that would have remained unchecked to find them.

Even if there was no mention of a thorough search of 5A taking place ... I have no doubt a systematic search would be conducted.

All you have to do to confirm that is to think what your own reaction would be if you were searching for a missing child.  Nor should it be forgotten that there were trained observers taking part in the search.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 08, 2016, 05:08:08 PM
England, 2014, a 3-year old child disappears - 30 police officers and many volunteers and a police helicopter launch a full-scale search, 3 hours later it's dark and the child still has not been found.

What sort of terrain was the child eventually found in?
Which equipment on the search helicopter located the child?
How many miles did the child walk in 3 and a half hours?

ETA this was a real case in Cambridgeshire in Feb 2014.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2016, 05:16:16 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 08, 2016, 04:39:47 PM
Sparsely furnished with 4 beds 2 cots 2 chests of drawers 3 coffee tables 1 telly 1 fully fitted kitchen 1 complete set of patio furniture 1 sideboard 1 dining table 6 dining chairs 1 complete bathroom suite 1 cane chair 2 sofas and 4 built in wardrobes?

It isn't the average family home though is it Pegasus, where there are numerous places for concealment. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 08, 2016, 08:08:45 PM
Why Am I not allowed to ask Pegasus where he or she thinks Madeleine was hidden or hiding, and why am I not allowed to express an opinion about his or her theory? If this post is deleted without explanation would you also kindly once and for all delete this account permanently.  There is no point continuing to post on a forum where one is censored for no good reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 08, 2016, 09:19:58 PM
Quote from: Alfred R Jones on April 08, 2016, 08:08:45 PM
Why Am I not allowed to ask Pegasus where he or she thinks Madeleine was hidden or hiding, and why am I not allowed to express an opinion about his or her theory? If this post is deleted without explanation would you also kindly once and for all delete this account permanently.  There is no point continuing to post on a forum where one is censored for no good reason.
Not claiming it happened and it does sound unlikely, just going back to square one without assumptions that's all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2016, 09:25:40 PM
Quote from: Alfred R Jones on April 08, 2016, 08:08:45 PM
Why Am I not allowed to ask Pegasus where he or she thinks Madeleine was hidden or hiding, and why am I not allowed to express an opinion about his or her theory? If this post is deleted without explanation would you also kindly once and for all delete this account permanently.  There is no point continuing to post on a forum where one is censored for no good reason.

I entirely agree with what you are saying.  Please do not allow one biased person to dictate whether or not you continue to post on this forum.
I rather think he/she would consider that "job well done" 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 08, 2016, 09:31:42 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 08, 2016, 05:06:35 PM
My children did a bunk on one occasion.  On discovering them missing from their beds I found them curled up fast asleep in the linen cupboard.  They had been watching a documentary on dust mites and decided they weren't sleeping in beds crawling with these creatures ... so the linen cupboard???

I found them quite quickly ... but believe me, the adrenalin rush on finding one's children gone would have ensured there was not one centimetre of of the house that would have remained unchecked to find them.

Even if there was no mention of a thorough search of 5A taking place ... I have no doubt a systematic search would be conducted.

All you have to do to confirm that is to think what your own reaction would be if you were searching for a missing child.  Nor should it be forgotten that there were trained observers taking part in the search.
Interesting Brietts thankyou. The interior search in PDL was psychologically conditioned from the start by the fact that a window was found open.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 08, 2016, 09:54:28 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 08, 2016, 09:31:42 PM
Interesting Brietts thankyou. The interior search in PDL was psychologically conditioned from the start by the fact that a window was found open.

How do you know? The police didn't really take much notice of the assertion about the window I thought.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 09, 2016, 12:50:56 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 08, 2016, 09:31:42 PM
Interesting Brietts thankyou. The interior search in PDL was psychologically conditioned from the start by the fact that a window was found open.

Was it conditioned in favour of preserving a potential crime scene or preventing multiple complete searches for a child in a limited space?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 09, 2016, 01:11:06 AM
Quote from: misty on April 09, 2016, 12:50:56 AM
Was it conditioned in favour of preserving a potential crime scene or preventing multiple complete searches for a child in a limited space?
The knowledge that the window had been opened by a stranger automatically created a strong assumption, in the minds of the very few people who actually did search inside the apartment, that the child had been taken by whatever stranger had opened the window. This reduced the inside search to a less than complete one IMO.
Similar psychology happened in the Cambs case I mentioned - a possible witness indicating the front door created a strong subconscious psychological assumption of an exit direction, which greatly influenced where was searched fully, and where wasn't .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 09, 2016, 01:35:39 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 09, 2016, 01:11:06 AM
The knowledge that the window had been opened by a stranger automatically created a strong assumption, in the minds of the very few people who actually did search inside the apartment, that the child had been taken by whatever stranger had opened the window. This reduced the inside search to a less than complete one IMO.
Similar psychology happened in the Cambs case I mentioned - a possible witness indicating the front door created a strong subconscious psychological assumption of an exit direction, which greatly influenced where was searched fully, and where wasn't .

I don't suppose the fact that the mother involved in the Cambs case had 6 other children (no father mentioned) posed any sort of distraction either?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 09, 2016, 01:45:15 AM
Quote from: misty on April 09, 2016, 01:35:39 AM
I don't suppose the fact that the mother involved in the Cambs case had 6 other children (no father mentioned) posed any sort of distraction either?
In the Cambs case what about all the relatives and friends who also searched, and the 30 police officers Misty?
Didn't they have any undercounter detectives?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 09, 2016, 01:59:40 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 09, 2016, 01:45:15 AM
In the Cambs case what about all the relatives and friends who also searched, and the 30 police officers Misty?
Didn't they have any undercounter detectives?

Obviously not, Pegasus. The rule is - you start in the middle & work out. The police have a lot to answer for - just as in Madeleine's case - they are in control from the moment they arrive on the scene. Is police training really that bad?
"Family" probably meant her other children.
The mother had been upstairs. The 3 & 4 year old were downstairs. The 3 year old who went missing was still in his pyjamas at 3pm so I suspect it was a chaotic household. There were very few hiding places in 5a, though.
Why don't you just go with the abduction theory - all the pieces fit that scenario. It really is the only explanation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 09, 2016, 02:20:38 AM
Quote from: misty on April 09, 2016, 01:59:40 AM
Obviously not, Pegasus. The rule is - you start in the middle & work out. The police have a lot to answer for - just as in Madeleine's case - they are in control from the moment they arrive on the scene. Is police training really that bad?
"Family" probably meant her other children.
The mother had been upstairs. The 3 & 4 year old were downstairs. The 3 year old who went missing was still in his pyjamas at 3pm so I suspect it was a chaotic household. There were very few hiding places in 5a, though.
Why don't you just go with the abduction theory - all the pieces fit that scenario. It really is the only explanation.
The fact that officers were standing in the kitchen about one metre away from the child and didn't find him is complete confirmation that as soon as there is an assumption a missing child has exited a residence, all commonsense and logic goes down the plughole, and the internal search is almost guaranteed to be incomplete.
http://dailym.ai/1UONTEi
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 09, 2016, 03:16:54 AM
North Carolina, 4-yr-old boy reported missing, police search apartment, find nothing, issue an Amber Alert, then child is found 5 hours later in a wardrobe asleep under a pile of clothes
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 09, 2016, 11:50:52 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 09, 2016, 03:16:54 AM
North Carolina, 4-yr-old boy reported missing, police search apartment, find nothing, issue an Amber Alert, then child is found 5 hours later in a wardrobe asleep under a pile of clothes

In the cases you have sourced, Pegasus, despite the failure of the initial search of the premises which failed to locate the missing child ... the child did eventually turn up.

The point about Madeleine is that she did not ... as far as I am concerned that rules out the notion she may have been quietly snoozing in a cupboard oblivious to her mother's wails of despair and the noise which was loud enough to cause Mrs Fenn to wonder what was going on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 09, 2016, 03:18:20 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 09, 2016, 11:50:52 AM
In the cases you have sourced, Pegasus, despite the failure of the initial search of the premises which failed to locate the missing child ... the child did eventually turn up.

The point about Madeleine is that she did not ... as far as I am concerned that rules out the notion she may have been quietly snoozing in a cupboard oblivious to her mother's wails of despair and the noise which was loud enough to cause Mrs Fenn to wonder what was going on.

Unless she slept as deeply as the twins seemed to sleep?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 09, 2016, 06:37:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2016, 03:18:20 PM
Unless she slept as deeply as the twins seemed to sleep?

She would have wakened at some point in time and been found by the forensic team working in the apartment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 09, 2016, 08:56:09 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 09, 2016, 06:37:57 PM
She would have wakened at some point in time and been found by the forensic team working in the apartment.
What about the south bedroom? The PJ forensic team May 4 did nothing in the south bedroom IMO, no searching,  no collection of hairs, no dragon dusting for prints, no uv lights, no examination of footprints. See the plan of the apartment in the files on which all the areas examined forensically are marked - it shows that there were no forensics done in south bedroom.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/5A_FORENSIC_4_5_7.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on April 10, 2016, 12:13:50 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 09, 2016, 08:56:09 PM
What about the south bedroom? The PJ forensic team May 4 did nothing in the south bedroom IMO, no searching,  no collection of hairs, no dragon dusting for prints, no uv lights, no examination of footprints. See the plan of the apartment in the files on which all the areas examined forensically are marked - it shows that there were no forensics done in south bedroom.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/5A_FORENSIC_4_5_7.htm

They believed the parents? Of what happened and where? And how possibly? Can police be so naive?
Or is it a case of no experience due to no child abductions ever having happened in that town??
It is a pity they didnt do forensics in the whole apartment
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 10, 2016, 12:29:57 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 09, 2016, 08:56:09 PM
What about the south bedroom? The PJ forensic team May 4 did nothing in the south bedroom IMO, no searching,  no collection of hairs, no dragon dusting for prints, no uv lights, no examination of footprints. See the plan of the apartment in the files on which all the areas examined forensically are marked - it shows that there were no forensics done in south bedroom.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/5A_FORENSIC_4_5_7.htm

In light of GA's assertions that he suspected the parents from 4th May 2007, can you offer a reasonable explanation as to why he would not have ordered a forensic sweep of the south bedroom?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 10, 2016, 12:49:40 AM
Quote from: misty on April 10, 2016, 12:29:57 AM
In light of GA's assertions that he suspected the parents from 4th May 2007, can you offer a reasonable explanation as to why he would not have ordered a forensic sweep of the south bedroom?
The first intelligence to indicate that the south bedroom may have been a crime scene was obtained on evening of 1 Aug 2007 Misty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 10, 2016, 01:10:30 AM
... however I agree that forensics should have been done of the whole apartment on on 4 May.
Unfortunatly the PJ on 4 May did absolutely no forensics behind that sofa (they didn't even pull it away from the window IMO). And they did absolutely no forensics on the wardrobe of the south bedroom on 4 May, no forensics of the large luggage item in that wardrobe (is there any record that they even looked inside in it?), and no forensics of the jumbled pile of clothes in that wardrobe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 10, 2016, 01:12:16 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 10, 2016, 12:49:40 AM
The first intelligence to indicate that the south bedroom may have been a crime scene was obtained on evening of 1 Aug 2007 Misty.
If the suspicion of parental involvement was there, examinations should have been undertaken almost immediately, not after a 3 month period during which contamination was permitted.
There was a forensic sweep done on 4th May on the ground from the children's bedroom to the front door & also through to the rear patio door. Why would CSI not have examined the route to the third exit point, ie the patio doors in the parents' bedroom?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 10, 2016, 01:27:02 AM
Quote from: misty on April 10, 2016, 01:12:16 AM
If the suspicion of parental involvement was there, examinations should have been undertaken almost immediately, not after a 3 month period during which contamination was permitted.
There was a forensic sweep done on 4th May on the ground from the children's bedroom to the front door & also through to the rear patio door. Why would CSI not have examined the route to the third exit point, ie the patio doors in the parents' bedroom?
Probably because there was no evidence that the south bedroom glass door had been unlocked that evening Misty, also because its shutter was down, and it would be very difficult (although not completely impossible) for someone to exit that way and close the shutter behind them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 10, 2016, 01:42:42 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 10, 2016, 01:27:02 AM
Probably because there was no evidence that the south bedroom glass door had been unlocked that evening Misty, also because its shutter was down, and it would be very difficult (although not completely impossible) for someone to exit that way and close the shutter behind them.

Can that very same argument not be applied to the children's bedroom window if, as Amaral said, he believed the scene was staged?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 10, 2016, 01:57:47 AM
Quote from: misty on April 10, 2016, 01:42:42 AM
Can that very same argument not be applied to the children's bedroom window if, as Amaral said, he believed the scene was staged?
Forensics were done on the north bedroom window simply because it was found open.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Gadfly1.3 on April 10, 2016, 01:19:05 PM
Quote from: Alfred R Jones on April 08, 2016, 08:08:45 PM
Why Am I not allowed to ask Pegasus where he or she thinks Madeleine was hidden or hiding, and why am I not allowed to express an opinion about his or her theory? If this post is deleted without explanation would you also kindly once and for all delete this account permanently.  There is no point continuing to post on a forum where one is censored for no good reason.

Don't go Alfred.  Even I'll stick up for your freedom of speech, even if Brietta has started censoring me.

Hope you listen to my advice and come back (I have twice).  We go back a long way -- I mean you even warned me via PM about all the lynchmob that will target me if I look at this case in an even handed way.   It's a shame you became more critical of me when I started to evaluate the evidence, but I'd still prefer you around.  You built up my self-esteem in my early posts by praising the quality of them publicly.

Come on, my old aristocratic son, -- I know Gerry got a little bit agitated this week on national television, but there is no need for the agitation to spread to people who aren't directly involved in the case.

If you don't come back, can I start using your trademark R. in the middle of my username?  Thanks, G.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 10, 2016, 06:34:01 PM
30 seconds, 3 minutes or 30 minutes.

"David's visit was to help her to take the children to the recreation area. When David returned from the beach he was with Gerry at the tennis courts, and it was Gerry who asked him to help Kate with taking the children to the recreation area, which had been arranged but did not take place. David was at the apartment for around 30 seconds." (KM 6 Sep 2007)

"At 18H30, the time at which he saw DP next to the tennis court. DAVID went to visit KATE and the children and returned close to 19H00" (GM 10 May 2007)

"Gerry had asked me just to pop in and check everything was alright err with Kate or you know again I can't remember the exact reason whether he was just making sure it was alright that he could stay there and you know more time but you know he'd asked me to pop in." (DP 11 April 2008)

1485 "I'm gonna pin you down and ask you how long you think you were in there for. I know you say minutes.'

DP "In their apartment, it, it, I'd say three minutes, five maximum.'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 10, 2016, 07:55:12 PM
I think me and Matt went straight to the, the courts, Dave went off to his apartment and I believe, erm, to Gerry and Kate’s apartment as well........“You said Dave went to the apartment'”
 Reply    “Well he did, but only briefly and then, well he went, he went back there and then, and then joined us, so fairly rapidly there was the full kind of compliment of, erm, of, the male adults within the group were playing tennis.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN_ROGATORY.htm

So we went, got our stuff and came back to the courts, which were already in play, because the social had already started. And Gerry was down playing on a court, I think there was only three of them, I think the, erm, the coach, whose name I can't remember, the tennis coach, the blonde haired bloke, erm, was playing to make up the numbers. And so we waited and watched for a little while, so we didn't get on court until, phew, sometime closer to seven, so maybe sort of quarter to or twenty to or ten to seven we went down to the court.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

I'm not sure you know what happened to Matt and Russell at that particular moment but I remember then you know I went over to see err Gerry at the err you know tennis courts, just to see you know what was happening, and err decided that we'd, you know I'd come, come back to play tennis.......got my stuff, went back to the tennis courts and then err there was me, Matt and Russell and I think Gerry played a little, for a little while but he decided that he'd, he'd played enough tennis for that day and err was going back and so it left with me, Russell and err Matt and err Dan who was the, the you know the tennis coach from Mark Warner.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DAVID-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm

Regarding his previous statement where he states that David returned half an hour later around 19:00, he says that he returned to the tennis court after half an hour, as this time frame refers to the second time he returned to the tennis court after getting ready for the game.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-ARGUIDO.htm

So they went straight to the tennis courts (Russell) or they all three went and got their stuff from the apartments (Matt) or David went to see Gerry while Russell and Matt went somewhere unknown.(David)

David came back very quickly from the McCann's apartment (Russ). Gerry agrees, but he went off again to get ready then, returning at 7pm. Matt agrees they didn't play until 7pm, but they were watching the game from 6.40 or 6,45 or 6.50pm.







Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 10, 2016, 08:13:01 PM
So we finished and set off, probably about twenty past six, sometime around there, because it was after when we'd got them to move, we were already late, so I think if we'd said, if they'd move it to six thirty and we're setting off at six twenty, I would have been happy that we could have made it there in time, but we'd already gone past the time when I thought we won't be able to go because we were already so late'.

00.07.20 4078 'Was that you, David and'.

Reply 'Russell'.
 
4078 'Russell'.

Reply 'It was men's social. Erm, so we went back up, erm, back to, well I went back to the apartment, got the tennis gear and back onto the courts or back to the courts area, erm, and the other guys went to get their stuff. Erm, and I think Dave said that he'd been to the apartment, but I don't know that for definite, that's just something I think has come out, I didn't know anything about that. So we went, got our stuff and came back to the courts, which were already in play, because the social had already started. And Gerry was down playing on a court, I think there was only three of them, I think the, erm, the coach, whose name I can't remember, the tennis coach, the blonde haired bloke, erm, was playing to make up the numbers. And so we waited and watched for a little while, so we didn't get on court until, phew, sometime closer to seven, so maybe sort of quarter to or twenty to or ten to seven we went down to the court. And we were hoping that Gerry would actually stay and make up the four, because everybody, there was one court that was full of four and then there was a three over he, but he, erm, sort of went back to, erm, to sort of help with, you know, Kate and the kids and didn't stay to sort of play with us and there was just the three of us and I think the coach stayed and played to make up the four initially, but didn't want to stay, so he didn't stay the whole time. But we played then for, I think the best part of an hour, erm, before going back to the apartment.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 11, 2016, 05:56:27 PM
"I'm already getting bids from some US networks for interviews with the McCanns for the 10th Anniversary." CM


"Tf they'd been able to have a professional nanny service which wasn't available at the time." CM

MirandaThePanda52 minutes ago
Great big lying b.........
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 11, 2016, 06:17:55 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 11, 2016, 05:56:27 PM
"I'm already getting bids from some US networks for interviews with the McCanns for the 10th Anniversary." CM


"Tf they'd been able to have a professional nanny service which wasn't available at the time." CM

MirandaThePanda52 minutes ago
Great big lying b.........


Of course, it's what he's paid to do   8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 11, 2016, 06:32:08 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 11, 2016, 06:17:55 PM

Of course, it's what he's paid to do   8)--))


"We have monitoring continuously online of the various fora." CM

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 18, 2016, 02:37:09 PM
This PDF document contains detailed accounts by UK police of several fascinating investigations.
http://library.college.police.uk/docs/J_Homicide_MII/J_Homicide_10.2.pdf
Includes a no-body conviction.
And a case of two cases.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 18, 2016, 02:44:52 PM
... and a test of reading observation skills  (ETA which no-one passed so I posted answer on other thread)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 18, 2016, 08:33:48 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 18, 2016, 02:37:09 PM
This PDF document contains detailed accounts by UK police of several fascinating investigations.
http://library.college.police.uk/docs/J_Homicide_MII/J_Homicide_10.2.pdf
Includes a no-body conviction.
And a case of two cases.

An interesting read (despite the disclaimer), which I've just finished. How did you locate that?
Why did you start with the dogs? The police had been given a location in that murder case & it wasn't the dogs who located the body, it was a human with a digger.
I thought you'd have been more interested in the blood on the climbing plant & the solitary piece of DNA which connected the perp to the scene.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 18, 2016, 08:52:20 PM
Quote from: misty on April 18, 2016, 08:33:48 PM
An interesting read (despite the disclaimer), which I've just finished. How did you locate that?
Why did you start with the dogs? The police had been given a location in that murder case & it wasn't the dogs who located the body, it was a human with a digger.
I thought you'd have been more interested in the blood on the climbing plant & the solitary piece of DNA which connected the perp to the scene.
I found it by chance while researching the latest incarnation of the SY investigation Misty.
There are many more issues - weeks of fascinating reading.
It's a way to learn how the professional experts in this field think - by reading what they read.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 18, 2016, 09:00:52 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 18, 2016, 08:52:20 PM
I found it by chance while researching the latest incarnation of the SY investigation Misty.

I found the information on T.I.E. very interesting as it provided the reasoning behind the questioning of the last known round of witnesses i.e. the grouping.
Does that methodology put a slightly different spin on DCI Redwood's statement "not considered persons of interest"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 18, 2016, 09:49:36 PM
Quote from: misty on April 18, 2016, 09:00:52 PM
I found the information on T.I.E. very interesting as it provided the reasoning behind the questioning of the last known round of witnesses i.e. the grouping.
Does that methodology put a slightly different spin on DCI Redwood's statement "not considered persons of interest"?
Trace Interview Eliminate makes sense.
I never saw any indication that the people Mr Redwood apparantly was interested in were even doing any burglaries so presumably they've been TIE'd.
As for the "not considered persons of interest" he has never publically stated anything to the contrary.
Here is the index of the HWG (of which MD is a member) journal - years of fascinating reading for us Misty.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on April 19, 2016, 09:39:39 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 18, 2016, 02:37:09 PM
This PDF document contains detailed accounts by UK police of several fascinating investigations.
http://library.college.police.uk/docs/J_Homicide_MII/J_Homicide_10.2.pdf
Includes a no-body conviction.
And a case of two cases.

Thanks for that, Pegasus. I'm only part of the way through, but I find it really interesting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on April 19, 2016, 09:41:18 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 18, 2016, 09:49:36 PM
Trace Interview Eliminate makes sense.
I never saw any indication that the people Mr Redwood apparantly was interested in were even doing any burglaries so presumably they've been TIE'd.
As for the "not considered persons of interest" he has never publically stated anything to the contrary.
Here is the index of the HWG (of which MD is a member) journal - years of fascinating reading for us Misty.

?? Did you mean to add a link?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on April 19, 2016, 10:07:26 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 18, 2016, 09:49:36 PM
Trace Interview Eliminate makes sense.
I never saw any indication that the people Mr Redwood apparantly was interested in were even doing any burglaries so presumably they've been TIE'd.
As for the "not considered persons of interest" he has never publically stated anything to the contrary.
Here is the index of the HWG (of which MD is a member) journal - years of fascinating reading for us Misty.

I find that the suggestion of Trace Investigate Evaluate makes more sense. Investigation can include interviews, but isn't necessarily limited to it. A police interview that I found jaw-droppingly clever involved a lot of fact-checking prior to it. No need for slippery stairs: the officer had done his homework. Evaluate is broader as well: while some people can be eliminated for all sorts of reasons, there are evidently the obvious ones who become targets for thorough active investigation, but there may also be others of a lower priority who need to remain on a back-burner.

Another thing that I've found interesting so far is the fact that it's even online: I doubt that the general public often gets a glimpse into the internal strategic issues facing a major authority.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 19, 2016, 11:55:29 AM
Quote from: Carana on April 19, 2016, 09:41:18 AM
?? Did you mean to add a link?
Sorry, google journal name.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on April 19, 2016, 12:22:52 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 19, 2016, 11:55:29 AM
Sorry, google journal name.

Ah. Just spotted it at the end of the document.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 20, 2016, 08:03:43 PM
In her notes dated July 18, almost two months after Maddie's disappearance and at a time when there are starting to appear indicia against the McCanns, Kate sounds disheartened and reinforces the accusations against Murat: "I had lots of hope that there would be progress in Murat's situation. I'm sure that he is involved and I feel like killing him, but I can't".

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id166.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 20, 2016, 10:04:43 PM
The Strange Case of Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and the McCanns

Excerpt

Which leads me on to the question of why they received such exceptional treatment from British authorities, directed straight from No. 10, to the extent that Blair and Brown eventually gave them a PR representative? I used at one stage to be Resident Clerk in the FCO, a now abolished post effectively of night duty officer. I can tell you from horrible personal experience that the FCO deals with gut-wrenching cases of lost or dead children abroad frequently. I spent one of the most terrible three hours of my life, through to a cold dawn, on the phone with a hysterical bereaved mother desperate to explore any avenue that might give a possibility that the boy who had just drowned in Brazil was misidentified as her son. On average, I am afraid such tragedies get substantially less than 1% of the public resources that were devoted to the McCanns.

I am going to come straight out with this. British diplomatic staff were under direct instruction to support the McCanns far beyond the usual and to put pressure on the Portuguese authorities over the case. I have direct information that more than one of those diplomatic staff found the McCanns less than convincing and their stories inconsistent. Embassy staff were perturbed to be ordered that British authorities were to be present at every contact between the McCanns and Portuguese police.

This again is absolutely not the norm. On a daily basis more British citizens have contact with foreign authorities than the total staff of the FCO. It would be simply impossible to give that level of support to everybody. Plus, against jingoistic presumption, a great many Brits who have contact with foreign police are actually criminals.

The British Ambassador in Portugal, John Buck, had been my direct boss in the FCO. he was Deputy Head of Southern European Department when I was Head of Cyprus Section. He and his staff were concerned by contradictions in the McCann’s story. The Embassy warned, in writing, that being perceived as too close to the McCanns might not prove wise. They demanded the instruction from London be reconfirmed. It was.

I know of people’s misgivings because I was told directly. But material was also leaked to a Belgian newspaper confirming what I have said. It was published by the Express, but like so much other material which is not supportive of the McCanns, it got taken down. Fortunately that last link preserved it. It also shows that the FCO continues to refuse Freedom of Information requests for the material on the interesting grounds that it might damage relations with Portugal.

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/the-strange-case-of-gordon-brown-and-the-mccanns/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 20, 2016, 10:17:39 PM
"You may be interested to know that Martin Grime, the (then) South Yorkshire Police dog handler whose dogs alerted to cadaver scent and blood in the apartment, car and on McCann clothing also had pressure put on him to over emphasize the need for forensic corroboration in both his statements and rogatory. Never in his career, on any case, had he been asked to do so."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 10:20:56 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 20, 2016, 10:04:43 PM
The Strange Case of Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and the McCanns

Excerpt

Which leads me on to the question of why they received such exceptional treatment from British authorities, directed straight from No. 10, to the extent that Blair and Brown eventually gave them a PR representative? I used at one stage to be Resident Clerk in the FCO, a now abolished post effectively of night duty officer. I can tell you from horrible personal experience that the FCO deals with gut-wrenching cases of lost or dead children abroad frequently. I spent one of the most terrible three hours of my life, through to a cold dawn, on the phone with a hysterical bereaved mother desperate to explore any avenue that might give a possibility that the boy who had just drowned in Brazil was misidentified as her son. On average, I am afraid such tragedies get substantially less than 1% of the public resources that were devoted to the McCanns.

I am going to come straight out with this. British diplomatic staff were under direct instruction to support the McCanns far beyond the usual and to put pressure on the Portuguese authorities over the case. I have direct information that more than one of those diplomatic staff found the McCanns less than convincing and their stories inconsistent. Embassy staff were perturbed to be ordered that British authorities were to be present at every contact between the McCanns and Portuguese police.

This again is absolutely not the norm. On a daily basis more British citizens have contact with foreign authorities than the total staff of the FCO. It would be simply impossible to give that level of support to everybody. Plus, against jingoistic presumption, a great many Brits who have contact with foreign police are actually criminals.

The British Ambassador in Portugal, John Buck, had been my direct boss in the FCO. he was Deputy Head of Southern European Department when I was Head of Cyprus Section. He and his staff were concerned by contradictions in the McCann’s story. The Embassy warned, in writing, that being perceived as too close to the McCanns might not prove wise. They demanded the instruction from London be reconfirmed. It was.

I know of people’s misgivings because I was told directly. But material was also leaked to a Belgian newspaper confirming what I have said. It was published by the Express, but like so much other material which is not supportive of the McCanns, it got taken down. Fortunately that last link preserved it. It also shows that the FCO continues to refuse Freedom of Information requests for the material on the interesting grounds that it might damage relations with Portugal.

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/the-strange-case-of-gordon-brown-and-the-mccanns/
Thankyou Pathfinder for posting this extremely interesting article
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/the-strange-case-of-gordon-brown-and-the-mccanns/
It is complete confirmation that the leak to belgian media, that at least one FCO person warned the government about the bizarrely high level of support and political pressure being provided, was absolutely true.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 10:32:21 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 20, 2016, 10:17:39 PM
"You may be interested to know that Martin Grime, the (then) South Yorkshire Police dog handler whose dogs alerted to cadaver scent and blood in the apartment, car and on McCann clothing also had pressure put on him to over emphasize the need for forensic corroboration in both his statements and rogatory. Never in his career, on any case, had he been asked to do so."
The source for this is a comment under
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/the-strange-case-of-gordon-brown-and-the-mccanns/
I believe that this is not simply hypothesising, but a statement of direct knowledge. It helps to confirm the statement by Sr Amaral that that the UK government's secret service did indeed "have a quiet chat with"  one of the UK operatives as he returned to the UK.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 10:45:00 PM
The author of this article had originally intended to publish this information in 2014, but didn't.

One of the reasons (IMO the main reason) why he now does publish it, on 20 April 2016, is because of the  court decision in Lisbon which cancels the banning of Mr Amaral's book.

Is it possible that a lot more information will now be published, by people with direct knowledge of the case, who were scared to publish before because of the aggressive legal machine of these tourists?

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/the-strange-case-of-gordon-brown-and-the-mccanns/

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 20, 2016, 10:49:43 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 10:45:00 PM
The author of this article had originally intended to publish this information in 2014, but didn't.

One of the reasons (IMO the main reason) why he now does publish it, on 20 April 2016, is because of the  court decision in Lisbon which cancels the banning of Mr Amaral's book.

Is it possible that a lot more information will now be published, by people with direct knowledge of the case, who were scared to publish before because of the aggressive legal machine of these tourists?

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/the-strange-case-of-gordon-brown-and-the-mccanns/

Well, that can't be bad.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 20, 2016, 11:08:47 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 10:45:00 PM
The author of this article had originally intended to publish this information in 2014, but didn't.

One of the reasons (IMO the main reason) why he now does publish it, on 20 April 2016, is because of the  court decision in Lisbon which cancels the banning of Mr Amaral's book.

Is it possible that a lot more information will now be published, by people with direct knowledge of the case, who were scared to publish before because of the aggressive legal machine of these tourists?

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/the-strange-case-of-gordon-brown-and-the-mccanns/

What "direct" source did Murray have or is it just hearsay?
Leaked to a Belgium newspaper = Duarte Levy. Enough said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on April 20, 2016, 11:09:21 PM
Oh my oh my...another layer unravelled
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 20, 2016, 11:13:44 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 10:32:21 PM
The source for this is a comment under
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/the-strange-case-of-gordon-brown-and-the-mccanns/
I believe that this is not simply hypothesising, but a statement of direct knowledge. It helps to confirm the statement by Sr Amaral that that the UK government's secret service did indeed "have a quiet chat with"  one of the UK operatives as he returned to the UK.

What knowledge do you have of Denise Thomson which leads you to believe she is making a statement of "direct knowledge"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 11:19:20 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 20, 2016, 10:49:43 PM
Well, that can't be bad.
Agreed, I imagine that many in the FCO thought it was extremely odd, that the UK government not only instructed the PJ that a UK gov person was to be present at all the update meetings, but also had the cheek to pressurise the PJ to hold those update meetings with the tourists, not at the PJ Police Station, but in the UK consulate, or even in a residential house south of Portimao. Most odd.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 20, 2016, 11:26:36 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 11:19:20 PM
Agreed, I imagine that many in the FCO thought it was extremely odd, that the UK government not only instructed the PJ that a UK gov person was to be present at all the update meetings, but also had the cheek to pressurise the PJ to hold those update meetings with the tourists, not at the PJ Police Station, but in the UK consulate, or even in a residential house south of Portimao. Most odd.

There are some very dangerous stairs in Portuguese police stations. Best to be accompanied by someone familiar with the health & safety laws.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 11:28:24 PM
Quote from: misty on April 20, 2016, 11:08:47 PM
What "direct" source did Murray have or is it just hearsay?
Leaked to a Belgium newspaper = Duarte Levy. Enough said.
Note which organisation he was a high-up employee of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 20, 2016, 11:29:53 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 11:28:24 PM
Note which organisation he was a high-up employee of.

Got the sack, didn't he?

ETA Suggest you check where he was working in 2007, Pegasus.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 11:35:20 PM
Quote from: misty on April 20, 2016, 11:26:36 PM
There are some very dangerous stairs in Portuguese police stations. Best to be accompanied by someone familiar with the health & safety laws.
No Misty, that was not the reason why the UK government pressurised the PJ to hold the regular update meetings with these tourists in (most unusually) UK consulate buildings.

This unique treatment became so established that the two tourists were shocked when eventually they were told that an update meeting with the PJ would be held at a PJ building. (source: book by KM)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 20, 2016, 11:41:42 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 11:35:20 PM
No Misty, that was not the reason why the UK government pressurised the PJ to hold the regular update meetings with these tourists in (most unusually) UK consulate buildings.

This unique treatment became so established that the two tourists were shocked when eventually they were told that an update meeting with the PJ would be held at a PJ building. (source: book by KM)

With due respect Pegasus - I suggest you look at Mr Murray's Wiki page before you believe some rubbish claims posted on an internet blog.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on April 20, 2016, 11:45:06 PM
Quote from: misty on April 20, 2016, 11:41:42 PM
With due respect Pegasus - I suggest you look at Mr Murray's Wiki page before you believe some rubbish claims posted on an internet blog.

Why dont mccann supporters ever investigate the facts rather than jump to discredit the source
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 20, 2016, 11:50:11 PM
Quote from: mercury on April 20, 2016, 11:45:06 PM
Why dont mccann supporters ever investigate the facts rather than jump to discredit the source

What facts? There are no facts. Murray had to leave the FCO 2 years prior to the McCann case. You can read the sordid details on his Wiki page.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 11:50:41 PM
I note that he has been awarded the Sam Adams Award for Integrity in Intelligence Misty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 11:56:02 PM
Quote from: misty on April 20, 2016, 11:41:42 PM
With due respect Pegasus - I suggest you look at Mr Murray's Wiki page before you believe some rubbish claims posted on an internet blog.
Murray's claim, that the UK Govt insisted to the PJ on a UK Govt presence at meetings between the PJ and these tourists, is fully confirmed in the book by honest witness KM. It most certainly is not a rubbish claim Misty. It is true.

I added the extra information which Murray doesn't mention, that these PJ meetings were held, remarkably, not at a PJ building, but at a UK consular building in/near Portimao. Again this is confirmed in the book by KM.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 21, 2016, 12:00:48 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 11:50:41 PM
I note that he has been awarded the Sam Adams Award for Integrity in Intelligence Misty


He's on the same pedestal as Julian Assange, then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:09:55 AM
Quote from: misty on April 21, 2016, 12:00:48 AM

He's on the same pedestal as Julian Assange, then.
Sentence 3 indicates he was pressurised to not publish this information in 2014. I wonder if any of those "decent people" happened by chance to be in the legal profession?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 12:12:51 AM
Quote from: mercury on April 20, 2016, 11:45:06 PM
Why dont mccann supporters ever investigate the facts rather than jump to discredit the source

You may stop to consider that Misty did indeed "investigate the facts" a talent in which she excels.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 21, 2016, 12:15:04 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:09:55 AM
Sentence 3 indicates he was pressurised to not publish this information in 2014. I wonder if any of those "decent people" happened by chance to be in the legal profession?

Why do you suppose he waited all those years until 2014 to consider publishing the information?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on April 21, 2016, 12:20:30 AM
Quote from: misty on April 20, 2016, 11:50:11 PM
What facts? There are no facts. Murray had to leave the FCO 2 years prior to the McCann case. You can read the sordid details on his Wiki page.

Excuse me if i dint count your words as all correct and written in stone, my POINT was it is a true fact that mccann supporters rubbish anyone disturbing the narrative, researched or not
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on April 21, 2016, 12:21:07 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 12:12:51 AM
You may stop to consider that Misty did indeed "investigate the facts" a talent in which she excels.

If i ever need your advice i shall ask for it, ta
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 21, 2016, 12:25:18 AM
Quote from: mercury on April 21, 2016, 12:20:30 AM
Excuse me if i dint count your words as all correct and written in stone, my POINT was it is a true fact that mccann supporters rubbish anyone disturbing the narrative, researched or not

You should always check the information & the source, Mercury. Rather like checking out the man who had a photo of the house he claimed MM had been to in Bavaria - but that's another story.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:28:26 AM
Quote from: misty on April 21, 2016, 12:15:04 AM
Why do you suppose he waited all those years until 2014 to consider publishing the information?
I haven't researched that detail Misty.
Much of what he says is confirmed in the book by honest witness KM.

Her book is a valuable and honest source which includes:
Phone communication between MB and GM.
Phone communication between TB and GM.
Phone communication between GB and GM, for example the two international calls on 23 May 2007.
Phone communication between DM and GM.
The fulltime allocation of an FCO employee (for example FCO were present on the Fatima trip).
Presence of FCO at the meetings with PJ.
Location at UK Govt buildings of meetings with PJ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on April 21, 2016, 12:31:07 AM
Quote from: misty on April 21, 2016, 12:25:18 AM
You should always check the information & the source, Mercury. Rather like checking out the man who had a photo of the house he claimed MM had been to in Bavaria - but that's another story.

The info is always more inportant especially if it has not been proven to be incorrect

And the fact that a source may have once been wrong is not a sentence for life
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 21, 2016, 12:35:30 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:28:26 AM
I haven't researched that detail Misty.
Much of what he says is confirmed in the book by honest witness KM.

Her book is a valuable and honest source which includes:
Phone communication between MB and GM.
Phone communication between TB and GM.
Phone communication between GB and GM, for example the two international calls on 23 May 2007.
Phone communication between DM and GM.
The fulltime allocation of an FCO employee (for example FCO were present on the Fatima trip).
Presence of FCO at the meetings with PJ.
Location at UK Govt buildings of meetings with PJ.

I'm not disputing the FCO special attention, Pegasus. IMO it was warranted because of the impending Cipriano case.
What I am disputing is that Murray was privy to confidential information from a source inside the FCO in the UK 2 years after his sacking.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 21, 2016, 12:37:46 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 11:50:41 PM
I note that he has been awarded the Sam Adams Award for Integrity in Intelligence Misty

And it backs up Amaral's book.


Someone puts forward the hypothesis according to which Madeleine would have died in her apartment, and that a member of the group would have removed her. It's a possibility, but nothing so far, no evidence, happens to support that theory.

The McCanns are put up with David Payne. We want to search the accommodation of the family friends to try to pick up Madeleine's clothes, especially those she was wearing on May 3rd at 5.35pm when she returned from the day centre with her mother and the twins. Evidently, this initiative is not widely supported. The British ambassador meets with the team directing the investigation. The political and the diplomatic seem to want to prevent us from freely doing our work.

- I'm sure this check is necessary.

- The clothes? Are you mad? if I understand you properly, you want to go into the apartment to take clothes to have them analysed?

- Yes. What's the problem? It's a perfectly normal procedure in cases like this.

- Of course, but with this media hype...I don't think I have ever in my life seen so many journalists....And I didn't come down in the last shower.

THE PJ'S DIFFICULTIES IN COMMUNICATING WITH THE MEDIA; THE PRO McCANN PRESS OFFICE.

From the start of the investigation, we ask for the presence of a press attaché to accompany us and take on communicating with the media. The Justice Minister fulfills this request. Very quickly, however, this decision is contested. The reaction of the press itself is feared and public opinion, which might interpret that presence with direct intervention in the investigation by the minister....Finally, the person retained is an investigator, who is not working on the case, speaks English and has some experience in this field. With hindsight, it can be said that it wasn't a good decision. In fact, after the reading of our first press release and the parents' press conferences, the press let fly.

We were convinced that the people directly involved in the investigation should remain distanced from the media whirlwind. We needed help: the police judiciaire would have to engage staff to dissect published articles, focusing on the analysis of press statements from the parents and their friends.But that didn't happen. The media circus was in full swing: all the time, new articles, live TV, a growing number of journalists running around the streets of Vila da Luz.

It didn't seem normal to us either that a couple whose child has just disappeared engages press attachés to deal with their relations with the media. It is not a question here of minimising the role of the means of communication and ignoring that a subject like this stirs up a lot of curiosity, but that constant preoccupation with the management of their communication by the parents, appeared to us, to say the least, astonishing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 12:45:30 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:28:26 AM
I haven't researched that detail Misty.
Much of what he says is confirmed in the book by honest witness KM.

Her book is a valuable and honest source which includes:
Phone communication between MB and GM.
Phone communication between TB and GM.
Phone communication between GB and GM, for example the two international calls on 23 May 2007.
Phone communication between DM and GM.
The fulltime allocation of an FCO employee (for example FCO were present on the Fatima trip).
Presence of FCO at the meetings with PJ.
Location at UK Govt buildings of meetings with PJ.

I took a leaf out of Misty's book, Pegasus, and did a little searching of my own.
Denise Thomson (the commentator referred to earlier) who seemed to be well informed regarding Martin Grime is a prolific twitterati ... I suggest you check her tweets before making an assessment on her expertise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 21, 2016, 12:52:56 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 12:45:30 AM
I took a leaf out of Misty's book, Pegasus, and did a little searching of my own.
Denise Thomson (the commentator referred to earlier) who seemed to be well informed regarding Martin Grime is a prolific twitterati ... I suggest you check her tweets before making an assessment on her expertise.

Another source.

"When the PJ files were first published and issued to some Journalists in 2008, Grimes was interviewed, "off the record" by a small number of journo's including a good friend and colleague of mine who was , at the time, a sub-editor of a National Sunday newspaper.

Grimes made it very clear that he was unhappy with what he referred to as his "treatment" by authorities unknown, (although he did say they were British), who had coerced him, he says, to "play down" the significance of the dogs' findings. Grimes let it be known that Eddies and Keelas 'scentings' were irrefutable, in his mind, having worked with the dogs successfully on very many cases for the many of the Constabularies in the UK on high profile cases.

Grimes stated that he was "instructed" to ensure that in his subsequently produced report, he was to emphasise that the dog's findings were inadmissable as evidence, (which is of course, true, but he had NEVER been instructed on any other case to point this out), and that they were effectively inconsequential without further corroborative evidence."

http://jerseyabusescandal.blogspot.com/2011/08/jersey-martin-grime-was-told-to-play.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:55:33 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 12:45:30 AM
I took a leaf out of Misty's book, Pegasus, and did a little searching of my own.
Denise Thomson (the commentator referred to earlier) who seemed to be well informed regarding Martin Grime is a prolific twitterati ... I suggest you check her tweets before making an assessment on her expertise.
Fair enough, but I notice you are not disputing what Murray says.
The links with blair and brown, and the extraordinary actions of the FCO, they are in KM's book.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 21, 2016, 01:00:59 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:55:33 AM
Fair enough, but I notice you are not disputing what Murray says.
The links with blair and brown, and the extraordinary actions of the FCO, they are in KM's book.

What do you find extraordinary about the actions of the FCO ensuring the safety of the parents of a child who may have been the victim of kidnapping?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 01:11:22 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 21, 2016, 12:52:56 AM
Another source.

"When the PJ files were first published and issued to some Journalists in 2008, Grimes was interviewed, "off the record" by a small number of journo's including a good friend and colleague of mine who was , at the time, a sub-editor of a National Sunday newspaper.

Grimes made it very clear that he was unhappy with what he referred to as his "treatment" by authorities unknown, (although he did say they were British), who had coerced him, he says, to "play down" the significance of the dogs' findings. Grimes let it be known that Eddies and Keelas 'scentings' were irrefutable, in his mind, having worked with the dogs successfully on very many cases for the many of the Constabularies in the UK on high profile cases.

Grimes stated that he was "instructed" to ensure that in his subsequently produced report, he was to emphasise that the dog's findings were inadmissable as evidence, (which is of course, true, but he had NEVER been instructed on any other case to point this out), and that they were effectively inconsequential without further corroborative evidence."

http://jerseyabusescandal.blogspot.com/2011/08/jersey-martin-grime-was-told-to-play.html
When and where did this "instruction" originate? The answer is provided by none other than Mr Amaral himself

' In his latest interview he claims that after two British police dogs were used to searched the McCann’s apartment at the Ocean Club, his team had to take the British person responsible for the operation to Faro Airport. Amaral, now retired and working as a crime writer, went on: "He’s at the airport waiting for a plane to return to England and he receives a phone call. Then he explains to our colleague that a member of MI5 was at the airport, waiting to talk with him about the result of the investigation.'
http://bit.ly/242dr2s

So the answer is, someone from the UK Govt met the person responsible for the UK dogs operation (IMO not MG) off the plane when it arrived at the UK airport on x Sept 2007

What is very interesting is that Mr Amaral is now in a position where if he does take the legal action he says he will, he can force this information, and many  more things, out into the open.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 01:22:02 AM
Quote from: misty on April 21, 2016, 01:00:59 AM
What do you find extraordinary about the actions of the FCO ensuring the safety of the parents of a child who may have been the victim of kidnapping?
Pressurising PJ to hold meetings at a UK consular building instead of at a PJ building.
Multiple phone communications between two Foreign Secretaries and GM.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 21, 2016, 01:23:27 AM
They said it's a case of national security. This is an absolute disgrace. Protecting who? The McCanns. Why are they being protected? Heads should roll SY the truth must prevail.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 01:27:46 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:55:33 AM
Fair enough, but I notice you are not disputing what Murray says.
The links with blair and brown, and the extraordinary actions of the FCO, they are in KM's book.

I do not find the alleged links at all extraordinary ... particularly so now that I have seen the Portuguese justice system in operation.

As for much of what Mr Murray says, I reserve judgement except to say one can indeed be judged by the company one keeps.

Having linked to a couple of blogs from his blog I make the same assessment of him as I do of Denise Murray having seen her twitter posts and those she tweets to and about.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 01:38:14 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 01:27:46 AM
(snip) As for much of what Mr Murray says, I reserve judgement except to say one can indeed be judged by the company one keeps. (snip)
But much of what Murray states is also stated by KM Brietta.
Have you read her book?
I can post the page numbers in her book which mention Brown and FCO actions, if you want?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 21, 2016, 01:41:29 AM
British diplomat warned Foreign Office of concerns over McCanns
Last updated at 10:18 03 December 2007

The Foreign Office was alerted to fears over Gerry and Kate McCann by a British diplomat in Portugal just days after their daughter Madeleine went missing.
The diplomat was sent to the holiday resort of Praia da Luz in the days following the four-year-old's disappearance and soon became concerned over "inconsistencies" in the testimonies by her parents and their friends.
After visiting the McCanns, the unnamed diplomat sent a report to the Foreign Office in London, admitting his worries about "confused declarations" of the McCanns' movements on the night of May 3.

He also noted the couple's "lack of co-operation" with the Portuguese police.
The diplomat's concerns were made over four months before Gerry and Kate were named arguidos (suspects) on September 7.
Contents of the letter were leaked to Belgian newspaper La Dernière Heure over the weekend.
The diplomat expressed his fears after receiving instruction from the Foreign Office to provide "all possible assistance to the McCann couple".
The French-language paper printed excerpts of the letter, quoting the diplomat as saying: "With the greatest respect, I would like to make you aware of the risks and implications to our relationship with the Portuguese authorities, if you consider the possible involvement of the couple.
"Please confirm to me, in the light of these concerns, that we want to continue to be closely involved in the case as was requested in your previous ­message."
Although the Government was quick to assist the McCanns in the days following Madeleine's disappearance, direct contact with the couple ceased when they were named as suspects.
La Dernière Heure pointed out that a majority of the diplomats originally involved in the case have now been taken off it.

The then-Prime Minister Tony Blair sent special envoy Sheree Dodd to act as a "media liaison officer" for the pair soon after Madeleine vanished.
Ms Dodd has since resigned from the Foreign Office, while the British consul in the Algarve, Bill Henderson, has retired.
John Buck, the British ambassador in Portugal, no longer works in the country.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-499340/British-diplomat-warned-Foreign-Office-concerns-McCanns.html#ixzz46PuRkgXr
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 21, 2016, 01:52:36 AM


La Derniere Heure - wasn't that the same newspaper who got hold of the Gaspar's original statements?


You really don't see the Levy connection, do you Pathfinder?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 02:00:45 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 01:38:14 AM
But much of what Murray states is also stated by KM Brietta.
Have you read her book?
I can post the page numbers in her book which mention Brown and FCO actions, if you want?

There is absolutely no dispute about FO involvement in Madeleine's case.  I just do not find it extraordinary, Pegasus, in fact I would have found it decidedly odd of there hadn't been.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 02:10:53 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 02:00:45 AM
There is absolutely no dispute about FO involvement in Madeleine's case.  I just do not find it extraordinary, Pegasus, in fact I would have found it decidedly odd of there hadn't been.
It is the amount of involvement that is absolutely unique Brietta, the number of phonecalls between GM and top UK Govt people is staggering, and unprecedented in any other case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 02:18:57 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 02:10:53 AM
It is the amount of involvement that is absolutely unique Brietta, the number of phonecalls between GM and top UK Govt people is staggering, and unprecedented in any other case.

Madeleine's case was unprecedented ... not even Ben's came close to what we now know had been happening in Portugal ... but bet your bottom dollar the Brit diplomats did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 02:25:30 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 02:18:57 AM
Madeleine's case was unprecedented ... not even Ben's came close to what we now know had been happening in Portugal ... but bet your bottom dollar the Brit diplomats did.
It's a bit odd if top people spent as long on the phone to GM as they did to world leaders.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 03:11:15 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 02:25:30 AM
It's a bit odd if top people spent as long on the phone to GM as they did to world leaders.

I neither know nor do I care ... it is water under the bridge.

I do not subscribe to the huge government conspiracy seen by Mr Amaral and others.  I have my own opinion why there was British government input into Madeleine McCann's case.  They had feet on the ground and knew the situation in Portugal. If I may say so on this wonderful off topic thread ... we have had a perfect example of the vagaries of Portuguese justice only this week.

It is a bit of a topsy turvy situation where one person's right to expression supersedes another's right not to be libelled.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on April 21, 2016, 10:14:58 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 20, 2016, 10:32:21 PM
The source for this is a comment under
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/the-strange-case-of-gordon-brown-and-the-mccanns/
I believe that this is not simply hypothesising, but a statement of direct knowledge. It helps to confirm the statement by Sr Amaral that that the UK government's secret service did indeed "have a quiet chat with"  one of the UK operatives as he returned to the UK.

IMO if our Secret Service had had a quiet chat with anyone at all  - we would not know a single thing about it.  The clue being in the word 'secret'.




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 21, 2016, 11:16:56 AM
Quote from: Benice on April 21, 2016, 10:14:58 AM
IMO if our Secret Service had had a quiet chat with anyone at all  - we would not know a single thing about it.  The clue being in the word 'secret'.

That doesn't make any sense. They are normal people like us not invisible. Get real.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 21, 2016, 11:21:50 AM
And, of course, Special Branch were involved in chauffeuring services when the McCanns fled Portugal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on April 21, 2016, 11:30:24 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 21, 2016, 11:16:56 AM
That doesn't make any sense. They are normal people like us not invisible. Get real.

The whole point of a Secret Service is that their actions are carried out in secret and are not privy to the general public.  Not much point in having one otherwise.

imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:01:37 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 03:11:15 AM
I neither know nor do I care ... it is water under the bridge.

I do not subscribe to the huge government conspiracy seen by Mr Amaral and others.  I have my own opinion why there was British government input into Madeleine McCann's case.  They had feet on the ground and knew the situation in Portugal. If I may say so on this wonderful off topic thread ... we have had a perfect example of the vagaries of Portuguese justice only this week.

It is a bit of a topsy turvy situation where one person's right to expression supersedes another's right not to be libelled.
One phonecall between a Foreign Secretary and GM exceeded an hour in length.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:05:11 PM
Quote from: Benice on April 21, 2016, 11:30:24 AM
The whole point of a Secret Service is that their actions are carried out in secret and are not privy to the general public.  Not much point in having one otherwise.

imo.
How do you know that there is a secret service?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:07:37 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 21, 2016, 11:21:50 AM
And, of course, Special Branch were involved in chauffeuring services when the McCanns fled Portugal.
Who provided chauffeuring within Portugal in the early days?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 21, 2016, 12:13:32 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:07:37 PM
Who provided chauffeuring within Portugal in the early days?


Surely not Embassy or FCO staff ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on April 21, 2016, 12:14:16 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:05:11 PM
How do you know that there is a secret service?

Errm  - my reference to a 'secret service' was in response to your own post making that very claim.  You said:-

 Quote
It helps to confirm the statement by Sr Amaral that that the UK government's secret service did indeed "have a quiet chat with"  one of the UK operatives as he returned to the UK.
unquote.





Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 21, 2016, 12:27:09 PM
Quote from: Benice on April 21, 2016, 12:14:16 PM
Errm  - my reference to a 'secret service' was in response to your own post making that very claim.  You said:-

 Quote
It helps to confirm the statement by Sr Amaral that that the UK government's secret service did indeed "have a quiet chat with"  one of the UK operatives as he returned to the UK.
unquote.

Presumably he meant S.I.S [Secret Intelligence Service aka MI6] the UK not having a secret service and all. The Americans have a Secret Service, it's job is to guard the President.
Now you know that I'll have to kill you  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:30:47 PM
Did the UK experts write the dog result documents before or after flying back to UK from Faro?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on April 21, 2016, 12:30:52 PM
Quote from: Benice on April 21, 2016, 10:14:58 AM
IMO if our Secret Service had had a quiet chat with anyone at all  - we would not know a single thing about it.  The clue being in the word 'secret'.

Why would there have been any need for the secret service to be involved ????
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 21, 2016, 12:35:45 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:30:47 PM
Did the UK experts write the dog result documents before or after flying back to UK from Faro?

The written report from Grime is merely dated Aug. 2007. Omitted for a specific reason?
 Link to file page not currently accessible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 21, 2016, 12:36:09 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 21, 2016, 12:30:52 PM
Why would there have been any need for the secret service to be involved ????

There have been some suggestions that the Intelligence Services were not there for the direct benefit of the McCanns, but to conceal the presence of some Establishment figure - all un-substantiated, of course, otherwise it wouldn't be secret    @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:36:41 PM
I am assuming that Mr Amaral is telling the truth, that he did accompany a UK expert to the airport, and that  someone would be waiting to have a chat with expert at disembarkation in the UK.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on April 21, 2016, 12:45:09 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 21, 2016, 12:36:09 PM
There have been some suggestions that the Intelligence Services were not there for the direct benefit of the McCanns, but to conceal the presence of some Establishment figure - all un-substantiated, of course, otherwise it wouldn't be secret    @)(++(*

Then why would an establishment figure need to be there either ?

After all the mccanns were 2 ordinary run of the mill doctors.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 21, 2016, 12:48:21 PM
@Pegasus
IMO MG report must have been written in Portugal. I do not recall seeing it being forwarded as an attachment from LP or any other source in the UK.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:51:04 PM
"when your flight from Faro lands in the UK, go to the sushi bar and sit next to the oriental priest, he will be wearing a bowler hat and a red rose in his lapel, and will be reading the Times, ask him what the weather is like in Paris in the spring, he will then provide you with your instructions"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 01:16:05 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 21, 2016, 12:27:09 PM
Presumably he meant S.I.S [Secret Intelligence Service aka MI6] the UK not having a secret service and all. The Americans have a Secret Service, it's job is to guard the President.
Now you know that I'll have to kill you  8(>((

Our 'secret service' is so secret there are people who think it is MI5.  Masters of disguise if not invisibility.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 01:33:30 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 21, 2016, 01:16:05 PM
Our 'secret service' is so secret there are people who think it is MI5.  Masters of disguise if not invisibility.
The secret service even if they exist cannot compete with the mastery of disguise and invisibility attained by the private investigators. Here is one of them in PDL, cunningly blending unnoticed into the background, travelling incognito as a priest to avoid suspicion. I'm not joking - that really is one of the PIs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 21, 2016, 02:11:32 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:51:04 PM
"when your flight from Faro lands in the UK, go to the sushi bar and sit next to the oriental priest, he will be wearing a bowler hat and a red rose in his lapel, and will be reading the Times, ask him what the weather is like in Paris in the spring, he will then provide you with your instructions"

Is that an extract from the Satanic Verses or James Bond?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 02:44:27 PM
Quote from: misty on April 21, 2016, 02:11:32 PM
Is that an extract from the Satanic Verses or James Bond?
It's my guess of the content of that voice call the UK expert received at Faro Airport Misty.
Partly inspired by an associate of MI5/MI6 who was part of the campaign to discredit Mr Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on April 21, 2016, 02:46:39 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 12:36:41 PM
I am assuming that Mr Amaral is telling the truth, that he did accompany a UK expert to the airport, and that  someone would be waiting to have a chat with expert at disembarkation in the UK.

Did he personally accompany someone to the airport? Or is this yet another hearsay assertion on his part?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 02:50:12 PM
Quote from: Carana on April 21, 2016, 02:46:39 PM
Did he personally accompany someone to the airport? Or is this yet another hearsay assertion on his part?
I will read the interview and check.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 21, 2016, 02:51:13 PM
I see Ched Evans has had his conviction quashed and because of new evidence can have a retrial.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 21, 2016, 03:21:49 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 21, 2016, 02:51:13 PM
I see Ched Evans has had his conviction quashed and because of new evidence can have a retrial.

remember me telling you appeals could be made if new evidence came to light and you disagreeing
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on April 21, 2016, 03:31:46 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 21, 2016, 02:50:12 PM
I will read the interview and check.

At the time, did Amaral understand spoken English, or not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 21, 2016, 03:41:42 PM
Quote from: davel on April 21, 2016, 03:21:49 PM
remember me telling you appeals could be made if new evidence came to light and you disagreeing

I think you will find that was in a different context.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 21, 2016, 03:44:26 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 21, 2016, 03:41:42 PM
I think you will find that was in a different context.
I think you will find it wasn't...it was in general...but I'm not one dwell
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 21, 2016, 04:05:58 PM
Quote from: davel on April 21, 2016, 03:44:26 PM
I think you will find it wasn't...it was in general...but I'm not one dwell

I expect I posted:
The appeal court will allow an appeal where the decision of the lower court was either:

    Wrong (in that it erred in law or in fact or in the exercise of its discretion).

    Unjust because of a serious procedural or other irregularity in the proceedings in the lower court.

They are the only grounds. Fresh evidence may be heard if the court of appeal allow it:
The Court of Appeal may hear new evidence that was not adduced in the original proceedings (section 23(1)(c) Criminal Appeal Act 1968), if:

    it appears capable of belief;
    it may afford any ground for allowing the appeal;
    it would have been admissible;
    it is an issue which is the subject of the appeal;
    there is a reasonable explanation for the failure to adduce it.
 But the fresh evidence is not grounds for appeal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 21, 2016, 04:14:10 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 21, 2016, 04:05:58 PM
I expect I posted:
The appeal court will allow an appeal where the decision of the lower court was either:

    Wrong (in that it erred in law or in fact or in the exercise of its discretion).

    Unjust because of a serious procedural or other irregularity in the proceedings in the lower court.

They are the only grounds. Fresh evidence may be heard if the court of appeal allow it:
The Court of Appeal may hear new evidence that was not adduced in the original proceedings (section 23(1)(c) Criminal Appeal Act 1968), if:

    it appears capable of belief;
    it may afford any ground for allowing the appeal;
    it would have been admissible;
    it is an issue which is the subject of the appeal;
    there is a reasonable explanation for the failure to adduce it.
 But the fresh evidence is not grounds for appeal.

but  fresh evidence is grounds for appeal as Cheddars has shown
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on April 21, 2016, 05:27:53 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 21, 2016, 02:51:13 PM
I see Ched Evans has had his conviction quashed and because of new evidence can have a retrial.

I couldn't remember who this chap is, and went off to Google: An English criminal conviction being retried.

Somewhat different from a PT civil trial in which a former initial senior officer, with next to no knowledge of missing children investigations, cited some facts from the files (while not citing others) and then presented his analyis in an authoritative way that many may accept as "fact". 

What he can be credited with as having got right is still one of the shortest threads on this forum.

The PT civil system, IMO, seems far more attuned to the more concrete cases of "your kid threw a football through my window, and this is what it cost me to replace the window in question".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 12:30:27 AM
Quote from: Carana on April 21, 2016, 03:31:46 PM
At the time, did Amaral understand spoken English, or not?
+++
In his latest interview he claims that after two British police dogs were used to search the McCann’s apartment at the Ocean Club, his team had to take the British person responsible for the operation to Faro Airport.
Amaral, now retired and working as a crime writer, went on: “He’s at the airport waiting for a plane to return to England and he receives a phone call. Then he explains to our colleague that a member of MI5 was at the airport, waiting to talk with him about the result of the investigation.
+++
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/485524/Portuguese-detective-says-MI5-spies-know-what-happened-to-Madeleine-McCann

Therefore the PJ officer who accompanies the unnamed UK expert to Faro airport is not Mr Amaral, it is one of Mr Amaral's colleagues. As Carana has deduced, it is a PJ officer who is able to converse in English with the UK expert. It is probably Freitas (excellent english-speaker) or Paiva (good english-speaker). Does anyone have a link to the actual Amaral interview in portuguese please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 22, 2016, 01:29:28 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 12:30:27 AM
+++
In his latest interview he claims that after two British police dogs were used to search the McCann’s apartment at the Ocean Club, his team had to take the British person responsible for the operation to Faro Airport.
Amaral, now retired and working as a crime writer, went on: “He’s at the airport waiting for a plane to return to England and he receives a phone call. Then he explains to our colleague that a member of MI5 was at the airport, waiting to talk with him about the result of the investigation.
+++
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/485524/Portuguese-detective-says-MI5-spies-know-what-happened-to-Madeleine-McCann

Therefore the PJ officer who accompanies the unnamed UK expert to Faro airport is not Mr Amaral, it is one of Mr Amaral's colleagues. As Carana has deduced, it is a PJ officer who is able to converse in English with the UK expert. It is probably Freitas (excellent english-speaker) or Paiva (good english-speaker). Does anyone have a link to the actual Amaral interview in portuguese please?

Try this one.
http://cmtv.sapo.pt/atualidade/detalhe/goncalo-amaral-teoria-de-rapto-de-maddie-nao-passa-de-uma-farsa.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 02:13:38 AM
Quote from: misty on April 22, 2016, 01:29:28 AM
Try this one.
http://cmtv.sapo.pt/atualidade/detalhe/goncalo-amaral-teoria-de-rapto-de-maddie-nao-passa-de-uma-farsa.html
Thankyou Misty yes that is the interview.
The account of PJ accompanying a UK expert to Faro airport, and that expert being met in the UK by MI5, is at 14m45. Does anyone know where there is a portuguese transcript of 14m45 onwards?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 03:19:19 AM
"Local Portuguese Woman [with excavation site as backdrop] - That has no logic. What thief breaks into a house, takes the child away, murders her, carries the child on his arms in everyone's sight on the street and then comes here to bury her in an place that is only ground rock? Only a fool would do that! That's all I have to say about that. [laughs at the idea]"
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2014/06/goncalo-amaral-there-was-no-breaking-in.html

This lady in the street is talking common-sense, however note that
Part 1 of SY theory ("thief breaks into a house") which if a window is unlocked does not require force, is good.
Excellent theory so far, because that is exactly what burglars do, and it's confirmed by the open shutter and window.

Part 2 of SY theory ("takes the child away") is rubbish.
No burglar would do that, as that lady on the street can easily tell SY.
The answer is to retain part 1, but replace part 2, with the SIO actually imagining they are a burglar, they think everyone is out, open a shutter and window, but then inside they see children.

The obvious result will be that the SIO turned burglar will immediately flee empty-handed (confirmed by the fact that no material items were stolen), and any awakened mobile child will simultaneously flee in the opposite direction, out of that room into another room (confirmed by the fact the child is missing from the first room).

That doesn't completely solve the disappearance, but it is the first step IMO.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 22, 2016, 12:52:30 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 03:19:19 AM
"Local Portuguese Woman [with excavation site as backdrop] - That has no logic. What thief breaks into a house, takes the child away, murders her, carries the child on his arms in everyone's sight on the street and then comes here to bury her in an place that is only ground rock? Only a fool would do that! That's all I have to say about that. [laughs at the idea]"
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2014/06/goncalo-amaral-there-was-no-breaking-in.html

This lady in the street is talking common-sense, however note that
Part 1 of SY theory ("thief breaks into a house") which if a window is unlocked does not require force, is good.
Excellent theory so far, because that is exactly what burglars do, and it's confirmed by the open shutter and window.

Part 2 of SY theory ("takes the child away") is rubbish.
No burglar would do that, as that lady on the street can easily tell SY.
The answer is to retain part 1, but replace part 2, with the SIO actually imagining they are a burglar, they think everyone is out, open a shutter and window, but then inside they see children.

The obvious result will be that the SIO turned burglar will immediately flee empty-handed (confirmed by the fact that no material items were stolen), and any awakened mobile child will simultaneously flee in the opposite direction, out of that room into another room (confirmed by the fact the child is missing from the first room).

That doesn't completely solve the disappearance, but it is the first step IMO.

It is horses for courses, Pegasus, what normal law abiding citizen who would never dream of illicitly entering someone's home know about what a criminal burglar might or might not do?
Burglars are not nice people they are criminals capable of heinous actions.

Who could contemplate a fourteen year old girl and a fourteen year old boy entering a home with the murderous intention of killing a mother and daughter ... but it happened.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/18/two-14-year-olds-lincoln-court-mother-elizabeth-edwards-daughter-katie-found-dead

Who would have believed two children were capable of kidnapping and murdering James Bulger ... and how long would the police have searched for adults if Thomson and Venables hadn't been caught on CCTV taking him from the shopping centre?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool/content/articles/2006/12/04/local_history_bulger_feature.shtml

I don't think your theory works ...
(a)  there is no supporting evidence
(b)  there is no explanation of what subsequently happened to Madeleine

Mr Amaral also struggles to expand his accidental death theory by his failure to suggest subsequent events.

Evidence of absence should have been enough to ensure all theories were checked to conclusion ... deciding on one (according to his unbanned book translations of which his supporters should be giving serious thought to removing from the internet as he is in a bit of a litigious mood) on the 4th of May and sticking to it really isn't good investigative practice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 01:43:32 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 22, 2016, 12:52:30 PM
It is horses for courses, Pegasus, what normal law abiding citizen who would never dream of illicitly entering someone's home know about what a criminal burglar might or might not do? (snip)
Brietta do you not agree that a good detectives must be able to think like the perp?.
If NW and MD put themselves in the shoes of a burglar, complete with striped t-shirt and swag bag, who thinks everyone is out, but then on opening a window, is shocked to find people are in, what would they do?
And do you agree good detectives must be able to transform themselves into the innocent victim? In this case that means travelling back in time a few decades- what would the 3-yr old MD or NW have done if awoken at night by a stranger outside opening the window of their bedroom while their parents were out?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 02:04:25 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 22, 2016, 12:52:30 PM
(snip)  (a)  there is no supporting evidence (snip)
I admit Brietta my hypothesis has absolutely no evidence supporting it except for the open shutter, the open window, the open bedroom door, and the absence of the child from her bedroom.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 22, 2016, 02:31:55 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 01:43:32 PM
Brietta do you not agree that a good detectives must be able to think like the perp?.
If NW and MD put themselves in the shoes of a burglar, complete with striped t-shirt and swag bag, who thinks everyone is out, but then on opening a window, is shocked to find people are in, what would they do?
And do you agree good detectives must be able to transform themselves into the innocent victim? In this case that means travelling back in time a few decades- what would the 3-yr old MD or NW have done if awoken at night by a stranger outside opening the window of their bedroom while their parents were out?

I think there may be a very fine line in some instances ... witness the arrests of former and presently employed detectives in Portugal.
If found guilty of the heinous charges made against them, they will have the book thrown at them, depending on which book ~ they could do a long stretch which on appeal is reduced to a couple of hours community service.

In my opinion the views expressed by many of the detectives working on Madeleine's case were indeed regressive ... so actually acting out the behaviour of a four year old should have presented no difficulty.

I think it is clear from his book ~ various interviews ~ statements from Ricardo Piava ... that Mr Amaral formed a firm view of events from which he never deviated.
He was totally inflexible and remains so nearly nine years down the line ... confirmed by his intention to publish a book containing so many mistakes and basic misunderstandings that to be relevant would require to be rewritten ... perhaps he has done that, I don't know.
But in the light of present day knowledge if he hasn't ~ he runs the risk of being ridiculed when it is scrutinised in the English speaking world and comparisons are made between his assertions and actual events.

One of the first things he needs to address is explaining exactly the mechanics of how and where Madeleine's parents hid her remains to complete his thesis.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 09:49:58 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 22, 2016, 02:31:55 PM
(snip) In my opinion the views expressed by many of the detectives working on Madeleine's case were indeed regressive ... so actually acting out the behaviour of a four year old should have presented no difficulty.(snip)
I was suggesting that the Met SIO whoever it is now should travel back in time to when they were an almost 4 yr old boy or girl and ask themselves which direction they would run if a stranger outside opened their bedroom shutter and window. Thinking like a child is a positive and, to solve this case, essential skill.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 09:58:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 22, 2016, 02:31:55 PM
(snip) I think it is clear from his book ~ various interviews ~ statements from Ricardo Piava ... that Mr Amaral formed a firm view of events from which he never deviated. (snip)
I disagree with some of Mr Amaral's deductions, for example his claim that KM opened the window
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 22, 2016, 10:38:47 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 09:49:58 PM
I was suggesting that the Met SIO whoever it is now should travel back in time to when they were an almost 4 yr old boy or girl and ask themselves which direction they would run if a stranger outside opened their bedroom shutter and window. Thinking like a child is a positive and, to solve this case, essential skill.

A four year old cannot conceal her own cadaver from all available resources for 9 years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 22, 2016, 10:55:36 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 09:49:58 PM
I was suggesting that the Met SIO whoever it is now should travel back in time to when they were an almost 4 yr old boy or girl and ask themselves which direction they would run if a stranger outside opened their bedroom shutter and window. Thinking like a child is a positive and, to solve this case, essential skill.

Four year olds are not a homogeneous bunch, Pegasus.  They would not all act in the same or even in a predictable pattern.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 11:06:01 PM
Quote from: misty on April 22, 2016, 10:38:47 PM
A four year old cannot conceal her own cadaver from all available resources for 9 years.
If a group of detectives makes a hypothesis that perhaps the shutter and window were opened from outside by someone intending to burgle a property where apparently everyone is out (clearly one of SY's hypotheses IMO), but then the detectives don't put themselves in the position of the child when that happens and work out exactly what the child would do, it would prove that millions of pounds can't buy common sense. More advanced and complex considerations like you mention Misty are important but should IMO not even be considered until long after the likely results of the noisy shutter opening are predicted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 22, 2016, 11:16:56 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 11:06:01 PM
If a group of detectives makes a hypothesis that perhaps the shutter and window were opened from outside by someone intending to burgle a property where apparently everyone is out (clearly one of SY's hypotheses IMO), but then the detectives don't put themselves in the position of the child when that happens and work out exactly what the child would do, it would prove that millions of pounds can't buy common sense. More advanced and complex considerations like you mention Misty are important but should IMO not even be considered until long after the likely results of the noisy shutter opening are predicted.

OK. Let's assume that the child progressed to beyond the side gate, without leaving any apparent evidence in doing so.
What was the child seeking? ...... Help.
Who was she seeking it from?.......Mum/Dad/friends/sone other grown-up.
Where would she go to find that help and how far would she have had to venture before she found someone?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 11:25:12 PM
Quote from: misty on April 22, 2016, 11:16:56 PM
OK. Let's assume that the child progressed to beyond the side gate, without leaving any apparent evidence in doing so.
What was the child seeking? ...... Help.
Who was she seeking it from?.......Mum/Dad/friends/sone other grown-up.
Where would she go to find that help and how far would she have had to venture before she found someone?
To work that out we would need to know
1. Did the parents tell the child they would be going out about an hour and threequarters after bedtime?
2. If so, did they tell her which restuarant?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 22, 2016, 11:32:42 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 22, 2016, 11:25:12 PM
To work that out we would need to know
1. Did the parents tell the child they would be going out about an hour and threequarters after bedtime?
2. If so, did they tell her which restuarant?

I'll have to answer that with another question. Did the child really cry for 75 mins without getting out of bed to see where her parents were or was the question "Mummy, why didn't you come...." asked out of unawareness?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 12:11:06 AM
Quote from: misty on April 22, 2016, 11:32:42 PM
I'll have to answer that with another question. Did the child really cry for 75 mins without getting out of bed to see where her parents were or was the question "Mummy, why didn't you come...." asked out of unawareness?
Good question, IMO the child would certainly have got out of bed and looked in the lounge and in the parent bedroom.

Returning to the evening of the 3rd, do I recall that GM states that on seeing the door angle his first thought was maybe she had gone to look for them in parent bedroom? Also that KM at 10 also thinks at first maybe she has gone to look for them in the parent bedroom?  That means probably the child at bedtime was not told that they would be going out an hour and three quarters after she went to slleep? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 12:37:55 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 23, 2016, 12:05:53 AM
(snip) Mr Armstrong sued the Sunday Times successfully in the UK (snip)
His 2003 book "Every Second Counts" was in the villa in Aug 2007.
It describes his remarkable recovery from serious illness to win races and start a foundation.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 01:27:49 AM
What do people think about the "secret cardinal"?
Was he, as stated in a film, a person being watched by the private investigators?
Or was he a private investigator in cunning disguise?
Did someone take the old saying "You can't get the staff these days" a bit too literally?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 23, 2016, 01:35:10 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 12:11:06 AM
Good question, IMO the child would certainly have got out of bed and looked in the lounge and in the parent bedroom.

Returning to the evening of the 3rd, do I recall that GM states that on seeing the door angle his first thought was maybe she had gone to look for them in parent bedroom? Also that KM at 10 also thinks at first maybe she has gone to look for them in the parent bedroom?  That means probably the child at bedtime was not told that they would be going out an hour and three quarters after she went to slleep?

Why not go outside on Tue if crying for 75 minutes and any tom, dick and harry could get in. Maybe she couldn't get out. Yes that sounds right. A door that keeps moving only in fantasy luzland.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on April 23, 2016, 01:39:18 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 12:11:06 AM
Good question, IMO the child would certainly have got out of bed and looked in the lounge and in the parent bedroom.

Returning to the evening of the 3rd, do I recall that GM states that on seeing the door angle his first thought was maybe she had gone to look for them in parent bedroom? Also that KM at 10 also thinks at first maybe she has gone to look for them in the parent bedroom?  That means probably the child at bedtime was not told that they would be going out an hour and three quarters after she went to slleep?

It was KM

15 40

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 23, 2016, 01:40:27 AM
Quote from: mercury on April 23, 2016, 01:39:18 AM
It was KM

15 40


That bloody magic door (Gerry yes keep on nodding). Obsession!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on April 23, 2016, 01:44:55 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 23, 2016, 01:40:27 AM
That bloody magic door. Obsession!

I know, a moved door can have move 8(*(d by the air from the irresponsibly left open patio door or MM gettng up for the loo, or naybe it wasnt moved at all, not an abductor definitely

Oh well, time will tell
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 01:47:19 AM
Quote from: mercury on April 23, 2016, 01:39:18 AM
It was KM

15 40 (snip)
Thanks. And doesn't GM say that on his check he thought maybe she had gone to look for them in the parent bedroom?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 23, 2016, 01:56:12 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 01:47:19 AM
Thanks. And doesn't GM say that on his check he thought maybe she had gone to look for them in the parent bedroom?

Not really. 8:30 left in same sleeping position. According to Gerry she was in the same position i.e. never awoke and didn't move any magic door.

"Around 8:30-8:35 they left for the Tapas restaurant. Before leaving they checked on the children, she doesn't know who; however Gerry says it was him."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 02:05:03 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 23, 2016, 01:56:12 AM
Not really. 8:30 left in same sleeping position. According to Gerry she was in the same position i.e. never awoke and didn't move any magic door.

"Around 8:30-8:35 they left for the Tapas restaurant. Before leaving they checked on the children, she doesn't know who; however Gerry says it was him."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm
Pathfinder the 8.30pm check was not visual.
" 20H35 ... listening from the outside and, as there was complete silence, he did not even enter" GM 10May
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 23, 2016, 02:19:56 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 01:27:49 AM
What do people think about the "secret cardinal"?
Was he, as stated in a film, a person being watched by the private investigators?
Or was he a private investigator in cunning disguise?
Did someone take the old saying "You can't get the staff these days" a bit too literally?

Weren't there two of them? One said he was sent by the Pope because the town wa evil; he aid he knew Madeleine was dead & who killed her. The other was an undercover agent, sent to infiltrate the church & local community.
Do Cardinals look out of place in Luz or are they featured on picture postcards as part of the scenery?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 02:39:08 AM
Quote from: misty on April 23, 2016, 02:19:56 AM
Weren't there two of them? One said he was sent by the Pope because the town wa evil; he aid he knew Madeleine was dead & who killed her. The other was an undercover agent, sent to infiltrate the church & local community.
Do Cardinals look out of place in Luz or are they featured on picture postcards as part of the scenery?
There was the fake priest who was definitely an undercover PI. And there was the cardinal who was supposedly a real character under close surveillence by the PIs. The cardinal has a thin face and a staff. The PI priest has a medium oriental looking face and no staff. At least the fake priest PI did some real searching - he was knocking at all the doors in the area just down those steps from the smith sighting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 23, 2016, 02:48:25 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 02:39:08 AM
There was the fake priest who was definitely an undercover PI. And there was the cardinal who was supposedly a real character under close surveillence by the PIs. The cardinal has a thin face and a staff. The PI priest has a medium oriental looking face and no staff. At least the fake priest PI did some real searching - he was knocking at all the doors in the area just down those steps from the smith sighting.

LOL How do you know that last bit? Did he get reported as yet another fake charity collector?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 03:14:26 AM
Quote from: misty on April 23, 2016, 02:48:25 AM
LOL How do you know that last bit? Did he get reported as yet another fake charity collector?
Because disguised as a Tibetan monk I was following the PI priest who was following the Secret Cardinal Misty
 

 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 23, 2016, 09:02:21 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 02:05:03 AM
Pathfinder the 8.30pm check was not visual.
" 20H35 ... listening from the outside and, as there was complete silence, he did not even enter" GM 10May

There are way too many contradictions. I wonder why Kate has such a hard time remembering the last time she saw Madeleine that day?

"Moreover, he says that with respect to Madeleine she was in the same position in which he had left her at the beginning of the night."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-ARGUIDO.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on April 23, 2016, 09:31:31 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 03:14:26 AM
Because disguised as a Tibetan monk I was following the PI priest who was following the Secret Cardinal Misty

  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 11:42:04 AM
PI checking area downsteps from smith sighting
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on April 23, 2016, 11:49:16 AM
Quote from: misty on April 23, 2016, 02:19:56 AM
Weren't there two of them? One said he was sent by the Pope because the town wa evil; he aid he knew Madeleine was dead & who killed her. The other was an undercover agent, sent to infiltrate the church & local community.
Do Cardinals look out of place in Luz or are they featured on picture postcards as part of the scenery?


  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 12:11:31 PM
Ditto private investigator checking area downsteps from sighting
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on April 23, 2016, 01:44:10 PM
There has clearly been a mega spat between Halligan and those he was supposed to pay (or reimburse).

I can understand that these people want to be paid... but who from? Should the Madeleine Fund have paid out twice? On what basis?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 23, 2016, 01:44:30 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 03:14:26 AM
Because disguised as a Tibetan monk I was following the PI priest who was following the Secret Cardinal Misty


 @)(++(*  Brilliant!
Shades of Clouseau & Cato.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 02:12:34 PM
There was a case of an actor hired to pose as a priest 5800km away in Georgetown.
An idea later re-used by the private investigation in PDL.
The psychology of repetitive behaviour is fascinating.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 06:22:15 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 23, 2016, 05:08:25 PM
What a tease   @)(++(*
Is there more?
Possibly just a desperate pink concoction in the sun?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 23, 2016, 06:28:50 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 06:22:15 PM
Possibly just a desperate pink concoction in the sun?

A very strong possibility, I should think, but we shall see tomorrow - or even tonight if people can  be bothered to stay up long enough. @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 06:42:44 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 23, 2016, 06:28:50 PM
A very strong possibility, I should think, but we shall see tomorrow - or even tonight if people can  be bothered to stay up long enough. @)(++(*
It will be a sunrise anti-Amaral attack IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 23, 2016, 06:49:23 PM
On the face of it, almost certainly, but newspapers sometime implant other little messages for their readers to enjoy, so that all is not always as it seems.

Is the Sun behind a paywall, as I certainly won't be buying a copy ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 23, 2016, 07:06:31 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 23, 2016, 06:49:23 PM
On the face of it, almost certainly, but newspapers sometime implant other little messages for their readers to enjoy, so that all is not always as it seems.

Is the Sun behind a paywall, as I certainly won't be buying a copy ?

It's free again now - changed 30/11/15.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 09:53:28 PM
It is possible the sun article may be about illness (eg diabetes)?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 10:08:17 PM
Quote from: davel on April 23, 2016, 09:23:55 PM
I think kates description is more accurate
I'm trying to bring the handful unit into the world of mathematical precision Dave1.
A "couple" of prime ministers had phone chats with GM in 2007.
As did a "brace" of foreign secretaries.
And rumour is there might be a "handful" of officers from the original investigation on telly later tonite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 23, 2016, 10:18:57 PM


I do hope that none of those officers is going to breach judicial secrecy live on air tonight or say anything which will undermine the current investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 10:38:26 PM
Watching CMTV. They just showed a short trailer for the special later tonight.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on April 23, 2016, 10:59:48 PM
Quote from: misty on April 23, 2016, 10:18:57 PM

I do hope that none of those officers is going to breach judicial secrecy live on air tonight or say anything which will undermine the current investigation.

Dont be so private eye funny
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 11:18:20 PM
The Sun article now appears to be online.
It is just a rewrite of the pathetic "Sick Brit trolls" article.
What is happening?
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/7100537/Madeleine-McCann-cop-paid-50k-by-sick-Brit-trolls-after-accusing-her-parents-of-lying-about-her-abduction.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 11:33:44 PM
The person who the Suni claims "wrote to a star asking him to put in £10,000" has already left a comment underneath pointing out that the Sun has got it wrong.

"EXCUSE ME !! I did no such thing writing to a celebrity asking for £10,000 I wrote to many asking if they could donate but I didn't specify amount, Please show me a copy of the letter you have, that shows this, if you are unable to please amend the article to Marian Greaves contacted many celebrities asking them to support the campaign, which is the actual fact of what I did."

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/7100537/Madeleine-McCann-cop-paid-50k-by-sick-Brit-trolls-after-accusing-her-parents-of-lying-about-her-abduction.html

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on April 23, 2016, 11:52:36 PM
The sun dont care, their business is NOT facts and truths, the opposite
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 24, 2016, 12:00:09 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 23, 2016, 11:33:44 PM
The person who the Suni claims "wrote to a star asking him to put in £10,000" has already left a comment underneath pointing out that the Sun has got it wrong.

"EXCUSE ME !! I did no such thing writing to a celebrity asking for £10,000 I wrote to many asking if they could donate but I didn't specify amount, Please show me a copy of the letter you have, that shows this, if you are unable to please amend the article to Marian Greaves contacted many celebrities asking them to support the campaign, which is the actual fact of what I did."

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/7100537/Madeleine-McCann-cop-paid-50k-by-sick-Brit-trolls-after-accusing-her-parents-of-lying-about-her-abduction.html

Here is the link to the copy of the letter she sent to Gary Barlow & Olly Murs. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6716.msg285032#msg285032    Post number 1048
 Interpret the £10,000/£300000 as you will.
She also suggested to Amaral's wife that a prolific supporter tweeter should be prosecuted for libelling Amaral & money could be raised to assist. Amaral's wife apparently declined. (screenshots available).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on April 24, 2016, 12:05:52 AM
live link to  GA   http://www.tvtuga.com/cmtv/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 24, 2016, 12:16:04 AM
Quote from: misty on April 24, 2016, 12:00:09 AM
I have reposted a copy of the public email letter she sent to Gary Barlow on Amazon. Interpret the £10,000/£300000 as you will.
She also suggested to Amaral's wife that a prolific supporter tweeter should be prosecuted for libelling Amaral & money could be raised to assist. Amaral's wife apparently declined. (screenshots available).

Does anyone really care?
Enough money was available for Sr Amaral to lodge his appeal successfully.
His fund and Leaving No Stone Unturned Ltd were both begging bowls....... so what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on April 24, 2016, 12:27:20 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 24, 2016, 12:16:04 AM
Does anyone really care?
Enough money was available for Sr Amaral to lodge his appeal successfully.
His fund and Leaving No Stone Unturned Ltd were both begging bowls....... so what?

The mcann begging bowl doesnt like the other begging bowl lol

It might make a nice cartoon


Your bowl is horrible my one is righteous and moral,  yours is Immoral and not righteous

My one i can spend on whatever i want
Yours is only for one purpose
You b........
Lol

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on April 24, 2016, 12:32:31 AM
i wish i could understand portugese because   GA is  speakign  really  well
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: puglove on April 24, 2016, 12:37:26 AM
Quote from: mercury on April 24, 2016, 12:27:20 AM
The mcann begging bowl doesnt like the other begging bowl lol

It might make a nice cartoon


Your bowl is horrible my one is righteous and moral,  yours is Immoral and not righteous

My one i can spend on whatever i want
Yours is only for one purpose
You b........
Lol

And Moab is my washpot!

 8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 24, 2016, 12:43:54 AM
Quote from: mercury on April 24, 2016, 12:27:20 AM
The mcann begging bowl doesnt like the other begging bowl lol

It might make a nice cartoon


Your bowl is horrible my one is righteous and moral,  yours is Immoral and not righteous

My one i can spend on whatever i want
Yours is only for one purpose
You b........
Lol

Sounds like an idea for Edward Monkton to use for a calendar  ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 24, 2016, 12:48:00 AM
Well, I watched it, didn't understand much, kept seeing Euclides Monteiro, but wait........no pictures of Smithman?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: puglove on April 24, 2016, 12:51:50 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 24, 2016, 12:43:54 AM
Sounds like an idea for Edward Monkton to use for a calendar  ?{)(**

Not Edward Mordrake, though. He's SO two-faced.   ?8)@)-)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 24, 2016, 12:57:22 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 24, 2016, 12:16:04 AM
Does anyone really care?
Enough money was available for Sr Amaral to lodge his appeal successfully.
His fund and Leaving No Stone Unturned Ltd were both begging bowls....... so what?

Marian Greaves apparently ~ who took the time to contradict the Sun's claim ~ and her contradiction has now been contradicted by publication of her email asking celebs/pensioners or whoever for a substantial gift to the cause of freedom of expression.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 24, 2016, 01:18:44 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 24, 2016, 12:57:22 AM
Marian Greaves apparently ~ who took the time to contradict the Sun's claim ~ and her contradiction has now been contradicted by publication of her email asking celebs/pensioners or whoever for a substantial gift to the cause of freedom of expression.

And? or so? or why is this relevant?
Cast your mind back to when some geezer needed dosh to make an appeal to a higher court.
The necessary funds were raised by begging bowl (see earlier posts) and the appeal went ahead and was upheld. THAT is all that counts. It's like in golf the key thing is not "how" but "how many".
I don't expect that will stop about another100 pages boring the arse off everyone with inconsequential chatter about whether or not Mrs Wembley had just the one or some such similar sort of animile.
It's rather like snapping at gnats when when being stampeded by heffalumps.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 24, 2016, 01:51:30 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 24, 2016, 01:18:44 AM
And? or so? or why is this relevant?
Cast your mind back to when some geezer needed dosh to make an appeal to a higher court.
The necessary funds were raised by begging bowl (see earlier posts) and the appeal went ahead and was upheld. THAT is all that counts. It's like in golf the key thing is not "how" but "how many".
I don't expect that will stop about another100 pages boring the arse off everyone with inconsequential chatter about whether or not Mrs Wembley had just the one or some such similar sort of animile.
It's rather like snapping at gnats when when being stampeded by heffalumps.

I haven't noticed you being shy about commenting on a subject while deriding members for doing just that.  Surely a bit of the "don't do's ... " there.

We are a discussion forum ... so that is what we do ... discuss.  Pity if that offends you ... but that was on the label when we all applied to join and most of us are content enough to be "snapping ants".
Please don't take it upon yourself to discourage members from posting.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 24, 2016, 02:24:00 AM
Two interesting points picked up from Twitter tonight.
1. Leanne Baulch did not set up the GFM account, it was allegedly already in existence but she just publicised it. What???? Await further information.

2. Amaral has said in the TV interview that there are some badly translated English copies of his book on the internet.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on April 24, 2016, 06:47:39 AM
Quote from: misty on April 24, 2016, 02:24:00 AM
Two interesting points picked up from Twitter tonight.
1. Leanne Baulch did not set up the GFM account, it was allegedly already in existence but she just publicised it. What???? Await further information.

2. Amaral has said in the TV interview that there are some badly translated English copies of his book on the internet.

Point 2 would mean it would be impossible to sue him based on the English versions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on April 25, 2016, 06:22:26 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on April 24, 2016, 06:47:39 AM
Point 2 would mean it would be impossible to sue him based on the English versions.

I dare say Isabel Durate has the Portuguese original.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on April 25, 2016, 06:31:24 PM
Please note that the Secret Cardinal posts now have their own thread.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7165.msg324880#msg324880
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 26, 2016, 10:27:04 AM
"BBCRadio4 reporting that the police are following one, remaining inquiry before McCann investigation closes."

From twitter so if true I told you this months ago. There is only one lead left to pursue hence the small remaining team.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 26, 2016, 10:30:47 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 26, 2016, 10:27:04 AM
"BBCRadio4 reporting that the police are following one, remaining inquiry before McCann investigation closes."

From twitter so if true I told you this months ago. There is only one lead left to pursue hence the small remaining team.

Interesting.  And likely true.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 26, 2016, 08:39:36 PM
I predict that if this case get solved, the answer will involve no uncovered carrying through the streets.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 12:47:32 AM
Why did the UK government phone GM in very early June 2007 (less than 2 weeks after Mitchell arrived) and inform him that they would be withdrawing Mitchell from the case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 28, 2016, 01:28:05 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 12:47:32 AM
Why did the UK government phone GM in very early June 2007 (less than 2 weeks after Mitchell arrived) and inform him that they would be withdrawing Mitchell from the case?

I can think of a reason why they may have asked him if he wished to withdraw from the case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 01:37:26 AM
Daily Star 28 Apr claims that the one remaining lead being investigated by SY is the 3 burglars.
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/511311/Three-key-burglar-suspects-questioned-Madeleine-McCann-police-theory-attack-lead-Portugal
IMO this article is diversion - it is a rewrite of an earlier article - it has no new content - no new quotes from police - only the usual pink "source".
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 01:41:26 AM
Quote from: misty on April 28, 2016, 01:28:05 AM
I can think of a reason why they may have asked him if he wished to withdraw from the case.
On 1/2/3 Jun 2007 the FCO told GM that they were going to withdraw CM from the case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 28, 2016, 02:14:16 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 01:41:26 AM
On 1/2/3 Jun 2007 the FCO told GM that they were going to withdraw CM from the case.

Ok - so the FCO suggested that CM was too high profile & the McCanns would be best to pay someone for their PR from the FMF.
Was that John Williams who made the call on behalf of the new Foreign Secretary? Cost-cutting - or where are you leading with this?

ETA Not John Williams - misleading Guardian report.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 02:29:15 AM
Quote from: misty on April 28, 2016, 02:14:16 AM
Ok - so the FCO suggested that CM was too high profile & the McCanns would be best to pay someone for their PR from the FMF.
Was that John Williams who made the call on behalf of the new Foreign Secretary? Cost-cutting - or where are you leading with this?
Presumably yes it was JW who phoned GM. This was June 1st or 2nd or 3rd Misty when MB had been FCS for ages and was certainly not new.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 28, 2016, 02:31:46 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 02:29:15 AM
Presumably yes it was JW who phoned GM. This was June 1st or 2nd or 3rd June Misty when Beckett had been FCS for ages and was certainly not new.

A withdrawal of UK government help for the McCanns, not interference then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 02:39:34 AM
Quote from: misty on April 28, 2016, 02:31:46 AM
A withdrawal of UK government help for the McCanns, not interference then?
This was IMO an intended reconfiguration of that Govt help to GM to make it less visible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 11:48:20 AM
"At the beginning of June, Gerry had a call from the director of communications at the Foreign Office. There was concern in the government, he said, that Clarence was 'becoming the story'. Whatever the case, it was suggested to Gerry that we should used Madeleine's Fund to employ someone to replace Clarence once our campaign visits were complete. Reluctantly Gerry agreed." (Source: KM book p170)

Did the FCO pull Mr Mitchell off the case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 12:06:31 PM
Quote from: misty on April 26, 2016, 04:23:09 PM
You are too trusting, Pegasus (snip)
No more trusting than G was, Misty - why did he let this man into the house and who was this man? 

"One day G, in what I can only assume was a moment of weakness, let the self-appointed ‘Lord’s Helper’ into the house. He was a tall, elderly gentleman sporting a wooden crucifix the size of Kansas around his neck. I stared at G in disbelief and soon decided it would be wise to take ... out to the park." (KM book p309-10)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on April 28, 2016, 12:56:17 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 11:48:20 AM
"At the beginning of June, Gerry had a call from the director of communications at the Foreign Office. There was concern in the government, he said, that Clarence was 'becoming the story'. Whatever the case, it was suggested to Gerry that we should used Madeleine's Fund to employ someone to replace Clarence once our campaign visits were complete. Reluctantly Gerry agreed." (Source: KM book p170)

Did the FCO pull Mr Mitchell off the case?

CM was on temporary secondment to the FCO assist with the massive media interest in a drama involving UK subjects that had occurred in a foreign country.

There was bound to be a limit at some point as to the support offered in the immediate aftermath.

I don't see the issue.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 01:41:33 PM
Quote from: Carana on April 28, 2016, 12:56:17 PM
CM was on temporary secondment to the FCO assist with the massive media interest in a drama involving UK subjects that had occurred in a foreign country.

There was bound to be a limit at some point as to the support offered in the immediate aftermath.

I don't see the issue.
Less than 12 days after his assignment to the case, there was concern in the government that he was becoming the story. The source is KM book p170.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 05:45:21 PM
It was very philanthropic of people to provide free use of luxury jets.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 28, 2016, 07:13:24 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 05:45:21 PM
It was very philanthropic of people to provide free use of luxury jets.

Yep, some people have empathy combined with concern and kindness

When our little boy died from his brain tumour, we were all devastated and we decided to push the boat out and take our daughter to Disney in Florida in an effort to get her and both of us back on track.  Travel to the USA was rare in 1976 and we hadn't a clue where we would stay.

An American customer of my hubbies company (hubby was not the owner nor in charge), heard about our son dying and our proposed visit ... and offered us the use of his gorgeous luxury apartment there.  Such kindness to complete strangers!

Some people have empathy and kindness, others have coldness, bitterness and animosity.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 28, 2016, 07:15:12 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 05:45:21 PM
It was very philanthropic of people to provide free use of luxury jets.

Nothing but the best - except when they have to pay themselves, then its Easyjet
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on April 28, 2016, 07:31:49 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 28, 2016, 07:15:12 PM
Nothing but the best - except when they have to pay themselves, then its Easyjet

I would have been really impressed had they used the Jet to go and check out the very many 'sightings' around the world... No one from Oprahs  country had a sighting did they? and did the Pope know anything  about a dodgy priest or something?  Hence the Pope visit, what was that about? show ,show ,show!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 28, 2016, 09:29:55 PM
Obviously not favours requested by someone in UK gov then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on April 29, 2016, 02:51:58 PM
What happened with the private jet that was planned for the trio's 10 June Lisbon-Casablanca flight?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on April 30, 2016, 12:00:46 AM
Three new articles from a case follower to peruse and ponder on

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/search?updated-max=2016-04-25T18:45:00%2B01:00&max-results=1

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/out-of-date.html

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2016_04_01_archive.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 01, 2016, 02:28:57 PM
Just came across this - hadn't seen mention of it before.  Seems to be a fairly new appointment

http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/cardiovascular-sciences/people/mccann

Professor of Cardiac Imaging and Honorary Consultant Cardiologist

Does this mean he is purely research and doesn't see patients any more?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on May 01, 2016, 02:51:17 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 01, 2016, 02:28:57 PM
Just came across this - hadn't seen mention of it before.  Seems to be a fairly new appointment

http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/cardiovascular-sciences/people/mccann

Professor of Cardiac Imaging and Honorary Consultant Cardiologist

Does this mean he is purely research and doesn't see patients any more?

Who knows.   But I'm sure it won't be long before someone finds fault with it .  No doubt every word is being scrutinised as we speak - with that sole aim in mind.

IMO

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 01, 2016, 04:56:27 PM
Quote from: Benice on May 01, 2016, 02:51:17 PM
Who knows.   But I'm sure it won't be long before someone finds fault with it .  No doubt every word is being scrutinised as we speak - with that sole aim in mind.

IMO
Professor of Cardiac Imaging and Honorary Consultant Cardiologist

Mayor of Olhão

Both look impressive
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 01, 2016, 05:05:24 PM
honorary consultant   
A clinical academic in the UK who is employed by a higher education institution or other organisation in a research and/or teaching capacity, and who also provides services for NHS patients at a consultant level in NHS facilities.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 01, 2016, 05:12:38 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 01, 2016, 05:05:24 PM
honorary consultant   
A clinical academic in the UK who is employed by a higher education institution or other organisation in a research and/or teaching capacity, and who also provides services for NHS patients at a consultant level in NHS facilities.

looks like he is extremely successful
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 01, 2016, 05:37:15 PM
Quote from: davel on May 01, 2016, 05:12:38 PM
looks like he is extremely successful

Indeed it does.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 01, 2016, 07:08:32 PM
Is it true that the UK consul sat in on all 3 formal police interviews of GM/KM in September 2007?

"We've had the British Consul from the Foreign Office present during the questioning"
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/local-news/mccanns-sos-to-miliband-1-1281209

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 01, 2016, 11:51:05 PM
consuls are normally bored...this was exciting
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 02, 2016, 12:12:48 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 01, 2016, 11:51:05 PM
consuls are normally bored...this was exciting
Is it usual to be present at police interviews?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 02, 2016, 12:14:52 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 02, 2016, 12:12:48 AM
Is it usual to be present at police interviews?

Is it usual for a British child to be kidnapped abroad?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 02, 2016, 12:15:45 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 02, 2016, 12:12:48 AM
Is it usual to be present at police interviews?

NO
"Someone" ensured they were for "some" reason
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 02, 2016, 12:18:14 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 02, 2016, 12:14:52 AM
Is it usual for a British child to be kidnapped abroad?

Not usual at all, errr........
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: puglove on May 02, 2016, 12:23:01 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 02, 2016, 12:14:52 AM
Is it usual for a British child to be kidnapped abroad?

Would Gerry leave his camera or wallet on the bed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 02, 2016, 12:49:55 AM
Craig Murray says:
Embassy staff were .... ordered that British authorities were to be present at every contact between the McCanns and Portuguese police.
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/the-strange-case-of-gordon-brown-and-the-mccanns

Here is confirmation that Craig is telling the truth. D.Hughes says:
"We've had the British Consul from the Foreign Office present during the questioning"
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/local-news/mccanns-sos-to-miliband-1-1281209

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 02, 2016, 01:02:11 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 02, 2016, 12:49:55 AM
Craig Murray says:
Embassy staff were .... ordered that British authorities were to be present at every contact between the McCanns and Portuguese police.
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/the-strange-case-of-gordon-brown-and-the-mccanns

Here is confirmation that Craig is telling the truth. D.Hughes says:
"We've had the British Consul from the Foreign Office present during the questioning"
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/local-news/mccanns-sos-to-miliband-1-1281209

The link also says ...

"The likelihood of Kate and Gerry McCann being charged over the death of their daughter was dramatically increased this morning, after DNA found in the family's hire-car was reported as 'almost certainly' Madeleine's."

http://www.shieldsgazette.com/cm/jarrow-and-hebburn-gazette/news/local-news/mccanns-sos-to-miliband-1-1281209#ixzz47S3Vbc41

In the light of such decidedly false information leaked by the investigation circulating about them and which they knew to be impossible ... do you think they weren't entitled as ordinary citizens to approach the foreign secretary of the day for protection.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 02, 2016, 01:09:01 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 02, 2016, 01:02:11 AM
The link also says ...

"The likelihood of Kate and Gerry McCann being charged over the death of their daughter was dramatically increased this morning, after DNA found in the family's hire-car was reported as 'almost certainly' Madeleine's."

http://www.shieldsgazette.com/cm/jarrow-and-hebburn-gazette/news/local-news/mccanns-sos-to-miliband-1-1281209#ixzz47S3Vbc41

In the light of such decidedly false information leaked by the investigation circulating about them and which they knew to be impossible ... do you think they weren't entitled as ordinary citizens to approach the foreign secretary of the day for protection.
That information was released on 11th Sept Brietta therefore it cannot possibly have been justification for UK government presence at every meeting between the PJ and GM/KM from 4th May to 7th Sept inclusive.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 02, 2016, 01:12:50 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 02, 2016, 01:09:01 AM
That information was released on 11th Sept Brietta therefore it cannot possibly have been justification for UK government presence at every meeting between the PJ and GM/KM from 4th May to 7th Sept inclusive.

The devil is alwys in the detail, oops brietta

 @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 02, 2016, 01:27:30 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 02, 2016, 01:12:50 AM
The devil is alwys in the detail, oops brietta

 @)(++(*
Although to be fair, that regional newspaper article indicates there was an intention to request additional help from the UK government soon after 11th Sept.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 02, 2016, 01:32:02 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 02, 2016, 01:09:01 AM
That information was released on 11th Sept Brietta therefore it cannot possibly have been justification for UK government presence at every meeting between the PJ and GM/KM from 4th May to 7th Sept inclusive.

At the time that information was merely the latest in a long line of propaganda stories leaked by the investigation and directed against Madeleine's parents.

"This is a very badly told story" Diário de Notícias
 
by: José Manuel Oliveira and Paula Martinheira

05 May 2007

The disappearance of Madeleine McCann, the English three-year-old child that was on holidays in Lagos, "is a very badly told story", a source from the Polícia Judiciária in Portimão has confided to DN. The statement reflects the authorities' doubts concerning the "confused" depositions that were given by the witnesses yesterday, throughout the day.

///   ///

The parents, who were taken to the PJ in Portimão at around mid-morning, refused to speak to the journalists, but advanced the idea that the apartment had been broken into, to the British media. Nevertheless, the resort's administration and the GNR assert that "there were no signs of a break-in whatsoever".
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id119.html

(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/dn050507.jpg)


Therefore within hours of Madeleine's abduction and while her case was being treated as such by the officers on the ground ... someone somewhere in the PJ was spinning against her parents and using the Portuguese press to do so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 02, 2016, 01:49:51 AM
"11 September 2007 ... if the situation progresses further, we'll make direct contact again  ..."

http://www.shieldsgazette.com/cm/jarrow-and-hebburn-gazette/news/local-news/mccanns-sos-to-miliband-1-1281209
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 02, 2016, 02:14:19 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 02, 2016, 01:49:51 AM
"11 September 2007 ... if the situation progresses further, we'll make direct contact again  ..."

http://www.shieldsgazette.com/cm/jarrow-and-hebburn-gazette/news/local-news/mccanns-sos-to-miliband-1-1281209

Their daughter was missing and as early as 5th May someone within the PJ investigation was attacking them in the Portuguese press picked up worldwide ... and continued to do so relentlessly.

I really fail to see where you of all people are subscribing to the conspiracy theories put around about shadowy government interference.

If the British government were exercising their duty of protecting British citizens abroad that is fine by me ... and no-one was in more need of that protection than an innocent couple whose name was being systematically destroyed for some reason or other by those who would have been better employed looking for a missing child. imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 02, 2016, 02:36:00 AM
"11 September 2007 ... if the situation progresses further, we'll make direct contact again  ..."

Things certainly did progress further over the following days.
So IMO soon after 11th Sept they did make direct contact again with the highest level of UK Govt.
Remember this is after they and all the UK police had returned to England.
So what exactly did they request during this direct contact?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 02, 2016, 03:05:58 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 02, 2016, 02:14:19 AM
Their daughter was missing and as early as 5th May someone within the PJ investigation was attacking them in the Portuguese press picked up worldwide ... and continued to do so relentlessly.



As early as 5th may philomena mccann was being fed lies and attacking the pj

Ie she said on tv that the pj took 5 hours to arrive, dont  you agree bretta that was false? Thnk about it, i will catch up tomrrow, nighty nite x
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 02, 2016, 05:45:35 AM
I wondered why Special Branch got involved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 02, 2016, 12:24:16 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 02, 2016, 02:36:00 AM
"11 September 2007 ... if the situation progresses further, we'll make direct contact again  ..."

Things certainly did progress further over the following days.
So IMO soon after 11th Sept they did make direct contact again with the highest level of UK Govt.
Remember this is after they and all the UK police had returned to England.
So what exactly did they request during this direct contact?

Assistance to find their daughter? since it was quite clear by that stage that the Portuguese police weren't doing so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 02, 2016, 12:56:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 02, 2016, 05:45:35 AM
I wondered why Special Branch got involved.

Do you mean "what was the national security interest" ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 02, 2016, 01:06:06 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 01, 2016, 07:08:32 PM
Is it true that the UK consul sat in on all 3 formal police interviews of GM/KM in September 2007?

"We've had the British Consul from the Foreign Office present during the questioning"
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/local-news/mccanns-sos-to-miliband-1-1281209
I don't recall anything like that in Kate's book.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 02, 2016, 01:48:03 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 02, 2016, 01:06:06 PM
I don't recall anything like that in Kate's book.

Cecilia Edwards, British Consul, was waiting for KM & Justine M when they arrived for interrogation on Fri 7th Sept.
(page 248 Madeleine). There is no reference to CE being present in the room during the questioning (she was probably on staircase duty).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 02, 2016, 02:51:56 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 02, 2016, 12:24:16 PM
Assistance to find their daughter? since it was quite clear by that stage that the Portuguese police weren't doing so.
But there is no mention of searching in the article Brietta, it is all about the possibility of being charged.
The reason given for proposed further "direct contact" with the top level of UK Govt after 11th Sept, is that it was the
"last option for support if they were charged".
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/local-news/mccanns-sos-to-miliband-1-1281209
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 02, 2016, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on May 02, 2016, 12:56:57 PM
Do you mean "what was the national security interest" ?

Yes. What is their interest or relevance to this case?

Special Branch is a label customarily used to identify units responsible for matters of national security in British and Commonwealth police forces, as well as in Ireland and the Royal Thai Police. A Special Branch unit acquires and develops intelligence, usually of a political nature, and conducts investigations to protect the State from perceived threats of subversion—particularly terrorism and other extremist activity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Branch

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 02, 2016, 04:49:28 PM
Maybe a Gamble connection.  He was  the head of the Belfast Region of the RUC's Special Branch.

Maybe just a coincidence, this case seems to  full of them.

If Wayback was correct, he had a special interest before the event.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 03, 2016, 02:17:15 PM
"Mr H sat with Mrs M as she was grilled by Portuguese police as a witness, and then as an official suspect"
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/local-news/mccanns-sos-to-miliband-1-1281209
Is this normal practice?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 03, 2016, 04:54:06 PM
"Gerry once spoke to him for more than an hour"

Was that before or after arguidisation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 04, 2016, 01:17:23 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 03, 2016, 02:17:15 PM
"Mr H sat with Mrs M as she was grilled by Portuguese police as a witness, and then as an official suspect"
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/local-news/mccanns-sos-to-miliband-1-1281209
Is this normal practice?

Soz, but who is Mr H ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 04, 2016, 01:26:19 AM
I thnk it was david hughes, remember the really fat geezer? Blobbng along with the mccanns at arguido interviews?
You can spot him here


http://youtu.be/F2IIIBAMjpc
Here he is talkng about no fund mney will be used for legal costs oh dear


http://youtu.be/BqnHDPeR6-c
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 01:43:19 AM
Quote from: sadie on May 04, 2016, 01:17:23 AM
Soz, but who is Mr H ?
A PR representative who was substituted to attend the September police interviews in place of Mr Mitchell because the UK Govt did not wish to be seen to be so deeply involved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 04, 2016, 01:48:06 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 03, 2016, 02:17:15 PM
"Mr H sat with Mrs M as she was grilled by Portuguese police as a witness, and then as an official suspect"
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/local-news/mccanns-sos-to-miliband-1-1281209
Is this normal practice?

According to KM's book, the only people mentioned as being present in the interviews were KM, her lawyer Carlos, his assistant Sofia, Joao Carlos, Ricardo Paiva & Paulo Ferreira.

Is there a page in the files which details when the PJ applied to make KM & GM arguidos?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 04, 2016, 01:54:17 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 04, 2016, 01:26:19 AM
I thnk it was david hughes, remember the really fat geezer? Blobbng along with the mccanns at arguido interviews?
You can spot him here


http://youtu.be/F2IIIBAMjpc

Quote from: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 01:43:19 AM
A PR representative who was substituted to attend the September police interviews in place of Mr Mitchell because the UK Govt did not wish to be seen to be so deeply involved.

Thank you mercury and thank you Pegasus. 

With your desciptions, now I know who Mr H is, and I remember him well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 01:56:36 AM
Quote from: misty on May 04, 2016, 01:48:06 AM
According to KM's book, the only people mentioned as being present in the interviews were KM, her lawyer Carlos, his assistant Sofia, Joao Carlos, Ricardo Paiva & Paulo Ferreira (snip)
I believe that UK police were possibly monitoring those Sept interviews from an adjoining room?
I agree it seems unlikely that DH was allowed to sit in, but that is what the newspaper says.
DH was there because the brit gov did not want CM there.
CM said:"officially the Government couldn't be seen to be involved'"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 11:16:17 AM
Why, after 9 years, hasn't even this elementary question been solved?
"What time was it when the child physically exited the property?"

Here is the easy three-step-method to solving that
1. Write down the earliest possible time of exit.
2. Write down the latest possible time of exit.
3. Reconstruct the period in between those two times.
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 12:47:40 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 11:16:17 AM
Why, after 9 years, hasn't even this elementary question been solved?
"What time was it when the child physically exited the property?"

Here is the easy three-step-method to solving that
1. Write down the earliest possible time of exit.
2. Write down the latest possible time of exit.
3. Reconstruct the period in between those two times.

I think if the exact time of Jane Tanner's sighting is established you would be well on the way to working out the exact time of Madeleine's exit from the apartment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 12:58:42 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 12:47:40 PM
I think if the exact time of Jane Tanner's sighting is established you would be well on the way to working out the exact time of Madeleine's exit from the apartment.
Interesting theory Brietta. So you think that a stranger opened the window and shutter immediately after GM left the apartment?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 01:09:30 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 12:58:42 PM
Interesting theory Brietta. So you think that a stranger opened the window and shutter immediately after GM left the apartment?

I think it possible the window was already open and the shutter raised.  I think it is possible the abductor was already in the apartment during Gerry McCann's check.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 04, 2016, 02:49:27 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 01:09:30 PM
I think it possible the window was already open and the shutter raised.  I think it is possible the abductor was already in the apartment during Gerry McCann's check.

An 'abductor' is not a fact Brietta,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 02:57:21 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 01:09:30 PM
I think it possible the window was already open and the shutter raised.  I think it is possible the abductor was already in the apartment during Gerry McCann's check.
We know he can't have been hiding in the bathroom Brietta.
Do you think he was hiding
(A) Behind the door of the children's bedroom?
(B) In a wardrobe in the children's bedroom?
(C) Behind a sofa in the lounge?
(D) In a wardrobe in the parent's bedroom?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 04, 2016, 02:59:48 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 01:09:30 PM
I think it possible the window was already open and the shutter raised.  I think it is possible the abductor was already in the apartment during Gerry McCann's check.

A very quick abductor. Matt did a listening check outside the window only minutes earlier. Must have been quiet as a mouse or not there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 03:00:57 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 01:09:30 PM
I think it possible the window was already open and the shutter raised.  I think it is possible the abductor was already in the apartment during Gerry McCann's check.
Brietta if the window and shutter had been opened by a stranger shortly before GM entered the apartment, and GM saw the child asleep, do you agree that means that the noise of the stranger opening the shutter did not awaken the child?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 03:26:19 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 02:57:21 PM
We know he can't have been hiding in the bathroom Brietta.
Do you think he was hiding
(A) Behind the door of the children's bedroom?
(B) In a wardrobe in the children's bedroom?
(C) Behind a sofa in the lounge?
(D) In a wardrobe in the parent's bedroom?

If already in the apartment which cannot be determined ~ none of those.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 03:28:49 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 03:00:57 PM
Brietta if the window and shutter had been opened by a stranger shortly before GM entered the apartment, and GM saw the child asleep, do you agree that means that the noise of the stranger opening the shutter did not awaken the child?

There is no way of knowing when exactly the shutter was raised.  Therefore there is no way of knowing if one child was disturbed ... ... but not the other two?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 03:33:44 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 03:26:19 PM
If already in the apartment which cannot be determined ~ none of those.
I thought you were going to say behind the children's bedroom door Brietta, which when you look at the layout of the child bedroom and the fitted wardrobes, is quite possible.
If a stranger was in the apartment during GM's check, which you seem to think is possible, where do you think he was hiding?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 03:42:51 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 03:28:49 PM
There is no way of knowing when exactly the shutter was raised.  Therefore there is no way of knowing if one child was disturbed ... ... but not the other two?
Thinking about it from the missing child's perspective (something that most people fail to do) I think she would wake up when someone opened the shutter, which makes a lot of noise. The non-waking of the others I admit I have no explanation for, do you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 03:46:28 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 03:33:44 PM
I thought you were going to say behind the children's bedroom door Brietta, which when you look at the layout of the child bedroom and the fitted wardrobes, is quite possible.
If a stranger was in the apartment during GM's check, which you seem to think is possible, where do you think he was hiding?

Crouched behind the opaque back of the cot nearest to the wardrobe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 04:18:11 PM

The Abductor probably opened the window and shutter after being scared by Gerry.  A means to escape or to check outside.  It would only have taken seconds.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 04, 2016, 04:21:05 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 04:18:11 PM
The Abductor probably opened the window and shutter after being scared by Gerry.  A means to escape or to check outside.  It would only have taken seconds.

So Jane noticed a man carrying a child but didn't notice a wide open window and raised shutters seconds later? Neither did Matt nor Russell when they passed through the car park on their checks. That didn't happen.

Not a draught inside that apartment nevermind moving doors & whooshing curtains.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 04:26:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 03:46:28 PM
Crouched behind the opaque back of the cot nearest to the wardrobe.
@Brietta so that scenario would be: a stranger opens the shutter and window, but the child continues sleeping, then GM enters, and the stranger hides behind a cot. It's all possible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 04:33:47 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 04:18:11 PM
The Abductor probably opened the window and shutter after being scared by Gerry.  A means to escape or to check outside.  It would only have taken seconds.
@Eleanor so your scenario would be: a stranger enters the apartment through a door, and the child remains asleep, then GM enters, and the stranger hides somewhere in the apartment, then GM leaves, then the stranger opens the shutter and window from inside?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 04:35:18 PM
Is it possible that the sound of the toilet flushing awoke the child?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 04:38:51 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 04:33:47 PM
@Eleanor so your scenario would be: a stranger enters the apartment through a door, and the child remains asleep, then GM enters, and the stranger hides somewhere in the apartment, then GM leaves, then the stranger opens the shutter and window from inside?

Yes.  This has always been my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 05:39:09 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 04:38:51 PM
Yes.  This has always been my opinion.

I think the intruder entered via the door and exited the same way.  The window was opened as an escape route or to pass Madeleine through to an accomplice, who I think was the person seen by Jane Tanner walking briskly away from the scene.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 05:52:37 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 05:39:09 PM
I think the intruder entered via the door and exited the same way.  The window was opened as an escape route or to pass Madeleine through to an accomplice, who I think was the person seen by Jane Tanner walking briskly away from the scene.

This is what I think.  The child seen by Jane Tanner was facing the opposite way to which she would have been picked up from her bed, so obviously passed to someone else, who then took off, carrying her in a most uncomfortable fashion.
Changing the way of carrying would have easily been done, once out of sight.
And Yes, I do think that Madeleine was sedated with something like Chloroform, easily reapplied with a pad in a plastic bag, in a pocket.

I have Googled "Making Chloroform from Household Products" enough times to get arrested myself.  It is easily done, and doesn't smell if done correctly.

I would be looking at people connected to Brazil to suggest where Madeleine could well have finished up.  Try finding a lost child in Brazil, let alone extradition.  Portuguese speaking, by the way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 04, 2016, 06:00:00 PM
And of course if you wanted a child and were prepared to pay...you may well want one with good genes...the daughter of two doctors would do just nicely
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 06:10:58 PM
Quote from: davel on May 04, 2016, 06:00:00 PM
And of course if you wanted a child and were prepared to pay...you may well want one with good genes...the daughter of two doctors would do just nicely

That is precisely what they would want.  Although God knows what the going rate is.  But it would have been a lot of money to a bunch of misfits in Praia da Luz.

Even the resort itself would suggest a child of relatively intelligent parents if Madeleine wasn't the precise target.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 06:25:59 PM
Interesting actually..though I do think if the window had been opened after Gerry left..he, Jez or Jane would probably have noticed it.

So if this is what both Eleanor and Brietta think happened..what do you make of SY 'finding' Tannerman after all this time? I have always thought it was bollocks..and it seems we may agree on something if you do believe the man Tanner saw was an abductor?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 04, 2016, 06:29:07 PM
Quote from: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 06:25:59 PM
Interesting actually..though I do think if the window had been opened after Gerry left..he, Jez or Jane would probably have noticed it.

So if this is what both Eleanor and Brietta think happened..what do you make of SY 'finding' Tannerman after all this time? I have always thought it was bollocks..and it seems we may agree on something if you do believe the man Tanner saw was an abductor?


Not sure about that. It was round the corner from where G & J were standing, even though they can't agree exactly where that was.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 06:48:27 PM
Quote from: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 06:25:59 PM
Interesting actually..though I do think if the window had been opened after Gerry left..he, Jez or Jane would probably have noticed it.

So if this is what both Eleanor and Brietta think happened..what do you make of SY 'finding' Tannerman after all this time? I have always thought it was bollocks..and it seems we may agree on something if you do believe the man Tanner saw was an abductor?

Neither Jez or Gerry would have been called upon to notice.  These shutter don't actually make a noise, otherwise I would be aware of it on a daily basis, which I am not.
Oh, and I raise and close shutters on a Holiday House, and they hardly make a sound.

Jane Tanner won't have been looking in that direction.  Why should she?  In the dark.  Look at the car park and the entrance to other apartments.

I would not go so far as to say that SY were talking bollox, but anyone with a thinking brain was bound to question that anyone coming from The Night Creche would have been walking in that direction, and carrying a child in that uncomfortable fashion for so long.

But I am not going to add to speculation that SY were trying to confuse the issue in an attempt to hide what they really know.

I honestly think that Scotland Yard didn't know the location as well as we all do.  We had all been at it for four years before they came along.

Yes, I do believe that the man Jane Tanner saw was one of the Abductors.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 06:53:16 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 04, 2016, 06:29:07 PM

Not sure about that. It was round the corner from where G & J were standing, even though they can't agree exactly where that was.

Gerry and Jez wouldn't have heard the shutters going up.  I never hear those of my immediate neighbours.  And it takes seconds to do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 06:55:54 PM
I just never understood the whole tannerman has been living under a rock and finally found out that the world has been looking for him for 7 years...and look he even knows exactly what he and his child were wearing that night AND still has them! spiel  @)(++(*

Reason for 'lying'..I can't see one though...its slightly odd
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 04, 2016, 06:58:23 PM
Quote from: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 06:55:54 PM
I just never understood the whole tannerman has been living under a rock and finally found out that the world has been looking for him for 7 years...and look he even knows exactly what he and his child were wearing that night AND still has them! spiel  @)(++(*

Reason for 'lying'..I can't see one though...its slightly odd

Crecheman has never said anything openly - all we have is what OP claim he said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 07:02:17 PM
Quote from: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 06:55:54 PM
I just never understood the whole tannerman has been living under a rock and finally found out that the world has been looking for him for 7 years...and look he even knows exactly what he and his child were wearing that night AND still has them! spiel  @)(++(*

Reason for 'lying'..I can't see one though...its slightly odd

Quite possibly he thought he might be of some use.  But he always was on The Night Creche Register.  What Scotland Yard decided to do with the information at that late stage is only for them to explain.  Which they almost certainly won't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 07:11:19 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 07:02:17 PM
Quite possibly he thought he might be of some use.  But he always was on The Night Creche Register.  What Scotland Yard decided to do with the information at that late stage is only for them to explain. Which they almost certainly won't.
Well no, we can't expect them to explain everything they do. I just cannot understand how they can effectively eliminate the guy Jane thought she saw...on nothing. I mean, he was going the wrong way even for where he was meant to be coming from :S
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 04, 2016, 07:21:16 PM
Quote from: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 07:11:19 PM
Well no, we can't expect them to explain everything they do. I just cannot understand how they can effectively eliminate the guy Jane thought she saw...on nothing. I mean, he was going the wrong way even for where he was meant to be coming from :S

My interpretation is that by identifying  Tannerman as Crecheman, a bona fidi parent, they have managed to eliminate  Tannerman as an abductor without openly rubbishing Jane's statements.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 07:22:37 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 04, 2016, 07:21:16 PM
My interpretation is that by identifying  Tannerman as Crecheman, a bona fidi parent, they have managed to eliminate  Tannerman as an abductor without openly rubbishing Jane's statements.
What would be the need in this though? That comes across a bit like they think shes talking rubbish but don't want to say so so lets create this guy out of thin air to get rid of the focus on him? Sorry if I'm understanding this wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 04, 2016, 07:26:33 PM
Quote from: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 07:22:37 PM
What would be the need in this though? That comes across a bit like they think shes talking rubbish but don't want to say so so lets create this guy out of thin air to get rid of the focus on him? Sorry if I'm understanding this wrong.

That's exactly what I think.  OG can't actually prove Jane's statement to be rubbish - ( they probably can't prove anything), so this is an alternative method of removing Tannerman from the equation.

OG are no longer looking for Tannerman, but they are looking for Smithman.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 07:31:58 PM
Quote from: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 07:11:19 PM
Well no, we can't expect them to explain everything they do. I just cannot understand how they can effectively eliminate the guy Jane thought she saw...on nothing. I mean, he was going the wrong way even for where he was meant to be coming from :S

We could all see that, Chloe.  I went off in mild bemusement at the time, while I had a think about it.

I think the problem was the half an hour or more between the Tanner Sighting and the Smith Sighting, although that wouldn't be hard to explain if you consider the time required to arrange a Pick Up.
None of them would have known if it would be successful until it actually happened.  So the abductor probably hid somewhere until it was arranged.
I think Madeleine was taken off from a beach, and no one would have wanted to be hanging around on some beach for half an hour with an abducted child.

I worked this out a very long time ago.  And whether or not I am right is actually not that important.  But I haven't changed my mind in nine years.

Yes, I have considered other options, but none of them make the same sort of sense.  This why the Cell Phone Pings are so important.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 07:38:15 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 06:48:27 PM
(snip) These shutter don't actually make a noise, otherwise I would be aware of it on a daily basis, which I am not.
Oh, and I raise and close shutters on a Holiday House, and they hardly make a sound ... (snip)
Re your shutters on two houses Eleanor. Are they metal? And are they manually operated?

The question of how noisy or silent these shutters are is so important. Do we have any cites from statements? Or  videos of of these shutters being opened?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 07:56:59 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 07:38:15 PM
Re your shutters on two houses Eleanor. Are they metal? And are they manually operated?

The question of how noisy or silent these shutters are is so important. Do we have any cites from statements? Or  videos of of these shutters being opened?

It's not just two houses, Pegasus.  It is several.  Some plastic, and supposedly some metal, although I am not certain about that.  None of them ever need painting.  All manually operated.  Same sort of thing as 5a.  These shutters are standard on the Continent.  None of them make  any noise.  I would hear them if they did.

And none of them are impossible to break into.  Believe me or not, as you will.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 08:04:30 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 04, 2016, 06:29:07 PM

Not sure about that. It was round the corner from where G & J were standing, even though they can't agree exactly where that was.

Jez would have been walking straight past without any reason to look behind over his left shoulder towards the McCann apartment while negotiating a buggy over cobbles.  Even if he had seen the raised shutter, would there have been any reason for him to think there was anything suspicious about it?

The car park was dark.  There was no security lighting.  There were overhanging trees. The window would have been outside Jane Tanner's peripheral vision as she walked from the entrance of the car park to the building. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 08:07:12 PM
Quote from: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 07:11:19 PM
Well no, we can't expect them to explain everything they do. I just cannot understand how they can effectively eliminate the guy Jane thought she saw...on nothing. I mean, he was going the wrong way even for where he was meant to be coming from :S

Jane did not 'think' she saw a man.  She saw him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 04, 2016, 08:11:29 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 08:07:12 PM
Jane did not 'think' she saw a man.  She saw him.

Indeed, but she also thought (after the event) that she had seen the abductor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 08:15:36 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 04, 2016, 08:11:29 PM
Indeed, but she also thought (after the event) that she had seen the abductor.

She did.  She just didn't realise at the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 04, 2016, 08:19:40 PM
OG seem to disagree.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2016, 08:41:46 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 04, 2016, 08:19:40 PM
OG seem to disagree.

If you say so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 04, 2016, 10:24:12 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 04, 2016, 08:19:40 PM
OG seem to disagree.
OG have opened up another scenario.  That doesn't necessarily mean that they have ruled Janes testimony out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 10:27:14 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 04, 2016, 08:07:12 PM
Jane did not 'think' she saw a man.  She saw him.
Indeed..I was not trying to insinuate that Jane went crackers for the night or something. Just a very badly worded post. Apologies.

Also I do not believe that SY have it right ruling that Janes guy out and using night creche dad to do so. It is highly unlikely that this guy taking his kid home was what Jane saw.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 10:46:18 PM
The sound of shutters being opened http://youtu.be/1uWUXFMZdWE
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 10:55:22 PM
Quote from: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 10:27:14 PM
(snip)... It is highly unlikely that this guy taking his kid home was what Jane saw.
9.15pm is a bit early to pick up from creche, he could have been on way to creche?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ChloeR on May 04, 2016, 11:10:10 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 10:55:22 PM
9.15pm is a bit early to pick up from creche, he could have been on way to creche?

Maybe. I'm sure I remember it as he was taking the child home though? Was a couple years ago now mind and my memory isn't the best
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 05, 2016, 12:34:13 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 04, 2016, 10:46:18 PM
The sound of shutters being opened http://youtu.be/1uWUXFMZdWE

Making a bit of a noise i would say....rather than "no noise"

I have stayed in various med apartments over the years, the shutters getting raised or let down was always somethng I had to do very slowly so as to not make a noise at siesta time
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 05, 2016, 12:56:01 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 05, 2016, 12:34:13 AM
Making a bit of a noise i would say....rather than "no noise"

I have stayed in various med apartments over the years, the shutters getting raised or let down was always somethng I had to do very slowly so as to not make a noise at siesta time
The shutters Heri used in the video are not 5A shutters, but they are similar.
IMO the noise would be likely to wake a sleeping child.

@Heri In the first part of the video, when the window is still closed, and the shutter is being raised by hands, is the microphone inside the room? Is that the sound which a child inside the room would hear, even while the window is closed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 05, 2016, 12:59:05 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 05, 2016, 12:56:01 AM
The shutters Heri used in the video are not 5A shutters, but they are similar.
IMO the noise would be likely to wake a sleeping child.
@Heri In the first part of the video, when the window is still closed, and the shutter is being raised by hands, is the microphone inside the room? Is that the sound which a child inside the room would hear, even while the window is closed?
It is impossible that these shutters make no noise at all,when lifted or closed, the whole mechanism and material construction ensures this. GOodnght!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 05, 2016, 01:10:07 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 05, 2016, 12:59:05 AM
It is impossible that these shutters make no noise at all,when lifted or closed, the whole mechanism and material construction ensures this. GOodnght!
What we need is some cites from the statements in the files about how noisy the actual shutters fitted in block 5 were.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 05, 2016, 01:19:38 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 05, 2016, 01:10:07 AM
What we need is some cites from the statements in the files about how noisy the actual shutters fitted in block 5 were.

If they existed I am sure 8 years later they would be common knowledge

This should do as evidence of "noise" from 5a shutters, must dash now



Edited for correct video
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 05, 2016, 01:25:12 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 05, 2016, 12:34:13 AM
Making a bit of a noise i would say....rather than "no noise"

I have stayed in various med apartments over the years, the shutters getting raised or let down was always somethng I had to do very slowly so as to not make a noise at siesta time

The noise depends on where the microphone was and the settings on the mike.  Then the audio settings when it was played back

I dont think that you can rely on a video to tell you all those things.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 05, 2016, 01:33:37 AM
Quote from: sadie on May 05, 2016, 01:25:12 AM
The noise depends on where the microphone was and the settings on the mike.  Then the audio settings when it was played back

I dont think that you can rely on a video to tell you all those things.

As i posted earlier, I have used these on umpteen occasions, they make a small to large racket dependng on how you handle them, they are not ROMAN blnds or NETS

There is no way GM will not have heard them if in the apartment at the time....if whilst chattng to Jez it is irrelevant if he did or not

It is 1.30 bye now
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 05, 2016, 01:46:50 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 05, 2016, 01:19:38 AM
This should do as evidence of "noise" from 5a shutters, must dash now
http://youtu.be/IeuMzyaCnnY
Thanks Merc for proof that the shutter is certainly noisy.
http://youtu.be/IeuMzyaCnnY
On hearing this noise at their window at night any mobile child would certainly wake and run straight out that bedroom door to ...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 05, 2016, 02:23:52 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 05, 2016, 01:46:50 AM
Thanks Merc for proof that the shutter is certainly noisy.
http://youtu.be/IeuMzyaCnnY
On hearing this noise at their window at night any mobile child would certainly wake and run straight out that bedroom door to ...

I have no idea what the psychology and possble actions of any 3 year old is in those circumstances might  be
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 05, 2016, 02:31:50 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 05, 2016, 02:23:52 AM
I have no idea what the psychology and possble actions of any 3 year old is in those circumstances might  be
You could make an educated guess Merc?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 05, 2016, 09:24:38 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 05, 2016, 01:46:50 AM
Thanks Merc for proof that the shutter is certainly noisy.
http://youtu.be/IeuMzyaCnnY
On hearing this noise at their window at night any mobile child would certainly wake and run straight out that bedroom door to ...

The shutters only made an appreciable noise when they were being forced repeatedly in an attempt to make them 'lock' in place.  No burglar would do that ... nor is that a demonstration of the technique used to raise them ... which was once the window had been slid open, the interior mechanism was used.

Listen to the shutter being raised before force was used ...  and listen as the shutters are allowed to fall back into place ... that will give a more realistic idea of the noise level normal opening of these shutters would produce ~ rather than the bull charging at the gate effort as seen here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 05, 2016, 04:47:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 05, 2016, 09:24:38 AM
The shutters only made an appreciable noise when they were being forced repeatedly in an attempt to make them 'lock' in place.  No burglar would do that ... nor is that a demonstration of the technique used to raise them ... which was once the window had been slid open, the interior mechanism was used.

Listen to the shutter being raised before force was used ...  and listen as the shutters are allowed to fall back into place ... that will give a more realistic idea of the noise level normal opening of these shutters would produce ~ rather than the bull charging at the gate effort as seen here.
We need someone to do a video demo of Heri's method, but with maximum speed and maximum quietness, exactly as a burglar would do. IMO a burglar with experience would get both window and shutter completely open in 10 seconds. @Heri do you think 10 seconds is possible?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 06, 2016, 01:22:23 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 05, 2016, 09:24:38 AM
The shutters only made an appreciable noise when they were being forced repeatedly in an attempt to make them 'lock' in place.  No burglar would do that ... nor is that a demonstration of the technique used to raise them ... which was once the window had been slid open, the interior mechanism was used.

Listen to the shutter being raised before force was used ...  and listen as the shutters are allowed to fall back into place ... that will give a more realistic idea of the noise level normal opening of these shutters would produce ~ rather than the bull charging at the gate effort as seen here.

Shutters ALWAYS make a noise howver they are opened or closed
The point is why/where does it matter
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 06, 2016, 01:45:19 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 06, 2016, 01:22:23 AM
Shutters ALWAYS make a noise howver they are opened or closed
The point is why/where does it matter
Shutter noise matters because the the child was only 3 metres away from the shutter when it was opened
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 06, 2016, 02:25:04 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 06, 2016, 01:45:19 AM
Shutter noise matters because the the child was only 3 metres away from the shutter when it was opened

Ah thanks, i was caught up in whether gerry jane or jez would have heard them
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 06, 2016, 03:01:17 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 06, 2016, 02:25:04 AM
Ah thanks, i was caught up in whether gerry jane or jez would have heard them
The sound of the shutter being raised entered 8 ears Merc if you think about it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 06, 2016, 03:15:11 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 06, 2016, 03:01:17 AM
The sound of the shutter being raised entered 8 ears Merc if you think about it.

8 ears? 4 people? One burglar and three kids?

Off to watch  a film, laters

Peggy you seem to forget a basic fact, many people just dont believe the mccans
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 06, 2016, 03:34:19 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 06, 2016, 03:15:11 AM
8 ears? 4 people? One burglar and three kids? (snip)
Yes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 06, 2016, 11:37:26 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 06, 2016, 02:25:04 AM
Ah thanks, i was caught up in whether gerry jane or jez would have heard them
I am pretty sure that neither Gerry nor Jez would have heard anything.

The sound would have had to travel

1)  Around the corner of the building  and over the wall.  The building was between them and the noise and they were effectively at the back of the building whilst any noise would have been at the front
2)  They were about 26 yards away.  Too far and with the building in between.

If someone other than Tannerman messed with them ... ?attempting to close them? ... and Jane was in line with the window at that particular moment as she walked, she might have heard a faint noise but it had to travel over 6 yards and over a very high wall,, dropping down to her ears.  It wouldn't have been much.  I doubt that it would register even .... and if it did, so what?

Someone just closing their shutters somewhere ... an everyday sound
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 06, 2016, 12:20:36 PM
And you believe Jane Tanner passed them both within a few feet without being heard or seen. Please  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 06, 2016, 02:02:11 PM
Quote from: sadie on May 06, 2016, 11:37:26 AM
(snip) an everyday sound
It would not sound like an everyday sound to a child in that bedroom.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 06, 2016, 03:39:05 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 06, 2016, 01:45:19 AM
Shutter noise matters because the the child was only 3 metres away from the shutter when it was opened

Two other children were nearer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2016, 06:33:56 PM

At 5:59 there is an example of a blind being raised ... it sounds as if it is a very quiet operation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 06, 2016, 07:36:14 PM
Paul Gordon 5A occupant said they were noisy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 06, 2016, 09:22:03 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 06, 2016, 12:20:36 PM
And you believe Jane Tanner passed them both within a few feet without being heard or seen. Please  @)(++(*

Easily done when engrossed in conversation and when Gerry who had his back to Jane blocked Jezes view with his body.  Probably tho, both were looking down at Jezes baby in the pushchair ... and quite probably they were in a smallish gap between parked cars.

IIRC Steven Carpenter commented on the cars parked down there.

Please correct me if I am wrong on this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 06, 2016, 09:24:20 PM
Quote from: sadie on May 06, 2016, 09:22:03 PM
Easily done when engrossed in conversation and when Gerry who had his back to Jane blocked Jezes view with his body.  Probably tho, both were looking down at Jezes baby in the pushchair ... and quite probably they were in a smallish gap between parked cars.

IIRC Steven Carpenter commented on the cars parked down there.

Please correct me if I am wrong on this.

Can you provide evidence of parked cars from the 3 witnesses? SC wasn't there at the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2016, 09:27:49 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 06, 2016, 09:24:20 PM
Can you provide evidence of parked cars from the 3 witnesses? SC wasn't there at the time.

If Jez remained standing on the road with his child in a buggy during the conversation it suggests there was some sort of barrier between him and traffic ... a parked vehicle for example?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 06, 2016, 09:46:47 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 06, 2016, 09:27:49 PM
If Jez remained standing on the road with his child in a buggy during the conversation it suggests there was some sort of barrier between him and traffic ... a parked vehicle for example?

Did you see any parked cars in Jane and Gerry's reconstruction? You have zero evidence from the 3 witnesses of parked vehicles.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2016, 09:57:48 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 06, 2016, 09:46:47 PM
Did you see any parked cars in Jane and Gerry's reconstruction? You have zero evidence from the 3 witnesses of parked vehicles.

There is a witness statement which mentions parked cars ... and zero evidence that there were none still parked there during the conversation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 06, 2016, 10:09:42 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 06, 2016, 09:57:48 PM
There is a witness statement which mentions parked cars ... and zero evidence that there were none still parked there during the conversation.

It's amazing how Jane Tanner can remember clearly Tannerman as time went by but parked vehicles is a toughie. But the last sentence is most interesting. How far away was she really when she saw the man  &%+((£

4078    “Were there any cars around there?”

Reply    “Erm, umm, no, I don’t know.  I don’t remember.  I don’t remember walking past any going up here and I think I would have probably, if there had been I would have realised, because that would have obscured my view of the person walking, so I can’t think of, I can’t think of any, no”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 06, 2016, 10:10:58 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 06, 2016, 06:33:56 PM
http://youtu.be/Ff-4H_K1mlc

At 5:59 there is an example of a blind being raised ... it sounds as if it is a very quiet operation.
Thanks Brietta, very interesting to see how the strap and the stops work.
However he has edited the video by turning the original audio to very low volume, which reduces the shutter noise to almost nothin, then he has added a second audio track (narration) at much higher volume.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 06, 2016, 10:15:07 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 06, 2016, 09:24:20 PM
Can you provide evidence of parked cars from the 3 witnesses? SC wasn't there at the time.

Time doesn't normally seem to bother you.  You adjust it to suit your purpose it seems


Stpephen Carpenter was there at approximately the same time as Gerry and Jez, withion a very few minutes either way.

PdL in  May is not a busy time.  We were there in June in 2010 IIRC and the roads were so empty of traffick that evening or day it was the norm for us to walk in the road much of the time.  It is unlikely that the cars parked there would change in the couple or so minutes that the Carpenters walked across relative to the time that Gerry and Jez chatted.

Stephen Carpenter IIRC stated that there were parked cars there.  And that was close as damn-it to the time that Gerry and Jez chatted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 06, 2016, 10:18:56 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 06, 2016, 09:27:49 PM
If Jez remained standing on the road with his child in a buggy during the conversation it suggests there was some sort of barrier between him and traffic ... a parked vehicle for example?

Precisely.

He felt protected by the parked cars.  Almost certainly he stood in the gap between two of them.


No dad with a child in a buggy would stand in the road, despite the extremely light traffick, unless he was protected.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 06, 2016, 10:21:56 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 06, 2016, 07:36:14 PM
Paul Gordon 5A occupant said they were noisy.
Thanks Pathfinder

P.Gordon statement: "We used to open the blinds during the day, returning to close them at night. When the blinds were being closed they would make much noise."

S.Gordon statement: "The bedroom shutters made a lot of noise and I find it difficult to understand that opening them would go un-noticed."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 06, 2016, 11:06:17 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 06, 2016, 10:21:56 PM
Thanks Pathfinder

P.Gordon statement: "We used to open the blinds during the day, returning to close them at night. When the blinds were being closed they would make much noise."

S.Gordon statement: "The bedroom shutters made a lot of noise and I find it difficult to understand that opening them would go un-noticed."

They were an every day sound pegasus ... and unlikely to disturb because of that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2016, 11:07:10 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 06, 2016, 10:09:42 PM
It's amazing how Jane Tanner can remember clearly Tannerman as time went by but parked vehicles is a toughie. But the last sentence is most interesting. How far away was she really when she saw the man  &%+((£

4078    “Were there any cars around there?”

Reply    “Erm, umm, no, I don’t know.  I don’t remember.  I don’t remember walking past any going up here and I think I would have probably, if there had been I would have realised, because that would have obscured my view of the person walking, so I can’t think of, I can’t think of any, no”.

Jane Tanner did not see the man carrying a child until she had passed Gerry and Jez and was referring to the area beyond the gate up to the junction where the man crossed ... not to the area immediately outside the tapas nearer to the men in conversation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 07, 2016, 12:03:27 AM
Quote from: sadie on May 06, 2016, 11:06:17 PM
They were an every day sound pegasus ... and unlikely to disturb because of that
The night of 3rd May was not day, it was nighttime Sadie.
It was at least 2 hours after her bedtime when someone opened the shutter and window of her bedroom.

 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 12:13:31 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 06, 2016, 11:07:10 PM
Jane Tanner did not see the man carrying a child until she had passed Gerry and Jez and was referring to the area beyond the gate up to the junction where the man crossed ... not to the area immediately outside the tapas nearer to the men in conversation.

Both Gerry and Kate's first statements say Jane was a lot further away when she spotted the man crossing the road. Maybe Pegasus can confirm the distance from the original Portuguese statements given on 4 May 2007.

SY will know if crecheman saw anybody on that road when he looked right before crossing it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 07, 2016, 12:14:45 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 07, 2016, 12:03:27 AM
The night of 3rd May was not day, it was nighttime Sadie.
It was at least 2 hours after her bedtime when someone opened the shutter and window of her bedroom.
I was using day to refer to the 24 hour day, Pegasus.  I realise that it was evening and dark.  But I think the same would apply; the noise would be so usual as to not  be noticed by most.

Mrs Fenn didn't notice the sound of the shutter being opened for instance ... altho Mr Gordon differentiated and mentioned that the noise was happening as the shutters were closed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 07, 2016, 12:14:56 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 07, 2016, 12:03:27 AM
The night of 3rd May was not day, it was nighttime Sadie.
It was at least 2 hours after her bedtime when someone opened the shutter and window of her bedroom.

I agree with Sadie,gosh, raising and closing shutters happens at mornngs, lunchtimes and late evenings and sometmes other times, so in itself not a suspicious sound at all, unless one hears one they know is theirs and they know no one is home, and theyre standing close by
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 07, 2016, 12:17:51 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 12:13:31 AM
Both Gerry and Kate's first statements say Jane was a lot further away when she spotted the man crossing the road. Maybe Pegasus can confirm the distance from the original Portuguese statements given on 4 May 2007.
Neither Gerry nor Kate was there. 

Different distances are given.  In some reports / statements Jane was only about 5 yards from Tannerman, in others further away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 12:19:10 AM
Quote from: sadie on May 07, 2016, 12:17:51 AM
Neither Gerry nor Kate was there. 

Different distances are given.  In some reports / statements Jane was only about 5 yards from Tannerman, in others further away.

Kate and Gerry got the distance from somebody. Jane told Gerry about the sighting.

How could a parked car be blocking her view from that short distance?

"If there had been I would have realised, because that would have obscured my view of the person walking." JT
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 07, 2016, 12:23:27 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 12:13:31 AM
Both Gerry and Kate's first statements say Jane was a lot further away when she spotted the man crossing the road. Maybe Pegasus can confirm the distance from the original Portuguese statements given on 4 May 2007.

SY will know if crecheman saw anybody on that road when he looked right before crossing it.

At the re-enactment although the men may have been positioned wherever ... Jane Tanner is almost level with the lounge window while viewing the man carrying the little girl if memory serves me well.

If that man looked right ... I assume that at the least he would have seen a woman approaching in flip flops ... she certainly saw him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 12:29:07 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 07, 2016, 12:23:27 AM
At the re-enactment although the men may have been positioned wherever ... Jane Tanner is almost level with the lounge window while viewing the man carrying the little girl if memory serves me well.

If that man looked right ... I assume that at the least he would have seen a woman approaching in flip flops ... she certainly saw him.

I think it was impossible for Jane to pass them both by the gate without being noticed so I think she may have spotted him before taking the route Amaral's believed she took - the path way so she turned left and never passed Gerry and Jes.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 07, 2016, 12:33:33 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 12:29:07 AM
I think it was impossible for Jane to pass them both by the gate without being noticed so I think she may have spotted him before taking the route Amaral's believed she took - the path way so she she turned left and never passed Gerry and Jes.

I'm sorry.  I really know nothing about Mr Amaral thinking Jane Tanner turned left.  Please explain.

However, had she done so ... how on earth could she have seen the man she saw with a building in between?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 07, 2016, 12:34:03 AM
Quote from: sadie on May 07, 2016, 12:14:45 AM
(snip) the noise would be so usual as to not  be noticed by most (snip).
That night was the very first time the child heard her bedroom shutter being opened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 07, 2016, 12:35:28 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 12:29:07 AM
I think it was impossible for Jane to pass them both by the gate without being noticed so I think she may have spotted him before taking the route Amaral's believed she took - the path way so she turned left and never passed Gerry and Jes.

She said they locked their patio doors, so was she avoiding gerry? By taking the roundabout other route?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 12:39:43 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 07, 2016, 12:33:33 AM
I'm sorry.  I really know nothing about Mr Amaral thinking Jane Tanner turned left.  Please explain.

However, had she done so ... how on earth could she have seen the man she saw with a building in between?

I agree with Amaral on this point.

As Jane left the secondary reception entrance and started walking up the road she saw the man crossing from about 25 metres away before she turned left onto the path and took that route back to her apartment. It was impossible for her to pass by the side gate where they were facing each other without being noticed. They weren't facing her direction.

Jes clearly says where he was in his first statement on 7 May 2007.

"I met him near the stairs of a ground floor. There was a gate leading up to some stairs."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 12:41:44 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 07, 2016, 12:35:28 AM
She said they locked their patio doors, so was she avoiding gerry? By taking the roundabout other route?

Yes I believe she avoided him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 07, 2016, 12:47:01 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 12:41:44 AM
Yes I believe she avoided him.

Id probably avoid him as well
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 12:50:54 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 07, 2016, 12:47:01 AM
Id probably avoid him as well

 @)(++(* and it explains if there were any parked cars it may have blocked her view of the man from that distance away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 07, 2016, 12:59:28 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 12:50:54 AM
@)(++(* and it explains if there were any parked cars it may have blocked her view of the man from that distance away.

not up to speed on the parked cars discussion, but it was a stretch to believe what tanner said she saw of the manwith some of the minutest details of the hair,clothes and shoes she gave having only looked at him for a couple seconds, details about every strand of his hair, whether there was creases in his trousers and high many inches in his heels, plus description of skin, not to mention description of the child, their clothing,then agan maybe many people have been cia trained
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 07, 2016, 01:04:38 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 12:39:43 AM
I agree with Amaral on this point.

As Jane left the secondary reception entrance and started walking up the road she saw the man crossing from about 25 metres away before she turned left onto the path and took that route back to her apartment. It was impossible for her to pass by the side gate where they were facing each other without being noticed. They weren't facing her direction.

Jes clearly says where he was in his first statement on 7 May 2007.

"I met him near the stairs of a ground floor. There was a gate leading up to some stairs."

How did she get into her apartment?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 07, 2016, 01:14:42 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 12:39:43 AM
I agree with Amaral on this point.

As Jane left the secondary reception entrance and started walking up the road she saw the man crossing from about 25 metres away before she turned left onto the path and took that route back to her apartment. (snip)
On what page of his book does Mr Amaral say this?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 01:20:23 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 07, 2016, 01:04:38 AM
How did she get into her apartment?

You can take the path route to the car park. There are two routes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 01:21:27 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 07, 2016, 01:14:42 AM
On what page of his book does Mr Amaral say this?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 07, 2016, 01:25:22 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 01:20:23 AM
You can take the path route to the car park. There are two routes.

But that involves walking the length of the apartment block in the direction of block 4 ... then walking up the side of the apartment block and walking all the way along the path between the apartment and the wall of the car park.

Long road for a short cut ... and why would she take it in the dark and seclusion?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 07, 2016, 01:27:40 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 01:21:27 AM

Does this mean they all left their back doors open for ease of checking? I suppose, yet again, since there are no independent witnesses otherwise its a possibility despite their sworn statements

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 01:27:49 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 07, 2016, 01:25:22 AM
But that involves walking the length of the apartment block in the direction of block 4 ... then walking up the side of the apartment block and walking all the way along the path between the apartment and the wall of the car park.

Long road for a short cut ... and why would she take it in the dark and seclusion?

It eliminates the impossible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 07, 2016, 01:28:39 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 07, 2016, 01:25:22 AM
But that involves walking the length of the apartment block in the direction of block 4 ... then walking up the side of the apartment block and walking all the way along the path between the apartment and the wall of the car park.

Long road for a short cut ... and why would she take it in the dark and seclusion?

To avoid gerry and/or to enter flat from patio door
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 01:34:35 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 07, 2016, 01:25:22 AM
But that involves walking the length of the apartment block in the direction of block 4 ... then walking up the side of the apartment block and walking all the way along the path between the apartment and the wall of the car park.

Long road for a short cut ... and why would she take it in the dark and seclusion?

That was Madeleine's last route from the tapas bar back to the apartment front key door at 5:30/40 on 3 May 2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 01:39:52 AM
"Inner route would take less than minute and outer route just over a minute."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN_ROGATORY.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 07, 2016, 01:54:34 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 01:39:52 AM
"Inner route would take less than minute and outer route just over a minute."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN_ROGATORY.htm

Jane Tanner is on record as having walked past the two men in conversation towards the junction where she had seen the man carrying the pyjama clad child crossing the road in front of her.

She turned left at the junction followed the route which the man she saw had just traversed before turning into the  5A car park and home.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 09:07:07 AM
This is simply not believable when she claims to have passed them within a few feet. "I don’t think they did see because as I went to acknowledge them and they, they didn’t sort of say hello back or anything." The truth is she can't remember much at all except seeing the man crossing the road.

"Yeah, I, I honestly, I can’t remember now which way they were. "

4078    “Go back over it and have a think if you heard anything from the point where you have passed Gerry and Jez to seeing this man, what could you hear?”
Reply    “Phew, I can’t think of anything, there was nothing, no, nothing that comes to mind, there was nothing, as I say, I can’t remember hearing a car or, no, nothing, I mean, it was quite, apart from, as I say, it was very quiet really around there”.

4078    “And Gez may have been facing you but you can’t really remember.”
Reply    “I can’t remember which, I’m trying to remember, because he obviously had the pram I’m trying to remember which way the pram was facing but I, no I can’t, no.”

4078    “What about the man and the child, did you hear his footsteps?”
Reply    “No, not that I can remember”.
 
4078    “Not that you were conscious of?”
Reply    “No, no, not that I’m conscious of, no”.

4078    “And you, obviously you can’t remember whether or not Gez saw you?”
Reply    “No. As I say I don’t think they did see because as I went to acknowledge them and they, they didn’t sort of say hello back or anything.”

4078    “So as you are trying to remember it and you can think of yourself walking up that road and you have gone past Gerry and Jez”.
Reply    “Umm”.
 
4078    “Are you conscious of any other movement?”
Reply    “It’s, it’s too long now.  Erm, no, not really.  I mean, I was just walking up, you know, I was like just sort of on a, not on a mission, but I was just like, you know, on the way to, to check, so I didn’t notice anything either side.  The only thing I noticed a movement was when somebody walked across at the top”.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 07, 2016, 10:48:36 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 09:07:07 AM
This is simply not believable when she claims to have passed them within a few feet. "I don’t think they did see because as I went to acknowledge them and they, they didn’t sort of say hello back or anything." The truth is she can't remember much at all except seeing the man crossing the road.

"Yeah, I, I honestly, I can’t remember now which way they were. "

4078    “Go back over it and have a think if you heard anything from the point where you have passed Gerry and Jez to seeing this man, what could you hear?”
Reply    “Phew, I can’t think of anything, there was nothing, no, nothing that comes to mind, there was nothing, as I say, I can’t remember hearing a car or, no, nothing, I mean, it was quite, apart from, as I say, it was very quiet really around there”.

4078    “And Gez may have been facing you but you can’t really remember.”
Reply    “I can’t remember which, I’m trying to remember, because he obviously had the pram I’m trying to remember which way the pram was facing but I, no I can’t, no.”

4078    “What about the man and the child, did you hear his footsteps?”
Reply    “No, not that I can remember”.
 
4078    “Not that you were conscious of?”
Reply    “No, no, not that I’m conscious of, no”.

4078    “And you, obviously you can’t remember whether or not Gez saw you?”
Reply    “No. As I say I don’t think they did see because as I went to acknowledge them and they, they didn’t sort of say hello back or anything.”

4078    “So as you are trying to remember it and you can think of yourself walking up that road and you have gone past Gerry and Jez”.
Reply    “Umm”.
 
4078    “Are you conscious of any other movement?”
Reply    “It’s, it’s too long now.  Erm, no, not really.  I mean, I was just walking up, you know, I was like just sort of on a, not on a mission, but I was just like, you know, on the way to, to check, so I didn’t notice anything either side.  The only thing I noticed a movement was when somebody walked across at the top”.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

Indeed ... that was a very full and detailed interview which was recorded over a period of some hours ... she did actually say a lot more about the man she saw than the one sentence you have highlighted.

Just as she made no bones about passing Gerry and Jez in the street.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 11:05:29 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 07, 2016, 10:48:36 AM
Indeed ... that was a very full and detailed interview which was recorded over a period of some hours ... she did actually say a lot more about the man she saw than the one sentence you have highlighted.

Just as she made no bones about passing Gerry and Jez in the street.

She did not pass them - it was not possible the way she claims. She had to turn left before meeting them. It's the only explanation why she wasn't seen or heard. She can't remember hearing footsteps, Gerry or Jes talking, she remembers nothing and it was quiet. All she remembered was seeing a man crossing at the top.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 07, 2016, 06:48:13 PM
NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) — The nephew of a retired Bronx nurse was charged with her murder late Friday, following her disappearance more than a week ago.

Police said her body still had not been found late Friday night after Topping was charged.

Myers had last been seen at her home at 1295 Grand Concourse last Wednesday, police said. Investigators believed foul play may be involved after sources say a cadaver dog got a hit in her bedroom.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2016/05/06/retired-bronx-nurse-disappearance/

Sirius, one of Singapore's first cadaver detector police dogs, given a hero's farewell

Said Mr Tan in his Facebook post: "He made Singapore proud, he served the nation as a service dog, he served the people, he helped to crack down cases. He is just so wonderful."

The post was shared more than 2,000 times and had garnered more than 19,000 'likes' as of Saturday morning.

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/sirius-one-of-singapores-first-cadaver-detector-police-dogs-given-a-heros-farewell
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 08, 2016, 02:24:56 AM
We all know cadaver dogs dont react to nose snot, sweat hidden in cuddly toys and pizza as suggested by some deluded posters
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 08, 2016, 02:50:30 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 08, 2016, 02:24:56 AM
We all know cadaver dogs dont react to nose snot, sweat hidden in cuddly toys and pizza as suggested by some deluded posters
Eddie was double trained

In  addition to his cadaver training,  he also had been trained to find dead and living bodies in collapsed buildings etc.

Part of his training for this was for bodily fluids such as nose snot (nice!), urine, sweat and blood.  Once a dog has been trained to something, he cannot be untrained ..... so .. . he will alert to such things.  He had also been trained to alert to dead pigs.  They couldn't use human bodies in the UK, so they used pigs. 

He was, we are told also trained to alert to human bodies in the USA.  Again, once trained to alerting to pigs, it could not be untrained out of him

Soz, mercury but you are forgetting all these things.

Thoroughly analysed and discussed in an earlier thread ... or two ... or three.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 08, 2016, 03:08:13 AM
Quote from: sadie on May 08, 2016, 02:50:30 AM
(snip) Part of his training for this was for bodily fluids such as ... sweat (snip)
Every person has millions of sweat paricles on their skin.
So why didn't Eddie alert in 5A to every person in the dog team Sadie?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 08, 2016, 03:18:33 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 08, 2016, 03:08:13 AM
Every person has millions of sweat paricles on their skin.
So why didn't Eddie alert in 5A to every person in the dog team Sadie?

Dunno.  Maybe it is only old sweat that he alerts to?   Or maybe he only alerts to it when instructed to do so in certain areas ... he would be conditioned by daily contact to fresh sweat
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2016, 10:46:43 AM
Quote from: sadie on May 08, 2016, 02:50:30 AM
Eddie was double trained

In  addition to his cadaver training,  he also had been trained to find dead and living bodies in collapsed buildings etc.

Part of his training for this was for bodily fluids such as nose snot (nice!), urine, sweat and blood.  Once a dog has been trained to something, he cannot be untrained ..... so .. . he will alert to such things.  He had also been trained to alert to dead pigs.  They couldn't use human bodies in the UK, so they used pigs. 

He was, we are told also trained to alert to human bodies in the USA.  Again, once trained to alerting to pigs, it could not be untrained out of him

Soz, mercury but you are forgetting all these things.

Thoroughly analysed and discussed in an earlier thread ... or two ... or three.

All cadaver dogs will alert to pig. You need to do research and a dead pig was not reported as missing from 5A.

"Acting in my role of advisor to the U.S. Justice Department I have facilitated assessment of numerous cadaver search dog teams in the United States. These dogs are exclusively trained using human cadaver sources. When I introduced
pig based products into training assessments 100%! of the animals alerted to the medium"

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 08, 2016, 11:03:55 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2016, 10:46:43 AM
All cadaver dogs will alert to pig. You need to do research and a dead pig was not reported as missing from 5A.

"Acting in my role of advisor to the U.S. Justice Department I have facilitated assessment of numerous cadaver search dog teams in the United States. These dogs are exclusively trained using human cadaver sources. When I introduced
pig based products into training assessments 100%! of the animals alerted to the medium"

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm

Despite claims and counterclaims regarding the woof woofs, something which has never been explained is why they only alerted to materials and objects which were associated with the McCanns or accommodation occupied by them.  From what I have read in the files, alerts were never recorded elsewhere.

Anyone like to explain this troubling coincidence?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 08, 2016, 11:32:59 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 08, 2016, 11:03:55 AM
Despite claims and counterclaims regarding the woof woofs, something which has never been explained is why they only alerted to materials and objects which were associated with the McCanns or accommodation occupied by them.  From what I have read in the files, alerts were never recorded elsewhere.

Anyone like to explain this troubling coincidence?

It has been explained...according to the files the dogs completely ignored the McCanns apartment  before being repeatedly brought back and alerting to areas they had completely ignored...same with the car


Maybe this great alleged skills of the dog made an intelligent member of the Polícia Judiciária, Inspector Paulo Días to ask the following (Relatório de Análise dos primeiros 11 Volumes): "If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times

can anyone explain this troubling fact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 08, 2016, 11:38:56 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 08, 2016, 11:03:55 AM
Despite claims and counterclaims regarding the woof woofs, something which has never been explained is why they only alerted to materials and objects which were associated with the McCanns or accommodation occupied by them.  From what I have read in the files, alerts were never recorded elsewhere.

Anyone like to explain this troubling coincidence?

Multiple cadaver alerts in multiple places, which must have occurred in different time frames & connected only to the McCanns, reeks like dead herrings. IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 11:47:42 AM
Quote from: davel on May 08, 2016, 11:32:59 AM
It has been explained...according to the files the dogs completely ignored the McCanns apartment  before being repeatedly brought back and alerting to areas they had completely ignored...same with the car


Maybe this great alleged skills of the dog made an intelligent member of the Polícia Judiciária, Inspector Paulo Días to ask the following (Relatório de Análise dos primeiros 11 Volumes): "If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times

can anyone explain this troubling fact

What is your expertise in the handling of dogs in these situations ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 08, 2016, 11:54:42 AM
Quote from: davel on May 08, 2016, 11:32:59 AM
It has been explained...according to the files the dogs completely ignored the McCanns apartment  before being repeatedly brought back and alerting to areas they had completely ignored...same with the car


Maybe this great alleged skills of the dog made an intelligent member of the Polícia Judiciária, Inspector Paulo Días to ask the following (Relatório de Análise dos primeiros 11 Volumes): "If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times

can anyone explain this troubling fact

Strange that isn't quite how Grime tells it.  According to the dog handler Eddie sensed something the moment he was brought to the door of apartment 5a.

You still haven't answered my question, why did the dogs only alert to the McCanns apartment and property?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 08, 2016, 11:55:30 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 11:47:42 AM
What is your expertise in the handling of dogs in these situations ?

#what was amarals seeing as he drew all the wrong conclusions
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 08, 2016, 11:57:12 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 08, 2016, 11:54:42 AM
Strange that isn't quite how Grime tells it.  According to the dog handler Eddie sensed something the moment he was brought to the door of apartment 5a.

Grimes opinion....nothing concrete...you cannot ignore what the pj said about the alerts...and you cannot ignore what Harrison said....NO INFERENCE....many people are drawing their own conclusions
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 08, 2016, 11:58:31 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 11:47:42 AM
What is your expertise in the handling of dogs in these situations ?

what is [ removed goading ] R Hall's experience...making an absolute fool of himself on the phone to SY re the dogs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 08, 2016, 11:59:56 AM
Quote from: davel on May 08, 2016, 11:55:30 AM
#what was amarals seeing as he drew all the wrong conclusions

That is your opinion, it has by no means been established.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 08, 2016, 12:02:07 PM
Quote from: davel on May 08, 2016, 11:57:12 AM
Grimes opinion....nothing concrete...you cannot ignore what the pj said about the alerts...and you cannot ignore what Harrison said....NO INFERENCE....many people are drawing their own conclusions

Grime's opinion?  He's the expert or hadn't you realised?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 12:03:17 PM
Quote from: davel on May 08, 2016, 11:58:31 AM
what is [ removed goading ] R Hall's experience...making an absolute fool of himself on the phone to SY re the dogs

You do make some strange comments.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2016, 12:48:57 PM
"I am convinced that on May 3, 2007, between 21:40 and 22:00, a man, I do not know who yet, opened from outside the window of Madeleine's room, trying to theft, believing that no one was in the apartment, he ran to Madeleine, and took her away. That man (or an accomplice) was seen by Jane Tanner and members of the Smith family."

Heri's theory. The abductor was seen by Jane Tanner after 21:40 and the Smiths at 10. So he believes Jane saw him going one way (much later than she claimed and with long hair!) and the Smiths saw him going another way (now with short hair!). It seems like the aductor didn't know which way he was going and Jane is incredibly unreliable as a witness. He opened the window and ran to Madeleine and took her away (ignoring and running through the twins in their cots I presume). I want to see this reconstruction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on May 08, 2016, 01:51:06 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 08, 2016, 11:03:55 AM
Despite claims and counterclaims regarding the woof woofs, something which has never been explained is why they only alerted to materials and objects which were associated with the McCanns or accommodation occupied by them.  From what I have read in the files, alerts were never recorded elsewhere.

Anyone like to explain this troubling coincidence?

You must have missed a lot of posts Angelo:

Here's one I made earlier on the subject:-

It seems to me that 'time allowed to search' is the obvious discrepancy between searches of anything McCann related - and other searches.

It's plain from the videos that the dogs do not always go in and immediately identify and make a beeline for a place or object that has been contaminated.    If that was the case then surely Eddie would have immediately alerted to Cuddlecat - and Keela would have alerted to the white curtains on her first search - and Eddie would have alerted to the keyfob on his first encounter with the Renault.

The dogs obviously need time.   

The longest time spent on any of the other cars was around 30 seconds - and no alerts were made.   After the same amount of time i.e. 30 seconds was spent on the Renault  -similarly  - no alerts were made.   It was only after being given a lot more time and encouragement regarding the Renault that Eddie finally alerted.     What would have happened if all the other cars had been given the same amount of time and attention?

IMO it's highly likely that other alerts would have occurred, because (as with the apartments) it's hard to believe that no alertable material had ever been deposited in those 9 cars - either in the factory while they were being built - or by their subsequent owners/families/friends.    The same goes for the apartments.




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 08, 2016, 01:54:25 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2016, 12:48:57 PM
"I am convinced that on May 3, 2007, between 21:40 and 22:00, a man, I do not know who yet, opened from outside the window of Madeleine's room, trying to theft, believing that no one was in the apartment, he ran to Madeleine, and took her away. That man (or an accomplice) was seen by Jane Tanner and members of the Smith family."

Heri's theory. The abductor was seen by Jane Tanner after 21:40 and the Smiths at 10. So he believes Jane saw him going one way (much later than she claimed and with long hair!) and the Smiths saw him going another way (now with short hair!). It seems like the aductor didn't know which way he was going and Jane is incredibly unreliable as a witness. He opened the window and ran to Madeleine and took her away (ignoring and running through the twins in their cots I presume). I want to see this reconstruction.

Should be hilarious
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 08, 2016, 02:02:30 PM
Quote from: Benice on May 08, 2016, 01:51:06 PM
You must have missed a lot of posts Angelo:

Here's one I made earlier on the subject:-

It seems to me that 'time allowed to search' is the obvious discrepancy between searches of anything McCann related - and other searches.

It's plain from the videos that the dogs do not always go in and immediately identify and make a beeline for a place or object that has been contaminated.    If that was the case then surely Eddie would have immediately alerted to Cuddlecat - and Keela would have alerted to the white curtains on her first search - and Eddie would have alerted to the keyfob on his first encounter with the Renault.

The dogs obviously need time.   

The longest time spent on any of the other cars was around 30 seconds - and no alerts were made.   After the same amount of time i.e. 30 seconds was spent on the Renault  -similarly  - no alerts were made.   It was only after being given a lot more time and encouragement regarding the Renault that Eddie finally alerted.     What would have happened if all the other cars had been given the same amount of time and attention?

IMO it's highly likely that other alerts would have occurred, because (as with the apartments) it's hard to believe that no alertable material had ever been deposited in those 9 cars - either in the factory while they were being built - or by their subsequent owners/families/friends.    The same goes for the apartments.

The dog handler knew from initial responses or in most cases the lack of them whether it was worth pursuing other objects.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 08, 2016, 02:07:35 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 08, 2016, 02:02:30 PM
The dog handler knew from initial responses or in most cases the lack of them whether it was worth pursuing other objects.

the dogs handlers opinion is not worth a bean as evidence...for very good reasons
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 08, 2016, 02:12:07 PM
Quote from: davel on May 08, 2016, 02:07:35 PM
the dogs handlers opinion is not worth a bean as evidence...for very good reasons

Sorry misread your post.  As proof yes but it is still evidence albeit unreliable at this time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 08, 2016, 02:27:03 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 08, 2016, 02:12:07 PM
Sorry misread your post.  As proof yes but it is still evidence albeit unreliable at this time.
Not proof
Not evidence
In fact no inference at all can be made from a them
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 02:39:37 PM
Quote from: Benice on May 08, 2016, 01:51:06 PM
You must have missed a lot of posts Angelo:

Here's one I made earlier on the subject:-

It seems to me that 'time allowed to search' is the obvious discrepancy between searches of anything McCann related - and other searches.

It's plain from the videos that the dogs do not always go in and immediately identify and make a beeline for a place or object that has been contaminated.    If that was the case then surely Eddie would have immediately alerted to Cuddlecat - and Keela would have alerted to the white curtains on her first search - and Eddie would have alerted to the keyfob on his first encounter with the Renault.

The dogs obviously need time.   

The longest time spent on any of the other cars was around 30 seconds - and no alerts were made.   After the same amount of time i.e. 30 seconds was spent on the Renault  -similarly  - no alerts were made.   It was only after being given a lot more time and encouragement regarding the Renault that Eddie finally alerted.     What would have happened if all the other cars had been given the same amount of time and attention?

IMO it's highly likely that other alerts would have occurred, because (as with the apartments) it's hard to believe that no alertable material had ever been deposited in those 9 cars - either in the factory while they were being built - or by their subsequent owners/families/friends.    The same goes for the apartments.

An excellently succinct post Benice which covers everything. 

It would have been impossible for the dogs not to have encountered traces of blood (both alert to blood) in none of the other residences they visited had they been given time.

On record in apartment 5A were two bloody incidents over a short period of time.  Logic dictates that 5A could not have been the only apartment in Luz where similar events had occurred.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2016, 02:45:29 PM
Eddie goes in first to find evidence of death odour. If he doesn't find any the blood dog ain't used.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 02:58:05 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2016, 02:45:29 PM
Eddie goes in first to find evidence of death odour. If he doesn't find any the blood dog ain't used.

Eddie alerted to blood, sometimes from the living ~ along with other scents of human putrefaction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2016, 02:59:20 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 02:58:05 PM
Eddie alerted to blood, sometimes from the living ~ along with other scents of human putrefaction.

No blood was found at Eddie's first alert by Keela nor on clothes etc. Keela can detect blood that has been cleaned off murder weapons etc.

Check this out:

(http://s32.postimg.org/o1hqru5xh/blooddog1.png)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 03:17:43 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2016, 02:59:20 PM
No blood was found at Eddie's first alert by Keela nor on clothes etc. Keela can detect blood that has been cleaned off murder weapons etc.

Check this out:

(http://s32.postimg.org/o1hqru5xh/blooddog1.png)

We came to this from the point being made that the only places in Luz that Eddie alerted in was related to the McCanns and the exaggerated time given to inspecting those places in comparison to others.

The alerts in the garage were ruled out by forensics ... therefore zero alerts there.

No reliance can be placed on a dog which failed to alert to substances which must be present in every residence in Luz even or particularly new build.

People bleed ... sometimes profusely ... sometimes not a lot.

Eddie alerted to blood.  It is illogical that he only alerted in the McCann apartment to the exclusion of all others. 

That certainly needs some explanation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2016, 03:27:19 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 03:17:43 PM
We came to this from the point being made that the only places in Luz that Eddie alerted in was related to the McCanns and the exaggerated time given to inspecting those places in comparison to others.

The alerts in the garage were ruled out by forensics ... therefore zero alerts there.

No reliance can be placed on a dog which failed to alert to substances which must be present in every residence in Luz even or particularly new build.

People bleed ... sometimes profusely ... sometimes not a lot.

Eddie alerted to blood.  It is illogical that he only alerted in the McCann apartment to the exclusion of all others. 

That certainly needs some explanation.

Cadaver dogs alert to blood but they first go into crime scene's to detect cadaver odour strangely enough how they get their name  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on May 08, 2016, 03:32:29 PM
Posters are reminded to keep comments amiable otherwise the big delete stick will come out.

Admin
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 03:38:53 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2016, 03:27:19 PM
Cadaver dogs alert to blood but they first go into crime scene's to detect cadaver odour strangely enough how they get their name  @)(++(*

The point is though ... sometimes there is no cadaver to be found ... sometimes the odour is found as in the Shannon Matthews case ... but thankfully continuing the search resulted in her being found alive and well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 04:02:00 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 03:38:53 PM
The point is though ... sometimes there is no cadaver to be found ... sometimes the odour is found as in the Shannon Matthews case ... but thankfully continuing the search resulted in her being found alive and well.

Dogs have no agenda.

They are trained for specific tasks and that is just what Eddie and Keela did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 04:09:34 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 04:02:00 PM
Dogs have no agenda.

They are trained for specific tasks and that is just what Eddie and Keela did.

Precisely.
They did what they were trained to do and found or did not find what they were trained to.  But their use most certainly did not resolve what happened to Madeleine McCann.

Part of that was that it was not understood by the senior investigator just exactly what their role in the investigation was nor did he have a grasp of forensics associated with that role.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 04:11:45 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 04:09:34 PM
Precisely.
They did what they were trained to do and found or did not find what they were trained to.  But their use most certainly did not resolve what happened to Madeleine McCann.

Part of that was that it was not understood by the senior investigator just exactly what their role in the investigation was nor did he have a grasp of forensics associated with that role.

I was not aware Amaral was a forensic  scientist.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 08, 2016, 04:12:21 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 04:09:34 PM
Precisely.
They did what they were trained to do and found or did not find what they were trained to.  But their use most certainly did not resolve what happened to Madeleine McCann.

Part of that was that it was not understood by the senior investigator just exactly what their role in the investigation was nor did he have a grasp of forensics associated with that role.

And yet OG didn't reject the idea that Madeleine might not have left 5A alive. Where did they get that idea from?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 04:23:11 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 04:11:45 PM
I was not aware Amaral was a forensic  scientist.

You are possibly quite correct in that assumption however it is usual for the police to seek the advice of experts in fields in which they have no expertise or knowledge and he had the advantage of having Portugal's top forensics scientist Francisco Corte-Real to advise when necessary.
All he had to do was, ask, listen and apply.  I am sure Corte-Real who was in close contact with the FSS throughout would have kept him informed, whether he understood the information being given is less sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 04:26:02 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 04:23:11 PM
You are possibly quite correct in that assumption however it is usual for the police to seek the advice of experts in fields in which they have no expertise or knowledge and he had the advantage of having Portugal's top forensics scientist Francisco Corte-Real to advise when necessary.
All he had to do was, ask, listen and apply.  I am sure Corte-Real who was in close contact with the FSS throughout would have kept him informed, whether he understood the information being given is less sure.

Yet his thesis of accidental death has not been disproved.

Amaral also remains a fixation of McCann supporters, even more highlighted since the recent judgement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 05:00:20 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 04:26:02 PM
Yet his thesis of accidental death has not been disproved.

Amaral also remains a fixation of McCann supporters, even more highlighted since the recent judgement.

Are you suggesting Mr Amaral is not pivotal to Madeleine's case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 05:02:08 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 05:00:20 PM
Are you suggesting Mr Amaral is not pivotal to Madeleine's case?

The McCanns are.

That is where yet he case started, not Amaral.

...and with the inevitable shelving of the case... .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 08, 2016, 05:06:59 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2016, 12:48:57 PM
"I am convinced that on May 3, 2007, between 21:40 and 22:00, a man, I do not know who yet, opened from outside the window of Madeleine's room, trying to theft, believing that no one was in the apartment, he ran to Madeleine, and took her away. That man (or an accomplice) was seen by Jane Tanner and members of the Smith family."

Heri's theory. The abductor was seen by Jane Tanner after 21:40 and the Smiths at 10. So he believes Jane saw him going one way (much later than she claimed and with long hair!) and the Smiths saw him going another way (now with short hair!). It seems like the aductor didn't know which way he was going and Jane is incredibly unreliable as a witness. He opened the window and ran to Madeleine and took her away (ignoring and running through the twins in their cots I presume). I want to see this reconstruction.
His theory is more complex than you have described.

Alternatively, your description is not accurate in terms of his theory.

Take your pick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 05:09:43 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 05:02:08 PM
The McCanns are.

That is where yet he case started, not Amaral.

...and with the inevitable shelving of the case... .

  ... and where exactly does the missing child fit into all of this?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2016, 05:10:08 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 08, 2016, 05:06:59 PM
His theory is more complex than you have described.

Alternatively, your description is not accurate in terms of his theory.

Take your pick.

Which part is wrong? Jane Tanner now seeing a man (cleared by SY) with longer hair much later than she said and the Smiths saw the same man with short hair?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 08, 2016, 05:18:22 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2016, 05:10:08 PM
Which part is wrong? Jane Tanner now seeing a man (cleared by SY) with longer hair much later than she said and the Smiths saw the same man with short hair?
I am not interested in 'championing' someone else's theory.

I am stating, as a fact, that you do not understand Heriberto's theory.

He does not have a single person involved.  He has 2 different people, with 2 different hair lengths.

And if you wish to discuss his theory, please PM him or comment on his blog.  He is quite happy to discuss his thinking.  Or at least, he was with me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on May 08, 2016, 05:19:56 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 08, 2016, 02:02:30 PM
The dog handler knew from initial responses or in most cases the lack of them whether it was worth pursuing other objects.

M. Grime tells us that

1. Eddie and Keela alerted to blood from living persons.

2.  that they alert to deposits so small that they cannot even be detected by forensics.

3. that they can detect blood deposited decades ago.

I do not believe that with the huge amount of holiday-makers (families) who stayed in those other apartments over the decades - that at no time had anyone ever spilt a single drop of blood in them.

With regard to the cars.   Eddie showed as little initial interest in the Renault as he did in the other cars.    It was not his behaviour which changed around that car - it was Martin Grimes.     It took a full two minutes before Eddie finally alerted - but only after being repeatedly called back -  with MG even tapping on the car to draw the dog's attention to it.

The maximum amount of time spent on any of the other cars was 30 seconds, in fact Eddie did not even complete a full circuit of one car before being allowed to run off to the next one.

If Eddie had been made to inspect the other cars for a full two minutes - then IMO there would have similar alerts in at least some of those cars as with the Renault.

In any event  - the fact that the Renault was clearly identifiable as belonging to the McCanns meant that any claim made that the testing was unbiased was completely untenable.

AIMHO

 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2016, 05:21:15 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 08, 2016, 05:18:22 PM
I am not interested in 'championing' someone else's theory.

I am stating, as a fact, that you do not understand Heriberto's theory.

He does not have a single person involved.  He has 2 different people, with 2 different hair lengths.

And if you wish to discuss his theory, please PM him or comment on his blog.  He is quite happy to discuss his thinking.  Or at least, he was with me.

Thanks for clearing it up and hopefully he will revise his page.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 08, 2016, 06:07:45 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 05:00:20 PM
Are you suggesting Mr Amaral is not pivotal to Madeleine's case?

Of course not - he's just your handy bete noire.

He was merely coordinator - a team leader - for a few months.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 06:14:17 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 08, 2016, 06:07:45 PM
Of course not - he's just your handy bete noire.

He was merely coordinator - a team leader - for a few months.

Exactly Jassi, and his thesis was shared with other members of the PJ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 08, 2016, 06:15:47 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 06:14:17 PM
Exactly Jassi, and his thesis was shared with other members of the PJ.

that's right...it seems not one of them understood the evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 06:19:23 PM
Quote from: davel on May 08, 2016, 06:15:47 PM
that's right...it seems not one of them understood the evidence

They understood perfectly well, there was no evidence of abduction, which has not changed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 07:42:06 PM
Quote from: davel on May 08, 2016, 06:15:47 PM
that's right...it seems not one of them understood the evidence

Which is a bit worrying for a modern law enforcement body.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 08, 2016, 07:45:27 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 07:42:06 PM
Which is a bit worrying for a modern law enforcement body.

Well it might be if it were true, rather than just an opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 07:46:07 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 07:42:06 PM
Which is a bit worrying for a modern law enforcement body.


In your opinion, which of course is geared towards defending the mccanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 08, 2016, 08:13:55 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 08, 2016, 06:07:45 PM
Of course not - he's just your handy bete noire.

He was merely coordinator - a team leader - for a few months.

Exactly, something team McCann struggle with.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 08:15:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2016, 05:09:43 PM
  ... and where exactly does the missing child fit into all of this?

That is a question you should pose to the mccanns, as regards child care.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 08, 2016, 08:26:57 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 08, 2016, 05:06:59 PM
His theory is more complex than you have described.

Alternatively, your description is not accurate in terms of his theory.

Take your pick.

I have asked him to explain in more detail how he concluded that it was physically impossible for the McCanns to be involved in Madeleine's disappearance, but he hasn't answered. (which is his prerogative). I just wondered if you understood how he reached that conclusion?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 08, 2016, 09:30:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 08, 2016, 08:26:57 PM
I have asked him to explain in more detail how he concluded that it was physically impossible for the McCanns to be involved in Madeleine's disappearance, but he hasn't answered. (which is his prerogative). I just wondered if you understood how he reached that conclusion?
Theorem.  Burglar A burgles 5A, and in so doing disturbs Madeleine, then silences her.

Makes it to a place nearby, where person B, linked to the burglary, is now confronted with a dead body.

Persons A and B are local, thus having much more knowledge of Luz than the McCanns.

Person A is Tannerman.  Person B is Smithman.

Person B, with local knowledge, gets rid of the body.

Heri hasn't ruled out the McCanns.  He is open to evidence that changes his current viewpoint.  I mentioned your username as one of those more open-minded than most, and he was genuinely interested.  Mind you, we covered so much stuff that I could write a book just about what we discussed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 09:36:04 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 08, 2016, 09:30:55 PM
Theorem.  Burglar A burgles 5A, and in so doing disturbs Madeleine, then silences her.

Makes it to a place nearby, where person B, linked to the burglary, is now confronted with a dead body.

Persons A and B are local, thus having much more knowledge of Luz than the McCanns.

Person A is Tannerman.  Person B is Smithman.

Person B, with local knowledge, gets rid of the body.

Heri hasn't ruled out the McCanns.  He is open to evidence that changes his current viewpoint.  I mentioned your username as one of those more open-minded than most, and he was genuinely interested.  Mind you, we covered so much stuff that I could write a book just about what we discussed.

Why would a burglar need to silence a 3 year old child just woken up ?

Secondly, a burglar seeing the place occupied would invaribly scarper thinking other people were there.

Third, no sign of a struggle and the apartment was not in a mess.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 08, 2016, 09:44:19 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 08, 2016, 09:30:55 PM
Theorem.  Burglar A burgles 5A, and in so doing disturbs Madeleine, then silences her.

Makes it to a place nearby, where person B, linked to the burglary, is now confronted with a dead body.

Persons A and B are local, thus having much more knowledge of Luz than the McCanns.

Person A is Tannerman.  Person B is Smithman.

Person B, with local knowledge, gets rid of the body.

Heri hasn't ruled out the McCanns.  He is open to evidence that changes his current viewpoint.  I mentioned your username as one of those more open-minded than most, and he was genuinely interested.  Mind you, we covered so much stuff that I could write a book just about what we discussed.

From what you have said Heri does not suspect the mcCanns at the moment but would change his mind if new evidence arose...that is my position and the stated position of the very open minded supporters on this forum
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 08, 2016, 09:55:30 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 09:36:04 PM
Why would a burglar need to silence a 3 year old child just woken up ?

Secondly, a burglar seeing the place occupied would invaribly scarper thinking other people were there.

Third, no sign of a struggle and the apartment was not in a mess.
Let me start again.  I do not support Heri's theorem, which I have said before.   And I do not wish to champion Heri's theorem, which I have said before.

But here it is.  The burglar does not have the mental stability/maturity that you or I do.  The burglar is not acting as a mature and balanced adult.

The act is one of panic.  Something done in a flash that was stupid, but impulse made it seem reasonable at the time.

It's like a lightening strike.  Why does it happen where it happens and when it happens, rather than a half a mile away and ten seconds later?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 08, 2016, 10:32:56 PM
@Heri did you look at all the names marked with convictions ?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 08, 2016, 10:36:31 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 08, 2016, 09:36:04 PM
Why would a burglar need to silence a 3 year old child just woken up ? (snip)
Agreed. On seeing a child present a burglar would flee.
No way would a burglar take the child.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 08, 2016, 10:39:01 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 08, 2016, 09:30:55 PM
Theorem.  Burglar A burgles 5A, and in so doing disturbs Madeleine, then silences her.

Makes it to a place nearby, where person B, linked to the burglary, is now confronted with a dead body.

Persons A and B are local, thus having much more knowledge of Luz than the McCanns.

Person A is Tannerman.  Person B is Smithman.

Person B, with local knowledge, gets rid of the body.

Heri hasn't ruled out the McCanns.  He is open to evidence that changes his current viewpoint.  I mentioned your username as one of those more open-minded than most, and he was genuinely interested.  Mind you, we covered so much stuff that I could write a book just about what we discussed.

I find this statement strange. Heri states on his blog that Maddie was abducted by a stranger...he states it as a fact...yet you claim he has not ruled out the Mccanns ...that does not add up. 

The fact that you describe one of the leading sceptics on the forum as one of the most open minded is also strange. Please note that myself and other supporters are very open minded and would be happy to consider any new evidence that implicates the McCanns...there just isn't any...and Heri seems to agree with us
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 08, 2016, 10:46:42 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 08, 2016, 09:30:55 PM
Theorem.  Burglar A burgles 5A, and in so doing disturbs Madeleine, then silences her.

Makes it to a place nearby, where person B, linked to the burglary, is now confronted with a dead body.

Persons A and B are local, thus having much more knowledge of Luz than the McCanns.

Person A is Tannerman.  Person B is Smithman.

Person B, with local knowledge, gets rid of the body.




Heri hasn't ruled out the McCanns.  He is open to evidence that changes his current viewpoint.  I mentioned your username as one of those more open-minded than most, and he was genuinely interested.  Mind you, we covered so much stuff that I could write a book just about what we discussed.




That is  one theorm that errs on the could have happened. Another recent theorm I was interested in was Maddie could have witnessed something she shouldn't have and been silenced....( I am not prepered to say what, or by who)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 08, 2016, 10:51:22 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on May 08, 2016, 10:46:42 PM



That is  one theorm that errs on the could have happened. Another recent theorm I was interested in was Maddie could have witnessed something she shouldn't have and been silenced....( I am not prepered to say what, or by who)

I prefer the abducted by aliens from the planet Zog...its more believable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 08, 2016, 10:59:24 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 08, 2016, 09:30:55 PM
Theorem.  Burglar A burgles 5A, and in so doing disturbs Madeleine, then silences her.

Makes it to a place nearby, where person B, linked to the burglary, is now confronted with a dead body.

Persons A and B are local, thus having much more knowledge of Luz than the McCanns.

Person A is Tannerman.  Person B is Smithman.

Person B, with local knowledge, gets rid of the body.

Heri hasn't ruled out the McCanns.  He is open to evidence that changes his current viewpoint.  I mentioned your username as one of those more open-minded than most, and he was genuinely interested.  Mind you, we covered so much stuff that I could write a book just about what we discussed.

I think you should correct your post...Heri plainly believes maddie was abducted...you are misrepresenting his views
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 08, 2016, 10:59:30 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 08, 2016, 09:55:30 PM
Let me start again.  I do not support Heri's theorem, which I have said before.   And I do not wish to champion Heri's theorem, which I have said before.

But here it is.  The burglar does not have the mental stability/maturity that you or I do.  The burglar is not acting as a mature and balanced adult.

The act is one of panic.  Something done in a flash that was stupid, but impulse made it seem reasonable at the time.

It's like a lightening strike.  Why does it happen where it happens and when it happens, rather than a half a mile away and ten seconds later?

Two burglars wearing the same clothes but different hair explained
One burglar being located east,(one walking towards there wth dead body)  doing what?
He then goes west to get rid of body
Crecheman being almost eliminated by Redwood must fit in here somewhere, but where?

If Heri has moved Tanners sighting to half hour later than what she said, are we supposed to thnk tanner made two major mstakes, one of the time and two seeing jez and gerry at the time of her check?





Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on May 08, 2016, 11:26:22 PM
Quote from: davel on May 08, 2016, 10:51:22 PM
I prefer the abducted by aliens from the planet Zog...its more believable

You know you could be onto something there Dave.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 09, 2016, 12:34:07 AM
Quote from: davel on May 08, 2016, 10:39:01 PM
I find this statement strange. Heri states on his blog that Maddie was abducted by a stranger...he states it as a fact...yet you claim he has not ruled out the Mccanns ...that does not add up. 

The fact that you describe one of the leading sceptics on the forum as one of the most open minded is also strange. Please note that myself and other supporters are very open minded and would be happy to consider any new evidence that implicates the McCanns...there just isn't any...and Heri seems to agree with us
Take it up with Heri.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 09, 2016, 07:27:59 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 09, 2016, 12:34:07 AM
Take it up with Heri.

I have taken it up with Heri........he has sent me a PM..I don't propose to reveal the contents of the pm but...what you are saying is untrue...Heri considers Maddie was abducted and her parents were not involved
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 09, 2016, 08:51:25 AM
Quote from: davel on May 08, 2016, 10:39:01 PM
I find this statement strange. Heri states on his blog that Maddie was abducted by a stranger...he states it as a fact...yet you claim he has not ruled out the Mccanns ...that does not add up. 

The fact that you describe one of the leading sceptics on the forum as one of the most open minded is also strange. Please note that myself and other supporters are very open minded and would be happy to consider any new evidence that implicates the McCanns...there just isn't any...and Heri seems to agree with us

It depends on your definition of 'sceptic' I suppose. I didn't give myself that label, so I can't comment on what you think it means.

My position is that I don't know what happened to Madeleine McCann, and I haven't seen any theory which explains it to my satisfaction.

That, in my opinion, allows me to be more open minded than someone who has committed themselves to defending a particular theory.

They, in my opinion, are more likely to accept evidence which supports their theory than to accept evidence which casts doubt on it. That isn't being open minded.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 09, 2016, 09:50:49 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2016, 08:51:25 AM
It depends on your definition of 'sceptic' I suppose. I didn't give myself that label, so I can't comment on what you think it means.

My position is that I don't know what happened to Madeleine McCann, and I haven't seen any theory which explains it to my satisfaction.

That, in my opinion, allows me to be more open minded than someone who has committed themselves to defending a particular theory.

They, in my opinion, are more likely to accept evidence which supports their theory than to accept evidence which casts doubt on it. That isn't being open minded.

I think you misunderstand the position of the supporters...we do not support blindly but based on the evidence. we are not foot ball supporters who support blindly. All the evidence including the actions of SY point towards the McCanns having no involvement. I consider myself to be openminded ...show me evidence that points to guilt and I'm happy to consider it and change my mind. The fact is many sceptics still do not understand the evidence of the dogs and dna.

I believe ...based on lots of reasons...that Kate is telling the truth. You are not sure if Kate is telling the truth...you are therefore sceptical..a sceptic.

I am pleased to see that Heri...an intelligent man who has done a lot of research on the case...agrees with me
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 09, 2016, 09:52:23 AM
Quote from: davel on May 09, 2016, 09:50:49 AM
I think you misunderstand the position of the supporters...we do not support blindly but based on the evidence. we are not foot ball supporters who support blindly. All the evidence including the actions of SY point towards the McCanns having no involvement. I consider myself to be openminded ...show me evidence that points to guilt and I'm happy to consider it and change my mind. The fact is many sceptics still do not understand the evidence of the dogs and dna.

I believe ...based on lots of reasons...that Kate is telling the truth. You are not sure if Kate is telling the truth...you are therefore sceptical..a sceptic.

I am pleased to see that Heri...an intelligent man who has done a lot of research on the case...agrees with me

The position of the supporters is not misunderstood.

It is very clearly defined.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 09, 2016, 09:54:25 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 09, 2016, 09:52:23 AM
The position of the supporters is not misunderstood.

It is very clearly defined.

not by you it isn't...so who has defined it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 09, 2016, 12:27:01 PM
Quote from: davel on May 09, 2016, 09:50:49 AM
I think you misunderstand the position of the supporters...we do not support blindly but based on the evidence. we are not foot ball supporters who support blindly. All the evidence including the actions of SY point towards the McCanns having no involvement. I consider myself to be openminded ...show me evidence that points to guilt and I'm happy to consider it and change my mind. The fact is many sceptics still do not understand the evidence of the dogs and dna.

I believe ...based on lots of reasons...that Kate is telling the truth. You are not sure if Kate is telling the truth...you are therefore sceptical..a sceptic.

I am pleased to see that Heri...an intelligent man who has done a lot of research on the case...agrees with me

I can only speak as I find. We have had threads presenting the evidence on which supporters base their position and it doesn't amount to a hill of beans in my opinion. Lots of opinion and very little evidence.

I'm not sure if anyone has told the truth and if I see evidence that a story has been changed that suggests to me that someone may be an unreliable witness. Tell me, did Kate McCann have a bath after the children were in bed or a shower while they played? If I'm sceptical of her evidence there's reasons, and that's one of them.

I'm sure Heri is intelligent but until he's willing to explain how he ruled the parents out I'm entitled to be sceptical about his conclusion. As a fan of 'scientific research' I'm surprised you seem prepared to accept his word for it, I must say.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 09, 2016, 12:37:13 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2016, 12:27:01 PM
I can only speak as I find. We have had threads presenting the evidence on which supporters base their position and it doesn't amount to a hill of beans in my opinion. Lots of opinion and very little evidence.

I'm not sure if anyone has told the truth and if I see evidence that a story has been changed that suggests to me that someone may be an unreliable witness. Tell me, did Kate McCann have a bath after the children were in bed or a shower while they played? If I'm sceptical of her evidence there's reasons, and that's one of them.

I'm sure Heri is intelligent but until he's willing to explain how he ruled the parents out I'm entitled to be sceptical about his conclusion. As a fan of 'scientific research' I'm surprised you seem prepared to accept his word for it, I must say.

Well said.  8((()*/ 8@??)( 8@??)(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 09, 2016, 01:11:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2016, 12:27:01 PM
I can only speak as I find. We have had threads presenting the evidence on which supporters base their position and it doesn't amount to a hill of beans in my opinion. Lots of opinion and very little evidence.

I'm not sure if anyone has told the truth and if I see evidence that a story has been changed that suggests to me that someone may be an unreliable witness. Tell me, did Kate McCann have a bath after the children were in bed or a shower while they played? If I'm sceptical of her evidence there's reasons, and that's one of them.

I'm sure Heri is intelligent but until he's willing to explain how he ruled the parents out I'm entitled to be sceptical about his conclusion. As a fan of 'scientific research' I'm surprised you seem prepared to accept his word for it, I must say.

The evidence you use are the twice translated non verbatim files which I think are a point of confusion IMO. ...so the evidence you are relying on to asses Kate is unreliable...You are entitled to be sceptical then please don't suggest that you are not a sceptic. I don't simply accept Heri's word for it ...you are mistaken again. I arrived at my conclusions independently based on the evidence and it just happen s that my ideas are similar to Heri's.

Again...I am open minded...something you cannot accept because in some ways you are closed minded
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 09, 2016, 02:59:26 PM
Quote from: davel on May 09, 2016, 01:11:22 PM
The evidence you use are the twice translated non verbatim files which I think are a point of confusion IMO. ...so the evidence you are relying on to asses Kate is unreliable...You are entitled to be sceptical then please don't suggest that you are not a sceptic. I don't simply accept Heri's word for it ...you are mistaken again. I arrived at my conclusions independently based on the evidence and it just happen s that my ideas are similar to Heri's.

Again...I am open minded...something you cannot accept because in some ways you are closed minded

The same files you are happy to accept when you agree with them you mean?

I never said I'm not sceptical, I said it depends on the definition of 'sceptic' as used by you whether I'm one of them or not.

I would love to see the evidence which you think makes it physically impossible for the McCanns to be involved in the disappearance, but I don't expect to.

Your last sentence is meaningless because it's just an opinion. I'll let others decide if it's correct or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 09, 2016, 03:17:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2016, 02:59:26 PM
The same files you are happy to accept when you agree with them you mean?

I never said I'm not sceptical, I said it depends on the definition of 'sceptic' as used by you whether I'm one of them or not.

I would love to see the evidence which you think makes it physically impossible for the McCanns to be involved in the disappearance, but I don't expect to.

Your last sentence is meaningless because it's just an opinion. I'll let others decide if it's correct or not.

Could you point out anywhere I have used the twice translated files to support anything I have said
You are totally wrong again...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 09, 2016, 06:48:33 PM
None of the bath times makes sense when you find the contradicting statements e.g. the Payne's. You go for a run but don't get a shower and get out of your sweaty clothes until an hour later. The other witness can't remember you in a towel. Gimme a break.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 09, 2016, 08:55:15 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 09, 2016, 06:48:33 PM
None of the bath times makes sense when you find the contradicting statements e.g. the Payne's. You go for a run but don't get a shower and get out of your sweaty clothes until an hour later. The other witness can't remember you in a towel. Gimme a break.
Where does your theory start Pathfinder?
For example, do you agree that the child did arrive back at the apartment after tapas tea?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 09, 2016, 10:29:03 PM
Did Operation Grange ever test the bedroom window and shutter?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 10, 2016, 10:02:07 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 09, 2016, 08:55:15 PM
Where does your theory start Pathfinder?
For example, do you agree that the child did arrive back at the apartment after tapas tea?

Yes all back to the apartment at 5:40 and Gerry leaves for tennis at 6..............A reconstruction should start from 5:30 on 3 May - parents and children at tapas eating area being signed out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 10, 2016, 12:46:57 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 10, 2016, 10:02:07 AM
Yes all back to the apartment at 5:40 and Gerry leaves for tennis at 6..............A reconstruction should start from 5:30 on 3 May - parents and children at tapas eating area being signed out.
So we agree that the child was in the apartment at about 5.40pm.
Jumping ahead, do you agree that the child was in the child bedroom at about 7.15pm?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 10, 2016, 01:36:49 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 10, 2016, 12:46:57 PM
So we agree that the child was in the apartment at about 5.40pm.
Jumping ahead, do you agree that the child was in the child bedroom at about 7.15pm?

I think you know my answer to that question if you have read my theory.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 10, 2016, 06:33:54 PM
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/man-held-over-babes-in-the-wood-murders/ar-BBsRNvN?ocid=spartanntp


Yet another cold case may be about to be resolved, which is good news for the families concerned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 12, 2016, 08:03:18 AM
So what news on the appeal to the Supreme Court ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on May 12, 2016, 06:22:21 PM
I  thought this interesting....

I didn't know were else to put it and i do mean ....as in which thread


Richard D Hall Telephone Call to Scotland Yard re McCann Case

https://www.youtube.com/embed/eHGngf4wy8Y
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 12, 2016, 06:31:11 PM
Quote from: xtina on May 12, 2016, 06:22:21 PM
I  thought this interesting....

I didn't know were else to put it and i do mean ....as in which thread


Richard D Hall Telephone Call to Scotland Yard re McCann Case

https://www.youtube.com/embed/eHGngf4wy8Y

That was one of the funniest things I've ever listened to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on May 12, 2016, 06:40:31 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 12, 2016, 06:31:11 PM
That was one of the funniest things I've ever listened to.


this isnt funny though is it

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-05-12/ben-needham-case-police-recalled-over-drinking-in-kos/


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 12, 2016, 06:53:58 PM
Quote from: xtina on May 12, 2016, 06:40:31 PM

this isnt funny though is it

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-05-12/ben-needham-case-police-recalled-over-drinking-in-kos/

It depends on whether or not you believe it is true.  Although I am entirely unsure of what they are supposed to have done.
Did they go out for a meal and a drink after they finished work?  Oh My.  That could be shocking.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 12, 2016, 07:00:59 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 12, 2016, 06:53:58 PM
It depends on whether or not you believe it is true.  Although I am entirely unsure of what they are supposed to have done.
Did they go out for a meal and a drink after they finished work?  Oh My.  That could be shocking.

Apart from not working of course, that's what the mccanns and the rest did.

At least at that point, it wasn't at the tax payers expense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 12, 2016, 07:33:51 PM
Quote from: xtina on May 12, 2016, 06:22:21 PM
I  thought this interesting....

I didn't know were else to put it and i do mean ....as in which thread


Richard D Hall Telephone Call to Scotland Yard re McCann Case

https://www.youtube.com/embed/eHGngf4wy8Y

Absolutely cringe worthy ... and this man has set himself up as a guru who actually seems to have a following.  Phew!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 12, 2016, 07:40:29 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 12, 2016, 07:33:51 PM
Absolutely cringe worthy ... and this man has set himself up as a guru who actually seems to have a following.  Phew!

CAVADER?  Sorry, sorry.  I really shouldn't mock.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 12, 2016, 11:12:00 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 12, 2016, 06:31:11 PM
That was one of the funniest things I've ever listened to.

Made me laugh too.

Richard Hall getrting it wrong .... and recording himself then publishing it himself !

How naive or biggoted he is showing himself to be   *&*%£
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on May 13, 2016, 08:40:52 AM
Quote from: sadie on May 12, 2016, 11:12:00 PM
Made me laugh too.

Richard Hall getrting it wrong .... and recording himself then publishing it himself !

How naive or biggoted he is showing himself to be   *&*%£


Richard Hall getrting it wrong ....... @)(++(*


i think you will find..........he does have a really massive following

because he shows the mccs/SY ....for what they are ..............and not afraid to do it

the main reason also .........he does not believe.... maddie was abducted ..same as the vast majority don't
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 13, 2016, 08:59:59 AM
Quote from: sadie on May 12, 2016, 11:12:00 PM
Made me laugh too.

Richard Hall getrting it wrong .... and recording himself then publishing it himself !

How naive or biggoted he is showing himself to be   *&*%£

There are bigots on both sides imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 13, 2016, 09:04:53 AM

Sadie's was a Typo Error.  Richard Hall's was a verbal error, several times.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 13, 2016, 09:08:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 13, 2016, 08:59:59 AM
There are bigots on both sides imo.

Indeed there are.

...and Sadie can hardly claim to be neutral bearing in mind her stance on the case, and her claims of meeting the mccanns. 8)-)))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 13, 2016, 09:08:51 AM
he's broken the law by playing that taped converstation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 13, 2016, 09:15:29 AM
I am sure if SY need to take action they will do.

Meanwhile Richard Hall and Heriberto, whom I believe you are fond of dave and have communicated with, or so you claim, are both into U.F.O.'s.

Quite a curious coincidence, isn't it ? 8)-)))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 13, 2016, 09:22:15 AM

Have a care about what is said of any member of this Forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 13, 2016, 09:27:10 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 13, 2016, 09:22:15 AM
Have a care about what is said of any member of this Forum.

I gave facts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 15, 2016, 12:33:53 AM
To clarify something on another thread
M Marreiros was collecting laundry at about 7.30pm-8pm Wed 2nd and saw a man in the stairwell
B da Silva was collecting laundry at about 6pm Thu 3rd and saw a man in the stairwell.
(corrected name)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 15, 2016, 12:47:40 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 15, 2016, 12:33:53 AM
To clarify something on another thread
M Fernando was collecting laundry at about 7.30pm-8pm Wed 2nd and saw a man in the stairwell
B da Silva was collecting laundry at about 6pm Thu 3rd and saw a man in the stairwell.

So two witnesses saw the same happening on the night before and the night of Madeleine's disappearance.  It was checked and ruled out, so I wonder what the explanation was to allow that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 15, 2016, 12:50:07 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 13, 2016, 09:15:29 AM
I am sure if SY need to take action they will do.

Meanwhile Richard Hall and Heriberto, whom I believe you are fond of dave and have communicated with, or so you claim, are both into U.F.O.'s.

Quite a curious coincidence, isn't it ? 8)-)))

I am not into UFO's. .... not at all

But because I have never seen one doesn't mean that they don't exist.  They may, or may not exist.

I am open minded


Perhaps you would benefit by being more open minded stephen
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 15, 2016, 12:54:35 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 15, 2016, 12:47:40 AM
So two witnesses saw the same happening on the night before and the night of Madeleine's disappearance.  It was checked and ruled out, so I wonder what the explanation was to allow that.

Fancy ruling those two witnesses out?  Whatever was Amaral thinking of?

Hmmm?  £5%4%
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 15, 2016, 12:59:19 AM
Quote from: sadie on May 15, 2016, 12:54:35 AM
Fancy ruling those two witnesses out?  Whatever was Amaral thinking of?

Hmmm?  £5%4%

Well, you can make a start on the discussion by proving
Amaral personally ruled them out,cant you
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 15, 2016, 01:02:59 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 15, 2016, 12:59:19 AM
Well, you can make a start on the discussion by proving
Amaral personally ruled them out,cant you

Amaral was Head Honcho on the case.   Ultimately it was his decision


The Head Honcho carries the buck.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 15, 2016, 01:06:08 AM
Quote from: sadie on May 15, 2016, 01:02:59 AM
Amaral was Head Honcho on the case.   Ultimately it was his decision


The Head Honcho carries the buck.

you may have a problem there with what a coordinator does
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 15, 2016, 01:09:43 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 15, 2016, 12:47:40 AM
So two witnesses saw the same happening on the night before and the night of Madeleine's disappearance.  It was checked and ruled out, so I wonder what the explanation was to allow that.
Few realise there were two sightings - by different laundry collectors, on different evenings, but in the same stairwell.
Wed 2nd 7.30pm-8pm stairwell sighting by M F M Marreiros.
Thu 3rd 6pm stairwell sighting by B d A P da Silva.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 15, 2016, 01:41:35 AM
Stairwell sighting 6pm Thu, matches sighting in files by B da Silva, press report in 2007
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/new-madeleine-suspect-seen-in-stairwell-509604

Stairwell sighting 7.30pm-8pm Wed, by M Marreiros, press report in 2013
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-witness-saw-weird-1918572

There are close similarities between both sightings.

BTW the first sighting, by B da Silva, is also reported indirectly in statement by T Castela

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on May 15, 2016, 01:45:52 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 12, 2016, 07:33:51 PM
Absolutely cringe worthy ... and this man has set himself up as a guru who actually seems to have a following.  Phew!



not actually seems to have a following .................he has..........

not a guru...just  shows the alternative to abduction .

for people to make up there own minds ...who have a mind of there own........

not what the mccs tell/want u to  believe

you tube stats
FIRST FILM: "The True Story of Madeleine McCann" (overall view of the case)

934,000 views - currently being watched by 1,190 per day


SECOND FILM: "The Phantoms" (showing that claimed abductors are mere 'phantoms' which were fabricated


120,500 views - currently being watched by 310 per day


THIRD FILM: "When Madeleine Died?" (suggesting that Madeleine may have already been dead by Sunday or Monday)
 

130,000 views - currently being watched by 1,320 per day


TOTAL YOUTUBE VIEWS to date:

1,185,000 views = currently being watched by 2,820 per day

This means that every minute, 24/7, two more people click on one or other of Richard's films.

====

These figures EXCLUDE:

* Hundreds of thousands of views on one or more of Richard's channels or websites

* People who have bought his DVDs and perhaps also shown it to relatives and friends

* Other YouTube videos of e.g. Richard giving talks or presentations about Madeleine on his tours.

====

Reading the hundreds of favourable comments made by YouTube viewers on his films also gives a very good indication of the success of his films
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 15, 2016, 02:10:19 PM
Quote from: xtina on May 15, 2016, 01:45:52 PM


not actually seems to have a following .................he has..........

not a guru...just  shows the alternative to abduction .

for people to make up there own minds ...who have a mind of there own........

not what the mccs tell/want u to  believe

you tube stats
FIRST FILM: "The True Story of Madeleine McCann" (overall view of the case)

934,000 views - currently being watched by 1,190 per day


SECOND FILM: "The Phantoms" (showing that claimed abductors are mere 'phantoms' which were fabricated


120,500 views - currently being watched by 310 per day


THIRD FILM: "When Madeleine Died?" (suggesting that Madeleine may have already been dead by Sunday or Monday)
 

130,000 views - currently being watched by 1,320 per day


TOTAL YOUTUBE VIEWS to date:

1,185,000 views = currently being watched by 2,820 per day

This means that every minute, 24/7, two more people click on one or other of Richard's films.

====

These figures EXCLUDE:

* Hundreds of thousands of views on one or more of Richard's channels or websites

* People who have bought his DVDs and perhaps also shown it to relatives and friends

* Other YouTube videos of e.g. Richard giving talks or presentations about Madeleine on his tours.

====

Reading the hundreds of favourable comments made by YouTube viewers on his films also gives a very good indication of the success of his films


Proof positive that there is indeed no accounting for taste.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 15, 2016, 02:32:38 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 15, 2016, 01:41:35 AM
Stairwell sighting 6pm Thu, matches sighting in files by B da Silva, press report in 2007
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/new-madeleine-suspect-seen-in-stairwell-509604

Stairwell sighting 7.30pm-8pm Wed, by M Marreiros, press report in 2013
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-witness-saw-weird-1918572

There are close similarities between both sightings.

BTW the first sighting, by B da Silva, is also reported indirectly in statement by T Castela

Correct Pegasus ... I read this newspaper report some time ago at the start of the reopening of Madeleine's case and have assumed it was the one sighting since then.  I had no idea that two employees had seen a man lurking in the stairwell on different nights immediately preceding Madeleine's disappearance.

By the time B da Silva gave his statement it appears the previous sighting had been dismissed.

I am sure there must be a record of Mario Marreiros' statement ... perhaps in the files which we have not seen or which are in the public domain.

Extraordinary if these events don't tie in somewhere to Madeleine's case. It may not be illegal to do what that individual was doing, but you have to ask what exactly it was that he was doing.


**snip
Mario, who only started working at the Ocean Club a month before Madeleine vanished, said he identified a potential suspect to Portuguese police a few months after Madeleine went missing.

He spent hours with an officer looking at pictures and videos.

Investigators could then find no other evidence linking the identified man to the girl’s disappearance.

However, according to Portuguese files, officers asked British police to put more questions to this man – a full year after Madeleine vanished.

Mario was 80% convinced he was the man he saw but admits he could not be sure and now six years have passed.

Referring to Portugal’s “secrecy of justice” law, he said: “I couldn’t speak then. I’d been warned by police I would be in trouble if I spoke to anyone.”

But Mario now says: “I am available. I am happy to speak.

"I have not spoken to the British police about what I saw but I want the truth to be revealed.”

Twice-divorced Mario, who has a 21-year-old son and lives in a village on the outskirts of Praia da Luz, worked at the Ocean Club for nine months.

Describing the man who haunts him he explained: “He was quite tall and looked sort-of Scandinavian.

"He had lots of hair, close to his head — like it was glued. It was straight hair. He was about my age now — 45, 46.”

Det Chief Supt Hamish Campbell, head of Scotland Yard’s Homicide and Serious Crime Command, said earlier this month that there are many people who could be spoken to and eliminated from the inquiry.

Mario added: “I agree with what the British police have said and lots of people should be interviewed again.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-witness-saw-weird-1918572
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on May 15, 2016, 03:33:04 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 15, 2016, 02:10:19 PM

Proof positive that there is indeed no accounting for taste.


He is saying ....here's the other side to the abduction .............

make your own mind up.

 it's that which may help guide others to search for the truth.

where as the mccs .....want to make your mind up for you .............very tasteless...i would say


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 15, 2016, 04:29:53 PM
Quote from: xtina on May 15, 2016, 03:33:04 PM

He is saying ....here's the other side to the abduction .............

make your own mind up.

 it's that which may help guide others to search for the truth.

where as the mccs .....want to make your mind up for you .............very tasteless...i would say

As well as working ceaselessly to have official investigations reopened into what happened to Madeleine that night and to do the best they can to have her returned to her home and loving family ... the McCanns have had to thole ignorant ill researched balderdash from sources such as your man being spread throughout the internet.

'Justice for Madeleine' really has very little to do with those who have taken pleasure for nine years in hounding her parents whenever and however they can with their amateur ill informed badly formulated videos in the vanguard.  The only beneficiaries of such a lack of judgement must surely be those who already know precisely what happened to Madeleine and who could perhaps give pointers to where she may be now.

That is the sort of behaviour I find tasteless ... not the desperate fight of a couple anxious to find their missing daughter.  They have enough to put up with, without people plotting to undermine them and the job they continue to do on Madeleine's behalf.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 15, 2016, 11:08:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 15, 2016, 08:43:18 PM
(snip)...Car and driver when needed...(snip)
Many people seem to unquestioningly accept that was an MW employee driving an MW car.
But think about the Fatima trip on 23rd May - the UK govt sent their own FCO employee CM on that trip, and there were two phonecalls between the Chancellor of the Exchequer and GM during that trip - does anyone really believe the driver and car were provided just by MW?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 16, 2016, 12:04:33 AM
Trying to trace the mystery 3rd apartment. Meanwhile here are apartments of a few of the many advisors etc who flew in almost instantly. Alderton G4B. David GP03. Pike 5CAT. Alex 54B.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 16, 2016, 12:22:13 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 15, 2016, 11:21:38 PM
Gerry visited. Do you 'go round' to next door but one? It depends on the layout of the floors and your speech patterns I suppose.

Gerry had gone round to one of the other apartments our party was occupying,
Madeleine. Kate McCann
"gone round to one of the other apartments our party was occupying"

Thanks GUnit. That was on a Sunday evening. Do you know what date? Was it Sun 7th May maybe?

Apparantly there was some sort of less than relaxed discussion, resulting in some people returning to the UK?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 16, 2016, 08:50:09 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 16, 2016, 12:22:13 AM
"gone round to one of the other apartments our party was occupying"

Thanks GUnit. That was on a Sunday evening. Do you know what date? Was it Sun 7th May maybe?

Apparantly there was some sort of less than relaxed discussion, resulting in some people returning to the UK?

It was Sunday 6th May and yes, the 'granny express' home was the result of the less than friendly discussion. Apparently someone made a comment which annoyed Gerry McCann.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 16, 2016, 09:58:36 PM
To which of the 3 apartments were the contents of 5A taken?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 16, 2016, 10:01:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 16, 2016, 08:50:09 AM
It was Sunday 6th May and yes, the 'granny express' home was the result of the less than friendly discussion. Apparently someone made a comment which annoyed Gerry McCann.
Do you know which people got sent home G-Unit?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 16, 2016, 10:16:32 PM
Where was the unidentified 3rd apartment?
The two apartments identified are 4-G and 4-I both on first floor of Block 4. 
Also on first floor are 4-H and 4-J.
But the 3rd apartment can't be 4-J because that was occupied by other tourists.
Could it be 4-H?
Or could it be an apartment on a higher floor?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 17, 2016, 09:12:26 AM
Well, here's an interesting article.


' Growing trend: Last year it was revealed that parents in England and Wales were being arrested every day on suspicion of leaving one or more of their children at home alone '

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3592641/Would-leave-10-month-old-home-Mother-causes-outrage-saying-pops-shop-baby-sleeping-surprising-number-women-agree.html#ixzz48tmQCaoZ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2016, 09:53:26 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 16, 2016, 10:01:00 PM
Do you know which people got sent home G-Unit?

It was clear that our parents were struggling to cope and would have more help at home. Johnny, too, seemed like a fish out of water in Praia da Luz. Michelle was very distressed and had two babies in Liverpool who needed her. After giving the matter some thought, we agreed we would ask Trisha, Sandy, Michael and Nicky to stay on.
Madeleine; Kate McCann

So Kate's parents and Nora [3] brother John and Gerry's mum [2] Michelle [Jon Corner's partner][1]

The purpose seemed to be to limit their support team  [at the suggestion of Alan Pike] to make it more streamlined and focused. The need became even clearer on Monday 7th.

This day provided us with a good example of one of the disadvantages of a large group: unless it is coordinated with military precision, people do not always know who is doing what and tasks can slip through the net. When
lunchtime came, Gerry and I were in the middle of another meeting when we discovered there was no one around to collect Sean and Amelie. We had to interrupt proceedings and go to the Toddler Club ourselves, phoning round our friends and family en route to try to get somebody who wasn’t too far away to come back and give them their lunch.
Madeleine; Kate McCann

I wonder what happened to all the lunches delivered by the Tapas every day? Had they been cancelled or would the missing ten people have returned once they realised lunch was due to be delivered? Apparently this happened at 1pm.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIAGO_BARREIROS.htm





Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2016, 01:49:45 PM
The third apartment was on the top floor of Block 4 [Nicky Gill]. Sandy and Trish Cameron had friends in Portugal and they had transport. They stayed in 4I which was the 'office'. Sandy and Michael Wright helped with the 'campaign' and Trish with childcare and cooking. There's an interesting comment about a 'dump' from Michael Wright.

We arrived in Portugal on Saturday morning, where a friend lent us a car to use and we went to Praia da Luz.

Sandy and I stayed in an apartment that also served as an office. Sandy dealt with the correspondence and I helped in the kitchen and with cleaning.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PATRICIA_CAMERON.htm

We had a separate apartment on the same floor and close to two doors somewhat of a distance. During part of this time, our days had similar routines. During the day we would leave the apartment to meet with Kate and Gerry in order to care for the twins Sean and Amelie, and also to cook for all of us. Kate and Gerry would use our apartment as an office in order to have meetings and to effect search plans for Madeleine. This continued until the end of June, at a time when Mark Warner required that we leave the complex and at a time when tourist high season was about to begin.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/A-J-CAMERON.htm

I frequently helped Sandy with with mundane tasks such as opening the mail. We received many e-mails relating to the campaign and there was much in them to talk about......

I am absolutely certain that Kate and Gerry were not capable of hiding Madeleine's body and later transporting it to a dump.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MICHAEL_WRIGHT.htm

We stayed in an apartment on the top floor of the same block where Kate and Gerry were staying.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NICKY_GILL.htm

During the first week that I was in Portugal Kate and Gerry were transported [driven] by representatives of Mark Warner. Sandy Cameron was also there and possessed a hire car, but it was not the Renault Scenic
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/L-R-MCQUEEN.htm


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 18, 2016, 02:27:49 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2016, 01:49:45 PM
The third apartment was on the top floor of Block 4 (snip)
Brilliant work G-Unit.
"We stayed in an apartment on the top floor of the same block where Kate and Gerry were staying" [NG statement].

So the third apartment was 4-O or 4-P or 4-Q or 4-R.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 18, 2016, 11:43:19 PM
Apartment 4-G (1st floor) was provided on Fri 4th May.
Apartment 4-I (1st floor), and a Penthouse apartment (split-level 3rd and 4th floors), were both provided on Sat 5th May. 

The penthouse apartment was either 4-O or 4-P or 4-Q or 4-R.
These penthouse apartments are upside down.
The entry door, living and dining areas, and the kitchen, are on the 4th floor.
But the 2 bedrooms and bathroom are then down an internal staircase, on the 3rd floor.
Both levels have balconies.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 19, 2016, 07:14:27 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 17, 2016, 09:12:26 AM
Well, here's an interesting article.


' Growing trend: Last year it was revealed that parents in England and Wales were being arrested every day on suspicion of leaving one or more of their children at home alone '

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3592641/Would-leave-10-month-old-home-Mother-causes-outrage-saying-pops-shop-baby-sleeping-surprising-number-women-agree.html#ixzz48tmQCaoZ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Interesting that story being written after the Portuguese said they didn't charge the McCanns with neglect out of compassion. I always thought leaving their children was counter-productive. It's nice to go for a meal with friends, but my mind would have been on the children all the time I was out, which would have spoiled the evening for me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 20, 2016, 01:48:56 AM
@Heri, Shining, etc, have you ever been to the top of the stairs in either block?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 20, 2016, 07:02:50 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 20, 2016, 01:48:56 AM
@Heri, Shining, etc, have you ever been to the top of the stairs in either block?
I have never been inside block 4 or block 5.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 20, 2016, 07:31:15 AM
Gerry McCann wrote in his blog on 11th July;

The Portuguese police interviewed three of our friends again today, to clarify points in their initial statements.

Which friends were they? There's nothing in the files that I can see.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2016, 08:20:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 20, 2016, 07:31:15 AM
Gerry McCann wrote in his blog on 11th July;

The Portuguese police interviewed three of our friends again today, to clarify points in their initial statements.

Which friends were they? There's nothing in the files that I can see.

The confrontation with Murat. The one in which Amaral manages to confuse Fiona with Jane.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 20, 2016, 12:08:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 20, 2016, 07:31:15 AM
Gerry McCann wrote in his blog on 11th July;

The Portuguese police interviewed three of our friends again today, to clarify points in their initial statements.

Which friends were they? There's nothing in the files that I can see.
FP RO ROB
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 20, 2016, 12:52:32 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 20, 2016, 07:02:50 AM
I have never been inside block 4 or block 5.
Thanks Shining. I had questions about whether or not there are doors on 3rd floor. And about the 5th floor door.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 20, 2016, 01:07:13 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 20, 2016, 12:52:32 PM
Thanks Shining. I had questions about whether or not there are doors on 3rd floor. And about the 5th floor door.

There was access either by stairs or lift as far as the Moyes' apartment ... Mrs Moyes detailed in a Radio Stoke interview being wakened by someone at the door ...

SUSAN MOYES Sure. We went out for a meal about seven o’clock down in the town. We walked back about nine o’clock, round past, erm, the church, round past the supermarket, back to the apartment. Went out on the balcony about quarter past nine. Everywhere was peaceful, everywhere was lovely. We then went to bed. We were woken up at half past eleven at night by one of the friends of the McCanns to say a little girl had been abducted. Those were the words she used. So we got dressed and joined in the search. We were out till about four in the morning with, oooh, about I dont know, thirty people, thirty other people maybe. The Mark Warner team were out with other guests at the Ocean Club.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 20, 2016, 01:25:37 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 20, 2016, 12:52:32 PM
Thanks Shining. I had questions about whether or not there are doors on 3rd floor. And about the 5th floor door.
If you would like to jot down your questions I can visit forearmed when I go walkabout.  It's easier than me simply having a look and possibly finding I didn't get the info you want.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 20, 2016, 01:44:52 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 20, 2016, 01:07:13 PM
There was access either by stairs or lift as far as the Moyes' apartment ... Mrs Moyes detailed in a Radio Stoke interview being wakened by someone at the door ...

SUSAN MOYES Sure. We went out for a meal about seven o’clock down in the town. We walked back about nine o’clock, round past, erm, the church, round past the supermarket, back to the apartment. Went out on the balcony about quarter past nine. Everywhere was peaceful, everywhere was lovely. We then went to bed. We were woken up at half past eleven at night by one of the friends of the McCanns to say a little girl had been abducted. Those were the words she used. So we got dressed and joined in the search. We were out till about four in the morning with, oooh, about I dont know, thirty people, thirty other people maybe. The Mark Warner team were out with other guests at the Ocean Club.

Yes that fits with my theory. She was taken away before 9:15 and seen at just past 10. Work it out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 20, 2016, 02:49:22 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 20, 2016, 01:07:13 PM
There was access either by stairs or lift as far as the Moyes' apartment ... Mrs Moyes detailed in a Radio Stoke interview being wakened by someone at the door ...

SUSAN MOYES Sure. We went out for a meal about seven o’clock down in the town. We walked back about nine o’clock, round past, erm, the church, round past the supermarket, back to the apartment. Went out on the balcony about quarter past nine. Everywhere was peaceful, everywhere was lovely. We then went to bed. We were woken up at half past eleven at night by one of the friends of the McCanns to say a little girl had been abducted. Those were the words she used. So we got dressed and joined in the search. We were out till about four in the morning with, oooh, about I dont know, thirty people, thirty other people maybe. The Mark Warner team were out with other guests at the Ocean Club.

I wonder who that was then? Not Kate or Fiona, they were in the apartment. Dianne was babysitting, and Jane had a child who was awake. It must have been Rachael. She went up all the stairs with Gerry, but that was at 10.30pm and she never mentioned knocking on doors. In fact the reason she went upstairs, she said, was to see if Madeleine had wandered up there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 20, 2016, 03:44:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 20, 2016, 02:49:22 PM
I wonder who that was then? Not Kate or Fiona, they were in the apartment. Dianne was babysitting, and Jane had a child who was awake. It must have been Rachael. She went up all the stairs with Gerry, but that was at 10.30pm and she never mentioned knocking on doors. In fact the reason she went upstairs, she said, was to see if Madeleine had wandered up there.

If the PJ had thought to interview Mr and Mrs Moyes we would have been able to ascertain exactly who raised the alarm with them.  The fact is, they were not interviewed or asked questions about the events of that evening.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 21, 2016, 12:40:13 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2016, 01:49:45 PM
The third apartment was on the top floor of Block 4 (snip)
one of these 4 duplex penthouse apartments
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 21, 2016, 03:25:08 PM
Observant viewers will have noticed that the 3rd floor (using UK convention) has no entry doors into apartments, and no walkways leading from the stairwell. From this can be deduced that the lift possibly skips that floor, stopping only at floors G 1 2 and 4.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 21, 2016, 07:25:10 PM
In photo (above) the stairs continue up one floor higher than the highest accomodation floor.
Here must be a utility room, not part of any apartment, which must contain at minimum the lift motor and gearbox.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 21, 2016, 11:24:02 PM
Quote from: mercury on May 21, 2016, 11:03:52 PM
The front door was probably not/not locked according to the mccann statements, so all it would take is the child to open the door usng the handle, I must add I find this also irresponsible and bizarre if you dont mind me saying!
Yes you are right Merc, the child was certainly capable of getting out of bed, opening the main wooden door, going outside, and closing the door behind her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 21, 2016, 11:33:44 PM
Thanks pegasus but i must make an appointment with my optician on monday as my post to which you replied seems to have vanshed in the ether for some obscure reason and of course it cant be because i was "off topic"

 &%+((£
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 22, 2016, 01:29:00 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 21, 2016, 11:33:44 PM
Thanks pegasus but i must make an appointment with my optician on monday as my post to which you replied seems to have vanshed in the ether for some obscure reason and of course it cant be because i was "off topic"

 &%+((£
Your post is on the optician tapas booking thread Merc.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 22, 2016, 01:46:38 AM
A big issue for all wandering theories is - no shoes were missing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 22, 2016, 02:07:09 AM
Re the penthouse apartment made available for use, and mentioned by NG.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7060.0;attach=6742;image
Can now probably rule out 4-Q, and the most likely is 4-O
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 24, 2016, 07:49:13 AM
I see the names and comments of some supporters are now appearing in the comments section of the Sun and Express.

Excellent.

It shows the other half of the coin.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 24, 2016, 07:54:05 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 24, 2016, 07:49:13 AM
I see the names and comments of some supporters are now appearing in the comments section of the Sun and Express.

Excellent.

It shows the other half of the coin.

who is really interested
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 24, 2016, 09:47:04 AM
Quote from: davel on May 24, 2016, 07:54:05 AM
who is really interested

The same sort of people who were interested in drawing up "The Dossier" I expect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 24, 2016, 09:48:31 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on May 24, 2016, 09:47:04 AM
The same sort of people who were interested in drawing up "The Dossier" I expect.

Very little doubt about it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 24, 2016, 01:13:08 PM
There is a rumour circulating that the mccanns have submitted an appeal to the Supreme Court.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 24, 2016, 01:16:25 PM
Should we be surprised? They have nothing to lose by doing so.
I wonder how long we need to wait to see if it is accepted or rejected?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 24, 2016, 01:18:03 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 24, 2016, 01:16:25 PM
Should we be surprised? They have nothing to lose by doing so.
I wonder how long we need to wait to see if it is accepted or rejected?

Well they can't even try going to the ECHR, without having gone to the highest court in Portugal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 24, 2016, 01:33:55 PM
I know it is difficult to be Off Topic on this thread ... how about bumping this topic to the appropriate thread for discussion there? ... probably ...  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7160.0 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Heriberto Janosch on May 25, 2016, 11:42:42 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 13, 2016, 09:15:29 AM
I am sure if SY need to take action they will do.

Meanwhile Richard Hall and Heriberto, whom I believe you are fond of dave and have communicated with, or so you claim, are both into U.F.O.'s.

Quite a curious coincidence, isn't it ? 8)-)))

I was not "into ufos". I was into DEBUNKING ufos ... Do not know if you understand the difference.

For example this book:

AVISTAMIENTOS OVNI EN LA ANTÁRTIDA EN 1965
by Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos, Manuel Borraz Aymerich, Heriberto Janosch González y Juan Carlos Victorio Uranga

ABSTRACT A team of four researchers from Spain and Argentina has devoted six years to analyze the rush of UFO sightings occurred in the Antarctica between June and August 1965. To this end, an unprecedented documentation has been collected, even contacting with surviving witnesses, and it has undergone profound examination, based on a rigorous scientific appraisal and using the best available supporting technology. None of the reviewed observations have a significant level of strangeness. The information generated originally is insufficient and even contradictory. When there are not conclusive explanations, conventional models have been found that fit the empirical data, which eliminates or considerably reduces its value as evidence that they were anomalous phenomena. It turned out that the three key sightings of July 3, 1965 in the Laurie and Deception Islands could have been caused, most probably, by observations of a meteor, the Echo II artificial satellite and astronomical stimuli like planet Mars or the stars Spica and Arcturus.

(BTW this book was very well received by the British Antarctic Survey)

http://www.ceticismoaberto.com/research/fotocat/avistamientos_ovni_antartida_1965.pdf (http://www.ceticismoaberto.com/research/fotocat/avistamientos_ovni_antartida_1965.pdf)

I like to study conspiracy theories like ufos, chemtrails, and McCann did it ...  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 25, 2016, 11:53:50 PM
Thanks for that
People assume and judge
Your theory of entry of burglar or abductor  is ok
But it doesnt really matter
What matters is real evidence in a police investigation
And the uk og have found NOTHING
So mr anarals thesis is as good as any theory
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Heriberto Janosch on May 26, 2016, 09:00:56 AM
Quote from: mercury on May 25, 2016, 11:53:50 PM
Thanks for that
People assume and judge
Your theory of entry of burglar or abductor  is ok
But it doesnt really matter
What matters is real evidence in a police investigation
And the uk og have found NOTHING
So mr anarals thesis is as good as any theory

You are wrong Mercury. There is a difference about "burglary that went wrong" vs. other theories.

At least three pevious burglaries on 5G, 5L and 4A and same modus operandi.

On the other hand Amaral theory physical impossible plus Tapas9 relaxed dining until 22:00.

The independent sighting of man with jacket in cold night with Madeleine like barefoot toddler in pyjamas discards wandering off theory.

Of course there is no enough evidence for Justice ... yet. Meanwhile consider it like "theory priorization".


 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 09:09:32 AM
Quote from: Heriberto Janosch on May 26, 2016, 09:00:56 AM
You are wrong Mercury. There is a difference about "burglary that went wrong" vs. other theories.

At least three pevious burglaries on 5G, 5L and 4A and same modus operandi.

On the other hand Amaral theory physical impossible plus Tapas9 relaxed dining until 22:00.

The independent sighting of man with jacket in cold night with Madeleine like barefoot toddler in pyjamas discards wandering off theory.

Of course there is no enough evidence for Justice ... yet. Meanwhile consider it like "theory priorization".

Just a man carrying his daughter Heri, that's all.

The accounts of the Tapas 9 were inconsistent and what happened with the mccanns in the apartment unverifiable, as with the window being open before 10 pm.

The case will remain unsolved as I said beforeon several occasions, bar a confession.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 26, 2016, 11:22:43 AM
Quote from: Heriberto Janosch on May 26, 2016, 09:00:56 AM
You are wrong Mercury. There is a difference about "burglary that went wrong" vs. other theories.

At least three pevious burglaries on 5G, 5L and 4A and same modus operandi.

On the other hand Amaral theory physical impossible plus Tapas9 relaxed dining until 22:00.

The independent sighting of man with jacket in cold night with Madeleine like barefoot toddler in pyjamas discards wandering off theory.

Of course there is no enough evidence for Justice ... yet. Meanwhile consider it like "theory priorization".

Why (once again) is Amaral's theory or similar 'physically impossible'? Can you prove beyond reasonable doubt that the T9 dined until 22.00?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Heriberto Janosch on May 26, 2016, 11:25:51 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 26, 2016, 11:22:43 AM
Why (once again) is Amaral's theory or similar 'physically impossible'? Can you prove beyond reasonable doubt that the T9 dined until 22.00?

How i like conspiracy theories!!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 11:35:39 AM
Quote from: Heriberto Janosch on May 26, 2016, 11:25:51 AM
How i like conspiracy theories!!!

You should know about that Heriberto.

That is what the abduction scenario is ?

Oh , by the way, are you still investigating U.F.O. sightings ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 26, 2016, 01:05:17 PM
Quote from: Heriberto Janosch on May 26, 2016, 09:00:56 AM
(snip) on the other hand Amaral theory physical impossible plus Tapas9 relaxed dining until 22:00 (snip).
IMO Amaral's main theory has discovery at about 10 therefore is consistent with relaxed dining until 10.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 26, 2016, 01:28:33 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 11:35:39 AM
You should know about that Heriberto.

That is what the abduction scenario is ?

Oh , by the way, are you still investigating U.F.O. sightings ?

You were left with egg on your face with that one first time round ... were I you I would either acknowledge error or I would stop drawing attention to it.

Despite slavish adherence to Mr Amaral's thesis regarding what happened to Madeleine on 3rd May 2007 ... I have never seen anyone going into great detail to show exactly how it was accomplished, which shows that there is no rational which supports it.

There is actually a lot of evidence pointing towards the reality of abduction.  Starting with Madeleine's absence ... and continuing to the PJ and SY actively investigating abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 26, 2016, 01:41:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 26, 2016, 01:28:33 PM
You were left with egg on your face with that one first time round ... were I you I would either acknowledge error or I would stop drawing attention to it.

Despite slavish adherence to Mr Amaral's thesis regarding what happened to Madeleine on 3rd May 2007 ... I have never seen anyone going into great detail to show exactly how it was accomplished, which shows that there is no rational which supports it.

There is actually a lot of evidence pointing towards the reality of abduction.  Starting with Madeleine's absence ... and continuing to the PJ and SY actively investigating abduction.

How do you know that?
The PJ investigated abduction the first time round and found no evidence to support the theory.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 26, 2016, 01:55:37 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on May 26, 2016, 01:41:36 PM
How do you know that?
The PJ investigated abduction the first time round and found no evidence to support the theory.

Sigh ...  &%+((£
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 26, 2016, 02:02:57 PM
Quote from: Heriberto Janosch on May 26, 2016, 09:00:56 AM
(snip) ... At least three pevious burglaries on 5G, 5L and 4A and same modus operandi ...(snip)
The aim of those petty burglary attempts (5G 5L 4A and others) was to steal cash, mobiles, cameras, electronic equipment, etc. Therefore the aim of the 5A burglary attempt was also to steal the same items. The 5A attempt was inevitably interrupted before entry (it is three times absolutely impossible that it wasn't interrupted), and the burglar fled completely empty handed. I don't see any other possible outcome.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 26, 2016, 02:21:38 PM
What if a burglary attempt is interrupted and the burglar flees empty handed but the person who interrupted the burglar has an accident as a result of fleeing the burglary attempt?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 26, 2016, 02:28:40 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 26, 2016, 02:21:38 PM
What if a burglary attempt is interrupted and the burglar flees empty handed but the person who interrupted the burglar has an accident as a result of fleeing the burglary attempt?

Are you suggesting this accident happened in the apartment or outside ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 02:31:26 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 26, 2016, 01:28:33 PM
You were left with egg on your face with that one first time round ... were I you I would either acknowledge error or I would stop drawing attention to it.

Despite slavish adherence to Mr Amaral's thesis regarding what happened to Madeleine on 3rd May 2007 ... I have never seen anyone going into great detail to show exactly how it was accomplished, which shows that there is no rational which supports it.

There is actually a lot of evidence pointing towards the reality of abduction.  Starting with Madeleine's absence ... and continuing to the PJ and SY actively investigating abduction.

What egg on the face are you referring to ?

Perhaps Heriberto should contact Nick Pope on that, who has worked for the Ministry of Defense.

Oh, by the way Brietta, do you know who Heriberto was working for when he was 'debunking' ?

It seems Heriberto has 1 dimension on both the McCann case and U.F.O.'s.

As to abduction, a story without proof.

P.S. Brietta, almost forgot. I did check on Heriberto's background and Richard Hall's as well, both from opposite sides of the fence on U.F.O.'s, (Pope by the way is an 'expert' in his field, the other two aren't), on both cases.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 26, 2016, 02:48:39 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 26, 2016, 02:28:40 PM
Are you suggesting this accident happened in the apartment or outside ?
In hypothetical cases it could be either. Keeping it hypothetical, an example by adapting another case - what if a pensioner interrupts a burglar climbing in her bedroom window, the burglar flees straight back out the window, and the pensioner as a result of fear and fleeing in the opposite direction has a serious fall or accident or medical event? This would leave an open window, open shutter, open bedroom door, and nothing stolen. Anyone deducing from the open window that the burglar had stolen the pensioner would be completely wrong. Basically burglars never steal pensioners or children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 26, 2016, 02:50:41 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 26, 2016, 02:48:39 PM
In hypothetical cases it could be either. Keeping it hypothetical, an example by adapting another case - what if a pensioner interrupts a burglar climbing in her bedroom window, the burglar flees straight back out the window, and the pensioner as a result of fear and fleeing in the opposite direction has a fall or heart attack? This would leave an open window, open shutter, open bedroom door, and nothing stolen. Anyone deducing from the open window that the burglar had stolen the pensioner would be completely wrong. Basically burglars never steal pensioners or children.

Did the pensioner go missing following this hypothetical incident?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 26, 2016, 03:02:24 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 26, 2016, 02:50:41 PM
Did the pensioner go missing following this hypothetical incident?
In cases were a resident has a serious health event after disturbing a burglar and after the burglar has fled, the resident is normally found straight away because they are in a visible location.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 26, 2016, 03:35:31 PM
Of course, but as this didn't happen, perhaps not such a good analogy. There is a missing child to explain. A dead pensioner doesn't come near.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 03:54:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 26, 2016, 01:28:33 PM
You were left with egg on your face with that one first time round ... were I you I would either acknowledge error or I would stop drawing attention to it.

Despite slavish adherence to Mr Amaral's thesis regarding what happened to Madeleine on 3rd May 2007 ... I have never seen anyone going into great detail to show exactly how it was accomplished, which shows that there is no rational which supports it.

There is actually a lot of evidence pointing towards the reality of abduction.  Starting with Madeleine's absence ... and continuing to the PJ and SY actively investigating abduction.

'.. I have never seen anyone going into great detail to show exactly how it was accomplished, which shows that there is no rational which supports it...'

Rubbish.

The forum owner would not permit that on here, for risk of 'libel'.

..and we know how much the mccanns like that word, don't we.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 04:37:16 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 03:54:46 PM
'.. I have never seen anyone going into great detail to show exactly how it was accomplished, which shows that there is no rational which supports it...'

Rubbish.

The forum owner would not permit that on here, for risk of 'libel'.

..and we know how much the mccanns like that word, don't we.
There are ways of phrasing ideas that explore possibilities without wandering into the libel zone.  And if it is better kept from Google, there is the members-only area.

Unless I am missing something major, Mr Amaral has never got near to explaining the logistics of his theory, with regards to what happened after Madeleine supposedly had an accident.

And that, in fact, is why I would advise the McCanns to allow the book to be published in the UK.  The book 'suggests' various logistical solutions that, frankly, are hilarious.

My favourite is the secret tunnels under Luz one.  The children of Luz allegedly use these to get to the sea, for some reason not using the roads or pavements.  Then, somehow, the tunnels seem to be forgotten as the children grow into adults, thus becoming secret, though presumably the next generation of children mysteriously is aware of them.

If the reader of the book just thinks about this idea, how did Gerry McCann, an adult, and one who did not grow up in Luz, know of them?  And how did Mr Amaral, an adult, and one who did not grow up in Luz, know about them?  And if Mr Amaral knew of these, why were they not searched during Mr Amaral's time in charge?  Why were the dogs not deployed in them?

Getting the book banned in the UK increases its appeal to those who think it must be damaging to the McCanns.  Whereas that book is such a soft target, that publishing it and exposing the weakness of its content, would show it adds very little to the case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 04:46:52 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 04:37:16 PM
There are ways of phrasing ideas that explore possibilities without wandering into the libel zone.  And if it is better kept from Google, there is the members-only area.

Unless I am missing something major, Mr Amaral has never got near to explaining the logistics of his theory, with regards to what happened after Madeleine supposedly had an accident.

And that, in fact, is why I would advise the McCanns to allow the book to be published in the UK.  The book 'suggests' various logistical solutions that, frankly, are hilarious.

My favourite is the secret tunnels under Luz one.  The children of Luz allegedly use these to get to the sea, for some reason not using the roads or pavements.  Then, somehow, the tunnels seem to be forgotten as the children grow into adults, thus becoming secret, though presumably the next generation of children mysteriously is aware of them.

If the reader of the book just thinks about this idea, how did Gerry McCann, an adult, and one who did not grow up in Luz, know of them?  And how did Mr Amaral, an adult, and one who did not grow up in Luz, know about them?  And if Mr Amaral knew of these, why were they not searched during Mr Amaral's time in charge?  Why were the dogs not deployed in them?

Getting the book banned in the UK increases its appeal to those who think it must be damaging to the McCanns.  Whereas that book is such a soft target, that publishing it and exposing the weakness of its content, would show it adds very little to the case.

I have said before Luz, I don't hold with all of Amaral's views and I have said he made mistakes.

I do not know the area so I can't comment on 'tunnels'.

If you don't mind me asking , how long have you lived there. I do understand if you don't wish to answer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 05:03:14 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 04:46:52 PM
I have said before Luz, I don't hold with all of Amaral's views and I have said he made mistakes.

I do not know the area so I can't comment on that.

If you don't mind me asking , how long have you lived there. I do understand if you don't wish to answer.
About 4 years now.

Please note, an awful lot of what I know about Luz was gathered solely because I became interested in the case (around the time of the OG dig).  Otherwise, frankly, I wouldn't have an inkling about the most of the workings of Luz.

It's a combination of free time, an interest in the case, and the ability to wander into Luz to check small but important details.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 05:08:05 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 05:03:14 PM
About 4 years now.

Please note, an awful lot of what I know about Luz was gathered solely because I became interested in the case (around the time of the OG dig).  Otherwise, frankly, I wouldn't have an inkling about the most of the workings of Luz.

It's a combination of free time, an interest in the case, and the ability to wander into Luz to check small but important details.

Thanks for that.

I am going to the AlGarve on  holiday in  2018.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2016, 06:49:02 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 04:37:16 PM
There are ways of phrasing ideas that explore possibilities without wandering into the libel zone.  And if it is better kept from Google, there is the members-only area.

Unless I am missing something major, Mr Amaral has never got near to explaining the logistics of his theory, with regards to what happened after Madeleine supposedly had an accident.

And that, in fact, is why I would advise the McCanns to allow the book to be published in the UK.  The book 'suggests' various logistical solutions that, frankly, are hilarious.

My favourite is the secret tunnels under Luz one.  The children of Luz allegedly use these to get to the sea, for some reason not using the roads or pavements.  Then, somehow, the tunnels seem to be forgotten as the children grow into adults, thus becoming secret, though presumably the next generation of children mysteriously is aware of them.

If the reader of the book just thinks about this idea, how did Gerry McCann, an adult, and one who did not grow up in Luz, know of them?  And how did Mr Amaral, an adult, and one who did not grow up in Luz, know about them?  And if Mr Amaral knew of these, why were they not searched during Mr Amaral's time in charge?  Why were the dogs not deployed in them?

Getting the book banned in the UK increases its appeal to those who think it must be damaging to the McCanns.  Whereas that book is such a soft target, that publishing it and exposing the weakness of its content, would show it adds very little to the case.

That would have to be about the worst piece of advice the McCanns have ever been given.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 07:31:31 PM
Quote from: davel on May 26, 2016, 06:49:02 PM
That would have to be about the worst piece of advice the McCanns have ever been given.....
Hardly given to the McCanns, or their friends, unless you believe they read this forum.  I don't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 26, 2016, 07:35:02 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 07:31:31 PM
Hardly given to the McCanns, or their friends, unless you believe they read this forum.  I don't.

Have you not heard of 'Monitor Mickey'?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2016, 07:36:31 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 07:31:31 PM
Hardly given to the McCanns, or their friends, unless you believe they read this forum.  I don't.

Semantics
It is a totally ridiculous suggestion
Would you want to allow amaral to appear on TVs to spread his lies too
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 07:37:35 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 26, 2016, 07:35:02 PM
Have you not heard of 'Monitor Mickey'?

Is he a (w)right one ? %£5&%
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 26, 2016, 07:38:50 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 07:37:35 PM
Is he a (w)right one ? %£5&%

Nah, he's definitely a wrong 'un 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 07:42:13 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 26, 2016, 07:38:50 PM
Nah, he's definitely a wrong 'un

...and remember Jassi , one of the purely 'imaginary' people 'monitoring' the 'net on behalf of the mccanns.

 8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2016, 07:44:24 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 07:42:13 PM
...and remember Jassi , one of the purely 'imaginary' people 'monitoring' the 'net on behalf of the mccanns.

 8(>((

Not imaginary according to Levenson
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 07:53:44 PM
Quote from: davel on May 26, 2016, 07:36:31 PM
Semantics
It is a totally ridiculous suggestion
Would you want to allow amaral to appear on TVs to spread his lies too
His lies?  Now you are wandering into defamation territory.

Mr Amaral is free to spread his opinion within Portugal, which happens to be the scene of the incident.

The UK is not the centre of the universe in this case.

Perhaps the most important battleground for the McCanns is Portugal, where the battle happens to be going very poorly for the McCanns.

How many times does Gonçalo Amaral have to turn up on Portuguese TV before this simple fact gets through?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on May 26, 2016, 07:59:22 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 07:53:44 PM
His lies?  Now you are wandering into defamation territory.

Mr Amaral is free to spread his opinion within Portugal, which happens to be the scene of the incident.

The UK is not the centre of the universe in this case.

Perhaps the most important battleground for the McCanns is Portugal, where the battle happens to be going very poorly for the McCanns.

How many times does Gonçalo Amaral have to turn up on Portuguese TV before this simple fact gets through?

I (respectfully) differ.

Straight comparison of the book with the files demonstrates that Amaral's account is markedly at variance with the truth.

Particularly since Amaral was coordinator of the investigation (until October 2007) he ought to have had a much better handle of the facts (up to the point of his removal) than his book suggests.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2016, 08:01:22 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 07:53:44 PM
His lies?  Now you are wandering into defamation territory.

Mr Amaral is free to spread his opinion within Portugal, which happens to be the scene of the incident.

The UK is not the centre of the universe in this case.

Perhaps the most important battleground for the McCanns is Portugal, where the battle happens to be going very poorly for the McCanns.

How many times does Gonçalo Amaral have to turn up on Portuguese TV before this simple fact gets through?

#you are making suggestions re the book but do not seem to be aware of what it conrtains
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on May 26, 2016, 08:03:30 PM
Quote from: davel on May 26, 2016, 08:00:06 PM
To convince us of their capability and the extraordinary work carried out by these very special detectives in the course of over 200 investigations, he screens a video for us, showing their training and their intervention on the ground

the dogs have not been involved in 200 investigations.....there are more

Of course, there, Amaral was (accurately) citing the figure Grime cited, which Portuguese libel law would (probably) allow him to get away with (on the basis that he was entitled to believe what Grime said).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 26, 2016, 08:06:35 PM
Quote from: ferryman on May 26, 2016, 08:03:30 PM
Of course, there, Amaral was (accurately) citing the figure Grime cited, which Portuguese libel law would (probably) allow him to get away with (on the basis that he was entitled to believe what Grime said).

Grime cited over 200 case searches, dont twist his words, Amaral merely quoted him, nothng wrong done,no lies at all by either of them, unless amaral misunderstood,which is not a crime, just numbers
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 26, 2016, 08:07:56 PM
So do you - to no avail .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 08:14:40 PM
All this drivel, and what difference will it make.

ZERO.  8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2016, 08:16:41 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 26, 2016, 08:14:40 PM
All this drivel, and what difference will it make.

ZERO.  8)--))


is that the best you can come up with...of course it makes no difference...the only difference would be if evidence had been found
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 26, 2016, 08:53:21 PM


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MA2hk_CIZeo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 09:17:18 PM
Quote from: davel on May 26, 2016, 07:57:37 PM
yes lies... have you read any of the book...i have posted several excerpts that are plainly untrue
That they are untrue is not the point.  Amaral is not supposed to be the god of truth.

I have read the book around 3 times.

I have posted some of the nonsense in the book.

But you are still in defamation territory.  It is simple.  It is the difference between Amaral got it wrong (which I believe the book does on multiple occasions) and Amaral lied in the book (for which you have no evidence).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 26, 2016, 09:33:23 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 09:17:18 PM
That they are untrue is not the point.  Amaral is not supposed to be the god of truth.

I have read the book around 3 times.

I have posted some of the nonsense in the book.

But you are still in defamation territory.  It is simple.  It is the difference between Amaral got it wrong (which I believe the book does on multiple occasions) and Amaral lied in the book (for which you have no evidence).


 8@??)( 8@??)(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 09:37:39 PM
An error is where one gets it wrong.  A statement that is not true but is presented as the truth.

A lie is quite different.  It is when one knows the truth and deliberately and knowingly tells an untruth.

Unless you have evidence Amaral knew the truth but deliberately told an untruth, you are still in defamation territory.

The book is replete with errors.  I have yet to see any evidence of lies.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2016, 10:04:17 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 09:37:39 PM
An error is where one gets it wrong.  A statement that is not true but is presented as the truth.

A lie is quite different.  It is when one knows the truth and deliberately and knowingly tells an untruth.

Unless you have evidence Amaral knew the truth but deliberately told an untruth, you are still in defamation territory.

The book is replete with errors.  I have yet to see any evidence of lies.
If they are errors why has he not corrected them

Amaral has read the files
He has read what grime said
Are you saying he did not understand it
It's quite simle
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 26, 2016, 10:10:41 PM
Which block 4 apartment were the contents taken to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 11:14:28 PM
Quote from: davel on May 26, 2016, 10:04:17 PM
If they are errors why has he not corrected them

Amaral has read the files
He has read what grime said
Are you saying he did not understand it
It's quite simle
Maybe because he has not read my blog, but I very much doubt that is the reason.

Mr Amaral claims in his book that on the evening of Friday 4 May 2007 he criss-crossed Luz, and basically found it was shut.  Furthermore, that he was told that Luz was also shut on the evening of 3 May 2007.  That is his opinion.

After digging about on the Internet, I have come up with sufficient evidence to convince me that Luz was not shut on Thursday evening, albeit the restaurants and pubs were far from packed.

I have not specifically checked on Friday 4 May, but the general evidence leads me to believe that Luz was not shut that evening either.

So, we have a situation.  I am right, and Mr Amaral is in error.  This does not make Mr Amaral a liar.  Or Mr Amaral is right, and I am in error.  This does not make me a liar. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on May 26, 2016, 11:22:47 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 09:37:39 PM
An error is where one gets it wrong.  A statement that is not true but is presented as the truth.

A lie is quite different.  It is when one knows the truth and deliberately and knowingly tells an untruth.

Unless you have evidence Amaral knew the truth but deliberately told an untruth, you are still in defamation territory.

The book is replete with errors.  I have yet to see any evidence of lies.
How hilarious that we may not accuse Amaral of lying in his book in which he accuses the parents of a missing child of lying!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 26, 2016, 11:26:54 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 11:14:28 PM
Maybe because he has not read my blog, but I very much doubt that is the reason.

Mr Amaral claims in his book that on the evening of Friday 4 May 2007 he criss-crossed Luz, and basically found it was shut.  Furthermore, that he was told that Luz was also shut on the evening of 3 May 2007.  That is his opinion.

After digging about on the Internet, I have come up with sufficient evidence to convince me that Luz was not shut on Thursday evening, albeit the restaurants and pubs were far from packed.

I have not specifically checked on Friday 4 May, but the general evidence leads me to believe that Luz was not shut that evening either.

So, we have a situation.  I am right, and Mr Amaral is in error.  This does not make Mr Amaral a liar.  Or Mr Amaral is right, and I am in error.  This does not make me a liar.
Hope you don't mind me using your post Shining to illustrate something about the smith sighting.
After passing the Smith group, which direction was taken by the man carrying a girl?
a) Past the large windows of the Chinese restaurant on Rua 25 Abril?
b) Past the Calheta bar (down the steps) and then past the Dolphin restaurant?
And do you agree all three were open that night?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 11:39:31 PM
Quote from: Alfie on May 26, 2016, 11:22:47 PM
How hilarious that we may not accuse Amaral of lying in his book in which he accuses the parents of a missing child of lying!
Feel free to accuse Mr Amaral of lying as long as you can back it up with evidence of said lie.

If you can't, it's defamation.

Think about this.  If one was to accuse the McCanns of lying, and one could not provide supporting evidence, it would be defamation.

What works for the McCanns works for Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 11:49:47 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 26, 2016, 11:26:54 PM
Hope you don't mind me using your post Shining to illustrate something about the smith sighting.
After passing the Smith group, which direction was taken by the man carrying a girl?
a) Past the large windows of the Chinese restaurant on Rua 25 Abril?
b) Past the Calheta bar (down the steps) and then past the Dolphin restaurant?
And do you agree all three were open that night?
We know from the PJ Files that the Dolphin was open that night.  The evidence supports the idea that the Royal Garden and Fernando's aka Café bar Calhete were open that night.

I think, but cannot prove by a mile, that Tractorman aka Euclides Monteiro was in Fernando's that night.

As to where Smithman went, the evidence supports going down towards the Dolphin/Calheta, but does not prove it.

I happen to be of the opinion the Smiths could provide enough evidence to decide this issue, even to this day.  But that is just IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2016, 11:50:57 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 11:39:31 PM
Feel free to accuse Mr Amaral of lying as long as you can back it up with evidence of said lie.

If you can't, it's defamation.

Think about this.  If one was to accuse the McCanns of lying, and one could not provide supporting evidence, it would be defamation.

What works for the McCanns works for Amaral.

The McCanns are accused of lying on here day in.. Day out
And no action is taken
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 27, 2016, 12:06:24 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 26, 2016, 11:26:54 PM
Hope you don't mind me using your post Shining to illustrate something about the smith sighting.
After passing the Smith group, which direction was taken by the man carrying a girl?
a) Past the large windows of the Chinese restaurant on Rua 25 Abril?
b) Past the Calheta bar (down the steps) and then past the Dolphin restaurant?
And do you agree all three were open that night?

There is no doubt he crossed the road before approaching Aoife face to face, passing on her left and going down the steps she and the rest of her family had just come up.

Had the mystery man not wanted to go down the steps he would have cut diagonally across the main road passing in front of and to the right of the Smiths.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 27, 2016, 12:12:28 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 11:39:31 PM
Feel free to accuse Mr Amaral of lying as long as you can back it up with evidence of said lie.

If you can't, it's defamation.

Think about this.  If one was to accuse the McCanns of lying, and one could not provide supporting evidence, it would be defamation.

What works for the McCanns works for Amaral.

We know the McCanns lied to throw off the Press pack.  That must make them liars too according to davels philosophy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 27, 2016, 12:16:16 AM
Quote from: davel on May 26, 2016, 11:50:57 PM
The McCanns are accused of lying on here day in.. Day out
And no action is taken

One man's lie is another man's truth!!  Fcuking tossers!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on May 27, 2016, 12:19:19 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 27, 2016, 12:16:16 AM
One man's lie is another man's truth!!  Fcuking tossers!!

that was very unladylike of kate wasnt it!!!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 27, 2016, 06:32:51 AM
Quote from: Heriberto Janosch on May 26, 2016, 11:25:51 AM
How i like conspiracy theories!!!

Most academics accept that unsupported assertions count for nothing. It seems you can't explain why it's physically impossible for the McCanns to be involved in their daughter's disappearance. Therefore you cannot, as you have claimed, rule them out.

Similarly you assert that the alarm was raised at 10pm despite various statements by strangers which suggest it was earlier. Perhaps you should perform another 'analysis' counting the T9 statements as one statement, because it was actually agreed between them. 

PS. I have no idea what the relevance of your remark about conspiracy theories is meant to convey.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 07:18:03 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 27, 2016, 06:32:51 AM
Most academics accept that unsupported assertions count for nothing. It seems you can't explain why it's physically impossible for the McCanns to be involved in their daughter's disappearance. Therefore you cannot, as you have claimed, rule them out.

Similarly you assert that the alarm was raised at 10pm despite various statements by strangers which suggest it was earlier. Perhaps you should perform another 'analysis' counting the T9 statements as one statement, because it was actually agreed between them. 

PS. I have no idea what the relevance of your remark about conspiracy theories is meant to convey.


the ruling out of the parents is not an unsupported assertion...there is a lot to support the parents being ruled out
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 07:22:40 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2016, 04:37:16 PM
There are ways of phrasing ideas that explore possibilities without wandering into the libel zone.  And if it is better kept from Google, there is the members-only area.

Unless I am missing something major, Mr Amaral has never got near to explaining the logistics of his theory, with regards to what happened after Madeleine supposedly had an accident.

And that, in fact, is why I would advise the McCanns to allow the book to be published in the UK.  The book 'suggests' various logistical solutions that, frankly, are hilarious.

My favourite is the secret tunnels under Luz one.  The children of Luz allegedly use these to get to the sea, for some reason not using the roads or pavements.  Then, somehow, the tunnels seem to be forgotten as the children grow into adults, thus becoming secret, though presumably the next generation of children mysteriously is aware of them.

If the reader of the book just thinks about this idea, how did Gerry McCann, an adult, and one who did not grow up in Luz, know of them?  And how did Mr Amaral, an adult, and one who did not grow up in Luz, know about them?  And if Mr Amaral knew of these, why were they not searched during Mr Amaral's time in charge?  Why were the dogs not deployed in them?

Getting the book banned in the UK increases its appeal to those who think it must be damaging to the McCanns.  Whereas that book is such a soft target, that publishing it and exposing the weakness of its content, would show it adds very little to the case.

The book is not banned in the UK and amaral is free to publish it........giving him immunity from defamation as you are suggesting is a rather ridiculous idea for obvious reasons
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 07:27:53 AM
What does it say for amaral's abilities as a detective that many of his conclusions are just plainly wrong...would he have written his book and would his book have sold if his book had been truthful to the facts...the book is called the truth...yet it plainly isn't
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 07:32:02 AM
Take this statement...

Eddie is always the first to be brought onto a site. Once he has discerned the odour that he knows so well, it's Keela's turn to go into action, on the lookout for the slightest whiff of blood. The simultaneous presence of the two elements in a given place - blood and cavaver odours - is taken to indicate that a body has been there and that it's probably there that the death occurred.

it simply isn't true....amaral got it wrong


I am not accusing amaral of lying....perhaps he just didn't understand
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 07:38:01 AM
From then on, we are sure that, at a given moment, there was a body in apartment 5A. We now have to interview firemen, medical services personnel, previous tenants and employees of the Ocean Club to make sure that no death has taken place in this accommodation, which they confirm. So, we can conclude that the odour discovered is certainly that of Madeleine Beth McCann.

again his conclusions are not correct...Grime makes it perfectly clear that an alert can be due to contamination
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 27, 2016, 07:41:53 AM
Quote from: Alfie on May 26, 2016, 11:22:47 PM
How hilarious that we may not accuse Amaral of lying in his book in which he accuses the parents of a missing child of lying!

Perhaps this will help you to understand. It's from the Appeal Judgment on the book banning injunction. It says that interpreting the facts of the investigation in a different way is legitimate in a literary work so long as it doesn't affect anyone's rights, and it didn't. That ruling was upheld by the Supreme Court, so the question of the book damaging the McCann's rights is dead in the water since 2010. That's why the re-banning was so strange, as it contradicted the earlier findings of both the Appeal and Supreme Courts.

 it seems to be important to stress the following: the indicative facts that led to the applicants’ constitution as arguidos within the inquiry were later on not valued by the Public Ministry’s Magistrates in order to lead to a criminal accusation, but those very same facts, seen through another prism and with another base, may lead to a different conclusion from that which was attained by those same Magistrates – those are indications that were deemed to be insufficient in terms of evidence in a criminal investigation, but they can be appreciated in a different way, in an interpretation that is legitimate to be published as a literary work, as long as said interpretation does not offend any fundamental rights of anyone involved – and we have written above already why we understand that said interpretation does not offend the applicants’ rights.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 07:51:29 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 27, 2016, 07:41:53 AM
Perhaps this will help you to understand. It's from the Appeal Judgment on the book banning injunction. It says that interpreting the facts of the investigation in a different way is legitimate in a literary work so long as it doesn't affect anyone's rights, and it didn't. That ruling was upheld by the Supreme Court, so the question of the book damaging the McCann's rights is dead in the water since 2010. That's why the re-banning was so strange, as it contradicted the earlier findings of both the Appeal and Supreme Courts.

 it seems to be important to stress the following: the indicative facts that led to the applicants’ constitution as arguidos within the inquiry were later on not valued by the Public Ministry’s Magistrates in order to lead to a criminal accusation, but those very same facts, seen through another prism and with another base, may lead to a different conclusion from that which was attained by those same Magistrates – those are indications that were deemed to be insufficient in terms of evidence in a criminal investigation, but they can be appreciated in a different way, in an interpretation that is legitimate to be published as a literary work, as long as said interpretation does not offend any fundamental rights of anyone involved – and we have written above already why we understand that said interpretation does not offend the applicants’ rights.


Thank you G-Unit for that.

It was abundantly clear what the recent judgement entailed, so why are certain  parties protesting otherwise ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 27, 2016, 07:55:13 AM
Quote from: Heriberto Janosch on May 26, 2016, 09:00:56 AM
You are wrong Mercury. There is a difference about "burglary that went wrong" vs. other theories.

At least three pevious burglaries on 5G, 5L and 4A and same modus operandi.

On the other hand Amaral theory physical impossible plus Tapas9 relaxed dining until 22:00.

The independent sighting of man with jacket in cold night with Madeleine like barefoot toddler in pyjamas discards wandering off theory.

Of course there is no enough evidence for Justice ... yet. Meanwhile consider it like "theory priorization".

Let's see your evidence of 10pm. One with a watch said Kate left to check at 9:50. According to others present at the table she wasn't gone long. The waiter who served Russell his steak said they were gone before 10pm. He is a reliable witness because he said Russell arrived back at 9:45 and Russell confirmed that time!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 27, 2016, 08:51:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 27, 2016, 07:41:53 AM
Perhaps this will help you to understand. It's from the Appeal Judgment on the book banning injunction. It says that interpreting the facts of the investigation in a different way is legitimate in a literary work so long as it doesn't affect anyone's rights, and it didn't. That ruling was upheld by the Supreme Court, so the question of the book damaging the McCann's rights is dead in the water since 2010. That's why the re-banning was so strange, as it contradicted the earlier findings of both the Appeal and Supreme Courts.

 it seems to be important to stress the following: the indicative facts that led to the applicants’ constitution as arguidos within the inquiry were later on not valued by the Public Ministry’s Magistrates in order to lead to a criminal accusation, but those very same facts, seen through another prism and with another base, may lead to a different conclusion from that which was attained by those same Magistrates – those are indications that were deemed to be insufficient in terms of evidence in a criminal investigation, but they can be appreciated in a different way, in an interpretation that is legitimate to be published as a literary work, as long as said interpretation does not offend any fundamental rights of anyone involved – and we have written above already why we understand that said interpretation does not offend the applicants’ rights.


"...as long as said interpretation does not offend any fundamental rights of anyone involved."

Why is the presumption of innocence not a fundamental right in this case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 08:53:06 AM
Quote from: Carana on May 27, 2016, 08:51:36 AM
"...as long as said interpretation does not offend any fundamental rights of anyone involved."

Why is the presumption of innocence not a fundamental right in this case?

The mccanns were not on trial Carana.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on May 27, 2016, 09:37:35 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 09:18:56 AM
Indeed.

Due to a misconception on the part of the Portuguese, they got away with charges on child abandonment.

If Portuguese residents had done the same , they would have been in court.

No doubt about it.

That's not what the Portuguese Attorney General  said  - he said their actions did not meet the 'Intent to Abandon' criterium required for them to be charged with 'abandonment'.        IOW -  the AG applied the law - and found they had not broken it.    Are you claiming he didn't know what he was talking about and was under a misconception?  Surely not - I was under the impression the Portuguese judiciary could do no wrong in your opinion.

To claim 'they got away with it' when it has been officially stated that they did not break the law is libelous IMO.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 09:47:10 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 08:53:06 AM
The mccanns were not on trial Carana.

they dont have to be on trial

Article 2 confirms that the Directive will apply at “all stages from the moment when a person is suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence, or an alleged criminal offence, until the final determination of the question whether the person has committed the offence concerned and that decision has become definitive”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 09:48:49 AM
Quote from: Benice on May 27, 2016, 09:37:35 AM
That's not what the Portuguese Attorney General  said  - he said their actions did not meet the 'Intent to Abandon' criterium required for them to be charged with 'abandonment'.        IOW -  the AG applied the law - and found they had not broken it.    Are you claiming he didn't know what he was talking about and was under a misconception?  Surely not - I was under the impression the Portuguese judiciary could do no wrong in your opinion.

To claim 'they got away with it' when it has been officially stated that they did not break the law is libelous IMO.

Do keep up.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/7115564/Revealed-The-reason-Kate-and-Gerry-werent-charged-over-Madeleine-McCanns-disappearance.html


AND TAKE NOTE.

This link and others have been provided before.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 09:57:57 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 09:48:49 AM
Do keep up.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/7115564/Revealed-The-reason-Kate-and-Gerry-werent-charged-over-Madeleine-McCanns-disappearance.html


AND TAKE NOTE.

This link and others have been provided before.

the person who needs to keep up is you...the Sun is not regarded as a reliable source...the archiving report is and explains why the mccanns were not charged
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on May 27, 2016, 09:59:09 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 09:48:49 AM
Do keep up.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/7115564/Revealed-The-reason-Kate-and-Gerry-werent-charged-over-Madeleine-McCanns-disappearance.html


AND TAKE NOTE.

This link and others have been provided before.


So you believe Sun reporters know better than the Portuguese Attorney General about PT law -  and that an article in the Sun supersedes the statement made by the Attorney General in his Final report.   LOL - there's no answer to that.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 27, 2016, 10:10:23 AM
Quote from: davel on May 27, 2016, 09:47:10 AM
they dont have to be on trial

Article 2 confirms that the Directive will apply at “all stages from the moment when a person is suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence, or an alleged criminal offence, until the final determination of the question whether the person has committed the offence concerned and that decision has become definitive”

Which only became applicable in February 2016, countries have until April 2018 to apply it. It is to clarify;

The presumption of innocence (set out in Article 6 (2) ECHR and Article 48 (1) EU Charter) is the cornerstone of the right to a fair trial.

and;

Recital 6 confirms that it applies “only to criminal proceedings, as interpreted in the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Court of Justice), without prejudice to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights.

I will provide the cite for you;
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/the-new-directive-on-presumption-
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 10:18:49 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 27, 2016, 10:10:23 AM
Which only became applicable in February 2016, countries have until April 2018 to apply it. It is to clarify;

The presumption of innocence (set out in Article 6 (2) ECHR and Article 48 (1) EU Charter) is the cornerstone of the right to a fair trial.

and;

Recital 6 confirms that it applies “only to criminal proceedings, as interpreted in the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Court of Justice), without prejudice to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights.

I will provide the cite for you;
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/the-new-directive-on-presumption-

are you contesting that the mccanns have the right to be considered innocent...you probably are...that is quite a disgraceful stance to take
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 27, 2016, 10:39:59 AM
Quote from: davel on May 27, 2016, 10:18:49 AM
are you contesting that the mccanns have the right to be considered innocent...you probably are...that is quite a disgraceful stance to take

Posting partial information with no cite isn't exactly ethical in my opinion. Am I under any obligation to presume them innocent? Cite please.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: lordpookles on May 27, 2016, 10:43:41 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 27, 2016, 07:55:13 AM
Let's see your evidence of 10pm. One with a watch said Kate left to check at 9:50. According to others present at the table she wasn't gone long. The waiter who served Russell his steak said they were gone before 10pm. He is a reliable witness because he said Russell arrived back at 9:45 and Russell confirmed that time!

Interesting if true. What time did SY/crimewatch say kate went to check?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 11:11:44 AM
What are the mccanns innocent of ?

The left their children and should have bee brought to court in Portugal for abandonment, just as any other Portuguese citizen would have happened to them in the same situation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 11:16:34 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 11:11:44 AM
What are the mccanns innocent of ?

The left their children and should have bee brought to court in Portugal for abandonment, just as any other Portuguese citizen would have happened to them in the same situation.

its explained in the archiving report..read it...not the sun
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 11:24:43 AM
Quote from: davel on May 27, 2016, 11:16:34 AM
its explained in the archiving report..read it...not the sun

No it isn't.

The mccanns deliberately and repeatedly, as did the others, leave their children for hours on end, for 5 nights, with largely unverified checks, and pray to a variety of dangers.


The mccanns escaped criminal charges, of that there is no doubt at all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 11:25:51 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 11:24:43 AM
No it isn't.

The mccanns deliberately and repeatedly, as did the others, leave their children for hours on end, for 5 nights, with largely unverified checks, and pray to a variety of dangers.


The mccanns escaped criminal charges, of that there is no doubt at all.

its explained in the archiving report...very simply...very clearly
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 12:06:56 PM
Incorrect.

It is abundantly clear, as would have  Portuguese residents who did the same, they should have been charged with abandonment.

It is appalling they were not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 12:09:19 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 12:06:56 PM
Incorrect.

It is abundantly clear, as would have  Portuguese residents who did the same, they should have been charged with abandonment.

It is appalling they were not.

according to the sun
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 12:16:06 PM
Dear oh dear.

It was in nearly every newspaper.

Try reading posts before you type.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Jean-Pierre on May 27, 2016, 12:16:28 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 12:06:56 PM
Incorrect.

It is abundantly clear, as would have  Portuguese residents who did the same, they should have been charged with abandonment.

It is appalling they were not.

From a legal perspective, it would have been a waste of time and would have resulted in an acquittal.  The reason being that the children were not abandoned, as there was a process of checks in place.  And there was no intent to abandon or recklessly expose the children to danger.  So there was no crime. 

You may not like it, but it is the legal position. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 12:18:36 PM
Quote from: Jean-Pierre on May 27, 2016, 12:16:28 PM
From a legal perspective, it would have been a waste of time and would have resulted in an acquittal.  The reason being that the children were not abandoned, as there was a process of checks in place.  And there was no intent to abandon or recklessly expose the children to danger.  So there was no crime. 

You may not like it, but it is the legal position.

Tell me how many of thew checks were verified.

and the children were left to their own devices

It was disgraceful behaviour , not just the mccanns either.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 12:22:51 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 12:18:36 PM
Tell me how many of thew checks were verified.

and the children were left to their own devices.

It was disgraceful behaviour , not just the mccanns either.

You may not like it, but it is the legal position.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 27, 2016, 12:29:13 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 12:18:36 PM
Tell me how many of thew checks were verified.

and the children were left to their own devices.

It was disgraceful behaviour , not just the mccanns either.

In Your Opinion ... which has no standing in law. Unlike the opinion of the Portuguese Attorney General.  Let's face it Stephen you are on a hiding to nothing following this tack ... as well as sailing too close to the wind regarding defamation for my liking.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 12:31:34 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 27, 2016, 12:29:13 PM
In Your Opinion ... which has no standing in law. Unlike the opinion of the Portuguese Attorney General.  Let's face it Stephen you are on a hiding to nothing following this tack ... as well as sailing too close to the wind regarding defamation for my liking.

Sailing close to the wind ?

The case happened in Portugal, and the report from Former minister of internal affairs Rui Pereira stands.

Get over it.

Still waiting for you to admit the mccanns did anything wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Jean-Pierre on May 27, 2016, 12:32:06 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 12:18:36 PM
Tell me how many of thew checks were verified.

and the children were left to their own devices

It was disgraceful behaviour , not just the mccanns either.

It may have been foolish, and had tragic consequences.

However, from a legal point of view there was no crime of abandonment committed by the McCanns.

In order to secure a conviction, the onus would be on the PP to prove intent, and to prove that no checks were actually made.  This would not be possible to do. 

As I said before, you may not like it, but it is the cold legal position.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 12:33:19 PM
You need to refer to the  Former minister of internal affairs in Portugval, Rui Pereira .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on May 27, 2016, 12:36:44 PM
Quote from: mercury on May 26, 2016, 08:06:35 PM
Grime cited over 200 case searches, dont twist his words, Amaral merely quoted him, nothng wrong done,no lies at all by either of them, unless amaral misunderstood,which is not a crime, just numbers

Quote
P In six years operational deployment in over 200 cases the dog has never

alerted to meat based foodstuffs.

Martin Grime.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on May 27, 2016, 12:44:34 PM
Quote from: Jean-Pierre on May 27, 2016, 12:16:28 PM
From a legal perspective, it would have been a waste of time and would have resulted in an acquittal.  The reason being that the children were not abandoned, as there was a process of checks in place.  And there was no intent to abandon or recklessly expose the children to danger.  So there was no crime. 

You may not like it, but it is the legal position.

With the exception of 'statutory offences' (forget them!) it seems to be an identical requirement of both penal codes (our own, adversarial and the Portuguese inquisitorial) that the commission of any crime requires both of two elements; guilty conduct and guilty intent.

The absence of either element means no crime (in either penal code).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 12:47:49 PM
Quote from: ferryman on May 27, 2016, 12:44:34 PM
With the exception of 'statutory offences' (forget them!) it seems to be an identical requirement of both penal codes (our own, adversarial and the Portuguese inquisitorial) that the commission of any crime requires both of two elements; guilty conduct and guilty intent.

The absence of either element means no crime (in either penal code).

Abandonment and intent, as the former Minister of Internal Affairs makes quite clear.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on May 27, 2016, 12:48:42 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 12:47:49 PM
Abandonment and intent, as the former Minister of Internal Affairs makes quite clear.

Intent to what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 27, 2016, 04:32:49 PM
Quote from: ferryman on May 27, 2016, 12:44:34 PM
With the exception of 'statutory offences' (forget them!) it seems to be an identical requirement of both penal codes (our own, adversarial and the Portuguese inquisitorial) that the commission of any crime requires both of two elements; guilty conduct and guilty intent.

The absence of either element means no crime (in either penal code).

Must let guy sent down for 4.5 years for causing death by dangerous driving today know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 04:39:33 PM
Quote from: ferryman on May 27, 2016, 12:48:42 PM
Intent to what?

Intent ???

Leaving the children ALONE, REPEATEDLY, whilst they drank free wine and ate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on May 27, 2016, 05:08:49 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on May 27, 2016, 04:32:49 PM
Must let guy sent down for 4.5 years for causing death by dangerous driving today know.

http://www.allaboutlaw.co.uk/stage/study-help/criminal-law-actus-reus-mens-rea
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on May 27, 2016, 05:19:14 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 04:39:33 PM
Intent ???

Leaving the children ALONE, REPEATEDLY, whilst they drank free wine and ate.
The McCanns intended to enjoy a relaxed evening a few dozen metres from where their children slept and to check on them at regular intervals, they did not intend for one of their kids to be abducted, it's very simple to understand really when you think about it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 05:37:50 PM
Quote from: Alfie on May 27, 2016, 05:19:14 PM
The McCanns intended to enjoy a relaxed evening a few dozen metres from where their children slept and to check on them at regular intervals, they did not intend for one of their kids to be abducted, it's very simple to understand really when you think about it.

Ah, abduction.

What abduction alf, and please give the proof of abduction.

There is no excuse for what the mccanns did, and don't try pretending there was.

They weren't in the back garden.

They were in a foreign country, with a language they did not know. etc., etc.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on May 27, 2016, 05:42:59 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 05:37:50 PM
Ah, abduction.

What abduction alf, and please give the proof of abduction.

There is no excuse for what the mccanns did, and don't try pretending there was.

They weren't in the back garden.

They were in a foreign country, with a language they did not know. etc., etc.
We were talking about intent weren't we?  What did the McCanns intend to do that caused Madeleine to disappear then in your view?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 05:52:42 PM
Quote from: Alfie on May 27, 2016, 05:42:59 PM
We were talking about intent weren't we?  What did the McCanns intend to do that caused Madeleine to disappear then in your view?

Tut , tut.

If you has been reading and comprehending my and others posts.

You would know that already.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on May 27, 2016, 06:24:40 PM
A reminder to keep posts amiable please. TY
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 27, 2016, 06:57:02 PM
Quote from: Alfie on May 27, 2016, 05:42:59 PM
We were talking about intent weren't we?  What did the McCanns intend to do that caused Madeleine to disappear then in your view?

They intended to leave their children alone every night before they even booked the holiday. Think about the risks involved .. or not, if you are a supporter of such parenting behaviour.

 If the flat had caught fire for instance...who would be to blame ... not the parents because they were no where near the kids!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 06:57:50 PM
Quote from: Alfie on May 27, 2016, 05:19:14 PM
(snip) a few dozen metres from where their children slept (snip)
a few   seven

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on May 27, 2016, 07:17:05 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on May 27, 2016, 06:57:02 PM
They intended to leave their children alone every night before they even booked the holiday. Think about the risks involved .. or not, if you are a supporter of such parenting behaviour.

 If the flat had caught fire for instance...who would be to blame ... not the parents because they were no where near the kids!
They did not intend to leave them unchecked all evening long, and they didn't.  If the flat had caught fire I have no doubt that they would have been in attendance within 60 seconds, assuming the apartments contained working fire alarms, which I believe is a statutory requirement of such apartments.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 27, 2016, 07:26:11 PM
Quote from: lordpookles on May 27, 2016, 10:43:41 AM
Interesting if true. What time did SY/crimewatch say kate went to check?

They are being smart - around 10 but the suspicious phone calls report revealed it matching mine. 9:51 Kate left to check. Alarm raised by 9:54/55. Smithman was spotted later - it all fits.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 27, 2016, 07:28:53 PM
Quote from: Alfie on May 27, 2016, 07:17:05 PM
They did not intend to leave them unchecked all evening long, and they didn't.  If the flat had caught fire I have no doubt that they would have been in attendance within 60 seconds, assuming the apartments contained working fire alarms, which I believe is a statutory requirement of such apartments.

I never said "They did not intend to leave them unchecked all evening long". I clearly stated they intended to leave the children alone every night before they went on holiday, without doing a risk assessment . Do you have any idea how long it takes to survive smoke inhilation? anyway no matter, they did not do a risk assessment.
 
Re the checking you mention. There was no set schedule ie every 15 or 20 or 30 minute intervals. these were NOT physical checks just 'listening at doors' IF the checking was as often as you and they try to make out, there would have been no time for  an'abductor' . someone would have bumped into him/her/ they surely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 27, 2016, 07:47:47 PM
Quote from: ferryman on May 27, 2016, 12:36:44 PM
Martin Grime.

Martin Grime said in his other report

...in over 200 [case searches [/b]the dog has never alerted to meat based and
specifically pork foodstuffs designed for human consumption.

It is rather obvious MG was not talking about individual police cases, but the number of searches the cadaver dog had done. If people call them cases or investigations, it matters not a jot, GA did not lie, neither did he lie that MH said in his report if the dogs alerted a body may have been removed. They were police investigating a mssing chld case, did you expect them to not think the obvious or did you expect them to make a long list of, "it could have been this, it could have been that" ie discarded bloody plasters, mushrooms and gardeners wet boots! Especially when the elephant was for them in the room, or should I say just the one room amngst many. Please do not forget that Portugal had had no experience at the time with cadaver dogs so they would go where they were led by their more experienced foreign colleagues.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 09:28:51 PM
Quote from: Alfie on May 27, 2016, 07:17:05 PM
(snip)... If the flat had caught fire I have no doubt that they would have been in attendance within 60 seconds, assuming the apartments contained working fire alarms, which I believe is a statutory requirement of such apartments.
How would they have heard the firealarm? That lounge balcony door looks double-glazed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 27, 2016, 09:31:00 PM
With the amount of noise that the Tapas bar would have been generating, they may not have heard any alarm - at least not at first.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 27, 2016, 09:36:08 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 06:57:50 PM
a few   seven

New world record Afie claiming McCanns could be there in 60 seconds. wow, it's not like I don't believe you or anything ( I don't) but how would they 'see' this fire if it was in the childrens room or just out side blocking the enterance to the room. smoke inhilation...

Do I hear 'damage limitation' being used -well there was no fire and only one child was 'abducted' could have been much worse it could have been all three...

The sad truth is  the parents could not see the apartment or hear their children crying from where they were sitting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 09:38:52 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 27, 2016, 04:39:33 PM
Intent ???

Leaving the children ALONE, REPEATEDLY, whilst they drank free wine and ate.
Wine, beer, sangria, and almond liqueurs, if you read the rogs Steve

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 27, 2016, 09:46:56 PM
A waiter destroying many statements

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 09:49:07 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 27, 2016, 09:31:00 PM
With the amount of noise that the Tapas bar would have been generating, they may not have heard any alarm - at least not at first.
If a fire started in the kitchen it would only take a few minutes to spread to the lounge and then it would be visible from the restaurant so what's all the fuss about?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 27, 2016, 09:51:26 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 09:49:07 PM
If a fire started in the kitchen it would only take a few minutes to spread to the lounge and then it would be visible from the restaurant so what's all the fuss about?

Agreed, what's a bit of smoke between friends.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 09:53:28 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 09:49:07 PM
If a fire started in the kitchen it would only take a few minutes to spread to the lounge and then it would be visible from the restaurant so what's all the fuss about?

The apartments are mainly concrete
Where the fire risk
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 10:01:06 PM
Quote from: davel on May 27, 2016, 09:53:28 PM
The apartments are mainly concrete
Where the fire risk
Last time I checked, sofas and mattresses and bedclothes and people are not made out of concrete Davel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 27, 2016, 10:05:07 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 09:49:07 PM
If a fire started in the kitchen it would only take a few minutes to spread to the lounge and then it would be visible from the restaurant so what's all the fuss about?

If a fire started it would probably be anyone seeing it seeing as the tapas group werent eye fixed on the flats all night if at all
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 10:08:21 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 10:01:06 PM
Last time I checked, sofas and mattresses and bedclothes and people are not made out of concrete Davel.

All these are fire retardent
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 27, 2016, 10:11:55 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 27, 2016, 09:31:00 PM
With the amount of noise that the Tapas bar would have been generating, they may not have heard any alarm - at least not at first.

When the alarm sounds the idea is to get out not go running to. Sixty seconds could prove to be just in the nick of too late.

https://www.gov.uk/workplace-fire-safety-your-responsibilities/fire-safety-and-evacuation-plans

http://www.firesafe.org.uk/fire-emergency-evacuation-plan-or-fire-procedure/

Before some smart arse says "you are quoting work place" yeah well spotted that's because it is the nearest relevant.
In private residences you have no legal restrictions on how you can you can kill yourself.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 10:14:21 PM
Quote from: davel on May 27, 2016, 10:08:21 PM
All these are fire retardent
If you were  in a concrete building and there was a fire inside your apartment would you silence the alarm and ignore the flames and continue posting, safe in the knowledge that you are fire-retardant Davel?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 10:16:08 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 10:14:21 PM
If you were  in a concrete building and there was a fire inside your apartment would you silence the alarm and ignore the flames and continue posting, safe in the knowledge that you are fire-retardant Davel?

The point you want to ignore is that these apartments seem to be a very low fire risk
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 10:25:45 PM
Quote from: davel on May 27, 2016, 10:16:08 PM
The point you want to ignore is that these apartments seem to be a very low fire risk
Every fireman in the world who has seen the victims of fires in concrete buildings would disagree with you Davel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 27, 2016, 10:38:42 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 10:25:45 PM
Every fireman in the world who has seen the victims of fires in concrete buildings would disagree with you Davel.

Davel just wants to point out, a fire could never kill any of those kids, a fall onto a sharp object or surface coukdnt kill a kid, a fall over a balcony or stairs couldnt kill a knetc etc

All designed to promote nothing could possibly have happened in the parents absence



IN sharon osbournes words, insane
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 27, 2016, 10:43:45 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 10:25:45 PM
Every fireman in the world who has seen the victims of fires in concrete buildings would disagree with you Davel.

Do you have any figures for the number of fires in Luz holiday apartments over the last 10 years please, Pegasus?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 27, 2016, 10:44:35 PM
Quote from: mercury on May 27, 2016, 10:38:42 PM
Davel just wants to point out, a fire could never kill any of those kids, a fall onto a sharp object or surface coukdnt kill a kid, a fall over a balcony or stairs couldnt kill a knetc etc

All designed to promote nothing could possibly have happened in the parents absence



IN sharon osbournes words, insane

Maybe Gerry is really Clark Kent...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 10:47:55 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 10:25:45 PM
Every fireman in the world who has seen the victims of fires in concrete buildings would disagree with you Davel.

perhaps we could have the opinion of a real fireman who I am sure would agree the apartments were not a fire risk
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 27, 2016, 10:54:50 PM
Quote from: davel on May 27, 2016, 10:47:55 PM
perhaps we could have the opinion of a real fireman who I am sure would agree the apartments were not a fire risk

Perhaps you can give your considered opinion why they are not a fire risk.
Is one side of the combustion triangle missing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 10:57:09 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on May 27, 2016, 10:54:50 PM
Perhaps you can give your considered opinion why they are not a fire risk.
Is one side of the combustion triangle missing?

concrete doesn't burn
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 27, 2016, 11:01:23 PM
Quote from: davel on May 27, 2016, 10:57:09 PM
concrete doesn't burn

I'm glad the twin towers didn't burn.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 27, 2016, 11:01:54 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on May 27, 2016, 10:44:35 PM
Maybe Gerry is really Clark Kent...

Well yes never denied it but kate boasted how quickly she could sprint...why sprint when 30 mns or more or more have lapsed

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 11:03:01 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on May 27, 2016, 11:01:23 PM
I'm glad the twin towers didn't burn.

the steel burnt in the twin towers...were there any low flying aircraft around 5a

Concrete does not burn, but somewhere around 1200 degrees it will produce steam to become calcium oxide.

Ca(OH)2 -> CaO + H2O

Calcium oxide is a white powder which melts at nearly 3000 C
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 27, 2016, 11:07:25 PM
The patio door was left open
Davel thinks there was no possibility a groggy chikd coukd go out and fall over the balcony or downthe stairs

Same with front door, unlocked, easy fir a toddler to open and go wonderng


Unsafe measures davel dear by the parents, totally irresponsible
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 11:09:22 PM
Quote from: mercury on May 27, 2016, 11:07:25 PM
The patio door was left open
Davel thinks there was no possibility a groggy chikd coukd go out and fall over the balcony or downthe stairs

Same with front door, unlocked, easy fir a toddler to open and go wonderng


Unsafe measures davel dear by the parents, totally irresponsible

not me...the archiving report felt maddie could not have physically left the apartment...read it...in the morning
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 27, 2016, 11:10:46 PM
Quote from: davel on May 27, 2016, 10:57:09 PM
concrete doesn't burn

True because concrete is fully oxidised but heat of burning contents is sufficient to reduce the structural strength to the point of collapse. Differences in the coefficients of thermal expansion between the shit and the hairpins cause collapse.
Then when the contents are burning there will be a depletion of oxygen which will be replaced causing drafts.........
Now you did S level physics you should be able to work it it all out from there.
So again which side of the combustion triangle is missing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2016, 11:13:10 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on May 27, 2016, 11:10:46 PM
True because concrete is fully oxidised but heat of burning contents is sufficient to reduce the structural strength to the point of collapse. Differences in the coefficients of thermal expansion between the shit and the hairpins cause collapse.
Then when the contents are burning there will be a depletion of oxygen which will be replaced causing drafts.........
Now you did S level physics you should be able to work it it all out from there.
So again which side of the combustion triangle is missing?

and what temperature is required for this to take place. In the twin towers their was aircraft fuel...what fuel would be present in the apartment to reach the required temp
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 27, 2016, 11:38:05 PM
Contents burn Davel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 01:06:46 AM
Looks like the winter snow has finally melted and the search for Deorr Kunz is resuming. Police have done a 3 day search. Next the private investigators KIC will be doing a search (or maybe are now), reportedly with the assistance of cadaver dogs from Georgia state.
 
Klein Investigations and Consulting. Public Statement : “KIC Texas has received media requests regarding the search for Deorr Kunz, Jr. The citizens of Lemhi County should be very proud of the men and women searchers who worked the case in hard conditions this past week. As the evidence obtained is reviewed by Law Enforcement the KIC team will be preparing their search. We will not announce the date or time of such search as we want to insure that we are not interrupted and can fully concentrate on the areas to which we will be searching. We want to continue to encourage anyone camping in the area of the Timber Creek Camp Ground to keep their eyes open and report anything out of place. We again thank the wonderful people of Idaho for their cooperation and tips.”  24 May at 17:40

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 28, 2016, 01:17:13 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 01:06:46 AM
Looks like the winter snow has finally melted and the search for Deorr Kunz is resuming. Police have done a 3 day search. Next the private investigators KIC will be doing a search (or maybe are now), reportedly with the assistance of cadaver dogs from Georgia state.
 
Klein Investigations and Consulting. Public Statement : “KIC Texas has received media requests regarding the search for Deorr Kunz, Jr. The citizens of Lemhi County should be very proud of the men and women searchers who worked the case in hard conditions this past week. As the evidence obtained is reviewed by Law Enforcement the KIC team will be preparing their search. We will not announce the date or time of such search as we want to insure that we are not interrupted and can fully concentrate on the areas to which we will be searching. We want to continue to encourage anyone camping in the area of the Timber Creek Camp Ground to keep their eyes open and report anything out of place. We again thank the wonderful people of Idaho for their cooperation and tips.” 

Topic has been moved to http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7045.0, Pegasus.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 01:29:34 AM
In the Fort one night there was a fire attended by more than 21 fire officers and 7 fire engines, and three residents were evacuated. It took hours to put out the blaze. A fourth resident Fernando Da Vel refused evacuation, claiming that because stone doesn't burn there was no fire risk.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 28, 2016, 02:24:07 AM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 01:29:34 AM
In the Fort one night there was a fire attended by more than 21 fire officers and 7 fire engines, and three residents were evacuated. It took hours to put out the blaze. A fourth resident Fernando Da Vel refused evacuation, claiming that because stone doesn't burn there was no fire risk.

You are absolutely wicked, Pegasus!

Was that the Fortazela - is it a restaurant/guest house? What happened there - I can't find anything on google.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 02:44:27 AM
Quote from: misty on May 28, 2016, 02:24:07 AM
You are absolutely wicked, Pegasus!

Was that the Fortazela - is it a restaurant/guest house? What happened there - I can't find anything on google.
It was a Sunday night in 2006 Misty (same night as a white van was torched outside the laundrette).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 09:40:32 AM
Quote from: davel on May 27, 2016, 11:03:01 PM
the steel burnt in the twin towers...were there any low flying aircraft around 5a

Concrete does not burn, but somewhere around 1200 degrees it will produce steam to become calcium oxide.

Ca(OH)2 -> CaO + H2O

Calcium oxide is a white powder which melts at nearly 3000 C

Some ones been Googling again  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 28, 2016, 09:44:12 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 09:40:32 AM
Some ones been Googling again  @)(++(*

It's just over 2,550 degrees Celsius.

I wonder if dave knows why Magnesium Oxide has a higher melting point, almost 300 degrees higher ?

Without googling of course.

 %£5&%
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 09:51:38 AM
Quote from: davel on May 27, 2016, 11:13:10 PM
and what temperature is required for this to take place. In the twin towers their was aircraft fuel...what fuel would be present in the apartment to reach the required temp
I don't recall mentioning the Twin Towers.
In the combustion triangle "fuel" is a generic term. In the presence of pure oxygen pretty well everything is a fuel.
What do you think furnishings hard and soft and clothing are made of? Insulation to electric cables etc etc.
What temperature do you think needs to be reached such that the rebar expands enough to spall off the concrete?
To educate yourself look at some Building Research videos on fire hazards.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 02:01:42 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 09:51:38 AM
I don't recall mentioning the Twin Towers.
In the combustion triangle "fuel" is a generic term. In the presence of pure oxygen pretty well everything is a fuel.
What do you think furnishings hard and soft and clothing are made of? Insulation to electric cables etc etc.
What temperature do you think needs to be reached such that the rebar expands enough to spall off the concrete?
To educate yourself look at some Building Research videos on fire hazards.

It was Slarti who mentioned the towers
I don't se the concrete building as a particular fire risk
Furnishings are usually fire retardant
I can see the s level bothered you and Stephen
It seems you had not even heard of them despite being educated at a similar time and both taking GCEs governed by the JMB...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 28, 2016, 02:59:42 PM
Incorrect again.

Neither me or Alice feel the need to boast as what we did at point in our education.

Meanwhile , we only have your unsubstantiated word for what you did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 03:22:04 PM
Quote from: davel on May 28, 2016, 02:01:42 PM
It was Slarti who mentioned the towers
I don't se the concrete building as a particular fire risk
Furnishings are usually fire retardant
I can see the s level bothered you and Stephen
It seems you had not even heard of them despite being educated at a similar time and both taking GCEs governed by the JMB...

Try looking at Building Research stuff re fire risks and how it all works. Then you may be in a position to make a  cogent argument.
Otherwise it's back the old.
"I don't see how it is a fire risk ergo it isn't cos I is clever"

p.s the GCE's I took were Cambridge not J.M.B.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 06:19:59 PM
Here's a building which is made from concrete and steel and therefore according to Davel Fire Consultancy has no fire risk.
http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/structures/strucfire/images_export/CaseStudy/HistoricFires/BuildingFires/windsor.gif

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 06:23:55 PM
A later photo of the same concrete and steel building
http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/structures/strucfire/images_export/CaseStudy/HistoricFires/BuildingFires/buildingFire.gif
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on May 28, 2016, 06:31:01 PM
In a holiday apartment in which there are very few electrical items in use, and no smokers present, no electrical storm and no jihadists with jets aimed at the apartment what would be the likely main cause of a fire in such a situation? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on May 28, 2016, 06:32:38 PM
Quote from: Alfie on May 28, 2016, 06:31:01 PM
In a holiday apartment in which there are very few electrical items in use, and no smokers present, no electrical storm and no jihadists with jets aimed at the apartment what would be the likely main cause of a fire in such a situation?

Spontaneous combustion, silly ...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 28, 2016, 06:38:18 PM
Quote from: ferryman on May 28, 2016, 06:32:38 PM
Spontaneous combustion, silly ...

I thought that was the reaction of the mccanns to the recent judgement in Portugal.

Metaphorically of course. %£5&% %£5&%
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on May 28, 2016, 06:42:29 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 28, 2016, 06:38:18 PM
I thought that was the reaction of the mccanns to the recent judgement in Portugal.

Metaphorically of course. %£5&% %£5&%

I think you might be mistaking that with righteous outrage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 06:43:07 PM
Quote from: Alfie on May 28, 2016, 06:31:01 PM
In a holiday apartment in which there are very few electrical items in use, and no smokers present, no electrical storm and no jihadists with jets aimed at the apartment what would be the likely main cause of a fire in such a situation?
Hob left on. Child turning grill on. Hair dryer. Matches. Lighter. Electrical wiring fault. Faulty toaster. Faulty tumble dryer. Cigarette end on sofa. Arson. Phone charger.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 28, 2016, 06:46:40 PM
Quote from: ferryman on May 28, 2016, 06:42:29 PM
I think you might be mistaking that with righteous outrage.

Nah.

You mean righteous outrage about leaving children unprotected, with infrequent visits, whilst out drinking ?

Hold on there, that was what the mccanns did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on May 28, 2016, 06:49:49 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 06:43:07 PM
Hob left on. Grill. Hair dryer. Matches. Lighter. Electrical wiring fault. Faulty toaster. Faulty tumble dryer. Cigarette end on sofa. Arson. Phone charger.
Was there a hob / grill with a naked flame?  Was there a hair dryer left on?  Were there matches in the apartment?  A Lighter?  Do toasters spontaneously combust when not being used?  Was there a tumble dryer?  Did the McCanns smoke? 
Phone charger is a possibility and electrical wiring fault I'll grant you.  So, how many holiday makers staying in similar apartments have had their holidays curtailed by fires in their apartments caused by electrical wiring or phone chargers in the last 10 years? If it's a relatively high likelihood then there must be plenty of examples. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 06:51:40 PM
Concrete building rated no-fire-risk by Davel
Probably started started by an electrical fault.
That is not the concrete building burning, it is the contents burning.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on May 28, 2016, 06:52:54 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on May 28, 2016, 06:46:40 PM
Nah.

You mean righteous outrage about leaving children unprotected, with infrequent visits, whilst out drinking ?

Hold on there, that was what the mccanns did.

Righteous outrage.

That a book accusing Madeleine's parents of killing Madeleine, disposing of her body, concocting a ruse of 'abduction' and launching a (fraudulent) 'appeal' in their (dead) daughter's name is adjudged something (other than) libellous!

Only inhabitants of a species other than human would dissent from that analysis.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 06:54:06 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 06:51:40 PM
Concrete building rated no-fire-risk by Davel Fire Consultancy.

I have never used the words no fire risk
Looks like the McCanns have appealed despite your assertion they would not
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 07:00:24 PM
So what was the risk from a fire
How many fires have there been involving this sort of building in Europe and how many fatalities have there been
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 07:01:39 PM
Quote from: davel on May 28, 2016, 06:54:06 PM
I have never used the words no fire risk
(snip)
Was it someone disguised as you who posted "the apartments were not a fire risk" Dave?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 07:03:18 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 07:01:39 PM
Was it someone disguised as you who posted "the apartments were not a fire risk" Dave?

And you have interpreted thAt as no fire risk
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 07:04:52 PM
Quote from: davel on May 28, 2016, 06:54:06 PM
(snip)
Looks like the McCanns have appealed despite your assertion they would not
Yes I admit my prediction was totally wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 07:14:00 PM
The point I am making is that the apartments seem to be made entirely of concrete with no wooden floors
The roof to 5a also seems to be solid concrete. There are therefore fewer combustible materials
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 07:18:11 PM

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/456652/Fire_Statistics_Great_Britain_2013-14___PDF_Version_.pdf

http://blog.sdfirealarms.co.uk/fire-safety/which-are-the-most-common-house-fire-causes-and-how-to-prevent-them/

http://www.patlabelsonline.co.uk/blog/10-common-causes-house-fires/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33124925
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 07:19:31 PM
Quote from: davel on May 28, 2016, 07:14:00 PM
The point I am making is that the apartments seem to be made entirely of concrete with no wooden floors
The roof to 5a also seems to be solid concrete. There are therefore fewer combustible materials
Any fireman would tell you that it is unsafe to leave toddlers home alone even in a concrete apartment.
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 07:20:48 PM
Quote from: Alfie on May 28, 2016, 06:49:49 PM
Was there a hob / grill with a naked flame?  Was there a hair dryer left on?  Were there matches in the apartment?  A Lighter?  Do toasters spontaneously combust when not being used?  Was there a tumble dryer?  Did the McCanns smoke? 
Phone charger is a possibility and electrical wiring fault I'll grant you.  So, how many holiday makers staying in similar apartments have had their holidays curtailed by fires in their apartments caused by electrical wiring or phone chargers in the last 10 years? If it's a relatively high likelihood then there must be plenty of examples.

Was a smoke alarm fitted in the apartment?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 28, 2016, 07:22:21 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 07:19:31 PM
Any fireman would tell you that it is unsafe to leave toddlers home alone even in a concrete apartment.
 

Exactly Pegasus.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 07:23:24 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 07:19:31 PM
Any fireman would tell you that it is unsafe to leave toddlers home alone even in a concrete apartment.
 

much of what we do every day is unsafe....i dont think fire rates highly as a possible danger..in this particular instance
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 07:27:58 PM


https://www.bre.co.uk/page.jsp?id=2788

Your mission Jim should you choose to accept it is :
For fire risks take the advice of Fire Research or Davel and Alfie Pyrotechnics.
This tape will self combust in 60 seconds.................... @)(++(*



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 07:31:48 PM
Quote from: Alfie on May 28, 2016, 06:49:49 PM
(snip) ... If it's a relatively high likelihood then there must be plenty of examples.
Here's a photo of a fire at a concrete apartment building in Portugal
A news report said people were "scooping up children in pyjamas and running into the street in fear for their lives".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2016, 07:39:59 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 07:20:48 PM
Was a smoke alarm fitted in the apartment?
I don't know about 5A, but after passing through dozens of homes in Portugal, I have yet to see one fitted with a smoke alarm. 

Hmmm.  Must check the DIY shop to see if they stock them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 07:40:38 PM
Quote from: davel on May 28, 2016, 07:23:24 PM
much of what we do every day is unsafe....i dont think fire rates highly as a possible danger..in this particular instance
A fire would be visible from the restaurant after a few minutes when all contents were really blazing.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 28, 2016, 07:43:10 PM
By which time it would be a bit late for parental intervention.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 07:55:31 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2016, 07:39:59 PM
I don't know about 5A, but after passing through dozens of homes in Portugal, I have yet to see one fitted with a smoke alarm. 

Hmmm.  Must check the DIY shop to see if they stock them.

It is properties let out for rental through organisations like MW  that I am interested in.
But specifically was 5A let out by Mark Warner or who ever without a smoke alarm fitted ?
That's a yes or no or I don't know not a "well if a sewing machine had bigger wheels it might be a car".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on May 28, 2016, 08:06:11 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 07:20:48 PM
Was a smoke alarm fitted in the apartment?
I would think Mark Warners would have had to comply to fire safety regulations wouldn't you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 08:06:18 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 07:31:48 PM
Here's a photo of a fire at a concrete apartment building in Portugal
A news report said people were "scooping up children in pyjamas and running into the street in fear for their lives".

a building where no doubt many smoke...light candles ...overload plug sockets. Those are the three top causes of fires
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on May 28, 2016, 08:06:59 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 07:31:48 PM
Here's a photo of a fire at a concrete apartment building in Portugal
A news report said people were "scooping up children in pyjamas and running into the street in fear for their lives".
What caused it? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 08:08:52 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 07:31:48 PM
Here's a photo of a fire at a concrete apartment building in Portugal
A news report said people were "scooping up children in pyjamas and running into the street in fear for their lives".

be interesting to know the cause of the fire...the concrete won't be on fire
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on May 28, 2016, 08:09:25 PM
Quote from: davel on May 28, 2016, 08:06:18 PM
a building where no doubt many smoke...light candles ...overload plug sockets. Those are the three top causes of fires
These are the 8 top causes of fire - number one is cooking, also
candles
smoking
electrical and lighting
Tumble dryer and waching machine
Lightning
children playing with lighters and matches
Christmas trees.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 08:12:54 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 07:31:48 PM
Here's a photo of a fire at a concrete apartment building in Portugal
A news report said people were "scooping up children in pyjamas and running into the street in fear for their lives".

these sorts of fores often start in rubbish chutes
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 08:24:18 PM
Quote from: Alfie on May 28, 2016, 08:06:59 PM
What caused it?
A TV on the fifth floor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 08:25:28 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 08:24:18 PM
A TV on the fifth floor.

how much damage was caused
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2016, 08:32:32 PM
Quote from: Alfie on May 28, 2016, 08:06:11 PM
I would think Mark Warners would have had to comply to fire safety regulations wouldn't you?
What fire safety regulations?

I'm in a villa with a 100% legal, fully registered for tax purposes, contract.

There are NO smoke detectors.  Ditto our first main place of stay.

Anyone suggesting a smoke detector in 5A needs to go beyond 'would', 'should' and 'ought to have'.

The MW complex 'should' have had decent security.

Did it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 08:34:16 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2016, 08:32:32 PM
What fire safety regulations?

I'm in a villa with a 100% legal, fully registered for tax purposes, contract.

There are NO smoke detectors.  Ditto our first main place of stay.

Anyone suggesting a smoke detector in 5A needs to go beyond 'would', 'should' and 'ought to have'.

The MW complex 'should' have had decent security.

Did it?

#so 5a did not have a smoke detector?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2016, 08:37:39 PM
Quote from: davel on May 28, 2016, 08:34:16 PM
#so 5a did not have a smoke detector?
I said earlier that I don't know.

I still don't know.

If the photos show a smoke detector, then we will have an answer.  But if they don't .......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 09:06:38 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2016, 09:02:23 PM
Was an American company?

Might well have had?

Bog standard Portugal?

bog standard...no standards...smoke alarms wont be the only lack of statndards
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 09:08:13 PM
Quote from: davel on May 28, 2016, 08:25:28 PM
how much damage was caused
Damage to the TV? Probably few of the channels worked after that inferno.
Damage to the apartments? - basically ruined by fire and water.
More seriously, 6 people taken to hospital with smoke inhalation.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 09:09:51 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 09:08:13 PM
Damage to the TV? Probably few of the channels worked after that inferno.
Damage to the apartments? - basically ruined by fire and water.
More seriously, 6 people taken to hospital with smoke inhalation.

not serious then
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 09:18:18 PM
Quote from: davel on May 28, 2016, 09:09:51 PM
not serious then
Smoke inhalation is very serious Davel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 09:19:26 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 09:18:18 PM
Smoke inhalation is very serious Davel.

can be fatal...depends how serious...how serious was it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 09:27:36 PM
Quote from: davel on May 28, 2016, 09:19:26 PM
can be fatal...depends how serious...how serious was it
Serious enough for 6 people to be taken to hospital Davel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 09:28:39 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 09:27:36 PM
Serious enough for 6 people to be taken to hospital Davel.

I just do not see fire as even a moderate risk...it certainly didn't happen
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 09:31:56 PM
Quote from: davel on May 28, 2016, 09:28:39 PM
I just do not see fire as even a moderate risk...it certainly didn't happen
Fire is a much lower risk to children than asphyxiation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 28, 2016, 09:36:16 PM
Quote from: davel on May 28, 2016, 09:28:39 PM
I just do not see fire as even a moderate risk...it certainly didn't happen

So which way do you want it? Ignore things that didn't happen but may have or discount things that did happen because they were unlikely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2016, 09:45:19 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on May 28, 2016, 09:36:16 PM
So which way do you want it? Ignore things that didn't happen but may have or discount things that did happen because they were unlikely.

ignore what we know didn't happen...there was no fire
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 10:18:07 PM
Quote from: Alfie on May 28, 2016, 08:06:11 PM
I would think Mark Warners would have had to comply to fire safety regulations wouldn't you?

I replied to this. I wonder where the reply went ?
It went along the lines of:
Why do you think smoke detectors are fitted ?
Hint: because there is a perceived risk of fire. QED


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 10:25:20 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 09:27:36 PM
Serious enough for 6 people to be taken to hospital Davel.

Get a good fire going and death can be by asphyxiation due to the fire using all the O2.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2016, 10:51:45 PM
Quote from: davel on May 28, 2016, 09:06:38 PM
bog standard...no standards...smoke alarms wont be the only lack of statndards
Make your mind up.

Was MW an American company requiring smoke alarms?

Or were there no smoke alarms required?

Can't have it both ways.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 11:22:00 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 10:25:20 PM
Get a good fire going and death can be by asphyxiation due to the fire using all the O2.
Yes fire can cause asphyxiation but there are far commoner causes for example accidental strangulation, object inhalation, liquid inhalation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 28, 2016, 11:28:44 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 11:22:00 PM
Yes fire can cause asphyxiation but there are far commoner causes for example accidental strangulation, object inhalation, liquid inhalation.

True Peggy.
I was just flagging it up to the "We know naff all about fire risks and building construction" brigade. The pics you put up on the other thread of the apartment interior were interesting.
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on May 28, 2016, 11:58:08 PM
Quote from: pegasus on May 28, 2016, 08:24:18 PM
A TV on the fifth floor.
Was the TV left on when the McCanns left the apartment?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on May 28, 2016, 11:59:31 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2016, 08:37:39 PM
I said earlier that I don't know.

I still don't know.

If the photos show a smoke detector, then we will have an answer.  But if they don't .......
Something to investigate on one of your next investigative missions then...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on May 29, 2016, 01:01:08 AM
Anecdotal evidence that Portugal was hot on fire regulations (pardon the pun) at least as far back as 2006

Fire Safety Regulations
Post Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:31 am

I just wanted to know if any one has experienced the same as we have? We are opening a small business in Lagos, we are renting two rooms in a large building and have had to have some fire plans drawn up to enable us to get our commercial license. The amount of fire safety equippment that we have had to have is unbelievable. We have a fire extinguisher in both rooms, a smoke detector in both rooms, a manual alarm button in one room, a siren and a control panel that controls the whole system! It seems that the only thing we haven't got is a fireman on standby!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 29, 2016, 01:27:25 AM
Quote from: Alfie on May 29, 2016, 01:01:08 AM
Anecdotal evidence that Portugal was hot on fire regulations (pardon the pun) at least as far back as 2006

Fire Safety Regulations
Post Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:31 am

I just wanted to know if any one has experienced the same as we have? We are opening a small business in Lagos, we are renting two rooms in a large building and have had to have some fire plans drawn up to enable us to get our commercial license. The amount of fire safety equippment that we have had to have is unbelievable. We have a fire extinguisher in both rooms, a smoke detector in both rooms, a manual alarm button in one room, a siren and a control panel that controls the whole system! It seems that the only thing we haven't got is a fireman on standby!
Small business.

My enquiries have confirmed that a small business, aka a pub, installed fire alarms in said pub in 2014.  I have not yet been able to work out whether this was a new regulation, or whether the previous tenant simply ignored regulations.

I do believe a scouting expedition to Kelly's and The Bull might be on the cards.

But does it matter a jot?  Any photos of 5A with a single smoke alarm?   That is the question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 29, 2016, 08:36:03 AM
another interesting case re portuguese justice..

A Briton held in a Portuguese jail for almost two years has acted as an under-cover agent for the United States authorities investigating a serious international crime, it was claimed yesterday.

A Portuguese judge will this week deliver her verdict in the case of Professor David Lowry, 54, a British civil rights lawyer accused of an alleged pounds 10 million fraud.

He has told The Observer that he would rather remain in Lisbon's notorious Caxias prison than accept any verdict short of acquittal.

Yesterday his American associate Craig Heesch, who has fought to establish his innocence, issued a statement in Lisbon saying he and Lowry had 'assisted US and international law enforcement agencies in a high profile criminal case as undercover agents - even while the professor is in prison.'

Heesch claimed last year that they had worked as for the FBI in investigations into white-collar crime. This was corroborated by former FBI agent Don Rogers, who gave evidence on Lowry's behalf after the FBI headquarters was unable to confirm it.

If Judge Teresa Feria finds Lowry guilty on Friday friends say it will finish his career.

The case against him is that he ran a Lisbon-based firm selling shares in non-existent firms. He did not deal in Portuguese shares.

He has told The Observer that he would rather remain in Lisbon's notorious Caxias prison than accept any verdict short of acquittal....he got his wish...he was sentenced to 17 years in prison and in portugal 17 years means 17 years


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 29, 2016, 09:00:22 AM
1999.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 29, 2016, 09:06:41 AM
that's right.....not sure if he has been released yet despite questions being asked in Parliament
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 29, 2016, 09:15:18 AM
'Portugal no haven for offshore shark'

LIVERPOOL-BORN David Lowry, 54, a lawyer and specialist in what one regulatory spokesman called "the less establishment end of the financial market", looked remarkably chipper, considering he had spent 23 months sharing a Portuguese prison cell with 13 others.
But that was before the judge at Lisbon's criminal court sent him down on Friday for nine years for fraud and conspiracy over the operations of his share telesales company, Paramount Portugal, and banished him from the country for another 10 years. At this, Lowry crumpled sideways, while his supporters in the curlicued, tiled courtroom murmured and huddled together in shock at the unexpectedly harsh verdict.

Lowry's crime was to have set up an unregistered operation in Lisbon from which scores of employees cold-called investors around the world and persuaded them to buy shares in small companies in Florida and New Zealand. Following investors' complaints, police closed the company in April 1997 and the judge found him guilty of fraud, criminal association, forgery and illegal use of a database containing potential investors' names and numbers.

Lowry insisted throughout his five-month trial that he was only following standard US business procedure. "I took Portuguese legal advice that said if I didn't deal in Portuguese stock or seek clients in Portugal, I needn't register the company," he said when I visited him in Lisbon's Caxias jail, where the former dictator Antonio Salazar used to lock up his political opponents.

Lowry has slightly faded blond good looks and a gently persuasive manner. "The Portuguese authorities are just inexperienced in telephone share- dealing," he said before the verdict. "They concocted this case against me on the basis of pure suspicion." He did not deny the activities of which he was accused. "I just did not believe I had done anything wrong. Where's the crime?"

The Portuguese judge, however, decided Lowry had mounted a calculated swindle. He had set up a "boiler-room" dealing operation to persuade investors to buy shares that were worthless, defrauding them of millions of pounds. The raid on Paramount was launched after disappointed Irish and Danish investors complained to Portugal's financial regulators that they had lost vast sums.

The twin-track career of David Lowry, as lawyer and businessman, lies in ruins: he can now neither run a business nor practise law. It is a humiliating blow for a man of charm and intelligence who has mobilised to his cause some of Britain's most eminent lawyers, several of whom testified at length in his favour.

"I'm a professional trustee. I look after other people's money. I cannot afford to be tainted with even the hint of fraud," he said during the trial. But the judge condemned him as "one of those people who play with millions".

David Lowry graduated in law in 1969 from Queen's University, Belfast. In a lengthy report submitted by the defence, his former jurisprudence professor, William Twining, rated his former student "a person of great potential". Lowry moved to the US with Prof Twining's blessing and prospered as an academic lawyer specialising in civil liberties, environmental protection and labour law, before moving into the telecommunications business. From the start "Lowry adopted the assertive and entrepreneurial style of American lawyers and businessmen", Prof Twining said.

Mr Lowry told me: "I used to teach students the law on white-collar crime." He became expert in international finance and tax havens, and set up worldwide consultancies that, in his words, "designed and managed offshore trusts and private corporations taking advantage of tax and fiscal opportunities, while ensuring anonymity for the client".

Domiciled in Switzerland, Lowry's British business connections amounted to a three-month stint in 1996 as director of a media company called Cable Road UK, and manager of Videotron UK, a company whose process of dissolution began last month.

The buccaneering world of transnational share-dealings boomed in the US in the 1980s, punting unquoted shares in high-risk startup companies by telephone or, latterly, on the internet. Operators used high-tech telecoms equipment to dodge national jurisdictions by being registered nowhere. Calls to numbers in one tax haven would be re-routed by satellite to another, so that neither investors nor the authorities knew exactly where to appeal when problems arose.

So renowned did Lowry's expertise become that the US authorities even sought his advice in tracking down tax fraudsters, according to Craig Heesch, a retired Los Angeles policeman and former undercover FBI operative, and Don Rogers, a former FBI special agent. Each testified that Mr Lowry had helped US investigations into racketeering on several occasions, the latest just months ago from his prison cell.

But British and US efforts to stamp out this form of white-collar crime have now spread to Portugal, and David Lowry is by far their biggest catch.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/portugal-no-haven-for-offshore-shark-1079044.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 29, 2016, 09:43:22 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 29, 2016, 01:27:25 AM
Small business.

My enquiries have confirmed that a small business, aka a pub, installed fire alarms in said pub in 2014.  I have not yet been able to work out whether this was a new regulation, or whether the previous tenant simply ignored regulations.

I do believe a scouting expedition to Kelly's and The Bull might be on the cards.

But does it matter a jot?  Any photos of 5A with a single smoke alarm?   That is the question.

There was an interesting item on the news a couple of weeks ago. Some large UK shops had been selling mattresses made in China which didn't meet UK safety regulations, they were much too flammable. It turned out the Chinese company had sent the wrong mattresses and no-one had noticed. The mattresses met European safety standards but not UK ones, which are much stricter. It can't be assumed that other countries have the same standards as the UK, or that they are enforced.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 29, 2016, 10:39:20 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 29, 2016, 09:43:22 AM
There was an interesting item on the news a couple of weeks ago. Some large UK shops had been selling mattresses made in China which didn't meet UK safety regulations, they were much too flammable. It turned out the Chinese company had sent the wrong mattresses and no-one had noticed. The mattresses met European safety standards but not UK ones, which are much stricter. It can't be assumed that other countries have the same standards as the UK, or that they are enforced.

For all the talk of unnecessary 'red tape', EU regulations set the  minimum standards that have to be met.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on May 29, 2016, 10:57:01 AM
So davel, any response to the article I cited on David Lowry ?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 29, 2016, 03:24:35 PM
Just in case the Bank Holiday turns wet and people are at a loose end - The Mirror Forum, courtesy of the Wayback machine.  8)--))

http://web.archive.org/web/20071023045635/http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewforum.php?f=31
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on May 29, 2016, 03:32:36 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 29, 2016, 03:24:35 PM
Just in case the Bank Holiday turns wet and people are at a loose end - The Mirror Forum, courtesy of the Wayback machine.  8)--))

http://web.archive.org/web/20071023045635/http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewforum.php?f=31

wow i know lots of names there
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 29, 2016, 04:49:41 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 29, 2016, 03:24:35 PM
Just in case the Bank Holiday turns wet and people are at a loose end - The Mirror Forum, courtesy of the Wayback machine.  8)--))

http://web.archive.org/web/20071023045635/http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewforum.php?f=31

Thanks Jassi.

I can understand why people were discussing the myths circulating as troo facts back then, but I have trouble with certain people who continue to perpetuate them even today.

Their motivations remain a mystery...

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Jean-Pierre on May 29, 2016, 07:08:08 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 29, 2016, 04:49:41 PM
Thanks Jassi.

I can understand why people were discussing the myths circulating as troo facts back then, but I have trouble with certain people who continue to perpetuate them even today.

Their motivations remain a mystery...

A bit of a trip down memory lane.  Not much has changed, really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on May 31, 2016, 11:54:54 PM
Quote from: Jean-Pierre on May 29, 2016, 07:08:08 PM
A bit of a trip down memory lane.  Not much has changed, really.

Alot has changed actually, alot of those posts on mirror forums were free for all in absence of info
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 04, 2016, 01:54:43 AM
from another thread
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 03, 2016, 03:38:16 PM
Well this gentleman did http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9470638/Tia-Sharp-Father-speaks-of-horror-at-being-yards-from-her-body-during-search.html. Came all the way from Nottingham I believe.
Re that south London case there is a video interview by a crime expert of one of the family and if you watch carefully here is a question - was that interview conducted in the lounge of the residence?
If so it demonstrates the incredible power of false assumption - completely overriding logical investigation - how else would it be possible to have a televised expert interview conducted at a distance of about 7 metres vertically from what would eventually be found to be the solution?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 04, 2016, 02:12:09 AM
Quote from: pegasus on June 04, 2016, 01:54:43 AM
from another threadRe that south London case there is a video interview by a crime expert of one of the family and if you watch carefully here is a question - was that interview conducted in the lounge of the residence?
If so it demonstrates the incredible power of false assumption - completely overriding logical investigation - how else would it be possible to have a televised expert interview conducted at a distance of about 7 metres vertically from what would eventually be found to be the solution?

The interviewee said "we was here....".
"They'd been under house arrest for 7 days" at time of interview.
I wonder where the FLO was?

ETA I also wonder why MWT had been drafted in at such an early stage?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 04, 2016, 02:45:15 AM
Quote from: misty on June 04, 2016, 02:12:09 AM
The interviewee said "we was here....".
"They'd been under house arrest for 7 days" at time of interview.
I wonder where the FLO was?
If that interview is in the lounge, as seems very likely, it's interesting to watch it in that context.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 04, 2016, 02:50:55 AM
Quote from: pegasus on June 04, 2016, 02:45:15 AM
If that interview is in the lounge, as seems very likely, it's interesting to watch it in that context.

I've just added above - I wonder why MWT was drafted in at such an early stage?
It's the posters - in a family lounge - which bothered me....it all looks so staged, which it was as it turned out.
Clearly the police did not think the missing child was still on the premises and the interviewee (like a few others I could mention) seemed to revel in the presence of the cameras.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 04, 2016, 02:59:20 AM
Quote from: misty on June 04, 2016, 02:50:55 AM
I've just added above - I wonder why MWT was drafted in at such an early stage?
It's the posters - in a family lounge - which bothered me....it all looks so staged, which it was as it turned out.
Clearly the police did not think the missing child was still on the premises and the interviewee (like a few others I could mention) seemed to revel in the presence of the cameras.
It demonstrates that an entire investigation can, within a minute of arriving at the scene, go off in every direction except the correct one - just by making one drastically false assumption.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 04, 2016, 03:15:22 AM
Quote from: pegasus on June 04, 2016, 02:59:20 AM
It demonstrates that an entire investigation can, within a minute of arriving at the scene, go off in every direction except the correct one - just by making one drastically false assumption.

I don't think it was an assumption. I think it was a huge error, which was repeated on more than one occasion by the investigating force. They knew his history - that should have set alarm bells ringing straight away.
I wonder why the cadaver dog didn't alert in the bedroom?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 04, 2016, 09:26:38 AM
Quote from: misty on June 04, 2016, 03:15:22 AM
I don't think it was an assumption. I think it was a huge error, which was repeated on more than one occasion by the investigating force. They knew his history - that should have set alarm bells ringing straight away.
I wonder why the cadaver dog didn't alert in the bedroom?

Would you believe that alert if it had?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 08, 2016, 11:21:44 PM
interesting story.......backs up what i have said


Ben Butler, 36, denies murdering his daughter Ellie by causing the "catastrophic" injuries.
She may have fallen and hit her head as she watched the popular children's cartoon, the Old Bailey heard.
The pathologist who carried out the post-mortem test said he had never seen someone die from similar injuries.
During his cross-examination of Prof Anthony Risdon, Mr Butler's defence counsel Icah Peart QC said Ellie had been a fan of the cartoon, and there were "Peppa Pig artefacts about her room".
'Considerable impact'
He asked the pathologist if he knew a rhyme from the show, where Peppa jumps and falls from a bed.
"What I am talking about is someone jumping up and down on the bed and, as Peppa Pig does, jumps over backwards, falls down and hits her head on the concrete floor," he said.
Mr Peart QC then asked Prof Risdon if such momentum may have resulted in Ellie's injuries.
He replied: "I have seen a large number of head injuries in children.
"I have never come across a scenario like that and I have never come across a short distance fall that results in a similar injury."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 10, 2016, 01:02:36 AM
Quote from: misty on June 04, 2016, 03:15:22 AM
I don't think it was an assumption. I think it was a huge error, which was repeated on more than one occasion by the investigating force. They knew his history - that should have set alarm bells ringing straight away.
I wonder why the cadaver dog didn't alert in the bedroom?
What an interesting and important question you have raised Misty.
This is a sign that the CSST study may be correct - it found that a PM interval of at least 85 minutes is required to produce a cadaver dog alert. IMO based on the CSST study we can deduce that in the London case, relocation to attic occurred at a PM interval of less than 85 minutes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 10, 2016, 01:58:46 AM
"The shortest post-mortem interval for which we received a correct response was one hour and 25 minutes ..."
http://www.csst.org/cadaver_scent.html

I think that answers your question Misty (why no alert in bedroom in London case).




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 10, 2016, 11:26:46 AM
Everyone has read the contradictions of 6:30 which is way over 85 minutes before she was reported missing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 10, 2016, 09:10:47 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 10, 2016, 11:26:46 AM
Everyone has read the contradictions of 6:30 which is way over 85 minutes before she was reported missing.

Even if there werent contradictiins 6.30 to 10 is 3.5 hours = 210mins of no independent sighting
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2016, 09:15:25 PM
Quote from: mercury on June 10, 2016, 09:10:47 PM
Even if there werent contradictiins 6.30 to 10 is 3.5 hours = 210mins of no independent sighting

Didn't JT see her around 9
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 10, 2016, 09:16:11 PM
Quote from: davel on June 10, 2016, 09:15:25 PM
Didn't JT see her around 9

Did she? I thought she saw a pair of feet
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 10, 2016, 09:21:59 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 10, 2016, 01:58:46 AM
"The shortest post-mortem interval for which we received a correct response was one hour and 25 minutes ..."
http://www.csst.org/cadaver_scent.html

I think that answers your question Misty (why no alert in bedroom in London case).

Exact time of death is unknown, Pegasus. I just wonder how long she was dead on the bed while he did what he did & took photos. I presume the cadaver dogs used in that case did not alert to dried blood.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 10, 2016, 09:51:30 PM
Quote from: mercury on June 10, 2016, 09:16:11 PM
Did she? I thought she saw a pair of feet

Or in the case of Sadies theory :
"What did you see? two feet ; but to you my girl one foot ten inches".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 10, 2016, 10:15:37 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 10, 2016, 09:51:30 PM
Or in the case of Sadies theory :
"What did you see? two feet ; but to you my girl one foot ten inches".
LOL
Jane tanners description in statements on 4 and 10  may went from two bare feet and bottom of pyjamas and magically by 10 may another jont statement appeared  where she also saw a pinky top (i dont believe this appears in her roggy nterview either) but at no time did she ever say she saw Madeleine so davel still needs to cme up with a cite if he believes she ever said any such thing...others have said it, but that doesnt count

Ergo

This leaves 210 mins at least from an independent witness statement of Maddie being seen that evening which allows for a death scent to develop
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 10, 2016, 11:27:33 PM
In the CSST experiment the pad contact duration was 20 minutes.
So maybe the shortest PM interval alerted was actually 85+20 = 125 minutes?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 10, 2016, 11:51:58 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 10, 2016, 11:27:33 PM
In the CSST experiment the pad contact duration was 20 minutes.
So maybe the shortest PM interval alerted was actually 85+20 = 125 minutes?

Yes, and?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 11, 2016, 12:02:08 AM
Quote from: pegasus on June 10, 2016, 11:27:33 PM
In the CSST experiment the pad contact duration was 20 minutes.
So maybe the shortest PM interval alerted was actually 85+20 = 125 minutes?

Maybe, I don't know. I just find the lack of firm alerts in locations where a body had definitely been present very disturbing when compared to the way Eddie's alerts were taken as positive indication of death by the PJ.
One wonders what extra charges K & G would have faced had they falsely confessed to discovering an apparent accidental death during that 90 minute dinner period. Quite clearly the PJ would have been made aware of minimum PM interval for alert. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 11, 2016, 12:46:42 AM
Quote from: mercury on June 10, 2016, 11:51:58 PM
Yes, and?
Last sighting + 125 mins makes about 23:10 earliest
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 11, 2016, 12:55:21 AM
Quote from: pegasus on June 11, 2016, 12:46:42 AM
Last sighting + 125 mins makes about 23:10 earliest

The prime suspcts evidence cant count for obvious reasns
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 11, 2016, 01:40:37 AM
Quote from: misty on June 10, 2016, 09:21:59 PM
Exact time of death is unknown, Pegasus. I just wonder how long she was dead on the bed while he did what he did & took photos. I presume the cadaver dogs used in that case did not alert to dried blood.

Two people said she was in bed. One said she was on top of the covers, the other under. Damn this is a hard one. Tell a lie I don't believe either!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2016, 01:47:25 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 11, 2016, 01:40:37 AM
Two people said she was in bed. One said she was on top of the covers, the other under. Damn this is a hard one.

Just to be clear, pathfinder, Misty's post is not in reference to Madeleine McCann.  It refers to the failure of cadaver dogs to alert to the bed of a heinously murdered child where it is known without a shadow of doubt her remains lay.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 11, 2016, 01:49:42 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 11, 2016, 01:40:37 AM
Two people said she was in bed. One said she was on top of the covers, the other under. Damn this is a hard one.

As Brietta has just explained, Pegasus & I were talking about the TS case.

I've already explained the other issue to you.
MM was under the covers when KM put her to bed.
At the time of the GM check, she was on top of the covers because he had inadvertently interrupted the abduction.
MM was quickly placed back on the bed so the abductor could hide. (Door move 1)
She was removed from the apartment after GM left, via the front door after the shutters had been raised. (Door move 2)
When MO checked at 9.35pm the blue bedroom curtains appeared green - amber light shining through blue.
It's really quite easy, even if it is just a thesis.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 11, 2016, 02:07:05 AM
Because they said so. Kate couldn't remember nowt about who checked on her before they left. I think it was Gerry. Yeah thinks not know. They have shown the truth.

"Doesn't know if the story was finished, but thinks she was sitting on the sofa."

"She thinks that Gerry entered the room, but does not recall him sitting on the bed."

"She thinks that Gerry was in the room, and each (Kate and Gerry) placed a twin in its crib at the same time, between Madeleine's bed and the bed next to the window."

"She was under the covers, she thinks because she was a bit cold.."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm

WTF!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2016, 07:18:24 AM
Quote from: misty on June 11, 2016, 01:49:42 AM
As Brietta has just explained, Pegasus & I were talking about the TS case.

I've already explained the other issue to you.
MM was under the covers when KM put her to bed.
At the time of the GM check, she was on top of the covers because he had inadvertently interrupted the abduction.
MM was quickly placed back on the bed so the abductor could hide. (Door move 1)
She was removed from the apartment after GM left, via the front door after the shutters had been raised. (Door move 2)
When MO checked at 9.35pm the blue bedroom curtains appeared green - amber light shining through blue.
It's really quite easy, even if it is just a thesis.

How did the 'abductor' pick MM up from under the covers? They looked very tidy she must have been lifted in such a way that she emerged from the top. Why was she still in a deep sleep?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on June 11, 2016, 08:26:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2016, 07:18:24 AM
How did the 'abductor' pick MM up from under the covers? They looked very tidy she must have been lifted in such a way that she emerged from the top. Why was she still in a deep sleep?
Do you think the way he covers were left indicate it's unlikely she woke and wandered?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 11, 2016, 08:44:09 AM
Quote from: Alfie on June 11, 2016, 08:26:01 AM
Do you think the way he covers were left indicate it's unlikely she woke and wandered?

The bed did not look slept in.

Barely disturbed.

IMO of course.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 11, 2016, 05:26:58 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 11, 2016, 08:44:09 AM
The bed did not look slept in.

Barely disturbed.

IMO of course.

The Police Officer said there was a dent in the bed as if a form had been lying there,  quite easy to just put your arms under a small child and lift it out without leaving much disturbance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 11, 2016, 05:34:35 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 11, 2016, 08:44:09 AM
The bed did not look slept in.

Barely disturbed.

IMO of course.

were you there then...did you get a good look
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 11, 2016, 05:46:30 PM
Quote from: Lace on June 11, 2016, 05:26:58 PM
The Police Officer said there was a dent in the bed as if a form had been lying there,  quite easy to just put your arms under a small child and lift it out without leaving much disturbance.

Like I said, the bed looked barely disturbed.

Almost as if, the cover sheet had been turned over for effect
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 11, 2016, 05:48:28 PM
Quote from: misty on June 11, 2016, 01:49:42 AM
As Brietta has just explained, Pegasus & I were talking about the TS case.

I've already explained the other issue to you.
MM was under the covers when KM put her to bed.
At the time of the GM check, she was on top of the covers because he had inadvertently interrupted the abduction.
MM was quickly placed back on the bed so the abductor could hide. (Door move 1)
She was removed from the apartment after GM left, via the front door after the shutters had been raised. (Door move 2)
When MO checked at 9.35pm the blue bedroom curtains appeared green - amber light shining through blue.
It's really quite easy, even if it is just a thesis.
Or it could be as simple as Madeleine became too hot under the covers and flapped them over, sleeping on top of them.   

Madeleine was virtually 4 years old and quite capable of doing that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 11, 2016, 05:53:08 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2016, 05:48:28 PM
Or it could be as simple as Madeleine became too hot under the covers and flapped them over, sleeping on top of them.   

Madeleine was virtually 4 years old and quite capable of doing that.

...and opening the patio doors and child gate...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 11, 2016, 06:01:33 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 11, 2016, 05:53:08 PM
...and opening the patio doors and child gate...

Maybe the patio door, maybe not.

Depending on how child safe the lock on the child gate she may or may not be able to open it.


BUT had she managed the patio doors, the minute she came out on to that patio area, she would have seen and heard her parents and their friends in the Tapas Restaurant just 50 metres away.

She would have been visible to them and she would have yelled

... and Madeleine was quite capable of making a mighty noise for such a little one.   They would have heard her and seen the change of light, from the lamp left lit, as the curtains were pulled back.  They would have seen her as well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 11, 2016, 06:22:27 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2016, 06:01:33 PM
Maybe the patio door, maybe not.

Depending on how child safe the lock on the child gate she may or may not be able to open it.


BUT had she managed the patio doors, the minute she came out on to that patio area, she would have seen and heard her parents and their friends in the Tapas Restaurant just 50 metres away.

She would have been visible to them and she would have yelled

... and Madeleine was quite capable of making a mighty noise for such a little one.   They would have heard her and seen the change of light, from the lamp left lit, as the curtains were pulled back.  They would have seen her as well.

Pure supposition Sadie.

So Madeleine could see clearly in the dark then ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 11, 2016, 06:44:53 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 11, 2016, 06:22:27 PM
Pure supposition Sadie.

So Madeleine could see clearly in the dark then ?

Had you failed to notice that the Tapas restaurant had huge windows and was well lit?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 11, 2016, 06:46:29 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2016, 06:44:53 PM
Had you failed to notice that the Tapas restaurant had huge windows and was well lit?

It was night time sadie, and she was a small girl.

Get real.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 11, 2016, 06:49:11 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 11, 2016, 06:46:29 PM
It was night time sadie, and she was a small girl.

Get real.
Even small girls can see and hear Stephen.

The Mccanns and friends group were well lit and she could directly see the place where they sat at only 50 metres away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 11, 2016, 06:51:44 PM
Madeleine never made it onto the patio so her night vision is irrelevant. She would not have closed the patio door behind her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 11, 2016, 06:52:20 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2016, 06:49:11 PM
Even small girls can see and hear Stephen.

The Mccanns and friends group were well lit and she could directly see the place where they sat at only 50 metres away.

How well could she see Sadie, approx 164 feet away in  the dark ?

You need to do a lot better than that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 11, 2016, 07:03:53 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 11, 2016, 06:52:20 PM
How well could she see Sadie, approx 164 feet away in  the dark ?

You need to do a lot better than that.

FGS Stephen, have you never sat in a lit room and looked across a dark area at another lit room?  You can see everything.  Try another tack.

Yep 50 metres is approx. 164 feet and also less than 55 yards. 
Pace it out.  It is not far to recognise your friends and her parents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 11, 2016, 07:06:34 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2016, 07:03:53 PM
FGS Stephen, have you never sat in a lit room and looked across a dark area at another lit room?  You can see everything.  Try another tack.

Yep 50 metres is approx. 164 feet and also less than 55 yards. 
Pace it out.  It is not far to recognise your friends and her parents.

FGS Sadie, get a grip.


She was a small child.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 11, 2016, 08:20:17 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2016, 06:01:33 PM
Maybe the patio door, maybe not.

Depending on how child safe the lock on the child gate she may or may not be able to open it.


BUT had she managed the patio doors, the minute she came out on to that patio area, she would have seen and heard her parents and their friends in the Tapas Restaurant just 50 metres away.

She would have been visible to them and she would have yelled

... and Madeleine was quite capable of making a mighty noise for such a little one.   They would have heard her and seen the change of light, from the lamp left lit, as the curtains were pulled back.  They would have seen her as well.

Rather than yell, she would more likely of headed off to see them and once out of sight of the tapas, who knows where she would go.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 11, 2016, 09:29:02 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2016, 07:03:53 PM
FGS Stephen, have you never sat in a lit room and looked across a dark area at another lit room?  You can see everything.  Try another tack. ...(snip)
0% of the restaurant is visible from the north bedroom.
0% of the north bedroom is visible from the restaurant.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 11, 2016, 09:30:33 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2016, 07:03:53 PM
(snip) ...Yep 50 metres is approx. 164 feet and also less than 55 yards. 
Pace it out.  It is not far to recognise your friends and her parents.
Pace it out and you will find the walking distance is 85 metres Sadie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 11, 2016, 09:37:05 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2016, 06:01:33 PM
Maybe the patio door, maybe not.

Depending on how child safe the lock on the child gate she may or may not be able to open it.


BUT had she managed the patio doors, the minute she came out on to that patio area, she would have seen and heard her parents and their friends in the Tapas Restaurant just 50 metres away.

She would have been visible to them and she would have yelled

... and Madeleine was quite capable of making a mighty noise for such a little one.   They would have heard her and seen the change of light, from the lamp left lit, as the curtains were pulled back.  They would have seen her as well.

This cant be stated as a fact or even a probable event unless you thnk the tapas party had their eyes glued on the apartment all night, why on earth would they do that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 11, 2016, 09:38:07 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 11, 2016, 08:20:17 PM
Rather than yell, she would more likely of headed off to see them and once out of sight of the tapas, who knows where she would go.
If she headed towards the tapas restaurant would she know how to open the tapas reception outer door?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 11, 2016, 09:39:08 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 11, 2016, 09:38:07 PM
If she headed towards the tapas restaurant would she know how to open the tapas reception outer door?

Would she even find them...?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 11, 2016, 09:43:33 PM
Quote from: mercury on June 11, 2016, 09:37:05 PM
This cant be stated as a fact or even a probable event unless you thnk the tapas party had their eyes glued on the apartment all night, why on earth would they do that?
Precisely Merc. How many people at the table saw GM enter or leave, or saw MO enter or leave, or saw KM enter or leave the balcony door? Zero. None. The diners at the table completely missed all 6 balcony door openings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 11, 2016, 09:47:30 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 11, 2016, 09:43:33 PM
Precisely Merc. How many people at the table saw GM enter or leave, or saw MO enter or leave, or saw KM enter or leave the balcony door? Zero. None. The diners at the table completely missed all 6 balcony door openings.

Its silly to suggest one or  all nine diners were eating and drnking with eyes transfixed at the apartments all night, its almost a monty python sketch
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 11, 2016, 09:57:02 PM
Quote from: mercury on June 11, 2016, 09:47:30 PM
Its silly to suggest one or  all nine diners were eating and drnking with eyes transfixed at the apartments all night, its almost a monty python sketch
Anyway they could only see the top third of the balcony door. And they couldn't see any of the west end (the opening end) of the balcony door - look at photos - a bit of the building sticks out which blocks their view.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 11, 2016, 10:03:08 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 11, 2016, 09:39:08 PM
Would she even find them...?
Yes but only if she got through the doors of the reception building.
The reception doors were probably not left open at night, and it's possible a child would push on them, find they did not move, and assume they are locked. (To open them you need to know how they work).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 11, 2016, 10:07:12 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 11, 2016, 09:57:02 PM
Anyway they could only see the top third of the balcony door. And they couldn't see any of the west end (the opening end) of the balcony door - look at photos - a bit of the building sticks out which blocks their view.

And not forgetting the cacophony of a busy restaraunt and the particular loud party, (aka Bridget Wilkins saying their laughter wafted right up to her apartment)any theory that they would have seen or heard Madeleine on the balcony is a non starter IMO as is her spotting her parents and shouting to them. I agree with the idea if she walked out she would have gone to them instead. VIs a vis the outer reception door and ablity to open it, doesnt really matter, someone will have probably entered or exited at some stage, or someone pass by and see her struggling to do so, maybe...maybe these queries should be addressed to KM who seems to think her child was able to go out and go find them despite also saying She is sure she wouldnt have gone out the apartment
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 12, 2016, 06:30:40 AM
Quote from: pegasus on June 11, 2016, 10:03:08 PM
Yes but only if she got through the doors of the reception building.
The reception doors were probably not left open at night, and it's possible a child would push on them, find they did not move, and assume they are locked. (To open them you need to know how they work).

...or even find the door. She only went for one evening meal with them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 12, 2016, 08:20:13 AM
Quote from: mercury on June 11, 2016, 10:07:12 PM
And not forgetting the cacophony of a busy restaraunt and the particular loud party, (aka Bridget Wilkins saying their laughter wafted right up to her apartment)any theory that they would have seen or heard Madeleine on the balcony is a non starter IMO as is her spotting her parents and shouting to them. I agree with the idea if she walked out she would have gone to them instead. VIs a vis the outer reception door and ablity to open it, doesnt really matter, someone will have probably entered or exited at some stage, or someone pass by and see her struggling to do so, maybe...maybe these queries should be addressed to KM who seems to think her child was able to go out and go find them despite also saying She is sure she wouldnt have gone out the apartment

In my opinion,   if Kate had told Madeleine the patio doors were open in case of emergency eg fire,  illness etc.  then if Kate knew her child as mothers do,  then Madeleine wouldn't have just wandered off for no reason, especially leaving her shoes behind,  climbing over a child gate at the top of the steps in the dark without shoes would have been difficult if not impossible for a child of that age.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 12, 2016, 08:40:56 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 12, 2016, 08:20:13 AM
In my opinion,   if Kate had told Madeleine the patio doors were open in case of emergency eg fire,  illness etc.  then if Kate knew her child as mothers do,  then Madeleine wouldn't have just wandered off for no reason, especially leaving her shoes behind,  climbing over a child gate at the top of the steps in the dark without shoes would have been difficult if not impossible for a child of that age.

???
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on June 12, 2016, 09:21:23 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 12, 2016, 08:20:13 AM
In my opinion,   if Kate had told Madeleine the patio doors were open in case of emergency eg fire,  illness etc.  then if Kate knew her child as mothers do,  then Madeleine wouldn't have just wandered off for no reason, especially leaving her shoes behind,  climbing over a child gate at the top of the steps in the dark without shoes would have been difficult if not impossible for a child of that age.

Kate knew her child as mothers do

does that also go then ......for if maddie woke in a dark apartment ....and found herself alone ....no mum no dad there...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 12, 2016, 09:23:23 AM
Quote from: xtina on June 12, 2016, 09:21:23 AM
Kate knew her child as mothers do

does that also go then ......for if maddie woke in a dark apartment ....and found herself alone ....no mum no dad there...

It wasn't dark,  they left the door ajar so that light would shine in.

Don't know what you are getting at,  are you saying that I agree with it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on June 12, 2016, 09:42:28 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 12, 2016, 09:23:23 AM
It wasn't dark,  they left the door ajar so that light would shine in.

Don't know what you are getting at,  are you saying that I agree with it?

i don't really know what your getting at either ...

you said

if Kate had told Madeleine the patio doors were open in case of emergency eg fire,  illness etc.

are you saying............that k mcc........told.a 3 year old. maddie the door would be unlocked...in case there was a fire etc
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on June 12, 2016, 09:45:17 AM
Quote from: xtina on June 12, 2016, 09:42:28 AM
i don't really know what your getting at either ...

you said

if Kate had told Madeleine the patio doors were open in case of emergency eg fire,  illness etc.

are you saying............that k mcc........told.a 3 year old. maddie the door would be unlocked...in case there was a fire etc

a  3  year old  or  4  year old has  no concept of  fire  danger  xtina     maddie wouldnt of   been able to understand that  danger  imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on June 12, 2016, 09:48:27 AM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 12, 2016, 09:45:17 AM
a  3  year old  or  4  year old has  no concept of  fire  danger  xtina     maddie wouldnt of   been able to understand that  danger  imo


exactly ....and probably terrified at the thought......of just being alone...let alone fire
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 12, 2016, 03:45:07 PM

If Madeleine wandered off ... where did she wander to ... and what happened to her?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 12, 2016, 09:36:55 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 12, 2016, 03:45:07 PM
If Madeleine wandered off ... where did she wander to ... and what happened to her?

Who knows...but we are getting somewhere.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on June 12, 2016, 09:51:35 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 12, 2016, 09:36:55 PM
Who knows...but we are getting somewhere.
Where do you think you are getting?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 12, 2016, 10:22:14 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 12, 2016, 03:45:07 PM
If Madeleine wandered off ... where did she wander to ... and what happened to her?
After wandering, a scenario in which small person could instantly and completely disappear is described in last 4 paras of RMorgan statement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 13, 2016, 01:10:25 AM
Quote from: pegasus on June 11, 2016, 09:30:33 PM
Pace it out and you will find the walking distance is 85 metres Sadie.


As far as visual and audial recognition is concerned, "crow flies" is the distance that matters

I have always  quoted "crow flies" distances, as most on here will know.  There have been occasions when I have measured the path distances and I have never tried to deceive on that distance either.

I found it a few metres under 85 metres walking distance, Pegasus, but I am not going to quibble over a small handful of metres.  I measured to the patio door from the groups seating area in the Tapas restaurant.



This distance could have been covered in a matter of seconds in emergency.  Both Kate and Gerry and several of their friends were extremely fit.

 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 13, 2016, 01:14:05 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 13, 2016, 01:10:25 AM

As far as visual and audial recognition is concerned, "crow flies" is the distance that matters



Only it couldnt have here
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 13, 2016, 02:29:44 AM
Quote from: mercury on June 13, 2016, 01:14:05 AM
Only it couldnt have here

Oh, don't you understand that crow flies is what matters when audio and visual distances is what is being talked about ?  &%&£(+
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 13, 2016, 02:32:21 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 13, 2016, 02:29:44 AM
Oh, don't you understand that crow flies is what matters when audio and visual distances is what is being talked about ?  &%&£(+

The audio and visual distances dont matter a single jot unless the parents eyes were glued all night to  their flat, get real sadie
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 13, 2016, 02:42:32 AM
Quote from: mercury on June 13, 2016, 02:32:21 AM
The audio and visual distances dont matter a single jot unless the parents eyes were glued all night to  their flat, get real sadie
Light changes would be noticeable to the group and thye light would change as any one coming out of the patio door pulled back the curtain.


But more importantly, Madeleine had direct vision of her parents and their friends from the balcony.  She would also hear the somewhat raucous voice of her father and her mothers voice ... and she would yell them.  At 50 metres, they would hear.   

Our back garden was 50 metres long and we could easily hear our children if they called, even when we had our backs to them and were laughing and joking over the fence.

Parents are tuned into the sounds of their childrens voices.  Perhaps you didn't know that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 13, 2016, 02:49:03 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 13, 2016, 02:42:32 AM
Light changes would be noticeable to the group and thye light would change as any one coming out of the patio door pulled back the curtain.


But more importantly, Madeleine had direct vision of her parents and their friends from the balcony.  She would also hear the somewhat raucous voice of her father and her mothers voice ... and she would yell them.  At 50 metres, they would hear.   

Our back garden was 50 metres long and we could easily hear our children if they called, even when we had our backs to them and were laughing and joking over the fence.

Parents are tuned into the sounds of their childrens voices.  Perhaps you didn't know that?

The tapas group wereNOT glued on their apartments all night ffs why would they be ??? Youre in incorrigible

If maddie walked out they would have NO CLUE
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 13, 2016, 03:00:53 AM
Quote from: mercury on June 13, 2016, 02:49:03 AM
The tapas group wereNOT glued on their apartments all night ffs why would they be ??? Youre in incorrigible

If maddie walked out they would have NO CLUE

Even in the unlikely event that they didn't see her, they would hear her.

A mum (or dad) is tuned into the cry of her child.  And Madeleine has a mighty voice


And the first thing she would see (if she managed the patio door) and hear would be them. 


She would holler
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 13, 2016, 03:05:06 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 13, 2016, 03:00:53 AM
Even in the unlikely event that they didn't see her, they would hear her.

A mum (or dad) is tuned into the cry of her child.  And Madeleine has a mighty voice


And the first thing she would see (if she managed the patio door) and hear would be them. 


She would holler

Totally wrong here sadie totally its all YOUR speculation and NOTHING more
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 13, 2016, 08:20:29 AM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 12, 2016, 09:45:17 AM
a  3  year old  or  4  year old has  no concept of  fire  danger  xtina     maddie wouldnt of   been able to understand that  danger  imo

If there was a fire someone would be able to get into the apartment if the patio doors were open.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 13, 2016, 08:33:48 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 13, 2016, 03:00:53 AM
Even in the unlikely event that they didn't see her, they would hear her.

A mum (or dad) is tuned into the cry of her child.  And Madeleine has a mighty voice


And the first thing she would see (if she managed the patio door) and hear would be them. 


She would holler

Unlike Kate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2016, 08:59:49 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 13, 2016, 03:00:53 AM
Even in the unlikely event that they didn't see her, they would hear her.

A mum (or dad) is tuned into the cry of her child.  And Madeleine has a mighty voice


And the first thing she would see (if she managed the patio door) and hear would be them. 


She would holler

You cannot substantiate what you say, but keep repeating it. Madeleine was 90cm tall according to her parents. According to Rachael only the top half of the patio doors could be seen from the restaurant. You will need to show what someone of that height would see from that balcony to show that your opinion of what Madeleine could see is correct. 

Rachael also says she glanced in the direction of the apartments occasionally. Madeleine's parents didn't because they were seated pretty much with their backs to the apartments on 3rd May.

Was music playing in the Tapas? I believe there was the equipment available. Music plus conversation makes hearing difficult, and, contrary to your assertion, not all parents hear their child's every sound. A waiter heard Kate, but he was speaking to one person at the time with no distracting cutlery or conversation.

Finally, you accept completely that Madeleine was loud. Perhaps within her family, but the creche workers described her differently. Not only that, she had been subjected to a regime designed to stop her leaving her bed at night. Even if she could see and hear her parents experience would have told her to think twice before shouting out to them; no reward could be expected.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2016, 09:07:04 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 13, 2016, 08:33:48 AM
Unlike Kate.

Struck dumb.

LOL @ the thought of Kate mutedly navigating her way from the apartment, through the gates, down the street & through the reception then silently approching the groups table before finally being able to express that 'they' had taken her.

 @)(++(*

What a crock.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 13, 2016, 09:14:12 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 13, 2016, 03:00:53 AM
Even in the unlikely event that they didn't see her, they would hear her.

A mum (or dad) is tuned into the cry of her child.  And Madeleine has a mighty voice


And the first thing she would see (if she managed the patio door) and hear would be them. 


She would holler

What a load of rubbish.

She was a small child and by accounts, quiet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 13, 2016, 09:32:47 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2016, 08:59:49 AM
You cannot substantiate what you say, but keep repeating it. Madeleine was 90cm tall according to her parents. According to Rachael only the top half of the patio doors could be seen from the restaurant. You will need to show what someone of that height would see from that balcony to show that your opinion of what Madeleine could see is correct. 

Rachael also says she glanced in the direction of the apartments occasionally. Madeleine's parents didn't because they were seated pretty much with their backs to the apartments on 3rd May.

Was music playing in the Tapas? I believe there was the equipment available. Music plus conversation makes hearing difficult, and, contrary to your assertion, not all parents hear their child's every sound. A waiter heard Kate, but he was speaking to one person at the time with no distracting cutlery or conversation.

Finally, you accept completely that Madeleine was loud. Perhaps within her family, but the creche workers described her differently. Not only that, she had been subjected to a regime designed to stop her leaving her bed at night. Even if she could see and hear her parents experience would have told her to think twice before shouting out to them; no reward could be expected.

IIRC Rachael was talking about her apartment, not the McCann apartment

I have eaten in that Tapas restaurant.  I was a couple of metres away from where the McCann group sat.  As was the case on May 3rd 2007, the greenery had just been cut back and I could see almost all of the patio area  to 5A.   IIRC I could see all the railings where Madeleine might have stood hollering; that is if she managed to open the sliding door.


She didn't open that door tho cos if she had, she wouldn't have bothered to close it again.  Kids don't .... and it would have been a struggle for such a tiny tot to open it in the first place.  Pushing from low down, as Madeleine would have had she tried, would have required far greater effort than pushing from normal level .... pushing from low down they would tend to yaw and stick.   

That is unless the patio doors were Rolls Royce quality.   
Most of the apartment looked very 3*, so I doubt that the patio doors were high quality.   


When I was there, there was no loud music.  In fact I cant remember any music at all. 

 

Madeleine was very capable of being really quite loud and if trying to attract her mum and dad, would use her lungs to full capacity, as any child would.   Your comment about her being subject to an over-riding regime is nonsense ... as was proved by the fact that she had regularly wandered to her mum  and dads bedroom.  The first place that Kate looked for her was in their bedroom IIRC.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 13, 2016, 09:44:52 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 13, 2016, 09:14:12 AM
What a load of rubbish.

She was a small child and by accounts, quiet.

Edith Piaf was tiny, but could she ever belt it out



Madeleine was only quiet when she was with strangers.   She had a mighty voice as has been shown in numerous family videos.



Both addresses were in your post, Sadie ... I've removed the one with the S     B:)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 13, 2016, 09:48:38 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 13, 2016, 09:44:52 AM
Edith Piaf was tiny, but could she ever belt it out



[youtube]https://youtu.be/7I7u_XLtFa0[/youtube]

Admin / John:  Why do youtube videos no longer open up for me?

Madeleine was only quiet when she was with strangers.   She had a mighty voice as has been shown in numerous family videos.

Well, I've heard it all know.

Comparing Edith Piaf to Madeleine. 8(*(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2016, 11:38:47 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 13, 2016, 09:32:47 AM
IIRC Rachael was talking about her apartment, not the McCann apartment

I have eaten in that Tapas restaurant.  I was a couple of metres away from where the McCann group sat.  As was the case on May 3rd 2007, the greenery had just been cut back and I could see almost all of the patio area  to 5A.   IIRC I could see all the railings where Madeleine might have stood hollering; that is if she managed to open the sliding door.


She didn't open that door tho cos if she had, she wouldn't have bothered to close it again.  Kids don't .... and it would have been a struggle for such a tiny tot to open it in the first place.  Pushing from low down, as Madeleine would have had she tried, would have required far greater effort than pushing from normal level .... pushing from low down they would tend to yaw and stick.   

That is unless the patio doors were Rolls Royce quality.   
Most of the apartment looked very 3*, so I doubt that the patio doors were high quality.   


When I was there, there was no loud music.  In fact I cant remember any music at all. 

 

Madeleine was very capable of being really quite loud and if trying to attract her mum and dad, would use her lungs to full capacity, as any child would.   Your comment about her being subject to an over-riding regime is nonsense ... as was proved by the fact that she had regularly wandered to her mum  and dads bedroom.  The first place that Kate looked for her was in their bedroom IIRC.

Once again opinion replaces facts. Rachael was quite clear what could be seen;

 Reply 'Erm well yeah I could see, I mean I could see the patio doors of ours and Gerry and Kates'.
1578 'How much of the patio doors''
 Reply 'Erm well kind of the top half really'.
1578 'Okay'.
 Reply "Yeah you know, I didn't get a full you know, you couldn't get a full view sort of right in, cos there were bushes, there were bushes and stuff there, erm'.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

The greenery may have been trimmed when you visited, but you clearly had a better view than Rachael did so a cite or photo showing the height of the greenery on 3rd May is needed to support your opinion.

The rest of your post is opinion and hearsay. You say she was loud, others say she wasn't. You say she visited her parent's bedroom, others said she had begun to do it less frequently. Just because you heard no music doesn't mean there was none.

Because Madeleine did occasionally have bad nights, Kate arranged a bonus system. She would get up in the middle of the night, would go to her parent's room to ensure they were there and would return to her own bed. This situation had gotten better before they went to Portugal.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANNET-KENNEDY.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 13, 2016, 05:09:34 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 13, 2016, 09:44:52 AM
Edith Piaf was tiny, but could she ever belt it out



Madeleine was only quiet when she was with strangers.   She had a mighty voice as has been shown in numerous family videos.



Both addresses were in your post, Sadie ... I've removed the one with the S     B:)

Please provide link to the videos.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2016, 10:12:11 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 13, 2016, 05:09:34 PM
Please provide link to the videos.

You will note from my edit that Sadie did indeed provide a link to the video she posted which I removed because the video was not playing. 

To avoid any ambiguity this is the link Sadie posted https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7I7u_XLtFa0

Sadie's original post can be found at http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg338921#msg338921


For information ... can you tell me why a link is required for a downloaded YouTube video when pressing the 'play' button does exactly that?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2016, 10:27:37 PM
Police probe after astonishing video emerges of couple having sex in park while a CHILD sits next to them

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3638914/Police-probe-astonishing-video-emerges-couple-having-sex-park-CHILD-sits-them.html#ixzz4BUslgCfC
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

for those who believe portuguese are far superior in their childcare than us brits
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 13, 2016, 11:26:18 PM
Quote from: davel on June 13, 2016, 10:27:37 PM
Police probe after astonishing video emerges of couple having sex in park while a CHILD sits next to them

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3638914/Police-probe-astonishing-video-emerges-couple-having-sex-park-CHILD-sits-them.html#ixzz4BUslgCfC
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

for those who believe portuguese are far superior in their childcare than us brits
Slight over-generalisation maybe Davel?
Judging an entire country by one couple.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 14, 2016, 12:04:30 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2016, 10:12:11 PM
You will note from my edit that Sadie did indeed provide a link to the video she posted which I removed because the video was not playing. 

To avoid any ambiguity this is the link Sadie posted https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7I7u_XLtFa0

Sadie's original post can be found at http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg338921#msg338921


For information ... can you tell me why a link is required for a downloaded YouTube video when pressing the 'play' button does exactly that?

On closer reading I think you  will find the links requested were for the other videos Sadie mentioned
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 14, 2016, 12:21:54 AM
Quote from: mercury on June 14, 2016, 12:04:30 AM
On closer reading I think you  will find the links requested were for the other videos Sadie mentioned

You are wrong about that, Mercury.

If you check the post to which I was responding ...
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg339030#msg339030 ... you will see it is entirely about Sadie's post which I edited and no other ~ twice edited actually ~ once to remove the link to see if doing so enabled the video to play ~ and on the second occasion, once I had ascertained that did the trick, to remove Sadie's request for assistance.

But thanks for your input anyway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 14, 2016, 12:22:32 AM
Quote from: davel on June 13, 2016, 10:27:37 PM
Police probe after astonishing video emerges of couple having sex in park while a CHILD sits next to them

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3638914/Police-probe-astonishing-video-emerges-couple-having-sex-park-CHILD-sits-them.html#ixzz4BUslgCfC
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

for those who believe portuguese are far superior in their childcare than us brits

Thats a bit like saying a britsh couple were found gulty of murdering their child therefore all brits are child killers, pathetic
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 14, 2016, 12:28:37 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 14, 2016, 12:21:54 AM
You are wrong about that, Mercury.

If you check the post to which I was responding ...
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg339030#msg339030 ... you will see it is entirely about Sadie's post which I edited and no other ~ twice edited actually ~ once to remove the link to see if doing so enabled the video to play ~ and on the second occasion, once I had ascertained that did the trick, to remove Sadie's request for assistance.

But thanks for your input anyway.

Why would slartibartfast ask for a lnk at 5pm when you altered the post at 11 am to show the videos? I will let him answer this and tell me if I am wrong, no big deal, was "trying to help"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2016, 07:33:23 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 13, 2016, 08:20:29 AM
If there was a fire someone would be able to get into the apartment if the patio doors were open.

Why would they want to get in unless they knew three children were home alone?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 14, 2016, 08:02:49 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2016, 10:12:11 PM
You will note from my edit that Sadie did indeed provide a link to the video she posted which I removed because the video was not playing. 

To avoid any ambiguity this is the link Sadie posted https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7I7u_XLtFa0

Sadie's original post can be found at http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg338921#msg338921


For information ... can you tell me why a link is required for a downloaded YouTube video when pressing the 'play' button does exactly that?

The family videos?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 14, 2016, 12:49:32 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 14, 2016, 08:02:49 AM
The family videos?

What family videos?  Your reply, to which I responded, was attached to the Piaf You Tube video.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 14, 2016, 05:05:45 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 14, 2016, 12:49:32 PM
What family videos?  Your reply, to which I responded, was attached to the Piaf You Tube video.

Maybe you should read the post.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 14, 2016, 07:01:20 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 14, 2016, 05:05:45 PM
Maybe you should read the post.

Since I appear to be missing something ... perhaps you would be kind enough to answer my question (politely ... but that is entirely up to you) and explain exactly what it is in words of one syllable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 14, 2016, 09:53:18 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 13, 2016, 09:44:52 AM


Madeleine was only quiet when she was with strangers.   She had a mighty voice as has been shown in numerous family videos.



Please provide links to the family videos...

That easier?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 14, 2016, 11:00:11 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 14, 2016, 09:53:18 PM
Please provide links to the family videos...

That easier?


Much easier and you have made your meaning much clearer, thank you ...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 15, 2016, 01:57:53 AM
So i wasnt wrong brie

Thanks
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 15, 2016, 08:13:00 PM
OG were told about CF 2 years ago.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/15/police-were-told-two-years-ago-about-clement-freuds-madeleine-mc/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 15, 2016, 08:31:14 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 15, 2016, 08:13:00 PM
OG were told about CF 2 years ago.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/15/police-were-told-two-years-ago-about-clement-freuds-madeleine-mc/

So, if this is true, they should have already thoroughly investigated him and any relevant associates
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 15, 2016, 08:50:22 PM
"...  was in the UK at the time ..."
No point in poring through dozens of pages of car rentals then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 15, 2016, 09:24:01 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 15, 2016, 08:31:14 PM
So, if this is true, they should have already thoroughly investigated him and any relevant associates
The son of victim VH wrote to the Met 2 years ago about CF but received no reply.
IMO this means the Met never investigated it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/15/police-were-told-two-years-ago-about-clement-freuds-madeleine-mc/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 15, 2016, 09:31:08 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 15, 2016, 09:24:01 PM
The son of victim VH wrote to the Met 2 years ago about CF but received no reply.
IMO this means the Met never investigated it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/15/police-were-told-two-years-ago-about-clement-freuds-madeleine-mc/

Tut tut, how could this be, I thought they had investigated all paedophile activity around PDL and had drawn a blank.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 15, 2016, 09:39:08 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 15, 2016, 09:31:08 PM
Tut tut, how could this be, I thought they had investigated all paedophile activity around PDL and had drawn a blank.
If the Met did investigate it I think they would have replied to the letter, but the Telegraph says there was "no reply".
BTW there are now more possible victims surfacing ... Murray was "contacted by seven people this morning".
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/clement-freud-paedophile-mp-could-have-sexually-abused-dozens-more-victims-a7083346.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 15, 2016, 09:46:55 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 15, 2016, 09:31:08 PM
Tut tut, how could this be, I thought they had investigated all paedophile activity around PDL and had drawn a blank.

Well I'm sure the McCann supporters believe Operation Grange are beyond approach.


Now there's a point. We asked to believe everything Operation Grange believe is right and everything the original PJ investigation believed is wrong. &%+((£

Now is that a matter of faith ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 15, 2016, 10:12:07 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 15, 2016, 09:46:55 PM
Well I'm sure the McCann supporters believe Operation Grange are beyond approach.


Now there's a point. We asked to believe everything Operation Grange believe is right and everything the original PJ investigation believed is wrong. &%+((£

Now is that a matter of faith ?

I think there is a word for it but it is not faith I have in mind  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: colombosstogey on June 16, 2016, 05:07:11 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 15, 2016, 08:31:14 PM
So, if this is true, they should have already thoroughly investigated him and any relevant associates

Just another patsy, he is dead isnt he.   They keep dragging these people up who cant answer.  Besides which he wasnt even in portugal at the time of her disappearance, and again where has innocent until proven guilty gone?  That women 60 years ago...... jeez.  I can say what i like about someone it seems, even without any proof whatsover, just one word against the other, although CF cant answer his accusers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 07:34:40 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 15, 2016, 09:46:55 PM
Well I'm sure the McCann supporters believe Operation Grange are beyond approach.


Now there's a point. We asked to believe everything Operation Grange believe is right and everything the original PJ investigation believed is wrong. &%+((£

Now is that a matter of faith ?

Total hypocrisy
You have claimed you believe Maddie died in accident in the apartment
Is that just faith
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 07:44:48 AM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 07:34:40 AM
Total hypocrisy
You have claimed you believe Maddie died in accident in the apartment
Is that just faith

Incorrect, yet again.

I have referred to the accidental death theory and walking out of the apartment.

I have also said, there is no evidence of any scenario that could be brought to court.

However, mccann supporters trot out abduction as though a fact, knowing full well there is no evidence but 'belief'  or another 'reason' to type it on a repeated basis.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 07:48:04 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 07:44:48 AM
Incorrect, yet again.

I have referred to the accidental death theory and walking out of the apartment.

I have also said, there is no evidence of any scenario that could be brought to court.

However, mccann supporters trot out abduction as though a fact, knowing full well there is no evidence but 'belief'  or another 'reason' to type it on a repeated basis.

You posted
If Maddie died in the apartment.. As I believe she did
Can you not remember your own posts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 07:56:55 AM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 07:48:04 AM
You posted
If Maddie died in the apartment.. As I believe she did
Can you not remember your own posts

I remember what I posted.

I also stated that forensic results neither confirmed or dismissed the possibility of a dead body.

I do not trot out accidental death as an absolute, unlike those who type abduction and an abductor here regularly as a fact. It is noticeable that you don't refer to that.

Likewise you claim on the balance of probabilities that abduction is the most likely fate of Madeleine, yet you have never quantified that, and regardless of your attempted efforts saying you accept there might be over possibilities, you attack those supporting them.

I have many times asked for evidence of abduction above any other scenario, and it has yet to materialize. Don't bother referring to that other thread, as there is nothing there of any consequence.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 08:02:52 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 07:56:55 AM
I remember what I posted.

I also stated that forensic results neither confirmed or dismissed the possibility of a dead body.

I do not trot out accidental death as an absolute, unlike those who type abduction and an abductor here regularly as a fact. It is noticeable that you don't refer to that.

Likewise you claim on the balance of probabilities that abduction is the most likely fate of Madeleine, yet you have never quantified that, and regardless of your attempted efforts saying you accept there might be over possibilities, you attack those supporting them.

I have many times asked for evidence of abduction above any other scenario, and it has yet to materialize. Don't bother referring to that other thread, as there is nothing there of any consequence.

You posted if Maddie died in an accident in the apartment.... As I believe she did
That is what you posted... Tell the truth
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 08:08:11 AM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 08:02:52 AM
You posted if Maddie died in an accident in the apartment.... As I believe she did
That is what you posted... Tell the truth

I haven't denied it.

I do not take accidental death as Gospel, unlike mccann supporters who treat abduction as that.

So davel, if there was no abduction, who is to blame for Madeleine's disappearance ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 08:12:15 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 08:08:11 AM
I haven't denied it.

I do not take accidental death as Gospel, unlike mccann supporters who treat abduction as that.

So davel, if there was no abduction, who is to blame for Madeleine's disappearance ?

your exact quote...

If Madeleine died as the result of an accident in the apartment as I believe she did,

so on what basis do you base your belief that maddie died in the apartment...it is total hypocrisy on your behalf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 08:15:10 AM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 08:12:15 AM
your exact quote...

If Madeleine died as the result of an accident in the apartment as I believe she did,

so on what basis do you base your belief that maddie died in the apartment...it is total hypocrisy on your behalf

You are totally obsessed with attacking me.

Quite sad.

You are also not answering my questions.

Anyone reading this, will  know exactly why you are doing this.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 08:17:12 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 08:15:10 AM
You are totally obsessed with attacking me.

Quite sad.

You are also not answering my questions.

Anyone reading this, will  know exactly why you are doing this.

I am pointing out that you criticise others for believing in abduction when you have stated you believe maddie dided in accident in the apartment...that is total hypocrisy and I'm sure everyone reading this understands that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 08:20:35 AM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 08:17:12 AM
I am pointing out that you criticise others for believing in abduction when you have stated you believe maddie dided in accident in the apartment...that is total hypocrisy and I'm sure everyone reading this understands that

What they will understand dave, is that I don't state it as an absolute fact, as it requires confirmatory evidence.

What they will also see, on here, and elsewhere, is McCann supporters stating abduction as a fact. ON A REGULAR BASIS, and not a shred of confirmatory evidence.

NIL points dave.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 08:22:41 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 08:20:35 AM
What they will understand dave, is that I don't state it as an absolute fact, as it requires confirmatory evidence.

What they will also see, on here, and elsewhere, is McCann supporters stating abduction as a fact. ON A REGULAR BASIS, and not a shred of confirmatory evidence.

NIL points dave.

you stated you believed Maddie died in an accident in the apartment.......then you criticise those who believe in abduction...total hypocrisy
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 08:27:35 AM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 08:22:41 AM
you stated you believed Maddie died in an accident in the apartment.......then you criticise those who believe in abduction...total hypocrisy

You aren't reading the posts, are you.

Very sad.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 08:35:44 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 08:27:35 AM
You aren't reading the posts, are you.

Very sad.

you stated you believed Maddie died in an accident in the apartment.......then you criticise those who believe in abduction...total hypocrisy
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 09:19:27 AM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 08:35:44 AM
you stated you believed Maddie died in an accident in the apartment.......then you criticise those who believe in abduction...total hypocrisy

Some people don't just believe in abduction, they reject any other possibility and repeatedly refer to abduction as a fact. I have never seen Stephen refer to accidental death as a fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 09:28:53 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 09:19:27 AM
Some people don't just believe in abduction, they reject any other possibility and repeatedly refer to abduction as a fact. I have never seen Stephen refer to accidental death as a fact.


Thank you G-Unit.

That  is my position.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 16, 2016, 09:43:07 AM

Interesting that Mr Amaral's accidental death theory didn't extend to an explanation of what had happened to the remains and that in my opinion makes a nonsense of his suppositions.

As late as 2014 ... that seemed to be still a work in progress.



Maddie's parents' anguish over disgraced detective's coffin claims
08:21, 17 JUN 2014
BY ELEANOR BARLOW

**snip
Speaking earlier to a Portuguese ­newspaper and its TV channel, Amaral, sacked after botching the initial hunt for Madeleine, repeated his claims the youngster is dead.

But he suggested the McCanns hid her body in the woman’s coffin at Praia da Luz catholic church – which they had a key for – a month after she vanished in 2007.
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-hid-body-7277975
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 09:48:36 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 16, 2016, 09:43:07 AM
Interesting that Mr Amaral's accidental death theory didn't extend to an explanation of what had happened to the remains and that in my opinion makes a nonsense of his suppositions.

As late as 2014 ... that seemed to be still a work in progress.



Maddie's parents' anguish over disgraced detective's coffin claims
08:21, 17 JUN 2014
BY ELEANOR BARLOW

**snip
Speaking earlier to a Portuguese ­newspaper and its TV channel, Amaral, sacked after botching the initial hunt for Madeleine, repeated his claims the youngster is dead.

But he suggested the McCanns hid her body in the woman’s coffin at Praia da Luz catholic church – which they had a key for – a month after she vanished in 2007.
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-hid-body-7277975

The word 'could' seems to, have been omitted in your post.

Selective editing Brietta ?

By the way, do you consider abduction as a fact, and if so, provide evidence to support that.

Beliefs don't count.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 09:53:34 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 16, 2016, 09:43:07 AM
Interesting that Mr Amaral's accidental death theory didn't extend to an explanation of what had happened to the remains and that in my opinion makes a nonsense of his suppositions.

As late as 2014 ... that seemed to be still a work in progress.



Maddie's parents' anguish over disgraced detective's coffin claims
08:21, 17 JUN 2014
BY ELEANOR BARLOW

**snip
Speaking earlier to a Portuguese ­newspaper and its TV channel, Amaral, sacked after botching the initial hunt for Madeleine, repeated his claims the youngster is dead.

But he suggested the McCanns hid her body in the woman’s coffin at Praia da Luz catholic church – which they had a key for – a month after she vanished in 2007.
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-hid-body-7277975

Well that's Amaral's thoughts. What of Mark Harrison's thoughts then?

I am currently of the opinion on the available information and statistical datasets that if death has occurred, that it is possible that Madeleine McCann’s body has been disposed into the sea at Praia da Luz.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 16, 2016, 10:02:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 09:53:34 AM
Well that's Amaral's thoughts. What of Mark Harrison's thoughts then?

I am currently of the opinion on the available information and statistical datasets that if death has occurred, that it is possible that Madeleine McCann’s body has been disposed into the sea at Praia da Luz.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm

"if"
"it is possible"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 10:11:49 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 09:19:27 AM
Some people don't just believe in abduction, they reject any other possibility and repeatedly refer to abduction as a fact. I have never seen Stephen refer to accidental death as a fact.

i believe in abduction...stephen believes maddie died in an accident in the apartment...whats the difference
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 10:13:19 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 09:53:34 AM
Well that's Amaral's thoughts. What of Mark Harrison's thoughts then?

I am currently of the opinion on the available information and statistical datasets that if death has occurred, that it is possible that Madeleine McCann’s body has been disposed into the sea at Praia da Luz.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm

of course its possible...whats your point
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 10:13:53 AM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 10:11:49 AM
i believe in abduction...stephen believes maddie died in an accident in the apartment...whats the difference

Mccann supporters type abduction as fact.

I don't say accidental death is fact. 

I know, evidence is required.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 10:19:52 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 10:13:53 AM
Mccann supporters type abduction as fact.

I don't say accidental death is fact. 

I know, evidence is required.

You have said you "believe" and then criticise others who believe different
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 10:24:47 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 15, 2016, 09:46:55 PM
Well I'm sure the McCann supporters believe Operation Grange are beyond approach.


Now there's a point. We asked to believe everything Operation Grange believe is right and everything the original PJ investigation believed is wrong. &%+((£

Now is that a matter of faith ?

here you are...criticising those who believe something...that is hypocritical
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 10:32:56 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 16, 2016, 10:02:32 AM
"if"
"it is possible"

I thought you were discussing theories of body disposal? Or was that just Amaral's theory?

According to Harrison it was possible for a body to go into the sea. A simple quick and obvious solution if you had to dispose of one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 10:33:04 AM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 10:19:52 AM
You have said you "believe" and then criticise others who believe different

Try reading and answering what I said, rather than putting in your interpretation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 10:34:12 AM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 10:24:47 AM
here you are...criticising those who believe something...that is hypocritical

Again, read what I said, and not you interpretation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 10:38:54 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 10:34:12 AM
Again, read what I said, and not you interpretation.

I believe , based on the available evidence maddie was abducted....so you cannot have any problem with that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 10:46:43 AM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 10:38:54 AM
I believe , based on the available evidence maddie was abducted....so you cannot have any problem with that

Now, once and for all, quantify your evidence.

Do not refer to the other thread, there is no evidence there.

Madeleine disappearing is not just evidence of abduction, it is also evidence for her walking out of the apartment and disappearing, also for her death, etc.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 10:57:25 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 10:46:43 AM
Now, once and for all, quantify your evidence.

Do not refer to the other thread, there is no evidence there.

Madeleine disappearing is not just evidence of abduction, it is also evidence for her walking out of the apartment and disappearing, also for her death, etc.

my belief in abduction is based on my belief that the mccanns are telling the truth....I beleive the evidence supports the fact that they are telling the truth....therefore the window was open.....


It is all about belief...we have to decide who we believe...it is true in every case taht's why if cases go to court there is a trial by jury...and the jury decide who they believe
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 11:05:29 AM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 10:57:25 AM
my belief in abduction is based on my belief that the mccanns are telling the truth....I beleive the evidence supports the fact that they are telling the truth....therefore the window was open.....


It is all about belief...we have to decide who we believe...it is true in every case taht's why if cases go to court there is a trial by jury...and the jury decide who they believe

There is no verification the window was open before 10 pm.

You do not know the mccanns told the truth. That is a belief.

There is no forensic evidence, anyone else, i.e. a third party was in the apartment that night.

..and you know all this.

For anyone to be charged with Madeleine's disappearance, requires evidence. There is no evidence to do that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 11:11:01 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 11:05:29 AM
There is no verification the window was open before 10 pm.

You do not know the mccanns told the truth. That is a belief.

There is no forensic evidence, anyone else, i.e. a third party was in the apartment that night.

..and you know all this.

For anyone to be charged with Madeleine's disappearance, requires evidence. There is no evidence to do that.

It is a belief....did you read the post.....just as you beleive maddie died in the apartment
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 11:31:33 AM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 10:38:54 AM
I believe , based on the available evidence maddie was abducted....so you cannot have any problem with that

That's acceptable. What's unacceptable is leaving out the 'belief' and 'if' words. As in suggesting the abductor is pleased to be ignored. What abductor? Until abduction is proved it shouldn't be posted as a fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 11:32:56 AM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 11:11:01 AM
It is a belief....did you read the post.....just as you beleive maddie died in the apartment

You used the word evidence.

Read your own post.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 11:36:39 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 11:32:56 AM
You used the word evidence.

Read your own post.


that's right...I believe them based on the evidence I have seen relating to them
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 16, 2016, 11:54:20 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 16, 2016, 09:43:07 AM
Interesting that Mr Amaral's accidental death theory didn't extend to an explanation of what had happened to the remains and that in my opinion makes a nonsense of his suppositions.

As late as 2014 ... that seemed to be still a work in progress.



Maddie's parents' anguish over disgraced detective's coffin claims
08:21, 17 JUN 2014
BY ELEANOR BARLOW

**snip
Speaking earlier to a Portuguese ­newspaper and its TV channel, Amaral, sacked after botching the initial hunt for Madeleine, repeated his claims the youngster is dead.

But he suggested the McCanns hid her body in the woman’s coffin at Praia da Luz catholic church – which they had a key for – a month after she vanished in 2007.
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-hid-body-7277975

Surely that is a bit of a non starter as crematoria staff routinely inspect coffins before cremation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 12:04:09 PM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 10:57:25 AM
my belief in abduction is based on my belief that the mccanns are telling the truth....I beleive the evidence supports the fact that they are telling the truth....therefore the window was open.....


It is all about belief...we have to decide who we believe...it is true in every case taht's why if cases go to court there is a trial by jury...and the jury decide who they believe

Which evidence has led you to believe they are telling the truth?

Bear in mind the window may have been open at some point, but who opened it? Not necessarily an abductor or burglar.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 12:07:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 12:04:09 PM
Which evidence has led you to believe they are telling the truth?

Bear in mind the window may have been open at some point, but who opened it? Not necessarily an abductor or burglar.

First I see no reason why they should lie about an accident  and secondly all their actions for the past 9 years...thirdly I don't see how such a lie could be maintained by them and the tapas...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 12:10:35 PM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 11:36:39 AM

that's right...I believe them based on the evidence I have seen relating to them

What evidence ?

Their accounts are inconsistent ?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 12:12:34 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 12:10:35 PM
What evidence ?

Their accounts are inconsistent ?

#their accounts are not inconsistent...you are relying on non verbatim twice translated reports
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 12:26:55 PM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 12:12:34 PM
#their accounts are not inconsistent...you are relying on non verbatim twice translated reports

Incorrect again.

Note again, there is absolutely no independent the verification the window was open before 10 pm.

Kate Mccanns are the only identified fingerprints.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 12:33:01 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 12:26:55 PM
Incorrect again.

Note again, there is absolutely no independent the verification the window was open before 10 pm.

Kate Mccanns are the only identified fingerprints.

#if Kate is telling the truth the window was open...it really is a simple as that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 12:37:02 PM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 12:33:01 PM
#if Kate is telling the truth the window was open...it really is a simple as that

'If' is the operative word.

Now rather than carry on in pointless discussions, since we are not going to agree with each other, why not ignore my posts and I will ignore yours ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 12:38:52 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 12:37:02 PM
'If' is the operative word.

Now rather than carry on in pointless discussions, since we are not going to agree with each other, why not ignore my posts and I will ignore yours ?

of course if is the operative word and taht is why any investigation must make the decision
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 12:41:04 PM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 12:07:00 PM
First I see no reason why they should lie about an accident  and secondly all their actions for the past 9 years...thirdly I don't see how such a lie could be maintained by them and the tapas...

It would be unusual for parents to lie about an accidental death, but not impossible.

There is more than one way to assess their actions for the past 9 years.

Why would the rest of the group need to be involved in any lies?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on June 16, 2016, 01:02:05 PM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 12:33:01 PM
#if Kate is telling the truth the window was open...it really is a simple as that

I don't see how davel.  An open shutter and window is not proof that Madeleine was abducted.  For all anyone knows an intruder opened them scaring the child who ran out of the apartment.  After that several scenarios are possible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 16, 2016, 02:16:49 PM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 10:38:54 AM
I believe , based on the available evidence maddie was abducted....so you cannot have any problem with that

Slim pickings davel.  On the other hand what evidence?

I don't need to remind you that those who first found her missing thought she had got out and wandered off!!  The abduction claim morphed after that and was supported by Tanners claim to have seen the abductor.  Since SY have discredited Tanner's claim its back to wandered off.

I would say that abduction is one of the least likely scenarios given that there are no traces of any third party intruder having entered the apartment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 16, 2016, 02:58:54 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 16, 2016, 02:16:49 PM
Slim pickings davel.  On the other hand what evidence?

I don't need to remind you that those who first found her missing thought she had got out and wandered off!!  The abduction claim morphed after that and was supported by Tanners claim to have seen the abductor.  Since SY have discredited Tanner's claim its back to wandered off.

I would say that abduction is one of the least likely scenarios given that there are no traces of any third party intruder having entered the apartment.

I posted this a few days ago but it vanished "in a fit of alacrity"; so here goes nothing:

    ..when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth
    (Sherlock Holmes in The Sign of the Four, ch. 6, 1890)

In a recent judgement the English Court of Appeal has not only rejected the Sherlock Holmes doctrine shown above, but also denied that probability can be used as an expression of uncertainty for events that have either happened or not.

United Kingdom February 20 2013

The Court of Appeal recently handed down judgment in the case of Nulty v Milton Keynes Borough Council [2013] EWCA Civ 15. The case concerned an appeal from the 3 November 2011 decision of Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart in the Technology & Construction Court of the High Court. In upholding the first instance decision, the Court of Appeal reiterated the principle in cases where there are competing explanations for a particular loss that causation cannot be established only by a process of elimination such that the 'least unlikely' cause of a loss is identified. A claimant must demonstrate that the particular version of events that they rely upon is more likely to have happened than not, in order for the civil burden of proof to be satisfied.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 03:16:03 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 16, 2016, 02:58:54 PM
I posted this a few days ago but it vanished "in a fit of alacrity"; so here goes nothing:

    ..when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth
    (Sherlock Holmes in The Sign of the Four, ch. 6, 1890)

In a recent judgement the English Court of Appeal has not only rejected the Sherlock Holmes doctrine shown above, but also denied that probability can be used as an expression of uncertainty for events that have either happened or not.

United Kingdom February 20 2013

The Court of Appeal recently handed down judgment in the case of Nulty v Milton Keynes Borough Council [2013] EWCA Civ 15. The case concerned an appeal from the 3 November 2011 decision of Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart in the Technology & Construction Court of the High Court. In upholding the first instance decision, the Court of Appeal reiterated the principle in cases where there are competing explanations for a particular loss that causation cannot be established only by a process of elimination such that the 'least unlikely' cause of a loss is identified. A claimant must demonstrate that the particular version of events that they rely upon is more likely to have happened than not, in order for the civil burden of proof to be satisfied.

Using the 'balance of probability' proof acceptable in civil cases it would be very difficult to support abduction as the most likely event in this case.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 03:30:26 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 16, 2016, 02:16:49 PM
Slim pickings davel.  On the other hand what evidence?

I don't need to remind you that those who first found her missing thought she had got out and wandered off!!  The abduction claim morphed after that and was supported by Tanners claim to have seen the abductor.  Since SY have discredited Tanner's claim its back to wandered off.

I would say that abduction is one of the least likely scenarios given that there are no traces of any third party intruder having entered the apartment.

Kates first words
They've taken her
Abduction
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 03:38:59 PM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 03:30:26 PM
Kates first words
They've taken her
Abduction
Who are they ?

Also, no evidence of abduction over any other of the realistic possibilities.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 04:00:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 03:16:03 PM
Using the 'balance of probability' proof acceptable in civil cases it would be very difficult to support abduction as the most likely event in this case.

it all comes down to whether the mccanns are telling the truth...if they are maddie was most likely abducted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 16, 2016, 05:19:32 PM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 03:30:26 PM
Kates first words
They've taken her
Abduction

I thought they were... "Gerry...Madeleine's gone!"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 08:16:20 PM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 04:00:56 PM
it all comes down to whether the mccanns are telling the truth...if they are maddie was most likely abducted

That's pretty obvious and isn't anywhere near as simple as you make it sound. You believe the McCanns have told the truth, but others aren't convinced.









Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 08:29:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 08:16:20 PM
That's pretty obvious and isn't anywhere near as simple as you make it sound. You believe the McCanns have told the truth, but others aren't convinced.
If SY said they were not suspects they must have been convinced
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 16, 2016, 08:43:23 PM
Quote from: Admin on June 16, 2016, 01:02:05 PM
I don't see how davel.  An open shutter and window is not proof that Madeleine was abducted.  For all anyone knows an intruder opened them scaring the child who ran out of the apartment.  After that several scenarios are possible.
Yes surely the child had the intelligence to run away from the shutter while it was being opened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 08:47:37 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 16, 2016, 08:43:23 PM
Yes surely the child had the intelligence to run away from the shutter while it was being opened.

Not if the child was in a very deep sleep having been totally worn out by playing all day
As the twins were
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 08:51:45 PM
Quote from: davel on June 16, 2016, 08:29:21 PM
If SY said they were not suspects they must have been convinced

It depends on the significance of the remit, as you very well know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2016, 08:54:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 08:51:45 PM
It depends on the significance of the remit, as you very well know.

I find it unbelievable that SY did not look st the evidence against the mccanns
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 16, 2016, 09:13:08 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 16, 2016, 11:54:20 AM
Surely that is a bit of a non starter as crematoria staff routinely inspect coffins before cremation?

Do you have a cite for that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 16, 2016, 09:21:39 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 16, 2016, 11:54:20 AM
Surely that is a bit of a non starter as crematoria staff routinely inspect coffins before cremation?

In many instances the body is also removed from the coffin before cremation.

http://www.everlifememorials.com/v/urns/cremation-process.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 16, 2016, 09:23:58 PM
Quote from: John on June 16, 2016, 09:21:39 PM
In many instances the body is also removed from the coffin before cremation.

Don't know about PT, but UK rules are:-

Quote
The coffin or container with the body inside shall not be opened or otherwise disturbed, other than in exceptional circumstances, and then only with the express permission and in the presence of the Applicant for Cremation (usually the executor or next of kin).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 17, 2016, 12:32:57 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 16, 2016, 03:38:59 PM
Who are they ?

Also, no evidence of abduction over any other of the realistic possibilities.
No evidence of anything else, despite Amarals enormous attempts to make something out of the dogs + other details.   

He clearly either did NOT understand that what the dogs were supposed to have alerted to had no forensic support so could not be considered as evidence.
OR
He chose not to understand, and to spread disinformation instead.



However on the abduction
1)  There were two unexplained sightings of a man carrying a little "sleeping/ unconscious " girl who, from the clothes she was wearing looked rather like Madeleine
2)  Furthermore NEITHER man was coming from the direction of a crèche.  Now that is quite pertinent.  Think about it.
3)  Seven responsible adults at the place, at the relevant time, all believed it was an abduction
4)  SY clearly believe it was an abduction.

There are a number of other pointers which indicate that it was an abduction and nothing else.
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on June 17, 2016, 01:17:54 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 17, 2016, 12:32:57 AM
There are a number of other pointers which indicate that it was an abduction and nothing else.
 

Such as? 

SY insist the Tanner sighting was nothing more than an innocent tourist out walking with his daughter which if true dispells the only evidence of an abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 17, 2016, 06:57:10 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 17, 2016, 12:32:57 AM
No evidence of anything else, despite Amarals enormous attempts to make something out of the dogs + other details.   

He clearly either did NOT understand that what the dogs were supposed to have alerted to had no forensic support so could not be considered as evidence.
OR
He chose not to understand, and to spread disinformation instead.



However on the abduction
1)  There were two unexplained sightings of a man carrying a little "sleeping/ unconscious " girl who, from the clothes she was wearing looked rather like Madeleine
2)  Furthermore NEITHER man was coming from the direction of a crèche.  Now that is quite pertinent.  Think about it.
3)  Seven responsible adults at the place, at the relevant time, all believed it was an abduction
4)  SY clearly believe it was an abduction.

There are a number of other pointers which indicate that it was an abduction and nothing else.
 

The dog alerts are clues to be investigated just as the sightings of men carrying children are. It's immaterial what 'seven responsible adults' believed [why the frantic searching then btw]. They accepted what they were told, which is something else. Operation Grange had a remit which suggests they were to investigate an abduction, so what they believed is also immaterial until that remit is clarified

If your other pointers relate to your theory of whodunit there are unanswered questions about 'bloodlines', 'tribes' and 'elders' if you ever revisit that thread.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 07:54:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2016, 08:51:45 PM
It depends on the significance of the remit, as you very well know.

the remit did not appear until 7 months after Grange started...we don't know when it was drawn up....I would have thought SY would have interviewed the parents early on. We have discussed this before
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 08:14:08 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 17, 2016, 12:32:57 AM
No evidence of anything else, despite Amarals enormous attempts to make something out of the dogs + other details.   

He clearly either did NOT understand that what the dogs were supposed to have alerted to had no forensic support so could not be considered as evidence.
OR
He chose not to understand, and to spread disinformation instead.



However on the abduction
1)  There were two unexplained sightings of a man carrying a little "sleeping/ unconscious " girl who, from the clothes she was wearing looked rather like Madeleine
2)  Furthermore NEITHER man was coming from the direction of a crèche.  Now that is quite pertinent.  Think about it.
3)  Seven responsible adults at the place, at the relevant time, all believed it was an abduction
4)  SY clearly believe it was an abduction.

There are a number of other pointers which indicate that it was an abduction and nothing else.
 

I am afraid Sadie your bias and colourful 'theories' only work with abduction.

There is no evidence of abduction, or for that matter any other theory/belief, which could be used in court.

Do you still contact Belgravia Station ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 17, 2016, 08:51:55 AM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 07:54:32 AM
the remit did not appear until 7 months after Grange started...we don't know when it was drawn up....I would have thought SY would have interviewed the parents early on. We have discussed this before

The remit was released once the MPS realised that the FOI requests would continue until it was imo. We have indeed discussed this before and as no firm conclusion was reached statements such as 'SY believe in abduction' are not strictly accurate. Just because posters believe something is true doesn't mean it is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 09:15:15 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2016, 08:51:55 AM
The remit was released once the MPS realised that the FOI requests would continue until it was imo. We have indeed discussed this before and as no firm conclusion was reached statements such as 'SY believe in abduction' are not strictly accurate. Just because posters believe something is true doesn't mean it is.

SY looked at all the evidence ......Having looked at the evidence they must have come to a conclusion as to whether the mccanns were involved....I simply cannot see that redwood would have ignored any suspicions and stated the mccanns were not suspects if he did have suspicions. it just does not make sense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on June 17, 2016, 09:39:41 AM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 09:15:15 AM
SY looked at all the evidence ......Having looked at the evidence they must have come to a conclusion as to whether the mccanns were involved....I simply cannot see that redwood would have ignored any suspicions and stated the mccanns were not suspects if he did have suspicions. it just does not make sense.

Neither does it make sense for people who have successfully  'got away' with a heinous crime - to then devote their time doing everything in their power to get the case re-investigated by one of the best police forces in the world.    They would have to be off their rockers to even contemplate taking such a dangerous course of action if they were guilty - especially when they had absolutely no need to.

They did the complete opposite of what guilty people would do IMO.

AIMO

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 09:44:11 AM
Quote from: Benice on June 17, 2016, 09:39:41 AM
Neither does it make sense for people who have successfully  'got away' with a heinous crime - to then devote their time doing everything in their power to get the case re-investigated by one of the best police forces in the world.    They would have to be off their rockers to even contemplate taking such a dangerous course of action if they were guilty - especially when they had absolutely no need to.

They did the complete opposite of what guilty people would do IMO.

AIMO

of course...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 17, 2016, 10:50:53 AM
Quote from: Benice on June 17, 2016, 09:39:41 AM
Neither does it make sense for people who have successfully  'got away' with a heinous crime - to then devote their time doing everything in their power to get the case re-investigated by one of the best police forces in the world.    They would have to be off their rockers to even contemplate taking such a dangerous course of action if they were guilty - especially when they had absolutely no need to.

They did the complete opposite of what guilty people would do IMO.

AIMO

You are forgetting that the McCanns didn't ask for 'one of the best police forces in the world' [says who?] to re-investigate the case. They asked for a review of the Portuguese investigation.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on June 17, 2016, 11:05:43 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2016, 10:50:53 AM
You are forgetting that the McCanns didn't ask for 'one of the best police forces in the world' [says who?] to re-investigate the case. They asked for a review of the Portuguese investigation.

I think you are nitpicking G.   No guilty person would deliberately do anything which drew attention to themselves after they had succeeded in getting away with a heinous crime.   Too daft for words IMO.

IMO we do have the best police force in the world.     



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on June 17, 2016, 11:06:46 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2016, 10:50:53 AM
You are forgetting that the McCanns didn't ask for 'one of the best police forces in the world' [says who?] to re-investigate the case. They asked for a review of the Portuguese investigation.
Did they not write to David Cameron then?  OK.  Why do you think they wanted a review of the Portuguese investigation if they were guilty then?  Why stir up that old hornet's nest?  what advantage would it have given them? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 11:11:58 AM
Quote from: Alfie on June 17, 2016, 11:06:46 AM
Did they not write to David Cameron then?  OK.  Why do you think they wanted a review of the Portuguese investigation if they were guilty then?  Why stir up that old hornet's nest?  what advantage would it have given them?

The mccanns started with the 'story' of abduction.

For which there is no evidence.

It escalated from there.

After all, without an abduction, where are the mccanns ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 11:14:33 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 11:11:58 AM
The mccanns started with the 'story' of abduction.

For which there is no evidence.

It escalated from there.

After all, without an abduction, where are the mccanns ?

so what happened to maddie based on the evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 11:35:21 AM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 11:14:33 AM
so what happened to maddie based on the evidence

She disappeared davel.

That's about it, isn't it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 17, 2016, 11:56:56 AM
Quote from: Alfie on June 17, 2016, 11:06:46 AM
Did they not write to David Cameron then?  OK.  Why do you think they wanted a review of the Portuguese investigation if they were guilty then?  Why stir up that old hornet's nest?  what advantage would it have given them?

Why do you continually ask questions that, unless you are the McCanns, are impossible to answer?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on June 17, 2016, 12:10:04 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 17, 2016, 11:56:56 AM
Why do you continually ask questions that, unless you are the McCanns, are impossible to answer?
Why not?  Do guilty people strive to have a review of the investigation into their crimes?  Is it what you would do?  Is there any possible reason, no matter how fanciful you can think of, for doing so?  Or is it completely inexplicable behaviour in your view?
I'm only asking questions, isn't that what sceptics pride themselves on doing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 12:20:40 PM
Quote from: Alfie on June 17, 2016, 12:10:04 PM
Why not?  Do guilty people strive to have a review of the investigation into their crimes?  Is it what you would do?  Is there any possible reason, no matter how fanciful you can think of, for doing so?  Or is it completely inexplicable behaviour in your view?
I'm only asking questions, isn't that what sceptics pride themselves on doing?

Ask Jeffrey Archer that one.  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 12:24:11 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 11:35:21 AM
She disappeared davel.

That's about it, isn't it.

either he rparents are involved....or she woke and wandered or abducted...evidence suggest her parents were not involved.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 12:25:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2016, 10:50:53 AM
You are forgetting that the McCanns didn't ask for 'one of the best police forces in the world' [says who?] to re-investigate the case. They asked for a review of the Portuguese investigation.

#absolute tosh...the mccanns pushed for the involvement of SY. SY had to carry out a review of all the evidence which would lead to an investigation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 17, 2016, 12:26:58 PM
Quote from: Alfie on June 17, 2016, 12:10:04 PM
Why not?  Do guilty people strive to have a review of the investigation into their crimes?  Is it what you would do?  Is there any possible reason, no matter how fanciful you can think of, for doing so?  Or is it completely inexplicable behaviour in your view?
I'm only asking questions, isn't that what sceptics pride themselves on doing?

And why do you think I or any other sceptic would have the first clue about the McCann's motivations?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 17, 2016, 12:27:44 PM
Quote from: Benice on June 17, 2016, 11:05:43 AM
I think you are nitpicking G.   No guilty person would deliberately do anything which drew attention to themselves after they had succeeded in getting away with a heinous crime.   Too daft for words IMO.

IMO we do have the best police force in the world.   

You may have noticed that this couple are very determined and sure of themselves. They 'knew' immediately what had happened to their daughter and they told the world about it. They told everyone that the shutters had been forced and their daughter taken. Gerry told his relatives there were paedophile gangs in Portugal and they had taken Madeline.

When it emerged that the shutters were undamaged and that they had left their children home alone in an unlocked apartment they glossed over that and carried on regardless.

They don't 'do' guilt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 12:31:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2016, 12:27:44 PM
You may have noticed that this couple are very determined and sure of themselves. They 'knew' immediately what had happened to their daughter and they told the world about it. They told everyone that the shutters had been forced and their daughter taken. Gerry told his relatives there were paedophile gangs in Portugal and they had taken Madeline.

When it emerged that the shutters were undamaged and that they had left their children home alone in an unlocked apartment they glossed over that and carried on regardless.

They don't 'do' guilt.

Well said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 12:35:15 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 12:24:11 PM
either he rparents are involved....or she woke and wandered or abducted...evidence suggest her parents were not involved.....

No Dave.
 
What evidence ?

There isn't any , either way.

The basic facts remain, as does the fact that the McCanns are the last known people to see Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 12:36:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2016, 12:27:44 PM
You may have noticed that this couple are very determined and sure of themselves. They 'knew' immediately what had happened to their daughter and they told the world about it. They told everyone that the shutters had been forced and their daughter taken. Gerry told his relatives there were paedophile gangs in Portugal and they had taken Madeline.

When it emerged that the shutters were undamaged and that they had left their children home alone in an unlocked apartment they glossed over that and carried on regardless.

They don't 'do' guilt.


you have a lot wrong....Gerry never said the shutters were damaged....nine years and you still don't understand. Perhaps if you and others understood the evidence you would realise that the parents are not involved
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 12:37:06 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 12:35:15 PM
No Dave.
 
What evidence ?

There isn't any , either way.

The basic fa ts remain, as does the fact that the McCanns are the last known people to see Madeleine.

you need to understand what the word evidence means....you obviously don't
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 12:40:56 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 12:37:06 PM
you need to understand what the word evidence means....you obviously don't

Your usual cliche's.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 12:42:29 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 12:40:56 PM
Your usual cliche's.

because you still don't understand...there is plenty of evidence to consider.

evidence
ˈɛvɪd(ə)ns/Submit
noun
1.
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 12:47:00 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 12:42:29 PM
because you still don't understand...there is plenty of evidence to consider.

evidence
ˈɛvɪd(ə)ns/Submit
noun
1.
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid

I don't need definitions dave.

It is you who can't comprehend there is no evidence of abduction worth a grain of salt.

Something tells me your mantra will continue unchanged.

However, that is not my problem.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 17, 2016, 01:04:46 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 12:36:10 PM

you have a lot wrong....Gerry never said the shutters were damaged....nine years and you still don't understand. Perhaps if you and others understood the evidence you would realise that the parents are not involved

How do you know what Gerry said, were you there?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 01:21:43 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 12:47:00 PM
I don't need definitions dave.

It is you who can't comprehend there is no evidence of abduction worth a grain of salt.

Something tells me your mantra will continue unchanged.

However, that is not my problem.

you originally said no evidence...that is objective...you are now saying no evidence worth a grain of salt...that is different and subjective. ...there is evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 01:22:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2016, 01:04:46 PM
How do you know what Gerry said, were you there?

you do not know either yet you are claiming an inconsistency.......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 01:28:24 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 01:21:43 PM
you originally said no evidence...that is objective...you are now saying no evidence worth a grain of salt...that is different and subjective. ...there is evidence

All that is known is Madeleine disappeared.

That is possible evidence of a crime.

There is nothing else.

If you say there is, CITE it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 01:47:29 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 01:28:24 PM
All that is known is Madeleine disappeared.

That is possible evidence of a crime.

There is nothing else.

If you say there is, CITE it.

statements made are evidence...everything the mccanns and others have ever said is evidence...what redwood said is evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on June 17, 2016, 01:52:46 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 17, 2016, 12:26:58 PM
And why do you think I or any other sceptic would have the first clue about the McCann's motivations?
You seem to think you know why one of them would throw his daughter away in a bin like garbage so I thought you might like to have a stab at answering why they would push for a review into their own alleged crimes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on June 17, 2016, 01:53:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2016, 12:27:44 PM
You may have noticed that this couple are very determined and sure of themselves. They 'knew' immediately what had happened to their daughter and they told the world about it. They told everyone that the shutters had been forced and their daughter taken. Gerry told his relatives there were paedophile gangs in Portugal and they had taken Madeline.

When it emerged that the shutters were undamaged and that they had left their children home alone in an unlocked apartment they glossed over that and carried on regardless.

They don't 'do' guilt.
What did you expect them to do, exactly?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 02:12:06 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 01:47:29 PM
statements made are evidence...everything the mccanns and others have ever said is evidence...what redwood said is evidence

Redwood found nothing dave.

Keep trying.

He said he believed.

He also stated Madeleine could be alive or dead.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 02:15:00 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 02:12:06 PM
Redwood found nothing dave.

Keep trying.

He said he believed.

He also stated Madeleine could be alive or dead.

Redwood said the McCanns were not suspects
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 02:17:14 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 02:15:00 PM
Redwood said the McCanns were not suspects

Like I said, Redwood found nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 02:19:04 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 02:17:14 PM
Like I said, Redwood found nothing.

he said the mccanns were not suspects
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 02:19:04 PM
he said the mccanns were not suspects

More cliche's dave.

...and if evidence came to light dave. 8)-)))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 02:22:10 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
More cliche's dave.

...and if evidence came to light dave. 8)-)))

it is not a cliche..its a fact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 02:24:40 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 02:22:10 PM
it is not a cliche..its a fact

...and if new evidence came to light .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 02:45:52 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 02:24:40 PM
...and if new evidence came to light .

IF

Its a big IF
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 02:49:40 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 02:45:52 PM
IF

Its a big IF

There is nothing else in this case dave.

You know full well SY has found nothing of any consequence.

Mind you, they have a load of files, presumably about to go into storage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 03:03:25 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 02:49:40 PM
There is nothing else in this case dave.

You know full well SY has found nothing of any consequence.

Mind you, they have a load of files, presumably about to go into storage.



there seems to be enough to rule out the parents....nothing found in nine years and if the parents are ruled out abduction is odds on
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 17, 2016, 03:07:22 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 03:03:25 PM


there seems to be enough to rule out the parents....nothing found in nine years and if the parents are ruled out abduction is odds on

How about a supporting calculation for that assertion ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 03:08:42 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 03:03:25 PM


there seems to be enough to rule out the parents....nothing found in nine years and if the parents are ruled out abduction is odds on


Dave, don't you yet realize, it isn't even known what happened to Madeleine  ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 03:10:02 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 17, 2016, 03:07:22 PM
How about a supporting calculation for that assertion ?

if the parents are ruled out then woke and wandered and abduction are the only real options...agreed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 03:10:38 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 03:08:42 PM

Dave, don't you yet realize, it isn't even known what happened to Madeleine  ?

you need to tell amaral that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 17, 2016, 03:14:45 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 03:10:02 PM
if the parents are ruled out then woke and wandered and abduction are the only real options...agreed

I asked you to provide a supporting calculation. That should be easy enough without having to ask me questions.
Let's see yer workings then I'll comment if it's worthwhile. Meanwhile it's up to you to substantiate your assertion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 17, 2016, 03:44:05 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 03:10:02 PM
if the parents are ruled out then woke and wandered and abduction are the only real options...agreed

Nope, you can't have woke & wandered without the McCanns being a pair of liars.


GM;   'she was tucked up in bed, errm... and there's no way she... she could have got out on her own.'
https://youtu.be/6Rw4S5o2KPY

KM;  'The shutter was up & the window was open, I'm not lying about that'
https://youtu.be/WLvnfcl-Zkg?t=1369


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 04:00:34 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 17, 2016, 03:44:05 PM
Nope, you can't have woke & wandered without the McCanns being a pair of liars.


GM;   'she was tucked up in bed, errm... and there's no way she... she could have got out on her own.'
https://youtu.be/6Rw4S5o2KPY

KM;  'The shutter was up & the window was open, I'm not lying about that'
https://youtu.be/WLvnfcl-Zkg?t=1369

They are contradictory statements at the very least.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 04:28:06 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 17, 2016, 03:14:45 PM
I asked you to provide a supporting calculation. That should be easy enough without having to ask me questions.
Let's see yer workings then I'll comment if it's worthwhile. Meanwhile it's up to you to substantiate your assertion.

I would prefer to break it down into chunks.....I'm happy to answer your question....so can we agree on some basics.
if the parents are ruled out then that leaves w@w and abduction...agreed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 17, 2016, 04:32:25 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 04:28:06 PM
I would prefer to break it down into chunks.....I'm happy to answer your question....so can we agree on some basics.
if the parents are ruled out then that leaves w@w and abduction...agreed

If she w@w, then who otw?

(opened the window)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 04:34:12 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 17, 2016, 04:32:25 PM
If she w@w, then who otw?

(opened the window)

I haven't got that far yet
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 17, 2016, 04:47:24 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 04:28:06 PM
I would prefer to break it down into chunks.....I'm happy to answer your question....so can we agree on some basics.
if the parents are ruled out then that leaves w@w and abduction...agreed

OK lets break it down into chunks :
Chunk 1: MM disappeared without trace on 3rd May 2007. The police could find no evidence to point to any specific cause.
Chunk:2 Your assertion above: "there seems to be enough to rule out the parents....nothing found in nine years and if the parents are ruled out abduction is odds on".
Chunk 3: Will be your substantiation of that assertion as I requested and as in accordance with forum rules.
Chunk4: Will be comments by members , possibly including me, on your substantiation.
Your move
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 04:54:10 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 17, 2016, 04:47:24 PM
OK lets break it down into chunks :
Chunk 1: MM disappeared without trace on 3rd May 2007. The police could find no evidence to point to any specific cause.
Chunk:2 Your assertion above: "there seems to be enough to rule out the parents....nothing found in nine years and if the parents are ruled out abduction is odds on".
Chunk 3: Will be your substantiation of that assertion as I requested and as in accordance with forum rules.
Chunk4: Will be comments by members , possibly including me, on your substantiation.
Your move
there seems to be enough to rule out the parents....nothing found in nine years and if the parents are ruled out abduction is odds on

good that I asked the question...which part of the statement would you like an assertion for...

]there seems to be enough to rule out the parents....nothing found in nine years   note I have used the word seems.....parents do not seem to be being investigated and Redwood has said they are not suspects...that seems to rule them out.....

and if the parents are ruled out abduction is odds on....or this part





Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 05:36:35 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 04:54:10 PM
there seems to be enough to rule out the parents....nothing found in nine years and if the parents are ruled out abduction is odds on

good that I asked the question...which part of the statement would you like an assertion for...

]there seems to be enough to rule out the parents....nothing found in nine years   note I have used the word seems.....parents do not seem to be being investigated and Redwood has said they are not suspects...that seems to rule them out.....

and if the parents are ruled out abduction is odds on....or this part

The crime if any, is unknown.

The last known people to see Madeleine, where the mccanns.

On that basis alone, how can you discount them, as their accounts of events VARY.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 17, 2016, 05:37:37 PM
Quote from: davel on June 17, 2016, 04:54:10 PM
there seems to be enough to rule out the parents....nothing found in nine years and if the parents are ruled out abduction is odds on

good that I asked the question...which part of the statement would you like an assertion for...

]there seems to be enough to rule out the parents....nothing found in nine years   note I have used the word seems.....parents do not seem to be being investigated and Redwood has said they are not suspects...that seems to rule them out.....

and if the parents are ruled out abduction is odds on....or this part

Are you now saying there are two assertions/postulations call it what you will ?

OK so let's make a stipulation that the parents were not involved.
On the basis of the parents not being involved your assertion is that abduction is odds on. The accepted definition of odds on being "more likely than evens".
If the parents were not involved there are two other possibilities: woke and wandered never to be seen again or abducted. So lets see yer calcs for arriving at "more likely than evens" for the abduction possibility. Or if you can't do that the calculations for longer odds on woke and wandered will do ...............
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2016, 06:46:21 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 05:36:35 PM
The crime if any, is unknown.

The last known people to see Madeleine, where the mccanns.

On that basis alone, how can you discount them, as their accounts of events VARY.

Cite for vary
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 18, 2016, 02:15:58 AM
Statement of GNR handler Fernandes talking about the dog Rex's behaviour on 4th May

"after the dogs were given this scent from the towel and near apartment 5A of block 5, the first sniffer dog headed to the door of that apartment."

Dogs can detect the direction of a scent trail.
IMO the PJ officer supervising should have unlocked the wooden door and allowed the dog to continue into the apartment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on June 18, 2016, 11:07:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2016, 12:27:44 PM
You may have noticed that this couple are very determined and sure of themselves. They 'knew' immediately what had happened to their daughter and they told the world about it. They told everyone that the shutters had been forced and their daughter taken. Gerry told his relatives there were paedophile gangs in Portugal and they had taken Madeline.

When it emerged that the shutters were undamaged and that they had left their children home alone in an unlocked apartment they glossed over that and carried on regardless.

They don't 'do' guilt.

Kate presumed the shutters must have been forced open - because as far as they knew they were locked.

Kate was immediately convinced  that an intruder had entered the apartment via the window.  Of course she thought her daughter had been taken.   She would have been abnormal not to have  thought that.

 Their relatives and friends were not there - and put their own interpretations of what 2  traumatised parents were telling them.   Chinese whispers ensued.     To claim that Gerry said Madeleine had definitely been taken by a paedaphile gang - on the strength of a witness who admitted he did not hear the whole conversation - or the exact words spoken but said what he heard was .... 'along the lines of....' is an example of chinese whispers on your part IMO.

When I first heard that Madeleine had disappeared - I immediately thought she had been taken by a paedaphile - and so did everyone else I knew.  That is the most common scenario in these cases.

As for they don't 'do' guilt.  They had said more than once that  they will carry the guilt of what happened with them for the rest of their lives - what more do you want.

I notice you make no allowances at all for the shock and trauma they were suddenly plunged into - and talk as if they were calmly telling people what they wanted them to believe - even though  (if they were guilty)  they would know without doubt that the shutters had not been smashed/jemmied - and the police would find them to be undamaged.     So why on earth would they want to convince the PJ or anyone else  - that they had been telling lies?

As for this couple being 'very determined and sure of themselves'.  Yes - they are sure Madeleine was abducted and they are determined to find out what happened to her and have been doing just that for the last 9 years.

That is not what guilty people would do - or even want to do.  They would want the whole thing to sink into obscurity ASAP.

AIMHO
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 18, 2016, 01:18:54 PM
Quote from: Benice on June 18, 2016, 11:07:12 AM
Kate presumed the shutters must have been forced open - because as far as they knew they were locked.

Kate was immediately convinced  that an intruder had entered the apartment via the window.  Of course she thought her daughter had been taken.   She would have been abnormal not to have  thought that.

 Their relatives and friends were not there - and put their own interpretations of what 2  traumatised parents were telling them.   Chinese whispers ensued.     To claim that Gerry said Madeleine had definitely been taken by a paedaphile gang - on the strength of a witness who admitted he did not hear the whole conversation - or the exact words spoken but said what he heard was .... 'along the lines of....' is an example of chinese whispers on your part IMO.

When I first heard that Madeleine had disappeared - I immediately thought she had been taken by a paedaphile - and so did everyone else I knew.  That is the most common scenario in these cases.

As for they don't 'do' guilt.  They had said more than once that  they will carry the guilt of what happened with them for the rest of their lives - what more do you want.

I notice you make no allowances at all for the shock and trauma they were suddenly plunged into - and talk as if they were calmly telling people what they wanted them to believe - even though  (if they were guilty)  they would know without doubt that the shutters had not been smashed/jemmied - and the police would find them to be undamaged.     So why on earth would they want to convince the PJ or anyone else  - that they had been telling lies?

As for this couple being 'very determined and sure of themselves'.  Yes - they are sure Madeleine was abducted and they are determined to find out what happened to her and have been doing just that for the last 9 years.

That is not what guilty people would do - or even want to do.  They would want the whole thing to sink into obscurity ASAP.

AIMHO
 

Why would they assume the shutters were locked?  There is no evidence that the shutter and window were open, still less than an intruder opened them, so your opinion of Kate's opinion relies solely on her and her husband telling the truth.

The nature of Chinese whispers is that they change as they are repeated. The four people who were informed of the broken shutters told the same story. You think Mr MacKenzie misheard? What a strange word to mishear.

I know what they've said, but people don't always mean what they say, you know.

The shock and trauma is speculation, although it would have been present no matter what occurred. Cause unknown. The PJ seem to have been immaterial - it was those back in the UK who needed to be told all about it very early on. All that worry spread around even while their friends were still searching for her. All the phone calls to be made had she been found.

Alex Woolfall said abduction was not discussed with him at the beginning, woke and wandered was, so they seem to have said different things to different people. How better to demonstrate your innocence than to start and maintain a worldwide search for your missing child?

Facts exist, but can be interpreted in different ways.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2016, 02:01:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 18, 2016, 01:18:54 PM
Why would they assume the shutters were locked?  There is no evidence that the shutter and window were open, still less than an intruder opened them, so your opinion of Kate's opinion relies solely on her and her husband telling the truth.

The nature of Chinese whispers is that they change as they are repeated. The four people who were informed of the broken shutters told the same story. You think Mr MacKenzie misheard? What a strange word to mishear.

I know what they've said, but people don't always mean what they say, you know.

The shock and trauma is speculation, although it would have been present no matter what occurred. Cause unknown. The PJ seem to have been immaterial - it was those back in the UK who needed to be told all about it very early on. All that worry spread around even while their friends were still searching for her. All the phone calls to be made had she been found.

Alex Woolfall said abduction was not discussed with him at the beginning, woke and wandered was, so they seem to have said different things to different people. How better to demonstrate your innocence than to start and maintain a worldwide search for your missing child?

Facts exist, but can be interpreted in different ways.

Gerry told one person the shutters had been forced....she repeated it as gemmied to the three others...it is as simple as that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 18, 2016, 04:24:43 PM
Quote from: davel on June 18, 2016, 02:01:54 PM
Gerry told one person the shutters had been forced....she repeated it as gemmied to the three others...it is as simple as that

Cite?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 18, 2016, 05:25:40 PM
Quote from: Benice on June 18, 2016, 11:07:12 AM
Kate presumed the shutters must have been forced open - because as far as they knew they were locked.

Kate was immediately convinced  that an intruder had entered the apartment via the window.  Of course she thought her daughter had been taken.   She would have been abnormal not to have  thought that.

 Their relatives and friends were not there - and put their own interpretations of what 2  traumatised parents were telling them.   Chinese whispers ensued.     To claim that Gerry said Madeleine had definitely been taken by a paedaphile gang - on the strength of a witness who admitted he did not hear the whole conversation - or the exact words spoken but said what he heard was .... 'along the lines of....' is an example of chinese whispers on your part IMO.

When I first heard that Madeleine had disappeared - I immediately thought she had been taken by a paedaphile - and so did everyone else I knew.  That is the most common scenario in these cases.

As for they don't 'do' guilt.  They had said more than once that  they will carry the guilt of what happened with them for the rest of their lives - what more do you want.

I notice you make no allowances at all for the shock and trauma they were suddenly plunged into - and talk as if they were calmly telling people what they wanted them to believe - even though  (if they were guilty)  they would know without doubt that the shutters had not been smashed/jemmied - and the police would find them to be undamaged.     So why on earth would they want to convince the PJ or anyone else  - that they had been telling lies?

As for this couple being 'very determined and sure of themselves'.  Yes - they are sure Madeleine was abducted and they are determined to find out what happened to her and have been doing just that for the last 9 years.

That is not what guilty people would do - or even want to do.  They would want the whole thing to sink into obscurity ASAP.

AIMHO
 

So your first thought when any child goes missing is they have been taken by a paedophile?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on June 18, 2016, 05:28:39 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 18, 2016, 05:25:40 PM
So your first thought when any child goes missing is they have been taken by a paedophile?
It certainly was my first thought when I heard a child had been taken from her bedroom at night, was it not yours?  I presume not, and that your first thought was hmmm...bet she had an accident and the parents have hidden her body.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 18, 2016, 05:39:41 PM
Quote from: Alfie on June 18, 2016, 05:28:39 PM
It certainly was my first thought when I heard a child had been taken from her bedroom at night, was it not yours?  I presume not, and that your first thought was hmmm...bet she had an accident and the parents have hidden her body.

These days the parents are the first port of call.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on June 18, 2016, 05:51:49 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 18, 2016, 05:39:41 PM
These days the parents are the first port of call.
These days?  As opposed to when?  Are you seriously telling me that you suspected the parents from the very first news bulletin?   Is that because you simply don't believe paedos abduct small children from their beds at night? 

Personally, from my experience of following this case online from word go, I would say few if any suspected the McCanns of hiding their kid's body in the first few days, even weeks.  Of course there was tons of hate directed at them for the so-called neglect, but little if no suspicion that they actually staged an abduction.  That came later. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 18, 2016, 11:04:11 PM
Quote from: Alfie on June 18, 2016, 05:51:49 PM
These days?  As opposed to when?  Are you seriously telling me that you suspected the parents from the very first news bulletin?   Is that because you simply don't believe paedos abduct small children from their beds at night? 

Personally, from my experience of following this case online from word go, I would say few if any suspected the McCanns of hiding their kid's body in the first few days, even weeks.  Of course there was tons of hate directed at them for the so-called neglect, but little if no suspicion that they actually staged an abduction.  That came later.

To paraphrase one of your colleagues, it has never happened so it can't happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2016, 11:06:37 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 18, 2016, 11:04:11 PM
To paraphrase one of your colleagues, it has never happened so it can't happen.

#it has never happened because it is physiologically impossible
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 18, 2016, 11:12:24 PM
Quote from: davel on June 18, 2016, 11:06:37 PM
#it has never happened because it is physiologically impossible

Glad you agree with me, no abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2016, 11:14:06 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 18, 2016, 11:12:24 PM
Glad you agree with me, no abduction.

what a stupid post..I wish I could be more explicit but the forum does not allow free speech...I don't agree with you
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 18, 2016, 11:20:01 PM
Quote from: davel on June 18, 2016, 11:14:06 PM
what a stupid post..I wish I could be more explicit but the forum does not allow free speech...I don't agree with you

about as stupid as you using the word pysiologically in the first place
You do know abusing mods is a sanctionable offence here, i have lots of points in the past for this, i dont do it anymore, bout time you stopped goading and abusing the mods and bringing the forum down and contaminating any half serious attempt of debate, others manage it why cant you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 18, 2016, 11:23:54 PM
Quote from: davel on June 18, 2016, 11:14:06 PM
what a stupid post..I wish I could be more explicit but the forum does not allow free speech...I don't agree with you

You're the one who leapt in.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 18, 2016, 11:28:15 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 18, 2016, 11:04:11 PM
To paraphrase one of your colleagues, it has never happened so it can't happen.

I love that argument. Especially the logical extension of it which results in those who make such postulation doing the very things they could not possibly sensibly do if they truly believed the postulation ..... ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 18, 2016, 11:31:54 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 18, 2016, 11:04:11 PM
To paraphrase one of your colleagues, it has never happened so it can't happen.

And the argument because it hasnt happened before, doesnt mean it couldnt have now, from the same group, wish they would make minds up
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2016, 11:34:38 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 18, 2016, 11:28:15 PM
I love that argument. Especially the logical extension of it which results in those who make such postulation doing the very things they could not possibly sensibly do if they truly believed the postulation ..... ?{)(**

perhaps you could point me to where that point has been made...like the others you are mistaken
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 18, 2016, 11:38:27 PM
Quote from: davel on June 18, 2016, 11:34:38 PM
perhaps you could point me to where that point has been made...like the others you are mistaken

Perhaps you could point me to where I said it had been made?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2016, 11:41:37 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 18, 2016, 11:38:27 PM
Perhaps you could point me to where I said it had been made?

if you cant that will do nicely
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 18, 2016, 11:46:02 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 17, 2016, 05:36:35 PM
(snip)... The last known people to see Madeleine, were the mccanns (snip)
That should be:
The last known person (singular) to see the child was ...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 18, 2016, 11:49:48 PM
Quote from: davel on June 18, 2016, 11:41:37 PM
if you cant that will do nicely

Well I cannot believe anyone on here would be so stupid as to advance the argument "it can't happen because it hasn't happened before". Or stupid enough to use it's cousin "show me where it has happened before".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 18, 2016, 11:57:46 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 18, 2016, 11:46:02 PM
That should be:
The last known person (singular) to see the child was ...

even thats not written in stone
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2016, 11:58:02 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 18, 2016, 11:49:48 PM
Well I cannot believe anyone on here would be so stupid as to advance the argument "it can't happen because it hasn't happened before". Or stupid enough to use it's cousin "show me where it has happened before".

as i have said you are wrong...we are talking about immediate or semi immediate death from ahead injury in a domestic situation...it is physiologically impossible....  show me a case anywhere in the world it has happened...that is for those who dont understand the physiology
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 19, 2016, 12:00:12 AM
Quote from: pegasus on June 18, 2016, 11:46:02 PM
That should be:
The last known person (singular) to see the child was ...

GM or JT. Take your pick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 19, 2016, 12:02:41 AM
Quote from: misty on June 19, 2016, 12:00:12 AM
GM or JT. Take your pick.

No, jt never said she saw madeleine, though others twisted her words,it is NOT the same
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on June 19, 2016, 12:03:34 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 18, 2016, 11:04:11 PM
To paraphrase one of your colleagues, it has never happened so it can't happen.
What are you claiming has never happened?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 19, 2016, 02:13:26 AM
Quote from: Alfie on June 19, 2016, 12:03:34 AM
What are you claiming has never happened?

Well there's zero evidence of abduction. Until you can find any please let me know. A scream a sound anything will do in a quiet deserted area. Mrs Fenn certainly heard something and it wasn't an abductor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 19, 2016, 08:27:22 AM
Quote from: davel on June 18, 2016, 11:58:02 PM
as i have said you are wrong...we are talking about immediate or semi immediate death from ahead injury in a domestic situation...it is physiologically impossible....  show me a case anywhere in the world it has happened...that is for those who dont understand the physiology

We weren't actually.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 19, 2016, 10:01:32 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on June 19, 2016, 08:27:22 AM
We weren't actually.

then tell me what you were referring to
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on June 19, 2016, 10:18:57 AM
Quote from: davel on June 18, 2016, 11:58:02 PM
as i have said you are wrong...we are talking about immediate or semi immediate death from ahead injury in a domestic situation...it is physiologically impossible....  show me a case anywhere in the world it has happened...that is for those who dont understand the physiology

Ah!

But when you've been overdosed with the "sleeping solution" calpol, it's probably all different ....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 19, 2016, 10:21:26 AM
Quote from: ferryman on June 19, 2016, 10:18:57 AM
Ah!

But when you've been overdosed with the "sleeping solution" calpol, it's probably all different ....

As one of my students said as to why his parents gave him and his brothers Calpol....


'To keep us quiet'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on June 19, 2016, 10:24:41 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 19, 2016, 10:21:26 AM
As one of my students said as to why his parents gave him and his brothers Calpol....


'To keep us quiet'

I daresay the parents were doctors ....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 19, 2016, 10:27:38 AM
Quote from: ferryman on June 19, 2016, 10:24:41 AM
I daresay the parents were doctors ....

No ferryman that aren't.

One is a Teacher and the other owns a Takeaway.

So much for your insight.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on June 19, 2016, 11:03:46 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 19, 2016, 02:13:26 AM
Well there's zero evidence of abduction. Until you can find any please let me know. A scream a sound anything will do in a quiet deserted area. Mrs Fenn certainly heard something and it wasn't an abductor.
Actually I was asking Slarti to explain his/her comment "it's never happened before" - what has never happened before? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 19, 2016, 11:31:06 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 19, 2016, 10:21:26 AM
As one of my students said as to why his parents gave him and his brothers Calpol....


'To keep us quiet'

do you realise what a stupid comment this is...calpol does not have any sedative effects...i thought you understood chemistry
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 19, 2016, 11:31:43 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 19, 2016, 10:27:38 AM
No ferryman that aren't.

One is a Teacher and the other owns a Takeaway.

So much for your insight.

ferryman was being sarcastic
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 19, 2016, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: davel on June 19, 2016, 11:31:06 AM
do you realise what a stupid comment this is...calpol does not have any sedative effects...i thought you understood chemistry


Only when overdosed ofcourse- then you die!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 19, 2016, 02:56:25 PM
Quote from: davel on June 19, 2016, 11:31:06 AM
do you realise what a stupid comment this is...calpol does not have any sedative effects...i thought you understood chemistry

I didn't say it did.

Stop making assumptions.

I merely reported what those parents and others do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 19, 2016, 02:58:10 PM
Quote from: davel on June 19, 2016, 11:31:43 AM
ferryman was being sarcastic

Wow, I never realized that.

After all, he holds them in  high regard.

Well two of them anyway. 8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 19, 2016, 02:58:59 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 19, 2016, 11:49:05 AM

Only when overdosed ofcourse- then you die!

There are some things davel would like to ignore.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on June 19, 2016, 03:06:50 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 19, 2016, 02:58:59 PM
There are some things davel would like to ignore.

paracetemol  overdose etc    can cause liver  faliure especally in a child i would imagine
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 19, 2016, 03:13:44 PM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 19, 2016, 03:06:50 PM
paracetemol  overdose etc    can cause liver  faliure especally in a child i would imagine

As a reminder for some.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3338854/Parents-quick-children-Calpol-Excessive-use-medicine-brands-linked-asthma-cause-kidney-liver-heart-damage.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on June 19, 2016, 03:18:20 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 19, 2016, 03:13:44 PM
As a reminder for some.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3338854/Parents-quick-children-Calpol-Excessive-use-medicine-brands-linked-asthma-cause-kidney-liver-heart-damage.html

i take   strong prescription codiene 30mg/500mg codiene painkillers for my spine   under my  drs care of course but  yes if they were regualy  dosed with capol    ina  child  a ovrdose was more likley wasnt it??
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on June 19, 2016, 03:20:13 PM
liver  faliure can also take  hours/days
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 19, 2016, 03:26:53 PM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 19, 2016, 03:18:20 PM
i take   strong prescription codiene 30mg/500mg codiene painkillers for my spine   under my  drs care of course but  yes if they were regualy  dosed with capol    ina  child  a ovrdose was more likley wasnt it??

I don't have problems anywhere near yours Carly, but I do take Ibuprofen  for Osteoarthritis in both my knees.

Now we understand to follow instructions on dosage.

However, sometimes, mistakes happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on June 19, 2016, 03:30:10 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 19, 2016, 03:26:53 PM
I don't have problems anywhere near yours Carly, but I do take Ibuprofen  for Osteoarthritis in both my knees.

Now we understand to follow instructions on dosage.

However, sometimes, mistakes happen.

 a  child if they got  hold of it  wouldnt understand  dosage etc    not  saying that maddie did of course but it is a possible  scenario because   in reach of children they oftern think pills are lollies/sweets or liquid medcine  is a  drink
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 19, 2016, 03:30:49 PM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 19, 2016, 03:30:10 PM
a  child if they got  hold of it  wouldnt understand  dosage etc    not  saying that maddie did of course but it is a possible  scenario because   in reach of children they oftern think pills are lollies/sweets

Precisely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 19, 2016, 08:14:54 PM
still kind of off topic... did we ever get to hear what John was talking about in the members only thread?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 12:37:05 AM
Apparently a party of 7 people went for meal at CF's place including 2 children.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/681212/Freud-inquiry-over-link-with-McCanns
So who were the other 3 people?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 20, 2016, 01:51:02 AM
Quote from: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 12:37:05 AM
Apparently a party of 7 people went for meal at CF's place including 2 children.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/681212/Freud-inquiry-over-link-with-McCanns
So who were the other 3 people?

Lunch - Trisha, Sandy & Justine were the other 3. (Madeleine p.193)
Wonder who delivered the letter?

PS Pegasus - I'm still waiting to know what the fake Cardinal was doing in the sea. Please.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 01:08:36 PM
Quote from: misty on June 20, 2016, 01:51:02 AM
Lunch - Trisha, Sandy & Justine were the other 3. (Madeleine p.193)
(snip)
Thanks
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 01:23:53 PM
Quote from: misty on June 20, 2016, 01:51:02 AM
(snip) still waiting to know what the fake Cardinal was doing in the sea. Please.
Why would anyone use a long metal rod in a search scenario?
It's obvious - to probe into the ground.
Here is a long metal rod being used by the NPIA cadaver dog team early morning 1st Aug 2007 in an area north of Rua Ramalhete.


(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P8/08_VOLUME_VIIIa_Page_2061.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 01:30:16 PM
And here is a long metal rod being used as a search tool by the Metropolitan Police on wasteland south of Rua 21 Abril in June 2014


(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/02/11/1EA9824C00000578-0-image-a-59_1423672562694.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 20, 2016, 01:33:05 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 01:23:53 PM
Why would anyone use a long metal rod in a search scenario?
It's obvious - to probe into the ground.
Here is a long metal rod being used by the NPIA cadaver dog team early morning 1st Aug 2007 in an area north of Rua Ramalhete.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P8/08_VOLUME_VIIIa_Page_2061.jpg

I'm still not getting it. Shallow water sand is constantly churned over by the waves What was he prodding/searching for if not fish?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 02:55:01 PM
Quote from: misty on June 20, 2016, 01:33:05 PM
I'm still not getting it. Shallow water sand is constantly churned over by the waves What was he prodding/searching for if not fish?
I don't know what sorts of leads or theories they were working from, maybe he was probing into the submerged sand beyond low tide line for something.
What is your explanation of the footage of this strangely dressed man wading in the sea at night with a pole?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 03:01:17 PM
Two people in that team were keen on "clock on mantelpiece" disguises and there are two proven uses of fake clergymen therefore there are probably more.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 20, 2016, 03:06:11 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 01:23:53 PM
Why would anyone use a long metal rod in a search scenario?
It's obvious - to probe into the ground.
Here is a long metal rod being used by the NPIA cadaver dog team early morning 1st Aug 2007 in an area north of Rua Ramalhete.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P8/08_VOLUME_VIIIa_Page_2061.jpg

You will find the answer in "Beyond Belief" by Emlyn Williams.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 20, 2016, 05:58:36 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 01:23:53 PM
Why would anyone use a long metal rod in a search scenario?
It's obvious - to probe into the ground.
Here is a long metal rod being used by the NPIA cadaver dog team early morning 1st Aug 2007 in an area north of Rua Ramalhete.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P8/08_VOLUME_VIIIa_Page_2061.jpg
I'm wary of describing this as probing into the ground with a long metal rod.  First, the ground is so hard by May that I don't think you'd get through the surface.  Second, the tool looks to me to be some variant of a hand-powered drill i.e. the handles are there for turning the tool.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 20, 2016, 06:02:07 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 01:30:16 PM
And here is a long metal rod being used as a search tool by the Metropolitan Police on wasteland south of Rua 21 Abril in June 2014
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/02/11/1EA9824C00000578-0-image-a-59_1423672562694.jpg
That isn't being used to probe the surface though.  The officer is using it to move aside brush or gorse, to avoid getting down with his hands to do the same.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 20, 2016, 06:17:07 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 02:55:01 PM
I don't know what sorts of leads or theories they were working from, maybe he was probing into the submerged sand beyond low tide line for something.
What is your explanation of the footage of this strangely dressed man wading in the sea at night with a pole?
If anyone knows the background to this team and their antics, it would be interesting to start a thread on it.  Anyone?

At the moment, working with the tiny scraps I have, here is my stab at an answer.

First, the person had a genuine belief that something related to the case was buried there, (e.g. a body or clothes) some distance under the surface of the sand, and the person was genuinely testing this out.

Second, the quote says footage, so I assume we are talking video here. And that raises the possibility it is part of a stunt, simply to 'justify' costs and expenses, as in 'We were very diligent.  Even making sure the beach was fully checked out!'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 20, 2016, 06:39:12 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 20, 2016, 05:58:36 PM
I'm wary of describing this as probing into the ground with a long metal rod.  First, the ground is so hard by May that I don't think you'd get through the surface.  Second, the tool looks to me to be some variant of a hand-powered drill i.e. the handles are there for turning the tool.

It appears to be a hand auger


https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=hand+auger+boring&biw=1252&bih=562&tbm=isch&imgil=XMiVD66xL9lJrM%253A%253BfLZipYAtyM5X8M%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.yourarticlelibrary.com%25252Fsoil%25252Fsoil-exploration-purpose-planning-investigation-and-tests-2%25252F45821%25252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=XMiVD66xL9lJrM%253A%252CfLZipYAtyM5X8M%252C_&usg=__P-EuLp1Y1EHxGlvGip1zS8-HO7g%3D&ved=0ahUKEwjdkKeMkrfNAhWrIMAKHaXJD3IQyjcIVg&ei=YyloV53TG6vBgAalk7-QBw#imgrc=XMiVD66xL9lJrM%3A
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 09:42:29 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 20, 2016, 06:39:12 PM
It appears to be a hand auger (snip)
Yes. As mentioned by Mark Harrison here
"The search utilised dogs trained to locate human remains and human blood, ground penetrating radar to detect sub surface disturbance and concealment, clearance teams to remove concealing vegetation, endoscopes to search drains and voids, and metal probes to search the ground."
and here
" The proven capability of the EVRD is to: Search to locate very small samples of human remains, body fluids and blood in any environment or terrain. Identify sub-surface depositions to a depth of approximately one metre below the surface of the ground, depending on the scent permeability of the ground. This depth is increased substantially when the ground is 'vented' prior to deployment."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 10:05:31 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 20, 2016, 06:17:07 PM
(snip) .... I assume we are talking video here ...(snip)
the brief video footage is at http://youtu.be/vphKz-Xjbn0?t=9m40s
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on June 22, 2016, 01:25:19 AM
Quote from: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 10:05:31 PM
the brief video footage is at http://youtu.be/vphKz-Xjbn0?t=9m40s

Off his trolley.   %&5%£
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 22, 2016, 02:52:48 AM
Quote from: Admin on June 22, 2016, 01:25:19 AM
Off his trolley.   %&5%£
@Admin and do you think of this priest?
As Shining will confirm he is on Rua Salgadeiras just south of the Smith sighting
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on June 22, 2016, 07:50:36 AM
Quote from: Admin on June 22, 2016, 01:25:19 AM
Off his trolley.   %&5%£

Yup.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 23, 2016, 06:14:47 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on June 22, 2016, 07:50:36 AM
Yup.
The madman disguise fooled King Achish and it still fools everyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 23, 2016, 11:15:19 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 23, 2016, 06:14:47 PM
The madman disguise fooled King Achish and it still fools everyone.

Who was the Cardinal attempting to deceive & did he look like Richard Gere?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 24, 2016, 04:20:25 PM
Quote from: misty on June 23, 2016, 11:15:19 PM
Who was the Cardinal attempting to deceive & did he look like Richard Gere?
You can see what he looked like in the video - IMO like someone wearing a latex old man mask (one that includes a saggy neck front) and a hat and hoodie to hide the sides of mask, and sunglasses to hide the eye holes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 24, 2016, 04:30:18 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 24, 2016, 04:20:25 PM
You can see what he looked like in the video - IMO like someone wearing a latex old man mask (one that includes a saggy neck front) and a hat and hoodie to hide the sides of mask, and sunglasses to hide the eye holes.
  Any idea how tall he is ?

My suspect loved dressing up.

But what was he doing and when ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 25, 2016, 12:54:41 AM
Quote from: pegasus on June 20, 2016, 10:05:31 PM
the brief video footage is at http://youtu.be/vphKz-Xjbn0?t=9m40s

That looks like the little black guys frm the film Ghost coming to take you to hell when youve been bad, what / who is it? For the uniniated?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 26, 2016, 04:40:25 PM
Quote from: mercury on June 25, 2016, 12:54:41 AM
That looks like the little black guys frm the film Ghost coming to take you to hell when youve been bad, what / who is it? For the uniniated?
Supposedly the man with the hoodie and long white staff wading in the sea at night is a suspect who was under surveillance by the MFLNSU funded Halligen undercover team in PDL.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 26, 2016, 11:43:31 PM
Quote from: pegasus on June 26, 2016, 04:40:25 PM
Supposedly the man with the hoodie and long white staff wading in the sea at night is a suspect who was under surveillance by the MFLNSU funded Halligen undercover team in PDL.

Where did you read that?
And why do I need to stifle a laugh?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 27, 2016, 12:12:23 AM
Quote from: mercury on June 26, 2016, 11:43:31 PM
Where did you read that?
And why do I need to stifle a laugh?
In the documentary, members of the MFLNSU-funded undercover detective team, in PDL and in Washington DC, clearly state that the man in the sea with hoodie and long white staff was a suspect they had under surveillance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 27, 2016, 12:18:24 AM
Sorry, what documentary?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 27, 2016, 12:28:51 AM
Quote from: mercury on June 27, 2016, 12:18:24 AM
Sorry, what documentary?
http://youtu.be/vphKz-Xjbn0
Operation Omega
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on June 27, 2016, 12:49:00 AM
Quote from: pegasus on June 27, 2016, 12:28:51 AM
http://youtu.be/vphKz-Xjbn0
Operation Omega

OMG what an utter and total dogs dinner, I could only watch so much

What a joke that docu was
It really beggars belief

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 27, 2016, 12:56:54 AM
Quote from: pegasus on June 27, 2016, 12:28:51 AM
http://youtu.be/vphKz-Xjbn0
Operation Omega

It really was just a fishing trip.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on June 27, 2016, 01:52:08 AM
There are 223 pages listing many thousands of car rentals in the files.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 03, 2016, 09:14:00 AM
I have a question,  as this is the 'Off Topic' thread I think it is ok to post it if not please delete.

Has anyone acted out, whether it would have been possible for Madeleine to have heard Gerry talking in the road from her bedroom?

I have been thinking about this and with the windows closed in my house I don't hear anyone speaking around the back of the house from my bedroom.

Also wouldn't Mrs Fenn have heard Gerry and Jez talking?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 03, 2016, 03:16:54 PM
Quote from: Lace on July 03, 2016, 09:14:00 AM
I have a question,  as this is the 'Off Topic' thread I think it is ok to post it if not please delete.

Has anyone acted out, whether it would have been possible for Madeleine to have heard Gerry talking in the road from her bedroom?

I have been thinking about this and with the windows closed in my house I don't hear anyone speaking around the back of the house from my bedroom.

Also wouldn't Mrs Fenn have heard Gerry and Jez talking?

With a sleeping child in the pushchair their voices would have been hushed.

From her bedroom, Madeleine would definitely have NOT been able to hear them talking.  Too far away and too many brick walls /windows to go through for sound to reach that far.

As they were standing on the corner of the alleyway which is 10 metres away from the sitting room window ... furthermore out of sight of anyone in that sitting room window, then I think it is virtually impossible that anyone standing in that window would have been able to hear them either ... and that is with the window open.

We don't know if that window was open or closed .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on July 20, 2016, 02:55:30 AM
Quote from: sadie on July 03, 2016, 03:16:54 PM
With a sleeping child in the pushchair their voices would have been hushed.

From her bedroom, Madeleine would definitely have NOT been able to hear them talking.  Too far away and too many brick walls /windows to go through for sound to reach that far.

As they were standing on the corner of the alleyway which is 10 metres away from the sitting room window ... furthermore out of sight of anyone in that sitting room window, then I think it is virtually impossible that anyone standing in that window would have been able to hear them either ... and that is with the window open.

We don't know if that window was open or closed .
IMO the lounge window (behind the sofa) was closed Sadie.
In your opinion, was it single-glazed or double-glazed?
It makes a big difference to sound transmission
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 20, 2016, 04:56:54 PM
Quote from: pegasus on July 20, 2016, 02:55:30 AM
IMO the lounge window (behind the sofa) was closed Sadie.
In your opinion, was it single-glazed or double-glazed?
It makes a big difference to sound transmission

I haven't a clue Pegasus, but I would imagine it was single glazed in a warm country.

If you had read my post, you would see that I had just said that I believed that Gerry and Jez would have been chatting in hushed voices, cos Jezes little one was asleep in the pushchair.  They were 10 metres away and out of sight.  Even with the window open I doubt that anyone would have heard in those circumstance ... and certainly not through a closed window, single or double glazed.

IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 20, 2016, 05:22:42 PM
Quote from: sadie on July 20, 2016, 04:56:54 PM
I haven't a clue Pegasus, but I would imagine it was single glazed in a warm country.

If you had read my post, you would see that I had just said that I believed that Gerry and Jez would have been chatting in hushed voices, cos Jezes little one was asleep in the pushchair.  They were 10 metres away and out of sight.  Even with the window open I doubt that anyone would have heard in those circumstance ... and certainly not through a closed window, single or double glazed.

IMO
If I can remember, I'll try to nip down for a peek.

I have been in perhaps 15 to 20 properties in Portugal and Spain and all bar 1 had double-glazing.

It is sitting in the low 30s in the shade outside at the moment, but the double glazing means it is low 20s inside.  In winter, it works the opposite way.  If it is, say, 13C outside, then you want something that keeps the heat in efficiently.

Kate writes about checking the patio door to see if wind was going out that way.  If the window was open, then checking the patio door was a bit pointless.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 20, 2016, 06:34:22 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 20, 2016, 05:22:42 PM
If I can remember, I'll try to nip down for a peek.

I have been in perhaps 15 to 20 properties in Portugal and Spain and all bar 1 had double-glazing.

It is sitting in the low 30s in the shade outside at the moment, but the double glazing means it is low 20s inside.  In winter, it works the opposite way.  If it is, say, 13C outside, then you want something that keeps the heat in efficiently.

Kate writes about checking the patio door to see if wind was going out that way.  If the window was open, then checking the patio door was a bit pointless.

I agree but Kate was in a dreadful panic.  Panicking people do not always do or think of rational things.

On GE street scene it shows the shutters closed.  Am I right in thinking that if the shutters are closed it means either inward opening windows or sliders?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on July 27, 2016, 12:57:43 PM
Quote from: sadie on July 20, 2016, 06:34:22 PM
I agree but Kate was in a dreadful panic.  Panicking people do not always do or think of rational things.

On GE street scene it shows the shutters closed.  Am I right in thinking that if the shutters are closed it means either inward opening windows or sliders?
sliders sadie
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on July 27, 2016, 04:25:33 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 27, 2016, 01:10:25 PM
"Parents moved to 5H for a few hours that night,"  So I take that to mean they shared the payne's apartment   for the remainder of the night.

"then moved to 4G day-time 4th" So that was in the Block next door closer to the main road. 

 "then moved to villa on 1st/2nd July."  The villa where the video was taken of the dog search in August.

...(snip)
Yes that's right. Also on about 5th May they were allocated two extra apartments in block 4 (same block as 4G), for guests and office. The move from block 4 apartments to villa took two days 1 and 2 July
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on July 27, 2016, 04:39:32 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 27, 2016, 01:10:25 PM
(snip) ..."Other couple were there 28Apr-22May and 30Jun-2Jul" ..(snip)
There are several sources for this, including Outros Apensos 13 mobile phone data. BTW a correction it's 29Jun-02Jul
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 27, 2016, 06:44:20 PM
Quote from: pegasus on July 27, 2016, 04:39:32 PM
There are several sources for this, including Outros Apensos 13 mobile phone data. BTW a correction it's 29Jun-02Jul
OK the question that goes through my mind is what was so important for them to go back to PDL just for essentially a couple of days (effectively just the two whole days if they arrive late one day and left early three days later).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on July 27, 2016, 08:59:58 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 27, 2016, 06:44:20 PM
OK the question that goes through my mind is what was so important for them to go back to PDL just for essentially a couple of days (effectively just the one day if they arrive late one day and left early two days later).
It was a nice thing to to go back and support their friends IMO Robbity.
Also see correction (29th not 30th).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 27, 2016, 09:03:44 PM
Quote from: pegasus on July 27, 2016, 08:59:58 PM
It was a nice thing to to go back and support their friends IMO Robbity.
Also see correction (29th not 30th).
I don't know about that as I don't have friends.  I noted the change. 29, 30, 1, 2.  I'll have to see where the dates  land within the week. 29th Friday  30th Saturday 1st July  Sunday 2nd Monday. so it was like having the weekend in PDL.  With a bit time each end to do other things.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 27, 2016, 10:37:46 PM
Quote from: pegasus on July 27, 2016, 08:59:58 PM
It was a nice thing to to go back and support their friends IMO Robbity.
Also see correction (29th not 30th).

Possibly also to return GM's wallet to him (as stated in GM's blog for 29th)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on July 28, 2016, 12:02:47 AM
Quote from: misty on July 27, 2016, 10:37:46 PM
Possibly also to return GM's wallet to him (as stated in GM's blog for 29th)
Yes they are the friends who returned the pickpocketed wallet on June 29th.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on July 28, 2016, 10:59:02 AM
Quote from: mercury on July 28, 2016, 12:49:42 AM
2 aparts provided by MW (snip)
3 apartments merc
4G on 1st floor
4I on 1st floor
4x (letter unknown) on 3rd and 4th floors (duplex penthouse)         
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 28, 2016, 01:57:14 PM
Quote from: misty on July 27, 2016, 10:37:46 PM
Possibly also to return GM's wallet to him (as stated in GM's blog for 29th)

Two friends flew out on 26th June and returned on 29th. They were there to replace the Camerons, who had business in the UK.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NICKY_GILL.htm

When we went back for the second time at the end of June to attend our sons graduation, it was even more difficult.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PATRICIA_CAMERON.htm

As I understand it they often stayed with the McCanns when visiting their son at Cambridge Uni. Did they stay in Leicestershire at the end of June? Was it them who collected the wallet and brought it back? They returned on 29th when the two women left.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 28, 2016, 02:49:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 28, 2016, 01:57:14 PM
Two friends flew out on 26th June and returned on 29th. They were there to replace the Camerons, who had business in the UK.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NICKY_GILL.htm

When we went back for the second time at the end of June to attend our sons graduation, it was even more difficult.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PATRICIA_CAMERON.htm

As I understand it they often stayed with the McCanns when visiting their son at Cambridge Uni. Did they stay in Leicestershire at the end of June? Was it them who collected the wallet and brought it back? They returned on 29th when the two women left.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/DIARY_BLOG.htm

Day 57 - 29/06/2007       
 Friday

Early rise this morning dropping off and picking up good friends from the airport. One of our friends from Amsterdam, who has been actively campaigning to publicise Madeleines disappearance, dropped in to see us for a couple of hours since he is on a golfing trip in the Algarve.

Our friends brought back my wallet which had been returned, needless to say minus the Sterling, although all my cards and €30 were still in it! It is good to have my driving license back and one or two other important things.

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

The Camerons are family, not friends.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on July 28, 2016, 04:24:17 PM
It was returned in person on morning 29th by friends from Leicester see OA13 p74+79 Misty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 28, 2016, 04:30:15 PM
Quote from: misty on July 28, 2016, 02:49:51 PM
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/DIARY_BLOG.htm

Day 57 - 29/06/2007       
 Friday

Early rise this morning dropping off and picking up good friends from the airport. One of our friends from Amsterdam, who has been actively campaigning to publicise Madeleines disappearance, dropped in to see us for a couple of hours since he is on a golfing trip in the Algarve.

Our friends brought back my wallet which had been returned, needless to say minus the Sterling, although all my cards and €30 were still in it! It is good to have my driving license back and one or two other important things.

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

The Camerons are family, not friends.

I know they are. I was trying to connect the dots. Wallet posted from London 22nd June. Goes to McCann's previous address on 23rd? Forwarded to Rothley address on 24th? Were the Kennedy's checking the post daily so found it on 24th? Was it then posted to 'friends' elsewhere for delivery to Portugal on 29th, did they collect it or were the friends local? No-one said, unfortunately.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on July 28, 2016, 04:30:25 PM
Quote from: pegasus on July 28, 2016, 04:24:17 PM
It was returned on 29th by friends who live near Qboro see  OA13p74+79 Misty

I think your post got mixed up a bit pegasus.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 28, 2016, 04:33:26 PM
Quote from: pegasus on July 28, 2016, 04:24:17 PM
It was returned in person on morning 29th by friends who live near Qboro see OA13p74+79 Misty

Sorry, your references mean nothing to me pegasus?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on July 28, 2016, 04:42:04 PM
Not garbled, it is a reference to the files for Misty

... ETA ... It is abbreviation for Outros Apensos Volume 13 Pages 74 and 79
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 28, 2016, 04:49:21 PM
Quote from: pegasus on July 28, 2016, 04:42:04 PM
Not garbled, it is a reference to the files for Misty

Well, i knew that.  So what is it to argue about?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 28, 2016, 05:33:00 PM
Quote from: pegasus on July 28, 2016, 04:24:17 PM
It was returned in person on morning 29th by friends from Leicester see OA13p74+79 Misty

Thanks, Pegasus. FP stopped on for a while after DP returned home, then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on July 28, 2016, 06:04:12 PM
Quote from: misty on July 28, 2016, 05:33:00 PM
(snip) ...stopped on for a while ...(snip)
IMO both departed 2nd Jul early morning (one happened to use phone that morning and other didn't).
Just over a week later one of them flew to portugal again (PJ meeting re RM identification)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 28, 2016, 06:20:08 PM
Quote from: pegasus on July 28, 2016, 06:04:12 PM
IMO both departed 2nd Jul early morning (one happened to use phone that morning and other didn't).
Just over a week later one of them flew to portugal again (PJ meeting re RM identification)

Ah, yes, I didn't notice the break in dates when I glanced earlier.
Montenegro is the mast nearest the airport, I assume.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 01, 2016, 12:48:39 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 31, 2016, 11:17:59 PM
In the New Theory it is possible to have bags removed just prior to the Police being called.
I have said the removed bag would have been belonging to Mark Warner and removed prior to the Police being called.  So any photos taken at a later time logically do not change or have any bearing on this prior event.
You would have to have been there to be able to know this: "Police were phoned about 22:41, no bags were removed before then."  Were you there?  Were you actually in the room at 22:41?  Presumably you weren't for there were times Kate says she was on her own.
The phonecall time is from network records. The 2 large bits of luggage arriving at apartment is from airline docs and the two leaving is from press. It's all evidence-based. Where is the evidence for the 3rd one you suggest?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 02, 2016, 01:53:53 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2016, 01:38:11 AM

If you read the statement you already quoted, you will find that they first became aware of the disappearance when they were woken up and told at about 01:00 and it is fairly obvious that JH and MO would have told them that the police were already at the scene.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on August 02, 2016, 03:18:50 PM
Dad who reported baby abducted from parking lot charged with murder

August 1, 2016

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/kaylynn-crawford-missing-ohio-dad-who-reported-baby-abducted-from-parking-lot-charged-with-murder/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab6a&linkId=27179471
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 02, 2016, 03:56:44 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on August 02, 2016, 03:18:50 PM
Dad who reported baby abducted from parking lot charged with murder

August 1, 2016

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/kaylynn-crawford-missing-ohio-dad-who-reported-baby-abducted-from-parking-lot-charged-with-murder/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab6a&linkId=27179471

At least the police have the body.
Bit odd, leaving the seat too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on August 02, 2016, 04:14:31 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on August 02, 2016, 03:18:50 PM
Dad who reported baby abducted from parking lot charged with murder

August 1, 2016

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/kaylynn-crawford-missing-ohio-dad-who-reported-baby-abducted-from-parking-lot-charged-with-murder/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab6a&linkId=27179471

This is the sort of drip-drip innuendo I object to, strenuously.

Because someone (somewhere) did report an 'abduction' when they were, themselves, culpable, it (apparently!) follows that every couple to file a similar report must also, themselves, be guilty (of something culpable). 

It really is the most reprehensible way to carry on.  Collumbo would be ashamed (I'm sure).  Whoever created that television character made Collumbo of much sterner (and more rigorous) stuff than that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on August 02, 2016, 04:19:31 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on August 02, 2016, 03:18:50 PM
Dad who reported baby abducted from parking lot charged with murder

August 1, 2016

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/kaylynn-crawford-missing-ohio-dad-who-reported-baby-abducted-from-parking-lot-charged-with-murder/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab6a&linkId=27179471
What can we deduce from this story Pathfinder...?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 02, 2016, 04:41:46 PM
Quote from: Alfie on August 02, 2016, 04:19:31 PM
What can we deduce from this story Pathfinder...?

Yet another dysfunctional family with an abusive father who had undergone anger management and whose wife and the child he subsequently murdered were under a protection order which barred him from contact with them.
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/08/01/countywide-search-underway-missing-infant/87904278/

It isn't really 'wandering Off Topic' more like careering uncontrollably.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on August 02, 2016, 04:57:32 PM
Quote from: Alfie on August 02, 2016, 04:19:31 PM
What can we deduce from this story Pathfinder...?

Child Abduction by a Stranger is Very Rare.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on August 02, 2016, 05:13:00 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on August 02, 2016, 04:57:32 PM
Child Abduction by a Stranger is Very Rare.

And?

You only have to know it happens.

Peter Voisey (from the bath of a ground-floor flat while all the family was at home).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on August 02, 2016, 05:52:38 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on August 02, 2016, 04:57:32 PM
Child Abduction by a Stranger is Very Rare.
We already know that.  Your story does not rule it out in this case though does it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2016, 10:20:53 PM
Quote from: sadie on August 02, 2016, 10:14:35 PM
IIRC. one of the waiters claimed to have phoned, Robbity.  I cant remember which one .... Maybe Jeronimo, but am not sure
OK the two last calls were 12 minutes apart but what about the one at 9:22 did that come from PDL?  That might have been someone reporting strange goings on in and around apartment G5A.
The two (12 minutes apart) calls could almost be considered the one call, but it is the earlier one that fascinates me the most.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on August 02, 2016, 11:04:05 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2016, 10:20:53 PM
OK the two last calls were 12 minutes apart but what about the one at 9:22 did that come from PDL?  That might have been someone reporting strange goings on in and around apartment G5A.
The two (12 minutes apart) calls could almost be considered the one call, but it is the earlier one that fascinates me the most.

Whose number is it being called at 21 22?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2016, 11:34:28 PM
Quote from: mercury on August 02, 2016, 11:04:05 PM
Whose number is it being called at 21 22?
What I have noted is that the number that called at 21:21:55  is the same number that also calls after the two calls from the Ocean Club (the highlighted ones)  this 2nd call was from 962414590 which is received by the police at 22:59:11 which is the time the first 2 GNR Police arrive at PDL.???
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 03, 2016, 12:08:29 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2016, 10:20:53 PM
OK the two last calls were 12 minutes apart but what about the one at 9:22 did that come from PDL?  That might have been someone reporting strange goings on in and around apartment G5A.
The two (12 minutes apart) calls could almost be considered the one call, but it is the earlier one that fascinates me the most.
Robbity the list you posted (page 3051) is calls from OC.
OC=2827710xx
GNR=282762809
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 12:15:55 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 03, 2016, 12:08:29 AM
Robbity the list you posted is calls from OC.
OC=2827710xx
GNR=282762809
Thanks for that correction, so do we have: "What I have noted is that the number that is called from Ocean Club at 21:21:55  is the same number that is also called after the two calls from the Ocean Club (the highlighted ones) to the PNR.
This 2nd call was to 962414590 which is made at 22:59:11 which is the time the first 2 GNR Police arrive at PDL.???"
Does that make better sense?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on August 03, 2016, 12:28:53 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2016, 11:34:28 PM
What I have noted is that the number that called at 21:21:55  is the same number that also calls after the two calls from the Ocean Club (the highlighted ones)  this 2nd call was from 962414590 which is received by the police at 22:59:11 which is the time the first 2 GNR Police arrive at PDL.???

The number endng 459 is the number called not the number called from, so
There is no call recieved by police at 22 59 , their number is different...someone will correct if i am wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 03, 2016, 12:32:16 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2016, 11:34:28 PM
(snip) ... call was from 962414590 which is received by the police at 22:59:11 ...(snip)
Robbity the call at 22:59:11 is from OC to a mobile, and it doesn't involve the GNR at all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on August 03, 2016, 12:39:17 AM
Quote from: mercury on August 03, 2016, 12:28:53 AM
The number endng 459 is the number called not the number called from, so
There is no call recieved by police at 22 59 , their number is different...someone will correct if i am wrong
G-Unit has used the PJ Files re OC staff to identify that the 4 calls made after the 2 calls to the GNR were to staff members working within the complex.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on August 03, 2016, 12:43:11 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on August 03, 2016, 12:39:17 AM
G-Unit has used the PJ Files re OC staff to identify that the 4 calls made after the 2 calls to the GNR were to staff members working within the complex.

Ok thank you
And well done GU

ROb take note
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 12:59:30 AM
Quote from: mercury on August 03, 2016, 12:28:53 AM
The number endng 459 is the number called not the number called from, so
There is no call recieved by police at 22 59 , their number is different...someone will correct if i am wrong
I think I covered this in my correction.
My correction was ""What I have noted is that the number that is called from Ocean Club at 21:21:55  is the same number that is also called after the two calls from the Ocean Club (the highlighted ones) to the PNR.
This 2nd call was to 962414590 which is made at 22:59:11 which is about the time the first 2 GNR Police arrive at PDL.

Thanks
"G-Unit has used the PJ Files re OC staff to identify that the 4 calls made after the 2 calls to the GNR were to staff members working within the complex."  So if that is true, I have no doubts about it, then the call made earlier at 21:21:55 was of the same nature "to staff members working within the complex".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 03, 2016, 01:28:13 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 01:16:56 AM
Can you give me the full link please?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAGE_ORDER.htm
scroll down to processos volume XI
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 01:53:45 AM
Quote from: mercury on August 03, 2016, 01:47:16 AM
which  forum out of interest
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6456.msg252517#msg252517

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6456.msg256385#msg256385 Very interesting timing there for there was call to the police very close to that time.  The time in the post is just 2 minutes prior that phone call.
21:21:55  but was it from that  PDL geographical area?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on August 03, 2016, 01:56:12 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 12:59:30 AM
I think I covered this in my correction.
My correction was ""What I have noted is that the number that is called from Ocean Club at 21:21:55  is the same number that is also called after the two calls from the Ocean Club (the highlighted ones) to the PNR.
This 2nd call was to 962414590 which is made at 22:59:11 which is about the time the first 2 GNR Police arrive at PDL.

Thanks
"G-Unit has used the PJ Files re OC staff to identify that the 4 calls made after the 2 calls to the GNR were to staff members working within the complex."  So if that is true, I have no doubts about it, then the call made earlier at 21:21:55 was of the same nature "to staff members working within the complex".

No you didnt
You posted
What I have noted is that the number that called at 21:21:55  is the same number that also calls after the two calls from the Ocean Club (the highlighted ones)  this 2nd call was from 962414590 which is received by the police at 22:59:11 which is the time the first 2 GNR Police arrive at PDL.???
Report to moderator     Logged
There was no call received  by police at 22 59


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on August 03, 2016, 02:00:26 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 01:53:45 AM
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6456.msg252517#msg252517

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6456.msg256385#msg256385 Very interesting timing there for there was call to the police very close to that time.  The time in the post is just 2 minutes prior that phone call.
21:21:55  but was it from that  PDL geographical area?

Oh
When you said old forum i imagned you meant a dfferent one from here!!
Anyway there was no call to police before 22 41 that night
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 02:03:55 AM
Quote from: mercury on August 03, 2016, 02:00:26 AM
Oh
When you said old forum i imagned you meant a dfferent one from here!!
Anyway there was no call to police before 22 41 that night
Yes, I understand now.   My correction was ""What I have noted is that the number that is called from Ocean Club at 21:21:55  is the same number that is also called after the two calls from the Ocean Club (the highlighted ones) to the PNR.
This 2nd call was to 962414590 which is made at 22:59:11 which is about the time the first 2 GNR Police arrive at PDL.

Thanks
"G-Unit has used the PJ Files re OC staff to identify that the 4 calls made after the 2 calls to the GNR were to staff members working within the complex."  So if that is true, I have no doubts about it, then the call made earlier at 21:21:55 was of the same nature "to staff members working within the complex".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 03, 2016, 02:36:40 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 12:59:30 AM
I think I covered this in my correction.
My correction was ""What I have noted is that the number that is called from Ocean Club at 21:21:55  is the same number that is also called after the two calls from the Ocean Club (the highlighted ones) to the PNR.
This 2nd call was to 962414590 which is made at 22:59:11 which is about the time the first 2 GNR Police arrive at PDL.

Thanks
"G-Unit has used the PJ Files re OC staff to identify that the 4 calls made after the 2 calls to the GNR were to staff members working within the complex."  So if that is true, I have no doubts about it, then the call made earlier at 21:21:55 was of the same nature "to staff members working within the complex".
After the calls to GNR the receptionist phoned his manager and reported the situation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 02:48:45 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 03, 2016, 02:36:40 AM
After the calls to GNR the receptionist phoned his manager and reported the situation.
What do you mean by "reported the situation"?  Are you reading from his/her statement to this fact.  If so what is this person's name?
The phone calls to the Manager were 7 - 18 minutes after the GNR calls so he wasn't just reporting that the police had been called, but maybe that the police had arrived. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 03, 2016, 03:20:12 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 02:48:45 AM
What do you mean by "reported the situation"?  Are you reading from his/her statement to this fact.  ... (snip)
See mccannpjfiles site - english translations page
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 04:37:03 AM
     LINDSAY JANE JOHNSTON
Quote
She indicates that on May 3rd 2007, at around 10.20pm, she was informed by her colleague Amy T. that Madeleine McCann had disappeared. At that, she immediately launched the "missing child" procedure. This procedure consists of dividing the site into several areas, which are allocated to various of the company's employees to start searching for the missing child. To that effect, the informant explains that, around 10.25pm, the date indicated, the said procedure was begun, dividing the whole site into three distinct areas, namely the north zone, the central zone (including the area of the company) and all the roads surrounding the company and which go as far as the beach. Five of the company's employees were mobilised to coordinate the searches, helped by various people ( other employees, tourists and residents)

Later, not knowing precisely what time, the local police came to the company and, taking into account the procedure which we had set in place, they proceeded with the appropriate actions for this type of situation.

Questioned by us, the informant indicated that the searches by members of the OCEAN CLUB ended at around 4am on the morning of May 4th, without result.
AMY ELLEN TIERNEY
Quote
The witness confirms that the girl's father went to the reception to call the police as soon as her disappearance was noticed and that twenty minutes had passed. The GNR took 30 - 35 minutes to arrive.

 JOHN ELLIOT HILL
Quote
With regard to the facts of the investigation. Statements show that he knew of these facts by means of a phone call from Lindsay, head of the child care service, who told him about a female child staying at the resort who had disappeared. This phone call was made to the deponent's mobile phone at about 22.28 on 03-05-2007. About 5 minutes later the deponent presented himself at the resort, because Lindsay had told him that she had initiated the procedure for missing children used by the company and the child had not been found. Upon arriving at the scene he saw about 100 people, employees, guests and residents searching the grounds, the beach and adjoining areas calling out the child's name.

With the use of cellphones there seem to be calls that are not registered on this phone register. 
What time did Gerry call the police?
From that time it took 30-35 min for them to arrive.  When did the police arrive?
First GNR arrived about 11 PM or 23:00.  Is then when Amy takes her timing from?

If the procedures start at 10:25 presumably that is done on permission of the Manager John Hill and we are told that is at 10:25 and he arrives shortly after that.   
According to Amy 20 minutes had passed before GM went to reception at 10:28 or thereabout JH rung and missing child procedure activated.  Gerry's request to ring the police is not complied with then but at either 10:41 or 10:53 take your pick.  If it was at 10:53 then they must have already been on their way.
So that puts the alert by Kate at 10:08
To what time do you add the 30-35 minutes to arrive? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 05:17:09 AM
    http://www.mccannfiles.com/id258.html
Quote
Statements of the GNR officers who attended the Ocean Club on the night/morning or 03/04 May 2007
Time
The order of arrival
23:00 :José Maria Batista Roque and Nelson Filipe Pacheco da Costa
 
23:25/23:50 :António Henrique da Conceição Duarte (Sergeant and Commander of the Lagos GNR Post)
 
 
00:00 : Rui Ségio Lopes Silva and 'Santos' (no statement found)
 
00:05 : Paulo Jorge Carvaihosa da Costa
 
00:10/00:15 : José Carlos Leal Pimentel
 
01.05/01.20 : Paulo Jorge Fernandes Neto
 
01:10 : João Vasco da Silva Casimiro
 
01:55/02:30 : Armando Augusto Morais and Carlos Manuel Carvalho Lacão


It is anyone's guess when the Police arrived for which group of officers are you aware of?  It sounded like the first 2 are not usually counted in the timing.
That was what made me think there were two separate call outs made to the PJ only one activating the Missing child procedures.
 

 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 07:42:00 AM
Who was the witness saying the following? My wife mentioned on the following day that she vaguely remembered someone calling "Madeleine, Madeleine", this was after we had crossed the road from the MW reception and before entering our apartment. She does not remember where the sound came from or whether it was in an urgent tone, not paying any more attention to it and only remembered the following day when we heard about Madeleine's disappearance". OK, before going on the next part, do you remember at what time you left'

If his wife wasn't interviewed that is not his problem, but it is still a clue for me.  A very important one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 03, 2016, 08:52:37 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 02:48:45 AM
What do you mean by "reported the situation"?  Are you reading from his/her statement to this fact.  If so what is this person's name?
The phone calls to the Manager were 7 - 18 minutes after the GNR calls so he wasn't just reporting that the police had been called, but maybe that the police had arrived.

If the receptionist [Helder Luis] phoned his manager [Vitor Santos] he didn't use the reception landline. Santos' number wasn't dialed after the police were called.

He knows about the situation that happened at the Ocean Club concerning the disappearance of a little given that on the day in question (03/05/2007) he was on duty and was contacted by a member of staff from the Tapas Restaurant between 09.30 and 22.00 who informed him that the daughter of some guests who were dining there had disappeared.

That he immediately contacted the GNR in Lagos, shortly after this the child’s father and John Hill arrived at the reception and he phoned the GNR again.

He then contacted the head of reception Vítor Santos and informed him of the situation.
http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/HELDER_LUIS.htm

With regard to the date of the disappearance on 3rd May 2007, he remembers that at 22.00/22.15 he received a phone call from the reception, from receptionist Helder, who told him that John Hill was extremely agitated as a child had disappeared and that the GNR had been contacted but had not arrived yet.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VITOR-SANTOS.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 10:22:15 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 03, 2016, 08:52:37 AM
If the receptionist [Helder Luis] phoned his manager [Vitor Santos] he didn't use the reception landline. Santos' number wasn't dialed after the police were called.

He knows about the situation that happened at the Ocean Club concerning the disappearance of a little given that on the day in question (03/05/2007) he was on duty and was contacted by a member of staff from the Tapas Restaurant between 09.30 and 22.00 who informed him that the daughter of some guests who were dining there had disappeared.

That he immediately contacted the GNR in Lagos, shortly after this the child’s father and John Hill arrived at the reception and he phoned the GNR again.

He then contacted the head of reception Vítor Santos and informed him of the situation.
http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/HELDER_LUIS.htm

With regard to the date of the disappearance on 3rd May 2007, he remembers that at 22.00/22.15 he received a phone call from the reception, from receptionist Helder, who told him that John Hill was extremely agitated as a child had disappeared and that the GNR had been contacted but had not arrived yet.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VITOR-SANTOS.htm
Even when you read http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VITOR-SANTOS.htm Vitor Santos could be confused as to the status of the possibility of two alerts to two missing kids.  He seems to accept that there was just the one but he too was off site when John Hill spoke to the child's father so we can't just assume that because Gerry is talking to the GNR that he is the same father mentioned talking to John Hill earlier.  Can we find any indication that Gerry McCann spoke to John Hill prior the first two GNR officers turning up at 11:00 PM?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 03, 2016, 10:45:30 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 10:22:15 AM
(snip) ... Can we find any indication that Gerry McCann spoke to John Hill prior the first two GNR officers turning up ...(snip)?
Did you consider reading JH statement?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on August 03, 2016, 02:03:00 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 04:37:03 AM
What time did Gerry call the police?


He never phoned the police, Matt was asked to run to main reception to report it.  Separately, the receptionist stated that he phoned the police initially after having been alerted by kitchen staff at the Tapas Restaurant.

Note to members

Please do not post theories within general discussion
threads. If you wish to explore a theory based on evidence
please start a new thread. TY
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on August 03, 2016, 02:33:01 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 10:22:15 AM
Even when you read http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VITOR-SANTOS.htm Vitor Santos could be confused as to the status of the possibility of two alerts to two missing kids.  He seems to accept that there was just the one but he too was off site when John Hill spoke to the child's father so we can't just assume that because Gerry is talking to the GNR that he is the same father mentioned talking to John Hill earlier.  Can we find any indication that Gerry McCann spoke to John Hill prior the first two GNR officers turning up at 11:00 PM?

Weren't they both in main reception when the GNR arrived?

If still confused about the reporting of the disappearance then this might help!

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1101.msg34381#msg34381
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 03:44:40 PM
Quote from: John on August 03, 2016, 02:33:01 PM
Weren't they both in main reception when the GNR arrived?

If still confused about the reporting of the disappearance then this might help!

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1101.msg34381#msg34381
C Edwards has done the research really well and yet he still said it was confusing. John Hill just kept losing his cool and never explained the situation properly to his staff. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on August 03, 2016, 04:06:33 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 03:44:40 PM
C Edwards has done the research really well and yet he still said it was confusing.  The only solution to that state of confusion is that there were two call outs and the ensuing confusion that followed, for John Hill just kept losing his cool and never explained the situation properly to his staff. 

I've never seen any suggestion staff were alerted twice in the PJ Files.  I've never seen anything in the media about two alerts, and that would be a hot story.  And I've never seen or heard of a missing child, which would require clarification to prevent it polluting information relating to Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 03, 2016, 04:33:56 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 03:44:40 PM
C Edwards has done the research really well and yet he still said it was confusing.  The only solution to that state of confusion is that there were two call outs and the ensuing confusion that followed, for John Hill just kept losing his cool and never explained the situation properly to his staff. 

C.Edward's research is indeed very impressive.  It is interesting, informative and fact based. That particular style of posting, in which every word spoken and every action taken by the witnesses involved is substantiated by in depth, painstaking research is in my opinion, one of the strengths of the forum.  It is devoid of unsupported speculation and is a style of posting which it would be well worth emulating in an effort to achieve the same admirable standard. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 08:15:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 03, 2016, 04:33:56 PM
C.Edward's research is indeed very impressive.  It is interesting, informative and fact based. That particular style of posting, in which every word spoken and every action taken by the witnesses involved is substantiated by in depth, painstaking research is in my opinion, one of the strengths of the forum.  It is devoid of unsupported speculation and is a style of posting which it would be well worth emulating in an effort to achieve the same admirable standard.
To me that work done was never tested with maths there is only one mathematical solution to that situation as I have described.  I am sure the mathematical solution of the situation takes it out of the realm of speculation into reality.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2016, 08:29:13 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on August 03, 2016, 04:06:33 PM
I've never seen any suggestion staff were alerted twice in the PJ Files.  I've never seen anything in the media about two alerts, and that would be a hot story.  And I've never seen or heard of a missing child, which would require clarification to prevent it polluting information relating to Madeleine.
Is John Hill still the Manager of OC?  If he is go and ask him?  But present him with the evidence discovered by that T Edwards study. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on August 03, 2016, 10:32:53 PM
Posters are AGAIN REMINDED not to post suspicions without evidence to back them up.  The only child reported missing in Luz on 3rd May 2007 was Madeleine McCann.  The alarm was raised around 10pm, anything which suggests the alarm was raised much earlier is inaccurate and misleading and will be removed on sight. TY
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on August 04, 2016, 12:27:33 AM
What do you mean by inaccurate before 10pm? Matt Oldfield said Kate left the table at 9:50 to check not 10? The waiter who served Russell his steak just before Kate left the table also said an earlier time. FP said between 9:45 to 10. Others didn't know the time because they didn't check a watch. 10pm seemed to be the convenient rounded up time to match the 30 minute checks. Foolish to presume that time is right without properly investigating it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2016, 12:47:55 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on August 04, 2016, 12:27:33 AM
What do you mean by inaccurate before 10pm? Matt Oldfield said Kate left the table at 9:50 to check not 10? The waiter who served Russell his steak just before Kate left the table also said an earlier time. FP said between 9:45 to 10. Others didn't know the time because they didn't check a watch. 10pm seemed to be the convenient rounded up time to match the 30 minute checks. Foolish to presume that time is right without properly investigating it.
Those phone calls on the register are timed, so if we can determine who made which call we will have a way of confirming time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2016, 07:17:28 AM
Quote from: misty on March 17, 2016, 08:31:27 PM
I can't find the reference to the 2nd call on 23/5 in the book or in Kate's diaries.

Going totally in another direction - what do you know about the nursery school located opposite block 4? I can't believe I've never known about it until today.

Did you ever find out about this Misty?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2016, 07:32:36 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 01, 2016, 11:31:47 AM
8:30pm can't be accurate, because three of the T7 didn't arrive at tapas until about 9pm.
Maybe SC has all his times out by about 30 minutes?
So add 30 mins to his remembered times and maybe the C family left Tapas at about 9:50pm just before KM check?
supposition.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2016, 07:36:55 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 01, 2016, 12:01:31 PM
Yes SC and his family left Tapas about 30 minutes later than he remembered IMO.
Just like PS and his family left Dolphin about 30 minutes later than he remembered.
People relaxing having a nice family meal in a restaurant do not watch the clock or rush.
Did they have a babysitter deadline to meet?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2016, 07:39:02 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 01, 2016, 12:31:16 PM
MO said Kate left the table at 9:50 but unfortunately SC never said if the voice was male or female. That would narrow down the possibilities.
It was mrs Carpenter who heard the voice.  Maybe SY can ask her to make a statement even at this late stage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on August 04, 2016, 07:40:55 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2016, 12:47:55 AM
Those phone calls on the register are timed, so if we can determine who made which call we will have a way of confirming time.

The phone call to the police was logged at 10:41 when John Hill was present at main reception. Manager John Hill was informed of the disappearance at 10:28.

"Statements show that he knew of these facts by means of a phone call from Lindsay, head of the child care service, who told him about a female child staying at the resort who had disappeared. This phone call was made to the deponent's mobile phone at about 22.28 on 03-05-2007. About 5 minutes later the deponent presented himself at the resort, because Lindsay had told him that she had initiated the procedure for missing children used by the company and the child had not been found."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_HILL.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2016, 07:43:51 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2016, 04:51:11 PM
Why do you decide that Carpenter was wrong as opposed to the T9?
Remember the statement had been translated and retranslated by the time this interview is listened/recorded.  I think the Carpenters need to be given an opportunity to make a new English interview.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2016, 09:01:04 AM
Quote from: pegasus on April 02, 2016, 05:01:30 PM
OK that is possible, CC hears KM shouting just after she discovers the apparent disappearance from the apartment.
That should be CC who says that.  SY needs to reinterview CC.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 04, 2016, 01:48:05 PM
JH phoned receptionist (call commencing at 22:38:28) and told him to phone police.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 04, 2016, 04:37:32 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2016, 07:39:02 AM
It was mrs Carpenter who heard the voice.  Maybe SY can ask her to make a statement even at this late stage.

Caroline Carpenters statement vanished  as did also the statements of Neil Berry and Raj Balu

Raj and Neil spoke to Gerry as he searched and may have given him an alibi in their statement ... BUT it vanished !!!   

It is also possible that Caroline may have given a statement that supported Gerry, BUT that has gone too.


All three statements that could likely have helped Gerry vanished.   I wonder why?  How did tghey vanish ?


All is not lost tho, cos almost without doubt SY will have re-interviewed them .... and know the truth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 04, 2016, 04:39:50 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 04, 2016, 01:48:05 PM
JH phoned receptionist (call commencing at 22:38:28) and told him to phone police.

Do you have a cite please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 04, 2016, 04:51:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 04, 2016, 04:39:50 PM
Do you have a cite please?
Processos vol XII page 3164
He phoned receptionist at 22:38:28 and told receptionist to phone police (call to police at 22:41:29).
He phoned receptionist again at 22:51:59 and told receptionist to phone police again (call to police at 22:52:39).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 04, 2016, 05:14:04 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2016, 09:01:04 AM
That should be CC who says that.  SY needs to reinterview CC.

CaC was reinterviewed by UK police.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FRANCES_KENNAH.htm
scroll down to where it says page 4399

*snipped*
From 2nd Letter of Request, received by UKCA 4th February 2008.

1. Page 18 Interview Steve CARPENTER, he was interviewed on 21st April 2008, the interview was recorded on DVD, please see enclosed 1 copy of the transcript, 1 copy of the DVD, 1 copy of his statement and a copy of the Detective's
statement evidencing the interview.
2. Page 18 Interview Carolyn Elizabeth CARPENTER, she was interviewed on 21st April 2008, the interview was recorded on DVD, please see enclosed 1 copy of the transcript, 1 copy of the DVD, 1 copy of her statement and a copy of the
Detective's statement evidencing the interview.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 04, 2016, 05:56:12 PM
Quote from: sadie on August 04, 2016, 04:37:32 PM
Caroline Carpenters statement vanished  as did also the statements of Neil Berry and Raj Balu

Raj and Neil spoke to Gerry as he searched and may have given him an alibi in their statement ... BUT it vanished !!!   

It is also possible that Caroline may have given a statement that supported Gerry, BUT that has gone too.


All three statements that could likely have helped Gerry vanished.   I wonder why?  How did tghey vanish ?


All is not lost tho, cos almost without doubt SY will have re-interviewed them .... and know the truth.

snipped;
"Raj and Neil spoke to Gerry as he searched"

Truth or myth? No mention of any conversation in their statements.

After 22:00 we were still sitting on the veranda in the Berry apartment. We heard noises downstairs and afterwards found out that a child had disappeared. My testimony dated 6th of May 2007 related the details of the conversation we overheard and the information regarding the paper that Neil and I used in the searches. I cannot add any more details save those which have already been given in this testimony.
http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RAJ_BALU.htm

From 22.00 onwards all the events that took place were already described in my previous statement of 7th May 2007 and i cannot add any further information, other than that which was already added.
http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NEIL_BERRY.htm


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 04, 2016, 08:22:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 04, 2016, 05:56:12 PM
snipped;
"Raj and Neil spoke to Gerry as he searched"

Truth or myth? No mention of any conversation in their statements.

After 22:00 we were still sitting on the veranda in the Berry apartment. We heard noises downstairs and afterwards found out that a child had disappeared. My testimony dated 6th of May 2007 related the details of the conversation we overheard and the information regarding the paper that Neil and I used in the searches. I cannot add any more details save those which have already been given in this testimony.
http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RAJ_BALU.htm

From 22.00 onwards all the events that took place were already described in my previous statement of 7th May 2007 and i cannot add any further information, other than that which was already added.
http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NEIL_BERRY.htm
As you can see from the red section above, one statement for each of them has vanished.  So potentially Gerrys alibi has vanished too. 

So two very important statements likely providing an alibi for Gerry 'lost' and then Caroline Carpenters statement vanished too.

So three potentially important statements for Gerry gone ... 'lost'


Why have just these three gone missing ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2016, 08:31:33 PM
Quote from: sadie on August 04, 2016, 08:22:56 PM
As you can see from the red section above, one statement for each of them has vanished.  So potentially Gerrys alibi has vanished too. 

So two very important statements likely providing an alibi for Gerry 'lost' and then Caroline Carpenters statement vanished too.

So three potentially important statements for Gerry gone ... 'lost'


Why have just these three gone missing ?
This is a tactic used by the police.  I think what you have discovered is downright scandalous.  I'll have to read that again and see what can be proven.  Have you told SY about this Sadie?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on August 04, 2016, 08:47:59 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 04, 2016, 04:51:05 PM
Processos vol XII page 3164
He phoned receptionist at 22:38:28 and told receptionist to phone police (call to police at 22:41:29).
He phoned receptionist again at 22:51:59 and told receptionist to phone police again (call to police at 22:52:39).
Well done, Pegasus.  A bit of a gem there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2016, 09:42:58 PM
Quote from: misty on April 02, 2016, 11:52:05 PM
The next checker did not notice the child was missing from her bed. The child could have
a)been hiding in or behind furniture
b)been locked in the bathroom
c) gone out the front door/patio door to seek help.
This is similar to my options approach  you seem to have forgot one option
a)been hiding in or behind furniture
b)been locked in the bathroom
c) gone out the front door/patio door to seek help.
d)  in bed where she was supposed to be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2016, 09:45:10 PM
Quote from: pegasus on April 03, 2016, 12:04:03 AM
Yes the main point is that following an interrupted entry attempt at the window of the the exact room the child was in, it is not at all surprising that the child was not on her bed.

If the child had been found safe and well, she would have been found either outside, or self-concealed in a different room.
Fits in with Carpenters hearing someone calling for 'Madeleine, Madeleine".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on August 05, 2016, 01:19:37 AM
I have removed all references to a second child having disappeared since there is nothing to suggest this ocurred.  The second phonecall was made to the police because they had not responded to the first call.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 05, 2016, 02:06:23 AM
Quote from: John on August 05, 2016, 01:19:37 AM
I have removed all references to a second child having disappeared since there is nothing to suggest this occurred.  The second phonecall was made to the police because they had not responded to the first call.
I have feeling this has been the mistake everyone has made, the PJ and the OC and  now the forums.  The very reason this case can't be solved yet there are traces of evidence for it left behind.   
"The second phone call was made to the police because they had not responded to the first call."  That is a guess at best, and obviously incorrect for it takes more than 10 minutes for the Police to respond  They are something like 30 minutes drive away at best  They would have to wait 30 minutes to know that the police hadn't responded. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on August 05, 2016, 02:36:35 AM
Quote from: sadie on August 04, 2016, 08:22:56 PM
As you can see from the red section above, one statement for each of them has vanished.  So potentially Gerrys alibi has vanished too. 

So two very important statements likely providing an alibi for Gerry 'lost' and then Caroline Carpenters statement vanished too.

So three potentially important statements for Gerry gone ... 'lost'


Why have just these three gone missing ?

Nothng has gone missing....all their statements are held by the uk police..and it is just not JUST these three its alot of statements given to the uk police that do not appear in the pj files....there is no portuguese conspiracy here dear
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 05, 2016, 02:45:34 AM
Quote from: mercury on August 05, 2016, 02:36:35 AM
Nothng has gone missing....all their statements are held by the uk police..and it is just not JUST these three its alot of statements given to the uk police that do not appear in the pj files....there is no portuguese conspiracy here dear
Therefore unless we know what these other statements say how come we are not allowed to show what the traces left behind seem to say?   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on August 05, 2016, 02:52:46 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 05, 2016, 02:45:34 AM
Therefore unless we know what these other statements say how come we are not allowed to show what the traces left behind seem to say?

Did anyone tell you you couldnt?

I was just answering a conspiratorial post which suggested someone had vanished evidence when theres no evidence for this

Just get your facts and deductions right and you cant go far wrong, start talking about ridiculous theories and you will, nite now
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 05, 2016, 02:59:29 AM
Quote from: mercury on August 05, 2016, 02:52:46 AM
Did anyone tell you you couldnt?

I was just answering a conspiratorial post which suggested someone had vanished evidence when theres no evidence for this
Wasn't that the gist of Sadie's post.  If they are removed from the forum and I can't recall which ones or what they were about, that just about says I can't.  Would you like to see this evidence?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on August 05, 2016, 03:26:15 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 05, 2016, 02:59:29 AM
Wasn't that the gist of Sadie's rant.  If they are removed from the forum and I can't recall which ones or what they were about, that just about says I can't.  Would you like to see this evidence?

No it wasnt
Sadie is accusng the pt police
Nothing to do with this forum
So also there is no evidnce for me to wish to see

Bye now i need to sleep unlke you
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 05, 2016, 08:26:48 AM
Quote from: misty on August 04, 2016, 05:14:04 PM
CaC was reinterviewed by UK police.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FRANCES_KENNAH.htm
scroll down to where it says page 4399

*snipped*
From 2nd Letter of Request, received by UKCA 4th February 2008.

1. Page 18 Interview Steve CARPENTER, he was interviewed on 21st April 2008, the interview was recorded on DVD, please see enclosed 1 copy of the transcript, 1 copy of the DVD, 1 copy of his statement and a copy of the Detective's
statement evidencing the interview.
2. Page 18 Interview Carolyn Elizabeth CARPENTER, she was interviewed on 21st April 2008, the interview was recorded on DVD, please see enclosed 1 copy of the transcript, 1 copy of the DVD, 1 copy of her statement and a copy of the
Detective's statement evidencing the interview.

Carolyn Carpenter's statement arrived at the Home Office then. Any evidence that they passed it to the PJ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 05, 2016, 10:18:07 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 04, 2016, 04:51:05 PM
Processos vol XII page 3164
He phoned receptionist at 22:38:28 and told receptionist to phone police (call to police at 22:41:29).
He phoned receptionist again at 22:51:59 and told receptionist to phone police again (call to police at 22:52:39).

Well spotted!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 05, 2016, 10:48:18 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 05, 2016, 02:06:23 AM
I have feeling this has been the mistake everyone has made, the PJ and the OC and  now the forums.  The very reason this case can't be solved yet there are traces of evidence for it left behind.   
"The second phone call was made to the police because they had not responded to the first call."  That is a guess at best, and obviously incorrect for it takes more than 10 minutes for the Police to respond  They are something like 30 minutes drive away at best  They would have to wait 30 minutes to know that the police hadn't responded.

You really must read the statements of those involved before you criticise those who have.  There was a logical series of events which connect the two phone calls made to police by the OC receptionist.  If anyone has made a mistake and is 'guessing' I suggest it is you.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 05, 2016, 11:12:25 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 05, 2016, 08:26:48 AM
Carolyn Carpenter's statement arrived at the Home Office then. Any evidence that they passed it to the PJ?


498 Home Office letter re: legal assistance 2008.05.28 (Portuguese)
4499 Page 4498 in English
17-Processo Vol 17 Page 4498 to Page 4499

It doesn't confirm that CaC's statement & DVD were in that batch, so I guess you'll claim that as evidence they were withheld.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 05, 2016, 11:23:29 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 05, 2016, 10:48:18 AM
You really must read the statements of those involved before you criticise those who have.  There was a logical series of events which connect the two phone calls made to police by the OC receptionist.  If anyone has made a mistake and is 'guessing' I suggest it is you.
Well would someone give the forum  a detailed breakdown of those two calls then please.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 05, 2016, 11:38:44 AM
Quote from: sadie on August 04, 2016, 08:22:56 PM
As you can see from the red section above, one statement for each of them has vanished.  So potentially Gerrys alibi has vanished too. 

So two very important statements likely providing an alibi for Gerry 'lost' and then Caroline Carpenters statement vanished too.

So three potentially important statements for Gerry gone ... 'lost'


Why have just these three gone missing ?

In October 2007 the McCann's lawyers CARLOS PINTO DE ABREU and ROGERIO ALVES sent a request to the Ministerio Publico in Portimao. It contains a list of people the McCanns wanted questioned and the questions to be asked.

The Carpenters are on the list and their questions relate to the evening of 3rd May. Balu and Berry are not on the McCann's list, which they surely would have been if Gerry McCann thought they had anything helpful to say.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MCCANNS-WANTED.htm

I can think of one possible reason why we don't see the first statements.

They may have contacted the UK police via the Crimestoppers number; those statements were withheld at the request of the UK.

As to Mrs Carpenter's rogatory; it may simply have mirrored her husband's and as it wasn't requested by the Portuguese it may have been disregarded somewhere along the line.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 05, 2016, 12:31:27 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 05, 2016, 11:23:29 AM
Well would someone give the forum  a detailed breakdown of those two calls then please.

Its all there already, all you have to do is search.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 05, 2016, 12:58:25 PM
Quote from: misty on August 05, 2016, 11:12:25 AM

498 Home Office letter re: legal assistance 2008.05.28 (Portuguese)
4499 Page 4498 in English
17-Processo Vol 17 Page 4498 to Page 4499

It doesn't confirm that CaC's statement & DVD were in that batch, so I guess you'll claim that as evidence they were withheld.

I think you may be misunderstanding how I reach conclusions. We know Mrs Carpenter made a rogatory statement and we know the statement went to the Home Office. We don't have any evidence that it went to Portugal. That doesn't mean it was withheld, it means we have no evidence that the Portuguese received it. That doesn't mean they didn't, it means we don't know.

We also know that earlier statements were given to UK police by Mr Carpenter, Mr Balu and Mr Berry.

Mr Balu appears to have made more than one previous statement;

I did not ask to see my original statements in order to refresh my memory. I confirm that these statements are correct.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RAJ_BALU.htm

Mr Berry seems to have made one previous statement;

I was asked whether I wanted to read my original statement in order to refresh my memory and I was granted this authorisation.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NEIL_BERRY.htm

Mr Carpenter seems to have made one previous statement;

DCF: Do you agree with me reading out your statement;

SC: Yes, I agree, yes.

DC: Good. Right, this statement was taken by a UK police officer on the 17th May and so the facts should be quite fresh in your memory.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN-CARPENTER.htm

If the statement was given on 17th May 2007 it seems strange that the police officer thinks the facts should be feash in Mr Carpenter's memory. It couldn't have been 2008, as this is when his present statement is dated; 21st April 2008.

So we have at least three statements with at least one more made by Mr Balu, so at least four previous statements.

The police officer mentions Carpenter's previous statement;

SC: Ah yes, yes and afterwards, humm...with Murat well...I just caught a glimpse of him on TV, it was rather my wife who phoned Philomena afterwards who then suggested that we contact the police support service.

DCF: Yes.

SC: And that is what I did, and afterwards the Hertford police contacted us.

DCF: Yes.

SC: Two days later I think.

DCF: Exactly, you phoned the criminal support number and was transferred to the Operational Squad of the Leicestershire Police Force which is where we are working.

SC: Ah ha.

DCF: And we made a request to the local police to collect your statement and it was in this sequence that your statement arrived.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN-CARPENTER.htm

So Mr Carpenter's wife phoned Philomena on 15th May [after they saw Murat on TV] and she told them to ring a particular number, then two days later a [one, singular] statement was taken from Mr Carpenter.

I can find no evidence that Mrs Carpenter made a previous statement, can anyone point me to any evidence of that?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 06, 2016, 12:23:53 AM
Not sure where to post this, so opted for here.
Did anyone watch The Investigator, a 4-part true crime story about the disappearance of Veronica (Carole) Packman?

To anyone who did - were you surprised MWT didn't request cadaver dogs be used at the family home, especially in the garden area where Causley said he burned the body? Given the investigator's  knowledge of the MM case, I was amazed to see forensic geologists employed to search soil for bone fragments without use of the dogs. Does that suggest that the dogs are not perhaps as reliable as we were led to believe? (I doubt cost was an issue)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on August 06, 2016, 01:23:47 AM
Quote from: misty on August 06, 2016, 12:23:53 AM
Not sure where to post this, so opted for here.
Did anyone watch The Investigator, a 4-part true crime story about the disappearance of Veronica (Carole) Packman?

To anyone who did - were you surprised MWT didn't request cadaver dogs be used at the family home, especially in the garden area where Causley said he burned the body? Given the investigator's  knowledge of the MM case, I was amazed to see forensic geologists employed to search soil for bone fragments without use of the dogs. Does that suggest that the dogs are not perhaps as reliable as we were led to believe? (I doubt cost was an issue)
Sorry, what is this guy's knowledge of the MBM case?

I had a lot of trouble in stitching this one together, but let me try.  Woman disappears.  House sale fraud what 5 years later?  Impersonator uses woman's credentials in Canada.  Yacht fake death insurance scam involving husband and impersonator.  Husband investigated and admits to murder of wife, but appears to be lying through his teeth re body disposal.

Hopefully, I got that more right than wrong, but can I ask my question again?  What is this guy's knowledge of the MBM case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 06, 2016, 01:42:12 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on August 06, 2016, 01:23:47 AM
Sorry, what is this guy's knowledge of the MBM case?

I had a lot of trouble in stitching this one together, but let me try.  Woman disappears.  House sale fraud what 5 years later?  Impersonator uses woman's credentials in Canada.  Yacht fake death insurance scam involving husband and impersonator.  Husband investigated and admits to murder of wife, but appears to be lying through his teeth re body disposal.

Hopefully, I got that more right than wrong, but can I ask my question again?  What is this guy's knowledge of the MBM case?

A pretty good brief summation there, Shining.

Here are 2 links to MWT. There are several others on google.

http://williams-thomas.co.uk/sites/default/files/Review%20of%20Madeleiene%20McCann%20Investigation.pdf

http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.co.uk/2009/12/mark-williams-thomas-another-key-figure.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 01:51:13 AM
"... was contacted by a member of staff from the Tapas Restaurant ... who informed him that the daughter of some guests who were dining there had disappeared ... he immediately contacted the GNR ..."
In this receptionist statement it is easily deduced that it means an employee who happened to be in the area of the restaurant when he phoned reception, not an employee who works at the restaurant. The resort manager, not the T9, deserves full credit for insisting that the GNR were called.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 06, 2016, 02:43:34 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 01:51:13 AM
"... was contacted by a member of staff from the Tapas Restaurant ... who informed him that the daughter of some guests who were dining there had disappeared ... he immediately contacted the GNR ..."
In this receptionist statement it is easily deduced that it means an employee who happened to be in the area of the restaurant when he phoned reception, not an employee who works at the restaurant. The resort manager, not the T9, deserves full credit for insisting that the GNR were called.
Wasn't Jes Wilkins up in the Tapas Restaurant at that time?
Quote
REPORT OF FOREIGN CARE
Date: 2007/05/04 Location: Praia da Luz - Lagos;
....He told us that yesterday, between 8.30 and 9pm, while he was in the "TAPAS" restaurant,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 03:42:55 AM
@Robbity 1. He was not an employee, 2. The short time he was in tapas/pool compound was about 2 hours before the 22:38 call to reception.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on August 06, 2016, 07:34:40 AM
Quote from: misty on August 06, 2016, 01:42:12 AM
A pretty good brief summation there, Shining.

Here are 2 links to MWT. There are several others on google.

http://williams-thomas.co.uk/sites/default/files/Review%20of%20Madeleiene%20McCann%20Investigation.pdf

http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.co.uk/2009/12/mark-williams-thomas-another-key-figure.html
Thanks.

I didn't follow the MBM case when it occurred so I had no idea he was involved.

So he's woke and wandered plus abducted, with no explanation of the window, shutter, patio doors, baby gate or garden gate.

Let me think about this one.   Hmmm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 06, 2016, 10:26:12 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on August 06, 2016, 07:34:40 AM
Thanks.

....

So he's woke and wandered plus abducted, with no explanation of the window, shutter, patio doors, baby gate or garden gate.

....
Doesn't make much sense does it.  &%+((£
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on August 06, 2016, 11:46:00 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 01:51:13 AM
"... was contacted by a member of staff from the Tapas Restaurant ... who informed him that the daughter of some guests who were dining there had disappeared ... he immediately contacted the GNR ..."
In this receptionist statement it is easily deduced that it means an employee who happened to be in the area of the restaurant when he phoned reception, not an employee who works at the restaurant. The resort manager, not the T9, deserves full credit for insisting that the GNR were called.

It is interesting that the receptionist wouldn't phone the police until he got the nod from the manager.  Probably standing orders?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 06, 2016, 02:10:15 PM
Quote from: John on August 06, 2016, 11:46:00 AM
It is interesting that the receptionist wouldn't phone the police until he got the nod from the manager.  Probably standing orders?
It would be interesting to know who the employee was and when his shift finished.  It is all this non-committed descriptions that allows us to make our own inferences from the statement.
" was contacted by a member of staff from the Tapas Restaurant ... who informed him that the daughter of some guests who were dining there had disappeared"
How many staff members were there?
Some guests - how many guests were there?
What time was this.

The possible variations of that could run into the hundreds.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 02:14:58 PM
Quote from: John on August 06, 2016, 11:46:00 AM
It is interesting that the receptionist wouldn't phone the police until he got the nod from the manager.  Probably standing orders?
His statement indicates that the phonecall (which was at 22:38 IMO) was first time he was told a child had disappeared.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 06, 2016, 05:05:26 PM
Quote from: mercury on August 05, 2016, 02:36:35 AM
Nothng has gone missing....all their statements are held by the uk police..and it is just not JUST these three its alot of statements given to the uk police that do not appear in the pj files....there is no portuguese conspiracy here dear

So how come that you have never brought forth this information about the UK police before?  I have mentioned the three missing statements several times before... and during your time on forum.

Please could you produce a citation for the UK police having the missing statements of Caroline Carpenter, Raj Balu and Neil Berry.  Thanks in anticipation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 05:56:52 PM
Quote from: sadie on August 06, 2016, 05:05:26 PM
So how come that you have never brought forth this information about the UK police before?  I have mentioned the three missing statements several times before... and during your time on forum.

Please could you produce a citation for the UK police having the missing statements of Caroline Carpenter, Raj Balu and Neil Berry.  Thanks in anticipation.
The statements are not missing, they are just not included in the published files.
Proof, that it was British police who conducted the early NB and RB interviews, is in this rog question in both rogs
"Do you confirm your previous statements to the British Police?"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 06, 2016, 06:09:41 PM
Quote from: misty on August 04, 2016, 05:14:04 PM
CaC was reinterviewed by UK police.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FRANCES_KENNAH.htm
scroll down to where it says page 4399

*snipped*
From 2nd Letter of Request, received by UKCA 4th February 2008.

1. Page 18 Interview Steve CARPENTER, he was interviewed on 21st April 2008, the interview was recorded on DVD, please see enclosed 1 copy of the transcript, 1 copy of the DVD, 1 copy of his statement and a copy of the Detective's
statement evidencing the interview.
2. Page 18 Interview Carolyn Elizabeth CARPENTER, she was interviewed on 21st April 2008, the interview was recorded on DVD, please see enclosed 1 copy of the transcript, 1 copy of the DVD, 1 copy of her statement and a copy of the
Detective's statement evidencing the interview.

Could you find the copy of Carolyns statement?


http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MISSING_PAGES.htm

SNIP/

Carolyn Carpenter

Rogatory interview not included in DVD:

2. Page 18 Interview Carolyn Elizabeth CARPENTER, she was interviewed on 21st April 2008, the interview was recorded on DVD, please see enclosed 1 copy of the transcript, 1 copy of the DVD, 1 copy of her statement and a copy of the
Detective's statement evidencing the interview.

Carolyn Carpenter page 18

http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FRANCES_KENNAH.htm#4400

SNIP/
2. Page 18 Interview Carolyn Elizabeth CARPENTER, she was interviewed on 21st April 2008, the interview was recorded on DVD, please see enclosed 1 copy of the transcript, 1 copy of the DVD, 1 copy of her statement and a copy of the
Detective's statement evidencing the interview.

-SNIP


Where is the missing Rogatory interview?  Does anyone know where the transcript is shown?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 06, 2016, 06:24:50 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 05:56:52 PM
The statements are not missing, they are just not included in the published files.
Proof, that it was British police who conducted the early NB and RB interviews, is in this rog question in both rogs
"Do you confirm your previous statements to the British Police?"

Why have these three statements NOT BEEN PUBLISHED?  These particular three that could well prove exactly where Gerry was and when.


http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RAJ_BALU.htm

SNIP/
We returned the Berry apartment and all of us ate on the veranda.

With regard to the question as to how I became aware a child had gone missing and my involvement in the searches;

After 22:00 we were still sitting on the veranda in the Berry apartment. We heard noises downstairs and afterwards found out that a child had disappeared. My testimony dated 6th of May 2007 related the details of the conversation we overheard and the information regarding the paper that Neil and I used in the searches. I cannot add any more details save those which have already been given in this testimony.
-SNIP

So where is Raj Balus testimony of 6th May 2007 ?  Why are we not seeing that?



http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NEIL_BERRY.htm

SNIP/
At about 20.00 Raj and I went to the Tapas restaurant to place our order and wait for our meal. I think that we had a drink while we waited. I do not remember exactly what we ordered but I think it included red cabbage. When we left with the meal we took the same walk back, along the pool, crossing the road back to the apartment. I think that our apartment was 4G.
I remember that at dinner that the McCanns were not at the restaurant at the time that we left and we did not see them while Raj and I were there.

Once back at the apartment we had dinner and remained there.

From 22.00 onwards all the events that took place were already described in my previous statement of 7th May 2007 and i cannot add any further information, other than that which was already added.
-SNIP

So where is Neil Berrys previous statement?  Why are we not seeing that ?



http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MISSING_PAGES.htm

SNIP/
Carolyn Carpenter

Rogatory interview not included in DVD:

2. Page 18 Interview Carolyn Elizabeth CARPENTER, she was interviewed on 21st April 2008, the interview was recorded on DVD, please see enclosed 1 copy of the transcript, 1 copy of the DVD, 1 copy of her statement and a copy of the
Detective's statement evidencing the interview.


Then we read: Carolyn Carpenter page 18

http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FRANCES_KENNAH.htm#4400

SNIP/
2. Page 18 Interview Carolyn Elizabeth CARPENTER, she was interviewed on 21st April 2008, the interview was recorded on DVD, please see enclosed 1 copy of the transcript, 1 copy of the DVD, 1 copy of her statement and a copy of the
Detective's statement evidencing the interview.
-SNIP


Where is the missing Rogatory interview?  Does anyone know where the transcript is shown?



So three statements, all, or any, of which could well prove where Gerry was at a very important time .... all NOT been published.

Why have these particular three not been published ?   What is special about them?   
They well might prove where Gerry WAS at a certain pertinent time, is there anything else that sets them apart from all the other statements, which HAVE been published ?


Anyway, the people who matter, SY, will little doubt have re-interviewed all three of them .  They will know.


And this knowledge may well be a part of why they believe in Kate and Gerrys innocence ... or so that seems.

IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 07:03:38 PM
Sadie the sighting of G by NB and RB is written in the files by a British analyst who saw both statements:

"... NB and RM ... heard him calling for Madeleine when they were sitting on N's balcony ... They both went down to talk to G ..."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRIGADE-OF-INFORMATION.htm 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 06, 2016, 07:10:27 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 01:51:13 AM
"... was contacted by a member of staff from the Tapas Restaurant ... who informed him that the daughter of some guests who were dining there had disappeared ... he immediately contacted the GNR ..."
In this receptionist statement it is easily deduced that it means an employee who happened to be in the area of the restaurant when he phoned reception, not an employee who works at the restaurant. The resort manager, not the T9, deserves full credit for insisting that the GNR were called.
Soz Pegasus, but I dont know how you deduce that from the statement.  I read the opposite to you.  I think it was a waiter IIRC.

The resort manager carries clout.  The tapas group obviously did not, they could INSIST nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 06, 2016, 07:15:13 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 07:03:38 PM
Sadie the sighting of G by NB and RB is written in the files by a British analyst who saw both statements:

"... NB and RM ... heard him calling for Madeleine when they were sitting on N's balcony ... They both went down to talk to G ..."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRIGADE-OF-INFORMATION.htm

Excellent.  Thank you Pegasus.  I hope that Pathfinder is reading this.

But I still cannot understand why the statements of NB and RB  (and Carolyn C) were not published as the others were.

it would have taken such a load of upset off Kate and Gerrys shoulders.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on August 06, 2016, 08:29:39 PM
I know about it Sadie. If Balu/Berry used a paper in the searches then this was after 10:20 NOT 10pm.

"The men's movements, however, are more difficult to pinpoint." from the report!

"At about 22.17 I received a call from Lyndsey Johnson, the creche Manager, informing me that the girl had gone missing."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EMMA-LOUISE.htm
Occupation: Hotel Manager
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 06, 2016, 08:43:40 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on August 06, 2016, 08:29:39 PM
I know about it Sadie. If Balu/Berry used a paper in the searches then this was after 10:20 NOT 10pm.

"The men's movements, however, are more difficult to pinpoint." from the report!

"At about 22.17 I received a call from Lyndsey Johnson, the creche Manager, informing me that the girl had gone missing."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EMMA-LOUISE.htm
Occupation: Hotel Manager
So what?  That means nothing Pathfinder.  Think about it.

They could have been passed the paper at any time during the search.   IMO the tendency would be to search in one direction, then return to a set point which I imagine would be 5A but equally well could have been the main reception .. or Tapas bar ... or ....?  At any stage the paper could have been given out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on August 06, 2016, 09:20:55 PM
The OC missing child procedure didn't start till way past 10pm. Smithman had done his deed before Balu/Berry were on the searching scene.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 09:24:19 PM
Quote from: sadie on August 06, 2016, 07:10:27 PM
Soz Pegasus, but I dont know how you deduce that from the statement.  I read the opposite to you.  I think it was a waiter IIRC.

The resort manager carries clout.  The tapas group obviously did not, they could INSIST nothing.
They seemed capable of insisting on a discount on the holiday Sadie, and insisting on a tapas block booking.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 09:30:15 PM
Quote from: sadie on August 06, 2016, 07:10:27 PM
Soz Pegasus, but I dont know how you deduce that from the statement.  I read the opposite to you.  I think it was a waiter IIRC ....(snip)
The phone records identify which employee phoned HL and told him to phone the police Sadie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 06, 2016, 09:41:34 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 09:24:19 PM
They seemed capable of insisting on a discount on the holiday Sadie, and insisting on a tapas block booking.
At the first stage they were in an advantageous position.  Buying accomodation that was half empty.  By the second stage, any sensible O.C. person could see that with little ones (especially three of them) and late at night, it was nigh impossible to walk up to the Millenium restaurant   My bet is that out of season as this was, the tapas restaurant was only half full as well.  No skin off their noses to allow a tapas block booking.


When we ate there in 2010, I think it was in June, and the place was only about a quarter full, if that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 09:53:17 PM
Quote from: sadie on August 06, 2016, 09:41:34 PM
(snip) ... My bet is that out of season as this was, the tapas restaurant was only half full as well.  No skin off their noses to allow a tapas block booking ... (snip)
Actually it was very popular and people would go at 9am in hope of booking a table for the evening. And due to the block booking, people were turned away - as described in several tourist statements and also in a very well written and informative book Sadie which I recommend you read..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 06, 2016, 10:19:21 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 09:30:15 PM
The phone records identify which employee phoned HL and told him to phone the police Sadie.
You can get that out of a number? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 10:44:23 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 06, 2016, 10:19:21 PM
You can get that out of a number?
The number and the time (22.38 = just before police were phoned) and the receptionist statement (he phoned police because he had just received a call instructing him to phone police) Robbity.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 06, 2016, 11:07:39 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 06, 2016, 10:44:23 PM
The number and the time (22.38 = just before police were phoned) and the receptionist statement (he phoned police because he had just received a call instructing him to phone police) Robbity.
That is right, you need more than that number but then how can you be sure they were even referring to that occasion in that statement.  I think this is an error of assessment.  We got an incident mentioned in a statement and a phone number but no proof they relate to each other.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 07, 2016, 02:45:32 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 06, 2016, 11:07:39 PM
That is right, you need more than that number but then how can you be sure they were even referring to that occasion in that statement.  I think this is an error of assessment.  We got an incident mentioned in a statement and a phone number but no proof they relate to each other.
IMO the 22:38 phonecall was obviously the phonecall instructing receptionist to phone police.
What do you think the 22:38 call was about Robbity?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 07, 2016, 03:00:11 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 07, 2016, 02:45:32 AM
IMO the 22:38 phonecall was obviously the phonecall instructing receptionist to phone police.
What do you think the 22:38 call was about Robbity?
So what number is calling what number and where is this recorded?  Link please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 07, 2016, 03:15:55 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 07, 2016, 03:00:11 AM
So what number is calling what number and where is this recorded?  Link please?
The useful link for almost everything is http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAGE_ORDER.htm Robbity.
Scroll down to Processos volume XII page 3164
Time 22:38:28.  The column headings identify which number is caller (chamador) and which is called (chamado).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 07, 2016, 03:28:19 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 07, 2016, 03:15:55 AM
The useful link for almost everything is http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAGE_ORDER.htm Robbity.
Scroll down to Processos volume XII page 3164
Time 22:38:28.  The column headings identify which number is caller (chamador) and which is called (chamado).
So could anyone go down that full list and tell exactly what every number called relates to? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 07, 2016, 03:39:34 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 07, 2016, 03:28:19 AM
So could anyone go down that full list and tell exactly what every number called relates to?
282771000 is OC landline.
A few of the other numbers are identified in the last column.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 07, 2016, 04:44:54 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 07, 2016, 03:39:34 AM
282771000 is OC landline.
A few of the other numbers are identified in the last column.
We need to get Shining to try every number on that list and see where it rings to.  Would you do that please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on August 07, 2016, 09:07:22 AM
just letting everybody know there is a new book out on Amazon called
The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann: What really happened? Kindle Edition
by Chelsea Hoffman (Author)

https://read.amazon.co.uk/kp/embed?asin=B01JVLAYP4&asin=B01JVLAYP4&preview=newtab&linkCode=kpe&ref_=cm_sw_r_kb_dp_mg9PxbDZMNB0M
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 07, 2016, 09:46:13 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 07, 2016, 03:15:55 AM
The useful link for almost everything is http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAGE_ORDER.htm Robbity.
Scroll down to Processos volume XII page 3164
Time 22:38:28.  The column headings identify which number is caller (chamador) and which is called (chamado).
That page "Processos volume XII page 3164" of phone calls showing some sort of sequence appears to be a forgery, the times of the calls is not in temporal sequence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 07, 2016, 02:22:13 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 07, 2016, 09:46:13 AM
That page "Processos volume XII page 3164" of phone calls showing some sort of sequence appears to be a forgery, the times of the calls is not in temporal sequence.
A masterpiece of deduction Robbity.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 07, 2016, 06:04:59 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 07, 2016, 02:22:13 PM
A masterpiece of deduction Robbity.
It is rather an odd set of phone calls where a large number of them are repeats, and  a number of them out of temporal sequence.  So is this a typed up list rather than a printout?  If it is typed up there can be errors introduced deliberately or by accident.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 08, 2016, 12:45:51 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 07, 2016, 06:04:59 PM
It is rather an odd set of phone calls where a large number of them are repeats, and  a number of them out of temporal sequence.  So is this a typed up list rather than a printout?  If it is typed up there can be errors introduced deliberately or by accident.
The suggestion that either Portugal Telecom or PJ might have introduced deliberate errors is simply ridiculous IMO.
The only deliberate alterations to phone records IMO were the redactions of certain numbers but that doesn't affect this page as no numbers are blanked.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 08, 2016, 01:09:25 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 08, 2016, 12:45:51 AM
The suggestion that either Portugal Telecom or PJ might have introduced deliberate errors is simply ridiculous IMO.
The only deliberate alterations to phone records IMO were the redactions of certain numbers but that doesn't affect this page as no numbers are blanked.
I have had 20 years at auditing records and it has the hallmarks of deliberate falsification.  Doesn't matter if you think it is ridiculous, to me it is new a line of investigation to see why the order of the phone calls is incorrect and under whose instructions it was being done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 12, 2016, 11:47:25 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 08, 2016, 01:09:25 AM
I have had 20 years at auditing records and it has the hallmarks of deliberate falsification.  Doesn't matter if you think it is ridiculous, to me it is new a line of investigation to see why the order of the phone calls is incorrect and under whose instructions it was being done.
If you saw some figures in financial accounts typexed out leaving blank spaces would you find that suspicious Robbity?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on August 13, 2016, 12:39:00 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 08, 2016, 01:09:25 AM
I have had 20 years at auditing records and it has the hallmarks of deliberate falsification.  Doesn't matter if you think it is ridiculous, to me it is new a line of investigation to see why the order of the phone calls is incorrect and under whose instructions it was being done.

I thought yousaid you were a scientist

Anyway, its ridiculous to think the typed pj police files have been doctored, thats a conspiracy too far
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 13, 2016, 03:42:27 AM
Quote from: mercury on August 13, 2016, 12:39:00 AM
I thought yousaid you were a scientist

Anyway, its ridiculous to think the typed pj police files have been doctored, thats a conspiracy too far
It is the responsibility of those who gave them to the PJ
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on August 14, 2016, 12:43:07 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 13, 2016, 03:42:27 AM
It is the responsibility of those who gave them to the PJ
the pj created the files with the evidence in them
Are you now saying the list of phone calls was forged by the phone companies?
Meh
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 14, 2016, 12:49:40 AM
Who asked Philip Green to provide a provide a private jet?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 14, 2016, 12:57:28 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 08, 2016, 01:09:25 AM
I have had 20 years at auditing records and it has the hallmarks of deliberate falsification.  Doesn't matter if you think it is ridiculous, to me it is new a line of investigation to see why the order of the phone calls is incorrect and under whose instructions it was being done.
As an expert in the spotting odd things in accounts is there anything that jumps out of, just as a random example, this page Robbity? http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/oa/OA_VOD/OA_11_VOD_Page_107.jpg
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 14, 2016, 01:28:26 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 14, 2016, 12:57:28 AM
As an expert in the spotting odd things in accounts is there anything that jumps out of, just as a random example, this page Robbity? http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/oa/OA_VOD/OA_11_VOD_Page_107.jpg
Nothing springs out at me, it is in the 22nd to the 24 th May  What was happening around that time?
What sort of clues are you seeing to begin with?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 14, 2016, 07:16:00 PM
Quote from: carlymichelle on August 07, 2016, 09:07:22 AM
just letting everybody know there is a new book out on Amazon called
The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann: What really happened? Kindle Edition
by Chelsea Hoffman (Author)

https://read.amazon.co.uk/kp/embed?asin=B01JVLAYP4&asin=B01JVLAYP4&preview=newtab&linkCode=kpe&ref_=cm_sw_r_kb_dp_mg9PxbDZMNB0M

Go on Carly, spoil it and tell us the ending- this is one we have been wating for? lol
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 15, 2016, 09:13:08 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 14, 2016, 01:28:26 AM
Nothing springs out at me, it is in the 22nd to the 24 th May  What was happening around that time?
What sort of clues are you seeing to begin with?
How about row 10  column 2 Robbity?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2016, 09:30:35 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 15, 2016, 09:13:08 PM
How about row 10  column 2 Robbity?
It looks blank to me, but there are a lot of blanks and I have no idea why, so I can't say that is suspicious unless I know what to expect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 15, 2016, 11:30:21 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 14, 2016, 12:49:40 AM
Who asked Philip Green to provide a provide a private jet?

The man who recommended his knighthood?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 15, 2016, 11:50:46 PM
Quote from: misty on August 15, 2016, 11:30:21 PM
The man who recommended his knighthood?
Probably yes Misty, or if not, maybe his successor-in-waiting, whose phone number is clearly invisible on row 10.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 15, 2016, 11:57:45 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 15, 2016, 11:50:46 PM
Probably yes Misty, or if not, his successor-in-waiting, whose phone number is clearly invisible on row 10.

The man who met the parents in Rome was a former PA of TB, so I would lean towards the outgoing PM calling in a favour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 16, 2016, 12:09:54 AM
Quote from: misty on August 15, 2016, 11:57:45 PM
The man who met the parents in Rome was a former PA of TB, so I would lean towards the outgoing PM calling in a favour.
Interesting re PA Misty, thanks. Agreed that is favourite candidate. BTW a different generous plane provider purely coincidentaly also happened to provide uk gov.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 16, 2016, 12:44:15 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 16, 2016, 12:09:54 AM
Interesting re PA Misty, thanks. Agreed that is favourite candidate. BTW a different generous plane provider purely coincidentaly also happened to provide uk gov.

Who's that then, there are lots of different providers?
DC has now been deprived of use of "Cam Force One" (cost to refurbish £30m)

And never complain about the cost of the McCann investigation http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/10/16/uk-government-blows-13-5-million-private-jets-send-illegal-immigrants-home/

Brexit won't solve this sort of expenditure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 16, 2016, 01:01:32 AM
Quote from: misty on August 16, 2016, 12:44:15 AM
Who's that then, there are lots of different providers?
For example Berlin/Amsterdam Misty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 16, 2016, 02:10:04 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 16, 2016, 01:01:32 AM
For example Berlin/Amsterdam Misty.

I don't know whose Hawker jet that was, Pegasus as the owner wanted to remain anonymous. Have I missed something?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 16, 2016, 03:35:47 AM
Quote from: misty on August 16, 2016, 02:10:04 AM
I don't know whose Hawker jet that was, Pegasus as the owner wanted to remain anonymous. Have I missed something?
Sorry I got totally sidetracked into reading about the Carlisle floods Misty.

Obviously none of these generous rich people woke up one morning and read about the disappearance and instantly thought "I will phone up the parents and offer to fly them to search cruising altitudes and distant foreign cities in my super expensive private jet!". IMO they were asked to offer jets by someone at the very top.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 16, 2016, 08:42:21 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 16, 2016, 03:35:47 AM
Sorry I got totally sidetracked into reading about the Carlisle floods Misty.

Obviously none of these generous rich people woke up one morning and read about the disappearance and instantly thought "I will phone up the parents and offer to fly them to search cruising altitudes and distant foreign cities in my super expensive private jet!". IMO they were asked to offer jets by someone at the very top.

Given this sort of expenditure....http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/7302/Blair-takes-189-000-private-jet-to-U-S-on-his-farewell-tour.......chartering a Hawker for the McCanns would be loose change.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 16, 2016, 08:56:08 PM
Those with a lot of money tend to want to hang on to it, hence their reluctance to pay taxes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 16, 2016, 10:42:55 PM
Quote from: misty on August 16, 2016, 02:10:04 AM
I don't know whose Hawker jet that was, Pegasus as the owner wanted to remain anonymous. Have I missed something?
And I thought you had read KM's book Misty. An excellent and honest source.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 16, 2016, 10:54:32 PM
Quote from: misty on August 16, 2016, 08:42:21 PM
Given this sort of expenditure....http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/7302/Blair-takes-189-000-private-jet-to-U-S-on-his-farewell-tour.......chartering a Hawker for the McCanns would be loose change.
Thankyou Misty. it seems this ridiculously expensive round-trip was: outbound early Wed 16 May 2007 and return late Thu 17 May 2007 is that right?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 16, 2016, 11:02:15 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 16, 2016, 10:42:55 PM
And I thought you had read KM's book Misty. An excellent and honest source.

I'm still none the wiser. Who was the fractional owner of the chartered Hawker?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 16, 2016, 11:25:22 PM
Quote from: misty on August 16, 2016, 11:02:15 PM
I'm still none the wiser. Who was the fractional owner of the chartered Hawker?
It wasn't a fractional owner it was a director Misty p171
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 16, 2016, 11:32:24 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 16, 2016, 10:54:32 PM
Thankyou Misty. it seems this ridiculously expensive round-trip was: outbound early Wed 16 May 2007 and return late Thu 17 May 2007 is that right?

It would seem so. On 14th May 2007 he was still flitting around in the UK. http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/7061/Blair-swans-around-in-helicopter

I have absolutely no recollection of him visiting my town!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 16, 2016, 11:54:50 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2016, 09:30:35 PM
It looks blank to me... (snip)
Row 10 column 2 is blank because someone did not want you to read it Robbity.
BTW it's exactly the same number as row 14 column 2.
Source = KM book
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on August 17, 2016, 12:00:26 AM
Pegasus/misty
Can you tell the rest of us what youre talking about, so we can join in
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 17, 2016, 12:05:30 AM
Quote from: mercury on August 17, 2016, 12:00:26 AM
Pegasus/misty
Can you tell the rest of us what youre talking about, so we can join in
It's about who provided free private jets Merc, and more important who asked them to do so.
A private jet was provided for the trip to the Vatican.
A private jet was provided for the 3 leg Berlin Amsterdam trip.
A private jet was going to be provided for the trip to Morocco, but seems provider changed mind so they only got an old prop plane.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 17, 2016, 12:13:18 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 16, 2016, 11:25:22 PM
It wasn't a fractional owner it was a director Misty p171

Must have been the one with the interesting Portuguese name.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on August 17, 2016, 12:16:12 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 17, 2016, 12:05:30 AM
It's about who provided free private jets Merc, and who asked them to do so.
I got that bit thanks
I couldnt make anything of the rest of it and if it means anything
16/17 May as far as we know , is only relevant for setting up the fund/press conference on it

Anyway, will let you get on with it without interruption
but sometimes you assume all readers know what youre talking about with initials being used for people and references to the file pages with no links etc

so, it seems TB DC AP JC and ZA and GAGA all had a vested interest

 8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 17, 2016, 12:20:46 AM
Quote from: misty on August 17, 2016, 12:13:18 AM
Must have been the one with the interesting Portuguese name.
Possibly Misty but doesn't really matter which - I'm only interested in who in the UK asked them to.
BTW the FCO sometimes charters private jets.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 17, 2016, 12:22:53 AM
Quote from: mercury on August 17, 2016, 12:16:12 AM
I got that bit thanks
I couldnt make anything of the rest of it and if it means anything
16/17 May as far as we know , is only relevant for setting up the fund/press conference on it

Anyway, will let you get on with it without interruption
but sometimes you assume all readers know what youre talking about with initials being used for people and references to the file pages with no links etc

so, it seems TB DC AP JC and ZA and GAGA all had a vested interest

 8)--))

We just assume the other readers are intelligent enough to work it out, Merc.  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on August 17, 2016, 12:40:17 AM
Quote from: misty on August 17, 2016, 12:22:53 AM
We just assume the other readers are intelligent enough to work it out, Merc.  8(0(*
Only those who have poured over the files in minute detail though

Anyway off for the night
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 17, 2016, 12:58:26 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 17, 2016, 12:20:46 AM
Possibly Misty but doesn't really matter which - I'm only interested in who in the UK asked them to.
BTW the FCO sometimes charters private jets.

Well, I think we can safely say it wasn't GB.
https://www.modernghana.com/news/161263/uk-cancels-plan-for-presidential-jets.html

Lots of Gov interest in the fleet
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/aviation-international-news/2008-01-21/netjets-has-dibs-most-northolt-slots

Does it have to be from the UK? Netjets Europe is based in Lisbon.

BTW Yes, I did read the book - about 5 years ago. I just don't have a photographic memory & I wasn't in the same room as the book last night!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 17, 2016, 02:00:34 AM
Quote from: misty on August 17, 2016, 12:58:26 AM
(snip) ... Does it have to be from the UK? ... (snip)
IMO the suggestions (to various people that they might assist by offering free jets) came from London.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 17, 2016, 02:09:21 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 17, 2016, 02:00:34 AM
IMO the suggestions (to various people that they might assist by offering free jets) came from London.

You're probably right &  I think we both know from whom - money no object and all that. It suggests that someone knew rather more about the background issues than have ever been disclosed, possibly not even to the parents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 17, 2016, 02:14:24 AM
Quote from: misty on August 17, 2016, 12:58:26 AM
Well, I think we can safely say it wasn't GB.
https://www.modernghana.com/news/161263/uk-cancels-plan-for-presidential-jets.html
... (snip)
To his credit he was opposed to the plan to lease multi-million dedicated jets full-time. The much more efficient option was chosen, of chartering jets per journey and only when essential, for example to assist the flood emergency.victims in the north. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 17, 2016, 02:33:51 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 17, 2016, 02:14:24 AM
To his credit he was opposed to the plan to lease multi-million dedicated jets full-time. The much more efficient option was chosen, of chartering jets per journey and only when essential, for example to assist the flood emergency.victims in the north.

Was that why you were reading about Carlisle? I doubt any jets would have been of assistance to the people there.
And full biscuit production has only recently resumed - the ex PM's were guilty of a heinous crime in not dealing with that situation sooner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 18, 2016, 12:36:17 AM
Quote from: misty on August 17, 2016, 02:33:51 AM
Was that why you were reading about Carlisle? I doubt any jets would have been of assistance to the people there.
And full biscuit production has only recently resumed - the ex PM's were guilty of a heinous crime in not dealing with that situation sooner.
It's up to you whether you believe me or not Misty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 18, 2016, 01:20:50 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 18, 2016, 12:36:17 AM
It's up to you whether you believe me or not Misty.

I'm not disbelieving you, Pegasus, as I don't know exactly what you've read about the floods, use of jets & which year you are referring to. You mentioned Carlisle, which was extremely badly affected on more than one occasion & last year they used a drone to obtain pictures of the devastation. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 18, 2016, 03:02:21 PM
Quote from: misty on August 18, 2016, 01:20:50 AM
I'm not disbelieving you, Pegasus, as I don't know exactly what you've read about the floods, use of jets & which year you are referring to. You mentioned Carlisle, which was extremely badly affected on more than one occasion & last year they used a drone to obtain pictures of the devastation.
The situation on 19 Nov 2009 "A landslip between Carlisle and Penrith caused the West Coast Main Line from London to Glasgow to close and there is flooding on the line at Lockerbie. ... The AA said it was "flat out" rescuing stricken cars and advised against all but essential travel." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8366360.stm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 18, 2016, 09:12:58 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 18, 2016, 03:02:21 PM
The situation on 19 Nov 2009 "A landslip between Carlisle and Penrith caused the West Coast Main Line from London to Glasgow to close and there is flooding on the line at Lockerbie. ... The AA said it was "flat out" rescuing stricken cars and advised against all but essential travel." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8366360.stm

I'm still not seeing anything about private jets, just RAF helicopters. I give up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2016, 10:45:33 PM
It is always interesting the information that Pegasus knows
Quote
Quote from: pegasus on June 18, 2014, 10:04:15 PM
An in-apartment child-sitting service was available at Mark Warner PDL.
And not some member of staff you and your kid don't know.
The same nannies who you trusted your kid to in the day were available for in-apartment child-sitting.
It was about 15 euros an hour IIRC ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 01:47:55 AM
Quote from: misty on August 18, 2016, 09:12:58 PM
I'm still not seeing anything about private jets, just RAF helicopters. I give up.
He went by jet Misty, makes sense given the rail and road delays.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 19, 2016, 02:11:18 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 01:47:55 AM
He went by jet Misty, makes sense given the rail and road delays.

I'll take your word for it as I can only see a reference to GB going there, not how he got there. Hilary Benn visited the day before, Cameron, Sadiq Khan Prince Charles also reportedly visited at separate times during the next week. That's a lot of private jets!

http://www.floodready.co.uk/uploadedfiles/case_studies/12/Cockermouth%20emergency%20response%20timeline%202009.pdf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 02:12:05 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2016, 10:45:33 PM
It is always interesting the information that Pegasus knows
"extra baby-sitting can be arranged in resort through the Childcare Manager at 12 to 15 euros per hour"
Source: Algarve Resident 10 May 2007
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 02:26:14 AM
Quote from: misty on August 19, 2016, 02:11:18 AM
I'll take your word for it as I can only see a reference to GB going there, not how he got there. Hilary Benn visited the day before, Cameron, Sadiq Khan Prince Charles also reportedly visited at separate times during the next week. That's a lot of private jets!
Thanks I didn't know they all went Misty. Maybe they all hitchhiked up the M6?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 19, 2016, 02:42:35 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 02:26:14 AM
Thanks I didn't know they all went Misty. Maybe they all hitchhiked up the M6?

LOL. It's normally quicker to walk it anyway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 03:43:24 PM
Quote from: misty on August 19, 2016, 02:42:35 AM
LOL. It's normally quicker to walk it anyway.
LOL but politicians tend to keep the wellies spotlessly clean until the actual photo-opportunities Misty. 

Back on topic, several of the highest people in gov had offered to do anything to help. Gov were involved in setting up both trips, meeting at airports, arranging for meetings with VIPs, etc. Gov (incl FCO) often charters or contracts or arranges private jets. So solving the question "who really arranged for the jets to be provided?" is easier than a piece of cake. And you may have noticed on every leg of both trips there was a full-time gov employee on the jets.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 05:11:34 PM
In real world solved cases where a perp wanted to ensure something/someone was not directly seen while being transported, there are 3 common transportation types:

bag etc
motor vehicle
none 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 19, 2016, 09:16:40 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 03:43:24 PM
LOL but politicians tend to keep the wellies spotlessly clean until the actual photo-opportunities Misty. 

Back on topic, several of the highest people in gov had offered to do anything to help. Gov were involved in setting up both trips, meeting at airports, arranging for meetings with VIPs, etc. Gov (incl FCO) often charters or contracts or arranges private jets. So solving the question "who really arranged for the jets to be provided?" is easier than a piece of cake. And you may have noticed on every leg of both trips there was a full-time gov employee on the jets.

The burning question has always been "why". Who or what was being protected to such an extreme degree? Maybe we'll find out one day.

Quote from: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 05:11:34 PM
In real world solved cases where a perp wanted to ensure something/someone was not directly seen while being transported, there are 3 common transportation types:

bag etc
motor vehicle
none 


There is one important factor you are overlooking - the cover of darkness.

Here is a link to a case I hadn't come across before & is eerily similar to the MM disappearance.
http://crimewatchdaily.com/2016/05/09/will-recently-discovered-video-help-find-missing-florida-girl-isabel-celis/

Even with CCTV there is no indication of exactly how the child went missing from the premises. Another one to get your teeth into, although there is a possible perpetrator named who has strong links to the family.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 10:12:13 PM
Quote from: misty on August 19, 2016, 09:16:40 PM
The burning question has always been "why". Who or what was being protected to such an extreme degree? Maybe we'll find out one day.

There is one important factor you are overlooking - the cover of darkness.

Here is a link to a case I hadn't come across before & is eerily similar to the MM disappearance.
http://crimewatchdaily.com/2016/05/09/will-recently-discovered-video-help-find-missing-florida-girl-isabel-celis/

Even with CCTV there is no indication of exactly how the child went missing from the premises. Another one to get your teeth into, although there is a possible perpetrator named who has strong links to the family.
Thanks for that interesting link Misty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 10:16:09 PM
In real world solved cases (even under cover of darkness) where a perp wanted to ensure something/someone was not directly seen while being transported, there are 3 common transportation types:

Bag etc
Motor vehicle
None 

Certainly not on the list: carrying the object or person unconcealed and visible (no bag, no vehicle) through populated streets.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 19, 2016, 10:45:30 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 10:16:09 PM
In real world solved cases (even under cover of darkness) where a perp wanted to ensure something/someone was not directly seen while being transported, there are 3 common transportation types:

Bag etc
Motor vehicle
None 

Certainly not on the list: carrying the object or person unconcealed and visible (no bag, no vehicle) through populated streets.

During daylight hours, many abductions occur involving the child being enticed or led away (sometimes by force) an undetermined distance to a vehicle or secluded location. If this can happen during daylight hours, why should an unconcealed carrying not occur under the cover of darkness, especially in an area where such a sight was not uncommon? Had any abductor only needed to carry a (sedated) child a short distance before proper concealment could be achieved, it is foolish to totally rule out unconcealed & visible carrying or walking.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 11:12:20 PM
Quote from: misty on August 19, 2016, 10:45:30 PM
During daylight hours, many abductions occur involving the child being enticed or led away (sometimes by force) an undetermined distance to a vehicle or secluded location. If this can happen during daylight hours, why should an unconcealed carrying not occur under the cover of darkness, especially in an area where such a sight was not uncommon? Had any abductor only needed to carry a (sedated) child a short distance before proper concealment could be achieved, it is foolish to totally rule out unconcealed & visible carrying or walking.
Ok can you give me a solved proven example, abduction or occultation, of unconcealed plainly visible carrying without bag or vehicle for 400+ metres through populated streets?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 19, 2016, 11:26:26 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 11:12:20 PM
Ok can you give me a solved proven example, abduction or occultation, of unconcealed plainly visible carrying without bag or vehicle for 400+ metres through populated streets?

Chloe Campbell walked through the streets with her abductors after being taken from her home. Does that count?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 12:03:28 AM
Quote from: misty on August 19, 2016, 11:26:26 PM
Chloe Campbell walked through the streets with her abductors after being taken from her home. Does that count?
No. "Carried" is a key word
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 20, 2016, 12:20:36 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 12:03:28 AM
No. "Carried" is a key word

OK. The two Newcastle girls who abducted a 2 year old from Primark must have employed a degree of carrying as they went on the bus & the Metro with the child, covering 3 miles in less than 2 hours.
There is another case involving an older teenage boy carrying a kidnapped child through the street in broad daylight (it was posted on here a while back), I'll try to find that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 20, 2016, 12:24:24 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 19, 2016, 11:12:20 PM
Ok can you give me a solved proven example, abduction or occultation, of unconcealed plainly visible carrying without bag or vehicle for 400+ metres through populated streets?

Teens chase man who snatched toddler from park
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/03/10/teens-chase-man-abducted-toddler/24705949/

Interestingly enough the child is being carried as described in Jane Tanner's sighting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 20, 2016, 12:29:59 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 20, 2016, 12:24:24 AM
Teens chase man who snatched toddler from park
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/03/10/teens-chase-man-abducted-toddler/24705949/

Interestingly enough the child is being carried as described in Jane Tanner's sighting.

Thanks, Brietta - that was the one I was looking for as I recalled you posting it before. I thought it happened in Canada or NZ which explains why I couldn't find it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 12:40:21 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 20, 2016, 12:24:24 AM
Teens chase man who snatched toddler from park
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/03/10/teens-chase-man-abducted-toddler/24705949/

Interestingly enough the child is being carried as described in Jane Tanner's sighting.
Close but no cigar Brietta, it was less than 400 metres.

 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 20, 2016, 01:20:58 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 20, 2016, 12:24:24 AM
Teens chase man who snatched toddler from park
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/03/10/teens-chase-man-abducted-toddler/24705949/

Interestingly enough the child is being carried as described in Jane Tanner's sighting.
Hard to be sure.  Was the kid screaming and fighting to escape?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 20, 2016, 01:32:35 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 12:40:21 AM
Close but no cigar Brietta, it was less than 400 metres.


Perhaps ... but only because of being hotly pursued.
If memory serves me well abductor had also gone to the trouble of disguising himself with a false moustache.

Children get abducted by strangers in the most bizarre circumstances. For example ...

The incident of the kidnapper caught on CCTV being chased down the street and the incident of the little girl being snatched from inside a shop had in common the fact that they were recorded plus the witnesses knew a kidnap was in progress.

Despite the poignant footage of James Bulger being led away no-one knew he was being kidnapped.  I wonder if without that footage James's vile abduction and murder would ever have been solved.
Who would have suspected that two young boys would do such a thing?  The many witnesses who thought they were seeing two brothers being hard on a sibling would probably never had made the connection without the CCTV.

The little girl snatched from her home while her mother slept was discovered badly injured in her back yard.
Had her abductor removed her from the scene of his crime, she might never have been found to become yet another 'mystery' and her mother another obvious suspect.  Shows that children are abducted from the safety of their homes ... although there may well be those who might think that she woke and wandered right into the hands of an attacker who just happened to be outside.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 02:07:02 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 20, 2016, 01:32:35 AM

Perhaps ... but only because of being hotly pursued.
If memory serves me well abductor had also gone to the trouble of disguising himself with a false moustache.

Children get abducted by strangers in the most bizarre circumstances. For example ...
  • Man Abducts 5-Year-Old Girl While Mom Sleeps http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Man-Abducts-5-Year-Old-Girl-While-Mom-Sleeps-Beats-Her-Unconscious-320024361.html
  • Man's attempt to kidnap little girl caught on camera http://www.khou.com/news/local/video/mans-attempt-to-kidnap-little-girl-caught-on-camera/265109091

The incident of the kidnapper caught on CCTV being chased down the street and the incident of the little girl being snatched from inside a shop had in common the fact that they were recorded plus the witnesses knew a kidnap was in progress.

Despite the poignant footage of James Bulger being led away no-one knew he was being kidnapped.  I wonder if without that footage James's vile abduction and murder would ever have been solved.
Who would have suspected that two young boys would do such a thing?  The many witnesses who thought they were seeing two brothers being hard on a sibling would probably never had made the connection without the CCTV.

The little girl snatched from her home while her mother slept was discovered badly injured in her back yard.
Had her abductor removed her from the scene of his crime, she might never have been found to become yet another 'mystery' and her mother another obvious suspect.  Shows that children are abducted from the safety of their homes ... although there may well be those who might think that she woke and wandered right into the hands of an attacker who just happened to be outside.
Thanks very interesting cases but the question was:

Ok can you give me a solved proven example, abduction or occultation, of unconcealed plainly visible carrying without bag or vehicle for 400+ metres through populated streets?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 02:26:24 AM
It is ridiculous to base a whole multi-million pound investigation on a hypothesis which is so implausible that you have to search the whole world, tens of thousands of cases, in an attempt to find just one proven example.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 20, 2016, 08:27:50 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 02:26:24 AM
It is ridiculous to base a whole multi-million pound investigation on a hypothesis which is so implausible that you have to search the whole world, tens of thousands of cases, in an attempt to find just one proven example.

The "it's never happened before so it didn't happen this time" is never a convincing argument.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on August 20, 2016, 09:23:13 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 02:26:24 AM
It is ridiculous to base a whole multi-million pound investigation on a hypothesis which is so implausible that you have to search the whole world, tens of thousands of cases, in an attempt to find just one proven example.
Do you really believe that is what the Met have done?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on August 20, 2016, 10:53:50 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on August 20, 2016, 08:27:50 AM
The "it's never happened before so it didn't happen this time" is never a convincing argument.

Especially when applied to "the trail blazers".
I don't believe Magellan's crew were the first to circumnavigate the world because it had never been done before so............
I don't believe Wilbur and Orville Wright were the first to use powered controlled flight because it had never been done before so...........................
Think of of all trail blazing stuff we were taught at school that must be wrong because it had never been done before. The list is endless.............. ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 20, 2016, 12:14:42 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 02:26:24 AM
It is ridiculous to base a whole multi-million pound investigation on a hypothesis which is so implausible that you have to search the whole world, tens of thousands of cases, in an attempt to find just one proven example.

It is ridiculous and incompetent to ignore and fail to follow through on evidence ... particularly eye witness evidence ... because dogs untrained for that job have not followed a scent.

Similarly, individuals like child serial killer Robert Black are able to practice for periods of up to and over twenty years by being peripatetic, making each crime and missing child seem unique despite using the same modus operandi.

**snip
Black goes into horrific detail about how he would abduct youngsters in his delivery van as he travelled round the country.

Detectives think Black was talking about actual crimes in the interviews but avoided incriminating himself by claiming to be describing a fantasy, ...

//////

He was able to evade justice for over 20 years as his job as a driver enabled him to criss-cross police boundaries and stay one step ahead of authorities.
But his luck ran out when a policeman spotted him bundling a little girl into his van in the Borders.

//////

He was jailed in 1990 but told police practically nothing.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/child-killer-robert-black-reveals-7430373



The Portuguese police had a head start on police dealing with widespread apparently unrelated disappearances of children.

Joana Cipriano disappeared from Figueira which is only seven miles from Praia da Luz.

**snip
A child protection specialist, Mark Williams-Thomas, who believes that Joana's and Madeleine's disappearances are related, said that the disappearance of two children unknown to each other, within a period of four years in a seven-mile radius, would be a huge coincidence, especially considering that Portugal is a small country with few abductions.[11] Before Joana's disappearance, the previous first-degree murder of a child in the Algarve region was in November 1990 and involved a British girl, nine-year-old Rachel Charles, who was abducted and murdered in Albufeira. Her body was found three days later; a British mechanic, Michael Cook, a friend of the family, was arrested and convicted.[12] Leandro Silva, the common-law husband of Leonor Cipriano, said in 2007 that "the only difference between the McCanns and us is that we don't have money."[13]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Joana_Cipriano


The problem there being that having 'solved' Joana's case with a conviction for murder but no evidence indicating what happened to Joana ... the same team was involved in investigating Madeleine's disappearance.

Would it have been possible for them to have thought outside the box and linked both cases without denting their 'honour' for the expeditious solving one.

Might it not have been very much a case of ~ every size fits all?


In my opinion the man seen leaving the scene of the crime carrying a child on the 3rd May 2007 was an abductor and the barefoot child being carried was Madeleine McCann.
If Robert Black had not been spotted bundling a little girl into his van and later stopped before the child's demise ... there would have been yet another missing child to add to the statistics.

Who knows in this day and age of untraceable children crossing what amount to open borders if Joana and Madeleine were the last or only two of many.
 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 20, 2016, 12:39:11 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 20, 2016, 12:14:42 PM
It is ridiculous and incompetent to ignore and fail to follow through on evidence ... particularly eye witness evidence ... because dogs untrained for that job have not followed a scent.

Similarly, individuals like child serial killer Robert Black are able to practice for periods of up to and over twenty years by being peripatetic, making each crime and missing child seem unique despite using the same modus operandi.

**snip
Black goes into horrific detail about how he would abduct youngsters in his delivery van as he travelled round the country.

Detectives think Black was talking about actual crimes in the interviews but avoided incriminating himself by claiming to be describing a fantasy, ...

//////

He was able to evade justice for over 20 years as his job as a driver enabled him to criss-cross police boundaries and stay one step ahead of authorities.
But his luck ran out when a policeman spotted him bundling a little girl into his van in the Borders.

//////

He was jailed in 1990 but told police practically nothing.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/child-killer-robert-black-reveals-7430373



The Portuguese police had a head start on police dealing with widespread apparently unrelated disappearances of children.

Joana Cipriano disappeared from Figueira which is only seven miles from Praia da Luz.

**snip
A child protection specialist, Mark Williams-Thomas, who believes that Joana's and Madeleine's disappearances are related, said that the disappearance of two children unknown to each other, within a period of four years in a seven-mile radius, would be a huge coincidence, especially considering that Portugal is a small country with few abductions.[11] Before Joana's disappearance, the previous first-degree murder of a child in the Algarve region was in November 1990 and involved a British girl, nine-year-old Rachel Charles, who was abducted and murdered in Albufeira. Her body was found three days later; a British mechanic, Michael Cook, a friend of the family, was arrested and convicted.[12] Leandro Silva, the common-law husband of Leonor Cipriano, said in 2007 that "the only difference between the McCanns and us is that we don't have money."[13]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Joana_Cipriano


The problem there being that having 'solved' Joana's case with a conviction for murder but no evidence indicating what happened to Joana ... the same team was involved in investigating Madeleine's disappearance.

Would it have been possible for them to have thought outside the box and linked both cases without denting their 'honour' for the expeditious solving one.

Might it not have been very much a case of ~ every size fits all?


In my opinion the man seen leaving the scene of the crime carrying a child on the 3rd May 2007 was an abductor and the barefoot child being carried was Madeleine McCann.
If Robert Black had not been spotted bundling a little girl into his van and later stopped before the child's demise ... there would have been yet another missing child to add to the statistics.

Who knows in this day and age of untraceable children crossing what amount to open borders if Joana and Madeleine were the last or only two of many.

There is no evidence that Smithman went into the McCann's apartment. He needs to be offered an amnesty to encourage him to come forward.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 01:26:47 PM
Quote from: Alfie on August 20, 2016, 09:23:13 AM
Do you really believe that is what the Met have done?
What they publically stated in Crimewatch gave the impression they were concentrating a a huge part of the investigation on the assumption that a perp would carry someone or something visibly in arms for a quarter of a mile or more through populated streets.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 01:51:28 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 20, 2016, 12:39:11 PM
There is no evidence that Smithman went into the McCann's apartment. He needs to be offered an amnesty to encourage him to come forward.
The man's destination was not to the clinic for treatment, nor to the chinese restaurant a few doors away for a meal, because both destinations are easily disproven by observing the man's course across the junction. Look at the map in the files which marks exactly where witness AS saw him.

IMO he was simply walking at normal speed, carrying his own daughter, most probably towards his home or holiday accommodation. And no degree in rocket propulsion is needed to deduce he was a non-english-speaker.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 04:33:03 PM
I never actually hypothesised "hiding" during the search. But IMO it is probable that the child hid within the property immediately when someone outside was attempting entry. So this is talking about sometime before 10pm. It is certainly not preposterous. It is the most frequent response of home-alone children when someone outside attempts entry, and I can back that up with many cases where exactly that happened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on August 20, 2016, 04:55:56 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 04:33:03 PM
I never actually hypothesised "hiding" during the search. But IMO it is probable that the child hid within the property immediately when someone outside was attempting entry. So this is talking about sometime before 10pm. It is certainly not preposterous. It is the most frequent response of home-alone children when someone outside attempts entry, and I can back that up with many cases where exactly that happened.
Have you not suggested that Madeleine was missed when the apartment was searched after the alarm was raised?  The fact that you think this is likely seems utterly bizarre to me. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 05:22:36 PM
Quote from: Alfie on August 20, 2016, 04:55:56 PM
Have you not suggested that Madeleine was missed when the apartment was searched after the alarm was raised?  The fact that you think this is likely seems utterly bizarre to me.
It would be bizarre to discard the science of studying and learning from other cases. Fact is there are many missing child cases where relatives and police "completely searched" the property yet missed the child.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 20, 2016, 06:04:58 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 05:22:36 PM
It would be bizarre to discard the science of studying and learning from other cases. Fact is there are many missing child cases where relatives and police "completely searched" the property yet missed the child.

In how many of those cases was the child never located?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 20, 2016, 06:27:35 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 01:26:47 PM
What they publically stated in Crimewatch gave the impression they were concentrating a a huge part of the investigation on the assumption that a perp would carry someone or something visibly in arms for a quarter of a mile or more through populated streets.

Do you really suppose SY outlined exactly their strategy for the consumption of interested viewers some of whom might be perpetrators?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 06:58:14 PM
Quote from: misty on August 20, 2016, 06:04:58 PM
In how many of those cases was the child never located?
Obviously 0% Misty because all the dozens of cases I am citing are solved cases where the missing person was eventually located by LE in the already supposedly "completely" searched location.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 20, 2016, 07:14:24 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 06:58:14 PM
Obviously 0% Misty because all the dozens of cases I am citing are solved cases where the missing person was eventually located by LE in the already supposedly "completely" searched location.

Does that statistic therefore lead you to conclude that missing Madeleine was not in the "searched" location?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 07:32:41 PM
Quote from: misty on August 20, 2016, 07:14:24 PM
Does that statistic therefore lead you to conclude that missing Madeleine was not in the "searched" location?
It's just an observation, proven by many solved cases, that even when people including relatives and police truly believe they have completely searched a location, in fact they often haven't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 20, 2016, 07:37:44 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 04:33:03 PM
I never actually hypothesised "hiding" during the search. But IMO it is probable that the child hid within the property immediately when someone outside was attempting entry. So this is talking about sometime before 10pm. It is certainly not preposterous. It is the most frequent response of home-alone children when someone outside attempts entry, and I can back that up with many cases where exactly that happened.
Is that possible outsider having gained entry may have left the exit ways open and the frightened person makes use of them and hides outside.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 20, 2016, 07:50:42 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 07:32:41 PM
It's just an observation, proven by many solved cases, that even when people including relatives and police truly believe they have completely searched a location, in fact they often haven't.

The reason the cases were solved is because the missing child had not been removed from the location by another party. The search area for 5a was minimal. If you extend the search area beyond the boundary of 5a then the scope for
error increases & your application of previous case study cannot really be used.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 07:53:44 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 20, 2016, 07:37:44 PM
Is that possible outsider having gained entry may have left the exit ways open and the frightened person makes use of them and hides outside.
IMO no, because in the northern hemisphere survival instinct is to move away from danger.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 20, 2016, 08:04:51 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 07:53:44 PM
IMO no, because in the northern hemisphere survival instinct is to move away from danger.
I always knew from my childhood days you Northerners were upside down.
"Is that possible outsider having gained entry (the inside of the building is the place of danger) may have left the exit ways open and the frightened person makes use of them and hides outside (because the outside now feels safer).  It is certainly how piglets would operate.  Wild cats would do the same.  So that could be instinctive in humans too, as it isn't something instinctively we test very often.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 09:14:51 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 20, 2016, 08:04:51 PM
I always knew from my childhood days you Northerners were upside down.
"Is that possible outsider having gained entry (the inside of the building is the place of danger) may have left the exit ways open and the frightened person makes use of them and hides outside (because the outside now feels safer).  It is certainly how piglets would operate.  Wild cats would do the same.  So that could be instinctive in humans too, as it isn't something instinctively we test very often.
Instinct is to to flee away from danger - as practised in the monster game.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 20, 2016, 10:56:16 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 09:14:51 PM
Instinct is to to flee away from danger - as practised in the monster game.
Later in life I found that the worst game to play with your kids.  I taught them to not fear the dark or anything, whereas I was told about the Boogey Man and that made me scared for no reason at all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 11:32:43 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 20, 2016, 10:56:16 PM
Later in life I found that the worst game to play with your kids.  I taught them to not fear the dark or anything, whereas I was told about the Boogey Man and that made me scared for no reason at all.
There are many other cases where a burglar started to make entry to a property thinking everyone was out, when in fact there was a child or children home alone, whose behavioural response was
1, if near the attempted entry point, flee away from attempted entry point, then
2. hide within the property
This is actual behaviour in real cases.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 21, 2016, 02:34:48 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 11:32:43 PM
There are many other cases where a burglar started to make entry to a property thinking everyone was out, when in fact there was a child or children home alone, whose behavioural response was
1, if near the attempted entry point, flee away from attempted entry point, then
2. hide within the property
This is actual behaviour in real cases.
"2. hide within the property":  Would that include parts of the property out of the building being entered?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on August 21, 2016, 02:51:20 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 20, 2016, 05:22:36 PM
It would be bizarre to discard the science of studying and learning from other cases. Fact is there are many missing child cases where relatives and police "completely searched" the property yet missed the child.
What is the square footage of Apt 5a, and how does this compare to the square footage of other properties searched where children were initially overlooked during a search? Please describe the various hiding places yu believe exist in Apt 5a were a child could succesfully hide or be hidden whilst frantic parents and friends and police search the premises.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 21, 2016, 02:54:22 AM
Quote from: Alfie on August 21, 2016, 02:51:20 AM
What is the square footage of Apt 5a, and how does this compare to the square footage of other properties searched where children were initially overlooked during a search? Please describe the various hiding places yu believe exist in Apt 5a were a child could succesfully hide or be hidden whilst frantic parents and friends and police search the premises.
And even if they missed finding her that night what would be the sequence after that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on August 21, 2016, 03:46:05 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 21, 2016, 02:54:22 AM
And even if they missed finding her that night what would be the sequence after that?
Pegasus will refuse to elaborate, unsurprisingly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 21, 2016, 04:18:41 AM
Quote from: Alfie on August 21, 2016, 03:46:05 AM
Pegasus will refuse to elaborate, unsurprisingly.
It seems rather a difficult thing to elaborate on for it would have to involve corruption at the highest level, if that is how it happened.  Like you'd have to say "the OC management or the PJ dumped Madeleine's body".  Who's going to claim that?
Does he really think this is the scenario but is just too scared to say.  I thought I was being risky saying there was a cover-up but destroying a body well that is another type of claim altogether.
That is a real interesting twist, if that is the case.  In my theory the "missing body: (not MM) had the potential of being returned, but if it hasn't been returned what has happened to it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 21, 2016, 06:36:26 PM
I don't have a theory of any kind, just pointing out that in general studying hundreds of solved cases is a way to better understand behaviour. For example there is a shutter video in which the first half (mechanisms and opening methods) fits generally with behaviour in many other cases where burglars open various doors or windows - it is predictable and well-precedented behaviour so IMO that theory is possible and even probable.  But the second half (predicted response) goes exactly against hundreds of behavioural examples in other cases and so just IMO the second half theory is impossible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 21, 2016, 06:46:20 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 21, 2016, 06:36:26 PM
I don't have a theory of any kind, just pointing out that in general studying hundreds of solved cases is a way to better understand behaviour. For example there is a shutter video in which the first half (mechanisms and opening methods) fits generally with behaviour in many other cases where burglars open various doors or windows - it is predictable and well-precedented behaviour so IMO that theory is possible and even probable.  But the second half (predicted response) goes exactly against hundreds of behavioural examples in other cases and so just IMO the second half theory is impossible.

Are you saying that people do not enter children's bedrooms via windows or lean through windows for the purpose of abduction?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 21, 2016, 07:44:57 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 21, 2016, 06:46:20 PM
Are you saying that people do not enter children's bedrooms via windows or lean through windows for the purpose of abduction?
IMO in the large majority of solved cases involving a window opened without authority, it was opened from outside by a person who was intending to burgle the property.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 21, 2016, 07:58:16 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 21, 2016, 06:46:20 PM
Are you saying that people do not enter children's bedrooms via windows ... (snip)
If it happens to be the only accessible window then it would be the most probable point of attempted entry, but obviously only if the burglars think no-one's home.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 21, 2016, 08:29:59 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 21, 2016, 06:46:20 PM
... or lean through windows for the purpose of abduction?
The only portable items within leaning-in distance were bedlinen and a wicker chair.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 21, 2016, 08:36:54 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 21, 2016, 06:36:26 PM
I don't have a theory of any kind, just pointing out that in general studying hundreds of solved cases is a way to better understand behaviour. For example there is a shutter video in which the first half (mechanisms and opening methods) fits generally with behaviour in many other cases where burglars open various doors or windows - it is predictable and well-precedented behaviour so IMO that theory is possible and even probable.  But the second half (predicted response) goes exactly against hundreds of behavioural examples in other cases and so just IMO the second half theory is impossible.
@Pegasus - Have you gone away from the option of MM being hidden in the apartment and missed during the initial search?  I see your point for I'm saying a similar thing too, in a way, but it takes the action of a human being to set it up i.e. to do the hiding etc.  A child can be hidden in a carry bag and that carry bag can be put into a shelf and therefore it looks like a piece of luggage and it doesn't register to all those many eyes as being a kid's hiding place. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 21, 2016, 09:15:15 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 21, 2016, 08:36:54 PM
@Pegasus - Have you gone away from the option of MM being hidden in the apartment and missed during the initial search?  I see your point for I'm saying a similar thing too, in a way, but it takes the action of a human being to set it up i.e. to do the hiding etc.  A child can be hidden in a carry bag and that carry bag can be put into a shelf and therefore it looks like a piece of luggage and it doesn't register to all those many eyes as being a kid's hiding place. 
Just IMO your theory you describe is impossible Robbity.
The time to start IMO is - after people went to tapas - and before anything happened - if an observant person walked once past the apartment what would they deduce?
(a) It had no people residing in it that week.
(b) It did have people residing in it that week but they were out.
(c) It did have people residing in it that week and they were in.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 21, 2016, 09:46:08 PM
Quote from: pegasus on August 21, 2016, 09:15:15 PM
Just IMO your theory you describe is impossible Robbity.
The time to start IMO is - after people went to tapas - and before anything happened - if an observant person walked once past the apartment what would they deduce?
(a) It had no people residing in it that week.
(b) It did have people residing in it that week but they were out.
(c) It did have people residing in it that week and they were in.
@ Pegasus how can you start off saying it is impossible when it has been the theory you have been promoting up till now? 
You say "The time to start IMO is - after people went to tapas - and before anything happened".   Well no doubt there was that too, but what happens after the alarm is raised?  Address my scenario and explain why it is impossible without confusing us with what could have happened prior to Kate's check please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on August 22, 2016, 03:53:11 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 21, 2016, 06:36:26 PM
I don't have a theory of any kind, just pointing out that in general studying hundreds of solved cases is a way to better understand behaviour. For example there is a shutter video in which the first half (mechanisms and opening methods) fits generally with behaviour in many other cases where burglars open various doors or windows - it is predictable and well-precedented behaviour so IMO that theory is possible and even probable.  But the second half (predicted response) goes exactly against hundreds of behavioural examples in other cases and so just IMO the second half theory is impossible.
Events on the night and following it would tend to strongly suggest Madeleine was not in the apartment whn the alarm was raised. Now dispute this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 22, 2016, 09:45:18 AM
Quote from: Alfie on August 22, 2016, 03:53:11 AM
Events on the night and following it would tend to strongly suggest Madeleine was not in the apartment whn the alarm was raised. Now dispute this.
Are you going to allow alternate theories that account for the cadaver odour not being related to Madeleine but someone else?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 22, 2016, 10:25:23 AM
Some would dispute there ever was a cadaver odour  8)-)))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on August 22, 2016, 04:47:44 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 22, 2016, 09:45:18 AM
Are you going to allow alternate theories that account for the cadaver odour not being related to Madeleine but someone else?
I don't see what that's got to do with the question I asked, but sure if you want...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on August 22, 2016, 07:31:10 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 22, 2016, 10:25:23 AM
Some would dispute there ever was a cadaver odour  8)-)))

Yes, including me. The dog reacted to something within his "training parameters", but it's not clear what exactly that encompassed.

Could he have reacted to the scent of a decomposing human body? Possibly. Is there any supporting evidence? No.

Could he have reacted to the scent of decomposing human substances that did not involve a death? Yes - we already know that he would react to dried blood from a living person. What we don't know is what other decomposing human substances he would react to. Was there any evidence of whatever else that may have been? No. But not only wasn't the apartment sealed off prior to the dog's inspection, it had been let out to 4 other lots of holidaymakers. Were they all interviewed? Not according to the files, although they may have been by the UK police later.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 22, 2016, 07:47:40 PM
Quote from: Alfie on August 22, 2016, 03:53:11 AM
Events on the night and following it would tend to strongly suggest Madeleine was not in the apartment whn the alarm was raised. (snip)
Agreed Alfie, nothing to dispute there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 22, 2016, 11:11:10 PM
Quote from: John on August 22, 2016, 08:41:18 PM
Smithman is key to the Madeleine McCann investigation.  Scotland Yard should have put much more effort and resources into indentifying him.  At least then we would have a better idea of what really happened instead of chasing a ghost for 9 years.

SY will have accessed phone records - and not just for the night of the 3rd - which will have helped them determine the veracity of the sighting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 23, 2016, 12:30:54 AM
Quote from: misty on August 23, 2016, 12:07:36 AM
The numbers are not redacted in the same manner as on GM's records - there would have been no need. The print out says UNKNOWN but has all the other data,
Maybe the computer that made the list had an incomplete list of country codes?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 23, 2016, 12:35:46 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 23, 2016, 12:30:54 AM
Maybe the computer that made the list had an incomplete list of country codes?

What are the odds of that on 2 different local phone lines during the same few days?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 23, 2016, 12:48:04 AM
Quote from: misty on August 23, 2016, 12:35:46 AM
What are the odds of that on 2 different local phone lines during the same few days?
Probably near 100% if the same computer making both lists.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 23, 2016, 01:21:51 AM
IMO it's probably just a computer error that prints "unknown" if the calling number doesn't fit its incomplete idea of correct numbers Misty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 23, 2016, 01:36:31 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 23, 2016, 01:21:51 AM
IMO it's probably just a computer error that prints "unknown" if the calling number doesn't fit its incomplete idea of correct numbers Misty.

OK. I was just curious because of the dates & a dial-up(?) in between 3 of the calls.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pegasus on August 25, 2016, 11:45:46 PM
Quote from: misty on August 23, 2016, 01:36:31 AM
OK. I was just curious because of the dates & a dial-up(?) in between 3 of the calls.
What month are you looking at Misty?
If it's before May 2007 it can't possibly be relevant.
Are you even in the relevant year?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 26, 2016, 12:13:03 AM
Quote from: pegasus on August 25, 2016, 11:45:46 PM
What month are you looking at Misty?
If it's before May 2007 it can't possibly be relevant.
Are you even in the relevant year?

Pages 16 & particularly 26 are the ones which caught my attention. (there are a few others in between)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 16, 2016, 10:54:01 AM
Silvia Batista's statement about Jane Tanner's sighting has always puzzled me. She said that Jane's account puzzled her because Jane said the man she saw was walking towards the T Junction, he hadn't actually reached it. She was puzzled because Jane couldn't see round the corner from where she says she was.
So what happened? The possibilities are;

Silvia's understanding of English was inadequate so she didn't understand exactly what Jane was saying. Did she translate for the PJ Inspector as well as the GNR? We don't know. The inspector says he 'conversed' with Gerry, so did he misunderstand what Gerry said?

Jane's account of the position of the locations of the man and herself changed.

Gerry misunderstood where Jane actually was when she saw the man. [He seems to be placing her at the entrance to block 5]. If Jane was at the entrance she was probably coming out of the block after checking her children. I think Heri had some thoughts on this.

At some point she translated the statement of one of the ladies who belonged to the group and that she describes as a brunette one. This lady said to the GNR elements, and she (the witness) translated, that she had seen a man on the road who might have carried a child.
This situation surprised her because she (the witness) was convinced that when the lady saw the man, the lady was in a place from where she had no angle of vision for the place where she saw the man. She doesn't know exactly what was the position of the lady when she saw the man, but she knows that the lady said she saw the man in the street in front of the Madeleine's bedroom window, walking in the direction of the street that then leads to the Baptista supermarket.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm

States that other details that may be relevant to the investigation concerns that they were directed to a citizen, of British nationality, who made up the group of tourists together with the family, name of Jane Tanner, and who detected the presence of a suspicious movement of an individual in the immediate area above identified, in the discourse of which was seen transporting a child of an early age;
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NELSON-DA-COSTA-1.htm

In conversation with Gerald McCann it was possible to establish the following:
At about 21.20, their friend Jane passed by the apartment (along the corridor of the main entrance) she saw an individual carrying a child who passed descending the road, however she did not recognise this individual, nor the child, only having noticed that the individual appeared to be aged between 30 or 40, had dark hair and light coloured trousers.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VITOR_MARTINS.htm#p15p3862
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 11:10:40 AM
It is interesting that Gerry describes Tanner sighting as an asexual "individual" whereas Silvia keeps on making the point it was a "man".  You might be able to see that.  So Gerry must have spoken to Jane at this time, I read somewhere it was about 3:00 AM before Jane told Gerry about what she had seen. 
I'm sure there is evidence she had spoke to others about what she had seen and they convinced her it wasn't Madeleine because the pyjamas were different than Madeleine's.  Would that have been before or after Kate's alert?  I think this really needs sorting out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 16, 2016, 12:06:21 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 11:10:40 AM
It is interesting that Gerry describes Tanner sighting as an asexual "individual" whereas Silvia keeps on making the point it was a "man".  You might be able to see that.  So Gerry must have spoken to Jane at this time, I read somewhere it was about 3:00 AM before Jane told Gerry about what she had seen. 
I'm sure there is evidence she had spoke to others about what she had seen and they convinced her it wasn't Madeleine because the pyjamas were different than Madeleine's.  Would that have been before or after Kate's alert?  I think this really needs sorting out.

It seems there may be material scattered around which is interesting.

Kate says in her book that Jane told Fiona quite early on, just after coming out of her apartment on hearing the commotion. She then 'immediately' reported her sighting to the police. Kate says Gerry was told but he didn't tell her until the morning.

Jane came out of her apartment just after 10pm, so she didn't report anything to the police 'immediately', they hadn't yet arrived.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 12:45:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 16, 2016, 12:06:21 PM
It seems there may be material scattered around which is interesting.

Kate says in her book that Jane told Fiona quite early on, just after coming out of her apartment on hearing the commotion. She then 'immediately' reported her sighting to the police. Kate says Gerry was told but he didn't tell her until the morning.

Jane came out of her apartment just after 10pm, so she didn't report anything to the police 'immediately', they hadn't yet arrived.
Out of interest, for what reason did Jane come out of her apartment at just after 10pm?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 16, 2016, 01:02:17 PM
Quote from: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 12:45:19 PM
Out of interest, for what reason did Jane come out of her apartment at just after 10pm?

The answer according to Kate is right there in my post.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 01:31:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 16, 2016, 01:02:17 PM
The answer according to Kate is right there in my post.
So the commotion happened "just after 10"? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 01:48:14 PM
Looking at a timeline Jane does return to the table "Rachael Oldfield 4/5/07 After placing their orders, at around 9.15pm, Gerry McCann went to check, only his apartment. He was held up for nearly 10 minutes because, he said, he had been chatting with Jes about tennis. Today there was a tournament which they both had to compete in. During Gerry's absence, the waiters started to bring the food. Jane was also absent to check her apartment. Gerry returned shortly after Jane.  so that explains why jane is not in ROB apartment on the 9:30 check, but ROB is also at the table too. 
Was ROB in the apartment when Jane arrives there? (I tend not  to think so.)
Quote
Rachael Oldfield 4/5/07 Between the starters and the main course, at around 9.30pm, her husband Matthew Oldfield and Russell O'Brien both went to check on the children. Kate was also planning to go and see the children, but they told her it was no trouble, that they would go and check. Kate, therefore, stayed at the restaurant. Four or five minutes later the interviewee's husband came back after having checked his apartment. He also checked the one where Madeleine was.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_INFORMATION.htm

So the time Jane goes to relieve Russell is closer to the 10:00 PM rather than the 9:15 check but ROB stays up at the apartments from 9:30 till around 10:00 on his own.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 16, 2016, 02:12:34 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 01:48:14 PM
Looking at a timeline Jane does return to the table "Rachael Oldfield 4/5/07 After placing their orders, at around 9.15pm, Gerry McCann went to check, only his apartment. He was held up for nearly 10 minutes because, he said, he had been chatting with Jes about tennis. Today there was a tournament which they both had to compete in. During Gerry's absence, the waiters started to bring the food. Jane was also absent to check her apartment. Gerry returned shortly after Jane.  so that explains why jane is not in ROB apartment on the 9:30 check, but ROB is also at the table too. 
Was ROB in the apartment when Jane arrives there? (I tend not  to think so.)http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_INFORMATION.htm

So the time Jane goes to relieve Russell is closer to the 10:00 PM rather than the 9:15 check but ROB stays up at the apartments from 9:30 till around 10:00 on his own.

He was back at the table and tucking into his steak before the alarm was raised. Jane had by that time replaced him in the apartment so was not at the table.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 02:14:42 PM
Quote from: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 01:31:39 PM
So the commotion happened "just after 10"?
Jane being in the apartment might have checked the time does she mention it?
Quote
When she was in the apartment, at about 22.00- 22.15 she heard Kate and Fiona shouting and saying that Madeleine had disappeared.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm

According to Jane, Gerry arrives back before Jane.

in Jane's state the is a map and on it "#9 zona do caoqui"  does anyone know what that means?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 16, 2016, 02:51:12 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 01:13:43 PM
I did some late editing and you might miss it so I'll repeat it sorry.

On page 99 the conversation with Fiona appears to happen outside Jane's apartment after 10:00 PM.

I seem to have this mental picture of Matt and Russell going to Russell's apartment first then Matt checks on his kid and then checks on the McCann's kids and then returns to the Tapas.  Did they both go to ROB's first, but if Jane is already there how come they don't mention that?

I always wondered how Fiona knew what Madeleine's pyjamas looked like?  How can Fiona convince Jane it wasn't Madeleine by the description of the pyjamas?  Have you worked that out?

Jane 'relieved' Russell who stayed with his child, so she wasn't there when he and Matt were there. Emma Knight went to get details just after the missing child procedure began, so around 10.30pm? It seems Kate or Gerry had given Fiona the details before Emma arrived. Jane contradicts the PJ Inspector, saying she told him about her sighting, not Gerry, at 3am. It was Saturday when she and Fiona discussed the pyjamas. There's a very confused bit when Jane talks about not being at the table when Kate told people what Madeleine was wearing.

I was told who the missing girl was and at the beginning of the procedure went to the McCann's apartment to obtain the girl's description and of the clothes she was wearing when she disappeared. When I arrived at the apartment, there was a lady on the terrace, whom I now know to be Kate McCann, accompanied by the wife of one of her friends, David Payne. Kate could not say a word, looked very upset and about to cry. It was Mrs Payne who provided me with the details that I needed.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EMMA-LOUISE.htm

Subsequently, she had no doubts that it could have been MBM because, through conversations with FP in which [FP] described the pyjamas that MBM had worn that night, which coincided with those she had seen.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm

So let's look at the details as per Jane;

 I think I heard some shouting, erm, so I actually went to sort of put my head out the roadside door.  And I think it was Rachael that I saw first because she had run back I think to check that Grace was obviously okay.  And then I think Rachael said, you know, she told me what had, you know she said ‘Oh Madeleine’s gone’ or, you know, something along those lines....“Erm, well I think I was in a bit of a, I mean, obviously, erm, the next thing I can remember is seeing Kate and Fiona....And Fi started running upstairs and that’s when I ran to Fi and said what I thought, you know, I said ‘I think I’ve seen somebody’....I don’t know whether she took it in properly....when they arrived Rachael I think went and got the GNR and I told the GNR chap and then when the PJ actually arrived they came and got me to go and talk to the, the PJ”....Russell was there when I spoke to the PJ, because I can remember Russell coming in with me when I spoke to the PJ, because there was Russell and Gerry was there as well in the apartment when I spoke to the PJ......That was at three o’clock in the morning after she’d disappeared....Well when the GNR people came, so the first lot of Police, the local Police came, erm, I spoke to them and I think that was through the translator, which was, I think she’s called Sylvie, she’s the Head of Housekeeping or something, she was doing the translating at that point.  So I’d spoken to the GNR Police and then when the PJ came, they came to get me to talk to them to say, to say what, what I’d seen.  And then I can remember the same GNR person saying to me later on in the night ‘Oh have you spoken to the PJ’ and I had by that stage, so”.....And where was Kate?”
Reply    “I don’t know at that point, she wasn’t, she wasn’t in the, she wasn’t there.  I don’t know whether, I think they had taken the twins out of the room by that stage, so I don’t know whether she was up in Dave and Fi’s room”.....Yes.  I think the point they’re trying to make is that you had no knowledge of what Madeleine was supposed to have been wearing when you gave that description”?
 Reply    “No I think, no because when, I wasn’t there at the table when Kate gave a you know, I think Kate gave everybody else, when she came, you know when everyone was looking for her, they had a description of what to look for but I wasn’t, I was in the room at that point so no I definitely didn’t know what she’d, and I’d never seen her in pyjamas, I’ve never seen Madeleine in pyjamas at home and or anywhere so”.....Rachael was the first person I told”.
 
4078    “Right”.
Reply    “And then Fiona and then I think when Russell and Matt or Russell and Dave, whoever it was that came back, I then, then told them”.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
 
 
 


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 16, 2016, 03:38:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 16, 2016, 02:51:12 PM
Jane 'relieved' Russell who stayed with his child, so she wasn't there when he and Matt were there. Emma Knight went to get details just after the missing child procedure began, so around 10.30pm? It seems Kate or Gerry had given Fiona the details before Emma arrived. Jane contradicts the PJ Inspector, saying she told him about her sighting, not Gerry, at 3am. It was Saturday when she and Fiona discussed the pyjamas. There's a very confused bit when Jane talks about not being at the table when Kate told people what Madeleine was wearing.

I was told who the missing girl was and at the beginning of the procedure went to the McCann's apartment to obtain the girl's description and of the clothes she was wearing when she disappeared. When I arrived at the apartment, there was a lady on the terrace, whom I now know to be Kate McCann, accompanied by the wife of one of her friends, David Payne. Kate could not say a word, looked very upset and about to cry. It was Mrs Payne who provided me with the details that I needed.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EMMA-LOUISE.htm

Subsequently, she had no doubts that it could have been MBM because, through conversations with FP in which [FP] described the pyjamas that MBM had worn that night, which coincided with those she had seen.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm

So let's look at the details as per Jane;

 I think I heard some shouting, erm, so I actually went to sort of put my head out the roadside door.  And I think it was Rachael that I saw first because she had run back I think to check that Grace was obviously okay.  And then I think Rachael said, you know, she told me what had, you know she said ‘Oh Madeleine’s gone’ or, you know, something along those lines....“Erm, well I think I was in a bit of a, I mean, obviously, erm, the next thing I can remember is seeing Kate and Fiona....And Fi started running upstairs and that’s when I ran to Fi and said what I thought, you know, I said ‘I think I’ve seen somebody’....I don’t know whether she took it in properly....when they arrived Rachael I think went and got the GNR and I told the GNR chap and then when the PJ actually arrived they came and got me to go and talk to the, the PJ”....Russell was there when I spoke to the PJ, because I can remember Russell coming in with me when I spoke to the PJ, because there was Russell and Gerry was there as well in the apartment when I spoke to the PJ......That was at three o’clock in the morning after she’d disappeared....Well when the GNR people came, so the first lot of Police, the local Police came, erm, I spoke to them and I think that was through the translator, which was, I think she’s called Sylvie, she’s the Head of Housekeeping or something, she was doing the translating at that point.  So I’d spoken to the GNR Police and then when the PJ came, they came to get me to talk to them to say, to say what, what I’d seen.  And then I can remember the same GNR person saying to me later on in the night ‘Oh have you spoken to the PJ’ and I had by that stage, so”.....And where was Kate?”
Reply    “I don’t know at that point, she wasn’t, she wasn’t in the, she wasn’t there.  I don’t know whether, I think they had taken the twins out of the room by that stage, so I don’t know whether she was up in Dave and Fi’s room”.....Yes.  I think the point they’re trying to make is that you had no knowledge of what Madeleine was supposed to have been wearing when you gave that description”?
 Reply    “No I think, no because when, I wasn’t there at the table when Kate gave a you know, I think Kate gave everybody else, when she came, you know when everyone was looking for her, they had a description of what to look for but I wasn’t, I was in the room at that point so no I definitely didn’t know what she’d, and I’d never seen her in pyjamas, I’ve never seen Madeleine in pyjamas at home and or anywhere so”.....Rachael was the first person I told”.
 
4078    “Right”.
Reply    “And then Fiona and then I think when Russell and Matt or Russell and Dave, whoever it was that came back, I then, then told them”.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

I find this strange. Had they run so low on topics of conversation that Kate was reduced to boring the rest of the group about what her elder daughter was wearing to bed that night?  Did she also describe in detail what her other children were wearing that night?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 03:59:57 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 16, 2016, 03:38:00 PM
I find this strange. Had they run so low on topics of conversation that Kate was reduced to boring the rest of the group about what her elder daughter was wearing to bed that night?  Did she also describe in detail what her other children were wearing that night?
I think you're barking up the wrong tree here - Kate obviously wasn't talking about Madeleine's pjs with the group BEFORE the alarm was raised.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 16, 2016, 04:19:46 PM
Quote from: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 03:59:57 PM
I think you're barking up the wrong tree here - Kate obviously wasn't talking about Madeleine's pjs with the group BEFORE the alarm was raised.

Could well be

So when was Kate then telling the rest of the group what Madeleine had been wearing  ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 04:26:25 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 16, 2016, 04:19:46 PM
Could well be

So when was Kate then telling the rest of the group what Madeleine had been wearing  ?
After she discovered Madeleine missing presumably!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 16, 2016, 04:32:15 PM
Quote from: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 04:26:25 PM
After she discovered Madeleine missing presumably!

But if they were sitting down at a table, as G-unit says, it must have been the following day, or later, in which case of what relevance was it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on September 16, 2016, 04:40:13 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 16, 2016, 04:32:15 PM
But if they were sitting down at a table, as G-unit says, it must have been the following day, or later, in which case of what relevance was it?
7 of the T9 went back to 5A after Kate raised the alarm.  There was a second search of 5A.  Then some people went out searching.  A description of what Madeleine was wearing, to aid the search, seems the most likely explanation.

Is there anything odd in this respect?  Before numerous statements are combed through checking on who knew what about the pyjamas and when.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 05:25:05 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 16, 2016, 04:32:15 PM
But if they were sitting down at a table, as G-unit says, it must have been the following day, or later, in which case of what relevance was it?
Sitting down at a table?  What table?  Where?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 16, 2016, 05:59:44 PM
Not sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 07:12:31 PM
Isn't it odd that one of the police there was able to speak with Jane without a interpreter or that is how it sounded like to me, but Jane didn't understand the question, I think, for the answer didn't quite tie in with the question.
So Jane says she tells Rachel first.  Does Rachel agree with that?  Does Rachel get out of all the child minding duties?  Why is Matt doing all the running around at 9:00 and then again at 9:30?
Rachel is hardly ever mentioned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 07:14:35 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 07:12:31 PM
Isn't it odd that one of the police there was able to speak with Jane without a interpreter or that is how it sounded like to me, but Jane didn't understand the question, I think, for the answer didn't quite tie in with the question.
So Jane says she tells Rachel first.  Does Rachel agree with that?  Does Rachel get out of all the child minding duties?  Why is Matt doing all the running around at 9:00 and then again at 9:30?
Rachel is hardly ever mentioned.
You do realise that the Rogatory Interviews were done months later in England with British police don't you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 07:24:09 PM
Quote from: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 07:14:35 PM
You do realise that the Rogatory Interviews were done months later in England with British police don't you?
About a year later, I have understood all that needed to be done again as the first statements probably hadn't been taken in the correct manner of taking them in the witness' native language, so they took these rogatory statements.
I feel we can treat the earlier "statements" as notes only.
Why did you ask me that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 07:27:44 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 07:24:09 PM
About a year later, I have understood all that needed to be done again as the first statements probably hadn't been taken in the correct manner of taking them in the witness' native language, so they took these rogatory statements.
I feel we can treat the earlier "statements" as notes only.
Why did you ask me that?
Because you wrote this

 isn't it odd that one of the police there was able to speak with Jane without a interpreter
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 07:36:04 PM
Quote from: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 07:27:44 PM
Because you wrote this

 isn't it odd that one of the police there was able to speak with Jane without a interpreter
Well how do you read this sentence "So I’d spoken to the GNR Police and then when the PJ came, they came to get me to talk to them to say, to say what, what I’d seen.  And then I can remember the same GNR person saying to me later on in the night ‘Oh have you spoken to the PJ’ and I had by that stage, so”.....And where was Kate?” "  It sounded to me like he talked directly to Jane without the use of Silvia.  Agree or disagree? Is it true one of the early GNR officers doesn't make a statement?   It could be the one not making a statement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 07:37:24 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 07:36:04 PM
Well how do you read this sentence "So I’d spoken to the GNR Police and then when the PJ came, they came to get me to talk to them to say, to say what, what I’d seen.  And then I can remember the same GNR person saying to me later on in the night ‘Oh have you spoken to the PJ’ and I had by that stage, so”.....And where was Kate?” "  It sounded to me like he talked directly to Jane without the use of Silvia.  Agree or disagree? Is it true one of the early GNR officers doesn't make a statement?   It could be the one not making a statement.
I get you.  Dunno then. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 07:45:03 PM
Quote from: Alfie on September 16, 2016, 07:37:24 PM
I get you.  Dunno then.
If this GNR person was able to understand English and Portuguese his statement might not have been helpful to Goncalo Amarals case against the McCanns so it was separated out.  Why else would one of them not make a statement?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 16, 2016, 11:09:49 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on September 16, 2016, 04:40:13 PM
7 of the T9 went back to 5A after Kate raised the alarm.  There was a second search of 5A.  Then some people went out searching.  A description of what Madeleine was wearing, to aid the search, seems the most likely explanation.

Is there anything odd in this respect?  Before numerous statements are combed through checking on who knew what about the pyjamas and when.

Rachael Matthew and Russell didn't go into 5A, they stayed at the bottom of the steps, so Kate didn't give any description of the child's pyjamas to 'everyone' at the table in the apartment. The only table where everyone but Jane was present seems to have been the Tapas table.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 11:25:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 16, 2016, 11:09:49 PM
Rachael Matthew and Russell didn't go into 5A, they stayed at the bottom of the steps, so Kate didn't give any description of the child's pyjamas to 'everyone' at the table in the apartment. The only table where everyone but Jane was present seems to have been the Tapas table.
I'm a bit surprised by that summary.  Either I'm wrong or you.  You reckon Matt never went into the apartment?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 16, 2016, 11:30:12 PM
Quote
At around 10pm, Kate, Madeleine's mother, went to her apartment to check on her children. She came back totally shocked, shouting, saying that Madeleine was no longer in her bedroom. At that time all the adults were in the restaurant. Then, the whole group went to Madeleine's bedroom and checked that the twins were sleeping OK. That there was no sign of a burglary in the apartment. Only one window in the childrens' bedroom was open. The window was open and the respective shutter [external blinds].
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD.htm
Just on the face of it Matt is saying the whole group went into the room.  Well we know that Dianne and Jane are excluded from that group.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 16, 2016, 11:32:33 PM
Where & when did the group write the timeline on the colouring book? Was that at the table in 5a?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 12:06:24 AM
ON his next statement he says he went inside but not into the bedroom
Quote
"Asked, he relates that when he entered the apartment, from memory, he did not approach MBM's bedroom therefore cannot provide any details about its condition.
so was previous description just from what others said or was that all visible from the door.  I think it was possible to see the window open shutter up from the doorway but he would need to be in the apartment.

From Rachel's statement it doesn't read that she went into the apartment either but went to her apartment and checked her kids.  So the two females in the apartment are Kate and Fiona.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 12:44:36 AM
But Rachel does confirm Jane comment that it was Rachel who was first told about the Tanner sighting.
Quote
I went to talk to Jane and said you know, that Madeleine had disappeared and the window was open and the shutter was up, erm and then Jane said to me that when she'd come back to do her check, erm she'd seen somebody carrying a child, walking kind of across the top of the T junction, as she, as she'd been walking up from the, from the Ocean Club, they'd been walking across the top of the road and we kind of said well you know, could have been, not could have been anyone but still sure it couldn't have been Madeleine because Gerry, cos you know if when she was, when she left the table to come up to do her check, Gerry was talking to Jez in the road, erm and so we, you know we had this discussion between ourselves, oh you know, it couldn't have been Madeleine because you know Gerry had only just checked and he was standing in the road and surely he would have seen, or you know surely somebody couldn't have taken her that quickly cos Gerry had literally just come out of the apartment, erm and we kind of you know battered that idea back and forward between us for you know, a couple of minutes, erm but you know, anyway'.
01.19.48 1578 'So what time did Jane tell you this''
 Reply 'It must have been about, erm ten past ten or something, quarter past ten I guess'.
1578 'And whereabouts did she tell you''
 Reply 'We were just outside her apartment but there was like a space between the apartments, erm sort of courtyard-y bit'.
1578 'From the car park entrance or the pool side''
 Reply 'Yeah, no the car park entrance'.
1578 'And who was present when she was telling you this''
 Reply 'No just me, just me, cos erm Fi was with Kate and, and Gerry and, well with Kate and Gerry I think and all the boys were sort of, had started to look around and started to, Matt had gone to the Police Station to, no gone to the Ocean Club to phone the Police'.
1578 'What was Janes demeanour when she was telling you this''
 Reply 'Erm she was quite shocked, well we were kind of bit puzzled, cos we thought well you know, could it really have been cos Gerry had just been in, erm but it was a bit of a sort of Jane was like, everybody gob smacked really that you know, she could well have seen Madeleine, erm but we did, you know we, we didn't have this discussion about whether it could have been just because of the sort of time of Gerry going in and him standing outside talking to Jez and you know, it would have been, somebody would have had to you know, sort of be very quick, or have been in the room when Gerry had gone in, we didn't talk about that at that time but, you know afterwards, erm obviously that was, I think we kept, yeah I mean we basically came to the conclusion that somebody would have had to have been in the room when Gerry had gone in to check'.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 12:58:59 AM
So it comes down to how did Fiona know what Madeleine was wearing so soon after this for the next person that Jane must talk to would be Fiona and those two describe the pyjamas AFAIK.
Quote
Reply 'So anyway Jane and I you know talked about that and, and then I can't remember whether she told, I think she told Fiona then, erm I mean basically you know as soon as the Police arrived, she told, she told the Police'.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

So what does Fiona say?

Rachel also says:
Quote
it just seemed too much of a coincidence that you know it couldn't be insignificant, erm so you know Jane said she'd tell the Police as soon as they arrived, which she did, erm and erm she didn't describe the pyjamas to me then, erm it was only really, I think it was the next day or perhaps even the day after that, that Jane, Fiona and I had a conversation about the pyjamas that the child was wearing, erm and Jane had said that they were sort of white with sort of pink flowers or something on and they had a bit of a, like a trim around the bottom, erm and Fiona said she'd asked Kate erm about the pyjamas, you know, what sort of pyjamas Madeleine was wearing, erm and sort of later that day I think you know, Fi came back and said basically Jane had described the pyjamas that Madeleine was wearing, so you know, that absolutely convinced us that this person walking away was carrying Madeleine, erm you know Jane, I mean none of us knew, I mean I suppose I, I might have known what bed clothes, erm what pyjamas Evie and Ella wore but that was only cos quite often they came to read stories in our apartment, or you know if Grace went there, but otherwise you know, we didn't ever seen any of the other children at bed time, erm you know, I know Jane hadn't seen the twins or Madeleine at bed time, so she would have no idea what pyjamas, or you know, or what Madeleine wore to bed, whether they were pyjamas or a nightie whatever, so erm, so it was you know sort of like the two, I think it must have been on the Saturday, erm that the pyjamas, Jane described the pyjamas to Fiona and Fiona found out from Kate, erm what Madeleine's pyjamas were like and they were the same as the ones that Jane had described'.

Here she is saying Fiona asks about the pyjamas later the next day but somehow she talks to Jane before that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 01:22:46 AM
What does Fiona say about talking to Jane?
Quote
She was never in Madeleine's family apartment.

She knew Madeleine well and describes her as very intelligent and she would not go with stranger without screaming or protesting unless she was very tired or sleeping.

As regards the episode with Jane - she [Jane] only told her that she had seen an individual with a child in his arms, not knowing if it was Madeleine
I presume "She was never in Madeleine's family apartment" means prior to the alert.
She doesn't mention describing the pyjamas with Jane.

Her second statement is all about Murat.
Her rogatory statement:
Quote
'Is there anything at this present moment about what we have been talking about that you wish to elaborate on or what you have said has jolted something else in your memory that you haven't already said''
 
 
 Reply
 'There's something I want to get in, which is something that happened a few days after, erm, with regards to Jane. You were saying, did she offer any description, which she didn't to me but, I'm trying to think whether it was the Saturday paper or the Sunday paper, my mum had bought a paper and it was in our apartment lying around and I had read it sort of the day, you know, I think it was the Saturday paper, I had read it and, erm, it said in this paper a description of what Madeleine was wearing and it put white pyjama bottoms and I read it and thought, well that's wrong, because I know I was with Kate on the night as she was giving her description and I knew it had a pattern on the bottoms and a frill at the bottom, so I remember being a bit, huh, well that's just wrong, you know, how can they get it wrong, this is a National Newspaper. But then Jane came later that day and read the same report and she said just off the top, you know, after reading it out loud, 'Well maybe it wasn't Madeleine I saw then, if she was wearing white pyjamas, because they weren't white pyjamas' and I said 'Well what were they' and she said 'Well they had, I'm sure they had some sort of pattern on them and a roll-up or some detail at the bottom'. And at that point my blood ran cold, because they were Madeleine's pyjamas. And, you know, that was the description she gave, having not seen Kate, having not talked to, to anybody about what Madeleine was wearing. And, erm, and I think we both, you know, just thought there's no doubt in our minds that that was Madeleine'.
 
 01.21.51
 1485
 'Yeah. And who was that to, that was to the Local Press, was it''
 
 
 Reply
 'What, the newspaper''
 
 
 1485
 'Yeah'.
 
 
 Reply
 'No, it wasn't, it was a National Newspaper that put'.
 
 
 1485
 'It was a National one, was it''
 
 
 Reply
 'Yeah, yeah, as I say, I think it, I think it was soon after, I think it was the Saturday, my mum might still even have the paper actually, she was the only one buying any, huh, erm'.

Was it ever published in a Newspaper the type of pyjamas Madeleine was wearing?

Lets focus on her conversation with Jane again:
Quote
But then Jane came later that day and read the same report and she said just off the top, you know, after reading it out loud, 'Well maybe it wasn't Madeleine I saw then, if she was wearing white pyjamas, because they weren't white pyjamas' and I said 'Well what were they' and she said 'Well they had, I'm sure they had some sort of pattern on them and a roll-up or some detail at the bottom'. And at that point my blood ran cold, because they were Madeleine's pyjamas. And, you know, that was the description she gave, having not seen Kate, having not talked to, to anybody about what Madeleine was wearing. And, erm, and I think we both, you know, just thought there's no doubt in our minds that that was Madeleine'.

To me that is a complete contradiction"  Jane says "'Well maybe it wasn't Madeleine I saw then, if she was wearing white pyjamas, because they weren't white pyjamas'" whereas Fiona says "and I think we both, you know, just thought there's no doubt in our minds that that was Madeleine'."  Is Fiona saying she knew more about the pyjamas than what was published in the paper?  Yes she is as she says Kate told her, but had not discussed this with Jane.  Does Jane remember this dramatic conversation with Fiona and the article in the Newspaper?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 01:39:23 AM
I find Jane particularly honest here: Saying how events subsequent have influenced her initial memory.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
Quote
4078    “And when you noticed the detail was it in any colour?”
Reply    “I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so”.
 
4078    “And, overall, what colour would you say the pyjama bottoms were?”
Reply    “Erm, I can’t, I can’t remember, I mean, I, I can’t remember, well I can’t remember now, but I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink.  That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.  It’s harder because now I know what the pyjamas were so I can’t”.

Quote
I think, just going back a bit, over again, this is something, I think when I realised the true significance of what I’d seen as well was almost like a couple of days afterwards when, erm, erm, I was talking to Fi about the pyjamas, because again it seems madness now why I hadn’t asked Kate and Gerry before this what the pyjamas were like, but it’s all sort of rha rha, you know, so I didn’t know what, what Madeleine’s pyjamas were before this.  And I’d actually read in a paper that they were white, it was in the Telegraph, I think it was the day afterwards Dianne had bought a Telegraph paper and in there it was saying she was wearing plain white pyjamas, so I think when I read that I almost thought ‘Oh maybe I have got it wrong’, you know, because I’d, out of everything, I thought ‘Oh they weren’t just plain white’, I thought they had got some sort of thing on it.  So I think it might have actually been the next morning, which would probably be the Saturday morning, I think I said something to, about oh, to Fi ‘Oh what were the pyjamas like’ and she actually described the pyjamas and she sort of said ‘Oh no that is what they were like’.  And that was, I think that was almost the moment when I couldn’t convince myself anymore that it wasn’t that, you know.  And then that’s, again, it’s sort of sounds, in hindsight, it all sounds like a long period of time, but I think that was when I thought ‘No, that was definitely’, you know, when she described what they, it was almost like ‘Well that’s exactly what I have described to’, you know, ‘to the Police the day after’”.
4078    “So in your own mind you couldn’t quite talk yourself out of it”.
Reply    “No, that was then and, I mean, and Fi said she could see the, you know, the horror on my face as I sort of realised that, it was sort of then, that was like ‘Well, no, I can’t convince myself anymore that it wasn’t that because this is’.  I mean, I think I was fairly certain anyway, but that was, I couldn’t convince myself then that it wasn’t”.
So Madeleine's pyjamas were described in the paper incorrectly as compared to Fiona's recollection.
But one would think the paper would describe the pyjamas as Kate recollected but maybe not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 01:54:26 AM
Kate only made one interview but in that she describes the pyjamas Madeleine was wearing:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm
Quote
At the time of her disappearance, she was wearing pyjamas with white bottoms with a floral pattern. The short-sleeved top, mainly pink with a blue-grey figure of a donkey bearing the inscription, "EEYORE," an inscription which is also on one of the trouser legs. The pyjamas are "Marks and Spencer" brand.
http://www.gettyimages.co.nz/detail/news-photo/kate-and-gerry-mccann-parents-of-missing-4-year-old-british-news-photo/74437110
http://www.mccannfiles.com/imagelib/sitebuilder/misc/show_image.html?linkedwidth=actual&linkpath=http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/crimewatchappeal.jpg&target=tlx_picpf3r
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 01:57:07 AM
Did Kate describe the description of the pyjamas before 10:20 with the group?  So that Fiona and Jane could even discuss this at the time of the alert?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 06:40:22 AM
What does Kate say?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm
Quote
Concerning Madeleine, she is Caucasian, white, aged four years (12/05/2003) about 90cm tall. Very slim, dark blond hair; shoulder-length. Left eye blue-green same as the right, which has a brown spot. She has a small brown spot on the skin of her left leg as well as sunburn on her right forearm. She has no scars. At the time of her disappearance, she was wearing pyjamas with white bottoms with a floral pattern. The short-sleeved top, mainly pink with a blue-grey figure of a donkey bearing the inscription, "EEYORE," an inscription which is also on one of the trouser legs. The pyjamas are "Marks and Spencer" brand.
I doubt if she figured all that out in the first 10 minutes after the alert.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 06:46:37 AM
In the arguido statement 6th Sept.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm
Quote
They arrived at the apartment around 5:40PM, earlier than usual, because Madeleine was tired, their other friends were at the beach and Gerry had an all-male tennis game at 6:00PM. At the flat they both bathed the children, and close to 6:00PM Gerry went to the tennis courts, soon after the children had finished their bath. They entered the apartment by the main door, with the key. She does not know if it was locked, and presumes it was Gerry who opened it. At lunch time they also entered by the same door.

After the children's bath, already alone, she put pyjamas and nappies on the twins, gave them each a glass of milk and biscuits. Before bathing the children and because it was early, they had thought of taking them to the recreation area, but then decided against this because of tiredness.

I get the feeling redressing the kids was Kate's job for Gerry had to rush off to the tennis again.  So I doubt if Gerry says much about the pyjamas but we'll have a look.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 06:57:25 AM
What does Gerry say on the 4th May?
Quote
With regard to Madeleine, he describes her as being of Caucasian race, with quite white skin, four years old (12-05-2003), almost 90 cm in height. She has a slim build
dark blond hair which is straight and shoulder length. Her left eye is blue and green and her right eye is green with a brown mark in the pupil. She has a small brown birthmark ,on the knee of her left leg
he does not remember any others. She did not have any scars. At the time of her disappearance she was wearing pyjamas, the trousers were white with a floral pattern, and the short-sleeved top was predominantly pink and there was a blue and grey figure of a donkey on the front, with the inscription "Eeyore".
I have a feeling that is word for word very close to what Kate has said.
Quote
At the time of her disappearance, she was wearing pyjamas with white bottoms with a floral pattern. The short-sleeved top, mainly pink with a blue-grey figure of a donkey bearing the inscription, "EEYORE," an inscription which is also on one of the trouser legs. The pyjamas are "Marks and Spencer" brand.
So that was a prepared bit for sure.

On the 10th he shows a more typical male response: 
Quote
Asked, he relates that he does not recall to have described exactly the type of pyjamas (colour, designs, etc.) that MADELEINE had worn at the time she disappeared.
Without his notes he doesn't remember.
And nothing about the pyjamas in his arguido statement 7th Sept 07.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 17, 2016, 01:16:19 PM
interesting read for some

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/wearent-writing-about-investigations.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on September 17, 2016, 02:08:56 PM
Quote from: xtina on September 17, 2016, 01:16:19 PM
interesting read for some

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/wearent-writing-about-investigations.html

An interesting read and a precise  analysis of what has happened to Amaral, courtesy of the Mccanns and their 'followers'.

IMHO naturally.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 17, 2016, 02:23:24 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on September 17, 2016, 02:08:56 PM
An interesting read and a precise  analysis of what has happened to Amaral, courtesy of the Mccanns and their 'followers'.

IMHO naturally.


that's exactly what i thought stephen
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 17, 2016, 03:52:11 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 06:57:25 AM
What does Gerry say on the 4th May?I have a feeling that is word for word very close to what Kate has said.So that was a prepared bit for sure.

On the 10th he shows a more typical male response:  Without his notes he doesn't remember.
And nothing about the pyjamas in his arguido statement 7th Sept 07.

You may well have identified the reason for the exact same description of Madeleine in the parent's statements. Gerry did like reading from notes, didn't he? I suspect he handed them out to others too; Alex Woolfall and Michael Wright are two examples. Did he help Kate to write hers?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id170.html

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 08:35:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 17, 2016, 03:52:11 PM
You may well have identified the reason for the exact same description of Madeleine in the parent's statements. Gerry did like reading from notes, didn't he? I suspect he handed them out to others too; Alex Woolfall and Michael Wright are two examples. Did he help Kate to write hers?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id170.html
Did you see how it was possible for Fiona to know what Madeleine's pyjamas were like by 10:15 PM 3rd May?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 18, 2016, 12:08:10 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 01:57:07 AM
Did Kate describe the description of the pyjamas before 10:20 with the group?  So that Fiona and Jane could even discuss this at the time of the alert?
This was the reference I was trying to find the other day Jane Tanner's 10 May statement:
Quote
Subsequently she had us doubt it was Madeleine. This was after she had spoken with Fiona Payne who had described Madeleine's pyjamas. Asked why she did not tell Kate Healy that night about this sighting, JT said she always avoided mentioning it to the McCanns therefore she didn't want to increase their suffering.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on September 18, 2016, 12:34:28 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 01:57:07 AM
Quote
Did Kate describe the description of the pyjamas before 10:20 with the group?  So that Fiona and Jane could even discuss this at the time of the alert?
This was the reference I was trying to find the other day Jane Tanner's 10 May statement:
Quote
Quote
Subsequently she had us doubt it was Madeleine. This was after she had spoken with Fiona Payne who had described Madeleine's pyjamas. Asked why she did not tell Kate Healy that night about this sighting, JT said she always avoided mentioning it to the McCanns therefore she didn't want to increase their suffering.

Rob, I think it likely that Jane would already have seen Madeleines pyjamas.

I think that the children of all families were usually bathed, put in their pj's and then went out communally  to play on the slides etc for a few minutes.

Doesn't mean that the image of Madeleines pj's had registered in Janes mind, tho
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 18, 2016, 12:37:59 PM
Quote from: sadie on September 18, 2016, 12:34:28 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 17, 2016, 01:57:07 AMThis was the reference I was trying to find the other day Jane Tanner's 10 May statement:
Quote
Rob, I think it likely that Jane would already have seen Madeleines pyjamas.

I think that the children of all families were usually bathed, put in their pj's and then went out communally  to play on the slides etc for a few minutes.

Doesn't mean that the image of Madeleines pj's had registered in Janes mind, tho
I'm only going off statements Sadie.  I did read something like that though, but was it the whole group that did that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 19, 2016, 12:46:53 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on September 19, 2016, 10:16:29 AM
Yes

In another context the two bods on the sidewalk in the top r.h. corner of the photos are interesting.
Not specifically the bods, you understand, but the amount of space the bods occupy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 19, 2016, 12:58:32 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 19, 2016, 12:46:53 PM
In another context the two bods on the sidewalk in the top r.h. corner of the photos are interesting.
Not specifically the bods, you understand, but the amount of space the bods occupy.
Jane squeezing past Jez and Gerry and neither noticing.  Easy!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 19, 2016, 03:56:05 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 19, 2016, 12:46:53 PM
In another context the two bods on the sidewalk in the top r.h. corner of the photos are interesting.
Not specifically the bods, you understand, but the amount of space the bods occupy.

Yes, was the near pavement similar I wonder. I have wondered why people kept saying the Payne's apartment was bigger. It had 2 bedrooms, but so had the Tanner's and the McCann's. Looking at that pic, however, the balcony was huge compared to anyone else's. I wonder if that's what they meant?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 19, 2016, 03:59:01 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 19, 2016, 03:56:05 PM
Yes, was the near pavement similar I wonder. I have wondered why people kept saying the Payne's apartment was bigger. It had 2 bedrooms, but so had the Tanner's and the McCann's. Looking at that pic, however, the balcony was huge compared to anyone else's. I wonder if that's what they meant?


I thought there were 3 but granny had to sleep on a couch so that the children could have 2 rooms.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 19, 2016, 08:10:50 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 19, 2016, 03:59:01 PM

I thought there were 3 but granny had to sleep on a couch so that the children could have 2 rooms.
The Paynes apartment must have been quite a bit bigger as it was able to accommodate an addition family of 4 for two nights(?).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 19, 2016, 09:05:27 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 19, 2016, 03:59:01 PM

I thought there were 3 but granny had to sleep on a couch so that the children could have 2 rooms.

Two bedrooms. One with the elder child the other with the parents and baby in cot. Granny slept on the sofa bed in the Living room as she didn't want to sleep in the elder child's room.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 19, 2016, 09:37:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 19, 2016, 09:05:27 PM
Two bedrooms. One with the elder child the other with the parents and baby in cot. Granny slept on the sofa bed in the Living room as she didn't want to sleep in the elder child's room.
That was I suppose before the McCanns joined them for a couple of nights
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on September 19, 2016, 10:32:45 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 19, 2016, 12:58:32 PM
Jane squeezing past Jez and Gerry and neither noticing.  Easy!
Agreed, very easy and no squeezing either.

Jez was in the road by the kerb and Gerry was on the edge of the pavement/ kerb according to reports on forum earlier.

Two bods in your photo, Alice .... and Jane was on her own.

Plenty of space.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 19, 2016, 11:24:50 PM
Quote from: sadie on September 19, 2016, 10:32:45 PM
Agreed, very easy and no squeezing either.

Jez was in the road by the kerb and Gerry was on the edge of the pavement/ kerb according to reports on forum earlier.

Two bods in your photo, Alice .... and Jane was on her own.

Plenty of space.

We've had a full discussion about Jane, Jez and Gerry here ...
Topic: Gerry and Jez chat while Jane walks by. Seconds later she spots Tannerman!
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1249.msg35271#msg35271

The perspective of that aerial photograph is interesting.  The recliners at poolside are positively tiny in comparison to those two figures which being further away from the camera should be smaller than the giants they appear to be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 19, 2016, 11:38:24 PM
Quote from: sadie on September 19, 2016, 10:32:45 PM
Agreed, very easy and no squeezing either.

Jez was in the road by the kerb and Gerry was on the edge of the pavement/ kerb according to reports on forum earlier.

Two bods in your photo, Alice .... and Jane was on her own.

Plenty of space.

That is not "my" photo.
I don't take pics like that. I photograph graffiti, anything non pc, probably my best one is of Manneken Pis on Worlds Aids day about 15 years ago................ &%+((£
Of course Eid Al-Adha in Morocco was worth two 36 shot rolls all those years ago. But graffiti less blocks of holiday flats nah not for me it shows nae class.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 20, 2016, 01:20:52 AM
Is the opening (behind Gerry (3rd photo)) of the end of the path shared by all the apartments?
Do all the private gates (red letters on photo 2) open onto this pathway?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on September 20, 2016, 08:56:01 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 20, 2016, 01:20:52 AM
Is the opening (behind Gerry (3rd photo)) of the end of the path shared by all the apartments?
Do all the private gates (red letters on photo 2) open onto this pathway?
Yep, and the low building in image 3 is the Tapas Reception. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 20, 2016, 09:24:20 AM
Quote from: sadie on September 20, 2016, 08:56:01 AM
Yep, and the low building in image 3 is the Tapas Reception.
The bit seen above the trees?  The building along the road is the secondary reception I think?  Did I get the right bit Sadie?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 20, 2016, 01:31:09 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 19, 2016, 09:37:22 PM
That was I suppose before the McCanns joined them for a couple of nights

Dianne stayed put in the living room, apparently;

Back in the apartment the cold, black night enveloped us all for what seemed like an eternity.
Dianne and I sat there just staring at each other, still as statues. ‘It’s so dark,’ she said again and again. ‘I
want the light to come.’ I felt exactly the same way. Gerry was stretched out on a camp bed with Amelie
asleep on his chest. He kept saying, ‘Kate, we need to rest.’ He managed to drift off but only briefly,
certainly for less than an hour. [Madeleine]

On 4th they went to their new apartment, 4G, so only one night at the Paynes. Kate's Mum, Dad and Aunt arrived on 4th and stayed with them in 4G as far as I can ascertain.

When Kate says 'back in the apartment' it's after she went out to speak to the police;

At one point I went out to speak to the police, needing some reassurance. It was difficult and exasperating as communication was so limited, and there was no reassurance to be had. I walked briskly up and down Rua Dr Agostinho da Silva, sometimes breaking into a jog, clinging to the hope that I’d spot something in the dark. The fear of Madeleine being dumped somewhere and dying of hypothermia started to hijack my thoughts. [Madeleine]

GNR Officer Lacao remembers;

He remembers that during a brief rest period at about 04.00, Madeleine's mother asked whether there was any news and whether the roads had been blocked off.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-LACAO.htm

Gerry was out too according to GNR Officer Silva;

He only had direct contact with the couple and their friends at about 04.00 when Gerry McCann approached the GNR group of which he was a member to ask whether there was a church close by. He replied to him in English, giving the directions to a nearby church.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUI-SILVA.htm


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on September 22, 2016, 12:03:58 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 20, 2016, 09:24:20 AM
The bit seen above the trees?  The building along the road is the secondary reception I think?  Did I get the right bit Sadie?
Are you referring to the image shown here?  I am not totally understanding your post.

ETA:  Upon reflection, I am not at all sure this image is of the Tapas restaurant  Something tells me that this image may be a view of the Tapas restaurant, taken from low down, maybe in the alleyway, but I am not sure.  [/s]The shrubs have grown very high  on this image, as they are prone to do very quickly on the western Algarve.


The building that I called the Tapas Reception is also called the Secondary Reception by some.

Does that help?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 22, 2016, 12:21:49 AM
Quote from: sadie on September 22, 2016, 12:03:58 AM
Are you referring to the image shown here?  I am not totally understanding your post.

Something tells me that this image may be a view of the Tapas restaurant, taken from low down, maybe in the alleyway, but I am not sure.  The shrubs have grown very high  on this image, as they are prone to do very quickly on the western Algarve.


The building that I called the Tapas Reception is also called the Secondary Reception by some.

Does that help?
You would be wrong to call the Tapas Restaurant also the Secondary Reception.  But it is possible "the Tapas Reception is also called the Secondary Reception".

The second pic which I thought might be showing the roof of the Tapas Bar could be wrong.  I can't see how they relate to the pic of the whole restaurant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on September 22, 2016, 12:41:08 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 22, 2016, 12:21:49 AM
You would be wrong to call the Tapas Restaurant also the Secondary Reception.  But it is possible "the Tapas Reception is also called the Secondary Reception".
Try reading my post again Rob.  I never mentioned the word restaurant

Tapas Reception = Secondary Reception

OK ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on September 22, 2016, 12:42:53 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 22, 2016, 12:21:49 AM
You would be wrong to call the Tapas Restaurant also the Secondary Reception.  But it is possible "the Tapas Reception is also called the Secondary Reception".

Having seen these two images together, I now am very doubtful that I am right in saying that the building behind the shrubs is the Tapas restaurant.  Will go back and amend.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 22, 2016, 12:47:52 AM
Quote from: sadie on September 22, 2016, 12:41:08 AM
Try reading my post again Rob.  I never mentioned the word restaurant

Tapas Reception = Secondary Reception

OK ?
I realise that now sorry Sadie   I've never heard of the phrase "Tapas reception".  I'll keep my eyes out for it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on September 22, 2016, 02:26:35 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 22, 2016, 02:22:44 AM
He stated the position of the door when he looked in and saw the twins in their cots.
Gerry stated the position he left the door in after checking on Madeleine and the twins. A comparison of both their statements would have indicated to an interested observer that the door had been moved between visits.

All he had to do was look into the room from the doorway to see the curtains, which he did when he saw the twins in their cots.

But he went to check on madeleine as well and didnt check she was there but went into her parents bedroom to see if she was sleeping there, hello?

Why did matthew do an indoor check at all???
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 22, 2016, 04:58:05 AM
Quote from: mercury on September 22, 2016, 02:26:35 AM
But he went to check on madeleine as well and didnt check she was there but went into her parents bedroom to see if she was sleeping there, hello?

Why did matthew do an indoor check at all???
Have you got proof of this?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on September 22, 2016, 11:21:52 AM
Quote from: misty on September 22, 2016, 01:57:43 AM
Oh, fhs Mercury........

And your P.S.........if GM is telling the truth in that he saw the bedroom door open at 9.10pm & saw Madeleine sleeping, then you have to accept he closed the door to at that time. Therefore, when MO checked some 20 mins later, found the door open again & saw the curtains as green + yellow, then something had happened in the apartment during those 20 minutes.
However, if you do not believe GM's testimony at all, then it is a whole different ball game which offers no explanation for MO's testimony.

I agree misty, the only other explanation is that Madeleine herself open the door while wandering around the apartment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on September 22, 2016, 11:24:36 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 22, 2016, 02:04:42 AM
I think there was sufficient evidence of abduction available to the police in the first few hours after Madeleine's disappearance.  The problem was that nobody coordinated it having been immediately sidetracked by trivia.
For example 'praying Arabs' and a distraught mother's request for a priest.

That same evidence although helpful in the abduction by a stranger scenario equally supports other possibilities.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on September 22, 2016, 01:05:17 PM
Quote from: John on September 22, 2016, 01:00:02 PM
I agree but circumstances would not allow it, media intrusion being just one element of many.

Media intrusion on a reconstruction would have been an issue to consider at any point in the process, wouldn't it?


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on September 22, 2016, 01:12:44 PM
Quote from: Carana on September 22, 2016, 01:05:17 PM
Media intrusion on a reconstruction would have been an issue to consider at any point in the process, wouldn't it?

Probably but more manageable later on when more resources were available.  One has to remember that friends and family of the tapas group were inviting every media outlet they could muster to Praia da Luz.  That might have had some benefit in one way but it had a very negative impact on the PJ's ability to conduct a proper investigation.  I think in hindsight they should have kept the media out of town or at least away from the crimescene, always assuming there was one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on September 22, 2016, 02:10:06 PM
Quote from: John on September 22, 2016, 01:12:44 PM
Probably but more manageable later on when more resources were available.  One has to remember that friends and family of the tapas group were inviting every media outlet they could muster to Praia da Luz.  That might have had some benefit in one way but it had a very negative impact on the PJ's ability to conduct a proper investigation.  I think in hindsight they should have kept the media out of town or at least away from the crimescene, always assuming there was one.

What makes you think that they had more resources available a year or so later as opposed to in the first couple of weeks?

They even had a PJ media spokesman who could have made up a statement as to why they were conducting one. Attempting to establish exactly when the child could have been taken that evening so as to narrow down potential means, escape routes, etc., appeals to potential witnesses... would have seemed quite plausible in the early days.

I do wonder if the decision not to conduct a reconstruction at the time was due to concerns over media intrusion at the scene as opposed to concern over a media investigation of what was by then a locally well-known but barely analysed previous "reconstruction" in a different case, undertaken in less than limpid conditions, that Amaral was associated with... coupled with the fact that he'd been an arguido in that case the day following Madeleine's disappearance and which the UK media hadn't noticed at the time.

Nah... Perish the thought....


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on September 22, 2016, 04:12:28 PM
Quote from: John on September 22, 2016, 01:12:44 PM
Probably but more manageable later on when more resources were available.  One has to remember that friends and family of the tapas group were inviting every media outlet they could muster to Praia da Luz.  That might have had some benefit in one way but it had a very negative impact on the PJ's ability to conduct a proper investigation.  I think in hindsight they should have kept the media out of town or at least away from the crimescene, always assuming there was one.

I don't believe the intention of the tapas group/family/friends who informed the media was 'to invite them' to PdL.  IIRC it was to publicise Madeleine's disappearance in the media as the quickest way to alert the public.

I doubt if any of them had the slightest idea that 100s of media people would descend on PdL in a matter of hours.

IIRC Rebelo made it clear to those requested to attend a recon that he could not guarantee being able to prevent a similar media invasion.      Letting the date of the proposed recon be known in advance- would have guaranteed that is exactly what would have happened IMO.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 22, 2016, 04:58:43 PM
Quote from: Benice on September 22, 2016, 04:12:28 PM
I don't believe the intention of the tapas group/family/friends who informed the media was 'to invite them' to PdL.  IIRC it was to publicise Madeleine's disappearance in the media as the quickest way to alert the public.

I doubt if any of them had the slightest idea that 100s of media people would descend on PdL in a matter of hours.

IIRC Rebelo made it clear to those requested to attend a recon that he could not guarantee being able to prevent a similar media invasion.      Letting the date of the proposed recon be known in advance- would have guaranteed that is exactly what would have happened IMO.

Agreed; especially as both sides seemingly were particularly garrulous. That's me being cultured and polite. My natural inclination would have been to use the word "trappy".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 22, 2016, 06:10:12 PM
Quote from: Carana on September 22, 2016, 02:10:06 PM
What makes you think that they had more resources available a year or so later as opposed to in the first couple of weeks?

They even had a PJ media spokesman who could have made up a statement as to why they were conducting one. Attempting to establish exactly when the child could have been taken that evening so as to narrow down potential means, escape routes, etc., appeals to potential witnesses... would have seemed quite plausible in the early days.

I do wonder if the decision not to conduct a reconstruction at the time was due to concerns over media intrusion at the scene as opposed to concern over a media investigation of what was by then a locally well-known but barely analysed previous "reconstruction" in a different case, undertaken in less than limpid conditions, that Amaral was associated with... coupled with the fact that he'd been an arguido in that case the day following Madeleine's disappearance and which the UK media hadn't noticed at the time.

Nah... Perish the thought....

Do you know when exactly the penny did drop that Amaral had been constituted an arguido and the nature of the accusation made against him?
I don't recall any mention of it in the press at all at that time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 22, 2016, 06:35:13 PM
Some interesting stuff from the libel trial witnesses. Particularly Edgar's PJ contact and Pike's connection with Missing People.

Duarte questioning Dave Edgar;

ID – Did the Polícia Judiciária (PJ) go on investigating after the case was filed?
DE says yes.
ID – Between 2008 and 2011, was much information relating to the case received by the PJ?
DE says yes, but not much information originated from Portugal. He thinks that Madeleine can be in Portugal and therefore the Portuguese information is important. But adds that the Portuguese public believed Madeleine was dead.

Guerra & Paz's lawyer's questions

GP – How did you manage to conduct an investigation without analysing all the process? Whom did you contact in Portugal?
DE says he contacted an informant who passed information to both the UK and Portuguese authorities. He doesn't want to say to whom he spoke, but says he spoke to someone from the PJ.
GP – Was there private investigators before you?
DE says yes but adds he was the first professional one.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2301.0

Alan Pike questioned by Amaral's lawyer;

SO – What part does excessive publicity play in primary trauma? Does it increase the stress and the anxiety?
AP – Yes it does.
SO – Would you agree it doesn't favour recuperation in the long term?
AP – The media are useful in the beginning.

The Judge;

MC – In which situations have you worked?
AP – Families with domestic violence, maltreatment, children taken from their families (this is a bit like grieving), families who have lost a child. He works for the UK organisation called "Missing People".
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2304.0


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 22, 2016, 07:09:51 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 22, 2016, 06:10:12 PM
Do you know when exactly the penny did drop that Amaral had been constituted an arguido and the nature of the accusation made against him?
I don't recall any mention of it in the press at all at that time.

Sometime about September 2007 the fit hit the shan.
Why do you think Sr Amaral was given a sideways promotion off the case?
Hint: look at it in the cold light of day of two cases and ignore surnames.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 22, 2016, 11:02:48 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 22, 2016, 07:09:51 PM
Sometime about September 2007 the fit hit the shan.
Why do you think Sr Amaral was given a sideways promotion off the case?
Hint: look at it in the cold light of day of two cases and ignore surnames.

That is an ... erm ... interesting way of putting it.  A "sideways promotion"   8**8:/:
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 23, 2016, 12:31:07 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 22, 2016, 11:02:48 PM
That is an ... erm ... interesting way of putting it.  A "sideways promotion"   8**8:/:

In the rush to have conspiracy theories sometimes the bleedin' obvious escapes people's attention.
This being one of those times.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on September 25, 2016, 02:19:20 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 22, 2016, 06:10:12 PM
Do you know when exactly the penny did drop that Amaral had been constituted an arguido and the nature of the accusation made against him?
I don't recall any mention of it in the press at all at that time.

It was briefly mentioned in the PT press at the time but it wasn't picked up the UK media for ages. Not the sort of news that Team Amaral's fans would be rushing to translate...

And when it did start to be discussed, once he was actually charged, it was within the context of a minor administrative lapse in the pursuit of justice for a supposedly barbarous crime committed by the mother and brother.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on September 25, 2016, 02:21:30 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 23, 2016, 12:31:07 AM
In the rush to have conspiracy theories sometimes the bleedin' obvious escapes people's attention.
This being one of those times.

I happen to agree with you, Alice. Perhaps for different reasons, although perhaps not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on September 25, 2016, 02:23:44 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 22, 2016, 07:09:51 PM
Sometime about September 2007 the fit hit the shan.
Why do you think Sr Amaral was given a sideways promotion off the case?
Hint: look at it in the cold light of day of two cases and ignore surnames.

It was actually reported in the PT media on 4-5 May.

ETA: http://expresso.sapo.pt/actualidade/policia-arguido-no-processo-das-agressoes-a-leonor-cipriano=f109569
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on September 25, 2016, 02:28:56 PM
And people wonder what some of the undisclosed diplomatic correspondence may have been about...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on September 25, 2016, 02:40:52 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 22, 2016, 11:02:48 PM
That is an ... erm ... interesting way of putting it.  A "sideways promotion"   8**8:/:

It's not entirely clear to me whether he ever actually went to work back in Faro, despite one journalist blogger's account of how he supposedly managed to solve an incredible amount of serious crimes. That Faro police may well have succeed in seizing a large haul of drugs seems quite possible... but was Amaral even there, let alone in charge of the operation?

Quite an amazing feat to have directed such huge stings and write his book at the same time... Yet, there's also the intriguing moan by his wife that no one wished him goodbye on his "last day"...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 25, 2016, 06:26:43 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 23, 2016, 12:31:07 AM
In the rush to have conspiracy theories sometimes the bleedin' obvious escapes people's attention.
This being one of those times.

Absolutely.   %£&)**#

One can only stand back in amazement and admire the chutzpah which remodelled an ignominious sacking into a "sideways move promotion"

As for 'conspiracy theories' ... I think what the coordinator of Madeleine's case has to say here might be considered as verging on paranoia.  If not that, perhaps one of the worst examples of unprofessional behaviour from a senior police officer ever publicly demonstrated.



Madeleine: Paulo Rebelo substitui Gonçalo Amaral... (ACTUALIZADA)

Paulo Rebelo ocupava as funções de director nacional adjunto.

O novo responsável pelo DIC de Portimão da PJ fez carreira na Direcção Central de Investigação ao Tráfico de Estupefacientes (DCITE) e esteve à frente da Directoria de Lisboa durante a investigação de pedofilia que resultou no processo Casa Pia.

Paulo Rebelo esteve também na condução do inquérito à fuga de informação relativa ao caso Freeport, de Alcochete.

Paulo Rebelo occupied the deputy national director functions.

The new responsible for Portimão PJ DIC has made a career in the Central Directorate for Investigation to Drug Trafficking (DCITE) and headed the Directorate of Lisbon during the pedophile investigation that resulted in the Casa Pia case.

Paulo Rebelo was also in the survey conduct leakage of information about the Freeport case of Alcochete.

Gonçalo Amaral foi afastado dia 02 de Outubro das funções de coordenador do DIC da PJ de Portimão depois de declarações feitas ao Diário de Notícias em que acusava a Polícia inglesa de favorecer o casal McCann nas investigações sobre o desaparecimento da sua filha Madeleine.

Goncalo Amaral was dismissed on 02 October of the DIC's coordinator of the PJ in Portimão after statements to the Daily News in which he accused the British police of favoring the McCanns in the investigation into the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine.

No mesmo dia, o director nacional da PJ, Alípio Ribeiro, considerou "óbvias" as razões que o levaram a tomar a decisão de afastar Gonçalo Amaral de coordenador do Departamento de Investigação Criminal de Portimão da PJ e do caso Madeleine McCann.

On the same day, the national director of the PJ, Alipio Ribeiro, considered "obvious" reasons that led him to take the decision to remove Gonçalo Amaral coordinator of the Criminal Investigation Department of Portimão PJ and Madeleine McCann case.


"Fiz cessar a comissão de serviço de Gonçalo Amaral em Portimão. As razões pelas quais dei esse despacho parecem-me óbvias", disse aos jornalistas Alípio Ribeiro, numa aparente referência às polémicas declarações de Gonçalo Amaral ao Diário de Notícias desse dia.

"I cease Gonçalo Amaral service commission in Portimão. The reasons I gave that order seems to me obvious," Alipio Ribeiro told reporters in an apparent reference to controversial remarks by Gonçalo Amaral to the Daily News that day.

O coordenador da investigação do caso da menina inglesa desaparecida no Algarve acusou, em declarações publicadas pelo Diário de Notícias, a Polícia inglesa de investigar "unicamente" pistas e informações "trabalhadas" pelos pais de Madeleine McCann.

The coordinator of the investigation of the missing British girl case in the Algarve accused in statements published by the Daily News, the English police to investigate "only" clues and information "worked" by the parents of Madeleine McCann.

"A Polícia britânica tem estado unicamente a trabalhar sobre aquilo que o casal McCann pretende e lhe convém", disse Gonçalo Amaral, quando comentava a notícia publicada no dia 01 de Outubro em vários jornais ingleses dando conta de um e-mail anónimo enviado para o site oficial do príncipe Carlos que acusa uma ex-empregada do Ocean Club, empreendimento da Praia da Luz de onde desapareceu a criança de quatro anos, de ter raptado a menina por vingança.

Gonçalo Amaral disse ao DN que tal informação não "tem qualquer credibilidade para a Polícia portuguesa", estando "completamente posta de parte".

Acrescentou que os seus colegas ingleses "têm vindo a investigar dicas e informações criadas e trabalhadas pelos McCann, esquecendo-se que o casal é suspeito da morte da sua filha Madeleine".

Para o até agora responsável pelo Departamento de Investigação Criminal de Portimão da PJ, a história do rapto por vingança não passa de "mais um facto trabalhado pelos McCann".

O Ocean Club "está situado na Praia da Luz e não em Londres, o que significa que tudo o que diga respeito ao aldeamento e respectivos funcionários já foi ou está a ser investigado pela Polícia Judiciária", adiantou.

Garantiu que não será um "e-mail, ainda por cima anónimo, que é fácil saber de onde partiu, que vai distrair a linha de investigação" da PJ.

"The British police have been only working on what the McCanns want and it suits him," said Goncalo Amaral, when commenting the news published on October 01 in several English newspapers realizing an anonymous e-mail sent to the official website of prince Charles who accuses an ex-employee of the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz where the child disappeared four years, to have kidnapped the girl for revenge.

Gonçalo Amaral told DN that such information does not "have any credibility for the Portuguese police", being "completely ruled out."

He added that their English colleagues "have been investigating tips and information created and worked by the McCanns, forgetting that the couple is suspected of the death of their daughter Madeleine."

For until now responsible for the Criminal Investigation Department of Portimão PJ, the story of the kidnapping for vengeance is merely "another fact worked for McCann."

The Ocean Club "is located in Praia da Luz and not in London, which means that everything that relates to the village and its employees have been or are being investigated by the Judicial Police," he said.

He assured it will not be an "e-mail, on top of Anonymous, which is easy to know from where he started, which will distract the line of investigation" of the PJ.

Madeleine McCann desapareceu de um apartamento da Praia da Luz, no Algarve, onde passava férias com os pais e os irmãos a 03 de Maio.

Depois de a PJ ter investigado a tese de rapto, os pais da menina, Kate e Gerry McCann, foram constituídos arguidos a 07 de Setembro, tendo abandonado o país dois dias depois.

Kate e Gerry McCann são, segundo os seus porta-vozes, suspeitos de homicídio involuntário e de ocultação de cadáver.

No entanto, os McCann não deixam de clamar a sua inocência e apelam à continuação das buscas para tentar encontrar a sua filha, hoje com quatro anos.

Madeleine McCann disappeared from an apartment in Praia da Luz, in the Algarve, where on vacation with his parents and siblings to 03 May.

After the PJ have investigated the abduction theory, the girl's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, were made defendants to September 07, having left the country two days later.

Kate and Gerry McCann are, according to their spokesmen, manslaughter suspects and concealment of a corpse.

However, the McCanns do not cease to cry out his innocence and call for continuing the search to try to find his daughter, now four years.

ARA/FC

Lusa/Fim
http://noticias.sapo.pt/lusa/artigo/Zz88UgQzaoDeFyvXmhfeew.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 25, 2016, 07:38:25 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 25, 2016, 06:26:43 PM
Absolutely.   %£&)**#

One can only stand back in amazement and admire the chutzpah which remodelled an ignominious sacking into a "sideways move promotion"

As for 'conspiracy theories' ... I think what the coordinator of Madeleine's case has to say here might be considered as verging on paranoia.  If not that, perhaps one of the worst examples of unprofessional behaviour from a senior police officer ever publicly demonstrated.



Madeleine: Paulo Rebelo substitui Gonçalo Amaral... (ACTUALIZADA)

Paulo Rebelo ocupava as funções de director nacional adjunto.

O novo responsável pelo DIC de Portimão da PJ fez carreira na Direcção Central de Investigação ao Tráfico de Estupefacientes (DCITE) e esteve à frente da Directoria de Lisboa durante a investigação de pedofilia que resultou no processo Casa Pia.

Paulo Rebelo esteve também na condução do inquérito à fuga de informação relativa ao caso Freeport, de Alcochete.

Paulo Rebelo occupied the deputy national director functions.

The new responsible for Portimão PJ DIC has made a career in the Central Directorate for Investigation to Drug Trafficking (DCITE) and headed the Directorate of Lisbon during the pedophile investigation that resulted in the Casa Pia case.

Paulo Rebelo was also in the survey conduct leakage of information about the Freeport case of Alcochete.

Gonçalo Amaral foi afastado dia 02 de Outubro das funções de coordenador do DIC da PJ de Portimão depois de declarações feitas ao Diário de Notícias em que acusava a Polícia inglesa de favorecer o casal McCann nas investigações sobre o desaparecimento da sua filha Madeleine.

Goncalo Amaral was dismissed on 02 October of the DIC's coordinator of the PJ in Portimão after statements to the Daily News in which he accused the British police of favoring the McCanns in the investigation into the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine.

No mesmo dia, o director nacional da PJ, Alípio Ribeiro, considerou "óbvias" as razões que o levaram a tomar a decisão de afastar Gonçalo Amaral de coordenador do Departamento de Investigação Criminal de Portimão da PJ e do caso Madeleine McCann.

On the same day, the national director of the PJ, Alipio Ribeiro, considered "obvious" reasons that led him to take the decision to remove Gonçalo Amaral coordinator of the Criminal Investigation Department of Portimão PJ and Madeleine McCann case.


"Fiz cessar a comissão de serviço de Gonçalo Amaral em Portimão. As razões pelas quais dei esse despacho parecem-me óbvias", disse aos jornalistas Alípio Ribeiro, numa aparente referência às polémicas declarações de Gonçalo Amaral ao Diário de Notícias desse dia.

"I cease Gonçalo Amaral service commission in Portimão. The reasons I gave that order seems to me obvious," Alipio Ribeiro told reporters in an apparent reference to controversial remarks by Gonçalo Amaral to the Daily News that day.

O coordenador da investigação do caso da menina inglesa desaparecida no Algarve acusou, em declarações publicadas pelo Diário de Notícias, a Polícia inglesa de investigar "unicamente" pistas e informações "trabalhadas" pelos pais de Madeleine McCann.

The coordinator of the investigation of the missing British girl case in the Algarve accused in statements published by the Daily News, the English police to investigate "only" clues and information "worked" by the parents of Madeleine McCann.

"A Polícia britânica tem estado unicamente a trabalhar sobre aquilo que o casal McCann pretende e lhe convém", disse Gonçalo Amaral, quando comentava a notícia publicada no dia 01 de Outubro em vários jornais ingleses dando conta de um e-mail anónimo enviado para o site oficial do príncipe Carlos que acusa uma ex-empregada do Ocean Club, empreendimento da Praia da Luz de onde desapareceu a criança de quatro anos, de ter raptado a menina por vingança.

Gonçalo Amaral disse ao DN que tal informação não "tem qualquer credibilidade para a Polícia portuguesa", estando "completamente posta de parte".

Acrescentou que os seus colegas ingleses "têm vindo a investigar dicas e informações criadas e trabalhadas pelos McCann, esquecendo-se que o casal é suspeito da morte da sua filha Madeleine".

Para o até agora responsável pelo Departamento de Investigação Criminal de Portimão da PJ, a história do rapto por vingança não passa de "mais um facto trabalhado pelos McCann".

O Ocean Club "está situado na Praia da Luz e não em Londres, o que significa que tudo o que diga respeito ao aldeamento e respectivos funcionários já foi ou está a ser investigado pela Polícia Judiciária", adiantou.

Garantiu que não será um "e-mail, ainda por cima anónimo, que é fácil saber de onde partiu, que vai distrair a linha de investigação" da PJ.

"The British police have been only working on what the McCanns want and it suits him," said Goncalo Amaral, when commenting the news published on October 01 in several English newspapers realizing an anonymous e-mail sent to the official website of prince Charles who accuses an ex-employee of the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz where the child disappeared four years, to have kidnapped the girl for revenge.

Gonçalo Amaral told DN that such information does not "have any credibility for the Portuguese police", being "completely ruled out."

He added that their English colleagues "have been investigating tips and information created and worked by the McCanns, forgetting that the couple is suspected of the death of their daughter Madeleine."

For until now responsible for the Criminal Investigation Department of Portimão PJ, the story of the kidnapping for vengeance is merely "another fact worked for McCann."

The Ocean Club "is located in Praia da Luz and not in London, which means that everything that relates to the village and its employees have been or are being investigated by the Judicial Police," he said.

He assured it will not be an "e-mail, on top of Anonymous, which is easy to know from where he started, which will distract the line of investigation" of the PJ.

Madeleine McCann desapareceu de um apartamento da Praia da Luz, no Algarve, onde passava férias com os pais e os irmãos a 03 de Maio.

Depois de a PJ ter investigado a tese de rapto, os pais da menina, Kate e Gerry McCann, foram constituídos arguidos a 07 de Setembro, tendo abandonado o país dois dias depois.

Kate e Gerry McCann são, segundo os seus porta-vozes, suspeitos de homicídio involuntário e de ocultação de cadáver.

No entanto, os McCann não deixam de clamar a sua inocência e apelam à continuação das buscas para tentar encontrar a sua filha, hoje com quatro anos.

Madeleine McCann disappeared from an apartment in Praia da Luz, in the Algarve, where on vacation with his parents and siblings to 03 May.

After the PJ have investigated the abduction theory, the girl's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, were made defendants to September 07, having left the country two days later.

Kate and Gerry McCann are, according to their spokesmen, manslaughter suspects and concealment of a corpse.

However, the McCanns do not cease to cry out his innocence and call for continuing the search to try to find his daughter, now four years.

ARA/FC

Lusa/Fim
http://noticias.sapo.pt/lusa/artigo/Zz88UgQzaoDeFyvXmhfeew.html

I was thinking more in terms of the real reason Sr Amaral was given an OBE.
I realise of course that has no legs in it for a lot of folk hereabouts, it being much more fun to talk about what the readers wives thought about it and whether or not he remodeled a chutzpah or any other kind of big cat for that matter.
I
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 26, 2016, 01:38:32 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 25, 2016, 07:38:25 PM
I was thinking more in terms of the real reason Sr Amaral was given an OBE.
I realise of course that has no legs in it for a lot of folk hereabouts, it being much more fun to talk about what the readers wives thought about it and whether or not he remodeled a chutzpah or any other kind of big cat for that matter.
I

I see you have got the gist of my post. No to sideways promotion. Yes to ignominious sacking. The English version confirming that is googlespeak, couched in much the same vein as in your reply ... but the original Portuguese puts it over very well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 26, 2016, 02:00:18 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 26, 2016, 01:38:32 AM
I see you have got the gist of my post. No to sideways promotion. Yes to ignominious sacking. The English version confirming that is googlespeak, couched in much the same vein as in your reply ... but the original Portuguese puts it over very well.

Would you translate Alice's last post, please, because I haven't the foggiest what (s)he's saying?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 26, 2016, 01:30:57 PM
Sr Amaral was given a shove sideways by his own bosses because he was a liability to the McCann case due to his forthcoming court appearances.
Naff all to do with insulting British Police Forces or Gordon Brown. I understand that idea will not sit well with conspiracy theorists on both sides of the equation but you really do need to get a grip on reality.
Definitions:
O.B.E = Order of The Big Elbow = the sack
D.C.M = Don't Come Monday = the sack
Sideways Promotion = being kept on at the same level or even a little above in a position where you can sit it out til pension time without causing too much damage to the organisation i.e it is the cheapest way for the organisation to solve the problem.  cf Katrina Percy*.
The above are common enough parlance in most professions.
Remodeled Chutzpah = I haven't a clue, ask Brietta she said it in her post. I presumed a Chutzpah is a big cat a bit like a Cheetah or Cougar or in other words I was taking the piss.
Clearer now?

* if you haven't heard of her, get out more.




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 26, 2016, 01:45:02 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 26, 2016, 01:30:57 PM
Sr Amaral was given a shove sideways by his own bosses because he was a liability to the McCann case due to his forthcoming court appearances.
Naff all to do with insulting British Police Forces or Gordon Brown. I understand that idea will not sit well with conspiracy theorists on both sides of the equation but you really do need to get a grip on reality.
Definitions:
O.B.E = Order of The Big Elbow = the sack
D.C.M = Don't Come Monday = the sack
Sideways Promotion = being kept on at the same level or even a little above in a position where you can sit it out til pension time without causing too much damage to the organisation i.e it is the cheapest way for the organisation to solve the problem.  cf Katrina Percy*.
The above are common enough parlance in most professions.
Remodeled Chutzpah = I haven't a clue, ask Brietta she said it in her post. I presumed a Chutzpah is a big cat a bit like a Cheetah or Cougar or in other words I was taking the piss.
Clearer now?

* if you haven't heard of her, get out more.

A bit clearer, ta.
*I can see why a new position was created for a sideways promotion.
How do you explain Tavares de Almeida also being removed from the investigating team?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 26, 2016, 03:32:23 PM
Quote from: misty on September 26, 2016, 01:45:02 PM
A bit clearer, ta.
*I can see why a new position was created for a sideways promotion.
How do you explain Tavares de Almeida also being removed from the investigating team?

I would be guessing why he was moved but when I moved people it was for one of three reasons:
1.They were as helpful as toothache to "the project" in one way or another and I wanted shut of them (extremely rarely).
2. I wanted them somewhere else because they had the skill sets I needed that somewhere else (quite commonplace).
3.The big white arrow came out of the ceiling with the usual "Thou Shalt" command attached to it! "do it immediately, do not pass go, do not collect two hundred quid, just do it" (not that often but I usually sulked if it put me out too much and I was the arbiter of "put me out too much"  @)(++(*).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on September 26, 2016, 04:00:08 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 26, 2016, 03:32:23 PM
I would be guessing why he was moved but when I moved people it was for one of three reasons:
1.They were as helpful as toothache to "the project" in one way or another and I wanted shut of them (extremely rarely).
2. I wanted them somewhere else because they had the skill sets I needed that somewhere else (quite commonplace).
3.The big white arrow came out of the ceiling with the usual "Thou Shalt" command attached to it! "do it immediately, do not pass go, do not collect two hundred quid, just do it" (not that often but I usually sulked if it put me out too much and I was the arbiter of "put me out too much"  @)(++(*).

I didn't quite understand no. 3, Alice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 26, 2016, 04:02:45 PM
Quote from: Carana on September 26, 2016, 04:00:08 PM
I didn't quite understand no. 3, Alice.
The bosses above. the "gods" on the upper floors.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 26, 2016, 06:21:39 PM
Quote from: misty on September 26, 2016, 01:45:02 PM
A bit clearer, ta.
*I can see why a new position was created for a sideways promotion.
How do you explain Tavares de Almeida also being removed from the investigating team?

According to the Mirror he wasn't removed he asked for leave of absence.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-cop-asks-to-leave-511093
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on September 26, 2016, 06:28:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 26, 2016, 06:21:39 PM
According to the Mirror he wasn't removed he asked for leave of absence.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-cop-asks-to-leave-511093
  Sadly your article quotes an unnamed source and there cannot be either accetped or believed, sorry  8(8-))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 26, 2016, 07:17:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 26, 2016, 06:21:39 PM
According to the Mirror he wasn't removed he asked for leave of absence.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-cop-asks-to-leave-511093

From the libel trial

http://truthformadeleine.com/2010/01/tavares-de-almeida-when-we-asked-uk-for-info-on-mccanns-we-got-a-single-side-of-a4/

snipped
12:48: Tavares de Almeida, chief inspector of police at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance, has taken the stand to give evidence.
12:48: He was involved in the case from the beginning, but taken off it in September 2007.
12:51: Mr de Almeida tells the court that he is still working as member of the Portuguese police.
12:52: He tells the court that British police took an active part in the investigation.
12:53: He said the Portuguese detectives found the co-operation given by their British counterparts useful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on September 26, 2016, 07:33:39 PM
Quote from: misty on September 26, 2016, 07:17:18 PM
From the libel trial

http://truthformadeleine.com/2010/01/tavares-de-almeida-when-we-asked-uk-for-info-on-mccanns-we-got-a-single-side-of-a4/

snipped
12:48: Tavares de Almeida, chief inspector of police at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance, has taken the stand to give evidence.
12:48: He was involved in the case from the beginning, but taken off it in September 2007.
12:51: Mr de Almeida tells the court that he is still working as member of the Portuguese police.
12:52: He tells the court that British police took an active part in the investigation.
12:53: He said the Portuguese detectives found the co-operation given by their British counterparts useful.

Is "he" referring to TdeA or to GA? (12:48)

If it's TdeA, his "sabbatical" couldn't have been anything to do with the Virgolino Borges torture investigation by any chance?

Hard to tell....


The sentence was reported in 2013, which doesn't seem to mean much in terms of the PT judicial lag at the time.
http://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/pena-suspensa-para-dupla-da-pj-condenada-por-tortura?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 26, 2016, 07:39:55 PM
Quote from: Carana on September 26, 2016, 07:33:39 PM
Is "he" referring to TdeA or to GA? (12:48)

If it's TdeA, his "sabbatical" couldn't have been anything to do with the Virgolino Borges torture investigation by any chance?

Hard to tell....


The sentence was reported in 2013, which doesn't seem to mean much in terms of the PT judicial lag at the time.
http://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/pena-suspensa-para-dupla-da-pj-condenada-por-tortura?


It was a commentary on TdA being cross-examined by the McCann legal team. "He" is TdA.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 26, 2016, 08:03:21 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 26, 2016, 04:02:45 PM
The bosses above. the "gods" on the upper floors.

I am glad someone is awake... 8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 26, 2016, 08:07:08 PM
Quote from: Carana on September 26, 2016, 04:00:08 PM
I didn't quite understand no. 3, Alice.

No need for you or Alfie to worry; it will not affect your PPRs....................this time...........  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 26, 2016, 08:10:29 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 26, 2016, 08:03:21 PM
I am glad someone is awake... 8(0(*
Would you like to complete the personal questionnaire?  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 29, 2016, 12:59:42 AM
"There is a page on the WBM that shows CEOP reported her missing that date, posted just after midnight. The posters were reported by a holidaymaker their at the time who was seriously concerned (Derby I think she was from, but long since 'curtained' "

Way Back Machine. What is a basis of this rumour?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 29, 2016, 08:55:12 AM
Computer glitch according to some, exposure of conspiracy according to others.

Well discussed at the time, but little mentioned since.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 29, 2016, 10:03:28 AM
Quote from: jassi on September 29, 2016, 08:55:12 AM
Computer glitch according to some, exposure of conspiracy according to others.

Well discussed at the time, but little mentioned since.
Thanks Jassi
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on September 29, 2016, 04:30:48 PM
http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/evidence-is-such-boring-stuff.html

Good blog to discard the ridiculous theory that another forum continues to promote and believes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on September 29, 2016, 04:32:50 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on September 29, 2016, 04:30:48 PM
http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/evidence-is-such-boring-stuff.html

Good blog to discard the ridiculous theory that another forum continues to promote and believes.

Thanks for the love link Pathfinder. 8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on September 29, 2016, 05:32:06 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on September 29, 2016, 04:30:48 PM
http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/evidence-is-such-boring-stuff.html

Good blog to discard the ridiculous theory that another forum continues to promote and believes.
http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39076140/Main%20Page

Excellent, meticulously researched examinations of various myths to do with the Madeleine Mccann case

This resource rebuts with actual facts the various myths presented by propaganda against The Mccanns.

Well worth a read.  Well worth taking the real facts on board if you care about Justice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on September 29, 2016, 05:46:04 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 26, 2016, 08:03:21 PM
I am glad someone is awake... 8(0(*

Quite an achievement if you get as little sleep as robbitybob (appears) to get ....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on September 29, 2016, 06:25:10 PM
Quote from: sadie on September 29, 2016, 05:32:06 PM
http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39076140/Main%20Page

Excellent, meticulously researched examinations of various myths to do with the Madeleine Mccann case

This resource rebuts with actual facts the various myths presented by propaganda against The Mccanns.

Well worth a read.  Well worth taking the real facts on board if you care about Justice.

Did you actually read the linked to blog?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 29, 2016, 06:32:31 PM
Quote from: ferryman on September 29, 2016, 05:46:04 PM
Quite an achievement if you get as little sleep as robbitybob (appears) to get ....
I'm not as anxious to solve the case now, since there has been some more funding given.  I'm getting sleep.  I'll do some posts and go off to bed again.  %£&)**#
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on September 29, 2016, 06:51:35 PM
Quote from: sadie on September 29, 2016, 05:32:06 PM
http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39076140/Main%20Page

Excellent, meticulously researched examinations of various myths to do with the Madeleine Mccann case

This resource rebuts with actual facts the various myths presented by propaganda against The Mccanns.

Well worth a read.  Well worth taking the real facts on board if you care about Justice.
Why is Blacksmith so obsessed with a ridiculous backwater forum and  the complete garbage that is tweeted on tw..ter?  He really should grow up and channel his literary pretensions into something a bit more worthwhile IMO, rather than churning out turgid prose about what 'HiDeHo' and 'SafariSara' said - it all a bit sad isn't it?! 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on October 04, 2016, 04:55:11 PM
Yeah I thought so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on October 05, 2016, 06:24:40 PM

UN picks former Socialist leader of Portugal to lead the world body

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/antonio-guterres-un-secretary-general-229190

Pick the bones out of that then  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on October 05, 2016, 06:33:24 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on October 05, 2016, 06:24:40 PM
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/antonio-guterres-un-secretary-general-229190

Pick the bones out of that then  @)(++(*

Looks like everybody wants to be pals with Portugal these days.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on October 05, 2016, 06:37:03 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on October 05, 2016, 06:33:24 PM
Looks like everybody wants to be pals with Portugal these days.

With a few notable exceptions on here.
Shall we run a book on how long it takes to get a "dissing" post about the gentleman ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on October 14, 2016, 11:26:12 PM
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1977537/fears-german-maddie-mccann-may-have-been-victim-of-sick-neo-nazi-serial-killer-after-his-dna-was-found-at-her-murder-site/

DNA matching that of Uwe Boehnhardt, a member of a neo-Nazi cell, has been found on her body
BY SAM WEBB  14th October 2016, 2:51 pm
THE DNA of a dead neo-Nazi killer has been found on the body of a young German girl who went missing 15 years ago.

Mushroom pickers found the body of Peggy Knobloch, who was 9 years old when she disappeared on the way home from school in 2001 – just nine miles from the girl’s home.

Now German police have announced that DNA matching that of Uwe Boehnhardt, a member of a neo-Nazi cell, has been found on her body.

Uwe Boehnhardt, who was part of the so-called National Socialist Underground (NSU) cell that killed nine foreigners and a policewoman between, committed suicide in 2011 alongside Uwe Mundlos after police discovered their three-member cell by chance.

Peggy’s remains were found in July in a forest some 95 miles from the city of Eisenach where the pair died.

Beate Zschaepe, the lone surviving member of the cell, is currently on trial for her alleged role in the killings of eight Greeks, one Turk and a German policewoman. She broke her silence last month, telling the court that she disavowed the ideology behind the killings and condemned them.

Peggy Knobloch was nine years old when she went missing on May 7 2001, never making it home from her German primary school, with her disappearance sparking an international missing person’s search.

Despite an intense search, the young girl was never found with parallels drawn between the young Bavarian girl and missing English girl Madeleine McCann.

The young girl’s body and other items were found by a member of the public who was walking through the forest looking for mushrooms in July.

After making the devastating discovery, they immediately notified police and more than 100 police officers then descended onto the scene to search for more clues.

It is understood the bones most likely surfaced after wild animals picked up the scent of the body and excavated it.

In 2002, a man with a learning disability was accused of killing the nine-year-old girl after allegedly sexually assaulting her. He told police he had sexually abused her then killed her when she went to tell on him.

The man was jailed for life in 2004, spending his time in an psychiatric hospital before he withdrew his confession.

He was released 10 years later when the conviction was overturned.

No one has since been charged with her disappearance.

The search for the young girl spread across her village, with authorities even using military planes in the extensive hunt for clues.

A line of inquiry took authorities to the Czech Republic and to Turkey in the belief she may have been kidnapped.

Her case sparked comparisons with Madeleine McCann who was just three when she went missing from a resort in Portugal in 2007 with reports of sightings of the toddler following from around the world.

The two girls look startingly similar with their blonde hair and wide eyes.
                     -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proof positive that a body really is necessary to ensure the correct conviction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on October 20, 2016, 01:49:41 PM
Quote from: misty on October 14, 2016, 11:26:12 PM
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1977537/fears-german-maddie-mccann-may-have-been-victim-of-sick-neo-nazi-serial-killer-after-his-dna-was-found-at-her-murder-site/

DNA matching that of Uwe Boehnhardt, a member of a neo-Nazi cell, has been found on her body
BY SAM WEBB  14th October 2016, 2:51 pm
THE DNA of a dead neo-Nazi killer has been found on the body of a young German girl who went missing 15 years ago.

Mushroom pickers found the body of Peggy Knobloch, who was 9 years old when she disappeared on the way home from school in 2001 – just nine miles from the girl’s home.

Now German police have announced that DNA matching that of Uwe Boehnhardt, a member of a neo-Nazi cell, has been found on her body.

Uwe Boehnhardt, who was part of the so-called National Socialist Underground (NSU) cell that killed nine foreigners and a policewoman between, committed suicide in 2011 alongside Uwe Mundlos after police discovered their three-member cell by chance.

Peggy’s remains were found in July in a forest some 95 miles from the city of Eisenach where the pair died.

Beate Zschaepe, the lone surviving member of the cell, is currently on trial for her alleged role in the killings of eight Greeks, one Turk and a German policewoman. She broke her silence last month, telling the court that she disavowed the ideology behind the killings and condemned them.

Peggy Knobloch was nine years old when she went missing on May 7 2001, never making it home from her German primary school, with her disappearance sparking an international missing person’s search.

Despite an intense search, the young girl was never found with parallels drawn between the young Bavarian girl and missing English girl Madeleine McCann.

The young girl’s body and other items were found by a member of the public who was walking through the forest looking for mushrooms in July.

After making the devastating discovery, they immediately notified police and more than 100 police officers then descended onto the scene to search for more clues.

It is understood the bones most likely surfaced after wild animals picked up the scent of the body and excavated it.

In 2002, a man with a learning disability was accused of killing the nine-year-old girl after allegedly sexually assaulting her. He told police he had sexually abused her then killed her when she went to tell on him.

The man was jailed for life in 2004, spending his time in an psychiatric hospital before he withdrew his confession.

He was released 10 years later when the conviction was overturned.

No one has since been charged with her disappearance.

The search for the young girl spread across her village, with authorities even using military planes in the extensive hunt for clues.

A line of inquiry took authorities to the Czech Republic and to Turkey in the belief she may have been kidnapped.

Her case sparked comparisons with Madeleine McCann who was just three when she went missing from a resort in Portugal in 2007 with reports of sightings of the toddler following from around the world.

The two girls look startingly similar with their blonde hair and wide eyes.
                     -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proof positive that a body really is necessary to ensure the correct conviction.

What do you make of the murder of Jack McVitie then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on October 20, 2016, 08:51:13 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on October 20, 2016, 01:49:41 PM
What do you make of the murder of Jack McVitie then?

Karma.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on October 26, 2016, 10:37:16 AM
wonder if this is about to hit the papers as poor mccs being targeted again ...

genuine....or scam

https://www.gofundme.com/madelinemccann

does seem to me to be a scam.....for publicity
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 26, 2016, 10:46:17 AM
Quote from: xtina on October 26, 2016, 10:37:16 AM
wonder if this is about to hit the papers as poor mccs being targeted again ...

genuine....or scam

https://www.gofundme.com/madelinemccann

does seem to me to be a scam.....for publicity

Who do you think is doing the scamming and getting the money?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on October 26, 2016, 11:11:59 AM
There does seem to be some idiot with almost £1000 to squander.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on October 26, 2016, 11:21:39 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 26, 2016, 10:46:17 AM
Who do you think is doing the scamming and getting the money?


 @)(++(*........no not the mccs Eleanor.....

well it is off line donations......and i doubt very much they have raised that amount in such a short time

but i do think it will hit the papers ......at a certain time....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 26, 2016, 11:35:45 AM
Quote from: xtina on October 26, 2016, 11:21:39 AM

 @)(++(*........no not the mccs Eleanor.....

well it is off line donations......and i doubt very much they have raised that amount in such a short time

but i do think it will hit the papers ......at a certain time....

LOL ... Nigerian princes must be having to come up with bigger and better schemes to pay for their diamond earings and keeping their Jaguar vehicles roadworthy ...
They do say there is one born every minute though ... offline donations?  Hmmm ...

https://www.bbb.org/new-york-city/get-consumer-help/articles/the-nigerian-prince-old-scam-new-twist/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on October 27, 2016, 12:32:48 AM
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/557001/Madeleine-McCann-fundraiser-probed-police-over-scam-lawsuit-against-girls-parents

Fraud cops to probe 'Maddie McCann Justice' fund
POLICE are investigating a fund aimed at having Madeleine McCann’s parents prosecuted.

By Jerry Lawton / Published 27th October 2016

A Facebook user set up a GoFundMe page he claimed was to raise £1.5million for legal action against Kate and Gerry.

Supporters had pledged £6,615 within 24 hours.
But last night police were investigating after some critical internet users branded Adam Cruz’s webpage a “scam”.

Cruz was blocked by administrators of Facebook site Madeleine McCann: Abduction or Scam even though many of its followers do not support the parents.

A message on the site said: “We do NOT endorse any post by Adam Cruz regarding a gofundme page against the McCanns and urge anyone who reads his plea to NOT donate to this.

“There was nothing to say Adam is who he said he is or indeed where any money would be going.’’

His McCanns: Private Prosecution page says: “Let’s deliver the justice Madeleine McCann deserves.”

A spokesman for the McCanns said they would not comment.

UNKNOWN: The identity of the fundraiser's creator could not be verified

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

Adam Cruz Thamesfield Ward. Is that a ward at HMP Thamesfield?
I followed the link to his F/B page earlier, as supplied by a poster on Abduction or Scam(seems to have been removed now)  His profile showed quite a lot of Leicester & USA friends.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on November 01, 2016, 02:24:03 PM
I don't think that I would have the patience to wade through yet another dog thread. That said, I am curious about a recent news event.

I'm aware that the following article only concerns "sniffer" dogs, which - in context - refers to S&R dogs. Nonetheless, these S&R dogs alerted to a trapped dog in the recent Italian quake. I find it wonderful that the rescue services were able to rescue the poor dog in question, but it does raise a question.

If S&R rescue dogs are trained to try to find signs of life of humans in a disaster situation, it doesn't exclude also alerting to signs of life in general (including, at least in this instance, a fellow canine).


https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2016/nov/01/dog-rescued-day-after-being-buried-alive-by-earthquake-in-italy-video

The question being: if dogs trained to find living humans in distress can also react to the scent of non-human living beings, then their alerts are not exclusive to humans.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 01, 2016, 02:49:54 PM
Quote from: Carana on November 01, 2016, 02:24:03 PM
I don't think that I would have the patience to wade through yet another dog thread. That said, I am curious about a recent news event.

I'm aware that the following article only concerns "sniffer" dogs, which - in context - refers to S&R dogs. Nonetheless, these S&R dogs alerted to a trapped dog in the recent Italian quake. I find it wonderful that the rescue services were able to rescue the poor dog in question, but it does raise a question.

If S&R rescue dogs are trained to try to find signs of life of humans in a disaster situation, it doesn't exclude also alerting to signs of life in general (including, at least in this instance, a fellow canine).


https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2016/nov/01/dog-rescued-day-after-being-buried-alive-by-earthquake-in-italy-video

The question being: if dogs trained to find living humans in distress can also react to the scent of non-human living beings, then their alerts are not exclusive to humans.

There would seem no reason why search & rescue dogs should be exclusive.
Their purpose is to search for signs of life, any life, in situations such as earthquakes. They obviously respond to some generic scent  that is common to humans and animals, rather than to a specific individual.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on November 01, 2016, 03:13:22 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 01, 2016, 02:49:54 PM
There would seem no reason why search & rescue dogs should be exclusive.
Their purpose is to search for signs of life, any life, in situations such as earthquakes. They obviously respond to some generic scent  that is common to humans and animals, rather than to a specific individual.

Yes, that would seem to be the case (at least based on this instance).

By extrapolation and in view of the number of VOCs involved in decomposing substances, many of which are common to both humans and animals, plus the fact that scientists still don't agree, an alert doesn't necessarily mean that the source of the "bouquet" in question is necessarily dead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on November 01, 2016, 09:10:31 PM
Quote from: Carana on November 01, 2016, 03:13:22 PM
Yes, that would seem to be the case (at least based on this instance).

By extrapolation and in view of the number of VOCs involved in decomposing substances, many of which are common to both humans and animals, plus the fact that scientists still don't agree, an alert doesn't necessarily mean that the source of the "bouquet" in question is necessarily dead.

Dogs trained to find signs of life are not the same as dogs trained go find signs of death

Nice try though
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 06, 2016, 01:02:21 AM
http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?ref=SERP&br=ro&mkt=en-GB&dl=en&lp=PT_EN&a=http%3a%2f%2fwww.cmjornal.xl.pt%2f

Uncle tells how he killed Joana Cipriano showed how gave the child's remains to pigs. See the re-enactment of the crime that shocked Portugal tonight at 11:45 pm, on CMTV.

Ler mais em: http://65.55.108.4/proxy.ashx?h=I[Name removed]fvSJDpixBDZQdf1J_FOd2S2SVELRe&a=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cmjornal.xl.pt%2F
Twelve years later, the jury appreciated the case Joana-Portimão girl who went missing in September 2004-still with doubts. Justice gave the case for closed-with two votes of won the judges of the Supreme Court of Justice, but still without knowing where the body of the child.
The thesis that the eight-year-old girl was sold continues to make sense in the mind of some of the jurors-who voted for conviction – and also on the neighbors, as Zulmira Ophelia, the last person to see Jeanne alive. "I don't know if they killed her [his mother and uncle]. I've never been sure, I admit that I have sold. I don't know, "says one of the judges, the CM, 12 years after the crime. "I was never convinced that they had killed the girl. Very little time has passed since I saw her, until I talked to the mother. There was no way they could have hidden the body and were so relaxed, "says the neighbor. Leonor and João Cipriano has already served two-thirds of the prison sentence to which they were condemned (16 years and eight months) and can be released soon.
The trial for murder and concealment of corpse was marked by the confession of John, who agreed to reconstitute the crime, images that now the CM reveals for the first time. The uncle of the child counted as butchered the girl and how they hid the body in a freezer. Then, says gave the remains to pigs.

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

Is anyone able to upload the programme for us to view, please?
Anyone else think the programme/ release of these images is in respect of an ulterior motive?



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 06, 2016, 09:33:39 AM
Quote from: mercury on November 01, 2016, 09:10:31 PM
Dogs trained to find signs of life are not the same as dogs trained go find signs of death

Nice try though

I really don't understand that.    Eddie alerted to the blood of Gerry McCann,  he was obviously alive,   so if say someone was buried due to an earthquake for instance,   surely Eddie would alert to that person whether or not the person was dead or alive?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 06, 2016, 12:00:47 PM
Quote from: misty on November 06, 2016, 01:02:21 AM
http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?ref=SERP&br=ro&mkt=en-GB&dl=en&lp=PT_EN&a=http%3a%2f%2fwww.cmjornal.xl.pt%2f

Uncle tells how he killed Joana Cipriano showed how gave the child's remains to pigs. See the re-enactment of the crime that shocked Portugal tonight at 11:45 pm, on CMTV.

Ler mais em: http://65.55.108.4/proxy.ashx?h=I[Name removed]fvSJDpixBDZQdf1J_FOd2S2SVELRe&a=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cmjornal.xl.pt%2F
Twelve years later, the jury appreciated the case Joana-Portimão girl who went missing in September 2004-still with doubts. Justice gave the case for closed-with two votes of won the judges of the Supreme Court of Justice, but still without knowing where the body of the child.
The thesis that the eight-year-old girl was sold continues to make sense in the mind of some of the jurors-who voted for conviction – and also on the neighbors, as Zulmira Ophelia, the last person to see Jeanne alive. "I don't know if they killed her [his mother and uncle]. I've never been sure, I admit that I have sold. I don't know, "says one of the judges, the CM, 12 years after the crime. "I was never convinced that they had killed the girl. Very little time has passed since I saw her, until I talked to the mother. There was no way they could have hidden the body and were so relaxed, "says the neighbor. Leonor and João Cipriano has already served two-thirds of the prison sentence to which they were condemned (16 years and eight months) and can be released soon.
The trial for murder and concealment of corpse was marked by the confession of John, who agreed to reconstitute the crime, images that now the CM reveals for the first time. The uncle of the child counted as butchered the girl and how they hid the body in a freezer. Then, says gave the remains to pigs.

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

Is anyone able to upload the programme for us to view, please?
Anyone else think the programme/ release of these images is in respect of an ulterior motive?

See images here.

http://www.cmjornal.pt/multimedia/fotogalerias/detalhe/tio-conta-como-matou-joana

CM reveals images uncle to reconstruct the alleged murder. Cipriano showed how has the remains of the child to the pigs.

See the reconstitution of the crime that shocked Portugal tonight, at 23.45, in CMTV.

Footage - CMTV shows reconstitution of Joana Cipriano murder. João Cipriano told how he killed his niece with the help of his sister, Leonor Cipriano, the girl's mother.

http://cmjornal.teste.online.xl.pt/multimedia/videos/detalhe/cmtv-mostra-reconstituicao-do-homicidio-de-joana?ref=videos_BarraLat
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 06, 2016, 09:19:42 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on November 06, 2016, 12:00:47 PM
See images here.

http://www.cmjornal.pt/multimedia/fotogalerias/detalhe/tio-conta-como-matou-joana

CM reveals images uncle to reconstruct the alleged murder. Cipriano showed how has the remains of the child to the pigs.

See the reconstitution of the crime that shocked Portugal tonight, at 23.45, in CMTV.

Footage - CMTV shows reconstitution of Joana Cipriano murder. João Cipriano told how he killed his niece with the help of his sister, Leonor Cipriano, the girl's mother.

http://cmjornal.teste.online.xl.pt/multimedia/videos/detalhe/cmtv-mostra-reconstituicao-do-homicidio-de-joana?ref=videos_BarraLat

Thanks for that, Pathfinder, plus posting the accessible links.
Are you now working on a full translation of the video for our benefit, per chance?  ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mercury on November 06, 2016, 10:01:28 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on November 06, 2016, 12:00:47 PM
See images here.

http://www.cmjornal.pt/multimedia/fotogalerias/detalhe/tio-conta-como-matou-joana

CM reveals images uncle to reconstruct the alleged murder. Cipriano showed how has the remains of the child to the pigs.

See the reconstitution of the crime that shocked Portugal tonight, at 23.45, in CMTV.

Footage - CMTV shows reconstitution of Joana Cipriano murder. João Cipriano told how he killed his niece with the help of his sister, Leonor Cipriano, the girl's mother.

http://cmjornal.teste.online.xl.pt/multimedia/videos/detalhe/cmtv-mostra-reconstituicao-do-homicidio-de-joana?ref=videos_BarraLat

He was obviously tortured before that reconstruction hmmmm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 06, 2016, 11:16:42 PM
Quote from: misty on November 06, 2016, 09:19:42 PM
Thanks for that, Pathfinder, plus posting the accessible links.
Are you now working on a full translation of the video for our benefit, per chance?  ?{)(**

(http://cdn.cmjornal.pt/images/2016-11/img_757x498$2016_11_05_01_00_06_574081.jpg)
I had envisaged the freezer in which it was alleged Joana's dismembered remains had been stored was a chest freezer.
That is a demonstration of the modus operandi ??
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 07, 2016, 12:24:13 AM
Quote from: misty on November 06, 2016, 09:19:42 PM
Thanks for that, Pathfinder, plus posting the accessible links.
Are you now working on a full translation of the video for our benefit, per chance?  ?{)(**

No I'm not Misty. Amaral was right. They cut her to pieces put her in a freezer then fed to pigs. Only s..m would support them.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 07, 2016, 12:36:45 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on November 07, 2016, 12:24:13 AM
No I'm not Misty. Amaral was right. They cut her to pieces put her in a freezer then fed to pigs. Only s..m would support them.


No blood or DNA found in the freezer, Pathfinder.
I'd really, really like to know what they purportedly carried on the stool which was tipped on its side.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on November 07, 2016, 07:35:03 AM
Quote from: davel on November 06, 2016, 08:06:18 PM
There is no confirmation her daughter is dead and no real evidence she was murdered

And no motive either.   The court did not accept the claim of incest.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 07, 2016, 09:48:14 AM
I haven't really followed the  Cipriano case,   but one thing I was wondering,   the little girl was seen at the shop, so they know the time she was there and the time that she left the shop to go home.   The mother was seen searching for her daughter,   so the time is known when the mother was seen searching.   The Police were called.   So I was wondering,   when did the mother and brother have time to murder the child, cut her up and put her remains in the freezer to then feed them to the pigs?    Surely the house would have needed a lot of cleaning?   Why would the mother go off searching,  surely she would have been cleaning the house?   Was DNA taken from the freezer?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on November 07, 2016, 10:16:34 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 06, 2016, 11:16:42 PM
(http://cdn.cmjornal.pt/images/2016-11/img_757x498$2016_11_05_01_00_06_574081.jpg)
I had envisaged the freezer in which it was alleged Joana's dismembered remains had been stored was a chest freezer.
That is a demonstration of the modus operandi ??

I think a lot of people have assumed that it was a chest freezer Brie.     

I have a similar three drawer freezer to the one shown.  The idea that a 6yr old child's body could be fitted in there is beyond ridiculous.

IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 07, 2016, 12:50:52 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 07, 2016, 09:48:14 AM
I haven't really followed the  Cipriano case,   but one thing I was wondering,   the little girl was seen at the shop, so they know the time she was there and the time that she left the shop to go home.   The mother was seen searching for her daughter,   so the time is known when the mother was seen searching.   The Police were called.   So I was wondering,   when did the mother and brother have time to murder the child, cut her up and put her remains in the freezer to then feed them to the pigs?    Surely the house would have needed a lot of cleaning?   Why would the mother go off searching,  surely she would have been cleaning the house?   Was DNA taken from the freezer?

Joana Cipriano disappeared in September 2004, at just 8 years old. A victim of neglect and exploitation at the hands of her mother, Joana was used to look after her two younger brothers, and was often seen in the village of Figueira running errands for her mother, Leonor Cipriano.

Joana Cipriano, was one of 6 siblings, she lived with her mother Leonor, and her 2 younger brothers. The other 3 children were given away to various family members. It was later proven to the courts that having given these children away, Leonor didn't keep any contact with them, for at least 14 years.

Leonor Cipriano, tried to give Joana away on numerous occasions, twice with the little girl's father, with whom she had had no relationship, only for him to return her. Joana was even left with a couple who were alcoholics, and had a sick child of their own.
One of the children, the fourth born, was found buckled to a chair, aged just 7 months old, whilst Leonor went out. He was later found by neighbours.

On Joana Cipriano's first day at school in 2003, her mother Leonor, left her to find her own way. Joana was found wandering, and lost by a neighbour, aged just 5 years old.

On the night Joana disappeared, her mother, had sent her daughter to the village shop, 420m away to buy groceries at 8pm.
Upon Joana's return, both Leonor Cipriano, and her brother Joao Cipriano, both beat Joana about the head, causing her mouth, temple, and nose to bleed.

Due to the severity of the beating, Joana fell and hit her head against the corner of a wall. It was this blow, that ultimately caused her death.

Both Leonor and Joao Cipriano, upon realising Joana was no longer breathing, embarked upon a plot to conceal both her death, and the body.

Joao Cipriano headed to the village, whilst Leonor cleaned the crime scene with petroleum, scouring pads, and a mop and bucket.

Traces of blood were found consistent to the attack, and subsequent concealment of the cadaver, were found in all areas described in the confessions of both killers.

Traces of blood were also found on the stem of the mop used to clean the crime scene.

The presence of ticks in the house indicated an attraction to the presence of fresh blood.

Joao Cipriano provided a confession, in front of a judge, a forensics expert, and members of the PJ, on video tape, under no duress, detailing the crime. Included in Joao Cipriano's confession, was a full description of how both he and Leonor, cut up the body of Joana into 4 parts, head, torso, and legs. The forensics expert stated that the description of the body parts that were more difficult to cut apart was anatomically accurate.

Joao Cipriano also described the implements used to cut up the body, these being a metal cutting saw, and a knife.
Joana's dismembered body was placed into 3 bags, before being placed into a freezer, where more traces of human blood were found.

Joao Cipriano stated that he didn't hurt Joana (sexually), but that he only killed her.

Joao Cipriano has various previous convictions, including one for attempted murder, whereby his victim was left blind.

Joana Cipriano's shoes were found inside the house, thus proving she had indeed returned from the shop.

Leonor Cipriano originally stated that she didn't report Joana's disappearance, due to having no credit
on her phone.

Giving testimony, António Leandro, Joana's stepfather, told the court how Leonor, had not only told him that she had been having a sexual relationship with her brother Joao, but that she also confessed to the pair murdering Joana.

Both Leonor, and Joao Cipriano were found guilty of the murder of Joana Cipriano, and the subsequent concealment of her cadaver. They were sentenced to 16 years imprisonment each.

There are so many more horrific points to this case, all of which can be read here:

http://www.dgsi.pt/jstj.nsf/954f0ce6ad9dd8b980256b5f003fa814/bfaf1cea93ab75fb8025716200388d89?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,06P363

http://laidbareblog.blogspot.com/2016/11/goncalo-amaral-coordinator-for-original.html

In April 2013, Leonor was tried and sentenced in court to seven months in prison for lying about the alleged assaults of the Judicial Police.

https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caso_Joana_Cipriano
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 18, 2016, 08:49:41 PM
@Shining

I think we discussed some time ago whether or not there was a CCTV camera on the Baptista supermarket.  You said there was one inside - IIRC - but you couldn't see one outside.

Just found this while browsing ...

CCTV- External Controls

In modern policing CCTV and cameras play an important role. The nearest camera to the apartment was one fixed on the outside of the mini-supermarket, situated approximately 15 metres down from the Tapas Restaurant.

This camera was pointing up towards the rear entrance/exit to Apartment 5a and would have been able to have captured anyone walking down the pavement past the front entrance of the Ocean Club and Tapas Restaurant.
Significantly the mini-supermarket camera although switched on - was not recording
http://williams-thomas.co.uk/sites/default/files/Review%20of%20Madeleiene%20McCann%20Investigation.pdf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 18, 2016, 10:23:55 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 18, 2016, 08:49:41 PM
.....
Significantly the mini-supermarket camera although switched on - was not recording
....
Does no one ever check to see if it is recording!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 18, 2016, 10:34:21 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 18, 2016, 08:49:41 PM
@Shining

I think we discussed some time ago whether or not there was a CCTV camera on the Baptista supermarket.  You said there was one inside - IIRC - but you couldn't see one outside.

Just found this while browsing ...

CCTV- External Controls

In modern policing CCTV and cameras play an important role. The nearest camera to the apartment was one fixed on the outside of the mini-supermarket, situated approximately 15 metres down from the Tapas Restaurant.

This camera was pointing up towards the rear entrance/exit to Apartment 5a and would have been able to have captured anyone walking down the pavement past the front entrance of the Ocean Club and Tapas Restaurant.
Significantly the mini-supermarket camera although switched on - was not recording
http://williams-thomas.co.uk/sites/default/files/Review%20of%20Madeleiene%20McCann%20Investigation.pdf

Brietta - if you can get your Google Earth to capture the image because it won't screenshot for me - there is a lovely image of the CCTV camera on the end of the building above the parking spaces at the side of the road. Unfortunately, but sensibly, it points towards the door of the supermarket & not up the road towards 5a.
I'm not sure if it was in the same position in 2007 or even 2009 when MWT was there (I am unable to access the historical images on GE either) but it seems ludicrous to have a camera pointing away from the very area it was installed to protect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 18, 2016, 10:57:51 PM
Quote from: misty on November 18, 2016, 10:34:21 PM
Brietta - if you can get your Google Earth to capture the image because it won't screenshot for me - there is a lovely image of the CCTV camera on the end of the building above the parking spaces at the side of the road. Unfortunately, but sensibly, it points towards the door of the supermarket & not up the road towards 5a.
I'm not sure if it was in the same position in 2007 or even 2009 when MWT was there (I am unable to access the historical images on GE either) but it seems ludicrous to have a camera pointing away from the very area it was installed to protect.

Just checked, Misty.  The camera is directed to cover the shop doorway and points away from the reception area and the side entrance to 5A.
I wonder if it would have picked up those areas anyway even if pointed in the direction MWT suggested because of the recessed location of the site ... to look up the street it would have had to be sited on the opposite wall, I think.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 18, 2016, 11:00:25 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 18, 2016, 10:57:51 PM
Just checked, Misty.  The camera is directed to cover the shop doorway and points away from the reception area and the side entrance to 5A.
I wonder if it would have picked up those areas anyway even if pointed in the direction MWT suggested because of the recessed location of the site ... to look up the street it would have had to be sited on the opposite wall, I think.

Why would a camera be pointing up rather than down anyway?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 18, 2016, 11:01:43 PM
This might have a bearing on things:

http://www.vda.pt/xms/files/Publicacoes/Artigo_MPC+CNN_Video_surveillance_vs_privacey_(PrivaceyLawBusiness2006).pdf
http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2007)014-e
http://www.surveillance-and-society.org/articles2(2)/regulation.pdf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 18, 2016, 11:24:18 PM
Quote from: misty on November 18, 2016, 11:00:25 PM
Why would a camera be pointing up rather than down anyway?

It wouldn't have been unless to cover parking or loading bays. Even if it had the fact that it wasn't recording anyway makes it a bit of an irrelevance.
But what a difference it would have made to the timeline if it had ... or if there had been CCTV inside the tapas or covering the reception area. 

Also, if Madeleine's kidnapping had been planned the location of any surveillance cameras would have been noted; perhaps explaining why men were noticed intently studying the apartment block?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 18, 2016, 11:30:21 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on November 18, 2016, 11:01:43 PM
This might have a bearing on things:

http://www.vda.pt/xms/files/Publicacoes/Artigo_MPC+CNN_Video_surveillance_vs_privacey_(PrivaceyLawBusiness2006).pdf
http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2007)014-e
http://www.surveillance-and-society.org/articles2(2)/regulation.pdf

I believe that in Britain we have more surveillance cameras than anyone and I doubt there is much dispute about their value as a crime fighting tool.
Just don't pick your nose in a public place ... you might very well be on camera somewhere.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 18, 2016, 11:43:58 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 18, 2016, 11:30:21 PM
I believe that in Britain we have more surveillance cameras than anyone and I doubt there is much dispute about their value as a crime fighting tool.
Just don't pick your nose in a public place ... you might very well be on camera somewhere.

And receive letters from the police asking if you or the front seat passenger in your car saw anything on M whatever at the time of whatever as there had been an accident in the vicinity of where the cameras picked you up.
Or can you prove you were not 200 miles from where you live on xx at yy as a car of your model with 80% of your registration was seen at zz.
Like spooky man.

Could be worse; when I was but a young man the cops could legitimately question you for being out after midnight. You just had to make sure you didn't have a knife or screwdriver in your pocket at the time or it'd be a night banged up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 19, 2016, 01:17:32 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on November 18, 2016, 11:43:58 PM
And receive letters from the police asking if you or the front seat passenger in your car saw anything on M whatever at the time of whatever as there had been an accident in the vicinity of where the cameras picked you up.
Or can you prove you were not 200 miles from where you live on xx at yy as a car of your model with 80% of your registration was seen at zz.
Like spooky man.

Could be worse; when I was but a young man the cops could legitimately question you for being out after midnight. You just had to make sure you didn't have a knife or screwdriver in your pocket at the time or it'd be a night banged up.

My friend is a piper and as a youth was pulled over more times than he had hot dinners to have his bag searched; 
until 1996 the pipes were classified as a 'weapon of war' so technically the cops were within their rights.
http://www.scotclans.com/bagpipes-a-weapon-of-war/
Having survived the searches, he went on to choose a career in the police.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 19, 2016, 01:39:52 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 19, 2016, 01:17:32 AM
My friend is a piper and as a youth was pulled over more times than he had hot dinners to have his bag searched; 
until 1996 the pipes were classified as a 'weapon of war' so technically the cops were within their rights.
http://www.scotclans.com/bagpipes-a-weapon-of-war/
Having survived the searches, he went on to choose a career in the police.
Wonderful, that is a 10 out of 10.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on December 24, 2016, 11:43:35 PM
Happy Christmas to you all, present & absent friends.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 25, 2016, 12:02:11 AM

Happy Christmas, Everyone.  Bon Fete.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 25, 2016, 12:07:46 AM
'Tis Christmas Day

Happy Crimbo everyone

http://youtu.be/0A8KT365wlA
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 25, 2016, 08:38:09 AM
Merry Christmas and a Happy and Healthy New Year to all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 29, 2016, 12:00:32 PM
THE HOUSE ON THE BLACK ROCK

An inhibiting factor is that since the disappearance of the child an old empty house adjacent to the Trig Point on the Rocha Negra has been demolished and all rubble removed, If she was concealed within this property the search would be unlikely to detect her now. (Mark Harrison)

https://h42a.wordpress.com/2016/12/28/black/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 29, 2016, 04:17:07 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on December 29, 2016, 12:00:32 PM
THE HOUSE ON THE BLACK ROCK

An inhibiting factor is that since the disappearance of the child an old empty house adjacent to the Trig Point on the Rocha Negra has been demolished and all rubble removed, If she was concealed within this property the search would be unlikely to detect her now. (Mark Harrison)

https://h42a.wordpress.com/2016/12/28/black/
On my current 12 days of Xmas tour at ShiningInLuz, I am thinking of including photos of a huge plot of undeveloped land which has 3 relevant factors.

First, it is roughly the same distance from 5A as the site that OG dug up in June 2014.  (I need to check the distances to be certain.)

Second, I know for a fact that it has anomalies on it.  Whether these anomalies are like the OG anomalies - well only OG could answer that.

Third, it has a truly decrepit old ramshackle hovel on it, which will need to be demolished before the plot can be developed.  On the face of it, it looks like an excellent place to stash a body, though in reality it is anything but.

Perhaps if I get the photos you would be willing to comment on whether such a ruin could be demolished without finding a Madeleine-sized body?

This part of Harrison's input is somewhat weak, IMO.

NB1.  Rocha Negra (Black Rock) is the black volcanic part that can be seen forming the eastern end of Luz bay.  Boa Vista and the trig point are built on rock that is non-volcanic.  That is why the cliff face crumbles after heavy rain.  If it is important, I'll take a walk to the cliff face where the sign that warns people of falling rock also says what kind of rock it is.  Most visitors to Luz simply think the whole cliff is Rocha Negra, though it is not.

NB2.  About a third of the way up to the top of the cliff, using the 'McCann route', there is an even more decrepit ruin.  It also looks like an excellent place to stash a Madeleine-sized body, at least to someone who visits Luz for a week.  The reality is it is not a good hidey-hole.  Perhaps I need to get photos, so I can explain why.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 29, 2016, 04:21:22 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on December 29, 2016, 04:17:07 PM
On my current 12 days of Xmas tour at ShiningInLuz, I am thinking of including photos of a huge plot of undeveloped land which has 3 relevant factors.

First, it is roughly the same distance from 5A as the site that OG dug up in June 2014.  (I need to check the distances to be certain.)

Second, I know for a fact that it has anomalies on it.  Whether these anomalies are like the OG anomalies - well only OG could answer that.

Third, it has a truly decrepit old ramshackle hovel on it, which will need to be demolished before the plot can be developed.  On the face of it, it looks like an excellent place to stash a body, though in reality it is anything but.

Perhaps if I get the photos you would be willing to comment on whether such a ruin could be demolished without finding a Madeleine-sized body?

This part of Harrison's input is somewhat weak, IMO.

NB1.  Rocha Negra (Black Rock) is the black volcanic part that can be seen forming the eastern end of Luz bay.  Boa Vista and the trig point are built on rock that is non-volcanic.  That is why the cliff face crumbles after heavy rain.  If it is important, I'll take a walk to the cliff face where the sign that warns people of falling rock also says what kind of rock it is.  Most visitors to Luz simply think the whole cliff is Rocha Negra, though it is not.

NB2.  About a third of the way up to the top of the cliff, using the 'McCann route', there is an even more decrepit ruin. It also looks like an excellent place to stash a Madeleine-sized body, at least to someone who visits Luz for a week.  The reality is it is not a good hidey-hole.  Perhaps I need to get photos, so I can explain why.


How would it do as a temporary storage place until somewhere better was found?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 29, 2016, 04:42:02 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 29, 2016, 04:21:22 PM

How would it do as a temporary storage place until somewhere better was found?
Sorry if I did not make it clear enough, mea culpa.

To visitors, in vein of the McCanns, it would look like an excellent place.  The reality, once one knows how Luz works, is it is cr*p.

It is on THE prime dog-running area in Luz.  Where many people take many dogs and exercise them off the leash.

It is on the easy route up/down the cliff to the trig point, used by casual amblers, mountain-bikers, and hardy Portuguese walkers in considerable numbers.

On my visit to the trig point I passed about a dozen people on top of the cliff.  And around the ruined house there was some German with 3 dogs running free who thought it was OK to let them play nip-the-ankles with me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on December 29, 2016, 05:07:40 PM
@Shining

Is dog-walking permitted on the beach in Luz?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 29, 2016, 05:25:04 PM
Quote from: misty on December 29, 2016, 05:07:40 PM
@Shining

Is dog-walking permitted on the beach in Luz?
Technically, no.  There are many signs up saying dogs are not permitted on the beach.

In reality, very early morning is the time when dog-walkers take their dogs to the beach.  The local council has rubbish men out soon after dawn, striving to clear the beach and the esplanade for the coming day.

And some of the dog-walkers take dogs to the beach.  Typically, each walker has 2+ dogs, the dogs are allowed to run free, they are normally quite small, and they are usually quite well behaved, choosing to play with other dogs while the respective owners ignore them and choose to chat with other dog owners.

You get the early morning amblers and joggers, and everything seems to work fine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on December 29, 2016, 05:50:13 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on December 29, 2016, 05:25:04 PM
Technically, no.  There are many signs up saying dogs are not permitted on the beach.

In reality, very early morning is the time when dog-walkers take their dogs to the beach.  The local council has rubbish men out soon after dawn, striving to clear the beach and the esplanade for the coming day.

And some of the dog-walkers take dogs to the beach.  Typically, each walker has 2+ dogs, the dogs are allowed to run free, they are normally quite small, and they are usually quite well behaved, choosing to play with other dogs while the respective owners ignore them and choose to chat with other dog owners.

You get the early morning amblers and joggers, and everything seems to work fine.

Thank you for that information.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 31, 2016, 11:03:36 AM
Happy New Year Rob

[?  And Carly and Davel ?]  Happy New Year
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on December 31, 2016, 11:27:50 AM
Quote from: sadie on December 31, 2016, 11:03:36 AM
Happy New Year Rob

[?  And Carly and Davel ?]  Happy New Year

Best wishes to all members for 2017. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 31, 2016, 11:33:36 AM
Quote from: John on December 31, 2016, 11:27:50 AM
Best wishes to all members for 2017.

I concur with that John.

Happy New Year to all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 31, 2016, 11:42:47 AM
Quote from: sadie on December 31, 2016, 11:03:36 AM
Happy New Year Rob

[?  And Carly and Davel ?]  Happy New Year

On TV, I just saw the fireworks going off in NZ to celebrate the New Year.  That is why I picked out the three peeps who might have already celebrated New Year.

My New Years greetings to others will come after midnight tonight.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 31, 2016, 11:46:54 AM
Quote from: sadie on December 31, 2016, 11:42:47 AM
On TV, I just saw the fireworks going off in NZ to celebrate the New Year.  That is why I picked out the three peeps who might have already celebrated New Year.

My New Years greetings to others will come after midnight tonight.
We had a bonfire big enough for the neighbours to call the fire brigade, two engines turned up, but it was safe enough and they let us carry on and we saw the New Year in.  Happy New Year everyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on January 01, 2017, 12:45:55 AM
A HAPPY NEW YEAR everyone

May 2017 be the year that Madeleine is brought home safely to her family



If there is a trafficking organisation involved may they be disbanded and suitably punished to keep all children safer.

May the man responsible be locked away, kept from hurting other children and families


All strength to your elbow Operation Grange   
Let 2017 be the year that it happens
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 01, 2017, 12:28:17 PM
Good post, Sadie.

A Happy 2017 to all the good folk on JF from me, too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on January 05, 2017, 05:08:52 PM
RE ‘THE HOUSE ON THE BLACK ROCK’; CORRECTIONS AND FEEDBACK

https://h42a.wordpress.com/2017/01/03/re-the-house-on-the-black-rock-corrections-and-feedback/

(https://h42a.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/daniekrugelblanket.jpg)

Blanket area 1

(https://i37.servimg.com/u/f37/19/28/81/23/daniek11.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on March 02, 2017, 07:55:08 PM
http://portugalresident.com/corrupt-cop-to-receive-%E2%82%AC400000-from-pj

There doesn't appear to be any question mark about the correctness of the conviction. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 02, 2017, 08:06:16 PM
Quote from: ferryman on March 02, 2017, 07:55:08 PM
http://portugalresident.com/corrupt-cop-to-receive-%E2%82%AC400000-from-pj

There doesn't appear to be any question mark about the correctness of the conviction.
Good ol' Portuguese justice... %&5%£
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 02, 2017, 08:06:50 PM
Quote from: ferryman on March 02, 2017, 07:55:08 PM
http://portugalresident.com/corrupt-cop-to-receive-%E2%82%AC400000-from-pj

There doesn't appear to be any question mark about the correctness of the conviction.

Crime certainly does pay well in Portugal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 02, 2017, 08:08:13 PM
Quote from: misty on March 02, 2017, 08:06:50 PM
Crime certainly does pay well in Portugal.
only if you are a member of the pj
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 08:27:45 PM
Quote from: ferryman on March 02, 2017, 07:55:08 PM
http://portugalresident.com/corrupt-cop-to-receive-%E2%82%AC400000-from-pj

There doesn't appear to be any question mark about the correctness of the conviction.

What does this have to do with the mccann case ?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 02, 2017, 08:32:42 PM
https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=pt&u=https://www.publico.pt/portugal/jornal/expresidente-de-celorico-da-beira-acusado-de-peculato-18462618&prev=search

He even became a mayor after leaving jail & committed a further crime.

Words really do fail.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 08:34:14 PM
Quote from: misty on March 02, 2017, 08:32:42 PM
https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=pt&u=https://www.publico.pt/portugal/jornal/expresidente-de-celorico-da-beira-acusado-de-peculato-18462618&prev=search

He even became a mayor after leaving jail & committed a further crime.

Words really do fail.

What does this have to do with the mccann case ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 02, 2017, 08:36:47 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 08:34:14 PM
What does this have to do with the mccann case ?

It's "wandering off topic";  in this instance about the lunatic decisions in Portugal's SC.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 08:42:17 PM
Quote from: misty on March 02, 2017, 08:36:47 PM
It's "wandering off topic";  in this instance about the lunatic decisions in Portugal's SC.

So nothing to do with thew McCann case, just a way of attacking the PJ.

In that case perhaps links to corrupt SY officers should be added. 8(0(*


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/revealed-corrupt-scotland-yard-officers-targeted-by-crime-bosses-a3477781.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 02, 2017, 08:45:36 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 08:42:17 PM
So nothing to do with thew McCann case, just a way of attacking the PJ.

In that case perhaps links to corrupt SY officers should be added. 8(0(*


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/revealed-corrupt-scotland-yard-officers-targeted-by-crime-bosses-a3477781.html

Don't you expect the court with the highest authority in the land to be able to serve & be seen to serve justice?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 08:47:13 PM
Quote from: misty on March 02, 2017, 08:45:36 PM
Don't you expect the court with the highest authority in the land to be able to serve & be seen to serve justice?

Corrupt police exist all around the world.

As to the Portuguese judicial system, your bias makes any comment by you, meaningless.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 02, 2017, 08:51:28 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 08:47:13 PM
Corrupt police exist all around the world.

As to the Portuguese judicial system, your bias makes any comment by you, meaningless.


Of course there are corrupt police everywhere. If you've read the article, you'll see that the SC have condoned the act of corruption by awarding compensation for the criminal's lost wages & given him the right to reinstatement. They have not rescinded the conviction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 08:55:13 PM
Quote from: misty on March 02, 2017, 08:51:28 PM

Of course there are corrupt police everywhere. If you've read the article, you'll see that the SC have condoned the act of corruption by awarding compensation for the criminal's lost wages & given him the right to reinstatement. They have not rescinded the conviction.

How many times has that happened in the UK ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 02, 2017, 08:57:21 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 08:55:13 PM
How many times has that happened in the UK ?

Don't know. Please provide cites for convicted UK police officers being awarded compensation & then reinstated without having been pardoned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 08:57:43 PM
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2015/03/the-shocking-truth-about-police-corruption-in-britain/

Imagine you lived in a country which last year had 3,000 allegations of police corruption. Worse, imagine that of these 3,000 allegations only half of them were properly investigated — because for police officers in this country, corruption was becoming routine. Imagine that the police increasingly used their powers to crack down not on criminals but on anyone who dared speak out against them. What sort of a country is this? Well, it’s Britain I’m afraid — where what was once the finest, most honest service in the world is in danger of becoming rotten.

Some of this was revealed in a little-noticed report by HM Inspectorate of Constabulary, which went on to deliver some even more shocking news. Nearly half of 17,200 officers and staff surveyed said that if they discovered corruption among their colleagues and chose to report it, they didn’t believe their evidence would be treated in confidence and would fear ‘adverse consequences’. This appalling lack of protection for whistle-blowers — often amounting to persecution — has become commonplace throughout the public services and creates a climate in which dishonesty and malpractice flourish.

ADVERTISING

inRead invented by Teads
The second report, compiled by the Serious Organised Crime Agency, bears this out. It says there has been a sharp increase over the past five years in the number of police officers dealing heroin, cocaine and amphetamines and an equally startling rise in the number of officers abusing their power ‘for sexual gratification’ — in other words bullying or cajoling suspects, witnesses and even victims into having sex with them.

Just this week, in fact, it emerged that the Met suspended 73 coppers, community support officers and other staff on corruption charges in the past two years. They cited drug crimes, bribery, theft, fraud, sexual misconduct and — everybody’s favourite — un-authorised disclosure of information. Eleven were convicted in court, but what happened to the others? The Met spokesman said rather blandly that some were allowed to resign or retire (presumably with full pension rights) and some were dismissed.



This rise in corruption and the apparent reluctance of police chiefs to fight it is a toxic combination. As ever, chief constables blame lack of resources for not being able to pursue inquiries into claims of malpractice. But what could be a greater priority than ensuring that their own officers are not breaking the law? These same police chiefs seem to find endless funds to pursue ancient sex abuse allegations, chase people who say unpleasant things on Twitter and prosecute journalists.

The vast majority of Britain’s police do a sometimes extremely arduous job with honesty, skill and good humour. But corruption left unchecked can infect entire forces. Anyone who doubts this need only study the lessons of the not-too-distant past.

Forty-five years ago the Times splashed across its front page a sensational story that led ultimately to what became known as ‘The Fall of Scotland Yard’. Under the headline ‘London policemen in bribe allegations’, it revealed a tale

 
The story, backed by taped conversations, bluntly accused three Yard detectives of planting evidence and taking back-handers from criminals ‘in exchange for dropping charges, being lenient with evidence in court, and for allowing a criminal to work unhindered’. If it had been just those three rogue officers, the story might quickly have been forgotten. But the tapes hinted at a far more endemic culture of graft and criminality.of corruption that came as a profound shock to a nation accustomed to seeing its constabulary through the prism of Dixon of Dock Green and Z Cars. A leading criminal lawyer of the time remarked: ‘It was like catching the Archbishop of Canterbury in bed with a prostitute.’Screen Shot 2015-03-06 at 10.57.47

Over the next few years, the Obscene Publications Squad was exposed as a tawdry protection racket extracting regular tithes from pornographers and Soho club-owners; drugs squad officers were shown to be running illegal cannabis deals; and half the Flying Squad was in the pay of criminals. These were not the clandestine activities of a few low-ranking detectives on the take. Whole squads were involved and the seniority of some of those taken down at the Old Bailey was shocking. In the words of trial judge Mr Justice Mars-Jones, it was ‘corruption on a scale that beggars description’.

The exposures of these corruption rackets had one thing in common — they were all revealed in the first place by the efforts of Britain’s free press. But these journalists could not have achieved all they did without the help of whistleblowers. Some of these were pornographers and criminals tired of being milked and intimidated, but others were rank and file police officers disgusted by the greed and criminality of so many of their peers.

The tragedy is that 40 years on, honest policemen in a similar position would fear arrest and imprisonment for even approaching a journalist without permission, despite the clear public interest in their doing so.

The police appear to be retreating into a bunker of secrecy and paranoia where all news must be ‘managed’ and freedom of information is considered a threat. On its website — alongside some vacuous rubbish about ‘declaring total war on crime’ — the Met claims to be committed to carrying out its duties with ‘humility’ and ‘transparency’.

Could anything be further from the truth? With its constant leak inquiries, harassment of whistleblowers and journalists, and scandalous misuse of terror legislation to tap the phone records and emails of ordinary citizens, the Met is probably more authoritarian and opaque than at any time in modern history. This culture comes directly from the top.

Being Commissioner of the Met has long been the most difficult job in policing, but there have been some good ones. Robert Mark, the Normandy veteran who cleaned out the Yard’s Augean stables in the 1970s; Ken Newman, a steely, austere man who served in Palestine during the emergency and headed the Royal Ulster Constabulary before re-organising the Met into a modern force; and the thoughtful Paul Condon, whose tenure came to a turbulent end with the Stephen Lawrence inquiry but who was arguably the cleverest of the lot. Each had his strengths and weaknesses but they all knew that a free, well-informed press was a cornerstone of policing in a democracy. Informal contact was generally encouraged, and in more than ten years as a crime correspondent in the 1980s and 1990s, I don’t recall a single leak inquiry or junior officer being disciplined for passing information to newspapers in good faith.

These men had respect for the office of constable — not least because they had all spent years on the front line before rising through the ranks. And they believed that part of their duty of accountability was to keep the public properly informed of what they were doing and why.

The present generation of police chiefs come from a very different breed. Fast-tracked and homogenised from an early stage, they can be difficult to tell apart. Often laden with degrees in law, business and ‘criminology’ accumulated during their police careers, they are more managers than police officers — managers of budgets, managers of public relations and, most importantly, managers of risk to their own careers. They speak in the obscure, vapid jargon of stakeholder engagement, paradigm shifts and proactivity. So much for transparency.

The present Met chief, Bernard Hogan-Howe, is of this ilk. He may develop into a great commissioner but the signs so far have not been promising. He has a pet theory which he calls ‘total policing’ (apparently based on the ‘total football’ played by Holland in the 1970s). It’s mainly harmless drivel about coppers having to play in all positions. But it contains an extremely sinister subtext. Explaining the philosophy a few years ago, he said it meant that ‘no legal tactic is out of bounds’ in the investigation of crime. Reasonable enough, one might think at first glance, but the problem with this catchy little mantra is that it takes no account of proportionality.

One of Hogan-Howe’s first moves after arriving at the Met was to use the Official Secrets Act to try to compel a Guardian journalist to reveal the source of a story about celebrity phone hacking. The Official Secrets Act is meant principally to be used to trap spies, traitors and those who threaten the defence of the realm — not reporters going about their legitimate business. This was a disproportionate and oppressive use of the law.

Similarly, legislation designed to combat terrorism and serious crime, such as the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, is used with alarming frequency by Hogan-Howe and other police chiefs to snoop on the internet and phone records of law-abiding citizens. This is the tactic of the police state. Not so much total policing as totalitarian policing.

Naturally, the ‘total policeman’ also favours more armed officers on routine duties, more Tasers and the mainland deployment of water cannon to disperse rioters, despite the fact that its use in Northern Ireland tended to inflame tensions rather than cool them. He also favours police officers being taken off the electoral roll and not wearing their uniforms on the way to and from duty shifts.The rise in Islamist terrorism has increased the threat level for soldiers and the police and sensible measures must be taken to combat that. But just as great a threat was posed over 30 years by the Provisional IRA and its offshoots without panic reactions. Hogan-Howe appears to be taking the police away from being a service and back towards being a coercive force. This is starkly demonstrated by the pursuit of journalists in the wake of the baleful Leveson inquiry. It has been driven to the point of absurdity, with up to 200 officers involved at one time and dozens of hapless hacks put before the courts, some on the flimsiest of charges.

All this has wider implications for the integrity of the police. One of the consequences of a heavy-handed police leadership stretching the law and using their power to bully and intimidate is that rank and file officers are encouraged to think they can do the same. Once ordinary officers start abusing power, a culture of semi-criminal behaviour becomes normal and whistleblowers are treated not as honourable but as traitors.

Judging from the recent reports, this may already be happening to an alarming degree around the country. The lessons of history suggest that if police chiefs are serious about neutralising the threat of corruption, they will need the help and support of the press. They will only get it if they start talking to journalists — instead of looking for reasons to arrest them.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on March 02, 2017, 09:01:43 PM
Quote
A SENIOR Portuguese detective who interviewed Kate McCann and accused her of being involved in the death of her daughter is facing trial for trying to torture a suspect into confessing.

Leaked court papers reveal that Tavares Almeida is one of three officers accused of beating Virgolino Borges, a railway worker, during nearly eight hours of interrogation.

According to witness testimony the officers bound him with handcuffs behind his back, beat his bare feet with a fence post until it splintered and punched him repeatedly in the stomach, kidneys and back.

Almeida is the second leading detective to be accused of torture. Chief Inspector Goncalo Amaral, the investigation's former co-ordinator, stepped down earlier this month amid separate allegations that he concealed evidence of the torture of a woman jailed for the murder of her daughter.

Almeida, who has led interviews and searches, is expected to face trial next year. He recently asked to be taken off the case and made an application for unpaid, extended leave.

Last week the appointment of a fresh police officer to head the inquiry raised Gerry and Kate McCann's hopes that it could be refocused on to the search for their daughter.

He is Paulo Rebelo, Portugal's second most senior police officer, who is conducting a full review of the case. This will include reinterviewing all the holidaymakers who were staying at the Ocean Club resort when Madeleine disappeared.

Last week he made clear all lines of inquiry were open including the possible abduction. Detectives are, however, still setting store by forensic science tests, which they claim suggest Madeleine died in the apartment.

There have been doubts about the reliability of the results. This week further analysis by the Forensic Science Service could prove critical in determining whether the McCanns and their friends face further questioning. Robert Murat, the only other suspect in the case, this weekend broke his silence to ask police to lift his status as a suspect. He said: "It's five months, my savings are gone, Mum's doing what she can. It's very, very difficult."

The disclosure of the legal action against Almeida further threatens the credibility of the Portuguese police. According to the court papers, dated October 4, Borges was interrogated by Almeida and his colleagues over a theft on March 3, 2000. Following searches at his home at 7pm and locker at work at 7.40pm, Borges was taken to the policia judiciaria station in Lisbon. During the questioning, which went on until 2.30am, Borges claims he suffered bruises to his throat, stomach, feet and a gash in his head. The testimony states: "He was handcuffed behind his back and grabbed by an officer in such a way so he couldn't double up and was punched various times in the stomach. Then they took off his shoes and with a fence post started beating his feet until the post began to splinter."

The injuries were confirmed by his wife the following night, who claimed she saw abrasions and bruises to his abdomen and back after he had been released without charge.

Almeida admits that he conducted the interrogation but says he cannot remember who was in charge and what happened.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/article73486.ece
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 09:03:22 PM
...............and for good measure



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2352108/Dock-pensions-rogue-police-MPs-officers-guilty-misconduct-lose-thousands.html


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33635962


http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/disgraced-fraud-cop-tanya-brookes-7797089

...and there is plenty more where that came from.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 02, 2017, 09:08:27 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 09:03:22 PM
...............and for good measure



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2352108/Dock-pensions-rogue-police-MPs-officers-guilty-misconduct-lose-thousands.html


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33635962


http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/disgraced-fraud-cop-tanya-brookes-7797089

...and there is plenty more where that came from.

One with compensation plus reinstatement, please. :)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on March 02, 2017, 09:10:15 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 09:03:22 PM
...............and for good measure



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2352108/Dock-pensions-rogue-police-MPs-officers-guilty-misconduct-lose-thousands.html


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33635962


http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/disgraced-fraud-cop-tanya-brookes-7797089

...and there is plenty more where that came from.

(Sic)

Under existing rules pensions can only be docked if an officer is found guilty of criminality.

It seems, in Portugal, if you are found guilty of criminality, you get your job back ....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 09:11:28 PM
Quote from: misty on March 02, 2017, 09:08:27 PM
One with compensation plus reinstatement, please. :)

Are you incapable of looking things up yourself ?

Just to help..............

Google Search...'corrupt police officers who have kept their pension, uk'

About 6,560,000 results (0.68 seconds)  8**8:/:

I will have another look tomorrow.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 09:12:53 PM
' Disgraced fraud cop Tanya Brookes to keep police pension

Brookes was found guilty of 25 counts of fraud in February and sentenced to 18 months in prison after her initial punishment of 30 months was cut '

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/disgraced-fraud-cop-tanya-brookes-7797089
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on March 02, 2017, 09:16:36 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-27830087

Quote
Det Supt Osman Khan said: "Following a recent conviction for drink driving, an officer was yesterday [Thursday] dismissed without notice for gross misconduct.
"West Yorkshire Police expects the highest standards of professionalism from all officers and staff and will take appropriate disciplinary action against anyone who fails to meet those standards."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 02, 2017, 09:17:34 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 09:11:28 PM
Are you incapable of looking things up yourself ?

Just to help..............

Google Search...'corrupt police officers who have kept their pension, uk'

About 6,560,000 results (0.68 seconds)  8**8:/:

I will have another look tomorrow.

I understand that legally they would be entitled to their pension as part of the job package, irrespective of the circumstances under which they left the force.
I'm looking for a UK officer who was convicted, got full back pay, & got reinstated despite being guilty. Have fun. :)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 09:25:19 PM
Quote from: misty on March 02, 2017, 09:17:34 PM
I understand that legally they would be entitled to their pension as part of the job package, irrespective of the circumstances under which they left the force.
I'm looking for a UK officer who was convicted, got full back pay, & got reinstated despite being guilty. Have fun. :)

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/cop-jailed-beating-wife-gets-2974444
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 02, 2017, 09:30:10 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 09:25:19 PM
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/cop-jailed-beating-wife-gets-2974444

No pay for 10 months whilst on remand.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 09:34:34 PM
Quote from: misty on March 02, 2017, 09:30:10 PM
No pay for 10 months whilst on remand.

Surely you are not defending this wife beater ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 02, 2017, 09:36:16 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 09:34:34 PM
Surely you are not defending this wife beater ?

Not at all. I'm just asking for all the criteria to be met in your cite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 09:42:26 PM
Quote from: misty on March 02, 2017, 09:36:16 PM
Not at all. I'm just asking for all the criteria to be met in your cite.

Why this desperate need.

I have shown that corruption exists in UK forces.

You are clearly desperate to denigrate the PJ at  every opportunity.


Now it would be interesting,  would it not , to compare the level of corruption in both forces. 8)-)))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 02, 2017, 09:57:49 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 02, 2017, 09:42:26 PM
Why this desperate need.

I have shown that corruption exists in UK forces.

You are clearly desperate to denigrate the PJ at  every opportunity.


Now it would be interesting,  would it not , to compare the level of corruption in both forces. 8)-)))

I realise I have made demands which defeat you.
How many of the UK corruption cases were appealed in the same manner as the Portuguese case i.e. decided by the SC after a 20 year period?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 02, 2017, 10:27:52 PM
This latest anomaly by the Portuguese SC has come fast on the heels of the daft McCann ruling & equally daft ruling over Cristovao's trial. Lawyers. mayors, ex-cops & judges are all part of a hugely corrupt system.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 02, 2017, 10:33:42 PM
in the last 10 years how many portuguese police have featured accused of torture on the Amnesty site and how many uk officers...its zero for uk
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 02, 2017, 10:58:23 PM
Quote from: misty on March 02, 2017, 09:36:16 PM
Not at all. I'm just asking for all the criteria to be met in your cite.

Do they have to speak Portuguese?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 02, 2017, 11:04:12 PM
Where it all began

In 1961, British lawyer Peter Benenson was outraged when two Portuguese students were jailed just for raising a toast to freedom. He wrote an article in The Observer newspaper and launched a campaign that provoked an incredible response. Reprinted in newspapers across the world, his call to action sparked the idea that people everywhere can unite in solidarity for justice and freedom.

This inspiring moment didn’t just give birth to an extraordinary movement, it was the start of extraordinary social change.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/who-we-are/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 03, 2017, 07:24:16 AM
Quote from: Brietta on March 02, 2017, 11:04:12 PM
Where it all began

In 1961, British lawyer Peter Benenson was outraged when two Portuguese students were jailed just for raising a toast to freedom. He wrote an article in The Observer newspaper and launched a campaign that provoked an incredible response. Reprinted in newspapers across the world, his call to action sparked the idea that people everywhere can unite in solidarity for justice and freedom.

This inspiring moment didn’t just give birth to an extraordinary movement, it was the start of extraordinary social change.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/who-we-are/

Why are you so intent on Portugal's record ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 03, 2017, 08:49:52 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 03, 2017, 07:24:16 AM
Why are you so intent on Portugal's record ?

Well, you know, if I'm honest, the country must be discredited. Portugal used to be seen as a sunny, safe, welcoming holiday destination for us Brits. Then a British child, left alone by her parents who were completely fooled by Portugal's presentation of itself as safe, disappeared.

Us Brits were horrified to learn that we can't expect to be able to leave our kids alone for just 30 minutes without them disappearing into thin air. We learned that Portugal has burglars, bogus charity collectors, people who stand in the streets in broad daylight spying on us and even child abusers! It has a border with Spain too, so these criminal types can escape easily! They can even reach Morocco!

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 03, 2017, 09:13:35 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 03, 2017, 08:49:52 AM
Well, you know, if I'm honest, the country must be discredited. Portugal used to be seen as a sunny, safe, welcoming holiday destination for us Brits. Then a British child, left alone by her parents who were completely fooled by Portugal's presentation of itself as safe, disappeared.

Us Brits were horrified to learn that we can't expect to be able to leave our kids alone for just 30 minutes without them disappearing into thin air. We learned that Portugal has burglars, bogus charity collectors, people who stand in the streets in broad daylight spying on us and even child abusers! It has a border with Spain too, so these criminal types can escape easily! They can even reach Morocco!
Which begs the question - why are so many of us (myself excluded) still going there? Must be the cheap wine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 03, 2017, 09:24:36 AM
Quote from: Alfie on March 03, 2017, 09:13:35 AM
Which begs the question - why are so many of us (myself excluded) still going there? Must be the cheap wine.

Given our alleged fondness for alcohol, quite possibly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 03, 2017, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 03, 2017, 09:24:36 AM
Given our alleged fondness for alcohol, quite possibly.
Speak for yourself.  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 03, 2017, 10:23:51 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 03, 2017, 07:24:16 AM
Why are you so intent on Portugal's record ?

Slartibartfast asked "Is that the report from an organisation founded by the McCann's lawyer?" in reference to Amnesty International.

The founding father of which was influenced by outrage at the injustice of two students being jailed for toasting freedom.

That is a matter of historical record.

It is worthy of note that the incident took place under the fascist regime of Salazar and has nothing to do with the present day democratic republic which is Portugal.

Amazing that members here have totally misinterpreted an historical event in Portuguese history and its relation to the founding of Amnesty International.


(http://terranovavoice.tamera.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/25-abril-cravo-290x300.jpg)
Dictatorship and Revolution in Portugal – History of a Dream

Lisbon, December 1960. In a bar two students clink their glasses to freedom – “A Liberdade!” They are spied on, denounced and finally sentenced to seven years in prison.

Under the Portuguese military dictatorship the word ‘freedom’ is prohibited.

It was reading about this incident in the London Times which moved the lawyer, Peter Benenson, to found Amnesty International.

It would still be thirteen years to the end of the dictatorship in Portugal.

On April 25, 1974 left-leaning troops move into Lisbon and within hours take over all key strategic places in the country.

The head of state and secret service give up after a short resistance. Forty-eight years of dictatorship are over. The dream of socialism awakens.

http://terranovavoice.tamera.org/2014/04/forty-years-after-the-carnation-revolution/1722
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on March 03, 2017, 10:24:10 AM
Quote from: Alfie on March 03, 2017, 09:13:35 AM
Which begs the question - why are so many of us (myself excluded) still going there? Must be the cheap wine.

That coupled with the less aggressive nature of the police than in other countries popular with the cheap booze honk-in-the-gutter Britset.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 03, 2017, 10:35:07 AM
Quote from: Alfie on March 03, 2017, 09:28:02 AM
Speak for yourself.  8(>((

It is well documented how some of the British abuse alcohol both in their own country and elsewhere.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on March 03, 2017, 10:39:02 AM
Quote from: Brietta on March 03, 2017, 10:23:51 AM
Slartibartfast asked "Is that the report from an organisation founded by the McCann's lawyer?" in reference to Amnesty International.

The founding father of which was influenced by outrage at the injustice of two students being jailed for toasting freedom.

That is a matter of historical record.

It is worthy of note that the incident took place under the fascist regime of Salazar and has nothing to do with the present day democratic republic which is Portugal.

Amazing that members here have totally misinterpreted an historical event in Portuguese history and its relation to the founding of Amnesty International.


(http://terranovavoice.tamera.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/25-abril-cravo-290x300.jpg)
Dictatorship and Revolution in Portugal – History of a Dream

Lisbon, December 1960. In a bar two students clink their glasses to freedom – “A Liberdade!” They are spied on, denounced and finally sentenced to seven years in prison.

Under the Portuguese military dictatorship the word ‘freedom’ is prohibited.

It was reading about this incident in the London Times which moved the lawyer, Peter Benenson, to found Amnesty International.

It would still be thirteen years to the end of the dictatorship in Portugal.

On April 25, 1974 left-leaning troops move into Lisbon and within hours take over all key strategic places in the country.

The head of state and secret service give up after a short resistance. Forty-eight years of dictatorship are over. The dream of socialism awakens.

http://terranovavoice.tamera.org/2014/04/forty-years-after-the-carnation-revolution/1722

According to those on here who consider themselves well informed, 40 odd years on Portugal remains a fascist state which is presented as fact in argument.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 03, 2017, 10:47:32 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on March 03, 2017, 10:39:02 AM
According to those on here who consider themselves well informed, 40 odd years on Portugal remains a fascist state which is presemtedas as fact in argument.

Indeed Alice.

Ferryman in particular, regularly refers to Portugal as being a dictatorship or Fascist state, when it is clearly a democracy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 03, 2017, 11:04:16 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on March 03, 2017, 10:39:02 AM
According to those on here who consider themselves well informed, 40 odd years on Portugal remains a fascist state which is presemtedas as fact in argument.

          To coin a phrase ... "They haven't gone away, you know".  Perhaps in Portugal, they are back?

(https://thinkingerrorfree.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/justice-is-blind-statue.jpg?w=240)

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 03, 2017, 11:50:14 AM
Quote from: Brietta on March 03, 2017, 11:04:16 AM
          To coin a phrase ... "They haven't gone away, you know".  Perhaps in Portugal, they are back?

(https://thinkingerrorfree.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/justice-is-blind-statue.jpg?w=240)

Need I remind you Brietta, there are extreme fascists in the UK, as there are in most countries, and in the last year or so, increasingly visible.

So again Brietta, why pick out Portugal ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 03, 2017, 01:28:03 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 03, 2017, 11:50:14 AM
Need I remind you Brietta, there are extreme fascists in the UK, as there are in most countries, and in the last year or so, increasingly visible.

So again Brietta, why pick out Portugal ?

Your prejudice blinded you to the actual content of my post on the achievement of Peter Benenson in his role as founder of Amnesty International. Which very possibly had a resonance relating to the Carnation Revolution in Portugal a little more than a decade later.

You are the one with the problem regarding Portugal.  Your haste to jump in to defend your erroneous interpretation of what I said and which exists only in your perception is evidence of that.

I did not "pick out Portugal" ... only your defensive attitude has.  You might think about that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 03, 2017, 01:42:00 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 03, 2017, 01:28:03 PM
Your prejudice blinded you to the actual content of my post on the achievement of Peter Benenson in his role as founder of Amnesty International. Which very possibly had a resonance relating to the Carnation Revolution in Portugal a little more than a decade later.

You are the one with the problem regarding Portugal.  Your haste to jump in to defend your erroneous interpretation of what I said and which exists only in your perception is evidence of that.

I did not "pick out Portugal" ... only your defensive attitude has.  You might think about that.

That tactic won't work we me Brietta.

What I pick out from you though is the questions you don't answer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 03, 2017, 01:45:17 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 03, 2017, 01:28:03 PM
Your prejudice blinded you to the actual content of my post on the achievement of Peter Benenson in his role as founder of Amnesty International. Which very possibly had a resonance relating to the Carnation Revolution in Portugal a little more than a decade later.

You are the one with the problem regarding Portugal.  Your haste to jump in to defend your erroneous interpretation of what I said and which exists only in your perception is evidence of that.

I did not "pick out Portugal" ... only your defensive attitude has.  You might think about that.

Also, would you care to explain why you and other supporters do not contradict those like ferryman, who continue to denigrate Portugal and call it either a Fascist state or Dictatorship ?

Will this be another question you don't answer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 03, 2017, 02:16:45 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 03, 2017, 01:45:17 PM
Also, would you care to explain why you and other supporters do not contradict those like ferryman, who continue to denigrate Portugal and call it either a Fascist state or Dictatorship ?

Will this be another question you don't answer.

Portugal cartainly has fascist remnants from its fascist past
Particularly in the police force
Those things don't disappear overnights
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 03, 2017, 02:22:21 PM
Quote from: davel on March 03, 2017, 02:16:45 PM
Portugal cartainly has fascist remnants from its fascist past
Particularly in the police force
Those things don't disappear overnights

There are fascists in the UK.

So your point is....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 03, 2017, 02:28:35 PM
Meanwhile the mighty MET who some hold in some esteem have in the not too recent past been described as institutionally racist,also having some of its officers as recently as the end of last year investigated for homophobia in regards  potentially "missed opportunities” to catch a prolific killer,I'm sure there are many more,I'm not saying any OG staff (if there are any left) are involved in this but they do belong to a force with this cloud over it.Then to top it all who is now the head of the MET,you couldn't make it up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 03, 2017, 02:42:30 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 03, 2017, 02:28:35 PM
Meanwhile the mighty MET who some hold in some esteem have in the not too recent past been described as institutionally racist,also having some of its officers as recently as the end of last year investigated for homophobia in regards  potentially "missed opportunities” to catch a prolific killer,I'm sure there are many more,I'm not saying any OG staff (if there are any left) are involved in this but they do belong to a force with this cloud over it.Then to top it all who is now the head of the MET,you couldn't make it up.

Is it your view that any police officer involved in a failed operation should never be allowed career progression?
Had CdM been the actual target, the force would have been applauded.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 03, 2017, 02:48:29 PM
Quote from: ferryman on March 03, 2017, 01:59:07 PM
A good start in "contradicting" anything or anyone is to contradict what they actually said, not what you think they said.

What I have said (and what I repeat, now) is that appeal-court ruling, upholding Amaral's "right" to lie, misrepresent and traduce, without let or hindrance, and with intent to personally profit from those lies, is fascist.  I said that for the excellent reason that it is.
My understanding of fascism is that one of the pillars is suppression of free speech.

Brietta's example appears to support that.

The McCanns attempted to suppress Amaral's right to free speech.  Does that make their action fascist?

The ruling no doubt will have to be posted ad infinitum.  The McCanns pushing abduction opened the door for others to promote alternatives.  And Amaral's alternative was found to be largely based on the interim report in the PJ Files.

You obviously don't like the outcome.  Fair enough as everyone is entitled to their opinion.

But to attempt to say the McCanns should be able to suppress free speech whilst saying a judgement preventing such suppression is fascist is an oxymoron.

The McCanns have not emerged from this looking intelligent, IMO. 

They had access to the PJ Files and could have countered with the archiving report, the conclusion that Gerry has an alibi re Smithman, the lack of reliance placed in the dogs, the actual DNA evidence etc.

They could have shredded Amaral's book in the Portuguese media at basically no cost.

I don't know what sort of Team McCann summit may have been held to determine that the course should be litigation rather than the media so I can't evaluate who proffered which view.  The end result is a disaster in my opinion.

The interesting thing is that the McCanns right to free speech within Portugal appears not to have been altered the appeal judgement or the SC judgement.

Where's a good PR man when you need one most?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 03, 2017, 02:54:51 PM
Quote from: misty on March 03, 2017, 02:42:30 PM
Is it your view that any police officer involved in a failed operation should never be allowed career progression?
Had CdM been the actual target, the force would have been applauded.

CdM was the actual target he was followed to the underground so the rest  would depend on a point of view if its regarded that the shooting of an innocent man was a successful operation,or whether the shooting of the innocent man was a complete cock up with a promotion to the top job a reward some years later.One wonder's how the world views that,much the same as some view the Portuguese no doubt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 03, 2017, 02:55:25 PM
Quote from: ferryman on March 03, 2017, 01:59:07 PM
A good start in "contradicting" anything or anyone is to contradict what they actually said, not what you think they said.

What I have said (and what I repeat, now) is that appeal-court ruling, upholding Amaral's "right" to lie, misrepresent and traduce, without let or hindrance, and with intent to personally profit from those lies, is fascist.  I said that for the excellent reason that it is.

What both the first judge and the Appeal Court judges actually said was that Amaral's book reached the same conclusions as, at a certain point in time,  the investigation reached.

Where they differed was whether, due to his position as a retired policeman, he wasn't allowed to discuss the case.
The first judge said he wasn't, the Appeal judges said he was.

I fail to understand what feature of fascism this represents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 03, 2017, 03:01:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 03, 2017, 10:23:51 AM
Slartibartfast asked "Is that the report from an organisation founded by the McCann's lawyer?" in reference to Amnesty International.

The founding father of which was influenced by outrage at the injustice of two students being jailed for toasting freedom.

That is a matter of historical record.

It is worthy of note that the incident took place under the fascist regime of Salazar and has nothing to do with the present day democratic republic which is Portugal.

Amazing that members here have totally misinterpreted an historical event in Portuguese history and its relation to the founding of Amnesty International.


(http://terranovavoice.tamera.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/25-abril-cravo-290x300.jpg)
Dictatorship and Revolution in Portugal – History of a Dream

Lisbon, December 1960. In a bar two students clink their glasses to freedom – “A Liberdade!” They are spied on, denounced and finally sentenced to seven years in prison.

Under the Portuguese military dictatorship the word ‘freedom’ is prohibited.

It was reading about this incident in the London Times which moved the lawyer, Peter Benenson, to found Amnesty International.

It would still be thirteen years to the end of the dictatorship in Portugal.

On April 25, 1974 left-leaning troops move into Lisbon and within hours take over all key strategic places in the country.

The head of state and secret service give up after a short resistance. Forty-eight years of dictatorship are over. The dream of socialism awakens.

http://terranovavoice.tamera.org/2014/04/forty-years-after-the-carnation-revolution/1722

You miss the point, the report sent to AI about Amaral came from an organisation setup by Correia
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 03, 2017, 03:39:41 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 03, 2017, 02:48:29 PM
My understanding of fascism is that one of the pillars is suppression of free speech.

Brietta's example appears to support that.

The McCanns attempted to suppress Amaral's right to free speech.  Does that make their action fascist?

The ruling no doubt will have to be posted ad infinitum.  The McCanns pushing abduction opened the door for others to promote alternatives.  And Amaral's alternative was found to be largely based on the interim report in the PJ Files.

You obviously don't like the outcome.  Fair enough as everyone is entitled to their opinion.

But to attempt to say the McCanns should be able to suppress free speech whilst saying a judgement preventing such suppression is fascist is an oxymoron.

The McCanns have not emerged from this looking intelligent, IMO. 

They had access to the PJ Files and could have countered with the archiving report, the conclusion that Gerry has an alibi re Smithman, the lack of reliance placed in the dogs, the actual DNA evidence etc.

They could have shredded Amaral's book in the Portuguese media at basically no cost.

I don't know what sort of Team McCann summit may have been held to determine that the course should be litigation rather than the media so I can't evaluate who proffered which view.  The end result is a disaster in my opinion.

The interesting thing is that the McCanns right to free speech within Portugal appears not to have been altered the appeal judgement or the SC judgement.

Where's a good PR man when you need one most?

Enshrined within the same article of International Law which protects Amaral's right to freedom of speech the McCann's right not to be defamed is also protected.

In other words ... with rights, comes responsibilities.

Amaral abused the right to the freedom of speech by doing very much as you are when denigrating the McCann's right to protect their good name.

Quote

http://fra.europa.eu/en/charterpedia/article/11-freedom-expression-and-information
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 03, 2017, 03:44:43 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 03, 2017, 03:39:41 PM
Enshrined within the same article of International Law which protects Amaral's right to freedom of speech the McCann's right not to be defamed is also protected.

In other words ... with rights, comes responsibilities.

Amaral abused the right to the freedom of speech by doing very much as you are when denigrating the McCann's right to protect their good name.

Quote
  • "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression.
    This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
    This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
  • The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary."

http://fra.europa.eu/en/charterpedia/article/11-freedom-expression-and-information


...And what Brietta of the rights of the Mccann's children, and those of the others in their group, who were left to their own devices and vulnerable ???
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 03, 2017, 03:46:11 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 03, 2017, 03:39:41 PM
Enshrined within the same article of International Law which protects Amaral's right to freedom of speech the McCann's right not to be defamed is also protected.

In other words ... with rights, comes responsibilities.

Amaral abused the right to the freedom of speech by doing very much as you are when denigrating the McCann's right to protect their good name.

Quote
  • "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression.
    This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
    This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
  • The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary."

http://fra.europa.eu/en/charterpedia/article/11-freedom-expression-and-information
I haven't denigrated anyone.

I have given my opinion that this choice was a poor choice, and made it clear such is my opinion, with reasoning why I arrived at that opinion.

This is my right under freedom of speech on the forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 03, 2017, 03:57:16 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 03, 2017, 03:01:46 PM
You miss the point, the report sent to AA about Amaral came from an organisation setup by Correia

Davel posted
Amnesty International
Several pj officers including amaral featured
No uk officer
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg387038#msg387038

To which you responded
Is that the report from an organisation founded by the McCann's lawyer?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg387040#msg387040

I have missed no point.  The evidence seems to indicate that you have.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 03, 2017, 04:00:42 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 03, 2017, 03:46:11 PM
I haven't denigrated anyone.

I have given my opinion that this choice was a poor choice, and made it clear such is my opinion, with reasoning why I arrived at that opinion.

This is my right under freedom of speech on the forum.

Just as it is my right to form an opinion as to the wording and tone of what you deign to post. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 03, 2017, 04:04:37 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 03, 2017, 02:48:29 PM
My understanding of fascism is that one of the pillars is suppression of free speech.

Brietta's example appears to support that.

The McCanns attempted to suppress Amaral's right to free speech.  Does that make their action fascist?

The ruling no doubt will have to be posted ad infinitum.  The McCanns pushing abduction opened the door for others to promote alternatives.  And Amaral's alternative was found to be largely based on the interim report in the PJ Files.

You obviously don't like the outcome.  Fair enough as everyone is entitled to their opinion.

But to attempt to say the McCanns should be able to suppress free speech whilst saying a judgement preventing such suppression is fascist is an oxymoron.

The McCanns have not emerged from this looking intelligent, IMO. 

They had access to the PJ Files and could have countered with the archiving report, the conclusion that Gerry has an alibi re Smithman, the lack of reliance placed in the dogs, the actual DNA evidence etc.

They could have shredded Amaral's book in the Portuguese media at basically no cost.

I don't know what sort of Team McCann summit may have been held to determine that the course should be litigation rather than the media so I can't evaluate who proffered which view.  The end result is a disaster in my opinion.

The interesting thing is that the McCanns right to free speech within Portugal appears not to have been altered the appeal judgement or the SC judgement.

Where's a good PR man when you need one most?

the mccanns are NOT trying to supress free speech....that is absolute rubbish. They are seeking to prevent themselves being the victims of defamation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 03, 2017, 04:07:10 PM
Quote from: davel on March 03, 2017, 04:04:37 PM
the mccanns are NOT trying to supress free speech....that is absolute rubbish. They are seeking to prevent themselves being the victims of defamation

They seem to spend more time in litigation than actually 'searching' for their daughter.

All they have achieved is a wider audience for Amaral and a growing dislike of them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 03, 2017, 04:13:31 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 03, 2017, 02:48:29 PM
My understanding of fascism is that one of the pillars is suppression of free speech.

Brietta's example appears to support that.

The McCanns attempted to suppress Amaral's right to free speech.  Does that make their action fascist?

The ruling no doubt will have to be posted ad infinitum.  The McCanns pushing abduction opened the door for others to promote alternatives.  And Amaral's alternative was found to be largely based on the interim report in the PJ Files.

You obviously don't like the outcome.  Fair enough as everyone is entitled to their opinion.

But to attempt to say the McCanns should be able to suppress free speech whilst saying a judgement preventing such suppression is fascist is an oxymoron.

The McCanns have not emerged from this looking intelligent, IMO. 

They had access to the PJ Files and could have countered with the archiving report, the conclusion that Gerry has an alibi re Smithman, the lack of reliance placed in the dogs, the actual DNA evidence etc.

They could have shredded Amaral's book in the Portuguese media at basically no cost.

I don't know what sort of Team McCann summit may have been held to determine that the course should be litigation rather than the media so I can't evaluate who proffered which view.  The end result is a disaster in my opinion.

The interesting thing is that the McCanns right to free speech within Portugal appears not to have been altered the appeal judgement or the SC judgement.

Where's a good PR man when you need one most?


this post does make you look intelligent.....now lets see how much you respect free speech
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 03, 2017, 04:16:35 PM
Quote from: davel on March 03, 2017, 04:13:31 PM

this post does make you look intelligent.....now lets see how much you respect free speech
Does it?  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 03, 2017, 04:23:34 PM
Quote from: davel on March 03, 2017, 04:13:31 PM

this post does make you look intelligent.....now lets see how much you respect free speech
Thank you for your compliment.  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 03, 2017, 04:56:08 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 03, 2017, 04:23:34 PM
Thank you for your compliment.  8((()*/
A compliment and a challenge.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 03, 2017, 05:34:14 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 03, 2017, 04:56:08 PM
A compliment and a challenge.
Hardly.

NB The others mods are fully aware that I have zero issue with them moderating my posts.  Perhaps a kindly mod will step to Davel-s rescue.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 03, 2017, 06:32:52 PM
Quote from: davel on March 03, 2017, 04:04:37 PM
the mccanns are NOT trying to supress free speech....that is absolute rubbish. They are seeking to prevent themselves being the victims of defamation

I think that statement should be in the past, not present tense. Their very expensive lesson in Portuguese law is over imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 04, 2017, 06:21:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 03, 2017, 06:32:52 PM
I think that statement should be in the past, not present tense. Their very expensive lesson in Portuguese law is over imo.
I hope you are wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 04, 2017, 09:51:45 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 04, 2017, 06:21:55 AM
I hope you are wrong.

I think the opinion that it is over is premature and fails to look at the bigger picture represented in this judgement and the opinions expressed by the judges in support of it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 04, 2017, 10:01:44 AM
Quote from: Brietta on March 04, 2017, 09:51:45 AM
I think the opinion that it is over is premature and fails to look at the bigger picture represented in this judgement and the opinions expressed by the judges in support of it.

All that is apparent, is that the Supreme Court made their decision based on Portuguese Law.

The McCann now owe money.

They should pay up.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 04, 2017, 11:12:02 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 04, 2017, 10:01:44 AM
All that is apparent, is that the Supreme Court made their decision based on Portuguese Law.

The McCann now owe money.

They should pay up.
I read parts of the SC report again and they make an error in saying the right of expression is equal to the right for honour.  Expression forbids dishonour so one is paramount over the other.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 04, 2017, 11:19:21 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 04, 2017, 11:12:02 AM
I read parts of the SC report again and they make an error in saying the right of expression is equal to the right for honour.  Expression forbids dishonour so one is paramount over the other.

So what exactly is your expertise in Portuguese Law ?

Bearing in mind of course, your distinct bias in supporting the McCann's.

The McCann's have been through the Portuguese legal system and failed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 04, 2017, 04:39:42 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 04, 2017, 11:19:21 AM
So what exactly is your expertise in Portuguese Law ?

Bearing in mind of course, your distinct bias in supporting the McCann's.

The McCann's have been through the Portuguese legal system and failed.
It is the otherway around.  The Portuguese legal system has failed the McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 04, 2017, 05:00:02 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 04, 2017, 04:39:42 PM
It is the otherway around.  The Portuguese legal system has failed the McCanns.

Or did their legal team fail them,by either launching the action or failing to obviously produce a strong enough argument.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 04, 2017, 05:06:56 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 04, 2017, 05:00:02 PM
Or did their legal team fail them,by either launching the action or failing to obviously produce a strong enough argument.
Their lawyer in Portugal is part of the Portuguese legal system too.  If their team had not prepared a proper argument you would need to ask why.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on March 04, 2017, 05:07:39 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 04, 2017, 04:39:42 PM
It is the otherway around.  The Portuguese legal system has failed the McCanns.

Perhaps you would like to explain to us how that is so, giving the relevant clauses and case law in Portuguese law which substantiates your argument?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on March 04, 2017, 05:12:28 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 04, 2017, 05:00:02 PM
Or did their legal team fail them,by either launching the action or failing to obviously produce a strong enough argument.

Or did their legal advisers say words to the effect of: "Look the claim is flaky at best but if you wish to pursue it we will give it our best endeavours, ............"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 04, 2017, 05:16:46 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on March 04, 2017, 05:12:28 PM
Or did their legal advisers say words to the effect of: "Look the claim is flaky at best but if you wish to pursue it we will give it our best endeavours, ............"
The lawyer is on record expressing concern over her ability to act for the McCanns.  That in itself is a miscarriage of justice if the Lawyers are under pressure from the establishment.  I'm presuming you guys know of the particular YT interview with Isabel Duartes (I think her name is) expressing this concern.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on March 04, 2017, 10:37:29 PM
Quote from: davel on March 04, 2017, 09:56:20 PM
amaral has been able to defame them with a book that contains lies

Not according to Portuguese Law apparently.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 04, 2017, 10:52:21 PM
Quote from: John on March 04, 2017, 10:37:29 PM
Not according to Portuguese Law apparently.

The court hasn't ruled on the truth of his lies
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on March 04, 2017, 11:37:28 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 03, 2017, 02:48:29 PM
My understanding of fascism is that one of the pillars is suppression of free speech.

Brietta's example appears to support that.

The McCanns attempted to suppress Amaral's right to free speech.  Does that make their action fascist?

The ruling no doubt will have to be posted ad infinitum.  The McCanns pushing abduction opened the door for others to promote alternatives.  And Amaral's alternative was found to be largely based on the interim report in the PJ Files.

You obviously don't like the outcome.  Fair enough as everyone is entitled to their opinion.

But to attempt to say the McCanns should be able to suppress free speech whilst saying a judgement preventing such suppression is fascist is an oxymoron.

The McCanns have not emerged from this looking intelligent, IMO. 

They had access to the PJ Files and could have countered with the archiving report, the conclusion that Gerry has an alibi re Smithman, the lack of reliance placed in the dogs, the actual DNA evidence etc.

They could have shredded Amaral's book in the Portuguese media at basically no cost.

I don't know what sort of Team McCann summit may have been held to determine that the course should be litigation rather than the media so I can't evaluate who proffered which view.  The end result is a disaster in my opinion.

The interesting thing is that the McCanns right to free speech within Portugal appears not to have been altered the appeal judgement or the SC judgement.

Where's a good PR man when you need one most?

Free speech needs to be carefully defined, though, doesn't it?

Free speech does not mean, literally, 'freedom' to say anything you want, without let or hindrance.

The Portuguese constitution (very properly!) does not guarantee that, because enshrined into a part of it Joanna Morais never quotes is a clause that upholds the right of citizens and (by extension) visitors to a good name. 

Clearly, then, the Portuguese constitution does not uphold the 'right' of anyone to say anything they want.

And it is scarcely the hallmark of civilised laws of any country, including countries that uphold  the right of free speech, that anyone can say anything they want without let or hindrance, and without regard to accuracy of statements made or damage done to the reputations of others in those statements.

Indeed, were that the default position in Portugal, the first-instance judge would never have reached the judgement she did, and Isabel Durate should, surely, have been (metaphorically) shot for ever entertaining the idea that Kate and Gerry should pursue a case against Amaral. 

Portugal (at least in theory); certainly by its constitution, and certainly by the first-instance ruling in the libel trial, upholds the right of citizens and (by extension) visitors to a good name.

Yet the second-instance judgement, and the judgement following it, uphold Amaral's 'right' to publish clear and demonstrable lies that lower the reputations of Kate and Gerry, and harm the prospects, either of finding Madeleine alive, or of convicting the author(s) of crimes against her, by declaring Madeleine definitely dead, and of accusing her parents of being the authors of her 'death' and of a monstrous cover-up and deceit to follow.

None of that is 'free speech' as understood in a healthy democracy; its propagation, more in line with that that might be expected of a state with fascist principles at its core.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 12:14:52 AM
Quote from: ferryman on March 04, 2017, 11:37:28 PM
Free speech needs to be carefully defined, though, doesn't it?

Free speech does not mean, literally, 'freedom' to say anything you want, without let or hindrance.

The Portuguese constitution (very properly!) does not guarantee that, because enshrined into a part of it Joanna Morais never quotes is a clause that upholds the right of citizens and (by extension) visitors to a good name. 

Clearly, then, the Portuguese constitution does not uphold the 'right' of anyone to say anything they want.

And it is scarcely the hallmark of civilised laws of any country, including countries that uphold  the right of free speech, that anyone can say anything they want without let or hindrance, and without regard to accuracy of statements made or damage done to the reputations of others in those statements.

Indeed, were that the default position in Portugal, the first-instance judge would never have reached the judgement she did, and Isabel Durate should, surely, have been (metaphorically) shot for ever entertaining the idea that Kate and Gerry should pursue a case against Amaral. 

Portugal (at least in theory); certainly by its constitution, and certainly by the first-instance ruling in the libel trial, upholds the right of citizens and (by extension) visitors to a good name.

Yet the second-instance judgement, and the judgement following it, uphold Amaral's 'right' to publish clear and demonstrable lies that lower the reputations of Kate and Gerry, and harm the prospects, either of finding Madeleine alive, or of convicting the author(s) of crimes against her, by declaring Madeleine definitely dead, and of accusing her parents of being the authors of her 'death' and of a monstrous cover-up and deceit to follow.

None of that is 'free speech' as understood in a healthy democracy; its propagation, more in line with that that might be expected of a state with fascist principles at its core.
Please, not the old fascism retort again.

Free speech (Amaral) v right to a good name (McCanns).

Free speech won.

Non-fascist.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on March 05, 2017, 12:22:06 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 12:14:52 AM
Please, not the old fascism retort again.

Free speech (Amaral) v right to a good name (McCanns).

Free speech won.

Non-fascist.

You need to re-read my post.

Free speech is not the same as 'freedom' (to say anything you want).

Fascism would no doubt indulge, even encourage, the hypocrisy of allowing lies and suppressing truth in speech (far from free).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 05, 2017, 12:22:28 AM
More than an element of fascism in these circumstances.

http://portugalresident.com/fury-and-despair-as-police-descend-on-culatra-island-to-ensure-compulsory-seizure-of-35-properties

Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on February 22, 2017
Fury and despair as police descend on Culatra island to ensure compulsory seizure of 35 properties

Chaotic scenes were playing out on Culatra island this morning, when government agency Polis Litoral moved forwards with the compulsory seizure of 35 properties on Farol nucleus, all earmarked for demolition.

Islanders refused point blank to hand over keys to homes as tense throngs chanted under the glare of TV cameras.

The worst of the morning was the suffocating police presence which island spokesman Feliciano Júlio said the embattled community had “never expected”.

With Polis agents flanked by maritme police as they moved slowly from property to property, daubing blue numbers on walls destined to be bulldozed, the islanders’ campaigning Facebook page alluded to the Nazi daubing of the homes of Jews in the run up to the Second World War.

One thing is certain: Wednesday’s compulsory seizure flew in the face of various court bids submitted by islanders the evening before, and could still be overturned.

This is what Feliciano Júlio, leader of Farol’s residents’ association is hoping.

He told reporters caught up in the jostling crowd and blaring klaxons, “we will fight this to the very last minute”.

Talking for one furious elderly man who said he wouldn’t move a stick of furniture out of his house, or hand over the keys, Júlio reiterated the government’s mistake in trying to wrestle properties from people who have nowhere else to go.

“We are still waiting for a renegotiation with the minister (of the environment)”, he stressed, as noise levels and rising emotions left reporters struggling to hear his words.
In fact, Júlio’s hope is that the tortuous ‘tomada de posse’ (compulsory seizure) which is expected to take two days, will be called off as a result of all the inconsistencies.

In parliament, MPs including Left Bloc firebrand Catarina Martins, and PCP leader Jerónimo de Sousa, are adamant that the so-called “renaturalisation process of Ria Formosa” - pushed through by Sociedade Polis in spite of protests - has been designed to promote private interests.

Visiting the island three days before Wednesday’s confusion, Catarina Martins said: “The data the government has supporting this plan cannot be trusted”, adding that the criteria put forward by Polis is also “far from reliable”.

Elsewhere, Algarve MPs Paulo Sá (PCP) and João Vasconcelos (BE) have been vociferous in their support for fishing folk forced out of their comfort-zone to try and take on an all-powerful government.

As campaigners always say, "hope is the last thing to die".

This has been an exhausting struggle - and as Catarina Martins pointed out starkly on Sunday: “Once a house has been demolished, there is nothing to recover the loss.

““Some of these houses are the only home of families who have no other alternative”, she said. “Nobody has spoken to these people, and no one here knows the criteria that determines these houses have to be demolished”, as official reasons have notoriously flip-flapped to suit the central agenda.

===================================================================


http://portugalresident.com/un-special-rapporteur-slates-portugal%E2%80%99s-golden-visa-programme-compulsory-home-seizures-and-%E2%80%9Cgross

Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on March 03, 2017
UN special rapporteur slates Portugal’s Golden Visa programme, compulsory home seizures and “gross violations of human rights”

Seen from the outside, Portugal has come in for quite a pasting from UN special rapporteur Leilani Farha who came here in December to assess how the financial crisis has affected housing.

One of the main focuses of her criticism was the much-lauded Golden Visa programme - the scheme that has seen millions pouring into the country in the form of ‘foreign investment’.

Farha’s frustration is that the investment didn’t go anywhere towards improving the lot of the country’s most underprivileged - not that this was its aim (far from it).

But the fact that it simply afforded wealthy foreigners fast-track visas (and estate agents a healthy turnaround) has not been the only limit of the scheme, she claims.

The Golden Visa ‘fad’ has driven up housing prices, “exacerbating the problems for middle and low income families”.

It has also taken properties from the rental market - again leaving everyday working folk the worse off in the equation.

“Despite the enormous injection of capital” (calculated to be €2.37 billion), the Golden Visa scheme did not result in the creation of jobs and “not even a small part of the gains were applied to the development of accessible habitation”, Farha explained in the report now in the hands of the Council for Human Rights.

As for the scheme’s effect on property prices, these increased in Lisbon by 5.2%, in Porto by 7.2% and in Amadora by 9.4%.

Farha was only in the country for a little over a week, so it is unlikely she made it down to the Algarve to see how the scheme affected prices there.

But the gist of her research was that Golden Visas have only benefitted a section of society that was already ‘perfectly well off thank you’ (other than perhaps it didn’t have free run of Schengen Space).

But that is not the only area of Portuguese policy that has worried the human rights advocate.

But that is not the only area of Portuguese policy that has worried the human rights advocate.

Farha, also executive director of NGO “Canada without Poverty”, is concerned by what she calls the “turistification” of large tracts of Lisbon and Porto so that they are rapidly becoming “enclaves for the rich and foreigners”.

Her trip to Portugal brought her face-to-face too with the government’s policy of evicting poor communities from what it deems ‘illegal dwellings’ - more usually communities in which the people have lived for generations.

Very much like what happening in the Algarve’s Ria Formosa, Farha was “confronted” writes ionline “with the evictions of the May 6 neighbourhood in Amadora” which she dubbed a “gross violation of international human rights legislation”.

In Loures, on the other side of the Tejo, she reports that she came upon conditions in the Torre ‘bairro’ (social housing project) that she “never expected to see in a developed country”.

“People living in the middle of rubbish, without electricity” were just some of the problems in an area just kilometres away from the capital.

Farha’s account will now be used to try and forge change in Portugal, but to what degree remains uncertain.

Ionline writes that it contacted the ministry of the environment for a response but did not get one in time for its publication deadline.

Elsewhere, MEP José Inácio told the Resident in a conversation about evictions in Ria Formosa that “the current environment minister hasn’t got a clue what he is doing” - a criticism that islanders wholeheartedly endorse after a week in which government promises to hear their points of view were railroaded with the help of battalions of police (click here).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 12:29:36 AM
Quote from: ferryman on March 05, 2017, 12:22:06 AM
You need to re-read my post.

Free speech is not the same as 'freedom' (to say anything you want).

Fascism would no doubt indulge, even encourage, the hypocrisy of allowing lies and suppressing truth in speech (far from free).
What suppressed speech?  The McCanns were, and are, entitled to freedom of speech.  How fascist is that, not.

They can state abduction until the death of time.

They cannot suppress the right of others to freedom of speech.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 05, 2017, 12:37:36 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 12:29:36 AM
What suppressed speech?  The McCanns were, and are, entitled to freedom of speech.  How fascist is that, not.

They can state abduction until the death of time.

They cannot suppress the right of others to freedom of speech.

The McCanns' right to free speech in Portugal was suppressed  by the laws of judicial secrecy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 05, 2017, 12:38:36 AM
Quote from: ferryman on March 05, 2017, 12:22:06 AM
You need to re-read my post.

Free speech is not the same as 'freedom' (to say anything you want).

Fascism would no doubt indulge, even encourage, the hypocrisy of allowing lies and suppressing truth in speech (far from free).

I believe fascists have in the past shown an expertise in organisation and the dissemination of propaganda.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 12:46:09 AM
Quote from: misty on March 05, 2017, 12:22:28 AM
More than an element of fascism in these circumstances.

http://portugalresident.com/fury-and-despair-as-police-descend-on-culatra-island-to-ensure-compulsory-seizure-of-35-properties

Which element of fascism?

We are moving to a property which has a rear garden (aka meadow) which is designated as both agricultural and environmental.  This means we can do sod all with it except farm it.  The previous owner had built various structures on it which violated these regulations.  The cãmara insisted these were ripped out before the house was sold to us.

We now have no pig pens.  We now have no 'orrible swimming pool.  Much else has gone due to the law.

Should I be calling the câmara fascist for enforcing the regulations?

I am not going to engage in a debate on properties built in Rio Formosa.  That is a designated natural park.  Go for the building regs on such on your own.

If you think this decision is fascist, you need to prove it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 05, 2017, 12:58:02 AM
Quote from: misty on March 05, 2017, 12:37:36 AM
The McCanns' right to free speech in Portugal was suppressed  by the laws of judicial secrecy.

The laws of judicial secrecy and the trashing of the McCann's reputation in the Portuguese press ran contemporaneously. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 05, 2017, 01:09:18 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 12:46:09 AM
Which element of fascism?

We are moving to a property which has a rear garden (aka meadow) which is designated as both agricultural and environmental.  This means we can do sod all with it except farm it.  The previous owner had built various structures on it which violated these regulations.  The cãmara insisted these were ripped out before the house was sold to us.

We now have no pig pens.  We now have no 'orrible swimming pool.  Much else has gone due to the law.

Should I be calling the câmara fascist for enforcing the regulations?

I am not going to engage in a debate on properties built in Rio Formosa.  That is a designated natural park.  Go for the building regs on such on your own.

If you think this decision is fascist, you need to prove it.

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/3a995f54975189c4adc37f847234b7dd3971f99b/0_0_4896_3264/master/4896.jpg?w=300&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=9c6c02784df51d04af8ebee8b51fbf2b)
Vanessa Morgado and her father are among the activists fighting for the islanders against Polis. For four generations they have been linked to Farol. Vanessa’s grandfather lived here, her father lives here, she was born and raised here and her daughter has strong ties to the island.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 01:13:40 AM
Quote from: Brietta on March 05, 2017, 01:09:18 AM
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/3a995f54975189c4adc37f847234b7dd3971f99b/0_0_4896_3264/master/4896.jpg?w=300&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=9c6c02784df51d04af8ebee8b51fbf2b)
Vanessa Morgado and her father are among the activists fighting for the islanders against Polis. For four generations they have been linked to Farol. Vanessa’s grandfather lived here, her father lives here, she was born and raised here and her daughter has strong ties to the island.
Fascist?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 05, 2017, 01:14:43 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 12:46:09 AM
Which element of fascism?

We are moving to a property which has a rear garden (aka meadow) which is designated as both agricultural and environmental.  This means we can do sod all with it except farm it.  The previous owner had built various structures on it which violated these regulations.  The cãmara insisted these were ripped out before the house was sold to us.

We now have no pig pens.  We now have no 'orrible swimming pool.  Much else has gone due to the law.

Should I be calling the câmara fascist for enforcing the regulations?

I am not going to engage in a debate on properties built in Rio Formosa.  That is a designated natural park.  Go for the building regs on such on your own.

If you think this decision is fascist, you need to prove it.
From the UN report..
"Elsewhere, MEP José Inácio told the Resident in a conversation about evictions in Ria Formosa that “the current environment minister hasn’t got a clue what he is doing” - a criticism that islanders wholeheartedly endorse after a week in which government promises to hear their points of view were railroaded with the help of battalions of police (click here)."

Under what definition of freedom of speech does this fall?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 01:24:45 AM
Quote from: misty on March 05, 2017, 01:14:43 AM
From the UN report..
"Elsewhere, MEP José Inácio told the Resident in a conversation about evictions in Ria Formosa that “the current environment minister hasn’t got a clue what he is doing” - a criticism that islanders wholeheartedly endorse after a week in which government promises to hear their points of view were railroaded with the help of battalions of police (click here)."

Under what definition of freedom of speech does this fall?
You have a look. I have made it clear I am not interested in debating Ria Formosa cos I don't know the current rules and regs about a natural park.  Nor what they have to do about Madeleine.  Over to you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 05, 2017, 01:32:19 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 01:24:45 AM
You have a look. I have made it clear I am not interested in debating Ria Formosa cos I don't know the current rules and regs about a natural park.  Nor what they have to do about Madeleine.  Over to you.

Fair enough.
Please explain what rights to free speech the Portuguese state granted the McCanns through the Portuguese media.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 05, 2017, 06:07:52 AM
Quote from: misty on March 05, 2017, 01:32:19 AM
Fair enough.
Please explain what rights to free speech the Portuguese state granted the McCanns through the Portuguese media.

Both the PJ and the McCanns were bound by Judicial Secrecy. Neither of them took much notice, it seems. Both used 'sources'.

The McCanns refused to let Portuguese station TVI show their documentary. It wanted to show it as a balancing exercise because it had shown Amaral's documentary. It seems they turned down the chance to put their case to the Portuguese people.
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/117391/McCann-TV-snub
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 05, 2017, 07:08:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 05, 2017, 06:07:52 AM
Both the PJ and the McCanns were bound by Judicial Secrecy. Neither of them took much notice, it seems. Both used 'sources'.

The McCanns refused to let Portuguese station TVI show their documentary. It wanted to show it as a balancing exercise because it had shown Amaral's documentary. It seems they turned down the chance to put their case to the Portuguese people.
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/117391/McCann-TV-snub
Win some lose some.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on March 05, 2017, 11:13:08 AM

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/maddie-mccanns-parents-were-nearly-9967698
Spot this week's deliberate error:

"Kate McCann thought Matthews was also going through the same agony of losing a daughter and asked Madeleine fund trustees to send cash".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 05, 2017, 01:07:07 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 12:29:36 AM
What suppressed speech?  The McCanns were, and are, entitled to freedom of speech.  How fascist is that, not.

They can state abduction until the death of time.

They cannot suppress the right of others to freedom of speech.

They have a right not to be defamed which you don't seem to understand
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 05, 2017, 01:43:50 PM
Quote from: davel on March 05, 2017, 01:07:07 PM
They have a right not to be defamed which you don't seem to understand

Remind me dave of what the judgement in Portugal said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on March 05, 2017, 03:23:47 PM
Quote from: davel on March 05, 2017, 01:07:07 PM
They have a right not to be defamed which you don't seem to understand

Unless you know the full truth about the disappearance I suggest any claims of defamation are premature.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 05, 2017, 03:43:00 PM
Quote from: John on March 05, 2017, 03:23:47 PM
Unless you know the full truth about the disappearance I suggest any claims of defamation are premature.
Are you suggesting that the McCanns cannot claim they have been defamed because an abuctor has yet to be charged and found guilty?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 05, 2017, 04:33:44 PM
Quote from: Alfie on March 05, 2017, 03:43:00 PM
Are you suggesting that the McCanns cannot claim they have been defamed because an abuctor has yet to be charged and found guilty?
That might be the case as long as it is done via a thesis.

I don't believe the same standard would be applied on the forum, i.e. it should be acceptable to propose a thesis about any person suggesting that they are involved in some way in a yet to be proved thesis.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 05, 2017, 04:43:37 PM
Quote from: John on March 05, 2017, 03:23:47 PM
Unless you know the full truth about the disappearance I suggest any claims of defamation are premature.

they are not John.....the McCanns have been defamed but amaral has been allowed to get away with it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 05, 2017, 04:45:29 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 12:46:09 AM
Which element of fascism?

We are moving to a property which has a rear garden (aka meadow) which is designated as both agricultural and environmental.  This means we can do sod all with it except farm it.  The previous owner had built various structures on it which violated these regulations.  The cãmara insisted these were ripped out before the house was sold to us.

We now have no pig pens.  We now have no 'orrible swimming pool.  Much else has gone due to the law.

Should I be calling the câmara fascist for enforcing the regulations?

I am not going to engage in a debate on properties built in Rio Formosa.  That is a designated natural park.  Go for the building regs on such on your own.

If you think this decision is fascist, you need to prove it.

why do we need to prove it...aren't we allowed freedom of speech
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 04:55:11 PM
Quote from: davel on March 05, 2017, 01:07:07 PM
They have a right not to be defamed which you don't seem to understand
I can understand the appeal court and SC decisions quite well enough.  Of course, if one repeatedly ignores those ...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 04:59:30 PM
Quote from: davel on March 05, 2017, 04:45:29 PM
why do we need to prove it...aren't we allowed freedom of speech
Oh dear.  You mean you want to use emotive and connotative words without supporting the same?  I believe that is called propaganda.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 05, 2017, 05:03:41 PM
Quote from: davel on March 05, 2017, 04:45:29 PM
why do we need to prove it...aren't we allowed freedom of speech
Free speech only happens in places where that is welcome.  If you want free speech you set up your own forum site or write your own book but here we have to abide by the rules of the forum owners.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 05, 2017, 06:14:50 PM
Quote from: ferryman on March 05, 2017, 05:13:30 PM
We know at least something approaching the full truth about Amaral's lies and we know they are lies by comparing what he has written (or said) with what is written in the files.

Making "claims" of defamation against Amaral, not so much claims as facts.

If you read the first judgement carefully you will find that the judge didn't see anything wrong with the book. On page 34 she says there's nothing new in the book. What it says was said by the investigation, it led to the McCanns being made arguidos and it has been said by others.

In order to penalise Amaral her judgement brings in his obligations as a retired policeman. Using some rather complicated mental gymnastics she decides that he has breached judicial secrecy and failed to allow the McCanns the presumption of innocence. Both of these requirements are imposed on a retired policeman, she argues, and they restrict his freedom of speech.

All the Appeal judges had to do then was show that being a retired policeman did not impose those obligations on Amaral, he enjoyed full unrestricted freedom of speech, and her judgement was shown to be wrong.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 05, 2017, 06:24:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 05, 2017, 06:14:50 PM
If you read the first judgement carefully you will find that the judge didn't see anything wrong with the book. On page 34 she says there's nothing new in the book. What it says was said by the investigation, it led to the McCanns being made arguidos and it has been said by others.

In order to penalise Amaral her judgement brings in his obligations as a retired policeman. Using some rather complicated mental gymnastics she decides that he has breached judicial secrecy and failed to allow the McCanns the presumption of innocence. Both of these requirements are imposed on a retired policeman, she argues, and they restrict his freedom of speech.

All the Appeal judges had to do then was show that being a retired policeman did not impose those obligations on Amaral, he enjoyed full unrestricted freedom of speech, and her judgement was shown to be wrong.

Quote
Freedom of speech and expression are not absolute, and common limitations to freedom of speech relate to libel, slander, obscenity, pornography, sedition, incitement, fighting words, classified information, copyright violation, trade secrets, non-disclosure agreements, the right to privacy, the right to be forgotten, public security, and perjury. Justifications for such include the harm principle, proposed by John Stuart Mill in On Liberty, which suggests that: "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others."[7]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 05, 2017, 06:52:58 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 04:59:30 PM
Oh dear.  You mean you want to use emotive and connotative words without supporting the same?  I believe that is called propaganda.


I dont need to be able to support anything under freedom of speech ....I can say exactly what I want.....i'm sure you will support me
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 05, 2017, 07:14:16 PM
Here's a reminder of reports from early on in this case..........................

British diplomat warned Foreign Office of concerns over McCanns

Last updated at 10:18 03 December 2007

The Foreign Office was alerted to fears over Gerry and Kate McCann by a British diplomat in Portugal just days after their daughter Madeleine went missing.

The diplomat was sent to the holiday resort of Praia da Luz in the days following the four-year-old's disappearance and soon became concerned over "inconsistencies" in the testimonies by her parents and their friends.

After visiting the McCanns, the unnamed diplomat sent a report to the Foreign Office in London, admitting his worries about "confused declarations" of the McCanns' movements on the night of May 3.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-499340/British-diplomat-warned-Foreign-Office-concerns-McCanns.html#ixzz4aTqeErFo

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 05, 2017, 07:20:28 PM
...and then we have this from the pro-McCann propaganda machine........

i.e. Clarence Mitchell.


 ' MCCANN'S MEDICS Madeleine McCann’s dad Gerry led team of top heart doctors to save life of ex England footballer '

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3012150/madeleine-mccann-gerry-heart-doctors-save-england-footballer/?CMP=Spklr-_-Editorial-_-TheSun-_-News-_-TwImageandlink-_-Statement-_-TWITTER

'It is not known if Gerry, 48, who co-incidentally lives in the same village as The Birch in Rothley, Leicestershire, carried out the hour-long operation but he was on hand to advise.'

'His work has been winning critical acclaim as he and ex-GP wife Kate continue the global hunt to find daughter Maddie, who disappeared nearly 10 years ago from a Portuguese holiday apartment.'

What 'global hunt' is that then ?

Where is this 'critical acclaim' ?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 07:26:17 PM
Quote from: davel on March 05, 2017, 06:52:58 PM

I dont need to be able to support anything under freedom of speech ....I can say exactly what I want.....i'm sure you will support me
Then Amaral did not need to be able to support anything under freedom of speech.

Commonly called waffle.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 05, 2017, 07:33:15 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 05, 2017, 07:20:28 PM
...and then we have this from the pro-McCann propaganda machine........

i.e. Clarence Mitchell.


 ' MCCANN'S MEDICS Madeleine McCann’s dad Gerry led team of top heart doctors to save life of ex England footballer '

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3012150/madeleine-mccann-gerry-heart-doctors-save-england-footballer/?CMP=Spklr-_-Editorial-_-TheSun-_-News-_-TwImageandlink-_-Statement-_-TWITTER

'It is not known if Gerry, 48, who co-incidentally lives in the same village as The Birch in Rothley, Leicestershire, carried out the hour-long operation but he was on hand to advise.'

'His work has been winning critical acclaim as he and ex-GP wife Kate continue the global hunt to find daughter Maddie, who disappeared nearly 10 years ago from a Portuguese holiday apartment.'

What 'global hunt' is that then ?

Where is this 'critical acclaim' ?

Now why do I think of that Harry Enfield character - you know the one - pops up saying 'only me'  and then ' you don't wanna do it like that'  to the surgeon   @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 05, 2017, 07:35:19 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 07:26:17 PM
Then Amaral did not need to be able to support anything under freedom of speech.

Commonly called waffle.

#no its called taeching people here including you that freedom of speech is not freedom to libel
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 07:47:38 PM
Quote from: davel on March 05, 2017, 07:35:19 PM
#no its called taeching people here including you that freedom of speech is not freedom to libel
Appeal court ruled differently.

SC declined to hear, and clarified that the McCanns were not cleared.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 05, 2017, 07:59:04 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 07:47:38 PM
Appeal court ruled differently.

SC declined to hear, and clarified that the McCanns were not cleared.

no they didnt....you need to read it again.  The word defamatory does not feature in the ruling....neither does the word cleared...have another look
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 05, 2017, 08:01:15 PM
Quote from: davel on March 05, 2017, 07:59:04 PM
no they didnt....you need to read it again.  The word defamatory does not feature in the ruling....neither does the word cleared...have another look
Never said 'defamatory' appeared in the ruling, did I?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 05, 2017, 08:07:46 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 05, 2017, 07:14:16 PM
Here's a reminder of reports from early on in this case..........................

British diplomat warned Foreign Office of concerns over McCanns

Last updated at 10:18 03 December 2007

The Foreign Office was alerted to fears over Gerry and Kate McCann by a British diplomat in Portugal just days after their daughter Madeleine went missing.

The diplomat was sent to the holiday resort of Praia da Luz in the days following the four-year-old's disappearance and soon became concerned over "inconsistencies" in the testimonies by her parents and their friends.

After visiting the McCanns, the unnamed diplomat sent a report to the Foreign Office in London, admitting his worries about "confused declarations" of the McCanns' movements on the night of May 3.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-499340/British-diplomat-warned-Foreign-Office-concerns-McCanns.html#ixzz4aTqeErFo

The clue lies in your statement ... "Here's a reminder of reports from early on in this case....."

I thought you should have worked out by now precisely what those are worth  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 05, 2017, 08:10:39 PM
As regards the Sun article, then we have this..............


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-38622454

'Leicester City legend Alan Birchenall saved by nurse'

Mmm.

Mr. Mitchell, take note.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 05, 2017, 08:11:41 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 05, 2017, 08:07:46 PM
The clue lies in your statement ... "Here's a reminder of reports from early on in this case....."

I thought you should have worked out by now precisely what those are worth  @)(++(*

You really mean like the reports of abduction... 8(0(* @)(++(*

You walked into that one Brietta.  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 05, 2017, 09:27:50 PM
Quote from: davel on March 05, 2017, 07:59:04 PM
no they didnt....you need to read it again.  The word defamatory does not feature in the ruling....neither does the word cleared...have another look

Page 70 SC RULING.

And let not be said, too, that the appellants were cleared by the order of filing the criminal proceedings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 05, 2017, 09:33:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 05, 2017, 09:27:50 PM
Page 70 SC RULING.

And let not be said, too, that the appellants were cleared by the order of filing the criminal proceedings.
cleared is the unnoficial  transaltion....what is the actual portuguese
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 05, 2017, 09:35:52 PM
Quote from: davel on March 05, 2017, 09:33:50 PM
cleared is the unnoficial  transaltion....what is the actual portuguese

Is this your Forrest Gump moment ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on March 05, 2017, 10:57:00 PM
Quote from: davel on March 05, 2017, 09:33:50 PM
cleared is the unnoficial  transaltion....what is the actual portuguese

Run the sentence through GoogleTranslate and it says:

"Nor is it also stated that the applicants were acquitted* by the order to close the criminal proceedings"

synonyms of acquit:   absolve, clear, exonerate, exculpate, declare innocent, find innocent, pronounce not guilty;

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 05, 2017, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on March 05, 2017, 10:57:00 PM
Run the sentence through GoogleTranslate and it says:

"Nor is it also stated that the applicants were acquitted* by the order to close the criminal proceedings"

synonyms of acquit:   absolve, clear, exonerate, exculpate, declare innocent, find innocent, pronounce not guilty;
of course they were not acuitted...they were never tried........as for your synonyms....not guilty does not mean found innocent and proven is something to do with bread....but of course we all know what a dogs dinner is....no confusion there
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on March 05, 2017, 11:14:25 PM
Quote from: davel on March 05, 2017, 11:01:24 PM
of course they were not acuitted...they were never tried........as for your synonyms....not guilty does not mean found innocent and proven is something to do with bread....but of course we all know what a dogs dinner is....no confusion there


I was merely informing you of the result if one runs the appropriate sentence on page 70 of the judgement through GoogleTranslate.
The synonyms are not mine.  If you object to them so strongly I suggest you contact the publishers of the Brontosaurus.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 06, 2017, 05:36:59 AM
Quote from: davel on March 05, 2017, 09:33:50 PM
cleared is the unnoficial  transaltion....what is the actual portuguese

Well if you know better what did the parties actually say and what difference does it make? Whatever Duarte said, the judges said she was wrong so that's the relevant point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 06, 2017, 08:17:41 AM
Amaral was found guilty of being involved in the incident
He attempted to cover it up
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 06, 2017, 08:22:00 AM
Note amaral sued correia for defamation on this point and the Portuguese court ruled no libel
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 06, 2017, 08:31:43 AM
Quote from: davel on March 06, 2017, 08:17:41 AM
Amaral was found guilty of being involved in the incident
He attempted to cover it up

How can anyone be found guilty of being involved in an incident that has never been proved to have happened?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 06, 2017, 08:56:12 AM
Quote from: davel on March 06, 2017, 08:17:41 AM
Amaral was found guilty of being involved in the incident
He attempted to cover it up

He was found guilty of incorrectly signing off a document, so implying he was involved in any torture is libel, do not repeat.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 06, 2017, 09:04:01 AM
Amaral also lost the defemation case relating to this
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 06, 2017, 09:12:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 06, 2017, 08:31:43 AM
How can anyone be found guilty of being involved in an incident that has never been proved to have happened?
I think you'll find that the judge(s) ruled that that Cipriano had been tortured.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 06, 2017, 09:16:26 AM
Quote from: Alfie on March 06, 2017, 09:12:24 AM
I think you'll find that the judge(s) ruled that that Cipriano had been tortured.
Tortured whilst in police custody with the pj and claiming she fell down the stairs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 06, 2017, 09:21:41 AM
As a reminder, as it seems needed, fellow prisoners claim they beat up Cipriano.

Next, Cipriano changed her accounts of events several times.

She is a bona fide liar.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 06, 2017, 09:30:37 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on March 06, 2017, 09:21:41 AM
As a reminder, as it seems needed, fellow prisoners claim they beat up Cipriano.

Next, Cipriano changed her accounts of events several times.

She is a bona fide liar.

It seems amaral is too
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on March 06, 2017, 10:30:05 AM
Quote from: davel on March 05, 2017, 11:30:20 PM
you quoted the synonyms....I just pointed out how unreliable they are as a translation tool........

try translating "old stick" into portugese via google translate

That makes no sense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 06, 2017, 08:30:26 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6Qr5bbWAAA_kkf.jpg:large)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 06, 2017, 08:58:31 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 06, 2017, 08:30:26 PM

Would be BS, would it not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 06, 2017, 09:00:06 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 06, 2017, 08:30:26 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6Qr5bbWAAA_kkf.jpg:large)
lol.  Wtf is claiming that the head of PJ are leaking like a sieve?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 06, 2017, 09:31:10 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 06, 2017, 08:58:31 PM
Would be BS, would it not?

BS is not having all options on the table in an unsolved case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 06, 2017, 09:33:36 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 06, 2017, 08:58:31 PM
Would be BS, would it not?
The tweet is by a renowned twitter troll so I wouldn't get too excited by it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 06, 2017, 09:35:01 PM
(https://i86.servimg.com/u/f86/18/66/11/30/cmtv10.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 06, 2017, 09:40:26 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 06, 2017, 09:35:01 PM
(https://i86.servimg.com/u/f86/18/66/11/30/cmtv10.jpg)

Hardly hot off the press, is it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on March 06, 2017, 10:04:19 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 06, 2017, 09:40:26 PM
Hardly hot off the press, is it?

Indeed, if true however it does rather boot two much propounded theories into touch.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on March 09, 2017, 07:48:11 PM
RIP John Ellis:

http://www.sc..thorpetelegraph.co.uk/tributes-paid-to-former-police-dog-handler/story-29465905-detail/story.html#wMfyAYOzUBh653KX.99
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 09, 2017, 10:28:46 PM
Quote from: ferryman on March 09, 2017, 07:48:11 PM
RIP John Ellis:

http://www.sc..thorpetelegraph.co.uk/tributes-paid-to-former-police-dog-handler/story-29465905-detail/story.html#wMfyAYOzUBh653KX.99

Perhaps you could enlighten us as to why you posted that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 09, 2017, 10:40:10 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 09, 2017, 10:28:46 PM
Perhaps you could enlighten us as to why you posted that?

This an Off Topic Thread.  It speaks for itself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on March 09, 2017, 11:29:45 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 09, 2017, 10:28:46 PM
Perhaps you could enlighten us as to why you posted that?

Opaqueness is not amenable to light.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on March 09, 2017, 11:46:34 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 09, 2017, 10:28:46 PM
Perhaps you could enlighten us as to why you posted that?

It is less off topic than Mick the Miller apparently. He was a dog what's wrong with that .......................... &%+((£

"Do not despise the snake for having no horns, for who is to say it will not become a dragon?"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 09, 2017, 11:57:37 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on March 09, 2017, 11:46:34 PM
It is less off topic than Mick the Miller apparently. He was a dog what's wrong with that .......................... &%+((£

"Do not despise the snake for having no horns, for who is to say it will not become a dragon?"

Thank you for that one.  And good night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on March 10, 2017, 07:16:15 PM
I see that Katie Hopkins lost her libel case.

£24,000 in damages, and £107,000 in court costs.


I wonder if that will stop her rants.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 28, 2017, 05:11:47 PM
It is interesting to note that one of the previous occupants of 5a was a Surgical Assistant.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JUNE-HUGHES.htm

Work shoes & trouser bottoms can become contaminated in a hospital theatre.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on March 28, 2017, 05:27:01 PM
Quote from: misty on March 28, 2017, 05:11:47 PM
It is interesting to note that one of the previous occupants of 5a was a Surgical Assistant.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JUNE-HUGHES.htm

Work shoes & trouser bottoms can become contaminated in a hospital theatre.

are you suggesting they wore this clothing shoes on holiday

http://www.ebay.co.uk/bhp/scrubs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 28, 2017, 05:36:23 PM
Quote from: kizzy on March 28, 2017, 05:27:01 PM
are you suggesting they wore this clothing shoes on holiday

http://www.ebay.co.uk/bhp/scrubs

Scrubs are worn over normal underwear/clothing. I am suggesting that possibly a comfortable pair of shoes which may have been worn for working purposes could also have been taken on holiday & placed in the wardrobe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 28, 2017, 05:56:33 PM
Quote from: misty on March 28, 2017, 05:36:23 PM
Scrubs are worn over normal underwear/clothing. I am suggesting that possibly a comfortable pair of shoes which may have been worn for working purposes could also have been taken on holiday & placed in the wardrobe.

Best practice would be for shoes to be worn only in theatre.  A quick google shows up different standards depending on the hospital including covering the shoes ... therefore it is perfectly feasible that a comfy pair of shoes could have been taken on holiday.

Sadly some people die on the operating table.  A surgical assistant is highly likely to have been involved in dealing with all aspects of that and to do so would be in the same room as the deceased for extended periods.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 28, 2017, 06:42:54 PM
Quote from: kizzy on March 28, 2017, 06:16:54 PM


It merely shows that the initial investigation overlooked a possible source of cross-contamination which resulted in Eddie's alert in the wardrobe area.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on March 28, 2017, 07:13:16 PM
Quote from: misty on March 28, 2017, 06:42:54 PM
It merely shows that the initial investigation overlooked a possible source of cross-contamination which resulted in Eddie's alert in the wardrobe area.


You don't know though, it was overlooked.

Do you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 28, 2017, 08:12:30 PM
Quote from: kizzy on March 28, 2017, 07:13:16 PM

You don't know though, it was overlooked.

Do you.

I don't see a request by the PJ for UK police to speak further with JH after the cadaver alert - can you find it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 28, 2017, 08:34:20 PM
Quote from: misty on March 28, 2017, 08:12:30 PM
I don't see a request by the PJ for UK police to speak further with JH after the cadaver alert - can you find it?
JH is that John Hill or someone else?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on March 28, 2017, 08:43:01 PM
Quote from: misty on March 28, 2017, 08:12:30 PM
I don't see a request by the PJ for UK police to speak further with JH after the cadaver alert - can you find it?


Probably, because they are not going to take scrub outfit on holiday with them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on March 28, 2017, 09:18:29 PM
looks like the sun is promoting this petition.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3197252/madeleine-mccann-petition-charged-child-neglect/

Pity it wasn't, to take a lie detector test.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 28, 2017, 09:24:28 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 28, 2017, 08:34:20 PM
JH is that John Hill or someone else?

I would suggest reading a few previous posts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 28, 2017, 09:26:18 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 28, 2017, 08:34:20 PM
JH is that John Hill or someone else?

See post #1905
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 28, 2017, 09:30:00 PM
Quote from: kizzy on March 28, 2017, 08:43:01 PM

Probably, because they are not going to take scrub outfit on holiday with them.

Who said it was a scrub outfit? Can you take a contaminated item of clothing off without transferring anything to what's being worn underneath? Is it possible to unwittingly stand in decomposing flesh or bodily fluids on an OR floor?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on March 28, 2017, 09:49:40 PM
Quote from: misty on March 28, 2017, 09:30:00 PM
Who said it was a scrub outfit? Can you take a contaminated item of clothing off without transferring anything to what's being worn underneath? Is it possible to unwittingly stand in decomposing flesh or bodily fluids on an OR floor?

Oh please, this is getting silly.

You would take those clothes ,you wear for work on holiday with you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 28, 2017, 09:55:25 PM
Quote from: kizzy on March 28, 2017, 09:49:40 PM
Oh please, this is getting silly.

You would take those clothes ,you wear for work on holiday with you.

A T-Shirt, underwear or a pair of comfy shoes? Yes - I'd take all those on holiday.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on March 28, 2017, 10:05:28 PM
Quote from: misty on March 28, 2017, 09:55:25 PM
A T-Shirt, underwear or a pair of comfy shoes? Yes - I'd take all those on holiday.

Well that is you, strange to say the least.

you would take work clothes,as you posted below. Well hopefully you will have washed them first.

stand in decomposing flesh or bodily fluids on an OR floor?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 29, 2017, 12:32:02 AM
Quote from: misty on March 28, 2017, 05:11:47 PM
It is interesting to note that one of the previous occupants of 5a was a Surgical Assistant.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JUNE-HUGHES.htm

Work shoes & trouser bottoms can become contaminated in a hospital theatre.
Did you notice the translation error in that statement "As far as I recall, the living woman sofa"  rather than "As far as I recall, the living room sofa" http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JUNE-HUGHES.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 29, 2017, 12:53:52 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 29, 2017, 12:32:02 AM
Did you notice the translation error in that statement "As far as I recall, the living woman sofa"  rather than "As far as I recall, the living room sofa" http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JUNE-HUGHES.htm

Ha, no I didn't. I was more interested in her occupation & the date the statement was taken than the accuracy of the translation. Having browsed through some old threads in search of a particular photo (which I still couldn't find),  the matter of how the McCann clothes on the wardrobe shelf could have been contaminated made me think about it again. It's quite clear from the statement date that Amaral could not have given JH's occupation due consideration in a possible cross-contamination.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 29, 2017, 08:57:49 AM
Quote from: misty on March 29, 2017, 12:53:52 AM
Ha, no I didn't. I was more interested in her occupation & the date the statement was taken than the accuracy of the translation. Having browsed through some old threads in search of a particular photo (which I still couldn't find),  the matter of how the McCann clothes on the wardrobe shelf could have been contaminated made me think about it again. It's quite clear from the statement date that Amaral could not have given JH's occupation due consideration in a possible cross-contamination.
Now I understand you.  You are thinking JH's clothes could have carried cadaver contamination on them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 08:58:24 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 29, 2017, 12:32:02 AM
Did you notice the translation error in that statement "As far as I recall, the living woman sofa"  rather than "As far as I recall, the living room sofa" http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JUNE-HUGHES.htm

"o sofa da sala" on the Portuguese statement. ENGLISH TRANSLATION BY INES so his/her mistake.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 29, 2017, 09:34:50 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 08:58:24 AM
"o sofa da sala" on the Portuguese statement. ENGLISH TRANSLATION BY INES so his/her mistake.

Precisely so.

How many other mistakes are attributable to translators anxious to publish the files on the internet?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 10:13:35 AM
Quote from: misty on March 28, 2017, 09:30:00 PM
Who said it was a scrub outfit? Can you take a contaminated item of clothing off without transferring anything to what's being worn underneath? Is it possible to unwittingly stand in decomposing flesh or bodily fluids on an OR floor?

I think she was a surgical assistant not an undertakers assistant. What about the development interval we are always told about?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 10:17:29 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 10:13:35 AM
I think she was a surgical assistant not an undertakers assistant. What about the development interval we are always told about?
If you remove bits of people on the operating table, the bits you remove effectively become bits of dead body.    Can we know for sure that this person or their personal effects were never exposed to materials that could have contaminated the apartment with cadaver scent?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 10:19:56 AM
Quote from: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 10:17:29 AM
If you remove bits of people on the operating table, the bits you remove effectively become bits of dead body.    Can we know for sure that this person or their personal effects were never exposed to materials that could have contaminated the apartment with cadaver scent?

Are you suggesting those bits have been dead for a couple of hours?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 10:22:22 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 10:19:56 AM
Are you suggesting those bits have been dead for a couple of hours?
I'm not suggesting anything - I asked a question.  Some operations last 8 hours.  Think about it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 10:28:19 AM
Quote from: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 10:22:22 AM
I'm not suggesting anything - I asked a question.  Some operations last 8 hours.  Think about it.

Is this the Alfie OR as abattoir theory?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 10:43:04 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 10:28:19 AM
Is this the Alfie OR as abattoir theory?
Is this post an attempt at goading?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 10:45:10 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 10:28:19 AM
Is this the Alfie OR as abattoir theory?
Rather than taking the piss, perhaps you can explain why it would have been impossible for someone who is a surgical assistant to have contaminated the apartment with cadaver odour. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 29, 2017, 11:05:24 AM
Quote from: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 10:45:10 AM
Rather than taking the piss, perhaps you can explain why it would have been impossible for someone who is a surgical assistant to have contaminated the apartment with cadaver odour.

So many possibilities have been dredged up to explain Eddie's alerts. Of course each one also suggests his alerts were not false. Instead the idea is that he alerted correctly, but it was to something other than a body in 5A on 3rd May 2007. Ten out of ten for effort, but most of the suggestions are pretty unbelievable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 11:16:57 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 29, 2017, 11:05:24 AM
So many possibilities have been dredged up to explain Eddie's alerts. Of course each one also suggests his alerts were not false. Instead the idea is that he alerted correctly, but it was to something other than a body in 5A on 3rd May 2007. Ten out of ten for effort, but most of the suggestions are pretty unbelievable.
Yes it's pretty unbelievable that Madeleine McCann lay dead in the apartment for 2 hours prior to 10pm because that means her parents went out to dinner and for a merry time in the full knowledge that their child was dead and allowed their friends to go check on their kids whilst they were at dinner, yet you seem to think this is plausible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 29, 2017, 11:17:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 29, 2017, 11:05:24 AM
So many possibilities have been dredged up to explain Eddie's alerts. Of course each one also suggests his alerts were not false. Instead the idea is that he alerted correctly, but it was to something other than a body in 5A on 3rd May 2007. Ten out of ten for effort, but most of the suggestions are pretty unbelievable.

Eddie alerted multiple times inside Haut de la Garenne - which had been redecorated & refurbished since the period of alleged murderous happenings. How can all those alerts be explained?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 29, 2017, 11:25:30 AM
Quote from: misty on March 29, 2017, 11:17:14 AM
Eddie alerted multiple times inside Haut de la Garenne - which had been redecorated & refurbished since the period of alleged murderous happenings. How can all those alerts be explained?
It was possible the odour came up through the floorboards.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 11:36:37 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 29, 2017, 11:25:30 AM
It was possible the odour came up through the floorboards.
Really?  Is that why they dug up the floorboards to discover all the children's bodies?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 29, 2017, 11:36:44 AM
Did the place even have floorboards ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 29, 2017, 11:38:30 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 29, 2017, 11:25:30 AM
It was possible the odour came up through the floorboards.

What, up to the first floor landing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 29, 2017, 11:52:49 AM
Quote from: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 11:16:57 AM
Yes it's pretty unbelievable that Madeleine McCann lay dead in the apartment for 2 hours prior to 10pm because that means her parents went out to dinner and for a merry time in the full knowledge that their child was dead and allowed their friends to go check on their kids whilst they were at dinner, yet you seem to think this is plausible.

Is the fact that people can behave normally following a traumatic event evidence that they had no input into the event? I don't think it is because there are so many variables involved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 12:03:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 29, 2017, 11:52:49 AM
Is the fact that people can behave normally following a traumatic event evidence that they had no input into the event? I don't think it is because there are so many variables involved.
It depends on the people involved and the circumstances and the time elapsed between the traumatic event and the normal behaviour.  We know the McCanns appeared to be behaving completely normally and in a relaxed manner prior to the alarm being raised.  We know they were quite relaxed about letting their friends go to the apartment, the alleged resting place of their dead child. We know that at the very most they would have had an hour or so to come to terms with the sudden death and decision to cover up prior to going to dinner.  Then we have to grapple with the motive for such a cover up in the event of an accidental death which occured presumably while they were still in the apartment.  It's a very big ask  to make the cadaver dog alerts work isn't it?   But apparently this scenario is absolutely no problem to you - I find that baffling.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 12:26:29 PM
Quote from: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 10:45:10 AM
Rather than taking the piss, perhaps you can explain why it would have been impossible for someone who is a surgical assistant to have contaminated the apartment with cadaver odour.

Let's consider the chain of events.

JH needs to have been involved in a surgical procedure where a body part was removed from a living person and allowed to remain at hand in an operating theatre until cadaver scent was established.

She was wearing exposed outdoor clothes underneath her scrubs contrary to standard practice which appears to suggest that nothing should be worn under scrubs. Outdoor shoes are a big no no.

JH managed to get herself contaminated and didn't follow correct sanitation protocols when leaving The Theatre.

She decided to take her work clothes to Portugal on holiday.

...

Impossible, nothing is impossible but this is vey very unlikely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 12:34:01 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 12:26:29 PM
Let's consider the chain of events.

JH needs to have been involved in a surgical procedure where a body part was removed from a living person and allowed to remain at hand in an operating theatre until cadaver scent was established.

She was wearing exposed outdoor clothes underneath her scrubs contrary to standard practice which appears to suggest that nothing should be worn under scrubs. Outdoor shoes are a big no no.

JH managed to get herself contaminated and didn't follow correct sanitation protocols when leaving The Theatre.

She decided to take her work clothes to Portugal on holiday.

...

Impossible, nothing is impossible but this is vey very unlikely.
And yet we are led to believe no amount of scrubbing will prevent a dog from detecting the one-time presence of a cadaver, and it only takes one drop of blood on an item buried on a beach for a dog to find it. OK, whatever you say.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 12:36:53 PM
Quote from: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 12:34:01 PM
And yet we are led to believe no amount of scrubbing will prevent a dog from detecting the one-time presence of a cadaver, and it only takes one drop of blood on an item buried on a beach for a dog to find it. OK, whatever you say.

So no answer and a flounce?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 29, 2017, 12:39:56 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 12:26:29 PM
Let's consider the chain of events.

JH needs to have been involved in a surgical procedure where a body part was removed from a living person and allowed to remain at hand in an operating theatre until cadaver scent was established.

She was wearing exposed outdoor clothes underneath her scrubs contrary to standard practice which appears to suggest that nothing should be worn under scrubs. Outdoor shoes are a big no no.

JH managed to get herself contaminated and didn't follow correct sanitation protocols when leaving The Theatre.

She decided to take her work clothes to Portugal on holiday.

...

Impossible, nothing is impossible but this is vey very unlikely.

One of the causes of the spread of MRSA is the illusion that scrubs are "clean" when they are actually as prone to cross-contamination (due to mass laundering) as any normal outdoor clothing.
Underwear can be quite easily contaminated, as can socks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 12:46:29 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 12:36:53 PM
So no answer and a flounce?
I gave you an answer and I wasn't flouncing - are you trying to goad me again?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 12:48:12 PM
Quote from: misty on March 29, 2017, 12:39:56 PM
One of the causes of the spread of MRSA is the illusion that scrubs are "clean" when they are actually as prone to cross-contamination (due to mass laundering) as any normal outdoor clothing.
Underwear can be quite easily contaminated, as can socks.

So you are either suggesting she took scrubs on holiday or that she was so contaminated it soaked through to underclothes if worn.

Is this more myth building as per the other thread?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 12:49:02 PM
Quote from: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 12:46:29 PM
I gave you an answer and I wasn't flouncing - are you trying to goad me again?

You didn't answer and appeared to decide you had had enough.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 12:52:33 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 12:49:02 PM
You didn't answer and appeared to decide you had had enough.
I did answer.  Not answering would have meant I didn't post at all.  I pointed out that the alleged super powers of the dogs are such that such trifles as not wearing outdoor clothes in surgery and following correct santitation procedures may not necessarily be enough to prevent cross contamination.  But I'll hold my hands up and defer to your apparent greater knowledge on the subject, so you win.  Congratulations. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 12:55:40 PM
Quote from: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 12:52:33 PM
I did answer.  Not answering would have meant I didn't post at all.  I pointed out that the alleged super powers of the dogs are such that such trifles as not wearing outdoor clothes in surgery and following correct santitation procedures may not necessarily be enough to prevent cross contamination.  But I'll hold my hands up and defer to your apparent greater knowledge on the subject, so you win.  Congratulations.

Thank you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 29, 2017, 01:02:08 PM
Quote from: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 12:03:02 PM
It depends on the people involved and the circumstances and the time elapsed between the traumatic event and the normal behaviour.  We know the McCanns appeared to be behaving completely normally and in a relaxed manner prior to the alarm being raised.  We know they were quite relaxed about letting their friends go to the apartment, the alleged resting place of their dead child. We know that at the very most they would have had an hour or so to come to terms with the sudden death and decision to cover up prior to going to dinner.  Then we have to grapple with the motive for such a cover up in the event of an accidental death which occured presumably while they were still in the apartment.  It's a very big ask  to make the cadaver dog alerts work isn't it?   But apparently this scenario is absolutely no problem to you - I find that baffling.

You struggle with the idea, as would anyone. That doesn't mean it couldn't happen, however. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 01:05:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 29, 2017, 01:02:08 PM
You struggle with the idea, as would anyone. That doesn't mean it couldn't happen, however.
So you admit it's a bit unlikely then? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 29, 2017, 01:34:02 PM
Quote from: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 01:05:37 PM
So you admit it's a bit unlikely then?

I find all the various theories have unlikely elements.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 29, 2017, 01:51:31 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 29, 2017, 12:48:12 PM
So you are either suggesting she took scrubs on holiday or that she was so contaminated it soaked through to underclothes if worn.

Is this more myth building as per the other thread?

No. I'm actually exploring a possible reason behind an uncorroborated alert to the wardrobe area in 5a. It is clear the original investigating force did not research it before deciding that a cadaver had most definitely been in 5a.
In the Shannon Matthews case, the UK police did discover that furniture in the house had previously been in contact with a cadaver elsewhere after asking relevant questions. How likely was that particular scenario?
 Had Shannon been the victim of a real abduction, we can only speculate the direction the investigation would have followed based solely on cadaver alerts & child porn found on the computer of someone in the same residence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on March 29, 2017, 05:36:12 PM
Quote from: kizzy on March 28, 2017, 09:18:29 PM
looks like the sun is promoting this petition.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3197252/madeleine-mccann-petition-charged-child-neglect/

Pity it wasn't, to take a lie detector test.

Just out of interest  - if the McCanns took and passed a lie detector test - would you accept that as proof of their innocence?    Or would you be coming up with reasons why such a result could be wrong?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 29, 2017, 05:41:45 PM
Quote from: misty on March 29, 2017, 11:38:30 AM
What, up to the first floor landing?
That is how the odour could spread across a whole building.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 09:17:13 PM
Quote from: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 11:16:57 AM
Yes it's pretty unbelievable that Madeleine McCann lay dead in the apartment for 2 hours prior to 10pm because that means her parents went out to dinner and for a merry time in the full knowledge that their child was dead and allowed their friends to go check on their kids whilst they were at dinner, yet you seem to think this is plausible.

This has happened many times so what is not plausible to you means nothing to real investigators. Their job is to discover the truth and nothing else should matter.

"Same as I always knew him to him to be - very outspoken, very upbeat."

I'm sure you can guess what he did before meeting his friends.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 29, 2017, 09:22:51 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 09:17:13 PM
This has happened many times so what is not plausible to you means nothing to real investigators. Their job is to discover the truth and nothing else should matter.

"Same as I always knew him to him to be - very outspoken, very upbeat."

I'm sure you can guess what he did before meeting his friends.

Killing your partner is one thing, especially if pre-meditated. Doing something awful to your own child is on another level. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 09:25:36 PM
You cannot predict how people will react after something terrible has happened. This guy hadn't changed according to his friends. He was acting his normal self after committing murder.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 29, 2017, 09:30:41 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 09:25:36 PM
You cannot predict how people will react after something terrible has happened. This guy hadn't changed according to his friends. He was acting his normal self after committing murder.

He was able to do so because the murder had gone according to plan - probably a cause for celebration as far as he was concerned. There was no-one else who could fall apart & drop him in it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 09:36:03 PM
Left the body in his van but still acting normal.

A man who beat a woman to death with a hammer after she sought money from him for an abortion was acting “completely normal” on the evening after the assault, his trial has heard.

Roy Webster (40), of Ashbree, Ashford, Co Wicklow has pleaded not guilty to murder but guilty to the manslaughter of Anne Shortall (47) on April 3rd, 2015 at The Murrough, Co Wicklow. His plea was not accepted by the State.
The Central Criminal Court on Thursday heard a statement from Mr Webster’s wife’s friend, Carmel Phibbs, which was read to the court by prosecuting counsel Paul Greene SC. Ms Phibbs said she was at the Webster home on the evening of April 3rd, 2015 when Mr Webster arrived back.
The court previously heard that earlier that day Mr Webster beat Ms Shortall to death with a hammer and left her taped up body in his van. The attack happened after she sought money for an abortion and threatened to tell his wife about a sexual encounter they had four months earlier. Patholohy reports showed she was not pregnant.

“Roy was acting completely normal,” said Ms Phibbs.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/criminal-court/man-acted-completely-normal-after-killing-woman-with-hammer-1.3013108
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 29, 2017, 10:02:57 PM
But do we think the McCanns could do this?  Gerry maybe, Kate definitely no.  Could Gerry have operated behind Kate's back entirely?
That thought gives me the creeps but I can't see how it can be discounted.  So why would Amaral always be gunning for Kate?  It seems he saw the situation differently.  I'd love to know how he thought they pulled off the disappearing Madeleine magic act.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 29, 2017, 10:21:59 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 29, 2017, 10:02:57 PM
But do we think the McCanns could do this?  Gerry maybe, Kate definitely no.  Could Gerry have operated behind Kate's back entirely?
That thought gives me the creeps but I can't see how it can be discounted.  So why would Amaral always be gunning for Kate?  It seems he saw the situation differently.  I'd love to know how he thought they pulled off the disappearing Madeleine magic act.

You are missing the point. No-one can predict who these people are, that's why friends and acquaintances are surprised.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 10:37:49 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 09:36:03 PM
Left the body in his van but still acting normal.

A man who beat a woman to death with a hammer after she sought money from him for an abortion was acting “completely normal” on the evening after the assault, his trial has heard.

Roy Webster (40), of Ashbree, Ashford, Co Wicklow has pleaded not guilty to murder but guilty to the manslaughter of Anne Shortall (47) on April 3rd, 2015 at The Murrough, Co Wicklow. His plea was not accepted by the State.
The Central Criminal Court on Thursday heard a statement from Mr Webster’s wife’s friend, Carmel Phibbs, which was read to the court by prosecuting counsel Paul Greene SC. Ms Phibbs said she was at the Webster home on the evening of April 3rd, 2015 when Mr Webster arrived back.
The court previously heard that earlier that day Mr Webster beat Ms Shortall to death with a hammer and left her taped up bodey in his van. The attack happened after she sought money for an abortion and threatened to tell his wife about a sexual encounter they had four months earlier. Patholohy reports showed she was not pregnant.

“Roy was acting completely normal,” said Ms Phibbs.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/criminal-court/man-acted-completely-normal-after-killing-woman-with-hammer-1.3013108
You are talking about a man who commited a deliberate act of murder of someone who he had no deep emotional attachment to, how is this in any way comparable?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 29, 2017, 10:44:03 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 09:36:03 PM
Left the body in his van but still acting normal.

A man who beat a woman to death with a hammer after she sought money from him for an abortion was acting “completely normal” on the evening after the assault, his trial has heard.

Roy Webster (40), of Ashbree, Ashford, Co Wicklow has pleaded not guilty to murder but guilty to the manslaughter of Anne Shortall (47) on April 3rd, 2015 at The Murrough, Co Wicklow. His plea was not accepted by the State.
The Central Criminal Court on Thursday heard a statement from Mr Webster’s wife’s friend, Carmel Phibbs, which was read to the court by prosecuting counsel Paul Greene SC. Ms Phibbs said she was at the Webster home on the evening of April 3rd, 2015 when Mr Webster arrived back.
The court previously heard that earlier that day Mr Webster beat Ms Shortall to death with a hammer and left her taped up body in his van. The attack happened after she sought money for an abortion and threatened to tell his wife about a sexual encounter they had four months earlier. Patholohy reports showed she was not pregnant.

“Roy was acting completely normal,” said Ms Phibbs.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/criminal-court/man-acted-completely-normal-after-killing-woman-with-hammer-1.3013108

I thought you were referring  to Prout.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 10:47:54 PM
Quote from: misty on March 29, 2017, 10:44:03 PM
I thought you were referring  to Prout.

He was alone on a 276 acre farm. He had plenty of time to clean up his mess but he didn't fool Eddie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 11:04:03 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 10:47:54 PM
He was alone on a 276 acre farm. He had plenty of time to clean up his mess but he didn't fool Eddie.
yes he did, Eddie didn't alert in the places where the body was, only where th body wasn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 11:27:24 PM
Quote from: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 11:04:03 PM
yes he did, Eddie didn't alert in the places where the body was, only where th body wasn't.

Eddie was right in his alert for cadaver scent - Eddie was professionally trained to detect it. Prout lied for years and you believe the word of a liar - I'm not surprised.

"An EVRD dog received additional training on human cadavers which were buried on land and submerged underwater. This took place in America and facilitated by the FBI at the University of Tennessee.

The scent detection threshold of the dog is greatly enhanced."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 29, 2017, 11:29:33 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 11:27:24 PM
Eddie was right in his alert for cadaver scent - Eddie was professionally trained to detect it. Prout lied for years and you believe the word of a liar - I'm not surprised.

"An EVRD dog received additional training on human cadavers which were buried on land and submerged underwater. This took place in America and facilitated by the FBI at the University of Tennessee.

The scent detection threshold of the dog is greatly enhanced."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
WTF are you on about?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 11:37:42 PM
You believe the confession of a liar. Got any evidence to back it up? Eddie's alert was correct for human cadaver scent and any denying from you will not change that proven fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 30, 2017, 12:22:25 AM
If Eddie is trained to alert to cadaver odour, we are right to think that is the trigger of the alert - cadaver odour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on March 30, 2017, 12:23:51 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 30, 2017, 12:22:25 AM
If Eddie is trained to alert to cadaver odour, we are right to think that is the trigger of the alert - cadaver odour.

Not when he alerted to other substances.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 30, 2017, 12:25:57 AM
Quote from: John on March 30, 2017, 12:23:51 AM
Not when he alerted to other substances.
Did these other substances not have traces of cadaver odour within them.  What were you  thinking of?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 30, 2017, 08:14:46 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 29, 2017, 11:37:42 PM
You believe the confession of a liar. Got any evidence to back it up? Eddie's alert was correct for human cadaver scent and any denying from you will not change that proven fact.
Once again, I ask you wtf are you on about?  Which part of the facts of the case are you disputing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 30, 2017, 10:25:18 AM
That Eddie alerted in the wrong place according to you - you believe the word of a murderer/liar over a professionally trained cadaver scent detecting dog. To me that says a lot about you. Eddie was not wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 30, 2017, 11:15:22 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 30, 2017, 10:25:18 AM
That Eddie alerted in the wrong place according to you - you believe the word of a murderer/liar over a professionally trained cadaver scent detecting dog. To me that says a lot about you. Eddie was not wrong.

Which Murderer/Liar?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 30, 2017, 11:22:42 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 30, 2017, 11:15:22 AM
Which Murderer/Liar?
Seems like PF thesis and freedom of speech is being exercised.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 30, 2017, 02:13:56 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 30, 2017, 10:25:18 AM
That Eddie alerted in the wrong place according to you - you believe the word of a murderer/liar over a professionally trained cadaver scent detecting dog. To me that says a lot about you. Eddie was not wrong.
So you dispute the established facts of the case then - that Prout murdered his wife in the lodge, bundled her body into the landrover and buried her on the grounds of his farm, all locations that the dog failed to alert to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 30, 2017, 02:30:37 PM
Quote from: Alfie on March 30, 2017, 02:13:56 PM
So you dispute the established facts of the case then - that Prout murdered his wife in the lodge, bundled her body into the landrover and buried her on the grounds of his farm, all locations that the dog failed to alert to?

The body was found well wrapped in plastic sheeting so scent could not escape.  Can you provide any evidence found at the lodge?

"Mrs Prout's remains were found wrapped in a curtain and plastic sheeting, the inquest was told."

Where was the curtain taken by cadaver hands?

"A millionaire farmer "snapped" and strangled his wife during an argument before sitting down to a glass of whisky."

Where was he sitting? Eddie alerted at the sofa.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 30, 2017, 05:06:23 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 30, 2017, 02:30:37 PM
The body was found well wrapped in plastic sheeting so scent could not escape.  Can you provide any evidence found at the lodge?

"Mrs Prout's remains were found wrapped in a curtain and plastic sheeting, the inquest was told."

Where was the curtain taken by cadaver hands?

"A millionaire farmer "snapped" and strangled his wife during an argument before sitting down to a glass of whisky."

Where was he sitting? Eddie alerted at the sofa.

You must remember cadaver scent is only transferable in certain cases, in the other ones it means a body must have been there. &%+((£
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 30, 2017, 05:07:21 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 30, 2017, 05:06:23 PM
You must remember cadaver scent is only transferable in certain cases, in the other ones it means a body must have been there. &%+((£

who told you that rubbish
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 30, 2017, 05:58:19 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 30, 2017, 05:06:23 PM
You must remember cadaver scent is only transferable in certain cases, in the other ones it means a body must have been there. &%+((£

You will need to post a cite for that ... and when you can't, you should really withdraw the misinformation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 30, 2017, 06:04:14 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 30, 2017, 05:58:19 PM
You will need to post a cite for that ... and when you can't, you should really withdraw the misinformation.

Whoosh. It was claimed that the dog alerted in the wrong places in an investigation which led to a convicted murderer yet we are constantly reminded about transference of cadaver scent. Posters can't have it both ways.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 30, 2017, 06:07:41 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 30, 2017, 05:06:23 PM
You must remember cadaver scent is only transferable in certain cases, in the other ones it means a body must have been there. &%+((£
I am not disputing Eddie's alert in the lounge of the Prout house which was probably as a result of transferrance, only pointing out that he failed to alert in a number of more obvious places where the body had definitely been.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on March 30, 2017, 06:08:30 PM
Quote from: Alfie on March 30, 2017, 06:07:41 PM
I am not disputing Eddie's alert in the lounge of the Prout house which was probably as a result of transferrance, only pointing out that he failed to alert in a number of more obvious places where the body had definitely been.

But it was known to have been well wrapped up?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on March 30, 2017, 06:10:02 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 30, 2017, 06:08:30 PM
But it was known to have been well wrapped up?
Then how did the cadaver odour get into the lounge but not the landrover or the lodge?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 30, 2017, 06:12:30 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 30, 2017, 05:06:23 PM
You must remember cadaver scent is only transferable in certain cases, in the other ones it means a body must have been there. &%+((£

 This just not true.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on March 30, 2017, 06:19:18 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 30, 2017, 05:06:23 PM
You must remember cadaver scent is only transferable in certain cases, in the other ones it means a body must have been there. &%+((£

In his rogatory interview Martin Grime was asked:

Quote
'How long does a cadaver have to be in contact with a surface or an object for the odour to be detected''

And Grime's response

Cross-contamination is immediate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 30, 2017, 07:14:58 PM
Quote from: ferryman on March 30, 2017, 06:19:18 PM
In his rogatory interview Martin Grime was asked:

And Grime's response

Cross-contamination is immediate.

That rather depends on the post-mortem interval. A person killed at 1am would not contaminate anything at
 1.01 am.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 30, 2017, 07:15:54 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on March 30, 2017, 05:06:23 PM
You must remember cadaver scent is only transferable in certain cases, in the other ones it means a body must have been there. &%+((£
The logic seems wrong there Slarti.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 30, 2017, 07:18:33 PM
Quote from: misty on March 30, 2017, 07:14:58 PM
That rather depends on the post-mortem interval. A person killed at 1am would not contaminate anything at
 1.01 am.
This seems to be the important issue being missed in the previous discussion, the timeline.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 30, 2017, 07:42:27 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 30, 2017, 07:18:33 PM
This seems to be the important issue being missed in the previous discussion, the timeline.

Agreed. For the cadaver dog to have alerted to the wardrobe a body with a post-mortem time of at least 75mins would have had to have been in there. That doesn't explain the lack of alerts to all the other items pictured in the wardrobe as shown in the crime scene photos.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 30, 2017, 07:46:20 PM
Quote from: misty on March 30, 2017, 07:42:27 PM
Agreed. For the cadaver dog to have alerted to the wardrobe a body with a post-mortem time of at least 75mins would have had to have been in there. That doesn't explain the lack of alerts to all the other items pictured in the wardrobe as shown in the crime scene photos.
It gets worse than that too for the dogs didn't arrive till months later.  The time interval before the test was run will mean the signal strength needed to be stronger (long postmortem interval longer) to begin with.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 05, 2017, 02:19:15 PM
Here's one Pegasus would really like as regards incomplete searching. I heard about it today on the radio. Apparently dogs were also used in the searches (but again, presumably not inside the family home).


http://metro.co.uk/2017/04/04/missing-boy-9-found-under-his-bed-6553326/

Ashitha Nagesh for Metro.co.ukTuesday 4 Apr 2017 2:40 pm

A nine-year-old boy who sparked a major police search after disappearing overnight has been found ‘under his bed’.
Josh Dinning went to bed at around 9.30pm, but when his parents went to wake him up for school he appeared to have vanished.
But after a massive helicopter search, it has been revealed that he was in his room the whole time.
Josh’s older brother, Scott, told local paper Chronicle Live that he was found ‘under a bed’.

‘I was just sitting outside the house when all of a sudden I heard someone saying, “he is here”,’ Scott told the paper.
Apparently Josh had got into the cabinet under the bed. It’s one of those beds that has sliding doors, and somehow he got himself inside and shut the doors.’
Detective Chief Superintendent Vanessa Jardine confirmed that he had been found ‘safe and well’.
As well as the police helicopter search, officers also patrolled a nearby river.

=======================================================================


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 05, 2017, 10:35:24 PM
Was Pegasus saying that the apartment 5A may not have been searched sufficiently enough?  I can only imagine what that means.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 05, 2017, 11:00:49 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 05, 2017, 10:35:24 PM
Was Pegasus saying that the apartment 5A may not have been searched sufficiently enough?  I can only imagine what that means.

Yes. There have been many discussions about this. Only one GNR officer searched the premises on the night of 3rd. There was no evidence in the statements showing exactly where various people searched within the apartment & its immediate boundary.
Given that there have been more than a couple of UK cases in recent years relating to children who have been reported missing & subsequently found to have been in the home all along, this latest case shows that UK police still don't seem to have learned lessons & ensured the home is properly searched before additional resources are mobilised.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 05, 2017, 11:19:59 PM
Quote from: misty on April 05, 2017, 11:00:49 PM
Yes. There have been many discussions about this. Only one GNR officer searched the premises on the night of 3rd. There was no evidence in the statements showing exactly where various people searched within the apartment & its immediate boundary.
Given that there have been more than a couple of UK cases in recent years relating to children who have been reported missing & subsequently found to have been in the home all along, this latest case shows that UK police still don't seem to have learned lessons & ensured the home is properly searched before additional resources are mobilised.
That doesn't make much sense either does it if you combine Pegasus and and Amaral's theory together. 
The McCann's find MM deceased, and hide her within the apartment, raise the alarm and let everyone else check to see if they can find her.  That would be one of the weirdest crime scenarios I've ever heard.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 05, 2017, 11:34:41 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 05, 2017, 11:19:59 PM
That doesn't make much sense either does it if you combine Pegasus and and Amaral's theory together. 
The McCann's find MM deceased, and hide her within the apartment, raise the alarm and let everyone else check to see if they can find her.  That would be one of the weirdest crime scenarios I've ever heard.

The McCanns don't have to find Madeleine deceased. She may have hidden after being frightened by someone opening her bedroom shutters & window. An incomplete search may have failed to find her before everyone vacated the apartment. That doesn't explain what happened next, though.

In the case of Josh yesterday, it flies in the face of logic that a 9 year old should remain hidden if people are shouting his name & searching, yet it happened. I don't yet know if he was just asleep or deliberately hiding.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 06, 2017, 01:34:17 AM
Quote from: misty on April 05, 2017, 11:34:41 PM
The McCanns don't have to find Madeleine deceased. She may have hidden after being frightened by someone opening her bedroom shutters & window. An incomplete search may have failed to find her before everyone vacated the apartment. That doesn't explain what happened next, though.

In the case of Josh yesterday, it flies in the face of logic that a 9 year old should remain hidden if people are shouting his name & searching, yet it happened. I don't yet know if he was just asleep or deliberately hiding.
Seems unlikely considering the number of people checking for Madeleine within the apartment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 06, 2017, 05:01:29 PM
Danny Collins LOL.

(https://i.servimg.com/u/f58/18/53/59/39/crap110.jpg)

Ten years on, Spanish-based investigative journalist Danny Collins has returned to Praia da Luz to re-examine the case. This is the story of what happened on that terrible night and what has followed since, piecing together the clues and false leads from the original investigation with the Metropolitan Police's efforts in recent years to find Madeleine and solve one of the most talked-about cases of the century.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/Books/Vanished-Disappearance-Madeline-McCann-Danny-Collins/1786062720
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 06, 2017, 05:10:55 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on April 06, 2017, 05:01:29 PM
Danny Collins LOL.

(https://i.servimg.com/u/f58/18/53/59/39/crap110.jpg)

Ten years on, Spanish-based investigative journalist Danny Collins has returned to Praia da Luz to re-examine the case. This is the story of what happened on that terrible night and what has followed since, piecing together the clues and false leads from the original investigation with the Metropolitan Police's efforts in recent years to find Madeleine and solve one of the most talked-about cases of the century.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/Books/Vanished-Disappearance-Madeline-McCann-Danny-Collins/1786062720

Merrily making up the story as he goes along, I see. Unlikely to contain anything of interest therefore.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 06, 2017, 05:14:56 PM
Another work of fiction. Perhaps McCanns will attempt to sue him for telling lies about them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on April 06, 2017, 05:32:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2017, 05:10:55 PM
Merrily making up the story as he goes along, I see. Unlikely to contain anything of interest therefore.

" Merrily making up the story as he goes along", much the same as Amaral then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 06, 2017, 05:41:26 PM
Quote from: Erngath on April 06, 2017, 05:32:21 PM
" Merrily making up the story as he goes along", much the same as Amaral then.

Amaral's facts are in the files, Collins' facts are wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 06, 2017, 05:51:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2017, 05:41:26 PM
Amaral's facts are in the files, Collins' facts are wrong.
What I worry about is that Amaral made sure his "facts" were in the file before he resigned.  He set up "facts" without any factual basis in other words.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 06, 2017, 06:01:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2017, 05:41:26 PM
Amaral's facts are in the files, Collins' facts are wrong.

many of amarals facts are wrong too
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 06, 2017, 06:09:43 PM
Quote from: davel on April 06, 2017, 06:01:09 PM
many of amarals facts are wrong too

To this day,SY nor the counterparts in the PJ have come with anything different.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 06, 2017, 06:27:25 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 06, 2017, 06:09:43 PM
To this day,SY nor the counterparts in the PJ have come with anything different.

some of amarals facts are wrong....such as there are no confirmed alerts to cadaver odour and no dna match to maddie...there is no evidence of cadaver in the apartment...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 06, 2017, 07:58:33 PM
Quote from: davel on April 06, 2017, 06:01:09 PM
many of amarals facts are wrong too

Amaral repeats what the investigation found and thought. Collins hasn't even checked the very simple easy to verify whereabouts of the McCanns on 3rd May. We know for sure they were not at the Paraiso that evening. There's no excuse for such a lack of research.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 06, 2017, 08:01:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2017, 07:58:33 PM
Amaral repeats what the investigation found and thought. Collins hasn't even checked the very simple easy to verify whereabouts of the McCanns on 3rd May. We know for sure they were not at the Paraiso that evening. There's no excuse for such a lack of research.

in his book amaral says a lot more ...much of it total BS....thers no excuse for total ignorance......which is much worse as amaral was the coordinator of the investigation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 06, 2017, 08:03:56 PM
Theres just something about Mr Amaral and the dogs that irk.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 06, 2017, 08:09:54 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 06, 2017, 08:03:56 PM
Theres just something about Mr Amaral and the dogs that irk.
simply that the less informed do not understand them...and it seems that includes amaral...im perfectly happy with what grime and harrison say about the alerts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 06, 2017, 10:09:17 PM
Quote from: davel on April 06, 2017, 08:09:54 PM
simply that the less informed do not understand them...and it seems that includes amaral...im perfectly happy with what grime and harrison say about the alerts
Careful you might offend someone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 07, 2017, 08:47:03 AM
Quote from: davel on April 06, 2017, 08:01:39 PM
in his book amaral says a lot more ...much of it total BS....thers no excuse for total ignorance......which is much worse as amaral was the coordinator of the investigation

You make many claims about Amaral's book. but seem unable to provide cites to support your allegations. Rumours of what he said are worthless, provide cites!

There's no excuse for total ignorance whoever you are. If Collins can't get the simple facts right it nullifies anything else he might say.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 07, 2017, 09:03:35 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 06, 2017, 08:03:56 PM
Theres just something about Mr Amaral and the dogs that irk.

I'm coming round to the point of view that constant referral to the mistaken analysis of the dog indications may be a libel directed at Kate and Gerry McCann.
The dog owner's report and the FSS report is very clear on the matter; thinking it is otherwise does not make it so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on April 07, 2017, 09:28:36 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 07, 2017, 09:03:35 AM
I'm coming round to the point of view that constant referral to the mistaken analysis of the dog indications may be a libel directed at Kate and Gerry McCann.
The dog owner's report and the FSS report is very clear on the matter; thinking it is otherwise does not make it so.

The alerts happened, as the experts have said, it doesn't point the finger at anyone and cannot be used in court. Discussion of the alerts is not libel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 07, 2017, 09:33:01 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on April 07, 2017, 09:28:36 AM
The alerts happened, as the experts have said, it doesn't point the finger at anyone and cannot be used in court. Discussion of the alerts is not libel.

There is no discussion re the alerts
No inference can be drawn from them according to the experts and they have no evidential reliability in or out of court
The only thing that irks is the sceptics inability to understand this
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on April 07, 2017, 09:39:07 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on April 07, 2017, 09:28:36 AM
The alerts happened, as the experts have said, it doesn't point the finger at anyone and cannot be used in court. Discussion of the alerts is not libel.

Precisely Slarti.

Discussion of the alerts is not libel.

The alerts happened.

What has been repeatedly shown on this forum, and elsewhere, including Gerry McCann's attempt, FAILED, to bring the matter up in court , is how the McCann's and their main backers are totally obsessed with the dogs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 09:55:20 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 07, 2017, 09:39:07 AM
Precisely Slarti.

Discussion of the alerts is not libel.

The alerts happened.

What has been repeatedly shown on this forum, and elsewhere, including Gerry McCann's attempt, FAILED, to bring the matter up in court , is how the McCann's and their main backers are totally obsessed with the dogs.
You always play this mind game method, and never put up a convincing argument.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on April 07, 2017, 09:57:53 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 09:55:20 AM
You always play this mind game method, and never put up a convincing argument.

It is not a mind game.

What I stated is fact.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 07, 2017, 10:01:23 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on April 07, 2017, 09:28:36 AM
The alerts happened, as the experts have said, it doesn't point the finger at anyone and cannot be used in court. Discussion of the alerts is not libel.

If the alerts cannot be used in court what is the point of the dogs in any case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 10:03:12 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 07, 2017, 09:57:53 AM
It is not a mind game.

What I stated is fact.
It might be factual somewhere in the past but there was no fact in what you said.
"What has been repeatedly shown on this forum, and elsewhere, including Gerry McCann's attempt, FAILED, to bring the matter up in court , is how the McCann's and their main backers are totally obsessed with the dogs."

Show us proof of that?

Quote from: barrier on April 07, 2017, 10:01:23 AM
If the alerts cannot be used in court what is the point of the dogs in any case?
They may have identified where a body was hidden. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 07, 2017, 10:05:50 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 10:03:12 AM

They may have identified where a body was hidden.

In the apartment months after the reported disappearance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 07, 2017, 10:10:17 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 07, 2017, 10:01:23 AM
If the alerts cannot be used in court what is the point of the dogs in any case?

Do you not understand why the dogs were brought in
They are brought in to find evidence
It's in the files as to why they were brought in
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 07, 2017, 10:12:31 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 07, 2017, 09:39:07 AM
Precisely Slarti.

Discussion of the alerts is not libel.

The alerts happened.

What has been repeatedly shown on this forum, and elsewhere, including Gerry McCann's attempt, FAILED, to bring the matter up in court , is how the McCann's and their main backers are totally obsessed with the dogs.

You seem to be obsessed with referring to people as obsessed
LOL
The alerts are meaningless without forensic corroboration
Sceptics do not understand the alerts
That's why they are sceptics
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 10:15:23 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 07, 2017, 10:05:50 AM
In the apartment months after the reported disappearance?
Yeah it is odd, but it added to the psychological pressure on the arguidos Kate and Gerry.  It was possible to elicit a confession, but no confession was offered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on April 07, 2017, 10:20:02 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2017, 08:47:03 AM
You make many claims about Amaral's book. but seem unable to provide cites to support your allegations. Rumours of what he said are worthless, provide cites!

There's no excuse for total ignorance whoever you are. If Collins can't get the simple facts right it nullifies anything else he might say.

I can only assume you haven't read Amaral's book.

With regard to not getting simple facts right -  he claims JT 'formally' identified Murat.    That is untrue - and there is nothing in the files to support his claim.

He states as a fact that it was definitely Madeleine who was heard crying on he 1st May - even though she was never named as definitely being that child  in a statement.    He refers to  'a neighbour' who claims to have heard Madeleine crying for 1.l/4 hrs to avoid mentioning Mrs Fenn's name.   

He then goes on to claim that Madeleine spoke to her parents the very next morning (the 2nd).  That is untrue. IMO he changed the date from the true date of the 3rd to the 2nd  in an attempt to convince the reader it WAS Madeleine who cried the night before on the 1st.     

Amaral then claims that Madeleine asked her parents why they didn't come when SHE cried.   No mention of Sean at all - thus removing the inconvenient fact that Mrs Fenn only heard one child crying and not two as claimed by Madeleine. 

IMO the above are several examples of him 'not getting simple facts right'.   His book is littered with them

AIMHO



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 07, 2017, 10:35:29 AM
Quote from: davel on April 07, 2017, 10:10:17 AM
Do you not understand why the dogs were brought in
They are brought in to find evidence
It's in the files as to why they were brought in

I know and they alerted to what they were trained for,its still not established to whom the alerts belonged to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 10:40:05 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 07, 2017, 10:35:29 AM
I know and they alerted to what they were trained for,its still not established to whom the alerts belonged to.
But if you are game enough to say the alerts were to someone other than Madeleine you will be cut down.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 07, 2017, 12:03:40 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 10:40:05 AM
But if you are game enough to say the alerts were to someone other than Madeleine you will be cut down.
Not true.  The dogs could both have alerted to human blood deposited before Madeleine entered 5A or after Madeleine disappeared.

There is simply no requirement for a dead body, even if the dogs were alerting to Madeleine or to A N Other.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 12:07:36 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 07, 2017, 12:03:40 PM
Not true.  The dogs could both have alerted to human blood deposited before Madeleine entered 5A or after Madeleine disappeared.

There is simply no requirement for a dead body, even if the dogs were alerting to Madeleine or to A N Other.
In the main bedroom there was no blood found so what was that?
Eddie would alert to blood where the blood had putrefied.  If there was no putrefied blood what else did he alert to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on April 07, 2017, 01:21:43 PM
Quote from: davel on April 07, 2017, 10:12:31 AM
You seem to be obsessed with referring to people as obsessed
LOL
The alerts are meaningless without forensic corroboration
Sceptics do not understand the alerts
That's why they are sceptics


Amaral is not needed to disbelieve the McCann's story of abduction, or consideration of the dogs indications.

It is already known they lack corroboration. It doesn't mean though, that the dogs didn't alert to the possible presence of a body.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 07, 2017, 01:23:33 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 07, 2017, 10:35:29 AM
I know and they alerted to what they were trained for,its still not established to whom the alerts belonged to.

As I said you don't understand
No one knows what they alerted too
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 07, 2017, 01:25:14 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 07, 2017, 01:21:43 PM

Amaral is not needed to disbelieve the McCann's story of abduction, or consideration of the dogs indications.

It is already known they lack corroboration. It doesn't mean though, that the dogs didn't alert to the possible presence of a body.

And it doesn't mean they did
So it doesn't mean anything
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on April 07, 2017, 01:29:38 PM
The dogs made multiple alerts.

Dogs don't have an agenda.

They respond to stimuli.

End of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 07, 2017, 01:47:40 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 07, 2017, 01:29:38 PM
The dogs made multiple alerts.

Dogs don't have an agenda.

They respond to stimuli.

End of.

They could have made a million alerts
No one knows what they alerted to
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 07, 2017, 02:05:54 PM
Quote from: davel on April 07, 2017, 01:23:33 PM
As I said you don't understand
No one knows what they alerted too

There in maybe lies a problem,the dogs alert to what they are trained for but humans can't figure it out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 07, 2017, 02:09:53 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 07, 2017, 02:05:54 PM
There in maybe lies a problem,the dogs alert to what they are trained for but humans can't figure it out.
You don't know what the dogs alerted to but you think you do
No one knows what the dogs alerted to
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 07, 2017, 02:13:25 PM
Quote from: Benice on April 07, 2017, 10:20:02 AM
I can only assume you haven't read Amaral's book.

With regard to not getting simple facts right -  he claims JT 'formally' identified Murat.    That is untrue - and there is nothing in the files to support his claim.

He states as a fact that it was definitely Madeleine who was heard crying on he 1st May - even though she was never named as definitely being that child  in a statement.    He refers to  'a neighbour' who claims to have heard Madeleine crying for 1.l/4 hrs to avoid mentioning Mrs Fenn's name.   

He then goes on to claim that Madeleine spoke to her parents the very next morning (the 2nd).  That is untrue. IMO he changed the date from the true date of the 3rd to the 2nd  in an attempt to convince the reader it WAS Madeleine who cried the night before on the 1st.     

Amaral then claims that Madeleine asked her parents why they didn't come when SHE cried.   No mention of Sean at all - thus removing the inconvenient fact that Mrs Fenn only heard one child crying and not two as claimed by Madeleine. 

IMO the above are several examples of him 'not getting simple facts right'.   His book is littered with them

AIMHO

I was asking amother poster for cites, but thanks for your efforts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on April 07, 2017, 02:25:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2017, 02:13:25 PM
I was asking amother poster for cites, but thanks for your efforts.
How very patronizing.   The cite is Amaral's book.  Read it, and you will find numerous instances of him getting things hopelessly wrong, things which have been discussed on this forum numerous times already.  All this demanding cites business is just another way of deflecting, all very childish IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 07, 2017, 03:06:33 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 12:07:36 PM
In the main bedroom there was no blood found so what was that?
Eddie would alert to blood where the blood had putrefied.  If there was no putrefied blood what else did he alert to?
Does it matter?

AFAIK, the only specimen the FSS tested for blood was a sample of plant from the garden and they did not find any.

Plus Grime chose to explain Eddie's response by saying it might have an origin elsewhere.

There is nothing that would stand up in a court of law that there was a dead body in 5A.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on April 07, 2017, 05:47:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2017, 02:13:25 PM
I was asking amother poster for cites, but thanks for your efforts.

My pleasure.

Here's another example of Amaral not being able to get simple facts right.

Chapter 4.TTOTL

Blood markers on the wall behind the sofa.

Other than her sleep problems, it is possible that Madeleine suffered from an illness, a hypothesis that was never confirmed. Immediately after the discovery of traces of blood in the apartment, the mother, in the course of an interview with a Portuguese magazine, revealed that Madeleine had had a nose bleed. But the bleeding could be associated with certain pathologies.
End quote

Simple fact  - no blood was found to be on the wall behind the settee - and yet Amaral claims it to be a fact.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 06:54:15 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 07, 2017, 01:21:43 PM

Amaral is not needed to disbelieve the McCann's story of abduction, or consideration of the dogs indications.

It is already known they lack corroboration. It doesn't mean though, that the dogs didn't alert to the possible presence of a body.
Eddie the cadaver dog alerted to the possible presence of a body.  You and I agree on this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 06:55:44 PM
Quote from: davel on April 07, 2017, 01:23:33 PM
As I said you don't understand
No one knows what they alerted too
Probability dictates they alerted to what they were trained to find.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 07, 2017, 07:04:19 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 06:55:44 PM
Probability dictates they alerted to what they were trained to find.

No it doesn't
There are no scientific studies to support what unconfirmed alerts relate to
Grime was asked twice if the alerts confirmed the presence of cadaver odour and he failed to answer the question on both occasions
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 07:17:12 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 07, 2017, 03:06:33 PM
Does it matter?

AFAIK, the only specimen the FSS tested for blood was a sample of plant from the garden and they did not find any.

Plus Grime chose to explain Eddie's response by saying it might have an origin elsewhere.

There is nothing that would stand up in a court of law that there was a dead body in 5A.
I agree that there is no evidence "that would stand up in a court of law that there was a dead body in 5A" but the intelligence it gives the investigators (from the bedroom alert) was that there was the possibility there had been a dead body that had been dead for more than a couple of hours.
So if you are looking at any surface and there clearly isn't a body on it at the time of the 10:00 Kate's alert "there was the possibility there had been a dead body [on that surface] that had been dead for more than a couple of hours".
In other words it implies that whoever died (if it was a deceased person) had to have died earlier in the night, or died later and was missed during the search. 
To explain how a  deceased person could have been in the apartment but not found during the search is the reason why the sports bag features in all the inquiries, for maybe the insides of sport bags were not checked by the PJ immediately after they arrived.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 07:24:53 PM
Quote from: davel on April 07, 2017, 07:04:19 PM
No it doesn't
There are no scientific studies to support what unconfirmed alerts relate to
Grime was asked twice if the alerts confirmed the presence of cadaver odour and he failed to answer the question on both occasions
Well the word "confirmed" makes the question tricky for it doesn't confirm anything, but probability is that if there is an alert it is an alert to whatever he was trained to find. 
For even you must agree that in the experiments where they moved cadavers after so many hours and then put the cadaver dogs to the test that the dogs were found to alert to the places where the cadavers had lain.  OK those spots where the alerts happened were unconfirmed from the forensic point of view but the experimenters knew a body had been there.

Therefore whenever a cadaver dog alerts to a spot one would have to consider it possible that a deceased body (more than 2 hours old) had lain here in the past.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 07, 2017, 07:30:55 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 07:17:12 PM
I agree that there is no evidence "that would stand up in a court of law that there was a dead body in 5A" but the intelligence it gives the investigators (from the bedroom alert) was that there was the possibility there had been a dead body that had been dead for more than a couple of hours.
So if you are looking at any surface and there clearly isn't a body on it at the time of the 10:00 Kate's alert "there was the possibility there had been a dead body [on that surface] that had been dead for more than a couple of hours".
In other words it implies that whoever died (if it was a deceased person) had to have died earlier in the night, or died later and was missed during the search. 
To explain how a  deceased person could have been in the apartment but not found during the search is the reason why the sports bag features in all the inquiries, for maybe the insides of sport bags were not checked by the PJ immediately after they arrived.
Is there something about the word 'bled' you don't understand.

Eddie alerted to the Scenic key-fob.  Keela alerted to the Scenic key-fob.  The FSS identified the DNA in the sample as Gerry's.  Not Gerry and someone else, just Gerry.  Gerry is not dead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 07:35:04 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 07, 2017, 07:30:55 PM
Is there something about the word 'bled' you don't understand.

Eddie alerted to the Scenic key-fob.  Keela alerted to the Scenic key-fob.  The FSS identified the DNA in the sample as Gerry's.  Not Gerry and someone else, just Gerry.  Gerry is not dead.
We've been over this previously and the key fob could have Gerry's blood on it and cadaver odour from another source.  The odour doesn't come from the dried blood unless it putrefied on the fob.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 07, 2017, 07:38:34 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 07:35:04 PM
We've been over this previously and the key fob could have Gerry's blood on it and cadaver odour from another source.  The odour doesn't come from the dried blood unless it putrefied on the fob.
The FSS detected only Gerry.  It did not detect DNA from a magical second source.  Did it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 07:45:17 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 07, 2017, 07:38:34 PM
The FSS detected only Gerry.  It did not detect DNA from a magical second source.  Did it?
Cadaver odour (whatever it is) permeates plastic bags so it can be there without DNA being present.  DNA can't penetrate a plastic bag.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 07, 2017, 07:51:07 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 07:45:17 PM
The cadaver odour permeates plastic bags so it can be there without DNA being present.
Cite
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 08:12:13 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 07, 2017, 07:51:07 PM
Cite
http://www.csst.org/cadaver_scent.html
"ICF RESERCH PAPER #97-1-1: POST- MORTEM INTERVAL FOR WHICH TRAINED K9s DIFFERENTIATE LIVE HUMAN SCENT vs DECOMP SCENT

*All post-mortem scent samples consist of sterile gauze pads, (sealed until just prior to use) placed on abdominal area of decedent for exactly 20 minutes. Gauze pads are then placed in unused plastic bags and double sealed with packing tape. All post-mortem scent samples are handled with latex gloves, and at no time do these samples come in skin contact with live human scent.
*All Live Human scent samples are placed on the abdominal area of a living person for exactly 20 minutes, then placed in unused plastic bags and double sealed in the same manner as the post-mortem samples.

The experiment test how long it took the odour to be detected after coming through the double sealed plastic bag.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 07, 2017, 08:19:07 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 08:12:13 PM
http://www.csst.org/cadaver_scent.html
"ICF RESERCH PAPER #97-1-1: POST- MORTEM INTERVAL FOR WHICH TRAINED K9s DIFFERENTIATE LIVE HUMAN SCENT vs DECOMP SCENT

*All post-mortem scent samples consist of sterile gauze pads, (sealed until just prior to use) placed on abdominal area of decedent for exactly 20 minutes. Gauze pads are then placed in unused plastic bags and double sealed with packing tape. All post-mortem scent samples are handled with latex gloves, and at no time do these samples come in skin contact with live human scent.
*All Live Human scent samples are placed on the abdominal area of a living person for exactly 20 minutes, then placed in unused plastic bags and double sealed in the same manner as the post-mortem samples.

The experiment test how long it took the odour to be detected after coming through the double sealed plastic bag.
The experiment was conducted with gauze pads.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 08:24:10 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 07, 2017, 08:19:07 PM
The experiment was conducted with gauze pads.
Gauze pads are easier to carry around compared to a whole cadaver and additionally how long could a living person survive sealed in a double sealed plastic bag?
I only used that cite to show that cadaver odour permeates the plastic bags.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 07, 2017, 09:15:03 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 08:24:10 PM
Gauze pads are easier to carry around compared to a whole cadaver and additionally how long could a living person survive sealed in a double sealed plastic bag?
I only used that cite to show that cadaver odour permeates the plastic bags.
It doesn't.  That why the scent pads were inside plastic bags.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 07, 2017, 09:19:13 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 07:24:53 PM
Well the word "confirmed" makes the question tricky for it doesn't confirm anything, but probability is that if there is an alert it is an alert to whatever he was trained to find. 
For even you must agree that in the experiments where they moved cadavers after so many hours and then put the cadaver dogs to the test that the dogs were found to alert to the places where the cadavers had lain.  OK those spots where the alerts happened were unconfirmed from the forensic point of view but the experimenters knew a body had been there.

Therefore whenever a cadaver dog alerts to a spot one would have to consider it possible that a deceased body (more than 2 hours old) had lain here in the past.

so what probability that a cadaver had been in 5a and what do you base your estimate  on
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 11:33:19 PM
Quote from: davel on April 07, 2017, 09:19:13 PM
so what probability that a cadaver had been in 5a and what do you base your estimate  on
For Eddie I believe he had an efficiency of over 95%.  I think that was from his training runs  everyday Martin tested Eddie and 95% of the time he would find the sample.
Because there was no blood in the bedroom there is no confusion caused by putrefied blood.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 11:37:46 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 07, 2017, 09:15:03 PM
It doesn't.  That why the scent pads were inside plastic bags.
OK so they put the scent pads inside the sealed bags and then what?  I would say the experiment works because the odour permeates through the plastic bags.  I'm going to have to understand the whole study by the looks of it.

The result was interesting "PRELIMINARY RESULTS: The shortest post-mortem interval for which we received a correct response was one hour and 25 minutes. However, the post-mortem interval for which we received a consistently correct response from all dogs involved is 2.5 - 3 hours."

"All of the dogs used in this project have been "cross-trained", that is trained in both the discipline of finding and indicating on live human scent and also on post-mortem (cadaver) scent. *"  This is different to Eddie who was only trained to find cadaver odour.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 01:24:30 AM
OK so they put the scent pads inside the sealed bags and then what? they opened the bags after that.  OK the test wasn't run using sealed bags.
But from personal experience I'd say a plastic bag would not be that effective in containing the odour of a cadaver
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 08, 2017, 02:50:45 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 11:37:46 PM
OK so they put the scent pads inside the sealed bags and then what?  I would say the experiment works because the odour permeates through the plastic bags.  I'm going to have to understand the whole study by the looks of it.

The result was interesting "PRELIMINARY RESULTS: The shortest post-mortem interval for which we received a correct response was one hour and 25 minutes. However, the post-mortem interval for which we received a consistently correct response from all dogs involved is 2.5 - 3 hours."

"All of the dogs used in this project have been "cross-trained", that is trained in both the discipline of finding and indicating on live human scent and also on post-mortem (cadaver) scent. *"  This is different to Eddie who was only trained to find cadaver odour.
How simple does the report have to be?

The pads went into plastic bags to keep the smell in.

Then the pads came out of the bags to conduct the test.

There is nothing about the smell permeating plastic bags.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 06:07:03 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 08, 2017, 02:50:45 AM
How simple does the report have to be?

The pads went into plastic bags to keep the smell in.

Then the pads came out of the bags to conduct the test.

There is nothing about the smell permeating plastic bags.
So if you murder someone "just put them in a sealed plastic bag and you won't get caught out by cadaver dogs".  I don't think so as I'm sure the cadaver odour permeates through a plastic liner/plastic bag. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 08, 2017, 07:41:21 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 07, 2017, 11:33:19 PM
For Eddie I believe he had an efficiency of over 95%.  I think that was from his training runs  everyday Martin tested Eddie and 95% of the time he would find the sample.
Because there was no blood in the bedroom there is no confusion caused by putrefied blood.

Eddie has no proven track record
It's all anecdotal
Amaral claimed Eddie had solved 200 crimes
More rubbish
Eddie will find cadaver odour if it's there
But we have no idea how significant unconfirmed alerts are
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 08:17:29 AM
Quote from: davel on April 08, 2017, 07:41:21 AM
Eddie has no proven track record
It's all anecdotal
Amaral claimed Eddie had solved 200 crimes
More rubbish
Eddie will find cadaver odour if it's there
But we have no idea how significant unconfirmed alerts are
Do you realise he gets training exercises everyday?  So I'm not considering cases as Amaral did.
In each training exercise he doesn't find a cadaver but a site that has been laced with cadaver odour containing products, which is similar to having an unconfirmed alert everyday.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 08:45:44 AM
Martin Grime: "My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD’s alert indications is that it is suggestive that this is ‘cadaver scent’ contaminant. This does not however suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with corroborating evidence."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 08, 2017, 09:09:08 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 08:45:44 AM
Martin Grime: "My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD’s alert indications is that it is suggestive that this is ‘cadaver scent’ contaminant. This does not however suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with corroborating evidence."

Grime says it is suggestive......not that it is
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 08, 2017, 09:10:13 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 08:17:29 AM
Do you realise he gets training exercises everyday?  So I'm not considering cases as Amaral did.
In each training exercise he doesn't find a cadaver but a site that has been laced with cadaver odour containing products, which is similar to having an unconfirmed alert everyday.

anectdotal..../no scientific evidence to support an unconfirmed alert
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on April 08, 2017, 09:25:31 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 06:07:03 AM
So if you murder someone "just put them in a sealed plastic bag and you won't get caught out by cadaver dogs".  I don't think so as I'm sure the cadaver odour permeates through a plastic liner/plastic bag.
According to Grime it doesn't need to be a plastic bag, a grease proof paper bag is just as effective at blocking all trace of cadaver scent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 09:43:56 AM
Quote from: Alfie on April 08, 2017, 09:25:31 AM
According to Grime it doesn't need to be a plastic bag, a grease proof paper bag is just as effective at blocking all trace of cadaver scent.
You can buy bin liners (200 litre drum sized) that would have enough capacity to hold a body but  I have never come across a large grease proof paper bag.
But my real doubt is that anything like that would really work.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on April 08, 2017, 09:48:37 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 09:43:56 AM
You can buy bin liners that would have enough capacity to hold a body but  I have never come across a large grease proof paper bag.
There was a case (forget the name of the child now) whose dead body was allegedly strapped into a car seat by the father.  Subsequently the car seat was put in a big greaseproof paperbag and that's the reason Grime gave why his dog did not alert to the scent of cadaver dog on it.  You'd have thought they'd have taken the evidence out of the cadaver odour proof paper bag but no.  None too bright these law enforcement types.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 08, 2017, 09:55:47 AM
When you put the body in the bag you will contaminate the outside of the bag
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 10:09:10 AM
Quote from: davel on April 08, 2017, 09:55:47 AM
When you put the body in the bag you will contaminate the outside of the bag
Contaminate with what?  OK if contamination is a problem hose the bag off before moving it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on April 08, 2017, 12:03:41 PM
Quote from: davel on April 08, 2017, 09:55:47 AM
When you put the body in the bag you will contaminate the outside of the bag

Assuming the body had reached the required degree of decomposition.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 01:13:54 PM
Quote from: davel on April 08, 2017, 09:10:13 AM
anectdotal..../no scientific evidence to support an unconfirmed alert
We were discussing the chances of an alert being to the past presence of a  cadaver.  You surely can't deny that there was a chance that a cadaver had been in the apartment that night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 01:16:58 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on April 08, 2017, 12:03:41 PM
Assuming the body had reached the required degree of decomposition.
I think I'd wash it just in case the fresh blood decomposes on the outside of the bag.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 08, 2017, 01:52:11 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 06:07:03 AM
So if you murder someone "just put them in a sealed plastic bag and you won't get caught out by cadaver dogs".  I don't think so as I'm sure the cadaver odour permeates through a plastic liner/plastic bag.
Cite
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on April 08, 2017, 05:39:35 PM
If odour doesn't pass through plastic bags then how does any drug smuggler or terrorist with explosives ever get caught?  &%+((£
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 08, 2017, 06:16:09 PM
Quote from: Alfie on April 08, 2017, 05:39:35 PM
If odour doesn't pass through plastic bags then how does any drug smuggler or terrorist with explosives ever get caught?  &%+((£

It can be presumed that any object placed inside of an airtight bag at some point contacted the outside of the bag itself leaving traces of the scent present. Dogs, depending upon how well they are trained, can easily detect the smell and alert on the suspicious odour.

Even if the substance inside the bag doesn’t contact the outside, when the bag is sealed the odour can spread around the outside as the air is being removed during the sealing process. This can allow the scent to be imparted upon the outside of the bag and it can be detected there.

Odours are small molecules and in the gas phase they can permeate through polymers. Certain polymers will have specific tolerances for certain gases and something like a polyethylene is pretty good for a lot of things, but not everything. This is really a gas permeability problem.  hte diffusion of gas molecules through a plastic bag is determined in general by the ability of the gas to fit through any porosity available in the polymer chains that make up the bag. Practically, this means that the heavier the molecule, the harder time it may have to diffuse. Furthermore the better the snugness/closeness of the polymer chains to one another (the porosity itself) may play some role.  The chemical attraction between diffusing molecule and plastic bag will play some role!


(As quoted by some clever people in another place)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 07:37:23 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 06:07:03 AM
So if you murder someone "just put them in a sealed plastic bag and you won't get caught out by cadaver dogs".  I don't think so as I'm sure the cadaver odour permeates through a plastic liner/plastic bag.
I have been looking for a cite for this but it isn't a fact that is readily publicised.  I'm sure it is there though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 08:05:13 PM
Thinks Misty and Alfie.
I'm sure that DNA molecules are too large to permeate through plastic bag walls.
Cadaverine and putrescine are small molecules and will leak through plastic. 
I'm sure if a seal pack of meat is left out of refrigeration it will become smelly without the need to open it.
Wikipedia:
Putrescine, or tetramethylenediamine, is a foul-smelling[1] organic chemical compound NH2(CH2)4NH2 (1,4-diaminobutane or butanediamine) that is related to cadaverine; both are produced by the breakdown of amino acids in living and dead organisms and both are toxic in large doses.[2][3] The two compounds are largely responsible for the foul odor of putrefying flesh, but also contribute to the odor of such processes as bad breath and bacterial vaginosis.[4] They are also found in semen and some microalgae, together with related molecules like spermine and spermidine.

Cadaverine is a foul-smelling diamine compound produced by the putrefaction of animal tissue. Cadaverine is a toxic[1] diamine with the formula NH2(CH2)5NH2, which is similar to putrescine. Cadaverine is also known by the names 1,5-pentanediamine and pentamethylenediamine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on April 08, 2017, 08:22:59 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 08:05:13 PM
Thinks Misty and Alfie.
I'm sure that DNA molecules are too large to permeate through plastic bag walls.
Cadaverine and putrescine are small molecules and will leak through plastic. 
I'm sure if a seal pack of meat is left out of refrigeration it will become smelly without the need to open it.
Wikipedia:
Putrescine, or tetramethylenediamine, is a foul-smelling[1] organic chemical compound NH2(CH2)4NH2 (1,4-diaminobutane or butanediamine) that is related to cadaverine; both are produced by the breakdown of amino acids in living and dead organisms and both are toxic in large doses.[2][3] The two compounds are largely responsible for the foul odor of putrefying flesh, but also contribute to the odor of such processes as bad breath and bacterial vaginosis.[4] They are also found in semen and some microalgae, together with related molecules like spermine and spermidine.

Cadaverine is a foul-smelling diamine compound produced by the putrefaction of animal tissue. Cadaverine is a toxic[1] diamine with the formula NH2(CH2)5NH2, which is similar to putrescine. Cadaverine is also known by the names 1,5-pentanediamine and pentamethylenediamine.

I feel sure that Misty can advise you on Graham's Law of Diffusion. 8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 08, 2017, 08:27:25 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 08, 2017, 08:22:59 PM
I feel sure that Misty can advise you on Graham's Law of Diffusion. 8(0(*
Graham's law of effusion (sometimes called Graham's law of diffusion) was formulated by Scottish physical chemist Thomas Graham in 1848. Graham found experimentally that the rate of effusion of a gas is inversely proportional to the square root of the mass of its particles.

What is effusion?
Effusion is the process in which a gas escapes through a hole of diameter considerably smaller than the mean free path of the molecules.[1] Under these conditions, essentially all molecules which arrive at the hole continue and pass through the hole, since collisions between molecules in the region of the hole are negligible.

I'm not sure if there are these holes in a plastic body bag.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on April 09, 2017, 07:39:33 PM
' 'HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT' Madeleine McCann could be ‘living with her captor and not even realise she was snatched’, says top cop once in charge of investigation

Maddie, who would now be a teenager, might not even realise she was snatched

By Tracey Kandohla '

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3292563/madeleine-mccann-with-captor-says-top-cop/

So typeth Tracey, close friend of Kate Mccann.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on April 09, 2017, 08:09:04 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 09, 2017, 07:39:33 PM
' 'HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT' Madeleine McCann could be ‘living with her captor and not even realise she was snatched’, says top cop once in charge of investigation

Maddie, who would now be a teenager, might not even realise she was snatched

By Tracey Kandohla '

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3292563/madeleine-mccann-with-captor-says-top-cop/

So typeth Tracey, close friend of Kate Mccann.


Fan  tastic  story. That is what it is fantastic. A little girl as smart as Madeleine doesn't know who she is?  like seriously hahahahaahaha.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 09, 2017, 08:35:41 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 08, 2017, 08:22:59 PM
I feel sure that Misty can advise you on Graham's Law of Diffusion. 8(0(*

I feel more sure that you can advise him far better than I ever could on that subject.  8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on April 09, 2017, 08:37:42 PM
Quote from: misty on April 09, 2017, 08:35:41 PM
I feel more sure that you can advise him far better than I ever could on that subject.  8)--))

Hardly Misty.

I here your specialism is effusion. 8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on April 09, 2017, 08:46:51 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on April 09, 2017, 08:09:04 PM

Fan  tastic  story. That is what it is fantastic. A little girl as smart as Madeleine doesn't know who she is?  like seriously hahahahaahaha.
You think a child taken from her parents before her fourth birthday would certainly know her true identity 10 years later? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 09, 2017, 09:09:53 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 09, 2017, 08:37:42 PM
Hardly Misty.

I here your specialism is effusion. 8(>((

If you believe that myth then never light a match downwind of me. @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on April 09, 2017, 09:20:28 PM
Quote from: misty on April 09, 2017, 09:09:53 PM
If you believe that myth then never light a match downwind of me. @)(++(*

Don't worry, that won't be a problem. 8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 09, 2017, 09:20:52 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 08, 2017, 01:52:11 PM
Cite

Try looking under gas permeability coefficients for polyethylene as a start point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 09, 2017, 10:30:15 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 09, 2017, 09:20:52 PM
Try looking under gas permeability coefficients for polyethylene as a start point.
Do you think they have tested polyethylene for permeability for the two gases putrescine and cadaverine I doubt it very much.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 09, 2017, 10:46:08 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 09, 2017, 10:30:15 PM
Do you think they have tested polyethylene for permeability for the two gases putrescine and cadaverine I doubt it very much.
 

OK then you can find a cite where it says it hasn't been tested, to back your assertion.
Then while your at it find a cite that says a gas of the same molecular density has not been tested. You only have to find one as fat or skinny as the case may be and you have the answer.
You seem to have an objection to working from first principles at anytime. I wonder why that should be so?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 09, 2017, 11:12:59 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on April 09, 2017, 08:37:42 PM
Hardly Misty.

I here your specialism is effusion. 8(>((

would that make your speciality confusion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 10, 2017, 12:05:05 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 09, 2017, 09:20:52 PM
Try looking under gas permeability coefficients for polyethylene as a start point.
Not near a cite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 10, 2017, 12:07:25 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 10, 2017, 12:05:05 AM
Not near a cite.

it seems polythenes are gas permeable and vapours permeate to a greater degree...lots of factors affect the permeability....humidity being important
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 10, 2017, 12:28:39 AM
Quote from: davel on April 10, 2017, 12:07:25 AM
it seems polythenes are gas permeable and vapours permeate to a greater degree...lots of factors affect the permeability....humidity being important
'it seems'

Cite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 10, 2017, 12:31:43 AM
For anyone interested.....

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aic.690150117/abstract
http://www.soarnol.com/eng/solution/solution050723.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 10, 2017, 12:36:17 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 10, 2017, 12:28:39 AM
'it seems'

Cite.

you havent got a clue have you


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aic.690150117/abstract
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 10, 2017, 12:47:57 AM
Quote from: misty on April 10, 2017, 12:31:43 AM
For anyone interested.....

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aic.690150117/abstract
http://www.soarnol.com/eng/solution/solution050723.html
Thank you for this.  Let me see if I can summarise correctly.

In 1969 time, if you blew up a plastic bag to over 8 times normal pressure, it would leak through the 'skin'.

I am not trying to shoot the messenger.  I am not even trying to shoot the message.  I am just asking a simple question.

Do 1969 plastic bags blown up to 8atm relate to the curious case of Madeleine McCann?  Cos I am curious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 10, 2017, 12:55:04 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 10, 2017, 12:47:57 AM
Thank you for this.  Let me see if I can summarise correctly.

In 1969 time, if you blew up a plastic bag to over 8 times normal pressure, it would leak through the 'skin'.

I am not trying to shoot the messenger.  I am not even trying to shoot the message.  I am just asking a simple question.

Do 1969 plastic bags blown up to 8atm relate to the curious case of Madeleine McCann?  Cos I am curious.

It's back to the dogs & the curious cases in which VRDs do not alert to cadavers wrapped tightly in plastic of some description.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 10, 2017, 01:01:06 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 09, 2017, 10:46:08 PM
 

OK then you can find a cite where it says it hasn't been tested, to back your assertion.
Then while your at it find a cite that says a gas of the same molecular density has not been tested. You only have to find one as fat or skinny as the case may be and you have the answer.
You seem to have an objection to working from first principles at anytime. I wonder why that should be so?
I have been working from first principles.  I know from experience that odours like putrescine will permeate plastic bags.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 10, 2017, 01:07:34 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 10, 2017, 01:01:06 AM
I have been working from first principles.  I know from experience that odours like putrescine will permeate plastic bags.

What about tarpaulin?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 10, 2017, 01:10:19 AM
Quote from: misty on April 10, 2017, 01:07:34 AM
What about tarpaulin?
I've never used it to contain bodies.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 10, 2017, 01:23:54 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 10, 2017, 01:10:19 AM
I've never used it to contain bodies.

Just curious, because I read certain heavy duty types have excellent methane permeability but are air & water proof.

Here's a link to a company which produces body bags. I am interested in the hunting bag in connection with another case I am following.
http://www.classicplasticscorp.com/body-bags.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 10, 2017, 03:07:58 AM
Quote from: misty on April 10, 2017, 01:23:54 AM
Just curious, because I read certain heavy duty types have excellent methane permeability but are air & water proof.

Here's a link to a company which produces body bags. I am interested in the hunting bag in connection with another case I am following.
http://www.classicplasticscorp.com/body-bags.html
They seem to have quite a range of body bags no cadaver dog resistant or fool proof murder bags.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 10, 2017, 03:15:56 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 10, 2017, 03:07:58 AM
They seem to have quite a range of body bags no cadaver dog resistant or fool proof murder bags.

Presumably body bags are only intended for short-term use until the cadaver is suitably chilled/embalmed.

I am wondering how long it takes for a body to decompose in an exposed warm location to such an extent that the bacteria are no longer active and odour is minimal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 10, 2017, 03:19:53 AM
Quote from: misty on April 10, 2017, 03:15:56 AM
Presumably body bags are only intended for short-term use until the cadaver is suitably chilled/embalmed.

I am wondering how long it takes for a body to decompose to such an extent that the bacteria are no longer active and odour is minimal.
From my studies on putrescine and cadaverine they are stable so once these chemicals form inside the bag and the bag buried somewhere it might be decades before the odours dissipate.


Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 10, 2017, 12:47:57 AM
Thank you for this.  Let me see if I can summarise correctly.

In 1969 time, if you blew up a plastic bag to over 8 times normal pressure, it would leak through the 'skin'.

I am not trying to shoot the messenger.  I am not even trying to shoot the message.  I am just asking a simple question.

Do 1969 plastic bags blown up to 8atm relate to the curious case of Madeleine McCann?  Cos I am curious.
You must realise how strong a tyre has to be to allow it to hold 30 pounds per square inch (2 atmospheres)  There is no plastic bag that would hold 8 atmospheres of pressure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 10, 2017, 11:43:16 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on April 10, 2017, 03:19:53 AM
From my studies on putrescine and cadaverine they are stable so once these chemicals form inside the bag and the bag buried somewhere it might be decades before the odours dissipate.

You must realise how strong a tyre has to be to allow it to hold 30 pounds per square inch (2 atmospheres)  There is no plastic bag that would hold 8 atmospheres of pressure.
Explain how the study quoted was 8.4atm then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 10, 2017, 12:43:15 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 10, 2017, 11:43:16 AM
Explain how the study quoted was 8.4atm then.
They used "permeability cells"  special apparatus like this (http://top-industrie.com/filemanager/images/large/cellule%20triaxial.JPG)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on April 13, 2017, 01:59:00 PM
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39586391

You might wish to spend two minutes of your time on a video embedded in this report.

The item is about the recent United Airlines incident re overbooking and physically dragging a passenger off.  Specifically, it is about an interview conducted with United Airlines boss Oscar Muniz.

The part pertinent to this forum is 'crisis communications expert' Alex Woolfall analysing the response of Oscar Muniz.  It is the first time I have heard Mr Woolfall explaining in his own words the dos and don'ts of communication in a crisis.

Mr Woolfall's involvement in the Madeleine McCann case is covered on pages 93, 103, 106, 111-113, 121-2, 138 and 211 of Kate's book 'madeleine'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 13, 2017, 08:58:42 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on April 13, 2017, 01:59:00 PM
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39586391

You might wish to spend two minutes of your time on a video embedded in this report.

The item is about the recent United Airlines incident re overbooking and physically dragging a passenger off.  Specifically, it is about an interview conducted with United Airlines boss Oscar Muniz.

The part pertinent to this forum is 'crisis communications expert' Alex Woolfall analysing the response of Oscar Muniz.  It is the first time I have heard Mr Woolfall explaining in his own words the dos and don'ts of communication in a crisis.

Mr Woolfall's involvement in the Madeleine McCann case is covered on pages 93, 103, 106, 111-113, 121-2, 138 and 211 of Kate's book 'madeleine'.

I don't think much expertise is required to know that Muniz was both hesitant & insincere in his apology for the situation which occurred.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 13, 2017, 09:22:54 PM
Quote from: misty on April 10, 2017, 03:15:56 AM
Presumably body bags are only intended for short-term use until the cadaver is suitably chilled/embalmed.

I am wondering how long it takes for a body to decompose in an exposed warm location to such an extent that the bacteria are no longer active and odour is minimal.

May one be so bold as to enquire just what you are contemplating?  ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 14, 2017, 09:18:51 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 13, 2017, 09:22:54 PM
May one be so bold as to enquire just what you are contemplating?  ?{)(**
It is a surprise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 14, 2017, 03:47:42 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on April 13, 2017, 09:22:54 PM
May one be so bold as to enquire just what you are contemplating?  ?{)(**

Nothing in the UK, that's for sure, Alice. 8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 03, 2017, 12:51:00 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zqoj-pfBUnY

Panorama Nov 2007 blocked by SME. Can anyone explain this for me, please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on May 03, 2017, 01:03:32 AM
Quote from: misty on May 03, 2017, 12:51:00 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zqoj-pfBUnY

Panorama Nov 2007 blocked by SME. Can anyone explain this for me, please?

The programme is copyright and the person who copied and uploaded it had no permission to do so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 03, 2017, 01:05:42 AM
Quote from: John on May 03, 2017, 01:03:32 AM
The programme is copyright and the person who copied and uploaded it had no permission to do so.

How does hideho get off with it ... any ideas, John?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 03, 2017, 01:06:24 AM
Quote from: John on May 03, 2017, 01:03:32 AM
The programme is copyright and the person who copied and uploaded it had no permission to do so.

It's deleted on our forum, too, despite having been available on the net for years.

ETA Crimewatch is still available.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2017, 08:58:51 AM
Here it is;

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2017, 04:54:30 PM
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 14, 2017, 06:36:20 PM
‘They looked so nice’: What we know about Ashley Zhao’s parents

http://www.cantonrep.com/news/20170122/they-looked-so-nice-what-we-know-about-ashley-zhaos-parents

JACKSON TWP. The lights inside Ang’s Asian Cuisine remained on last week.

Menus were stacked neatly on the counter. Tables were set with bottles of soy sauce and salt-and-pepper shakers. The tip jar waited expectantly on the counter.

Nothing inside the restaurant hinted that it had closed a week earlier, after police found the body of 5-year-old Ashley Zhao, the owners’ daughter, hidden inside.

Liang J. Zhao, 34, and Mingming Chen, 29, reported their daughter missing Jan. 9, prompting an overnight search by Jackson Township police that ended with the discovery of Ashley’s body and the arrest of her parents the following day.

The family’s neighbors, customers and the wider community have struggled to reconcile those allegations with the hardworking entrepreneurs and parents Zhao and Chen appeared to be.

“They looked so nice,” said Kirk Klusty, who lived in the same apartment building as Zhao, Chen and their daughters. “They seemed like good people.”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 15, 2017, 08:44:51 PM
Gerry & Kate McCann in Praia da Luz


(http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/bb5f7fc5461f464695c253358687f7c1/praia-da-luz-a-pretty-fishing-and-tourist-village-on-the-south-western-dgpwaw.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 15, 2017, 09:00:57 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 15, 2017, 08:44:51 PM
Gerry & Kate McCann in Praia da Luz


(http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/bb5f7fc5461f464695c253358687f7c1/praia-da-luz-a-pretty-fishing-and-tourist-village-on-the-south-western-dgpwaw.jpg)
And Clarence Mitchell at the rear.  4th person??
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 15, 2017, 10:08:59 PM
Top of steps passing Dolphin, Kelly's, Church to rocks in 3 minutes going slow. Going straight down Rua 25 de Abril would be quicker.

Smithman sighting location 4 mins onwards

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 17, 2017, 10:39:02 AM
Yvonne Fletcher murder suspect will not face trial 'after MI5 blocked crucial evidence'
CHLOE CHAPLAIN 2 hours ago

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/yvonne-fletcher-murder-suspect-will-not-face-trial-after-evidence-blocked-by-security-services-a3540781.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 17, 2017, 10:41:29 AM
Demonstrates how government can interfere with the course of justice.

Might we see something similar wit Madeleine? I seem to recall some FOI request being rejected on the grounds of national security.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alfie on May 17, 2017, 10:45:50 AM
Quote from: jassi on May 17, 2017, 10:41:29 AM
Demonstrates how government can interfere with the course of justice.

Might we see something similar wit Madeleine? I seem to recall some FOI request being rejected on the grounds of national security.
Do you think MI5 interfered in the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance because of a matter of national security?  *&*%£
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 17, 2017, 10:46:50 AM
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/foi1.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 17, 2017, 10:52:57 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 17, 2017, 10:46:50 AM
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/foi1.jpg)


Thank you    8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 24, 2017, 08:14:08 PM
Holy Moses - another sceptic mod? Do us mere mortals not even get a vote now?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 24, 2017, 09:55:58 PM
Quote from: misty on May 24, 2017, 08:14:08 PM
Holy Moses - another sceptic mod? Do us mere mortals not even get a vote now?

The Moderation Team is evenly balanced at the moment, and I have no problem with it as it stands.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 25, 2017, 08:55:26 AM
Quote from: jassi on May 17, 2017, 10:52:57 AM

Thank you    8((()*/

That request seems to be from John Clements for the Daily Mirror...

Whether or not a UK LE agency was requested - and was granted a warrant - to organise any form of covert surveillance on anyone, I don't quite see how it would be in the public interest - as opposed to the public's interest in the case - to reveal that to the media.

Quote:
Who was listening to Kate and Gerry McCann? Daily Mirror
 
By JON CLEMENTS
Feb 18, 09 02:55 PM
 
A few days ago I received an interesting letter from Leicestershire police about the Madeleine McCann investigation.
 
I had asked them, in July, if they had got any warrants (under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) to use surveillance powers – such as phone tapping and email interception on behalf of the Portuguese police.
 
The force initially stalled saying it needed to “consult other Agencies” before replying.
 
After a six month delay, Leicestershire has now claimed it is exempt from Freedom of Information laws in this case due to “national security”.
 
I’ve put in dozens of FoI requests to police forces over the years, some you get and some you don’t but “national security” is a new one on me.
 
To make matters even murkier, Leicestershire claimed a second exemption because the information I requested could relate to “the Security bodies”.
 
A quick look at the FoI Act reveals “Security bodies” are MI5, MI6, GCHQ (pictured above), special forces (such as the SAS) and the Serious Organised Crime Agency.
 
Hmm.
 
Despite claiming these exemptions, Leicestershire seem at pains to neither confirm nor deny they hold any information relevant to my request anyway.
 
Check out (slowly I suggest) the tortuous conclusion to the three page letter explaining their stance.
 
“It is our decision that the Leicestershire Constabulary must maintain a position of neither confirming nor denying that any relevant information is held and that this response, which neither confirms nor denies that information is held, should not be taken as conclusive evidence that the information you have requested exists or does not exist”.
 
Thanks, but I think that is a rather long-winded way of saying Foxtrot Oscar.
 
However, it does beg the question just who was bugging the McCanns after they returned from Praia da Luz?
 
And what has the answer got to do with national security?

     
Kate and Gerry McCann, and national security – update, 18 February 2009
     
Kate and Gerry McCann, and national security – update Daily Mirror
 
By JON CLEMENTS
Feb 18, 09 03:39 PM
 
I’ve just spoken to the McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell who has declined to comment.
 
Quite sensible, really.
 
After all, you never know who’s listening do you?

     
The McCann national security documents, 20 February 2009
     
The McCann national security documents Daily Mirror
 
By JON CLEMENTS
Feb 20, 09 10:45 AM
 
Thanks for taking so much interest in my post about the McCanns and “national security”.
 
I have to say I’m a bit surprised that some of you think this proves that much about what happened to Madeleine, though.
 
From my point of view, it suggests Kate and Gerry may, I stress may, have been subjected to an unusual – perhaps unprecedented – degree of surveillance after the returned to the UK.
 
I’m not sure it indicates that much about what has happened to her and where she may be now.
 
I’ve made some more inquiries and it it would appear that the most likely agency involved in any bugging would be the Serious Organised Crime Agency (Soca).
 
They provide a lot of “technical assistance” to small police forces who don’t have the skills or equipment to mount a major surveillance operation.
 
As some of you have pointed out, they work closely with the Child Exploitation and Online Protection centre (CEOP) who carry out some very complicated and delicate operations against paedophiles.
 
If you click below you can see the letter from Leicestershire police.
 
Thanks
 
McCanns FoI request PDF

Freedom Of Information Request Reference No: 1092/08, page 1

Freedom Of Information Request Reference No: 1092/08, page 2

Freedom Of Information Request Reference No: 1092/08, page 3

/ Quote

http://madeleinemccann.org/blog/2014/04/20/freedom-of-information/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Investigatory_Powers_Act_2000
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 04, 2017, 09:51:35 PM
I've been on my hols - any news about the McCann ECHR business ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 04, 2017, 09:58:44 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 04, 2017, 09:51:35 PM
I've been on my hols - any news about the McCann ECHR business ?

Hope you had a good time.
No, no news. Still waiting for the piccy of Amaral handing over his cheque, for a substantial amount, to a children's charity too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 04, 2017, 10:04:59 PM
Maybe he ticked the 'no publicity' box.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 04, 2017, 10:33:07 PM
Quote from: misty on June 04, 2017, 09:58:44 PM
Hope you had a good time.
No, no news. Still waiting for the piccy of Amaral handing over his cheque, for a substantial amount, to a children's charity too.

If he sets up a new one he can use the money he raises to sue people so long as it's aims allow it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 04, 2017, 10:35:43 PM
 
Quote from: jassi on June 04, 2017, 10:04:59 PM
Maybe he ticked the 'no publicity' box.
@)(++(*  I can't quite see that happening, can you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 05, 2017, 12:41:01 AM
Quote from: misty on June 04, 2017, 09:58:44 PM
Hope you had a good time.
No, no news. Still waiting for the piccy of Amaral handing over his cheque, for a substantial amount, to a children's charity too.
That trip to Switzerland immediately after the ruling.

I am wondering if the lolly is stashed away in a place where no-one can get at it.   In a Swiss bank?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 03, 2017, 01:43:40 PM
http://portugalresident.com/human-remains-discovered-beside-aljezur-ruin

Does anyone know if these remains have been identified yet?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 03, 2017, 02:01:03 PM
Quote from: misty on July 03, 2017, 01:43:40 PM
http://portugalresident.com/human-remains-discovered-beside-aljezur-ruin

Does anyone know if these remains have been identified yet?

Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on March 03, 2017
Aljezur bones: “a woman”, says PJ as forensics now probe age
The mysterious bones discovered in a remote site near a ruined farm in the Aljezur hillside recently have been recovered by judicial police forensic experts and are now being tested for their age.

As a spokesman explained: “They could be six months old, six years or even 60. We don’t have the answers yet”.

All police appear to be sure of this far is that the bones belong to a woman.

As to any missing women in the area, our PJ source said this is not yet a matter under investigation.

“First we have to discover whether these are recent bones”, he explained. “Once we have that information, investigation into missing people may then go ahead”.
http://portugalresident.com/aljezur-bones-%E2%80%9Ca-woman%E2%80%9D-says-pj-as-forensics-now-probe-age
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 03, 2017, 02:04:43 PM
Quote from: misty on July 03, 2017, 01:43:40 PM
http://portugalresident.com/human-remains-discovered-beside-aljezur-ruin

Does anyone know if these remains have been identified yet?
If you don't get the information on here I suggest you simply email Natasha.

I have sent a couple of emails to her, both answered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ferryman on July 03, 2017, 02:40:31 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 03, 2017, 02:04:43 PM
If you don't get the information on here I suggest you simply email Natasha.

I have sent a couple of emails to her, both answered.

Natasha Donn?

"Information"?

Isn't that an oxymoron?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 03, 2017, 03:16:47 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 03, 2017, 02:04:43 PM
If you don't get the information on here I suggest you simply email Natasha.

I have sent a couple of emails to her, both answered.

Is there a particular reason you are not able to give us an update based on ND's replies?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 03, 2017, 04:02:13 PM
Quote from: misty on July 03, 2017, 03:16:47 PM
Is there a particular reason you are not able to give us an update based on ND's replies?
There isn't an update to give.

I asked for a meeting some time back and she agreed.  For various reasons it hasn't happened yet.

I was merely pointing out that thus far my emails have received replies.

Since she wrote the original article, there is a good chance she will know whether or not more has been established.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 03, 2017, 04:24:35 PM
It would be very simple to tell if this was the jaw of a child or an adult..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 13, 2017, 11:52:36 PM
http://www.rd.com/true-stories/inspiring/stopping-a-kidnapper/      (Dec 2016)

It was a scene Norman Rockwell might have painted: three kids laughing as they took turns riding a scooter on their quiet street. Last ­December, on a crisp Saturday afternoon in Wichita Falls, Texas, 11-year-old TJ Smith had just jumped off the scooter as his neighbor Kim,* age 7, claimed her turn, and her sister Julie,* 9, looked on. Kim straddled the scooter and paused to catch her breath. That was when a bearded man with a head of messy curls appeared. The kids didn’t see where he came from, but they know exactly what happened next: Without uttering a word, he picked Kim up off the scooter and calmly strode away.

“He cradled her like a baby and just walked down the street,” says TJ. In fact, the composed way the man held Kim led TJ to believe he must have been a relative. But something wasn’t right. “I could see her face,” TJ said. “She was scared.” Read this other inspiring story about a foiled kidnapping.

Kim’s fear escalated into sobs, then pleas for help. She began kicking and flailing, trying to get free of the man’s grip. “What are you doing?” Julie shouted. But the man, unfazed, walked the length of the block until he reached an alley and disappeared.

Though he admits he was scared, TJ says he never thought about the danger to himself.

TJ’s first impulse was to chase after them. But what was a 4-foot-tall, 70-pound kid going to do to stop a grown man? “I wanted to help, but I couldn’t do it myself,” he says. So he ran to his grown-up neighbors’ home.

Brad Ware and his wife were relaxing on the couch in their living room when their front door burst open.

“Brad!” yelled TJ. “A man just picked up a little girl and took her into the alley!”

And just like that, TJ was gone, back on the street sprinting after his abducted little friend. “I ran back to where I saw him take her to see if they were still there,” says TJ. Ware and his wife jumped into their car and trailed close behind.

TJ ran to the end of the street and turned the corner. He had no idea what to expect or who might be waiting for him. But he needed to find Kim. If he lost her, TJ feared, she might never be found alive.

Once TJ hit the alley, he spotted the man a couple of blocks down, standing in front of an abandoned white house—its windows busted, doors boarded up, and yard overgrown. He was shoving the panicked girl through a window. These other unsung heroes will restore your faith in humanity.

Just then, Ware and his wife pulled up. “Stay here,” Ware told TJ as he took off toward the house. With Ware now bearing down on him, the man let go of Kim in the window frame and walked away, almost non­chalantly, before breaking into a run. Ware caught up with him. They struggled. Ware kicked the man in the groin and wrapped him in his arms. The man squirmed free and fled across the street. When he stumbled, Ware lunged and tackled him.

Alerted by Julie and other neighbors, the police and the victim’s mother had arrived on the scene. Kim dashed into the safety of her mother’s arms, and the two cried and hugged.

Meanwhile, officers cuffed and arrested Raeshawn Perez, 26. He was charged with aggravated kidnapping and was being held on $50,000 bond as this article went to press.

There were a few heroes that day, but Ware insists that the quick-­thinking, dogged 11-year-old deserves most of the credit. “You know, he’s the one who more or less saved the girl,” Ware told KFDX.

That news came as no surprise to TJ’s mother. “This is exactly his character,” says Angie Hess  Smith. “His first thought is not of himself. It’s always of others.”

*Names have been changed to protect privacy 

====================================================================

This story was posted on the Official Find Madeleine F/B page. There are other reports of it via Google.
It is an example of the open carrying of an abducted child in broad daylight & the consequences could have been horrifying.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 14, 2017, 12:51:25 AM
Quote from: misty on July 13, 2017, 11:52:36 PM
http://www.rd.com/true-stories/inspiring/stopping-a-kidnapper/      (Dec 2016)

It was a scene Norman Rockwell might have painted: three kids laughing as they took turns riding a scooter on their quiet street. Last ­December, on a crisp Saturday afternoon in Wichita Falls, Texas, 11-year-old TJ Smith had just jumped off the scooter as his neighbor Kim,* age 7, claimed her turn, and her sister Julie,* 9, looked on. Kim straddled the scooter and paused to catch her breath. That was when a bearded man with a head of messy curls appeared. The kids didn’t see where he came from, but they know exactly what happened next: Without uttering a word, he picked Kim up off the scooter and calmly strode away.

“He cradled her like a baby and just walked down the street,” says TJ. In fact, the composed way the man held Kim led TJ to believe he must have been a relative. But something wasn’t right. “I could see her face,” TJ said. “She was scared.” Read this other inspiring story about a foiled kidnapping.

Kim’s fear escalated into sobs, then pleas for help. She began kicking and flailing, trying to get free of the man’s grip. “What are you doing?” Julie shouted. But the man, unfazed, walked the length of the block until he reached an alley and disappeared.

Though he admits he was scared, TJ says he never thought about the danger to himself.

TJ’s first impulse was to chase after them. But what was a 4-foot-tall, 70-pound kid going to do to stop a grown man? “I wanted to help, but I couldn’t do it myself,” he says. So he ran to his grown-up neighbors’ home.

Brad Ware and his wife were relaxing on the couch in their living room when their front door burst open.

“Brad!” yelled TJ. “A man just picked up a little girl and took her into the alley!”

And just like that, TJ was gone, back on the street sprinting after his abducted little friend. “I ran back to where I saw him take her to see if they were still there,” says TJ. Ware and his wife jumped into their car and trailed close behind.

TJ ran to the end of the street and turned the corner. He had no idea what to expect or who might be waiting for him. But he needed to find Kim. If he lost her, TJ feared, she might never be found alive.

Once TJ hit the alley, he spotted the man a couple of blocks down, standing in front of an abandoned white house—its windows busted, doors boarded up, and yard overgrown. He was shoving the panicked girl through a window. These other unsung heroes will restore your faith in humanity.

Just then, Ware and his wife pulled up. “Stay here,” Ware told TJ as he took off toward the house. With Ware now bearing down on him, the man let go of Kim in the window frame and walked away, almost non­chalantly, before breaking into a run. Ware caught up with him. They struggled. Ware kicked the man in the groin and wrapped him in his arms. The man squirmed free and fled across the street. When he stumbled, Ware lunged and tackled him.

Alerted by Julie and other neighbors, the police and the victim’s mother had arrived on the scene. Kim dashed into the safety of her mother’s arms, and the two cried and hugged.

Meanwhile, officers cuffed and arrested Raeshawn Perez, 26. He was charged with aggravated kidnapping and was being held on $50,000 bond as this article went to press.

There were a few heroes that day, but Ware insists that the quick-­thinking, dogged 11-year-old deserves most of the credit. “You know, he’s the one who more or less saved the girl,” Ware told KFDX.

That news came as no surprise to TJ’s mother. “This is exactly his character,” says Angie Hess  Smith. “His first thought is not of himself. It’s always of others.”

*Names have been changed to protect privacy 

====================================================================

This story was posted on the Official Find Madeleine F/B page. There are other reports of it via Google.
It is an example of the open carrying of an abducted child in broad daylight & the consequences could have been horrifying.

No-one saw him ~ there is no report of any passerby noticing anything amiss.

He was able to walk from where he took the child to where he was apprehended and no-one saw him.  The little girl although seven years old was terrified yet she didn't kick, scream or struggle.

If that little girl's playmate hadn't been there to see what happened and to raise the alarm it is highly likely that little girl would never have been seen again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 14, 2017, 12:53:39 AM
Following on from mistys post


An example of a girl abducted from her own bed with her parents also asleep in the house ... and whilst sleeping alongside her sister, sharing a bed it seems

http://www.thejournal.ie/mising-kidnapped-found-900814-May2013/

Elizabeth Smart

http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900889/original/?width=363&version=900889
(http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900889/original/?width=363&version=900889)



Elizabeth Smart earlier this month. Pic: AP Photo/Rick Bowmer

This is Elizabeth Smart, a young Utah woman who was kidnapped from her bedroom in Salt Lake City in 2002 when she was 14.

http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900893/original/?width=630&version=900893(http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900893/original/?width=630&version=900893)

Pic: AP Photo/Douglas C Pizac

She was taken from the home she lived in with her parents, Ed and Lois Smart (pictured above), and five siblings in a well-to-do neighbourhood.

That night, the alarm hadn’t been set in their home, and hours after the family went to bed Brian David Mitchell broke in.

http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900891/original/?width=314&version=900891
(http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900891/original/?width=314&version=900891)


Brian David Mitchell arrives at the federal court house in Salt Lake City. Pic: AP Photo/Colin E Braley

The black-clad and polite Mitchell abducted Smart from the room she shared with her sister Mary Katherine (9), who pretended to be asleep and remembered details of the abduction that helped the police in their investigation.

Mitchell took Smart back to the camp he shared with Wanda Barzee in a woods, where the young teen was forced to “marry” the older man in a ceremony. During her captivity, Smart was raped, forced to drink alcohol and abused.

http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/902347/original/?width=616&version=902347
(http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/902347/original/?width=616&version=902347)



Elizabeth Smart arrives at the federal court house for the closing arguments in the trial of Brian David Mitchell. Pic: AP Photo/Colin E Braley

Thousands of volunteers scoured the area near the Smart home in an effort to find the young girl.

After some time, Mary Katherine identified Mitchell as ‘Emmanuel’, a homeless man who been given odd jobs at the Smart home. The police did not follow up this lead thoroughly, the parents argued, but after a drawing of ‘Emmanuel’ appeared on America’s Most Wanted, Mitchell’s family recognised his face and contacted the authorities.

Nine months after the abduction, Mitchell was spotted in Sandy, Utah, by a biker who had seen America’s Most Wanted. He alerted police, and Smart (who was wearing a disguise), was found while walking with Mitchell, and reunited with her family.

Mitchell was sentenced to life in prison in 2011. Barzee is serving a 15-year sentence in Texas. Smart, now an activist and contributor to ABC News, got married last year on the Hawaiian island of O’ahu.

http://youtu.be/BYZ2ihhQjAY




OK so an abduction CAN HAPPEN whilst the parents are at home.  How does that affect some of you that go on  that Madeleine could not have been abducted if they had stayed in?   They were only 50 metres away in what was effectively block 5 Ocean Club garden ... and checking regularly.


So Madeleine could have been abducted even with her parents at home
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on July 14, 2017, 07:22:25 AM
Quote from: sadie on July 14, 2017, 12:53:39 AM
Following on from mistys post


An example of a girl abducted from her own bed with her parents also asleep in the house ... and whilst sleeping alongside her sister, sharing a bed it seems

http://www.thejournal.ie/mising-kidnapped-found-900814-May2013/

Elizabeth Smart

http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900889/original/?width=363&version=900889
(http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900889/original/?width=363&version=900889)



Elizabeth Smart earlier this month. Pic: AP Photo/Rick Bowmer

This is Elizabeth Smart, a young Utah woman who was kidnapped from her bedroom in Salt Lake City in 2002 when she was 14.

http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900893/original/?width=630&version=900893(http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900893/original/?width=630&version=900893)

Pic: AP Photo/Douglas C Pizac

She was taken from the home she lived in with her parents, Ed and Lois Smart (pictured above), and five siblings in a well-to-do neighbourhood.

That night, the alarm hadn’t been set in their home, and hours after the family went to bed Brian David Mitchell broke in.

http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900891/original/?width=314&version=900891
(http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900891/original/?width=314&version=900891)


Brian David Mitchell arrives at the federal court house in Salt Lake City. Pic: AP Photo/Colin E Braley

The black-clad and polite Mitchell abducted Smart from the room she shared with her sister Mary Katherine (9), who pretended to be asleep and remembered details of the abduction that helped the police in their investigation.

Mitchell took Smart back to the camp he shared with Wanda Barzee in a woods, where the young teen was forced to “marry” the older man in a ceremony. During her captivity, Smart was raped, forced to drink alcohol and abused.

http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/902347/original/?width=616&version=902347
(http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/902347/original/?width=616&version=902347)



Elizabeth Smart arrives at the federal court house for the closing arguments in the trial of Brian David Mitchell. Pic: AP Photo/Colin E Braley

Thousands of volunteers scoured the area near the Smart home in an effort to find the young girl.

After some time, Mary Katherine identified Mitchell as ‘Emmanuel’, a homeless man who been given odd jobs at the Smart home. The police did not follow up this lead thoroughly, the parents argued, but after a drawing of ‘Emmanuel’ appeared on America’s Most Wanted, Mitchell’s family recognised his face and contacted the authorities.

Nine months after the abduction, Mitchell was spotted in Sandy, Utah, by a biker who had seen America’s Most Wanted. He alerted police, and Smart (who was wearing a disguise), was found while walking with Mitchell, and reunited with her family.

Mitchell was sentenced to life in prison in 2011. Barzee is serving a 15-year sentence in Texas. Smart, now an activist and contributor to ABC News, got married last year on the Hawaiian island of O’ahu.

http://youtu.be/BYZ2ihhQjAY




OK so an abduction CAN HAPPEN whilst the parents are at home.  How does that affect some of you that go on  that Madeleine could not have been abducted if they had stayed in?   They were only 50 metres away in what was effectively block 5 Ocean Club garden ... and checking regularly.


So Madeleine could have been abducted even with her parents at home



Or she could have walked out through an unlocked sliding door, or........


The situation remains, that the presence of an unknown person in the apartment, hasn't been determined,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 07:36:28 AM
Quote from: sadie on July 14, 2017, 12:53:39 AM
Following on from mistys post


An example of a girl abducted from her own bed with her parents also asleep in the house ... and whilst sleeping alongside her sister, sharing a bed it seems

http://www.thejournal.ie/mising-kidnapped-found-900814-May2013/

Elizabeth Smart

http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900889/original/?width=363&version=900889
(http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900889/original/?width=363&version=900889)



Elizabeth Smart earlier this month. Pic: AP Photo/Rick Bowmer

This is Elizabeth Smart, a young Utah woman who was kidnapped from her bedroom in Salt Lake City in 2002 when she was 14.

http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900893/original/?width=630&version=900893(http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900893/original/?width=630&version=900893)

Pic: AP Photo/Douglas C Pizac

She was taken from the home she lived in with her parents, Ed and Lois Smart (pictured above), and five siblings in a well-to-do neighbourhood.

That night, the alarm hadn’t been set in their home, and hours after the family went to bed Brian David Mitchell broke in.

http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900891/original/?width=314&version=900891
(http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/900891/original/?width=314&version=900891)


Brian David Mitchell arrives at the federal court house in Salt Lake City. Pic: AP Photo/Colin E Braley

The black-clad and polite Mitchell abducted Smart from the room she shared with her sister Mary Katherine (9), who pretended to be asleep and remembered details of the abduction that helped the police in their investigation.

Mitchell took Smart back to the camp he shared with Wanda Barzee in a woods, where the young teen was forced to “marry” the older man in a ceremony. During her captivity, Smart was raped, forced to drink alcohol and abused.

http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/902347/original/?width=616&version=902347
(http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/902347/original/?width=616&version=902347)



Elizabeth Smart arrives at the federal court house for the closing arguments in the trial of Brian David Mitchell. Pic: AP Photo/Colin E Braley

Thousands of volunteers scoured the area near the Smart home in an effort to find the young girl.

After some time, Mary Katherine identified Mitchell as ‘Emmanuel’, a homeless man who been given odd jobs at the Smart home. The police did not follow up this lead thoroughly, the parents argued, but after a drawing of ‘Emmanuel’ appeared on America’s Most Wanted, Mitchell’s family recognised his face and contacted the authorities.

Nine months after the abduction, Mitchell was spotted in Sandy, Utah, by a biker who had seen America’s Most Wanted. He alerted police, and Smart (who was wearing a disguise), was found while walking with Mitchell, and reunited with her family.

Mitchell was sentenced to life in prison in 2011. Barzee is serving a 15-year sentence in Texas. Smart, now an activist and contributor to ABC News, got married last year on the Hawaiian island of O’ahu.

http://youtu.be/BYZ2ihhQjAY




OK so an abduction CAN HAPPEN whilst the parents are at home.  How does that affect some of you that go on  that Madeleine could not have been abducted if they had stayed in?   They were only 50 metres away in what was effectively block 5 Ocean Club garden ... and checking regularly.


So Madeleine could have been abducted even with her parents at home


It's normal for parents go to bed every night with no reason to expect anything like that to happen. It's not normal for parents to go out to dinner and leave small children home alone in an unlocked apartment. That's because there's reason to expect waking, crying, falling, wandering; all the usual things small children can get up to when unsupervised. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 14, 2017, 08:27:17 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 07:36:28 AM
It's normal for parents go to bed every night with no reason to expect anything like that to happen. It's not normal for parents to go out to dinner and leave small children home alone in an unlocked apartment. That's because there's reason to expect waking, crying, falling, wandering; all the usual things small children can get up to when unsupervised.

Despite being in the company of older children the little seven year old girl was abducted.  Lifted off the street and taken away by a stranger.

What evidence was there for that?
She was not under parental supervision or the supervision of an adult when she was taken off the street.  Does that in any way negate the fact of abduction or the culpability of the perpetrator? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 08:59:39 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 14, 2017, 08:27:17 AM
Despite being in the company of older children the little seven year old girl was abducted.  Lifted off the street and taken away by a stranger.

What evidence was there for that?
  • Eye witness evidence.
  • Her recovery from his clutches.
She was not under parental supervision or the supervision of an adult when she was taken off the street.  Does that in any way negate the fact of abduction or the culpability of the perpetrator?

Sometimes things happen which can't be foreseen. All a parent can do is guard their children against the everyday accidents which can be foreseen. Some parents don't even do that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 14, 2017, 09:47:21 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 08:59:39 AM
Sometimes things happen which can't be foreseen. All a parent can do is guard their children against the everyday accidents which can be foreseen. Some parents don't even do that.

It is rare for a child to be abducted from the street.

It is rare for a child to be abducted from her bed.

The rarity does not preclude that it does not happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on July 14, 2017, 09:59:07 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 14, 2017, 09:47:21 AM
It is rare for a child to be abducted from the street.

It is rare for a child to be abducted from her bed.

The rarity does not preclude that it does not happen.

Nor does it mean it happened in this case Brietta.


It is one of three possibilities, ignoring any outlandish theory.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 10:47:26 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 14, 2017, 09:47:21 AM
It is rare for a child to be abducted from the street.

It is rare for a child to be abducted from her bed.

The rarity does not preclude that it does not happen.

If Madeleine McCann was abducted that was not foreseeable, but there's no evidence that she was. What was foreseeable was a range of other problems associated with leaving small children home alone in an unlocked apartment.

It's those foreseeable problems which they gambled with. They could easily have found their child highly distressed after crying for 30 minutes, screaming along the street looking for her parents, or lying at the foot of those steps having fallen over the railings or the child gate.

That was how they failed in their duty of care.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on July 14, 2017, 11:24:05 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 10:47:26 AM
If Madeleine McCann was abducted that was not foreseeable, but there's no evidence that she was. What was foreseeable was a range of other problems associated with leaving small children home alone in an unlocked apartment.

It's those foreseeable problems which they gambled with. They could easily have found their child highly distressed after crying for 30 minutes, screaming along the street looking for her parents, or lying at the foot of those steps having fallen over the railings or the child gate.

That was how they failed in their duty of care.

The open shutters and window is clear evidence of an intruder.   The fact that some people don't want to believe that Kate was telling the truth about them is irrelevant.   It's obvious that both police forces do believe her - otherwise they would not have been able to rule her out of their enquiries.

IMO when it's a case of the 'professional conclusion's arrived at by experts - versus the 'wishful thinking' of some sceptics - the professionals win hands down every time. 

IMO Some sceptics want to believe Kate lied purely because of their personal animosity towards her,   On the other hand the police are only interested in finding out what happened to Madeleine based on the evidence - and not based on their personal feelings towards anyone.     That is what separates the highly trained detectives employed by 2 police forces from the untrained amateur 'sleuths' on the internet - particularly with regard to this case, IMO.

AIMHO 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on July 14, 2017, 11:31:21 AM
Quote from: Benice on July 14, 2017, 11:24:05 AM
The open shutters and window is clear evidence of an intruder.   The fact that some people don't want to believe that Kate was telling the truth about them is irrelevant.   It's obvious that both police forces do believe her - otherwise they would not have been able to rule her out of their enquiries.

IMO when it's a case of the 'professional conclusion's arrived at by experts - versus the 'wishful thinking' of some sceptics - the professionals win hands down every time. 

IMO Some sceptics want to believe Kate lied purely because of their personal animosity towards her,   On the other hand the police are only interested in finding out what happened to Madeleine based on the evidence - and not based on their personal feelings towards anyone.     That is what separates the highly trained detectives employed by 2 police forces from the untrained amateur 'sleuths' on the internet - particularly with regard to this case, IMO.

AIMHO

There has been no verification of the 'open window and shutters' prior to 10 pm.

You already know, no forensic indication has been found to show a third party in the apartment, and no need to mention the hairs or partial fingerprints, as proving they were made /left that night would be rather difficult.

It is also evident that the initial inquiry did not believe the McCann's either, and could find no evidence of an intruder.

In the end , of course , after Amaral's removal, the case was shelved due to lack of evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 14, 2017, 11:41:50 AM
Quote from: Benice on July 14, 2017, 11:24:05 AM
The open shutters and window is clear evidence of an intruder.   The fact that some people don't want to believe that Kate was telling the truth about them is irrelevant.   It's obvious that both police forces do believe her - otherwise they would not have been able to rule her out of their enquiries.

IMO when it's a case of the 'professional conclusion's arrived at by experts - versus the 'wishful thinking' of some sceptics - the professionals win hands down every time. 

IMO Some sceptics want to believe Kate lied purely because of their personal animosity towards her,   On the other hand the police are only interested in finding out what happened to Madeleine based on the evidence - and not based on their personal feelings towards anyone.     That is what separates the highly trained detectives employed by 2 police forces from the untrained amateur 'sleuths' on the internet - particularly with regard to this case, IMO.

AIMHO

The wishful thinking is also very evident in SY's thoughts,burgalary gone wrong? 4 arguidos? now none!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on July 14, 2017, 11:55:03 AM
Quote from: barrier on July 14, 2017, 11:41:50 AM
The wishful thinking is also very evident in SY's thoughts,burgalary gone wrong? 4 arguidos? now none!

Wishful thinking is not part of a detective's training.   They follow leads as a result of information they have - and that we don't have.  A lead can produce further information/knowledge helpful to the enquiry even if it doesn't prove who the perpetrator is.   If leads are not followed then that possibility is lost.
IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 12:13:41 PM
Quote from: Benice on July 14, 2017, 11:24:05 AM
The open shutters and window is clear evidence of an intruder.   The fact that some people don't want to believe that Kate was telling the truth about them is irrelevant.   It's obvious that both police forces do believe her - otherwise they would not have been able to rule her out of their enquiries.

IMO when it's a case of the 'professional conclusion's arrived at by experts - versus the 'wishful thinking' of some sceptics - the professionals win hands down every time. 

IMO Some sceptics want to believe Kate lied purely because of their personal animosity towards her,   On the other hand the police are only interested in finding out what happened to Madeleine based on the evidence - and not based on their personal feelings towards anyone.     That is what separates the highly trained detectives employed by 2 police forces from the untrained amateur 'sleuths' on the internet - particularly with regard to this case, IMO.

AIMHO

If a highly trained detective believes everything witnesses say he needs a refresher course in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 12:28:09 PM
Quote from: Benice on July 14, 2017, 11:55:03 AM
Wishful thinking is not part of a detective's training.   They follow leads as a result of information they have - and that we don't have.  A lead can produce further information/knowledge helpful to the enquiry even if it doesn't prove who the perpetrator is.   If leads are not followed then that possibility is lost.
IMO

Such a pity the Met was so short of these highly trained people;

Two-thirds of CID detectives in Met are not trained detectives
May 2009
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/two-thirds-of-cid-detectives-in-met-are-not-trained-detectives-6716736.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 14, 2017, 12:43:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 12:28:09 PM
Such a pity the Met was so short of these highly trained people;

Two-thirds of CID detectives in Met are not trained detectives
May 2009
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/two-thirds-of-cid-detectives-in-met-are-not-trained-detectives-6716736.html

When the salary offered is not even half that of the average MP, is it any wonder that the Met has trouble recruiting or retaining staff?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/31/wanted-london-detectives-no-experience-necessary

I feel truly sorry for the officers who have to deal with the worst society has to offer on a daily basis for so little reward.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 14, 2017, 01:09:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 10:47:26 AM
If Madeleine McCann was abducted that was not foreseeable, but there's no evidence that she was. What was foreseeable was a range of other problems associated with leaving small children home alone in an unlocked apartment.

It's those foreseeable problems which they gambled with. They could easily have found their child highly distressed after crying for 30 minutes, screaming along the street looking for her parents, or lying at the foot of those steps having fallen over the railings or the child gate.

That was how they failed in their duty of care.

As you so succinctly put it "If Madeleine McCann was abducted that was not foreseeable."

What evidence can you present that might suggest any support for your speculations about Madeleine  ...
[/list]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 14, 2017, 01:11:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 14, 2017, 01:09:04 PM
    As you so succinctly put it "If Madeleine McCann was abducted that was not foreseeable."

    What evidence can you present that might suggest any support for your speculations about Madeleine  ...
    • found their child highly distressed after crying for 30 minutes ~ bearing in mind we have analysed Mrs Fenn's statement ad nauseam
    • screaming along the street looking for her parents
    • lying at the foot of those steps
      having fallen over the railings
      or the child gate.
      (you forgot to mention falling from the couch ... but no worries}

.......and comatose after overdosing on Calpol......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 01:28:58 PM
Quote from: misty on July 14, 2017, 12:43:57 PM
When the salary offered is not even half that of the average MP, is it any wonder that the Met has trouble recruiting or retaining staff?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/31/wanted-london-detectives-no-experience-necessary

I feel truly sorry for the officers who have to deal with the worst society has to offer on a daily basis for so little reward.

A starting salary of almost £30,000 would be very attractive to many people. Restricting their recruitment drive to those with degrees is a little short-sighted in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 14, 2017, 02:25:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 01:28:58 PM
A starting salary of almost £30,000 would be very attractive to many people. Restricting their recruitment drive to those with degrees is a little short-sighted in my opinion.

In real terms based on living outside London, it's £23000 which is on a par with a newly qualified teacher. Maybe they only want people with degrees because of the prospect of being sued by unsuccessful applicants on the basis of racial discrimination.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 02:56:19 PM
Quote from: misty on July 14, 2017, 02:25:22 PM
In real terms based on living outside London, it's £23000 which is on a par with a newly qualified teacher. Maybe they only want people with degrees because of the prospect of being sued by unsuccessful applicants on the basis of racial discrimination.

Why should a policeman not have the same starting salary as a teacher? They both beat the starting pay of a soldier who faces more danger than either of them in theory.

Would someone with a degree not sue them if they were rejected then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 14, 2017, 03:35:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 02:56:19 PM
Why should a policeman not have the same starting salary as a teacher? They both beat the starting pay of a soldier who faces more danger than either of them in theory.

Would someone with a degree not sue them if they were rejected then?

http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/Ratesofpay-Regular.pdf

Note the rates of pay for certain professions within the army. I presume they received the benefit of subsidised living costs.
IMO most soldiers, policeman, nurses etc are worth far more than they are paid but I think that by keeping the salary low these demanding professions attract the people who want to do the job rather than those who just want the money.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 14, 2017, 03:44:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 02:56:19 PM
Why should a policeman not have the same starting salary as a teacher? They both beat the starting pay of a soldier who faces more danger than either of them in theory.

Would someone with a degree not sue them if they were rejected then?

(http://kartv.net/Images/Thumbs/News/25235-londra-saldirganinin-kimligi-belirlendi-270x0.jpeg)

Any one of the new intake of the three categories of employee you have named run the risk of leaving to go to work and never returning home again.

If you think the going rate for a senior detective should match new recruits that is a matter for you bearing in mind that even Sophia Leal complained of her husband's remuneration ... so it is not entirely a situation unique to the met.

As far as I see it ... the suggestion was that if there is a shortage of detectives ... a look has to be taken at their remuneration just as at times of shortage in other professions the salary has to be a consideration.

I don't think your post suggests any solution to the issue you keyed up as a problem in an earlier post.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 14, 2017, 06:21:33 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 14, 2017, 12:51:25 AM
-snip-
No-one saw him ~ there is no report of any passerby noticing anything amiss.

He was able to walk from where he took the child to where he was apprehended and no-one saw him.  The little girl although seven years old was terrified yet she didn't kick, scream or struggle.

If that little girl's playmate hadn't been there to see what happened and to raise the alarm it is highly likely that little girl would never have been seen again.
 -snip-
No-one saw him. 

It was daylight and he calmly walked away carrying a sobbing, then pleading-for-help little girl.  She began kicking and flailing, trying to get free of the man’s grip

Yet, no-one saw him


It was daylight and she was sobbing, pleading, kicking and flailing ....yet no-one saw him!


It was dusk / dark when Madeleine vanished and she was asleep/drugged.   It can happen and did happen in the case of this little protesting seven year old.

Yet some of you on here, and elsewhere, cannot accept that this scenario was possible.


Time to re-adjust you thoughts, it seems.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 06:29:57 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 14, 2017, 01:09:04 PM
    As you so succinctly put it "If Madeleine McCann was abducted that was not foreseeable."

    What evidence can you present that might suggest any support for your speculations about Madeleine  ...
    • found their child highly distressed after crying for 30 minutes ~ bearing in mind we have analysed Mrs Fenn's statement ad nauseam
    • screaming along the street looking for her parents
    • lying at the foot of those steps
      having fallen over the railings
      or the child gate.
      (you forgot to mention falling from the couch ... but no worries}

In the crying possibility more evidence than can be mustered for an abduction. Please note that was a list of the POSSIBLE results of leaving small children home alone in an unlocked apartment. You know - the things any parent thinks of BEFORE they decide to go out the door.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on July 14, 2017, 06:32:18 PM
Quote from: sadie on July 14, 2017, 06:21:33 PM
No-one saw him. 

It was daylight and he calmly walked away carrying a sobbing, then pleading-for-help little girl.  She began kicking and flailing, trying to get free of the man’s grip

Yet, no-one saw him


It was daylight and she was sobbing, pleading, kicking and flailing ....yet no-one saw him!


It was dusk / dark when Madeleine vanished and she was asleep/drugged.   It can happen and did happen in the case of this little protesting seven year old.

Yet some of you on here, and elsewhere, cannot accept that this scenario was possible.


Time to re-adjust you thoughts, it seems.


Would that be in the same way some people can't accept the scenarios  of accidental death or walking out of the apartment as being possible ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 06:50:51 PM
Quote from: misty on July 14, 2017, 03:35:31 PM
http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/Ratesofpay-Regular.pdf

Note the rates of pay for certain professions within the army. I presume they received the benefit of subsidised living costs.
IMO most soldiers, policeman, nurses etc are worth far more than they are paid but I think that by keeping the salary low these demanding professions attract the people who want to do the job rather than those who just want the money.

You forgot to explain why people with degrees don't sue for racial discrimination if rejected!

Why would someone who wanted to be a policeman go to university instead of joining the Force?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 15, 2017, 09:23:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 06:50:51 PM
You forgot to explain why people with degrees don't sue for racial discrimination if rejected!

Why would someone who wanted to be a policeman go to university instead of joining the Force?

There are many reasons why a person with a degree could be rejected by the police force, just as the Army does e.g tatoos/short sightedness.

Many children these days do a degree at Uni & then find that either they are unable to get work in their chosen field or that their chosen field no longer appeals to them. Joining the police is  just one option for a post-grad.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 16, 2017, 08:30:00 AM
Quote from: misty on July 15, 2017, 09:23:51 PM
There are many reasons why a person with a degree could be rejected by the police force, just as the Army does e.g tatoos/short sightedness.

Many children these days do a degree at Uni & then find that either they are unable to get work in their chosen field or that their chosen field no longer appeals to them. Joining the police is  just one option for a post-grad.

I wanted you to explain your statement below, which seems to suggest that people without degrees are prone to sue for racial discrimination while people with degrees are not. It seems you are unwilling or unable to do so.

"Maybe they only want people with degrees because of the prospect of being sued by unsuccessful applicants on the basis of racial discrimination."

There are some jobs which require a greater degree of commitment than others. In the police the pay isn't great, the job is dangerous and the hours are anti-social. Your picture of the uncertain graduate looking at the police force as one of their 'options' is worrying. In my opinion a non-graduate with a long standing desire be a policeman would be preferable.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 18, 2017, 08:35:19 PM
The tennis courts were busy on the afternoon of Thursday 3rd May. According to the creche sheets Madeleine was dropped off at Minis at 14.56. Her parents had booked a lesson with the Tennis Coach from 3.30-4.30. However;

as the courts were unoccupied, we decided to have a knock-up for half an hour first. [Madeleine]

The courts weren't entirely unoccupied as one court was fully booked; Weinberger from 2.30-3.30, followed by Kids Club 3.30-4.30, followed by the Tennis Clinic 4.30-5.30. The last event was on both courts.

So the McCanns played on the free court from 3 pm until 4.30?

Near the end of our lesson, as I strove desperately to improve my substandard backhand, another guest appeared, and he and Gerry decided to have a game together [Madeleine]

Did the Clinic take place on only one court then? Who was the other guest? Stephen Carpenter thinks he played tennis with Gerry that afternoon;

 I would say that it was on Thursday that we played tennis and I think that this was what we talked about in the Tapas bar.

DCF: OK, do you have any idea of what time you played tennis with Gerry'

SC: Humm... from two to four or from two until any time in the afternoon, I remember it coincided with leaving the kids in the crèche and picking them up.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN-CARPENTER.htm

Gerry, of course was busy until 3 pm. He sat with his feet in the toddler pool and had his photo taken. Then he went with Kate to the toddler and Mini Clubs. Jane and Rachael played on one of the courts from 1.30-2.30 approximately too.

probably about half one, erm, Rachael and I just went down to, you know, the court was free so we thought ‘Oh we’ll go and have a bit of a knock’ at that point. ....and I think we played ‘til about, phew, half two
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

What a pity the tennis players weren't interviewed. Did anyone attend the Clinic? Which men played in the social tennis? Was it 2 plus Gerry and Dan or 5 plus Gerry and Dan? Matthew has no idea, it seems;

And Gerry was down playing on a court, I think there was only three of them, I think the, erm, the coach, whose name I can't remember, the tennis coach, the blonde haired bloke, erm, was playing to make up the numbers.....there was one court that was full of four and then there was a three
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 18, 2017, 09:22:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 16, 2017, 08:30:00 AM
I wanted you to explain your statement below, which seems to suggest that people without degrees are prone to sue for racial discrimination while people with degrees are not. It seems you are unwilling or unable to do so.

"Maybe they only want people with degrees because of the prospect of being sued by unsuccessful applicants on the basis of racial discrimination."

There are some jobs which require a greater degree of commitment than others. In the police the pay isn't great, the job is dangerous and the hours are anti-social. Your picture of the uncertain graduate looking at the police force as one of their 'options' is worrying. In my opinion a non-graduate with a long standing desire be a policeman would be preferable.

The force is asking for graduates to apply for the role of a DC, not a PC. Any non-graduate with a desire to be a policeman can apply for a PC's job in the usual way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 18, 2017, 09:57:29 PM
Quote from: misty on July 18, 2017, 09:22:31 PM
The force is asking for graduates to apply for the role of a DC, not a PC. Any non-graduate with a desire to be a policeman can apply for a PC's job in the usual way.

Which still doesn't answer my question about suing, does it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 18, 2017, 10:14:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 18, 2017, 09:57:29 PM
Which still doesn't answer my question about suing, does it?

There is nothing to be sued for.  The UK Police have long been interested in employing Graduates.  I thought everyone knew that.

Meanwhile the UK Police still want ordinary Policemen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 18, 2017, 10:36:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 14, 2017, 08:59:39 AM
Sometimes things happen which can't be foreseen. All a parent can do is guard their children against the everyday accidents which can be foreseen. Some parents don't even do that.

I agree we should guard our children from everyday accident s that can be forseen
If Maddie was the victim of a stranger abduction as SY believe that was not an everyday occurrence that could be forseen
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 18, 2017, 10:59:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 18, 2017, 09:57:29 PM
Which still doesn't answer my question about suing, does it?

If the bar is raised higher it is much easier to discriminate at application stage, especially in a region where 1 in 3 people were born outside the UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/01/most-uk-police-forces-have-disproportionate-number-of-white-officers

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 18, 2017, 11:02:57 PM
Quote from: misty on July 18, 2017, 10:59:11 PM
If the bar is raised higher it is much easier to discriminate at application stage, especially in a region where 1 in 3 people were born outside the UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/01/most-uk-police-forces-have-disproportionate-number-of-white-officers

Discriminate against whom?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 18, 2017, 11:04:59 PM
Quote from: davel on July 18, 2017, 10:36:48 PM
I agree we should guard our children from everyday accident s that can be forseen
If Maddie was the victim of a stranger abduction as SY believe that was not an everyday occurrence that could be forseen

The parents didn't guard their children against the foreseeable everyday accidents, which was my point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 18, 2017, 11:09:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 18, 2017, 11:04:59 PM
The parents didn't guard their children against the foreseeable everyday accidents, which was my point.
Everyday accidents happen everyday
That is not why Maddie is missing
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 18, 2017, 11:33:38 PM
Isn't it quiet tonight
Silence is golden
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2017, 12:00:54 AM
Quote from: davel on July 18, 2017, 11:33:38 PM
Isn't it quiet tonight
Silence is golden

One might be thankful for that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 19, 2017, 12:25:03 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2017, 12:00:54 AM
One might be thankful for that.
Don't worry.  When the cat's away, I can see the mice playing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2017, 01:17:16 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 19, 2017, 12:25:03 AM
Don't worry.  When the cat's away, I can see the mice playing.

This cat is never away.  But this cat isn't quite so good at sanctions as some others.  I so often don't see the point of sanctioning anyone.

However, don't try me.  I am really not very nice when I have finally had enough.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 24, 2017, 11:14:19 PM

Original report:-
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/portugal-attacker-shouts-i-killed-madeleine-mccann-he-stabs-liverpool-holidaymaker-1452801

I saw this article when looking for something else & found the sentence imposed by the court unbelievable. Only in Portugal......

ETA & even more unbelievably, the guy is now apparently working as a bartender in Albufeira according to his F/B profile.

http://theportugalnews.com/news/briton-spared-jail-following-drink-fuelled-knife-attack/35291

09-07-2015 12:36:00 · 0 COMMENTS

A British man has been spared jail after an Algarve court ruled he could not be imputed for the crime of attempting to murder a fellow Briton.
On Thursday this week newspaper Correio da Manhã reported that 23-year-old defendant Shane Leighton walked free from Portimão court after judges considered that he could not be held responsible for his acts as he was under the influence of drink and drugs at the time.
 
Leighton was accused of attempting to murder a British woman, 41-year-old Clara Corrigan, in May last year after stabbing her 14 times.
 
The incident took place during the early hours of 29 May in Albufeira.
 
The defendant reportedly told the court that he couldn’t remember a thing about the frenzy as he had been out celebrating his birthday and the last thing he recalled was waking up in the GNR police station.
 
Despite walking free he was handed a suspended sentence to be sectioned for between three years and ten years and eight months, suspended for that same time, as well as being ordered to undergo routine drug and alcohol tests.
 
The Briton will be accompanied during this period by the Institute for Drugs and Addiction as well as by Social Services.
The GNR will also be keeping an eye on him to watch out for “new socially maladaptive behaviours”.
 
Ms. Corrigan was stabbed 14 times by Leighton after he took her back to his grandmother’s home after they met in a bar.

She managed to escape the attack and ask neighbours for help.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 25, 2017, 08:43:27 PM
I believe that Madeleine was abducted for monetary gain and that she is no longer with the people who stole her.  I believe that Operation Grange know this, and probably know who she is with and more or less where where she is.  But probably in a country with no extradition, and certainly without poof of DNA, which would be almost impossible to come by.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 26, 2017, 01:08:36 AM
 Sorry about that, Erngath, but it was a reply to a deleted post.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on July 26, 2017, 01:19:51 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 25, 2017, 08:43:27 PM
I believe that Madeleine was abducted for monetary gain and that she is no longer with the people who stole her.  I believe that Operation Grange know this, and probably know who she is with and more or less where where she is.  But probably in a country with no extradition, and certainly without poof of DNA, which would be almost impossible to come by.

I disagree Eleanor, the sad fact is that Operation Grange has not managed to progress this investigation at all despite the substantial resources afforded to it.  Madeleine being abducted, sold on and living a new life is pure fantasy imo.  Like Ben Needham, Madeleine's fate will probably eventually be revealed as nothing more than an unfortunate accident.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 26, 2017, 01:35:50 AM
Quote from: John on July 26, 2017, 01:19:51 AM
I disagree Eleanor, the sad fact is that Operation Grange has not managed to progress this investigation at all despite the substantial resources afforded to it.  Madeleine being abducted, sold on and living a new life is pure fantasy imo.  Like Ben Needham, Madeleine's fate will probably eventually be revealed as nothing more than an unfortunate accident.

Ah, well,  I thought that we are all entitled to our opinion.  And that we should not express opinion as fact, which you have just done.

You do not know what Operation Grange has managed to progress.

And much as I love you half to bits, don't try to do to me anything that I would never try to do to you.

If nothing else then I can spot a bullshitter at around ten miles.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 26, 2017, 01:50:29 AM
Quote from: John on July 26, 2017, 01:19:51 AM
I disagree Eleanor, the sad fact is that Operation Grange has not managed to progress this investigation at all despite the substantial resources afforded to it.  Madeleine being abducted, sold on and living a new life is pure fantasy imo.  Like Ben Needham, Madeleine's fate will probably eventually be revealed as nothing more than an unfortunate accident.

Many of the cases of young children who died after wandering. unnoticed, from their residence involved water.
http://www.kctv5.com/story/25967440/boy-with-autism-wanders-away-from-home
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3563935/Two-year-old-boy-dead-pond-wandering-away-Florida-home.html
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/4-Year-old-Boy-Who-Wandered-Away-From-Home-Dies-251599941.html
http://articles.latimes.com/2014/mar/21/local/la-me-ln-missing-boy-dead-pool-20140321
http://cw33.com/2017/03/16/missing-2-year-old-found-dead-in-pond/


Why do you think Madeleine was not located following an unfortunate accident?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 26, 2017, 02:05:55 AM
Quote from: John on July 26, 2017, 01:19:51 AM
I disagree Eleanor, the sad fact is that Operation Grange has not managed to progress this investigation at all despite the substantial resources afforded to it.  Madeleine being abducted, sold on and living a new life is pure fantasy imo.  Like Ben Needham, Madeleine's fate will probably eventually be revealed as nothing more than an unfortunate accident.

Investigations come to a conclusion one way or another.  It looks convincing that the police theory about Ben Needham's death was spot on; a situation which his family have accepted and which hopefully let them get on with their lives despite having no body to bury.

Corrie Mckeague's family are less content.  The search for his body has been called off although the excavation will not be infilled until after a police review and I think some incinerated waste is to be sifted.  Intriguing that a pre-nineteen forties skull was found ... wonder if that was the result of foul play and if the police will try to identify who it was?

In both these cases everything has been done that could be and they both reached a conclusion of sorts.  The police seem convinced Corrie was conveyed to the landfill site but just can't be found.

On the other hand, I don't think Scotland Yard are ready to call quits on Madeleine McCann just yet.  I'm hoping that is more than they are just tying up the loose ends ready for the next cold case review in future years ... I'm hoping there is a firm goal in mind.
I don't think there is anything accidental as far as Madeleine is concerned ... I think she vanished as a result of intervention ... and I think that is what SY is working on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 26, 2017, 05:50:55 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 25, 2017, 08:43:27 PM
I believe that Madeleine was abducted for monetary gain and that she is no longer with the people who stole her.  I believe that Operation Grange know this, and probably know who she is with and more or less where where she is.  But probably in a country with no extradition, and certainly without poof of DNA, which would be almost impossible to come by.

When do you believe OG came to this conclusion and what of OG and its funding? being used to monitor? if it can't proceed? what else is it for?
Then there are of course the digs in 2014.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 26, 2017, 07:11:02 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 26, 2017, 05:50:55 PM
When do you believe OG came to this conclusion and what of OG and its funding? being used to monitor? if it can't proceed? what else is it for?
Then there are of course the digs in 2014.

What about the digs in 2014?  Do you have an opinion you wish to share on that or any of the other points you have raised.  I think the quality of debate could easily be enhanced if there was an attempt to participate rather than to hector.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 26, 2017, 07:24:44 PM
The digs in 2014 appear to have produced nothing. What else is there to say ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 26, 2017, 08:01:51 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 26, 2017, 07:24:44 PM
The digs in 2014 appear to have produced nothing. What else is there to say ?

That The Met. are pursuing are one last substantial lead?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 26, 2017, 08:06:31 PM
Since 2014 ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 26, 2017, 08:13:13 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 26, 2017, 07:24:44 PM
The digs in 2014 appear to have produced nothing. What else is there to say ?

It is only now that we are aware of the blood found in Kos which is to be tested for a match to Ben Needham.  Did you know a skull had been recovered during the police searches for Corrie McKeague which is not his?

I don't think it is usual for police to divulge all the information available to them while still involved in an active investigation;  which probably explains why the general public has no idea what may have been recovered from the digs carried out in Luz.
You can speculate if you like ... my speculation is that in Madeleine's case no news is good news as far as the digs are concerned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 26, 2017, 08:21:53 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 26, 2017, 08:06:31 PM
Since 2014 ?

Nope ... I don't think they operate along the lines of we internet snoopers of revisiting ground hog day.  They have either found what they were looking for in 2014 or it wasn't there to be found ... but, whatever they didn't stick there in 2014, they moved on. They do something ... evaluate their action ... then progress to the next.

I think there is still an active investigation being carried out on Madeleine's behalf and I firmly believe the process and where they are at with that is nobody's business but those who need to know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 26, 2017, 08:46:36 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 26, 2017, 07:24:44 PM
The digs in 2014 appear to have produced nothing. What else is there to say ?
* IF * they produced nothing, at least they ruled certain speculation out.

We dont know that they produced nothing, but if so, they at least, have moved on - unlike Amaral who got stuck in a rut because he either didn't understand that the dogs alerts meant nothing .... or he didn't want to acknowledge that they meant (nothing) because he was so set on his own ideas
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 26, 2017, 08:51:31 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 26, 2017, 08:13:13 PM
It is only now that we are aware of the blood found in Kos which is to be tested for a match to Ben Needham.  Did you know a skull had been recovered during the police searches for Corrie McKeague which is not his?

I don't think it is usual for police to divulge all the information available to them while still involved in an active investigation;  which probably explains why the general public has no idea what may have been recovered from the digs carried out in Luz.
You can speculate if you like ... my speculation is that in Madeleine's case no news is good news as far as the digs are concerned.

God forbid that they should divulge information to do with the ongoing case.

Much as we would like to know, divulging that would be fatal to the investigation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 26, 2017, 09:18:15 PM
Quote from: sadie on July 26, 2017, 08:51:31 PM
God forbid that they should divulge information to do with the ongoing case.

Much as we would like to know, divulging that would be fatal to the investigation

Which investigation would that be?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 26, 2017, 10:04:47 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on July 26, 2017, 09:18:15 PM
Which investigation would that be?

Alice, please desist.  That sort of post lends nothing to the discussion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 27, 2017, 10:58:20 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 26, 2017, 10:04:47 PM
Alice, please desist.  That sort of post lends nothing to the discussion.

What remains to be discussed?
The libel trial is over long since and the OG investigation has no legal standing in Portugal. It remains to be seen whether the "re-opening" of the file by the Portuguese Judiciary was anything other than a device by which The Met could ask questions in Portugal under Portuguese law.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 11:49:36 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on July 27, 2017, 10:58:20 AM
What remains to be discussed?
The libel trial is over long since and the OG investigation has no legal standing in Portugal. It remains to be seen whether the "re-opening" of the file by the Portuguese Judiciary was anything other than a device by which The Met could ask questions in Portugal under Portuguese law.

I think that even if you are correct in your assumption that the Portuguese reopened Madeleine's case only as a vehicle to assist Scotland Yard lawfully ... it does not cancel out that there is an active investigation continuing into her case.

Personally speaking I think you are wrong.
I think the Portuguese reopened their case as a result of discovering when carrying out their own review that to do so was merited by the evidence.  Whether or not their initial investigation was prompted by what was happening as regards Operation Grange, the Policia Judiciaria were hardly going to advise their bosses not to bother with reopening Madeleine's case if they were aware there was evidence worth investigating.

I think they are as keen to solve Madeleine McCann's case as Scotland Yard are.  Therefore I think it is wrong to denigrate the investigation by questioning if there is one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 27, 2017, 12:31:30 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 11:49:36 AM
I think that even if you are correct in your assumption that the Portuguese reopened Madeleine's case only as a vehicle to assist Scotland Yard lawfully ... it does not cancel out that there is an active investigation continuing into her case.

Personally speaking I think you are wrong.
I think the Portuguese reopened their case as a result of discovering when carrying out their own review that to do so was merited by the evidence.  Whether or not their initial investigation was prompted by what was happening as regards Operation Grange, the Policia Judiciaria were hardly going to advise their bosses not to bother with reopening Madeleine's case if they were aware there was evidence worth investigating.

I think they are as keen to solve Madeleine McCann's case as Scotland Yard are.  Therefore I think it is wrong to denigrate the investigation by questioning if there is one.
Excellent post Brietta  8@??)( .   
I think you are right, most of the PJ will want it properly cleared up.

However I suspect that there might be a few, mainly in the Western Algarve,  who are not so keen.
Who likes their mistakes shown up?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 27, 2017, 01:03:35 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 26, 2017, 07:11:02 PM
What about the digs in 2014?  Do you have an opinion you wish to share on that or any of the other points you have raised.  I think the quality of debate could easily be enhanced if there was an attempt to participate rather than to hector.

Eleanor raised an opinion on an open forum as regards her thoughts on where OG are in relation to the investigation, why is it unreasonable to politely ask how she came to such thoughts,when Rowley couldn't or wouldn't answer if Grange know whether the poor girl is alive or dead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on July 27, 2017, 01:05:15 PM
Quote from: sadie on July 27, 2017, 12:31:30 PM
Excellent post Brietta  8@??)( .   
I think you are right, most of the PJ will want it properly cleared up.

However I suspect that there might be a few, mainly in the Western Algarve,  who are not so keen.
Who likes their mistakes shown up?

...or of course you're barking up the wrong tree, and nothing will happen, because there is nothing to find.

Pointers, merely pointers, to the shelving of the case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 01:27:49 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 27, 2017, 01:03:35 PM
Eleanor raised an opinion on an open forum as regards her thoughts on where OG are in relation to the investigation, why is it unreasonable to politely ask how she came to such thoughts,when Rowley couldn't or wouldn't answer if Grange know whether the poor girl is alive or dead.

The issue I have is the way in which some posts are coming across as being badly put and impolite to the point of aggression and are discouraging rather than encouraging discussion.

You may believe you responded politely to an opinion expressed without rancour by another member ... I found your response rude and argumentative.
Exactly what was it you were trying to say about the digs in 2014? ... I'm interested.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 27, 2017, 01:36:28 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 01:27:49 PM
The issue I have is the way in which some posts are coming across as being badly put and impolite to the point of aggression and are discouraging rather than encouraging discussion.

You may believe you responded politely to an opinion expressed without rancour by another member ... I found your response rude and argumentative.
Exactly what was it you were trying to say about the digs in 2014? ... I'm interested.

What possible information could be gleaned from a landscaping exercise to be able to lead OG into knowing who and where Madeleine is with as raised by Eleanors post.They were not searching for a live and findable child by any stretch of the imagination.As others have pointed out it lead no where,much like the cocked up burglary theory.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 27, 2017, 01:54:38 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 11:49:36 AM
I think that even if you are correct in your assumption that the Portuguese reopened Madeleine's case only as a vehicle to assist Scotland Yard lawfully ... it does not cancel out that there is an active investigation continuing into her case.

Personally speaking I think you are wrong.
I think the Portuguese reopened their case as a result of discovering when carrying out their own review that to do so was merited by the evidence.  Whether or not their initial investigation was prompted by what was happening as regards Operation Grange, the Policia Judiciaria were hardly going to advise their bosses not to bother with reopening Madeleine's case if they were aware there was evidence worth investigating.

I think they are as keen to solve Madeleine McCann's case as Scotland Yard are.  Therefore I think it is wrong to denigrate the investigation by questioning if there is one.

You are entitled to your opinion just as I am to mine. There is no evidence either way a better case may be made for my argument than yours.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 02:05:46 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 27, 2017, 01:36:28 PM
What possible information could be gleaned from a landscaping exercise to be able to lead OG into knowing who and where Madeleine is with as raised by Eleanors post.They were not searching for a live and findable child by any stretch of the imagination.As others have pointed out it lead no where,much like the cocked up burglary theory.

Of course they were looking for human remains ... hence the cadaver dogs.

It led nowhere? in my opinion that is a rather jaundiced view.

They did not find Madeleine's remains.  As far as I am concerned that was a result.  Her body was not there to be found despite whatever the intelligence the police were acting on was.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 27, 2017, 02:10:00 PM
Everything has gone quiet since the 10th anniversary. I can think of various possible reasons why.
The media have finally lost interest.
The McCanns have decided to shut up after their Supreme Court defeat.
The McCanns have had to shut up if they can't afford to pay for the awareness PR campaign any longer.

Unless OG can find a convincing answer the McCanns remain exactly where they were in 2008. Under suspicion.
Unless OG can find a convincing answer The MPS will emerge from this under suspicion of having agreed to carry out a biased investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 02:10:42 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on July 27, 2017, 01:54:38 PM
You are entitled to your opinion just as I am to mine. There is no evidence either way a better case may be made for my argument than yours.


You are rather free with your assumptions which are less than respectful.  One day perhaps the penny will drop that such comment reflects more adversely on the donor than the recipient.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on July 27, 2017, 02:17:32 PM
Quote from: misty on July 26, 2017, 01:50:29 AM
Many of the cases of young children who died after wandering. unnoticed, from their residence involved water.
http://www.kctv5.com/story/25967440/boy-with-autism-wanders-away-from-home
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3563935/Two-year-old-boy-dead-pond-wandering-away-Florida-home.html
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/4-Year-old-Boy-Who-Wandered-Away-From-Home-Dies-251599941.html
http://articles.latimes.com/2014/mar/21/local/la-me-ln-missing-boy-dead-pool-20140321
http://cw33.com/2017/03/16/missing-2-year-old-found-dead-in-pond/


Why do you think Madeleine was not located following an unfortunate accident?

Sorry for not replying earlier misty.  There are many reasons why she would not have been found following a supposed fatal accident but the favourite has to be concealment by the person involved.  It is unfortunate that the hinterland around PdL is so pockmarked by both natural and manmade features to the extent that any small child so concealed therein might never be found.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on July 27, 2017, 02:58:27 PM
Wild animals very often disturb burial sites and move items around above ground leading to their discovery, several cases in Australia saw this happen.  With this in mind does anyone know if further searches have taken place around Luz in case remains or clothing resurface or is it a case of nobody cares any more?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 27, 2017, 03:30:29 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on July 27, 2017, 02:58:27 PM
Wild animals very often disturb burial sites and move items around above ground leading to their discovery, several cases in Australia saw this happen.  With this in mind does anyone know if further searches have taken place around Luz in case remains or clothing resurface or is it a case of nobody cares any more?
I very much doubt anyone is interested enough to 'search' now we are 10 years on.  I have no doubt, however,  that if body parts, bones, clothing etc. surfaced it would be reported.

The interesting thing about the 'hinterland' around Luz is how hard it is to get away from dog-walkers, tourists, hikers, locals going about their business.

Somewhere I have got a pamphlet about one of the two barragems allegedly used to conceal Madeleine's body.  It turns out in reality it is a popular nature trek.  From memory, there is even a refreshment stop at some point along the trail.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 27, 2017, 03:48:25 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 02:05:46 PM
Of course they were looking for human remains ... hence the cadaver dogs.

It led nowhere? in my opinion that is a rather jaundiced view.

They did not find Madeleine's remains.  As far as I am concerned that was a result.  Her body was not there to be found despite whatever the intelligence the police were acting on was.

Then SY completely misunderstood the intelligence, what other answer can there be.It was either a wild goose chase or some one led them up the garden path in which case that some one should be done for wasting police time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 27, 2017, 03:59:37 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on July 27, 2017, 02:58:27 PM
Wild animals very often disturb burial sites and move items around above ground leading to their discovery, several cases in Australia saw this happen.  With this in mind does anyone know if further searches have taken place around Luz in case remains or clothing resurface or is it a case of nobody cares any more?

I guess its all down to recourses,don't know where you are,but recently in the UK the police searched a landfill site looking for a missing serviceman,despite there were many man hours over a 20 week period but no sign has been found of the guy,yet it seems as if they do still believe he his likely to be in there but have now stopped searching.
10 yrs on from the girl going missing and 3 yrs on from the digs its unlikely to my mind at least that any full scale search as before will take place.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 04:33:38 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 27, 2017, 03:48:25 PM
Then SY completely misunderstood the intelligence, what other answer can there be.It was either a wild goose chase or some one led them up the garden path in which case that some one should be done for wasting police time.

Very speculative. 
Interesting that you appear to think that if intelligence doesn't pan out it is as a result of ...
In your opinion is investigation a waste of time in general or only in relation to Madeleine McCann's case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 04:45:46 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 27, 2017, 03:30:29 PM
I very much doubt anyone is interested enough to 'search' now we are 10 years on.  I have no doubt, however,  that if body parts, bones, clothing etc. surfaced it would be reported.

The interesting thing about the 'hinterland' around Luz is how hard it is to get away from dog-walkers, tourists, hikers, locals going about their business.

Somewhere I have got a pamphlet about one of the two barragems allegedly used to conceal Madeleine's body.  It turns out in reality it is a popular nature trek.  From memory, there is even a refreshment stop at some point along the trail.

I think you are right about dog walkers and their dogs and joggers being likely to discover any remains.  A very quick search turns up loads of instances.

'Unlucky' dog walker finds TWO dead bodies in same churchyard spot within weeks
The member of the public - who has not been named - is not under any suspicion and is simply unfortunate to have found both bodies, say police
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/unlucky-dog-walker-finds-two-4326407

Dog walkers find dead body while out walking in popular park
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/dog-walkers-find-dead-body-6689463

GRIM DISCOVERY Richmond Park dog walker finds dead body during morning jog
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2109787/richmond-park-dog-walker-finds-dead-body-during-morning-jog/

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 27, 2017, 06:46:56 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 04:33:38 PM
Very speculative. 
Interesting that you appear to think that if intelligence doesn't pan out it is as a result of ...
  • misunderstanding
  • a wild goose chase
  • being led up the garden path
In your opinion is investigation a waste of time in general or only in relation to Madeleine McCann's case?

June 2014 digs,followed by interviews of 4 arguidos which lead no where,any intelligence to dig was not extracted from the questioning, so where did it come from? the investigation was described then as to right back at the beginning being no further forward.By the end of that year according to Rowley they were no longer of interest.
Autumn 2015 its announced that OG is drastically scaled back,its gone and going no where fast.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 08:01:51 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 27, 2017, 06:46:56 PM
June 2014 digs,followed by interviews of 4 arguidos which lead no where,any intelligence to dig was not extracted from the questioning, so where did it come from? the investigation was described then as to right back at the beginning being no further forward.By the end of that year according to Rowley they were no longer of interest.
Autumn 2015 its announced that OG is drastically scaled back,its gone and going no where fast.

You appear to harbour a great deal of antipathy towards Operation Grange which I find extraordinary since it is after all, an investigation which is taking place on behalf of a missing girl?
Is it your preference she shouldn't be looked for?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 27, 2017, 08:42:45 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 08:01:51 PM
You appear to harbour a great deal of antipathy towards Operation Grange which I find extraordinary since it is after all, an investigation which is taking place on behalf of a missing girl?
Is it your preference she shouldn't be looked for?

I think a case can be made for Operation Grange to be acting on behalf of the parents of the missing girl. As Rowley said, their mission is to help the parents. It may be that their interests and Madeleine's are the same, but if they're not............

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 27, 2017, 09:23:11 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 02:10:42 PM
You are rather free with your assumptions which are less than respectful.  One day perhaps the penny will drop that such comment reflects more adversely on the donor than the recipient.

Reap as ye sow. Respect is earned not demanded.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 10:26:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 27, 2017, 08:42:45 PM
I think a case can be made for Operation Grange to be acting on behalf of the parents of the missing girl. As Rowley said, their mission is to help the parents. It may be that their interests and Madeleine's are the same, but if they're not............

There is no doubt that finding Madeleine is in the best interest of her family ... why would you insinuate that might not be the case for Madeleine?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 10:33:33 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on July 27, 2017, 09:23:11 PM
Reap as ye sow. Respect is earned not demanded.

  ... indeed and, "Manners maketh man"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on July 28, 2017, 12:21:09 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 08:01:51 PM
You appear to harbour a great deal of antipathy towards Operation Grange which I find extraordinary since it is after all, an investigation which is taking place on behalf of a missing girl?
Is it your preference she shouldn't be looked for?

The emphasis appears to be on finding someone to blame rather then finding the missing child.  At least the pitiful reward offererd by SY points to that realisation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 28, 2017, 01:00:21 AM
Quote from: John on July 28, 2017, 12:21:09 AM
The emphasis appears to be on finding someone to blame rather then finding the missing child.  At least the pitiful reward offererd by SY points to that realisation.

A chicken & egg situation. The size of the reward is irrelevant given the profile of the case & the risk involved for being the whistle-blower is immeasurable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 28, 2017, 06:21:17 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 10:26:19 PM
There is no doubt that finding Madeleine is in the best interest of her family ... why would you insinuate that might not be the case for Madeleine?

Madeleine disappeared in unknown circumstances. Operation Grange have been investigating an abduction. If she wasn't abducted then their investigation isn't acting on her behalf.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 28, 2017, 09:11:19 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 08:01:51 PM
You appear to harbour a great deal of antipathy towards Operation Grange which I find extraordinary since it is after all, an investigation which is taking place on behalf of a missing girl?
Is it your preference she shouldn't be looked for?

If you have any evidence  that they are actually looking for the girl I'm sure I'm not alone in wishing to see it.
OG for some reason is nothing but a headline investigation imo,Autumn 2013 crimewatch and the revelation moment,  at the beginning of 2014 imminent arrest were supposedly going to be made,it was in June that we know the 4 arguidos were questioned followed by OG officers in the full glare of the worlds media on their hands and knees in the hot sun landscaping the Portuguese countryside.November/December of that year another raft of interviewee's.
Autumn 2015 announcement of scaling back,April 2016 HH one last lead,April 2017 Rowley all theories still open.
An awful lot of headlines to have got no where bar elimination of all and sundry and the spending of £11+ million of hard earned tax payers money.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 09:52:54 AM
Quote from: John on July 28, 2017, 12:21:09 AM
The emphasis appears to be on finding someone to blame rather then finding the missing child.  At least the pitiful reward offererd by SY points to that realisation.

I think the Scotland Yard investigation will be carried out along conventional lines in what is an unconventional setting.

I don't think any reward whatever the amount is likely to entice anyone involved in Madeleine's disappearance to come forward now particularly should they suspect theirs or their family's safety might be compromised as a result.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 09:57:16 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 28, 2017, 06:21:17 AM
Madeleine disappeared in unknown circumstances. Operation Grange have been investigating an abduction. If she wasn't abducted then their investigation isn't acting on her behalf.

Is there even the tiniest chance that Operation Grange might know more about the situation than you have stated in what should have been properly flagged up as in your opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 10:04:57 AM
Quote from: barrier on July 28, 2017, 09:11:19 AM
If you have any evidence  that they are actually looking for the girl I'm sure I'm not alone in wishing to see it.
OG for some reason is nothing but a headline investigation imo,Autumn 2013 crimewatch and the revelation moment,  at the beginning of 2014 imminent arrest were supposedly going to be made,it was in June that we know the 4 arguidos were questioned followed by OG officers in the full glare of the worlds media on their hands and knees in the hot sun landscaping the Portuguese countryside.November/December of that year another raft of interviewee's.
Autumn 2015 announcement of scaling back,April 2016 HH one last lead,April 2017 Rowley all theories still open.
An awful lot of headlines to have got no where bar elimination of all and sundry and the spending of £11+ million of hard earned tax payers money.
(http://www.saidacity.net/_old/Upload/2014-06/Ext_p_155580/Ext_p_155580_01.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on July 28, 2017, 10:22:47 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 09:52:54 AM
I think the Scotland Yard investigation will be carried out along conventional lines in what is an unconventional setting.

I don't think any reward whatever the amount is likely to entice anyone involved in Madeleine's disappearance to come forward now particularly should they suspect theirs or their family's safety might be compromised as a result.

Given the torching of Malinka's car and the spray painting of the word 'FALA' on the footway beside it you could have a point.

(http://i.imgur.com/aC9AKea.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on July 28, 2017, 10:27:16 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 27, 2017, 08:42:45 PM
I think a case can be made for Operation Grange to be acting on behalf of the parents of the missing girl. As Rowley said, their mission is to help the parents. It may be that their interests and Madeleine's are the same, but if they're not............

SY  believe that Madeleine was abducted by strangers  because no evidence of foul play by the parents or their friends exists  or has ever emerged -  whereas evidence of the non-involvement of any of them in her disappearance does exist -  as well as evidence that an intruder entered 5A via a window.   

The fact that some people choose to believe that 9 people are all lying their heads off while SY detectives believe they are all telling the truth is irrelevant to SY.

SY are professional detectives not barmy conspiracy theorists  - and are not interested in entertaining the outlandish allegations - (all manifestly based on personal spite and animosity towards the parents), which pervade the 'sceptic' sites.

AIMHO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 28, 2017, 10:27:44 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 10:04:57 AM
(http://www.saidacity.net/_old/Upload/2014-06/Ext_p_155580/Ext_p_155580_01.jpg)

Mad dogs and Englishmen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 28, 2017, 10:33:35 AM
Quote from: Benice on July 28, 2017, 10:27:16 AM
SY  believe that Madeleine was abducted by strangers  because no evidence of foul play by the parents or their friends exists  or has ever emerged -  whereas evidence of the non-involvement of any of them in her disappearance does exist -  as well as evidence that an intruder entered 5A via a window.   

The fact that some people choose to believe that 9 people are all lying their heads off while SY detectives believe they are all telling the truth is irrelevant to SY.

SY are professional detectives not barmy conspiracy theorists  - and are not interested in entertaining the outlandish allegations - (all manifestly based on personal spite and animosity towards the parents), which pervade the 'sceptic' sites.

AIMHO

Rowley April 2017.

Quote
MR: So, you’ll understand from your experience, the way murder investigations work, detectives will
start off with various hypotheses, about what’s happened in a murder, what has happened in a
missing person’s investigation, whether someone has been abducted. All those different possibilities
will be worked through. This case is no different from that but the evidence is limited at the moment to
be cast iron as to which one of those hypotheses we should follow. So we have to keep an open
mind. As I said we have some critical lines of enquiry, those linked to particular lines of enquiry, but
I’m not going to discuss them today because they are very much live investigations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 10:37:22 AM
Quote from: John on July 28, 2017, 10:22:47 AM
Given the torching of Malinka's car and the spray painting of the word 'FALA' on the footway beside it you could have a point.

(http://www.imgur.com/aC9AKea)

The Mafia were pussycats in comparison to some of these newer gangs, John; their initiation practices particularly as documented in South America, are unthinkable.
I doubt anyone who had to relocate under a new identity as a result of the troubles in Northern Ireland sleeps easy at night even at this remove.

If Madeleine was taken either from her room or from the street by an individual ... he is not going to grass himself in.

If Madeleine was taken by a criminal gang ... I do not believe they will talk now even if they would like to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 28, 2017, 10:52:44 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 09:57:16 AM
Is there even the tiniest chance that Operation Grange might know more about the situation than you have stated in what should have been properly flagged up as in your opinion.

All the evidence suggests that Operation Grange were set up to investigate an abduction and nothing else. Rowley was unable to offer any evidence of abduction except;

It is not a 20-year-old who has gone missing and who has made a decision to start a new life, this is a young girl who is missing and at the heart of this has been an abduction.

If that is 'evidence' then our police need more training because many young children disappear who haven't been abducted. Perhaps they do know more, but until they tell us we can't assume that's so.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on July 28, 2017, 10:54:46 AM
Quote from: barrier on July 28, 2017, 10:33:35 AM
Rowley April 2017.

Clutching at straws IMO.

Anyone who believes SY are not completely satisfied that neither the McCanns nor their friends are complicit in Madeleine's disappearance is allowing their wishful thinking to get the better of them IMO.

Unless you are a conspiracy theorist - the fact that the McCanns are regularly updated by SY on their activities should tell you something.

AIMHO

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: barrier on July 28, 2017, 10:27:44 AM
Mad dogs and Englishmen.

Unless you care to think so.

I think the image portrays a working dog with the handler taking the necessary steps to allow it to function and carry out its job properly in a hot climate.

I thought it rather summed up your faux outrage at highly skilled professionals doing their job.  "...  on their hands and knees in the hot sun landscaping the Portuguese countryside"

Dogs and people work in all sorts of enviroments, don't you know?
(http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/uploads/oli/images/Avalanche_Rescue_Dog_Looking_A_6552172.jpg)

One wishes you had as much concern for finding a missing girl as you have for police welfare issues and the British taxpayer for whom you purport to speak.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 11:02:34 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 28, 2017, 10:52:44 AM
All the evidence suggests that Operation Grange were set up to investigate an abduction and nothing else. Rowley was unable to offer any evidence of abduction except;

It is not a 20-year-old who has gone missing and who has made a decision to start a new life, this is a young girl who is missing and at the heart of this has been an abduction.

If that is 'evidence' then our police need more training because many young children disappear who haven't been abducted. Perhaps they do know more, but until they tell us we can't assume that's so.

I rather suspect the police are going on slightly more than you give them credit for ... let's wait and see who is closer to the mark.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on July 28, 2017, 11:04:45 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 28, 2017, 10:52:44 AM
All the evidence suggests that Operation Grange were set up to investigate an abduction and nothing else. Rowley was unable to offer any evidence of abduction except;

It is not a 20-year-old who has gone missing and who has made a decision to start a new life, this is a young girl who is missing and at the heart of this has been an abduction.

If that is 'evidence' then our police need more training because many young children disappear who haven't been abducted. Perhaps they do know more, but until they tell us we can't assume that's so.

IMO it is obvious that the comment was not intended to be evidence - it was just a comment - ruling out one major reason why many young people disappear.

The fact that you have to cling on to it as something to deride whilst ignoring the rest of his comment  i.e. ''and at the heart of this has been an abduction''  speaks volumes imo.

AIMHO

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 28, 2017, 11:15:56 AM
Quote from: Benice on July 28, 2017, 11:04:45 AM
IMO it is obvious that the comment was not intended to be evidence - it was just a comment - ruling out one major reason why many young people disappear.

The fact that you have to cling on to it as something to deride whilst ignoring the rest of his comment  i.e. ''and at the heart of this has been an abduction''  speaks volumes imo.

AIMHO

If OG can prove that an abduction took place why not say so?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on July 28, 2017, 11:28:47 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 28, 2017, 11:15:56 AM
If OG can prove that an abduction took place why not say so?

IMO Their statement that ''neither the McCanns nor their friends are suspects or persons of interest'' should be enough to tell you that abduction is what SY believe.   What they don't know (as far as we know)  is if Madeleine was alive or dead when she was taken, or what happened to her after she disappeared.

Only sceptics and conspiracy theorists have managed to convince themselves that the real meaning of the above SY statement  is... 'The McCanns are prime suspects.

I didn't have you down as one of those people G.


Must go out now.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 28, 2017, 11:39:07 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 27, 2017, 10:33:33 PM
  ... indeed and, "Manners maketh man"

I don't believe that particular proverb was literal. I much prefer "fight fire with fire".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on July 28, 2017, 11:51:40 AM
Quote from: Benice on July 28, 2017, 11:28:47 AM
IMO Their statement that ''neither the McCanns nor their friends are suspects or persons of interest'' should be enough to tell you that abduction is what SY believe.   What they don't know (as far as we know)  is if Madeleine was alive or dead when she was taken, or what happened to her after she disappeared.

Only sceptics and conspiracy theorists have managed to convince themselves that the real meaning of the above SY statement  is... 'The McCanns are prime suspects.

I didn't have you down as one of those people G.


Must go out now.

Just as belief by some members of SY.

We do not know if she was taken from the apartment.

Clearly SY are not investigating the Mccanns.

After all, they were handed one remit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 28, 2017, 11:59:19 AM
Quote from: Benice on July 28, 2017, 11:28:47 AM
IMO Their statement that ''neither the McCanns nor their friends are suspects or persons of interest'' should be enough to tell you that abduction is what SY believe.   What they don't know (as far as we know)  is if Madeleine was alive or dead when she was taken, or what happened to her after she disappeared.

Only sceptics and conspiracy theorists have managed to convince themselves that the real meaning of the above SY statement  is... 'The McCanns are prime suspects.

I didn't have you down as one of those people G.


Must go out now.

The statement above is completely consistent with their remit. Clearly neither the parents or their friends are suspected of abducting Madeleine. I'm asking why they believe in abduction, not whether they believe in it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on July 28, 2017, 01:48:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 28, 2017, 11:59:19 AM
The statement above is completely consistent with their remit. Clearly neither the parents or their friends are suspected of abducting Madeleine. I'm asking why they believe in abduction, not whether they believe in it.

There isn't a scrap of independently verifiable evidence which any reputable police force could rely on to support the abduction by a stranger claim which renders SY's insular investigation so questionable given the previous interference in the case by British officials.  A widened investigation would be something worth pursuing in order to look at the behaviour of those individuals close to the Madeleine campaign who were directly involved in the employment and instruction of crooked PI's.  The evidence of a conspiracy is there for all to see but SY remain totally blinkered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 28, 2017, 01:57:37 PM
Quote from: Benice on July 28, 2017, 10:54:46 AM
Clutching at straws IMO.

Anyone who believes SY are not completely satisfied that neither the McCanns nor their friends are complicit in Madeleine's disappearance is allowing their wishful thinking to get the better of them IMO.

Unless you are a conspiracy theorist - the fact that the McCanns are regularly updated by SY on their activities should tell you something.

AIMHO

A regular update of we haven't a clue tells us nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 28, 2017, 02:01:47 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 28, 2017, 01:57:37 PM
A regular update of we haven't a clue tells us nothing.

I don't think it is meant to.  It wasn't your child who disappeared.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on July 28, 2017, 02:02:27 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 28, 2017, 01:57:37 PM
A regular update of we haven't a clue tells us nothing.

It tells me they are no nearer to finding out what happened to Maddie than Amaral was ten years ago.  At least Amaral has put forward various scenarios for debate unlike SY who appear to be hamstrung or have tunnel vision.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 28, 2017, 02:05:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 11:00:16 AM
Unless you care to think so.

I think the image portrays a working dog with the handler taking the necessary steps to allow it to function and carry out its job properly in a hot climate.

I thought it rather summed up your faux outrage at highly skilled professionals doing their job.  "...  on their hands and knees in the hot sun landscaping the Portuguese countryside"

Dogs and people work in all sorts of enviroments, don't you know?
(http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/uploads/oli/images/Avalanche_Rescue_Dog_Looking_A_6552172.jpg)

One wishes you had as much concern for finding a missing girl as you have for police welfare issues and the British taxpayer for whom you purport to speak.

Cool of the morning or into the evening would be better for the dogs and police one would have thought.,I have no emotional attachment to the girl not knowing her,as a fully funded member of the uk tax paying community I reserve the right to criticise within certain parameters the actions of any public funded body as I see fit.Its plainly obvious that at the moment the OG arm of SY do not know the whereabouts of the girl,they can't even tell you if she is dead or alive,£11+millions buys you that!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 28, 2017, 02:08:10 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 28, 2017, 02:01:47 PM
I don't think it is meant to.  It wasn't your child who disappeared.

Its a criminal investigation just what can be told without compromising that investigation? little or nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 03:10:11 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 28, 2017, 02:05:36 PM
Cool of the morning or into the evening would be better for the dogs and police one would have thought.,I have no emotional attachment to the girl not knowing her,as a fully funded member of the uk tax paying community I reserve the right to criticise within certain parameters the actions of any public funded body as I see fit.Its plainly obvious that at the moment the OG arm of SY do not know the whereabouts of the girl,they can't even tell you if she is dead or alive,£11+millions buys you that!

"Its plainly obvious that at the moment the OG arm of SY do not know the whereabouts of the girl,they can't even tell you if she is dead or alive,£11+millions buys you that!"
Is entirely - In Your Opinion - unless you are able to affirm you have been taken into police confidence about the investigation into Madeleine McCann's case. Are you able to do that?

Of course you cannot.

Apart from your breach of forum protocol the thing which perplexes me is your declared antipathy as a taxpayer, to law and order.  As a taxpayer I don't appreciate the thought of living in a country where internet kangaroo courts hold sway and the rights of citizens are ignored.
Operation Grange was set up to review the case of a British child missing abroad.
Enough evidence was found to rule her parents out of the equation thus leaving abduction as the prime theory and to merit reopening the investigation.

Therefore Operation Grange is lawfully constituted with the permission of the Portuguese authorities to investigate a crime against a British child abroad.

What is it about that sequence of events you feel the need to rail about?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 28, 2017, 03:20:42 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 03:10:11 PM
"Its plainly obvious that at the moment the OG arm of SY do not know the whereabouts of the girl,they can't even tell you if she is dead or alive,£11+millions buys you that!"
Is entirely - In Your Opinion - unless you are able to affirm you have been taken into police confidence about the investigation into Madeleine McCann's case. Are you able to do that?

Of course you cannot.

Apart from your breach of forum protocol the thing which perplexes me is your declared antipathy as a taxpayer, to law and order.  As a taxpayer I don't appreciate the thought of living in a country where internet kangaroo courts hold sway and the rights of citizens are ignored.
Operation Grange was set up to review the case of a British child missing abroad.
Enough evidence was found to rule her parents out of the equation thus leaving abduction as the prime theory and to merit reopening the investigation.

Therefore Operation Grange is lawfully constituted with the permission of the Portuguese authorities to investigate a crime against a British child abroad.

What is it about that sequence of events you feel the need to rail about?
Cite for the piece I have bolded?  I would be most interested, because that part has passed me by totally.

It would also mean Sky's 10 anniversary special got its major point wrong, so this is not insignificant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 03:28:52 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on July 28, 2017, 02:02:27 PM
It tells me they are no nearer to finding out what happened to Maddie than Amaral was ten years ago.  At least Amaral has put forward various scenarios for debate unlike SY who appear to be hamstrung or have tunnel vision.

Police silence is easily explained, Angelo.  Kate and Gerry McCann appealed to the press for restraint and the following was released by Scotland Yard ...

Quote:
This came the day after the Metropolitan police assistant commissioner, Mark Rowley, sent a letter to editors appealing for restraint because of the potential for the Portuguese to halt the investigation.

Rowley explained that the British police were operating under Portuguese law and his opposite number in Portugal, in the policia judiciaria, did not intend – as had been the Met's practice – to brief the media on the search.

He said that the Portuguese police chief had been clear "that if we provide any briefings or information on the work they are undertaking on our behalf, or if reporters cause any disruption to their work in Portugal, activity will cease".

It would mean that Scotland Yard detectives would be unable to excavate sites around the resort of Praia da Luz where the then three-year-old Madeleine went missing on 3 May 2007.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/may/09/madeleinemccann-national-newspapers


As far as Amaral's input to the case is concerned,he apparently made such an impression on his bosses that they sacked him from it in September 2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 28, 2017, 03:30:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 03:10:11 PM
"Its plainly obvious that at the moment the OG arm of SY do not know the whereabouts of the girl,they can't even tell you if she is dead or alive,£11+millions buys you that!"
Is entirely - In Your Opinion - unless you are able to affirm you have been taken into police confidence about the investigation into Madeleine McCann's case. Are you able to do that?

Of course you cannot.

Apart from your breach of forum protocol the thing which perplexes me is your declared antipathy as a taxpayer, to law and order.  As a taxpayer I don't appreciate the thought of living in a country where internet kangaroo courts hold sway and the rights of citizens are ignored.
Operation Grange was set up to review the case of a British child missing abroad.
Enough evidence was found to rule her parents out of the equation thus leaving abduction as the prime theory and to merit reopening the investigation.

Therefore Operation Grange is lawfully constituted with the permission of the Portuguese authorities to investigate a crime against a British child abroad.

What is it about that sequence of events you feel the need to rail about?

The emboldened piece is pushing it a bit.
The Met have absolutley no authority in Portugal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 03:59:08 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on July 28, 2017, 03:30:36 PM
The emboldened piece is pushing it a bit.
The Met have absolutley no authority in Portugal.

Have it your own way ... I'm of the opinion the Portuguese might be slightly miffed to have their townships dug up by foreigners without as much as a say so ... but obviously you must have your finger on the pulse and know better.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 04:03:36 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 28, 2017, 03:20:42 PM
Cite for the piece I have bolded?  I would be most interested, because that part has passed me by totally.

It would also mean Sky's 10 anniversary special got its major point wrong, so this is not insignificant.

Please remind me of the bit where it says who the prime suspects are considered to be ... that is the part which confounds me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 28, 2017, 04:06:43 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 04:03:36 PM
Please remind me of the bit where it says who the prime suspects are considered to be ... that is the part which confounds me.
If you choose to dodge the question I asked, so be it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 28, 2017, 04:27:53 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 03:59:08 PM
Have it your own way ... I'm of the opinion the Portuguese might be slightly miffed to have their townships dug up by foreigners without as much as a say so ... but obviously you must have your finger on the pulse and know better.

It is a question of how the law is configured nothing more nothing less.
Show me an authoritative statement for any police force having authority in any country other than it's own.
You seem to be attempting to divert btw; the location of my digit is of no relevance.
The law is what it is whether it suits us or not.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 04:34:37 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 28, 2017, 04:06:43 PM
If you choose to dodge the question I asked, so be it.

There was no question though was there? and if I am less than inclined to join in the game, entirely my decision. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 28, 2017, 04:43:39 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 28, 2017, 03:20:42 PM
Cite for the piece I have bolded?  I would be most interested, because that part has passed me by totally.

It would also mean Sky's 10 anniversary special got its major point wrong, so this is not insignificant.
This was the question.

To date on this forum, I have seen it alleged many times that the McCanns were investigated and cleared.

I have yet to see one iota of evidence that this is the case.

I take it from your response that you have no such evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 04:59:43 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on July 28, 2017, 04:27:53 PM
It is a question of how the law is configured nothing more nothing less.
Show me an authoritative statement for any police force having authority in any country other than it's own.
You seem to be attempting to divert btw; the location of my digit is of no relevance.
The law is what it is whether it suits us or not.

I consider diversion to be your forte so I must bow to your superior knowledge in that respect.  As for the rest, I recommend you read the various threads on the forum in which differences in the application of law and order in Portugal and Britain receive a mention, sometimes in great detail.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on July 28, 2017, 05:05:19 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 28, 2017, 04:43:39 PM
This was the question.

To date on this forum, I have seen it alleged many times that the McCanns were investigated and cleared.

I have yet to see one iota of evidence that this is the case.

I take it from your response that you have no such evidence.

My understanding is that this 'cleared' suggestion comes from the removal of the arguido status which was applied to Robert Murat and Kate and Gerry McCann initially. This reflects a complete misunderstanding as to what the arguido status actually represents.    The Portuguese Supreme Court in their wisdom could see that this was the case thus why they deemed it necessary to clarify the situation in their judgement in the recent defamation case instigated by the McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on July 28, 2017, 05:08:27 PM
Posters are reminded of the forum rules.  In particular, comments should not be antagonistic or goading. TY
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 05:25:55 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 28, 2017, 04:43:39 PM
This was the question.

To date on this forum, I have seen it alleged many times that the McCanns were investigated and cleared.

I have yet to see one iota of evidence that this is the case.

I take it from your response that you have no such evidence.

Oh, I see ... "Cite for the piece I have bolded?" translates to the above. 


Since the 'allegations' you cite will have cites to support them there is little point in my reiteration since your entrenched position doesn't already appear to have been dented by them.

Conversely ... what is your supporting evidence?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 28, 2017, 05:47:09 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 05:25:55 PM
Oh, I see ... "Cite for the piece I have bolded?" translates to the above. 


Since the 'allegations' you cite will have cites to support them there is little point in my reiteration since your entrenched position doesn't already appear to have been dented by them.

Conversely ... what is your supporting evidence?
Note the question mark, hence it was a question.

You cannot re-iterate.  For the simple reason that you did not iterate in the first instance.  And when you were asked to iterate, you declined to do so.

I have made it clear I am interested in hearing of the alleged investigation of McCann involvement.

You have made it clear you have no evidence of such an alleged investigation.

TY.

Dinner calls.  Our 'new' neighbour has provided us with produce grown in his back garden, so I am keen on a home-grown meal, even though we have yet another month before we move.

The tw*t called our builder went off yesterday leaving all the water cut off.  When the kids switched it back on above, they did not realise that the under-build was flooding.  So the stuff I move in about 3 months ago is probably ruined.

A Year In Provence?  Try 5 years in Barlavento.     *&*%£
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 05:57:19 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 28, 2017, 05:47:09 PM
Note the question mark, hence it was a question.

You cannot re-iterate.  For the simple reason that you did not iterate in the first instance.  And when you were asked to iterate, you declined to do so.

I have made it clear I am interested in hearing of the alleged investigation of McCann involvement.

You have made it clear you have no evidence of such an alleged investigation.

TY.

Dinner calls.  Our 'new' neighbour has provided us with produce grown in his back garden, so I am keen on a home-grown meal, even though we have yet another month before we move.

The tw*t called our builder went off yesterday leaving all the water cut off.  When the kids switched it back on above, they did not realise that the under-build was flooding.  So the stuff I move in about 3 months ago is probably ruined.

A Year In Provence?  Try 5 years in Barlavento.     *&*%£

Conversely ... what is your supporting evidence?   &%+((£
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 28, 2017, 07:05:10 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 05:57:19 PM
Conversely ... what is your supporting evidence?   &%+((£
Given that you have failed to provide any evidence of an investigation (4th request?), why should I attempt to provide evidence of a negative?

Time to either cough up or move on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 28, 2017, 07:34:04 PM

What a good idea.  Let's all move on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 28, 2017, 07:41:18 PM
It would be really beneficial if people would concentrate less on what they think the current investigators haven't addressed and more on what SY & the PJ hope to achieve following identification of viable leads.
 There are reputations on the line here, not least the PJ's who could redeem themselves following the mistakes made by the original team. They will not be chasing shadows or paying lip-service to the Brits - what a coup it will be for them if they can finish what SY started in reviewing the files.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 07:48:09 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on July 28, 2017, 06:54:42 PM
It would be the same asking me to read a kids Meccano magazine in lieu of one of Tim O'Shenko's works to obtain a factual opinion on applied mecahnics  ?{)(**

eta: or applied mechanics even

(http://s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/centaur-wp/designweek/prod/content/uploads/2013/02/Ladybird1LoRes.jpeg)
Don't knock it until you try it. 
I once passed a science exam very well indeed having studied only from a child's book.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 28, 2017, 07:49:41 PM
Quote from: Benice on July 28, 2017, 10:27:16 AM
SY  believe that Madeleine was abducted by strangers  because no evidence of foul play by the parents or their friends exists  or has ever emerged - whereas evidence of the non-involvement of any of them in her disappearance does exist -  as well as evidence that an intruder entered 5A via a window.   

The fact that some people choose to believe that 9 people are all lying their heads off while SY detectives believe they are all telling the truth[/color] is irrelevant to SY.

SY are professional detectives not barmy conspiracy theorists  - and are not interested in entertaining the outlandish allegations - (all manifestly based on personal spite and animosity towards the parents), which pervade the 'sceptic' sites.

AIMHO

"SY  believe that Madeleine was abducted by strangers  because no evidence of foul play by the parents or their friends exists  or has ever emerged -no evidence of stranger abduction so that is a bit of a  daft sentence!
No evidence of parents friends exist? really?

 - whereas evidence of the non-involvement of any of them in her disappearance does exist
Show us the evidence of this [proving a negatve is always a B.....]
 -  as well as evidence that an intruder entered 5A via a window.
  Show us the evidence, as it has been checked and there was no evidence found...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 28, 2017, 07:51:23 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 07:48:09 PM
(http://s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/centaur-wp/designweek/prod/content/uploads/2013/02/Ladybird1LoRes.jpeg)
Don't knock it until you try it. 
I once passed a science exam very well indeed having studied only from a child's book.

I passed a Naval Air Mechanics Board, if that helps.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 28, 2017, 07:53:29 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 03:10:11 PM
"Its plainly obvious that at the moment the OG arm of SY do not know the whereabouts of the girl,they can't even tell you if she is dead or alive,£11+millions buys you that!"
Is entirely - In Your Opinion - unless you are able to affirm you have been taken into police confidence about the investigation into Madeleine McCann's case. Are you able to do that?

Of course you cannot.

Apart from your breach of forum protocol the thing which perplexes me is your declared antipathy as a taxpayer, to law and order.  As a taxpayer I don't appreciate the thought of living in a country where internet kangaroo courts hold sway and the rights of citizens are ignored.
Operation Grange was set up to review the case of a British child missing abroad.
Enough evidence was found to rule her parents out of the equation thus leaving abduction as the prime theory and to merit reopening the investigation.

Therefore Operation Grange is lawfully constituted with the permission of the Portuguese authorities to investigate a crime against a British child abroad.

What is it about that sequence of events you feel the need to rail about?

"Enough evidence was found to rule her parents out of the equation thus leaving abduction as the prime theory and to merit reopening the investigation."

Oh I missed that can you please send the cite please. thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 28, 2017, 07:58:10 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 07:48:09 PM
(http://s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/centaur-wp/designweek/prod/content/uploads/2013/02/Ladybird1LoRes.jpeg)
Don't knock it until you try it. 
I once passed a science exam very well indeed having studied only from a child's book.


Important information...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 07:59:33 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 28, 2017, 07:53:29 PM

"Enough evidence was found to rule her parents out of the equation thus leaving abduction as the prime theory and to merit reopening the investigation."

Oh I missed that can you please send the cite please. thanks.

Haven't you noticed.  We have moved on from there.  Misty has suggested a more productive path to follow, might I be so bold as to suggest you take it there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 28, 2017, 08:00:33 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 07:48:09 PM
(http://s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/centaur-wp/designweek/prod/content/uploads/2013/02/Ladybird1LoRes.jpeg)
Don't knock it until you try it. 
I once passed a science exam very well indeed having studied only from a child's book.

I would expect nothing less.
There is a convincing argument for "O" level science text books being children's books.
Tim O'Shenko is, however, a whole horse of different colour.
Cue the piebald horse joke.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 28, 2017, 08:01:40 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 28, 2017, 07:51:23 PM
I passed a Naval Air Mechanics Board, if that helps.

I bet it made your eyes water!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 28, 2017, 08:04:03 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on July 28, 2017, 08:01:40 PM
I bet it made your eyes water!

Now that was funny.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 28, 2017, 08:11:27 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 07:59:33 PM
Haven't you noticed.  We have moved on from there.  Misty has suggested a more productive path to follow, might I be so bold as to suggest you take it there.

But this is the  'wandering off topic' topic. We can go wherever we want with it.  ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on July 28, 2017, 08:15:08 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 28, 2017, 08:11:27 PM
But this is the  'wandering off topic' topic. We can go wherever we want with it.  ?{)(**

As long as we don't split the infinitive....... ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 28, 2017, 08:20:49 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 07:59:33 PM
Haven't you noticed.  We have moved on from there.  Misty has suggested a more productive path to follow, might I be so bold as to suggest you take it there.

I just notice you don't want to show all this evidence you are keeping to yourself... could this be because there is NONE and you made that up, because that is what it looks like.

Misty doesn't get to chose what posts I challenge, could I be so bold as to remind you of that, thank you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 28, 2017, 08:22:56 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on July 28, 2017, 08:15:08 PM
As long as we don't split the infinitive....... ?{)(**

Why not?  I'm quite good at that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on July 28, 2017, 08:27:47 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 28, 2017, 08:22:56 PM
Why not?  I'm quite good at that.

Just much needed humour on a Friday evening, after a taxing week.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 28, 2017, 08:31:21 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on July 28, 2017, 08:27:47 PM
Just much needed humour on a Friday evening, after a taxing week.

You and me both.  But never mind.  All will be well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 08:35:04 PM
Quote from: misty on July 28, 2017, 07:41:18 PM
It would be really beneficial if people would concentrate less on what they think the current investigators haven't addressed and more on what SY & the PJ hope to achieve following identification of viable leads.
 There are reputations on the line here, not least the PJ's who could redeem themselves following the mistakes made by the original team. They will not be chasing shadows or paying lip-service to the Brits - what a coup it will be for them if they can finish what SY started in reviewing the files.

I think you are right that nothing would please the Policia Judiciaria more than to be instrumental in solving Madeleine's case.  They will do everything in their power towards that end and as lead authority the kudos of success will be theirs if Madeleine is found.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on July 28, 2017, 08:36:56 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 28, 2017, 08:31:21 PM
You and me both.  But never mind.  All will be well.

Indeed Eleanor, time heals.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 28, 2017, 09:39:23 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on July 28, 2017, 08:15:08 PM
As long as we don't split the infinitive....... ?{)(**

I prefer mine pitted and dumped in a Gimlet  ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 29, 2017, 11:54:09 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 28, 2017, 03:10:11 PM
"Its plainly obvious that at the moment the OG arm of SY do not know the whereabouts of the girl,they can't even tell you if she is dead or alive,£11+millions buys you that!"
Is entirely - In Your Opinion - unless you are able to affirm you have been taken into police confidence about the investigation into Madeleine McCann's case. Are you able to do that?

Of course you cannot.

Apart from your breach of forum protocol the thing which perplexes me is your declared antipathy as a taxpayer, to law and order. 

Question and answer to and from Rowley,note Rowley not my words.

Quote
Q: Do the significant lines of enquiry suggest to you Maddie is alive or dead?
MR: As I said earlier on we have no definitive evidence as to whether Maddie is alive or dead. We
have to keep an open mind that is why we describe it as a missing person enquiry. Of course we
understand why after so many years people would be pessimistic but we are keeping an open mind
and treating it as a missing person enquiry.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8138.30


Which breach of forum protocol would that be?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 29, 2017, 12:33:13 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 29, 2017, 11:54:09 AM
Question and answer to and from Rowley,note Rowley not my words.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8138.30


Which breach of forum protocol would that be?

Perhaps you missed the discussion on caveats? 

I endeavour not to delete posts which have in my opinion, slipped back into ignoring them ... is it your preference that I discontinue doing that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 27, 2017, 08:26:15 PM
It seems that certain little somebodies have been busy altering the wording of the PJ files online. The first snipped copy had been previously posted on here on a couple of occasions, as recently as Feb 2017. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1620.1220;wap2

  The veracity of the wording can be confirmed on an independent source http://madeleinemccann.org/blog/2014/04/20/pj-files-gnr-officer-statements/

Witness statement of GNR Dog Handler Antonio Freitas Silva...
snipped
That after having given the sniffer dog the towel and next to the residence of the missing girl, more specifically, next to apartment block 5A and 5, the first sniffer dog headed toward the door of that apartment. Immediately afterward, he headed in the direction of block 4, returned around block 5, and came down a road that exists between this block and the leisure area (pools, restaurants, etc). He turned right; in the direction of the aforementioned apartment and headed toward the main road. There, he crossed the street and next to the wall of block 6, turned right, and headed toward the contiguous parking area. More concretely, he headed next to a light post and sniffed the ground around that post. After this, he crossed the street again and headed toward the access zone to the restaurants and pool area, sniffing the door which was closed at that time. He again went to the parking zone, and at that point, lost the scent.
- When carrying out this operation with the second dog, he followed the same route, took the same direction and headed toward the light post in the parking lot mentioned above. He sniffed the area and at that point appeared to have lost the scent. The only difference was that this dog did not head toward the entrance of the restaurant or the pool area.
*emboldened part should read left not right as translated from Portuguese.

This is the latest version online which has been subtly altered to correspond with the diagram of the S&R dogs displayed in the files (someone suggested diagram prepared by the press not the PJ)

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANTONIO_SILVA.htm


 That after having smelt the aforementioned towel, next to the residence of the missing girl, more specifically next to block 5’s apartment 5A, the first tracker-dog headed toward the door of that apartment, soon whirled about in the direction of block 4, bypassing block 5 along a route (the corridor) that goes around that block and gives unto a path that runs between this block and the resort’s leisure area (pools, restaurants, etc). The dog went into the path on the left, heading toward the main road (Francisco Gentil Martins). Once there, he crossed the street and close to block 6’s wall, turned right, heading toward the contiguous parking area, more particularly toward a light post where he sniffed the ground. After this, he crossed the street again and headed toward the resort’s access zone, sniffing the door which was closed at that time. He again went to the parking zone, but finally lost interest in the search, i.e lost the scent.

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

If anyone is in any doubt that the PJ files cannot be relied upon in the form they have been presented on the internet then this alteration 9 years down the line must surely be proof of it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 27, 2017, 08:44:59 PM
Quote from: misty on August 27, 2017, 08:26:15 PM
It seems that certain little somebodies have been busy altering the wording of the PJ files online. The first snipped copy had been previously posted on here on a couple of occasions, as recently as Feb 2017. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1620.1220;wap2

  The veracity of the wording can be confirmed on an independent source http://madeleinemccann.org/blog/2014/04/20/pj-files-gnr-officer-statements/

Witness statement of GNR Dog Handler Antonio Freitas Silva...
snipped
That after having given the sniffer dog the towel and next to the residence of the missing girl, more specifically, next to apartment block 5A and 5, the first sniffer dog headed toward the door of that apartment. Immediately afterward, he headed in the direction of block 4, returned around block 5, and came down a road that exists between this block and the leisure area (pools, restaurants, etc). He turned right; in the direction of the aforementioned apartment and headed toward the main road. There, he crossed the street and next to the wall of block 6, turned right, and headed toward the contiguous parking area. More concretely, he headed next to a light post and sniffed the ground around that post. After this, he crossed the street again and headed toward the access zone to the restaurants and pool area, sniffing the door which was closed at that time. He again went to the parking zone, and at that point, lost the scent.
- When carrying out this operation with the second dog, he followed the same route, took the same direction and headed toward the light post in the parking lot mentioned above. He sniffed the area and at that point appeared to have lost the scent. The only difference was that this dog did not head toward the entrance of the restaurant or the pool area.
*emboldened part should read left not right as translated from Portuguese.

This is the latest version online which has been subtly altered to correspond with the diagram of the S&R dogs displayed in the files (someone suggested diagram prepared by the press not the PJ)

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANTONIO_SILVA.htm


 That after having smelt the aforementioned towel, next to the residence of the missing girl, more specifically next to block 5’s apartment 5A, the first tracker-dog headed toward the door of that apartment, soon whirled about in the direction of block 4, bypassing block 5 along a route (the corridor) that goes around that block and gives unto a path that runs between this block and the resort’s leisure area (pools, restaurants, etc). The dog went into the path on the left, heading toward the main road (Francisco Gentil Martins). Once there, he crossed the street and close to block 6’s wall, turned right, heading toward the contiguous parking area, more particularly toward a light post where he sniffed the ground. After this, he crossed the street again and headed toward the resort’s access zone, sniffing the door which was closed at that time. He again went to the parking zone, but finally lost interest in the search, i.e lost the scent.

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

If anyone is in any doubt that the PJ files cannot be relied upon in the form they have been presented on the internet then this alteration 9 years down the line must surely be proof of it.

So you believe an incorrect translation should be left?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 27, 2017, 08:49:37 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on August 27, 2017, 08:44:59 PM
So you believe an incorrect translation should be left?
It should be clear to a translator whether it says left or right.  So I'm tending to think this is more a correction of the actual statement by the translator.
Does anyone read Portuguese?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 27, 2017, 08:56:15 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on August 27, 2017, 08:44:59 PM
So you believe an incorrect translation should be left?

Yes, as like many other documents it has been used in many an online discussion over the years as "evidence".
 The revised copy should be posted underneath with an explanation for the errors.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 27, 2017, 08:57:38 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 27, 2017, 08:49:37 PM
It should be clear to a translator whether it says left or right.  So I'm tending to think this is more a correction of the actual statement by the translator.
Does anyone read Portuguese?

It's a bit more than just left or right, Rob. The original translation does not mention the main road as being Gentil da Martins.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 27, 2017, 10:48:33 PM
Quote from: misty on August 27, 2017, 08:26:15 PM
It seems that certain little somebodies have been busy altering the wording of the PJ files online. The first snipped copy had been previously posted on here on a couple of occasions, as recently as Feb 2017. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1620.1220;wap2

  The veracity of the wording can be confirmed on an independent source http://madeleinemccann.org/blog/2014/04/20/pj-files-gnr-officer-statements/

Witness statement of GNR Dog Handler Antonio Freitas Silva...
snipped
That after having given the sniffer dog the towel and next to the residence of the missing girl, more specifically, next to apartment block 5A and 5, the first sniffer dog headed toward the door of that apartment. Immediately afterward, he headed in the direction of block 4, returned around block 5, and came down a road that exists between this block and the leisure area (pools, restaurants, etc). He turned right; in the direction of the aforementioned apartment and headed toward the main road. There, he crossed the street and next to the wall of block 6, turned right, and headed toward the contiguous parking area. More concretely, he headed next to a light post and sniffed the ground around that post. After this, he crossed the street again and headed toward the access zone to the restaurants and pool area, sniffing the door which was closed at that time. He again went to the parking zone, and at that point, lost the scent.
- When carrying out this operation with the second dog, he followed the same route, took the same direction and headed toward the light post in the parking lot mentioned above. He sniffed the area and at that point appeared to have lost the scent. The only difference was that this dog did not head toward the entrance of the restaurant or the pool area.
*emboldened part should read left not right as translated from Portuguese.

This is the latest version online which has been subtly altered to correspond with the diagram of the S&R dogs displayed in the files (someone suggested diagram prepared by the press not the PJ)

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANTONIO_SILVA.htm


 That after having smelt the aforementioned towel, next to the residence of the missing girl, more specifically next to block 5’s apartment 5A, the first tracker-dog headed toward the door of that apartment, soon whirled about in the direction of block 4, bypassing block 5 along a route (the corridor) that goes around that block and gives unto a path that runs between this block and the resort’s leisure area (pools, restaurants, etc). The dog went into the path on the left, heading toward the main road (Francisco Gentil Martins). Once there, he crossed the street and close to block 6’s wall, turned right, heading toward the contiguous parking area, more particularly toward a light post where he sniffed the ground. After this, he crossed the street again and headed toward the resort’s access zone, sniffing the door which was closed at that time. He again went to the parking zone, but finally lost interest in the search, i.e lost the scent.

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

If anyone is in any doubt that the PJ files cannot be relied upon in the form they have been presented on the internet then this alteration 9 years down the line must surely be proof of it.
Well spotted misty
Not only the files, but G Earth has been altered too, in several places

I cant prove it as simply as you have but I know that it has been altered, because i have seen before and after on GE ... and sometimes the actual place in real life.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 28, 2017, 02:18:16 AM
Quote from: misty on August 27, 2017, 08:26:15 PM
It seems that certain little somebodies have been busy altering the wording of the PJ files online. The first snipped copy had been previously posted on here on a couple of occasions, as recently as Feb 2017. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1620.1220;wap2

  The veracity of the wording can be confirmed on an independent source http://madeleinemccann.org/blog/2014/04/20/pj-files-gnr-officer-statements/

Witness statement of GNR Dog Handler Antonio Freitas Silva...
snipped
That after having given the sniffer dog the towel and next to the residence of the missing girl, more specifically, next to apartment block 5A and 5, the first sniffer dog headed toward the door of that apartment. Immediately afterward, he headed in the direction of block 4, returned around block 5, and came down a road that exists between this block and the leisure area (pools, restaurants, etc). He turned right; in the direction of the aforementioned apartment and headed toward the main road. There, he crossed the street and next to the wall of block 6, turned right, and headed toward the contiguous parking area. More concretely, he headed next to a light post and sniffed the ground around that post. After this, he crossed the street again and headed toward the access zone to the restaurants and pool area, sniffing the door which was closed at that time. He again went to the parking zone, and at that point, lost the scent.
- When carrying out this operation with the second dog, he followed the same route, took the same direction and headed toward the light post in the parking lot mentioned above. He sniffed the area and at that point appeared to have lost the scent. The only difference was that this dog did not head toward the entrance of the restaurant or the pool area.
*emboldened part should read left not right as translated from Portuguese.

This is the latest version online which has been subtly altered to correspond with the diagram of the S&R dogs displayed in the files (someone suggested diagram prepared by the press not the PJ)

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANTONIO_SILVA.htm


 That after having smelt the aforementioned towel, next to the residence of the missing girl, more specifically next to block 5’s apartment 5A, the first tracker-dog headed toward the door of that apartment, soon whirled about in the direction of block 4, bypassing block 5 along a route (the corridor) that goes around that block and gives unto a path that runs between this block and the resort’s leisure area (pools, restaurants, etc). The dog went into the path on the left, heading toward the main road (Francisco Gentil Martins). Once there, he crossed the street and close to block 6’s wall, turned right, heading toward the contiguous parking area, more particularly toward a light post where he sniffed the ground. After this, he crossed the street again and headed toward the resort’s access zone, sniffing the door which was closed at that time. He again went to the parking zone, but finally lost interest in the search, i.e lost the scent.

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

If anyone is in any doubt that the PJ files cannot be relied upon in the form they have been presented on the internet then this alteration 9 years down the line must surely be proof of it.

I think that is a profound post, Misty, which illustrates perfectly why "the files" just cannot be accepted as if they originated on Mount Sinai.

Your capability in researching and pin pointing these facts leaves me in awe.
You and Pegasus made a great team.  You on one side of the divide and Pegasus on the other but both motivated by truth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 28, 2017, 02:32:43 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 28, 2017, 02:18:16 AM
I think that is a profound post, Misty, which illustrates perfectly why "the files" just cannot be accepted as if they originated on Mount Sinai.

Your capability in researching and pin pointing these facts leaves me in awe.
You and Pegasus made a great team.  You on one side of the divide and Pegasus on the other but both motivated by truth.

I will confess something elsewhere prompted me to look at Silva's statement earlier & when I read the current online version I knew straight away that it had been altered - hence I checked the original version from posts on here. I'm nowhere near being in Pegasus's league but I live & learn.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 28, 2017, 02:41:54 AM
Quote from: misty on August 28, 2017, 02:32:43 AM
I will confess something elsewhere prompted me to look at Silva's statement earlier & when I read the current online version I knew straight away that it had been altered - hence I checked the original version from posts on here. I'm nowhere near being in Pegasus's league but I live & learn.
Is that right?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 28, 2017, 09:30:08 AM
Quote from: misty on August 28, 2017, 02:32:43 AM
I will confess something elsewhere prompted me to look at Silva's statement earlier & when I read the current online version I knew straight away that it had been altered - hence I checked the original version from posts on here. I'm nowhere near being in Pegasus's league but I live & learn.

You are an absolute treasure misty.

And Pegasus was.  Do hope that he is OK
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 30, 2017, 11:52:24 PM
Maelys de Araujo: Police fear French girl who went missing from wedding may have been kidnapped
Investigators said ‘criminal possibility’ cannot be ruled out after sniffer dogs lost their trail for the nine-year-old in a car park

Jeff Farrell

Kidnappers may have taken a nine-year-old girl who vanished from a wedding in the French Alps, police said.

Maelys de Araujo was last seen in a play room in the village hall in Chambery, a small town in the Pont-de-Beauvoisin region of southeastern France.

She disappeared at some point after 3am on Sunday morning.

Police launched a massive hunt after she was declared formally missing for 48 hours. They said a “criminal possibility" cannot be ruled out.

Guests initially searched for the girl at the hall after a DJ announced that she had disappeared from the wedding party, which she had attended with her parents and older sister.

One of the wedding guests, Grégoire, told Le Parisien newspaper: "The DJ for the evening announced on the microphone that a child had disappeared. Suddenly, everyone started searching, in the main hall and outside.

"It was anguish. To see the disappearance of a nine-year-old, that's not nothing. We initially thought she must be asleep in a corner after a game of hide-and-seek. After an hour, as we'd found nothing, the police were alerted."

After they alerted the police, around 100 officers, including divers and dog handlers, launched a massive search for the girl, trawling through dense woodland and a nearby river. But their search came up empty handed.

Investigators now believe de Araujo may have been taken in a vehicle after the three sniffer dogs tracking her scent, lost her trail in the car park outside the village hall in Pont-de-Beauvoisin.

Regional police chief Yves Marzin said: “One of the possible theories is that little Maelys left in a car, one way or another."

Detectives believe it is more likely with “each passing hour” that de Araujo was kidnapped than the possibility that she was involved in an accident or ran away.

“Given the time that has elapsed since the disappearance of young Maelys and given the resources that have been sadly deployed in vain to find her, the criminal possibility can no longer be ruled out,” local prosecutor Dietlind Baudoin told a news conference.

But she warned against “making hasty conclusions” in the search for the girl, whose family are believed to be from the nearby department of Jura.

Locals have helped in an appeal to find the missing girl, who has brown hair and hazel eyes, and have placed posters in the windows of bars and shops in Pont-de-Beauvoisin.

Police are questioning the 180 people who attended the wedding as well as people at two other parties held in the town over the weekend.

So far, 140 people out of a total of 250 have been questioned, according to Didier Plunian, who heads the region’s search and rescue unit.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/maelys-de-araujo-missing-girl-wedding-kidnapping-france-alps-french-police-pont-de-beauvoisin-a7919486.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 05, 2017, 07:44:41 PM
See current breaking news re Bell Pottinger.
Apparently they made a name for themselves working for clients who were "reputationally difficult".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on September 05, 2017, 09:34:23 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 05, 2017, 07:44:41 PM
See current breaking news re Bell Pottinger.
Apparently they made a name for themselves working for clients who were "reputationally difficult".

Yes, noticed that. Been chucked out of the PR society or some such.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 05, 2017, 10:17:11 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on September 05, 2017, 09:34:23 PM
Yes, noticed that. Been chucked out of the PR society or some such.

Indeed now they require an expert in reputation management, to save them from themselves lol
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 06, 2017, 12:58:25 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on September 05, 2017, 09:34:23 PM
Yes, noticed that. Been chucked out of the PR society or some such.

May 09, 2007
Mark Warner, the holiday company at the centre of the Portuguese kidnap story, is using the Bell Pottinger Group for help with the crisis.
Head of issues and crisis management Alex Woolfall is on location in Portugal and reports directly to MD ­David Hopkins.

Mark Warner brought in Resonate on a generic brief a week before three-year-old Madeleine McCann was kidnapped from its Portuguese resort in Praia da Luz. MD Michael Froh­lich then referred the firm to his parent company’s crisis specialist.

Frohlich and Resonate dir­ector Tricia Moon are helping liaise with the British Consulate in Portugal, the Portuguese Police and the Portuguese and UK media.

They are working with staff at Mark Warner’s Kensington headquarters.

http://www.prweek.com/article/656479/mark-warner-hires-bell-pottinger#qDtUmbgAszAryhex.99
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on September 06, 2017, 01:49:06 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 30, 2017, 11:52:24 PM
Maelys de Araujo: Police fear French girl who went missing from wedding may have been kidnapped
Investigators said ‘criminal possibility’ cannot be ruled out after sniffer dogs lost their trail for the nine-year-old in a car park

Jeff Farrell

Kidnappers may have taken a nine-year-old girl who vanished from a wedding in the French Alps, police said.

Maelys de Araujo was last seen in a play room in the village hall in Chambery, a small town in the Pont-de-Beauvoisin region of southeastern France.

She disappeared at some point after 3am on Sunday morning.

Police launched a massive hunt after she was declared formally missing for 48 hours. They said a “criminal possibility" cannot be ruled out.

Guests initially searched for the girl at the hall after a DJ announced that she had disappeared from the wedding party, which she had attended with her parents and older sister.

One of the wedding guests, Grégoire, told Le Parisien newspaper: "The DJ for the evening announced on the microphone that a child had disappeared. Suddenly, everyone started searching, in the main hall and outside.

"It was anguish. To see the disappearance of a nine-year-old, that's not nothing. We initially thought she must be asleep in a corner after a game of hide-and-seek. After an hour, as we'd found nothing, the police were alerted."

After they alerted the police, around 100 officers, including divers and dog handlers, launched a massive search for the girl, trawling through dense woodland and a nearby river. But their search came up empty handed.

Investigators now believe de Araujo may have been taken in a vehicle after the three sniffer dogs tracking her scent, lost her trail in the car park outside the village hall in Pont-de-Beauvoisin.

Regional police chief Yves Marzin said: “One of the possible theories is that little Maelys left in a car, one way or another."

Detectives believe it is more likely with “each passing hour” that de Araujo was kidnapped than the possibility that she was involved in an accident or ran away.

“Given the time that has elapsed since the disappearance of young Maelys and given the resources that have been sadly deployed in vain to find her, the criminal possibility can no longer be ruled out,” local prosecutor Dietlind Baudoin told a news conference.

But she warned against “making hasty conclusions” in the search for the girl, whose family are believed to be from the nearby department of Jura.

Locals have helped in an appeal to find the missing girl, who has brown hair and hazel eyes, and have placed posters in the windows of bars and shops in Pont-de-Beauvoisin.

Police are questioning the 180 people who attended the wedding as well as people at two other parties held in the town over the weekend.

So far, 140 people out of a total of 250 have been questioned, according to Didier Plunian, who heads the region’s search and rescue unit.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/maelys-de-araujo-missing-girl-wedding-kidnapping-france-alps-french-police-pont-de-beauvoisin-a7919486.html

Man charged over missing ‘French Maddie’ girl

The 34-year-old suspect, a pal of the groom, turned up uninvited.

According to a source, police found the girl’s DNA in his car. He caught their attention when he was spotted cleaning the motor the day after the wedding.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/world-news/642451/missing-french-nine-year-old-girl-man-charged

He is described as an odd-job man on sick leave. Investigators have revealed he had two scratches, to his arm and knee, which he said was as a result of gardening.

The man was one of 180 wedding guests who were questioned by police when Maëlys de Araujo disappeared. Detectives also took statements from 70 other people attending two other events nearby.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-41144230

The charged man is one of two suspects who were detained on Thursday over inconsistencies in their statements, but then released on Friday evening.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/04/man-charged-missing-french-nine-year-old-girl-dna-found-car/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 06, 2017, 02:02:58 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on September 06, 2017, 01:49:06 AM
Man charged over missing ‘French Maddie’ girl

The 34-year-old suspect, a pal of the groom, turned up uninvited.

According to a source, police found the girl’s DNA in his car. He caught their attention when he was spotted cleaning the motor the day after the wedding.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/world-news/642451/missing-french-nine-year-old-girl-man-charged

He is described as an odd-job man on sick leave. Investigators have revealed he had two scratches, to his arm and knee, which he said was as a result of gardening.

The man was one of 180 wedding guests who were questioned by police when Maëlys de Araujo disappeared. Detectives also took statements from 70 other people attending two other events nearby.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-41144230

The charged man is one of two suspects who were detained on Thursday over inconsistencies in their statements, but then released on Friday evening.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/04/man-charged-missing-french-nine-year-old-girl-dna-found-car/

John opened a thread on Maelys PF >>  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=89.0  please place a copy of your post there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on September 06, 2017, 12:07:52 PM
Did you remove my last post re Amaral thread?

Shafelia Ahmed's parents denouncing the police. I saw it yesterday -  worth watching the full episode.

https://www.facebook.com/InvestigationDiscoveryUK/videos/1437206959732070/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on September 06, 2017, 03:58:10 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 06, 2017, 12:58:25 AM
May 09, 2007
Mark Warner, the holiday company at the centre of the Portuguese kidnap story, is using the Bell Pottinger Group for help with the crisis.
Head of issues and crisis management Alex Woolfall is on location in Portugal and reports directly to MD ­David Hopkins.

Mark Warner brought in Resonate on a generic brief a week before three-year-old Madeleine McCann was kidnapped from its Portuguese resort in Praia da Luz. MD Michael Froh­lich then referred the firm to his parent company’s crisis specialist.

Frohlich and Resonate dir­ector Tricia Moon are helping liaise with the British Consulate in Portugal, the Portuguese Police and the Portuguese and UK media.

They are working with staff at Mark Warner’s Kensington headquarters.

http://www.prweek.com/article/656479/mark-warner-hires-bell-pottinger#qDtUmbgAszAryhex.99

This week, Bell Pottinger has been criticised by an independent law firm review by law firm Herbert Smith Freehills and expelled from the Public Relations and Communications Association (PRCA).

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/sep/05/bell-pottingersouth-africa-pr-firm (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/sep/05/bell-pottingersouth-africa-pr-firm)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on September 06, 2017, 04:27:58 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on September 06, 2017, 03:58:10 PM
This week, Bell Pottinger has been criticised by an independent law firm review by law firm Herbert Smith Freehills and expelled from the Public Relations and Communications Association (PRCA).

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/sep/05/bell-pottingersouth-africa-pr-firm (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/sep/05/bell-pottingersouth-africa-pr-firm)

The South Africans are demanding that those involved in the Bell Pottinger campaign be prosecuted so unsurprising that Lord Bell and Henderson have jumped ship already.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 15, 2017, 09:07:06 PM
Cabo Costa: The serial killer who wanted sex
He was a respected member of the community of Santa Comba Dão, a perverted murderer.
Sexual rejection was an excuse.

By Carlos Anjos | 22.03.15

Cabo António Costa, married and with children, ended up sentenced to 25 years


António Costa was a GNR military man in the reserve. Known man in Santa Comba Dão, where he resided in a house in Cabecinha de Rei. Person well seen socially, by his profession and by the activities of social, associative and religious character in which he was involved. But the unthinkable happened.

THE FIRST VICTIM Isabel Cristina de Sousa Isidoro, born on January 12, 1988, was killed when she was 17 years old.
On May 24, 2005, around 12.00, António Costa drove his car near his house when he saw Isabel Cristina. He stopped the car and started talking to the girl and offered her a ride home. The young woman accepted and entered the car of António Costa.
... ... ... ...  Isabel Cristina told him that she would file a complaint with the GNR for violation.
Antonio Costa, irritated by the threat, shouted at the young woman. During the discussion, Isabel attacked, giving her a push that projected her against one of the interior panels of the car, where it struck violently with the head. The force of the clash was such that Isabel immediately began bleeding from her head and frothing her mouth. Instead of helping the girl, António Costa decided to stifle her, leaving her only when he thought she was dead.
He then decided to get rid of the body. Knowing well the area of ​​Figueira da Foz, where he had a vacation apartment, he decided to take the body there and throw it into the sea.
He closed Isabel's body in the trunk of the car and went to Figueira da Foz.
Before, he stopped at his house, where he found sacks of litter and nylon. Already in Figueira, he went to the cable of the Mondego and stopped the car. He opened the suitcase and placed Isabel's body in the sacks he carried from his house, tying them with the nylon cord. He placed a piece of a cement beam in the sack that he found on the sack, so that the sack immediately sank. He then carried the sack to the top of the cliff, from which he threw it into the sea, with the certainty that Isabel was dead and convinced that the body would no longer be found.
Which was not true. According to the autopsy report, among other injuries, the presence of foreign material was detected in the deep airways, a result of the entry of water into the airways, because Isabel was still breathing how much she fell in the sea. The cause of death turned out to be suffocation from drowning. After his body had been dislodged, the defendant returned to his residence, Isabel's corpse eventually hit the coast on May 31. He was found by a fisherman near Cabedelo beach, in Figueira da Foz. The corpse was still inside the sack.

THE SECOND VICTIM Mariana Gonçalves Lourenço, born on April 29, 1987, was killed at age 18.
On October 14, 2005, around 11:00 AM, António Costa was in the backyard of his house when he saw Mariana on the street and talked to her.
The young woman, as she had known him for a long time, had no problem talking to her neighbor.
Costa invited her to accompany him to a contiguous site, where a shed existed, telling him that he wanted to show her something.
They walked a few yards on foot, still on the main road, and took a dirt road that gave access to the place where it would be what he said he wanted to show.
Arrived at the scene, Costa made Mariana enter the shed and inside the space revealed his intention.
I told her that she was very pretty and came forward to kiss her. Surprised, Mariana rejected him, pushed him away, preventing him from kissing her.
She shouted and called him names and told him she was going to tell her parents and then the GNR.
Antonio Costa reacted, gripping her tightly, in order to manoeuvre her and manage to kiss her, as he intended.
As Mariana continued to quarrel, he, irritated by her rejection, passed his right arm around Mariana's neck, making her tie and suffocating her. He held the pressure until she stopped breathing.
António Costa caused the young woman's death.
After taking her life, he found himself obliged to dispose of her body to hide the crime.
It was your house to get the car. He returned to the scene with sackcloth bags and nylon thread to bag, tie, and carry the girl's body.
This time, he decided he would shoot him into the Coiço dam at Penacova. He threw her body into fresh water because he believed the chances of her appearing were minor.
António Costa drove the car to the IP3, heading towards Coimbra. He stopped the car at the confluence of the Mortágua stream with the Mondego river, below the IP3 bridge. This was the place chosen to have deep water. The body of the young woman remained submerged until June 1, 2006, when parts of the corpse appeared next to the grate of the entrance of the tunnel of access of water to the turbines of the mini-hydro of the zone.
Mariana's body was already in an advanced state of decomposition, when an employee operating a claw-type cleaning machine brought it to the surface by picking it up 14 meters deep.

THE THIRD VICTIM Joana Margarida Marques de Oliveira, born on December 28, 1988, was killed when she was 17 years old. António Costa was Joan's neighbor. Her family knew him and cherished him.
In February 2006, Costa asked the young woman's opinion about a certain detail of her garden. Joana agreed to help him. On May 8, 2006, the girl left school about 12.00 p.m., walking home as usual.
The road to the house passed by the residence of Antonio Costa, who was alone at home that day, since the woman was at her place of work - the village high school. When he saw the young woman pass by, he engaged in conversation. Just as he had done with Mariana, he invited Joana to accompany him to the aforementioned shed-he had to show her something. Joana Marques de Oliveira accompanied him to the place.
As had happened with Mariana, they followed the main road on foot, after which they took the dirt road, which gave access to the said shed. This time, António Costa did not wait to enter the shed. Still on the beaten path, he threw himself at Joan, begging her for a kiss. The young woman refused and, outraged, told him that he had a court of law, that he was married, that he was her neighbor, friend of his parents and that he must be crazy. I told him I would tell him everything. António Costa was not moved by Joana's reaction and tried to seize her. The girl tossed the school bag into his face. Once again, she had difficulty coping with the rejection, and in the face of her refusal, she grabbed her hard to maneuver her. Joan did not give up and continued to struggle.
As he did not get his way again, he wrapped his arms around her neck, just as he had already done with Isabel and Mariana, squeezed him tightly until she choked, taking his life. But Joana struggled and scratched her right arm. The girl's glasses fell to the floor and broke. They came later to be found on the spot by PJ inspectors. António Costa went to the house to get the car and two sacks of litter and nylon yarn. He took Joan's corpse and placed it in the trunk of the car, and this time left several traces of blood in the trunk of the car, which were later identified as belonging to Joan. He went back to the Coiço dam. He put his body in the two sacks, tied them with the nylon cord in his body, and put stones to make weight, and threw his body into the water of the dam. Joana's body remained submerged until June 24, when, following the search to rescue the corpse - they had emptied the dam at about four meters high - it was found in a zone near the place where the murderer had thrown him. The investigations carried out by the PJ focused on his residence in Cabecinha de Rei, Santa Comba Dão, his apartment in Tavarede, in Figueira da Foz, and the vehicle, where blood was found in the luggage compartment, identified as Joana's. On June 22, António Costa confessed to PJ that he was responsible for the death of the three girls, as well as for the fate of their bodies. Also before the examining magistrate, he confessed to all the crimes, the detailed form as he acted, and he was the one who indicated the exact location where the crimes occurred. He also mentioned the place where the bodies had been disposed of, as well as the routes he had used, and had actively collaborated in the reconstruction of the facts. He later reconsidered, which is why he changed his strategy and went on to declare himself innocent. But it was late, very late. The evidence was collected and António Costa was sentenced in a trial to 25 years in prison.

This case refers us to the analysis of the psychic dimension: how to explain that a man who for 50 years has had a normal life, a successful professional career, well integrated socially, has become a killing machine overnight ?

What has happened in the head of Corporal António Costa?

From the facts, it turns out that, after the first murder, the situation was purely and simply uncontrollable and that Antonio Costa liked the pleasure of taking one's life.
This is the only way to explain the subsequent behaviour, with the aggravating fact that the victims are all people who lived close to them, and therefore their relationships.

The question that remains is what would have happened if this man had not been detained. Had he stopped killing, or would he continue to commit such a crime until he could be identified and detained a day later?
I sincerely believe that if the PJ has not stopped him, Antonio Costa had returned to kill.

 http://www.cmjornal.pt/mais-cm/domingo/detalhe/cabo_costa_o_serial_killer_que_queria_sexo



Sceptics seem to have difficulty with the fact that in common with every other country in the world Portugal is not quite the idyll they wish to portray.

There has been denial that burglaries occur; there has been denial that home invasions involving assaults on British girls happened.

I had never heard of Costa prior to recently catching up on old Portuguese newspaper reports: I found it an interesting read when bearing in mind the cases with which I am familiar.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 15, 2017, 10:01:55 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 15, 2017, 09:07:06 PM
Cabo Costa: The serial killer who wanted sex
He was a respected member of the community of Santa Comba Dão, a perverted murderer.
Sexual rejection was an excuse.

By Carlos Anjos | 22.03.15

Cabo António Costa, married and with children, ended up sentenced to 25 years


António Costa was a GNR military man in the reserve. Known man in Santa Comba Dão, where he resided in a house in Cabecinha de Rei. Person well seen socially, by his profession and by the activities of social, associative and religious character in which he was involved. But the unthinkable happened.

THE FIRST VICTIM Isabel Cristina de Sousa Isidoro, born on January 12, 1988, was killed when she was 17 years old.
On May 24, 2005, around 12.00, António Costa drove his car near his house when he saw Isabel Cristina. He stopped the car and started talking to the girl and offered her a ride home. The young woman accepted and entered the car of António Costa.
... ... ... ...  Isabel Cristina told him that she would file a complaint with the GNR for violation.
Antonio Costa, irritated by the threat, shouted at the young woman. During the discussion, Isabel attacked, giving her a push that projected her against one of the interior panels of the car, where it struck violently with the head. The force of the clash was such that Isabel immediately began bleeding from her head and frothing her mouth. Instead of helping the girl, António Costa decided to stifle her, leaving her only when he thought she was dead.
He then decided to get rid of the body. Knowing well the area of ​​Figueira da Foz, where he had a vacation apartment, he decided to take the body there and throw it into the sea.
He closed Isabel's body in the trunk of the car and went to Figueira da Foz.
Before, he stopped at his house, where he found sacks of litter and nylon. Already in Figueira, he went to the cable of the Mondego and stopped the car. He opened the suitcase and placed Isabel's body in the sacks he carried from his house, tying them with the nylon cord. He placed a piece of a cement beam in the sack that he found on the sack, so that the sack immediately sank. He then carried the sack to the top of the cliff, from which he threw it into the sea, with the certainty that Isabel was dead and convinced that the body would no longer be found.
Which was not true. According to the autopsy report, among other injuries, the presence of foreign material was detected in the deep airways, a result of the entry of water into the airways, because Isabel was still breathing how much she fell in the sea. The cause of death turned out to be suffocation from drowning. After his body had been dislodged, the defendant returned to his residence, Isabel's corpse eventually hit the coast on May 31. He was found by a fisherman near Cabedelo beach, in Figueira da Foz. The corpse was still inside the sack.

THE SECOND VICTIM Mariana Gonçalves Lourenço, born on April 29, 1987, was killed at age 18.
On October 14, 2005, around 11:00 AM, António Costa was in the backyard of his house when he saw Mariana on the street and talked to her.
The young woman, as she had known him for a long time, had no problem talking to her neighbor.
Costa invited her to accompany him to a contiguous site, where a shed existed, telling him that he wanted to show her something.
They walked a few yards on foot, still on the main road, and took a dirt road that gave access to the place where it would be what he said he wanted to show.
Arrived at the scene, Costa made Mariana enter the shed and inside the space revealed his intention.
I told her that she was very pretty and came forward to kiss her. Surprised, Mariana rejected him, pushed him away, preventing him from kissing her.
She shouted and called him names and told him she was going to tell her parents and then the GNR.
Antonio Costa reacted, gripping her tightly, in order to manoeuvre her and manage to kiss her, as he intended.
As Mariana continued to quarrel, he, irritated by her rejection, passed his right arm around Mariana's neck, making her tie and suffocating her. He held the pressure until she stopped breathing.
António Costa caused the young woman's death.
After taking her life, he found himself obliged to dispose of her body to hide the crime.
It was your house to get the car. He returned to the scene with sackcloth bags and nylon thread to bag, tie, and carry the girl's body.
This time, he decided he would shoot him into the Coiço dam at Penacova. He threw her body into fresh water because he believed the chances of her appearing were minor.
António Costa drove the car to the IP3, heading towards Coimbra. He stopped the car at the confluence of the Mortágua stream with the Mondego river, below the IP3 bridge. This was the place chosen to have deep water. The body of the young woman remained submerged until June 1, 2006, when parts of the corpse appeared next to the grate of the entrance of the tunnel of access of water to the turbines of the mini-hydro of the zone.
Mariana's body was already in an advanced state of decomposition, when an employee operating a claw-type cleaning machine brought it to the surface by picking it up 14 meters deep.

THE THIRD VICTIM Joana Margarida Marques de Oliveira, born on December 28, 1988, was killed when she was 17 years old. António Costa was Joan's neighbor. Her family knew him and cherished him.
In February 2006, Costa asked the young woman's opinion about a certain detail of her garden. Joana agreed to help him. On May 8, 2006, the girl left school about 12.00 p.m., walking home as usual.
The road to the house passed by the residence of Antonio Costa, who was alone at home that day, since the woman was at her place of work - the village high school. When he saw the young woman pass by, he engaged in conversation. Just as he had done with Mariana, he invited Joana to accompany him to the aforementioned shed-he had to show her something. Joana Marques de Oliveira accompanied him to the place.
As had happened with Mariana, they followed the main road on foot, after which they took the dirt road, which gave access to the said shed. This time, António Costa did not wait to enter the shed. Still on the beaten path, he threw himself at Joan, begging her for a kiss. The young woman refused and, outraged, told him that he had a court of law, that he was married, that he was her neighbor, friend of his parents and that he must be crazy. I told him I would tell him everything. António Costa was not moved by Joana's reaction and tried to seize her. The girl tossed the school bag into his face. Once again, she had difficulty coping with the rejection, and in the face of her refusal, she grabbed her hard to maneuver her. Joan did not give up and continued to struggle.
As he did not get his way again, he wrapped his arms around her neck, just as he had already done with Isabel and Mariana, squeezed him tightly until she choked, taking his life. But Joana struggled and scratched her right arm. The girl's glasses fell to the floor and broke. They came later to be found on the spot by PJ inspectors. António Costa went to the house to get the car and two sacks of litter and nylon yarn. He took Joan's corpse and placed it in the trunk of the car, and this time left several traces of blood in the trunk of the car, which were later identified as belonging to Joan. He went back to the Coiço dam. He put his body in the two sacks, tied them with the nylon cord in his body, and put stones to make weight, and threw his body into the water of the dam. Joana's body remained submerged until June 24, when, following the search to rescue the corpse - they had emptied the dam at about four meters high - it was found in a zone near the place where the murderer had thrown him. The investigations carried out by the PJ focused on his residence in Cabecinha de Rei, Santa Comba Dão, his apartment in Tavarede, in Figueira da Foz, and the vehicle, where blood was found in the luggage compartment, identified as Joana's. On June 22, António Costa confessed to PJ that he was responsible for the death of the three girls, as well as for the fate of their bodies. Also before the examining magistrate, he confessed to all the crimes, the detailed form as he acted, and he was the one who indicated the exact location where the crimes occurred. He also mentioned the place where the bodies had been disposed of, as well as the routes he had used, and had actively collaborated in the reconstruction of the facts. He later reconsidered, which is why he changed his strategy and went on to declare himself innocent. But it was late, very late. The evidence was collected and António Costa was sentenced in a trial to 25 years in prison.

This case refers us to the analysis of the psychic dimension: how to explain that a man who for 50 years has had a normal life, a successful professional career, well integrated socially, has become a killing machine overnight ?

What has happened in the head of Corporal António Costa?

From the facts, it turns out that, after the first murder, the situation was purely and simply uncontrollable and that Antonio Costa liked the pleasure of taking one's life.
This is the only way to explain the subsequent behaviour, with the aggravating fact that the victims are all people who lived close to them, and therefore their relationships.

The question that remains is what would have happened if this man had not been detained. Had he stopped killing, or would he continue to commit such a crime until he could be identified and detained a day later?
I sincerely believe that if the PJ has not stopped him, Antonio Costa had returned to kill.

 http://www.cmjornal.pt/mais-cm/domingo/detalhe/cabo_costa_o_serial_killer_que_queria_sexo



Sceptics seem to have difficulty with the fact that in common with every other country in the world Portugal is not quite the idyll they wish to portray.

There has been denial that burglaries occur; there has been denial that home invasions involving assaults on British girls happened.

I had never heard of Costa prior to recently catching up on old Portuguese newspaper reports: I found it an interesting read when bearing in mind the cases with which I am familiar.

I've seen no-one promoting Portugal as idyllic, do you have cites to support that claim?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on October 15, 2017, 10:25:02 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 15, 2017, 09:07:06 PM
Cabo Costa: The serial killer who wanted sex
He was a respected member of the community of Santa Comba Dão, a perverted murderer.
Sexual rejection was an excuse.

By Carlos Anjos | 22.03.15

Cabo António Costa, married and with children, ended up sentenced to 25 years


António Costa was a GNR military man in the reserve. Known man in Santa Comba Dão, where he resided in a house in Cabecinha de Rei. Person well seen socially, by his profession and by the activities of social, associative and religious character in which he was involved. But the unthinkable happened.

THE FIRST VICTIM Isabel Cristina de Sousa Isidoro, born on January 12, 1988, was killed when she was 17 years old.
On May 24, 2005, around 12.00, António Costa drove his car near his house when he saw Isabel Cristina. He stopped the car and started talking to the girl and offered her a ride home. The young woman accepted and entered the car of António Costa.
... ... ... ...  Isabel Cristina told him that she would file a complaint with the GNR for violation.
Antonio Costa, irritated by the threat, shouted at the young woman. During the discussion, Isabel attacked, giving her a push that projected her against one of the interior panels of the car, where it struck violently with the head. The force of the clash was such that Isabel immediately began bleeding from her head and frothing her mouth. Instead of helping the girl, António Costa decided to stifle her, leaving her only when he thought she was dead.
He then decided to get rid of the body. Knowing well the area of ​​Figueira da Foz, where he had a vacation apartment, he decided to take the body there and throw it into the sea.
He closed Isabel's body in the trunk of the car and went to Figueira da Foz.
Before, he stopped at his house, where he found sacks of litter and nylon. Already in Figueira, he went to the cable of the Mondego and stopped the car. He opened the suitcase and placed Isabel's body in the sacks he carried from his house, tying them with the nylon cord. He placed a piece of a cement beam in the sack that he found on the sack, so that the sack immediately sank. He then carried the sack to the top of the cliff, from which he threw it into the sea, with the certainty that Isabel was dead and convinced that the body would no longer be found.
Which was not true. According to the autopsy report, among other injuries, the presence of foreign material was detected in the deep airways, a result of the entry of water into the airways, because Isabel was still breathing how much she fell in the sea. The cause of death turned out to be suffocation from drowning. After his body had been dislodged, the defendant returned to his residence, Isabel's corpse eventually hit the coast on May 31. He was found by a fisherman near Cabedelo beach, in Figueira da Foz. The corpse was still inside the sack.

THE SECOND VICTIM Mariana Gonçalves Lourenço, born on April 29, 1987, was killed at age 18.
On October 14, 2005, around 11:00 AM, António Costa was in the backyard of his house when he saw Mariana on the street and talked to her.
The young woman, as she had known him for a long time, had no problem talking to her neighbor.
Costa invited her to accompany him to a contiguous site, where a shed existed, telling him that he wanted to show her something.
They walked a few yards on foot, still on the main road, and took a dirt road that gave access to the place where it would be what he said he wanted to show.
Arrived at the scene, Costa made Mariana enter the shed and inside the space revealed his intention.
I told her that she was very pretty and came forward to kiss her. Surprised, Mariana rejected him, pushed him away, preventing him from kissing her.
She shouted and called him names and told him she was going to tell her parents and then the GNR.
Antonio Costa reacted, gripping her tightly, in order to manoeuvre her and manage to kiss her, as he intended.
As Mariana continued to quarrel, he, irritated by her rejection, passed his right arm around Mariana's neck, making her tie and suffocating her. He held the pressure until she stopped breathing.
António Costa caused the young woman's death.
After taking her life, he found himself obliged to dispose of her body to hide the crime.
It was your house to get the car. He returned to the scene with sackcloth bags and nylon thread to bag, tie, and carry the girl's body.
This time, he decided he would shoot him into the Coiço dam at Penacova. He threw her body into fresh water because he believed the chances of her appearing were minor.
António Costa drove the car to the IP3, heading towards Coimbra. He stopped the car at the confluence of the Mortágua stream with the Mondego river, below the IP3 bridge. This was the place chosen to have deep water. The body of the young woman remained submerged until June 1, 2006, when parts of the corpse appeared next to the grate of the entrance of the tunnel of access of water to the turbines of the mini-hydro of the zone.
Mariana's body was already in an advanced state of decomposition, when an employee operating a claw-type cleaning machine brought it to the surface by picking it up 14 meters deep.

THE THIRD VICTIM Joana Margarida Marques de Oliveira, born on December 28, 1988, was killed when she was 17 years old. António Costa was Joan's neighbor. Her family knew him and cherished him.
In February 2006, Costa asked the young woman's opinion about a certain detail of her garden. Joana agreed to help him. On May 8, 2006, the girl left school about 12.00 p.m., walking home as usual.
The road to the house passed by the residence of Antonio Costa, who was alone at home that day, since the woman was at her place of work - the village high school. When he saw the young woman pass by, he engaged in conversation. Just as he had done with Mariana, he invited Joana to accompany him to the aforementioned shed-he had to show her something. Joana Marques de Oliveira accompanied him to the place.
As had happened with Mariana, they followed the main road on foot, after which they took the dirt road, which gave access to the said shed. This time, António Costa did not wait to enter the shed. Still on the beaten path, he threw himself at Joan, begging her for a kiss. The young woman refused and, outraged, told him that he had a court of law, that he was married, that he was her neighbor, friend of his parents and that he must be crazy. I told him I would tell him everything. António Costa was not moved by Joana's reaction and tried to seize her. The girl tossed the school bag into his face. Once again, she had difficulty coping with the rejection, and in the face of her refusal, she grabbed her hard to maneuver her. Joan did not give up and continued to struggle.
As he did not get his way again, he wrapped his arms around her neck, just as he had already done with Isabel and Mariana, squeezed him tightly until she choked, taking his life. But Joana struggled and scratched her right arm. The girl's glasses fell to the floor and broke. They came later to be found on the spot by PJ inspectors. António Costa went to the house to get the car and two sacks of litter and nylon yarn. He took Joan's corpse and placed it in the trunk of the car, and this time left several traces of blood in the trunk of the car, which were later identified as belonging to Joan. He went back to the Coiço dam. He put his body in the two sacks, tied them with the nylon cord in his body, and put stones to make weight, and threw his body into the water of the dam. Joana's body remained submerged until June 24, when, following the search to rescue the corpse - they had emptied the dam at about four meters high - it was found in a zone near the place where the murderer had thrown him. The investigations carried out by the PJ focused on his residence in Cabecinha de Rei, Santa Comba Dão, his apartment in Tavarede, in Figueira da Foz, and the vehicle, where blood was found in the luggage compartment, identified as Joana's. On June 22, António Costa confessed to PJ that he was responsible for the death of the three girls, as well as for the fate of their bodies. Also before the examining magistrate, he confessed to all the crimes, the detailed form as he acted, and he was the one who indicated the exact location where the crimes occurred. He also mentioned the place where the bodies had been disposed of, as well as the routes he had used, and had actively collaborated in the reconstruction of the facts. He later reconsidered, which is why he changed his strategy and went on to declare himself innocent. But it was late, very late. The evidence was collected and António Costa was sentenced in a trial to 25 years in prison.

This case refers us to the analysis of the psychic dimension: how to explain that a man who for 50 years has had a normal life, a successful professional career, well integrated socially, has become a killing machine overnight ?

What has happened in the head of Corporal António Costa?

From the facts, it turns out that, after the first murder, the situation was purely and simply uncontrollable and that Antonio Costa liked the pleasure of taking one's life.
This is the only way to explain the subsequent behaviour, with the aggravating fact that the victims are all people who lived close to them, and therefore their relationships.

The question that remains is what would have happened if this man had not been detained. Had he stopped killing, or would he continue to commit such a crime until he could be identified and detained a day later?
I sincerely believe that if the PJ has not stopped him, Antonio Costa had returned to kill.

 http://www.cmjornal.pt/mais-cm/domingo/detalhe/cabo_costa_o_serial_killer_que_queria_sexo



Sceptics seem to have difficulty with the fact that in common with every other country in the world Portugal is not quite the idyll they wish to portray.

There has been denial that burglaries occur; there has been denial that home invasions involving assaults on British girls happened.

I had never heard of Costa prior to recently catching up on old Portuguese newspaper reports: I found it an interesting read when bearing in mind the cases with which I am familiar.

Who said Portugal was an idyll?
Mind you compared with several places I have visited doing what I do, it is believe me.
I managed always to get through security in Portugal without having money stolen from me by guys in funny uniforms with SMGs over their shoulders. That is more than can be said for other places.
I don't recall ever being instructed in Portugal "whatever you do, do not go off that ramp there and if you domake a mistake reverse out".
"Make sure you are not the front car at a set of traffic lights". and so on.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 15, 2017, 10:31:25 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on October 15, 2017, 10:25:02 PM
Who said Portugal was an idyll?
Mind you compared with several places I have visited doing what I do, it is believe me.
I managed always to get through security in Portugal without having money stolen from me by guys in funny uniforms with SMGs over their shoulders. That is more than can be said for other places.
I don't recall ever being instructed in Portugal "whatever you do, do not go off that ramp there and if you domake a mistake reverse out".
"Make sure you are not the front car at a set of traffic lights". and so on.

The point is that the mccanns were on a Mark Warner family holiday not seven days in the Colombian Jungle
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 15, 2017, 10:56:44 PM
Its a small world... Mark Rowley went to the same school as I did... And then went on to Cambridge....obviously very smart
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on October 15, 2017, 11:18:14 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 15, 2017, 10:31:25 PM
The point is that the mccanns were on a Mark Warner family holiday not seven days in the Colombian Jungle

I don't recall saying I was in Colombia so what makes you think I was ?
Brietta posted that all sceptics think Portugal is idyllic. I then said that in comparison to some places it is.


 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 15, 2017, 11:22:17 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on October 15, 2017, 11:18:14 PM
I don't recall saying I was in Colombia so what makes you think I was ?
Brietta posted that all sceptics think Portugal is idyllic. I then said that in comparison to some places.

You have become some what of a .... since you have changed your avatar.  You need a snickers.  https://youtu.be/ruiFjHPBtGk
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 15, 2017, 11:22:31 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on October 15, 2017, 11:18:14 PM
I don't recall saying I was in Colombia so what makes you think I was ?
Brietta posted that all sceptics think Portugal is idyllic. I then said that in comparison to some places it is.

I think you are being very patronising to uk travellers  in general...I think its quite reasonable to expect a MW resort in Portugal to be idyllic.... The mccans were caught totally off guard... Again if we are in places like Kashmir... The most dangerous place i have been.... We are far more careful

I was hoping to travel overland to Ladakh but was advised the Kargil to Leh highway was just too dangerous... I dont think it would have made any difference if i had taken my mother

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 15, 2017, 11:36:29 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 15, 2017, 11:22:31 PM
I think you are being very patronising to uk travellers  in general...I think its quite reasonable to expect a MW resort in Portugal to be idyllic.... The mccans were caught totally off guard... Again if we are in places like Kashmir... The most dangerous place i have been.... We are far more careful

Was Luz bought by Mark Warner? I thought they just purchased the Ocean Club.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 15, 2017, 11:44:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 15, 2017, 11:36:29 PM
Was Luz bought by Mark Warner? I thought they just purchased the Ocean Club.

No MW just owned the ocean club where the mccanns stayed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 15, 2017, 11:51:18 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 15, 2017, 11:44:09 PM
No MW just owned the ocean club where the mccanns stayed

To be precise Mark Warner owned various plots of land within Luz. They didn't own the apartments where the McCanns stayed and had no control over who approached or entered them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 15, 2017, 11:54:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 15, 2017, 11:51:18 PM
To be precise Mark Warner owned various plots of land within Luz. They didn't own the apartments where the McCanns stayed and had no control over who approached or entered them.
It was advertised as a MW resort so surely its reasonable to describe it as a MW resort
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on October 16, 2017, 12:15:36 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on October 15, 2017, 11:22:17 PM
You have become some what of a .... since you have changed your avatar.  You need a snickers.  https://youtu.be/ruiFjHPBtGk

No! just still the same outspoken person. I'll change the avatar back if you like.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 16, 2017, 01:12:03 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on October 16, 2017, 12:15:36 AM
No! just still the same outspoken person. I'll change the avatar back if you like.
No, no, no, I look at it and it makes me laugh every time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 16, 2017, 06:58:24 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 15, 2017, 11:54:19 PM
It was advertised as a MW resort so surely its reasonable to describe it as a MW resort

It depends what 'resort' means, I suppose. I see them as enclosed spaces.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on October 16, 2017, 10:29:47 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 16, 2017, 06:58:24 AM
It depends what 'resort' means, I suppose. I see them as enclosed spaces.

I suppose one could consider Bognor Regis in its entirety "A Butlins Resort"....... &%+((£
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 17, 2017, 10:41:18 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on October 16, 2017, 10:29:47 AM
I suppose one could consider Bognor Regis in its entirety "A Butlins Resort"....... &%+((£

 *&*%£

Keep the avatar  love the hat matching the shoes- designer with great eye for colour coordination. Hell yeah you rock!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 23, 2017, 09:48:01 AM
Not sure this is the right place, but an interesting concept of child care.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/sherin-mathews-disappearance-banished-punishment-father-wesley-spring-valley-dallas-texas-richardson-a8014456.html

All sounds a bit strange to me.


[Edited]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on October 23, 2017, 12:45:42 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 23, 2017, 09:48:01 AM
Not sure this is the right place, but an interesting concept of child care.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/sherin-mathews-disappearance-banished-punishment-father-wesley-spring-valley-dallas-texas-richardson-a8014456.html

All sounds a bit strange to me.
 

BEAST  8(8-))

Imo, of course
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on October 23, 2017, 01:00:04 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 23, 2017, 09:48:01 AM
Not sure this is the right place, but an interesting concept of child care.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/sherin-mathews-disappearance-banished-punishment-father-wesley-spring-valley-dallas-texas-richardson-a8014456.html

All sounds a bit strange to me.

The body was found about 11 a.m. in a culvert near East Spring Valley and South Bowser roads, east of U.S. Highway 75, with the help of search dogs.

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime/2017/10/22/richardson-police-plan-news-conference-unconfirmed-rumorsspread-3-year-old-sherin-mathews-found

Sherin Mathews: US police find body in missing child case

Police in Texas say they have found a body in the search for three-year-old Sherin Mathews, who went missing on 7 October when her father sent her out of their home at 03:00 as punishment.
The Richardson police department told reporters the remains were "most likely" those of Sherin, whose disappearance made headlines in Dallas and India.
The Indian-origin couple adopted the girl two years ago from an Indian orphanage.
Police have not given any details of how she may have died.

The body was found in a tunnel about half a mile from her home on Sunday. The area is being "treated as a crime scene", police said.

The Press Trust of India news agency reported that an identification process was under way, but police said they had "no reason" to believe the body was of any other child.

Sherin's father, Wesley Mathews, was arrested and released on bail after admitting to endangering her life after sending her out of the home at 03:00 because she had refused to finish her milk.

Her mother was reportedly asleep when the incident took place.
The couple have another four-year-old daughter, who has been placed in foster care after the incident.

Mr Mathews told the police that his daughter, who had developmental disabilities and limited vocabulary skills, had to be fed often as she was severely malnourished, and he had acted out of "frustration".
He said he had found she was missing after going to check on her 15 minutes later. He told the police he had returned to the house and "did a load of laundry" as he was not too worried.

He reported the disappearance only after sunrise.

Police had previously told reporters that both the parents had "stopped co-operating" with the investigation, although the mother has not been charged.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-41717946

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 23, 2017, 02:46:11 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on October 23, 2017, 01:00:04 PM
The body was found about 11 a.m. in a culvert near East Spring Valley and South Bowser roads, east of U.S. Highway 75, with the help of search dogs.

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime/2017/10/22/richardson-police-plan-news-conference-unconfirmed-rumorsspread-3-year-old-sherin-mathews-found

Sherin Mathews: US police find body in missing child case

Police in Texas say they have found a body in the search for three-year-old Sherin Mathews, who went missing on 7 October when her father sent her out of their home at 03:00 as punishment.
The Richardson police department told reporters the remains were "most likely" those of Sherin, whose disappearance made headlines in Dallas and India.
The Indian-origin couple adopted the girl two years ago from an Indian orphanage.
Police have not given any details of how she may have died.

The body was found in a tunnel about half a mile from her home on Sunday. The area is being "treated as a crime scene", police said.

The Press Trust of India news agency reported that an identification process was under way, but police said they had "no reason" to believe the body was of any other child.

Sherin's father, Wesley Mathews, was arrested and released on bail after admitting to endangering her life after sending her out of the home at 03:00 because she had refused to finish her milk.

Her mother was reportedly asleep when the incident took place.
The couple have another four-year-old daughter, who has been placed in foster care after the incident.

Mr Mathews told the police that his daughter, who had developmental disabilities and limited vocabulary skills, had to be fed often as she was severely malnourished, and he had acted out of "frustration".
He said he had found she was missing after going to check on her 15 minutes later. He told the police he had returned to the house and "did a load of laundry" as he was not too worried.

He reported the disappearance only after sunrise.

Police had previously told reporters that both the parents had "stopped co-operating" with the investigation, although the mother has not been charged.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-41717946


Not sure what time sunrise would be in Texas, but but presumably a few hours after 3 am.
Why did he wait so long ? Did he think she was going to come wandering back on her own?
I wonder what he laundered that had to be done at that time in  the morning?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on October 23, 2017, 03:03:48 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 23, 2017, 02:46:11 PM
Not sure what time sunrise would be in Texas, but but presumably a few hours after 3 am.
Why did he wait so long ? Did he think she was going to come wandering back on her own?
I wonder what he laundered that had to be done at that time in  the morning?
Good point jassi

Fancy locking a three year old out.  Especially at that time in the night.

Beast.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on October 23, 2017, 11:34:42 PM
http://portugalresident.com/judges-%E2%80%9Ccondone%E2%80%9D-domestic-violence-in-case-of-%E2%80%98adulterous-female%E2%80%99
Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on October 23, 2017
Two appeal court judges are in the spotlight this week for apparently condoning domestic violence when the victim is ‘an adulterous female’.

Quoting passages from the Bible, and citing cultures where adulterous women are stoned to death, judges Neto de Moura and Maria Luísa Abrantes ruled that “the adultery of a woman is a very serious attack on the honour and dignity of (her) man”.

Over 20 pages, the duo ‘demolished’ the woman who in 2014 cheated on her husband and then ended up physically assaulted by him after being held to account, against her will, by her former lover, reports Jornal de Notícias.

A lower court had previously heard the case and handed both men suspended jail terms. The Public Ministry appealed however, hoping for custodial sentences.

These will now not be forthcoming.

Indeed, the Porto appeal court duo stressed that “in the Bible, we can read that an adulterous woman should be punished with death”.

It’s a judgement that has sparked outrage over social media - many commentators complaining that it takes the whole issue of gender equality back to the Dark Ages.

The judges’ feeling however was that the lower court had appreciated all the details “well”, particularly in the context that the husband was acting while suffering from depression.

In other words, the judgement ‘sticks’, the aggressors walk free - albeit saddled with their initial fines and suspended jail terms - and any woman committing adultery within an established relationship and coming a cropper will now be painfully aware that judges may not be totally on her side.

========================================================

The Appeal Court at its finest!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on October 24, 2017, 10:20:46 AM
Quote from: misty on October 23, 2017, 11:34:42 PM
http://portugalresident.com/judges-%E2%80%9Ccondone%E2%80%9D-domestic-violence-in-case-of-%E2%80%98adulterous-female%E2%80%99
Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on October 23, 2017
Two appeal court judges are in the spotlight this week for apparently condoning domestic violence when the victim is ‘an adulterous female’.

Quoting passages from the Bible, and citing cultures where adulterous women are stoned to death, judges Neto de Moura and Maria Luísa Abrantes ruled that “the adultery of a woman is a very serious attack on the honour and dignity of (her) man”.

Over 20 pages, the duo ‘demolished’ the woman who in 2014 cheated on her husband and then ended up physically assaulted by him after being held to account, against her will, by her former lover, reports Jornal de Notícias.

A lower court had previously heard the case and handed both men suspended jail terms. The Public Ministry appealed however, hoping for custodial sentences.

These will now not be forthcoming.

Indeed, the Porto appeal court duo stressed that “in the Bible, we can read that an adulterous woman should be punished with death”.

It’s a judgement that has sparked outrage over social media - many commentators complaining that it takes the whole issue of gender equality back to the Dark Ages.

The judges’ feeling however was that the lower court had appreciated all the details “well”, particularly in the context that the husband was acting while suffering from depression.

In other words, the judgement ‘sticks’, the aggressors walk free - albeit saddled with their initial fines and suspended jail terms - and any woman committing adultery within an established relationship and coming a cropper will now be painfully aware that judges may not be totally on her side.

========================================================

The Appeal Court at its finest!!

Totally baffling.   But then what can you expect from a judicial system which having found that a person has been tortured by PJ officers whilst in their custody  - does not even contemplate a re-trial but instead increases the victim's prison sentence  - whilst the perpetrators walk free!

Inexplicable.

IMO


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 24, 2017, 02:41:22 PM
It appears that the father of  3 year old Sherrin has changed his story.

"On Monday, Wesley Mathews and his attorney voluntarily arrived at the Richardson police station and shared a different account of  his adoptive daughter's disappearance, Perlich said.

"He provided an alternate series of events from what he had previously given us," Perlich said." 

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime/2017/10/23/father-missing-3-year-old-sherin-mathews-arrested

Site now updated.

Dumped body after she choked on milk feed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 24, 2017, 06:06:00 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 24, 2017, 02:41:22 PM
It appears that the father of  3 year old Sherrin has changed his story.

"On Monday, Wesley Mathews and his attorney voluntarily arrived at the Richardson police station and shared a different account of  his adoptive daughter's disappearance, Perlich said.

"He provided an alternate series of events from what he had previously given us," Perlich said." 

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime/2017/10/23/father-missing-3-year-old-sherin-mathews-arrested

Site now updated.

Dumped body after she choked on milk feed

Oh Dear God.  Poor little girl.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 25, 2017, 09:45:39 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 24, 2017, 02:41:22 PM
It appears that the father of  3 year old Sherrin has changed his story.

"On Monday, Wesley Mathews and his attorney voluntarily arrived at the Richardson police station and shared a different account of  his adoptive daughter's disappearance, Perlich said.

"He provided an alternate series of events from what he had previously given us," Perlich said." 

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime/2017/10/23/father-missing-3-year-old-sherin-mathews-arrested

Site now updated.

Dumped body after she choked on milk feed


You know the father who did a heinous thing claiming he was punishing a three year old by locking her out of the home,thinking people would not find this behaviour abhorrent.
The police were correct and got him to own up.

You can put the rest of my post back because it was not in any way libel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 25, 2017, 09:54:47 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on October 25, 2017, 09:45:39 PM

You know the father who did a heinous thing claiming he was punishing a three year old by locking her out of the home,thinking people would not find this behaviour abhorrent.
The police were correct and got him to own up.

People do stupid things on the spur of the moment when stressed and then come to regret them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 25, 2017, 10:07:56 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 25, 2017, 09:54:47 PM
People do stupid things on the spur of the moment when stressed and then come to regret them.

Yeah, they also think they can be very clever and smart and out smart the police, but  the truth will out!
quite a few murderers have confessed because they know the game is up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on October 25, 2017, 10:51:13 PM
In Memoriam

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nftncTMcZ8U
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on October 25, 2017, 11:47:23 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on October 25, 2017, 10:51:13 PM
In Memoriam

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nftncTMcZ8U
You beat me to it

I was going to post the same song but a different version

http://youtu.be/bQQCPrwKzdo

Your version is much more lively but according to Youtube figures this was more popular


RIP Music man.  You will long be remembered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on October 27, 2017, 02:44:37 PM
K-9 Handlers Who Found Sherin Mathews Share Their Story

One K-9 led her handler to a field north of the Mathews home and eventually to the culvert where investigators found the small child's body.

"She started doing it from a long way off, and it wasn't an area she was supposed to be looking in, but that's how it concluded," said Seevers, of the K-9's path. "She found her way there. One of the things we have to do is we have to believe in them and she took us there."

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/K-9-Handlers-Who-Found-Sherin-Mathews-Share-Their-Story-453464213.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 27, 2017, 04:18:44 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on October 27, 2017, 02:44:37 PM
K-9 Handlers Who Found Sherin Mathews Share Their Story

One K-9 led her handler to a field north of the Mathews home and eventually to the culvert where investigators found the small child's body.

"She started doing it from a long way off, and it wasn't an area she was supposed to be looking in, but that's how it concluded," said Seevers, of the K-9's path. "She found her way there. One of the things we have to do is we have to believe in them and she took us there."

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/K-9-Handlers-Who-Found-Sherin-Mathews-Share-Their-Story-453464213.html

It is always a win to find a body when there is one.  If you can call it a win.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on October 27, 2017, 05:12:24 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 27, 2017, 04:18:44 PM
It is always a win to find a body when there is one.  If you can call it a win.

The body was found because it was hidden close to where she lived and not 20 miles away. Sadly not all bodies are found but fortunately it's not a win for the lying father.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 27, 2017, 07:26:20 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on October 27, 2017, 05:12:24 PM
The body was found because it was hidden close to where she lived and not 20 miles away. Sadly not all bodies are found but fortunately it's not a win for the lying father.

But no body has ever been found of Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 27, 2017, 08:11:34 PM
Not just a body, of course, absolutely no trace of her at all
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 30, 2017, 09:55:08 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5031805/Single-mother-three-year-old-son-died-avoids-jail.html

Tells a strange story about a child who dies in the bath and his mother admitting she told lies... the child 'took' some of mums pills  few years earlier...


No she didn't get jail time. She accidentally left him in the bath for 15 minutes and he had a suspected heart failure??????
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on October 31, 2017, 01:03:20 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on October 30, 2017, 09:55:08 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5031805/Single-mother-three-year-old-son-died-avoids-jail.html

Tells a strange story about a child who dies in the bath and his mother admitting she told lies... the child 'took' some of mums pills  few years earlier...


No she didn't get jail time. She accidentally left him in the bath for 15 minutes and he had a suspected heart failure??????

Is this the same woman?

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/blackburn/9630377.Blackburn_woman_jailed_for_posing_as_PC_on_Facebook/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on October 31, 2017, 01:34:15 AM
Quote from: misty on October 31, 2017, 01:03:20 AM
Is this the same woman?

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/blackburn/9630377.Blackburn_woman_jailed_for_posing_as_PC_on_Facebook/

Certainly looks like it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 03, 2017, 12:24:03 AM
Has Blacksmith been Carter-Rucked? Almost all his posts have gone.
http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/its.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 03, 2017, 01:25:59 AM
Quote from: misty on November 03, 2017, 12:24:03 AM
Has Blacksmith been Carter-Rucked? Almost all his posts have gone.
http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/its.html

Hmmm, rather cryptic to say the least.

Quote
It's...
...all done. End quote

It is certainly ... all gone: in my opinion it's not "all done" until it is found out what happened to Madeleine.  You could well be right, Misty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 03, 2017, 11:22:33 AM
Quote from: misty on November 03, 2017, 12:24:03 AM
Has Blacksmith been Carter-Rucked? Almost all his posts have gone.
http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/its.html

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 03, 2017, 02:04:56 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on November 03, 2017, 11:22:33 AM
“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.”

If Carter Ruck were going to attack Blacksmith why wait ten years? Perhaps this is a voluntary development.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 03, 2017, 02:26:00 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on November 03, 2017, 11:22:33 AM
“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.”
We have laws of libel...it is as simple as that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 03, 2017, 02:27:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 03, 2017, 02:26:00 PM
We have laws of libel...it is as simple as that

Some people have deeper pockets than others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 03, 2017, 03:00:11 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on November 03, 2017, 02:27:06 PM
Some people have deeper pockets than others.

CR are working for nothing...BS has to obey the law...do you disagree with that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 03, 2017, 03:03:43 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 03, 2017, 03:00:11 PM
CR are working for nothing...BS has to obey the law...do you disagree with that
Cite for CR working for nothing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on November 03, 2017, 03:22:23 PM
Quote from: misty on November 03, 2017, 12:24:03 AM
Has Blacksmith been Carter-Rucked? Almost all his posts have gone.
http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/its.html

There's an old adage, "something worth saying...", which would fit the bill rather nicely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 03, 2017, 03:33:32 PM
Quote from: John on November 03, 2017, 03:22:23 PM
There's an old adage, "something worth saying...", which would fit the bill rather nicely.
Some of us think what he is saying is a load of rubbish
The McCanns are entitled not to be defamed
Post considered libellous towards amaral and others are removed from this site
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on November 03, 2017, 03:44:30 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 03, 2017, 03:33:32 PM
Some of us think what he is saying is a load of rubbish
The McCanns are entitled not to be defamed
Post considered libellous towards amaral and others are removed from this site

That's my point, to remove a blog only goes to show that it wasn't worth anything in the first place and obviously not capable of being defended legally.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 03, 2017, 04:02:36 PM
Quote from: John on November 03, 2017, 03:44:30 PM
That's my point, to remove a blog only goes to show that it wasn't worth anything in the first place and obviously not capable of being defended legally.

Didn't Gerry have a blog that he removed ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 03, 2017, 06:40:06 PM
Quote from: John on November 03, 2017, 03:22:23 PM
There's an old adage, "something worth saying...", which would fit the bill rather nicely.

In B/S's mind, there really was plenty worth saying, especially about the press, which leads me to think he was pushed rather than merely jumped.

(  (ty6e[  Antonio, I know you follow this forum avidly  8)--)))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 03, 2017, 06:46:37 PM
Quote from: misty on November 03, 2017, 06:40:06 PM
In B/S's mind, there really was plenty worth saying, especially about the press, which leads me to think he was pushed rather than merely jumped.

(  (ty6e[  Antonio, I know you follow this forum avidly  8)--)))

Yes it looks like BS is HISTORY .... &^&*% antonio...sweet irony
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 03, 2017, 10:25:35 PM
Quote from: John on November 03, 2017, 03:44:30 PM
That's my point, to remove a blog only goes to show that it wasn't worth anything in the first place and obviously not capable of being defended legally.

...or financially.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 03, 2017, 11:57:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 03, 2017, 06:46:37 PM
Yes it looks like BS is HISTORY .... &^&*% antonio...sweet irony
If Blacksmith is the person that I and others seem to think he is, then he is skating on VERY thin ice

I am surprised that he hasn't gone before tbh
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 04, 2017, 08:10:24 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on November 03, 2017, 10:25:35 PM
...or financially.
Bs made claims that he said we're backed by evidence....they obviously were not
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 04, 2017, 08:57:14 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 04, 2017, 08:10:24 AM
Bs made claims that he said we're backed by evidence....they obviously were not

So you don’t think it costs significant amounts of money to defend yourself against a company the size of CR? It’s like playing poker, you can have the best hand in the world but if you don’t have the stakes to take advantage of it, you lose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 04, 2017, 09:26:55 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on November 04, 2017, 08:57:14 AM
So you don’t think it costs significant amounts of money to defend yourself against a company the size of CR? It’s like playing poker, you can have the best hand in the world but if you don’t have the stakes to take advantage of it, you lose.

the truth is an absolute defence against libel...BS has claimed he has proof the Mccanns have continually lied. he has given his examples and proof and some have believed him. I certainly didnt and could see where he was wrong.
Its clear he doesnt have proof they lied. ,,,,...if he has been silenced I think its just
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 04, 2017, 09:31:47 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 04, 2017, 09:26:55 AM
the truth is an absolute defence against libel...BS has claimed he has proof the Mccanns have continually lied. he has given his examples and proof and some have believed him. I certainly didnt and could see where he was wrong.
Its clear he doesnt have proof they lied. ,,,,...if he has been silenced I think its just

There are site's that carry his words surely if he was silenced then those sites would have to take down his posting's.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 04, 2017, 09:40:38 AM
Quote from: barrier on November 04, 2017, 09:31:47 AM
There are site's that carry his words surely if he was silenced then those sites would have to take down his posting's.

Perhaps other sites will follow....we have to wait and see...still no confirmation he has been silenced
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 04, 2017, 10:39:47 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 04, 2017, 09:40:38 AM
Perhaps other sites will follow....we have to wait and see...still no confirmation he has been silenced

Hedging your bets maybe?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 04, 2017, 10:58:06 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on November 04, 2017, 10:39:47 AM
Hedging your bets maybe?

I think you are taking this a bit too seriously....it looks like he may have been silenced...we don't know for sure yet
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 04, 2017, 11:15:33 AM
Quote from: barrier on November 04, 2017, 09:31:47 AM
There are site's that carry his words surely if he was silenced then those sites would have to take down his posting's.

With that in mind I have taken some copies. I'm particularly interested in his most recent post, where he explained in some depth what he means by 'it's done'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 04, 2017, 12:14:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 04, 2017, 11:15:33 AM
With that in mind I have taken some copies. I'm particularly interested in his most recent post, where he explained in some depth what he means by 'it's done'.

and in what way do you think his musings are of any consequence....from what I've seen he thinks the parents are involved. In my opinion he hasn't got a clue.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 04, 2017, 12:30:21 PM
So would the mod who removed my post tell me why
It seems those who claim bs is being silenced want to silence me
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 04, 2017, 12:47:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 04, 2017, 12:30:21 PM
So would the mod who removed my post tell me why
It seems those who claim bs is being silenced want to silence me

Misty was the first one to suggest he was being silenced. I, for example, think there are other possibilities.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 04, 2017, 12:48:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 04, 2017, 12:47:52 PM
Misty was the first one to suggest he was being silenced. I, for example, think there are other possibilities.

I agree
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 04, 2017, 12:49:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 04, 2017, 11:15:33 AM
With that in mind I have taken some copies. I'm particularly interested in his most recent post, where he explained in some depth what he means by 'it's done'.

Yes, That was VERY interesting!

As those who dare to question are silenced there is no Justice, and never will be for Madeleine Beth McCann. It is my opinion that this always was and always has been about protecting the parents.

Blacksmith Quote

It's...

...all done. Goncalo Amaral is safe and the facts are now clear to see. The Law can say the rest.



The good news is, if  and BIG IF, he has been CK'd and it does head to court there will be a very willing group ready to set up a  'fund' as was done for Sr Amaral. AND ALSO, the  tapas will have to appear in court to discuss their movements and time lines and ALLA that jazz ALL over again in this country. Very ,very interesting indeed.

For those who will claim the McCanns have won already then please read how libel laws are 'argued' in court in this country.  8**8:/:
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 04, 2017, 12:55:44 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 04, 2017, 09:31:47 AM
There are site's that carry his words surely if he was silenced then those sites would have to take down his posting's.


Yup, but then again... they could claim they are being harassed, and their Human rights are being violated!!
 (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 04, 2017, 01:29:11 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 04, 2017, 12:49:57 PM
Yes, That was VERY interesting!

As those who dare to question are silenced there is no Justice, and never will be for Madeleine Beth McCann. It is my opinion that this always was and always has been about protecting the parents.

Blacksmith Quote

It's...

...all done. Goncalo Amaral is safe and the facts are now clear to see. The Law can say the rest.



The good news is, if  and BIG IF, he has been CK'd and it does head to court there will be a very willing group ready to set up a  'fund' as was done for Sr Amaral. AND ALSO, the  tapas will have to appear in court to discuss their movements and time lines and ALLA that jazz ALL over again in this country. Very ,very interesting indeed.

For those who will claim the McCanns have won already then please read how libel laws are 'argued' in court in this country.  8**8:/:
Well, if he is the man I think he is  ... and I could be wrong, then he has already lost once in Court
And Court warned about what he is saying ....

If Mistaken is not mistaken, seems I have the wrong man in mind and that Blacksmith Smith has not been before the Courts

AIMHO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 04, 2017, 01:45:31 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 04, 2017, 12:49:57 PM
Yes, That was VERY interesting!

As those who dare to question are silenced there is no Justice, and never will be for Madeleine Beth McCann. It is my opinion that this always was and always has been about protecting the parents.

Blacksmith Quote

It's...

...all done. Goncalo Amaral is safe and the facts are now clear to see. The Law can say the rest.



The good news is, if  and BIG IF, he has been CK'd and it does head to court there will be a very willing group ready to set up a  'fund' as was done for Sr Amaral. AND ALSO, the  tapas will have to appear in court to discuss their movements and time lines and ALLA that jazz ALL over again in this country. Very ,very interesting indeed.

For those who will claim the McCanns have won already then please read how libel laws are 'argued' in court in this country.  8**8:/:

I think it's you who needs to read the libel laws..
I doubt very much the McCann's would have to appear in court
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 04, 2017, 01:51:01 PM
Quote from: sadie on November 04, 2017, 01:29:11 PM
Well, if he is the man I think he is  ... and I could be wrong, then he has already lost once in Court
And Court warned about what he is saying ....

AIMHO

No he is not the man you are thinking of Sadie? to suggest he has been warned by the court is an outrageous lie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 04, 2017, 02:19:31 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 04, 2017, 01:51:01 PM
No he is not the man you are thinking of Sadie? to suggest he has been warned by the court is an outrageous lie.

It's not a lie if Sadie thinks it's true ..it may be untrue but not a lie
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 04, 2017, 02:38:58 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 04, 2017, 02:19:31 PM
It's not a lie if Sadie thinks it's true ..it may be untrue but not a lie

 (&^&

So, on that note Davel, If I think the parents are lying about that night and what they did,  it could be true!

No problem, happy with that . 8)--))

oh libel laws... So let's have a wee look at this then shall we. It is up to the plaintif to prove libel. YES PROVE IT.

Antonio  has gone through the Tapas versions of account, he has also discussed at great length the Amaral events

 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 04, 2017, 02:43:57 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 04, 2017, 02:38:58 PM
(&^&

So, on that note Davel, If I think the parents are lying about that night and what they did,  it could be true!

No problem, happy with that . 8)--))

oh libel laws... So let's have a wee look at this then shall we. It is up to the plaintif to prove libel. YES PROVE IT.

Antonio  has gone through the Tapas versions of account, he has also discussed at great length the Amaral events

 This is a guy who knows exactly what he is doing!

When in the near future SY come up with no stranger abductor then....
...

The plaintiff doesn't have to prove it....major error on your behalf...if he thinks that he's wrong too

If BS accuses the McCann's of anything ....he has to prove its true...and the McCann s cannot be forced to answer any questions he raises
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 04, 2017, 03:00:19 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 04, 2017, 02:54:17 PM
And if you say you think they are lying....that would be libel

If I say what I think it would be freedom of speech I am entitled to offer a theory which does not match the McCanns- I think you have been reading them wiki pages...lol

  and soooooooo how confident are you that Antonio cannot prove what he claims ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 04, 2017, 06:07:18 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 04, 2017, 03:09:58 PM
Freedom of speech is not freedom to libel in the UK
I'm 100% sure he can't prove anything


Saying you do not believe a persons story is not libel...tsk!
I do not believe in an invisible God-in sky.. libel? nah  just saying like I see it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 04, 2017, 06:19:25 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 04, 2017, 06:13:23 PM
once again...if you say you think the mccanns are lying then that is libellous


No, really it isn't! as in really really isn't!

I can say I believe the PJ version of the investigation- Who do not believe an abductor took Maddie.. there ya go   have you got CK phone number? lol
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 04, 2017, 06:29:55 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 04, 2017, 06:19:25 PM

No, really it isn't! as in really really isn't!

I can say I believe the PJ version of the investigation- Who do not believe an abductor took Maddie.. there ya go   have you got CK phone number? lol

yuu havent said that the mccanns are lying..bs did....thats why he can be accused of libel
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 05, 2017, 01:03:06 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 04, 2017, 06:19:25 PM

No, really it isn't! as in really really isn't!

I can say I believe the PJ version of the investigation- Who do not believe an abductor took Maddie.. there ya go   have you got CK phone number? lol
So are you saying that you dont believe the Porto-Special-Madeleine-PJ group?  SY are working with them and all the new analyses and info that they will collectively have.   They must have agreed to Rowley saying what he did, otherwise IMO there would be a big conflict between them

Are you pinning all your faith on Faro / Portimao PJ and Amaral (who is a criminal and found guilty of perjury) lying in the Portuguese Courts?   Pinning all your faith on old stuff from 2007/ 2008 that has been well looked at and maybe found lacking in some areas... then improved on by the addition of further findings.

Do try and see the fact that progress will have been made and that things have moved on.  They are not what they were in 2o07/2008

AIMHO

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 05, 2017, 06:48:37 PM
Quote from: sadie on November 05, 2017, 01:03:06 PM
So are you saying that you dont believe the Porto-Special-Madeleine-PJ group?  SY are working with them and all the new analyses and info that they will collectively have.   They must have agreed to Rowley saying what he did, otherwise IMO there would be a big conflict between them

Are you pinning all your faith on Faro / Portimao PJ and Amaral (who is a criminal and found guilty of perjury) lying in the Portuguese Courts?   Pinning all your faith on old stuff from 2007/ 2008 that has been well looked at and maybe found lacking in some areas... then improved on by the addition of further findings.

Do try and see the fact that progress will have been made and that things have moved on.  They are not what they were in 2o07/2008

AIMHO

According to Rowley and Foy, OG looked at the 2007 evidence and decided it was OK to move swiftly on. According to the Portuguese Supreme Court ruling a mere nine months ago the 2007 evidence contained unanswered questions. It is extremely relevant therefore until the answers to those questions are found.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 05, 2017, 07:00:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2017, 06:48:37 PM
According to Rowley and Foy OG looked at the 2007 evidence and decided it was OK to move swiftly on. According to the Portuguese Supreme Court ruling a mere nine months ago the 2007 evidence contained unanswered questions. It is extremely relevant therefore until the answers to those questions are found.
Thank you for your answer, Gunit, but the post was aimed at Mistaken, who seems to be depending only on things found and thought to be the case in 2007/ 2008.

Several of those thoughts have been proved to be wrong, yet she still clings to them and takes no account of more up to date thoughts and findings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 05, 2017, 07:03:12 PM
Quote from: sadie on November 05, 2017, 07:00:17 PM
Thank you for your answer, Gunit, but the post was aimed at Mistaken, who seems to be depending only on things found and thought to be the case in 2007/ 2008.

Several of those thoughts have been proved to be wrong, yet she still clings to them and takes no account of more up to date thoughts and findings.

Yet you allow your theory to be mired in the sticky toffee of the past with Tannerman. Redwood moved the timeline along.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 05, 2017, 07:25:47 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 05, 2017, 07:03:12 PM
Yet you allow your theory to be mired in the sticky toffee of the past with Tannerman,Redwood moved the time along.

Please take it to the appropriate thread ... http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1327.0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 05, 2017, 08:37:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2017, 06:48:37 PM
According to Rowley and Foy OG looked at the 2007 evidence and decided it was OK to move swiftly on. According to the Portuguese Supreme Court ruling a mere nine months ago the 2007 evidence contained unanswered questions. It is extremely relevant therefore until the answers to those questions are found.

could you give cite for your claim of unanswered questions......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 05, 2017, 09:50:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2017, 06:48:37 PM
According to Rowley and Foy OG looked at the 2007 evidence and decided it was OK to move swiftly on. According to the Portuguese Supreme Court ruling a mere nine months ago the 2007 evidence contained unanswered questions. It is extremely relevant therefore until the answers to those questions are found.

Thats a very big accusation...is there any truth in it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 05, 2017, 09:54:22 PM
Quote from: sadie on November 05, 2017, 07:00:17 PM
Thank you for your answer, Gunit, but the post was aimed at Mistaken, who seems to be depending only on things found and thought to be the case in 2007/ 2008.

Several of those thoughts have been proved to be wrong, yet she still clings to them and takes no account of more up to date thoughts and findings.

I have seen no evidence of new thoughts or findings which have added anything to the evidence gathered in 2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 05, 2017, 09:58:32 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 05, 2017, 09:50:11 PM
Thats a very big accusation...is there any truth in it

You cab read the ruling here

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 05, 2017, 09:59:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2017, 09:58:32 PM
You cab read the ruling here

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.0

could you point out where it claims there are unanswerred questions as you have claimed....I think you are mistaken
and I thought you would be unable to provide a cite
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 05, 2017, 10:24:30 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 05, 2017, 10:12:34 PM
looks like this is an outrageous false claim and should therefore be removed

I think ...

Quote
Nevertheless, despite national authorities assuming all measures to render their trip to Portugal viable, for unknown reasons, after the many doubts that they raised about the necessity and opportunity of their trip were clarified several times, witnesses chose not to attend, which made the reconstitution impractical.

Provides proof of unanswered questions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 05, 2017, 10:32:36 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on November 05, 2017, 10:24:30 PM
I think ...

Provides proof of unanswered questions.

So its a referral to to the reconstruction in your opinion....yet even without the reconstruction the archiving report stated there was no evidence against the mccanns.  So the mysterious unsanswerred questions relate to the reconstruction that neither of the present investigations felt was necessary.....what an utter damp squib
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 05, 2017, 10:53:34 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 05, 2017, 10:32:36 PM
So its a referral to to the reconstruction in your opinion....yet even without the reconstruction the archiving report stated there was no evidence against the mccanns.  So the mysterious unsanswerred questions relate to the reconstruction that neither of the present investigations felt was necessary.....what an utter damp squib

No matter how much scorn you pour on the first investigation and the Supreme Court ruling the facts remain, whether later investigators ignored them or not. Until they fully explain why they ignored them we don't know whether it's justified or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 05, 2017, 11:05:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2017, 10:53:34 PM
No matter how much scorn you pour on the first investigation and the Supreme Court ruling the facts remain, whether later investigators ignored them or not. Until they fully explain why they ignored them we don't know whether it's justified or not.

the fact remain that neither investigtion consider the parents suspects...something you seem to find impossible to accept
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 07:57:52 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 05, 2017, 11:05:05 PM
the fact remain that neither investigtion consider the parents suspects...something you seem to find impossible to accept

Apparently they have based their opinions on the first investigation, which was not convinced of their innocence. If it had been it wouldn't have included this in it's legal summary;

We believe that the main damage was caused to the McCann arguidos, who lost the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were constituted arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also disturbed, because said facts remain unclarified.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 06, 2017, 08:02:54 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 07:57:52 AM
Apparently they have based their opinions on the first investigation, which was not convinced of their innocence. If it had been it wouldn't have included this in it's legal summary;

We believe that the main damage was caused to the McCann arguidos, who lost the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were constituted arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also disturbed, because said facts remain unclarified.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

the key part is "we believe"......and as has been discussed at lenghth it is basically impossible to prove innocence so its rather a ridiculous statement ...since when does a suspect have to prove innocence....what happened to the presumption of innocence.....the ECHR will no doubt answer that.

both investigating police forces have said teh mccanns are not suspects and unless any new evidence surfaces that is the case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 06, 2017, 08:14:09 AM
The fact is that SY believe Maddie was abducted. They are a highly respected police force with access to all the evidence. The PJ do not consider the McCanns suspects. Unless there is a giant conspiracy in place involving hundreds of professionals who would have to be acting dishonestly then according to SY the evidence points to an abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 10:19:19 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 06, 2017, 08:02:54 AM
the key part is "we believe"......and as has been discussed at lenghth it is basically impossible to prove innocence so its rather a ridiculous statement ...since when does a suspect have to prove innocence....what happened to the presumption of innocence.....the ECHR will no doubt answer that.

both investigating police forces have said teh mccanns are not suspects and unless any new evidence surfaces that is the case

The first investigation provided the evidence upon which they based their conclusions. The present investigations have provided none. You may be prepared to accept the 'because we say so' argument, but that concept was rejected wholesale by my generation many years ago.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on November 06, 2017, 10:56:57 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 07:57:52 AM
Apparently they have based their opinions on the first investigation, which was not convinced of their innocence. If it had been it wouldn't have included this in it's legal summary;

We believe that the main damage was caused to the McCann arguidos, who lost the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were constituted arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also disturbed, because said facts remain unclarified.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

Unless and until we know what the crime is -  which ( according to the PJ)  a recon would prove the McCanns innocent of - it's too vague to be taken seriously IMO.   Prove their innocence of what! ?

IIRC one of the points the PJ believed would be proved by a recon is regarding the breeze which according to Kate caused the door to slam.   For that to happen the weather would have to be identical to what it was on 3rd May the previous year -  and the breeze would have to gust at exactly the same moment as it did on that date.   

It's difficult to believe that whoever claimed a recon would clear this question up - didn't notice that very large elephant in the room. 

AIMHO




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 11:04:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 10:19:19 AM

The first investigation provided the evidence upon which they based their conclusions. The present investigations have provided none. You may be prepared to accept the 'because we say so' argument, but that concept was rejected wholesale by my generation many years ago.

The second investigation is not required to prove anything at this stage, so will you please stop suggesting that they are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 06, 2017, 11:34:13 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 11:04:58 AM
The second investigation is not required to prove anything at this stage, so will you please stop suggesting that they are.

The second investigation has provided nothing for us to discuss so any discussion will always be based on the initial investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 11:43:43 AM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on November 06, 2017, 11:34:13 AM
The second investigation has provided nothing for us to discuss so any discussion will always be based on the initial investigation.

May I remind you that the second investigation is not required to prove anything to you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 11:51:42 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 11:04:58 AM
The second investigation is not required to prove anything at this stage, so will you please stop suggesting that they are.

I'm not suggesting that they should, merely pointing out that I am not in the habit of accepting anyone's pronunciations without question. 'Why do you say that?' is not, in my opinion, an unreasonable question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 12:52:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 11:51:42 AM
I'm not suggesting that they should, merely pointing out that I am not in the habit of accepting anyone's pronunciations without question. 'Why do you say that?' is not, in my opinion, an unreasonable question.

It is not a reasonable question when you know that there is no answer.

Please stop deflecting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 01:44:13 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 12:52:40 PM
It is not a reasonable question when you know that there is no answer.

Please stop deflecting.

How can there be no answer? SY and the PJ must have some reason for saying the parents are not suspects.

What do you think I'm deflecting from?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 06, 2017, 02:08:22 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 11:43:43 AM
May I remind you that the second investigation is not required to prove anything to you.

I didn’t suggest it did, I was more pointing out that posters making assumptions about the second investigations to bolster their argument is not on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 06, 2017, 02:49:43 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on November 06, 2017, 11:34:13 AM
The second investigation has provided nothing for us to discuss so any discussion will always be based on the initial investigation.

The archiving report stated clearly there was no evidence against the McCann's....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 06, 2017, 02:50:31 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 06, 2017, 02:49:43 PM
The archiving report stated clearly there was no evidence against the McCann's....

And?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 03:00:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 01:59:36 PM
Scotland Yard and The PJ have said that The McCanns are not Suspects.  Any other suggestion is Deflecting.  Or seriously suggesting that Scotland Yard and The PJ are lying.

This is Libel, and I'm not having it.  So please desist.

Otherwise I will be forced to Delete your comments.

I'm sorry but your explanation still doesn't make sense to me.

I have not denied that SY and the PJ said that the McCanns are not suspects.
I have not accused either of them of lying.

What exactly are you accusing me of?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 06, 2017, 03:01:42 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on November 06, 2017, 02:50:31 PM
And?
And that explains why they are not suspects
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 06, 2017, 03:13:10 PM
The simple truth is the Mccanns still remain the last kmown people to have seen Madeleine alive.

There is no forensic evidence of a third party in the apartment that night, and the latest headlines in the MSM are quite frankly laughable.

I.M.H.O.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 03:13:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 03:00:30 PM
I'm sorry but your explanation still doesn't make sense to me.

I have not denied that SY and the PJ said that the McCanns are not suspects.
I have not accused either of them of lying.

What exactly are you accusing me of?

You are expecting answers when there are none. And suggesting that someone is lying.  This is Libel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 06, 2017, 03:16:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 11:51:42 AM
I'm not suggesting that they should, merely pointing out that I am not in the habit of accepting anyone's pronunciations without question. 'Why do you say that?' is not, in my opinion, an unreasonable question.


I certainly don't simply accept something just because they say so
I don't just believe the McCann's are innocent because they are not suspects
I've looked at the evidence and to me it is obvious they are not involved
SY have simply confirmed this
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 06, 2017, 03:54:31 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 06, 2017, 03:16:17 PM

I certainly don't simply accept something just because they say so
I don't just believe the McCann's are innocent because they are not suspects
I've looked at the evidence and to me it is obvious they are not involved
SY have simply confirmed this

That appears to be classic confirmation bias.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 06, 2017, 03:56:01 PM
Quote from: Slartibartfast on November 06, 2017, 03:54:31 PM
That appears to be classic confirmation bias.

It may appear to you

In your opinion..to me it's looking at the evidence and then

reaching a conclusion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 06, 2017, 03:59:38 PM
What evidence is that then ?

Evidence of an intruder in the apartment ?

None has been found.

Can you remind me of what Clarence Mitchell said about that ?


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 06, 2017, 04:00:52 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 06, 2017, 03:59:38 PM
What ecvidence is that then ?

E

The evidence SY refer to
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on November 06, 2017, 04:07:21 PM
Let's be clear guys and gals, no topic is off-limit as long as all comments comply with our very strict forum rules.

A reminder to moderators that censorship is not a mod function. I have reinstated many posts over the last few days which would otherwise have been lost to the forum.  A little edit here and there works wonders. TY
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 04:08:51 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 06, 2017, 03:13:10 PM
The simple truth is the Mccanns still remain the last kmown people to have seen Madeleine alive.

There is no forensic evidence of a third party in the apartmenr that night, and rhe latest headlines in the MSM are quite frankly laughable.

I.M.H.O.

And as a Moderator, you should know better.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 06, 2017, 04:09:18 PM
I thought the PJ only made suspects known to the public when they are declared arguido. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on November 06, 2017, 04:12:14 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 06, 2017, 08:14:09 AM
The fact is that SY believe Maddie was abducted. They are a highly respected police force with access to all the evidence. The PJ do not consider the McCanns suspects. Unless there is a giant conspiracy in place involving hundreds of professionals who would have to be acting dishonestly then according to SY the evidence points to an abduction.

They (SY) could also be completely wrong as has happened in the past.  According to SY, Tannerman has been accounted for, are they wrong in that too?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 06, 2017, 04:14:08 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 04:08:51 PM
And as a Moderator, you should know better.

You need to explain that reply Eleanor.

I have given the situation as it stands.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 06, 2017, 04:20:22 PM
Quote from: John on November 06, 2017, 04:12:14 PM
They (SY) could also be completely wrong as has happened in the past.  According to SY, Tannerman has been accounted for, are they wrong in that too?
Actually tannerman has not been accounted for so sorry John you are wrong.... Tannerman has not been totally ruled out
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 06, 2017, 04:22:39 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 06, 2017, 03:59:38 PM
What evidence is that then ?

Evidence of an intruder in the apartment ?

None has been found.

Can you remind me of what Clarence Mitchell said about that ?
I have discussed it at length..we don't agree ... further discussion is pointless..SY

 believe...based on the evidence Maddie was abducted

And I agree
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 06, 2017, 04:26:13 PM
Quote from: John on November 06, 2017, 04:12:14 PM
They (SY) could also be completely wrong as has happened in the past.  According to SY, Tannerman has been accounted for, are they wrong in that too?

As I have said...there is no evidence against the McCann's according to the archiving report
The pj agree the McCann's are not suspects
It's unrealistic to assume they are both wrong ...imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on November 06, 2017, 04:28:21 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 06, 2017, 04:26:13 PM
As I have said...there is no evidence against the McCann's according to the archiving report
The pj agree the McCann's are not suspects
It's unrealistic to assume they are both wrong ...imo

The Archive is almost ten years out of date davel. Its anyone's guess what the PJ and SY really think.  Maybe if they got off their backsides and investigated the criminal conduct post disappearance, they might just get somewhere.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 06, 2017, 04:31:03 PM
Quote from: John on November 06, 2017, 04:28:21 PM
The Archive is almost ten years out of date davel. Its anyone's guess what the PJ and SY really think.  Maybe if they got off their backsides and investigated the criminal conduct post disappearance, they might just get somewhere.

You are critical of both SY and PJ...yet you have no evidence to support that criticism...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 05:05:57 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 06, 2017, 04:14:08 PM
You need to explain that reply Eleanor.

I have given the situation as it stands.

I am not required to explain anything.  You need to explain your remarks and your actions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 05:54:38 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 03:13:25 PM
You are expecting answers when there are none. And suggesting that someone is lying.  This is Libel.

I don't think I have. Could you identify the posts you object to please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 05:59:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 05:54:38 PM
I don't think I have. Could you identify the posts you object to please?

No.  But I expect that you can.  Or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 06, 2017, 06:13:54 PM
IMO it is important to remember that this is a Portuguese case first & foremost. Should the PJ have found it necessary to obtain clarification of certain points relating to the Tapas 9 statements then they would have issued rogatory letters to the UK police.
 Almost all the original statements taken were done so under witness status. AFAIK it is a criminal offence in Portugal to later alter a witness statement. In the same vein, were the UK police to have re-interviewed the McCanns, neither by request of nor in the presence of PJ officers, those statements & any additional evidence obtained from them would be inadmissible in a Portuguese criminal court.
 When SY said the Portuguese legal system is complex, they weren't joking. We have recently witnessed the collapse of the case against Cristovao & his various associates simply because the evidence wasn't collected by the correct authority. No doubt it will be incredibly difficult for the Portuguese prosecutors to get their courts to accept evidence gathered by an overseas authority in the event that same evidence provides grounds for prosecution.
IMO the fact that the PJ do not appear to have ever asked any further questions of the Tapas 9 is further proof  they do not consider the group to have been involved in any way.

AIMHO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 06, 2017, 06:29:02 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 06, 2017, 05:05:57 PM
I am not required to explain anything.  You need to explain your remarks and your actions.

I most certainly do not.

I gave known facts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 06:44:53 PM
Quote from: misty on November 06, 2017, 06:13:54 PM
IMO it is important to remember that this is a Portuguese case first & foremost. Should the PJ have found it necessary to obtain clarification of certain points relating to the Tapas 9 statements then they would have issued rogatory letters to the UK police.
 Almost all the original statements taken were done so under witness status. AFAIK it is a criminal offence in Portugal to later alter a witness statement. In the same vein, were the UK police to have re-interviewed the McCanns, neither by request of nor in the presence of PJ officers, those statements & any additional evidence obtained from them would be inadmissible in a Portuguese criminal court.
 When SY said the Portuguese legal system is complex, they weren't joking. We have recently witnessed the collapse of the case against Cristovao & his various associates simply because the evidence wasn't collected by the correct authority. No doubt it will be incredibly difficult for the Portuguese prosecutors to get their courts to accept evidence gathered by an overseas authority in the event that same evidence provides grounds for prosecution.
IMO the fact that the PJ do not appear to have ever asked any further questions of the Tapas 9 is further proof  they do not consider the group to have been involved in any way.

AIMHO.

The emphasis placed on what OG thinks and says does tend to obscure the fact that it's a Portuguese case, doesn't it? I imagine the police only interview people if they think they will learn something. In my opinion they would learn nothing by interviewing the T9.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 06, 2017, 09:18:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 06:44:53 PM
The emphasis placed on what OG thinks and says does tend to obscure the fact that it's a Portuguese case, doesn't it? I imagine the police only interview people if they think they will learn something. In my opinion they would learn nothing by interviewing the T9.

I would say they have already interviewed the McCanns as witnesses
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 06, 2017, 09:46:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 06:44:53 PM
The emphasis placed on what OG thinks and says does tend to obscure the fact that it's a Portuguese case, doesn't it? I imagine the police only interview people if they think they will learn something. In my opinion they would learn nothing by interviewing the T9.

There was something not clear in Murats case that needed clearing up though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on November 07, 2017, 12:29:12 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 06, 2017, 09:18:42 PM
I would say they have already interviewed the McCanns as witnesses

Only the OG team and those supervising it will know this for sure, consequently we can only speculate on what or who OG might be pursuing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on November 07, 2017, 03:56:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2017, 06:44:53 PM
The emphasis placed on what OG thinks and says does tend to obscure the fact that it's a Portuguese case, doesn't it? I imagine the police only interview people if they think they will learn something. In my opinion they would learn nothing by interviewing the T9.

It's not just a PT case now, though, surely?

I can't see any reason why the UK would need to necessarily formally re-interview the T9.

If there were question marks about details that they weren't aware of or found unclear, they could presumably interview them informally, see whether the answers corresponded and move on. If, on the other hand, any answers raised red flags, then, yes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 07, 2017, 04:09:40 PM
Quote from: Carana on November 07, 2017, 03:56:22 PM
It's not just a PT case now, though, surely?

I can't see any reason why the UK would need to necessarily formally re-interview the T9.

If there were question marks about details that they weren't aware of or found unclear, they could presumably interview them informally, see whether the answers corresponded and move on. If, on the other hand, any answers raised red flags, then, yes.

It's definitely a Portuguese case, as it always was. A British police officer has no more power than any other civilian in Portugal,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 07, 2017, 04:10:28 PM
Quote from: Carana on November 07, 2017, 03:56:22 PM
It's not just a PT case now, though, surely?

I can't see any reason why the UK would need to necessarily formally re-interview the T9.

If there were question marks about details that they weren't aware of or found unclear, they could presumably interview them informally, see whether the answers corresponded and move on. If, on the other hand, any answers raised red flags, then, yes.

So you can see a reason
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on November 07, 2017, 05:55:29 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 07, 2017, 04:10:28 PM
So you can see a reason

If it proved necessary.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 07, 2017, 09:18:10 PM
Quote from: Carana on November 07, 2017, 03:56:22 PM
It's not just a PT case now, though, surely?

I can't see any reason why the UK would need to necessarily formally re-interview the T9.

If there were question marks about details that they weren't aware of or found unclear, they could presumably interview them informally, see whether the answers corresponded and move on. If, on the other hand, any answers raised red flags, then, yes.

Totally agree
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 10:20:58 AM
I see it is being reported in the press, that a person who has reputedly given considerable support to the Mccanns has been found quilty of downloading over 40,000 indecent images of children.



http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/ipswich-man-avoids-prison-after-downloading-over-40-000-indecent-images-of-children-1-5283183
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 27, 2017, 10:38:22 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 10:20:58 AM
I see it is being reported in the press, that a person who has reputedly given considerable support to the Mccanns has been found quilty of downloading over 40,000 indecent images of children.



http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/ipswich-man-avoids-prison-after-downloading-over-40-000-indecent-images-of-children-1-5283183

And this reflects badly on The McCanns in what way, do you think?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 10:54:50 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 27, 2017, 10:38:22 AM
And this reflects badly on The McCanns in what way, do you think?

I have made my views clear on Nessling quite some time ago.

It will be interesting to observe if any of the main tabloids supporting the Mccanns , pick up on this story.

What do you think Eleanor ?

Remember the way,. the MSM  treated Brenda Leyland ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 27, 2017, 11:35:19 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 10:54:50 AM
I have made my views clear on Nessling quite some time ago.

It will be interesting to observe if any of the main tabloids supporting the Mccanns , pick up on this story.

What do you think Eleanor ?

Remember the way,. the MSM  treated Brenda Leyland ?

The arrest of nessling has no relevance to the case at all
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 11:38:00 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 27, 2017, 11:35:19 AM
The arrest of nessling has no relevance to the case at all

He has vigorously supported the Mccanns.

By your argument, then neither did Brenda Leyland.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 27, 2017, 11:44:36 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 10:54:50 AM
I have made my views clear on Nessling quite some time ago.

It will be interesting to observe if any of the main tabloids supporting the Mccanns , pick up on this story.

What do you think Eleanor ?

Remember the way,. the MSM  treated Brenda Leyland ?

I don't have an opinion.  And I can think of no reason for why The Press would want to pick up on some spurious connection.
Or why you should either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 11:48:32 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 27, 2017, 11:44:36 AM
I don't have an opinion.  And I can think of no reason for why The Press would want to pick up on some spurious connection.
Or why you should either.

Did you have an opinion on Brenda Leyland, who committed NO CRIME ?

Whereas this man is now on the sex offenders register for 10 years.

As far as I am concerned, he was and is, a McCann supporting troll.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 27, 2017, 11:59:16 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 11:38:00 AM
He has vigorously supported the Mccanns.

By your argument, then neither did Brenda Leyland.

Could you explain what relevance nessling has to the case
As you have introduced him to the thread


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 12:01:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 27, 2017, 11:59:16 AM
Could you explain what relevance nessling has to the case
As you have introduced him to the thread

Can you explain what Brenda Leyland had to do with this case ?

You have been quite happy to discuss her.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 27, 2017, 12:02:50 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 11:48:32 AM
Did you have an opinion on Brenda Leyland, who committed NO CRIME ?

Whereas this man is now on the sex offenders register for 10 years.

As far as I am concerned, he was and is, a McCann supporting troll.

I felt desperately sorry for a lonely woman with mental health problems.

I also posted on Nigel Nessling's Site.  For which I am in no way ashamed.  Please note.  I WAS A MEMBER OF NIGEL NESSLING'S SITE.  Okay.

But then I try not to judge.

I was pretty nearly the first Forum person to admit that I left my children alone in similar circumstances.

But then I am far from perfect.

If it should ever come about that The McCanns were in some way involved in the disappearance of their daughter then I will know that I have never accused without proof, and have nothing to feel ashamed of.

This is the person that I will ever be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 27, 2017, 12:03:20 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 12:01:17 PM
Can you explain what Brenda Leyland had to do with this case ?

You have been quite happy to discuss her.
Brenda ...as you know....directed some tweets towards the McCann's and others that some found offensive
Apart from that she had nothing to do with the case

As for nessling he sounds like a very sick person and I think everyone on the forum would agree with that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 12:17:31 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 27, 2017, 12:02:50 PM
I felt desperately sorry for a lonely woman with mental health problems.

I also posted on Nigel Nessling's Site.  For which I am in no way ashamed.  Please note.  I WAS A MEMBER OF NIGEL NESSLING'S SITE.  Okay.

But then I try not to judge.

I was pretty nearly the first Forum person to admit that I left my children alone in similar circumstances.

But then I am far from perfect.

If it should ever come about that The McCanns were in some way involved in the disappearance of their daughter then I will know that I have never accused without proof, and have nothing to feel ashamed of.

This is the person that I will ever be.

Thank you for that reply Eleanor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 27, 2017, 12:32:54 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 12:17:31 PM
Thank you for that reply Eleanor.

And Thank You, Stephen.  I still have hopes for you.  Although some might say that I am pissing into the wind.  But I don't give up that easily.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 27, 2017, 01:03:26 PM
Perhaps Stephen thought nessling would get some sort of support or excuses from supporters.....I'm sure he wont
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 01:05:07 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 27, 2017, 01:03:26 PM
Perhaps Stephen thought nessling would get some sort of support or excuses from supporters.....I'm sure he wont

Not any more, or so I have heard.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 01:10:43 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 27, 2017, 12:32:54 PM
And Thank You, Stephen.  I still have hopes for you.  Although some might say that I am pissing into the wind.  But I don't give up that easily.

The proverbial 'pissing in the wind' reference is often how people labelled 'sceptics' view in waiting for responses from McCann supporters, though I don't place you in that frame..

As to giving up, not my style either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 27, 2017, 01:22:51 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 01:05:07 PM
Not any more, or so I have heard.

I can only see him getting condemnation here.....I've never seen his blog
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 27, 2017, 01:23:17 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 01:05:07 PM
Not any more, or so I have heard.

I would if I thought he needed help.  But that's just me.  I don't give up on people that easily.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 27, 2017, 10:48:05 PM
Deleted

I have now read around and am amending my post

I still think that the Nigel Nessling that I met and knew was a lovely guy, who worked so hard and sincerely for charitable causes.  So sad that he developed this dreadful want /need

The judge obviously saw a great deal of good in him too, otherwise he would have jailed him
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 10:56:55 PM
Quote from: sadie on November 27, 2017, 10:48:05 PM
Are you intimating something here?

A lovely guy ... and very sincere in his belief in Madeleines abduction.

I hope that you are not libelling him, because if you are I will support him to the hilt.


I remember you libelling me on Amazon, but perhaps mistakenly, I had forgiven you for that.

I suggest you read the news Sadie as regards him and his criminal conviction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 27, 2017, 11:16:21 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 27, 2017, 10:56:55 PM
I suggest you read the news Sadie as regards him and his criminal conviction.
I am unable to open the webpage mentioned on thsi ancient computer, but I now gather that he has been tried for indecent images on his computer.  If that is correct, then of course I cannot support him on that.

Section deleted because I have finally been able to read the reports of the Court case.

ETA.
I have great sorrow that such a fine man succumbed to his base needs /wants

Make no bones about it, Nigel Nessling has done a huge amount of good charitable work as well as taking the time and making the effort to persue Justice in the Madeleine case.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 28, 2017, 07:54:58 AM
Quote from: sadie on November 27, 2017, 11:16:21 PM
I am unable to open the webpage mentioned on thsi ancient computer, but I now gather that he has been tried for indecent images on his computer.  If that is correct, then of course I cannot support him on that.

Section deleted because I have finally been able to read the reports of the Court case.

ETA.
I have great sorrow that such a fine man succumbed to his base needs /wants

Make no bones about it, Nigel Nessling has done a huge amount of good charitable work as well as taking the time and making the effort to persue Justice in the Madeleine case.

Well we are told he is fond of children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 28, 2017, 08:21:19 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on November 28, 2017, 07:54:58 AM
Well we are told he is fond of children.

So was a certain J Saville. He did lots of good work for charity as well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 09:48:52 AM
I am absolutely staggered that any attempt to defend this individual has been made.

Over 40,000 really says it all.

...and he admitted it. *&^^& *&^^& *&^^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 28, 2017, 09:52:46 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 09:48:52 AM
I am absolutely staggered that any attempt to defend this individual has been made.

Over 40,000 really says it all.

...and he admitted it. *&^^& *&^^& *&^^&

... and not just slightly dodgy stuff either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 10:19:17 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on November 28, 2017, 09:52:46 AM
... and not just slightly dodgy stuff either.

Words do fail in this regard Slarti.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 28, 2017, 10:30:55 AM
I M O It seems like some as long as they are upstanding citizens , can get away with anything.

No matter what they do, involving children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 28, 2017, 10:32:56 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 09:48:52 AM
I am absolutely staggered that any attempt to defend this individual has been made.

Over 40,000 really says it all.

...and he admitted it. *&^^& *&^^& *&^^&
.

Staggered doesn't even cover it Stephen and what's worse one of our moderators agree with Sadie. What Nessling did is not a victimless crime. There are children out there who will be scarred for the rest of their lives because of Nessling's actions. Absolutely shameful that we have people on this forum who are actually trying to minimise his horrendous criminal behaviour. I just hope he is kept away from children in the future.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 10:39:12 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on November 28, 2017, 10:32:56 AM
.

Staggered doesn't even cover it Stephen and what's worse one of our moderators agree with Sadie. What Nessling did is not a victimless crime. There are children out there who will be scarred for the rest of their lives because of Nessling's actions. Absolutely shameful that we have people on this forum who are actually trying to minimise his horrendous criminal behaviour. I just hope he is kept away from children in the future.

I totally concur Faithlilly.

The judges actions in this regard need questioning, and I hope for a review of the sentence.


http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/unduly_lenient_sentences/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 28, 2017, 10:59:59 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 10:39:12 AM
I totally concur Faithlilly.

The judges actions in this regard need questioning, and I hope for a review of the sentence.


http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/unduly_lenient_sentences/

We can but hope Stephen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 28, 2017, 11:25:22 AM
I think it can give a bit of understanding on how the mccanns are viewed, it’s not what they did, it’s who they are.

IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on November 28, 2017, 11:48:15 AM
Quote from: kizzy on November 28, 2017, 11:25:22 AM
I think it can give a bit of understanding on how the mccanns are viewed, it’s not what they did, it’s who they are.

IMO

It's both.  Their arrogance knows no bounds imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Jane Mcard on November 28, 2017, 12:14:20 PM
They should have locked Nessling up and thrown away the key imo. and investigated the competency of the judge who let him off.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 28, 2017, 02:22:04 PM
Woman was kidnapped for 10 years. The horror that the police found
NOVEMBER 28, 2017

Italian police arrested a man and rescued a woman who had been kidnapped ten years ago. He had already done the same in 1995

It was thanks to a stop operation that the Italian police discovered the terrifying case of a woman who had been abducted for 10 years, forced to slave labor and abused and raped. The discovery came last week and is impressing Italians by the cruelty of the images released by the authorities themselves. And also because the aggressor is already a repeat offender in this crime.

The woman, who is from Romania, is now 29 and has two children, a 9-year-old boy and a three-year-old girl, allegedly the result of the abuses she has been subjected to since she took up employment at that house near Gizzeria at 19 to care for her of the suspect. The 55-year-old man began to mistreat the young woman shortly after the woman's death and prevented any contact with the outside world and kept her confined to a hole full of garbage and unconditional, according to the description in the Italian press and in the images shared by the authorities.

There was no water or light, the beds were made of cardboard.

In addition, the woman has been the victim of mistreatment, assaults, beatings, bites and even electric shocks

During a stop operation, the police noticed the children's uncaring appearance and decided to investigate, asking to see where they lived and talk to their mother. That's where the discovery was made. Woman and children were taken to a safe place while the man was detained.

The suspect had already been convicted in 1995 of five years in prison for various crimes, including kidnapping, assault, sexual assault on a 23-year-old woman for a month. Just the same as you did with this woman.

The man denied all charges, claiming that the house was a temporary accommodation and that the children were born in the hospital and attending school.
https://www.dn.pt/mundo/interior/mulher-esteve-sequestrada-durante-10-anos-o-horror-que-a-policia-encontrou-8949083.html?utm_source=Push&utm_medium=Web
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 28, 2017, 02:37:56 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 28, 2017, 02:22:04 PM
Woman was kidnapped for 10 years. The horror that the police found
NOVEMBER 28, 2017

Italian police arrested a man and rescued a woman who had been kidnapped ten years ago. He had already done the same in 1995

It was thanks to a stop operation that the Italian police discovered the terrifying case of a woman who had been abducted for 10 years, forced to slave labor and abused and raped. The discovery came last week and is impressing Italians by the cruelty of the images released by the authorities themselves. And also because the aggressor is already a repeat offender in this crime.

The woman, who is from Romania, is now 29 and has two children, a 9-year-old boy and a three-year-old girl, allegedly the result of the abuses she has been subjected to since she took up employment at that house near Gizzeria at 19 to care for her of the suspect. The 55-year-old man began to mistreat the young woman shortly after the woman's death and prevented any contact with the outside world and kept her confined to a hole full of garbage and unconditional, according to the description in the Italian press and in the images shared by the authorities.

There was no water or light, the beds were made of cardboard.

In addition, the woman has been the victim of mistreatment, assaults, beatings, bites and even electric shocks

During a stop operation, the police noticed the children's uncaring appearance and decided to investigate, asking to see where they lived and talk to their mother. That's where the discovery was made. Woman and children were taken to a safe place while the man was detained.

The suspect had already been convicted in 1995 of five years in prison for various crimes, including kidnapping, assault, sexual assault on a 23-year-old woman for a month. Just the same as you did with this woman.

The man denied all charges, claiming that the house was a temporary accommodation and that the children were born in the hospital and attending school.
https://www.dn.pt/mundo/interior/mulher-esteve-sequestrada-durante-10-anos-o-horror-que-a-policia-encontrou-8949083.html?utm_source=Push&utm_medium=Web

The rose tinted spectacles don’t really work in that case either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on November 28, 2017, 03:56:50 PM
Quote from: Jane Mcard on November 28, 2017, 12:14:20 PM
They should have locked Nessling up and thrown away the key imo. and investigated the competency of the judge who let him off.

I wouldn't go that far but at least he's been ordered to do 150 hrs community service. Sweeping the streets of Ipswich in a bright orange boilersuit with NONCE emblazoned on the back would do nicely imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 28, 2017, 04:22:13 PM
Quote from: John on November 28, 2017, 03:56:50 PM
I wouldn't go that far but at least he's been ordered to do 150 hrs community service. Sweeping the streets of Ipswich in a bright orange boilersuit with NONCE emblazoned on the back would do nicely imo.

You wouldn't go that far ? Imagine it was your children or grandchildren in those photographs. How far would you go then John ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on November 28, 2017, 04:33:32 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on November 28, 2017, 04:22:13 PM
You wouldn't go that far ? Imagine it was your children or grandchildren in those photographs. How far would you go then John ?

I'd string the fecker up to the nearest lamppost.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: John on November 28, 2017, 04:33:32 PM
I'd string the fecker up to the nearest lamppost.

This, of course, has nothing to do with The McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 28, 2017, 05:20:19 PM
Quote from: sadie on November 27, 2017, 10:48:05 PM
Deleted

I have now read around and am amending my post

I still think that the Nigel Nessling that I met and knew was a lovely guy, who worked so hard and sincerely for charitable causes.  So sad that he developed this dreadful want /need

The judge obviously saw a great deal of good in him too, otherwise he would have jailed him

You can never judge a book by it's cover. I believe he raised funds for an organisation called Forever Searching. They are on Facebook until 2008, but their website seems to have disappeared.
https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/vee8

Vee8 seems to be the name he posted under on certain forums.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 05:26:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 28, 2017, 05:20:19 PM
You can never judge a book by it's cover. I believe he raised funds for an organisation called Forever Searching. They are on Facebook until 2008, but their website seems to have disappeared.
https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/vee8

Vee8 seems to be the name he posted under on certain forums.


Also 'hotrod'.

I have been told his facebook page has been evaporated.

God knows what this has done to his family.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 05:46:42 PM

I stand by what I actually said.  I would help him if I thought I could, as I would for anyone..

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.  As it happens, I will be out of the queue altogether.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 28, 2017, 05:56:17 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 05:46:42 PM
I stand by what I actually said.  I would help him if I thought I could, as I would for anyone..

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.  As it happens, I will be out of the queue altogether.

I wonder if you would have posted the same statement if you didn't have to ability to censore posts in reply ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 28, 2017, 06:00:16 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 04:45:18 PM
This, of course, has nothing to do with The McCanns.

Neither is the latest news on the criminal exploits of ex members of the PJ. Doesn't stop supporters posting it though, does it ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 28, 2017, 06:01:20 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on November 28, 2017, 05:56:17 PM
I wonder if you would have posted the same statement if you didn't have to ability to censore posts in reply ?
There are rules and this forum is by far the best run I've ever known. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 06:12:04 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on November 28, 2017, 05:56:17 PM
I wonder if you would have posted the same statement if you didn't have to ability to censore posts in reply ?

I never censor posts in reply to my comments, unless they are completely beyond the pale.  This is why I very rarely comment these days.
And when replies to my comments are beyond the pale then I leave it to another Moderator to deal with.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 28, 2017, 06:21:33 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 06:12:04 PM
I never censor posts in reply to my comments, unless they are completely beyond the pale.  This is why I very rarely comment these days.
And when replies to my comments are beyond the pale then I leave it to another Moderator to deal with.

The fact that you would compare your (I'm sure) rather paltry misdemeanours in terms of forgiveness with the actions of a convicted paedophile is irresponsible if not ' beyond the pale'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on November 28, 2017, 06:23:54 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 05:26:12 PM

Also 'hotrod'.

I have been told his facebook page has been evaporated.

God knows what this has done to his family.

Indeed!
They will be trying to reconcile their experience of a valued family member to what they now have to accept
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 06:26:00 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 28, 2017, 06:01:20 PM
There are rules and this forum is by far the best run I've ever known.

Merci beaucoup.  We do try, but it often goes unnoticed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 06:28:10 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on November 28, 2017, 06:21:33 PM
The fact that you would compare your (I'm sure) rather paltry misdemeanours in terms of forgiveness with the actions of a convicted paedophile is irresponsible if not ' beyond the pale'.

Thank you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 06:36:53 PM
Quote from: Erngath on November 28, 2017, 06:23:54 PM
Indeed!
They will be trying to reconcile their experience of a valued family member to what they now have to accept

Ah, but give no quarter.  Let's all be sure that we never did anything to be ashamed of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 28, 2017, 06:44:34 PM
Not just a case of shame, it is deemed to be illegal and in the current public view one of the worse crimes possible, although there are clearly degrees of offence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on November 28, 2017, 06:58:00 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 06:36:53 PM
Ah, but give no quarter.  Let's all be sure that we never did anything to be ashamed of.

To be absolutely clear I will never ever understand how anyone can view such images of children and abhor that anyone does so or that these images are made.
The damage to the children involved must be immeasurable.

I'm thinking it must be a nightmare for the family of anyone convicted of such a crime.
Trying to reconcile their feelings for their loved one with the realisation of their loved ones dark side.
However as you said earlier, this has nothing to do with the McCanns and Madeleine's imo abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 07:12:25 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 28, 2017, 06:44:34 PM
Not just a case of shame, it is deemed to be illegal and in the current public view one of the worse crimes possible, although there are clearly degrees of offence.

Obviously.  According to the sentence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 28, 2017, 07:17:54 PM
What ever one's own opinion may be, in this country even a judge is only able to do what the law allows.

This is informative and a bit of an eye opener:

https://www.mowbraywoodwards.co.uk/personal-life/indecent-images-internet-sex-crime/sentencing-illegal-images?gclid=CjwKCAiAr_TQBRB5EiwAC_QCq2SYGeLJgJ-oYXGhLNyVH8ivYE6LwsfmYXn3PxTShZ3bivwIlaCunhoC8_MQAvD_BwE
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 28, 2017, 07:19:14 PM
Quote from: Erngath on November 28, 2017, 06:58:00 PM
To be absolutely clear I will never ever understand how anyone can view such images of children and abhor that anyone does so or that these images are made.
The damage to the children involved must be immeasurable.

I'm thinking it must be a nightmare for the family of anyone convicted of such a crime.
Trying to reconcile their feelings for their loved one with the realisation of their loved ones dark side.
However as you said earlier, this has nothing to do with the McCanns and Madeleine's imo abduction.

I agree Erngath,  how anyone can view those photo's of children being abused is beyond me,  it is a disgusting and unforgiveable crime.

My feelings are with his family,   they must be going through hell,   with them in mind,  I will say no more about it.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 07:37:21 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 28, 2017, 07:19:14 PM
I agree Erngath,  how anyone can view those photo's of children being abused is beyond me,  it is a disgusting and unforgiveable crime.

My feelings are with his family,   they must be going through hell,   with them in mind,  I will say no more about it.

And I will go on feeling desperately sorry for him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 07:44:39 PM
...............and what of Nessling's victims ???
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 28, 2017, 08:09:02 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 07:37:21 PM
And I will go on feeling desperately sorry for him.

Do you feel desperately sorry for all criminals or just certain ones, Eleanor?

For 7 or 8 years this man was making indecent images of children and possessing prohibited images of children. In my opinion it is those children who deserve sympathy, not the adults who prey on them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 08:18:19 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 07:44:39 PM
...............and what of Nessling's victims ???

You and your like will no doubt take care of those.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 08:20:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 28, 2017, 08:09:02 PM
Do you feel desperately sorry for all criminals or just certain ones, Eleanor?

For 7 or 8 years this man was making indecent images of children and possessing prohibited images of children. In my opinion it is those children who deserve sympathy, not the adults who prey on them.

I try not to judge in the light of my own inadequacies.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 08:29:05 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 08:18:19 PM
You and your like will no doubt take care of those.

Would you say 'you and your like' if member of members of your family had extremely indecent pictures blazoned all over their computer.

When the boots on the other foot, there lies a different perspective.

Nesslings actions are inexcusable, along with the judge who FAILED to give him a custodial sentence.






Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 08:34:51 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 08:29:05 PM
Would you say 'you and your like' if member of members of your family had extremely indecent pictures blazoned all over their computer.

When the boots on the other foot, there lies a different perspective.

Nesslings actions are inexcusable, along with the judge who FAILED to give him a custodial sentence.

I expect that The Judge had his reasons.  Although no doubt The Judge is far more stupid than you will ever be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 08:40:28 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 08:34:51 PM
I expect that The Judge had his reasons.  Although no doubt The Judge is far more stupid than you will ever be.

...and what of yours ???
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 08:42:41 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 08:40:28 PM
...and what of yours ???

Forget it, Stephen.  You are wasting your time trying to take the rise out of me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 08:45:29 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 08:42:41 PM
Forget it, Stephen.  You are wasting your time trying to take the rise out of me.

As you are with me.

By the numbers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 09:29:34 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 08:42:41 PM
Forget it, Stephen.  You are wasting your time trying to take the rise out of me.

Also, sarcasm will get you absolutely nowhere with me.

It's  a bit like water off a ducks back.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 28, 2017, 09:58:00 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 08:20:04 PM
I try not to judge in the light of my own inadequacies.

There's a difference between not judging and sympathising.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 28, 2017, 10:48:32 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 28, 2017, 05:26:12 PM

Also 'hotrod'.

I have been told his facebook page has been evaporated.

God knows what this has done to his family.
Are you picking on Mloddy now?

What grounds have you for this?

Citation please
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 28, 2017, 10:56:31 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 07:37:21 PM
And I will go on feeling desperately sorry for him.

As you know I don't give Kate McCann much credit for many finer feelings but paedophiles made even her skin crawl.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 29, 2017, 04:41:22 AM
Quote from: sadie on November 28, 2017, 10:48:32 PM
Are you picking on Mloddy now?

What grounds have you for this?

Citation please


What on earth are you on about ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 29, 2017, 09:03:03 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 28, 2017, 09:58:00 PM
There's a difference between not judging and sympathising.
Funny old subject this with some equally funny views. Funny peculiar that is not funny haha.
It's a bit mealy mouthed on the one hand and a bit cut his goolies off on the other.
According to the NSPCC there are likely to be 7000+ cases similar to this for 2017.
So what is so special about Mr Nessling's case?
Does everyone hold the same view for all the other cases ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 29, 2017, 09:44:13 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on November 29, 2017, 09:03:03 AM
Funny old subject this with some equally funny views. Funny peculiar that is not funny haha.
It's a bit mealy mouthed on the one hand and a bit cut his goolies off on the other.
According to the NSPCC there are likely to be 7000+ cases similar to this for 2017.
So what is so special about Mr Nessling's case?
Does everyone hold the same view for all the other cases ?

Well they are all perverts.

They can be chemically castrated.

e.g.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_castration

Oh by the way Alice and anyone reading this thread, just look up on the net, what Nessling and some of his cohorts accused some 'sceptics' of. TRUE IRONY.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 29, 2017, 09:54:01 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 29, 2017, 09:44:13 AM
Well they are all shittes.

They can be chemically castrated.

e.g.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_castration

There are many ways of abusing children for sexual gratification. Will that remove the urge, or just make them more frustrated?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 29, 2017, 10:01:05 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 29, 2017, 09:54:01 AM
There are many ways of abusing children for sexual gratification. Will that remove the urge, or just make them more frustrated?

You would need to ask an expert in that field that question jassi.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 29, 2017, 10:57:16 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 29, 2017, 10:01:05 AM
You would need to ask an expert in that field that question jassi.

As several supporters think Madeleine was taken by a paedophile it is rather surprising that they are viewing Nessling's actions with such apparent understanding.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 29, 2017, 11:51:50 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on November 29, 2017, 10:01:05 AM
You would need to ask an expert in that field that question jassi.
The "Mengele Method" just looks like a way of creating another 7000 Euclids. Is the world ready for that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 29, 2017, 12:00:05 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on November 29, 2017, 11:51:50 AM
The "Mengele Method" just looks like a way of creating another 7000 Euclids. Is the world ready for that?

Hardly unique to Mengele.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 29, 2017, 12:46:00 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 28, 2017, 07:37:21 PM
And I will go on feeling desperately sorry for him.


Even though you don't know - what he could have been capable of ,if not caught.

the below is bad enough,


“He said he needed to find more material to grow his collection and gained a thrill from forbidden fruit,” said Michael Crimp, prosecuting.

The court heard that police officers went to Nessling’s home in Larchcroft Road, Ipswich, on April 11 and seized items including two laptops, a hard drive and a tower unit.

When the equipment was analysed it was found to contain 804 still and moving images in the most serious level A category, 818 still and moving level B images and more than 40,000 still and moving images in the lowest level C category.

There were also 3,000 prohibited images of children,.

Nessling, 59, admitted three offences of making indecent images of children and possessing prohibited images of children


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 29, 2017, 01:17:07 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 29, 2017, 12:46:00 PM

Even though you don't know - what he could have been capable of ,if not caught.

the below is bad enough,


“He said he needed to find more material to grow his collection and gained a thrill from forbidden fruit,” said Michael Crimp, prosecuting.

The court heard that police officers went to Nessling’s home in Larchcroft Road, Ipswich, on April 11 and seized items including two laptops, a hard drive and a tower unit.

When the equipment was analysed it was found to contain 804 still and moving images in the most serious level A category, 818 still and moving level B images and more than 40,000 still and moving images in the lowest level C category.

There were also 3,000 prohibited images of children,.

Nessling, 59, admitted three offences of making indecent images of children and possessing prohibited images of children

While images/offences are described as Category A , B & C the average punter has no clue what that entails without looking it up. Most can't be bothered to. One does not wind up with 804 Cat A images on one's PC by accident. Cat A is the worst and as your corresponent flinches from using the key word "penetration" it's best if one looks it up in this instance to find out what Cat A is about.
Whatever, without a market place there is no place for the goods so as long as the market place is sustained there will be persecution of children by those out for the fast buck.
Just to round it off Nesslings sentence was "about right" under our laws. We don't do consecutive sentencing so he will have been copped for the worst offence of being in posession of Cat A images. This carries a custodial sentence of two years. If however the defendant pleads guilty 1/3 is knocked off which brings it down to 16 months. If a sentence is less than two years the judge may legitimately hand out a suspended sentence.
The person nonetheless remains convicted of an offence which puts them on the sex offenders register.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 29, 2017, 01:53:52 PM
Makes you wonder though, why they targeted him in the first place.

Still imo in the cat peodaphile - a no go area for any decent person-for sympathy or anything else.

Still a possibility as well for those who believe abduction -peodaphile could have took maddie.

IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 29, 2017, 02:50:45 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 29, 2017, 01:53:52 PM
Makes you wonder though, why they targeted him in the first place.

Still imo in the cat peodaphile - a no go area for any decent person-for sympathy or anything else.

Still a possibility as well for those who believe abduction -could have took maddie

He pleaded guilty to making images as well as viewing/downloading them. That opens up the possibility of a victim reporting his activities.

What is beyond doubt is that he is an adult who knowingly and deliberately broke the law for years. At the same time he campaigned on behalf of missing children. In my opinion that means he either has a split personality or he's a hypocrite of the highest order.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 29, 2017, 07:15:26 PM
Lightning strikes twice..........................

SAME JUDGE.

http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/15177458.Paedophile_police_officer_walks_free_from_court_after_telling_judge_he_is__so_sorry__about_child_abuse_stash/

A PAEDOPHILE police officer has walked free from court despite downloading 1,600 indecent images of children.

Canvey-based PC Clive Hansen was caught with some of the most vile images of child sexual abuse imaginable in November last year.

Judge David Goodin, sitting at Ipswich Crown Court, referred to the Essex Police officer's "exemplary" conduct previously and urged him to stop looking at this type of "stuff".

Hansen, 53, of Borrowdale Close, Benfleet, had previously admitted three counts of making indecent pictures and one offence of possessing a prohibited image of a child.


He was handed a four month jail term, suspended for 12 months.

The court heard how the force received a tip off that one of their officers was downloading child abuse images.

Officers went to his home, seized a laptop and arrested him when he returned from his shift.

Michael Crimp, prosecuting, said: "He gave no comment during his first interview. Later he did describe how he had had a problem for a long time."

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 29, 2017, 07:24:31 PM
How very similar.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 29, 2017, 07:27:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 29, 2017, 07:24:31 PM
How very similar.

Indeed they are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 29, 2017, 07:50:47 PM
One trusts he is no longer a police officer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 29, 2017, 07:51:47 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 29, 2017, 07:50:47 PM
One trusts he is no longer a police officer.

He was sacked.

I wonder if Nessling was.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 29, 2017, 08:39:55 PM
The tabloids haven't picked this up, I notice. It could make an interesting story with a different twist.

LONG-TERM MCCANN SUPPORTER PLACED ON THE SEX OFFENDER'S REGISTER

for example.

He was also made the subject of a sexual harm prevention order, the penalty for breaching that goes up to 5 years;

Sexual Harm Prevention Orders (SHPOs) replaced the sexual offences prevention order. They are a measure available to the court to use to protect the general public or specific members of the public against serious sexual harm.
http://criminal-defence-solicitors.com/sexual-harm-prevention-order/?doing_wp_cron=1511984153.2227530479431152343750

I wonder if this is the same man? Different job of work but the right age.
http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/firebug-torches-teenager-s-car-1-97287

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 29, 2017, 08:51:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 29, 2017, 08:39:55 PM
The tabloids haven't picked this up, I notice. It could make an interesting story with a different twist.

LONG-TERM MCCANN SUPPORTER PLACED ON THE SEX OFFENDER'S REGISTER

for example.

He was also made the subject of a sexual harm prevention order, the penalty for breaching that goes up to 5 years;

Sexual Harm Prevention Orders (SHPOs) replaced the sexual offences prevention order. They are a measure available to the court to use to protect the general public or specific members of the public against serious sexual harm.
http://criminal-defence-solicitors.com/sexual-harm-prevention-order/?doing_wp_cron=1511984153.2227530479431152343750

I wonder if this is the same man? Different job of work but the right age.
http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/firebug-torches-teenager-s-car-1-97287

Yes it is. 8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on November 29, 2017, 08:56:22 PM
...................and another one.

https://theukdatabase.com/2017/06/24/joseph-caddick-ipswich/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 29, 2017, 09:38:54 PM
Another one. Are the police following a trail?

http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/suffolk-man-who-had-more-than-230-000-indecent-child-images-is-spared-jail-1-5017518
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 29, 2017, 10:11:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 29, 2017, 09:38:54 PM
Another one. Are the police following a trail?

http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/suffolk-man-who-had-more-than-230-000-indecent-child-images-is-spared-jail-1-5017518
Imagine if a person was jailed for that, what is the minimum number of images before jail is assured?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 29, 2017, 10:21:52 PM
Now compare those sentences to this.

http://portugalresident.com/young-welsh-woman-left-%E2%80%9Chigh-and-dry%E2%80%9D-in-portuguese-jail-receives-6-month-suspended-sentence
Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on November 29, 2017

The nightmare may at last be over for 25-year-old Sophie Grey - but her family are outraged by the six-month suspended jail sentence she has finally received after being left “high and dry” in a Portuguese jail for four and a half months.

Father Roger told the family’s hometown newspaper the South Wales Argus earlier this week that they are considering seeking compensation.

“I think she was imprisoned illegally”, he told the paper.

Sophie’s plight only made it into the press in July, when her family were at their wits end with the difficulties put their way (click here).

Sophie had been arrested after her boyfriend and another man were involved in what was described as an “altercation” with police in Praia das Maças, a seaside town near Sintra.

Her family said she was not even aware of her crime when she was arrested, but due to the fact that she had no permanent address in Portugal, or anyone to vouch for her, she was remanded in custody.

“She’s in a cell with four other people. The first person she met that could speak English was a murderer”, Roger Grey told reporters at the time.

After pressure from local Welsh MP David Davies who was said to have contacted Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, the story made it into national and international press.

As David Davies explained: “In the UK this sort of crime wouldn’t have been dealt with like this. One of the charges appears to be for shouting at a police officer, so I am concerned”.

Sophie was finally released on August 18 - when the family told their local paper that they were still “no clearer” of the charges she faced.

Her release was made on the understanding that she remained in Portugal until the trial date.

That came up at long last at Sintra court, and the sentences have finally been given: six months’ suspended for Sophie for hitting a police agent who, according to Sophie’s father, admitted in court that she did not mean to hit him “she was just flailing her arms around”.

“I think it was a very harsh sentence for what happened”, Roger Grey told the South Wales Argus.

His daughter was acquitted of two other charges, added the paper, not explaining what these charges were but stressing that the family had hoped she was be acquitted on all the charges.

Sophie’s unnamed boyfriend and the other man were also handed suspended sentences (three years each), and ordered to pay fines reaching €9000, reports Correio da Manhã today.

Despite being unhappy about the court’s decision, Sophie’s family are clearly relieved that they have reached the point where their daughter can finally return home.

Her father told reporters that he hopes Sophie will be back in Wales within the next “two to three weeks”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 29, 2017, 10:54:29 PM
She seems to have received a sentence similar to the one she would have been given in the UK, and she's lucky it was suspended imo. The men got bigger sentences, which suggests their crime was more serious. Assaulting a policeman isn't a good idea in any country because it's a serious offence. I wonder why she's not returning home immediately?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 29, 2017, 11:10:20 PM
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/08/11/11/432989A900000578-4781566-image-m-20_1502448468721.jpg)
British woman, 25, is forced to spend five months in a Portuguese prison awaiting trial for assaulting a police officer after 'begging him not to shoot her dog'
Sophie Grey, 25, from Wales, detained in Portuguese prison over row over pet 
Miss Grey accused of assaulting policeman who 'threatened her dog with a gun'
Full-time carer now faces up to five years in prison and is being held in custody
MP David Davies, for Monmouth,  is calling on Portuguese officials to release her

By Katie French For Mailonline
PUBLISHED: 11:51, 11 August 2017 | UPDATED: 18:07, 11 August 2017
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4781566/British-woman-forced-spend-months-Portuguese-prison.html#ixzz4zrgO6KYm

Brits and their dogs huh?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on December 02, 2017, 10:25:35 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 29, 2017, 11:10:20 PM
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/08/11/11/432989A900000578-4781566-image-m-20_1502448468721.jpg)
British woman, 25, is forced to spend five months in a Portuguese prison awaiting trial for assaulting a police officer after 'begging him not to shoot her dog'
Sophie Grey, 25, from Wales, detained in Portuguese prison over row over pet 
Miss Grey accused of assaulting policeman who 'threatened her dog with a gun'
Full-time carer now faces up to five years in prison and is being held in custody
MP David Davies, for Monmouth,  is calling on Portuguese officials to release her

By Katie French For Mailonline
PUBLISHED: 11:51, 11 August 2017 | UPDATED: 18:07, 11 August 2017
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4781566/British-woman-forced-spend-months-Portuguese-prison.html#ixzz4zrgO6KYm

Brits and their dogs huh?

I don't know about Portuguese cops but if you attack a Spanish policeman expect to be put down.  I recall seeing a middle aged British man on crutches being beaten with sticks because he gave a Guardia Civil officer some cheek. She deserves all she got in my opinion, when you visit another country you should behave.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 02, 2017, 10:43:17 PM
Quote from: misty on November 29, 2017, 10:21:52 PM
Now compare those sentences to this.

http://portugalresident.com/young-welsh-woman-left-%E2%80%9Chigh-and-dry%E2%80%9D-in-portuguese-jail-receives-6-month-suspended-sentence
Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on November 29, 2017

The nightmare may at last be over for 25-year-old Sophie Grey - but her family are outraged by the six-month suspended jail sentence she has finally received after being left “high and dry” in a Portuguese jail for four and a half months.

Father Roger told the family’s hometown newspaper the South Wales Argus earlier this week that they are considering seeking compensation.

“I think she was imprisoned illegally”, he told the paper.

Sophie’s plight only made it into the press in July, when her family were at their wits end with the difficulties put their way (click here).

Sophie had been arrested after her boyfriend and another man were involved in what was described as an “altercation” with police in Praia das Maças, a seaside town near Sintra.

Her family said she was not even aware of her crime when she was arrested, but due to the fact that she had no permanent address in Portugal, or anyone to vouch for her, she was remanded in custody.

“She’s in a cell with four other people. The first person she met that could speak English was a murderer”, Roger Grey told reporters at the time.

After pressure from local Welsh MP David Davies who was said to have contacted Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, the story made it into national and international press.

As David Davies explained: “In the UK this sort of crime wouldn’t have been dealt with like this. One of the charges appears to be for shouting at a police officer, so I am concerned”.

Sophie was finally released on August 18 - when the family told their local paper that they were still “no clearer” of the charges she faced.

Her release was made on the understanding that she remained in Portugal until the trial date.

That came up at long last at Sintra court, and the sentences have finally been given: six months’ suspended for Sophie for hitting a police agent who, according to Sophie’s father, admitted in court that she did not mean to hit him “she was just flailing her arms around”.

“I think it was a very harsh sentence for what happened”, Roger Grey told the South Wales Argus.

His daughter was acquitted of two other charges, added the paper, not explaining what these charges were but stressing that the family had hoped she was be acquitted on all the charges.

Sophie’s unnamed boyfriend and the other man were also handed suspended sentences (three years each), and ordered to pay fines reaching €9000, reports Correio da Manhã today.

Despite being unhappy about the court’s decision, Sophie’s family are clearly relieved that they have reached the point where their daughter can finally return home.

Her father told reporters that he hopes Sophie will be back in Wales within the next “two to three weeks”.
We only have one side of the story, but from the sounds of it the sentence along with the stay in prison were totally disproportionate.  No wonder her family was upset.

So this is another example of Portuguese so called Justice, is it ?   Thank goodness we live in the UK

FGS !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 03, 2017, 05:25:34 PM
Quote from: sadie on December 02, 2017, 10:43:17 PM
We only have one side of the story, but from the sounds of it the sentence along with the stay in prison were totally disproportionate.  No wonder her family was upset.

So this is another example of Portuguese so called Justice, is it ?   Thank goodness we live in the UK

FGS !

As John says if you go to another country expect to live by their laws and ways.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 03, 2017, 08:48:52 PM
Authorities think they have found body of missing 3-year-old NC girl, FBI says

(CNN)Authorities believe they have found the body of Mariah Woods, a 3-year-old eastern North Carolina girl missing for more than five days, the FBI said Saturday.

The body was found Saturday evening in Pender County by a dive team, Shelley Lynch, with the FBI in Charlotte, said.

The mother's live-in boyfriend was charged Saturday in connection with her disappearance, authorities said earlier.
Earl Kimrey, 32, was being held on more than $1 million bond at the Onslow County Detention Center following his arrest for concealing a death, obstruction of justice and other charges, the Onslow County Sheriff's Office said.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/12/02/us/north-carolina-missing-girl-arrest/index.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 03, 2017, 09:25:21 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on December 03, 2017, 05:25:34 PM
As John says if you go to another country expect to live by their laws and ways.

yes...all that fuss about the lady in Iran
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on December 03, 2017, 09:33:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 03, 2017, 09:25:21 PM
yes...all that fuss about the lady in Iran

And the young American held in North Korea.
I suppose he should have lived by their laws.
What was his crime ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 05, 2017, 04:17:57 PM
Judges of controversial ruling will have disciplinary process
05 DECEMBER 2017

In the grounds of the judgment, domestic violence against women is minimized by the fact that she has committed adultery

The judges responsible for the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Porto that invoked the Bible, the Penal Code of 1886 and even civilizations that punish adultery with the death penalty to justify a decision will be subject to a disciplinary process, the Expresso advances. According to the online edition of this publication, the Superior Council of Magistracy met today and decided to convert the investigation into a disciplinary process.

https://www.dn.pt/portugal/interior/juizes-do-acordao-polemico-vao-ter-processo-disciplinar-8964994.html?utm_source=Push&utm_medium=Web

(In update)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 05, 2017, 04:30:31 PM
Quote from: sadie on December 02, 2017, 10:43:17 PM
We only have one side of the story, but from the sounds of it the sentence along with the stay in prison were totally disproportionate.  No wonder her family was upset.

So this is another example of Portuguese so called Justice, is it ?   Thank goodness we live in the UK

FGS !

How about referring yo miscarriages of justice in the UK ?


Or do you prefer just to attack Portugal ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 05, 2017, 04:39:48 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 05, 2017, 04:30:31 PM
How about referring yo miscarriages of justice in the UK ?


Or do you prefer just to attack Portugal ?

You have a very strange notion indeed of what attacking Portugal actually is.  The people of Portugal  have the right and deserve protection from corrupt police and incompetent judges and from my reading of press and blogs they applaud the forces of law and order who undertake the very difficult task of ensuring they get that measure of protection.

Portugal is on the up and up as far as weeding out what is left of what in my opinion has been a very corrupt establishment indeed ... I for one welcome every victory achieved in that task.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 05, 2017, 04:44:00 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 05, 2017, 04:39:48 PM
You have a very strange notion indeed of what attacking Portugal actually is.  The people of Portugal  have the right and deserve protection from corrupt police and incompetent judges and from my reading of press and blogs they applaud the forces of law and order who undertake the very difficult task of ensuring they get that measure of protection.

Portugal is on the up and up as far as weeding out what is left of what in my opinion has been a very corrupt establishment indeed ... I for one welcome every victory achieved in that task.

The same applies to miscarriages of justice in all countries , NOT JUST PORTUGAL .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on December 06, 2017, 09:37:18 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 05, 2017, 04:39:48 PM
You have a very strange notion indeed of what attacking Portugal actually is.  The people of Portugal  have the right and deserve protection from corrupt police and incompetent judges and from my reading of press and blogs they applaud the forces of law and order who undertake the very difficult task of ensuring they get that measure of protection.

Portugal is on the up and up as far as weeding out what is left of what in my opinion has been a very corrupt establishment indeed ... I for one welcome every victory achieved in that task.

I totally agree.  It seems to me that some 'attitudes' in PT have been very similar to the attitudes of some of our own police (and judiciary) 40 or 50 years ago - where a policeman's word was taken over Joe Blogs almost as a matter of course. 

IIRC Robert Murat described his 'interviews' by the PJ as.....  'Like something out of Life on Mars'.  Having never watched the prog. I didn't know what he meant at the time.   Now that I have watched the 'repeats' I am reminded of the amount of intimidation - including violence- which was perpetrated in some police stations - to get a result.

IMO if it wasn't for his UK nationality and the fact that the eyes of the world were watching - there is more than a small chance that he would now be in prison.

PT is a very young democracy in the scheme of things but it's encouraging to know that they are now taking steps to eliminate these 'old habits'.    Hopefully addressing the miscarriages of justice which must have happened because of corrupt policemen and incompetent judges will also not be too far away.
AIMHO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 06, 2017, 09:43:26 AM
Just to balance the situation.

'Serious corruption has happened in our justice system - and the penalties could stand to be harsher'

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/serious-corruption-has-happened-in-our-justice-system-and-the-penalties-could-stand-to-be-harsher-a6694346.html

'The shocking truth about police corruption in Britain
It’s a growing problem.

But they’re hunting whistleblowers instead'

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2015/03/the-shocking-truth-about-police-corruption-in-britain/

'Police officers 'removed from duties' over baton footage in Birmingham'

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/31/birmingham-video-of-police-kicking-man-during-search-being-investigated

P.S. There is an abundant number of other sources on these issues as well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on December 06, 2017, 10:07:35 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 06, 2017, 09:43:26 AM
Just to balance the situation.

'Serious corruption has happened in our justice system - and the penalties could stand to be harsher'

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/serious-corruption-has-happened-in-our-justice-system-and-the-penalties-could-stand-to-be-harsher-a6694346.html

'The shocking truth about police corruption in Britain
It’s a growing problem.

But they’re hunting whistleblowers instead'

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2015/03/the-shocking-truth-about-police-corruption-in-britain/

You are missing the point Stephen.     No-one is claiming that our police force are free of corruption. 

However - in order to ''balance the situation''  you need to provide cites of the miscarriages of justices which have taken place in PT and which have since been admitted and redressed by the PT judiciary.

As far as I am aware there have been many instances in the UK - but not one in PT.   
IMO

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 06, 2017, 10:16:23 AM
Quote from: Benice on December 06, 2017, 10:07:35 AM
You are missing the point Stephen.     No-one is claiming that our police force are free of corruption. 

However - in order to ''balance the situation''  you need to provide cites of the miscarriages of justices which have taken place in PT and which have since been admitted and redressed by the PT judiciary.

As far as I am aware there have been many instances in the UK - but not one in PT.   
IMO

The only point that is visible, is the repeated focus on Portugal.

Not hard to see why.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 06, 2017, 10:20:19 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 06, 2017, 10:16:23 AM
The only point that is visible, is the repeated focus on Portugal.
Yes it's strange how posters keep mentioning Portugal
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on December 06, 2017, 10:41:00 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 06, 2017, 10:20:19 AM
Yes it's strange how posters keep mentioning Portugal

Indeed - what possible connection could there be between corrupt Portuguese policemen and the McCann case?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on December 06, 2017, 11:34:40 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 06, 2017, 10:43:25 AM
I hope you are not implying corruption in this case.

Since that is libel.

Your wishful thinking is getting the better of you.    There is nothing libellous in referring to a Portuguese policeman connected to the McCann case who was found guilty of a crime considered to be serious enough for him to be given a suspended prison sentence and to acquire a criminal record.   That is a fact not an opinion. 

This happened in Portugal.   I can only assume that is why 'Portugal' features in forum discussions.  Your apparent objection to 'Portugal' being mentioned is unfathomable.
IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 08, 2017, 12:59:03 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on December 03, 2017, 08:48:52 PM
Authorities think they have found body of missing 3-year-old NC girl, FBI says

(CNN)Authorities believe they have found the body of Mariah Woods, a 3-year-old eastern North Carolina girl missing for more than five days, the FBI said Saturday.

The body was found Saturday evening in Pender County by a dive team, Shelley Lynch, with the FBI in Charlotte, said.

The mother's live-in boyfriend was charged Saturday in connection with her disappearance, authorities said earlier.
Earl Kimrey, 32, was being held on more than $1 million bond at the Onslow County Detention Center following his arrest for concealing a death, obstruction of justice and other charges, the Onslow County Sheriff's Office said.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/12/02/us/north-carolina-missing-girl-arrest/index.html

3 year old death covered up due to sexual abuse. They said it was an abduction.

Mariah Woods 'was sexually abused by her mother's boyfriend': Shocking court documents suggest suspect in three-year-old girl's death molested the toddler - and 'her mother knew'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5153647/Mariah-Woods-abused-mothers-boyfriend.html

Child Protection reports seen by The Daily News – Jacksonville state that a witness, living in a trailer with the family in North Carolina, US, had seen Earl Kimrey put “his penis in the mouth” of the little girl.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 08, 2017, 01:01:32 PM
Quote from: Benice on December 06, 2017, 11:34:40 AM
Your wishful thinking is getting the better of you.    There is nothing libellous in referring to a Portuguese policeman connected to the McCann case who was found guilty of a crime considered to be serious enough for him to be given a suspended prison sentence and to acquire a criminal record.   That is a fact not an opinion. 

This happened in Portugal.   I can only assume that is why 'Portugal' features in forum discussions.  Your apparent objection to 'Portugal' being mentioned is unfathomable.
IMO

Your continued obsession in denigrating Portugal is not unfathomable, I see it as being quite deliberate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on December 09, 2017, 10:14:23 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 08, 2017, 01:01:32 PM
Your continued obsession in denigrating Portugal is not unfathomable, I see it as being quite deliberate.

You forgot to put IYO.

I have never denigrated the country of Portugal.   I have given my opinion on aspects of their judiciary system and my opinion of corrupt Portuguese police officers - which FYI is no different to my opinion of policemen who abuse the power they have been entrusted with  - anywhere else in the world.     If you have a problem with that - then you should say what it is.   

As barely a day passes without your opinion - that Madeleine's parents are responsible for her disappearance - being repeatedly introduced by you into virtually every thread - regardless of  the subject being discussed  - your attempt to label me or any other poster as having a 'continuing obsession' could not possibly be more ironic imo.

I await your opinion of what it is you think I am 'deliberately' trying to do.

AIMHO 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 09, 2017, 10:45:50 AM
Quote from: Benice on December 09, 2017, 10:14:23 AM
You forgot to put IYO.

I have never denigrated the country of Portugal.   I have given my opinion on aspects of their judiciary system and my opinion of corrupt Portuguese police officers - which FYI is no different to my opinion of policemen who abuse the power they have been entrusted with  - anywhere else in the world.     If you have a problem with that - then you should say what it is.   

As barely a day passes without your opinion - that Madeleine's parents are responsible for her disappearance - being repeatedly introduced by you into virtually every thread - regardless of  the subject being discussed  - your attempt to label me or any other poster as having a 'continuing obsession' could not possibly be more ironic imo.

I await your opinion of what it is you think I am 'deliberately' trying to do.

AIMHO

'I see it as being quite deliberate.'

Very clear cut. That means it's my opinion.

I have said more recently, not every day,  the parents actions instigated the events. That is a fact.

Why don't you give and discuss examples of police behaviour in other countries ?

Why do you focus on Portugal ?

As to opinions, you put yours on here, so why do you have a problem if I do ?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 09, 2017, 10:54:20 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 09, 2017, 10:45:50 AM
'I see it as being quite deliberate.'

Very clear cut. That means it's my opinion.

I have said more recently, not every day,  the parents actions instigated the events. That is a fact.

Why don't you give and discuss examples of police behaviour in other countries ?

Why do you focus on Portugal ?

As to opinions, you put yours on here, so why do you have a problem if I do ?

I can only assume that she thinks it will lead to some world-shattering breakthrough leading to the solving of this case. Why bother otherwise?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 09, 2017, 11:21:30 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 09, 2017, 10:45:50 AM
'I see it as being quite deliberate.'

Very clear cut. That means it's my opinion.

I have said more recently, not every day,  the parents actions instigated the events. That is a fact.

Why don't you give and discuss examples of police behaviour in other countries ?

Why do you focus on Portugal ?

As to opinions, you put yours on here, so why do you have a problem if I do ?

Why indeed. It's not as if it will influence anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 09, 2017, 11:37:22 AM
Quote from: jassi on December 09, 2017, 10:54:20 AM
I can only assume that she thinks it will lead to some world-shattering breakthrough leading to the solving of this case. Why bother otherwise?

To be fair its where the answer lies imo,so do SY, not that counts for much,seeing has they have no jurisdiction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on December 09, 2017, 11:53:48 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 09, 2017, 10:45:50 AM
'I see it as being quite deliberate.'

Very clear cut. That means it's my opinion.

I have said more recently, not every day,  the parents actions instigated the events. That is a fact.

Why don't you give and discuss examples of police behaviour in other countries ?

[b]Why do you focus on Portugal ?[/b]

As to opinions, you put yours on here, so why do you have a problem if I do ?

Are you being serious?   This forum is dedicated to discussing and debating the McCann case which happened in Portugal.    It massively involves Portuguese police and Portuguese law.    Perhaps you can explain why those facts are not valid reasons for their regular inclusion in any debate on this particular case.

I have no objection to anyone voicing their opinions - in fact I am always interested to hear other people's opinions.   And I certainly have no desire to close down or stop differing opinions to mine being discussed.

I see you are still determined to have a different rule for yourself to the one you keep insisting other people must follow when it comes to differentiating between fact and opinion.

You stated quite clearly as a fact that I have a 'continued obsession' with Portugal.    Your 'opinion' which you now claim is evident from the words........ '' I see it''...... refers only to your belief that 'my obsession' (which you claimed as a fact) is quite deliberate on my part.     Of course had you simply put IMO at the end of your post - we would not be having this discussion.

I await your opinion on what it is I am deliberately trying to do by mentioning Portugal in discussions about the McCann case.

AIMHO


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 09, 2017, 01:49:58 PM
Quote from: Benice on December 09, 2017, 11:53:48 AM
Are you being serious?   This forum is dedicated to discussing and debating the McCann case which happened in Portugal.    It massively involves Portuguese police and Portuguese law.    Perhaps you can explain why those facts are not valid reasons for their regular inclusion in any debate on this particular case.

I have no objection to anyone voicing their opinions - in fact I am always interested to hear other people's opinions.   And I certainly have no desire to close down or stop differing opinions to mine being discussed.

I see you are still determined to have a different rule for yourself to the one you keep insisting other people must follow when it comes to differentiating between fact and opinion.

You stated quite clearly as a fact that I have a 'continued obsession' with Portugal.    Your 'opinion' which you now claim is evident from the words........ '' I see it''...... refers only to your belief that 'my obsession' (which you claimed as a fact) is quite deliberate on my part.     Of course had you simply put IMO at the end of your post - we would not be having this discussion.

I await your opinion on what it is I am deliberately trying to do by mentioning Portugal in discussions about the McCann case.

AIMHO

This thread is called 'wandering off topic'.

I therefore think it is quite applicable to discuss the behaviour of police in other countries.

Can you cite in the Mccann case, what illegal activity has taken place ?

IYO of course.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 09, 2017, 06:38:44 PM
Quote from: Benice on December 06, 2017, 11:34:40 AM
Your wishful thinking is getting the better of you.    There is nothing libellous in referring to a Portuguese policeman connected to the McCann case who was found guilty of a crime considered to be serious enough for him to be given a suspended prison sentence and to acquire a criminal record.   That is a fact not an opinion. 


According to another poster in the Nessling thread, continual denigration even if true is tantamount to abuse,sauce for the Goose,sauce for the Gooose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 09, 2017, 11:20:03 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 08, 2017, 01:01:32 PM
Your continued obsession in denigrating Portugal is not unfathomable, I see it as being quite deliberate.
Why did you remove my perfectly reasonable response to this post, stephen ?

You will always win the argument if you keep removing the responses.

How about a fair and level playing field stephen?  You repeatedly keep removing my responses to YOUR comments

FAIR PLAY, please.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on December 10, 2017, 09:08:55 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 09, 2017, 01:49:58 PM
This thread is called 'wandering off topic'.

I therefore think it is quite applicable to discuss the behaviour of police in other countries.

Can you cite in the Mccann case, what illegal activity has taken place ?

IYO of course.

This is what you claimed -  which I consider to be an unwarranted personal attack.

''Your continued obsession in denigrating Portugal is not unfathomable, I see it as being quite deliberate.''

You obviously can't provide proof of the  'obsession with denigrating Portugal'  accusations which you have made against me , and neither do you have any intention of answering any of my questions.    In the knowledge that for some unknown reason you never answer any of my questions I won't hold my breath for that to change,  but whilst that does remain the case there is no way that the discussion can move on.

Therefore I will leave you to discuss the behaviour of other police forces.       Whilst doing so perhaps you could you remind us of when you had a single good or positive word to say about your own country's team of SY police officers who have been dealing with this case.     

AIMHO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:21:56 AM
Quote from: Benice on December 10, 2017, 09:08:55 AM
This is what you claimed -  which I consider to be an unwarranted personal attack.

''Your continued obsession in denigrating Portugal is not unfathomable, I see it as being quite deliberate.''

You obviously can't provide proof of the  'obsession with denigrating Portugal'  accusations which you have made against me , and neither do you have any intention of answering any of my questions.    In the knowledge that for some unknown reason you never answer any of my questions I won't hold my breath for that to change,  but whilst that does remain the case there is no way that the discussion can move on.

Therefore I will leave you to discuss the behaviour of other police forces.       Whilst doing so perhaps you could you remind us of when you had a single good or positive word to say about your own country's team of SY police officers who have been dealing with this case.     

AIMHO

You back the Mccanns 100%.

The Mccanns have a vested interest in attacking the PJ. Not that has done them any good.

I have never seen you mention the 'poor' behaviour of other police forces apart from where it is brought up by others.

As to not answering questions,  you should not preach to others.

There is a simple solution, of course, don't respond to my posts, and I won't respond to yours.

A.I.M.H.O. of course.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:25:41 AM
Quote from: sadie on December 09, 2017, 11:20:03 PM
Why did you remove my perfectly reasonable response to this post, stephen ?

You will always win the argument if you keep removing the responses.

How about a fair and level playing field stephen?  You repeatedly keep removing my responses to YOUR comments

FAIR PLAY, please.

How would you know who removed your post Sadie ?

As a reminder, goading posts will be removed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:28:07 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:21:56 AM
You back the Mccanns 100%.

The Mccanns have a vested interest in attacking the PJ. Not that has done them any good.

I have never seen you mention the 'poor' behaviour of other police forces apart from where it is brought up by others.

As to not answering questions,  you should not preach to others.

There is a simple solution, of course, don't respond to my posts, and I won't respond to yours.

A.I.M.H.O. of course.

I also back the McCanns 100%......It ten yeras and no real evidence against them and both police forces do not consider them suspects. I therefore think its reasonable to conclude they had no criminal involvement which suggests to me maddie was abducted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:29:51 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:28:07 AM
I also back the McCanns 100%......It ten yeras and no real evidence against them and both police forces do not consider them suspects. I therefore think its reasonable to conclude they had no criminal involvement which suggests to me maddie was abducted


...and they can't find an abductor or evidence of anyone in the apartment.

Hardly surprising.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:30:53 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:29:51 AM

...and they can't find an abductor or evidence of anyone in the apartment.

Hardly surprising.

it is hardly surprising given the amount of time passed before SY started their investigation...perhaps if SY had forensically exanined the apt they may have found some evidence..
how do you explain the fact that the parents are not suspects
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:33:06 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:30:53 AM
it is hardly surprising given the amount of time passed before SY started their investigation...perhaps if SY had forensically exanined the apt they may have found some evidence

You cannot find what doesn't exist.

I.M.H.O.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:33:38 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:28:07 AM
I also back the McCanns 100%......It ten yeras and no real evidence against them and both police forces do not consider them suspects. I therefore think its reasonable to conclude they had no criminal involvement which suggests to me maddie was abducted

No evidence against any one can be seen to reasonable to conclude there is to be no resolution.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:33:48 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:33:06 AM
You cannot find what doesn't exist.

I.M.H.O.

Just because you cannot find something does not mean it does not exist...IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:34:48 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:30:53 AM
it is hardly surprising given the amount of time passed before SY started their investigation...perhaps if SY had forensically exanined the apt they may have found some evidence..
how do you explain the fact that the parents are not suspects

No one is so they don't hold any exclusive rights on that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:35:02 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:33:38 AM
No evidence against any one can be seen to reasonable to conclude there is to be no resolution.

the fact that the mccanns are not suspects must be significant....imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:36:30 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:34:48 AM
No one is so they don't hold any exclusive rights on that.

yet it has been claimed here that the four burglars have been ruled out..is Murat ruled out
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:37:13 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:35:02 AM
the fact that the mccanns are not suspects must be significant....imo

Might be, might not be,lack of evidence means anyone and everyone is free from suspicion which is more significant imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:39:20 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:37:13 AM
Might be, might not be,lack of evidence means anyone and everyone is free from suspicion which is more significant imo.
So you are saying the Mccanns are free from suspicion..fair enough
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:40:25 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:36:30 AM
yet it has been claimed here that the four burglars have been ruled out..is Murat ruled out

I think you will find Rowley confirmed the four burglars were ruled out,not a claim from any one on here.The simple fact is no one is officially under the spotlight,that includes the McCanns and if you like Murat,why bring him into it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:41:41 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:40:25 AM
I think you will find Rowley confirmed the four burglars were ruled out,not a claim from any one on here.The simple fact is no one is officially under the spotlight,that includes the McCanns and if you like Murat,why bring him into it?

As i have said the fact the police have said that they are not suspects must support their claim to innocence..imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:43:01 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:33:48 AM
Just because you cannot find something does not mean it does not exist...IMO

As in evidence of accidental death ?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:43:38 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:39:20 AM
So you are saying the Mccanns are free from suspicion..fair enough

My opinions count for nothing along with any one else on here,Rowley does not confide in me,but we know from his last statement no one but no one is under suspicion.He said they had leads to follow not people.The debacle of the woman in purple amply demonstrates that.imo and all that jazz.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:44:41 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:43:01 AM
As in evidence of accidental death ?

So you agree an abductor could exist?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:46:06 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:43:38 AM
My opinions count for nothing along with any one else on here,Rowley does not confide in me,but we know from his last statement no one but no one is under suspicion.He said they had leads to follow not people.The debacle of the woman in purple amply demonstrates that.imo and all that jazz.
Rowley does not confide so we dont know who is under suspicion...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:46:38 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:41:41 AM
As i have said the fact the police have said that they are not suspects must support their claim to innocence..imo

If that were to suddenly turn over night? there is only one way of knowing if any one is innocent or some way guilty,that is to have been party to what went on that night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:48:15 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:44:41 AM
So you agree an abductor could exist?

Do you agree Madeleine may have an accident in the apartment and died ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:48:36 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:46:38 AM
If that were to suddenly turn over night? there is only one way of knowing if any one is innocent or some way guilty,that is to have been party to what went on that night.

But IMO we know at the moment that the mccanns are not suspects
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:49:37 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:48:15 AM
Do you agree Madeleine may have an accident in the apartment and died ?
No I dont think that is possible for many many reasons and it seems both police forces are not considering this possibility
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:50:07 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:46:06 AM
Rowley does not confide so we dont know who is under suspicion...

To be precise Redwood said that,Rowley has never utterd any thing about them save to say he was happy with which the much maligned investigation at the outset dealt admirably with them.That was under the Stewardship of Mr Amaral was it not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 10, 2017, 09:50:37 AM
Please be careful of not posting opinion as fact. Repeated infringement will be sanctioned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:52:18 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:49:37 AM
No I dont think that is possible for many many reasons and it seems both police forces are not considering this possibility

I think it would be fairer to say,both police forces don't seem to have considered this so far,we don't know where they are at now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:53:35 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:51:36 AM
we have been told the mccanns are not suspects and it is clear they are not being investigated..

You never know,that statement may well represent why the case remains unsolved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:53:53 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:49:37 AM
No I dont think that is possible for many many reasons and it seems both police forces are not considering this possibility




Yet they can't find an abductor, and you can't find what doesn't exist.

A.I.M.H.O. naturally.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:54:02 AM
We have been told clearly by both investigations taht the mCCanns are not suspects...combined with my opinion that there is no real evidence against them and that theya re not being investigated makes it reasonable to conclude they are not suspects
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:55:02 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:53:53 AM

Yet they can't find an abductor, and you can't find what doesn't exist.

A.I.M.H.O. naturally.

you have already said that this morning and i replied that just because you cannot find something does not mean it does not exist
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:56:25 AM
im off to the park with the dog now...will leave you to it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 10, 2017, 09:59:01 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:56:25 AM
im off to the park with the dog now...will leave you to it

That'll be the last thing you'd do in this part of the world with the weather as it is.
Now that is off topic.

 (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 10:09:19 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:55:02 AM
you have already said that this morning and i replied that just because you cannot find something does not mean it does not exist

As with accidental death and the walking out scenario.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on December 10, 2017, 10:14:21 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:21:56 AM
You back the Mccanns 100%.

The Mccanns have a vested interest in attacking the PJ. Not that has done them any good.

I have never seen you mention the 'poor' behaviour of other police forces apart from where it is brought up by others.

As to not answering questions,  you should not preach to others.

There is a simple solution, of course, don't respond to my posts, and I won't respond to yours.

A.I.M.H.O. of course.

You seem to think that people back the McCanns because they 'like' the  McCanns, which is a ridiculous claim for anyone to make imo.

I do not know the McCanns, neither could I say for sure whether I would like them if I did meet them.     It is their INNOCENCE of the alleged crime of removing their dead daughters body from 5a and disposing of it which I back.    I came to that conclusion by studying the case and not because I like or dislike the McCanns.     The fact that you seem totally unable to grasp that concept is not my problem.
 
AIMHO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 10:22:16 AM
Quote from: Benice on December 10, 2017, 10:14:21 AM
You seem to think that people back the McCanns because they 'like' the  McCanns, which is a ridiculous claim for anyone to make imo.

I do not know the McCanns, neither could I say for sure whether I would like them if I did meet them.     It is their INNOCENCE of the alleged crime of removing their dead daughters body from 5a and disposing of it which I back.    I came to that conclusion by studying the case and not because I like or dislike the McCanns.     The fact that you seem totally unable to grasp that concept is not my problem.
 
AIMHO

You do not know what happened there, do you.

It's your belief.

As to final paragraph, I too have studied the case, and see no evidence that an abduction took place, other than for the say so of the Mccanns.

...and they weren't there, when she disappeared.

The case is marked by a lack of evidence sufficient to prove any of the scenarios are true.

As to the 'fact' you state, that is your opinion, it doesn't mean I concur.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 10, 2017, 10:34:37 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 10:22:16 AM
You do not know what happened there, do you.

It's your belief.

As to final paragraph, I too have studied the case, and see no evidence that an abduction took place, other than for the say so of the Mccanns.

...and they weren't there, when she disappeared.

The case is marked by a lack of evidence sufficient to prove any of the scenarios are true.

As to the 'fact' you state, that is your opinion, it doesn't mean I concur.

This doesn't make sense.  You agree that The McCanns weren't there when Madeleine disappeared, so what do you think could have happened?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 10:35:57 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 10, 2017, 10:34:37 AM
This doesn't make sense.  You agree that The McCanns weren't there when Madeleine disappeared, so what do you think could have happened?

Yes it does.

None of the 3 scenarios requires the presence of the Mccanns in the apartment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on December 10, 2017, 12:29:18 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:54:02 AM
We have been told clearly by both investigations taht the mCCanns are not suspects...combined with my opinion that there is no real evidence against them and that theya re not being investigated makes it reasonable to conclude they are not suspects

You shouldn't believe anything a cop says publicly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on December 10, 2017, 12:32:19 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:41:41 AM
As i have said the fact the police have said that they are not suspects must support their claim to innocence..imo

Works both ways, but the Portuguese Supreme Court tells us a different story and they are a higher authority than the Portuguese police.  It appears the jury are still out on the question of innocence.

eta some posters think that if they post the claim of innocence often enough that we might just believe them.   %77*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 01:09:29 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 10, 2017, 12:32:19 PM
Works both ways, but the Portuguese Supreme Court tells us a different story and they are a higher authority than the Portuguese police.  It appears the jury are still out on the question of innocence.

eta some posters think that if they post the claim of innocence often enough that we might just believe them.   %77*

You are 100% wrong..the SC made the point that the archiving report was not evidence of innocence....I believe they made the point that they were not there to rule on innoccence or guilt of the mccanns. The SC did not look at the evidence held by the police...the police are the ones best judged to deceide who and who is not a suspect as they have access to all the evidence and both police forces have stated the mccanns are NOT suspect
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on December 10, 2017, 01:23:11 PM
Everyone knows that cops never ever ever reveal the entire story.  The reason for this is because they are evidence gatherers, it is not within their brief to determine anyone innocent or guilty.  And that is why I accept the Portuguese SC ruling and not anything the police feel they are free to declare.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 10, 2017, 01:31:12 PM
The McCanns were not suspects in August 2007 when they clearly were. Here's a reminder:

Wednesday 8 August 2007 - McCanns officially NOT Suspects

João Carlos returned our car at lunchtime (albeit with a piece missing from the boot). He said that Neves and Encarnação were ready to see us later that afternoon.

If we’d wondered about the change of venue for our regular informal meeting, the reason for it soon became clear: this wasn’t our regular informal meeting. We were taken to an upstairs room at the police station where we were greeted by Luís Neves and Guilhermino Encarnação. Our interpreter this time was a police officer, not Proconsul Angela Morado, as was usually the case. The whole demeanour of Neves and Encarnação was different. They looked serious and cold. There had been a ‘shift’ in the investigation, they said. They had always been optimistic that Madeleine was alive, but now things had changed.

Gerry was then asked to leave the room. Now the sirens in my head were deafening. I was on my own and afraid. Please God, let my Madeleine be OK.
Tell us about that night, they said. Tell us everything that happened after the children went to bed. I gave them every detail I could remember, as I had before, but this time they responded by just staring at me and shaking their heads.

Neves stated bluntly that they didn’t believe my version of events.

On and on it went. They tried to convince me I’d had a blackout – a ‘loss of memory episode’, I think they called it. My denials, answers and pleas fell on deaf ears. This was their theory and they wanted to shoehorn me into it, end of story. At last they seemed to decide that the interview was over. They told me I could ring them any time, day or night, to give them the information they were waiting for.

Finally, Gerry tried to establish when – and if – we would be having another meeting with them. ‘The next time we meet it will be across the table.’ The message behind this rather Delphic statement was clear: there would be no more informal meetings.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 01:46:44 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on December 10, 2017, 01:31:12 PM
The McCanns were not suspects in August 2007 when they clearly were. Here's a reminder:

Wednesday 8 August 2007 - McCanns officially NOT Suspects

João Carlos returned our car at lunchtime (albeit with a piece missing from the boot). He said that Neves and Encarnação were ready to see us later that afternoon.

If we’d wondered about the change of venue for our regular informal meeting, the reason for it soon became clear: this wasn’t our regular informal meeting. We were taken to an upstairs room at the police station where we were greeted by Luís Neves and Guilhermino Encarnação. Our interpreter this time was a police officer, not Proconsul Angela Morado, as was usually the case. The whole demeanour of Neves and Encarnação was different. They looked serious and cold. There had been a ‘shift’ in the investigation, they said. They had always been optimistic that Madeleine was alive, but now things had changed.

Gerry was then asked to leave the room. Now the sirens in my head were deafening. I was on my own and afraid. Please God, let my Madeleine be OK.
Tell us about that night, they said. Tell us everything that happened after the children went to bed. I gave them every detail I could remember, as I had before, but this time they responded by just staring at me and shaking their heads.

Neves stated bluntly that they didn’t believe my version of events.

On and on it went. They tried to convince me I’d had a blackout – a ‘loss of memory episode’, I think they called it. My denials, answers and pleas fell on deaf ears. This was their theory and they wanted to shoehorn me into it, end of story. At last they seemed to decide that the interview was over. They told me I could ring them any time, day or night, to give them the information they were waiting for.

Finally, Gerry tried to establish when – and if – we would be having another meeting with them. ‘The next time we meet it will be across the table.’ The message behind this rather Delphic statement was clear: there would be no more informal meetings.

The mcCanns were not suspects until new evidence arose..

We have been told by both police forces taht teh mccanns are not suspects...of course IF new evidence arises this could change...I just dont see that is like;y do you..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 10, 2017, 01:57:01 PM
If they have new evidence they won't be telling us until they have ALL the evidence required.  12 million and counting - why is this case special? They know who did it IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 10, 2017, 03:28:30 PM
Future argumentative posts will be deleted.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 10, 2017, 04:59:43 PM
If posters stick to the rules there wouldn’t be a problem.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 10, 2017, 05:02:49 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 04:47:45 PM
As regards the mcanns not being suspects..we have..

Both police forces stating the mccanns are not suspects

IMO The mcanns have not been interviewed under caution

IMO The mccanns do not appear to being investigated by SY or the PJ

SY have spent 12 million pounds and as far as we can see have chasing leads in portugal

The archiving despatch stating no evidence against the McCanns

Based on all that I think it is perfectly reasonable to conclude the McCanns  are not suspects and not naive or gullible in the slightest...in fact i would say the imo anyone who thinks the McCanns are suspects is simply ignoring the evidence

SY spent £12 million chasing one lead in Portugal, the supposed failed burglary, which is a strange set of affairs seeing has they have no jurisdiction in Portugal. Any other leads were all newspaper nonsense including the woman in purple.imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 10, 2017, 05:04:41 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 05:02:19 PM
we have been told clearly the mccanns have not been intervied under caution...stephen has posted it several times as fact

When i say "it appears"...that is obviously my opinion

Doesn’t make it a fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 10, 2017, 05:27:11 PM
Some seem to be struggling telling the difference between fact and opinion. I can say that there is no evidence of them being interviewed as a fact that doesn’t mean it is a fact they haven’t been interviewed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 05:48:21 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on December 10, 2017, 05:27:11 PM
Some seem to be struggling telling the difference between fact and opinion. I can say that there is no evidence of them being interviewed as a fact that doesn’t mean it is a fact they haven’t been interviewed.

do you have a cite for no evidence of interview as you are staing it as fact...it sounds more like opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 10, 2017, 05:52:34 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on December 10, 2017, 05:27:11 PM
Some seem to be struggling telling the difference between fact and opinion. I can say that there is no evidence of them being interviewed as a fact that doesn’t mean it is a fact they haven’t been interviewed.
That logic made me think.   Was person A. interviewed or not?
There could be documented evidence of an interview.
Surveillance could have been kept on Person A. for a period of time so one could say no interview between start and finish of surveillance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 05:53:43 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 10, 2017, 05:52:34 PM
That logic made me think.   Was person A. interviewed or not?
There could be documented evidence of an interview.
Surveillance could have been kept on Person A. for a period of time so one could say no interview between start and finish of surveillance.

Yes...there may well be evidence in the form of witness statements...it is therefore incorrect to say no evidence exists
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 10, 2017, 06:03:28 PM
Stop attacking moderation or face the consequences.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on December 10, 2017, 08:56:44 PM
I know there isn't much news about on this case at the moment but can we please keep posts relevant and amiable.  Flaunting of forum rules will attract sanctions. TY
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:01:52 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 10, 2017, 01:23:11 PM
Everyone knows that cops never ever ever reveal the entire story.  The reason for this is because they are evidence gatherers, it is not within their brief to determine anyone innocent or guilty.  And that is why I accept the Portuguese SC ruling and not anything the police feel they are free to declare.

the SC are in no position to declare the mccanns innocent or guilty as their has been no trial and they have not heard the evidence...AFAIAC they did not give their opinion on the innocence of the mccanns..in fact they cannot...no court deals with the concept of innocence...its guilty or not guilty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 10, 2017, 09:05:56 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:01:52 PM
the SC are in no position to declare the mccanns innocent or guilty as their has been no trial and they have not heard the evidence...AFAIAC they did not give their opinion on the innocence of the mccanns..in fact they cannot...no court deals with the concept of innocence...its guilty or not guilty

They reviewed the evidence and declared that they had not been cleared as per their claim. Simple.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:06:35 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2017, 09:01:52 PM
the SC are in no position to declare the mccanns innocent or guilty as their has been no trial and they have not heard the evidence...AFAIAC they did not give their opinion on the innocence of the mccanns..in fact they cannot...no court deals with the concept of innocence...its guilty or not guilty

Case done and dusted.

Mccanns lost.

Time to get over it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2017, 09:08:57 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 10, 2017, 09:06:35 PM
Case done and dusted.

Mccanns lost.

Time to get over it.

You are mistaken if you think the case affects me and that has nothing to do with what angelo has claimed...the SC did NOT rule on the mccanns innocence as angelo seeems to think
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on December 12, 2017, 04:08:16 PM
Please stop posting off-topic complaints.  We were asked to give the IURD adoption topic its own thread and we complied, irrelevant posts were removed.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8829.msg435295#msg435295
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 09:40:26 PM
Here's a thought.


The Grenfell Tower victims survivors have received approx £5,000,000.


Spending on the Mccann case, with nothing to show for it, has exceeeded, by all accounts well over £11,000,000, and counting.

Mmm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 09:41:37 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 09:40:26 PM
Here's a thought.


The Grenfell Tower victims survivors have received approx £5,000,000.


Spending on the Mccann case, with nothing to show for it, has exceeeded, by all accounts well over £11,000,000.

Mmm.

Amazing..many receive nothing when their properties burn down
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 09:43:47 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 14, 2017, 09:41:37 PM
Amazing..many receive nothing when their properties burn down

So no comment on the spending davel ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 09:44:30 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 09:43:47 PM
So no comment on the spending davel ?

Yes....I think it's money well spent
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 09:46:05 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 14, 2017, 09:44:30 PM
Yes....I think it's money well spent

It has achieved nothing in the Mccann case.


So davel, who is more important, the Grenfell victims and survivors, or 1 girl who disappeared without trace over 10 years ago ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 09:49:47 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 09:46:05 PM
It has achieved nothing in the Mccann case.


So davel, who is more important, the Grefell victims and survivors, or 1 girl who disappeared without trace over 10 years ago ?
I think it's rather a silly question
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 09:51:44 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 14, 2017, 09:49:47 PM
I think it's rather a silly question

Why ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 09:55:17 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 09:51:44 PM
Why ?

Because I do...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 10:03:41 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 14, 2017, 09:55:17 PM
Because I do...

So are you therefore saying, that one missing child is more important ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 10:04:19 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 10:03:41 PM
So are you therefore saying, that one missing child is more important ?

I'm not saying anything
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 10:06:29 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 14, 2017, 10:04:19 PM
I'm not saying anything


Conclusions will be drawn.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 10:11:03 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 10:06:29 PM

Conclusions will be drawn.
Do you think I care
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 10:14:07 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 14, 2017, 10:11:03 PM
Do you think I care

Well, I care davel, for the people who died awful deaths and those that survived that dreadful fire.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 10:15:45 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 10:14:07 PM
Well, I care davel, for people who died awful deaths and those that survived that dreadful fire.

I care about those people too...but I don't care what conclusions you draw about me
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 10:21:27 PM
I care about Maddie and her family too because I believe they are victims of an evil crime
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 14, 2017, 10:33:20 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 14, 2017, 10:21:27 PM
I care about Maddie and her family too because I believe they are victims of an evil crime

Then on the other hand MM may not have been the victim of a crime.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 10:35:56 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on December 14, 2017, 10:33:20 PM
Then on the other hand MM may not have been the victim of a crime.
imo...they were....and not just one crime...yours enigmatically
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 14, 2017, 11:22:33 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 14, 2017, 10:35:56 PM
imo...they were....and not just one crime...yours enigmatically
I couldn't agree more.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 14, 2017, 11:33:55 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 14, 2017, 10:35:56 PM
imo...they were....and not just one crime...yours enigmatically
enigmatic
ˌɛnɪɡˈmatɪk/Submit
adjective
difficult to interpret or understand; mysterious.
"he took the money with an enigmatic smile"
synonyms:   mysterious, puzzling, hard to understand, mystifying, inexplicable, baffling, perplexing, bewildering, confusing, impenetrable, inscrutable, incomprehensible, unexplainable, unfathomable, indecipherable, Delphic, oracular;
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 14, 2017, 11:52:35 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 14, 2017, 11:33:55 PM
enigmatic
ˌɛnɪɡˈmatɪk/Submit
adjective
difficult to interpret or understand; mysterious.
"he took the money with an enigmatic smile"
synonyms:   mysterious, puzzling, hard to understand, mystifying, inexplicable, baffling, perplexing, bewildering, confusing, impenetrable, inscrutable, incomprehensible, unexplainable, unfathomable, indecipherable, Delphic, oracular;

Think I would go with confusingly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 11:56:40 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on December 14, 2017, 11:52:35 PM
Think I would go with confusingly.

I think you are confused imo of course
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 15, 2017, 06:52:57 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 14, 2017, 11:56:40 PM
I think you are confused imo of course

It’s entirely up to you if you want to put your arguments clearly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 15, 2017, 08:35:53 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 14, 2017, 10:21:27 PM
I care about Maddie and her family too because I believe they are victims of an evil crime

Alleged!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 08:41:43 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 14, 2017, 10:21:27 PM
I care about Maddie and her family too because I believe they are victims of an evil crime

No crime has been determined.

As you often say, the police collect evidence.

Any 'crime' is determined in a court.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 09:06:40 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 08:41:43 AM
No crime has been determined.

As you often say, the police collect evidence.

Any 'crime' is determined in a court.
That's why I say I believe...I believe several crimes have been n committed against the McCann's
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 09:16:08 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 15, 2017, 09:06:40 AM
That's why I say I believe...I believe several crimes have been n committed against the McCann's

Then list these so called 'crimes'.

None of these supposed 'crimes' has resulted in an arrest, and it still hasn't been determined how and when exactly Madeleine disappeared.

The reality is, Madeleine could have walked out of the apartment and 'disappeared'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 15, 2017, 09:49:12 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 09:16:08 AM
Then list these so called 'crimes'.

None of these supposed 'crimes' has resulted in an arrest, and it still hasn't been determined how and when exactly Madeleine disappeared.

The reality is, Madeleine could have walked out of the apartment and 'disappeared'.

Could have, in your opinion.  And a number of other things could have happened in the opinion of some others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 09:52:15 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 15, 2017, 09:49:12 AM
Could have, in your opinion.  And a number of other things could have happened in the opinion of some others.

I knew that already.

What matters are facts and evidence.

No one has been arrested and the cause of Madeleine's disappearance has not been determined.

Opinions are not evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 10:26:57 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 09:16:08 AM
Then list these so called 'crimes'.

None of these supposed 'crimes' has resulted in an arrest, and it still hasn't been determined how and when exactly Madeleine disappeared.

The reality is, Madeleine could have walked out of the apartment and 'disappeared'.

I would rather not list the crimes as it would lead to a pointless debate
The pj final report said it was highly unlikely Maddie walked out of the apartment...that statement is a piece of evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 10:29:56 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 15, 2017, 10:26:57 AM
I would rather not list the crimes as it would lead to a pointless debate
The pj final report said it was highly unlikely Maddie walked out of the apartment...that statement is a piece of evidence

No crime or crimes have been determined. That is for a court to decide and not you.

Highly unlikely, is an opinion, and does not mean it didn't happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 10:52:42 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 10:29:56 AM
No crime or crimes have been determined. That is for a court to decide and not you.

Highly unlikely, is an opinion, and does not mean it didn't happen.

I am allowed an opinion and my opinion is more than one crime had been committed against the McCann family

Highly unlikely means highly unlikely
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 10:55:41 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 15, 2017, 10:52:42 AM
I am allowed an opinion and my opinion is more than one crime had been committed against the McCann family

Highly unlikely means highly unlikely

You can say all you wish, but it doesn't mean it's true.

Remember that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 11:11:38 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 10:55:41 AM
You can say all you wish, but it doesn't mean it's true.

Remember that.

I can believe it's true and in my opinion it is true
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 11:15:40 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 15, 2017, 11:11:38 AM
I can believe it's true and in my opinion it is true

Belief is not a truth, just a belief.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 11:46:58 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 11:15:40 AM
Belief is not a truth, just a belief.

It is the truth to the believer and may well be true
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 12:00:03 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 15, 2017, 11:46:58 AM
It is the truth to the believer and may well be true

You belittle belief but as I have explained to you before....the whole justice system is based on belief....what a jury believe is often all that decides between guilty or not guilty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 12:03:15 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 15, 2017, 12:00:03 PM
You belittle belief but as I have explained to you before....the whole justice system is based on belief....what a jury believe is often all that decides between guilty or not guilty

A jury is presented with evidence and witness statements, together with the legal advice by the Judge.

That has not occurred here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 12:08:13 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 12:03:15 PM
A jury is presented with evidence and witness statements, together with the legal advice by the Judge.

That has not occurred here.

I didn't say it has...the jury listens to evidence and has to decide what it believes...that is the point...the whole justice system is based on belief...there is often no absolute proof
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 12:11:49 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 15, 2017, 12:08:13 PM
I didn't say it has...the jury listens to evidence and has to decide what it believes...that is the point...the whole justice system is based on belief...there is often no absolute proof

Of course there could be.

What if a crime is recorded on 'camera' ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 12:16:39 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 12:11:49 PM
Of course there could be.

What if a crime is recorded on 'camera' ?

Read the post again and tell me where I contradict that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 12:54:30 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 12:11:49 PM
Of course there could be.

What if a crime is recorded on 'camera' ?

In my post I say ...in most cases...there is no absolute proof... therefore in some there is
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 15, 2017, 01:05:14 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 14, 2017, 11:33:55 PM
enigmatic
ˌɛnɪɡˈmatɪk/Submit
adjective
difficult to interpret or understand; mysterious.
"he took the money with an enigmatic smile"
synonyms:   mysterious, puzzling, hard to understand, mystifying, inexplicable, baffling, perplexing, bewildering, confusing, impenetrable, inscrutable, incomprehensible, unexplainable, unfathomable, indecipherable, Delphic, oracular;

slarti
Quote
Think I would go with confusingly.

I think I would go for Delphic actually.  More than one enigmatic reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 15, 2017, 01:14:18 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 09:52:15 AM
I knew that already.

What matters are facts and evidence.

No one has been arrested and the cause of Madeleine's disappearance has not been determined.

Opinions are not evidence.
IYO .... and as far as we all, including you, know

But SY have not shared their thoughts, so you dont know ... and neither do we.



Please can you remember to put your own IMO's in? 

You are extraordinarily fast at correcting others ... and even wiping their posts if omited.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 01:43:15 PM
Quote from: sadie on December 15, 2017, 01:14:18 PM
IYO .... and as far as we all, including you, know

But SY have not shared their thoughts, so you dont know ... and neither do we.



Please can you remember to put your own IMO's in? 

You are extraordinarily fast at correcting others ... and even wiping their posts if omited.

If the cause had been determined , or someone charged, we would know by now.

At the last announcement, if correct, they were chasing one final lead.

Please tell me where I am wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 02:09:07 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 01:43:15 PM
If the cause had been determined , or someone charged, we would know by now.

At the last announcement, if correct, they were chasing one final lead.

Please tell me where I am wrong.

Things may have changed since that announcement...we just do not know
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 15, 2017, 04:28:06 PM
Quote from: sadie on December 15, 2017, 01:05:14 PM
slarti
I think I would go for Delphic actually.  More than one enigmatic reason.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delphic_ambiguity (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delphic_ambiguity)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 16, 2017, 01:34:02 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 01:43:15 PM
If the cause had been determined , or someone charged, we would know by now.

At the last announcement, if correct, they were chasing one final lead.

Please tell me where I am wrong.

If the cause had been determined , or someone charged, we would know by now.

In YOUR opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 16, 2017, 01:52:39 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on December 15, 2017, 04:28:06 PM
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delphic_ambiguity (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delphic_ambiguity)

My meaning for the word Delphic comes from the lists here

http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/delphic


Several of the words in these lists cover my meaning .... but you will have to work out which ones.  Soz
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 06:27:11 AM
Quote from: sadie on December 16, 2017, 01:34:02 AM
If the cause had been determined , or someone charged, we would know by now.

In YOUR opinion

So Sadie, why would these 'globally powerful people' you refer to permit an investigation ?

Meanwhile if you say I am wrong, can you prove that the nature of Madeleine's disappearance has been proved , or someone arrested ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 16, 2017, 08:51:02 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 06:27:11 AM
So Sadie, why would these 'globally powerful people' you refer to permit an investigation ?

Meanwhile if you say I am wrong, can you prove that the nature of Madeleine's disappearance has been proved , or someone arrested ?

Well seeing as its a given SY have no jurisdiction abroad,the PJ are the ones who hold the key,not a peep out of them,strange innit,given all the publicity of the supposed last,last lead from SY.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 16, 2017, 09:00:36 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 06:27:11 AM
So Sadie, why would these 'globally powerful people' you refer to permit an investigation ?

Meanwhile if you say I am wrong, can you prove that the nature of Madeleine's disappearance has been proved , or someone arrested ?
Can YOU prove that the nature of Madeleines disappearance has NOT been proven ?

You should have said IMO, but you appear to think that as a moderator, you can get away with it ... and, of course, you can unless we keep picking you up for it

How tiresome to have to do that repeatedly.  %56&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:04:02 AM
Quote from: sadie on December 16, 2017, 09:00:36 AM
Can YOU prove that the nature of Madeleines disappearance has NOT been proven ?

You should have said IMO, but you appear to think that as a moderator, you can get away with it ... and, of course, you can unless we keep picking you up for it

How tiresome to have to do that repeatedly.  %56&

You can believe in any story you wish Sadie, but it won't make it true.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:05:16 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 16, 2017, 08:51:02 AM
Well seeing as its a given SY have no jurisdiction abroad,the PJ are the ones who hold the key,not a peep out of them,strange innit,given all the publicity of the supposed last,last lead from SY.

Quite right Barrier.

For some, it is all they have left.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:11:58 AM
Quote from: sadie on December 16, 2017, 09:00:36 AM
Can YOU prove that the nature of Madeleines disappearance has NOT been proven ?

You should have said IMO, but you appear to think that as a moderator, you can get away with it ... and, of course, you can unless we keep picking you up for it

How tiresome to have to do that repeatedly.  %56&

Rowley  only as recently as May of this year said they still weren't sure of which hypothese to follow.
Now unless you know different this is the reference point.imo

Quote
: So, you’ll understand from your experience, the way murder investigations work, detectives will start off with various hypotheses, about what’s happened in a murder, what has happened in a missing person’s investigation, whether someone has been abducted. All those different possibilities will be worked through. This case is no different from that but the evidence is limited at the moment to be cast iron as to which one of those hypotheses we should follow. So we have to keep an open mind. As I said we have some critical lines of enquiry, those linked to particular lines of enquiry, but I’m not going to discuss them today because they are very much live investigations. 
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:16:58 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:11:58 AM
Rowley  only as recently as May of this year said they still weren't sure of which hypothese to follow.
Now unless you know different this is the reference point.imo

Thank you for that reminder Barrier, which has been posted on hear before.


Why do do some people wish to forget it ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 09:23:16 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:11:58 AM
Rowley  only as recently as May of this year said they still weren't sure of which hypothese to follow.
Now unless you know different this is the reference point.imo

Rowley also said..

however she left that apartment she was abducted
The parents are not suspects..

so they dont know exactly what happened but the above to facts are true according to rowley
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:25:39 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 09:23:16 AM
Rowley also said..

however she left that apartment she was abducted
The parents are not suspects..

so they dont know exactly what happened but the above to facts are true according to rowley

That could mean not leaving of her own accord.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 09:27:56 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:25:39 AM
That could mean not leaving of her own accord.

but it is ruling out the involvement of the parents
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 16, 2017, 09:33:02 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:04:02 AM
You can believe in any story you wish Sadie, but it won't make it true.

you forget, stephen, I look at facts.


Now I am not getting into a prolonged slanging match.  With Christmas almost on us I haven't got the time to waste
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:34:30 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 09:27:56 AM
but it is ruling out the involvement of the parents

I've never seen that in writing,cite?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:37:03 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 09:23:16 AM
Rowley also said..

however she left that apartment she was abducted
The parents are not suspects..

so they dont know exactly what happened but the above to facts are true according to rowley

Rowley is giving his opinion, nothing more.

Besides, when has been head of the investigation ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:40:21 AM
Quote from: sadie on December 16, 2017, 09:33:02 AM
you forget, stephen, I look at facts.


Now I am not getting into a prolonged slanging match.  With Christmas almost on us I haven't got the time to waste

Well I don't believe your theories, and I am not the only one.

 'globally powerful people'

So Sadie, let's have some proof of this.

You've made the claim and others, time for some cites to back it up.

If you please.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:43:01 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 09:23:16 AM
Rowley also said..

however she left that apartment she was abducted
The parents are not suspects..

so they dont know exactly what happened but the above to facts are true according to rowley

What Rowley actually said was that the matter of the parents was dealt with in the initial investigation,you know the one lead by Mr Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:43:49 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:43:01 AM
What Rowley actually said was that the matter of the parents was dealt with in the initial investigation,you know the one lead by Mr Amaral.

Exactly.

Not by SY.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:46:27 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:43:49 AM
Exactly.

Not by SY.

How did  Amaral get it so right one wonders,perhap's he was far better than some detractors wish to admit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 09:48:34 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:46:27 AM
How did  Amaral get it so right one wonders,perhap's he was far better than some detractors wish to admit.

Amaral clearly got athe important details wrong...there is no confirmation of a cadaver in teh apartment as he claimed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 09:49:21 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:37:03 AM
Rowley is giving his opinion, nothing more.

Besides, when has been head of the investigation ?

you were praising his opinions a few posts ago
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:50:23 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 09:47:22 AM
What rowleyactually said was...the parents are not suspects and howver maddie left the aprtment she was abducted...he never mentioned amaral who was sacked from the initial investigation

Rowley is not the head of the investigation, and merely reads what he has been told.

He was not there in Portugal in 2007.

Amaral was, along with other members of the PJ.

NO EVIDENCE WAS FOUND FOR ABDUCTION.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:52:13 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 09:49:21 AM
you were praising his opinions a few posts ago

I pointed out as did Barrier, Rowley doesn't know what happened.

Abduction is an unproven theory and no one has been arrested, for what i think are blatantly obvious reasons.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:53:43 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 09:48:34 AM
Amaral clearly got athe important details wrong...there is no confirmation of a cadaver in teh apartment as he claimed

Where is the confirmation of an abductor ?

i.e evidence, let alone proof.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 09:55:13 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:52:13 AM
I pointed out as did Barrier, Rowley doesn't know what happened.

Abduction is an unproven theory and no one has been arrested, for what i think are blatantly obvious reasons.


no one has been arrested for blatantly obvious reasons I agree. whan I joined the thread this morning barrier was quoting Rowley and you were agreeing with Barrier...suddenly Rowley views are being down played
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:55:37 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 09:48:34 AM
Amaral clearly got athe important details wrong...there is no confirmation of a cadaver in teh apartment as he claimed

Yet in the first judgement which found against Amaral,you know the one you back,the judge states proven facts.

Quote
Taking into account the matter considered undisputed in the selection of facts and the decision handed down in due course after producing the matter of evidence and discussing the case, the following facts are demonstrated :

Quote
6. The British police dogs “Eddie” and “Keela” detected human blood and cadaver in the apartment 5A, Ocean Club [alínea AR) of the undisputed facts].
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:56:14 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 09:52:21 AM
amaral was sacked from the investigation and the evidence he based his thesis on has been debunked#

Accidental death has not been debunked davel, or proved.

Neither has abduction, one way or the other.

Keep to facts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 09:56:27 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:53:43 AM
Where is the confirmation of an abductor ?

i.e evidence, let alone proof.

We have been through all this before and Im not going to get involved in petty arguments...Redwood said...based on teh evidence we believe maddie was abducted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:57:51 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 09:55:13 AM

no one has been arrested for blatantly obvious reasons I agree. whan I joined the thread this morning barrier was quoting Rowley and you were agreeing with Barrier...suddenly Rowley views are being down played

Then you need to read it again.

Rowley said to the effect multiple hypotheses.

i.e. they don't know what happened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:58:31 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 09:52:21 AM
amaral was sacked from the investigation and the evidence he based his thesis on has been debunked#

Yet the bristish investigation team is more than happy with him.
Who debunked his thesis  some internet detective's?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 09:59:03 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 09:57:51 AM
Then you need to read it again.

Rowley said to the effect multiple hypotheses.

i.e. they don't know what happened.

so now again you beleive rowleys words...he also said the parents were not suspects and maddie was abducted..bye
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 10:01:06 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 09:59:03 AM
so now again you beleive rowleys words...he also said the parents were not suspects and maddie was abducted..bye

Rowley doesn't know what happened on May the 3 rd 2007.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 16, 2017, 10:02:22 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 09:59:03 AM
so now again you beleive rowleys words...he also said the parents were not suspects and maddie was abducted..bye

Cite for Rowley saying the parents aren't suspects,please.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on December 16, 2017, 10:04:44 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 10:01:06 AM

Rowley doesn't know what happened on May the 3 rd 2007.



In your opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 16, 2017, 10:06:20 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:58:31 AM
Yet the bristish investigation team is more than happy with him.
Who debunked his thesis  some internet detective's?

In Your Opinion.  I will be deleting comments that don't conform to The Rules of this Forum.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 10:18:21 AM
Quote from: Erngath on December 16, 2017, 10:04:44 AM

In your opinion.

He said multiple hypotheses, i.e. he doesn't know what happened, and nothing you can say will change that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 10:21:43 AM
As a reminder, the thread title is Wandering off topic.

i.e. there is no specific matter being discussed, but instead a variety.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 16, 2017, 10:27:17 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 10:18:21 AM
He said multiple hypotheses, i.e. he doesn't know what happened, and nothing you can say will change that.

Indeed. Rowley is a high ranking Metropolitan Police officer, well removed from the day to day investigation and as such  only knows what he has been told by subordinates.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on December 16, 2017, 10:38:47 AM
Quote from: jassi on December 16, 2017, 10:27:17 AM
Indeed. Rowley is a high ranking Metropolitan Police officer, well removed from the day to day investigation and as such  only knows what he has been told by subordinates.

In my view, if the Met really had information about Maddie's disappearance the investigation would have been stepped up a gear instead of being wrapped up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 16, 2017, 10:44:25 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 16, 2017, 10:38:47 AM
In my view, if the Met really had information about Maddie's disappearance the investigation would have been stepped up a gear instead of being wrapped up.
That is possible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 16, 2017, 10:55:04 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:58:31 AM
Yet the bristish investigation team is more than happy with him.
Who debunked his thesis  some internet detective's?
Quote from: Eleanor on December 16, 2017, 10:06:20 AM
In Your Opinion.  I will be deleting comments that don't conform to The Rules of this Forum.  Thank you.

Its not my opinion,its Rowleys,why else would he say he was happy with how the parents were dealt with in the initial investigation?

This is what he said,links have been provided multiple times.

 
Quote
Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the
original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was
all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of
investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 11:19:27 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 16, 2017, 10:55:04 AM
Its not my opinion,its Rowleys,why else would he say he was happy with how the parents were dealt with in the initial investigation?

This is what he said,links have been provided multiple times.

I dont think the UK investigation team are at all happy with amaral seeing as he was sacked for criticising them...imo. It was the team after amaral who decided the mccanns had no case to answer
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 11:30:06 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 11:19:27 AM
I dont think the UK investigation team are at all happy with amaral seeing as he was sacked for criticising them...imo. It was the team after amaral who decided the mccanns had no case to answer

The team after Amaral, could not find evidence of anything to charge anyone.

Nothing has changed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 11:30:57 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 11:30:06 AM
The team after Amaral, could not find evidence of anything to charge anyone.

Nothing has changed.
correct ........no evidence to charge the mccanns
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 11:31:57 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 11:30:57 AM
correct ........no evidence to charge the mccanns

NO evidence to charge anyone davel, and no evidence of abduction either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 11:33:22 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 11:31:57 AM
NO evidence to charge anyone davel, and no evidence of abduction either.

can you give a cite for no evidence of abduction
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 16, 2017, 11:39:12 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 11:19:27 AM
I dont think the UK investigation team are at all happy with amaral seeing as he was sacked for criticising them...imo. It was the team after amaral who decided the mccanns had no case to answer

It was the team after Amaral who, following the refusal of the group to take part in the reconstitution, decided there was nothing more they could do.

Therefore, as we do not envision, at the present moment, the execution of any other diligence within the process that might produce any useful result for the process, I submit it to your consideration, for you to determine whatever you may see as convenient.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 11:47:37 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:46:27 AM
How did  Amaral get it so right one wonders,perhap's he was far better than some detractors wish to admit.

Just a polite reminder ... the Portuguese sacked Amaral as coordinator of Madeleine McCann's case ... the investigation was placed in the entirely capable hands of Rebelo who according to the Portuguese press of the time took over the entirely disorganised mess left behind by his predecessor.

The new team that is led by Paulo Rebelo, the new coordinator of the Criminal Investigation Department of Policia Judiciaria (PJ) in Portimao, already has the Maddie case process digitalized into the personal computers. "It was a hideous amount of work", because the process' paperwork was "anarquically spread out", according to a source with PJ, who criticises the inexistence of a centralising figure in the former team, who "would know how to distribute the work".
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/paulo-rebelo-calls-in-biggest-homicide-expert-20-1-t2333.html

In my opinion the best spin possible has been put on Amaral's sacking as reading his book will confirm ... but it is contrary to press reports at the time which confirm his incompetence.

Rebelo took over a mess left behind by an incompetent ... he digitised and coordinated the information which had been left lying around on scraps of paper.  Therefore the praise merited by and given to the Portuguese investigation by Scotland Yard and the fact they were able to use it, lies fairly and squarely with the foot soldiers who initially collected the uncollated information left lying around by the incompetent Amaral regime and Rebelo and his team who put it into some sort of workable order.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 11:50:34 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 16, 2017, 11:39:12 AM
It was the team after Amaral who, following the refusal of the group to take part in the reconstitution, decided there was nothing more they could do.

Therefore, as we do not envision, at the present moment, the execution of any other diligence within the process that might produce any useful result for the process, I submit it to your consideration, for you to determine whatever you may see as convenient.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm

... and it was the Amaral team who neglected to carry out the diligence of reconstitution at a time when all the main players were available.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 11:54:35 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 16, 2017, 09:58:31 AM
Yet the bristish investigation team is more than happy with him.
Who debunked his thesis  some internet detective's?

The Portuguese Rebelo investigation ... who appear to have understood the concept of forensic science and the requirement for proof.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 16, 2017, 12:03:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 11:50:34 AM
... and it was the Amaral team who neglected to carry out the diligence of reconstitution at a time when all the main players were available.

Yes, there's no getting away from that. Had they done so at the time, the outcome of their investigation might have been quite different.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on December 16, 2017, 12:52:13 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 11:47:37 AM
Just a polite reminder ... the Portuguese sacked Amaral as coordinator of Madeleine McCann's case ... the investigation was placed in the entirely capable hands of Rebelo who according to the Portuguese press of the time took over the entirely disorganised mess left behind by his predecessor.

The new team that is led by Paulo Rebelo, the new coordinator of the Criminal Investigation Department of Policia Judiciaria (PJ) in Portimao, already has the Maddie case process digitalized into the personal computers. "It was a hideous amount of work", because the process' paperwork was "anarquically spread out", according to a source with PJ, who criticises the inexistence of a centralising figure in the former team, who "would know how to distribute the work".
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/paulo-rebelo-calls-in-biggest-homicide-expert-20-1-t2333.html

In my opinion the best spin possible has been put on Amaral's sacking as reading his book will confirm ... but it is contrary to press reports at the time which confirm his incompetence.

Rebelo took over a mess left behind by an incompetent ... he digitised and coordinated the information which had been left lying around on scraps of paper.  Therefore the praise merited by and given to the Portuguese investigation by Scotland Yard and the fact they were able to use it, lies fairly and squarely with the foot soldiers who initially collected the uncollated information left lying around by the incompetent Amaral regime and Rebelo and his team who put it into some sort of workable order.

To be fair, Rebelo was not subjected to the pressure that Amaral and his team were put under.  Rebelo had the luxury of being able to take their time to properly document everything whereas Amaral's team were actually looking for a live child and following up live leads with few resources available to them. To be wise in hindsight is a wonderful ability.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 01:18:48 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 16, 2017, 12:52:13 PM
To be fair, Rebelo was not subjected to the pressure that Amaral and his team were put under.  Rebelo had the luxury of being able to take their time to properly document everything whereas Amaral's team were actually looking for a live child and following up live leads with few resources available to them. To be wise in hindsight is a wonderful ability.

Again amaral misunderstood the evidence..imo....and that was his downfall.... Harrison explains in the files how at a meeting with grime amaral was told the alerts had no evintial value....he ignored the experts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 01:23:11 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 01:18:48 PM
Again amaral misunderstood the evidence..imo....and that was his downfall.... Harrison explains in the files how at a meeting with grime amaral was told the alerts had no evintial value....he ignored the experts

Yet you keep referring to it, and the alerts are recorded in the case files and will not disappear, unlike someone I could mention.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 01:50:19 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 01:23:11 PM
Yet you keep referring to it, and the alerts are recorded in the case files and will not disappear, unlike someone I could mention.

With no value bas evidence and therefore totally useless imo
Yet amaral used them as evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 02:41:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 01:50:19 PM
With no value bas evidence and therefore totally useless imo
Yet amaral used them as evidence

Still there and not going away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 02:47:46 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 02:41:28 PM
Still there and not going away.

And that is where they will stay gathering dust imo because I cannot see they have been any use at all
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 16, 2017, 03:29:04 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 11:47:37 AM
Just a polite reminder ... the Portuguese sacked Amaral as coordinator of Madeleine McCann's case ... the investigation was placed in the entirely capable hands of Rebelo who according to the Portuguese press of the time took over the entirely disorganised mess left behind by his predecessor.


Can you tell us how many times the McCanns have been interviewed after Amaral was removed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 04:08:06 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 01:23:11 PM
Yet you keep referring to it, and the alerts are recorded in the case files and will not disappear, unlike someone I could mention.

Please, please, please think twice before reiterating the horrendous misinterpretation of the evidence and the reliance of the Amaral investigation on it resulting in the misdirection of the investigation he coordinated.

If the dogs give doggy indications ... then, over to the humans to make sense of it all.  It is that simple.

We have seen the video ... we have read the forensic results from the human investigation; using the imprimatur of the files we have read the bemused Inspector Diaz stating : "If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 04:47:13 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 04:08:06 PM
Please, please, please think twice before reiterating the horrendous misinterpretation of the evidence and the reliance of the Amaral investigation on it resulting in the misdirection of the investigation he coordinated.

If the dogs give doggy indications ... then, over to the humans to make sense of it all.  It is that simple.

We have seen the video ... we have read the forensic results from the human investigation; using the imprimatur of the files we have read the bemused Inspector Diaz stating : "If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times"

Excellent post
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 04:52:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 04:08:06 PM
Please, please, please think twice before reiterating the horrendous misinterpretation of the evidence and the reliance of the Amaral investigation on it resulting in the misdirection of the investigation he coordinated.

If the dogs give doggy indications ... then, over to the humans to make sense of it all.  It is that simple.

We have seen the video ... we have read the forensic results from the human investigation; using the imprimatur of the files we have read the bemused Inspector Diaz stating : "If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1DID7gxWrM
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 05:01:05 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 04:52:46 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1DID7gxWrM

Excellent...note how the dog alerted immediately to the spot rather than running past it several times and totally ignoring it before alerting as Eddie did in PDL
Makes the alerts very suspect imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 05:15:21 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 04:52:46 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1DID7gxWrM

Yes Alice ... dogs are an extremely useful tool indeed ... no-one has ever suggested otherwise ... but their indications really do require to be backed-up by evidence.

Officers from the Rebelo investigation and no doubt Rebelo himself gave very serious attention to the role played by the dogs ... why wouldn't they since it was the lynch pin of the Amaral investigation's case against Kate and Gerry ... they also interpreted the forensics appropriately which is why the arguido status imposed on them was lifted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on December 16, 2017, 05:57:32 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 01:50:19 PM
With no value bas evidence and therefore totally useless imo
Yet amaral used them as evidence

Police are duty bound to look at all the evidence and that included the dog alerts which were certainly suggestive of something untoward.  Add to this the fact that the FSS were telling the Portuguese one thing but failing to back it up in their final report apparently.

The part which sells it for me is that the cadaver dogs only showed an interest in McCann related objects and accomodation.  I for one don't believe in serial coincidences.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 06:26:22 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 16, 2017, 05:57:32 PM
Police are duty bound to look at all the evidence and that included the dog alerts which were certainly suggestive of something untoward.  Add to this the fact that the FSS were telling the Portuguese one thing but failing to back it up in their final report apparently.

The part which sells it for me is that the cadaver dogs only showed an interest in McCann related objects and accomodation.  I for one don't believe in serial coincidences.


Precisely Angelo.
No matter what bluster is typed, the dogs only alerted to the Mccann belongings or objects they had been in contact with.

Likewise, I don't believe in that number of coincidences.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 06:57:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 05:01:05 PM
Excellent...note how the dog alerted immediately to the spot rather than running past it several times and totally ignoring it before alerting as Eddie did in PDL
Makes the alerts very suspect imo

You didn't see the part where the dog was called back?
You have no comment on the amount of cuing by the handler to work his dog effectively at the task?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 07:05:37 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 05:15:21 PM
Yes Alice ... dogs are an extremely useful tool indeed ... no-one has ever suggested otherwise ... but their indications really do require to be backed-up by evidence.

Officers from the Rebelo investigation and no doubt Rebelo himself gave very serious attention to the role played by the dogs ... why wouldn't they since it was the lynch pin of the Amaral investigation's case against Kate and Gerry ... they also interpreted the forensics appropriately which is why the arguido status imposed on them was lifted.

I don't recall ever stating anything to the contrary.
The question is what is evidence in this connexion?
As most cases, with or without dawgs, hang on the weight of circumstantial evidence it could in this instance be pretty much anything that added credence to the dogs actions, that is allowed by the judge to be presented as evidence in court.
On that one Mesdames et Messieurs ......faites vos jeux.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 16, 2017, 07:06:31 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 04:16:35 PM
Key words missing in you post.   8)-)))
What were they Stephen?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 08:12:30 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 07:05:37 PM
I don't recall ever stating anything to the contrary.
The question is what is evidence in this connexion?
As most cases, with or without dawgs, hang on the weight of circumstantial evidence it could in this instance be pretty much anything that added credence to the dogs actions, that is allowed by the judge to be presented as evidence in court.
On that one Mesdames et Messieurs ......faites vos jeux.

in this case once the dogs handler say that the alerts have no evidential value then...they have no value as evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 09:40:58 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 08:12:30 PM
in this case once the dogs handler say that the alerts have no evidential value then...they have no value as evidence

You and other supporters then have the audacity to accuse Stephen of being boring with his mantras....... @)(++(*

Do you ever have an original thought?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on December 16, 2017, 09:57:19 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 07:05:37 PM
I don't recall ever stating anything to the contrary.
The question is what is evidence in this connexion?
As most cases, with or without dawgs, hang on the weight of circumstantial evidence it could in this instance be pretty much anything that added credence to the dogs actions, that is allowed by the judge to be presented as evidence in court.
On that one Mesdames et Messieurs ......faites vos jeux.

Hard to tell if the dogs' "evidence" would have been allowed in PT, as there doesn't appear to be any legal provision, but nor does it seem to be prohibited.

The barks might impress a jury,  but then the caveat writ large about the barks requiring physical evidence might have cancelled out the idea of showing the videos in the first place.

What else is there?

A mixed soup of DNA from 3-5 contributors in the car? Meaningless for most people, aside from a few armchair sleuths who don't appear to understand.

The front / back door issue re an entry point and a key? No one knows what Gerry actually said, as opposed to what was noted in Portuguese.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 10:04:03 PM
Quote from: Carana on December 16, 2017, 09:57:19 PM
Hard to tell if the dogs' "evidence" would have been allowed in PT, as there doesn't appear to be any legal provision, but nor does it seem to be prohibited.

The barks might impress a jury,  but then the caveat writ large about the barks requiring physical evidence might have cancelled out the idea of showing the videos in the first place.

What else is there?

A mixed soup of DNA from 3-5 contributors in the car? Meaningless for most people, aside from a few armchair sleuths who don't appear to understand.

The front / back door issue re a entry point and a key? No one knows what Gerry actually said, as opposed to what was noted in Portuguese.

Precisely my point hence my comment "faites vos jeux"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on December 16, 2017, 10:16:47 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 10:04:03 PM
Precisely my point hence my comment "faites vos jeux"

Yes, I understood what you meant.

In a case with less media attention, it might have been admitted (and I'll only get told off if I mention another case concerning a missing child on here in which I found the lack of evidence to be jaw-dropping).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 10:45:12 PM
Quote from: Carana on December 16, 2017, 10:16:47 PM
Yes, I understood what you meant.

In a case with less media attention, it might have been admitted (and I'll only get told off if I mention another case concerning a missing child on here in which I found the lack of evidence to be jaw-dropping).

I know the one you mean[ I think].
I have views on that case which if articulated here would have both sides queueing up to nail fiery crosses to my door... @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on December 16, 2017, 11:41:09 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 10:45:12 PM
I know the one you mean[ I think].
I have views on that case which if articulated here would have both sides queueing up to nail fiery crosses to my door... @)(++(*

Best not go there then, at least not on this part of the forum. I'd be happy to discss on the other sub-forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 16, 2017, 11:59:51 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2017, 09:59:03 AM
so now again you beleive rowleys words...he also said the parents were not suspects and maddie was abducted..bye

She wasn’t old enough to make a decision to set off and start her own life.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 17, 2017, 12:03:17 AM
 &%%6x
Quote from: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 05:06:15 PM
There is nothing in my post which is my opinion ... what facts are you contesting?

Most of it. Myth making par excellence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 17, 2017, 12:25:49 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on December 17, 2017, 12:03:17 AM
&%%6x
Most of it. Myth making par excellence

Go ahead then ... be specific.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 07:24:27 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 04:08:06 PM
Please, please, please think twice before reiterating the horrendous misinterpretation of the evidence and the reliance of the Amaral investigation on it resulting in the misdirection of the investigation he coordinated.

If the dogs give doggy indications ... then, over to the humans to make sense of it all.  It is that simple.

We have seen the video ... we have read the forensic results from the human investigation; using the imprimatur of the files we have read the bemused Inspector Diaz stating : "If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times"

Doggy indications ?


Well, I've just about heard it all now. *^&*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on December 17, 2017, 08:07:37 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 16, 2017, 05:57:32 PM
Police are duty bound to look at all the evidence and that included the dog alerts which were certainly suggestive of something untoward.  Add to this the fact that the FSS were telling the Portuguese one thing but failing to back it up in their final report apparently.

The part which sells it for me is that the cadaver dogs only showed an interest in McCann related objects and accomodation.  I for one don't believe in serial coincidences.

IMO if Keela had been sent into the other apartments, she would have alerted to blood.

This is because

a) I DO believe Grime's claim that she could sniff out miniscule amounts of blood deposited decades ago - and that the detection of blood was her only expertise - so  -unlike Eddie - there was never any question over what it was she was alerting to. 

and
 b)

I do NOT believe it is possible that not a single drop of blood had ever been in situ in any part of even ONE other apartment, let alone THREE of them, in the very long time scale that Keela could be relied on to make a detection.
--------------------

 It all depended on .... 'time allowed to search' .....IMO.    For instance Keela did not alert to the white curtain in 5A on her first visit  - it took a second visit and a second search before she did that. 

The co-incidence IMO is that it just happened to be all the apartments where Keela was NOT deployed that no alerts to blood were made.

 AIMHO


     
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 08:32:14 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 16, 2017, 05:57:32 PM
Police are duty bound to look at all the evidence and that included the dog alerts which were certainly suggestive of something untoward.  Add to this the fact that the FSS were telling the Portuguese one thing but failing to back it up in their final report apparently.

The part which sells it for me is that the cadaver dogs only showed an interest in McCann related objects and accomodation.  I for one don't believe in serial coincidences.

The fact that the dogs only alerted to things mccann does not sell it for me for reasons I have given  many times on this forum...I too do not b elieve in serial coincindences and that is another raeson I do not beleive there ever was a cadver in 5a.

your claim that the FSS was saying one thing to the PJ is pure speculation  imo with no basis in fact.

i have asked many times what do the alerts tell us...nothing we dont already know  imo...they are basically valuless..imo

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 17, 2017, 08:41:06 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 04:08:06 PM
Please, please, please think twice before reiterating the horrendous misinterpretation of the evidence and the reliance of the Amaral investigation on it resulting in the misdirection of the investigation he coordinated.

If the dogs give doggy indications ... then, over to the humans to make sense of it all.  It is that simple.

We have seen the video ... we have read the forensic results from the human investigation; using the imprimatur of the files we have read the bemused Inspector Diaz stating : "If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times"

Well said Brietta.

Inspector Diaz is correct in what he is saying.

I have mentioned numerous times,  what would have happened if Grime hadn't known it was where the McCann's had been staying?    I doubt very much if he would have called Eddie back numerous times.   What would have happened if Eddie had been searching outside?   Where no one would know where the cadaver would be?  No one would  know where the dog should search,  so no one would be able to keep calling the dog back to search in a particular place.   If a dog can smell the scent of death,  then it is trained to alert to where it smells it,  not run off and have to be called back.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 08:41:28 AM
For alerts which some claim have no validity, the obsession with them continues.

I find this quite strange.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 17, 2017, 08:42:45 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 08:41:28 AM
For alerts which some claim have no validity, the obsession with them continues.

I find this quite strange.

Do you?  Then why do you and others keep mentioning the dog alerts?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 08:43:00 AM
Quote from: Lace on December 17, 2017, 08:41:06 AM
Well said Brietta.

Inspector Diaz is correct in what he is saying.

I have mentioned numerous times,  what would have happened if Grime hadn't known it was where the McCann's had been staying?    I doubt very much if he would have called Eddie back numerous times.   What would have happened if Eddie had been searching outside?   Where no one would know where the cadaver would be?  No one would be know where the dog should search,  so no one would be able to keep calling the dog back to search in a particular place.   If a dog can smell the scent of death,  then it is trained to alert to where it smells it,  not run off and have to be called back.




Was Diaz an expert in dog deployment ?

What experience did he have in this field exactly ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 08:43:44 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 08:41:28 AM
For alerts which some claim have no validity, the obsession with them continues.

I find this quite strange.

when I see something which is so intrinsically wrong imo  posted I like to correct it...what is strange about that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 08:44:55 AM
Quote from: Lace on December 17, 2017, 08:42:45 AM
Do you?  Then why do you and others keep mentioning the dog alerts?

I am watching the reactions.

It is quite fascinating to see the reaction to something which repeated claims have said, have no meaning.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 08:46:14 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 08:43:00 AM

Was Diaz an expert in dog deployment ?

What experience did he have in this field exactly ?

he doesnt have any that we know of so we take his obsevations at face value and they really are quite damning...imo. alice provided a link yesterday to cadaver dogs at work...that was also quite damning to the results iin pdl..al my opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 17, 2017, 08:48:08 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 08:44:55 AM
I am watching the reactions.

It is quite fascinating to see the reaction to something which repeated claims have said, have no meaning.

So,  you and others mention the dog alerts for them then to be discussed,  as this is a discussion board, and then accuse the pro's of being obsessed with the dog alerts,  how strange.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 17, 2017, 08:49:48 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 08:43:00 AM

Was Diaz an expert in dog deployment ?

What experience did he have in this field exactly ?

You don't have to be an expert in dog deployment to observe a dog in action,   not doing what it is meant to do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 08:50:23 AM
Quote from: Lace on December 17, 2017, 08:48:08 AM
So,  you and others mention the dog alerts for them then to be discussed,  as this is a discussion board, and then accuse the pro's of being obsessed with the dog alerts,  how strange.

more predictable than strange...when a poster has no answer to the post...diversion...imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 08:51:44 AM
having little knowledge of cadaver dogs did not stop the PJ drawing incorrect conclusions re the alerts  imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 08:53:00 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 08:46:14 AM
he doesnt have any that we know of so we take his obsevations at face value and they really are quite damning...imo. alice provided a link yesterday to cadaver dogs at work...that was also quite damning to the results iin pdl..al my opinion

That is a matter of opinion AND certainly not mine.

Next.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 08:54:59 AM
Quote from: Lace on December 17, 2017, 08:49:48 AM
You don't have to be an expert in dog deployment to observe a dog in action,   not doing what it is meant to do.

Really ?

On what basis are you doing that ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 08:57:15 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 08:53:00 AM
That is a matter of opinion AND certainly not mine.

Next.

we all have our opinions on the alerts...the difernece is that some opinions are backed by reasoned argumant..imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 08:58:56 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 08:57:15 AM
we all have our opinions on the alerts...the difernece is that some opinions are backed by reasoned argumant..imo

I do not agree it was a reasoned argument.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 09:51:13 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 08:58:56 AM
I do not agree it was a reasoned argument.

whether it is reasoned or not is a matter of opinion. I would say in view of what both Grime and Harrison have stated then no reliabilty or value can be given to the unconfirmed alerts...any conclusions reached by placing value or reliability on the alerts would therefore have no value or reliability..imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 09:58:47 AM

From Martin Grimes statement, YET AGAIN.


'What we should understand with this dog is that he only barks when he finds something, he won't bark at any other times. He won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or anything like that. The only times I've ever known him bark since I've got him as a small puppy a) for his dinner and that's just excitement and that's one of the training methods we use to teach to bark when we want him to and when he actually finds something, he won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or something like that, so again I would say that's a positive indication.'


'My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is
suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant. This does not however
suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a
number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence
reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence.'

YET THE DOGS ONLY MADE ALERTS IN REPSECT OF MATERIAL OR PLACES THE MCCANN'S HAD BEEN.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 10:01:43 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 09:58:47 AM

From Martin Grimes statement, YET AGAIN.


'What we should understand with this dog is that he only barks when he finds something, he won't bark at any other times. He won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or anything like that. The only times I've ever known him bark since I've got him as a small puppy a) for his dinner and that's just excitement and that's one of the training methods we use to teach to bark when we want him to and when he actually finds something, he won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or something like that, so again I would say that's a positive indication.'


'My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is
suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant. This does not however
suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a
number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence
reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence.'

so no evidential or intelligence reliability can be atributed to the alerts...that confirms and supports what i have posted

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 10:06:03 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 09:58:47 AM
From Martin Grimes statement, YET AGAIN.


'What we should understand with this dog is that he only barks when he finds something, he won't bark at any other times. He won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or anything like that. The only times I've ever known him bark since I've got him as a small puppy a) for his dinner and that's just excitement and that's one of the training methods we use to teach to bark when we want him to and when he actually finds something, he won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or something like that, so again I would say that's a positive indication.'


'My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is
suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant. This does not however
suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a
number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence
reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence.'

YET THE DOGS ONLY MADE ALERTS IN REPSECT OF MATERIAL OR PLACES THE MCCANN'S HAD BEEN.

you have added another point which I have repeatedly explained..


The reason the dogs only alerted to things mccann is because it was only in the mccanns apt that they were repeatedly brought back to sites they had repeatedly ignored. The video posted by alice shows a cadaver dog in action which does NOT act in this way...all my opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 17, 2017, 10:09:05 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 10:01:43 AM
so no evidential or intelligence reliability can be atributed to the alerts...that confirms and supports what i have posted

So why did the judge in the first Judgement re McCann V Amaral,state that

Quote
6. The British police dogs “Eddie” and “Keela” detected human blood and cadaver in the apartment 5A, Ocean Club [alínea AR) of the undisputed facts].

Rememebr this is from the judgement you support,she must have thought they had some bearing to have raised them.To raise them she must have thought they must be of evidential reasoning.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 10:09:42 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 10:06:03 AM
you have added another point which I have repeatedly explained..


The reason the dogs only alerted to things mccann is because it was only in the mccanns apt that they were repeatedly brought back to sites they had repeatedly ignored. The video posted by alice shows a cadaver dog in action which does NOT act in this way...all my opinion

One video does not make a world.

As to the alerts, no matter how many times you type it, they will remain, and there is b....r all else in this case.

No evidence, forensic or otherwise to show a burglary/abductor/kidnapper in the apartment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 10:10:40 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 17, 2017, 10:09:05 AM
So why did the judge in the first Judgement re McCann V Amaral,state that

Rememebr this is from the judgement you support,she must have thought they had some bearing to have raised them.To raise them she must have thought they must be of evidential reasoning.

she can think what she likes...the experts say they do not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Benice on December 17, 2017, 10:11:03 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 09:58:47 AM
From Martin Grimes statement, YET AGAIN.


'What we should understand with this dog is that he only barks when he finds something, he won't bark at any other times. He won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or anything like that. The only times I've ever known him bark since I've got him as a small puppy a) for his dinner and that's just excitement and that's one of the training methods we use to teach to bark when we want him to and when he actually finds something, he won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or something like that, so again I would say that's a positive indication.'


'My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is
suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant. This does not however
suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a
number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence
reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence.'

YET THE DOGS ONLY MADE ALERTS IN REPSECT OF MATERIAL OR PLACES THE MCCANN'S HAD BEEN.

As Keela was not deployed in any of  the other apartments, no-one can say for sure that she would not have alerted in one or more of them if she had been sent in.
IMO



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 17, 2017, 10:11:41 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 10:10:40 AM
she can think what she likes...the experts say they do not.

So that's why it got turned over in the appeal court.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 10:12:03 AM
They are circumstantial evidence, and they will remain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 10:13:13 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 10:10:40 AM
she can think what she likes...the experts say they do not.

Yet you supported her when it suited you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 10:15:34 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 10:12:03 AM
They are circumstantial evidence, and they will remain.

they have no value or reliability as evidence according to the experts....that is a fact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 10:20:27 AM
They are circumstantial evidence, and they will remain.

There is nothing else in this case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 10:21:59 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 10:20:27 AM
They are circumstantial evidence, and they will remain.

There is nothing else in this case.

They are not circumstantial evidence imo...cite required
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 10:25:52 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 10:21:59 AM
They are not circumstantial evidence imo...cite required

This has been explained to you before on this forum.

I am not going to waste my time telling you something you have already been told.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 10:28:03 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 10:25:52 AM
This has been explained to you before on this forum.

I am not going to waste my time telling you something you have already been told.

again ..in your opinion...you may think its been expalined..I would say it hasnt

please do not remove this post ...it is within forum rules and I have saved a copy
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 10:39:06 AM
'Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact—like a fingerprint at the scene of a crime. By contrast, direct evidence supports the truth of an assertion directly—i.e., without need for any additional evidence or inference.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence

or,  for general definitions

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=definition+of+circumstantial+evidence&oq=definition+of+circumstantial+&aqs=chrome.0.0j69i57j0l4.19615j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 10:45:49 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 10:39:06 AM
'Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact—like a fingerprint at the scene of a crime. By contrast, direct evidence supports the truth of an assertion directly—i.e., without need for any additional evidence or inference.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence

or,  for general definitions

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=definition+of+circumstantial+evidence&oq=definition+of+circumstantial+&aqs=chrome.0.0j69i57j0l4.19615j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

good post...a fingerprint has evidentail value but is still circumstantial
an unconfirmed alert has no evidential value and cannot therefore be circumstantial evidence..imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 10:47:03 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 10:45:49 AM
good post...a fingerprint has evidentail value but is still circumstantial
an unconfirmed alert has no evidential value and cannot therefore be circumstantial evidence..imo

You need to read again davel.

The alerts are circumstantial.

No doubt about it , IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 10:51:01 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 10:47:03 AM
You need to read again davel.

The alerts are circumstantial.

No doubt about it , IMO.

I dont need to read it again...

the aerts cannot support anything directly or indirectly therefore they cannot  be classed as evidence...as Harrison said...no inference can be drawn from the alerts...therefore they cannot support anything and cannot be classed as circumstanial evidence   imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 10:54:25 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 10:51:01 AM
I dont need to read it again...

the aerts cannot support anything directly or indirectly therefore they cannot  be classed as evidence...as Harrison said...no inference can be drawn from the alerts...therefore they cannot support anything and cannot be classed as circumstanial evidence   imo

I have read several definitions of what is classed as circumstantial evidence.

The alerts fall under those auspices.

IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 11:02:01 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 10:54:25 AM
I have read several definitions of what is classed as circumstantial evidence.

The alerts fall under those auspices.

IMO.

the alerts do not fall under the definition you posted as the alerts cannot support anything as they have no evidential reliability or value...if you have another definition post it but i would suggest it will change nothing  imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 11:08:57 AM
Basically davel, what ever some types on here, which opposes your view, you seem to type the opposite.

Nothing you will type will change my view, that the alerts remain circumstantial evidence.

Let's try leaving it at that, and I will accept you you believe the reverse.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 11:10:38 AM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 11:08:57 AM
Basically davel, what ever some types on here, which opposes your view, you seem to type the opposite.

Nothing you will type will change my view, that the alerts remain circumstantial evidence.

Let's try leaving it at that, and I will accept you you believe the reverse.
You totally misunderstand...Im not intersted in changing your view.. i just wish to tell you you are wrong and expalin why you are wrong...imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 11:12:56 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 11:10:38 AM
You totally misunderstand...Im not intersted in changing your view.. i just wish to tell you you are wrong and expalin why you are wrong...imo

For once, just leave it.

I have explained my view, you have given yours. We will not agree.

End of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on December 17, 2017, 11:51:58 AM
The dog alerts do constitute evidence and will remain so.  The caveat to that however is that it is unconfirmed evidence at best and possibly totally unconnected at the least.  If a body is subsequently found the dog alerts could take on a whole new meaning imo.  As mentioned yesterday, the fact that the alerts appear to be restricted to the McCanns is sinister imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 11:55:56 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 17, 2017, 11:51:58 AM
The dog alerts do constitute evidence and will remain so.  The caveat to that however is that it is unconfirmed evidence at best and possibly totally unconnected at the least.  If a body is subsequently found the dog alerts could take on a whole new meaning imo.  As mentioned yesterday, the fact that the alerts appear to be restricted to the McCanns is sinister imo.

You can think what you like but the experts say the alerts have no value or reliability as evidence....fact not opinion
I have explained why the dogs only alerted to things McCann ...my opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on December 17, 2017, 12:12:34 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 11:55:56 AM
You can think what you like but the experts say the alerts have no value or reliability as evidence....fact not opinion
I have explained why the dogs only alerted to things McCann ...my opinion

The alternative being one or both of them came into contact with a cadaver.  Only time will tell.  Is it any wonder many people suspect the parents after everything that happened?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 12:26:26 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 17, 2017, 12:12:34 PM
The alternative being one or both of them came into contact with a cadaver.  Only time will tell.  Is it any wonder many people suspect the parents after everything that happened?
People suspect the McCann's because they do not understand the dogs...imo
It is quite possible that there was never a cadaver in that apartment and the McCann's never came into contact with s cadaver
That is fact not opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 17, 2017, 01:17:39 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 12:26:26 PM
People suspect the McCann's because they do not understand the dogs...imo
It is quite possible that there was never a cadaver in that apartment and the McCann's never came into contact with s cadaver
That is fact not opinion

Is it opinion dressed as fact.
No6 of the proven facts in the McCann V Amaral case,clearly states there was a cadaver alert.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 01:27:59 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 17, 2017, 01:17:39 PM
Is it opinion dressed as fact.
No6 of the proven facts in the McCann V Amaral case,clearly states there was a cadaver alert.
Then according to Grime and Harrison they are wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 01:42:22 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 17, 2017, 01:17:39 PM
Is it opinion dressed as fact.
No6 of the proven facts in the McCann V Amaral case,clearly states there was a cadaver alert.

Indeed.

That still stands in the judgement and has not been revoked.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on December 17, 2017, 02:18:57 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 17, 2017, 12:12:34 PM
The alternative being one or both of them came into contact with a cadaver.  Only time will tell.  Is it any wonder many people suspect the parents after everything that happened?


And many people do not!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on December 17, 2017, 02:35:13 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 09:58:47 AM
From Martin Grimes statement, YET AGAIN.


'What we should understand with this dog is that he only barks when he finds something, he won't bark at any other times. He won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or anything like that. The only times I've ever known him bark since I've got him as a small puppy a) for his dinner and that's just excitement and that's one of the training methods we use to teach to bark when we want him to and when he actually finds something, he won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or something like that, so again I would say that's a positive indication.'


'My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is
suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant. This does not however
suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a
number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence
reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence.'

YET THE DOGS ONLY MADE ALERTS IN REPSECT OF MATERIAL OR PLACES THE MCCANN'S HAD BEEN.


Unless the dog barked at nothing in particular, I'd assume that he did indeed bark at "something". What "something"  was, we may never know. According to Grime, he'd react to whatever was within his "training parameters"... but we don't know exactly what that encompassed or excluded.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 02:41:59 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 01:49:04 PM
according to the experts it is wrong

The Portuguese Court Judgement stands as with the contents.


Unless you are implying Grime or Harrison were called to give evidence. 8)-)))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 17, 2017, 02:58:37 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 17, 2017, 01:17:39 PM
Is it opinion dressed as fact.
No6 of the proven facts in the McCann V Amaral case,clearly states there was a cadaver alert.


Zampo alerted forty five times ... all false positives ... there were no bodies and the serial killer wasn't one.

"I've got another good example of a conviction without a body.  The case of Thomas Quick, the Swedish serial killer who never was.  Zampo the cadaver dog alerted no less than 45 times in places that Quick claimed to have brought his victims' bodies.  The only slight problem was...he never actually committed any of the murders.  Ooops."  Alfie
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/20/thomas-quick-bergwall-sweden-murder

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5883.msg210424#msg210424
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 02:59:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 01:49:04 PM
according to the experts it is wrong

Irrelevant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on December 17, 2017, 03:11:13 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 17, 2017, 11:51:58 AM
The dog alerts do constitute evidence and will remain so.  The caveat to that however is that it is unconfirmed evidence at best and possibly totally unconnected at the least.  If a body is subsequently found the dog alerts could take on a whole new meaning imo.  As mentioned yesterday, the fact that the alerts appear to be restricted to the McCanns is sinister imo.

In a sense, yes, the footage of the dogs alerts could constitute evidence, if judged to be admissible in a country with no known precedent. There's always a first.

However, yet again, the dogs were assets to help find any trace of physical evidence... and there simply wasn't any.

FTR, I don't exclude the possibility that she could have died in the flat that night (whatever happened), but I just don't see any evidence that she did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 03:14:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 03:03:14 PM
Tell me when it was proven

Read the judgement as to what is proved, or read Barrier's comment on the previous page.

This has been done on several previous occasions on this forum
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 03:51:24 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 03:47:48 PM
There is no confirmation of cadaver odour so it cannot have been proved
We would need to know exactly what the court means by...proven facts....but one thing that we do know is....the alerts are not proof
It really is that simple

IT IS IRRELEVANT WHAT YOU THINK.

It is what is in the judgement.

Why don't you read it again ? 8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 17, 2017, 03:56:12 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 03:51:24 PM
IT IS IRRELEVANT WHAT YOU THINK.

It is what is in the judgement.

Why don't you read it again ? 8(0(*

Never a truer word.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on December 17, 2017, 04:19:58 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 04:08:35 PM
Lets establish the facts..

the proven facts state that the dogs  alerted to cadaver odour

Harrison and grime say there is no confirmation

They both cannot be true...one of them has to be wrong


Hmmm.

Supposedly:

- Eddie reacted to whatever was within his "training parameters". Whatever those actually were is less than clear.

- Keela only reacted to the physical presence of blood. And, according to Grime, she could alert to molecules of blood that couldn't be detected by forensic analysis, and that she accurately found the scent of blood that was more than 30 years old.

I can see the USP of a dog trainer embarking on a new career, but I can't see any physical evidence that these canine assets were supposed to have pinpointed in this case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 17, 2017, 04:20:15 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 17, 2017, 04:08:35 PM
Lets establish the facts..

the proven facts state that the dogs  alerted to cadaver odour

Harrison and grime say there is no confirmation

They both cannot be true...one of them has to be wrong

What we need is the definition of what the court means by proven facts

Have a read.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0

Quote
Taking into account the matter considered undisputed in the selection of facts and the decision handed down in due course after producing the matter of evidence and discussing the case, the following facts are demonstrated :

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 17, 2017, 08:19:49 PM
Quote from: stephen25000 on December 17, 2017, 02:59:50 PM
Irrelevant.
Rude.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 14, 2018, 03:11:54 PM
I just came across this -

On 9 May, the 24 Horas newspaper reported that police had found a vehicle near Praia da Luz that may have been used by the kidnapper.[15] Further, CCTV video from a petrol station near Lagos showed a child matching Madeleine's description with a woman and two men. The child was having an altercation with the woman.[15] The following day it was reported that the car from the petrol station had British number plates and it was claimed that the person caught taking photographs was one of the men on the CCTV footage.[13] [16]


I hadn't seen that before.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 04, 2018, 03:22:51 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-26324244
The strange case of the 'time travel' murder
28 April 2014

A woman's body is found in London. DNA turns up a hit, yet the suspect apparently died weeks before the alleged victim. Here, forensic scientist Dr Mike Silverman tells the story of one of the strangest cases of his career.

It was a real-life mystery that could have come straight from the pages of a modern-day detective novel.

A woman had been brutally murdered in London and biological material had been found under her fingernails, possibly indicating that she might have scratched her attacker just before she died.

A sample of the material was analysed and results compared with the National DNA database and quickly came back with a positive match.

The problem was, the "hit" identified a woman who had herself been murdered - a full three weeks before the death of her alleged "victim".

The killings had taken place in different areas of the capital and were being investigated by separate teams of detectives.

With no sign of a connection between the two women and nothing to suggest they had ever met, the most "likely" scenario was that the samples had been mixed-up or contaminated at the one obvious place that they had come together - the forensic laboratory. A complaint was made by the senior investigating officer.

It was 1997 and I was the national account manager for the Forensic Science Service at the time, so it was my responsibility to find out if a mistake had been made at the laboratory.

My first thought was that perhaps the second victim's fingernail clipping had been mislabelled and had actually come from the first victim all along. As soon as I started to look at the samples, I could see this wasn't the case

The victim had painted her nails with a distinctive leopard skin pattern and the cuttings that had been taken bore the exact same pattern. There was no doubt that they were the correct ones.

I then checked through the laboratory records to see if there was any way the samples could have been accidentally mixed-up.

This too turned out to be a non-starter as the two sets of samples had never been out of the lab's exhibit store at the same time. In any event, several weeks had passed between the analysis of the first and second clippings and different members of staff had been involved.

Determined to get to the bottom of the mystery, I decided to look more closely at how the clippings themselves had come to be collected and discovered that both bodies had undergone an autopsy at the same mortuary, though they had arrived there several weeks apart.

Forensic autopsies - those carried out in the case of murder or suspicious death - are far more detailed and involved than standard, non-criminal autopsies. Among other examinations, blood and organ samples are collected for toxicological testing, stomach contents are collected and analysed and fingernails are scraped and clipped.

It was while I was examining the mortuary records that I came across a possible answer. It transpired that the body of the first murder victim had been kept in the freezer for several weeks while the police carried out their initial investigation.

It had been removed from the freezer to allow the pathologist to take additional nail clippings the day before the body of the second murder victim had arrived at the mortuary.

The following day, the same pair of scissors had been used to cut the nails of the second murder victim. Although the scissors had been cleaned between uses, I couldn't help but wonder whether sufficient genetic material had survived the cleaning process to transfer onto the second victim's nails and then produce a DNA profile in the subsequent analysis.

I had started my career in forensic science during the late 1970s and back then, the idea of being able to identify someone from a few tiny drops of blood seemed like something out of science fiction.

In those early days, we rarely wore protective clothing at crime scenes or worried about potential contamination because there was no method to analyse any biological material that was as small as the eye could see.

Today, everyone entering a crime scene has to don a new, clean paper over-suit and overshoes as well as gloves since DNA retrieval techniques are now so sensitive that simply lightly touching an object - such as a door knob or knife handle - can leave enough of a trace to carry out a successful DNA analysis.

In 1997, the time of the mystery murder, DNA profiling was only a few years old and, as I was about to discover, the technology was improving so quickly that previously unforeseen problems were beginning to occur.

I arranged for the nail scissors from the mortuary to be analysed and discovered not two but three separate DNA profiles were present. Further examination found DNA contamination on several other mortuary instruments but it was only ever going to present a problem when it came to fingernail scissors.

The autopsy knives, for example, were found to have traces of DNA of several different people on them, but because incisions were never sampled for DNA, cross contamination was not an issue.

I immediately sent out an urgent memo to all coroners, mortuaries and forensic pathologists in the country, highlighting the problem and suggesting that, in the future, all nail clippings should be taken with disposable scissors and that the scissors should then be placed in the evidence bag with the nail clippings to confirm they had only been used once. It's a system that remains in place to this day.

Modern DNA analysis is now so sensitive that contamination is a major issue, with the potential to send criminal investigations spiralling off in the wrong direction.

In Germany in 2007, traces of DNA belonging to an unknown female were found at the scene of the murder of a police officer.

When run through the German database, identical DNA was found to have been present at the scene of five other murders in Germany and France, along with several burglaries and car thefts. In total, the woman's DNA was found at 40 separate crime scenes.

The German authorities spent two years and thousands of hours searching for the culprit, only to discover that the DNA had in fact been present on the swabs the crime scene investigators had been using to collect their samples. The swabs had been accidentally contaminated by a woman working at the factory that produced them.

For years DNA has been seen as the ultimate crime-fighting weapon with successful convictions arising from ever smaller traces, but in many ways DNA analysis has become a victim of its own success.

Now that we have the ability to create a DNA profile from just a few human cells, traces can be found almost everywhere.

But as we are all depositing DNA everywhere we go, the significance of finding and analysing these traces will become increasingly open to interpretation unless there is sufficient DNA material present to eliminate the possibility of secondary contact or cross-contamination, or additional evidence supporting direct involvement in the crime.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dr Mike Silverman is the author of Written In Blood, a history of forensic science.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 07, 2018, 11:20:13 PM
http://portugalresident.com/anti-corruption-watchdog-sinks-teeth-into-portugal
Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on March 07, 2018
GRECO, the council of Europe’s anti-corruption agency, has delivered a broadside to Portugal just as yet another case of alleged institutional corruption hogs the headlines.

In a report released this week, GRECO stresses that Portugal has “a very low level of compliance” with recommendations on fighting corruption among MPs, judges and prosecutors.

Portugal has only “satisfactorily implemented” one of the 15 recommendations that came out of an agency evaluation three years ago, says the report.

“Three have been partly implemented” but 11 have been left hanging - a situation GRECO qualifies as “globally unsatisfactory” as it calls on the country to “step up its efforts” to clamp down on what is often seen here as the ‘way things work’.

GRECO concedes Portugal has launched “an ambitious reform aimed at bolstering integrity, enhancing accountability and increasing transparency of a wide range of public office holders” but it points out that “it remains to be seen whether and how the overarching principles and standards of conduct for MPs are developed”.

“As far as judges are concerned”, says the agency’s press statement, “GRECO is disappointed by the non-fulfillment of recommendations that it deems crucial for fostering greater independence of the judiciary and of judges and enhancing public trust in this branch”.

The watchdog has given Portugal until December “to report back on the implementation of the outstanding recommendations” - by which time there may be even more ‘shocking cases of institutional corruption’ under Public Ministry investigation.

In a story being widely repeated over the United States media, Associated Press remarks: “In recent years, a former Portuguese prime minister, the government minister overseeing the police, the head of the country's largest private bank and two senior magistrates, among other officials, have been arrested on suspicion of corruption”.

And today the implications of the latest 'e-toupeira' investigation centering on alleged skullduggery involving judicial employees, among others, is being splashed across the nation's television screens (click here). Indeed, since we wrote our story, new names have joined the list of 'arguidos'.

natasha.donn@algarveresident.com

'E-toupeira' is a corruption investigation involving Benfica FC. Shades of Cristovao & Sporting FC.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 12, 2018, 12:34:47 AM
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43362511

Gabriel Cruz.  Spain.  I know no more than the report above, which is to the effect that his step-mother was pulled over in a car with Gabriel's body in the boot, after making an emotional plea for his return.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 12, 2018, 01:39:38 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 12, 2018, 12:34:47 AM
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43362511

Gabriel Cruz.  Spain.  I know no more than the report above, which is to the effect that his step-mother was pulled over in a car with Gabriel's body in the boot, after making an emotional plea for his return.
That is a few weeks old now.  I wonder where the body has been stored for if it was warm its not going to be very nice by now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 12, 2018, 02:58:43 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 12, 2018, 01:39:38 AM
That is a few weeks old now.  I wonder where the body has been stored for if it was warm its not going to be very nice by now.
The report is currently 9 hours old.   *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 12, 2018, 03:06:52 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 12, 2018, 02:58:43 AM
The report is currently 9 hours old.   *%87
OK I might have jumped to conclusions here, assuming he had been dead since he was last seen

"Gabriel was last seen on 27 February when he left his grandmother's house in the village of Las Hortichuelas in the municipality of Níjar.

He was supposed to go over to a neighbour's for a play date, but he never returned.

On 3 March, the boy's father Angel Cruz and his now arrested partner, Ana Julia Quezada, found a T-shirt with his DNA 10 km (6 miles) from Nijar.

It is the 12th today   OK  4 days after going missing the parents are arrested.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 12, 2018, 02:26:14 PM
Apparently the accidental death of the woman in question's daughter is being looked at again.  The child fell to her death from a window.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 12, 2018, 03:53:05 PM
Gabriel Cruz.  Correio da Manhã is reporting, via El Pais in Spain.

http://www.cmjornal.pt/mundo/detalhe/gabriel-cruz-foi-estrangulado-no-dia-em-que-desapareceu?ref=HP_Grupo1

According to El Pais, an autopsy has shown that Gabriel was strangled on the day he went missing.

Ana Julia Quezada, the girlfriend of Gabriel's father, appears on video in the link.  The language is Spanish, but even if your understanding of Spanish is poor, you will get the gist from the visuals.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on March 13, 2018, 10:35:55 AM
surely no amount of money -  is going to find any evidence of abduction.



A response is still awaited from the British Home Office to last month’s request for more funding, which came at a time when the Met, along with police forces throughout the UK, are under severe budget pressure and laying off thousands of officers.

Aside from such pressure, many analysts have described the Operation Grange investigation as a “sham”.

Colin Sutton, a highly respected senior Met detective now in retirement, has been more concise in his criticism.

Last May, around the 10th anniversary of Madeleine’s disappearance, he said the investigation had been so “restricted” from the start that it was destined to fail.

After being tipped to lead Operation Grange, Colin Sutton was advised against it in a phone conversation with another senior Met officer. He was told that operation Grange would be restricted to the abduction theory.
 
Colin Sutton has not elaborated since last May, but nor has he backtracked on his comments.

He said recently: “I have no reason to change my view that Grange was never a comprehensive reinvestigation of all possible theories and that unless and until it changes that focus it will be doomed to fail.”

http://portugalresident.com/justice-for-madeleine-and-mary
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 13, 2018, 10:47:11 AM
Quote from: kizzy on March 13, 2018, 10:35:55 AM
surely no amount of money -  is going to find any evidence of abduction.



A response is still awaited from the British Home Office to last month’s request for more funding, which came at a time when the Met, along with police forces throughout the UK, are under severe budget pressure and laying off thousands of officers.

Aside from such pressure, many analysts have described the Operation Grange investigation as a “sham”.

Colin Sutton, a highly respected senior Met detective now in retirement, has been more concise in his criticism.

Last May, around the 10th anniversary of Madeleine’s disappearance, he said the investigation had been so “restricted” from the start that it was destined to fail.

After being tipped to lead Operation Grange, Colin Sutton was advised against it in a phone conversation with another senior Met officer. He was told that operation Grange would be restricted to the abduction theory.
 
Colin Sutton has not elaborated since last May, but nor has he backtracked on his comments.

He said recently: “I have no reason to change my view that Grange was never a comprehensive reinvestigation of all possible theories and that unless and until it changes that focus it will be doomed to fail.”

http://portugalresident.com/justice-for-madeleine-and-mary

Colin Sutton has backtracked... In May he said he would look at the case in more, detail... I don't have the exact wording but it's on his blog... He seems to have not followed through with this
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on March 13, 2018, 10:56:49 AM
Quote from: Davel on March 13, 2018, 10:47:11 AM
Colin Sutton has backtracked... In May he said he would look at the case in more, detail... I don't have the exact wording but it's on his blog... He seems to have not followed through with this

So if he has looked at it in more detail....what has he come up with.

Or has he not come up with anything, apart from what he said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 13, 2018, 11:00:19 AM
Quote from: kizzy on March 13, 2018, 10:56:49 AM
So if he has looked at it in more detail....what has he come up with.

Or has he not come up with anything, apart from what he said.

Maybe a work in  progress - rather like OG
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 13, 2018, 08:53:15 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 13, 2018, 11:00:19 AM
Maybe a work in  progress - rather like OG


With only two flights abroad by OG officers up to August of last year,thats a stretch of an imagination.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 13, 2018, 08:56:21 PM
Quote from: kizzy on March 13, 2018, 10:56:49 AM
So if he has looked at it in more detail....what has he come up with.

Or has he not come up with anything, apart from what he said.

he has bactracked on his statement  to look at the case in more detail
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 13, 2018, 09:01:31 PM
Quote from: kizzy on March 13, 2018, 10:56:49 AM
So if he has looked at it in more detail....what has he come up with.

Or has he not come up with anything, apart from what he said.
Maybe he has heard something on the grapevine and doesn't publicly like to lose face and back down ?  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 13, 2018, 09:06:01 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 13, 2018, 08:53:15 PM

With only two flights abroad by OG officers up to August of last year,thats a stretch of an imagination.

With modern technology, a physical presence may not be necessary. After all, it's not as if there is any physical searching.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on March 15, 2018, 12:45:48 AM
Quote from: Davel on March 13, 2018, 10:47:11 AM
Colin Sutton has backtracked... In May he said he would look at the case in more, detail... I don't have the exact wording but it's on his blog... He seems to have not followed through with this

Are you really surprised?  It would be interesting to establish who at the Home Office was responsible for ensuring that Operation Grange would never be a comprehensive reinvestigation of all possible theories.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 15, 2018, 03:05:09 AM
This could well warrant a thread of its own.
I have just noticed that the alleged kidnapping, convicted fraudster Paulo Pereira Cristovao appears to have started work for Goldman Sachs.
Goldman Sachs are currently embroiled in a case with the Portuguese Bank BES over a defaulted loan of a mere €765m.  Make of the appointment what you will.


https://www.algarvedailynews.com/news/10291-goldman-sachs-vs-novo-banco-case-to-be-heard-in-lisbon-not-london

Three London Court of Appeal judges unanimously have ruled that the legal dispute between Novo Banco and the US bank Goldman Sachs will have to be resolved in Portugal and not in the British courts.

This decision overturned a lower court decision in August that stated that the loan set arranged by Goldman Sachs in favour of the former Banco Espírito Santo (BES) just two months before it collapsed, could be heard in London.

Novo Banco, now run by António Ramalho, had argued that the case should be heard in Portugal with Goldman Sachs wanting the case to be judged in London in what it sees as a more competent and skilled framework when dealing with complex financial matters.

Novo Banco today said that the London court agreed with the decision of the Bank of Portugal that the case came under Portuguese law and that the proper place for the action to take place is in Portugal where the Administrative Court of Lisbon now will handle the battle over the €765 million 'disappearing loan.'

The money was credited to BES in June 2014 by Oak Finance, an investment vehicle set up by Goldman Sachs which was made up of several powerful funds.

BES then went bust in August 2014 and after its mutation into Novo Banco, the debt was taken on by Novo Banco as a liability.

In December 2014, the Bank of Portugal, led by Carlos Costa, shifted this liability from the recently refinanced ‘good bank’ Novo Banco to ‘bad bank’, the old BES which had no way of repaying such an amount.

The legal action to recover the debt that Carols Costa had wiped out with his magic wand was filed in the summer of 2015 by the group of international investors in Oak Finance which included a New Zealand state pension fund.

That case was opened after Novo Banco failed to pay the first installment of the loan in question, with the bank chaired by Eduardo Stock da Cunha considering itself free of this responsibility, but due only to some nifty and unethical financial footwork.

Much as the world dislikes Goldmnan Sachs, it has a good case against Novo Banco which, in collusion with the Bank of Portugal, stripped out a loan that was repayable when part of Novo Banco, and in effect was written off when is passed back to the BES ‘bad bank’ which was, and remains, deeply insolvent with billions in liabilities and scant few remaining assets.

Goldman Sachs will not be best pleased that the hearing now will be in Portugal where it rightly assumes that political interference is more likely than in London.
====================================================

 Ex Portuguese PM Barroso is also currently working for Goldman Sachs International as the non-executive chairman.

https://www.expatica.com/pt/news/country-news/AD-Barroso-caught-lobbying-for-Goldman-Sachs-despite-ban_1715959.html
Portugal’s Durão Barroso, former Prime Minister of Portugal, former EC President and current employee of the giant vampire squid, Goldman Sachs, has been caught lobbying on behalf of his employer, breaking a ban imposed by the European Commission when he left office.

EU Commissioner, Jyrki Katainen,� confirmed he had a lobby meeting with Barroso who had his Goldman Sachs International hat on.

�

Katainen, EU Commissioner for Jobs, Growth, Investment and Competitiveness, has confirmed Barroso lobbied for investment bank Goldman Sachs International in a meeting at which the two discussed trade and defence.

After Barroso’s highly controversial appointment by Goldman Sachs in 2016, the ex-EU president told his successor, Jean-Claude Juncker, that of course he would not be lobbying EU institutions on behalf of his new employer.

This promise led the European Commission’s ethics committee to conclude that Barroso’s appointment would not interfere with his continuing duty to maintain integrity and discretion as set out in the EU treaties.

Katainen’s confirmation suggests that Barroso has ignored his earlier undertaking, an undertaking which protected his more than ample EU pension, and has betrayed the ethics committee’s trust that he would stick to his word.

European pressure group,� ALTER-EU, has filed a complaint urging the Commission to re-evaluate Barroso’s job at Goldman Sachs as he has been active in lobbying the European Commission.

Margarida Silva from ALTER-EU commented today, “Commissioner Katainen’s letter strongly suggests that Barroso is indeed using his privileged position to lobby the EU on behalf of Goldman Sachs. No one outside the institution has more insider know-how, contacts and lingering influence than a former president of the Commission, which is a great asset for any actor seeking to influence EU policy.”

“Given the new facts, the Commission’s ethics committee must re-assess its acceptance of Barroso’s role at Goldman Sachs. Former Presidents using their insider status to shape EU policy on behalf of a new employer shows neither integrity nor discretion.”

Myriam Douo from ALTER-EU member group Friends of the Earth Europe said, “This meeting is an excellent example of how the revolving door between politics and business benefits corporations. Barroso was able to set up a one-on-one meeting with a sitting commissioner with a single phone call. They met in a hotel and no minutes were kept of any part of the discussion.

“Only an insider like Barroso can get this type of highly-privileged access, which undermines democracy and feeds distrust in European cooperation. Barroso must face repercussions for breaking the European Treaties and his case be forwarded to the European Court of Justice.”

The confirmation of the lobby meeting between Barroso and Katainen added weight to an earlier complaint by ALTER-EU, which highlighted that the assessment of the former President’s new role was too narrow to fulfil the requirements of Article 245 of the European Treaties.


© algarvedailynews.com
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 15, 2018, 08:35:57 AM
Quote from: misty on March 15, 2018, 03:05:09 AM
This could well warrant a thread of its own.
I have just noticed that the alleged kidnapping, convicted fraudster Paulo Pereira Cristovao appears to have started work for Goldman Sachs.
Goldman Sachs are currently embroiled in a case with the Portuguese Bank BES over a defaulted loan of a mere €765m.  Make of the appointment what you will.


https://www.algarvedailynews.com/news/10291-goldman-sachs-vs-novo-banco-case-to-be-heard-in-lisbon-not-london

Three London Court of Appeal judges unanimously have ruled that the legal dispute between Novo Banco and the US bank Goldman Sachs will have to be resolved in Portugal and not in the British courts.

This decision overturned a lower court decision in August that stated that the loan set arranged by Goldman Sachs in favour of the former Banco Espírito Santo (BES) just two months before it collapsed, could be heard in London.

Novo Banco, now run by António Ramalho, had argued that the case should be heard in Portugal with Goldman Sachs wanting the case to be judged in London in what it sees as a more competent and skilled framework when dealing with complex financial matters.

Novo Banco today said that the London court agreed with the decision of the Bank of Portugal that the case came under Portuguese law and that the proper place for the action to take place is in Portugal where the Administrative Court of Lisbon now will handle the battle over the €765 million 'disappearing loan.'

The money was credited to BES in June 2014 by Oak Finance, an investment vehicle set up by Goldman Sachs which was made up of several powerful funds.

BES then went bust in August 2014 and after its mutation into Novo Banco, the debt was taken on by Novo Banco as a liability.

In December 2014, the Bank of Portugal, led by Carlos Costa, shifted this liability from the recently refinanced ‘good bank’ Novo Banco to ‘bad bank’, the old BES which had no way of repaying such an amount.

The legal action to recover the debt that Carols Costa had wiped out with his magic wand was filed in the summer of 2015 by the group of international investors in Oak Finance which included a New Zealand state pension fund.

That case was opened after Novo Banco failed to pay the first installment of the loan in question, with the bank chaired by Eduardo Stock da Cunha considering itself free of this responsibility, but due only to some nifty and unethical financial footwork.

Much as the world dislikes Goldmnan Sachs, it has a good case against Novo Banco which, in collusion with the Bank of Portugal, stripped out a loan that was repayable when part of Novo Banco, and in effect was written off when is passed back to the BES ‘bad bank’ which was, and remains, deeply insolvent with billions in liabilities and scant few remaining assets.

Goldman Sachs will not be best pleased that the hearing now will be in Portugal where it rightly assumes that political interference is more likely than in London.
====================================================

 Ex Portuguese PM Barroso is also currently working for Goldman Sachs International as the non-executive chairman.

https://www.expatica.com/pt/news/country-news/AD-Barroso-caught-lobbying-for-Goldman-Sachs-despite-ban_1715959.html
Portugal’s Durão Barroso, former Prime Minister of Portugal, former EC President and current employee of the giant vampire squid, Goldman Sachs, has been caught lobbying on behalf of his employer, breaking a ban imposed by the European Commission when he left office.

EU Commissioner, Jyrki Katainen,� confirmed he had a lobby meeting with Barroso who had his Goldman Sachs International hat on.

�

Katainen, EU Commissioner for Jobs, Growth, Investment and Competitiveness, has confirmed Barroso lobbied for investment bank Goldman Sachs International in a meeting at which the two discussed trade and defence.

After Barroso’s highly controversial appointment by Goldman Sachs in 2016, the ex-EU president told his successor, Jean-Claude Juncker, that of course he would not be lobbying EU institutions on behalf of his new employer.

This promise led the European Commission’s ethics committee to conclude that Barroso’s appointment would not interfere with his continuing duty to maintain integrity and discretion as set out in the EU treaties.

Katainen’s confirmation suggests that Barroso has ignored his earlier undertaking, an undertaking which protected his more than ample EU pension, and has betrayed the ethics committee’s trust that he would stick to his word.

European pressure group,� ALTER-EU, has filed a complaint urging the Commission to re-evaluate Barroso’s job at Goldman Sachs as he has been active in lobbying the European Commission.

Margarida Silva from ALTER-EU commented today, “Commissioner Katainen’s letter strongly suggests that Barroso is indeed using his privileged position to lobby the EU on behalf of Goldman Sachs. No one outside the institution has more insider know-how, contacts and lingering influence than a former president of the Commission, which is a great asset for any actor seeking to influence EU policy.”

“Given the new facts, the Commission’s ethics committee must re-assess its acceptance of Barroso’s role at Goldman Sachs. Former Presidents using their insider status to shape EU policy on behalf of a new employer shows neither integrity nor discretion.”

Myriam Douo from ALTER-EU member group Friends of the Earth Europe said, “This meeting is an excellent example of how the revolving door between politics and business benefits corporations. Barroso was able to set up a one-on-one meeting with a sitting commissioner with a single phone call. They met in a hotel and no minutes were kept of any part of the discussion.

“Only an insider like Barroso can get this type of highly-privileged access, which undermines democracy and feeds distrust in European cooperation. Barroso must face repercussions for breaking the European Treaties and his case be forwarded to the European Court of Justice.”

The confirmation of the lobby meeting between Barroso and Katainen added weight to an earlier complaint by ALTER-EU, which highlighted that the assessment of the former President’s new role was too narrow to fulfil the requirements of Article 245 of the European Treaties.


© algarvedailynews.com

Sometimes I get the feeling I'm in a parallel universe ...

JUSTICE
MP asks for new trial for Paulo Pereira Cristóvão and 17 other defendants
In the investigative debate, which took place this Friday in the Sintra Court, the Public Prosecutor's Office defended that the defendants did not present anything that "uproots the accusation".

LUSA March 9, 2018, 6:11 PM

The Public Prosecutor's Office (MP) wants Paulo Pereira Cristóvão , a former inspector of the Judiciary Police, and 17 other defendants accused of violent assaults on residences in Lisbon and Cascais to be tried again for the facts that appear in the indictment.

Snip
Robbery, kidnapping, criminal association
In that sense, the magistrate defended that the 18 defendants be pronounced [follow for judgment] in the exact terms of the prosecution order of the Public Ministry, which describes seven assaults or robberies in Lisbon and Cascais.

Pereira Cristóvão is accused of two felonies of qualified robbery, one in attempted form, four crimes of kidnapping, two crimes of usurpation of functions, two crimes of detention of prohibited weapon and of a crime of adhesion to criminal association.

The lawyer of the former PJ inspector and also former vice-president of Sporting asked for his constituent not to be pronounced [not to be judged] by these 11 crimes.

Rui Costa Pereira admits, however, that the criminal investigating judge Cristina Henriques Esteves changes the "degree of participation" of his client "to complicity in the only crime that is indicated practiced."

Snip
The 18 defendants, including three policemen and leone Juve Leo cheerleader Nuno Vieira Mendes, known as Mustafa, respond by criminal association, robbery, kidnapping, possession of a prohibited weapon, abuse of power, violation of domicile by employee and document forgery.

According to the indictment of the Public Prosecutor's Office, Paulo Pereira Cristóvão, a former inspector of the PJ and also a former vice-president of Sporting, two other defendants and the three police gathered information and decided which people and places to assault by the group, namely in the Lisbon area and on the south bank of the Tagus River.

The information was then transmitted to the other elements, which formed the operational side of the alleged criminal network.
https://www.publico.pt/2018/03/09/sociedade/noticia/mp-pede-novo-julgamento-para-paulo-pereira-cristovao-e-outros-17-arguidos-1806061
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on March 19, 2018, 03:20:37 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 15, 2018, 08:35:57 AM
Sometimes I get the feeling I'm in a parallel universe ...

JUSTICE
MP asks for new trial for Paulo Pereira Cristóvão and 17 other defendants
In the investigative debate, which took place this Friday in the Sintra Court, the Public Prosecutor's Office defended that the defendants did not present anything that "uproots the accusation".

LUSA March 9, 2018, 6:11 PM

The Public Prosecutor's Office (MP) wants Paulo Pereira Cristóvão , a former inspector of the Judiciary Police, and 17 other defendants accused of violent assaults on residences in Lisbon and Cascais to be tried again for the facts that appear in the indictment.

Snip
Robbery, kidnapping, criminal association
In that sense, the magistrate defended that the 18 defendants be pronounced [follow for judgment] in the exact terms of the prosecution order of the Public Ministry, which describes seven assaults or robberies in Lisbon and Cascais.

Pereira Cristóvão is accused of two felonies of qualified robbery, one in attempted form, four crimes of kidnapping, two crimes of usurpation of functions, two crimes of detention of prohibited weapon and of a crime of adhesion to criminal association.

The lawyer of the former PJ inspector and also former vice-president of Sporting asked for his constituent not to be pronounced [not to be judged] by these 11 crimes.

Rui Costa Pereira admits, however, that the criminal investigating judge Cristina Henriques Esteves changes the "degree of participation" of his client "to complicity in the only crime that is indicated practiced."

Snip
The 18 defendants, including three policemen and leone Juve Leo cheerleader Nuno Vieira Mendes, known as Mustafa, respond by criminal association, robbery, kidnapping, possession of a prohibited weapon, abuse of power, violation of domicile by employee and document forgery.

According to the indictment of the Public Prosecutor's Office, Paulo Pereira Cristóvão, a former inspector of the PJ and also a former vice-president of Sporting, two other defendants and the three police gathered information and decided which people and places to assault by the group, namely in the Lisbon area and on the south bank of the Tagus River.

The information was then transmitted to the other elements, which formed the operational side of the alleged criminal network.
https://www.publico.pt/2018/03/09/sociedade/noticia/mp-pede-novo-julgamento-para-paulo-pereira-cristovao-e-outros-17-arguidos-1806061


Who did he allegedly kidnap?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 25, 2018, 01:52:09 PM
Is the long-overdue Poulton documentary coming out tomorrow?

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 25, 2018, 03:47:08 PM
Quote from: misty on April 25, 2018, 01:52:09 PM
Is the long-overdue Poulton documentary coming out tomorrow?

Gosh.  That looks interesting.  Although heaven knows what Pat Brown has to do with this.  A deflection perhaps.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 26, 2018, 05:25:32 PM
Quote from: misty on April 25, 2018, 01:52:09 PM
Is the long-overdue Poulton documentary coming out tomorrow?

According to a screenshot from twitter posted elsewhere we are destined to remain on documentary tenterhooks for some time to come.
As Miss O'Hara said,  "Tomorrow is another day."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 26, 2018, 05:31:14 PM

Oh Dear.  What a pity.  I have been sooo looking forward to this for sooo long.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 26, 2018, 09:38:40 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 26, 2018, 05:25:32 PM
According to a screenshot from twitter posted elsewhere we are destined to remain on documentary tenterhooks for some time to come.
As Miss O'Hara said,  "Tomorrow is another day."

said Dougal, and it was. ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 27, 2018, 01:33:21 PM
Its up on the tube for those interested.

https://youtu.be/q1M_CulIDrQ
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on April 27, 2018, 02:44:55 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 27, 2018, 01:33:21 PM
Its up on the tube for those interested.

https://youtu.be/q1M_CulIDrQ

Well that was rather boring  IMO of course
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 27, 2018, 03:08:44 PM
Something in the air,mind its from a reliable source,remeber Hillsborough.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6156218/madeline-mccann-parents-kate-gerry-warned-not-talk-11th-anniversary-disappearance/

Quote
'DON'T TALK' Madeleine McCann parents Kate and Gerry ‘warned by cops not to talk about missing daughter’ on 11th anniversary of disappearance
Scotland Yard detectives are said to have warned the couple it could hinder the ongoing £12m search if they discuss it publicly
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 27, 2018, 08:07:38 PM
Certainly it is technically a very amateur production and not of a high enough standard to be used on TV... A straight to you tube production
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 27, 2018, 09:36:10 PM

So, same old same old.  Nothing new at all.  What did she hope to achieve?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 27, 2018, 09:37:08 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 27, 2018, 09:36:10 PM
So, same old same old.  Nothing new at all.  What did she hope to achieve?

she hoped to further her own career
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 27, 2018, 09:48:47 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 27, 2018, 09:37:08 PM
she hoped to further her own career

Big Fail, in that case.  Who even knows who she is?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 27, 2018, 09:53:03 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 27, 2018, 09:48:47 PM
Big Fail, in that case.  Who even knows who she is?

I totally agree....her latest straight to you tube production...confirms her inability to make a doc that any TV company would be interested in...never mind the content...the technical quality of the prodution is woeful
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 27, 2018, 10:06:30 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 27, 2018, 09:53:03 PM
I totally agree....her latest straight to you tube production...confirms her inability to make a doc that any TV company would be interested in...never mind the content...the technical quality of the prodution is woeful

Is it YouTube?  I thought she said that she would never do that.  Well, well.  What a disaster.  If all else fails then succumb to YouTube.  Every idiot puts up rubbish on YouTube.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 27, 2018, 10:09:22 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 27, 2018, 10:06:30 PM
Is it YouTube?  I thought she said that she would never do that.  Well, well.  What a disaster.  If all else fails then succumb to YouTube.  Every idiot puts up rubbish on YouTube.

not only is it on you tube it looks as though its been recorded on a phone...the quality is so poor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 27, 2018, 10:27:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 27, 2018, 10:09:22 PM
not only is it on you tube it looks as though its been recorded on a phone...the quality is so poor.

Do you think Sonia Poulton doorstepped Kate McCann with her Mobile?   What was it with the Camera Crew?

Oh, I know.  The Camera Crew refused to part with the film because it was so awful, and such a disgrace.  Bully for them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 28, 2018, 02:48:28 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 27, 2018, 10:27:40 PM
Do you think Sonia Poulton doorstepped Kate McCann with her Mobile?   What was it with the Camera Crew?

Oh, I know.  The Camera Crew refused to part with the film because it was so awful, and such a disgrace.  Bully for them.

I gave up watching at 9:15 in and I don't know if I'll ever bother to go back to it.  Just same old same old repetition ... I really don't know what encourages these amateurs to humiliate themselves by these public displays of their limitations.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 28, 2018, 09:22:30 AM
I watched the whole thing (but then I am bed bound currently with nothing else to do) and didn't think it was THAT bad, but I did grow weary of Poulton's voice over.  It seemed to me she had wanted to be bolder and say more controversial things but lots got lost or overdubbed in the editing stage.  Bottled it basically.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 28, 2018, 10:45:03 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on April 28, 2018, 09:22:30 AM
I watched the whole thing (but then I am bed bound currently with nothing else to do) and didn't think it was THAT bad, but I did grow weary of Poulton's voice over.  It seemed to me she had wanted to be bolder and say more controversial things but lots got lost or overdubbed in the editing stage.  Bottled it basically.

I went back to it and followed it through to the end and my opinion is that it is seriously flawed both in quality and content.

The visuals didn't upset me too much probably because post Blair Witch one has learned to cope ... but agree regarding the audio track which was appallingly bad and on occasion just emphasised the amateurish approach from start to finish of the whole.

In my opinion no professional broadcaster would entertain this seriously and if she had a modicum of street cred anywhere previously I would imagine she has seriously damaged it with this effort at production.

I have watched better quality and better edited filming from war zones where the reporter was under fire which were probably more accurate than this was ... then all they were doing was dodging live bullets ... she was trying to stick to a sceptic script which was tedious with misrepresentation and repetition.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on April 28, 2018, 11:01:46 AM
Posters are warned that this goading and nitpicking must cease otherwise I will suspend accounts.

Please take heed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on April 28, 2018, 02:16:10 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on April 28, 2018, 09:22:30 AM
I watched the whole thing (but then I am bed bound currently with nothing else to do) and didn't think it was THAT bad, but I did grow weary of Poulton's voice over.  It seemed to me she had wanted to be bolder and say more controversial things but lots got lost or overdubbed in the editing stage.  Bottled it basically.

I found her obviously one sided in the way she went about her documentary.   Why bring the charity race for Missing People into it?   Kate reached her goal,   no one would be expected to raise £30,000 for a charity run, yet Sonia brought that in and said Kate was twenty thousand down on what the  appeal for Amaral had achieved.  Pure cattiness and I really don't like that sort of thing.

As to the windows being cleaned the day before in the apartment,  I think she should have checked if they had been,  can't see that happening in the middle of a weeks holiday,  going by my own stays in apartments.

All my own opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 29, 2018, 09:16:57 AM
An American policeman has been arrested for 45 rapes and 12 murders... Caught by a technique called Familial DNA... A technique developed by the FSS... Well done the FSS
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 02, 2018, 10:19:50 PM
Mr Mitchell landed a new job in April;

PR supremo Clarence Mitchell is now the public face of Cambridge Analytica.
https://www.channel4.com/news/clarence-mitchell-the-new-face-of-cambridge-analytica

But it didn't last long;

Cambridge Analytica: Facebook data-harvest firm to shut
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43983958
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 04, 2018, 04:53:19 PM
Interesting story here about an abducted child who supports the woman who abducted her in preference to he birth mother.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5689313/I-mother-Devastated-biological-mom-baby-stolen-birth-screams-daughter-court.html

I suppose the moral might be 'be careful what you wish for'

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 04, 2018, 06:57:55 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 04, 2018, 04:53:19 PM
Interesting story here about an abducted child who supports the woman who abducted her in preference to he birth mother.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5689313/I-mother-Devastated-biological-mom-baby-stolen-birth-screams-daughter-court.html

I suppose the moral might be 'be careful what you wish for'
Sentencing has yet to be done.  In animals switching offspring at birth happens all the time.  I'd be surprised if the sentence is severe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 04, 2018, 07:07:10 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 04, 2018, 06:57:55 PM
Sentencing has yet to be done. In animals switching offspring at birth happens all the time.  I'd be surprised if the sentence is severe.

Maybe they don't have the same feelings of possessiveness that humans do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 04, 2018, 07:11:59 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 04, 2018, 07:07:10 PM
Maybe they don't have the same feelings of possessiveness that humans do.
We've got hens and one mother had 8 chicks and the other never hatched any.  The one with 8 won't let the other hen any where near her chicks.  There certainly is no police force trying to sort it out. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 05, 2018, 05:51:17 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 04, 2018, 07:11:59 PM
We've got hens and one mother had 8 chicks and the other never hatched any.  The one with 8 won't let the other hen any where near her chicks.  There certainly is no police force trying to sort it out.

Mallards tend to get their broods mixed up when two mothers pass on the water and the ducklings follow the wrong mother.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 05, 2018, 10:02:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 02, 2018, 10:19:50 PM
Mr Mitchell landed a new job in April;

PR supremo Clarence Mitchell is now the public face of Cambridge Analytica.
https://www.channel4.com/news/clarence-mitchell-the-new-face-of-cambridge-analytica

But it didn't last long;

Cambridge Analytica: Facebook data-harvest firm to shut
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43983958


LOL Mr Jinx    update on this horror story is: the people behind this started up a similar company before closing CA.  so they are still going to do what they did under a different name!  He may still have a newer newish Job.

Cheers for the link Barrier.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 05, 2018, 10:08:31 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on May 05, 2018, 10:02:25 PM

LOL Mr Jinx    update on this horror story is: the people behind this started up a similar company before closing CA.  so they are still going to do what they did under a different name!  He may still have a newer newish Job.

Cheers for the link Barrier.

Twas Gunit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 05, 2018, 10:14:48 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 05, 2018, 10:08:31 PM
Twas Gunit.

oops yes.. sorry Thanks G
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 14, 2018, 11:33:50 PM
https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/world/%E2%80%98we%E2%80%99ve-brought-lindsey-home%E2%80%99-remains-of-10-year-old-girl-who-vanished-in-2009-have-been-found/ar-AAxfLOa?li=BBqdg4K&ocid=UP97DHP
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 15, 2018, 12:04:56 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 14, 2018, 11:33:50 PM
https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/world/%E2%80%98we%E2%80%99ve-brought-lindsey-home%E2%80%99-remains-of-10-year-old-girl-who-vanished-in-2009-have-been-found/ar-AAxfLOa?li=BBqdg4K&ocid=UP97DHP

Very sad for the family & a shame it took so long for Lindsey's remains to be found. Let's hope LE can finally bring her killer to justice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 29, 2018, 11:28:05 PM
https://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/chamar-palhaco-a-um-policia-nao-e-crime?ref=HP_Grupo1

 Calling a police officer "clown" is not a crime

 Judges considered language as "ordinary," but insufficient to establish a crime of injury. By Carlos Rodrigues Lima / SÁBADO | 19:12

 First, it was a discussion with the taxi driver who transported her to the PSP squad in Massamá on June 1 last year. Arriving there, Monica, 33, with the help of the police, eventually solved the problem of the taxi fare, and immediately told the agents that she intended to file a complaint for domestic violence. Inside the squadron, he gave the agents the expression: "you are a clown, you are not worth anything, f..k you." As a complainant, Monica became the defendant and was convicted at first instance of two crimes of wrongdoing, but the Lisbon Court of Appeal acquitted her, considering that the woman's words were nothing more than a mere verbalization of crude, ordinary language. incapable of undermining the character, good name or reputation of visas. " In a ruling released this month, judges Magarida Bacelar and Agostinho Torres stated that "while noting that the language used was strong and excessive," the words "were uttered in an exaggerated criticism". The latter may have exceeded certain limits, but they "are not likely to affect the honor and consideration of the persons to whom they were directed in such a way as to merit the tutelage of punishment." That is, one thing is the person, another is the behavior: "Indeed, the content of the expressions in question instills the idea that the people of the offended were criticized for behavior but not expressly" "But even if one can consider that it is a criticism directed directly at the actions of offended people, it is clear that it is in the area of ​​their strictly professional behavior and does not reach the core of the personal dignity of the offended," said the judges. to set aside a fine of EUR 500 to which Monica had been subject in the Court of Sintra. The decision of the Court of Appeal of Lisbon ended up against one of the points of the appeal of the defendant, who argued that the expressions used would have to be framed in a context of exaltation, after the discussion with the taxi driver, and the feeling for that the PSP's agents were being less diligent in their domestic violence complaint.

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

Does this judgement put "Tweedledee & Tweedledum" into perspective?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2018, 05:39:53 AM
Quote from: misty on May 29, 2018, 11:28:05 PM
https://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/chamar-palhaco-a-um-policia-nao-e-crime?ref=HP_Grupo1

 Calling a police officer "clown" is not a crime

 Judges considered language as "ordinary," but insufficient to establish a crime of injury. By Carlos Rodrigues Lima / SÁBADO | 19:12

 First, it was a discussion with the taxi driver who transported her to the PSP squad in Massamá on June 1 last year. Arriving there, Monica, 33, with the help of the police, eventually solved the problem of the taxi fare, and immediately told the agents that she intended to file a complaint for domestic violence. Inside the squadron, he gave the agents the expression: "you are a clown, you are not worth anything, f..k you." As a complainant, Monica became the defendant and was convicted at first instance of two crimes of wrongdoing, but the Lisbon Court of Appeal acquitted her, considering that the woman's words were nothing more than a mere verbalization of crude, ordinary language. incapable of undermining the character, good name or reputation of visas. " In a ruling released this month, judges Magarida Bacelar and Agostinho Torres stated that "while noting that the language used was strong and excessive," the words "were uttered in an exaggerated criticism". The latter may have exceeded certain limits, but they "are not likely to affect the honor and consideration of the persons to whom they were directed in such a way as to merit the tutelage of punishment." That is, one thing is the person, another is the behavior: "Indeed, the content of the expressions in question instills the idea that the people of the offended were criticized for behavior but not expressly" "But even if one can consider that it is a criticism directed directly at the actions of offended people, it is clear that it is in the area of ​​their strictly professional behavior and does not reach the core of the personal dignity of the offended," said the judges. to set aside a fine of EUR 500 to which Monica had been subject in the Court of Sintra. The decision of the Court of Appeal of Lisbon ended up against one of the points of the appeal of the defendant, who argued that the expressions used would have to be framed in a context of exaltation, after the discussion with the taxi driver, and the feeling for that the PSP's agents were being less diligent in their domestic violence complaint.

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

Does this judgement put "Tweedledee & Tweedledum" into perspective?

No, it has nothing to do with it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 30, 2018, 07:46:39 AM
Quote from: misty on May 29, 2018, 11:28:05 PM
https://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/chamar-palhaco-a-um-policia-nao-e-crime?ref=HP_Grupo1

 Calling a police officer "clown" is not a crime

 Judges considered language as "ordinary," but insufficient to establish a crime of injury. By Carlos Rodrigues Lima / SÁBADO | 19:12

 First, it was a discussion with the taxi driver who transported her to the PSP squad in Massamá on June 1 last year. Arriving there, Monica, 33, with the help of the police, eventually solved the problem of the taxi fare, and immediately told the agents that she intended to file a complaint for domestic violence. Inside the squadron, he gave the agents the expression: "you are a clown, you are not worth anything, f..k you." As a complainant, Monica became the defendant and was convicted at first instance of two crimes of wrongdoing, but the Lisbon Court of Appeal acquitted her, considering that the woman's words were nothing more than a mere verbalization of crude, ordinary language. incapable of undermining the character, good name or reputation of visas. " In a ruling released this month, judges Magarida Bacelar and Agostinho Torres stated that "while noting that the language used was strong and excessive," the words "were uttered in an exaggerated criticism". The latter may have exceeded certain limits, but they "are not likely to affect the honor and consideration of the persons to whom they were directed in such a way as to merit the tutelage of punishment." That is, one thing is the person, another is the behavior: "Indeed, the content of the expressions in question instills the idea that the people of the offended were criticized for behavior but not expressly" "But even if one can consider that it is a criticism directed directly at the actions of offended people, it is clear that it is in the area of ​​their strictly professional behavior and does not reach the core of the personal dignity of the offended," said the judges. to set aside a fine of EUR 500 to which Monica had been subject in the Court of Sintra. The decision of the Court of Appeal of Lisbon ended up against one of the points of the appeal of the defendant, who argued that the expressions used would have to be framed in a context of exaltation, after the discussion with the taxi driver, and the feeling for that the PSP's agents were being less diligent in their domestic violence complaint.

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

Does this judgement put "Tweedledee & Tweedledum" into perspective?

It was extremely disrespectful of two police officers who after all were only doing their job in what must have been a scene of confusion and distress.  Kate McCann was wrong to put those comments in her book, imo it reveals her to be petty and judgemental and someone who likes to blame others for her own shortcomings. She was a guest in a foreign country where the police service is very different to that in England. She might have felt intimidated by the armed officers or even frustrated that they weren't behaving in a manner which she might have expected. Either way, she was not qualified to criticise their actions, they were not to know that the case would turn into the mammoth worldwide search for a missing child that it has become. They were tasked with searching for a child who had strayed, nothing more and nothing less.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2018, 07:52:31 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 30, 2018, 07:46:39 AM
It was extremely disrespectful of two police officers who after all were only doing their job in what must have been a scene of confusion and distress.  Kate McCann was wrong to put those comments in her book, imo it reveals her to be petty and judgemental and someone who like to blame others for her own shortcomings.

But it's ok for amaral in his book to accuse the McCabe of being liars and criminals
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 30, 2018, 08:03:48 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 30, 2018, 07:52:31 AM
But it's ok for amaral in his book to accuse the McCabe of being liars and criminals

Can you cite from his book where he used those words or is this simply your attempt to justify Kate McCanns comments?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2018, 08:06:00 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 30, 2018, 08:03:48 AM
Can you cite from his book where he used those words or is this simply your attempt to justify Kate McCanns comments?

He claimed they had lied in covering up Maddie's death which would be a criminal offence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 30, 2018, 08:11:35 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 30, 2018, 07:52:31 AM
But it's ok for amaral in his book to accuse the McCabe of being liars and criminals

Of course writing a book in which he "suggested" the McCanns found their child dead, hid her body and claimed  abduction pales into insignifcance compared to be called Tweedledum and Tweedledee.
Really!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2018, 08:33:36 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 30, 2018, 08:03:48 AM
Can you cite from his book where he used those words or is this simply your attempt to justify Kate McCanns comments?
What is the name of his book?   The entire tome is written to convince the reader that the McCanns hid their child’s body.  So, it’s perfectly acceptable to you to write a book, ever page of which adds up to a character assassination, but a passing three word comment about two unnamed cops is beyond the pale as far as you’re concerned.  A telling example of your bias, borne out of your visceral dislike of the missing child’ mother, IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2018, 08:36:34 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 30, 2018, 07:46:39 AM
It was extremely disrespectful of two police officers who after all were only doing their job in what must have been a scene of confusion and distress.  Kate McCann was wrong to put those comments in her book, imo it reveals her to be petty and judgemental and someone who likes to blame others for her own shortcomings. She was a guest in a foreign country where the police service is very different to that in England. She might have felt intimidated by the armed officers or even frustrated that they weren't behaving in a manner which she might have expected. Either way, she was not qualified to criticise their actions, they were not to know that the case would turn into the mammoth worldwide search for a missing child that it has become. They were tasked with searching for a child who had strayed, nothing more and nothing less.
What qualifications do you need before you’re allowed to criticize the police in another country? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2018, 08:43:32 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 30, 2018, 07:46:39 AM
It was extremely disrespectful of two police officers who after all were only doing their job in what must have been a scene of confusion and distress.  Kate McCann was wrong to put those comments in her book, imo it reveals her to be petty and judgemental and someone who likes to blame others for her own shortcomings. She was a guest in a foreign country where the police service is very different to that in England. She might have felt intimidated by the armed officers or even frustrated that they weren't behaving in a manner which she might have expected. Either way, she was not qualified to criticise their actions, they were not to know that the case would turn into the mammoth worldwide search for a missing child that it has become. They were tasked with searching for a child who had strayed, nothing more and nothing less.

But of course your continual criticism of SY is acceptable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2018, 08:48:14 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 30, 2018, 07:46:39 AM
It was extremely disrespectful of two police officers who after all were only doing their job in what must have been a scene of confusion and distress.  Kate McCann was wrong to put those comments in her book, imo it reveals her to be petty and judgemental and someone who likes to blame others for her own shortcomings. She was a guest in a foreign country where the police service is very different to that in England. She might have felt intimidated by the armed officers or even frustrated that they weren't behaving in a manner which she might have expected. Either way, she was not qualified to criticise their actions, they were not to know that the case would turn into the mammoth worldwide search for a missing child that it has become. They were tasked with searching for a child who had strayed, nothing more and nothing less.

In my opinion Kate McCann's decision to include that comment in her book says far more about her than it does about the alleged incompetence of the GNR.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2018, 08:49:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2018, 08:48:14 AM
In my opinion Kate McCann's decision to include that comment in her book says far more about her than it does about the alleged incompetence of the GNR.

But that's just your opinion...others think there is nothing wrong with it.....others think amaral book is a absolute disgrace
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 30, 2018, 08:56:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2018, 08:48:14 AM
In my opinion Kate McCann's decision to include that comment in her book says far more about her than it does about the alleged incompetence of the GNR.


But your opinion of Kate McCann is extremely poor in all aspects of her character, IMO .
Not everyone shares your low opinion of her character. IMO

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 30, 2018, 08:57:09 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 30, 2018, 08:49:59 AM
But that's just your opinion...others think there is nothing wrong with it.....others think amaral book is a absolute disgrace

Now that is an opinion I agree with!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2018, 09:01:53 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2018, 08:48:14 AM
In my opinion Kate McCann's decision to include that comment in her book says far more about her than it does about the alleged incompetence of the GNR.

IMO her “Tweedledee” comment, to those who read the book without the preconceived massive  bias against her, is a non-issue, which expresses little more than the frustration that Kate felt at the time at the seemingly slow to act or understand GNR, which given the situation was perfectly understandable, even if some choose to read it as unreasonable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2018, 09:04:08 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2018, 09:01:53 AM
IMO her “Tweedledee” comment, to those who read the book without the preconceived massive  bias against her, is a non-issue, which expresses little more than the frustration that Kate felt at the time at the seemingly slow to act or understand GNR, which given the situation was perfectly understandable, even if some choose to read it as unreasonable.

Very well put
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 30, 2018, 09:09:58 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2018, 09:01:53 AM
IMO her “Tweedledee” comment, to those who read the book without the preconceived massive  bias against her, is a non-issue, which expresses little more than the frustration that Kate felt at the time at the seemingly slow to act or understand GNR, which given the situation was perfectly understandable, even if some choose to read it as unreasonable.

I'm surprised she remembered anything about that night let alone minute details about two GNR officers whom she thought weren't doing enough to salvage the situation brought about by her own neglect.  This wasn't a one-off situation however, she then went on to refer to PJ detective Paiva as a f....ing tosser.

One has to wonder what she hoped to achieve by spouting these insults so publicly at the Portuguese police in such a premeditated manner?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2018, 09:15:05 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 30, 2018, 08:49:59 AM
But that's just your opinion...others think there is nothing wrong with it.....others think amaral book is a absolute disgrace

I'm not at all surprised that some people think there's nothing wrong with giving the police derogatory nicknames. They probably quite liked the media using terms like 'sardine munchers' to describe the Portuguese people too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 30, 2018, 09:17:08 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2018, 09:15:05 AM
I'm not at all surprised that some people think there's nothing wrong with giving the police derogatory nicknames. They probably quite liked the media using terms like 'sardine munchers' to describe the Portuguese people too.

I believe that the crux of the problem in Portugal was xenophobic related.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2018, 09:17:58 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 30, 2018, 09:17:08 AM
I believe that the crux of the problem in Portugal was xenophobic related.

I agree...the PJ's dislike for the English
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 30, 2018, 09:20:59 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 30, 2018, 09:17:58 AM
I agree...the PJ's dislike for the English

 @)(++(*    could you blame them?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2018, 09:21:19 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 30, 2018, 09:20:59 AM
@)(++(*    could you blame them?

Yes...and it's xenophobic as you have said
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2018, 09:46:16 AM
There is a very weird inverse racism at play in this case which I have observed from those of a British seceptic slant and it is “everything Portuguese = brilliant or at least excusable, everything British = suspect at worse, or incompetent or useless at best”. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2018, 09:51:55 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 30, 2018, 09:09:58 AM
I'm surprised she remembered anything about that night let alone minute details about two GNR officers whom she thought weren't doing enough to salvage the situation brought about by her own neglect.  This wasn't a one-off situation however, she then went on to refer to PJ detective Paiva as a f....ing tosser.

One has to wonder what she hoped to achieve by spouting these insults so publicly at the Portuguese police in such a premeditated manner?
She has every right to express herself, her feelings and frustrations in her book in any way she sees fit.  Perhaps if she’d known in advance what sensitive snowflakes some people are on behalf of the Portuguese police she might have thought twice about upsetting them.  Perhaps in the next edition we can petittion her to change Tweedledum & Tweedledee to “Crockett and Tubbs” and “f....ing tosser” to “lovely young man”. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 30, 2018, 10:11:43 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2018, 09:01:53 AM
IMO That’s because you already disliked the woman before you even read the book and read it looking for anything to reinforce your bias.  Her “Tweedledee” comment, to those who read the book without the preconceived massive  bias against her, is a non-issue, which expresses little more than the frustration that Kate felt at the time at the seemingly slow to act or understand GNR, which given the situation was perfectly understandable, even if some choose to read it as unreasonable.

Snip
It was not until about 11.10pm that two policemen arrived from the nearest town, Lagos, about five miles away.

To me they seemed bewildered and out of their depth, and I couldn't shake the images of Tweedledum and Tweedledee out of my head.

I realise how unfair this might sound, but with communication hampered by the language barrier and precious
time passing, their presence did not fill me with confidence at all.

We did not appreciate until later that these two officers were from the Guarda Nacional Republicana, or GNR, who are essentially military police, like the Gendarmes in France or Guardia Civil in Spain, run by the Interior Ministry. They deal with matters like highway patrol and crowd control, and are also responsible for law enforcement in more rural areas like the Algarve, but they do not handle criminal investigations.

At that stage, of course, we weren't familiar with the various tiers of the Portuguese police system. As far as we were concerned, they were simply "the police".   Kate McCann


In my opinion the "Tweedledum and Tweedledee affair" has been taken entirely out of context and twisted to make a big issue out of trivia.

If that is 'justification' for even a minuscule measure of the opprobrium directed at the McCanns and anyone with the slightest connection to them, it really does epitomise the dark art of making something out of nothing.  In my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 30, 2018, 10:22:54 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 30, 2018, 10:11:43 AM
Snip
It was not until about 11.10pm that two policemen arrived from the nearest town, Lagos, about five miles away.

To me they seemed bewildered and out of their depth, and I couldn't shake the images of Tweedledum and Tweedledee out of my head.

I realise how unfair this might sound, but with communication hampered by the language barrier and precious
time passing, their presence did not fill me with confidence at all.

We did not appreciate until later that these two officers were from the Guarda Nacional Republicana, or GNR, who are essentially military police, like the Gendarmes in France or Guardia Civil in Spain, run by the Interior Ministry. They deal with matters like highway patrol and crowd control, and are also responsible for law enforcement in more rural areas like the Algarve, but they do not handle criminal investigations.

At that stage, of course, we weren't familiar with the various tiers of the Portuguese police system. As far as we were concerned, they were simply "the police".   Kate McCann


In my opinion the "Tweedledum and Tweedledee affair" has been taken entirely out of context and twisted to make a big issue out of trivia.

If that is 'justification' for even a minuscule measure of the opprobrium directed at the McCanns and anyone with the slightest connection to them, it really does epitomise the dark art of making something out of nothing.  In my opinion.
IMO, you have provided sufficient context to evaluate the Tweedledum and Tweedledee quote.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2018, 10:28:30 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 30, 2018, 10:11:43 AM
Snip
It was not until about 11.10pm that two policemen arrived from the nearest town, Lagos, about five miles away.

To me they seemed bewildered and out of their depth, and I couldn't shake the images of Tweedledum and Tweedledee out of my head.

I realise how unfair this might sound, but with communication hampered by the language barrier and precious
time passing, their presence did not fill me with confidence at all.

We did not appreciate until later that these two officers were from the Guarda Nacional Republicana, or GNR, who are essentially military police, like the Gendarmes in France or Guardia Civil in Spain, run by the Interior Ministry. They deal with matters like highway patrol and crowd control, and are also responsible for law enforcement in more rural areas like the Algarve, but they do not handle criminal investigations.

At that stage, of course, we weren't familiar with the various tiers of the Portuguese police system. As far as we were concerned, they were simply "the police".   Kate McCann


In my opinion the "Tweedledum and Tweedledee affair" has been taken entirely out of context and twisted to make a big issue out of trivia.

If that is 'justification' for even a minuscule measure of the opprobrium directed at the McCanns and anyone with the slightest connection to them, it really does epitomise the dark art of making something out of nothing.  In my opinion.
You’re right, Kate even acknowledges that her comment may sound unfair. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2018, 11:56:12 AM
You are nit-picking IMO.

"While the concepts of race and ethnicity are considered to be separate in contemporary social science, the two terms have a long history of equivalence in both popular usage and older social science literature. "Ethnicity" is often used in a sense close to one traditionally attributed to "race": the division of human groups based on qualities assumed to be essential or innate to the group (e.g. shared ancestry or shared behavior). Therefore, racism and racial discrimination are often used to describe discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis, independent of whether these differences are described as racial. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 30, 2018, 12:25:20 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2018, 09:51:55 AM
She has every right to express herself, her feelings and frustrations in her book in any way she sees fit.  Perhaps if she’d known in advance what sensitive snowflakes some people are on behalf of the Portuguese police she might have thought twice about upsetting them.  Perhaps in the next edition we can petittion her to change Tweedledum & Tweedledee to “Crockett and Tubbs” and “f....ing tosser” to “lovely young man”.

She has every right to express herself, her feelings and frustrations in her book in any way she sees fit.


Yes ....the same applies  for posters on here - who should not be called mccann bashers.

Just because they don't believe maddie was abducted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2018, 12:46:45 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2018, 10:28:30 AM
You’re right, Kate even acknowledges that her comment may sound unfair.

It didn't just sound unfair, it was unfair in my opinion. There's always two sides to every story but for this 'victim' only her opinion matters it seems.

'They seemed bewildered and out of their depth'. Perhaps because the group weren't making much sense?

"It's always hard to get sense out of panicking people. When you're scared and pumped full of adrenaline you react like a child. You assume everyone knows what you know. They were hard to get sense out of."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1568477/Portuguese-police-admit-Madeleine-circus.html

'with communication hampered by the language barrier'.
Well that wasn't the fault of the GNR officers, and there was an interpreter there.

'precious time passing'.
I think the most precious time had already passed; 1.5 hours since the time they thought their child had disappeared until the call to the police. Enough time for her to be in Spain. It was already too late to think of closing borders and airports. Again, no fault of the GNR.







Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2018, 12:52:47 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2018, 11:56:12 AM
You are nit-picking IMO.

"While the concepts of race and ethnicity are considered to be separate in contemporary social science, the two terms have a long history of equivalence in both popular usage and older social science literature. "Ethnicity" is often used in a sense close to one traditionally attributed to "race": the division of human groups based on qualities assumed to be essential or innate to the group (e.g. shared ancestry or shared behavior). Therefore, racism and racial discrimination are often used to describe discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis, independent of whether these differences are described as racial. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

I think we all know the difference between racial and cultural differences these days  - or we should, imo. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2018, 01:19:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2018, 12:52:47 PM
I think we all know the difference between racial and cultural differences these days  - or we should, imo.
I think you've missed the point of my post but never mind, it doesn't really matter - call it xenophobia, call it racism, it amounts to pretty much the same thing. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2018, 01:20:16 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 30, 2018, 12:25:20 PM
She has every right to express herself, her feelings and frustrations in her book in any way she sees fit.


Yes ....the same applies  for posters on here - who should not be called mccann bashers.

Just because they don't believe maddie was abducted.
When was the last time anyone on here called you a McCann basher? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2018, 01:21:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2018, 12:46:45 PM
It didn't just sound unfair, it was unfair in my opinion. There's always two sides to every story but for this 'victim' only her opinion matters it seems.

'They seemed bewildered and out of their depth'. Perhaps because the group weren't making much sense?

"It's always hard to get sense out of panicking people. When you're scared and pumped full of adrenaline you react like a child. You assume everyone knows what you know. They were hard to get sense out of."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1568477/Portuguese-police-admit-Madeleine-circus.html

'with communication hampered by the language barrier'.
Well that wasn't the fault of the GNR officers, and there was an interpreter there.

'precious time passing'.
I think the most precious time had already passed; 1.5 hours since the time they thought their child had disappeared until the call to the police. Enough time for her to be in Spain. It was already too late to think of closing borders and airports. Again, no fault of the GNR.
It's her book, therefore it's her opinion that matters to her - why should a book about HER recollection of events strive to see everything from everyone else's point of view also?  Where does it say in her book that only her opinion matters anyway?  And where in the passage quoted does she lay the blame at the feet of the GNR?  She acknowledges that they realised later the GNR were not responsible for criminal investigations.  sheesh, give the woman a break for once in your life!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2018, 02:16:06 PM
Personally, I found Tony Parson's "sardine-munching" op-ed disgraceful. I'm not all suprised that Portugal was offended (with the help of the PT tabloids).

No consideration for how that could affect public  / diplomatic relations regarding a missing chld.

I wonder how much he earned for that? £200-300?

Hopkins in drag.

IMO.

ETA: corrected: it wasn't the Daily Mail for once, but the Mirror.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 30, 2018, 03:09:58 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2018, 02:16:06 PM
Personally, I found Tony Parson's "sardine-munching" op-ed disgraceful. I'm not all suprised that Portugal was offended (with the help of the PT tabloids).

No consideration for how that could affect public  / diplomatic relations regarding a missing chld.

I wonder how much he earned for that? £200-300?

Hopkins in drag.

IMO.

ETA: corrected: it wasn't the Daily Mail for once, but the Mirror.

I don't recall having read the article by Tony Parsons in any great depth if at all  http://themaddiecasefiles.com/oh-up-yours-senor-tony-parsons-daily-mirror-19-10--t2347.html but I see it attracted 485 complaints to the Press Complaints Commission which appears to break the record for 2007.

I am at a loss to see why Madeleine and her family have been on the receiving end of eleven years of criticism, not for anything for which they can reasonably be held responsible but because someone else voiced his opinion.

However ill judged one might think it to have been ... doesn't the apparent furore voicing it appears to have caused up to the present day, for example still being mentioned on our forum today ... fly in the face of the 'freedom of speech' principle epitomised by the ubiquitous ...
1.Everyone shall possess the right to freely express and publicise his thoughts in words, images or by any other means, as well as the right to inform others, inform himself and be informed without hindrance or discrimination 2.Exercise of the said rights shall not be hindered or limited by any type or form of censorship Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, Article 37.º

Or is that only for those and such as those?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 30, 2018, 05:58:54 PM
I know this thread is wandering off topic, but can we keep it reasonably civil and not use it as an opportunity to have a go at other posters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2018, 07:42:17 AM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2018, 02:16:06 PM
Personally, I found Tony Parson's "sardine-munching" op-ed disgraceful. I'm not all suprised that Portugal was offended (with the help of the PT tabloids).

No consideration for how that could affect public  / diplomatic relations regarding a missing chld.

I wonder how much he earned for that? £200-300?

Hopkins in drag.

IMO.

ETA: corrected: it wasn't the Daily Mail for once, but the Mirror.

Why blame the man who wrote the article and not the rag which published it, and therefore endorsed it?

There was a schoolboy error in the headline 'Oh, Up Yours, Senor'. Portuguese men are Senhors; Senors are Spanish men.

He blames the Portuguese Police, their media, the people and the Ambassador himself for any damage to diplomatic relations between the two countries. The Ambassador's crime, apparently, was to mention that the McCanns left their children home alone. Like many others, Parson's sees this as a 'mistake' for which the loss of their daughter is punishment enough. No acknowledgement that others making similar 'mistakes' have been prevented by the authorities from seeing their children subsequently.

It is the fault of the spectacularly stupid, cruel Portuguese police. I have never much cared for the convention of calling cops "pigs" or "filth", but I am happy to make an exception.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/oh-up-yours-senor-516864

I wonder which Portuguese newspapers you class as 'tabloids'? I am of the opinion there is only one tabloid newspaper in Portugal.

I prefer the voice of reason;

The McCanns, it is hinted and sometimes expressed explicitly, cannot possibly be treated fairly under this inadequate Portuguese system. There is a touch of arrogant xenophobia here, as if Portugal was some backward banana republic and, even more inaccurately, as if England and Wales's system of criminal justice, from police investigation to trial, was wonderful and totally free of miscarriages of justice.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/sep/10/uk.pressandpublishing



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 31, 2018, 08:37:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2018, 07:42:17 AM
Why blame the man who wrote the article and not the rag which published it, and therefore endorsed it?

There was a schoolboy error in the headline 'Oh, Up Yours, Senor'. Portuguese men are Senhors; Senors are Spanish men.

He blames the Portuguese Police, their media, the people and the Ambassador himself for any damage to diplomatic relations between the two countries. The Ambassador's crime, apparently, was to mention that the McCanns left their children home alone. Like many others, Parson's sees this as a 'mistake' for which the loss of their daughter is punishment enough. No acknowledgement that others making similar 'mistakes' have been prevented by the authorities from seeing their children subsequently.

It is the fault of the spectacularly stupid, cruel Portuguese police. I have never much cared for the convention of calling cops "pigs" or "filth", but I am happy to make an exception.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/oh-up-yours-senor-516864

I wonder which Portuguese newspapers you class as 'tabloids'? I am of the opinion there is only one tabloid newspaper in Portugal.

I prefer the voice of reason;

The McCanns, it is hinted and sometimes expressed explicitly, cannot possibly be treated fairly under this inadequate Portuguese system. There is a touch of arrogant xenophobia here, as if Portugal was some backward banana republic and, even more inaccurately, as if England and Wales's system of criminal justice, from police investigation to trial, was wonderful and totally free of miscarriages of justice.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/sep/10/uk.pressandpublishing

There appears to be that undercurrent of nationalism surrounding the case from the U.K. side. The PT like most countries that depends significantly on tourism has got used to the ways of its numerous visitors.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2018, 08:57:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2018, 07:42:17 AM
Why blame the man who wrote the article and not the rag which published it, and therefore endorsed it?

There was a schoolboy error in the headline 'Oh, Up Yours, Senor'. Portuguese men are Senhors; Senors are Spanish men.

He blames the Portuguese Police, their media, the people and the Ambassador himself for any damage to diplomatic relations between the two countries. The Ambassador's crime, apparently, was to mention that the McCanns left their children home alone. Like many others, Parson's sees this as a 'mistake' for which the loss of their daughter is punishment enough. No acknowledgement that others making similar 'mistakes' have been prevented by the authorities from seeing their children subsequently.

It is the fault of the spectacularly stupid, cruel Portuguese police. I have never much cared for the convention of calling cops "pigs" or "filth", but I am happy to make an exception.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/oh-up-yours-senor-516864

I wonder which Portuguese newspapers you class as 'tabloids'? I am of the opinion there is only one tabloid newspaper in Portugal.

I prefer the voice of reason;

The McCanns, it is hinted and sometimes expressed explicitly, cannot possibly be treated fairly under this inadequate Portuguese system. There is a touch of arrogant xenophobia here, as if Portugal was some backward banana republic and, even more inaccurately, as if England and Wales's system of criminal justice, from police investigation to trial, was wonderful and totally free of miscarriages of justice.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/sep/10/uk.pressandpublishing
  if you are going to quote and praise  the guardian then you should quote the whole paragraph as I have done............


The McCanns, it is hinted and sometimes expressed explicitly, cannot possibly be treated fairly under this inadequate Portuguese system. There is a touch of arrogant xenophobia here, as if Portugal was some backward banana republic and, even more inaccurately, as if England and Wales's system of criminal justice, from police investigation to trial, was wonderful and totally free of miscarriages of justice. Yes, they do things differently, and I don't deny that they may, possibly, have made a mess of their inquiries and been unfair to the McCanns. But none of that is yet clear, and the media ought not to assume it.


it isnt as supportive of the portuguese police as you imply
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 31, 2018, 08:59:31 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2018, 08:57:44 AM
  if you are going to quote and praise  the guardian then you should quote the whole paragraph as I have done............


The McCanns, it is hinted and sometimes expressed explicitly, cannot possibly be treated fairly under this inadequate Portuguese system. There is a touch of arrogant xenophobia here, as if Portugal was some backward banana republic and, even more inaccurately, as if England and Wales's system of criminal justice, from police investigation to trial, was wonderful and totally free of miscarriages of justice. Yes, they do things differently, and I don't deny that they may, possibly, have made a mess of their inquiries and been unfair to the McCanns. But none of that is yet clear, and the media ought not to assume it.


it isnt as supportive of the portuguese police as you imply

Hmmm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2018, 08:59:37 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on May 31, 2018, 08:37:36 AM
There appears to be that undercurrent of nationalism surrounding the case from the U.K. side. The PT like most countries that depends significantly on tourism has got used to the ways of its numerous visitors.

although the uk tabloids went to far...as they did in their reporting of the mccanns...I think some criticism of the PJ was quite justified
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2018, 09:34:43 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on May 31, 2018, 08:37:36 AM
There appears to be that undercurrent of nationalism surrounding the case from the U.K. side. The PT like most countries that depends significantly on tourism has got used to the ways of its numerous visitors.
There also appears to be a curious anti-British undercurrent from Brits who doubt the McCanns, who also seem quite defensive of even the slightest criticism directed at anything Portuguese.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2018, 09:37:51 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on May 31, 2018, 08:59:31 AM
Hmmm.
That was written in the immediate aftermath of the McCanns being made arguidos.  Even I assumed the PJ must have had SOME grounds for their suspicions.  Turns out there were none and as it turned out the PJ did make a mess of their enquiries so....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 10:41:27 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 09:37:51 AM
That was written in the immediate aftermath of the McCanns being made arguidos.  Even I assumed the PJ must have had SOME grounds for their suspicions.  Turns out there were none and as it turned out the PJ did make a mess of their enquiries so....
IYO.

If there were no grounds for suspicion, they would have been interviewed as witnesses, not arguidos.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 31, 2018, 10:50:20 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 09:34:43 AM
There also appears to be a curious anti-British undercurrent from Brits who doubt the McCanns, who also seem quite defensive of even the slightest criticism directed at anything Portuguese.

Please provide a cite for that or delete.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 10:57:44 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 09:37:51 AM
That was written in the immediate aftermath of the McCanns being made arguidos.  Even I assumed the PJ must have had SOME grounds for their suspicions.  Turns out there were none and as it turned out the PJ did make a mess of their enquiries so....
Police 'rushed Madeleine McCann case'
By Fiona Govan in Praia da Luz5:01PM GMT 05 Dec 2007
Madeleine McCann’s parents might have been spared the anguish of being named suspects over her disappearance if Portuguese police had not rushed their case through before a change in the law, it has been claimed.

Kate and Gerry McCann were made arguidos - formal suspects - just eight days before new legal measures were introduced which would have required firmer evidence against them.

The couple’s Portuguese lawyer has claimed that detectives may have deliberately fast-tracked the investigation to ensure they were put in the frame.

Investigators named the McCanns, both 39, as arguidos on September 7 after allegedly finding microscopic traces of blood in their holiday apartment and "bodily fluids" they thought could have belonged to Madeleine in the boot of their hire car.

Carlos Pinto de Abreu, a Portuguese lawyer on the McCanns’ defence team, said that under Portugal’s new penal code, police must have more than just suspicions to make somebody an arguido.

"On September 15 a new procedural penal code was introduced making it necessary for there to be evidence against the citizen before they could be made an arguido.

"Before this date it wasn’t necessary. You could be made an arguido without actual evidence against you," he said.

"Maybe that is why the investigation took the turn it did - why they were named arguidos eight days before the new laws came in," said Mr Pinto de Abreu.

His comments followed those of Fernando Jose Pinto Monteiro, Portugal’s Attorney General, who recently admitted the McCanns may not have been made suspects under the new laws.

"At the time when the McCanns were made 'arguidos' the law did not demand justified suspicions. I do not know if they would be (arguidos) in light of the new Code," he said in an interview with the Portuguese magazine Visao.

Clarence Mitchell, the official spokesman of the McCanns, said he hoped the introduction of the new law would work in their favour.

"Being declared arguidos almost three months ago caused the McCanns’ immense anguish and continues to do so," he said.

"To think they could have been saved that under a law introduced only days later makes a mockery of the case against them.

"They are entirely innocent victims of a horrible crime that has taken away their daughter and they want to be cleared as soon as possible so the focus can return to finding Madeleine.

"If it is true that changes to the law would have meant that they would not have been made arguidos that’s all the more reason for their status to be dropped now.

"Regardless of any changes in the law they should be eliminated forthwith from the inquiry."

Portuguese police were told last week that forensic results requested from Birmingham’s Forensic Science Service had so far proved "inconclusive".

They plan to travel to Britain next week to re-interview the McCanns and the seven friends who dined with them at the Tapas restaurant on the night of May 3, when Madeleine went missing from the holiday apartment in Praia da Luz.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html


I think this is one of the most heartbreaking newspaper articles concerning the propaganda war (which I believe was waged unrelentingly against Kate and Gerry McCann) from the first headline of "A badly told story" to alleged drunkenness to alleged swinging to alleged drugging their children right up to becoming official suspects in Madeleine's disappearance.
All of it unwarranted but all of it still hanging around like a bad smell at a remove of eleven years  as far some are concerned
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 31, 2018, 11:06:29 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 10:57:44 AM
Police 'rushed Madeleine McCann case'
By Fiona Govan in Praia da Luz5:01PM GMT 05 Dec 2007
Madeleine McCann’s parents might have been spared the anguish of being named suspects over her disappearance if Portuguese police had not rushed their case through before a change in the law, it has been claimed.

Kate and Gerry McCann were made arguidos - formal suspects - just eight days before new legal measures were introduced which would have required firmer evidence against them.

The couple’s Portuguese lawyer has claimed that detectives may have deliberately fast-tracked the investigation to ensure they were put in the frame.

Investigators named the McCanns, both 39, as arguidos on September 7 after allegedly finding microscopic traces of blood in their holiday apartment and "bodily fluids" they thought could have belonged to Madeleine in the boot of their hire car.

Carlos Pinto de Abreu, a Portuguese lawyer on the McCanns’ defence team, said that under Portugal’s new penal code, police must have more than just suspicions to make somebody an arguido.

"On September 15 a new procedural penal code was introduced making it necessary for there to be evidence against the citizen before they could be made an arguido.

"Before this date it wasn’t necessary. You could be made an arguido without actual evidence against you," he said.

"Maybe that is why the investigation took the turn it did - why they were named arguidos eight days before the new laws came in," said Mr Pinto de Abreu.

His comments followed those of Fernando Jose Pinto Monteiro, Portugal’s Attorney General, who recently admitted the McCanns may not have been made suspects under the new laws.

"At the time when the McCanns were made 'arguidos' the law did not demand justified suspicions. I do not know if they would be (arguidos) in light of the new Code," he said in an interview with the Portuguese magazine Visao.

Clarence Mitchell, the official spokesman of the McCanns, said he hoped the introduction of the new law would work in their favour.

"Being declared arguidos almost three months ago caused the McCanns’ immense anguish and continues to do so," he said.

"To think they could have been saved that under a law introduced only days later makes a mockery of the case against them.

"They are entirely innocent victims of a horrible crime that has taken away their daughter and they want to be cleared as soon as possible so the focus can return to finding Madeleine.

"If it is true that changes to the law would have meant that they would not have been made arguidos that’s all the more reason for their status to be dropped now.

"Regardless of any changes in the law they should be eliminated forthwith from the inquiry."

Portuguese police were told last week that forensic results requested from Birmingham’s Forensic Science Service had so far proved "inconclusive".

They plan to travel to Britain next week to re-interview the McCanns and the seven friends who dined with them at the Tapas restaurant on the night of May 3, when Madeleine went missing from the holiday apartment in Praia da Luz.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html


I think this is one of the most heartbreaking newspaper articles concerning the propaganda war (which I believe was waged unrelentingly against Kate and Gerry McCann) from the first headline of "A badly told story" to alleged drunkenness to alleged swinging to alleged drugging their children right up to becoming official suspects in Madeleine's disappearance.
All of it unwarranted but all of it still hanging around like a bad smell at a remove of eleven years  as far some are concerned

Portuguese detectives made the McCanns suspects in Maddie’s disappearance after taking advice from British police, it was claimed yesterday.

Cracker-style profiler Lee Rainbow – who worked on the Ipswich Ripper and Shannon Matthews cases – said officers should consider their possible involvement in the case, a court was told.

The National Policing Improvement Agency ( NPIA) expert wrote a report to Algarve police chiefs giving advice.

Details of the confidential report emerged during the final day of a libel trial involving former Portuguese detective Goncalo Amaral, who led the Maddie investigation.

Amaral is trying to overturn a worldwide injunction banning the publication of his book Maddie: The Truth of the Lie. In it he claims Kate and Gerry were involved in Maddie’s death and staged her disappearance. His lawyer, Antonio Cabrita, told the court Rainbow wrote: “It was Madeleine’s father who was the last one to see her alive.

“The family is a lead that should be followed. The contradictions in Gerald McCann’s statements might lead us to suspect a homicide.”

Cabrita added: “This report has never been published before but is part of the investigation.

On June 1st 2007 British police had the theory that Madeleine could be dead and the family could be involved.

“It was British police who said they must consider not only abduction but homicide as well.”

The NPIA provided a checklist of what should be done, advising the Portuguese police to include the McCanns in their inquiry and take new forensics at their holiday apartment in Praia da Luz.

Last night an NPIA spokesman said: “In disappearance cases it is common for the NPIA to advise investigating officers to consider the possibility of the involvement of family and close friends. The NPIA gave similar generic advice to the Portuguese police in the Madeleine McCann case.”

Meanwhile, Kate and Gerry launched criminal proceedings against Portuguese TV station TVI yesterday for repeating Amaral’s claims that Maddie is dead. A ruling in Amaral’s libel case is due to be made on February 18.

http://mccannexposure.wordpress.com/2010/02/11/brit-police-treat-the-mccanns-as-suspects/


But as we know they ruled in favor of GA ...and also revealed they were not cleared of any involvement 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 31, 2018, 11:19:23 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 10:57:44 AM
Police 'rushed Madeleine McCann case'
By Fiona Govan in Praia da Luz5:01PM GMT 05 Dec 2007
Madeleine McCann’s parents might have been spared the anguish of being named suspects over her disappearance if Portuguese police had not rushed their case through before a change in the law, it has been claimed.

Kate and Gerry McCann were made arguidos - formal suspects - just eight days before new legal measures were introduced which would have required firmer evidence against them.

The couple’s Portuguese lawyer has claimed that detectives may have deliberately fast-tracked the investigation to ensure they were put in the frame.

Investigators named the McCanns, both 39, as arguidos on September 7 after allegedly finding microscopic traces of blood in their holiday apartment and "bodily fluids" they thought could have belonged to Madeleine in the boot of their hire car.

Carlos Pinto de Abreu, a Portuguese lawyer on the McCanns’ defence team, said that under Portugal’s new penal code, police must have more than just suspicions to make somebody an arguido.

"On September 15 a new procedural penal code was introduced making it necessary for there to be evidence against the citizen before they could be made an arguido.

"Before this date it wasn’t necessary. You could be made an arguido without actual evidence against you," he said.

"Maybe that is why the investigation took the turn it did - why they were named arguidos eight days before the new laws came in," said Mr Pinto de Abreu.

His comments followed those of Fernando Jose Pinto Monteiro, Portugal’s Attorney General, who recently admitted the McCanns may not have been made suspects under the new laws.

"At the time when the McCanns were made 'arguidos' the law did not demand justified suspicions. I do not know if they would be (arguidos) in light of the new Code," he said in an interview with the Portuguese magazine Visao.

Clarence Mitchell, the official spokesman of the McCanns, said he hoped the introduction of the new law would work in their favour.

"Being declared arguidos almost three months ago caused the McCanns’ immense anguish and continues to do so," he said.

"To think they could have been saved that under a law introduced only days later makes a mockery of the case against them.

"They are entirely innocent victims of a horrible crime that has taken away their daughter and they want to be cleared as soon as possible so the focus can return to finding Madeleine.

"If it is true that changes to the law would have meant that they would not have been made arguidos that’s all the more reason for their status to be dropped now.

"Regardless of any changes in the law they should be eliminated forthwith from the inquiry."

Portuguese police were told last week that forensic results requested from Birmingham’s Forensic Science Service had so far proved "inconclusive".

They plan to travel to Britain next week to re-interview the McCanns and the seven friends who dined with them at the Tapas restaurant on the night of May 3, when Madeleine went missing from the holiday apartment in Praia da Luz.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html


I think this is one of the most heartbreaking newspaper articles concerning the propaganda war (which I believe was waged unrelentingly against Kate and Gerry McCann) from the first headline of "A badly told story" to alleged drunkenness to alleged swinging to alleged drugging their children right up to becoming official suspects in Madeleine's disappearance.
All of it unwarranted but all of it still hanging around like a bad smell at a remove of eleven years  as far some are concerned


Well said
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 31, 2018, 11:32:32 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2018, 09:01:53 AM
IMO That’s because you already disliked the woman before you even read the book and read it looking for anything to reinforce your bias.  Her “Tweedledee” comment, to those who read the book without the preconceived massive  bias against her, is a non-issue, which expresses little more than the frustration that Kate felt at the time at the seemingly slow to act or understand GNR, which given the situation was perfectly understandable, even if some choose to read it as unreasonable.

If you want people to read and learn anything from your posts regarding defending the McCanns and tapas group, it should not be very difficult to do so without personal attacks especially as you feel offence on behalf of the McCanns at every turn. Even to the point of bemoaning about certain threads and wanting to know (seek justification as if you have propriety over this case/forum) why are people asking questions etc.etc.

Justas a note in debating society... personal attacks are a sign you have lost your argument.

NUFF SAID!  ^*&&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2018, 11:33:27 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 09:34:43 AM
There also appears to be a curious anti-British undercurrent from Brits who doubt the McCanns, who also seem quite defensive of even the slightest criticism directed at anything Portuguese.

We're not discussing slight criticism, we're discussing a sustained attack on the people, representatives and institutions of another country by the British media and some British citizens. Anyone who believes in fair play would disassociate themselves from such behaviour in my opinion. It's not anti-British to do that, it's anti the uneducated and xenophobic elements in our society.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 31, 2018, 11:33:54 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on May 31, 2018, 11:32:32 AM
If you want people to read and learn anything from your posts regarding defending the McCanns and tapas group, it should not be very difficult to do so without personal attacks especially as you feel offence on behalf of the McCanns at every turn. Even to the point of bemoaning about certain threads and wanting to know (seek justification as if you have propriety over this case/forum) why are people asking questions etc.etc.

Justas a note in debating society... personal attacks are a sigh you have lost your argument.

NUFF SAID!  ^*&&


A very personal attack I M O
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 31, 2018, 11:37:25 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2018, 01:20:16 PM
When was the last time anyone on here called you a McCann basher?


See the inference on post #2911 regarding who is bashing the McCanns- people who do not fall for their story as to what happened to their daughter.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 31, 2018, 11:40:31 AM
Quote from: Erngath on May 31, 2018, 11:33:54 AM

A very personal attack I M O

You reap what you sow I suppose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 31, 2018, 11:43:49 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 10:57:44 AM
Police 'rushed Madeleine McCann case'
By Fiona Govan in Praia da Luz5:01PM GMT 05 Dec 2007
Madeleine McCann’s parents might have been spared the anguish of being named suspects over her disappearance if Portuguese police had not rushed their case through before a change in the law, it has been claimed.

Kate and Gerry McCann were made arguidos - formal suspects - just eight days before new legal measures were introduced which would have required firmer evidence against them.

The couple’s Portuguese lawyer has claimed that detectives may have deliberately fast-tracked the investigation to ensure they were put in the frame.

Investigators named the McCanns, both 39, as arguidos on September 7 after allegedly finding microscopic traces of blood in their holiday apartment and "bodily fluids" they thought could have belonged to Madeleine in the boot of their hire car.

Carlos Pinto de Abreu, a Portuguese lawyer on the McCanns’ defence team, said that under Portugal’s new penal code, police must have more than just suspicions to make somebody an arguido.

"On September 15 a new procedural penal code was introduced making it necessary for there to be evidence against the citizen before they could be made an arguido.

"Before this date it wasn’t necessary. You could be made an arguido without actual evidence against you," he said.

"Maybe that is why the investigation took the turn it did - why they were named arguidos eight days before the new laws came in," said Mr Pinto de Abreu.

His comments followed those of Fernando Jose Pinto Monteiro, Portugal’s Attorney General, who recently admitted the McCanns may not have been made suspects under the new laws.

"At the time when the McCanns were made 'arguidos' the law did not demand justified suspicions. I do not know if they would be (arguidos) in light of the new Code," he said in an interview with the Portuguese magazine Visao.

Clarence Mitchell, the official spokesman of the McCanns, said he hoped the introduction of the new law would work in their favour.

"Being declared arguidos almost three months ago caused the McCanns’ immense anguish and continues to do so," he said.

"To think they could have been saved that under a law introduced only days later makes a mockery of the case against them.

"They are entirely innocent victims of a horrible crime that has taken away their daughter and they want to be cleared as soon as possible so the focus can return to finding Madeleine.

"If it is true that changes to the law would have meant that they would not have been made arguidos that’s all the more reason for their status to be dropped now.

"Regardless of any changes in the law they should be eliminated forthwith from the inquiry."

Portuguese police were told last week that forensic results requested from Birmingham’s Forensic Science Service had so far proved "inconclusive".

They plan to travel to Britain next week to re-interview the McCanns and the seven friends who dined with them at the Tapas restaurant on the night of May 3, when Madeleine went missing from the holiday apartment in Praia da Luz.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html


I think this is one of the most heartbreaking newspaper articles concerning the propaganda war (which I believe was waged unrelentingly against Kate and Gerry McCann) from the first headline of "A badly told story" to alleged drunkenness to alleged swinging to alleged drugging their children right up to becoming official suspects in Madeleine's disappearance.
All of it unwarranted but all of it still hanging around like a bad smell at a remove of eleven years  as far some are concerned

Poor, poor misunderstood McCanns  8(8-))

Now can we talk about the pain and suffering the real victim of the tragedy has endured ? Poor Madeleine !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 31, 2018, 11:47:43 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 09:34:43 AM
There also appears to be a curious anti-British undercurrent from Brits who doubt the McCanns, who also seem quite defensive of even the slightest criticism directed at anything Portuguese.


Really, care to back that up with a cite or stats or even a case study.

 I find the contents of this post  to be accusatory without foundation- It comes across as just someone sounding off.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 31, 2018, 11:54:48 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on May 31, 2018, 11:47:43 AM

Really, care to back that up with a cite or stats or even a case study.

 I find the contents of this post  to be accusatory without foundation- It comes across as just someone sounding off.

Or an agent provocateur, maybe?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 12:04:38 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 31, 2018, 11:43:49 AM
Poor, poor misunderstood McCanns  8(8-))

Now can we talk about the pain and suffering the real victim of the tragedy has endured ? Poor Madeleine !

Let's start with an explanation of how much help Madeleine could expect if her mother had been locked away like Leonore Cipriano?
Who is looking for Joana?

Presently the Policia Judiciaria and Scotland Yard have fully investigated Madeleine's case which is still an active one until we are told differently.

I don't think 'misunderstood' is the word I would use for an articulate couple who finally achieved that level of police support for their missing daughter; 'misrepresented' being far more appropriate one to refer to the situation in which they found themselves ... in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 12:05:49 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 10:57:44 AM
Police 'rushed Madeleine McCann case'
By Fiona Govan in Praia da Luz5:01PM GMT 05 Dec 2007
Madeleine McCann’s parents might have been spared the anguish of being named suspects over her disappearance if Portuguese police had not rushed their case through before a change in the law, it has been claimed.

Kate and Gerry McCann were made arguidos - formal suspects - just eight days before new legal measures were introduced which would have required firmer evidence against them.

The couple’s Portuguese lawyer has claimed that detectives may have deliberately fast-tracked the investigation to ensure they were put in the frame.

Investigators named the McCanns, both 39, as arguidos on September 7 after allegedly finding microscopic traces of blood in their holiday apartment and "bodily fluids" they thought could have belonged to Madeleine in the boot of their hire car.

Carlos Pinto de Abreu, a Portuguese lawyer on the McCanns’ defence team, said that under Portugal’s new penal code, police must have more than just suspicions to make somebody an arguido.

"On September 15 a new procedural penal code was introduced making it necessary for there to be evidence against the citizen before they could be made an arguido.

"Before this date it wasn’t necessary. You could be made an arguido without actual evidence against you," he said.

"Maybe that is why the investigation took the turn it did - why they were named arguidos eight days before the new laws came in," said Mr Pinto de Abreu.

His comments followed those of Fernando Jose Pinto Monteiro, Portugal’s Attorney General, who recently admitted the McCanns may not have been made suspects under the new laws.

"At the time when the McCanns were made 'arguidos' the law did not demand justified suspicions. I do not know if they would be (arguidos) in light of the new Code," he said in an interview with the Portuguese magazine Visao.

Clarence Mitchell, the official spokesman of the McCanns, said he hoped the introduction of the new law would work in their favour.

"Being declared arguidos almost three months ago caused the McCanns’ immense anguish and continues to do so," he said.

"To think they could have been saved that under a law introduced only days later makes a mockery of the case against them.

"They are entirely innocent victims of a horrible crime that has taken away their daughter and they want to be cleared as soon as possible so the focus can return to finding Madeleine.

"If it is true that changes to the law would have meant that they would not have been made arguidos that’s all the more reason for their status to be dropped now.

"Regardless of any changes in the law they should be eliminated forthwith from the inquiry."

Portuguese police were told last week that forensic results requested from Birmingham’s Forensic Science Service had so far proved "inconclusive".

They plan to travel to Britain next week to re-interview the McCanns and the seven friends who dined with them at the Tapas restaurant on the night of May 3, when Madeleine went missing from the holiday apartment in Praia da Luz.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html


I think this is one of the most heartbreaking newspaper articles concerning the propaganda war (which I believe was waged unrelentingly against Kate and Gerry McCann) from the first headline of "A badly told story" to alleged drunkenness to alleged swinging to alleged drugging their children right up to becoming official suspects in Madeleine's disappearance.
All of it unwarranted but all of it still hanging around like a bad smell at a remove of eleven years  as far some are concerned
Shame that Kate writes in 'madeleine' that the sequence of events was quite different. I will dig out the relevant cite, yet again, for anyone who wishes to be pedantic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 31, 2018, 12:14:12 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 31, 2018, 11:40:31 AM
You reap what you sow I suppose.

There is no suppose about it......imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 31, 2018, 12:16:19 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 12:05:49 PM
Shame that Kate writes in 'madeleine' that the sequence of events was quite different. I will dig out the relevant cite, yet again, for anyone who wishes to be pedantic.
I think you had better do that.  I'm not sure how you think the sequence was actually different.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 12:19:15 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 12:05:49 PM
Shame that Kate writes in 'madeleine' that the sequence of events was quite different. I will dig out the relevant cite, yet again, for anyone who wishes to be pedantic.

Kate wrote MADELEINE with personal experience and the benefit of hindsight.  I would therefore expect whatever she writes to be much more accurate than a newspaper not in possession of all the facts as she was.

However the gist of the article is all to accurate and that is that the McCanns were made arguidos eight days before a change in the law meant that mere suspicion of wrongdoing was not enough justification for so doing - it required firm evidence in justification.
In my opinion a disinterested observer looking at it dispassionately would be able to see at a glance why the law was changed ... it made mistakes less likely and cut down on corruption.

So fire ahead ... I think pedants are always welcome ... they certainly used to be on this thread.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 31, 2018, 12:20:33 PM
All quiet on the western front then?

"all quiet on the Western Front" has become a colloquial expression meaning stagnation, or lack of visible change, in any context"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2018, 12:24:49 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on May 31, 2018, 10:50:20 AM
Please provide a cite for that or delete.
It's my opinion and so I don't need to provide a cite.  Surely you are not claiming never to have seen British sceptics slagging off British police whilst lauding the PJ to high heaven?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 31, 2018, 12:25:39 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 12:04:38 PM
Let's start with an explanation of how much help Madeleine could expect if her mother had been locked away like Leonore Cipriano?
Who is looking for Joana?

Presently the Policia Judiciaria and Scotland Yard have fully investigated Madeleine's case which is still an active one until we are told differently.

I don't think 'misunderstood' is the word I would use for an articulate couple who finally achieved that level of police support for their missing daughter; 'misrepresented' being far more appropriate one to refer to the situation in which they found themselves ... in my opinion.


Fanciful appeal to a weak hearted.  There is NO evidence Kate was going to be locked up without a trial so please spare us the made up stories.

Madelienes whereabouts is the parents responsibility! Why are you dumping that into the police and the global public? tapas 9 could have kept lookingtaking it in turns?  Kate N Gerry went to Portugal many times -not to look for their daughter but to chase money.


Evidence they are 'articulate' please. case study, references etc are welcome.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2018, 12:26:48 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 10:41:27 AM
IYO.

If there were no grounds for suspicion, they would have been interviewed as witnesses, not arguidos.
I'm talking about actual evidence, not Amaral's gut feel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 31, 2018, 12:31:53 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 31, 2018, 11:40:31 AM
You reap what you sow I suppose.


Unfortunately that is not always true. IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2018, 12:37:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2018, 11:33:27 AM
We're not discussing slight criticism, we're discussing a sustained attack on the people, representatives and institutions of another country by the British media and some British citizens. Anyone who believes in fair play would disassociate themselves from such behaviour in my opinion. It's not anti-British to do that, it's anti the uneducated and xenophobic elements in our society.
The same goes for the xenophobic attitude towards the British  by the Portuguese media and some of its citizens,who seem to have decided that most Brits abroad are feckless drunks who neglect their children as a matter of routine.  As an advocate of fair play I'm sure you wholeheartedly agree. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2018, 12:39:08 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on May 31, 2018, 12:14:12 PM
There is no suppose about it......imo
And the same goes for you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 31, 2018, 12:41:28 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 12:24:49 PM
It's my opinion and so I don't need to provide a cite.  Surely you are not claiming never to have seen British sceptics slagging off British police whilst lauding the PJ to high heaven?

Do you find that unusual as a principle? as in for pretty much everything in life "some folk swear by 'em others swear at 'em" or is it just some people saying things in defence of the PJ that you find distasteful ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 31, 2018, 12:44:03 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 12:37:23 PM
The same goes for the xenophobic attitude towards the British  by the Portuguese media and some of its citizens,who seem to have decided that most Brits abroad are feckless drunks who neglect their children as a matter of routine.  As an advocate of fair play I'm sure you wholeheartedly agree.

Are you suggesting there is no truth in this? You need to go to 'English tourist hot spots' it is vile behaviour witnessed by many Uk citizens who do not drink booze all night and leave their children alone. It was your darlings the McCanns who told the world media it is a UK cultural thing. So hey ho.

Yeah they saw nothing wrong in dragging a whole nation into their web. it being lies as well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2018, 12:44:58 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on May 31, 2018, 12:41:28 PM
Do you find that unusual as a principle? as in for pretty much everything in life "some folk swear by 'em others swear at 'em" or is it just some people saying things in defence of the PJ that you find distasteful ?
Cite for distasteful please.
To reiterate:

There also appears to be a curious anti-British undercurrent from Brits who doubt the McCanns, who also seem quite defensive of even the slightest criticism directed at anything Portuguese.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 31, 2018, 12:48:50 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 12:44:58 PM
Cite for distasteful please.
To reiterate:

There also appears to be a curious anti-British undercurrent from Brits who doubt the McCanns, who also seem quite defensive of even the slightest criticism directed at anything Portuguese.

IN YOUR OPINION you have no evidence  of this claim what so ever.  rant rant rant...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 31, 2018, 12:52:16 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on May 31, 2018, 12:48:50 PM
IN YOUR OPINION you have no evidence  of this claim what so ever.  rant rant rant...
It is quite obvious after a while.  Polarisation would be an apt description.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 31, 2018, 12:57:00 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 12:44:58 PM
Cite for distasteful please.
To reiterate:

There also appears to be a curious anti-British undercurrent from Brits who doubt the McCanns, who also seem quite defensive of even the slightest criticism directed at anything Portuguese.


An opinion I share.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 31, 2018, 01:07:41 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 31, 2018, 12:52:16 PM
It is quite obvious after a while.  Polarisation would be an apt description.

I disagree.  VS is making claims he/she cannot back up, also he /she infers this is about posters on this forum which is wrong. Perhaps VS can provide cites or state his opinion from observing (name it here).

As an example. IMO by reading the posts from supporters on this forum I get the impression they dislike anyone who challenges the McCanns version  of what happened to their daughter. They enjoy refereing to thses posters as  McCann bashers.

I enjoy this as it means they have no defence of the couple at all -what so ever. None.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2018, 01:12:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 12:37:23 PM
The same goes for the xenophobic attitude towards the British  by the Portuguese media and some of its citizens,who seem to have decided that most Brits abroad are feckless drunks who neglect their children as a matter of routine.  As an advocate of fair play I'm sure you wholeheartedly agree.

I provided a cite showing a vicious xenophobic attack on the Portuguese people, their officials and institutions. I notice you have provided no cites to support your accusations of xenophobic attacks 'by the Portuguese media and some of it's citizens'. As an advocate of fair play I expect you to provide your evidence too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 31, 2018, 01:28:05 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 12:24:49 PM
It's my opinion and so I don't need to provide a cite.  Surely you are not claiming never to have seen British sceptics slagging off British police whilst lauding the PJ to high heaven?

Thou shall not lay burden of proof onto him that is questioning the claim. (“Burden of Proof Reversal”)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 31, 2018, 01:32:32 PM
Can we cut the sniping.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2018, 01:42:57 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on May 31, 2018, 01:28:05 PM
Thou shall not lay burden of proof onto him that is questioning the claim. (“Burden of Proof Reversal”)
I'm not asking for proof, only if you are claiming not to have observed that of which I speak.  It's a simple question requiring a yes / no response.  If you have never witnessed any body on this forum  or elsewhere routinely slagging off, say Operation Grange, whilst simultaneously excusing and praising the PJ for their actions then just say so, and we'll leave it there. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2018, 01:44:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2018, 01:12:40 PM
I provided a cite showing a vicious xenophobic attack on the Portuguese people, their officials and institutions. I notice you have provided no cites to support your accusations of xenophobic attacks 'by the Portuguese media and some of it's citizens'. As an advocate of fair play I expect you to provide your evidence too.
You're quite right, I haven't provided a cite.  I apologise for this, and it may take me a while to find one but I will get back to you on this....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 01:48:31 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 12:19:15 PM
Kate wrote MADELEINE with personal experience and the benefit of hindsight.  I would therefore expect whatever she writes to be much more accurate than a newspaper not in possession of all the facts as she was.

However the gist of the article is all to accurate and that is that the McCanns were made arguidos eight days before a change in the law meant that mere suspicion of wrongdoing was not enough justification for so doing - it required firm evidence in justification.
In my opinion a disinterested observer looking at it dispassionately would be able to see at a glance why the law was changed ... it made mistakes less likely and cut down on corruption.

So fire ahead ... I think pedants are always welcome ... they certainly used to be on this thread.
Presumably I should keep this on copy and paste, the number of times it has already appeared, but for those who wish it yet again ...

"We'd waited almost 4 weeks for these interviews and it was obvious they had been hastily arranged once Bob Small notified the PJ that we would be leaving the country."

Not even Kate claims it had anything to do with forthcoming legal changes.  That idea is a red herring.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 31, 2018, 01:48:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 01:42:57 PM
I'm not asking for proof, only if you are claiming not to have observed that of which I speak.  It's a simple question requiring a yes / no response.  If you have never witnessed any body on this forum  or elsewhere routinely slagging off, say Operation Grange, whilst simultaneously excusing and praising the PJ for their actions then just say so, and we'll leave it there.

In that case no, I have not seen anyone praising the PJ and slagging off OG.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 31, 2018, 02:02:13 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on May 31, 2018, 01:48:36 PM
In that case no, I have not seen anyone praising the PJ and slagging off OG.


A John McEnroe quote does come to mind.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2018, 02:26:28 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 01:48:31 PM
Presumably I should keep this on copy and paste, the number of times it has already appeared, but for those who wish it yet again ...

"We'd waited almost 4 weeks for these interviews and it was obvious they had been hastily arranged once Bob Small notified the PJ that we would be leaving the country."

Not even Kate claims it had anything to do with forthcoming legal changes.  That idea is a red herring.

I dont think your cite supports your claim.. Im fairly sure I have seen articles that support the claim that the mccanns were made arguido shortly before the law was changed... Ill see if I can dig one out
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 31, 2018, 02:38:13 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 01:48:31 PM
Presumably I should keep this on copy and paste, the number of times it has already appeared, but for those who wish it yet again ...

"We'd waited almost 4 weeks for these interviews and it was obvious they had been hastily arranged once Bob Small notified the PJ that we would be leaving the country."

Not even Kate claims it had anything to do with forthcoming legal changes.  That idea is a red herring.

I presume some supporter provided a cite at some stage demonstrating this change to the law was was to be retrospective?  *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 31, 2018, 02:41:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 12:39:08 PM
And the same goes for you.

Quite possibly or maybe not as the case may be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 31, 2018, 02:50:05 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 12:44:58 PM
Cite for distasteful please.
To reiterate:

There also appears to be a curious anti-British undercurrent from Brits who doubt the McCanns, who also seem quite defensive of even the slightest criticism directed at anything Portuguese.

Five Common Mistakes to Avoid When Asking a Question
1. Asking a Question That Was Just Answered.
2. Asking About Something Completely Irrelevant
3. Asking Questions That Aren't Questions
4. Asking Questions That Are Ambiguous
5. Asking the Wrong Person

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 03:00:46 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 01:48:31 PM
Presumably I should keep this on copy and paste, the number of times it has already appeared, but for those who wish it yet again ...

"We'd waited almost 4 weeks for these interviews and it was obvious they had been hastily arranged once Bob Small notified the PJ that we would be leaving the country."

Not even Kate claims it had anything to do with forthcoming legal changes.  That idea is a red herring.
You posted:
Snip
“Kate's book said they were planning to leave.

p232 "We'd waited almost 4 weeks for these interviews and it was obvious they had been hastily arranged once Bob Small notified the PJ that we were leaving the country.  Otherwise, why now?  As far as we knew, they didn't have the forensics results back yet."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8044.msg397529#msg397529

Were I you I would also C&P the response to your post which was:
Snip
23rd August;
In any case, as we were now being kept in the dark, we didn’t know much about it ourselves by this stage
[Madeleine]
Clearly the PJ had no intention of telling them anything, let alone if the forensic results were back. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8044.msg397546#msg397546

Kate says they were being kept in the dark … in my opinion they knew relations had cooled considerably … if to the extent they had any inkling of being made arguidos ~ you would have to provide a cite for that, because I cannot.

What you have provided is proof the McCanns didn’t cut and run as claimed by some bloggers.  Their decision to leave when the lease on the rented villa expired was already known and may indeed have been the catalyst for the undue haste in making them arguidos.

All before having any evidence at all let alone sufficient evidence in justification. 

Perhaps in the hope of extracting a confession to 'solve' yet another case; which would have been farcical as confirmed when the forensic evidence was returned and interpreted correctly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 31, 2018, 03:01:09 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 31, 2018, 02:02:13 PM

A John McEnroe quote does come to mind.

So no cite then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 03:42:38 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 03:00:46 PM
You posted:
Snip
“Kate's book said they were planning to leave.

p232 "We'd waited almost 4 weeks for these interviews and it was obvious they had been hastily arranged once Bob Small notified the PJ that we were leaving the country.  Otherwise, why now?  As far as we knew, they didn't have the forensics results back yet."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8044.msg397529#msg397529

Were I you I would also C&P the response to your post which was:
Snip
23rd August;
In any case, as we were now being kept in the dark, we didn’t know much about it ourselves by this stage
[Madeleine]
Clearly the PJ had no intention of telling them anything, let alone if the forensic results were back. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8044.msg397546#msg397546

Kate says they were being kept in the dark … in my opinion they knew relations had cooled considerably … if to the extent they had any inkling of being made arguidos ~ you would have to provide a cite for that, because I cannot.

What you have provided is proof the McCanns didn’t cut and run as claimed by some bloggers.  Their decision to leave when the lease on the rented villa expired was already known and may indeed have been the catalyst for the undue haste in making them arguidos.

All before having any evidence at all let alone sufficient evidence in justification. 

Perhaps in the hope of extracting a confession to 'solve' yet another case; which would have been farcical as confirmed when the forensic evidence was returned and interpreted correctly.
The discussion was about impending legal changes.

Nothing in your post is relevant to that, is it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 31, 2018, 03:47:48 PM
The only conclusion I can reach is that the British authorities are reluctant to admit defeat in case the Portuguese then pull something out of the hat and make them look foolish.

Maybe this 'last lead' may provide the answer, maybe not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 31, 2018, 03:50:39 PM
I guess there would be no grounds to claim that. Very few Portuguese police have visited UK over this case  and certainly it's not the sort of place to come for a suntan
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2018, 04:40:31 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 31, 2018, 03:50:39 PM
I guess there would be no grounds to claim that. Very few Portuguese police have visited UK over this case  and certainly it's not the sort of place to come for a suntan
Very droll I’m sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 31, 2018, 04:43:15 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2018, 02:26:28 PM
I dont think your cite supports your claim.. Im fairly sure I have seen articles that support the claim that the mccanns were made arguido shortly before the law was changed... Ill see if I can dig one out
They were but I was looking for the reason of the timing.  Kate was expecting it, but did not really expand on the reason but thought it had something to do with something happening 4 weeks earlier and that seems to be the cadaver dog examinations and the fact they were planing to leave Portugal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2018, 04:48:24 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 31, 2018, 04:43:15 PM
They were but I was looking for the reason of the timing.  Kate was expecting it, but did not really expand on the reason but thought it had something to do with something happening 4 weeks earlier and that seems to be the cadaver dog examinations and the fact they were planing to leave Portugal.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 31, 2018, 05:05:34 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2018, 04:48:24 PM
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html
"The couple’s Portuguese lawyer has claimed that detectives may have deliberately fast-tracked the investigation to ensure they were put in the frame."

"May have" means it is only a suspicion at best.  It is only the PJ who know the actual reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 05:30:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2018, 04:48:24 PM
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html
On which date did the McCanns announce they were to leave Portugal?

On which date did the McCanns plan to leave Portugal?

Were these dates before 15 Sep 2007?

And surely Kate and Gerry could simply have removed themselves from Portugal until the law changed?

The legislation change argument is a dead duck.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2018, 06:26:46 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 05:30:46 PM
On which date did the McCanns announce they were to leave Portugal?

On which date did the McCanns plan to leave Portugal?

Were these dates before 15 Sep 2007?

And surely Kate and Gerry could simply have removed themselves from Portugal until the law changed?

The legislation change argument is a dead duck.

Interesting dates

8th August Interview with Neves and Encarnacao;

Neves stated bluntly that they didn’t believe my version of events. It ‘didn’t fit’ [madeleine]

27th August Esther McVey advised Kate to go home for her own safety and to protect Madeleine's good name.

om the same day they were told to vacate their villa by 11th September. (2 week's notice)

Monday 10th September. Date chosen for leaving Portugal.

Unknown date. Bob Small notifies the PJ the date the McCanns plan to leave.

Monday 3rd September. McCanns told of pending interviews.

We’d waited almost four weeks for these interviews and it was obvious they had been hastily arranged once Bob Small notified the PJ that we would be leaving the country. Otherwise, why now? As far as we knew, they didn’t have the forensic results back yet. [madeleine]

Kate seemed to think that the PJ wouldn't interview them until they had the forensic results, Why she thought she would know when they came back I don't know.

On Saturday 8th September the PJ gave permission for them to leave, which they did at 7am the following day.





Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on May 31, 2018, 06:44:42 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 05:30:46 PM
On which date did the McCanns announce they were to leave Portugal?

On which date did the McCanns plan to leave Portugal?

Were these dates before 15 Sep 2007?

And surely Kate and Gerry could simply have removed themselves from Portugal until the law changed?

The legislation change argument is a dead duck.

It certainly is until someone can show the change was retrospective.
If the argument has legs that should be easy enough to prove. It might even say how it was to be implemented regarding live investigations and open cases.
I am sure a supporter will come along shortly with a "cut and paste" of the relevant legislation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 06:52:15 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 03:42:38 PM
The discussion was about impending legal changes.

Nothing in your post is relevant to that, is it?

I'm replying to the interpretation you chose to put on my post. 

What was in the minds of those who made the McCanns arguidos with such undue hate?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 07:48:47 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 06:52:15 PM
I'm replying to the interpretation you chose to put on my post. 

What was in the minds of those who made the McCanns arguidos with such undue hate?
  • was it because they knew the McCanns were getting ready to return home?
  • was it because of the impending change to the legal code which would have compelled them to produce firm evidence without which it would have been impossible to have made them arguidos?
  • or was it the perfect storm of the combination of all three - the McCann notification of leaving - the change in the law - the lack of credible evidence?
Speculate ad infinitum.

The McCanns announced they were leaving, and their announced departure date was before the law changed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2018, 09:02:15 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 07:48:47 PM
Speculate ad infinitum.

The McCanns announced they were leaving, and their announced departure date was before the law changed.

could you tell us on what date the PJ decided they would make the mccanns arguidos...without that your views are speculation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 09:09:19 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 07:48:47 PM
Speculate ad infinitum.

The McCanns announced they were leaving, and their announced departure date was before the law changed.

Without evidence ... there is absolutely no way that the Portuguese authorities would have sanctioned making the request for the McCann's return to Portugal to be questioned as arguidos.
I believe the PJ were aware there was no evidence ... hence the undue haste to have the case 'wrapped up' ASAP choosing what they thought was the weakest link ie the distraught mother of the missing child.

Therefore in my opinion the leaving was not the problem but the change to the code most certainly was.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 31, 2018, 09:09:49 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2018, 08:59:37 AM
although the uk tabloids went to far...as they did in their reporting of the mccanns...I think some criticism of the PJ was quite justified

Absolutely, they should have interrogated the tapas group immediately and made sure a reconstruction was done before anyone was allowed to head home.  They were far too easy going with them all imho.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2018, 09:12:00 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 31, 2018, 09:09:49 PM
Absolutely, they should have interrogated the tapas group immediately and made sure a reconstruction was done before anyone was allowed to head home.

could you explain how they could prevent the tapas group leaving portugal...dont the PJ need evidence to detain a person.........
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 31, 2018, 09:13:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2018, 09:34:43 AM
There also appears to be a curious anti-British undercurrent from Brits who doubt the McCanns, who also seem quite defensive of even the slightest criticism directed at anything Portuguese.

I take it you mean anti SY?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2018, 09:14:22 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 31, 2018, 09:13:08 PM
I take it you mean anti SY?

and anti FSS.....anti british govt....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 31, 2018, 09:26:09 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2018, 09:51:55 AM
She has every right to express herself, her feelings and frustrations in her book in any way she sees fit.  Perhaps if she’d known in advance what sensitive snowflakes some people are on behalf of the Portuguese police she might have thought twice about upsetting them.  Perhaps in the next edition we can petittion her to change Tweedledum & Tweedledee to “Crockett and Tubbs” and “f....ing tosser” to “lovely young man”.

IMO, by doing what she did in using a book to spout venom at several Portuguese police officers she has attracted similar disdain and hatred from many people in both Portugal and in the UK.  And some people still ask why she receives such hatred even after 11 years.

Kate McCann brought this down upon her own head.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2018, 09:31:49 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 31, 2018, 09:26:09 PM
IMO, by doing what she did in using a book to spout venom at several Portuguese police officers she has attracted similar disdain and hatred from many people in both Portugal and in the UK.  And some people still ask why she receives such hatred even after 11 years.

Kate McCann brought this down upon her own head.

you seem to be getting very personally involved...hatred is a very strong word...she also receives a lot of support
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 31, 2018, 09:32:33 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 31, 2018, 09:26:09 PM
IMO, by doing what she did in using a book to spout venom at several Portuguese police officers she has attracted similar disdain and hatred from many people in both Portugal and in the UK.  And some people still ask why she receives such hatred even after 11 years.

Kate McCann brought this down upon her own head.

I don't hate  her.
ETA.
I don't know anyone who hates her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 31, 2018, 09:33:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2018, 09:31:49 PM
you seem to be getting very personally involved...hatred is a very strong word...she also receives a lot of support

What goes around comes around imo, she is reaping her own crop.  Had she cooperated fully with the PJ back in 2007 we wouldn't be having this debate now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 31, 2018, 09:38:07 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 31, 2018, 09:33:40 PM
What goes around comes around imo, she is reaping her own crop.  Had she cooperated fully with the PJ back in 2007 we wouldn't be having this debate now.

Can you explain further what you mean?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2018, 09:38:43 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 31, 2018, 09:33:40 PM
What goes around comes around imo, she is reaping her own crop.  Had she cooperated fully with the PJ back in 2007 we wouldn't be having this debate now.

I don't see how any answers to the, questions, she was asked would have changed anything.... I doubt it would make, a scrap of difference to your degree if hatred... Which I find more than slightly strange
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2018, 09:42:15 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 31, 2018, 09:32:33 PM
I don't hate  her.
ETA.
I don't know anyone who hates her.

I think she seems a very warm caring person and is a loss to the medical profession
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 31, 2018, 09:51:43 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2018, 09:38:43 PM
I don't see how any answers to the, questions, she was asked would have changed anything.... I doubt it would make, a scrap of difference to your degree if hatred... Which I find more than slightly strange

Those would have been the warm-up questions so she fell at the first fence imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2018, 09:55:48 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 31, 2018, 09:51:43 PM
Those would have been the warm-up questions so she fell at the first fence imo.

I agree those, were the warm up questions  and if Kate had, answered them there, would have been another 48..
She was absolutely  right to answer none

You have inadvertently  admitted the questions were of no importance
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 11:41:11 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2018, 09:02:15 PM
could you tell us on what date the PJ decided they would make the mccanns arguidos...without that your views are speculation
What does that have to do with anything?

Kate's book goes - announcement to leave - then made arguidos.

It does not get simpler.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 11:43:57 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2018, 09:09:19 PM
Without evidence ... there is absolutely no way that the Portuguese authorities would have sanctioned making the request for the McCann's return to Portugal to be questioned as arguidos.
I believe the PJ were aware there was no evidence ... hence the undue haste to have the case 'wrapped up' ASAP choosing what they thought was the weakest link ie the distraught mother of the missing child.

Therefore in my opinion the leaving was not the problem but the change to the code most certainly was.
Pure speculation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2018, 05:00:39 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 11:43:57 PM
Pure speculation.

But nevertheless a fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 05:32:21 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 31, 2018, 11:41:11 PM
What does that have to do with anything?

Kate's book goes - announcement to leave - then made arguidos.

It does not get simpler.

Amaral's book says it was the announcement that the McCanns were leaving that triggered the decision to interview them before they went..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 08:21:11 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 01, 2018, 05:00:39 AM
But nevertheless a fact.
Pure speculation by definition does not constitute a fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 08:24:31 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 05:32:21 AM
Amaral's book says it was the announcement that the McCanns were leaving that triggered the decision to interview them before they went..

Interviewed yes... But what triggerred making them arguidos
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 08:42:53 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 08:24:31 AM
Interviewed yes... But what triggerred making them arguidos

If there's a possibility that someone will incriminate themselves by answering the questions asked they must be made arguido so they can choose to stay silent and have a lawyer present.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 08:50:18 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 08:42:53 AM
If there's a possibility that someone will incriminate themselves by answering the questions asked they must be made arguido so they can choose to stay silent and have a lawyer present.

But once the rules Re arguido changed they would need evidence to make them arguido and to ask incriminating questions
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 09:15:02 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 08:50:18 AM
But once the rules Re arguido changed they would need evidence to make them arguido and to ask incriminating questions
As they had already announced a departure date prior to the legal change, we will never know what might have happened.  It's pure speculation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2018, 09:18:20 AM
One might ask what was stopping the PJ making them arguidos earlier.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 09:30:15 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 09:15:02 AM
As they had already announced a departure date prior to the legal change, we will never know what might have happened.  It's pure speculation.

Mosts posts here, are pure, speculation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 09:36:13 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 08:50:18 AM
But once the rules Re arguido changed they would need evidence to make them arguido and to ask incriminating questions

I don't know about that. Some changes took effect on 15th September 2007. According to the Portuguese Resident;

To name someone as “arguido” the criminal police force now requires validation by a judge.To protect the suspect’s rights, before the first interview, the person must be informed of the facts that are attributed to them and of the existing evidence, as long as this does not jeopardise the investigation or the fundamental rights of third parties.Interviews now have a maximum duration of four hours, where previously there was no time limit, and can be resumed for the same period of time but only with a minimum interval of an hour. Statements made in violation of these limits are considered void.
http://portugalresident.com/revisions-of-the-criminal-procedure-code



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 09:39:00 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 01, 2018, 09:18:20 AM
One might ask what was stopping the PJ making them arguidos earlier.

Perhaps Kate McCann was correct and they were waiting for the FSS report.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2018, 09:42:18 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 09:39:00 AM
Perhaps Kate McCann was correct and they were waiting for the FSS report.
But there was no incriminating evidence in that report so why would that have been the trigger for making them arguidos?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 01, 2018, 09:45:48 AM
Kate McCann was interrogated for eleven hours on 6th September.

On the 7th she was constituted arguida to ensure she didn't incriminate herself by answering important questions they must have forgotten to ask on the 6th such as ... had she looked inside a wardrobe and showing her photographs was asked to describe what was in it?

She was asked what happened when she raised the alarm at the tapas ... and did she have her mobile phone with her?

Did she contact Sky News and did she ask for a priest?

As has already been said ... just the softening up process ... before the nitty gritty of the 'forensic evidence' was introduced as follows:
43   (Various films had been shown to her of the inspection by forensic dogs, where one can see their signalling indications of the scent of a human corpse and traces of human blood as well as the comments by the expert overseeing the exercise.)
Having seen the film and after the scent of a corpse was signalled in her bedroom near the wardrobe, and behind the sofa by the window in the sitting room, Kate McCann said she could not explain anything more than she already had.
Her response to the next four questions was exactly that ... "she could not explain anything more than she already had."

It has already been said the McCanns waited for a fortnight for this interrogation. They didn't have to in my opinion as they were still free agents.  Did they delay their journey home as a result of thinking the police were still looking for Madeleine? 

Obviously the 48 questions had all been asked at the eleven hour marathon Kate had endured the day before.  Therefore the intention in bringing them in and asking them again on the following day could only have been to enable Kate to be charged.  But the frail, vulnerable woman didn't half put a spoke in their wheel and instead of letting them absolve themselves of their incompetence really put the spotlight on it.  In my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 01, 2018, 09:51:13 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 08:21:11 AM
Pure speculation by definition does not constitute a fact.

So it isn't a fact that the Criminal Code was changed?  Have we been misinformed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 10:00:08 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 31, 2018, 09:33:40 PM
What goes around comes around imo, she is reaping her own crop.  Had she cooperated fully with the PJ back in 2007 we wouldn't be having this debate now.

No, perhaps not. Without the world's media watching, she and Gerry might have slipped down those stairs straight into sharing cells with a few other people I can think of.

Fed to pigs, cremated in someone's coffin... possibilities are endless to explain away the disappearance of kids. I expect any Stephen King novel could provide inspiration.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 10:00:41 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 01, 2018, 09:45:48 AM
Kate McCann was interrogated for eleven hours on 6th September.

On the 7th she was constituted arguida to ensure she didn't incriminate herself by answering important questions they must have forgotten to ask on the 6th such as ... had she looked inside a wardrobe and showing her photographs was asked to describe what was in it?

She was asked what happened when she raised the alarm at the tapas ... and did she have her mobile phone with her?

Did she contact Sky News and did she ask for a priest?

As has already been said ... just the softening up process ... before the nitty gritty of the 'forensic evidence' was introduced as follows:
43   (Various films had been shown to her of the inspection by forensic dogs, where one can see their signalling indications of the scent of a human corpse and traces of human blood as well as the comments by the expert overseeing the exercise.)
Having seen the film and after the scent of a corpse was signalled in her bedroom near the wardrobe, and behind the sofa by the window in the sitting room, Kate McCann said she could not explain anything more than she already had.
Her response to the next four questions was exactly that ... "she could not explain anything more than she already had."

It has already been said the McCanns waited for a fortnight for this interrogation. They didn't have to in my opinion as they were still free agents.  Did they delay their journey home as a result of thinking the police were still looking for Madeleine? 

Obviously the 48 questions had all been asked at the eleven hour marathon Kate had endured the day before.  Therefore the intention in bringing them in and asking them again on the following day could only have been to enable Kate to be charged.  But the frail, vulnerable woman didn't half put a spoke in their wheel and instead of letting them absolve themselves of their incompetence really put the spotlight on it.  In my opinion.

As Angelo pointed out yesterday  if Kate, had answerred those 48 questions there would have been more, asked.... I feel the questions were simply to grind her down
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 01, 2018, 10:09:34 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 10:00:41 AM
As Angelo pointed out yesterday  if Kate, had answerred those 48 questions there would have been more, asked.... I feel the questions were simply to grind her down

The changes to the penal code also included the imposition of a maximum time for interrogations of I think three hours?  Prior to that there was no limit.
How long was Leonor Cipriano questioned for?  Who knows?  But we do know that Kate was subjected to eleven hours of it and I've seen thirteen mentioned ~ that might have been inclusive of comfort breaks?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 10:10:30 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 10:00:41 AM
As Angelo pointed out yesterday  if Kate, had answerred those 48 questions there would have been more, asked.... I feel the questions were simply to grind her down

I have no idea if more would have been asked, but I can well imagine how anything she did say in answer to certain questions could have been distorted and taken out of context.

A frequent argument that I keep seeing is that several questions appear straightforward. But the catch is that when you answer those, it throws suspicion on the ones that remain unanswered.

When it first came out that she'd refused to answer the arguido questions, I didn't understand why not, either. However, the penny dropped for me quite some time ago, and I think the lawyer eventually advised her correctly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 10:16:01 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 01, 2018, 09:51:13 AM
So it isn't a fact that the Criminal Code was changed?  Have we been misinformed?
Yes, and the misinformation continues. The law changed AFTER the date on which the McCanns had announced they were to leave Portugal, and after the date they chose to leave Portugal.

Not even Kate claims pending legal changes influenced the outcome.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 10:21:35 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 01, 2018, 09:51:13 AM
So it isn't a fact that the Criminal Code was changed?  Have we been misinformed?

The Criminal Code was changed, but I can find no evidence that Carlos Pinto de Abreu was correct when he said;

"On September 15 a new procedural penal code was introduced making it necessary for there to be evidence against the citizen before they could be made an arguido.

"Before this date it wasn’t necessary. You could be made an arguido without actual evidence against you," he said.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 10:22:05 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 01, 2018, 10:09:34 AM
The changes to the penal code also included the imposition of a maximum time for interrogations of I think three hours?  Prior to that there was no limit.
How long was Leonor Cipriano questioned for?  Who knows?  But we do know that Kate was subjected to eleven hours of it and I've seen thirteen mentioned ~ that might have been inclusive of comfort breaks?

Offhand, I don't recall anything about interrogation session times. I could check, but not sure I'd have time today.

NB There are two codes related to offences: one is the penal code (which sets out various crimes and penalties) and the other is the penal procedure code (which stipulates what is permissible or not, and rights, throughout the criminal process). The PPC is the one that keeps changing within the blink of an eyelid. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 10:22:56 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 01, 2018, 09:42:18 AM
But there was no incriminating evidence in that report so why would that have been the trigger for making them arguidos?
As no one has claimed the FSS report was the trigger, I can't see the point of your question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2018, 10:24:06 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 10:21:35 AM
The Criminal Code was changed, but I can find no evidence that Carlos Pinto de Abreu was correct when he said;

"On September 15 a new procedural penal code was introduced making it necessary for there to be evidence against the citizen before they could be made an arguido.

"Before this date it wasn’t necessary. You could be made an arguido without actual evidence against you," he said.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html
Murat was made an arguido on zero evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 10:24:54 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 10:21:35 AM
The Criminal Code was changed, but I can find no evidence that Carlos Pinto de Abreu was correct when he said;

"On September 15 a new procedural penal code was introduced making it necessary for there to be evidence against the citizen before they could be made an arguido.

"Before this date it wasn’t necessary. You could be made an arguido without actual evidence against you," he said.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html

It was the penal (criminal) procedure code that changed then.

Carlos Pinto de Abreu, a Portuguese lawyer on the McCanns’ defence team, said that under Portugal’s new penal code, police must have more than just suspicions to make somebody an arguido.

"On September 15 a new procedural penal code was introduced making it necessary for there to be evidence against the citizen before they could be made an arguido.

"Before this date it wasn’t necessary. You could be made an arguido without actual evidence against you," he said.


Not the same code.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 10:27:01 AM
I posted the changes years ago on here, and more than once, but it would take hours to see if I can find them again. Sigh...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 01, 2018, 10:31:30 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 01, 2018, 10:00:08 AM
No, perhaps not. Without the world's media watching, she and Gerry might have slipped down those stairs straight into sharing cells with a few other people I can think of.

Fed to pigs, cremated in someone's coffin... possibilities are endless to explain away the disappearance of kids. I expect any Stephen King novel could provide inspiration.

Its a possibility Muriel Mckay was fed to pigs,so there is possibilty's it happens.

Quote
Mrs McKay's body was never discovered, but it was suspected she was fed to pigs on a Hertfordshire farm owned by the brothers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-17464298
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 10:44:04 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 10:16:01 AM
Yes, and the misinformation continues. The law changed AFTER the date on which the McCanns had announced they were to leave Portugal, and after the date they chose to leave Portugal.

Not even Kate claims pending legal changes influenced the outcome.



1. With help from the Winkworth Estate Agency in Lagos, it was established that the residence occupied by the McCann couple in Rua da Flores, lot 27 - Vivenda Vista do Mar, P da L was effectively occupied by them on 02-07-2007, whilst the contract shows that the hire period began on 1st July, according to the copy of the contract we were given.

- The McCanns' departure took place on 09-09-2007 and the keys to the house were returned the following day (10-09-2007) to the Winkworth office in Lagos by an English woman named Susan who was the wife of the Anglican vicar who celebrated mass in the P da L church.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DCCB_LETTER.htm

According to the rental agreement, the rental was from 1 July to 31 August.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P11/11_VOLUME_XIa_Page_2953.jpg

From memory (if someone could find the section in Kate's book), they stayed on there or elsewhere pending further upcoming police interviews. From Susan Hubbard's statement, my impression is that they got an extension on their rental in the villa.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 10:45:51 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 10:22:56 AM
As no one has claimed the FSS report was the trigger, I can't see the point of your question.

Read the archiving summarry.... All the evidence used to make them arguidis was not confirmed... It specifically  mentions the residues collected and sent to the FSS
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 01, 2018, 10:49:21 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 10:45:51 AM
Read the archiving summarry.... All the evidence used to make them arguidis was not confirmed... It specifically  mentions the residues collected and sent to the FSS

It is immaterial, the PJ had suspicions and there were enough contradictions in statements for PJ to want to ask incriminating questions which required them being made arguidos.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 11:00:33 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 01, 2018, 10:49:21 AM
It is immaterial, the PJ had suspicions and there were enough contradictions in statements for PJ to want to ask incriminating questions which required them being made arguidos.
The whole discussion  is immaterial.  ......as nothing came from the questions.... And the PJ have clearly stated there is no evidence against the McCanns
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 11:03:36 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 01, 2018, 10:49:21 AM
It is immaterial, the PJ had suspicions and there were enough contradictions in statements for PJ to want to ask incriminating questions which required them being made arguidos.

The archiving report tells us the evidence used to make them arguidos and doesn't mention contradiction s in statements.... Again it seems the present investigations do not see the alleged contradictions as of any importance
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 11:10:32 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 01, 2018, 10:49:21 AM
It is immaterial, the PJ had suspicions and there were enough contradictions in statements for PJ to want to ask incriminating questions which required them being made arguidos.

I don't find it immaterial.

Until I, or some kind sould finds my post here from several years ago, I'll have to simply go from memory. A key difference in that legal article (at the time) was that the suspicion had to be founded (I can't remember the term used offhand, but IMO it clearly meant more than what could have been "interpreted" as sanctioning a fishing expedition, otherwise I can't see te purpose of having changed the phrasing.

The facts appear to be that:

- the McCanns stayed on beyond the expiry of their villa rental contract.
- the law was about to change.
- they were interviewed prior to that change.
- the PJ only had Lowe's email re the DNA results at the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 11:32:19 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 01, 2018, 10:31:30 AM
Its a possibility Muriel Mckay was fed to pigs,so there is possibilty's it happens.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-17464298

No one has ever found a trace of that missing litttle girl.

No forensic evidence was ever found to substantiate that (IMO) wild theory.

If you haven't read the alleged "evidence" against that family... it really is one of the most bizarre trials that I've ever read about. And I do mean trial, not just the "investigation". How that case ever even got to trial is beyond my comprehension in the 21st century.

Whoever is guilty in that case, unless something new comes to light, I just can't see how justice has been done with respect to that little girl.

And, if those currently serving very long sentences are not in fact guilty, there's a predator out there who is free as a bird to prey again.

Whether there is any direct connection to Joana's disappearance, the sexual agressions against other girls in the area over a period of years and Maeleine's disappearance - I have no idea. I find it to be a possibility worthy of investigation, which may well be the final lead that SY (and possibly also the Porto PJ team) are pursuing.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 01, 2018, 11:35:40 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 01, 2018, 11:32:19 AM
No one has ever found a trace of that missing litttle girl.

No forensic evidence was ever found to substantiate that (IMO) wild theory.


So nothing to rule it out then.Pigs that is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 01, 2018, 11:40:49 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 01, 2018, 11:32:19 AM

Whether there is any direct connection to Joana's disappearance, the sexual agressions against other girls in the area over a period of years and Maeleine's disappearance - I have no idea. I find it to be a possibility worthy of investigation, which may well be the final lead that SY (and possibly also the Porto PJ team) are pursuing.


There again it might not be,why speculate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 11:55:10 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 01, 2018, 11:40:49 AM

There again it might not be,why speculate.

Who's speculating? Surely it would be a legitimate  lead for the police to investigate whether 2 child disappearances and 12 sexual agressions (or potential ones) occurred in a relatively cliose proximity over a period of a few years could have a common connection?

Or do you think that such potential leads should be swept under the carpet and not investigated at all? If so, why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2018, 12:03:37 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 01, 2018, 11:35:40 AM
So nothing to rule it out then.Pigs that is.
Nothing to rule out being fed to wild dogs, or the lions at Lisbon Zoo either.  Simply no evidence at all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 12:04:23 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 01, 2018, 11:35:40 AM
So nothing to rule it out then.Pigs that is.

No. But as substantiated as finding a UFO conspiracy theorist as a witness.

If there was no counter-evidence provided as to the lack of evidence of UFOs or the expert witness testimony, how can the jury contest it (their role is to come to a conclusion based on "facts" presented during the trial".

IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 12:06:01 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 01, 2018, 12:03:37 PM
Nothing to rule out being fed to wild dogs, or the lions at Lisbon Zoo either.  Simply no evidence at all.

Just saw this post. Snap.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 12:13:26 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 10:45:51 AM
Read the archiving summarry.... All the evidence used to make them arguidis was not confirmed... It specifically  mentions the residues collected and sent to the FSS
Unless someone was psychic, the archiving summary is not relevant to the sequence of events leading to 7 Sep 2007.  The case was not archived then and no archiving summary existed.

You are at the wrong time on the wrong battleground.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 12:36:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 01, 2018, 12:03:37 PM
Nothing to rule out being fed to wild dogs, or the lions at Lisbon Zoo either.  Simply no evidence at all.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44332699
2 lions, 2 tigers, 1 jaguar and a bear have just escaped from a zoo in west Germany.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2018, 12:37:41 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 12:36:25 PM
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44332699
2 lions, 2 tigers, 1 jaguar and a bear have just escaped from a zoo in west Germany.
ha, I just read that.  I wonder how many little kids they’ve snacked on so far...?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 12:43:31 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 12:13:26 PM
Unless someone was psychic, the archiving summary is not relevant to the sequence of events leading to 7 Sep 2007.  The case was not archived then and no archiving summary existed.

You are at the wrong time on the wrong battleground.

The archiving report explained the basis on the evidence used to make them arguidos... Not sure why you are mentioning psychics
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 01, 2018, 12:50:42 PM
Memo:

A reminder to all posters to keep comments constructive and amicable. Attack opinion by all means but please do not make personal comments towards fellow members. This forum prides itself in allowing all shades of opinion so please bear this in mind when responding. TY and have a pleasant weekend.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 01:05:47 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 12:43:31 PM
The archiving report explained the basis on the evidence used to make them arguidos... Not sure why you are mentioning psychics
No doubt you will quote the relevant part.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 01:23:25 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 01:05:47 PM
No doubt you will quote the relevant part.

I have done it many times and have quoted a summary from memory earlier today ...when I'm at my pc will provide the link
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 01, 2018, 01:35:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2018, 09:55:48 PM
I agree those, were the warm up questions  and if Kate had, answered them there, would have been another 48..
She was absolutely  right to answer none

You have inadvertently  admitted the questions were of no importance

Angelo is correct, in a formal police interview situation a detective will ask a series of simple questions initially which should be easily answered. If the suspect hesitates or refuses to answer these innocuous questions then the police have the right to consider the witness hostile. At that point there is no point in proceeding to the more inquisitorial questions.

If the police have incriminating evidence at that point the suspect might be arrested and charged.  If not they will normally be released while the search for such evidence continues.

I cannot understand your comment to the effect that she was right to answer none.  She was morally obliged to answer the police questions to the best of her ability, this was her daughter who had disappeared. The police were right in asking her finally, "Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?", to which Kate responded, "Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks".

So my question is this.  Why would the mother of a missing child refuse to cooperate in an investigation which has the sole purpose of finding that child?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 01:40:07 PM
Quote from: John on June 01, 2018, 01:35:46 PM
Angelo is correct, in a formal police interview situation a detective will ask a series of simple questions initially which should be easily answered. If the suspect hesitates or refuses to answer these innocuous questions then the police have the right to consider the witness hostile. At that point there is no point in proceeding to the more inquisitorial questions.

If the police have incriminating evidence at that point the suspect might be arrested and charged.  If not they will normally be released while the search for such evidence continues.

In which country? Kate was interviewed the day before the arguido interview and answered all questions as a witness, i.e. prior to being constituted as an arguida.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 01, 2018, 01:41:38 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 10:00:41 AM
As Angelo pointed out yesterday  if Kate, had answerred those 48 questions there would have been more, asked.... I feel the questions were simply to grind her down

Or for non-believers of conspiracy theories merely an attempt by the investigating authorities to find the truth ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 01, 2018, 01:45:16 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 01, 2018, 11:55:10 AM
Who's speculating? Surely it would be a legitimate  lead for the police to investigate whether 2 child disappearances and 12 sexual agressions (or potential ones) occurred in a relatively cliose proximity over a period of a few years could have a common connection?

Or do you think that such potential leads should be swept under the carpet and not investigated at all? If so, why?
When I,m on my pc next I'll post a link regarding that from Row!ey.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 01, 2018, 01:50:31 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 10:16:01 AM
Yes, and the misinformation continues. The law changed AFTER the date on which the McCanns had announced they were to leave Portugal, and after the date they chose to leave Portugal.

Not even Kate claims pending legal changes influenced the outcome.

Hmmm ... so they just said, "Right, that's that guys ... got them out of our hair!  What for our next wheeze?  Oh I know!  How about we change the law???

How long does it take for a country to enact major changes to the law?  The change to the law concerning arguidos didn't happen overnight, it would have been a long time coming and to think it didn't figure in PG calculations is in my opinion as naive as it is disingenuous.

The PJ would in my opinion have been well aware that suspicion alone would no longer be grounds to make a person arguido and that law was about to come into force.

So what is it?  Didn't the PJ know or care about the impending change to the law?  Were they so incompetent that they didn't know that the 'evidence' they had was fatally flawed and if they were going to use it it had to be done under the old regime; in the knowledge that even if the McCanns had remained in Portugal they had to have firm evidence against them to impose arguido status.

The PJ had obviously decided the McCanns were to be arguidos whatever their reasons ... the change in the law would not have allowed that.
In my opinion the date of the McCann leaving took second place to the date of the law changing.  Only hurried things up a bit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 01:57:27 PM
Quote from: John on June 01, 2018, 01:35:46 PM
Angelo is correct, in a formal police interview situation a detective will ask a series of simple questions initially which should be easily answered. If the suspect hesitates or refuses to answer these innocuous questions then the police have the right to consider the witness hostile. At that point there is no point in proceeding to the more inquisitorial questions.

If the police have incriminating evidence at that point the suspect might be arrested and charged.  If not they will normally be released while the search for such evidence continues.

I cannot understand your comment to the effect that she was right to answer none.  She was morally obliged to answer the police questions to the best of her ability, this was her daughter who had disappeared. The police were right in asking her finally, "Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?", to which Kate responded, "Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks".

So my question is this.  Why would the mother of a missing child refuse to cooperate in an investigation which has the sole purpose of finding that child?

I feel she was right to answer none because as Angelo alluded to it would simply have invited more questions.  The PJ could the grind Kate down until she may have made an innocent inadvertant error... Such an error may have given the PJ grounds to arrest her... And quite possibly  refuse bail

That's, why I think she was  given the advice not to answer
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 01, 2018, 01:59:10 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 01, 2018, 01:40:07 PM
In which country? Kate was interviewed the day before the arguido interview and answered all questions as a witness, i.e. prior to being constituted as an arguida.

Yes, I understand she was questioned with Gerry by her side so why the change when questioned on her own?  Is Kate McCann unable to answer questions in her own right?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 01:59:57 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 01, 2018, 01:41:38 PM
Or for non-believers of conspiracy theories merely an attempt by the investigating authorities to find the truth ?

They were unlikely.. IMO... To find the truth when they are on record placing far to much reliance on the alerts... Again... All the evidence the PJ thought they had was not confirmed or consolidated... According to the archiving report
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 01, 2018, 02:00:36 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 11:00:33 AM
The whole discussion  is immaterial.  ......as nothing came from the questions.... And the PJ have clearly stated there is no evidence against the McCanns

Agreed, with the caveat that it was an extremely successful smear. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 02:01:18 PM
Quote from: John on June 01, 2018, 01:59:10 PM
Yes, I understand she was questioned with Gerry by her side so why the change when questioned on her own?  Is Kate McCann unable to answer questions in her own right?

Again I can see exactly  why an innocent person would be advidlsed not to answer questions in that situation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 01, 2018, 02:01:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 01:57:27 PM
I feel she was right to answer none because as Angelo alluded to it would simply have invited more questions.  The PJ could the grind Kate down until she may have made an innocent inadvertant error... Such an error may have given the PJ grounds to arrest her... And quite possibly  refuse bail

That's, why I think she was  given the advice not to answer

Is that another way of saying she might have incriminated herself?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 02:02:28 PM
Quote from: John on June 01, 2018, 01:59:10 PM
Yes, I understand she was questioned with Gerry by her side so why the change when questioned on her own?  Is Kate McCann unable to answer questions in her own right?

She was interviewed on 4 May, with Gerry allowed to sit behind her on that occasion (which was actually kind of the PJ).

I have seen nothing to suggest that he was present for her pre-arguido interivew of 6 September. Quite the contrary, unless you have other information.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 02:04:11 PM
Quote from: John on June 01, 2018, 02:01:28 PM
Is that another way of saying she might have incriminated herself?

Absolutely.... An innocent person can incriminate themselves
Do you think the right to silence is to protect the innocent or the guilty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 01, 2018, 02:04:19 PM
Quote from: John on June 01, 2018, 01:35:46 PM
Angelo is correct, in a formal police interview situation a detective will ask a series of simple questions initially which should be easily answered. If the suspect hesitates or refuses to answer these innocuous questions then the police have the right to consider the witness hostile. At that point there is no point in proceeding to the more inquisitorial questions.

If the police have incriminating evidence at that point the suspect might be arrested and charged.  If not they will normally be released while the search for such evidence continues.

I cannot understand your comment to the effect that she was right to answer none.  She was morally obliged to answer the police questions to the best of her ability, this was her daughter who had disappeared. The police were right in asking her finally, "Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?", to which Kate responded, "Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks".

So my question is this.  Why would the mother of a missing child refuse to cooperate in an investigation which has the sole purpose of finding that child?


The only reason i can think of is not to incriminate herself  - it is obviouse imo that at the time she knew that maddie could not be helped.

Otherwise like you say you would do everything to help find your child regardless of the consequences - and if telling the truth have nothing to fear.

After all at the time to many lawyers..... PR  etc etc involved to fear any miscarriage of justice imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 01, 2018, 02:04:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 02:01:18 PM
Again I can see exactly  why an innocent person would be advidlsed not to answer questions in that situation

As I understand it, it was her lawyer who advised she didn't answer any questions as an arguida.  A lawyer would only make such a recommendation if he suspected his client was in trouble?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 01, 2018, 02:08:21 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 02:04:11 PM
Absolutely.... An innocent person can incriminate themselves
Do you think the right to silence is to protect the innocent or the guilty

Any suspect who invokes the right to silence has obviously serious concerns for one reason or another.  In real life, the innocent mother of the missing child will cooperate fully with the investigation charged with finding him or her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 01, 2018, 02:12:14 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 01, 2018, 02:04:19 PM

The only reason i can think of is not to incriminate herself  - it is obviouse imo that at the time she knew that maddie could not be helped.

Otherwise like you say you would do everything to help find your child regardless of the consequences - and if telling the truth have nothing to fear.

After all at the time to many lawyers..... PR  etc etc involved to fear any miscarriage of justice imo

What makes you think that "it is obviouse that at the time she knew that maddie could not be helped" ?

Do you think that is why the family have devoted a huge portion of their lives to finding Madeleine over the intervening years since?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 02:12:50 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 01, 2018, 01:50:31 PM
Hmmm ... so they just said, "Right, that's that guys ... got them out of our hair!  What for our next wheeze?  Oh I know!  How about we change the law???

How long does it take for a country to enact major changes to the law?  The change to the law concerning arguidos didn't happen overnight, it would have been a long time coming and to think it didn't figure in PG calculations is in my opinion as naive as it is disingenuous.

The PJ would in my opinion have been well aware that suspicion alone would no longer be grounds to make a person arguido and that law was about to come into force.

So what is it?  Didn't the PJ know or care about the impending change to the law?  Were they so incompetent that they didn't know that the 'evidence' they had was fatally flawed and if they were going to use it it had to be done under the old regime; in the knowledge that even if the McCanns had remained in Portugal they had to have firm evidence against them to impose arguido status.

The PJ had obviously decided the McCanns were to be arguidos whatever their reasons ... the change in the law would not have allowed that.
In my opinion the date of the McCann leaving took second place to the date of the law changing.  Only hurried things up a bit.
This is an example of the misinformation I was talking about.

If you have any evidence that the PJ knew of the date and content of these changes, it is time to provide it.

Unless Kate's book is wrong, Carlos Pinto de Abreu didn't see it coming and didn't forewarn the McCanns. And it was his job to know of such changes.

Otherwise your argument is speculation, pure and simple.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 02:15:15 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 01:57:27 PM
I feel she was right to answer none because as Angelo alluded to it would simply have invited more questions.  The PJ could the grind Kate down until she may have made an innocent inadvertant error... Such an error may have given the PJ grounds to arrest her... And quite possibly  refuse bail

That's, why I think she was  given the advice not to answer
Kate's book suggests otherwise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 02:20:59 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 02:15:15 PM
Kate's book suggests otherwise.

What... In your opion.. Does kates book suggest... I think you are mistaken
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 02:22:44 PM
Quote from: John on June 01, 2018, 02:08:21 PM
Any suspect who invokes the right to silence has obviously serious concerns for one reason or another.  In real life, the innocent mother of the missing child will cooperate fully with the investigation charged with finding him or her.

Serious concerns that she might be a victim of miscarriage  of justice... IMO... Simple as that
...and not if she has concerns with the motive and competence of the police force... Imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 02:26:44 PM
The fact is that sometimes an innocent person takes the right to silence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 01, 2018, 02:39:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 02:26:44 PM
The fact is that sometimes an innocent person takes the right to silence

Is that innocent or found not guilty....?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 02:43:30 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 01, 2018, 02:39:04 PM
Is that innocent or found not guilty....?

Innocent... Are you not aware
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 01, 2018, 02:46:04 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 01, 2018, 02:12:14 PM
What makes you think that "it is obviouse that at the time she knew that maddie could not be helped" ?

Do you think that is why the family have devoted a huge portion of their lives to finding Madeleine over the intervening years since?

That was my opinion. - my opinion also B is - what have they actually done to find maddie.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 02:57:54 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 02:12:50 PM
This is an example of the misinformation I was talking about.

If you have any evidence that the PJ knew of the date and content of these changes, it is time to provide it.

Unless Kate's book is wrong, Carlos Pinto de Abreu didn't see it coming and didn't forewarn the McCanns. And it was his job to know of such changes.

Otherwise your argument is speculation, pure and simple.

I wasn't aware of the sweeping reform to come at the time, but then I had no particular reason to be interested. The concept of reform appears to have been approved by the PT parliament in 2005.

How much the local PJ may have known about it and when isn't clear. If they seriously weren't aware of imminent changes in the law that directly affected their own work... then, who should have informed and prepared them for such changes.

Not the case in PT, but luckily the changes didn't encompass the death penalty...

3.1 O Código Penal de 2007 e a preocupação com os novos riscos
Em  2005,  o  XVII  Governo  Constitucional  Português  previu 
–  pela   Resolução   do   
Conselho de Ministros n° 138/2005 –
 um vasto programa de reformas na esfera da justiça penal propondo uma nova revisão dos Códigos Penal e Processual Penal, como também, “o enquadramento da definição e da execução da política criminal, a lei quadro da reforma do sistema  prisional  e  respectivos  diplomas  complementares  e  o  regime  das  bases  de  dados 
para fins de investigação criminal”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 01, 2018, 03:27:10 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 01, 2018, 11:55:10 AM
Who's speculating? Surely it would be a legitimate  lead for the police to investigate whether 2 child disappearances and 12 sexual agressions (or potential ones) occurred in a relatively cliose proximity over a period of a few years could have a common connection?

Or do you think that such potential leads should be swept under the carpet and not investigated at all? If so, why?

Mark Rowley April 2017,note has not is.


Quote
Q: The theory of a sex predator responsible for Maddie’s disappearance is something the Portuguese police have focussed on. How big a part of your investigation has that been, because there were a series of sex attack on sleeping, mainly British children in nearby resorts. So how important has that
been to your investigation?
 
MR: That has been one key line of enquiry. The reality is in any urban area, you cast your net wide and you find a whole range of offences and sex offenders who live nearby and those coincidences need to be sifted out; what is a coincidence and what could be linked to the investigation we are currently dealing with and just like we do in London we have been doing in Portugal so offences which could be linked have to be looked at and either ruled in or ruled out and that’s the work we have been doing.
 


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on June 01, 2018, 03:28:40 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 01, 2018, 02:46:04 PM
That was my opinion. - my opinion also B is - what have they actually done to find maddie.

nothing imho
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2018, 03:38:32 PM
Quote from: John on June 01, 2018, 02:08:21 PM
Any suspect who invokes the right to silence has obviously serious concerns for one reason or another.  In real life, the innocent mother of the missing child will cooperate fully with the investigation charged with finding him or her.
Unless she suspects that the police are out to pin the crime on her, in which case she might refuse to play into their hands.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2018, 03:41:56 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 02:12:50 PM
This is an example of the misinformation I was talking about.

If you have any evidence that the PJ knew of the date and content of these changes, it is time to provide it.

Unless Kate's book is wrong, Carlos Pinto de Abreu didn't see it coming and didn't forewarn the McCanns. And it was his job to know of such changes.

Otherwise your argument is speculation, pure and simple.
Are you seriously suggesting that the police would know nothing of a change to the law due to occur a mere couple of weeks later which would directly affect the way they handle suspects in the future? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2018, 04:17:51 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 01, 2018, 03:41:56 PM
Are you seriously suggesting that the police would know nothing of a change to the law due to occur a mere couple of weeks later which would directly affect the way they handle suspects in the future?

That's what I was wondering. If the changes came as a last-minute surprise to the nation's entire criminal legal system, then there was a problem. IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2018, 04:19:20 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 01, 2018, 04:17:51 PM
That's what I was wondering. If the changes came as a last-minute surprise to the nation's entire criminal legal system, then there was a problem. IMO.
It would certainly point to a highly disorganised system, if true.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 01, 2018, 04:37:09 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 02:26:44 PM
The fact is that sometimes an innocent person takes the right to silence

Cite for the innocent mother of a missing kid refusing police questions?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 04:40:09 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 01, 2018, 04:37:09 PM
Cite for the innocent mother of a missing kid refusing police questions?

If you can point out where I have said that I will give you a cite
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 04:59:59 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 01, 2018, 03:41:56 PM
Are you seriously suggesting that the police would know nothing of a change to the law due to occur a mere couple of weeks later which would directly affect the way they handle suspects in the future?
What difference does it make?

The McCanns had already announced their departure date.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 05:05:09 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 04:59:59 PM
What difference does it make?

The McCanns had already announced their departure date.

It would certainly point to a highly disorganised system, if true.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 01, 2018, 05:43:03 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 01, 2018, 04:59:59 PM
What difference does it make?

The McCanns had already announced their departure date.
How did you work that out?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 01, 2018, 06:10:38 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 02:43:30 PM
Innocent... Are you not aware

So how do you know?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 06:17:30 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 01, 2018, 05:43:03 PM
How did you work that out?

It's in the book! Bob Small told the police they were leaving on 10th September.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 01, 2018, 06:24:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 06:17:30 PM
It's in the book! Bob Small told the police they were leaving on 10th September.
So you believe Kate on that point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 06:59:22 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 01, 2018, 06:24:33 PM
So you believe Kate on that point.

Amaral said the same. Independent confirmation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 01, 2018, 07:15:52 PM
For the benefit of posters who didn't see this earlier:

A reminder to all posters to keep comments constructive and amicable. Attack opinion by all means but please do not make personal comments towards fellow members. This forum prides itself in allowing all shades of opinion so please bear this in mind when responding. TY and have a pleasant weekend.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 01, 2018, 09:03:24 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 01, 2018, 04:37:09 PM
Cite for the innocent mother of a missing kid refusing police questions?

You posted as fact that sometimes an innocent person takes the right to silence and by inference you implied that Kate McCann was such a person.  The McCann case aside, I asked you to cite an example of where the innocent mother of a missing child refused to cooperate with the police.  I think you will have trouble finding such an example because in the real world this just doesn't happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 09:07:09 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 01, 2018, 09:03:24 PM
You posted as fact that sometimes an innocent person takes the right to silence and by inference you implied that Kate McCann was such a person.  The McCann case aside, I asked you to cite an example of where the innocent mother of a missing child refused to cooperate with the police.  I think you will have trouble finding such an example because this just doesn't happen.

I didnt imply anything...I stated a fact...you made an incorrect inference...I stated that it is possible for an innocent person to take the right to silence...that is a fact. You are asking for a cite for something I didnt post
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on June 01, 2018, 09:07:35 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 01, 2018, 09:03:24 PM
You posted as fact that sometimes an innocent person takes the right to silence and by inference you implied that Kate McCann was such a person.  The McCann case aside, I asked you to cite an example of where the innocent mother of a missing child refused to cooperate with the police.  I think you will have trouble finding such an example because in the real world this just doesn't happen.

some might  think  that the mcanns were  too  worried about getting out of the mess they created  they thought they were above the police
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 09:07:48 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 01, 2018, 06:10:38 PM
So how do you know?
Colin Stagg
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 09:14:11 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 01, 2018, 09:03:24 PM
You posted as fact that sometimes an innocent person takes the right to silence and by inference you implied that Kate McCann was such a person.  The McCann case aside, I asked you to cite an example of where the innocent mother of a missing child refused to cooperate with the police.  I think you will have trouble finding such an example because in the real world this just doesn't happen.

using your logic can you  provide a cite where the mother of a missing child has refused to answer questions and been found guilty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 01, 2018, 09:59:42 PM
http://www.missingkids.com/content/dam/ncmec/en_us/desktop/publications/pdf6a.pdf

Whilst this was written for US families who are unfortunate enough to have a child go missing, the advice provided was largely followed by the McCanns in the first months following Madeleine's disappearance. Quite why someone who has co-operated so fully with the investigating force when it mattered most should be condemned for not answering questions some 4 months later, which were no more than a fishing expedition, is beyond me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 01, 2018, 10:15:30 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 09:07:48 PM
Colin Stagg

Can you provide an external cite to Colin Stagg not answering questions?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2018, 10:23:28 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 01, 2018, 10:15:30 PM
Can you provide an external cite to Colin Stagg not answering questions?

I will tomorrow.... Again I have done so before
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 10:25:52 PM
Quote from: misty on June 01, 2018, 09:59:42 PM
http://www.missingkids.com/content/dam/ncmec/en_us/desktop/publications/pdf6a.pdf

Whilst this was written for US families who are unfortunate enough to have a child go missing, the advice provided was largely followed by the McCanns in the first months following Madeleine's disappearance. Quite why someone who has co-operated so fully with the investigating force when it mattered most should be condemned for not answering questions some 4 months later, which were no more than a fishing expedition, is beyond me.

What works geographically and culturally in one country doesn't necessarily work elsewhere. I have seen no evidence of full cooperation by Kate McCann, unless one statement is what you're referring to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 01, 2018, 10:56:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 05:05:09 PM
It would certainly point to a highly disorganised system, if true.
What would it point to were it not true?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 01, 2018, 11:07:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2018, 10:25:52 PM
What works geographically and culturally in one country doesn't necessarily work elsewhere. I have seen no evidence of full cooperation by Kate McCann, unless one statement is what you're referring to?

Did the parents deny the Portuguese FLO access to their lives at the time? He would have gained far more insight than any twice-translated statement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 02, 2018, 03:01:44 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2018, 09:14:11 PM
using your logic can you  provide a cite where the mother of a missing child has refused to answer questions and been found guilty

There are lots of cases where mothers have been found guilty of murdering their own child after initially refusing to cooperate with investigators.

Cases include Aliayah Lunsford, Mikaeel Kular, Jhessye Shockley, Timothy Wiltsey and Kimberly Lopez for starters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 08:10:21 AM
Quote from: misty on June 01, 2018, 11:07:46 PM
Did the parents deny the Portuguese FLO access to their lives at the time? He would have gained far more insight than any twice-translated statement.

I have no idea how much access any FLO had to their lives. Paiva had dealings with them and said in January 2010;

Asked if he had ever got the impression from the McCanns that they thought Madeleine could be dead, he said: "Yes."
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id296.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 08:10:38 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 02, 2018, 03:01:44 AM
There are lots of cases where mothers have been found guilty of murdering their own child after initially refusing to cooperate with investigators.

Cases include Aliayah Lunsford, Mikaeel Kular, Jhessye Shockley, Timothy Wiltsey and Kimberly Lopez for starters.

The background to the cases of child murder involving a parent or someone close to the child with which I am familiar almost invariably concern children who are already on an at risk register and/or whose guardians are suffering known psychological problems.
There is always evidence the children were subject to abuse and neglect.  There is always evidence against the perpetrator. 

Kate and Gerry McCann do not fall into that category as the PJ investigation proved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 08:25:32 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 08:10:38 AM
The background to the cases of child murder involving a parent or someone close to the child with which I am familiar almost invariably concern children who are already on an at risk register and/or whose guardians are suffering known psychological problems.
There is always evidence the children were subject to abuse and neglect.  There is always evidence against the perpetrator. 

Kate and Gerry McCann do not fall into that category as the PJ investigation proved.

I don't think anyone ever accused the McCanns or anyone else close to the child of murdering Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 08:28:37 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 08:25:32 AM
I don't think anyone ever accused the McCanns or anyone else close to the child of murdering Madeleine.
When you say “anyone “ do you mean anyone ever, or anyone in authority? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 02, 2018, 08:34:35 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 02, 2018, 03:01:44 AM
There are lots of cases where mothers have been found guilty of murdering their own child after initially refusing to cooperate with investigators.

Cases include Aliayah Lunsford, Mikaeel Kular, Jhessye Shockley, Timothy Wiltsey and Kimberly Lopez for starters.

You need to provide a link to show non co-operation... A list of names provrs nothing the first one I looked at was convicted from inconsistencies in her statement  showing she cooperated

Michael Kulars mother cooperated with the police too... I doubt any of the people named took the right to silence... You have not provided a cite
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 08:41:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 08:10:21 AM
I have no idea how much access any FLO had to their lives. Paiva had dealings with them and said in January 2010;

Asked if he had ever got the impression from the McCanns that they thought Madeleine could be dead, he said: "Yes."
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id296.htm

The twins played with Paiva's children at his home.  Kate and Gerry dined there.  So I would say Paiva had a great deal of access to them at the time.


Snip
Later, another witness told the court that the investigation changed from a missing person’s inquiry into a murder hunt after Kate had a nightmare and told police where to look for the body.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Police liaison officer Ricardo Paiva said: “The turning point of the investigation came after I received a phone call from Kate McCann.

“She said she had had a nightmare and saw Madeleine’s body lying on a hillside.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
He added: “At the end of July Kate phoned me. She was alone as Gerry was in the UK and she was crying, saying she’d dreamt Madeleine was up in the hills and we should do searches there. She gave the impression that she thought Madeleine was dead.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
However, under cross examination he accepted claims that the couple contacted the media before the police were not true.
Judge Rodrigues asked him why he could not accept that Madeleine could have been kidnapped and then killed. Mr Paiva did not answer.

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-express/20100113/282454230115774
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 08:42:19 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 08:25:32 AM
I don't think anyone ever accused the McCanns or anyone else close to the child of murdering Madeleine.

                                  Paiva did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 08:49:57 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 08:42:19 AM
                                  Paiva did.

As per forum protocol I assume a cite is forthcoming?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 08:53:56 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 08:49:57 AM
As per forum protocol I assume a cite is forthcoming?

Later, another witness told the court that the investigation changed from a missing person’s inquiry into a murder hunt after Kate had a nightmare and told police where to look for the body.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg464593#msg464593
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 08:59:40 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 08:53:56 AM
Later, another witness told the court that the investigation changed from a missing person’s inquiry into a murder hunt after Kate had a nightmare and told police where to look for the body.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg464593#msg464593

So no mention of the McCanns or anyone close to them being involved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 09:08:54 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 08:59:40 AM
So no mention of the McCanns or anyone close to them being involved.

Probably not if you quickly skim over the part after "murder inquiry", know nothing about the case and don't follow links to read further. 

Most readers will get the gist particularly if they have been following the case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 09:21:16 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 09:08:54 AM
Probably not if you quickly skim over the part after "murder inquiry", know nothing about the case and don't follow links to read further. 

Most readers will get the gist particularly if they have been following the case.

Please provide the cite for the McCanns being suspected of murder as per forum rules. The gist of it doesn’t really count.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 09:24:07 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 09:21:16 AM
Please provide the cite for the McCanns being suspected of murder as per forum rules. The gist of it doesn’t really count.
Why would murder have been ruled out by those who suspected the McCanns? Those who suspect them already think they are monsters for “neglecting” their kids, who may have drugged them too, then they had a “dodgy” friend and they believe they casually disposed of the body of their eldest, then set about deceiving the world  so why rule out murder?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 02, 2018, 09:25:41 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 09:24:07 AM
Why would murder have been ruled out by those who suspected the McCanns?

the words...all options are being considered ...springs to mind
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 09:27:01 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 09:24:07 AM
Why would murder have been ruled out by those who suspected the McCanns?

Doesn’t work like that, Brietta has claimed that the McCanns were suspected of murder. That requires a cite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 09:29:01 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 09:27:01 AM
Doesn’t work like that, Brietta has claimed that the McCanns were suspected of murder. That requires a cite.
I’m not interested in that, I’m asking why would murder have been ruled out by the PJ.  Was it?  If so on what basis?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 09:29:28 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 01, 2018, 02:57:54 PM
I wasn't aware of the sweeping reform to come at the time, but then I had no particular reason to be interested. The concept of reform appears to have been approved by the PT parliament in 2005.

How much the local PJ may have known about it and when isn't clear. If they seriously weren't aware of imminent changes in the law that directly affected their own work... then, who should have informed and prepared them for such changes.

Not the case in PT, but luckily the changes didn't encompass the death penalty...

3.1 O Código Penal de 2007 e a preocupação com os novos riscos
Em  2005,  o  XVII  Governo  Constitucional  Português  previu 
–  pela   Resolução   do   
Conselho de Ministros n° 138/2005 –
 um vasto programa de reformas na esfera da justiça penal propondo uma nova revisão dos Códigos Penal e Processual Penal, como também, “o enquadramento da definição e da execução da política criminal, a lei quadro da reforma do sistema  prisional  e  respectivos  diplomas  complementares  e  o  regime  das  bases  de  dados 
para fins de investigação criminal”.

You are aware of when PT got rid of the death penalty?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 09:31:12 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 09:29:01 AM
I’m not interested in that, I’m asking why would murder have been ruled out by the PJ.  Was it?  If so on what basis?

Nothing to do with the point in question and probably deflection.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 02, 2018, 09:32:29 AM
http://banmarchive.org.uk/collections/soundings/02_135.pdf

one has to ask whether, were Colin Stagg to be
arrested under the Howard regime, his silence on the second occasion on interview
might not now be used as an extra limb of material to be held against a
defendant at the trial stage.

colin stagg exercised his right to silence and was later found to be innocent
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 09:34:40 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 09:31:12 AM
Nothing to do with the point in question and probably deflection.
It is everything to do with the point and interesting that you are incapable of answering it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 09:46:43 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 09:21:16 AM
Please provide the cite for the McCanns being suspected of murder as per forum rules. The gist of it doesn’t really count.

A cite has been provided on two occasions already this morning.

Whether or not it meets with your opinion or approval ... it remains a valid cite
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 10:16:31 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 09:34:40 AM
It is everything to do with the point and interesting that you are incapable of answering it.

If course the police considered murder. It would be absurd not to. Still not a cite they suspected the McCanns of it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 10:17:23 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 10:16:31 AM
If course the police considered murder. It would be absurd not to. Still not a cite they suspected the McCanns of it.
Great, so they considered the parents murdered Madeleine but why dismiss it - on what grounds?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 10:20:40 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 10:17:23 AM
Great, so they considered the parents murdered Madeleine but why dismiss it - on what grounds?

You appear to have misunderstood. I didn’t say they considered the McCanns as suspects.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 02, 2018, 10:21:29 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 10:16:31 AM
If course the police considered murder. It would be absurd not to. Still not a cite they suspected the McCanns of it.

More likely to have considered them to be responsible for her death rather than murder - IMO.
There are many causes of death besides murder, which is a deliberate act.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 02, 2018, 10:32:20 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 09:46:43 AM
A cite has been provided on two occasions already this morning.

Whether or not it meets with your opinion or approval ... it remains a valid cite

It should meet with forum rules

Thanks
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:00:21 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 10:20:40 AM
You appear to have misunderstood. I didn’t say they considered the McCanns as suspects. That was Brietta and we are still awaiting the cite for that.
I have misunderstood nothing, I am not Brietta and I am (in the spirit of the title of this thread) asking a related but slightly different question and it is this: did the police ever suspect the McCanns of murdering Madeleine and if not, why dismiss the idea?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:00:48 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 02, 2018, 10:21:29 AM
More likely to have considered them to be responsible for her death rather than murder - IMO.
There are many causes of death besides murder, which is a deliberate act.
So on what grounds would they have dismissed murder?  Rhetorical question, I don’t expect an answer but it’s still a very valid question IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 11:02:11 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:00:21 AM
I have misunderstood nothing, I am not Brietta and I am (in the spirit of the title of this thread) asking a related but slightly different question and it is this: did the police ever suspect the McCanns of murdering Madeleine and if not, why dismiss the idea?

No idea, I am not the PJ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 02, 2018, 11:03:16 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:00:48 AM
So on what grounds would they have dismissed murder?  Rhetorical question, I don’t expect an answer but it’s still a very valid question IMO.
Lack of evidence of a murder.  Where is the blood?  Where is the body? Where are the weapons?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:03:34 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 11:02:11 AM
No idea, I am not the PJ.
If you think the parents capable of neglect, of drugging, of body disposal, why not murder?  It’s not a massive leap yet apparently this never crossed their minds...?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:04:28 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 02, 2018, 11:03:16 AM
Lack of evidence of a murder.  Where is the blood?  Where is the body? Where are the weapons?
Lack of evidence of drugging and body disposal yet that’s what Amaral and his cronies believe(d).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 02, 2018, 11:14:32 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 02, 2018, 11:03:16 AM
Lack of evidence of a murder.  Where is the blood?  Where is the body? Where are the weapons?

Well for Murder you need a motive, and a plan. if you meet both criteria you will conceal the body.
NB: strangulation does not require loss of blood or a murder weapon.

 For those readers who do noyt post but have an interest of the case- the PJ have never openly accused the Family of murdering their daughter. Some are trying to claim this,  and add momentum to the ha te campaign against the PJ and in particular Sr Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:21:42 AM
Some people seem quite affronted by the idea that the PJ suspected the McCanns might have committed murder.  I wonder why.  Genuinely curious.  Rant over.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 02, 2018, 11:27:46 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:04:28 AM
Lack of evidence of drugging and body disposal yet that’s what Amaral and his cronies believe(d).

For balance,lack of evidence of a burglary gone wrong but Redwood and his cronies spent a wad of tax payers money in search of it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 11:35:04 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 08:53:56 AM
Later, another witness told the court that the investigation changed from a missing person’s inquiry into a murder hunt after Kate had a nightmare and told police where to look for the body.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg464593#msg464593

I can find evidence that journalists published that, but no evidence that Paiva actually said it. He said;

Police liaison officer Ricardo Paiva said: “The turning point of the investigation came after I received a phone call from Kate McCann.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/151405/Maddie-died-in-apartment-court-hears

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:41:12 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 02, 2018, 11:27:46 AM
For balance,lack of evidence of a burglary gone wrong but Redwood and his cronies spent a wad of tax payers money in search of it.
Any views on why the PJ don't appear to have suspected the McCanns of murder?  Shouldn't they have done?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 11:54:15 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 02, 2018, 11:14:32 AM
Well for Murder you need a motive, and a plan. if you meet both criteria you will conceal the body.
NB: strangulation does not require loss of blood or a murder weapon.

 For those readers who do noyt post but have an interest of the case- the PJ have never openly accused the Family of murdering their daughter. Some are trying to claim this,  and add momentum to the ha te campaign against the PJ and in particular Sr Amaral.

I am loath to mention the word ... but I require a cite for the momentum of the hate campaigns you have indicated in your post.  Thank you
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 02, 2018, 11:56:00 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 09:21:16 AM
Please provide the cite for the McCanns being suspected of murder as per forum rules. The gist of it doesn’t really count.

Brietta has mentioned the occasion when Kate telephoned Paiva in some distress when she insisted they search a hillside for Maddie.  That doesn't necessarily mean murder though.  She could have strayed, been lifted and then let free somewhere remote where she got into further trouble.

Redwood looking for a body in scrubland near the beach suggests to me that he was convinced the Smith's sighting was of Maddie, that she had been abducted and murdered.

Amaral also raises the theory that Maddie was murdered in the apartment in a moment of rage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 12:02:37 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 02, 2018, 11:27:46 AM
For balance,lack of evidence of a burglary gone wrong but Redwood and his cronies spent a wad of tax payers money in search of it.
Snip
He said there had been a four-fold increase in the number of burglaries in the area between January and May 2007 and one possible scenario was that Madeleine had disturbed a burglar.

"Windows were a feature, as well as burglaries taking place in the evening," he said.

Two incidents had occurred in the McCanns' block - one attempted burglary and one actual burglary - in the 17 days before Madeleine went missing, he said.

There had also been an intruder in a property within the holiday complex where a British family with two children were staying the year before, he added.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24528530


Why is it that you suppose Scotland Yard should not have included burglaries and burglars in their investigation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 02, 2018, 12:04:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:41:12 AM
Any views on why the PJ don't appear to have suspected the McCanns of murder?  Shouldn't they have done?

IMO the PJ would need a motive first but if a body did disappear, no police force would rule it out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 02, 2018, 12:08:33 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 02, 2018, 11:14:32 AM
Well for Murder you need a motive, and a plan. if you meet both criteria you will conceal the body.
NB: strangulation does not require loss of blood or a murder weapon.

 For those readers who do noyt post but have an interest of the case- the PJ have never openly accused the Family of murdering their daughter. Some are trying to claim this,  and add momentum to the ha te campaign against the PJ and in particular Sr Amaral.

There is a fine line between accidental killing and murder as evidence in the Joanna Yeates case, her killer had no plan, no prior intent.   Her killer was convicted of murder though because in those few seconds he lost control and Joanna was asphyxiated.  Vincent Tabak had no prior criminal convictions and was a respectible engineer.  A moment of madness destroyed two lives for ever.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 02, 2018, 12:13:20 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 12:02:37 PM
Snip
He said there had been a four-fold increase in the number of burglaries in the area between January and May 2007 and one possible scenario was that Madeleine had disturbed a burglar.

"Windows were a feature, as well as burglaries taking place in the evening," he said.

Two incidents had occurred in the McCanns' block - one attempted burglary and one actual burglary - in the 17 days before Madeleine went missing, he said.

There had also been an intruder in a property within the holiday complex where a British family with two children were staying the year before, he added.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24528530


Why is it that you suppose Scotland Yard should not have included burglaries and burglars in their investigation?

Because burglars don't abduct children per chance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 02, 2018, 12:23:24 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:04:28 AM
Lack of evidence of drugging and body disposal yet that’s what Amaral and his cronies believe(d).

Lack of evidence is only iyo.....GA probably still does believe in his belief


How long was it - that the twins were tested for any drugging.

Straight away - i think you will find the answer is no ...i think more like 4 months
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 02, 2018, 12:29:48 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 12:02:37 PM
Snip
He said there had been a four-fold increase in the number of burglaries in the area between January and May 2007 and one possible scenario was that Madeleine had disturbed a burglar.

"Windows were a feature, as well as burglaries taking place in the evening," he said.

Two incidents had occurred in the McCanns' block - one attempted burglary and one actual burglary - in the 17 days before Madeleine went missing, he said.

There had also been an intruder in a property within the holiday complex where a British family with two children were staying the year before, he added.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24528530


Why is it that you suppose Scotland Yard should not have included burglaries and burglars in their investigation?


Of course they also buried their loot in the lawless hill's.yeah right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:32:13 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 02, 2018, 12:04:53 PM
IMO the PJ would need a motive first but if a body did disappear, no police force would rule it out.
No they wouldn't need a motive first.  Many murders are investigated and suspects apprehended before a motive for them is arrived at. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:33:42 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 02, 2018, 12:23:24 PM
Lack of evidence is only iyo.....GA probably still does believe in his belief


How long was it - that the twins were tested for any drugging.

Straight away - i think you will find the answer is no ...i think more like 4 months
I'm sure GA probably still does "believe in his belief" - but that is all he's got.  Belief, no evidence for it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 02, 2018, 12:35:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:33:42 PM
I'm sure GA probably still does "believe in his belief" - but that is all he's got.  Belief, no evidence for it.

Does he need any more? He is no longer a police officer or involved in the investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 02, 2018, 12:42:56 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:33:42 PM
I'm sure GA probably still does "believe in his belief" - but that is all he's got.  Belief, no evidence for it.

I think you'll find that is untrue. There is lots of evidence around but no proof.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:43:03 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 02, 2018, 12:35:52 PM
Does he need any more? He is no longer a police officer or involved in the investigation.
Hasn't he got another book up his sleeve?  After all Madeleine and her parents appear to be his main source of income these days.  Clinging on to his belief would be an essential prerequisite for his on-going career I would have thought.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 02, 2018, 12:43:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:33:42 PM
I'm sure GA probably still does "believe in his belief" - but that is all he's got.  Belief, no evidence for it.


That's all you got ...beliefs - and no evidence for it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:44:22 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 02, 2018, 12:42:56 PM
I think you'll find that is untrue. There is lots of evidence around but no proof.
Not according to the archiving report which cited a lack of evidence against both the McCanns and Murat as the reasons for shelving the case and removing their arguido status.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:45:09 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 02, 2018, 12:43:48 PM

That's all you got ...beliefs - and no evidence for it.
I'm happy with that - no one is hurt or damaged by my beliefs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 02, 2018, 12:47:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:43:03 PM
Hasn't he got another book up his sleeve?  After all Madeleine and her parents appear to be his main source of income these days.  Clinging on to his belief would be an essential prerequisite for his on-going career I would have thought.

I believe there was talk of one, but as nothing has materialised perhaps it was just idle gossip
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:48:29 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 02, 2018, 12:47:30 PM
I believe there was talk of one, but as nothing has materialised perhaps it was just idle gossip
Oh no, surely not?  What a pity, he did promise one was imminent. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 02, 2018, 12:49:36 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 02, 2018, 12:42:56 PM
I think you'll find that is untrue. There is lots of evidence around but no proof.

Not according to Pedro de Carmo
He has said clearly there is no evidence against the parents
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 02, 2018, 12:53:05 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:48:29 PM
Oh no, surely not?  What a pity, he did promise one was imminent.

I don't suppose it is of any real concern to many people
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 02, 2018, 12:53:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:44:22 PM
Not according to the archiving report which cited a lack of evidence against both the McCanns and Murat as the reasons for shelving the case and removing their arguido status.

You mean a deficiency in evidence, not an absence of it.  We know there is lots of evidence in this case which points to certain possibilities, it is the job of the professional investigators to unravel that evidence and make some sense of it.  To state that there is no evidence is incorrect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 02, 2018, 12:55:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:45:09 PM
I'm happy with that - no one is hurt or damaged by my beliefs.

Wrong imo..it could damage what happened to maddie.

But your happy with that - in your words.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:59:55 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 02, 2018, 12:55:35 PM
Wrong imo..it could damage what happened to maddie.

But your happy with that - in your words.
How exactly could my belief that Madeleine was abducted damage what happened to her? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 01:00:37 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 02, 2018, 12:53:48 PM
You mean a deficiency in evidence, not an absence of it.  We know there is lots of evidence in this case which points to certain possibilities, it is the job of the professional investigators to unravel that evidence and make some sense of it.  To state that there is no evidence is incorrect.
Is there evidence against Murat then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 02, 2018, 01:02:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:59:55 PM
How exactly could my belief that Madeleine was abducted damage what happened to her?

Because we don't know she was imo abducted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 01:07:30 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 02, 2018, 01:02:39 PM
Because we don't know she was imo abducted
But how specifically do my beliefs hurt a child that you (presumably) believe is long dead?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 02, 2018, 01:08:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 01:00:37 PM
Is there evidence against Murat then?

Not that I'm aware of.  He was fully investigated and cooperated fully in that investigation.  An extensive search was carried out at his home in Luz and no incriminating material found.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 01:08:40 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 02, 2018, 12:53:05 PM
I don't suppose it is of any real concern to many people
I'm sure you're spot on there - the only people who will be feeling a little let down and disappointed are his supporters I expect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 02, 2018, 01:15:48 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 02, 2018, 09:29:28 AM
You are aware of when PT got rid of the death penalty?

Yes, My comment was rhetorical.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 02, 2018, 01:17:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 01:08:40 PM
I'm sure you're spot on there - the only people who will be feeling a little let down and disappointed are his supporters I expect.

On the contrary, I find the only ones expressing much of an interest in him are those who dislike him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 01:27:44 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 02, 2018, 01:17:55 PM
On the contrary, I find the only ones expressing much of an interest in him are those who dislike him.
Oh I must have overestimated his vast support and popularity then, as evinced by the alleged thousands, who donated to his 'Justice' Fund, and imagined all the whooping and hollering with joy when he won on appeal, and the glee with which news of a new book from the great man himself was announced, and I must also be misunderstanding all the posts of support and praise his actions and words continue to enjoy across the web to this day, from those who appear to like him very much. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 01:33:23 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 02, 2018, 12:23:24 PM
Lack of evidence is only iyo.....GA probably still does believe in his belief


How long was it - that the twins were tested for any drugging.

Straight away - i think you will find the answer is no ...i think more like 4 months

In my opinion yet something else the PJ failed to do.  It was up to them to authorise such a procedure surely?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 02, 2018, 01:33:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 01:27:44 PM
Oh I must have overestimated his vast support and popularity then, as evinced by the alleged thousands, who donated to his 'Justice' Fund, and imagined all the whooping and hollering with joy when he won on appeal, and the glee with which news of a new book from the great man himself was announced, and I must also be misunderstanding all the posts of support and praise his actions and words continue to enjoy across the web to this day, from those who appear to like him very much.

IMO, his popularity was in his standing up against the McCanns and winning. I'm sure that gave many much satisfaction.
All in the past now so little interest in his current activities - at least as far as I'm concerned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 02, 2018, 01:36:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 01:27:44 PM
Oh I must have overestimated his vast support and popularity then, as evinced by the alleged thousands, who donated to his 'Justice' Fund, and imagined all the whooping and hollering with joy when he won on appeal, and the glee with which news of a new book from the great man himself was announced, and I must also be misunderstanding all the posts of support and praise his actions and words continue to enjoy across the web to this day, from those who appear to like him very much.

Is this all in your opinion - or do you have proof of your estimation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 01:36:38 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 02, 2018, 12:13:20 PM
Because burglars don't abduct children per chance?

An Ohio man has been sentenced to 35 years in prison without the chance of parole for breaking into two homes and abducting and raping a six-year-old girl and attempting to abduct a 10-year-old girl.

Thirty-year-old Justin Christian pleaded guilty on Thursday to charges including rape, kidnapping and burglary. He declined to say anything before a judge sentenced him.

Prosecutors say Christian carefully planned the abduction attempts and scouted the homes.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/burgalr-raped-abducted-six-year-old-girl-jailed-justin-christian-cleveland-ohio-paedophilia-a7952491.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 02, 2018, 01:41:09 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 02, 2018, 01:15:48 PM
Yes, My comment was rhetorical.

Interesting old world.
Portugal bans the death sentence early to mid nineteenth century at a time GB still hanged children.
20th Century UK there remained those who wished to continue hanging children.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 02:13:15 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 02, 2018, 01:08:16 PM
Not that I'm aware of.  He was fully investigated and cooperated fully in that investigation.  An extensive search was carried out at his home in Luz and no incriminating material found.
Exactly the same can be said for the McCanns. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 02, 2018, 02:26:40 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 02, 2018, 01:41:09 PM
Interesting old world.
Portugal bans the death sentence early to mid nineteenth century at a time GB still hanged children.
20th Century UK there remained those who wished to continue hanging children.....

Yes, I know. Somehow PT got behind on other reforms, though, and are now catapulting themselves forward. Good on them.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 02:33:58 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 02, 2018, 01:36:14 PM
Is this all in your opinion - or do you have proof of your estimation.
What exactly are you asking for proof of? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 02:37:42 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 01:33:23 PM
In my opinion yet something else the PJ failed to do.  It was up to them to authorise such a procedure surely?

I have found no evidence which would have led the PJ to suspect that any of the children were sedated, so they had no reason to have any of them tested. The forensic people did examine MM's bed, which is probably normal procedure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 02, 2018, 02:40:41 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 01:33:23 PM
In my opinion yet something else the PJ failed to do.  It was up to them to authorise such a procedure surely?

Wonderful thing this hindsight.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 02, 2018, 03:15:14 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 02, 2018, 02:40:41 PM
Wonderful thing this hindsight.

Hindsight really won't do when it comes to police investigations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 03:19:00 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 01:27:44 PM
Oh I must have overestimated his vast support and popularity then, as evinced by the alleged thousands, who donated to his 'Justice' Fund, and imagined all the whooping and hollering with joy when he won on appeal, and the glee with which news of a new book from the great man himself was announced, and I must also be misunderstanding all the posts of support and praise his actions and words continue to enjoy across the web to this day, from those who appear to like him very much.

In my opinion it's wrong to assume that people who agree on one aspect of this case agree on all aspects of the case. Not all those who support the McCanns support their childcare decisions. Similarly, not all those who don't support the McCanns support everything Amaral said or did. The world isn't black or white, and neither are people's opinions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 03:24:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 03:19:00 PM
In my opinion it's wrong to assume that people who agree on one aspect of this case agree on all aspects of the case. Not all those who support the McCanns support their childcare decisions. Similarly, not all those who don't support the McCanns support everything Amaral said or did. The world isn't black or white, and neither are people's opinions.
Once again we have another misapprehension about what I wrote.  I did not claim that ALL those who doubt the McCanns support everthing Amaral said or did, only that he does enjoy a large amount of support and admiration from those who don’t support the McCanns, which is true.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 03:40:43 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 02, 2018, 02:26:40 PM
Yes, I know. Somehow PT got behind on other reforms, though, and are now catapulting themselves forward. Good on them.

It remains to be seen if and when the police of England and Wales will have limits set on the length of interviews with suspects, which Portugal brought in in 2007.

I would hesitate to accuse the UK police of being 'unreformed', however, because each country has different rules, developed to suit their circumstances.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 03:51:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 03:40:43 PM
It remains to be seen if and when the police of England and Wales will have limits set on the length of interviews with suspects, which Portugal brought in in 2007.

I would hesitate to accuse the UK police of being 'unreformed', however, because each country has different rules, developed to suit their circumstances.

Haven't you read the legislation covering that?  There is a lot of it.  A good starting point for England and Wales might be here ... https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/60/section/41
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 02, 2018, 03:53:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 03:40:43 PM
It remains to be seen if and when the police of England and Wales will have limits set on the length of interviews with suspects, which Portugal brought in in 2007.

I would hesitate to accuse the UK police of being 'unreformed', however, because each country has different rules, developed to suit their circumstances.
Yes... No law against incest in Portugal.... Must suit there circumstances
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 03:55:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 03:24:50 PM
Once again we have another misapprehension about what I wrote.  I did not claim that ALL those who doubt the McCanns support everthing Amaral said or did, only that he does enjoy a large amount of support and admiration from those who don’t support the McCanns, which is true.

In my opinion you implied that the same people donated to his defence fund, whooped and hollered with joy when he won the libel case, expressed glee at the prospect of another book by him and support and praise his actions and words in their internet posts. That may or may not be correct. Are you able to identify even one person who has done all those things?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 04:02:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 03:55:48 PM

In my opinion you implied that the same people donated to his defence fund, whooped and hollered with joy when he won the libel case, expressed glee at the prospect of another book by him and support and praise his actions and words in their internet posts. That may or may not be correct. Are you able to identify even one person who has done all those things?
In my opinion you imply a lot of things which when challenged you deny implying.  In my opinion you have got it wrong and I implied no such thing.  Nor am I going on another fool’s errand to satisfy this ridiculous cite-lust that has gripped the forum every time anyone expresses an opinion or makes a point about anything, especially as when cites are provided they are then ignored by those demanding them.  It is simply designed to shut down discussion IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 04:06:34 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 02, 2018, 03:53:26 PM
Yes... No law against incest in Portugal.... Must suit there circumstances

Nor in France, Spain, Belgium, The Netherlands and Luxembourg.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 02, 2018, 04:47:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 04:06:34 PM
Nor in France, Spain, Belgium, The Netherlands and Luxembourg.

yes an absolute disgrace and something Im sure we all agree portugal needs to address
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 02, 2018, 05:03:24 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:04:28 AM
Lack of evidence of drugging and body disposal yet that’s what Amaral and his cronies believe(d).
I believe the Prank Theory - nothing else, so I don't justify what they believe yet Amaral's theory and the prank theory are very similar, just the names of the victim and people potentially involved are different.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 05:05:37 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 02, 2018, 02:40:41 PM
Wonderful thing this hindsight.


Not as wonderful as a little foresight is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 02, 2018, 05:07:12 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:21:42 AM
Some people seem quite affronted by the idea that the PJ suspected the McCanns might have committed murder.  I wonder why.  Genuinely curious.  Rant over.
If they thought they murdered Madeleine you would wonder about the sense of leaving the other two kids in their care.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 02, 2018, 05:09:17 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 02, 2018, 11:27:46 AM
For balance,lack of evidence of a burglary gone wrong but Redwood and his cronies spent a wad of tax payers money in search of it.
The open window and raised shutters are themselves potential evidence of a burglary.  Then the phone calls.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 02, 2018, 05:14:29 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 02, 2018, 12:23:24 PM
Lack of evidence is only iyo.....GA probably still does believe in his belief


How long was it - that the twins were tested for any drugging.

Straight away - i think you will find the answer is no ...i think more like 4 months
Beliefs can come and go.  Unless he was to say what he believes now I wouldn't say "GA probably still does believe in his belief".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 05:31:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 02, 2018, 04:47:49 PM
yes an absolute disgrace and something Im sure we all agree portugal needs to address

It depends why you think it's a disgrace. Is there any particular reason for picking on Portugal from the list of European countries?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 05:34:17 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 02, 2018, 03:51:38 PM
Haven't you read the legislation covering that?  There is a lot of it.  A good starting point for England and Wales might be here ... https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/60/section/41

I haven't. I simply looked at the rules governing interviews and there was no mention of time limits when interviewing suspects. Are you saying your link does reveal such limits?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 06:00:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 04:02:45 PM
In my opinion you imply a lot of things which when challenged you deny implying.  In my opinion you have got it wrong and I implied no such thing.  Nor am I going on another fool’s errand to satisfy this ridiculous cite-lust that has gripped the forum every time anyone expresses an opinion or makes a point about anything, especially as when cites are provided they are then ignored by those demanding them.  It is simply designed to shut down discussion IMO.

In my opinion there's no point in debating opinions. Person number one gives their opinion. Persons number two gives their opposing opinion. Why continue if neither side offers evidence to support their beliefs? Just to have a slanging match?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 02, 2018, 06:07:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 04:02:45 PM
In my opinion you imply a lot of things which when challenged you deny implying.  In my opinion you have got it wrong and I implied no such thing.  Nor am I going on another fool’s errand to satisfy this ridiculous cite-lust that has gripped the forum every time anyone expresses an opinion or makes a point about anything, especially as when cites are provided they are then ignored by those demanding them.  It is simply designed to shut down discussion IMO.
Cites solve the argument.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 06:20:27 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 02, 2018, 06:07:27 PM
Cites solve the argument.
Sometimes, but today I have been asked 3 times for cites for ridiculous things that don't require cites, it's getting out of hand and is as I said before a way of shutting down discussion.  I suppose you'll be asking me for cites for that now too....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 02, 2018, 07:03:06 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 03:55:48 PM

In my opinion you implied that the same people donated to his defence fund, whooped and hollered with joy when he won the libel case, expressed glee at the prospect of another book by him and support and praise his actions and words in their internet posts. That may or may not be correct. Are you able to identify even one person who has done all those things?

The Law of Libel on this Forum prevents this.  But we all know who.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 02, 2018, 07:06:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 06:00:14 PM
In my opinion there's no point in debating opinions. Person number one gives their opinion. Persons number two gives their opposing opinion. Why continue if neither side offers evidence to support their beliefs? Just to have a slanging match?

Then we might as well shut up shop.  Is that what you would like?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 02, 2018, 07:17:32 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 02, 2018, 06:07:27 PM
Cites solve the argument.

Only if accepted. I have seen posts where the cite site is rejected as unreliable.  And don't ask for a cite  8)-)))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 07:44:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 06:00:14 PM
In my opinion there's no point in debating opinions. Person number one gives their opinion. Persons number two gives their opposing opinion. Why continue if neither side offers evidence to support their beliefs? Just to have a slanging match?
You earlier asked for a cite for something I never claimed in the first place.  You wanted the name of someone who supported Amaral in the libel trial, who looked forward to his book and who supports and praises him to this day.  Well off the top of my head I can think of two such people who post on this forum but what is to be gained by naming them?  Am I then to trawl through all their posts to prove my point?  And once I have done that will you acknowledge I am right?  Of course not!  You’ll simply ignore my post so that is why it is a fool’s errand. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 02, 2018, 07:46:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 06:00:14 PM
In my opinion there's no point in debating opinions. Person number one gives their opinion. Persons number two gives their opposing opinion. Why continue if neither side offers evidence to support their beliefs? Just to have a slanging match?

It is your opinion that the Portuguese, statements are reliable..... It is mine that they are not
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 10:48:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 10:36:03 PM
Great.  I look forward to your next thread full of cut and pastes of the McCanns and their friends’ statements (with accompanying  links) which you have carefully selected to imply wrong-doing on their part.   Presumably we should all read your posts and contribute nothing , as there is nothing really to add is there?

You can respond or not as you wish, but you can't rebut facts with opinion. I research events, not people. My last project showed that Gerry McCann was probably correct when he said DP was absent from the tennis courts between 6.30 and 7 pm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 02, 2018, 10:53:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 10:48:35 PM
You can respond or not as you wish, but you can't rebut facts with opinion. I research events, not people. My last project showed that Gerry McCann was probably correct when he said DP was absent from the tennis courts between 6.30 and 7 pm.

You claimed Grimes opinion was that eddie alerted to cadaver...which was neither a fact nor his opinion....your research is flawed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 10:57:37 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 02, 2018, 07:46:14 PM
It is your opinion that the Portuguese, statements are reliable..... It is mine that they are not

I have said that they were ratified and signed by the witnesses in accordance with Portuguese requirements. Therefore they are worthy of being seen as evidence by the Portuguese Judiciary.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 02, 2018, 11:10:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 10:57:37 PM
I have said that they were ratified and signed by the witnesses in accordance with Portuguese requirements. Therefore they are worthy of being seen as evidence by the Portuguese Judiciary.
I absolutely  agree... But whether they are, accurate is, another question
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:22:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 10:48:35 PM
You can respond or not as you wish, but you can't rebut facts with opinion. I research events, not people. My last project showed that Gerry McCann was probably correct when he said DP was absent from the tennis courts between 6.30 and 7 pm.
Do you believe your  research project is valuable work...?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 11:32:28 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:22:45 PM
Do you believe your  research project is valuable work...?

It has value for me, because I'm interested in truth, not beliefs or speculations.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:42:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2018, 11:32:28 PM
It has value for me, because I'm interested in truth, not beliefs or speculations.
I find it very hard to believe you have no beliefs nor have ever speculated about this case, if only in private.    No one here is able to contribute any facts about the case you don’t already know about so why invite discussion about it in the first place, when really all other people have to offer apart from the same facts you already know is opinions and beliefs?  This research project doesn’t need a public forum really, does it...or does it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 12:07:40 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 11:42:30 PM
I find it very hard to believe you have no beliefs nor have ever speculated about this case, if only in private.    No one here is able to contribute any facts about the case you don’t already know about so why invite discussion about it in the first place, when really all other people have to offer apart from the same facts you already know is opinions and beliefs?  This research project doesn’t need a public forum really, does it...or does it?

I think it's time you accepted that I'm under no obligation to enlighten you about my motives, beliefs or choice of subject when posting. I intend to continue to post how and what I want to, making every effort to keep to the rules of the forum. I suggest that you do the same and cease what is beginning to feel like harassment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 03, 2018, 02:03:05 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2018, 12:32:13 PM
No they wouldn't need a motive first.  Many murders are investigated and suspects apprehended before a motive for them is arrived at.

That should have happened with a tampered crime scene and no evidence of an intruder and deleted mobile history without notifying the police. They had their suspicions that things didn't add up. Did they ask the McCanns why mobile history was deleted only hours after the disappearance? Not to my knowledge.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 08:58:22 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 12:07:40 AM
I think it's time you accepted that I'm under no obligation to enlighten you about my motives, beliefs or choice of subject when posting. I intend to continue to post how and what I want to, making every effort to keep to the rules of the forum. I suggest that you do the same and cease what is beginning to feel like harassment.
I was only asking questions, I do apologise.  But I agree, it’s uncomfortable when your motives, and every word and deed are picked over tirelessly isn’t it?  Imagine it multiplied by hundreds of 1000s over the course of 11 years, knowing this enormous critical scrutiny exists on numerous social media platforms and in best selling books, how much like harrassment that must feel.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 09:15:55 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 08:58:22 AM
I was only asking questions, I do apologise.  But I agree, it’s uncomfortable when your motives, and every word and deed are picked over tirelessly isn’t it?  Imagine it multiplied by hundreds of 1000s over the course of 11 years, knowing this enormous critical scrutiny exists on numerous social media platforms and in best selling books, how much like harrassment that must feel.

I used to know another member who spent a lot of time 'only asking questions'. Very similar questions, actually. Thank you for the apology; hopefully you will now concentrate on the discussions and accept that no-one has to explain themselves to you. I don''t know how the rest of your post is relevant. Whatever you're talking about, it's nothing to do with me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: carlymichelle on June 03, 2018, 09:17:04 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 09:15:55 AM
I used to know another member who spent a lot of time 'only asking questions'. Very similar questions, actually. Thank you for the apology; hopefully you will now concentrate on the discussions and accept that no-one has to explain themselves to you. I don''t know how the rest of your post is relevant. Whatever you're talking about, it's nothing to do with me.

yes i too  recall that certian member  no one has the right to  harrass someone because they dont believe the mcanns story
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 09:25:02 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 09:15:55 AM
I used to know another member who spent a lot of time 'only asking questions'. Very similar questions, actually. Thank you for the apology; hopefully you will now concentrate on the discussions and accept that no-one has to explain themselves to you. I don''t know how the rest of your post is relevant. Whatever you're talking about, it's nothing to do with me.
And I don’t know what relevance the behaviour of past members has to me or the discussion at hand, but I won’t ask you to explain yourself as that would obviously be harrassment wouldn’t it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 03, 2018, 09:39:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 09:15:55 AM
I used to know another member who spent a lot of time 'only asking questions'. Very similar questions, actually. Thank you for the apology; hopefully you will now concentrate on the discussions and accept that no-one has to explain themselves to you. I don''t know how the rest of your post is relevant. Whatever you're talking about, it's nothing to do with me.
There is a sense of deja vu.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 03, 2018, 09:43:36 AM

Any more Insults and I will be issuing Warning Points along with Deletions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 09:48:27 AM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 03, 2018, 09:17:04 AM
yes i too  recall that certian member  no one has the right to  harrass someone because they dont believe the mcanns story


Equally, no one has the right to harass someone who believes Madeleine was abducted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 09:51:32 AM
It seems the moderators were doing their job as the comment was speedily deleted. Both were ad hominem behaviour, but there's a difference in my opinion. Harassment and bullying are characterised by being repeated. Name-calling is a one-off event.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: carlymichelle on June 03, 2018, 09:53:47 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 03, 2018, 09:49:50 AM

Nothing on here hurts.

nope its called ignore  button 8)-))) and no nothing  hurts on here unless you  are too sensitive
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 03, 2018, 09:55:57 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 09:51:32 AM
It seems the moderators were doing their job as the comment was speedily deleted. Both were ad hominem behaviour, but there's a difference in my opinion. Harassment and bullying are characterised by being repeated. Name-calling is a one-off event.

It wasn't a one off event so thanks for the clarification..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 09:58:48 AM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 03, 2018, 09:17:04 AM
yes i too  recall that certian member  no one has the right to  harrass someone because they dont believe the mcanns story


Until or if  we hear otherwise the "McCanns story" is also the story being believed by the current police investigation IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 10:05:37 AM
Posters are well aware that personal comments and criticism of other members will be removed in line with forum rules. No member is required to give an account of their opinion or personal point of view.

I subscribe to the woke and wandered and lifted from the street outside theory based on hard evidence. Nobody has yet come up with an alternate plausible explanation for that evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: barrier on June 03, 2018, 10:09:13 AM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 09:58:48 AM

Until or if  we hear otherwise the "McCanns story" is also the story being believed by the current police investigation IMO.

That may well be the case,but it could also be the reason it remains unsolved imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:14:16 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 03, 2018, 10:09:13 AM
That may well be the case,but it could also be the reason it remains unsolved imo.



Do you mean that because the current police investigation appear to believe the McCanns story that this means their belief  will inhibit the investigation and thus iit will be unsolved?
Can you expand on your post?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on June 03, 2018, 10:15:16 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 10:05:37 AM
Posters are well aware that personal comments and criticism of other members will be removed in line with forum rules. No member is required to give an account of their opinion or personal point of view.

I subscribe to the woke and wandered and lifted from the street outside theory based on hard evidence. Nobody has yet come up with an alternate plausible explanation for that evidence.

i agree with that theory angelo but whatever did happen to maddie the situation was down to the parents imo  theres no excuse for their actions that  night
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 10:15:39 AM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 03, 2018, 09:53:47 AM
nope its called ignore  button 8)-))) and no nothing  hurts on here unless you  are too sensitive
I wish those who are so sensitive they find my posts hurtful or harrassment would use it on mine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: jassi on June 03, 2018, 10:17:09 AM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:14:16 AM


Do you mean that because the current police investigation appear to believe the McCanns story that this means their belief  will inhibit the investigation and thus iit will be unsolved?
Can you expand on your post?

I think it is fair to say that you will never find what you seek if you look in the wrong place.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: barrier on June 03, 2018, 10:19:44 AM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:14:16 AM


Do you mean that because the current police investigation appear to believe the McCanns story that this means their belief  will inhibit the investigation and thus iit will be unsolved?
Can you expand on your post?

The remit is rather restrictive is it not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Mr Gray on June 03, 2018, 10:23:52 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 03, 2018, 10:19:44 AM
The remit is rather restrictive is it not.

I would say ut isn't... They are investigating the abduction... One possibility  is, they discover she was not abducted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 10:25:31 AM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 09:58:48 AM

Until or if  we hear otherwise the "McCanns story" is also the story being believed by the current police investigation IMO.

Are you referring to the Metropolitan Police investigation? There is a Portuguese one which has primacy, so that one is the most important one in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:27:50 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 03, 2018, 10:19:44 AM
The remit is rather restrictive is it not.



Not as far as I am aware.
Do you believe that the police investigation will allow the case to remain unsolved rather than pursue any lead, indication or evidence that casts doubt on the McCanns story?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:29:46 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 10:25:31 AM
Are you referring to the Metropolitan Police investigation? There is a Portuguese one which has primacy, so that one is the most important one in my opinion.


I prefer and hope  they are both intent on finding out what happened to Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Mr Gray on June 03, 2018, 10:31:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 10:25:31 AM
Are you referring to the Metropolitan Police investigation? There is a Portuguese one which has primacy, so that one is the most important one in my opinion.

The Portuguese investigation has clearly stated that the McCann's are not suspects and there is NO evidence against them
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: barrier on June 03, 2018, 10:31:30 AM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:27:50 AM


Not as far as I am aware.
Do you believe that the police investigation will allow the case to remain unsolved rather than pursue any lead, indication or evidence that casts doubt on the McCanns story?

To answer would be pure speculation for now we know the remit is investigate as if an abduction took place in the uk which is a bit weird seeing as the alleged crime took place over seas.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: barrier on June 03, 2018, 10:35:13 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 03, 2018, 10:31:10 AM
The Portuguese investigation has clearly stated that the McCann's are not suspects and there is NO evidence against them

In which case do you not believe what you post.One minute your post's suggest that there is possibility's of something other than abduction yet indicate in another that its a closed one in that respect.

Quote from: Davel on June 03, 2018, 10:23:52 AM
I would say ut isn't... They are investigating the abduction... One possibility  is, they discover she was not abducted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:38:24 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 03, 2018, 10:31:30 AM
To answer would be pure speculation for now we know the remit is investigate as if an abduction took place in the uk which is a bit weird seeing as the alleged crime took place over seas.


My interpretation of that was that they would use the same investigation techniques that they would use as if it was a UK abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: barrier on June 03, 2018, 10:39:32 AM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:38:24 AM

My interpretation of that was that they would use the same investigation techniques that they would use as if it was a UK abduction.

Doesn't exactly work though it could be argued.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:40:02 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 03, 2018, 10:31:10 AM
The Portuguese investigation has clearly stated that the McCann's are not suspects and there is NO evidence against them



Indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:41:07 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 03, 2018, 10:39:32 AM
Doesn't exactly work though it could be argued.


In what way?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:43:45 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 03, 2018, 10:17:09 AM
I think it is fair to say that you will never find what you seek if you look in the wrong place.


That doesn't answer my question.
Do you believe the current investigation will ignore any lead, indication, or evidence that does not support abduction and allow the case to remain unsolved?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: jassi on June 03, 2018, 10:50:38 AM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:43:45 AM

That doesn't answer my question.
Do you believe the current investigation will ignore any lead, indication, or evidence that does not support abduction and allow the case to remain unsolved?

Yes.  Not necessarily the foot soldiers, though they will do as they are told,  but certainly the decision-makers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:53:38 AM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 03, 2018, 10:15:16 AM
i agree with that theory angelo but whatever did happen to maddie it  was caused by the mcanns neglect and  terrible parenting imo  theres no excuse for their actions that  night

It's not a choice I would have made.
We stayed at Butlins ( ugh) once, where lots of parents left their children in their chalet and went out for the evening
Checks were supposed to be regularly made by undisclosed staff.
We chose not to do this or ever use a similar system in hotels we stayed in.
I wouldn't describe those parents who did leave their children in the hotel room or chalet as " terrible'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Mr Gray on June 03, 2018, 10:54:15 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 03, 2018, 10:50:38 AM
Yes.  Not necessarily the foot soldiers, though they will do as they are told,  but certainly the decision-makers.

I find that a rather ridiculous idea
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:54:50 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 03, 2018, 10:50:38 AM
Yes.  Not necessarily the foot soldiers, though they will do as they are told,  but certainly the decision-makers.

So a corrupt investigation?
Quite a serious accusation imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: jassi on June 03, 2018, 10:57:37 AM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:54:50 AM
So a corrupt investigation?
Quite a serious accusation imo.

I'l settle for corruption at the top - politicians and their backers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 11:04:40 AM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:43:45 AM

That doesn't answer my question.
Do you believe the current investigation will ignore any lead, indication, or evidence that does not support abduction and allow the case to remain unsolved?

In the Yorkshire Ripper case the man in charge was focusing on the hoaxer 'Wearside Jack'. The evidence pointing to Sutcliffe was ignored on his orders.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Mr Gray on June 03, 2018, 11:05:40 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 03, 2018, 10:57:37 AM
I'l settle for corruption at the top - politicians and their backers.

I find that ridiculous too
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Mr Gray on June 03, 2018, 11:06:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 11:04:40 AM
In the Yorkshire Ripper case the man in charge was focusing on the hoaxer 'Wearside Jack'. The evidence pointing to Sutcliffe was ignored on his orders.

Cite required
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 03, 2018, 11:15:53 AM
Detective Andy Laptew was a junior officer on the inquiry who interviewed Sutcliffe and felt 'alarm bells ringing', but his concerns were ignored and three more women were murdered

"I wasn't happy with Peter Sutcliffe, there were a lot of alarm bells ringing.

“The reason we actually went to see Sutcliffe was because his vehicle had been sighted in three separate red light areas.

“He had a striking resemblance to the photo-fit of the woman who was attacked in Buslingthorpe Lane, in Leeds. He had a gap in his teeth which again was indicative of the the attacker of two of the women who were killed.

“He was in the suspect occupation group – in that he was a heavy goods vehicle driver.

“I said to my colleague 'why don't we bring him in?” and he said 'no we have been told specifically do not bring anybody in'.

“In fact I'll tell you what happened I took it direct to Dick Holland (Superintendant in charge of the enquiry), a man who I had put on a pedestal and hero worshiped

“Has he got a Geordie accent he said. 'No he's local' I said, 'he's from Bradford, he's a dead ringer for the photo-fit.'

"Then he said 'If anybody mentions the photo-fits to me again they will be doing traffic for the rest of their service.

"I could have crawled under the crack in the door."

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/detective-who-warned-peter-sutcliffe-8665987
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 10:53:38 AM
It's not a choice I would have made.
We stayed at Butlins ( ugh) once, where lots of parents left their children in their chalet and went out for the evening
Checks were supposed to be regularly made by undisclosed staff.
We chose not to do this or ever use a similar system in hotels we stayed in.
I wouldn't describe those parents who did leave their children in the hotel room or chalet as " terrible'

Times change and so do attitudes. I was reading yesterday about loads of people who were transported in car boots and in the backs of vans when they were children in the 1970's. No-one would do that now and if they did then consequences would follow. There's a difference, of course, between using an organised system and leaving children home alone against your holiday provider's advice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 11:19:19 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 03, 2018, 10:23:52 AM
I would say ut isn't... They are investigating the abduction... One possibility  is, they discover she was not abducted

The investigation has turned into a bit of a damp squid now as far as finding Maddie is concerned. Time for the McCanns to do something instead of massaging their own careers. 

If it was my child and I was as innocent as they claim I would have been out in Portugal promoting an awareness campaign seeking any information. I don't think there's even a confidential number for Portuguese people to phone with information which in my mind is an utter disgrace.  Maybe one of our Portuguese members can confirm this?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 11:19:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 11:04:40 AM
In the Yorkshire Ripper case the man in charge was focusing on the hoaxer 'Wearside Jack'. The evidence pointing to Sutcliffe was ignored on his orders.
As has been pointed out -  the Portuguese have primacy in this case, so it would be a very foolish course of action to take to ignore evidence which they have access to and which they are pursuing as part of the investigation. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 03, 2018, 11:15:53 AM
Detective Andy Laptew was a junior officer on the inquiry who interviewed Sutcliffe and felt 'alarm bells ringing', but his concerns were ignored and three more women were murdered

"I wasn't happy with Peter Sutcliffe, there were a lot of alarm bells ringing.

“The reason we actually went to see Sutcliffe was because his vehicle had been sighted in three separate red light areas.

“He had a striking resemblance to the photo-fit of the woman who was attacked in Buslingthorpe Lane, in Leeds. He had a gap in his teeth which again was indicative of the the attacker of two of the women who were killed.

“He was in the suspect occupation group – in that he was a heavy goods vehicle driver.

“I said to my colleague 'why don't we bring him in?” and he said 'no we have been told specifically do not bring anybody in'.

“In fact I'll tell you what happened I took it direct to Dick Holland (Superintendant in charge of the enquiry), a man who I had put on a pedestal and hero worshiped

“Has he got a Geordie accent he said. 'No he's local' I said, 'he's from Bradford, he's a dead ringer for the photo-fit.'

"Then he said 'If anybody mentions the photo-fits to me again they will be doing traffic for the rest of their service.

"I could have crawled under the crack in the door."

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/detective-who-warned-peter-sutcliffe-8665987

It does make you wonder if junior officers working on OG ever mentioned the Smithman efits and Mr Smith's statement. The inquiry seems to have decided early on that the McCanns 'were where they said they were' to use Commander Foy's words.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 11:26:53 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 11:19:48 AM
As has been pointed out -  the Portuguese have primacy in this case, so it would be a very foolish course of action to take to ignore evidence which they have access to and which they are pursuing as part of the investigation.

Don't you realise by now that this case is a poisoned chalice for the Portuguese police?  No officer wants to be publicly associated with it in case he is called Tweedledee, Tweedledum or a F....ing Tosser by Kate McCann.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 11:28:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
It does make you wonder if junior officers working on OG ever mentioned the Smithman efits and Mr Smith's statement. The inquiry seems to have decided early on that the McCanns 'were where they said they were' to use Commander Foy's words.
Probably because of the numerous witnesses that put them in the places they said they were at the time of the Smithman sighting. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 11:28:38 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 03, 2018, 10:57:37 AM
I'l settle for corruption at the top - politicians and their backers.


So corruption at the highest level in both governments?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 11:30:10 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 11:26:53 AM
Don't you realise by now that this case is a poisoned chalice for the Portuguese police?  No officer wants to be publicly associated with it in case he is called Tweedledee, Tweedledum or a F....ing Tosser by Kate McCann.
What a ludicrous assertion.  Are the Portuguese really that terrified of the opinion of Kate McCann?  Surely they would love nothing better to be able to nail the McCanns' sorry arses to the wall of some Portuguese prison for sweet revenge on the poor sods that got so terribly slandered by the evil witch so what's stopping them?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: carlymichelle on June 03, 2018, 11:30:45 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 11:26:53 AM
Don't you realise by now that this case is a poisoned chalice for the Portuguese police?  No officer wants to be publicly associated with it in case he is called Tweedledee, Tweedledum or a F....ing Tosser by Kate McCann.

not only that but some  supporters accused  portugese  police  of being involved with maddies abduction etc on diffrent forums and facebook etc
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 11:32:35 AM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 09:58:48 AM

Until or if  we hear otherwise the "McCanns story" is also the story being believed by the current police investigation IMO.

What the police think privately is not necessarily the same as they promote publicly, I thought you would have known that Erngath?   Or could it be that you have applied a sprinkling of wishful thinking fairydust to that view?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 11:34:10 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 11:30:10 AM
What a ludicrous assertion.  Are the Portuguese really that terrified of the opinion of Kate McCann?  Surely they would love nothing better to be able to nail the McCanns' sorry arses to the wall of some Portuguese prison for sweet revenge on the poor sods that got so terribly slandered by the evil witch so what's stopping them?

How many careers has it destroyed so far?

As for nailing arses to the wall, my file on post disappearance events could very well achieve that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 11:44:29 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 11:28:10 AM
Probably because of the numerous witnesses that put them in the places they said they were at the time of the Smithman sighting.

As all times given by those witnesses and by the Smith family were approximate I don't see them as irrefutable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 11:50:00 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 11:34:10 AM
How many careers has it destroyed so far?

As for nailing arses to the wall, my file on post disappearance events could very well achieve that.
I don't know, why don't you tell us how many careers the case has destroyed so far - list all the victims here...
Glad to know that you're the one that's finally going to crack the case and get arses nailed though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: jassi on June 03, 2018, 11:50:49 AM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 11:28:38 AM

So corruption at the highest level in both governments?

You don't believe governments and politicians are  corrupt?
How touchingly naive.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 11:54:26 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 11:44:29 AM
As all times given by those witnesses and by the Smith family were approximate I don't see them as irrefutable.
Even giving or taking ten minutes each way on every single statement hardly allows sufficient time for a man to leave the dining table, change his clothes, retrieve a corpse from it's hiding place, walk beyond the distance of the Smiths sighting, find another suitable hiding place, return to the his apartment, change back into his earlier clothes and return to the table several minutes before his wife gets up to go to the apartment.  Not only that, but it requires for those seated at the table during his protracted absence whilst supposedly hiding a body to all forget to mention this protracted absence just before the alarm was raised.
So, in short I would say that unless you believe all the Tapas group are very forgetful indeed or covering up, it's pretty irrefutable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: barrier on June 03, 2018, 11:55:27 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 03, 2018, 11:50:49 AM
You don't believe governments and politicians are  corrupt?
How touchingly naive.

Watch the third part of the Thorpe trilogy tonight it'll maybe show it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 12:10:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 11:50:00 AM
I don't know, why don't you tell us how many careers the case has destroyed so far - list all the victims here...
Glad to know that you're the one that's finally going to crack the case and get arses nailed though.

I have not claimed that I could crack the case as far as the child's disappearance is concerned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 12:14:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 11:54:26 AM
Even giving or taking ten minutes each way on every single statement hardly allows sufficient time for a man to leave the dining table, change his clothes, retrieve a corpse from it's hiding place, walk beyond the distance of the Smiths sighting, find another suitable hiding place, return to the his apartment, change back into his earlier clothes and return to the table several minutes before his wife gets up to go to the apartment.  Not only that, but it requires for those seated at the table during his protracted absence whilst supposedly hiding a body to all forget to mention this protracted absence just before the alarm was raised.
So, in short I would say that unless you believe all the Tapas group are very forgetful indeed or covering up, it's pretty irrefutable.

The last time Maddie was seen in public was around 5.30pm.  The disappearance was announced after 10pm so by my calculations that gives a window of 4½ hours in which only David Payne, Matthew Oldfield and Maddie's parents allegedly visited the apartment. Curiously, Payne's recollection of that event is somewhat different to Kate McCanns.  More false memory syndrome?

Even stranger is that Oldfield failed to see Maddie when he visited the apartment around 9.30pm yet her bed was right beside the bedroom door. In his first police statement he said he merely listened at the door of apartment 5a but later said he had gone in and noticed that the room seemed lighter than the others, as if the shutters had been opened. He cannot be certain whether Madeleine was there.

Probably because she wasn't!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 12:23:26 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 12:14:30 PM
The last time Maddie was seen in public was around 5.30pm.  The disappearance was announced after 10pm so by my calculations that gives a window of 4½ hours in which only David Payne, Matthew Oldfield and Maddie's parents allegedly visited the apartment. Curiously, Payne's recollection of that event is somewhat different to Kate McCanns.  More false memory syndrome?
My post pertained specifically to the improbability of Gerry being Smithman - perhaps you could address that point?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 12:24:00 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 11:54:26 AM
Even giving or taking ten minutes each way on every single statement hardly allows sufficient time for a man to leave the dining table, change his clothes, retrieve a corpse from it's hiding place, walk beyond the distance of the Smiths sighting, find another suitable hiding place, return to the his apartment, change back into his earlier clothes and return to the table several minutes before his wife gets up to go to the apartment.  Not only that, but it requires for those seated at the table during his protracted absence whilst supposedly hiding a body to all forget to mention this protracted absence just before the alarm was raised.
So, in short I would say that unless you believe all the Tapas group are very forgetful indeed or covering up, it's pretty irrefutable.

Why do you think it had to take place before they all left the table? What about after?

In the confusion following the disappearance of Madeleine it would be possible that one of the men or Fiona Payne 'escaped' to join in the searches again later".
Analyst 7792 Eaton
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRIGADE-OF-INFORMATION.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 03, 2018, 12:26:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 11:28:10 AM
Probably because of the numerous witnesses that put them in the places they said they were at the time of the Smithman sighting.

And what time was that?

Manuela, the cook: They had already eaten the main course, [Cut to blurry image of a woman’s face, with a strong southern accent from Algarve], because it was already around 9:30pm when she gave the alarm.
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/05/tapas-cook-breaks-silence-and-talks.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 12:27:13 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 12:24:00 PM
Why do you think it had to take place before they all left the table? What about after?

In the confusion following the disappearance of Madeleine it would be possible that one of the men or Fiona Payne 'escaped' to join in the searches again later".
Analyst 7792 Eaton
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRIGADE-OF-INFORMATION.htm
Are you suggesting that the Smith sighting happened AFTER the alarm was raised? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 12:27:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 12:23:26 PM
My post pertained specifically to the improbability of Gerry being Smithman - perhaps you could address that point?

Mr Smith certainly thought so and he was there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 12:28:50 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 11:54:26 AM
Even giving or taking ten minutes each way on every single statement hardly allows sufficient time for a man to leave the dining table, change his clothes, retrieve a corpse from it's hiding place, walk beyond the distance of the Smiths sighting, find another suitable hiding place, return to the his apartment, change back into his earlier clothes and return to the table several minutes before his wife gets up to go to the apartment.  Not only that, but it requires for those seated at the table during his protracted absence whilst supposedly hiding a body to all forget to mention this protracted absence just before the alarm was raised.
So, in short I would say that unless you believe all the Tapas group are very forgetful indeed or covering up, it's pretty irrefutable.

The last time Maddie was seen in public was around 5.30pm.  The disappearance was announced after 10pm so by my calculations that gives a window of 4½ hours in which only David Payne, Matthew Oldfield and Maddie's parents allegedly visited the apartment. Curiously, Payne's recollection of that event is somewhat different to Kate McCanns.  More false memory syndrome?

Even stranger is that Oldfield failed to see Maddie when he visited the apartment around 9.30pm yet her bed was right beside the bedroom door. In his first police statement he said he merely listened at the door of apartment 5a but later said he had gone in and noticed that the room seemed lighter than the others, as if the shutters had been opened. He cannot be certain whether Madeleine was there.

Probably because she wasn't!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 03, 2018, 12:30:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 12:27:13 PM
Are you suggesting that the Smith sighting happened AFTER the alarm was raised?

Given the vagaries of time, it's not impossible -IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 12:37:23 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 03, 2018, 12:30:36 PM
Given the vagaries of time, it's not impossible -IMO
G-unit only deals in facts not vagaries so I look forward to her response to my question (if I am not being too impertinent in asking it). 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 12:38:34 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 12:27:49 PM
Mr Smith certainly thought so and he was there.
Since when has 60-80% been "certain"?  Do you think there is any possibility at all that he was mistaken?  Why, I wonder, did the highly esteemed PJ conclude that Gerry could not have been Smithman - surely not because they were naively taken in by the Tapas group? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 03, 2018, 12:43:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 12:27:13 PM
Are you suggesting that the Smith sighting happened AFTER the alarm was raised?

Of course the alarm was raised before that sighting. Gerry believed it was around 10:13 when Kate raised the alarm. That time differs from other witness statements who put it before 10 - Matt, Fiona as early as 9:45, the waiter, cook etc. But if Gerry's time was correct then Smithman would have happened before the alarm  (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 12:45:40 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 03, 2018, 12:26:13 PM
And what time was that?

Manuela, the cook: They had already eaten the main course, [Cut to blurry image of a woman’s face, with a strong southern accent from Algarve], because it was already around 9:30pm when she gave the alarm.
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/05/tapas-cook-breaks-silence-and-talks.html
Why have you decided that this statement is the only accurate one?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 12:47:01 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 03, 2018, 12:43:58 PM
Of course the alarm was raised before that sighting. Gerry believed it was around 10:13 when Kate raised the alarm. That time differs from other witness statements who put it before 10 - Matt, Fiona as early as 9:45, the waiter, cook etc. But if Gerry's time was correct then Smithman would have happened before the alarm  (&^&
Why do you suppose the PJ, who had access to all the same statements that you do, decided that the alarm was raised at around 10pm then?  Are they not as astute as you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 03, 2018, 12:47:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 12:45:40 PM
Why have you decided that this statement is the only accurate one?

I haven't decided that is correct but many witnesses have the alarm before 10 and NOT after like Gerry.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 03, 2018, 12:47:57 PM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 03, 2018, 10:15:16 AM
i agree with that theory angelo but whatever did happen to maddie it  was caused by the mcanns neglect and  terrible parenting imo  theres no excuse for their actions that  night
And they regret that too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 12:48:47 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 12:27:13 PM
Are you suggesting that the Smith sighting happened AFTER the alarm was raised?

That would depend on the time they all exited the Tapas complex.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 03, 2018, 12:54:50 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 03, 2018, 12:47:57 PM
And they regret that too.

One would certainly hope so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 03, 2018, 12:59:15 PM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 09:58:48 AM

Until or if  we hear otherwise the "McCanns story" is also the story being believed by the current police investigation IMO.

Not according to the last official communique from The Met.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 03, 2018, 01:01:57 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 03, 2018, 12:26:13 PM
And what time was that?

Manuela, the cook: They had already eaten the main course, [Cut to blurry image of a woman’s face, with a strong southern accent from Algarve], because it was already around 9:30pm when she gave the alarm.
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/05/tapas-cook-breaks-silence-and-talks.html
If you look at her statement in the PJ file she said she wasn't at work that night.  http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARIA_JOSE.htm

"Upon questioning, the witness confirms that on the day of the disappearance, she worked at the restaurant from 10h00 to 18h45, when, having finished her shift, she went home, where she remained with her 13 year old son until approximately 10h00 the following day (4th May)."

So any statement about what happened later must be treated with caution.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 01:08:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 12:48:47 PM
That would depend on the time they all exited the Tapas complex.
The PJ decided that the alarm was raised around 10pm which means that that is the likely time they exited the Tapas complex, which just so happens to be around the time of the Smith sighting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Mr Gray on June 03, 2018, 01:17:10 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 11:34:10 AM
How many careers has it destroyed so far?

As for nailing arses to the wall, my file on post disappearance events could very well achieve that.

so tell us how many careers it has destroyed.......I would have thought amarals conviction for perjury destroyed his..

as for your file...you have benn claiming this for almost a year now...judging by your posts on here re the topic your claims are baseless..imo...after all your claims when do you expect to send this file to the pj
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 01:27:21 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 03, 2018, 11:50:49 AM
You don't believe governments and politicians are  corrupt?
How touchingly naive.

Goading ignored!
Can you show the post where I made such a statement.
Usual deflection from you. IMO

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 01:28:34 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 03, 2018, 01:01:57 PM
If you look at her statement in the PJ file she said she wasn't at work that night.  http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARIA_JOSE.htm

"Upon questioning, the witness confirms that on the day of the disappearance, she worked at the restaurant from 10h00 to 18h45, when, having finished her shift, she went home, where she remained with her 13 year old son until approximately 10h00 the following day (4th May)."

So any statement about what happened later must be treated with caution.
Wow, that's some big piece of misinformation Pathfinder posted then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 01:36:27 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 11:32:35 AM
What the police think privately is not necessarily the same as they promote publicly, I thought you would have known that Erngath?   Or could it be that you have applied a sprinkling of wishful thinking fairydust to that view?


Possibly the private thinking is the same as the public thinking!
I thought you might have known  that  Angelo.
Or could it be that  you have applied a sprinkling  of wishful thinking  fairy dust to your view?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 01:41:42 PM
Accusing one of being "touchingly naive" and "sprinkling wishful fairy dust" , both of which I find rather demeaning does seem to be an acceptable way of replying to my post.
Ah well!
I do hope I  am not going to be accused of believing n the tooth fairy as well!



Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Mr Gray on June 03, 2018, 03:02:53 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 03, 2018, 11:32:35 AM
What the police think privately is not necessarily the same as they promote publicly, I thought you would have known that Erngath?   Or could it be that you have applied a sprinkling of wishful thinking fairydust to that view?

I think you are in denial.....it isnt just what both police forces have said its everything else that supports the parents innocence. You might want to think that SY have spent 12 million investigating an abduction in portugal ,,,,,,,made several ilors...interviewed several suspects...but really they know the parents are involved...that to me sounds ridiculous
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 03, 2018, 03:14:56 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 03, 2018, 01:01:57 PM
If you look at her statement in the PJ file she said she wasn't at work that night.  http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARIA_JOSE.htm

"Upon questioning, the witness confirms that on the day of the disappearance, she worked at the restaurant from 10h00 to 18h45, when, having finished her shift, she went home, where she remained with her 13 year old son until approximately 10h00 the following day (4th May)."

So any statement about what happened later must be treated with caution.

Well researched Robitty.  Do you think that might pass as a 'discrepancy'?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 03, 2018, 03:25:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 03, 2018, 03:02:53 PM
I think you are in denial.....it isnt just what both police forces have said its everything else that supports the parents innocence. You might want to think that SY have spent 12 million investigating an abduction in portugal ,,,,,,,made several ilors...interviewed several suspects...but really they know the parents are involved...that to me sounds ridiculous
I have heard it suggested that the way the police work is they had to investigate abduction first (like the appetizer) by arresting various burglars and assorted criminals to satisfy themselves it couldn't possibly have happened so that they could then concentrate on the main course of investigating the parents, so that just desserts can be served at some point in the future - it's a lesiurely 3 course meal, don't you know!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Brietta on June 03, 2018, 03:37:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 11:04:40 AM
In the Yorkshire Ripper case the man in charge was focusing on the hoaxer 'Wearside Jack'. The evidence pointing to Sutcliffe was ignored on his orders.

Despite his lucrative career promoting his association with it, we are constantly informed that Amaral holds no responsibility for any of the major decisions made in Madeleine's case.
Don't you think the big boys who did it and ran away put all their eggs into the one basket just as the superintendent in charge of the enquiry into the ripper murders did and overlooked vital evidence just as he did?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Brietta on June 03, 2018, 03:47:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2018, 10:25:31 AM
Are you referring to the Metropolitan Police investigation? There is a Portuguese one which has primacy, so that one is the most important one in my opinion.

The PJ were also investigating abduction and in the absence of ilors seem to be doing so stll.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 03, 2018, 03:53:25 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 03, 2018, 01:01:57 PM
If you look at her statement in the PJ file she said she wasn't at work that night.  http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARIA_JOSE.htm

"Upon questioning, the witness confirms that on the day of the disappearance, she worked at the restaurant from 10h00 to 18h45, when, having finished her shift, she went home, where she remained with her 13 year old son until approximately 10h00 the following day (4th May)."

So any statement about what happened later must be treated with caution.

That's extremely interesting Rob.  In her statement she claims to have been at home with her 13-year-old son when the disappearance was discovered as her shift finished at 6.45pm.  Yet in the "Tapas cook breaks silence and talks about the McCanns" interview it is implied that she was there that night and saw what went on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: John on June 03, 2018, 03:58:04 PM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 01:41:42 PM
Accusing one of being "touchingly naive" and "sprinkling wishful fairy dust" , both of which I find rather demeaning does seem to be an acceptable way of replying to my post.
Ah well!
I do hope I  am not going to be accused of believing n the tooth fairy as well!

I have asked mods not to over moderate the forum but to use some discretion.  A little humour is allowed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: John on June 03, 2018, 04:01:15 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 03, 2018, 03:37:53 PM
Despite his lucrative career promoting his association with it, we are constantly informed that Amaral holds no responsibility for any of the major decisions made in Madeleine's case.
Don't you think the big boys who did it and ran away put all their eggs into the one basket just as the superintendent in charge of the enquiry into the ripper murders did and overlooked vital evidence just as he did?

Amaral would have been subject to supervisory checks throughout the enquiry.  Although he was a senior detective and coordinator, he could only follow a path sanctioned by his overseers and ultimately the AG.  The problem for Amaral was that he was seen as the public face of the PJ so people wrongly assumed that he was in charge.  He undoubtedly liked the exposure but in the end it was his undoing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 04:04:19 PM
Quote from: John on June 03, 2018, 03:58:04 PM
I have asked mods not to over moderate the forum but to use some discretion.  A little humour is allowed.


Thank you.
Hopefully the use of discretion will apply equally to both sides of the discussion.
It also means that any sceptic may now be labelled " touchingly naive ".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: John on June 03, 2018, 04:06:16 PM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 04:04:19 PM

Thank you.
Hopefully the use of discretion will apply equally to both sides of the discussion.
It also means that any sceptic may now be labelled " touchingly naive ".

I'm sure you could think of something more amusing before Alice arrives with another epigram.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 04:06:28 PM
Quote from: John on June 03, 2018, 04:01:15 PM
Amaral would have been subject to supervisory checks throughout the enquiry.  Although he was a senior detective and coordinator, he could only follow a path sanctioned by his overseers and ultimately the AG.  The problem for Amaral was that he was seen as the public face of the PJ so people wrongly assumed that he was in charge.




And yet he was the police officer who felt confident and knowledgeable enough to write "The truth of the lie."!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: John on June 03, 2018, 04:26:49 PM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 04:06:28 PM



And yet he was the police officer who felt confident and knowledgeable enough to write "The truth of the lie."!

I have no doubt he was confident and knowledgeable, in fact, as coordinator he probably knew more about what was going on than anyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 04:38:26 PM
Quote from: John on June 03, 2018, 04:26:49 PM
I have no doubt he was confident and knowledgeable, in fact, as coordinator he probably knew more about what was going on than anyone.

As you would expect that is not an opinion I share .
I'm sure he shares your opinion of himself.
He always appeared rather smug and self opinionated . IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: jassi on June 03, 2018, 04:39:59 PM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 04:38:26 PM
As you would expect that is not an opinion I share .
I'm sure he shares your opinion of himself.
He always appeared rather smug and self opinionated . IMO

A common fault of mankind.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Brietta on June 03, 2018, 04:49:10 PM
Quote from: John on June 03, 2018, 04:26:49 PM
I have no doubt he was confident and knowledgeable, in fact, as coordinator he probably knew more about what was going on than anyone.

I think he was hugely out of his depth and the added pressure of being made an arguido in Leanor Cipriano's case added to the stress.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: barrier on June 03, 2018, 04:54:05 PM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 04:38:26 PM
As you would expect that is not an opinion I share .
I'm sure he shares your opinion of himself.
He always appeared rather smug and self opinionated . IMO
Yet the ongoing investigation has so far failed to prove him wrong,hey oh such is life.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Mr Gray on June 03, 2018, 04:58:53 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 03, 2018, 04:54:05 PM
Yet the ongoing investigation has so far failed to prove him wrong,hey oh such is life.
IMO, the fact the PJ have said there is no evidence against the McCann's proves him wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 05:00:31 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 03, 2018, 04:54:05 PM
Yet the ongoing investigation has so far failed to prove him wrong,hey oh such is life.


Neither has the ongoing investigation proved him to be in the slightest correct, hey ho such is life!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: barrier on June 03, 2018, 05:21:25 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 03, 2018, 04:58:53 PM
IMO, the fact the PJ have said there is no evidence  against the McCann's proves him wrong

Still doesn't equate to any thing to prove him wrong,until such time as either one comes out with someting along the lines of what SYP did in the Needham case declaring in their professional opinion what happened then all options are open imo or unless they nail some one (England will win the World cup again before that happens).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: barrier on June 03, 2018, 05:23:51 PM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 05:00:31 PM

Neither has the ongoing investigation proved him to be in the slightest correct, hey ho such is life!

You've seen the evidence?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2018, 05:28:45 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 03, 2018, 05:23:51 PM
You've seen the evidence?

No, neither have you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Mr Gray on June 03, 2018, 06:00:29 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 03, 2018, 05:21:25 PM
Still doesn't equate to any thing to prove him wrong,until such time as either one comes out with someting along the lines of what SYP did in the Needham case declaring in their professional opinion what happened then all options are open imo or unless they nail some one (England will win the World cup again before that happens).

have not realised by now that amarals thesis was based on his poor understanding of the evidence... Have you read his book... Watched his documentary
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: barrier on June 03, 2018, 06:08:56 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 03, 2018, 06:00:29 PM
have not realised by now that amarals thesis was based on his poor understanding of the evidence... Have you read his book... Watched his documentary

SY trump anything he wrote with their well publicised landscaping,was ground force out there I wonder.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Mr Gray on June 03, 2018, 06:10:09 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 03, 2018, 06:08:56 PM
SY trump anything he wrote with their well publicised landscaping,was ground force out there I wonder.

Your post doesn't really make any sense... Perhaps a sprinkling of fairy dust would help
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: barrier on June 03, 2018, 06:10:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 03, 2018, 05:58:17 PM
Do you and sil really need a quote for the fact that amaral was removed from the investigation... I'm shocked

So the book is factual,no wonder Amaral won.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 03, 2018, 06:28:05 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 03, 2018, 01:28:34 PM
Wow, that's some big piece of misinformation Pathfinder posted then.
One would have to discover why the person called Manuela says totally opposing things one year apart.  I don't blame Pathfinder at this stage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Top
Post by: Mr Gray on June 03, 2018, 06:30:25 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 03, 2018, 06:10:52 PM
So the book is factual,no wonder Amaral won.
The book is not factual... Anyone who doesn't realise that needs to pay more attention.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 03, 2018, 06:31:15 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 03, 2018, 03:14:56 PM
Well researched Robitty.  Do you think that might pass as a 'discrepancy'?
I think it must rank as something higher than discrepancy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 03, 2018, 06:39:36 PM
Quote from: John on June 03, 2018, 03:53:25 PM
That's extremely interesting Rob.  In her statement she claims to have been at home with her 13-year-old son when the disappearance was discovered as her shift finished at 6.45pm.  Yet in the "Tapas cook breaks silence and talks about the McCanns" interview it is implied that she was there that night and saw what went on.
Might not be the same Manuela.  But both described as cooks and there were no other "Manuela"s in the Tapas staff list.  There is a translated version of that video on the HiDeHo channel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 04, 2018, 06:02:05 PM
Posts of a personal nature which are merely intended to goad and add little to the debates will be removed on sight so don't go complaining to admin when this happens.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 05, 2018, 03:12:37 AM
From one of the texts in the libel / damages case:

The criminal investigation officers, retired for various reasons of disciplinary penalty application, retain special rights, being holders of an identification card for recognition of their quality and the rights they enjoy [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 of 31 January].

The statute of the retirement [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording in the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, that the retired, apart from his right to a retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on being in activity.

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/v01.htm



From the link I gave earlier on displinary measures on the other thread, the scale (Chapter 12) is:

a) repreensão escrita - written reprimand
b) multa - fine
c) suspension
d) “inactividade” (not quite sure what the difference is, but involves being barred from promotion for 2 years)
e) aposentação compulsiva - compulsory resignation *
f) dismissal

http://www.dgpj.mj.pt/sections/leis-da-justica/pdf-ult/sections/leis-da-justica/pdf-ult/decreto-lei-n-196-94-de/downloadFile/file/DL196.94.pdf?nocache=1192191524.72

The Disciplinary Unit was calling for the suspension of Cristovão, Amaral and a few others over the Cipriano saga. (I've no idea why this only got reported in 2011, but anyway.)

http://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/pj-pede-suspensao-para-investigadores

Chapter 16 has an interesting and long list of types of misconduct that can result in the more serious disciplinary measures...

Chapter 17 deals with attenuating circumstances (e.g., previous good behaviour), and Chapter 18 deals with aggravating ones (prior misconduct, a violation committed while on duty, or in public, an accumulation of violations...).


According to "Aviso (extrato) n.o 11666/2013" (dead link), on appeal, Amaral got a reduction in a fine and in a suspension, but it doesn't state which case this was about. (I have the text, if anyone is particularly interested, but the accents need correcting as they turned into gibberish.)

Note: aposentação can apparently mean retirement or resignation. However, in police lingo, "aposentação compulsiva" is translated by euro-lex as compulsory resignation. "Aposentação no interesse da Europol ..." =  "retirement in the interests of Europol", but this doesn't exist in the PT disciplinary code.
* https://www.linguee.com/portuguese-english/translation/aposenta%C3%A7%C3%A3o+compulsiva.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 05, 2018, 09:58:05 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 05, 2018, 03:12:37 AM
From one of the texts in the libel / damages case:

The criminal investigation officers, retired for various reasons of disciplinary penalty application, retain special rights, being holders of an identification card for recognition of their quality and the rights they enjoy [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 of 31 January].

The statute of the retirement [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording in the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, that the retired, apart from his right to a retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on being in activity.

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/v01.htm



From the link I gave earlier on displinary measures on the other thread, the scale (Chapter 12) is:

a) repreensão escrita - written reprimand
b) multa - fine
c) suspension
d) “inactividade” (not quite sure what the difference is, but involves being barred from promotion for 3 years)
e) aposentação compulsiva - compulsory resignation *
f) dismissal

http://www.dgpj.mj.pt/sections/leis-da-justica/pdf-ult/sections/leis-da-justica/pdf-ult/decreto-lei-n-196-94-de/downloadFile/file/DL196.94.pdf?nocache=1192191524.72

The Disciplinary Unit was calling for the suspension of Cristovão, Amaral and a few others over the Cipriano saga. (I've no idea why this only got reported in 2011, but anyway.)

http://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/pj-pede-suspensao-para-investigadores

Chapter 16 has an interesting and long list of types of misconduct that can result in the more serious disciplinary measures...

Chapter 17 deals with attenuating circumstances (e.g., previous good behaviour), and Chapter 18 deals with aggravating ones (prior misconduct, a violation committed while on duty, or in public, an accumulation of violations...).


According to "Aviso (extrato) n.o 11666/2013" (dead link), on appeal, Amaral got a reduction in a fine and in a suspension, but it doesn't state which case this was about. (I have the text, if anyone is particularly interested, but the accents need correcting as they turned into gibberish.)

Note: aposentação can apparently mean retirement or resignation. However, in police lingo, "aposentação compulsiva" is translated by euro-lex as compulsory resignation. "Aposentação no interesse da Europol ..." =  "retirement in the interests of Europol", but this doesn't exist in the PT disciplinary code.
* https://www.linguee.com/portuguese-english/translation/aposenta%C3%A7%C3%A3o+compulsiva.html

As usual an interesting and informative post, Carana.

PJ seeks suspension for investigators
The Judiciary Police Disciplinary Unit asks for the suspension of Paulo Pereira Cristóvão, Gonçalo Amaral and three PJ inspectors for alleged involvement in the case of assaults on Leonor Cipriano, convicted of the death and concealment of her daughter's body, Joana, in 2004.
Ler mais em: http://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/pj-pede-suspensao-para-investigadores


Contrary to popular belief it appears that Amaral was not the credit to the Judiciary Police that many claim him to have been.
The PJ themselves wanted him and some of his peer group suspended and I believe Paulo Pereira Cristóvão did eventually leave the service under a cloud which didn't prevent him from carving out bigger and better future careers.

I did find the description of Leonor Cipriano's conviction for "the death and concealment of her daughter's body" food for thought.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 05, 2018, 10:21:33 AM
In other words, was he pushed or did he jump?

In my opinion he didn't need to resign but he might have been offered early retirement and his pension if he did.  The Cipriano fiasco must have been a determining factor in that decision imo since if convicted of perjury his position as a senior officer would have been untenable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 05, 2018, 10:46:38 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 05, 2018, 10:21:33 AM
In other words, was he pushed or did he jump?

In my opinion he didn't need to resign but he might have been offered early retirement and his pension if he did.  The Cipriano fiasco must have been a determining factor in that decision imo since if convicted of perjury his position as a senior officer would have been untenable.

I'm in complete agreement with that, Angelo.

Carana's post raises further questions for me.  She posted

Snip
From one of the texts in the libel / damages case:

The criminal investigation officers, retired for various reasons of disciplinary penalty application, retain special rights, being holders of an identification card for recognition of their quality and the rights they enjoy [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 of 31 January].

The statute of the retirement [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording in the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, that the retired, apart from his right to a retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on being in activity.

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/v01.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Therefore, irrespective of the nature of the offence an officer forced to retire under a cloud still retains what? … the equivalent of a warrant card?


Apparently Goncalo Amaral retired from public service because he was bound by legal restrictions imposed upon him by his status which prevented him clearing his name. 
But in his retiral he “remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on being in activity.”

If he couldn’t do something while in employment … how was he able to do it when retired if remaining bound by the same restrictions in force when he was still working?

Just doesn't make sense to me in the light of Amaral's chosen career path.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 05, 2018, 10:56:19 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 05, 2018, 10:46:38 AM
I'm in complete agreement with that, Angelo.

Carana's post raises further questions for me.  She posted

Snip
From one of the texts in the libel / damages case:

The criminal investigation officers, retired for various reasons of disciplinary penalty application, retain special rights, being holders of an identification card for recognition of their quality and the rights they enjoy [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 of 31 January].

The statute of the retirement [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording in the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, that the retired, apart from his right to a retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on being in activity.

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/v01.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Therefore, irrespective of the nature of the offence an officer forced to retire under a cloud still retains what? … the equivalent of a warrant card?


Apparently Goncalo Amaral retired from public service because he was bound by legal restrictions imposed upon him by his status which prevented him clearing his name. 
But in his retiral he “remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on being in activity.”

If he couldn’t do something while in employment … how was he able to do it when retired if remaining bound by the same restrictions in force when he was still working?

Just doesn't make sense to me in the light of Amaral's chosen career path.

Something you should ask the Portuguese authorities - if you are sufficiently concerned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 05, 2018, 11:11:19 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 05, 2018, 10:21:33 AM
In other words, was he pushed or did he jump?

In my opinion he didn't need to resign but he might have been offered early retirement and his pension if he did.  The Cipriano fiasco must have been a determining factor in that decision imo since if convicted of perjury his position as a senior officer would have been untenable.

This is the Foreword from the French version.

“Certainly, this book responds to the need I felt to defend myself, having been discredited by the institution for which I worked for more than twenty-six years, without being given any chance to explain myself, publicly or within the institution itself. I made the request several times, but it was never heard. I, therefore, scrupulously respected the rules of the police judiciaire and I refrained from making any comment. But this goes without saying: I experienced that silence to which I was constrained as an attack on my dignity. Later, I was removed from the investigation. It was then that I understood that it was time to speak. To do that, I requested early retirement in order to be able to express myself freely.

However, the purpose of this work is more important: to contribute to finding the truth so that justice can finally be done in the investigation known as the “Maddie case.” Truth and justice are two values strongly anchored within me, which reflect my profound beliefs: they always guided the work I did for the institution to which I am proud to have belonged. Even in retirement, they continue to inspire me and to be present in my life.

In no way does this text seek to challenge the work of my colleagues in the police judiciaire or to compromise the ongoing investigation. I am convinced that the disclosure of all the facts may, in the present case, result in harming the investigation. However, the reader will have access to unpublished information, to new interpretations of events – always with respect for the law – and, of course, to relevant enquiries.

The only objective of a criminal investigation is the search for truth. There is no place for the “politically correct.”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 05, 2018, 11:18:19 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 05, 2018, 10:56:19 AM
Something you should ask the Portuguese authorities - if you are sufficiently concerned.

I'm discussing it with you Jassie.  I'm a member of a discussion forum as are you.  That is what we do because quite simply that is all we are equipped to do as I think most of us have realised that we aren't going to change the world.
The Portuguese authorities as far as I know are not members here.

You and I are entitled to express our opinions though.  I sometimes wish you would take advantage of that by attempting to expand the discussion somewhat as opposed to issuing one liners designed to put down other members and or stifle debate.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 05, 2018, 11:20:39 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 05, 2018, 11:18:19 AM
I'm discussing it with you Jassie.  I'm a member of a discussion forum as are you.  That is what we do because quite simply that is all we are equipped to do as I think most of us have realised that we aren't going to change the world.
The Portuguese authorities as far as I know are not members here.

You and I are entitled to express our opinions though.  I sometimes wish you would take advantage of that by attempting to expand the discussion somewhat as opposed to issuing one liners designed to put down other members and or stifle debate.

So really it was a rhetorical question as none of us are likely to know the answer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 05, 2018, 11:30:01 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 05, 2018, 10:21:33 AM
In other words, was he pushed or did he jump?

In my opinion he didn't need to resign but he might have been offered early retirement and his pension if he did.  The Cipriano fiasco must have been a determining factor in that decision imo since if convicted of perjury his position as a senior officer would have been untenable.

I don't see how he could have taken "early retirement": he was 50 at the time.

According to Article 148 of their regulations (if I'm deciphering it correctly), you can request retirement as of 60 (I haven't found anything about years of service as is the case in some other countries). There is a scheme for those lower down the bread-scale whereby they can get a partial pension, also as of 60, in return for reserve duty, which wouldn't apply in his case, either.

SECÇÃO II Aposentação
  Artigo 148.º
Passagem à situação de aposentação   
1 - O pessoal de investigação criminal, mesmo quando provido em comissão de serviço em cargos dirigentes, passa à situação de aposentado, se o requerer, quando tenha completado 60 anos de idade.
2 - O disposto no número anterior é aplicável ao pessoal na situação de disponibilidade.
  Contém as alterações dos seguintes diplomas:
   - DL n.º 235/2005, de 30/12
     Consultar versões anteriores deste artigo:
   -1ª versão: DL n.º 275-A/2000, de 09/11
http://www.pgdlisboa.pt/leis/lei_mostra_articulado.php?tabela=leis&artigo_id=&nid=35&ficha=101&pagina=&nversao=&so_miolo=


I can't find what the penalty is for the most serious category (f - demissão), which in context would seem to mean dismissal.

Assuming the penalty is accordingly more severe, I would imagine that there would be no pension rights, which Amaral does seem to have retained, whether that was actually a full pension or a reduced one as in the equivalent for Europol.

As he already had a fine and a suspension over the Cipriano saga, which I imagine would count as an aggravating factor, then I would find it logical that he either got option D - "inactividade" (one category worse than suspension) or option E - compulsory resignation.

The problem with Option D -  "inactividade", is that it doesn't correspond to the "aposentação" for disciplinary reasons cited in the court case.


By elimination, therefore (IMO), my conclusion is that he must have got slapped with Option E - compulsory resignation. Looking through the list of types of misconduct that qualify, the most obvious one (IMO) would be conduct that reflects badly on the PJ's prestige and dignity.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 05, 2018, 11:51:05 AM
Note: aposentação can apparently mean retirement or resignation. However, in police lingo, "aposentação compulsiva" is translated by euro-lex as compulsory resignation. "Aposentação no interesse da Europol ..." =  "retirement in the interests of Europol", but this doesn't exist in the PT disciplinary code.
* https://www.linguee.com/portuguese-english/translation/aposenta%C3%A7%C3%A3o+compulsiva.html


Double-checked on something.

As with Europol (and the 25th Amendment in the US), someone can be removed from office due to physical or mental incapacity.

However, this appears to be irrelevant in terms of Amaral's situation.

 Artigo 150.º
Aposentação por incapacidade   
1 - Os funcionários que, por debilidade ou entorpecimento das faculdades físicas ou intelectuais manifestadas no exercício da função, não possam continuar nesta sem grave transtorno para os serviços serão submetidos a junta médica da ADSE.
2 - O funcionário submetido a junta médica, nos termos do número anterior, que for julgado incapaz será notificado do parecer desta e disporá de 30 dias para requerer a aposentação ou produzir, por escrito, as observações que tiver por convenientes.
3 - O funcionário que, nos termos do número anterior, não requeira a aposentação decorrido o prazo aí referido é submetido a junta médica da Caixa Geral de Aposentações.
4 - O funcionário que se encontre na situação prevista no n.º 2, e enquanto não tiver lugar a decisão final sobre a aposentação, pode ser suspenso do exercício de funções sempre que a respectiva incapacidade o justifique, por despacho do Ministro da Justiça, mediante proposta do director nacional.
5 - A suspensão prevista no presente artigo é executada por forma a serem resguardados o prestígio e a dignidade do funcionário e não produz efeitos sobre as remunerações auferidas.
   

http://www.pgdlisboa.pt/leis/lei_mostra_articulado.php?tabela=leis&artigo_id=&nid=35&ficha=101&pagina=&nversao=&so_miolo=
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 05, 2018, 11:57:49 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 05, 2018, 11:51:05 AM
Note: aposentação can apparently mean retirement or resignation. However, in police lingo, "aposentação compulsiva" is translated by euro-lex as compulsory resignation. "Aposentação no interesse da Europol ..." =  "retirement in the interests of Europol", but this doesn't exist in the PT disciplinary code.
* https://www.linguee.com/portuguese-english/translation/aposenta%C3%A7%C3%A3o+compulsiva.html


Double-checked on something.

As with Europol (and the 25th Amendment in the US), someone can be removed from office due to physical or mental incapacity.

However, this appears to be irrelevant in terms of Amaral's situation.

 Artigo 150.º
Aposentação por incapacidade   
1 - Os funcionários que, por debilidade ou entorpecimento das faculdades físicas ou intelectuais manifestadas no exercício da função, não possam continuar nesta sem grave transtorno para os serviços serão submetidos a junta médica da ADSE.
2 - O funcionário submetido a junta médica, nos termos do número anterior, que for julgado incapaz será notificado do parecer desta e disporá de 30 dias para requerer a aposentação ou produzir, por escrito, as observações que tiver por convenientes.
3 - O funcionário que, nos termos do número anterior, não requeira a aposentação decorrido o prazo aí referido é submetido a junta médica da Caixa Geral de Aposentações.
4 - O funcionário que se encontre na situação prevista no n.º 2, e enquanto não tiver lugar a decisão final sobre a aposentação, pode ser suspenso do exercício de funções sempre que a respectiva incapacidade o justifique, por despacho do Ministro da Justiça, mediante proposta do director nacional.
5 - A suspensão prevista no presente artigo é executada por forma a serem resguardados o prestígio e a dignidade do funcionário e não produz efeitos sobre as remunerações auferidas.
   

http://www.pgdlisboa.pt/leis/lei_mostra_articulado.php?tabela=leis&artigo_id=&nid=35&ficha=101&pagina=&nversao=&so_miolo=

No doubt there is a letter of severance giving the full SP sloshing about somewhere.
If one had a copy of that docuemnt one would not be reduced to playing guessing games.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 05, 2018, 11:59:00 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 05, 2018, 09:58:05 AM
As usual an interesting and informative post, Carana.

PJ seeks suspension for investigators
The Judiciary Police Disciplinary Unit asks for the suspension of Paulo Pereira Cristóvão, Gonçalo Amaral and three PJ inspectors for alleged involvement in the case of assaults on Leonor Cipriano, convicted of the death and concealment of her daughter's body, Joana, in 2004.
Ler mais em: http://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/pj-pede-suspensao-para-investigadores


Contrary to popular belief it appears that Amaral was not the credit to the Judiciary Police that many claim him to have been.
The PJ themselves wanted him and some of his peer group suspended and I believe Paulo Pereira Cristóvão did eventually leave the service under a cloud which didn't prevent him from carving out bigger and better future careers.

I did find the description of Leonor Cipriano's conviction for "the death and concealment of her daughter's body" food for thought.

So do I, now that you mention it.

"... condenada pela morte e ocultação do cadáver da filha"

Ler mais em: http://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/pj-pede-suspensao-para-investigadores


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 05, 2018, 12:29:21 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 05, 2018, 11:57:49 AM
No doubt there is a letter of severance giving the full SP sloshing about somewhere.
If one had a copy of that docuemnt one would not be reduced to playing guessing games.

Agreed. However, as I can't find it online, I can only go by (http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/jud/mccanns-v-amaral-judgment_Page_43.jpg)

Which is in the April 2015 ruling of that interminable saga.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 05, 2018, 12:36:08 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 05, 2018, 11:57:49 AM
No doubt there is a letter of severance giving the full SP sloshing about somewhere.
If one had a copy of that docuemnt one would not be reduced to playing guessing games.

And, unless the PT Official Journal (or whatever it's called) got it totally wrong, he did already have a suspension sanction over the Cipriano case, ultimately reduced in severity on appeal - as per my earlier cite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 05, 2018, 12:59:54 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 05, 2018, 11:11:19 AM
This is the Foreword from the French version.

“Certainly, this book responds to the need I felt to defend myself, having been discredited by the institution for which I worked for more than twenty-six years, without being given any chance to explain myself, publicly or within the institution itself. I made the request several times, but it was never heard. I, therefore, scrupulously respected the rules of the police judiciaire and I refrained from making any comment. But this goes without saying: I experienced that silence to which I was constrained as an attack on my dignity. Later, I was removed from the investigation. It was then that I understood that it was time to speak. To do that, I requested early retirement in order to be able to express myself freely.

However, the purpose of this work is more important: to contribute to finding the truth so that justice can finally be done in the investigation known as the “Maddie case.” Truth and justice are two values strongly anchored within me, which reflect my profound beliefs: they always guided the work I did for the institution to which I am proud to have belonged. Even in retirement, they continue to inspire me and to be present in my life.

In no way does this text seek to challenge the work of my colleagues in the police judiciaire or to compromise the ongoing investigation. I am convinced that the disclosure of all the facts may, in the present case, result in harming the investigation. However, the reader will have access to unpublished information, to new interpretations of events – always with respect for the law – and, of course, to relevant enquiries.

The only objective of a criminal investigation is the search for truth. There is no place for the “politically correct.”

I can't find any provision for "requesting early retirement" at age 50. Retirement options are (or were) as of 60.

He - understandably - doesn't mention his disciplinary sanctions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 06, 2018, 10:04:48 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 05, 2018, 12:59:54 PM
I can't find any provision for "requesting early retirement" at age 50. Retirement options are (or were) as of 60.

He - understandably - doesn't mention his disciplinary sanctions.

In the UK a police officer can retire on half pension after only twenty years in the job.  After 30 years they can retire on a full pension despite their age.  Many go on to start second careers.  Same applies to the Navy, Army and RAF.

I don't know exactly what the rules are in Portugal but Amaral had almost 30 years under his belt in 2007 so he was eligible to retire at 50.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 06, 2018, 10:12:47 PM
Quote from: John on June 06, 2018, 10:04:48 PM
In the UK a police officer can retire on half pension after only twenty years in the job.  After 30 years they can retire on a full pension despite their age.  Many go on to start second careers.  Same applies to the Navy, Army and RAF.

I don't know what the rules are in Portugal but if Amaral was in the police since he was 20 then he could retire at 50.

Yes, I know, which I was looking out for an option related to years of service, but didn't find one - only the as of 60 one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 06, 2018, 10:16:33 PM
The 30th of June 2008 marked Gonçalo Amaral's last day of service for the PJ. It was a day that passed like many before, in a proud 27-year career.

So he didn't make the 30 years, no doubt his pension was calculated accordingly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 06, 2018, 10:32:53 PM
Quote from: John on June 06, 2018, 10:16:33 PM
The 30th of June 2008 marked Gonçalo Amaral's last day of service for the PJ. It was a day that passed like many before, in a proud 27-year career.

So he didn't make the 30 years, no doubt his pension was calculated accordingly.

But it's not based on years of service in PT, John. At least, as far as I've been able to find.

ETA: However, the amount does appear to be calculated according to years of service and level of salary.
http://www.pgdlisboa.pt/leis/lei_mostra_articulado.php?artigo_id=1862A0081&nid=1862&tabela=leis&pagina=1&ficha=1&so_miolo=&nversao=
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 06, 2018, 10:58:06 PM
From the document above,

Artigo 81.º
Aposentação 1 - Sem prejuízo do regime estatutariamente previsto para os militares da Guarda Nacional Republicana, para o pessoal com funções policiais da Polícia de Segurança Pública, para o pessoal da Polícia Judiciária, para o pessoal do corpo da guarda prisional e para os funcionários judiciais, a idade de aposentação e o tempo de serviço estabelecidos no n.º 1 do artigo 37.º do Estatuto da Aposentação passam a ser de 65 anos e de 15 anos, respetivamente

Googlish:
Retirement 1 - Without prejudice to the statutory provision for military personnel of the Republican National Guard, personnel with police functions of the Public Security Police, personnel of the Judicial Police, prison corps personnel and judicial officers, the retirement age and the period of service established in paragraph 1 of article 37 of the Retirement Statute shall be 65 years and 15 years, respectively

From the PJ regulation document I posted earlier (although it dates back to '94, I haven't found any update), there was an option to request retirement as of 60, but the normal age is 65. 

That's why, unless I come across anything else, I don't see how he could have requested taking early retirement at 50...

ETA: A caveat is that it's not clear what law this bit refers to:
Article 79

1 - O regime da aposentação voluntária que não dependa de verificação de incapacidade fixa-se com base na lei em vigor e na situação existente na data em que se profira despacho a reconhecer o direito à aposentação.

Googlish:
1 - The system of voluntary retirement that does not depend on verification of incapacity is fixed based on the law in force and the situation existing on the date on which the order to recognize the right to retirement is given.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 07, 2018, 07:09:35 AM
What is this latest area of discussion intended to reveal?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 07, 2018, 08:50:21 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 07, 2018, 07:09:35 AM
What is this latest area of discussion intended to reveal?

Amaral will always be a target so every little facet of his life has to be investigated.  I see no problem with that.

As to his retirement, he had a mostly successful 28 years in the Portuguese police rising to the level of coordinator and head of the PJ in Portimão.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 07, 2018, 08:55:36 AM
In my opinion the forum isn't biased, but certain members are. I think it shows when people include disparaging adjectives with people's names. Not only does it demonstrate that person's bias, it appears to be an attempt to influence those reading their posts. The media had that intention when they did it, describing Amaral as 'boozy, outrageous, inept, disgraced, bungling' and much more.
http://newsoutlines.blogspot.com/2010/01/adjectives-used-by-british-press-to.html

Anyone using disparaging adjectives to describe the McCanns would, in my opinion, find their posts deleted almost immediately.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 07, 2018, 09:01:46 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 07, 2018, 08:50:21 AM
Amaral will always be a target so every little facet of his life has to be investigated.  I see no problem with that.

As to his retirement, he had a mostly successful 28 years in the Portuguese police rising to the level of coordinator and head of the PJ in Portimão.

Agreed, but it's hardly likely to add anything of any use, is it?
Having won his court case, he is free of legal entanglement and is able to sit back and enjoy his sardines and other pleasures of life.

Character assassination won't help rehabilitate the McCanns in the public eye or find their daughter, so it seems a futile activity to engage in, however much pleasure it might afford some.
Purely my own opinion, of course.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 07, 2018, 09:02:38 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 07, 2018, 08:50:21 AM
Amaral will always be a target so every little facet of his life has to be investigated.  I see no problem with that.

As to his retirement, he had a mostly successful 28 years in the Portuguese police rising to the level of coordinator and head of the PJ in Portimão.
I think you have to look at the reasons why Amaral might be a target and not any other PJ inspector who worked on Madeleine's case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 07, 2018, 09:11:41 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 07, 2018, 08:50:21 AM
Amaral will always be a target so every little facet of his life has to be investigated.  I see no problem with that.

As to his retirement, he had a mostly successful 28 years in the Portuguese police rising to the level of coordinator and head of the PJ in Portimão.

Amaral is not a target but a legitimate area for discussion... But every post that is critical of him in the kadrlt few, days, has been removed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 07, 2018, 09:13:16 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 07, 2018, 09:02:38 AM
I think you have to look at the reasons why Amaral might be a target and not any other PJ inspector who worked on Madeleine's case.

That's easy imo. He dared to write a book accusing the McCanns of involvement and gave several media interviews expressing those same theories.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 07, 2018, 09:14:29 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 07, 2018, 08:55:36 AM
In my opinion the forum isn't biased, but certain members are. I think it shows when people include disparaging adjectives with people's names. Not only does it demonstrate that person's bias, it appears to be an attempt to influence those reading their posts. The media had that intention when they did it, describing Amaral as 'boozy, outrageous, inept, disgraced, bungling' and much more.
http://newsoutlines.blogspot.com/2010/01/adjectives-used-by-british-press-to.html

Anyone using disparaging adjectives to describe the McCanns would, in my opinion, find their posts deleted almost immediately.
Your last sentence is entirely inaccurate, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 07, 2018, 09:15:16 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 07, 2018, 09:11:41 AM
Amaral is not a target but a legitimate area for discussion... But every post that is critical of him in the kadrlt few, days, has been removed

We all know he was fired from the investigation, we don't need a thousand posts to reveal it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 07, 2018, 09:16:42 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 07, 2018, 09:13:16 AM
That's easy imo. He dared to write a book accusing the McCanns of involvement and gave several media interviews expressing those same theories.

I agree. If he had accepted his removal from the case without a murmur it is unlikely that his name would have cropped up again. IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on June 07, 2018, 09:29:40 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 07, 2018, 09:16:42 AM
I agree. If he had accepted his removal from the case without a murmur it is unlikely that his name would have cropped up again. IMO



If he hadn't written his accusatory book then his name would not be mentioned as often. IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 07, 2018, 09:31:07 AM
Ithink he did the right thing writing that book - why should he have been the disgraced one.

The disgrace was the children being left in the first place.

He knew more than anyone what was going on - and it has been proven he was a threat. imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 07, 2018, 09:50:55 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 07, 2018, 09:15:16 AM
We all know he was fired from the investigation, we don't need a thousand posts to reveal it.

The thread that is now pushing up daisies was of the frequent was/wasn't variety, so I went off to check.

From what I've been able to find from official - publicly available - sources, the answer doesn't seem entirely clear-cut: I don't see how he could have "retired" of his own free will at 50 with a pension, as he's stated. If anyone finds evidence to the contrary from equally sound sources, or if I've misunderstood, I'm happy to stand corrected.

At the same time, it doesn't seem as if he was dismissed with immediate effect from the PJ (which the term "sacked" may imply), although he was from the investigation and his position as Portimão coordinator.

As is often the case, it seems that reality isn't always entirely black or white.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 07, 2018, 09:54:45 AM
Quote from: kizzy on June 07, 2018, 09:31:07 AM
Ithink he did the right thing writing that book - why should he have been the disgraced one.

The disgrace was the children being left in the first place.

He knew more than anyone what was going on - and it has been proven he was a threat. imo
Disgraced because of his conviction
Disgraced because of his remarks about the British police
Disgraced because of his misunderstanding of the evidence, particularly the DNA and dog alerts
Disgraced because he cashed in on a missing child for his own personal gain.
Disgraced for stating as fact that Madeleine is dead and her parents covered it up.

Take your pick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 07, 2018, 10:05:29 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 07, 2018, 09:13:16 AM
That's easy imo. He dared to write a book accusing the McCanns of involvement and gave several media interviews expressing those same theories.
Absolutely.
We are told he was a very small cog in the wheel and when he published his book he had been convicted of a criminal offence in relation to the cover up of the torture of the mother of another missing child.

The case was archived and among the conclusions was:
"  ... To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media – before the police – was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous."
http://madeleinemccann.org/blog/2014/04/20/the-pjs-final-report-the-archiving-dispatch/#adi4

What on earth gave Amaral the right to gainsay that and to publish a book which in my opinion could well be renamed The truth of "The LIE" to deliberately drag the names of two innocent people through the mire ... in my opinion partly because he had taken the hump with his employers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 07, 2018, 10:06:09 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 07, 2018, 09:16:42 AM
I agree. If he had accepted his removal from the case without a murmur it is unlikely that his name would have cropped up again. IMO

I agree in part.

He might have disappeared into public oblivion in in relation to this case, but his name would still have been in the spotlight, at least in Portugal, concerning the Cipriano one.

His choice to write a book, star as the lead police officer in a documentary  numerous media interviews, including on popular matinée chat shows, and a column in CdM with unproven "conclusions" involving criminal activity... placed him in the media spotlight.

He could have made other choices.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 07, 2018, 10:17:04 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 07, 2018, 09:02:38 AM
I think you have to look at the reasons why Amaral might be a target and not any other PJ inspector who worked on Madeleine's case.

Hard one, that. ;)

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 07, 2018, 10:17:14 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 07, 2018, 09:54:45 AM
Disgraced because of his conviction
Disgraced because of his remarks about the British police
Disgraced because of his misunderstanding of the evidence, particularly the DNA and dog alerts
Disgraced because he cashed in on a missing child for his own personal gain.
Disgraced for stating as fact that Madeleine is dead and her parents covered it up.

Take your pick.

AND to think the McCanns are to be afforded our love and support even though no one knows if they were involved with their daughters disappearance!  so we must love the parents:

Support them because of the lack of evidence
Support them because of their remarks and accusations about the Portuguese police
Support them because of their misunderstanding of door widths, ligthting, distance, views to children in apartment, particularly the bit where they caim they could see the apartments when all they could see was the top part,not the entrance where the children slept.
Support them  for stating as fact that Madeleine was abducted by paedophile gang via a open window
Support them for their various version of accounts of what happened. Reading their ROGS is IMO excruciatingly painful.
Support them for NOT taking part in a reconstruction
Support them for claiming they left the children because it 'felt safe'

Pick away... there is much much more for this pile!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 07, 2018, 10:17:59 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 07, 2018, 10:05:29 AM
Absolutely.
We are told he was a very small cog in the wheel and when he published his book he had been convicted of a criminal offence in relation to the cover up of the torture of the mother of another missing child.

The case was archived and among the conclusions was:
"  ... To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media – before the police – was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous."
http://madeleinemccann.org/blog/2014/04/20/the-pjs-final-report-the-archiving-dispatch/#adi4

What on earth gave Amaral the right to gainsay that and to publish a book which in my opinion could well be renamed The truth of "The LIE" to deliberately drag the names of two innocent people through the mire ... in my opinion partly because he had taken the hump with his employers.

I thought he was convicted a while after his book was published?

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5840.0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 07, 2018, 10:19:39 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 07, 2018, 10:06:09 AM
I agree in part.

He might have disappeared into public oblivion in in relation to this case, but his name would still have been in the spotlight, at least in Portugal, concerning the Cipriano one.

His choice to write a book, star as the lead police officer in a documentary  numerous media interviews, including on popular matinée chat shows, and a column in CdM with unproven "conclusions" involving criminal activity... placed him in the media spotlight.

He could have made other choices.

Without this case the majority of us would never have heard of Cipriano.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 07, 2018, 10:24:58 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 07, 2018, 09:02:38 AM
I think you have to look at the reasons why Amaral might be a target and not any other PJ inspector who worked on Madeleine's case.


Oh but, the whole  PJ were behind Amaral in the theories he was discussing. They all suspected the parents of 'something'. shocked at least about the children being left alone every night. And to be fair the slagging of the Portuguese's police and judiciary began on the first few hours of MBM having been declared 'abducted'.

rememeber:  "They are all alone out there looking for Madeleine,"  No police doing anything claim!
then we have tweedle dee, dweedle dum and furking one kerrs.  So anyone who disagrees with the 'Abduction via window as claimed- is an evil troll... heehee
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 07, 2018, 10:32:12 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 07, 2018, 10:17:14 AM
AND to think the McCanns are to be afforded our love and support even though no one knows if they were involved with their daughters disappearance!  so we must love the parents:

Support them because of their lack of evidence to convict them of anything
Support them because of their remarks and accusations about the Portuguese police
Support them because of their misunderstanding of door widths, ligthting, distance, views to children in apartment, particularly the bit where they caim they could see the apartments when all they could see was the top part,not the entrance where the children slept.
Support them  for stating as fact that Madeleine was abducted by paedophile gang via a open window
Support them for their various version of accounts of what happened. Rheading their ROGS is IMO excruciatingly painful.
Support them for NOT taking part in a reconstruction
Support them for claiming they left the children because it 'felt safe' when in fact they planned to leave the children alone before they left the UK IMO so can't possibly make that claim from a holiday brochure.

Pick away... there is much much more for this pile!

Please could you give a cite for 'Madeleine was abducted by a Paedophile gang via a open window'   thanks in advance.

What remarks and accusations about the Portuguese police are you referring to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 07, 2018, 10:44:33 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 07, 2018, 10:06:09 AM
I agree in part.

He might have disappeared into public oblivion in in relation to this case, but his name would still have been in the spotlight, at least in Portugal, concerning the Cipriano one.

His choice to write a book, star as the lead police officer in a documentary  numerous media interviews, including on popular matinée chat shows, and a column in CdM with unproven "conclusions" involving criminal activity... placed him in the media spotlight.

He could have made other choices.

At one time I seem to remember, we are told he had aspirations to be a lawyer?  However in my opinion no other choice could have been as immediately lucrative as the one he chose for himself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 07, 2018, 10:47:05 AM
The McCanns did not refuse to attend the reconstruction,  plus the first reconstruction was cancelled by Amaral, because of the many tourists!!   I'm sorry but the place was disrupted already and I don't think a reconstruction during the evening would have caused any more disruption that it already had. 

Can I remind you that there is a lot of accusations about SY on this forum so it would seem that people are not shy of slagging them off.   You have to remember the McCann's had lost a child and was under extreme stress,   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 07, 2018, 10:53:17 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 07, 2018, 09:54:45 AM
Disgraced because of his conviction
Disgraced because of his remarks about the British police
Disgraced because of his misunderstanding of the evidence, particularly the DNA and dog alerts
Disgraced because he cashed in on a missing child for his own personal gain.
Disgraced for stating as fact that Madeleine is dead and her parents covered it up.

Take your pick.


Wasn't that a disgrace for the mccanns to employ criminals.

Fransisco Marco, Mracos Aragao, Kevin Halligen - to name but a few.



Not to find maddie - but to dish the dirt on G A. [ from the maddie fund] IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 07, 2018, 10:53:40 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 07, 2018, 10:44:33 AM
At one time I seem to remember, we are told he had aspirations to be a lawyer?  However in my opinion no other choice could have been as immediately lucrative as the one he chose for himself.

He has some sort of law degree. Was that taken while in the police ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 07, 2018, 10:54:31 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 07, 2018, 10:17:14 AM
AND to think the McCanns are to be afforded our love and support even though no one knows if they were involved with their daughters disappearance!  so we must love the parents:

Support them  because of their lack of evidence to convict them of anything (does not mean innocent)
Support them because of their remarks and accusations about the Portuguese police
Support them  because of their misunderstanding of door widths, ligthting, distance, views to children in apartment,, particularly the bit where they caim they could see the apartments when all they could see was the top part,not the entrance where the children slept.-
Support them bec .ause they  cashed in on their missing daughter (suspected of being 'take by paedophoiles) for  personal gain.PR doesn't come cheap these days.
Support them  for stating as fact that Madeleine was abducted by paedophile gang via a open window
 Support them for their various version of accounts of what happened. reading their ROGS is excruciatingly painful.
Support them for NOT  taking part in a reconstruction
Support them for  claiming  they left the children because it 'felt safe' when in fact they planned to leave the children alone before they left the UK so can't possibly make that claim from a holiday brochure..erm did they,  oh.

Pick away... there is much much more for this pile!

Have you ever read the archiving document?  Because I think if you had you would have seen that your post is way off the mark as far as the Policia Judiciaria ~ José de Magalhães e Menezes the Republic of Portugal's Prosecutor and João Melchior Gomes, the Portuguese Republic's Joint General Prosecutor, are concerned.

I tend to throw my hat into the ring as far as these guys are concerned.
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 07, 2018, 10:57:43 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 07, 2018, 10:17:14 AM
AND to think the McCanns are to be afforded our love and support even though no one knows if they were involved with their daughters disappearance!  so we must love the parents:

Support them because of their lack of evidence to convict them of anything
Support them because of their remarks and accusations about the Portuguese police
Support them because of their misunderstanding of door widths, ligthting, distance, views to children in apartment, particularly the bit where they caim they could see the apartments when all they could see was the top part,not the entrance where the children slept.
Support them  for stating as fact that Madeleine was abducted by paedophile gang via a open window
Support them for their various version of accounts of what happened. Rheading their ROGS is IMO excruciatingly painful.
Support them for NOT taking part in a reconstruction
Support them for claiming they left the children because it 'felt safe' when in fact they planned to leave the children alone before they left the UK IMO so can't possibly make that claim from a holiday brochure.

Pick away... there is much much more for this pile!

 8@??)(


Excellent post - the list is endless
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 07, 2018, 11:07:50 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 07, 2018, 10:17:59 AM
I thought he was convicted a while after his book was published?

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5840.0
It seems you thought correctly

Snip
Some members continue to hold the mistaken belief that Dr Gonçalo Amaral was convicted of torture in the Joana Cipriano case.  I suggest they read up on the facts outlined below.


Madeleine McCann police chief found guilty of falsifying evidence

(http://i.imgur.com/eG38XPQ.gif?1)

By John Bingham
23 May 2009

The former Portuguese police chief who accused the parents of Madeleine McCann of involvement in her disappearance, has been found guilty of falsifying evidence in another missing child case.

(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01404/Goncalo-Amaral_1404754c.jpg)

Mr Amaral has now been convicted of falsifying evidence to help cover up for three of his officers who were accused of torture.

He stood trial in relation to the investigation into the disappearance of eight-year-old Joana Cipriano from a village near Praia da Luz in 2004.

Her mother, Leonor, and uncle, Joao Cipriano, were convicted of murdering her, although her body was never found.

They later claimed they were tortured into confessing but police said that Mrs Cipriano tried to commit suicide by throwing herself off a staircase.

Three inspectors – Leonel Marques, Pereira Cristovao and Paulo Marques Bom – were cleared of torture after a seven-month trial at Faro Court in the Algarve.

The jury nevertheless found Mr Amaral guilty of falsifying documents to help cover for them.

A fifth officer, Antonio Nunes Cardoso, was found guilty of falsifying documents and was given a two-and-a-half year suspended jail sentence.

Outside court, Mr Amaral said he was not surprised by the verdict and blamed "political pressure".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5370361/Madeleine-McCann-police-chief-found-guilty-of-falsifying-evidence.html
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5840.msg207872#msg207872
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 07, 2018, 11:21:37 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 07, 2018, 10:47:05 AM
The McCann's did not refuse to attend the reconstruction,  plus the first reconstruction was cancelled by Amaral, because of the many tourists!!   I'm sorry but the place was disrupted already and I don't think a reconstruction during the evening would have caused any more disruption that it already had. 

What remarks and accusations about the Portuguese police are you referring to?   Can I remind you that there is a lot of accusations about SY on this forum so it would seem that people are not shy of slagging them off.   You have to remember the McCann's had lost a child and was under extreme stress,   then of course you can't imagine that can you as you have already convicted them.

The reconstruction was requested by the Rebelo investigation.

In my opinion he was following the protocol and procedures that the initial investigation neglected to do for example:In my opinion, none of that should have been necessary and makes it obvious that Rebelo was having to start his investigation from scratch many months after the 'golden hours' had long since passed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 07, 2018, 11:49:55 AM
I see the weekend has started early this week. 

Posters are well aware that naughty posts will be removed on sight so no excuses. 

Moderators please take note...NO EXCEPTIONS!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 07, 2018, 11:55:23 AM
Have I missed something?   *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 07, 2018, 11:58:16 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 07, 2018, 11:55:23 AM
Have I missed something?   *%87

Easily done...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 07, 2018, 12:19:02 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 07, 2018, 11:07:50 AM
It seems you thought correctly

Snip
Some members continue to hold the mistaken belief that Dr Gonçalo Amaral was convicted of torture in the Joana Cipriano case.  I suggest they read up on the facts outlined below.


Madeleine McCann police chief found guilty of falsifying evidence

(http://i.imgur.com/eG38XPQ.gif?1)

By John Bingham
23 May 2009

The former Portuguese police chief who accused the parents of Madeleine McCann of involvement in her disappearance, has been found guilty of falsifying evidence in another missing child case.

(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01404/Goncalo-Amaral_1404754c.jpg)

Mr Amaral has now been convicted of falsifying evidence to help cover up for three of his officers who were accused of torture.

He stood trial in relation to the investigation into the disappearance of eight-year-old Joana Cipriano from a village near Praia da Luz in 2004.

Her mother, Leonor, and uncle, Joao Cipriano, were convicted of murdering her, although her body was never found.

They later claimed they were tortured into confessing but police said that Mrs Cipriano tried to commit suicide by throwing herself off a staircase.

Three inspectors – Leonel Marques, Pereira Cristovao and Paulo Marques Bom – were cleared of torture after a seven-month trial at Faro Court in the Algarve.

The jury nevertheless found Mr Amaral guilty of falsifying documents to help cover for them.

A fifth officer, Antonio Nunes Cardoso, was found guilty of falsifying documents and was given a two-and-a-half year suspended jail sentence.

Outside court, Mr Amaral said he was not surprised by the verdict and blamed "political pressure".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5370361/Madeleine-McCann-police-chief-found-guilty-of-falsifying-evidence.html
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5840.msg207872#msg207872

So those saying he was convicted before he retired, or before he wrote his book are wrong? I'm pleased we've cleared that up.

Retirement 2008
Book release 2008
Conviction 2009.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 07, 2018, 12:22:30 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 07, 2018, 10:53:17 AM

Wasn't that a disgrace for the mccanns to employ criminals.

Fransisco Marco, Mracos Aragao, Kevin Halligen - to name but a few.



Not to find maddie - but to dish the dirt on G A. [ from the maddie fund] IMO.

I presume that you can support the implication that the Mccans employed them in full knowledge of the facts at the time via credible sources.

And that the reason for doing so was "Not to find maddie - but to dish the dirt on G A. [ from the maddie fund]
IMO".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 07, 2018, 12:29:45 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 07, 2018, 11:58:16 AM
Easily done...

Not fun being a mod...

We don't often agree on substance, but I don't recall you being online when I posted on the now-defunct thread to find my hard-researched post on a short trip to Pluto. You did edit my post later to remove my comment referring to the removal of the thread in question, but I have no problem with that, just normal modding.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 07, 2018, 12:32:04 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 07, 2018, 12:22:30 PM
I presume that you can support the implication that the Mccans employed them in full knowledge of the facts at the time via credible sources.

And that the reason for doing so was "Not to find maddie - but to dish the dirt on G A. [ from the maddie fund]
IMO".

Well they didn't check their credible sources did they -  when employing them.

Detectives Hired by the McCanns want to Frame Gonçalo Amaral



https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/02/detectives-hired-by-mccanns-want-to.html

Método 3, the Spanish detective agency hired by the McCanns, tried to convince Leonor Cipriano's Lawyer to change the course of defense. The agency operational wanted to make of Gonçalo Amaral - the former coordinator of the PJ of Portimão, responsible for the investigation to the disappearance of Madeleine and Joana, the main target, through the intersection of the two cases
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 07, 2018, 12:37:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 07, 2018, 12:19:02 PM
So those saying he was convicted before he retired, or before he wrote his book are wrong? I'm pleased we've cleared that up.

Retirement 2008
Book release 2008
Conviction 2009.

Absolutely ... couldn't be clearer
Madeleine McCann police chief found guilty of falsifying evidence

(http://i.imgur.com/eG38XPQ.gif?1)

By John Bingham
23 May 2009

The former Portuguese police chief who accused the parents of Madeleine McCann of involvement in her disappearance, has been found guilty of falsifying evidence in another missing child case.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
However it did drag on for quite some time, Amaral having been made arguido on 4th May 2007 ... then of course there was his failed appeal against his criminal conviction a couple of years later.
So it was apparently all go for him.  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1162.msg32770#msg32770
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 07, 2018, 12:45:08 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 07, 2018, 12:29:45 PM
Not fun being a mod...

We don't often agree on substance, but I don't recall you being online when I posted on the now-defunct thread to find my hard-researched post on a short trip to Pluto. You did edit my post later to remove my comment referring to the removal of the thread in question, but I have no problem with that, just normal modding.

If we could all live near the top of this pyramid (in link), life would be much more pleasant.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hierarchy_of_disagreement (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hierarchy_of_disagreement)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 07, 2018, 01:04:12 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 07, 2018, 12:32:04 PM
Well they didn't check their credible sources did they -  when employing them.

Detectives Hired by the McCanns want to Frame Gonçalo Amaral



https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/02/detectives-hired-by-mccanns-want-to.html

Método 3, the Spanish detective agency hired by the McCanns, tried to convince Leonor Cipriano's Lawyer to change the course of defense. The agency operational wanted to make of Gonçalo Amaral - the former coordinator of the PJ of Portimão, responsible for the investigation to the disappearance of Madeleine and Joana, the main target, through the intersection of the two cases

What substantiates the inferences in that paragraph?

Personally, when possible, I prefer official documents, cited in context. Or at least, neutral reporting by non-tabloids, whatever that means these days.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 07, 2018, 01:06:47 PM
I do find it a bit of a bummer when cites are provided and then scorned or rejected because they fail to meet a poster's criteria.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 07, 2018, 01:52:52 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 07, 2018, 01:06:47 PM
I do find it a bit of a bummer when cites are provided and then scorned or rejected because they fail to meet a poster's criteria.

I partially agree with that, Jassi.

Personally, I find old tabloid articles (even the wildly OTT ones) worthy of discussion, if a balanced analysis and some kind of factual conclusion is the end result.

Whether that discussion is feasible, when a thread descends into partisan slamming matches, is hard for any mod to judge as it unfolds, on whichever forum and whatever the topic on any easily-searchable  corner of the Internet.

ETA: where I have a problem is when tabloids are cited with no caveat, particularly when cited by those who should know better as to the cut-throat media war at the time and the lack of time, decency, or a genuine misunderstanding of facts at the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 07, 2018, 02:31:49 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 07, 2018, 01:52:52 PM
I partially agree with that, Jassi.

Personally, I find old tabloid articles (even the wildly OTT ones) worthy of discussion, if a balanced analysis and some kind of factual conclusion is the end result.

Whether that discussion is feasible, when a thread descends into partisan slamming matches, is hard for any mod to judge as it unfolds, on whichever forum and whatever the topic on any easily-searchable  corner of the Internet.

ETA: where I have a problem is when tabloids are cited with no caveat, particularly when cited by those who should know better as to the cut-throat media war at the time and the lack of time, decency, or a genuine misunderstanding of facts at the time.

As Rowley observed, stories in the media can't be relied upon to be correct. In my opinion they contain grains of truth, but also spin, gossip and speculation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 07, 2018, 03:00:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 07, 2018, 02:31:49 PM
As Rowley observed, stories in the media can't be relied upon to be correct. In my opinion they contain grains of truth, but also spin, gossip and speculation.

That's the same gist as what I said, yet again, a dozen or so posts ago.

I tried to check back to refer to it, but I think it went out with the bath-water. lol
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 07, 2018, 06:38:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 07, 2018, 12:19:02 PM
So those saying he was convicted before he retired, or before he wrote his book are wrong? I'm pleased we've cleared that up.

Retirement 2008
Book release 2008
Conviction 2009.
But I see what he was convicted of was a crime that happened in 2004, and from what I understand he had been charged with involvement in that crime prior to being made coordinator in the McCann case.
Having these factors in your mind is not conducive to good work IMO.
The date of conviction is less important.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 07, 2018, 06:50:32 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 07, 2018, 06:38:25 PM
But I see what he was convicted of was a crime that happened in 2004, and from what I understand he had been charged with involvement in that crime prior to being made coordinator in the McCann case.
Having these factors in your mind is not conducive to good work IMO.
The date of conviction is less important.

Until he is convicted there must be a presumption of innocence so why is the date of the conviction unimportant?

Oh boy am I going to enjoy this!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 07, 2018, 06:56:32 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 07, 2018, 06:50:32 PM
Until he is convicted there must be a presumption of innocence so why is the date of the conviction unimportant?

Oh boy am I going to enjoy this!
Was he convicted in 2009?  Yes he was so he was in hindsight guilty all along.  He should have felt guilty in knowing what he had done prior to the conviction.  If he didn't that is another matter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 07, 2018, 06:59:13 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 07, 2018, 06:56:32 PM
Was he convicted in 2009?  Yes he was so he was in hindsight guilty all along.  He would have felt guilty in knowing what he had done prior to the conviction.  If he didn't that is another matter.

Where is the "spittin'mi beer out with laughter emoji" ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 07, 2018, 07:02:31 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 07, 2018, 06:59:13 PM
Where is the "spittin'mi beer out with laughter emoji" ?
You've already used that one!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 07, 2018, 07:17:56 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 07, 2018, 06:38:25 PM
But I see what he was convicted of was a crime that happened in 2004, and from what I understand he had been charged with involvement in that crime prior to being made coordinator in the McCann case.
Having these factors in your mind is not conducive to good work IMO.
The date of conviction is less important.

The date of conviction was provided because someone got it wrong. When he was made arguido he pffered to step down from the case and was told to carry on, he says.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 07, 2018, 10:39:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 07, 2018, 07:17:56 PM
The date of conviction was provided because someone got it wrong. When he was made arguido he pffered to step down from the case and was told to carry on, he says.

If this was a private conversation, I doubt that there's any official record of it. If there was a formal exchange of correspondence, I haven't come across it in the files.

Every country's police forces have no doubt had "slippery stair" incidents, well before smartphones were around.

True or not, I don't understand how someone under a cloud over an investigation into a missing child could remain as coordinator of an investigation involving another missing child.

So far, I haven't found anything in the regulations about "gardening leave", pending the outcome of such incidents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 08, 2018, 06:38:26 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 07, 2018, 10:39:17 PM
If this was a private conversation, I doubt that there's any official record of it. If there was a formal exchange of correspondence, I haven't come across it in the files.

Every country's police forces have no doubt had "slippery stair" incidents, well before smartphones were around.

True or not, I don't understand how someone under a cloud over an investigation into a missing child could remain as coordinator of an investigation involving another missing child.

So far, I haven't found anything in the regulations about "gardening leave", pending the outcome of such incidents.

The fact remains that he was allowed to continue. Is it necessary to understand why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 08, 2018, 08:40:03 AM
I wonder why Jane began to feel abandoned? Her evidence is fairly incoherent, but she seems to be saying that Russell was gone longer than she expected when he returned to the Tapas for his meal. According to Russell's statements on 4th and 11th May, however, he only left their apartment at 21.55 to go and get his food.

Reply    “Erm, well Evie was still up, so I was just with Evie in the room and I think it was getting quite and Russell had sort of said ‘I’ll go and finish my meal and then I’ll come back’.  So the next thing I can sort of really remember is thinking ‘Oh I wonder why he’s not’, you know, I think I was thinking ‘Oh he’s got chatting, he’s not gonna’, you know, ‘he’s not gonna come back’, blah, blah, sort of thinking along those lines....... But I don’t know how long that is from, but I think it must have been a fair while from, because I was actually thinking ‘Oh he should be back by now’, sort of actually, you know, to actually look out of the window”.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 08, 2018, 09:01:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 08, 2018, 08:40:03 AM
I wonder why Jane began to feel abandoned? Her evidence is fairly incoherent, but she seems to be saying that Russell was gone longer than she expected when he returned to the Tapas for his meal. According to Russell's statements on 4th and 11th May, however, he only left their apartment at 21.55 to go and get his food.

Reply    “Erm, well Evie was still up, so I was just with Evie in the room and I think it was getting quite and Russell had sort of said ‘I’ll go and finish my meal and then I’ll come back’.  So the next thing I can sort of really remember is thinking ‘Oh I wonder why he’s not’, you know, I think I was thinking ‘Oh he’s got chatting, he’s not gonna’, you know, ‘he’s not gonna come back’, blah, blah, sort of thinking along those lines....... But I don’t know how long that is from, but I think it must have been a fair while from, because I was actually thinking ‘Oh he should be back by now’, sort of actually, you know, to actually look out of the window”.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

Keep investigating this aspect please.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on June 08, 2018, 09:09:59 AM
 @)(++(* it  sounds like the  tapas  7  were  up and down  like yo yos  during  dinner
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 08, 2018, 09:41:05 AM
I thought it was Rachael who informed Jane that MM was missing.

Jane 4th May
When she was in the apartment, at about 22.00- 22.15 she heard Kate and Fiona shouting and saying that Madeleine had disappeared.

10th May
Later she heard voices of KH and FP who were in the corridor in front of the bedroom windows and who called, desperately, for Madeleine. When she saw her it was KH herself who told the deponent that Madeleine had disappeared, not clarifying in what circumstances, continuing her search. The deponent stayed in her apartment because her daughter, El, was asleep and the smallest, Ev, was still awake and complaining.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 08, 2018, 09:41:46 AM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 08, 2018, 09:09:59 AM
@)(++(* it  sounds like the  tapas  7  were  up and down  like yo yos  during  dinner

It does rather, but in fact it was mainly Tanner & O'Brien who were playing musical chairs.
5 never moved at all after the group assembled.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 08, 2018, 09:51:11 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 08, 2018, 09:41:46 AM
It does rather, but in fact it was mainly Tanner & O'Brien who were playing musical chairs.
5 never moved at all after the group assembled.

The Paynes and Dianne Webster, Kate and Rachael stayed put.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 08, 2018, 10:04:02 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 08, 2018, 09:51:11 AM
The Paynes and Dianne Webster, Kate and Rachael stayed put.
Kate??
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 08, 2018, 10:17:54 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 08, 2018, 10:04:02 AM
Kate??

Only moved at the end of the evening. Gerry left once, right at the beginning.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 08, 2018, 10:25:01 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 08, 2018, 10:17:54 AM
Only moved at the end of the evening. Gerry left once, right at the beginning.
It was only the end of the evening because she discovered Madeleine missing, but to say she stayed put at the table is nonsense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 08, 2018, 10:38:05 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 08, 2018, 10:25:01 AM
It was only the end of the evening because she discovered Madeleine missing, but to say she stayed put at the table is nonsense.
She hadn't budged before then. She sat there from 8.30 until 10.
Nothing to argue about really, but I'm sure you will.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 08, 2018, 10:52:49 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 08, 2018, 09:41:05 AM
I thought it was Rachael who informed Jane that MM was missing.

Jane 4th May
When she was in the apartment, at about 22.00- 22.15 she heard Kate and Fiona shouting and saying that Madeleine had disappeared.

10th May
Later she heard voices of KH and FP who were in the corridor in front of the bedroom windows and who called, desperately, for Madeleine. When she saw her it was KH herself who told the deponent that Madeleine had disappeared, not clarifying in what circumstances, continuing her search. The deponent stayed in her apartment because her daughter, El, was asleep and the smallest, Ev, was still awake and complaining.

Tanner’s rogatory interview.


4078    “And what happened after that?”
Reply    “Erm, I think that’s when I went back to the roadside, I sort of looked out of the roadside door.  I think I heard some shouting, erm, so I actually went to sort of put my head out the roadside door.  And I think it was Rachael that I saw first because she had run back I think to check that Grace was obviously okay.  And then I think Rachael said, you know, she told me what had, you know she said ‘Oh Madeleine’s gone’ or, you know, something along those lines.  And that’s, it was almost straightaway as she said that I sort of had that, this person sort of came into my head at that”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 08, 2018, 10:52:59 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 08, 2018, 10:38:05 AM
She hadn't budged before then. She sat there from 8.30 until 10.
Nothing to argue about really, but I'm sure you will.
She left the table at 10pm to check on her kids as you have stated therefore it is entirely inaccurate to say she stayed put at the table all evening.  The end.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 08, 2018, 11:05:54 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 08, 2018, 06:38:26 AM
The fact remains that he was allowed to continue. Is it necessary to understand why?

I'm a curious soul. lol

What's the rationale behind police officers being suspended pending investigations into alleged misconduct where that's routine practice?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 08, 2018, 11:27:03 AM
The long and short of it,no matter how much dirt is tried to be slung at Anmaral,neither of the present day investigations have managed to prove him wrong,maybe that's what irks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 08, 2018, 11:30:22 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 08, 2018, 10:52:49 AM
Tanner’s rogatory interview.


4078    “And what happened after that?”
Reply    “Erm, I think that’s when I went back to the roadside, I sort of looked out of the roadside door.  I think I heard some shouting, erm, so I actually went to sort of put my head out the roadside door.  And I think it was Rachael that I saw first because she had run back I think to check that Grace was obviously okay.  And then I think Rachael said, you know, she told me what had, you know she said ‘Oh Madeleine’s gone’ or, you know, something along those lines.  And that’s, it was almost straightaway as she said that I sort of had that, this person sort of came into my head at that”.

So at first Kate told her, then it changes to Rachael. Why would Jane immediately think that the man she saw had taken MM? Most people imo would think she'd got out; hence the searching. Rachael has the answer;

Kate and Fi were standing by the window, like on the outside of the apartment and no, Kate, I think Kate had said you know, somebodys taken her, cos the shutter was up and the window was open, erm yeah, I think it was then that we kind of realised that she'd been taken, erm as, you know, as opposed to just kind of wandering out of her bed and just wondering where people were, erm and then, and I remember then going to talk to Jane and Matt went off and that, I went to talk to Jane and said you know, that Madeleine had disappeared and the window was open and the shutter was up, erm and then Jane said to me that when she'd come back to do her check, erm she'd seen somebody carrying a child,
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on June 08, 2018, 11:31:55 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 08, 2018, 11:27:03 AM
The long and short of it,no matter how much dirt is tried to be slung at Anmaral,neither of the present day investigations have managed to prove him wrong,maybe that's what irks.

The reality is that Amaral has not been proven right or wrong and the highest Court in Portugal has decreed that the McCanns have not been cleared.  The perfect stalemate position.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 08, 2018, 11:33:01 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 08, 2018, 11:27:03 AM
The long and short of it,no matter how much dirt is tried to be slung at Anmaral,neither of the present day investigations have managed to prove him wrong,maybe that's what irks.
THe fact that both investigations have categorically stated that the McCanns are not suspects tends to prove him wrong.  Of course you won't accept that, and neither I doubt will he.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 08, 2018, 11:37:04 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 08, 2018, 11:33:01 AM
THe fact that both investigations have categorically stated that the McCanns are not suspects tends to prove him wrong.  Of course you won't accept that, and neither I doubt will he.

Its still to be detremined what crime as been commited,so no proof he is wrong,I doubt you'll accept that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 08, 2018, 11:42:25 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 07, 2018, 06:50:32 PM
Until he is convicted there must be a presumption of innocence so why is the date of the conviction unimportant?

Oh boy am I going to enjoy this!

lol Alice,

Yes, of course, there is a legal presumption of innocence in most civilised countries right up until the final appeal fails, which - in PT -  can take a decade or more.

My impression is that it's quite a complicated issue.

- First of all, there were two investigations: one was the external criminal one, and the other was the internal one by the PJ watchdog. Both are subject to a lengthy appeal process (cf the Cristovão saga).

- A different layer is whether the person under investigation should be allowed to continue on the same type of case, pending the outcome.

To take that into a different context: would it be appropriate for a broker accused of embezzlement to continue managing clients' portfolios? The company itself has a vested interest in finding out what the hell happened.

- A further layer concerns public perception: if the press discovered that a brokerage company found it normal that someone under a cloud of suspicion was still allowed to handle enormous wealth and hadn't taken appropriate measures, the company's name would be worth next to nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 08, 2018, 11:46:04 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 08, 2018, 11:37:04 AM
Its still to be detremined what crime as been commited,so no proof he is wrong,I doubt you'll accept that.
He will never be proved right of that I have absolutely no doubt. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 08, 2018, 11:59:56 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 08, 2018, 11:46:04 AM
He will never be proved right of that I have absolutely no doubt.

The only way he'll be proved wrong is for a miracle to happen imo.
As recently as April 2017 SY couldn't  confirm if Madeleine was dead or alive.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 08, 2018, 12:00:56 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 08, 2018, 11:59:56 AM
The only way he'll be proved wrong is for a miracle to happen imo.
As recently as April 2017 SY couldn't  confirm if Madeleine was dead or alive.
Likewise re: being proved correct. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 08, 2018, 12:02:37 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 08, 2018, 11:05:54 AM
I'm a curious soul. lol

What's the rationale behind police officers being suspended pending investigations into alleged misconduct where that's routine practice?

I don't have a clue about Portugal. I know there is legislation concerning police conduct both for England and Wales and Scotland.

The Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/2632/contents/made

The Police Service of Scotland (Conduct) Regulations 2014
http://www.scotland.police.uk/assets/pdf/151934/184779/police-service-of-scotland-conduct-regulations-sop
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 08, 2018, 12:05:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 08, 2018, 11:30:22 AM
So at first Kate told her, then it changes to Rachael. Why would Jane immediately think that the man she saw had taken MM? Most people imo would think she'd got out; hence the searching. Rachael has the answer;

Kate and Fi were standing by the window, like on the outside of the apartment and no, Kate, I think Kate had said you know, somebodys taken her, cos the shutter was up and the window was open, erm yeah, I think it was then that we kind of realised that she'd been taken, erm as, you know, as opposed to just kind of wandering out of her bed and just wondering where people were, erm and then, and I remember then going to talk to Jane and Matt went off and that, I went to talk to Jane and said you know, that Madeleine had disappeared and the window was open and the shutter was up, erm and then Jane said to me that when she'd come back to do her check, erm she'd seen somebody carrying a child,
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm
"So at first Kate told her, then it changes to Rachael."  Wrong IMO - Nowhere does she say Rachael told her first.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 08, 2018, 12:11:56 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 08, 2018, 11:37:04 AM
Its still to be detremined what crime as been commited,so no proof he is wrong,I doubt you'll accept that.

Never say never, but for the moment I disagree.

The two investigations were opened / reopened based on an assessment of facts, and opportunities to further explore what happened to this little girl and who (if anyone), was criminally responsible for an - as yet - undetermined potential criime.

So far, ok.

Both jurisdictions stated that the parents weren't suspects. Although that could always change, so far it hasn't.

I find it absurd to imagine that both police forces had ignored any of a list of criminally liable possibilities involving the parents prior to stating that they weren't suspects.

Since when would two independent police investigations in two countries be (re)launched to concentrate on proving or disproving a theory of one particular officer (and his entourage) who coordinated the investigation for its first 5 months?

There are always going to be supporters of the "thwarted hero" amongst conspiracy theorists whatever the
subject. Although conspiracies do exist, IMO there are far more theorists than actual ones. Conveniently, it feeds into the current populist zeitgeist narrative of David v Goliath, or whatever represents a particular archetype.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 08, 2018, 12:16:18 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 08, 2018, 11:59:56 AM
The only way he'll be proved wrong is for a miracle to happen imo.
As recently as April 2017 SY couldn't  confirm if Madeleine was dead or alive.

In your view, a "miracle" would be if he was proven right?

For me, a "miracle" would be that she might eventually be found alive...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 08, 2018, 12:22:15 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 08, 2018, 11:30:22 AM
So at first Kate told her, then it changes to Rachael. Why would Jane immediately think that the man she saw had taken MM? Most people imo would think she'd got out; hence the searching. Rachael has the answer;

Kate and Fi were standing by the window, like on the outside of the apartment and no, Kate, I think Kate had said you know, somebodys taken her, cos the shutter was up and the window was open, erm yeah, I think it was then that we kind of realised that she'd been taken, erm as, you know, as opposed to just kind of wandering out of her bed and just wondering where people were, erm and then, and I remember then going to talk to Jane and Matt went off and that, I went to talk to Jane and said you know, that Madeleine had disappeared and the window was open and the shutter was up, erm and then Jane said to me that when she'd come back to do her check, erm she'd seen somebody carrying a child,
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

Speculation but could Tanner by the rogatories been made aware that if Fiona had been the first to hear about Tanner’s sighting there would have been a conversation about what the child was wearing as Fiona knew by that point and Rachael didn’t ?

For me Tanner was desperately trying to convince the interviewer that she would have no way of knowing what Madeleine was wearing at that point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 08, 2018, 12:26:40 PM
Quote from: Admin on June 08, 2018, 11:31:55 AM
The reality is that Amaral has not been proven right or wrong and the highest Court in Portugal has decreed that the McCanns have not been cleared.  The perfect stalemate position.

Any criminal considerations were outwith the remit of the civil one (although some conclusions might not make that limpid). The civil one was not about the investigation itself, but about the repeated dissemination, in a limited amount of examples, of a particular theory which was considered by the plaintiffs to have caused damage.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 08, 2018, 12:31:03 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 08, 2018, 12:26:40 PM
Any criminal considerations were outwith the remit of the civil one (although some conclusions might not make that limpid). The civil one was not about the investigation itself, but about the repeated dissemination, in a limited amount of examples, of a particular theory which was considered by the plaintiffs to have caused damage.
outwith

preposition SCOTTISH
outside; beyond.
"he has lived outwith Scotland for only five years"

"Outwith" a word never used in New Zealand!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 08, 2018, 12:31:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 08, 2018, 12:02:37 PM
I don't have a clue about Portugal. I know there is legislation concerning police conduct both for England and Wales and Scotland.

The Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/2632/contents/made

The Police Service of Scotland (Conduct) Regulations 2014
http://www.scotland.police.uk/assets/pdf/151934/184779/police-service-of-scotland-conduct-regulations-sop

Thanks, G-Unit. I'll have a look at those, and see if I can find anything similar in the PT regulations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 08, 2018, 12:33:14 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 08, 2018, 12:31:03 PM
outwith

preposition SCOTTISH
outside; beyond.
"he has lived outwith Scotland for only five years"

"Outwith" a word never used in New Zealand!

LOL Rob,

Without doesn't have the same meaning. ;)

Outwith means beyond, outside of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 08, 2018, 12:36:37 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 08, 2018, 12:33:14 PM
LOL Rob,

Without doesn't have the same meaning. ;)

Outwith means beyond, outside of.
Yes  I copied it from Google.  We use without but never outwith.    "Only out with the old and in with the new".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 08, 2018, 12:45:10 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 08, 2018, 12:11:56 PM
I find it absurd to imagine that both police forces had ignored any of a list of criminally liable possibilities involving the parents prior to stating that they weren't suspects.



Do you consider it absurd then when Rowley states in response to a question regarding the parents
Quote
Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of investigation.


Quote from: Carana on June 08, 2018, 12:11:56 PM

Since when would two independent police investigations in two countries be (re)launched to concentrate on proving or disproving a theory of one particular officer (and his entourage) who coordinated the investigation for its first 5 months?

I never said that the investigations were out to prove or disprove his theory,what I said is there is no proof his theory is wrong as yet.Hell and freezing come to mind before it happens.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 08, 2018, 12:52:31 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 08, 2018, 12:11:56 PM
Never say never, but for the moment I disagree.

The two investigations were opened / reopened based on an assessment of facts, and opportunities to further explore what happened to this little girl and who (if anyone), was criminally responsible for an - as yet - undetermined potential criime.

So far, ok.

Both jurisdictions stated that the parents weren't suspects. Although that could always change, so far it hasn't.

I find it absurd to imagine that both police forces had ignored any of a list of criminally liable possibilities involving the parents prior to stating that they weren't suspects.

Since when would two independent police investigations in two countries be (re)launched to concentrate on proving or disproving a theory of one particular officer (and his entourage) who coordinated the investigation for its first 5 months?

There are always going to be supporters of the "thwarted hero" amongst conspiracy theorists whatever the
subject. Although conspiracies do exist, IMO there are far more theorists than actual ones. Conveniently, it feeds into the current populist zeitgeist narrative of David v Goliath, or whatever represents a particular archetype.

That excellent post made me feel so sad, Carana, you nearly always hit the nail on the head and you've driven it right in yet again.

The present investigations by the Portuguese and English are all about Madeleine and are being conducted in the present despite the genesis being 2007 .  In my opinion absolutely everything else is subordinate to that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 08, 2018, 01:17:56 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 08, 2018, 11:33:01 AM
THe fact that both investigations have categorically stated that the McCanns are not suspects tends to prove him wrong.  Of course you won't accept that, and neither I doubt will he.

Not suspects in what scenario? abducting their child- selling her to gypsies? sending her to a closed secret convent?

what are they not suspected of? No crime has been established and the 'abduction' from the apartment has shown no evidence of such.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 08, 2018, 03:10:15 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 08, 2018, 11:59:56 AM
The only way he'll be proved wrong is for a miracle to happen imo.



Quote from: Carana on June 08, 2018, 12:16:18 PM
In your view, a "miracle" would be if he was proven right.

Can't see where that view is expressed,nice of you to think for me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 08, 2018, 05:06:41 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 08, 2018, 01:17:56 PM
Not suspects in what scenario? abducting their child- selling her to gypsies? sending her to a closed secret convent?

what are they not suspected of? No crime has been established and the 'abduction' from the apartment has shown no evidence of such.
Do parents do such things?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 08, 2018, 06:15:37 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 08, 2018, 05:06:41 PM
Do parents do such things?

Some parents do unthinkable things to their children for example the Turpin children in America.

Turpin case: Siblings allegedly starved, shackled and taunted with food
(http://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/180118193016-turpin-family-hp-video.jpg)
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/19/us/california-torture-case-turpin/index.html

There is always evidence of such atrocities.  On the other hand there is evidence that Madeleine and her siblings were very much loved and well cared children ... to imply otherwise is despicable in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on June 08, 2018, 06:23:40 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 08, 2018, 06:15:37 PM
Some parents do unthinkable things to their children for example the Turpin children in America.

Turpin case: Siblings allegedly starved, shackled and taunted with food
(http://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/180118193016-turpin-family-hp-video.jpg)
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/19/us/california-torture-case-turpin/index.html

There is always evidence of such atrocities.  On the other hand there is evidence that Madeleine and her siblings were very much loved and well cared children ... to imply otherwise is despicable in my opinion.

I made a similar post saying that in the video of Madeleine with her little shoe, she seemed to me to be a well cared for and much loved child.
The post was deleted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 08, 2018, 06:29:57 PM
Quote from: Erngath on June 08, 2018, 06:23:40 PM
I made a similar post saying that in the video of Madeleine with her little shoe, she seemed to me to be a well cared for and much loved child.
The post was deleted.
No doubt it was the way you said it!  Was it clearly stated as opinion or were you making it out to be a fact?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 08, 2018, 06:39:35 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 08, 2018, 03:10:15 PM

Can't see where that view is expressed,nice of you to think for me.

Fair enough. Upon reading a few of your other related comments since then, I can see that how I understood it isn't necessarily what you meant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 08, 2018, 06:42:39 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 08, 2018, 03:10:15 PM

Can't see where that view is expressed,nice of you to think for me.
Two more miracles!  Posters being considerate and nice to each other.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 08, 2018, 06:54:54 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 08, 2018, 06:15:37 PM
Some parents do unthinkable things to their children for example the Turpin children in America.

Turpin case: Siblings allegedly starved, shackled and taunted with food
(http://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/180118193016-turpin-family-hp-video.jpg)
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/19/us/california-torture-case-turpin/index.html

There is always evidence of such atrocities.  On the other hand there is evidence that Madeleine and her siblings were very much loved and well cared children ... to imply otherwise is despicable in my opinion.

What goes on behind closed doors is often missed by the authorities.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on June 08, 2018, 07:00:06 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 08, 2018, 06:29:57 PM
No doubt it was the way you said it!  Was it clearly stated as opinion or were you making it out to be a fact?

No it was my opinion, as it still  is my opinion that Madeleine seemed to me to be a much loved child.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 08, 2018, 07:28:28 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 08, 2018, 06:54:54 PM
What goes on behind closed doors is often missed by the authorities.

The Turpins home schooled their children https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/19/us/turpins-child-torture-case/index.html and according to neighbours they were reclusive.https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/19/us/california-torture-case-turpin/index.html

(http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44216000/jpg/_44216748_maddypony203b.jpg)
There is testimony given under oath from non family members who knew Madeleine and her parents well that she and her siblings were very much loved and well cared for children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 08, 2018, 07:42:16 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 08, 2018, 07:28:28 PM
The Turpins home schooled their children https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/19/us/turpins-child-torture-case/index.html and according to neighbours they were reclusive.https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/19/us/california-torture-case-turpin/index.html

(http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44216000/jpg/_44216748_maddypony203b.jpg)
There is testimony given under oath from non family members who knew Madeleine and her parents well that she and her siblings were very much loved and well cared for children.

Given under oath?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 08, 2018, 08:18:41 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 08, 2018, 06:54:54 PM
What goes on behind closed doors is often missed by the authorities.

True, and I've read about numerous harrowing situations. In this case, however, I can't find anything remotely resembling those horror stories.

NB: Having read through the totality of witness statements in the Cipriano case, in which none of the neutral to positive ones ever got translated, if anything untoward had been going on with regard to that little girl, I can't find it in the rulings. My only question mark on such a possibility got glossed over.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 08, 2018, 10:20:11 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 08, 2018, 07:42:16 PM
Given under oath?
Witness statement of Karen Lamena Elaine McCalman (family friend) 2008.05.14

Testimony from Ka.L.E.Mc

Age if less than 18 years:

Occupation:

This deposition (comprising 2 pages and signed by me) is true and according to my understanding. I am aware that, if proven to the contrary, I will be subject to prosecution if I have voluntarily testified to something with knowledge of it being false or not corresponding to the truth.

Date: May 16, 2008

Signature _________________________________

 I am the abovementioned person living in East Goscote, Leicestershire. The full address was previously supplied to police. I live with my husband and our two children of four and two years of age.
 
Recently I was interviewed by police from Leicestershire on certain points concerning the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. I have been informed that this questionnaire was drawn up following a formal request from the Portuguese authorities. I am aware that my testimony is subject to the Portuguese Criminal Code and English law.
 
These are the answers that I can provide to the questions which I received:
 
I have known Kate McCann and her daughter Madeleine for about two and a half years. At that time the McCANN family lived in Queniborough. Kate and I knew each other from the local group of http://www.netmums.com group of toddlers at Charnwood. We got on well with each other and we became friends. We met at least once a week and we frequented each other's homes. I took care of Madeleine some afternoons or days.
 
I always thought Madeleine was fun [-loving], smart and expressed herself with ease. She had a very pleasant personality and got on very well with my daughter. She made people smile.
 
Initially I thought that Gerry McCann was a bit harsh, but as we got to know each other he revealed himself to be very nice and fun [-loving].
 
I think Kate was a little shy until we got to know each other. She is strong but modest and would never want to be on the pedestal where she is today.

 I am not aware of any conflict between the family. Madeleine and Kate got on well together like best friends do. I never saw Kate or Gerry physically mistreat children. (page 1)

I never saw Madeleine ill and I consider her a healthy child. I never saw changes in her behaviour.
 
Madeleine never made complaints about anybody. She never showed bad behaviour, in fact she was almost the perfect child. We were able to bring her to her senses like she was an adult.

She never seemed scared. She was not hyperactive.
 
Regarding the sleep habits of Madeleine, Kate told me that when they lived in Queniborough Madeleine used to wake in the middle of the night and come to bed with the parents for the rest of the night. When they moved to Rothley she began to do this less often and the parents used to give her stickers as a bonus to sleep all night alone.
 
I remember there were many of these stickers in the house, for the nights when she would sleep alone all night. The stickers were glued to the door of the refrigerator.
 
Kate and Gerry never seemed tired and never struggled to take care of the children.

I have no knowledge of Madeleine at any time to have been subjected to medication. I only remember her being given paracetamol once when she had a cold.
 
I think the behaviour of Madeleine appropriate for her age. She was very energetic, but a model child. She liked to swim, play tennis and ride a bicycle and attend kindergarten.
 
I think Kate and Gerry were exemplary parents. Kate never raised her voice and always kept herself calm and never seemed tired of her children even on the busiest days. Gerry 'stripped' his professional air such that he came home after work and got involved entirely with the children.
 
I do not remember any more, nor any information or additional explanation that is relevant or which may help in the investigation.
 
This testimony was made by me and it is true according to my understanding.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KA-LEMc.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 09, 2018, 12:15:26 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 08, 2018, 06:15:37 PM
Some parents do unthinkable things to their children for example the Turpin children in America.

Turpin case: Siblings allegedly starved, shackled and taunted with food
(http://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/180118193016-turpin-family-hp-video.jpg)
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/19/us/california-torture-case-turpin/index.html

There is always evidence of such atrocities.  On the other hand there is evidence that Madeleine and her siblings were very much loved and well cared children ... to imply otherwise is despicable in my opinion.


I find it quite unacceptable that you can post about the horrors of some parenting skills- discussing the Turpin 'family'. and refuse too accept that loving MBM was never in question  regarding the parents-but caring is very different as she is no longer with her family due to her parents not caring for her. I find it quite astonishing that you do not understand what the word caring means. They left their children alone without anyone to 'care' for them as they slept.

I have no doubt they loved their children even though like many mothers who struggle with three children under 4 it can leave you exhausted. I understand that Gerry wasn't really the new man hands on dad like the other Tapas fathers, according to Kate. So as a family unit it wasn't blissful 24/7 . But that night they were not there to 'care' for their daughter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 09, 2018, 11:16:32 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 09, 2018, 12:15:26 AM


I find it quite unacceptable that you can post about the horrors of some parenting skills- discussing the Turpin 'family'. and refuse too accept that loving MBM was never in question  regarding the parents-but caring is very different as she is no longer with her family due to her parents not caring for her. I find it quite astonishing that you do not understand what the word caring means. They left their children alone without anyone to 'care' for them as they slept.

I have no doubt they loved their children even though like many mothers who struggle with three children under 4 it can leave you exhausted. I understand that Gerry wasn't really the new man hands on dad like the other Tapas fathers, according to Kate. So as a family unit it wasn't blissful 24/7 . But that night they were not there to 'care' for their daughter.
But is that the reason she disappeared?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 09, 2018, 11:19:43 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 09, 2018, 11:16:32 AM
But is that the reason she disappeared?

None of us know the reason she disappeared, only that she did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 09, 2018, 11:28:08 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 09, 2018, 11:19:43 AM
None of us know the reason she disappeared, only that she did.
Therefore we shouldn't be blaming anyone IMO.   Kizzy talks of Madeleine's pain, well when did she have this pain and what caused the pain? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 09, 2018, 11:30:08 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 09, 2018, 11:28:08 AM
Therefore we shouldn't be blaming anyone IMO.   Kizzy talks of Madeleine's pain, well when did she have this pain and what caused the pain?

I suppose she may have died peacefully in her sleep.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 09, 2018, 11:31:02 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 09, 2018, 11:28:08 AM
Therefore we shouldn't be blaming anyone IMO.   Kizzy talks of Madeleine's pain, well when did she have this pain and what caused the pain?

I don't agree, the parents are to blame for creating the situation in the first place.  Had they took it in turns to look after the children properly or bothered to take them to the night creche then this entire fiasco could have been avoided. They took a chance with their children's safety and it backfired. If somebody did lift her from the street outside then certainly they are guilty of a despicable crime but that is a separate issue imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on June 09, 2018, 11:34:04 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 09, 2018, 11:31:02 AM
I don't agree, the parents are to blame for creating the situation in the first place.  Had they took it in turns to look after the children properly or bothered to take them to the night creche then this entire fiasco could have been avoided. They took a chance with their children's safety and it backfired. If somebody did lift her from the street outside then certainly they are guilty of a despicable crime.

i totally agree maddie was 3 and the twins were even younger   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 11:36:25 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 09, 2018, 11:30:08 AM
I suppose she may have died peacefully in her sleep.

Tragically children do and it can happen whatever the age of the child.
However, their parents do not immediately take them to the nearest rubbish skip and throw them into it as far as I know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 11:38:59 AM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 09, 2018, 11:34:04 AM
i totally agree maddie was 3 and the twins were even younger

 ... and their parents were at a distance of less than 45 seconds away from them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 09, 2018, 11:41:41 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 11:38:59 AM
... and their parents were at a distance of less than 45 seconds away from them.

But only once they'd got up  off their a*se
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 11:45:31 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 09, 2018, 11:41:41 AM
But only once they'd got up  off their a*se

If you have children did you ever consider that sitting having a meal 30 to 40 seconds distance away from them put them at risk ... or did you have supper sitting at their bedside?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 09, 2018, 11:47:52 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 11:45:31 AM
If you have children did you ever consider that sitting having a meal 30 to 40 seconds distance away from them put them at risk ... or did you have supper sitting at their bedside?

I've never put myself in that position.

The point I was making is that they are only that time away ONCE they got up from the table.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 09, 2018, 11:50:16 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 11:45:31 AM
If you have children did you ever consider that sitting having a meal 30 to 40 seconds distance away from them put them at risk ... or did you have supper sitting at their bedside?

Well usually someone would have to get through a locked front door sneak past the room we were in climb a creaky stair, grab a child with no noise and retreat the same way....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 09, 2018, 11:50:48 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 09, 2018, 11:31:02 AM
I don't agree, the parents are to blame for creating the situation in the first place.  Had they took it in turns to look after the children properly or bothered to take them to the night creche then this entire fiasco could have been avoided. They took a chance with their children's safety and it backfired. If somebody did lift her from the street outside then certainly they are guilty of a despicable crime but that is a separate issue imo.
Kids have gone missing even when the parents were present.  Kids at the Tapas could wander off too.  I don't think there is any guaranteed safety.
I know they regret not being at home, but it is only one of the factors IMO in this case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 09, 2018, 11:51:37 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 11:45:31 AM
If you have children did you ever consider that sitting having a meal 30 to 40 seconds distance away from them put them at risk ... or did you have supper sitting at their bedside?

History has shown us that it is in fact a risk.  IMO it doesn't matter if it was 50m or 500m, leaving three children under four years of age alone for any length of time is a no-no.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 09, 2018, 11:54:14 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 09, 2018, 11:50:48 AM
Kids have gone missing even when the parents were present.  Kids at the Tapas could wander off too.  I don't think there is any guaranteed safety.
I know they regret not being at home, but it is only one of the factors IMO in this case.

Nothing is guaranteed agreed but using some common sense is usually a good starting point.  We know the children were left alone for periods exceeding one hour which is inexcusable imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 09, 2018, 11:58:42 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 09, 2018, 11:54:14 AM
Nothing is guaranteed agreed but using some common sense is usually a good starting point.  We know the children were left alone for periods exceeding one hour which is inexcusable imo.
That was based on one witness statement only and denied by Gerry McCann.  In other words we don't know the facts.  Had Mrs Fenn reported it to the Police and the complaint investigated then we would be dealing with more reliable facts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 11:59:27 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 09, 2018, 11:50:16 AM
Well usually someone would have to get through a locked front door sneak past the room we were in climb a creaky stair, grab a child with no noise and retreat the same way....

The police were called and officers arrived at the property in Weymouth, Dorset, to arrest Jones at about 6.45am in October last year.

It is not known when Jones broke into the house or when he is alleged to have assaulted the girl.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The kitchen window blind was crumpled in the middle and I could see the window was clearly open.

"We had locked everything up as we went to bed.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parents-woken-girl-6-after-10155446
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 09, 2018, 12:15:00 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 11:59:27 AM
The police were called and officers arrived at the property in Weymouth, Dorset, to arrest Jones at about 6.45am in October last year.

It is not known when Jones broke into the house or when he is alleged to have assaulted the girl.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The kitchen window blind was crumpled in the middle and I could see the window was clearly open.

"We had locked everything up as we went to bed.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parents-woken-girl-6-after-10155446
Her mother said:

"I felt like the worst person, that I let my daughter down completely. I thought I should have heard something or woken up."

I’m sure there are some people who hold her responsible too, those people who are perfect parents, we’ve all encountered a few.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on June 09, 2018, 12:35:26 PM
 i kinda  wonder that some  mcann spporters that  think  it is ok to leave  toddlers alone were they born in the children  should be seen and not heard  era or  were their parents?? im in my late  30s and i dont understand   how  anyone could think its  ok to leave  toddlers  alone??
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 09, 2018, 12:41:18 PM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 09, 2018, 12:35:26 PM
i kinda  wonder that some  mcann spporters that  think  it is ok to leave  toddlers alone were they born in the children  should be seen and not heard  era or  were their parents?? im in my late  30s and i dont understand   how  anyone could think its  ok to leave  toddlers  alone??

I don't think it's OK to leave children alone...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 09, 2018, 12:47:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 09, 2018, 12:15:00 PM
Her mother said:

"I felt like the worst person, that I let my daughter down completely. I thought I should have heard something or woken up."

I’m sure there are some people who hold her responsible too, those people who are perfect parents, we’ve all encountered a few.

The man was charged with trespass with intent to commit a sexual offence and sexual assault of a child under 13. He was acquitted by a jury.

So it wasn't proved that he had broken in or assaulted the girl.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 09, 2018, 12:50:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 09, 2018, 12:15:00 PM
Her mother said:

"I felt like the worst person, that I let my daughter down completely. I thought I should have heard something or woken up."

I’m sure there are some people who hold her responsible too, those people who are perfect parents, we’ve all encountered a few.

Completely different imo

Imagine what would have happened if the girl had been left alone while her parents were at the pub 50 yards away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on June 09, 2018, 12:52:36 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 09, 2018, 12:50:11 PM
Completely different imo

Imagine what would have happened if the girl had been left alone while her parents were at the pub 50 yards away.

kizzy there is no excuse for  what the mcanns and their  friends did on that holiday   leaving  toddlers  and babys alone while they  ate and  drank   you can understand why amaral and the portugal police were suspicious
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 09, 2018, 12:59:51 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 11:59:27 AM
The police were called and officers arrived at the property in Weymouth, Dorset, to arrest Jones at about 6.45am in October last year.

It is not known when Jones broke into the house or when he is alleged to have assaulted the girl.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The kitchen window blind was crumpled in the middle and I could see the window was clearly open.

"We had locked everything up as we went to bed.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parents-woken-girl-6-after-10155446

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-39514284 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-39514284)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 09, 2018, 01:15:02 PM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 09, 2018, 12:52:36 PM
kizzy there is no excuse for  what the mcanns and their  friends did on that holiday   leaving  toddlers  and babys alone while they  ate and  drank   you can understand why amaral and the portugal police were suspicious

Exactly carlymichelle
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 09, 2018, 01:18:58 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 09, 2018, 12:59:51 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-39514284 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-39514284)


Just shows you the length some will go

 without checking the facts - just use it to there own advantage for the sake of mccanns.imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 09, 2018, 01:22:32 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 09, 2018, 01:18:58 PM

Just shows you the length some will go

 without checking the facts - just use it to there own advantage for the sake of mccanns.imo
Excuse me - the case was used to prove that someone could break into a house and gain access to a child while the parents were present. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 09, 2018, 01:22:41 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 09, 2018, 01:18:58 PM

Just shows you the length some will go

 without checking the facts - just use it to there own advantage for the sake of mccanns.imo

I'll certainly agree with that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 01:25:30 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 09, 2018, 12:59:51 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-39514284 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-39514284)
Quote
Mr Jones, of no fixed address, told the court he had no recollection of how he ended up in the house. He said he had a female friend who lived nearby and must have entered the wrong house by mistake after a night out drinking.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-39514284

The point is that Mr Jones entered the house, despite it being locked up for the night, entered a six year old child's room and her bed and was found there when the little girl's step-father went to investigate her complaint.

The house was locked down.  The parent's were on the premises.  Yet an intruder managed to gain access through a window.

If instead of falling asleep Mr Jones had taken it into his head to lift the child from her bed and abscond with her we could well be reading all about it from a hate site set up to excoriate her parents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 09, 2018, 01:50:49 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 01:25:30 PM
Quote
Mr Jones, of no fixed address, told the court he had no recollection of how he ended up in the house. He said he had a female friend who lived nearby and must have entered the wrong house by mistake after a night out drinking.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-39514284

The point is that Mr Jones entered the house, despite it being locked up for the night, entered a six year old child's room and her bed and was found there when the little girl's step-father went to investigate her complaint.

The house was locked down.  The parent's were on the premises.  Yet an intruder managed to gain access through a window.

If instead of falling asleep Mr Jones had taken it into his head to lift the child from her bed and abscond with her we could well be reading all about it from a hate site set up to excoriate her parents.

If this and if that and if the other.
The idea of a bloke pissed as a fart carrying off a 13 year old is pushing credulity a bit far.
But lets say for the sake of argument he did. Over to you to prove it happened to MBM. Just saying well it could have because I surmise it could have happened here don't really cut it , do it now?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 09, 2018, 01:54:44 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 09, 2018, 01:50:49 PM
If this and if that and if the other.
The idea of a bloke pissed as a fart carrying off a 13 year old is pushing credulity a bit far.
But lets say for the sake of argument he did. Over to you to prove it happened to MBM. Just saying well it could have because I surmise it could have happened here don't really cut it , do it now?
What are you on about?  She was 6.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 09, 2018, 02:12:54 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 09, 2018, 01:50:49 PM
If this and if that and if the other.
The idea of a bloke pissed as a fart carrying off a 13 year old is pushing credulity a bit far.
But lets say for the sake of argument he did. Over to you to prove it happened to MBM. Just saying well it could have because I surmise it could have happened here don't really cut it , do it now?

Bit surprised he was able to break in without waking the whole street.
Maybe the property wasn't as secure as was claimed.

Strange story all round.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 09, 2018, 02:40:02 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 01:25:30 PM
Quote
Mr Jones, of no fixed address, told the court he had no recollection of how he ended up in the house. He said he had a female friend who lived nearby and must have entered the wrong house by mistake after a night out drinking.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-39514284

The point is that Mr Jones entered the house, despite it being locked up for the night, entered a six year old child's room and her bed and was found there when the little girl's step-father went to investigate her complaint.

The house was locked down.  The parent's were on the premises.  Yet an intruder managed to gain access through a window.

If instead of falling asleep Mr Jones had taken it into his head to lift the child from her bed and abscond with her we could well be reading all about it from a hate site set up to excoriate her parents.


The house was locked down.  The parent's were on the premises.  Yet an intruder managed to gain access through a window.




Well the house cant have been as secure as they think.

what happened to the girls onesies then. who took them off

imo this story you promoted seems to me like aN attempt for publicity.

He was found not guilty...surprised at you with your innocent till proven guilty approach. B

Revealing that on here of an innocent man.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on June 09, 2018, 02:44:08 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 09, 2018, 02:12:54 PM
Bit surprised he was able to break in without waking the whole street.
Maybe the property wasn't as secure as was claimed.

Strange story all round.


Many years ago when I lived with my parents, we had neighbours whose house was broken into while they were asleep.
The chap's wristw..ch was taken from his bedside table.

So, no I don't find it strange at all.
Strange can happen!


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 09, 2018, 03:31:54 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 09, 2018, 02:12:54 PM
Bit surprised he was able to break in without waking the whole street.
Maybe the property wasn't as secure as was claimed.

Strange story all round.
Aha!  The first hint of victim blaming there...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 09, 2018, 03:32:30 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 09, 2018, 02:12:54 PM
Bit surprised he was able to break in without waking the whole street.
Maybe the property wasn't as secure as was claimed.

Strange story all round.
Do burglars breaking into houses usually wake the whole street out of interest?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 09, 2018, 03:33:44 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 09, 2018, 02:40:02 PM

The house was locked down.  The parent's were on the premises.  Yet an intruder managed to gain access through a window.




Well the house cant have been as secure as they think.

what happened to the girls onesies then. who took them off

imo this story you promoted seems to me like aN attempt for publicity.

He was found not guilty...surprised at you with your innocent till proven guilty approach. B

Revealing that on here of an innocent man.
An attempt for publicity for whom?  The man actually did break in and get into the girl's bed, he did not deny it - his defence was that he was blind drunk. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 09, 2018, 03:34:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 09, 2018, 03:32:30 PM
Do burglars breaking into houses usually wake the whole street out of interest?

When they are rolling drunk they may do - singing, banging about, shouting, that sort of thing  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 09, 2018, 03:36:03 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 09, 2018, 03:33:44 PM
An attempt for publicity for whom?  The man actually did break in and get into the girl's bed, he did not deny it - his defence was that he was blind drunk.

A defence that was accepted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 09, 2018, 03:37:01 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 09, 2018, 03:36:03 PM
A defence that was accepted.
Did I say otherwise?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 09, 2018, 03:39:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 09, 2018, 03:37:01 PM
Did I say otherwise?

No, you just omitted to mention it, so I did it for.  8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 09, 2018, 05:09:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 09, 2018, 03:33:44 PM
An attempt for publicity for whom?  The man actually did break in and get into the girl's bed, he did not deny it - his defence was that he was blind drunk.

The fact that he was charged with trespass suggests to me that there wasn't enough evidence to charge him with breaking in.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 09, 2018, 05:10:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 09, 2018, 05:09:36 PM
The fact that he was charged with trespass suggests to me that there wasn't enough evidence to charge him with breaking in.

Good spot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 09, 2018, 05:34:08 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 09, 2018, 11:58:42 AM
That was based on one witness statement only and denied by Gerry McCann.  In other words we don't know the facts.  Had Mrs Fenn reported it to the Police and the complaint investigated then we would be dealing with more reliable facts.

I know who I would believe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 09, 2018, 05:36:49 PM
Quote from: carlymichelle on June 09, 2018, 12:35:26 PM
i kinda  wonder that some  mcann spporters that  think  it is ok to leave  toddlers alone were they born in the children  should be seen and not heard  era or  were their parents?? im in my late  30s and i dont understand   how  anyone could think its  ok to leave  toddlers  alone??

It isn't ok.  Toddlers should never be left on their own for any more than a few minutes, it's common sense but unfortunately they don't teach common sense in medical school.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 09, 2018, 05:39:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 09, 2018, 01:22:32 PM
Excuse me - the case was used to prove that someone could break into a house and gain access to a child while the parents were present.

JonBenét Patricia Ramsey being such an example and as yet unsolved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 09, 2018, 05:47:07 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 09, 2018, 05:09:36 PM
The fact that he was charged with trespass suggests to me that there wasn't enough evidence to charge him with breaking in.
To be strictly accurate he was charged with (and cleared of) "trespass with intent to commit a sexual offence".

"If there is intent to commit a crime, this is burglary. If there is no such intent, the breaking and entering alone is probably at least illegal trespass, which is a misdemeanor crime." https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=98
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 09, 2018, 05:59:09 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 09, 2018, 05:36:49 PM
It isn't ok.  Toddlers should never be left on their own for any more than a few minutes, it's common sense but unfortunately they don't teach common sense in medical school.
Fortunately  they teach doctors how to save lives.... You obviously  have a problem with doctors
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 09:09:14 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 09, 2018, 01:50:49 PM
If this and if that and if the other.
The idea of a bloke pissed as a fart carrying off a 13 year old is pushing credulity a bit far.
But lets say for the sake of argument he did. Over to you to prove it happened to MBM. Just saying well it could have because I surmise it could have happened here don't really cut it , do it now?

Don't you think it is pushing credulity for those parents to find a man in their six year old daughter's bed?
Equally incredible that he effected entry to a locked house entirely unheard and unseen and who, if he had so desired could have lifted the child and left the premises with her as unheard and unseen as he had entered?

How is it possible for you to defend such an indefensible situation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 09, 2018, 09:26:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 09:09:14 PM
Don't you think it is pushing credulity for those parents to find a man in their six year old daughter's bed?
Equally incredible that he effected entry to a locked house entirely unheard and unseen and who, if he had so desired could have lifted the child and left the premises with her as unheard and unseen as he had entered?

How is it possible for you to defend such an indefensible situation?

Quite agree
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 09:33:03 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 09, 2018, 09:26:46 PM
Quite agree
Why am I not at all surprised by that response, but how sad that you should feel the need to express it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 09, 2018, 09:41:11 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 09:33:03 PM
Why am I not at all surprised by that response, but how sad that you should feel the need to express it.

Even sadder that you chose to write it in the first place then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 09, 2018, 09:41:24 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 09:33:03 PM
Why am I not at all surprised by that response, but how sad that you should feel the need to express it.

Because it is common sense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 09, 2018, 10:34:12 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 09:09:14 PM
Don't you think it is pushing credulity for those parents to find a man in their six year old daughter's bed?
Equally incredible that he effected entry to a locked house entirely unheard and unseen and who, if he had so desired could have lifted the child and left the premises with her as unheard and unseen as he had entered?

How is it possible for you to defend such an indefensible situation?

Oh amazingly easily.
About as easily as you find it to display faux outrage and misrepresent the posts of others seemingly..... ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 09, 2018, 10:55:16 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 09, 2018, 09:41:24 PM
Because it is common sense.
What are you referring to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 10, 2018, 12:19:30 AM
Quote from: kizzy on June 09, 2018, 12:50:11 PM
Completely different imo

Imagine what would have happened if the girl had been left alone while her parents were at the pub 50 yards away.
They were still on Ocean Club premises kizzy ... and the tapas group could see the only entrance (patio door) that The Mccanns, at the time, knew to be unlocked although closed.  The patio area outside this patio door was illuminated by the street lamp opposite.

When Amaral postulated that no intruder could have got in to 5A and trying to prove it, he said that no intruder would have risked entering when so overlooked by the parents at only 50 metres distance.


You seem to hang on Amarals every word.  Why are you ignoring Amarals opinion on this ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 10, 2018, 12:42:00 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 09, 2018, 02:12:54 PM
Bit surprised he was able to break in without waking the whole street.
Maybe the property wasn't as secure as was claimed.

Strange story all round.
We have been broken into three times without hearing the burglars entrance.  However we were wakened by a wimpering, trembling dog the once ... and the noise of movement within the house both the other times.


Now the good news.  Our new local neighbourhood watch, which is using up to the minute electronic technology and keen vigilant neighbours just prevented a burglar getting away, partially by tracking him on video cameras and partially by blocking off all the escape routes by man power.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 10, 2018, 06:48:52 AM
"Ad hom" posts maybe removed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 10, 2018, 10:59:40 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2018, 11:38:59 AM
... and their parents were at a distance of less than 45 seconds away from them.

Mr Brunt that moronic !!!!     

He trashed that claim. even a young gazelle couldn't do it in that time! IF they were that close she could have waved and shouted for the tapas tram to come to her...

45 seconds eh   ^*&&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 10, 2018, 11:10:49 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 10, 2018, 12:19:30 AM
They were still on Ocean Club premises kizzy ... and the tapas group could see the only entrance (patio door) that The Mccanns, at the time, knew to be unlocked although closed.  The patio area outside this patio door was illuminated by the street lamp opposite.

When Amaral postulated that no intruder could have got in to 5A and trying to prove it, he said that no intruder would have risked entering when so overlooked by the parents at only 50 metres distance.


You seem to hang on Amarals every word.  Why are you ignoring Amarals opinion on this ?

Enbolden.... they could NOT see the comings and goings of anyone from that patio door due the bushes ..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 10, 2018, 11:30:52 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 10, 2018, 12:19:30 AM
They were still on Ocean Club premises kizzy ... and the tapas group could see the only entrance (patio door) that The Mccanns, at the time, knew to be unlocked although closed.  The patio area outside this patio door was illuminated by the street lamp opposite.

When Amaral postulated that no intruder could have got in to 5A and trying to prove it, he said that no intruder would have risked entering when so overlooked by the parents at only 50 metres distance.


You seem to hang on Amarals every word.  Why are you ignoring Amarals opinion on this ?


When Amaral postulated that no intruder could have got in to 5A and trying to prove it, he said that no intruder would have risked entering when so overlooked by the parents at only 50 metres distance.

Amaral was adament that no intruder had got into 5a.    Had he heard about the man who was getting into apartments and getting into bed with children?    How did he think that man had got into those apartments?  The apartments were secured according to the parents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 10, 2018, 11:41:14 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 10, 2018, 11:30:52 AM

When Amaral postulated that no intruder could have got in to 5A and trying to prove it, he said that no intruder would have risked entering when so overlooked by the parents at only 50 metres distance.

Amaral was adament that no intruder had got into 5a.    Had he heard about the man who was getting into apartments and getting into bed with children?    How did he think that man had got into those apartments?  The apartments were secured according to the parents.

Could it be it was the parents claims  he was quoting... irony? He knew it wasn't 45 seconds (Brietta got it down to 30/40 seconds in one of her posts) He knew the parents could not see who was entering the apartment from the Patio doors...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 10, 2018, 01:18:08 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 10, 2018, 11:41:14 AM
Could it be it was the parents claims  he was quoting... irony? He knew it wasn't 45 seconds (Brietta got it down to 30/40 seconds in one of her posts) He knew the parents could not see who was entering the apartment from the Patio doors...
That is not the point GA was making.  It is from the perspective of an intruder.  Did an intruder know the Tapas 9 had trouble seeing the apartment?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on June 10, 2018, 01:59:33 PM
Reminder to all members!

Forum Rules

You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, adult material, or otherwise in violation of any International or United States Federal law. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless you own the copyright or you have written consent from the owner of the copyrighted material. Spam, flooding, advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are also forbidden on this forum.

Note that it is impossible for the staff or the owners of this forum to confirm the validity of posts. Please remember that we do not always actively monitor the posted messages, and as such, are not responsible for the content contained within. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information presented. The posted messages express the views of the author, and not necessarily the views of this forum, its staff, its subsidiaries, or this forum's owner. Anyone who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to notify an administrator or moderator of this forum immediately. The staff and the owner of this forum reserve the right to remove objectionable content, within a reasonable time frame, if they determine that removal is necessary. This is a manual process, however, please realize that they may not be able to remove or edit particular messages immediately. This policy applies to member profile information as well.

You remain solely responsible for the content of your posted messages. Furthermore, you agree to indemnify and hold harmless the owners of this forum, any related websites to this forum, its staff, and its subsidiaries. The owners of this forum also reserve the right to reveal your identity (or any other related information collected on this service) in the event of a formal complaint or legal action arising from any situation caused by your use of this forum.

You have the ability, as you register, to choose your username. We advise that you keep the name appropriate. With this user account you are about to register, you agree to never give your password out to another person except an administrator, for your protection and for validity reasons. You also agree to NEVER use another person's account for any reason.  We also HIGHLY recommend you use a complex and unique password for your account, to prevent account theft.

After you register and login to this forum, you will be able to fill out a detailed profile. It is your responsibility to present clear and accurate information. Any information the forum owner or staff determines to be inaccurate or vulgar in nature will be removed, with or without prior notice. Appropriate sanctions may be applicable.

Please note that with each post, your IP address is recorded, in the event that you need to be banned from this forum or your ISP contacted. This will only happen in the event of a major violation of this agreement.

Also note that the software places a cookie, a text file containing bits of information (such as your username and password), in your browser's cache. This is ONLY used to keep you logged in/out. The software does not collect or send any other form of information to your computer.

Please treat all members with respect and accept gracefully that other users may not necessarily share your point of view.  Debates should be structured and constructive, they should not be used as a mechanism to disrupt or goad or provoke other users.  In the event that a breach of these rules occurs, moderators can invoke sanctions which can include pre authorisation of posts and a temporary ban.

These rules will be amended periodically as the need arises.

ADMIN
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 10, 2018, 04:01:37 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 10, 2018, 11:41:14 AM
Could it be it was the parents claims  he was quoting... irony? He knew it wasn't 45 seconds (Brietta got it down to 30/40 seconds in one of her posts) He knew the parents could not see who was entering the apartment from the Patio doors...

You don't think the PJ thought to walk the distance from the Tapas to the apartment then?

It was one of the first things that came into Martin Brunt's head to check out and we've all watched him do it ~ something like seventy four steps or thereabouts if I recall correctly.

Why wouldn't the trained investigators of the PJ do what had occurred to a journalist to do in walking the distance and maybe even timing how long it took them to do it as well, do you think?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 10, 2018, 04:23:52 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 10, 2018, 04:01:37 PM
You don't think the PJ thought to walk the distance from the Tapas to the apartment then?

It was one of the first things that came into Martin Brunt's head to check out and we've all watched him do it ~ something like seventy four steps or thereabouts if I recall correctly.

Why wouldn't the trained investigators of the PJ do what had occurred to a journalist to do in walking the distance and maybe even timing how long it took them to do it as well, do you think?

I cn only assume they did, once they stopped laughing at the 30/40 seconds away, story, and the mother running out to go get the Tapas group leaving babies alone again after one had already been abducted.

 I mean come on...

"Why wouldn't the trained investigators of the PJ do what had occurred to a journalist to do in walking the distance and maybe even timing" 

Well , them trained investigators probably wouldn't because they could not see  people sitting at the Tapas from the balcony, they also didn't believe they were'like sitting in a garden' So the steps and times would not have been relevant within the first few hours...too busy munching them samiches, watching Kate n Gerry searching all alone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 10, 2018, 04:28:09 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 10, 2018, 04:23:52 PM
I cn only assume they did, once they stopped laughing at the 30/40 seconds away, story, and the mother running out to go get the Tapas group leaving babies alone again after one had already been abducted.

 I mean come on...

"Why wouldn't the trained investigators of the PJ do what had occurred to a journalist to do in walking the distance and maybe even timing" 

Well , them trained investigators probably wouldn't because they could not see  people sitting at the Tapas from the balcony, they also didn't believe they were'like sitting in a garden' So the steps and times would not have been relevant within the first few hours...too busy munching them samiches, watching Kate n Gerry searching all alone.

Don't forget that being obese sardine-munchers, they would take a lot longer to do the journey than our super-fit heros, so the timing might not be so accurate.
If only they had arranged a re-enactment they could have timed these athletes
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on June 10, 2018, 04:33:16 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 10, 2018, 04:28:09 PM
Don't forget that being obese sardine-munchers, they would take a lot longer to do the journey than our super-fit heros, so the timing might not be so accurate.
If only they had arranged a re-enactment they could have timed these athletes

Sardines don't contribute to weight gain.
Quite healthy I would have thought.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 10, 2018, 04:45:55 PM
Quote from: Erngath on June 10, 2018, 04:33:16 PM
Sardines don't contribute to weight gain.
Quite healthy I would have thought.

Amaral was a bit of a porker at the beginning though perhaps it was the liquid lunches that piled the pounds on  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 10, 2018, 05:17:25 PM
Sardines maybe a healthy source of omega 3 oil but I see no reason why they would not contribute to obesity.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 10, 2018, 05:40:17 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 10, 2018, 01:18:08 PM
That is not the point GA was making.  It is from the perspective of an intruder.  Did an intruder know the Tapas 9 had trouble seeing the apartment?
Whilst The Mccanns were not in the best position to see the apartment, Rob, I dont think that is true with others in the group. 

The bushes had just been pruned back and  the Patio area was illuminated by the street lamp immediately opposite

Please do not forget that I have been there and eaten in that Tapas restaurant and weighed up the view of the Patio area that any intruder would have had to pass thru.   However the view of the route to the patio window to the parents bedroom was not illuminated in the same way.  If that patio window had been left unlocked then I think that it just might have been possible for an intruder to have entered via that route.

Many moons ago, John highlighted the fact that although the patio area was illuminated by the street llamp opposite, much of the stairs up were in the shade.  From a careful analysis of the exact light source position I believe this to be true.

I also think that the bedroom patio door was hidden from the Tapas group by a big bush and that the garden edge of the balcony was in shade.  The steps up (not illuminated) went up to the shaded portion of the balcony and across to that shrub hidden patio window.


However even if an intruder was going across the narrow shaded area of the balcony (and so his actual body was not illuminated) I am pretty sure that his body shape would stand out like a sore thumb against the illuminated area of the balcony behind.


Hope this is readily understandable.



PS I still think that via the unlit black hole of the front door is the most likely entry point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 05:45:22 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 10, 2018, 05:40:17 PM
Whilst The Mccanns were not in the best position to see the apartment, Rob, I dont think that is true with others in the group. 

The bushes had just been pruned back and  the Patio area was illuminated by the street lamp immediately opposite

Please do not forget that I have been there and eaten in that Tapas restaurant and weighed up the view of the Patio area that any intruder would have had to pass thru.   However the view of the route to the patio window to the parents bedroom was not illuminated in the same way.  If that patio window had been left unlocked then I think that it just might have been possible for an intruder to have entered via that route.

Many moons ago, John highlighted the fact that although the patio area was illuminated by the street llamp opposite, much of the stairs up were in the shade.  From a careful analysis of the exact light source position I believe this to be true.

I also think that the bedroom patio door was hidden from the Tapas group by a big bush and that the garden edge of the balcony was in shade.  The steps up (not illuminated) went up to the shaded portion of the balcony and across to that shrub hidden patio window.


However even if an intruder was going across the narrow shaded area of the balcony (and so his actual body was not illuminated) I am pretty sure that his body shape would stand out like a sore thumb against the illuminated area of the balcony behind.


Hope this is readily understandable.



PS I still think that via the unlit black hole of the front door is the most likely entry point.

Would you think it reasonable to leave your kids unattended in that apartment while you ate? I was pretty shocked when i saw a programme on this and the map showing the distance from apartment to where they were eating, imo they took one hell of a risk in leaving them it wasnt as though they were very near to the apartment
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 05:48:31 PM
my theory on this is that she was abducted by a very organised pedophile group and she is likely still alive.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 10, 2018, 05:50:58 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 05:45:22 PM
Would you think it reasonable to leave your kids unattended in that apartment while you ate? I was pretty shocked when i saw a programme on this and the map showing the distance from apartment to where they were eating, imo they took one hell of a risk in leaving them it wasnt as though they were very near to the apartment
Apparently it is common practice at these holiday destinations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2018, 05:57:14 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 10, 2018, 05:50:58 PM
Apparently it is common practice at these holiday destinations.

Who says?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 06:49:09 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 10, 2018, 05:40:17 PM
Whilst The Mccanns were not in the best position to see the apartment, Rob, I dont think that is true with others in the group. 

The bushes had just been pruned back and  the Patio area was illuminated by the street lamp immediately opposite

Please do not forget that I have been there and eaten in that Tapas restaurant and weighed up the view of the Patio area that any intruder would have had to pass thru.   However the view of the route to the patio window to the parents bedroom was not illuminated in the same way.  If that patio window had been left unlocked then I think that it just might have been possible for an intruder to have entered via that route.

Many moons ago, John highlighted the fact that although the patio area was illuminated by the street llamp opposite, much of the stairs up were in the shade.  From a careful analysis of the exact light source position I believe this to be true.

I also think that the bedroom patio door was hidden from the Tapas group by a big bush and that the garden edge of the balcony was in shade.  The steps up (not illuminated) went up to the shaded portion of the balcony and across to that shrub hidden patio window.


However even if an intruder was going across the narrow shaded area of the balcony (and so his actual body was not illuminated) I am pretty sure that his body shape would stand out like a sore thumb against the illuminated area of the balcony behind.


Hope this is readily understandable.



PS I still think that via the unlit black hole of the front door is the most likely entry point.

This all assumes that all those at the table ignored everyone around them, forgot about the food in front of them and concentrated soley on the patio doors. Unlikely in a real world situation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 10, 2018, 06:56:07 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 05:45:22 PM
Would you think it reasonable to leave your kids unattended in that apartment while you ate? I was pretty shocked when i saw a programme on this and the map showing the distance from apartment to where they were eating, imo they took one hell of a risk in leaving them it wasnt as though they were very near to the apartment

Bottom line is they did take a risk and have paid for it every day since.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 10, 2018, 06:57:03 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 05:48:31 PM
my theory on this is that she was abducted by a very organised pedophile group and she is likely still alive.

The evidence says otherwise.  Have a look at the police scent dogs thread.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2018, 06:57:58 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 10, 2018, 06:56:07 PM
Bottom line is they did take a risk and have paid for it every day since.

I actually agree...although maddie paid the highest price
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 07:01:53 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2018, 06:57:58 PM
I actually agree...although maddie paid the highest price

That’s an admission from a supporter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 07:05:45 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 10, 2018, 06:57:03 PM
The evidence says otherwise.  Have a look at the police scent dogs thread.

I have read about the police scent dogs, I am not convinced at all! if she was dead her body would have been found by now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 07:08:16 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 10, 2018, 05:50:58 PM
Apparently it is common practice at these holiday destinations.

not to my knowledge it isn't ,  they had a baby sitting service so can't have been that common. There is no way I would ever have left my children in that situation and I have been abroad many times with my children when that age , for one thing no matter how close you might be or how many times you checked they could still have woken up and found themselves alone, i would never have risked that with my kids and in fact have never left them alone in those circumstances , they come with us to eat or we eat at the apartment  or we eat earlier.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2018, 07:10:19 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 06:49:09 PM
This all assumes that all those at the table ignored everyone around them, forgot about the food in front of them and concentrated soley on the patio doors. Unlikely in a real world situation.

According to Rachael the doors couldn't be seen anyway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 10, 2018, 07:11:57 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 07:08:16 PM
not to my knowledge it isn't ,  they had a baby sitting service so can't have been that common. There is no way I would ever have left my children in that situation and I have been abroad many times with my children when that age , for one thing no matter how close you might be or how many times you checked they could still have woken up and found themselves alone, i would never have risked that with my kids and in fact have never left them alone in those circumstances , they come with us to eat or we eat at the apartment  or we eat earlier.

I suspect most people did - hence the Millennium Restaurant which served meals early to accommodate children
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on June 10, 2018, 07:16:42 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 07:08:16 PM
not to my knowledge it isn't ,  they had a baby sitting service so can't have been that common. There is no way I would ever have left my children in that situation and I have been abroad many times with my children when that age , for one thing no matter how close you might be or how many times you checked they could still have woken up and found themselves alone, i would never have risked that with my kids and in fact have never left them alone in those circumstances , they come with us to eat or we eat at the apartment  or we eat earlier.

Yes most people would do that.
However some people do so, perhaps leaving their child in a hotel room while they dine.
I saw French parents drinking in a hotel bar while their children played near the pool.
Fortunately no ill befell those children.
Not all parents make  the wise decisions  we do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 07:32:09 PM
Quote from: Erngath on June 10, 2018, 07:16:42 PM
Yes most people would do that.
However some people do so, perhaps leaving their child in a hotel room while they dine.
I saw French parents drinking in a hotel bar while their children played near the pool.
Fortunately no ill befell those children.
Not all parents make  the wise decisions  we do.

French parents seem to want to be with their children, albeit letting their children a little bit of free reign. The U.K. veiw as promulgated appears to out of sight...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on June 10, 2018, 07:39:48 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 07:32:09 PM
French parents seem to want to be with their children, albeit letting their children a little bit of free reign. The U.K. veiw as promulgated appears to out of sight...


A little  bit of free rein?
They were well out of sight and their kids were running amok.
Let's not go down the line that all French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese  etc parents are exemplary parents.
I don't buy it!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 10, 2018, 07:45:11 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 10, 2018, 06:57:03 PM
The evidence says otherwise.  Have a look at the police scent dogs thread.
Please do not misinform Angelo.  There is no evidence showing death had occured.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 10, 2018, 07:47:09 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 05:48:31 PM
my theory on this is that she was abducted by a very organised pedophile group and she is likely still alive.
At last you are on the ball in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 07:54:40 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 10, 2018, 07:47:09 PM
At last you are on the ball in my opinion.

A paedophile group?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 08:14:08 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 10, 2018, 07:11:57 PM
I suspect most people did - hence the Millennium Restaurant which served meals early to accommodate children

we would eat early with our kids then retire to our room , read or sit on the balcony with a wine while the kids slept , it never entered our head to leave them and go out again without them, never done that and never will.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 08:18:52 PM
Were the patio doors locked or not? that is something i haven't found a definitive answer on it wasn't in Kate's book as I recall?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2018, 08:25:59 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 08:14:08 PM
we would eat early with our kids then retire to our room , read or sit on the balcony with a wine while the kids slept , it never entered our head to leave them and go out again without them, never done that and never will.

did you ever smoke while your children were in the room
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 10, 2018, 08:32:03 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 08:18:52 PM
Were the patio doors locked or not? that is something i haven't found a definitive answer on it wasn't in Kate's book as I recall?

If they and Matt came and went via the patio door, as they say, the door cannot have been locked. It can only be locked from the inside.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 08:34:07 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 10, 2018, 08:32:03 PM
If they and Matt came and went via the patio door, as they say, the door cannot have been locked. It can only be locked from the inside.

 *&(+(+
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 08:34:39 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2018, 08:25:59 PM
did you ever smoke while your children were in the room

no , I've never smoked.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 08:36:24 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2018, 08:25:59 PM
did you ever smoke while your children were in the room

Marriage breakup is probably even more damaging....so what are you trying to prove?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 08:40:02 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 08:36:24 PM
Marriage breakup is probably even more damaging....so what are you trying to prove?

m
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2018, 08:41:14 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 08:36:24 PM
Marriage breakup is probably even more damaging....so what are you trying to prove?

I wouldnt agree in the slightest...many marriages breakdown and the children are far happier than when unhappy parents stay together...Im not trying to prove anything...smoking wth children in the room could be classified as a form of child abuse.....and leads to a higher rate of lung cancer and a horrible death.......there might be those criticising the mccanns who are exposing their children to an early death and do not realise it...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2018, 08:42:09 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 08:40:02 PM
what are you talking about ? what has smoking and marriage break up got to do with anything?

simple question...have you ever smoked with children in the room...its a form of child abuse...imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 08:42:22 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 08:40:02 PM
what are you talking about ? what has smoking and marriage break up got to do with anything?

Trying to understand what Davel is trying to prove,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 08:44:30 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2018, 08:42:09 PM
simple question...have you ever smoked with children in the room...its a form of child abuse...imo

You appear to be abusing IndigoJ by asking random questions with a view to proving he/she is a child abuser. This is unacceptable. Stop.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2018, 08:46:26 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 08:44:30 PM
You appear to be abusing IndigoJ by asking random questions with a view to proving he/she is a child abuser. This is unacceptable. Stop.

Im not accusing her of anything,,,it is not a random question...its a question about looking after and taking care of children...thats the topic she is posting on. Im making the point that ill treatment of children takes many forms
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 08:47:13 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2018, 08:46:26 PM
Im not accusing her of anything,,,it is not a random question...its a question about looking after and taking care of children...thats the topic she is posting on. Im making the point that ill treatment of children takes many forms

No doesn’t wash. Don’t do it again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2018, 08:49:43 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 08:47:13 PM
No doesn’t wash. Don’t do it again.

Im making a perfectly valid point...I wont direct it at any poster...but...more children are harmed by passive smoking than  being  left alone...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 08:55:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2018, 08:49:43 PM
Im making a perfectly valid point...I wont direct it at any poster...but...more children are harmed by passive smoking than  being  left alone...

More children are harmed by marriage breakup than passive smoking or by being left alone....

And your point is?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 10, 2018, 08:55:38 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 08:42:22 PM
Trying to understand what Davel is trying to prove,

Just providing evidence of what we already know?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 08:56:43 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2018, 08:42:09 PM
simple question...have you ever smoked with children in the room...its a form of child abuse...imo

I've never smoked and don't intend to start either, it's not relevant to this discussion.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2018, 08:57:17 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 08:55:00 PM
More children are harmed by marriage breakup than passive smoking than by being left alone....

And your point is?

my point is its unfair to single out the mccanns as not properly looking after their children when many parents...perhaps some here ...have not properly looked after theirs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 08:57:59 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2018, 08:57:17 PM
my point is its unfair to single out the mccanns as not properly looking after their children when many parents...perhaps some here ...have not properly looked after theirs

it is fair to discuss it  when it is what happened in this case!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 08:58:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2018, 08:57:17 PM
my point is its unfair to single out the mccanns as not properly looking after their children when many parents...perhaps some here ...have not properly looked after theirs

A completely facile argument... it’s ok to drink and drive because some people stab other people.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2018, 09:01:45 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 08:58:45 PM
A completely facile argument... it’s ok to drink and drive because some people stab other people.

you obviusly are not following the argument...teh mccanns were wrong to leave their children...its wrong to smoke in the presemnce of children...d and d and stabbing are also both wrong...nothing facile about anything i have posted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 09:10:10 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2018, 09:01:45 PM
you obviusly are not following the argument...teh mccanns were wrong to leave their children...its wrong to smoke in the presemnce of children...d and d and stabbing are also both wrong...nothing facile about anything i have posted

Fallacy of relative privation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2018, 09:14:15 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 09:10:10 PM
Fallacy of relative privation.


in my mind...or my opinion...you lost the argument some time ago
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 09:25:15 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2018, 09:14:15 PM

in my mind...or my opinion...you lost the argument some time ago

You are the one who appears to think that the fact that some people smoke around their children in some way reduces the opprobrium attached to those who leave their children to the tender mercies of whatever.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2018, 09:58:44 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 09:25:15 PM
You are the one who appears to think that the fact that some people smoke around their children in some way reduces the opprobrium attached to those who leave their children to the tender mercies of whatever.

I actually think both are wrong and can result in damage to  children....but I genuinely care about the welfare of all children and we as adults have a duty to take care of them...Im pretty proud of my own....Ive done a good job
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 10, 2018, 11:01:14 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 08:18:52 PM
Were the patio doors locked or not? that is something i haven't found a definitive answer on it wasn't in Kate's book as I recall?
the patio door can't be unlocked from the outside.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2018, 11:01:58 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 10, 2018, 11:01:14 PM
the patio door can't be unlocked from the outside.

nor locked
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 10, 2018, 11:05:21 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 10, 2018, 09:10:10 PM
Fallacy of relative privation.
That is a new one on me.

"Fallacy of relative privation (also known as "appeal to worse problems" or "not as bad as") – dismissing an argument or complaint due to the existence of more important problems in the world, regardless of whether those problems bear relevance to the initial argument."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2018, 11:07:19 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 10, 2018, 11:05:21 PM
That is a new one on me.

"Fallacy of relative privation (also known as "appeal to worse problems" or "not as bad as") – dismissing an argument or complaint due to the existence of more important problems in the world, regardless of whether those problems bear relevance to the initial argument."

but Im not doing that... I am not dismissing anything   so an argument to fallacy
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 10, 2018, 11:09:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2018, 11:01:58 PM
nor locked

But could it be locked and then closed from the outside?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2018, 11:10:42 PM
Quote from: John on June 10, 2018, 11:09:04 PM
But could it be locked and then closed from the outside?

yes ..it could be locked from the inside...and then could not be opened from the outside
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 10, 2018, 11:11:09 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 08:18:52 PM
Were the patio doors locked or not? that is something i haven't found a definitive answer on it wasn't in Kate's book as I recall?

Seems the patio door was only locked during daytime when the family were all out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 10, 2018, 11:12:41 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2018, 08:42:09 PM
simple question...have you ever smoked with children in the room...its a form of child abuse...imo

Jeez yes; like a chimney, they didn't call me "Old Black Country Zeke" for nothing.
There we'd be, half a dozen 13 year olds (all children) passing around a Joystick or a Royalty.
Then popping off down the Dun Cow for a pint of bitter, thinking "I'll be glad when I am old enough to enjoy this"!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2018, 11:15:49 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 10, 2018, 11:12:41 PM
Jeez yes; like a chimney, they didn't call me "Old Black Country Zeke" for nothing.
There we'd be, half a dozen 13 year olds (all children) passing around a Joystick or a Royalty.
Then popping off down the Dun Cow for a pint of bitter, thinking "I'll be glad when I am old enough to enjoy this"!

precisely...and parents left their children in chalets at butlins whilst playing bingo.....both wrong

alice...the relationship  between smoking, passive smoking and lung cancer  is well established....dont treat it as a joke
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 10, 2018, 11:26:05 PM
Quote from: John on June 10, 2018, 11:09:04 PM
But could it be locked and then closed from the outside?
Good question.  I don't recall anyone saying that is what they did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 10, 2018, 11:41:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2018, 11:15:49 PM
precisely...and parents left their children in chalets at butlins whilst playing bingo.....both wrong

alice...the relationship  between smoking, passive smoking and lung cancer  is well established....dont treat it as a joke

It was well established in about 1956. The period to which I referred.
Who said I was treating "it" as a joke rather than treating something else as a joke ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 11, 2018, 12:03:11 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 10, 2018, 10:59:40 AM
Mr Brunt that moronic !!!!     

He trashed that claim. even a young gazelle couldn't do it in that time! IF they were that close she could have waved and shouted for the tapas tram to come to her...

45 seconds eh   ^*&&

Before making incorrect statements, Mistaken, I suggest that you check the facts first.

Using Google Earth everyonje can measure the distance.  The group were a tadge over 50 metres away from 5A patio windows, crow flies

By foot they were less than 80 metres away



Both Kate and Gerry were very fit and good practiced runners.

100 metres on the flat has been accomplished in 9.58 seconds.  Therefore say 80 metres would take 9.58 x 0.8 = 7.7 seconds.

Now neither Kate nor Gerry, though fast, is Usain Bolt, so let's be generous and double that time     7.7 x 2 = 15.4 seconds.

Allow time for opening two unlocked gates and steps up (which are part of the ascribed  distance and could easily be taken two at a time with such fit people).  Add a slow start from sitting and in my estimation the shortest time for one of them to run that distance is under 30 seconds

Under 30 seconds from seat to patio door of 5A.   And that is being generous to you disbelievers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 11, 2018, 12:20:39 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 10, 2018, 11:10:49 AM
Enbolden.... they could NOT see the comings and goings of anyone from that patio door due the bushes ..
Once again, Mistaken, you are totally incorrect.  The bushes had JUST been cut back and from my position in the Tapas restaurant i could see virtually all the patio window.  The bushes had just been cut back before my visit too.

I sat a little over 2 metres away from the so called tapas group.

Foliage grows very rapidly in the the Atlantic Praia de Luz area, due to the rain coming in from the Atlantic and the sunny conditions.  It is essential to judge the view with foliage cut back as when Madeleine vanished, otherwise the patio windows get hidden by the rapidly growing foliage.

Eleven years on, I doubt that the conditiion and height etc of the bushes can be reproduced as they were eleven years earlier
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 11, 2018, 12:27:07 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 10, 2018, 04:23:52 PM
I cn only assume they did, once they stopped laughing at the 30/40 seconds away, story, and the mother running out to go get the Tapas group leaving babies alone again after one had already been abducted.

 I mean come on...

"Why wouldn't the trained investigators of the PJ do what had occurred to a journalist to do in walking the distance and maybe even timing" 

Well , them trained investigators probably wouldn't because they could not see  people sitting at the Tapas from the balcony, they also didn't believe they were'like sitting in a garden' So the steps and times would not have been relevant within the first few hours...too busy munching them samiches, watching Kate n Gerry searching all alone.

See my post @12.03am today

They could have done it in under 30 seconds.  They could see everything because of the illumination and the fact that the bushes had just been trimmed back
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 11, 2018, 12:43:21 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 10, 2018, 01:18:08 PM
That is not the point GA was making.  It is from the perspective of an intruder.  Did an intruder know the Tapas 9 had trouble seeing the apartment?
Sorry but you are listening to the wrong people and have consequently got it wrong yourself.  I have been there, eaten at that restaurant and seen for myself.

Amaral confirms that no intruder would go in via the patio door to the lounge because it was overlooked by the Tapas group at only 50 metres.   I am doubtful that he even noticed the patio door to the parents bedroom cos as far as I am aware, no forensics were done on that window.

Jeez, Unbelievable !!!  .... if my doubt is correct.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 11, 2018, 12:48:22 AM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 10, 2018, 05:45:22 PM
Would you think it reasonable to leave your kids unattended in that apartment while you ate? I was pretty shocked when i saw a programme on this and the map showing the distance from apartment to where they were eating, imo they took one hell of a risk in leaving them it wasnt as though they were very near to the apartment
So how far way was it ?

And how long would it take to get there in an emergency?

PS  Google Earth will give you the necessary information
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 11, 2018, 06:24:52 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2018, 12:48:22 AM
So how far way was it ?

And how long would it take to get there in an emergency?

PS  Google Earth will give you the necessary information

Scenario

Madeleine wakes up, wanders around the apartment in the dark, trips and bangs her head. How long will it take for anyone to get there?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2018, 06:39:14 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 11, 2018, 06:24:52 AM
Scenario

Madeleine wakes up, wanders around the apartment in the dark, trips and bangs her head. How long will it take for anyone to get there?

All three children wake up and cry. Will anyone hear them and 'run'?

As for seeing anything to alarm them;

1578 'And from where you were sat, what was your view like of the apartments''
 Reply 'Erm well yeah I could see, I mean I could see the patio doors of ours and Gerry and Kates'.

1578 'How much of the patio doors''
 Reply 'Erm well kind of the top half really'.

1578 'Okay'.
 Reply "Yeah you know, I didn't get a full you know, you couldn't get a full view sort of right in, cos there were bushes, there were bushes and stuff there, erm'.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 11, 2018, 09:05:15 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on June 11, 2018, 06:24:52 AM
Scenario

Madeleine wakes up, wanders around the apartment in the dark, trips and bangs her head. How long will it take for anyone to get there?

Oh, I thought that she was tall enough to reach the light switches
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 11, 2018, 10:31:10 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2018, 12:20:39 AM
Once again, Mistaken, you are totally incorrect.  The bushes had JUST been cut back and from my position in the Tapas restaurant i could see virtually all the patio window.  The bushes had just been cut back before my visit too.

I sat a little over 2 metres away from the so called tapas group.

Foliage grows very rapidly in the the Atlantic Praia de Luz area, due to the rain coming in from the Atlantic and the sunny conditions.  It is essential to judge the view with foliage cut back as when Madeleine vanished, otherwise the patio windows get hidden by the rapidly growing foliage.

Eleven years on, I doubt that the conditiion and height etc of the bushes can be reproduced as they were eleven years earlier

You must have extremely good eyesight to make out any detail at that distance Sadie.  The photo below shows exactly what can be seen from the tapas restaurant.

McCann apartment patio shown circled.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 11, 2018, 10:33:32 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2018, 09:02:24 AM
What is it about you and my posts, slarti?

I see that you have managed to alter 4 out of five of them on this thread already and I only started posting after midnight !!!

Please explain your  reasons in detail in future when you use the "RED LINE" to score out parts, or all, of everything that I write.  My posts had passed the critical eye of at least two moderators, and NOT ONE of them was altered until you came along at just after 6am and altered the lot.

Just why is it that you enjoy decimating everything I write?

Admin posted a reminder of the forum rules yesterday across all the boards. Criticism of other users is not permitted.

Snip

Please treat all members with respect and accept gracefully that other users may not necessarily share your point of view.  Debates should be structured and constructive, they should not be used as a mechanism to disrupt or goad or provoke other users.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg466563#msg466563
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 11, 2018, 10:39:47 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 11, 2018, 10:31:10 AM
You must have extremely good eyesight to make out any detail at that distance Sadie.  The photo below shows exactly what can be seen from the tapas restaurant.

McCann apartment patio shown circled.

Where was their table in relation to the viewpoint of where that photo was taken?

Where and when did this photo originate, Angelo?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 11, 2018, 10:41:46 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2018, 12:48:22 AM
So how far way was it ?

And how long would it take to get there in an emergency?

PS  Google Earth will give you the necessary information

Did it matter how far it was because the parents were totally oblivious to anything happening.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 11, 2018, 10:48:05 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 11, 2018, 10:39:47 AM
Where was their table in relation to the viewpoint of where that photo was taken?

Where and when did this photo originate, Angelo?

The photo I posted was taken from the best possible vantage point ie beyond the plastic sheeting.
The photo was taken by Jacques Lange for the Paris Match Magazine.


From Gonçalo Amaral's book, 'The Truth of the Lie', page 60:
 
'At night, with the existing vegetation, in a restaurant with a lateral opaque plastic cover and with the group of friends sat with their backs to the apartments, they weren't seeing anything and any person could easily have had access to the apartment without being detected, coming in and calmly and deceptively coming out.'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on June 11, 2018, 12:11:32 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2018, 12:48:22 AM
So how far way was it ?

And how long would it take to get there in an emergency?

PS  Google Earth will give you the necessary information

Too far.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on June 11, 2018, 12:13:43 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 11, 2018, 12:43:21 AM
Sorry but you are listening to the wrong people and have consequently got it wrong yourself.  I have been there, eaten at that restaurant and seen for myself.

Amaral confirms that no intruder would go in via the patio door to the lounge because it was overlooked by the Tapas group at only 50 metres.   I am doubtful that he even noticed the patio door to the parents bedroom cos as far as I am aware, no forensics were done on that window.

Jeez, Unbelievable !!!  .... if my doubt is correct.

Did you go there specifically to check out the McCann disappearance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 11, 2018, 04:39:59 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 11, 2018, 12:13:43 PM
Did you go there specifically to check out the McCann disappearance?

As opposed to which?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 11, 2018, 07:16:20 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 11, 2018, 12:11:32 PM
Too far.

Who is the arbiter what "too far" is?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 11, 2018, 11:29:34 PM
Quote from: IndigoJ on June 11, 2018, 12:11:32 PM
Too far.
Please use I think or IMO when something is said that may or may not be true but your own point of view.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 12, 2018, 01:26:39 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 11, 2018, 10:31:10 AM
You must have extremely good eyesight to make out any detail at that distance Sadie.  The photo below shows exactly what can be seen from the tapas restaurant.

McCann apartment patio shown circled.


The Mccann apartment has the illuminated arch

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/parismatchtapasrestauraxe3.jpg
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/parismatchtapasrestauraxe3.jpg)


Deleted.  Upon further examination, SIL is correct and I was wrong.  Apologies



3) The camera exposure time and also printing techniques can change the look of the photos.  I could see much more clearly than that.  Has someone fiddled with these things to give such a dull photo?  ( ETA, I see that the copy of that photo which I have found is MUCH clearer than the copy you posted, Angelo.  Try maginfying my photo for more detail including the patio windows )

After all Amaral too, postulated that the Tapas group were overlooking the Patio doors and no intruders would go in that way, so he thought that they had a good view.

Are you saying that Amaral was talking nonsense Angelo?

4)  What was the date of the photo ? 
It is amazing to British eyes just how quickly foliage grows in the western Algarve and can very quickly block off views.  I guess it is the westerly winds bringing in the rain from the adjoining Atlantic and the warm sunny weather that came just after Madeleine went missing

5)  This photo was taken from between the Tapas restaurant and the Tapas bar.  In other words it was several metres further west than where we have generally been led to believe the group sat.   Then the viewing angle changes, the foliage in line with the camera also changes from what is correct.


ETA, I see that after challenges from Carana, Angelo has now informed us that the photo was NOT taken from the Tapas table.

IMO, that information should be added whenever anyone uses it, because most people are likely to think that this is the correct viewing angle ... and it is not

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 12, 2018, 01:37:27 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 12, 2018, 01:26:39 AM

The Mccann apartment has the illuminated arch

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/parismatchtapasrestauraxe3.jpg
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/parismatchtapasrestauraxe3.jpg)


1)  anyone can see that the photo was taken from almost ground level.   

2)  I wonder why anyone would do that? ... so distort the better view that was being seen from head height.  Such an odd position to take a photo from, with the camera on/near the floor.  Must have been tricky to take from down there.  So much easier to take from waist height, shoulder height or even with the camera sitting on a table

Was it deliberately posed to give a false view?  With what intent? 

Is that photo deliberate disinformation?


3) The camera exposure time and also printing techniques can change the look of the photos.  I could see much more clearly than that.  Has someone fiddled with these things to give such a dull photo?  ( ETA, I see that the copy of that photo which I have found is MUCH clearer than the copy you posted, Angelo )

After all Amaral too, postulated that the Tapas group were overlooking the Patio doors and no intruders would go in that way, so he thought that they had a good view.

Are you saying that Amaral was talking nonsense Angelo?

4)  What was the date of the photo ?  It is amazing to British eyes just how quickly foliage grows in the western Algarve and can very quickly block off views.  I guess it is the westerly winds bringing in the rain from the adjoining Atlantic and the warm sunny weather that came just after Madeleine went missing

5)  Tghis photo was taken from between the Tapas restaurant and the Tapas bar.  In other words it was several metres further west than where we have generally been led to believe the group sat.   Then the viewing angle changes, the foliage in line with the camera also changes from what is correct.


This photo is clearly NOT FACT, it has too many errors



Having recently noticed all these anomolies, i confess to wondering if this photo was a deliberate ploy to try and make out that The Mccanns were lying about the friends view of 5A.
Since one can clearly see the top of the table nearest, the photo was obviously taken from above the level of table.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 12, 2018, 01:48:15 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 11, 2018, 10:48:05 AM
The photo I posted was taken from the best possible vantage point ie beyond the plastic sheeting.
The photo was taken by Jacques Lange for the Paris Match Magazine.


From Gonçalo Amaral's book, 'The Truth of the Lie', page 60:
 
'At night, with the existing vegetation, in a restaurant with a lateral opaque plastic cover and with the group of friends sat with their backs to the apartments, they weren't seeing anything and any person could easily have had access to the apartment without being detected, coming in and calmly and deceptively coming out.'

So Amaral picks his words differently for each situation does he?

One day he says that no intruder would have attempted to get in to 5A using the patio door as it were so closely overlooked by the parents and friends

..... and another day he says, "At night, with the existing vegetation, in a restaurant with a lateral opaque plastic cover and with the group of friends sat with their backs to the apartments, they weren't seeing anything and any person could easily have had access to the apartment without being detected, coming in and calmly and deceptively coming out."

Both statements can't be true

Or perchance, he had visited some time after and the vegetation had spurted ?


And what about his claim that the group sat with their backs to the Apartment.  The table was round with the group spaced around it.   Who is being deceptive there ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 12, 2018, 02:09:00 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 12, 2018, 01:37:27 AM
Since one can clearly see the top of the table nearest, the photo was obviously taken from above the level of table.
You are quite correct SIL.  Thank you for that.    I had been looking at the chair seats thinking that they were horizontal or worse on the photos.

I have amended my post.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 12, 2018, 02:16:18 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 12, 2018, 01:48:15 AM
So Amaral picks his words differently for each situation does he?

One day he says that no intruder would have attempted to get in to 5A using the patio door as it were so closely overlooked by the parents and friends

..... and another day he says, "At night, with the existing vegetation, in a restaurant with a lateral opaque plastic cover and with the group of friends sat with their backs to the apartments, they weren't seeing anything and any person could easily have had access to the apartment without being detected, coming in and calmly and deceptively coming out."

The expression * L..., L..., pants on fire * comes to mind.   Both statements can't be true

Or perchance, he had visited some time after and the vegetation had spurted ?


And what about his claim that the group sat with their backs to the Apartment.  The table was round with the group spaced around it.   Who is being deceptive there ?
I think the difference is a matter of knowledge.    Someone not knowing what they could see from the Tapas won't go there.  Someone knowing what was possible to see could attempt it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on June 12, 2018, 07:35:49 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 11, 2018, 04:39:59 PM
As opposed to which?

you mean as opposed to what? as opposed to simply going there for a holiday without the intention to check out the site , did she go with that purpose is what i was asking
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 12, 2018, 11:31:51 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 12, 2018, 02:16:18 AM
I think the difference is a matter of knowledge.    Someone not knowing what they could see from the Tapas won't go there.  Someone knowing what was possible to see could attempt it.

It's laughable for anyone to suggest that the parents spent their night peering constantly at the patio of 5a.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 12, 2018, 11:34:39 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 12, 2018, 11:31:51 PM
It's laughable for anyone to suggest that the parents spent their night peering constantly at the patio of 5a.

Even if they had Angelo the children’s bedroom was on the other side of the building. Fire would have been a far more common danger than abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 01:04:15 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 12, 2018, 11:34:39 PM
Even if they had Angelo the children’s bedroom was on the other side of the building. Fire would have been a far more common danger than abduction.

The front of the building was thought to be secured by a dropped shutter and a solid locked front door.
They didn't know it was possible to raise the shutter from outside. 
Nor did they know about burglaries taking place in the resort with entry via a window or with the use of a key ... two of which had taken place in apartment block A.

Why on earth would the thought of someone entering their apartment and abducting a child even enter their heads?  At that time they were totally unaware that a sexual predator was gaining entry to holiday apartments in the near vicinity and in Luz itself.

No holidaymaker snuggling down in bed at night was aware of the potential danger of someone entering while they slept and either or robbing them and carrying out an  assault on their children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2018, 06:25:25 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 01:04:15 AM
The front of the building was thought to be secured by a dropped shutter and a solid locked front door.
They didn't know it was possible to raise the shutter from outside. 
Nor did they know about burglaries taking place in the resort with entry via a window or with the use of a key ... two of which had taken place in apartment block A.

Why on earth would the thought of someone entering their apartment and abducting a child even enter their heads?  At that time they were totally unaware that a sexual predator was gaining entry to holiday apartments in the near vicinity and in Luz itself.

No holidaymaker snuggling down in bed at night was aware of the potential danger of someone entering while they slept and either or robbing them and carrying out an  assault on their children.

A lot of emphasis is placed on these rumours of burglaries and assaults. Was the Ocean Club supposed to gather crime statistics and warn their guests that their apartments might be entered illegally? They offered safe deposit boxes at reception; there's a clue. They offered a baby-sitting service; there's another. Otherwise they are entitled to assume their guests know about everyday dangers such as fire and accidents. I thought we all knew how quickly small children can get into difficulties when unsupervised and that it's risky to leave doors open and go out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 08:57:05 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2018, 06:25:25 AM
A lot of emphasis is placed on these rumours of burglaries and assaults. Was the Ocean Club supposed to gather crime statistics and warn their guests that their apartments might be entered illegally? They offered safe deposit boxes at reception; there's a clue. They offered a baby-sitting service; there's another. Otherwise they are entitled to assume their guests know about everyday dangers such as fire and accidents. I thought we all knew how quickly small children can get into difficulties when unsupervised and that it's risky to leave doors open and go out.
Unfortunately the 'everyday dangers' in the Algarve at that time included the danger of intrusion to one's home for the purpose of burglary and the intrusion to one's home for the purpose of burglary and or to assault children.

The block of flats the McCann family occupied had suffered two burglaries in the previous weeks and other nearby premises had also been entered.

They had weighed the risks of fire or accident ... there was no evidence of fire or accident taking place ... but there was evidence of intrusion and evidence of a missing child, both of which must now be factored into any risk assessment when visiting the Algarve.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 13, 2018, 09:21:08 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 08:57:05 AM
Unfortunately the 'everyday dangers' in the Algarve at that time included the danger of intrusion to one's home for the purpose of burglary and the intrusion to one's home for the purpose of burglary and or to assault children.

The block of flats the McCann family occupied had suffered two burglaries in the previous weeks and other nearby premises had also been entered.

They had weighed the risks of fire or accident ... there was no evidence of fire or accident taking place ... but there was evidence of intrusion and evidence of a missing child, both of which must now be factored into any risk assessment when visiting the Algarve.

...or any other holiday destination.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2018, 09:32:51 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 08:57:05 AM
Unfortunately the 'everyday dangers' in the Algarve at that time included the danger of intrusion to one's home for the purpose of burglary and the intrusion to one's home for the purpose of burglary and or to assault children.

The block of flats the McCann family occupied had suffered two burglaries in the previous weeks and other nearby premises had also been entered.

They had weighed the risks of fire or accident ... there was no evidence of fire or accident taking place ... but there was evidence of intrusion and evidence of a missing child, both of which must now be factored into any risk assessment when visiting the Algarve.

Do you investigate local crime statistics before you choose a holiday destination? Were these alleged crimes included in the local crime statistics anyway? Did you expect someone to warn the holidaymakers? Who's responsibility was it?

There was no mention of assessing risk, because it 'felt safe'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 12:13:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2018, 09:32:51 AM
Do you investigate local crime statistics before you choose a holiday destination? Were these alleged crimes included in the local crime statistics anyway? Did you expect someone to warn the holidaymakers? Who's responsibility was it?

There was no mention of assessing risk, because it 'felt safe'.

You are the one who raised the issue regarding risk assessment.

It is now generally known that in 2007 there was a high risk factor for families with young children associated with holidaying in the Algarve.  Was it common knowledge among potential visitors at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance?

How the police chose to address the problem remains a bit of a mystery for me.  How the holiday industry chose to address the problem certainly did not include giving potential holidaymakers the relevant information to enable informed choices to be arrived at.
Nor did it include the addition of CCTV covering private areas of the resort or security lighting covering dark entrances close to the rental accommodation such as that added to block 5A after and probably as a direct result of Madeleine's disappearance.
 
With reference to the risk of fire you mentioned … if you were tasked with carrying out a risk assessment of apartment 5A … what would you make of the security grilles covering the windows which were added after - and probably as a direct result of - Madeleine’s disappearance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 13, 2018, 12:30:40 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 12:13:43 PM
You are the one who raised the issue regarding risk assessment.

It is now generally known that in 2007 there was a high risk factor for families with young children associated with holidaying in the Algarve.  Was it common knowledge among potential visitors at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance?

How the police chose to address the problem remains a bit of a mystery for me.  How the holiday industry chose to address the problem certainly did not include giving potential holidaymakers the relevant information to enable informed choices to be arrived at.
Nor did it include the addition of CCTV covering private areas of the resort or security lighting covering dark entrances close to the rental accommodation such as that added to block 5A after and probably as a direct result of Madeleine's disappearance.
 
With reference to the risk of fire you mentioned … if you were tasked with carrying out a risk assessment of apartment 5A … what would you make of the security grilles covering the windows which were added after - and probably as a direct result of - Madeleine’s disappearance?
I would be grateful if you adhered to forum convention and wrapped this sort of stuff in a big IYO, because much of it does not stand up to scrutiny, IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 01:08:00 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 13, 2018, 12:30:40 PM
I would be grateful if you adhered to forum convention and wrapped this sort of stuff in a big IYO, because much of it does not stand up to scrutiny, IMO.

              For example? ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 13, 2018, 01:29:58 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 01:08:00 PM
              For example? ?
Much of it, IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2018, 01:56:11 PM
I have replied point by point. There seem to be a few assumptions without any cites to support them.

Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 12:13:43 PM
You are the one who raised the issue regarding risk assessment.

I was replying to you;

"They had weighed the risks of fire or accident" (#3599)

It is now generally known that in 2007 there was a high risk factor for families with young children associated with holidaying in the Algarve.  Was it common knowledge among potential visitors at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance?

In your opinion (the bolded text). It was clearly not common knowledge at the time, or the T9 would have known.

How the police chose to address the problem remains a bit of a mystery for me.  How the holiday industry chose to address the problem certainly did not include giving potential holidaymakers the relevant information to enable informed choices to be arrived at.

Did the police and holiday industry have knowledge of the 'problem'? Cite required.

Nor did it include the addition of CCTV covering private areas of the resort or security lighting covering dark entrances close to the rental accommodation such as that added to block 5A after and probably as a direct result of Madeleine's disappearance.

CCTV in the Tapas area would have been most useful, we could all have verified who left the enclosure and at what time. I imagine that the apartment owners were required to meet certain standards. Was security lighting one of them? Cite required.
 
With reference to the risk of fire you mentioned … if you were tasked with carrying out a risk assessment of apartment 5A … what would you make of the security grilles covering the windows which were added after - and probably as a direct result of - Madeleine’s disappearance?

Are you saying the security grilles constituted a fire hazard? That would be a matter for the consideration of those offering the property for rental.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 02:01:38 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on June 13, 2018, 01:29:58 PM
Much of it, IMO.

You surely must have a specific complaint?
You have specifically accused me of failing to adhere to forum convention and that my post did not stand up to scrutiny but you are unable to specify in which way.

Are you making unfounded complaints just to goad and be mischeivous?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on June 13, 2018, 02:18:21 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 02:01:38 PM
You surely must have a specific complaint?
You have specifically accused me of failing to adhere to forum convention and that my post did not stand up to scrutiny but you are unable to specify in which way.

Are you making unfounded complaints just to goad and be mischeivous?
Forum rules are quite clear re personal opinions.

Either add an IYO to your post or I will refer the matter to John.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 13, 2018, 02:27:38 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 12:13:43 PM
You are the one who raised the issue regarding risk assessment.

It is now generally known that in 2007 there was a high risk factor for families with young children associated with holidaying in the Algarve.  Was it common knowledge among potential visitors at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance?

How the police chose to address the problem remains a bit of a mystery for me.  How the holiday industry chose to address the problem certainly did not include giving potential holidaymakers the relevant information to enable informed choices to be arrived at.
Nor did it include the addition of CCTV covering private areas of the resort or security lighting covering dark entrances close to the rental accommodation such as that added to block 5A after and probably as a direct result of Madeleine's disappearance.
 
With reference to the risk of fire you mentioned … if you were tasked with carrying out a risk assessment of apartment 5A … what would you make of the security grilles covering the windows which were added after - and probably as a direct result of - Madeleine’s disappearance?

You cannot blame the Algarve for what happened to Maddie, the area was no more a risk than any other region in Europe imo.  We know the area was and probably still is a favourite stomping ground for various undesirables but so are the Spanish Costas and many other resort areas all along the Mediterranean coast.  The sad truth is that tourist resorts will always be a magnet for criminals of all shades and colour, Praia da Luz is no better or no worse imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 13, 2018, 02:29:14 PM

I have read Brietta's comment several times.

There is nothing wrong with it, and nothing that requires an IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 13, 2018, 02:33:48 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 13, 2018, 02:29:14 PM
I have read Brietta's comment several times.

There is nothing wrong with it, and nothing that requires an IMO.

Brietta wrongly singled out the Algarve for criticism when it is well known that it isn't the worst region in Europe for crime.  Her "high risk" claim is greatly exaggerated and is not borne out by any historical evidence.  Had the McCanns exercised a modicum of savy that night, we wouldn't be here now discussing this event.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 13, 2018, 02:34:18 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 13, 2018, 02:29:14 PM
I have read Brietta's comment several times.

There is nothing wrong with it, and nothing that requires an IMO.

Anyone who uses the phrase “it is known” does not have any evidence IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 13, 2018, 02:37:47 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 13, 2018, 02:33:48 PM
Brietta wrongly singled out the Algarve for criticism when it is well known that it isn't the worst region in Europe for crime.  Her "high risk" claim is greatly exaggerated and is not borne out by any historical evidence.

It is The Algarve that we are discussing.  And Brietta was referring to The Ocean Club Management being aware of what had been happening, which they were.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2018, 02:41:14 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 13, 2018, 02:27:38 PM
You cannot blame the Algarve for what happened to Maddie, the area was no more a risk than any other region in Europe imo.  We know the area was and probably still is a favourite stomping ground for various undesirables but so are the Spanish Costas and many other resort areas all along the Mediterranean coast.  The sad truth is that tourist resorts will always be a magnet for criminals of all shades and colour, Praia da Luz is no better or no worse imo.
I don't think Brietta suggested it was the worst or at greater risk than other holiday destinations, just that we now know there were a number of recent break-ins in the immediate area.  It is not uncommon for resorts or public places / facilities to issue a warning about thieves currently operating in an area and to be extra vigilant.  Does this appear to have happened at the OC / other parts of PdL? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 13, 2018, 02:50:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2018, 02:41:14 PM
I don't think Brietta suggested it was the worst or at greater risk than other holiday destinations, just that we now know there were a number of recent break-ins in the immediate area. It is not uncommon for resorts or public places / facilities to issue a warning about thieves currently operating in an area and to be extra vigilant.  Does this appear to have happened at the OC / other parts of PdL?

Is it?
Would we expect to see similar signs in Blackpool or Skegness, for example ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 13, 2018, 02:57:58 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 13, 2018, 02:37:47 PM
It is The Algarve that we are discussing.  And Brietta was referring to The Ocean Club Management being aware of what had been happening, which they were.

Virtually every resort in the world experience pilfering from clients bedrooms. The Ocean Club in Luz would be very aware that there were isolated incidences of this at their premises but certainly insufficient to merit CCTV everywhere, armed guards or barbed wire and manned security gates. All a bit ott Brietta?

ETA it's common sense to take precautions when abroad but obviously some leave their brains at passport control.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2018, 03:06:27 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 13, 2018, 02:50:57 PM
Is it?
Would we expect to see similar signs in Blackpool or Skegness, for example ?
I've never been to Skegness, and it's been a while since I was in Blackpool, but this was the kind of thing I was thinking of, from a hotel in France
https://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhotoDirectLink-g187266-d1687431-i23897607-Hotel_Etoile_d_Or-Megeve_Haute_Savoie_Auvergne_Rhone_Alpes.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 13, 2018, 03:08:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2018, 03:06:27 PM
I've never been to Skegness, and it's been a while since I was in Blackpool, but this was the kind of thing I was thinking of, from a hotel in France
https://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhotoDirectLink-g187266-d1687431-i23897607-Hotel_Etoile_d_Or-Megeve_Haute_Savoie_Auvergne_Rhone_Alpes.html

Seriously VS, would you go out to dine while on holiday abroad and leave your apartment unlocked?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2018, 03:09:43 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 13, 2018, 03:08:42 PM
Seriously VS, would you go out to dine and leave your apartment unlocked?
Definitely not!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2018, 03:14:27 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 13, 2018, 03:08:42 PM
Seriously VS, would you go out to dine while on holiday abroad and leave your apartment unlocked?

It is a shame there are such nasty people about that we are unable to
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2018, 03:17:31 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 13, 2018, 03:14:27 PM
It is a shame there are such nasty people about that we are unable to
I have been the victim of burglary so many times (from locked houses and apartments over the years) that I have a heightened sense of security.  One time we were burgled while we slept in our beds.  It makes you somewhat paranoid. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 03:22:12 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 13, 2018, 02:33:48 PM
Brietta wrongly singled out the Algarve for criticism when it is well known that it isn't the worst region in Europe for crime.  Her "high risk" claim is greatly exaggerated and is not borne out by any historical evidence.  Had the McCanns exercised a modicum of savy that night, we wouldn't be here now discussing this event.

The only reason for "singling out the Algarve" is that Madeleine McCann vanished from the Algarve while on holiday there with her family.

It is my opinion concentration on her parents as opposed to concentration on intelligence perhaps leading to evidence might very well have led to her safe recovery.

Intelligence such as the possible distraction of an activated burglar alarm in Odiaxere around the time Madeleine vanished.
The burglaries which had taken place in Luz were also intelligence as was the disappearance of Joana Cipriano from her home a short distance from Luz.
In my opinion, by far the most compelling intelligence of all was in the form of the home invasions and assaults on children which had taken place in the Algarve.

The only intelligence which seemed to attract any attention at all in my opinion was the dog visit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2018, 03:26:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2018, 03:17:31 PM
I have been the victim of burglary so many times (from locked houses and apartments over the years) that I have a heightened sense of security.  One time we were burgled while we slept in our beds.  It makes you somewhat paranoid.

I had to smile when my son said he'd bought a burglar alarm for his barge... It's made out if steel.. Two feet long and very sharp
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 03:31:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2018, 03:09:43 PM
Definitely not!

LOL ... I once went out leaving the door of my hotel room propped against the wall it having fallen in on me when I opened it.
So, yes I have gone out and not only left the door unlocked ... I left a huge gap where it should have been.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on June 13, 2018, 03:45:54 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 13, 2018, 03:26:06 PM
I had to smile when my son said he'd bought a burglar alarm for his barge... It's made out if steel.. Two feet long and very sharp

You should probably delete that, if he now used it against a burglar it would be classed as premeditated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 13, 2018, 04:06:49 PM

I've got an antique Sword Stick at the top of my stairs.  Not that The French are even remotely lawless.  It's The English Expats you have to watch out for.

I shall plead Crime of Passion if I ever have to use it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 13, 2018, 05:19:40 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 01:04:15 AM
The front of the building was thought to be secured by a dropped shutter and a solid locked front door.
They didn't know it was possible to raise the shutter from outside. 
Nor did they know about burglaries taking place in the resort with entry via a window or with the use of a key ... two of which had taken place in apartment block A.

Why on earth would the thought of someone entering their apartment and abducting a child even enter their heads?  At that time they were totally unaware that a sexual predator was gaining entry to holiday apartments in the near vicinity and in Luz itself.

No holidaymaker snuggling down in bed at night was aware of the potential danger of someone entering while they slept and either or robbing them and carrying out an  assault on their children.

Imagine there’d been a fire which started at the front of the apartment  near the children’s bedroom. Would the parents have seen it from their table at the tapas ? It is more than likely the children would have been beyond help by the time they could see the flames. How much support do you think the parents would have received then ? Imagine the scene.....the parents sitting quaffing wine and socialising while their babies burned. Horrific !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 13, 2018, 05:22:18 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 13, 2018, 04:06:49 PM
I've got an antique Sword Stick at the top of my stairs.  Not that The French are even remotely lawless.  It's The English Expats you have to watch out for.

I shall plead Crime of Passion if I ever have to use it.

The late great Ken Dodd comes to mind with his tickling stick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2018, 05:24:34 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 13, 2018, 05:19:40 PM
Imagine there’d been a fire which started at the front of the apartment  near the children’s bedroom. Would the parents have seen it from their table at the tapas ? It is more than likely the children would have been beyond help by the time they could see the flames. How much support do you think the parents would have received then ? Imagine the scene.....the parents sitting quaffing wine and socialising while their babies burned. Horrific !
Though not supporting their actions, they would nonetheless have had my deepest sympathies, I certainly wouldn’t have taken to social media to delight in adding to their misery by slagging them off endlessly for years. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2018, 05:32:18 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2018, 05:24:34 PM
Though not supporting their actions, they would nonetheless have had my deepest sympathies, I certainly wouldn’t have taken to social media to delight in adding to their misery by slagging them off endlessly for years.

Happily, though the tragedy that did happen was horrendous enough to be going on with, the twins escaped unscathed.

Despite that, their lives can hardly have been 'normal' ones given the tremendous efforts that have been put into hounding the family et al using social media to do so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 13, 2018, 05:37:53 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 13, 2018, 05:19:40 PM
Imagine there’d been a fire which started at the front of the apartment  near the children’s bedroom. Would the parents have seen it from their table at the tapas ? It is more than likely the children would have been beyond help by the time they could see the flames. How much support do you think the parents would have received then ? Imagine the scene.....the parents sitting quaffing wine and socialising while their babies burned. Horrific !

This didn't happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 13, 2018, 05:40:04 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 13, 2018, 05:37:53 PM
This didn't happen.


No and we don't know the alleged abduction did -  neither imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 13, 2018, 05:56:32 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 13, 2018, 05:40:04 PM

No and we don't know the alleged abduction did -  neither imo
Will you concede it is one of the possible reasons Madeleine has disappeared?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 13, 2018, 06:01:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2018, 05:24:34 PM
Though not supporting their actions, they would nonetheless have had my deepest sympathies, I certainly wouldn’t have taken to social media to delight in adding to their misery by slagging them off endlessly for years.

Then you would have been one of the few. I can’t see a standing ovation for Gerry from the police after that or that Missing People would have touched Kate with the proverbial barge pole.

The point is fire was always a greater danger than abduction. Unfortunately they didn’t seem to care.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2018, 06:15:19 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 13, 2018, 06:01:42 PM
Then you would have been one of the few. I can’t see a standing ovation for Gerry from the police after that or that Missing People would have touched Kate with the proverbial barge pole.

The point is fire was always a greater danger than abduction. Unfortunately they didn’t seem to care.
As there would have been no need for Gerry to be attending a police meeting, nor for Kate McCann to be an ambassador for Missing People in such a circumstance your point is moot.  I don't think I would be one of the few to think "how dreadful, they must be besides themselves with guilt and grief" - I do like to think there are more kind, understanding people in the world than unforgiving, judgemental harpies but perhaps not. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 13, 2018, 06:36:04 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2018, 06:15:19 PM
As there would have been no need for Gerry to be attending a police meeting, nor for Kate McCann to be an ambassador for Missing People in such a circumstance your point is moot.  I don't think I would be one of the few to think "how dreadful, they must be besides themselves with guilt and grief" - I do like to think there are more kind, understanding people in the world than unforgiving, judgemental harpies but perhaps not.

Do you really believe the McCanns would not be vilified by every right minded person for leaving their babies to burn while they were socialising with their friends.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2018, 06:37:12 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2018, 03:06:27 PM
I've never been to Skegness, and it's been a while since I was in Blackpool, but this was the kind of thing I was thinking of, from a hotel in France
https://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhotoDirectLink-g187266-d1687431-i23897607-Hotel_Etoile_d_Or-Megeve_Haute_Savoie_Auvergne_Rhone_Alpes.html

Was there such a notice at the Ocean Club reception (where the safe deposit boxes were)? Or, more to the point, can you prove there wasn't?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2018, 06:38:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2018, 06:37:12 PM
Was there such a notice at the Ocean Club reception (where the safe deposit boxes were)? Or, more to the point, can you prove there wasn't?
Are you asking me to prove a negative?  Then you win. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2018, 06:40:07 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 13, 2018, 06:36:04 PM
Do you really believe the McCanns would not be vilified by every right minded person for leaving their babies to burn while they were socialising with their friends.
In this day and age they would probably be burned at the twitter stake, for sure.  I suppose you think that's  correct and only fair.  I don't.  That's probably the main difference between you and me..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 13, 2018, 06:53:07 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2018, 06:40:07 PM
In this day and age they would probably be burned at the twitter stake, for sure.  I suppose you think that's  correct and only fair.  I don't.  That's probably the main difference between you and me..

Please do not second guess what I believe. You certainly don’t know me well enough.

I think they would deserve to be punished to the greatest extent of the law.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2018, 06:58:25 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 13, 2018, 06:53:07 PM
Please do not second guess what I believe. You certainly don’t know me well enough.

I think they would deserve to be punished to the greatest extent of the law.
You weren't talking about the law though were you?  You were talking about the public reaction and the vilification.  From your response it seems clear to me you would have no sympathy at all and would side with the vilifier ("every right minded person"), but do please correct me if I'm wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 13, 2018, 07:03:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2018, 06:58:25 PM
You weren't talking about the law though were you?  You were talking about the public reaction and the vilification.  From your response it seems clear to me you would have no sympathy at all and would side with the vilifier ("every right minded person"), but do please correct me if I'm wrong.

My post was about how the vast majority of the U.K. would view the McCanns but yes, I would have no sympathy. My sympathy would be reserved for those poor children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2018, 07:09:33 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 13, 2018, 07:03:40 PM
My post was about how the vast majority of the U.K. would view the McCanns but yes, I would have no sympathy. My sympathy would be reserved for those poor children.
And I would obviously have sympathy for them first and foremost, but I do also often sympathise with people who make foolish life-changing mistakes or choices the consequences of which will haunt them for the rest of their lives.  Does that make me a bad person?  I don't know why you've even introduced this fire scenario because in terms of outcome for Madeleine it's really no different from the alleged abduction / woke and wandered scenario, so why would public perception be drastically different in any case?  Don't you believe "most right minded people" don't support the McCanns and have no sympathy for them anyway?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2018, 07:10:02 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2018, 06:38:31 PM
Are you asking me to prove a negative?  Then you win.

And you lose because you suggested that warning notices are a good idea but had no idea if the Ocean Club displayed such a notice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2018, 07:12:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2018, 07:10:02 PM
And you lose because you suggested that warning notices are a good idea but had no idea if the Ocean Club displayed such a notice.
I made no comment on whether they were or they weren't actually, In fact I  asked if such signs were in situ in PdL.  So once again you are wrong.

My post:

I don't think Brietta suggested it was the worst or at greater risk than other holiday destinations, just that we now know there were a number of recent break-ins in the immediate area. It is not uncommon for resorts or public places / facilities to issue a warning about thieves currently operating in an area and to be extra vigilant.  Does this appear to have happened at the OC / other parts of PdL?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2018, 07:21:12 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2018, 07:12:51 PM
I made no comment on whether they were or they weren't actually, In fact I  asked if such signs were in situ in PdL.  So once again you are wrong.

My post:

I don't think Brietta suggested it was the worst or at greater risk than other holiday destinations, just that we now know there were a number of recent break-ins in the immediate area. It is not uncommon for resorts or public places / facilities to issue a warning about thieves currently operating in an area and to be extra vigilant.  Does this appear to have happened at the OC / other parts of PdL?

Why would you mention it if you weren't endorsing it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2018, 07:25:07 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2018, 07:21:12 PM
Why would you mention it if you weren't endorsing it?
Did I endorse it?  No, I was merely making an observation, in response to a question about Brietta's post, what's the problem?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 13, 2018, 07:46:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2018, 06:37:12 PM
Was there such a notice at the Ocean Club reception (where the safe deposit boxes were)? Or, more to the point, can you prove there wasn't?

These things usually get mentioned at the welcome meeting when tourists first arrive and gather to be told what's what. Common sense really!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2018, 09:07:47 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 13, 2018, 07:46:16 PM
These things usually get mentioned at the welcome meeting when tourists first arrive and gather to be told what's what. Common sense really!!

I feel sorry for people who need to be told to be security and safety conscious. As teenagers of 17 my friend and I hid our money under the carpet of our B & B. Were we unusually careful or just sensible?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 13, 2018, 09:19:18 PM
Mother doted on her daughter and is now charged with her murder!

A teddy bear with heart-shaped cards read: 'RIP Princess', while a unicorn toy and red roses were also left outside the police cordon.

Amelia was described as an 'angelic' little girl who loved Peppa Pig and the colour pink.

A neighbour said: 'She was a delight, always giggling and smiling. She was just a normal happy toddler who was usually dressed in pink.

'I'd see her out playing in the garden - her mum doted on her.'

Mother, 37, is charged with murder after the body of her four-year-old daughter was found in the garden of their south Wales home

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/mother-37-is-charged-with-murder-after-the-body-of-her-four-year-old-daughter-was-found-in-the-garden-of-their-south-wales-home/ar-AAytB3i?li=BBoPWjQ&ocid=iehp
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2018, 09:35:41 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 13, 2018, 09:19:18 PM
Mother doted on her daughter and is now charged with her murder!

A teddy bear with heart-shaped cards read: 'RIP Princess', while a unicorn toy and red roses were also left outside the police cordon.

Amelia was described as an 'angelic' little girl who loved Peppa Pig and the colour pink.

A neighbour said: 'She was a delight, always giggling and smiling. She was just a normal happy toddler who was usually dressed in pink.

'I'd see her out playing in the garden - her mum doted on her.'

Mother, 37, is charged with murder after the body of her four-year-old daughter was found in the garden of their south Wales home

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/mother-37-is-charged-with-murder-after-the-body-of-her-four-year-old-daughter-was-found-in-the-garden-of-their-south-wales-home/ar-AAytB3i?li=BBoPWjQ&ocid=iehp

Judging by her facebook page her main interests seem to be going out drinking with her friesnds
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 13, 2018, 09:38:40 PM
Like the tapas 9?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2018, 09:42:24 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 13, 2018, 09:38:40 PM
Like the tapas 9?

I wont say anymore because its an ongoing  case...we will see what more comes out
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 13, 2018, 09:45:27 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 13, 2018, 09:19:18 PM
Mother doted on her daughter and is now charged with her murder!

A teddy bear with heart-shaped cards read: 'RIP Princess', while a unicorn toy and red roses were also left outside the police cordon.

Amelia was described as an 'angelic' little girl who loved Peppa Pig and the colour pink.

A neighbour said: 'She was a delight, always giggling and smiling. She was just a normal happy toddler who was usually dressed in pink.

'I'd see her out playing in the garden - her mum doted on her.'

Mother, 37, is charged with murder after the body of her four-year-old daughter was found in the garden of their south Wales home

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/mother-37-is-charged-with-murder-after-the-body-of-her-four-year-old-daughter-was-found-in-the-garden-of-their-south-wales-home/ar-AAytB3i?li=BBoPWjQ&ocid=iehp

Simply awful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2018, 09:55:38 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 13, 2018, 09:45:27 PM
Simply awful.

It is...and lets hope this tragedy isnt being used to point the finger at the mccanns...but of course it is...wth pathfinder comparing her and her friends to the tapas 9
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2018, 10:03:14 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 13, 2018, 09:55:38 PM
It is...and lets hope this tragedy isnt being used to point the finger at the mccanns...but of course it is...wth pathfinder comparing her and her friends to the tapas 9
It wouldn’t have been posted on this forum if it wasn’t an attempt to draw some sort of parallel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 13, 2018, 10:46:25 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 13, 2018, 09:35:41 PM
Judging by her facebook page her main interests seem to be going out drinking with her friesnds

Ready with the judging claws? lets get scratching at her life style choices, single parent, no university degree?

I am  thinking there is  mental health issues behind this. It can be controlled sometimes by drugs and other therapies but then it only takes that one time...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2018, 10:56:20 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 13, 2018, 10:46:25 PM
Ready with the judging claws? lets get scratching at her life style choices, single parent, no university degree?

I am  thinking there is  mental health issues behind this. It can be controlled sometimes by drugs and other therapies but then it only takes that one time...

I didn't bring the case here for discussion.. But doting mother's do not murder their children
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 13, 2018, 10:58:39 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 13, 2018, 10:56:20 PM
I didn't bring the case here for discussion

Yeah. you didn't.  funny though you never ,mentioned the child's suffering just the mothers life style..ah well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 14, 2018, 12:45:52 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2018, 07:12:51 PM
I made no comment on whether they were or they weren't actually, In fact I  asked if such signs were in situ in PdL.  So once again you are wrong.

My post:

I don't think Brietta suggested it was the worst or at greater risk than other holiday destinations, just that we now know there were a number of recent break-ins in the immediate area. It is not uncommon for resorts or public places / facilities to issue a warning about thieves currently operating in an area and to be extra vigilant.  Does this appear to have happened at the OC / other parts of PdL?

It was a very safe feeling place when we were there, but we now know that it was not that safe at all.

Guess it is like people; often the smooth talking, jokey pleasant folk are not what they seem.  They take care to hide their true personalities and bad sides behind the veneer of pleasantness  and friendship
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2018, 06:59:37 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 14, 2018, 12:45:52 AM
It was a very safe feeling place when we were there, but we now know that it was not that safe at all.

Guess it is like people; often the smooth talking, jokey pleasant folk are not what they seem.  They take care to hide their true personalities and bad sides behind the veneer of pleasantness  and friendship

I don't know how to judge the safety of a holiday resort, but I wouldn't leave my flat unlocked with three sleeping children in it no matter where it was. Saying it 'felt safe' isn't a reason, it's an excuse and a bad one too. Nowhere is safe enough to do that imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 14, 2018, 08:25:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2018, 06:59:37 AM
I don't know how to judge the safety of a holiday resort, but I wouldn't leave my flat unlocked with three sleeping children in it no matter where it was. Saying it 'felt safe' isn't a reason, it's an excuse and a bad one too. Nowhere is safe enough to do that imo.

It used to be.  A sad sign of the times.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2018, 10:05:24 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 14, 2018, 08:25:14 AM
It used to be.  A sad sign of the times.

It appeared to be safer years ago. Whether it actually was or whether that was an illusion I don't know. In 1971 33 abductions involving children were reported, as opposed to 1,141 in 2013/14. It can't be assumed that there has been a real increase in these crimes though. There have been other changes such as increased awareness, more openness between children and adults, wider reporting and a greater willingness by police to record and investigate.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37504781

I remember being with a group of workmates one day in the 1960's when we spotted a man at an upstairs window exposing himself. It never occurred to us to tell the police, we just laughed and pointed and went on our way.
 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 14, 2018, 11:55:56 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 13, 2018, 09:55:38 PM
It is...and lets hope this tragedy isnt being used to point the finger at the mccanns...but of course it is...wth pathfinder comparing her and her friends to the tapas 9

It's not a case of pointing the finger but in any unsolved case involving the unexplained disappearance of a young child and where there has been a history of non cooperation with the investigating authorities I consider it only right that all possible scenarios are fully explored. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 14, 2018, 12:08:07 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 14, 2018, 11:55:56 AM
It's not a case of pointing the finger but in any unsolved case involving the unexplained disappearance of a young child and where there has been a history of non cooperation with the investigating authorities I consider it only right that all possible scenarios are fully explored.

One swallow does not a summer make and one instance of an arguida exercising her right to silence does not a history make ... in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 14, 2018, 12:21:33 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 14, 2018, 11:55:56 AM
It's not a case of pointing the finger but in any unsolved case involving the unexplained disappearance of a young child and where there has been a history of non cooperation with the investigating authorities I consider it only right that all possible scenarios are fully explored.

How do you define "a history" of doing something?

A history of doing (whatever) could be interpreted as being a recurrent event. If that's what you mean, could you provide other instances aside from the one time when, as an arguida, she was apparently advised to exercise her right to not respond?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 14, 2018, 12:24:21 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 14, 2018, 12:08:07 PM
One swallow does not a summer make and one instance of an arguida exercising her right to silence does not a history make ... in my opinion.

I hadn't seen your post prior to my own. Yours was far more poetic than mine, but the same question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2018, 01:23:32 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 14, 2018, 11:55:56 AM
It's not a case of pointing the finger but in any unsolved case involving the unexplained disappearance of a young child and where there has been a history of non cooperation with the investigating authorities I consider it only right that all possible scenarios are fully explored.

I see SY as the professionals and am sure they have looked at all possibilities
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 14, 2018, 02:36:18 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 14, 2018, 12:21:33 PM
How do you define "a history" of doing something?

A history of doing (whatever) could be interpreted as being a recurrent event. If that's what you mean, could you provide other instances aside from the one time when, as an arguida, she was apparently advised to exercise her right to not respond?

Well let's see, one could add employing private detectives contrary to Portuguese law, running off back to the UK at the first opportunity and a failure to take part in a requested reconstruction with their tapas pals.  Have I missed anything?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 14, 2018, 04:35:21 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 14, 2018, 02:36:18 PM
Well let's see, one could add employing private detectives contrary to Portuguese law, running off back to the UK at the first opportunity and a failure to take part in a requested reconstruction with their tapas pals.  Have I missed anything?
How can Portuguese law stop UK citizens employing PIs in Spain?
Nothing stopped them returning.  No law against that.
They can't do a reconstruction on their own.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 14, 2018, 05:55:55 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 14, 2018, 04:35:21 PM
How can Portuguese law stop UK citizens employing PIs in Spain?
Nothing stopped them returning.  No law against that.
They can't do a reconstruction on their own.

We've covered this before, Portuguese law prohibits the employing of private investigators when an enquiry is live.  Second point, the parents chose to return to the UK rather than cooperate further with the Portuguese police. Third point, had they really been willing to participate in the reconstruction organised by the Portuguese police I have no doubt that the other members of the tapas group would also have agreed to return to Portugal. All imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 14, 2018, 06:21:34 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 14, 2018, 02:36:18 PM
Well let's see, one could add employing private detectives contrary to Portuguese law, running off back to the UK at the first opportunity and a failure to take part in a requested reconstruction with their tapas pals.  Have I missed anything?

According to which articles of the code?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 15, 2018, 12:18:18 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2018, 07:10:02 PM
And you lose because you suggested that warning notices are a good idea but had no idea if the Ocean Club displayed such a notice.
And almost certainly they did not post such notices.

Cos if they had it would have been all over the internet now.

Using this fact alone, I would say that with virtually certainty, Ocean Club had NO such notices up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2018, 07:50:41 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 15, 2018, 12:18:18 AM
And almost certainly they did not post such notices.

Cos if they had it would have been all over the internet now.

Using this fact alone, I would say that with virtually certainty, Ocean Club had NO such notices up.

IYO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 15, 2018, 08:03:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2018, 07:50:41 AM
IYO

Sadie is right imo.  Any such notices would have been photographed and posted years ago, if they existed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2018, 08:10:34 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 15, 2018, 12:18:18 AM
And almost certainly they did not post such notices.

Cos if they had it would have been all over the internet now.

Using this fact alone, I would say that with virtually certainty, Ocean Club had NO such notices up.
True, OC would have made sure to let the world know such warnings had been given,  as an arse covering exercise. (IMO before y’all get exercised).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 15, 2018, 09:03:51 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2018, 07:50:41 AM
IYO

Not required.  "I would say" does it for me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2018, 09:34:27 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 15, 2018, 08:03:36 AM
Sadie is right imo.  Any such notices would have been photographed and posted years ago, if they existed.

I assume they didn't feel the need to issue warnings therefore. They did recommend use of the safe deposit boxes, and they didn't offer baby listening because the resort wasn't suitable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 15, 2018, 10:00:45 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2018, 09:34:27 AM
I assume they didn't feel the need to issue warnings therefore. They did recommend use of the safe deposit boxes, and they didn't offer baby listening because the resort wasn't suitable.

What kind of service? A physical listening one? I don't quite see why a baby-listening service wasn't suitable if someone was assigned a particular block or at most two. But then, the absence of noise when listening at the door wouldn't necessarily mean that all was well and the time between checks would presumably not be much different to what the group (barring the Paynes) did themselves.

I've noticed a few hotels in various countries that offer some kind of baby-listening device in rooms that someone monitors at the reception and knows where to contact parents if there is any unusual noise. From what I've read, that's usually when the parents are dining in the hotel restaurant, but it could still mean quite a few minutes from noise to parents getting to the bedroom.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2018, 10:02:46 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2018, 09:34:27 AM
I assume they didn't feel the need to issue warnings therefore. They did recommend use of the safe deposit boxes, and they didn't offer baby listening because the resort wasn't suitable.
The need to issue warnings might have been precipitated by a recent increase in the number of break ins and burglaries though.  We are part of a neighbourhood watch scheme in our street.  Every now and then we get a note shoved through the door to tell us that a house in our street was broken into and how it was done, to tell us to be extra vigilant and security conscious.  It certainly doesn’t do any harm to br reminded of this now and agsin does it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2018, 10:13:36 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 15, 2018, 10:02:46 AM
The need to issue warnings might have been precipitated by a recent increase in the number of break ins and burglaries though.  We are part of a neighbourhood watch scheme in our street.  Every now and then we get a note shoved through the door to tell us that a house in our street was broken into and how it was done, to tell us to be extra vigilant and security conscious.  It certainly doesn’t do any harm to br reminded of this now and agsin does it?

What recent increase? None of the OC staff mentioned such an increase.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 15, 2018, 10:15:53 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 15, 2018, 10:02:46 AM
The need to issue warnings might have been precipitated by a recent increase in the number of break ins and burglaries though.  We are part of a neighbourhood watch scheme in our street.  Every now and then we get a note shoved through the door to tell us that a house in our street was broken into and how it was done, to tell us to be extra vigilant and security conscious.  It certainly doesn’t do any harm to br reminded of this now and agsin does it?

All due respect doesn't seem to work does it? for some at least.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2018, 10:30:11 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2018, 10:13:36 AM
What recent increase? None of the OC staff mentioned such an increase.
Were there no break ins at O C in the week(s) before Madeleine’s disappearance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2018, 10:30:48 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 15, 2018, 10:15:53 AM
All due respect doesn't seem to work does it? for some at least.
???
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 15, 2018, 10:57:33 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 15, 2018, 10:30:48 AM
???

If you're getting note's through every now and again telling of break-ins despite increased security, for some its not working is it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2018, 11:26:56 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 15, 2018, 10:57:33 AM
If you're getting note's through every now and again telling of break-ins despite increased security, for some its not working is it?
There’s no way of knowing - there might have been more break-ins had people not been pre-warned there were burglars operating in the area.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 15, 2018, 11:27:43 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 15, 2018, 08:03:36 AM
Sadie is right imo.  Any such notices would have been photographed and posted years ago, if they existed.

I have to agree on that one.  Had there been warning notices posted or handed out to visitors they would have been mentioned in despatches from day one IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2018, 02:10:04 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 15, 2018, 10:30:11 AM
Were there no break ins at O C in the week(s) before Madeleine’s disappearance?

I have a confirmed theft but no confirmation of a forced entry or of the police being informed;

She says that as far as she can remember, during the years that she has worked at the resort, she knows of some thefts from inside the apartments and most recently on 16th April 2007 there was a theft from an apartment in Block 5 L, from where a plasma display screen, credit cards and a mobile phone belonging to the respective guests were taken.

She says that she does not remember having been told that doors or windows had been forced, the guests having said that they had just left the door on the latch, however she is not certain.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARIA-GONCALVES.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2018, 02:15:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2018, 02:10:04 PM
I have a confirmed theft but no confirmation of a forced entry or of the police being informed;

She says that as far as she can remember, during the years that she has worked at the resort, she knows of some thefts from inside the apartments and most recently on 16th April 2007 there was a theft from an apartment in Block 5 L, from where a plasma display screen, credit cards and a mobile phone belonging to the respective guests were taken.

She says that she does not remember having been told that doors or windows had been forced, the guests having said that they had just left the door on the latch, however she is not certain.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARIA-GONCALVES.htm
Was that from the apartment above 5A?  Didn't Mrs Fenn's apartment have an attempted break in?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2018, 02:27:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 15, 2018, 02:15:03 PM
Was that from the apartment above 5A?  Didn't Mrs Fenn's apartment have an attempted break in?

Was it reported to the OC or the police? If not, how was anyone to judge an 'increase' in such crimes?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2018, 02:38:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2018, 02:27:06 PM
Was it reported to the OC or the police? If not, how was anyone to judge an 'increase' in such crimes?
Who knows how many break-ins or attempted break ins were reported to the OC, I don't suppose they would ever have told us.  But we know of two in the weeks leading up to Madeleine's disappearance, also of bogus charity collectors operating in the area.  Whether or not this level of crime is the norm in PdL I cannot say.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on June 15, 2018, 04:13:04 PM
Anyone have the full SP on this?
An application was going to me made etc.
I can find no evidence of it ever coming to fruition. Any takers?

Kate and Gerry McCann bid for access to police files on Madeleine
KATE and Gerry McCann are set to play an active role in the new Portuguese police inquiry into their daughter’s disappearance, it was revealed yesterday. Their lawyers are preparing to apply for the status of “assistentes” or active participants under Portuguese law.

It means the couple could be alerted to new leads, receive case files and even request the questioning of witnesses.

Rogerio Alves, the McCanns’ lawyer, said yesterday that the couple had been informed in advance about the reopening of the inquiry at a meeting in Lisbon last week.

He added: “What it means is that the police understand there are new avenues that should be explored.

“This brings Madeleine’s parents a legitimate expectation not only that the truth will be discovered but also that it will be possible to find Madeleine alive, which is the sole aim of all the efforts they have been ­making.” If successful in their bid to be named assistentes, it will be a remarkable turnaround for the couple who were once officially regarded as suspects – arguidos – over the disappearance of three-year-old Madeleine from their holiday apartment in Praia da Luz in May 2007.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/439256/Kate-and-Gerry-McCann-bid-for-access-to-police-files-on-Madeleine
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 15, 2018, 05:30:34 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 15, 2018, 04:13:04 PM
Anyone have the full SP on this?
An application was going to me made etc.
I can find no evidence of it ever coming to fruition. Any takers?

Kate and Gerry McCann bid for access to police files on Madeleine
KATE and Gerry McCann are set to play an active role in the new Portuguese police inquiry into their daughter’s disappearance, it was revealed yesterday. Their lawyers are preparing to apply for the status of “assistentes” or active participants under Portuguese law.

It means the couple could be alerted to new leads, receive case files and even request the questioning of witnesses.

Rogerio Alves, the McCanns’ lawyer, said yesterday that the couple had been informed in advance about the reopening of the inquiry at a meeting in Lisbon last week.

He added: “What it means is that the police understand there are new avenues that should be explored.

“This brings Madeleine’s parents a legitimate expectation not only that the truth will be discovered but also that it will be possible to find Madeleine alive, which is the sole aim of all the efforts they have been ­making.” If successful in their bid to be named assistentes, it will be a remarkable turnaround for the couple who were once officially regarded as suspects – arguidos – over the disappearance of three-year-old Madeleine from their holiday apartment in Praia da Luz in May 2007.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/439256/Kate-and-Gerry-McCann-bid-for-access-to-police-files-on-Madeleine

Did not Amaral apply to be one of those?

Did we hear any more about that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 15, 2018, 06:36:49 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on June 15, 2018, 04:13:04 PM
Anyone have the full SP on this?
An application was going to me made etc.
I can find no evidence of it ever coming to fruition. Any takers?

Kate and Gerry McCann bid for access to police files on Madeleine
KATE and Gerry McCann are set to play an active role in the new Portuguese police inquiry into their daughter’s disappearance, it was revealed yesterday. Their lawyers are preparing to apply for the status of “assistentes” or active participants under Portuguese law.

It means the couple could be alerted to new leads, receive case files and even request the questioning of witnesses.

Rogerio Alves, the McCanns’ lawyer, said yesterday that the couple had been informed in advance about the reopening of the inquiry at a meeting in Lisbon last week.

He added: “What it means is that the police understand there are new avenues that should be explored.

“This brings Madeleine’s parents a legitimate expectation not only that the truth will be discovered but also that it will be possible to find Madeleine alive, which is the sole aim of all the efforts they have been ­making.” If successful in their bid to be named assistentes, it will be a remarkable turnaround for the couple who were once officially regarded as suspects – arguidos – over the disappearance of three-year-old Madeleine from their holiday apartment in Praia da Luz in May 2007.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/439256/Kate-and-Gerry-McCann-bid-for-access-to-police-files-on-Madeleine


I never quite worked it out. They appear to have applied for the status, but it was refused because they were made arguidos in the meantime, then there's a letter from their lawyer saying that the two weren't incompatible... then that seems to be it (unless there's something lurking elsewhere in the files).
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MCCANNS_ASSISTENTE.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 29, 2018, 08:13:19 PM
New lead as second William Tyrrell search finishes

Detectives searching for William Tyrrell have uncovered new information as they wrap up a targeted search of bushland near the NSW mid-north coast town of Kendall.

Search teams and cadaver dogs will now return to the main, larger search area near William's grandmother's home from where the toddler disappeared in September 2014.

The tiny community has been urged to cast a suspicious eye over family members,
friends and neighbours as pressure mounts to solve the mystery.

Detective Chief Inspector Gary Jubelin earlier this week announced the investigation had zoned in on a second small patch of bushland about four kilometres from the home.

On Friday he confirmed police had completed the second search at Batar Creek without finding specific evidence - but new leads had emerged.

"While we have not located evidence of William being in this location, investigators have gained information from the search," he said in a statement.

AAP understands the new information did not come from within the search zone itself but was uncovered in the last few days. It was not a tip-off from the public.

The swarming police presence around the town is designed to put "pressure" on a person in the Kendall surrounds who has held back information from investigators.

"There is a person out there who knows why we are searching this area and will no doubt be feeling pressure from the intensity of the investigation," Det Insp Jubelin said.

He urged people to be aware of other peoples' behaviour in case they begin to crack under the scrutiny.

"I would encourage them to come forward with any information they have - William's family need answers as to what happened to their little boy."

The main search is expected to last for another week and a half.

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/new-lead-as-second-william-tyrrell-search-finishes
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 29, 2018, 09:13:39 PM
William Tyrrell: Strike Force Rosann returns on evidence mission to present case beyond reasonable doubt

THE search area has been narrowed and the NSW State Coroner is overseeing the next move by Strike Force Rosann in the ongoing investigation into the disappearance of William Tyrrell.

More than 15,000 pieces of information and lines of inquiry over the last three and a half years has brought the police contingent, led by Detective Chief Inspector Gary Jubelin, back to where it all began – Benaroon Drive in Kendall where the three-and-a-half year old disappeared without a trace on September 12, 2014.

Today, the street was noticeably absent of residents as media and police lined the roadside outside the home perched high on a corner block from where the little boy disappeared. The scrum stretched up the hill and to the fringe of thick bushland where the Strike Force has set up a command post – facing directly into a void of vegetation that may just hold some answers.

This time around they are not looking for a lost child, Det Ch Insp Jubelin said. The new search will be concentrated to just three square kilometres and will have a forensic focus.

The Strike Force, he said, want absolute certainty they have the investigation covered should it result in an arrest or go to an inquest.

“The search, which we anticipate will take about three to four weeks, will focus on a forensic search. We will be co-ordinating and documenting the areas we search and the purpose of this evidence, whether it’s presented to a court – coroner or criminal – is to prove that beyond reasonable doubt, William’s disappearance was the result of human intervention and not misadventure,” Det Ch Insp Jubelin said from Benaroon Drive on June 13.

Fifty officers from the Public Order and Riot Squad have already entered bushland surrounding the property from where William vanished. The property at the time was owned by his grandmother and he was visiting with his foster family on the day of his suspected abduction.

They will scour the same area covered by police and emergency services in the 10 days after the child went missing, tracing every step and collecting evidence.

“(The search) will be of a lesser scale than last time but it will be more intense – roughly over three square kilometres,” Det Insp Jubelin said.

“Fifty officers are involved in the search from the Public Order and Riot Squad and the State Planning Unit – they are the experts in this field. We are outlining what we require and they are providing the services.

“What I'm hoping from this search is we will have definitive evidence that we can present to a court if necessary.”

Det Insp Jubelin said time will be no barrier to finding evidence despite the fact the region has experienced the extremes of weather conditions over the last three years.

There is strategy behind the latest development in the investigation, he said, and refused to conclude the search for William had exhausted all possibility of an outcome.

"We have not given up on this investigation. We are committed to finding out what happened to William. We are mindful it has been three and half years since William disappeared and we still have not solved this matter,” he said.

The Tyrrell case will go to an inquest if it can’t be solved from a criminal perspective. But Det Insp Jubelin said there are still strong lines of inquiry and people of interest that have the focus of the Strike Force.

He said among those many lines of inquiry were early allegations of an active paedophile ring operating out of the mid north coast.

“Until this matter is solved we will keep all lines of inquiry open. We need conclusive evidence before I can say one thing or another. That line of inquiry was a legitimate line of inquiry that we’ve explore and that didn’t provide any information that led to the charging of any person or the recovery of William.

“It’s appropriate for us at this particular point in time to conduct this search,” he said.

“What we have done is build up a database of evidence that we readily refer to. The search we are doing and the defined areas we are looking at is for a reason.

“Everything we do is planned. There is strategy behind every time we talk to the media and every inquiry we do. It's not done in an ad hoc fashion.

“We've got a deliberate plan and it was coordinated at this time because it suited the investigation.”

William was taken into foster care at 11 months old.

Police have previously ruled out his foster and biological families as having played a role in his disappearance.

A $1 million reward, unique in that it’s offered for the recovery of William and not the conviction of a person, still stands.

“We strongly believe there are people out there who have information on this and I make a point to those people – if you do have information concerning what happened to William you are at risk of committing a criminal offence by concealing an offence if you do not come forward,” Det Insp Jubelin said.

“I suggest you come to us before we come to you.”

Strike Force Rosann continues to brief the family on the investigation and the latest leads and thanked the Kendall community for its ongoing support.

https://www.portnews.com.au/story/5465754/arrest-or-inquest-william-tyrrell-investigators-want-absolute-certainty/?src=rss
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 30, 2018, 12:00:39 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 29, 2018, 09:13:39 PM
William Tyrrell: Strike Force Rosann returns on evidence mission to present case beyond reasonable doubt

THE search area has been narrowed and the NSW State Coroner is overseeing the next move by Strike Force Rosann in the ongoing investigation into the disappearance of William Tyrrell.

More than 15,000 pieces of information and lines of inquiry over the last three and a half years has brought the police contingent, led by Detective Chief Inspector Gary Jubelin, back to where it all began – Benaroon Drive in Kendall where the three-and-a-half year old disappeared without a trace on September 12, 2014.

Today, the street was noticeably absent of residents as media and police lined the roadside outside the home perched high on a corner block from where the little boy disappeared. The scrum stretched up the hill and to the fringe of thick bushland where the Strike Force has set up a command post – facing directly into a void of vegetation that may just hold some answers.

This time around they are not looking for a lost child, Det Ch Insp Jubelin said. The new search will be concentrated to just three square kilometres and will have a forensic focus.

The Strike Force, he said, want absolute certainty they have the investigation covered should it result in an arrest or go to an inquest.

“The search, which we anticipate will take about three to four weeks, will focus on a forensic search. We will be co-ordinating and documenting the areas we search and the purpose of this evidence, whether it’s presented to a court – coroner or criminal – is to prove that beyond reasonable doubt, William’s disappearance was the result of human intervention and not misadventure,” Det Ch Insp Jubelin said from Benaroon Drive on June 13.

Fifty officers from the Public Order and Riot Squad have already entered bushland surrounding the property from where William vanished. The property at the time was owned by his grandmother and he was visiting with his foster family on the day of his suspected abduction.

They will scour the same area covered by police and emergency services in the 10 days after the child went missing, tracing every step and collecting evidence.

“(The search) will be of a lesser scale than last time but it will be more intense – roughly over three square kilometres,” Det Insp Jubelin said.

“Fifty officers are involved in the search from the Public Order and Riot Squad and the State Planning Unit – they are the experts in this field. We are outlining what we require and they are providing the services.

“What I'm hoping from this search is we will have definitive evidence that we can present to a court if necessary.”

Det Insp Jubelin said time will be no barrier to finding evidence despite the fact the region has experienced the extremes of weather conditions over the last three years.

There is strategy behind the latest development in the investigation, he said, and refused to conclude the search for William had exhausted all possibility of an outcome.

"We have not given up on this investigation. We are committed to finding out what happened to William. We are mindful it has been three and half years since William disappeared and we still have not solved this matter,” he said.

The Tyrrell case will go to an inquest if it can’t be solved from a criminal perspective. But Det Insp Jubelin said there are still strong lines of inquiry and people of interest that have the focus of the Strike Force.

He said among those many lines of inquiry were early allegations of an active paedophile ring operating out of the mid north coast.

“Until this matter is solved we will keep all lines of inquiry open. We need conclusive evidence before I can say one thing or another. That line of inquiry was a legitimate line of inquiry that we’ve explore and that didn’t provide any information that led to the charging of any person or the recovery of William.

“It’s appropriate for us at this particular point in time to conduct this search,” he said.

“What we have done is build up a database of evidence that we readily refer to. The search we are doing and the defined areas we are looking at is for a reason.

“Everything we do is planned. There is strategy behind every time we talk to the media and every inquiry we do. It's not done in an ad hoc fashion.

“We've got a deliberate plan and it was coordinated at this time because it suited the investigation.”

William was taken into foster care at 11 months old.

Police have previously ruled out his foster and biological families as having played a role in his disappearance.

A $1 million reward, unique in that it’s offered for the recovery of William and not the conviction of a person, still stands.

“We strongly believe there are people out there who have information on this and I make a point to those people – if you do have information concerning what happened to William you are at risk of committing a criminal offence by concealing an offence if you do not come forward,” Det Insp Jubelin said.

“I suggest you come to us before we come to you.”

Strike Force Rosann continues to brief the family on the investigation and the latest leads and thanked the Kendall community for its ongoing support.

https://www.portnews.com.au/story/5465754/arrest-or-inquest-william-tyrrell-investigators-want-absolute-certainty/?src=rss
A virtually impossible task even if they were to find the remains of the little boy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 06:59:12 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 30, 2018, 12:00:39 AM
A virtually impossible task even if they were to find the remains of the little boy.

It sounds like they have suspicions and are trying to flush the person out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 30, 2018, 10:23:07 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 06:59:12 AM
It sounds like they have suspicions and are trying to flush the person out.
Possible - but I wonder if it will work?
  Depends on what they are likely to find.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 30, 2018, 10:50:30 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 29, 2018, 09:13:39 PM
William Tyrrell: Strike Force Rosann returns on evidence mission to present case beyond reasonable doubt

THE search area has been narrowed and the NSW State Coroner is overseeing the next move by Strike Force Rosann in the ongoing investigation into the disappearance of William Tyrrell.

More than 15,000 pieces of information and lines of inquiry over the last three and a half years has brought the police contingent, led by Detective Chief Inspector Gary Jubelin, back to where it all began – Benaroon Drive in Kendall where the three-and-a-half year old disappeared without a trace on September 12, 2014.

Today, the street was noticeably absent of residents as media and police lined the roadside outside the home perched high on a corner block from where the little boy disappeared. The scrum stretched up the hill and to the fringe of thick bushland where the Strike Force has set up a command post – facing directly into a void of vegetation that may just hold some answers.

This time around they are not looking for a lost child, Det Ch Insp Jubelin said. The new search will be concentrated to just three square kilometres and will have a forensic focus.

The Strike Force, he said, want absolute certainty they have the investigation covered should it result in an arrest or go to an inquest.

“The search, which we anticipate will take about three to four weeks, will focus on a forensic search. We will be co-ordinating and documenting the areas we search and the purpose of this evidence, whether it’s presented to a court – coroner or criminal – is to prove that beyond reasonable doubt, William’s disappearance was the result of human intervention and not misadventure,” Det Ch Insp Jubelin said from Benaroon Drive on June 13.

Fifty officers from the Public Order and Riot Squad have already entered bushland surrounding the property from where William vanished. The property at the time was owned by his grandmother and he was visiting with his foster family on the day of his suspected abduction.

They will scour the same area covered by police and emergency services in the 10 days after the child went missing, tracing every step and collecting evidence.

“(The search) will be of a lesser scale than last time but it will be more intense – roughly over three square kilometres,” Det Insp Jubelin said.

“Fifty officers are involved in the search from the Public Order and Riot Squad and the State Planning Unit – they are the experts in this field. We are outlining what we require and they are providing the services.

“What I'm hoping from this search is we will have definitive evidence that we can present to a court if necessary.”

Det Insp Jubelin said time will be no barrier to finding evidence despite the fact the region has experienced the extremes of weather conditions over the last three years.

There is strategy behind the latest development in the investigation, he said, and refused to conclude the search for William had exhausted all possibility of an outcome.

"We have not given up on this investigation. We are committed to finding out what happened to William. We are mindful it has been three and half years since William disappeared and we still have not solved this matter,” he said.

The Tyrrell case will go to an inquest if it can’t be solved from a criminal perspective. But Det Insp Jubelin said there are still strong lines of inquiry and people of interest that have the focus of the Strike Force.

He said among those many lines of inquiry were early allegations of an active paedophile ring operating out of the mid north coast.

“Until this matter is solved we will keep all lines of inquiry open. We need conclusive evidence before I can say one thing or another. That line of inquiry was a legitimate line of inquiry that we’ve explore and that didn’t provide any information that led to the charging of any person or the recovery of William.

“It’s appropriate for us at this particular point in time to conduct this search,” he said.

“What we have done is build up a database of evidence that we readily refer to. The search we are doing and the defined areas we are looking at is for a reason.

“Everything we do is planned. There is strategy behind every time we talk to the media and every inquiry we do. It's not done in an ad hoc fashion.

“We've got a deliberate plan and it was coordinated at this time because it suited the investigation.”

William was taken into foster care at 11 months old.

Police have previously ruled out his foster and biological families as having played a role in his disappearance.

A $1 million reward, unique in that it’s offered for the recovery of William and not the conviction of a person, still stands.

“We strongly believe there are people out there who have information on this and I make a point to those people – if you do have information concerning what happened to William you are at risk of committing a criminal offence by concealing an offence if you do not come forward,” Det Insp Jubelin said.

“I suggest you come to us before we come to you.”

Strike Force Rosann continues to brief the family on the investigation and the latest leads and thanked the Kendall community for its ongoing support.

https://www.portnews.com.au/story/5465754/arrest-or-inquest-william-tyrrell-investigators-want-absolute-certainty/?src=rss


Yes, very interesting. This part also caught my attention "A $1 million reward, unique in that it’s offered for the recovery of William and not the conviction of a person, still stands" That is a lot of money! I would guess money isn't a factor to motivate those involved.
It is also interesting that a random dog walker doesn't pass by  -find the body and report it to grab the money...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 10:57:04 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 30, 2018, 10:23:07 AM
Possible - but I wonder if it will work?
  Depends on what they are likely to find.

Well, they have clearly asked people to watch each other while they pile on the psychological pressure by theit activities.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 30, 2018, 11:09:58 AM
Note by Editor:

Please keep all conversations civil, constructive and to the point. Let's try and get through the weekend with as few reports as possible being made. 

Have a great weekend everyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 30, 2018, 11:21:08 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 06:59:12 AM
It sounds like they have suspicions and are trying to flush the person out.

Yes, it does, whether they've narrowed their suspects down to one or several possibilities.

As in any country, they've had major screw-ups - cf the dingo case - (IMO - before anyone asks me to provide links), but also some extraordinary successes - cf Daniel Morcombe.

In the few cases I've read about, they now seem to have a clear media strategy (as does the UK, when it works).



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 11:36:14 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 30, 2018, 11:21:08 AM
Yes, it does, whether they've narrowed their suspects down to one or several possibilities.

As in any country, they've had major screw-ups - cf the dingo case - (IMO - before anyone asks me to provide links), but also some extraordinary successes - cf Daniel Morcombe.

In the few cases I've read about, they now seem to have a clear media strategy (as does the UK, when it works).

They do seem to be focusing on the immediate area, not further afield. If it doesn't work it will be baclk to the drawing board, I suppose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 30, 2018, 11:39:57 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 11:36:14 AM
They do seem to be focusing on the immediate area, not further afield. If it doesn't work it will be baclk to the drawing board, I suppose.
Huge investment of money too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 11:49:50 AM
Just to wander off topic, I wonder why the O'Briens booked a one bedroomed apartment with a cot? Where was their eldest daughter going to sleep before they got upgraded to a two bedroomed apartment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 30, 2018, 11:51:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 11:49:50 AM
Just to wander off topic, I wonder why the O'Briens booked a one bedroomed apartment with a cot? Where was their eldest daughter going to sleep before they got upgraded to a two bedroomed apartment.
Cite please showing they booked "a one bedroomed apartment with a cot"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 30, 2018, 11:54:13 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 11:36:14 AM
They do seem to be focusing on the immediate area, not further afield. If it doesn't work it will be baclk to the drawing board, I suppose.

There might indeed be an element of bluff in that tactic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 12:48:52 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 30, 2018, 11:51:41 AM
Cite please showing they booked "a one bedroomed apartment with a cot"

(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P2/02_VOLUME_IIa_Page_334.jpg)

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P2/02_VOLUME_IIa_Page_334.jpg

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 30, 2018, 06:37:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 12:48:52 PM
(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P2/02_VOLUME_IIa_Page_334.jpg)

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P2/02_VOLUME_IIa_Page_334.jpg
You say "they booked"  who are you referring to?  There maybe an error on the MW property arrival list but we can't say that was a result of something Russell has done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 30, 2018, 07:01:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 11:49:50 AM
Just to wander off topic, I wonder why the O'Briens booked a one bedroomed apartment with a cot? Where was their eldest daughter going to sleep before they got upgraded to a two bedroomed apartment.
In the bath?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 30, 2018, 07:14:10 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 30, 2018, 07:01:57 PM
In the bath?
Has anyone slept in the bath (as a bed)?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 07:29:01 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 30, 2018, 06:37:31 PM
You say "they booked"  who are you referring to?  There maybe an error on the MW property arrival list but we can't say that was a result of something Russell has done.

Nope.

I think Matt and, erm, Russ and Jane had only booked a one bedroomed one but they actually did get a two bedroomed one.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 30, 2018, 07:32:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 11:49:50 AM
Just to wander off topic, I wonder why the O'Briens booked a one bedroomed apartment with a cot? Where was their eldest daughter going to sleep before they got upgraded to a two bedroomed apartment.
Most one here will have a sofa bed in the lounge
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 07:36:32 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 30, 2018, 07:32:29 PM
Most one here will have a sofa bed in the lounge

Is that based on any knowledge or is it just a guess? Putting a child to bed in the living room sounds like a grim idea to me. or do you think they were going to use it, if it existed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 30, 2018, 07:38:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 07:36:32 PM
Is that based on any knowledge or is it just a guess? Putting a child to bed in the living room sounds like a grim idea to me. or do you think they were going to use it, if it existed?

I'm stating a fact......have you ever stayed in such a resort....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 30, 2018, 07:50:16 PM
https://youtu.be/c4NMYPsFKb8?t=2506

Eddie's inspection of 5D. There are 2 bedrooms in that apartment,

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 30, 2018, 07:56:13 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 07:36:32 PM
Is that based on any knowledge or is it just a guess? Putting a child to bed in the living room sounds like a grim idea to me. or do you think they were going to use it, if it existed?
Perhaps all the girls were going to stay in the bedroom and the husband was going to kip in the bath.  or on the sofa even.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 30, 2018, 08:04:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 07:36:32 PM
Is that based on any knowledge or is it just a guess? Putting a child to bed in the living room sounds like a grim idea to me. or do you think they were going to use it, if it existed?

All sounds a bit cheapskate
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 30, 2018, 08:24:07 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 30, 2018, 08:04:54 PM
All sounds a bit cheapskate

Every penny’s a prisoner  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 30, 2018, 08:39:49 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 30, 2018, 06:37:31 PM
You say "they booked"  who are you referring to?  There maybe an error on the MW property arrival list but we can't say that was a result of something Russell has done.

I was under the impression that David Payne had organised the holiday and had made the bookings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 09:45:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 30, 2018, 07:38:41 PM
I'm stating a fact......have you ever stayed in such a resort....

If you're stating a fact you will have evidence, of course. I don't think the sofas in 5A were sofa beds.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 30, 2018, 09:50:59 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 30, 2018, 08:39:49 PM
I was under the impression that David Payne had organised the holiday and had made the bookings.
That is what it seems like on the sheet.  G-unit originally asked "I wonder why the O'Briens booked a one bedroomed apartment with a cot?".
I don't see why Russell is being blamed for something others had done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 01, 2018, 02:58:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 07:29:01 PM
Nope.

I think Matt and, erm, Russ and Jane had only booked a one bedroomed one but they actually did get a two bedroomed one.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
OK but things are not quite as she says for the McCanns had a two bedroomed apartment.
"Russ and Jane had only booked a one bedroomed one but they actually did get a two bedroomed one."  So regardless of what it said on the MW form they got a two bedroomed apartment.   The form does not have room numbers allocated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 01, 2018, 09:21:34 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 30, 2018, 09:50:59 PM
That is what it seems like on the sheet.  G-unit originally asked "I wonder why the O'Briens booked a one bedroomed apartment with a cot?".
I don't see why Russell is being blamed for something others had done.

I don't see that anyone is being blamed - just an observation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 01, 2018, 11:05:39 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 30, 2018, 12:48:52 PM
(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P2/02_VOLUME_IIa_Page_334.jpg)

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P2/02_VOLUME_IIa_Page_334.jpg
That's really quite interesting.

The report is dated 27 Apr and they all trundled up on the 28th.

Had the change to a 2 bed apt been requested pre-Apr 27 but not noted on the booking sheet?

Or was this issue resolved on the Faro to OC bus?

Or did they have to go to OC Reception to rectify it?

Finally, is there anywhere a list of the OC apts in block 5 showing how many bedrooms each had?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 01, 2018, 11:08:23 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 01, 2018, 11:05:39 AM
That's really quite interesting.

The report is dated 27 Apr and they all trundled up on the 28th.

Had the change to a 2 bed apt been requested pre-Apr 27 but not noted on the booking sheet?

Or was this issue resolved on the Faro to OC bus?

Or did they have to go to OC Reception to rectify it?

Finally, is there anywhere a list of the OC apts in block 5 showing how many bedrooms each had?

all of zero importance...imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 01, 2018, 11:46:03 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 01, 2018, 11:08:23 AM
all of zero importance...imo
Not quite zero, for were they originally booked for 5C.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 01, 2018, 02:55:18 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 01, 2018, 11:05:39 AM
That's really quite interesting.

The report is dated 27 Apr and they all trundled up on the 28th.

Had the change to a 2 bed apt been requested pre-Apr 27 but not noted on the booking sheet?

Or was this issue resolved on the Faro to OC bus?

Or did they have to go to OC Reception to rectify it?

Finally, is there anywhere a list of the OC apts in block 5 showing how many bedrooms each had?

They were given 5D, which was a two bedroomed apartment. It was on the computer sheets as a T1 apartment, however; one bedroom. I think they were upgraded but didn't have to pay extra. In my opinion that was done in order to keep the group together, following the fuss they made to ensure that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 01, 2018, 06:51:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 01, 2018, 02:55:18 PM
They were given 5D, which was a two bedroomed apartment. It was on the computer sheets as a T1 apartment, however; one bedroom. I think they were upgraded but didn't have to pay extra. In my opinion that was done in order to keep the group together, following the fuss they made to ensure that.
What do you mean by "T1 apartment"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 01, 2018, 07:05:35 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 01, 2018, 06:51:19 PM
What do you mean by "T1 apartment"?

The first reference is the apartment number, the second one gives it's size. T1, 2 or 3 denotes bedrooms. So a one-bedroom apartment was booked and that's what was paid for, hence putting a T2 down as a T1.

(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P2/02_VOLUME_IIa_Page_351.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 03, 2018, 09:31:45 AM
Sorry to interrupt,  but I have a question not related to what you are discussing.

Does anyone know who the occupier of 5g was?    The apartment which had the fridge hanging open with meat inside it going rotten.

I find it strange that someone who was going away would leave meat in their fridge and then leave the door open.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 03, 2018, 10:05:20 AM
Quote from: Lace on July 03, 2018, 09:31:45 AM
Sorry to interrupt,  but I have a question not related to what you are discussing.

Does anyone know who the occupier of 5g was?    The apartment which had the fridge hanging open with meat inside it going rotten.

I find it strange that someone who was going away would leave meat in their fridge and then leave the door open.

I think you mean G5J. I have seen nothing to indicate when or by whom that apartment was occupied. Someone claimed the occupants left on 4th May, but no cite was provided.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 03, 2018, 11:28:17 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 03, 2018, 10:05:20 AM
I think you mean G5J. I have seen nothing to indicate when or by whom that apartment was occupied. Someone claimed the occupants left on 4th May, but no cite was provided.
4th May would be an odd departure date.  Even if 5J was owner-occupied.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 03, 2018, 11:41:57 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 03, 2018, 11:28:17 AM
4th May would be an odd departure date.  Even if 5J was owner-occupied.

Do you know which apartment was 5J? The Moyes were in 5K, I do know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 03, 2018, 12:03:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 03, 2018, 11:41:57 AM
Do you know which apartment was 5J? The Moyes were in 5K, I do know.
Not off the top of my head.  It must be possible to match up 5J, due to the police entering, but that would not tell me who the occupants were.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 03, 2018, 12:15:20 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 03, 2018, 12:03:23 PM
Not off the top of my head.  It must be possible to match up 5J, due to the police entering, but that would not tell me who the occupants were.

It doesn't seem to have been connected to the Ocean Club, according to the Block 5 cleaner. Did she clean G5G or not? Perhaps not, but she noticed it was occupied.

Regarding her job, she points out that she is the person who is responsible for cleaning Block 5, more specifically apartments A, B, C, D, H, I, K, L, M and P, and also states that when the child disappeared only apartments A, B, D, G, H and K were occupied.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 04, 2018, 07:59:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 03, 2018, 10:05:20 AM
I think you mean G5J. I have seen nothing to indicate when or by whom that apartment was occupied. Someone claimed the occupants left on 4th May, but no cite was provided.

Yes sorry that's the apartment I meant.  That's interesting if they left on the 4th,   I wonder who they were.  Thanks G-Unit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 06, 2018, 10:32:36 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 06, 2018, 08:57:46 PM
As someone with knowledge of mental illness can you give us a cite as to when homosexuality was considered a mental illness by the Medical profession

Do the research yourself!   people were placed in mental hospitals for many years by families they were treated in the most abhorrent ways, some would argue inhumane.  I am shocked you do not know about our history before the NHS and even after. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 09, 2018, 10:47:08 PM
I been watching developments in Thailand re the boys lost in the caves....their parents have done basically nothing...just sat on their derrieres and let other people rescue their children...why have the parents not dived into the caves themselves....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 09, 2018, 11:22:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 09, 2018, 10:47:08 PM
I been watching developments in Thailand re the boys lost in the caves....their parents have done basically nothing...just sat on their derrieres and let other people rescue their children...why have the parents not dived into the caves themselves....
Could it be they don't know how to swim?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 10, 2018, 07:08:54 AM
The rescue operation in Thailand seems to be on it's way to a successful conclusion (fingers crossed). What a great example of how wonderful human beings can be; risking their own lives to help strangers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on July 10, 2018, 07:30:47 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 09, 2018, 10:47:08 PM
I been watching developments in Thailand re the boys lost in the caves....their parents have done basically nothing...just sat on their derrieres and let other people rescue their children...why have the parents not dived into the caves themselves....

I assume that was an attempt at a bad joke Davel as scuba diving through hundreds of metres of cave systems is not to be attempted by the untrained. IMO.

Of course that is totally different to looking in bins and asking people questions about a missing child, particularly as it is significantly more dangerous to the searcher.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on July 10, 2018, 07:47:05 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 09, 2018, 10:47:08 PM
I been watching developments in Thailand re the boys lost in the caves....their parents have done basically nothing...just sat on their derrieres and let other people rescue their children...why have the parents not dived into the caves themselves....


Very tacky D - when you use someones torment to protect mccanns

This isn't over yet and could end tragically .

The parents have been there for their children.

 Im sure each one of them would dive in that water - if they were allowed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 11:39:39 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 09, 2018, 10:47:08 PM
I been watching developments in Thailand re the boys lost in the caves....their parents have done basically nothing...just sat on their derrieres and let other people rescue their children...why have the parents not dived into the caves themselves....

The rescue is nothing short of a miracle.

It was only made possible through the co-operation of government international, national and local and the skill and expertise of properly trained and equipped professionals.

The parents could do nothing to help their boys.

Kate and Gerry McCann had to shoulder every aspect of searching for Madeleine from concept, co-ordination to execution.

The thought that they or any other mortal human being should be expected to do that while facing criticism for doing it is certainly in my opinion, a reflection of something very dark in the psyche of those who oppose them at every step.

The professionals are now there and doing the job that should never have been given up on in the first instance.  But thank God the parents of the Thai boys didn't have to wait for as long as Madeleine's parents had to wait for that to happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 10, 2018, 11:51:50 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 11:39:39 AM
The rescue is nothing short of a miracle.

It was only made possible through the co-operation of government international, national and local and the skill and expertise of properly trained and equipped professionals.

The parents could do nothing to help their boys.

Kate and Gerry McCann had to shoulder every aspect of searching for Madeleine from concept, co-ordination to execution.

The thought that they or any other mortal human being should be expected to do that while facing criticism for doing it is certainly in my opinion, a reflection of something very dark in the psyche of those who oppose them at every step.

The professionals are now there and doing the job that should never have been given up on in the first instance.  But thank God the parents of the Thai boys didn't have to wait for as long as Madeleine's parents had to wait for that to happen.

The McCanns weren't 'expected' to do anything, they chose to do what they did. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on July 10, 2018, 11:59:54 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 11:39:39 AM
The rescue is nothing short of a miracle.

It was only made possible through the co-operation of government international, national and local and the skill and expertise of properly trained and equipped professionals.

The parents could do nothing to help their boys.

Kate and Gerry McCann had to shoulder every aspect of searching for Madeleine from concept, co-ordination to execution.

The thought that they or any other mortal human being should be expected to do that while facing criticism for doing it is certainly in my opinion, a reflection of something very dark in the psyche of those who oppose them at every step.

The professionals are now there and doing the job that should never have been given up on in the first instance.  But thank God the parents of the Thai boys didn't have to wait for as long as Madeleine's parents had to wait for that to happen.

Not once did the McCanns take part in an official organised search so your criticism of the police is very misplaced. Damage limitation was the name of the game.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 12:08:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 10, 2018, 11:51:50 AM
The McCanns weren't 'expected' to do anything, they chose to do what they did.

They 'chose' to continue looking for their daughter when the police had thrown in the towel.  In my opinion having no alternative hardly equates with choice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 12:15:48 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on July 10, 2018, 11:59:54 AM
Not once did the McCanns take part in an official organised search so your criticism of the police is very misplaced. Damage limitation was the name of the game.

In my opinion individuals have no locus in what happens with the contract between the victim of crime and the investigating authorities.

In my opinion Madeleine McCann was the victim of negligence on the part of the investigators the second it was decided to try to make the evidence fit the crime rather than following the evidence to see where it would lead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 10, 2018, 12:33:44 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 12:08:28 PM
They 'chose' to continue looking for their daughter when the police had thrown in the towel.  In my opinion having no alternative hardly equates with choice.

They chose to begin their campaign before the police had picked up the towel, let alone thrown it in.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on July 10, 2018, 12:37:05 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 12:08:28 PM
They 'chose' to continue looking for their daughter when the police had thrown in the towel.  In my opinion having no alternative hardly equates with choice.

Kate McCann had a choice at the arguida interview but she chose self preservation over full and frank disclosure.  No wonder the police too chose to end the investigation. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on July 10, 2018, 12:42:57 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 12:15:48 PM
In my opinion individuals have no locus in what happens with the contract between the victim of crime and the investigating authorities.

In my opinion Madeleine McCann was the victim of negligence on the part of the investigators the second it was decided to try to make the evidence fit the crime rather than following the evidence to see where it would lead.

Unbelievable Brietta, claiming Maddie was a victim of police negligence when clearly it was down to her useless parents.  The police are duty bound to pursue every scenario and now you criticise them for doing their job.  You are aware that most child abduction cases involve a family member?  The Cipriano case being a classic example.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 10, 2018, 01:00:10 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on July 10, 2018, 12:42:57 PM
Unbelievable Brietta, claiming Maddie was a victim of police negligence when clearly it was down to her useless parents.  The police are duty bound to pursue every scenario and now you criticise them for doing their job.  You are aware that most child abduction cases involve a family member?  The Cipriano case being a classic example.

Neither parent had absconded with Madeleine. Which other family member could have been responsible iyo?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 01:09:12 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on July 10, 2018, 12:42:57 PM
Unbelievable Brietta, claiming Maddie was a victim of police negligence when clearly it was down to her useless parents.  The police are duty bound to pursue every scenario and now you criticise them for doing their job.  You are aware that most child abduction cases involve a family member?  The Cipriano case being a classic example.

It is easy to be judgemental in retrospect for the simple reason that hindsight is an exact science.  But in my opinion the minute a police officer oversteps the bounds of his/her responsibility to investigate and instead adopts the mantle of forensic expert, prosecution and judge the path is opened towards very dangerous ground indeed.

In my opinion Madeleine McCann was the victim ... argue among yourselves whether of one person or a team ... who let her, as a missing child and the victim of crime down very badly indeed.

The only person of any importance here was Madeleine and the job of collecting evidence to show what might have become of her was in my opinion botched big style.
If it hadn't been ... there would have been very little 'unfinished business' to be uncovered when Scotland Yard and Policia Judiciaria took on the review of the case independent of each other.

In my opinion following the evidence might have led to the perpetrator/s; but deciding who the perp was without supporting evidence and then looking for the evidence is a recipe for disaster ... and so it proved to be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on July 10, 2018, 01:26:38 PM
Quote from: misty on July 10, 2018, 01:00:10 PM
Neither parent had absconded with Madeleine. Which other family member could have been responsible iyo?

Well they wouldn't have, had she succumbed to an accident in the apartment as the police theorised.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on July 10, 2018, 01:29:18 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 01:09:12 PM
It is easy to be judgemental in retrospect for the simple reason that hindsight is an exact science.  But in my opinion the minute a police officer oversteps the bounds of his/her responsibility to investigate and instead adopts the mantle of forensic expert, prosecution and judge the path is opened towards very dangerous ground indeed.

In my opinion Madeleine McCann was the victim ... argue among yourselves whether of one person or a team ... who let her, as a missing child and the victim of crime down very badly indeed.

The only person of any importance here was Madeleine and the job of collecting evidence to show what might have become of her was in my opinion botched big style.
If it hadn't been ... there would have been very little 'unfinished business' to be uncovered when Scotland Yard and Policia Judiciaria took on the review of the case independent of each other.

In my opinion following the evidence might have led to the perpetrator/s; but deciding who the perp was without supporting evidence and then looking for the evidence is a recipe for disaster ... and so it proved to be.

From the police point of view after pursuing the evidence it appeared not to be a case of stranger abduction.  Would you rather they make it all up based on thin air?  The moment Kate McCann refused to answer the most basic of questions was the moment the police said to themselves, "oh aye...here we go".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on July 10, 2018, 03:55:20 PM
Quote from: misty on July 10, 2018, 01:00:10 PM
Neither parent had absconded with Madeleine. Which other family member could have been responsible iyo?





Neither parent had absconded with Madeleine.

That is only in your opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 10, 2018, 04:13:22 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 01:09:12 PM
It is easy to be judgemental in retrospect for the simple reason that hindsight is an exact science.  But in my opinion the minute a police officer oversteps the bounds of his/her responsibility to investigate and instead adopts the mantle of forensic expert, prosecution and judge the path is opened towards very dangerous ground indeed.

In my opinion Madeleine McCann was the victim ... argue among yourselves whether of one person or a team ... who let her, as a missing child and the victim of crime down very badly indeed.

The only person of any importance here was Madeleine and the job of collecting evidence to show what might have become of her was in my opinion botched big style.
If it hadn't been ... there would have been very little 'unfinished business' to be uncovered when Scotland Yard and Policia Judiciaria took on the review of the case independent of each other.

In my opinion following the evidence might have led to the perpetrator/s; but deciding who the perp was without supporting evidence and then looking for the evidence is a recipe for disaster ... and so it proved to be.

Based on evidence only they saw, the parents decided what crime had been committed before the police arrived.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 10, 2018, 05:41:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 10, 2018, 04:13:22 PM
Based on evidence only they saw, the parents decided what crime had been committed before the police arrived.

In comparison with a very recent UK crime, a body would could been discovered by searchers before the PJ had even arrived at the scene.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 10, 2018, 06:23:57 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 01:09:12 PM
It is easy to be judgemental in retrospect for the simple reason that hindsight is an exact science.  But in my opinion the minute a police officer oversteps the bounds of his/her responsibility to investigate and instead adopts the mantle of forensic expert, prosecution and judge the path is opened towards very dangerous ground indeed.

In my opinion Madeleine McCann was the victim ... argue among yourselves whether of one person or a team ... who let her, as a missing child and the victim of crime down very badly indeed.

The only person of any importance here was Madeleine and the job of collecting evidence to show what might have become of her was in my opinion botched big style.
If it hadn't been ... 1) there would have been very little 'unfinished business' to be uncovered when Scotland Yard and Policia Judiciaria took on the review of the case independent of each other.

2)  In my opinion following the evidence might have led to the perpetrator/s; but deciding who the perp was without supporting evidence and then looking for the evidence is a recipe for disaster ... and so it proved to be.

1) Was there ever an official statement from either Police Force which delineated the extent of the unfinished business to which you refer?.
2) What evidence is it you have access to that leads you to that belief ?

How many opportunies were missed? was it 169, 300 and something? Lots of numbers have been bandied around.
It always reminds me of "Legs" Lansbury in the Manchurian Candidate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0WZwSx7UdU
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 10, 2018, 06:36:53 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on July 10, 2018, 06:23:57 PM
1) Was there ever an official statement from either Police Force which delineated the extent of the unfinished business to which you refer?.
2) What evidence is it you have access to that leads you to that belief ?

How many opportunies were missed? was it 169, 300 and something? Lots of numbers have been bandied around.
It always reminds me of "Legs" Lansbury in the Manchurian Candidate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0WZwSx7UdU

Don’t ask her for evidence Alice. I’ve been waiting weeks for her to explain why she thinks that OG is interested in Sadie’s theory.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 06:55:19 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 10, 2018, 06:36:53 PM
Don’t ask her for evidence Alice. I’ve been waiting weeks for her to explain why she thinks that OG is interested in Sadie’s theory.

How terribly rude  ^*&&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 07:00:53 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on July 10, 2018, 06:23:57 PM
1) Was there ever an official statement from either Police Force which delineated the extent of the unfinished business to which you refer?.
2) What evidence is it you have access to that leads you to that belief ?

How many opportunies were missed? was it 169, 300 and something? Lots of numbers have been bandied around.
It always reminds me of "Legs" Lansbury in the Manchurian Candidate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0WZwSx7UdU

In my opinion, the original investigation was hardly a textbook example in procedure for dealing with a missing child case.  In my opinion it could well have been used as an example of what not to do and who knows, perhaps it was?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 10, 2018, 07:08:23 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 06:55:19 PM
How terribly rude  ^*&&

Not to answer pertinent questions ? I absolutely agree but no less than I’ve come to expect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 10, 2018, 07:09:30 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 10, 2018, 06:36:53 PM
Don’t ask her for evidence Alice. I’ve been waiting weeks for her to explain why she thinks that OG is interested in Sadie’s theory.
She might have you on "Ignore"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 10, 2018, 07:37:20 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 10, 2018, 07:00:53 PM
In my opinion, the original investigation was hardly a textbook example in procedure for dealing with a missing child case.  In my opinion it could well have been used as an example of what not to do and who knows, perhaps it was?

Well you being a girl from Bearsden or wherever who will not be flim flammed by a bootleg Glasgow Green accent need to brush up on your "dummy selling" skills.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 10, 2018, 07:45:49 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 10, 2018, 06:36:53 PM
Don’t ask her for evidence Alice. I’ve been waiting weeks for her to explain why she thinks that OG is interested in Sadie’s theory.

Brietta has seen the Special Madeleine Crimewatch videos, as all of you did, before the master copy was wiped.  She saw the pointers to the interest in my folders by SY then ..... as all of you did.   But most of you chose to ignore them

I could show you further pointers, but I will not as it would let the 'cat out of the bag' ... and despite goading, I am not prepared to do that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 10, 2018, 07:50:36 PM
Quote from: sadie on July 10, 2018, 07:45:49 PM
Brietta has seen the Special Madeleine Crimewatch videos, as all of you did, before the master copy was wiped.  She saw the pointers to the interest in my folders by SY then ..... as all of you did.   But most of you chose to ignore them

I could show you further pointers, but I will not as it would let the 'cat out of the bag' ... and despite goading, I am not prepared to do that.

It's a wise woman who knows her own folders.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 10, 2018, 07:57:09 PM
Quote from: sadie on July 10, 2018, 07:45:49 PM
Brietta has seen the Special Madeleine Crimewatch videos, as all of you did, before the master copy was wiped.  She saw the pointers to the interest in my folders by SY then ..... as all of you did.   But most of you chose to ignore them

I could show you further pointers, but I will not as it would let the 'cat out of the bag' ... and despite goading, I am not prepared to do that.

Didn’t Misty and Brietta post the extracts of the videos you claimed had been wiped ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 11, 2018, 12:33:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 10, 2018, 07:50:36 PM
It's a wise woman who knows her own folders.
Thank you. 

I used the colour Lilac (= Lavender) for them all.

* Lavenders * being the name that I think is given to people with an interest in both boys and girls.  I am not absolutely sure of that, but it makes sense, with girls being pink and boys being pale blue.   Pink and pale blue mixed together gives a * Lavender * hue.

Many years ago, I saw that at least one Uni in America "catered" for Homos, Lesbians, Bi-sexuals, Transgenders etc and Lavenders.  And that got me thinking because i had come across the word * Lavender * a couple of years previously and wondered.

 - Anyway all my folders were lavender coloured, except for one

 - Also my hubby had just taken possession of one of those mighty screened TV's and at the time the carried lavender folder was labelled with my scrawly writing on it.  You could see my gawd awful writing.

 - And the loose leaved folder, which is transparent, was full of loose sheets in pockets.  The pockets very unusually had a black edge to them rather than the usual white or clear edge.  I had never seen black edged pockets before (or since)

It was my folder being carried alright, and almost certianly the box folder in the middle of the top shelf was mine too .... Coincidentally what was in them went precisely with what was being said by the commentator, at the exact same time
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 11, 2018, 12:44:57 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 10, 2018, 07:57:09 PM
Didn’t Misty and Brietta post the extracts of the videos you claimed had been wiped ?
Yes, they posted copies, but the colours were very murky and nothing was very clear.  But thanks to misty and Brietta, there are still copies around, albeit not very clear.   Well done both of you.

I wonder why the very clear original vanished?   The other Madeleine Special Crimewatch video still stands.  Why chose this one to get rid of ?   
Perhaps someone wanted to hide something ?

Unless someone has the know-how to give the copies a new addy, I bet that they will vanish too .... or be subtlety altered to hide certain things
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on July 11, 2018, 10:22:23 AM
Quote from: sadie on July 11, 2018, 12:44:57 AM
Yes, they posted copies, but the colours were very murky and nothing was very clear.  But thanks to misty and Brietta, there are still copies around, albeit not very clear.   Well done both of you.

I wonder why the very clear original vanished?   The other Madeleine Special Crimewatch video still stands.  Why chose this one to get rid of ?   
Perhaps someone wanted to hide something ?

Unless someone has the know-how to give the copies a new addy, I bet that they will vanish too .... or be subtlety altered to hide certain things

I bet in ten years time a lot of the stuff we take for granted on the internet will have also disappeared Sadie, if anything is worth saving its best to download and save it yourself.  But then in ten years time will we be really bothered?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 11, 2018, 10:26:35 AM
Quote from: John on July 11, 2018, 10:22:23 AM
I bet in ten years time a lot of the stuff we take for granted on the internet will have also disappeared Sadie, if anything is worth saving its best to download and save it yourself. But then in ten years time will we be really bothered?

Only the truly obsessed. Some of us might even be dead by then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 11, 2018, 11:23:49 AM
Quote from: sadie on July 11, 2018, 12:44:57 AM
Yes, they posted copies, but the colours were very murky and nothing was very clear.  But thanks to misty and Brietta, there are still copies around, albeit not very clear.   Well done both of you.

I wonder why the very clear original vanished?   The other Madeleine Special Crimewatch video still stands.  Why chose this one to get rid of ?   
Perhaps someone wanted to hide something ?

Unless someone has the know-how to give the copies a new addy, I bet that they will vanish too .... or be subtlety altered to hide certain things

Firstly if Brietta and Misty posted the videos you said had been removed then they weren’t removed were they ? Secondly I find the videos very clear so are you sure it’s not just your eyesight ? Thirdly if you could source the folders with the black edging from a retail outlet don’t you think OG would be able to too ?

TBH Sadie I’m not sure why anyone would want to alter any of the Crimewatch footage. It was screened in several countries so what would be the point ? Are you truly suggesting it is in order to obscure the fact that OG is following your theory?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 11, 2018, 12:23:11 PM
I know my eyesight is getting weaker.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 11, 2018, 12:54:07 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 11, 2018, 12:23:11 PM
I know my eyesight is getting weaker.
Then calibrate it, in a practical test.

On 3 Nov 2018, at 9.15pm, under sodium streetlights, can you still distinguish colours?

It's a check on the Jane Tanner sighting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 11, 2018, 01:22:41 PM
An interesting comment by a Times reader in today's paper under an article entitled "Risk free Britain is letting down its children"

"My grandchildren in Switzerland were required to WALK to their kindergarten themselves from age 4. Their parents were not allowed to accompany them, just practice with them the route. The route is also made in such a way that very young kids do not have to cross any road. Children are taught not to come close to strangers and must memorize their parents' phone numbers and their address.  According to the Swiss rules, no child lives more than 300 meters from the nearest kindergarten (schools can be slightly longer distance), and must walk to these places themselves - or else, taken by a school bus (for the kids who live in rural areas). there is no such thing as "school run" in Switzerland".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 11, 2018, 02:09:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 11, 2018, 01:22:41 PM
An interesting comment by a Times reader in today's paper under an article entitled "Risk free Britain is letting down its children"

"My grandchildren in Switzerland were required to WALK to their kindergarten themselves from age 4. Their parents were not allowed to accompany them, just practice with them the route. The route is also made in such a way that very young kids do not have to cross any road. Children are taught not to come close to strangers and must memorize their parents' phone numbers and their address.  According to the Swiss rules, no child lives more than 300 meters from the nearest kindergarten (schools can be slightly longer distance), and must walk to these places themselves - or else, taken by a school bus (for the kids who live in rural areas). there is no such thing as "school run" in Switzerland".

I walked to school and so did my children. Kate McCann, being so over-protective (during daylight hours) wouldn't have allowed her children to do so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 11, 2018, 02:34:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 11, 2018, 02:09:14 PM
I walked to school and so did my children. Kate McCann, being so over-protective (during daylight hours) wouldn't have allowed her children to do so.
You allowed your 4 year old children to walk to school unaccompanied by an adult? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 11, 2018, 03:53:45 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 11, 2018, 10:26:35 AM
Only the truly obsessed. Some of us might even be dead by then.

Oh come on,theres still,  will the HO grant funding again this autumn coming, for the continual search for the last lead,lots to look forward to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 11, 2018, 04:16:33 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 11, 2018, 03:53:45 PM
Oh come on,theres still,  will the HO grant funding again this autumn coming, for the continual search for the last lead,lots to look forward to.

I was thinking 10 years on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 11, 2018, 04:19:28 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 11, 2018, 04:16:33 PM
I was thinking 10 years on.

I intend to live for ever,so far so good.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 12, 2018, 01:19:20 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 11, 2018, 11:23:49 AM
Firstly if Brietta and Misty posted the videos you said had been removed then they weren’t removed were they ? Secondly I find the videos very clear so are you sure it’s not just your eyesight ? Thirdly if you could source the folders with the black edging from a retail outlet don’t you think OG would be able to too ?

TBH Sadie I’m not sure why anyone would want to alter any of the Crimewatch footage. It was screened in several countries so what would be the point ? Are you truly suggesting it is in order to obscure the fact that OG is following your theory?

I dont think that you are bothering to read my responses. 

The original video, which was very clear, has gone.  Just a couple of rather hazy copies, with low colour, exist.  We know of these thanks to misty and Brie..

So, Faith, why has one of the two Special Madeleine Crime Watch videos vanished, but the other one still stands?


Any sensible suggestions about why the one, but not the other?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 12, 2018, 01:48:03 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 11, 2018, 02:09:14 PM
I walked to school and so did my children. Kate McCann, being so over-protective (during daylight hours) wouldn't have allowed her children to do so.
Well you are an Army wife we understand?   Posted to Germany?   Paderborn or nearby ? Were the chidrens' schools on the garrison itself, or adjoining?

https://www.care.com/c/stories/3239/when-can-my-child-walk-to-school-alone/en-gb/

Age 10 seems to be considered the normal age that most children were developmentally safe to walk to school

I dont like to criticize but I would suggest that walking on ones own to school as at 4 or 5 year old is far too young.


TBH, Gunit I find it sickening, how The Mccanns can be so stridently criticised for their regularly checked sleeping children being left for up to half an hour and you boasting that your children walked on their own to school.  Presumably they were only 4 or 5 when they started going to school.  Madeleine was just a few days short of her 4th birthday.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 12, 2018, 02:34:04 AM
Hard question with no set answer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 08:39:28 AM
Quote from: sadie on July 12, 2018, 01:48:03 AM
Well you are an Army wife we understand?   Posted to Germany?   Paderborn or nearby ? Were the chidrens' schools on the garrison itself, or adjoining?

https://www.care.com/c/stories/3239/when-can-my-child-walk-to-school-alone/en-gb/

Age 10 seems to be considered the normal age that most children were developmentally safe to walk to school

I dont like to criticize but I would suggest that walking on ones own to school as at 4 or 5 year old is far too young.


TBH, Gunit I find it sickening, how The Mccanns can be so stridently criticised for their regularly checked sleeping children being left for up to half an hour and you boasting that your children walked on their own to school.  Presumably they were only 4 or 5 when they started going to school.  Madeleine was just a few days short of her 4th birthday.

I was speaking about the past, Sadie, when British children were allowed to be independent like Swedish children still are. Every child in the village where I grew up walked to school alone apart from the first day. My daughter walked to school with older children and they used public roads.

Even in those days, however, I wasn't left home alone at night and neither were my children. Attitudes to that are the same as they always were; children need a baby-sitter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 12, 2018, 08:49:08 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 08:39:28 AM
I was speaking about the past, Sadie, when British children were allowed to be independent like Swedish children still are. Every child in the village where I grew up walked to school alone apart from the first day. My daughter walked to school with older children and they used public roads.

Even in those days, however, I wasn't left home alone at night and neither were my children. Attitudes to that are the same as they always were; children need a baby-sitter.
Do you consider a child is safer walking to and from school aged 4 on their own, than being left unattended asleep in a house for 30 minutes with parents 100 metres away?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 12, 2018, 09:25:16 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 12, 2018, 08:49:08 AM
Do you consider a child is safer walking to and from school aged 4 on their own, than being left unattended asleep in a house for 30 minutes with parents 100 metres away?
Sorry VS, but a correction:

The Mccanns were just over 50 metres away crow flies of 5A = well within earshot .

And walking distance was under 80 metres.

These distances can be reliably checked on Google Earth
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 12, 2018, 09:37:54 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 12, 2018, 08:49:08 AM
Do you consider a child is safer walking to and from school aged 4 on their own, than being left unattended asleep in a house for 30 minutes with parents 100 metres away?

Exactly!!

Quote from: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 08:39:28 AM
I was speaking about the past, Sadie, when British children were allowed to be independent like Swedish children still are. Every child in the village where I grew up walked to school alone apart from the first day. My daughter walked to school with older children and they used public roads.

Even in those days, however, I wasn't left home alone at night and neither were my children. Attitudes to that are the same as they always were; children need a baby-sitter.

At the age of 4? 

Why were they unescorted ?  Originally you said that they went on their own IIRC ... and in a foreign country too !!

Even being accompanied by a neighbours/friends child isn't enough IMO.  Too many dangers and distractions around.

Were you off making money ?  Working?  Why did you risk it ?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 10:01:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 08:39:28 AM
I was speaking about the past, Sadie, when British children were allowed to be independent like Swedish children still are. Every child in the village where I grew up walked to school alone apart from the first day. My daughter walked to school with older children and they used public roads.

Even in those days, however, I wasn't left home alone at night and neither were my children. Attitudes to that are the same as they always were; children need a baby-sitter.

Indeed G. and not only are the sweeds doing that they also leave thir children out in their prams in very cold weather to get them used to their climate. over here that would be seen as child abuse.

My mum told me that she used to make a lot of pocket money by watching other peoples babies in prams during the day or baby sitting at night! and she was only 14! no mobile phones...

All the children in our village walk 1 mile to school without parental involvement in ALL weathers... As did I and my siblings we came to no harm. I'm not sure about ina large town or city now a days though.

Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 12, 2018, 08:49:08 AM
Do you consider a child is safer walking to and from school aged 4 on their own, than being left unattended asleep in a house for 30 minutes with parents 100 metres away?


Who said the children were all alone?  all children go to school at the same time do they not, they have neighbouring children and class mates and friends to walk with.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 10:06:04 AM
Quote from: sadie on July 12, 2018, 09:25:16 AM
Sorry VS, but a correction:

The Mccanns were just over 50 metres away crow flies of 5A = well within earshot .

And walking distance was under 80 metres.

These distances can be reliably checked on Google Earth


cite for well within earshot.


if this is the case then one has to challenge the claim by Kate that she left the non' kidnapped 'children to run  and tell the other tapas group that Maddie was taken? disappeared? whatever...

AND then you have to wonder why did they have to go to the door to listen if well within earshot.


Myth making along with crime watch files being aired and read and acted upon by SY..  (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 12, 2018, 10:10:49 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 10:01:55 AM
Indeed G. and not only are the sweeds doing that they also leave thir children out in their prams in very cold weather to get them used to their climate. over here that would be seen as child abuse.

My mum told me that she used to make a lot of pocket money by watching other peoples babies in prams during the day or baby sitting at night! and she was only 14! no mobile phones...

All the children in our village walk 1 mile to school without parental involvement in ALL weathers... As did I and my siblings we came to no harm. I'm not sure about ina large town or city now a days though.


Who said the children were all alone?  all children go to school at the same time do they not, they have neighbouring children and class mates and friends to walk with.
There will be moments when they would be alone at times.  -  who knows.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 10:12:17 AM
Quote from: sadie on July 12, 2018, 09:37:54 AM
Exactly!!

At the age of 4? 

Why were they unescorted ?  Originally you said that they went on their own IIRC ... and in a foreign country too !!

Even being accompanied by a neighbours/friends child isn't enough IMO.  Too many dangers and distractions around.

Were you off making money ?  Working?  Why did you risk it ?

I never mentioned age, I never said my children walked to school alone, and I never said it was in a foreign country. Those are all your assumptions/inventions.

You nay recall that in the 1970's most people didn't have the option of paying others to raise their children while they went off to ;make money'. We brought our own children up and lived on one wage.

At that time children walking to school without adult supervision wasn't seen as a risk. Neither was playing out with their friends or running errands. Times and attitudes have changed, except, as I said, in respect of baby-sitting. Even back then we knew they were necessary.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 10:25:42 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 10:06:04 AM

cite for well within earshot.


if this is the case then one has to challenge the claim by Kate that she left the non' kidnapped 'children to run  and tell the other tapas group that Maddie was taken? disappeared? whatever...

AND then you have to wonder why did they have to go to the door to listen if well within earshot.


Myth making along with crime watch files being aired and read and acted upon by SY..  (&^&

Some people seem to believe that it's perfectly fine to leave children sleeping and go out to dine, so long as they check on those children every 30 minutes. That's a fallacy. It has always been an accepted rule that small children aren't left home alone under any circumstances.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 12, 2018, 10:27:45 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 10:25:42 AM
Some people seem to believe that it's perfectly fine to leave children sleeping and go out to dine, so long as they check on those children every 30 minutes. That's a fallacy. It has always been an accepted rule that small children aren't left home alone under any circumstances.
Who said it was a rule?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 12, 2018, 10:32:55 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 10:01:55 AM
Indeed G. and not only are the sweeds doing that they also leave thir children out in their prams in very cold weather to get them used to their climate. over here that would be seen as child abuse.

My mum told me that she used to make a lot of pocket money by watching other peoples babies in prams during the day or baby sitting at night! and she was only 14! no mobile phones...

All the children in our village walk 1 mile to school without parental involvement in ALL weathers... As did I and my siblings we came to no harm. I'm not sure about ina large town or city now a days though.


Who said the children were all alone?  all children go to school at the same time do they not, they have neighbouring children and class mates and friends to walk with.
So as long as there are two or more four year olds walking to school unaccompanied then no problem?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 12, 2018, 10:33:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 10:12:17 AM
I never mentioned age, I never said my children walked to school alone, and I never said it was in a foreign country. Those are all your assumptions/inventions.

You nay recall that in the 1970's most people didn't have the option of paying others to raise their children while they went off to ;make money'. We brought our own children up and lived on one wage.

At that time children walking to school without adult supervision wasn't seen as a risk. Neither was playing out with their friends or running errands. Times and attitudes have changed, except, as I said, in respect of baby-sitting. Even back then we knew they were necessary.
Why was it not seen as a risk?  Was this before Hindley and Brady?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 12, 2018, 10:35:05 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 10:25:42 AM
Some people seem to believe that it's perfectly fine to leave children sleeping and go out to dine, so long as they check on those children every 30 minutes. That's a fallacy. It has always been an accepted rule that small children aren't left home alone under any circumstances.
It’s what has happened in numerous hotels worldwide for many years, perfectly legally to the best of my knowledge.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 10:38:04 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 12, 2018, 10:32:55 AM
So as long as there are two or more four year olds walking to school unaccompanied then no problem?

I don't know, is it?

 you are the one trying to make comparisons of children being encouraged to enjoy freedom and responsibility along with like  minded responsible parents.  I don't imagine these same parents would ask their 4 year olds to baby sit  twin babies while they go out for a drink in a pub...

So not a real comparison is it... But good try!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 10:47:46 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 12, 2018, 10:27:45 AM
Who said it was a rule?

I saw it as a rule so obvious that it never entered my head to go out and leave my children home alone. I knew no-one else who did it either. It was generally known and accepted imo.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 12, 2018, 10:51:52 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 10:38:04 AM
I don't know, is it?

 you are the one trying to make comparisons of children being encouraged to enjoy freedom and responsibility along with like  minded responsible parents.  I don't imagine these same parents would ask their 4 year olds to baby sit  twin babies while they go out for a drink in a pub...

So not a real comparison is it... But good try!
I babysat my 9 month old sister when only 10 myself, while my parents drove an hour away to enjoy themselves all afternoon, so who knows, eh?  But my point is that 4 year old children in Switzerland have to walk to school unaccompanied by adults to foster their spirit of independence, which IMO puts them at higher risk of wandering off, having an accident or being abducted than if the same kids were tucked up in bed asleep at home and left unattended for periods of up to 30 minutes.  No doubt you strenuously disagree!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 11:05:51 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 12, 2018, 10:35:05 AM
It’s what has happened in numerous hotels worldwide for many years, perfectly legally to the best of my knowledge.

Paedophilia is legal world wide  in some communities- does it make it right - I don't think so!

British Children aged 5 and over  removed from their homes by parents and married off to pensioners in Middle eastern countries- not legal here -but legal in other countries. close eyes- look away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 12, 2018, 11:10:25 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 11:05:51 AM
Paedophilia is legal world wide  in some communities- does it make it right - I don't think so!

British Children aged 5 and over  removed from their homes by parents and married off to pensioners in Middle eastern countries- not legal here -but legal in other countries. close eyes- look away.
WTF, are you intent on bringing your Muslim bashing to this thread as well?  How off topic can you get?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 11:19:01 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 12, 2018, 11:10:25 AM
WTF, are you intent on bringing your Muslim bashing to this thread as well?  How off topic can you get?


I am NOT Muslim bashing how dare you!   This is what these children have to continue to endure because anyone who tries to speak up on their behalf is accused of  muslim bashing. OH AND BTW it is NOT only muslims it is Christians and others!

shh lets not talk about these things eh?  as I said   look away if you don't want to know about these things!

Some supporters are happy to embrace the idea that MBM was abducted ... why would she be abducted and by whom? She is/was white child with Christian  back ground... world wide search for her costing millions! and you attack me when I mention other children are abducted from their homes to be carried off and  married off...


Love the bit about this being off topic... this being the 'wandering off topic' thread... ^*&&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 11:37:06 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 12, 2018, 10:33:58 AM
Why was it not seen as a risk?  Was this before Hindley and Brady?

It was after the Moors murders and also the murders committed by Mary Bell. Those crimes shocked and horrified everyone, but they weren't seen as a sign that child-murderers were lurking around every corner. They were seen as rare and unusual crimes and the children were just unlucky to have been taken by those monsters. Other children continued to live normal lives; going to school, playing out and freely wandering around. Most of them grew up safe, well and spent many happy hours playing with their friends 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 11:51:54 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 12, 2018, 10:51:52 AM
I babysat my 9 month old sister when only 10 myself, while my parents drove an hour away to enjoy themselves all afternoon, so who knows, eh?  But my point is that 4 year old children in Switzerland have to walk to school unaccompanied by adults to foster their spirit of independence, which IMO puts them at higher risk of wandering off, having an accident or being abducted than if the same kids were tucked up in bed asleep at home and left unattended for periods of up to 30 minutes.  No doubt you strenuously disagree!

It is not my job to dictate to parents in any country how to bring up their children- why would you think I have some responsibility by agreeing or disagreeing?

in your opinion you state 'puts them at higher risk of wandering off, having an accident or being abducted ' If you google Swiss embassy and let them know you have taken a risk assessment and are concerned about child safety and parental responsibilities, I am sure they will take your concerns on board- OR maybe not.

There is no comparison so stop trying to make one. IF the Swiss parents were leaving their children alone to go out drinking then I would condemn that behaviour. I would doubt if a child was abducted such parents would set up a company ,and go 'walk about like celebrities' and do the jogging, blogging, bragging bits.

There would be no issue with a time line either...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 12, 2018, 11:52:57 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 11:37:06 AM
It was after the Moors murders and also the murders committed by Mary Bell. Those crimes shocked and horrified everyone, but they weren't seen as a sign that child-murderers were lurking around every corner. They were seen as rare and unusual crimes and the children were just unlucky to have been taken by those monsters. Other children continued to live normal lives; going to school, playing out and freely wandering around. Most of them grew up safe, well and spent many happy hours playing with their friends
What's changed then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 12, 2018, 11:54:36 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 11:51:54 AM
It is not my job to dictate to parents in any country how to bring up their children- why would you think I have some responsibility by agreeing or disagreeing?

in your opinion you state 'puts them at higher risk of wandering off, having an accident or being abducted ' If you google Swiss embassy and let them know you have taken a risk assessment and are concerned about child safety and parental responsibilities, I am sure they will take your concerns on board- OR maybe not.

There is no comparison so stop trying to make one. IF the Swiss parents were leaving their children alone to go out drinking then I would condemn that behaviour. I would doubt if a child was abducted such parents would set up a company ,and go 'walk about like celebrities' and do the jogging, blogging, bragging bits.

There would be no issue with a time line either...
I didn't expect a straight answer and my expectations were met, thank you.  ^*&&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 12:00:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 12, 2018, 11:52:57 AM
What's changed then?


Society! we live in a different era...
In 70's my mum said women were not allowed in pubs/bars!

 Are you aware that children as young as 7 have expensive iphones!! are sexting and sending inappropriate pictures of themselves? The new sexualisation of the nation has moved on from the sleazy sun page three days!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 12:19:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 12, 2018, 10:51:52 AM
I babysat my 9 month old sister when only 10 myself, while my parents drove an hour away to enjoy themselves all afternoon, so who knows, eh?  But my point is that 4 year old children in Switzerland have to walk to school unaccompanied by adults to foster their spirit of independence, which IMO puts them at higher risk of wandering off, having an accident or being abducted than if the same kids were tucked up in bed asleep at home and left unattended for periods of up to 30 minutes.  No doubt you strenuously disagree!

Switzerland, Germany, Japan and the Netherlands all allow children to make their own way to and from school and playgrounds, just as we once did. The children learn to be responsible and self-reliance. I don't know of any benefit a  small child gains from being left home alone.
https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/business/free-range-kids-_swiss-resist-fear-based-childrearing-for-now/42384890

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 12, 2018, 12:21:41 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 12:00:11 PM

Society! we live in a different era...
In 70's my mum said women were not allowed in pubs/bars!

 Are you aware that children as young as 7 have expensive iphones!! are sexting and sending inappropriate pictures of themselves? The new sexualisation of the nation has moved on from the sleazy sun page three days!
Children are far more likely to be victims of grooming and online sleeze in the comfort of their own homes with mummy and daddy sat downstairs watching telly than they are walking to and from school, however that was not the comparison I was looking for.  I was asking G-Unit what has changed with regard to allowing children free range outdoors - has there been a marked increase in child rape and murder by opportunist strangers since the 60s?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 12, 2018, 12:23:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 12:19:27 PM
Switzerland, Germany, Japan and the Netherlands all allow children to make their own way to and from school and playgrounds, just as we once did. The children learn to be responsible and self-reliance. I don't know of any benefit a  small child gains from being left home alone.
https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/business/free-range-kids-_swiss-resist-fear-based-childrearing-for-now/42384890
Why should learning responsibility and self-reliance end at the child's doorstep then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 12:39:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 12, 2018, 12:21:41 PM
Children are far more likely to be victims of grooming and online sleeze in the comfort of their own homes with mummy and daddy sat downstairs watching telly than they are walking to and from school, however that was not the comparison I was looking for.  I was asking G-Unit what has changed with regard to allowing children free range outdoors - has there been a marked increase in child rape and murder by opportunist strangers since the 60s?


Yeah that is what has changed!! society! 

I was asking G-Unit what has changed with regard to allowing children free range outdoors - has there been a marked increase in child rape and murder by opportunist strangers since the 60s?

There is the two working parents and using cars for convenience  to get kids to school-reasons.


YES. read the news...  Robert Black to name one. Jamie Bulger killers, name two... many,many unsolved crimes of  child disappearances..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 12:42:09 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 12:00:11 PM

Society! we live in a different era...
In 70's my mum said women were not allowed in pubs/bars!

 Are you aware that children as young as 7 have expensive iphones!! are sexting and sending inappropriate pictures of themselves? The new sexualisation of the nation has moved on from the sleazy sun page three days!

Women's lives have changed dramatically. It's true about women being banned from the bar; they were allowed only in other areas of pubs and clubs. My first passport had my three children on it; they didn't need their own then. I was only allowed to put them on there with the written permission of the head of our household; my husband.Similarly I could only get credit with his written permission.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 12:47:01 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 12:42:09 PM
Women's lives have changed dramatically. It's true about women being banned from the bar; they were allowed only in other areas of pubs and clubs. My first passport had my three children on it; they didn't need their own then. I was only allowed to put them on there with the written permission of the head of our household; my husband.Similarly I could only get credit with his written permission.

OMG.. wow. that wasn't all that long ago either? I'm not sure equality has brought about good for women in light of these changes though.
 I put  my career on hold  when I had my children- they love having me home when they get in from school and during the summer holidays.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 12:57:31 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 12, 2018, 12:21:41 PM
Children are far more likely to be victims of grooming and online sleeze in the comfort of their own homes with mummy and daddy sat downstairs watching telly than they are walking to and from school, however that was not the comparison I was looking for.  I was asking G-Unit what has changed with regard to allowing children free range outdoors - has there been a marked increase in child rape and murder by opportunist strangers since the 60s?

I don't believe there has been a real increase, but there's been an increase in awareness, reporting and fear. The vast majority of children ate in mo more danger now than they were in the 1960's imo.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37504781
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 12, 2018, 12:57:55 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 12:39:58 PM

Yeah that is what has changed!! society! 

I was asking G-Unit what has changed with regard to allowing children free range outdoors - has there been a marked increase in child rape and murder by opportunist strangers since the 60s?

There is the two working parents and using cars for convenience  to get kids to school-reasons.


YES. read the news...  Robert Black to name one. Jamie Bulger killers, name two... many,many unsolved crimes of  child disappearances..
Perhaps you could answer the question?  Has there been a marked increased risk to unaccompanied children from strangers intent on abducting them since the 1960s?  Statistical evidence will do. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 12, 2018, 01:00:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 12:57:31 PM
I don't believe there has been a real increase, but there's been an increase in awareness, reporting and fear. The vast majority of children ate in mo more danger now than they were in the 1960's imo.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37504781
Exactly.  Yet these days you would probably get a visit from social services if you let your kindergartan age child walk to school alone (unless you lived in Switzerland of course). 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 02:28:57 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 12:47:01 PM
OMG.. wow. that wasn't all that long ago either? I'm not sure equality has brought about good for women in light of these changes though.
 I put  my career on hold  when I had my children- they love having me home when they get in from school and during the summer holidays.

It only changed following the Sex Discrimination Act of 1975. Women no longer needed a male guarantor for credit, and were given the right to resume work after having a child. 

I see modern women trying to juggle family, work and relationships and I feel for them. I faced challenges because we lived on one wage, but I had time. All the time I needed to know, teach, play with and understand my children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 12, 2018, 04:27:31 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 12:00:11 PM

Society! we live in a different era...
In 70's my mum said women were not allowed in pubs/bars!

 Are you aware that children as young as 7 have expensive iphones!! are sexting and sending inappropriate pictures of themselves? The new sexualisation of the nation has moved on from the sleazy sun page three days!
Rubbish!  Soz but your Mum got it wrong .... or you ... erm .. misrememberd!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on July 12, 2018, 05:24:13 PM
Quote from: sadie on July 12, 2018, 04:27:31 PM
Rubbish!  Soz but your Mum got it wrong .... or you ... erm .. misrememberd!

Did you know, it was only in 1982 that pubs no longer has the right to refuse to serve women.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on July 12, 2018, 05:25:41 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 12, 2018, 12:00:11 PM

Society! we live in a different era...
In 70's my mum said women were not allowed in pubs/bars!

 Are you aware that children as young as 7 have expensive iphones!! are sexting and sending inappropriate pictures of themselves? The new sexualisation of the nation has moved on from the sleazy sun page three days!

I remember a time when it was inappropriate for women to go into bars and pubs while unaccompanied but I don't think they were barred as such.  I suppose different areas had different rules. In some parts of the British Isles a girl had to be chaperoned on a date, same thing happened in many European countries.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 05:55:48 PM
Quote from: John on July 12, 2018, 05:25:41 PM
I remember a time when it was inappropriate for women to go into bars and pubs while unaccompanied but I don't think they were barred as such.  I suppose different areas had different rules. In some parts of the British Isles a girl had to be chaperoned on a date, same thing happened in many European countries.

I remember when Yates Wine Lodges had bare floorboards scattered with sawdust. In Lancashire where I grew up women might go into a bar in a pub, but every man in there would stop talking and stare until they left and went into the saloon bar. If they didn't take the hint the landlord would 'suggest' it. On the other hand some saloon bars still had bells around the walls. You could ring them and get table service.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 12, 2018, 07:04:54 PM
so women were allowed in pubs in the 70s
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 07:48:39 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 12, 2018, 07:04:54 PM
so women were allowed in pubs in the 70s

Women have always been allowed in Pubs. They weren't welcome in the Public Bar, or tap room, which was reserved for men. Most women wouldn't have wanted to go in anyway; they were very basic. Women used the Saloon Bar or the Snug.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pub
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 12, 2018, 07:51:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 07:48:39 PM
Women have always been allowed in Pubs. They weren't welcome in the Public Bar, or tap room, which was reserved for men. Most women wouldn't have wanted to go in anyway; they were very basic. Women used the Saloon Bar or the Snug.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pub

In referring to mistakens post
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 07:53:56 PM
Quote from: John on July 12, 2018, 05:25:41 PM
I remember a time when it was inappropriate for women to go into bars and pubs while unaccompanied but I don't think they were barred as such.  I suppose different areas had different rules. In some parts of the British Isles a girl had to be chaperoned on a date, same thing happened in many European countries.

When we were in Germany in the early 1970's single girls could go out only in the company of a trusted male family member. The proximity of many young male British soldiers might have had something to do with that though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on July 12, 2018, 08:41:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 07:53:56 PM
When we were in Germany in the early 1970's single girls could go out only in the company of a trusted male family member. The proximity of many young male British soldiers might have had something to do with that though.

Same when I was in Madeira at that time, girls had to be chaperoned by their peers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on July 12, 2018, 09:52:13 PM
I am not old enough to have experience of pubs in the early 70's but I imagine it would depend upon what type of pub you were talking about. A so called spit and sawdust pub in the countryside with a bunch of regulars who could well be all male probably wouldn't want a woman in there as it would stop their discussions (swearing).

When I was a younger I used to frequent a pub reasonably regularly and many times I was the only woman in the bar. I was with my boyfriend who was a regular there. Woman weren't banned but weren't particularly encouraged unless you became "one of the lads" so to speak.

I fit in really well.  ?>)()<
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 10:13:49 PM
Quote from: Sunny on July 12, 2018, 09:52:13 PM
I am not old enough to have experience of pubs in the early 70's but I imagine it would depend upon what type of pub you were talking about. A so called spit and sawdust pub in the countryside with a bunch of regulars who could well be all male probably wouldn't want a woman in there as it would stop their discussions (swearing).

When I was a younger I used to frequent a pub reasonably regularly and many times I was the only woman in the bar. I was with my boyfriend who was a regular there. Woman weren't banned but weren't particularly encouraged unless you became "one of the lads" so to speak.

I fit in really well.  ?>)()<

Using bad language was one of the things men did in there. In my young days men didn't swear in front of women where I lived. They swore at work and in the Pub with their mates, but not in the home.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 13, 2018, 12:24:06 AM
Quote from: John on July 12, 2018, 05:25:41 PM
I remember a time when it was inappropriate for women to go into bars and pubs while unaccompanied but I don't think they were barred as such. I suppose different areas had different rules. In some parts of the British Isles a girl had to be chaperoned on a date, same thing happened in many European countries.

Spot on John. 
They were never barred in my experience, but "nice" girls just didn't go in alone, in case they were thought of as prostitute types ( I think).   Had i wanted to go in, I would have, because I have happily broken silly conventions all my life.

I never knew anyone who was chaperoned.  Maybe that was the convention of the Upper Classes, or the ?pseudo? religious?   

Actually I read a report where promiscuousness was supposed to be rife amongst the Upper Classes and the lower end of the Working Classes.  The Middle Class girls held off, because they couldn't let their families down.

Maybe it is the same now ?  But I doubt it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 13, 2018, 02:32:18 AM
My girlfriend wouldn't even go into a bottle store.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 13, 2018, 08:53:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 10:13:49 PM
Using bad language was one of the things men did in there. In my young days men didn't swear in front of women where I lived. They swore at work and in the Pub with their mates, but not in the home.



I came of age drinking wise when 15 8(0(* 18 in the early 70's thinking back to then there were very few women nor girls in the pubs,the local dance hall/disco's where one would meet up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 13, 2018, 11:02:30 AM
God, you people are old.  When I started drinking in pubs - 1980 - there didn't appear to be any marked gender split. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 18, 2018, 01:20:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 12, 2018, 07:48:39 PM
Women have always been allowed in Pubs. They weren't welcome in the Public Bar, or tap room, which was reserved for men. Most women wouldn't have wanted to go in anyway; they were very basic. Women used the Saloon Bar or the Snug.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pub


According to my mum our local village 'pubs' did not have separate snug or saloon bar, there were added after late 70's due to a new law. In Scotland children are still not allowed to go into  pubs ,even with parents, unless they are having food=bar meals  are provided.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 18, 2018, 01:29:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 12, 2018, 01:00:44 PM
Exactly.  Yet these days you would probably get a visit from social services if you let your kindergartan age child walk to school alone (unless you lived in Switzerland of course).

Maybe get a visit not in the Tapas case

...But fortunately for the MBM's parents  leaving her alone  every night As they went out wining and dining is really all ok dokey. Thankfully those poor parents were not charged with anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 18, 2018, 02:42:53 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 18, 2018, 01:20:54 PM

According to my mum our local village 'pubs' did not have separate snug or saloon bar, there were added after late 70's due to a new law. In Scotland children are still not allowed to go into  pubs ,even with parents, unless they are having food=bar meals  are provided.
&%%6

A sanity check with my better half has concluded that kids in England were allowed in bars, with parents, without meals, at least 20 years ago.

The Smith visit to Kelly's was with young children and without meals.  Perhaps people are more relaxed in Luz and the RoI?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 18, 2018, 02:51:33 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 18, 2018, 02:42:53 PM
&%%6

A sanity check with my better half has concluded that kids in England were allowed in bars, with parents, without meals, at least 20 years ago.

The Smith visit to Kelly's was with young children and without meals.  Perhaps people are more relaxed in Luz and the RoI?
Children under 14 will be allowed into pubs
JASON BENNETTO
Wednesday 16 November 1994
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/children-under-14-will-be-allowed-into-pubs-1439842.html

Apparently it was already the case in Scotland when this article was printed:  so 1995 seems to be when the law was relaxed in England and wales
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 18, 2018, 03:01:44 PM
@Shining
(http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/130/590x/Maddie-Madeleine-McCann-time-line-day-missing-798356.jpg)
I am puzzled by the protuberance casting a shadow on the wall above the gate ... is it a PIR?  Do you have any idea?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 18, 2018, 03:25:59 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 18, 2018, 03:01:44 PM
@Shining
(http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/130/590x/Maddie-Madeleine-McCann-time-line-day-missing-798356.jpg)
I am puzzled by the protuberance casting a shadow on the wall above the gate ... is it a PIR?  Do you have any idea?
Sorry, no idea.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 18, 2018, 03:54:48 PM
Look like a drainage pipe to me.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 18, 2018, 04:20:21 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 18, 2018, 03:25:59 PM
Sorry, no idea.

Thank you.
I think if it is still there it may be visible from the pavement (new gate not withstanding) or the pathway at the back ( although I believe the hedge has been allowed to grow for privacy).  Would it be possible for you to discretely have a glance to check it out next time you are in the vicinity ~ if you can still see beyond these two privacy measures.

Cancel the above, Shining, I've just read Misty's post and agree that it is a drain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 18, 2018, 04:33:46 PM
Quote from: misty on July 18, 2018, 03:54:48 PM
Look like a drainage pipe to me.

I think that is spot on Misty.  I had thought of that initially but dismissed it because I couldn't see why there would be a drain in that location.  I thought it might be a PIR as described by Margaret Hall.

Your screenshot raises another question though ... what are the two fixings at the top right of the image?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 18, 2018, 04:42:08 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 18, 2018, 04:33:46 PM
I think that is spot on Misty.  I had thought of that initially but dismissed it because I couldn't see why there would be a drain in that location.  I thought it might be a PIR as described by Margaret Hall.

Your screenshot raises another question though ... what are the two fixings at the top right of the image?

Brackets to support the foliage arch over the gate, I think.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 18, 2018, 06:15:23 PM
Quote from: misty on July 18, 2018, 04:42:08 PM
Brackets to support the foliage arch over the gate, I think.
I think that is logical, Misty.  That weight of foliage would definitely need support of some sort.
(http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Pvhl8dnfPgU/TXPISJ3T68I/AAAAAAAAIFc/1Gza7oHN5Is/s1600/232860_1.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 18, 2018, 06:36:50 PM
So, half a dozen posts over garden drainage & supports.   @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 18, 2018, 06:45:07 PM
Quote from: misty on July 18, 2018, 03:54:48 PM
Look like a drainage pipe to me.
It would be the drainage of the patio area.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 18, 2018, 06:48:31 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 18, 2018, 06:45:07 PM
It would be the drainage of the patio area.

Congratulations. Give the moderator a banana.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 18, 2018, 06:55:30 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 18, 2018, 06:48:31 PM
Congratulations. Give the moderator a banana.
I love bananas - shall I set up a funding site?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 18, 2018, 07:21:40 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 18, 2018, 06:36:50 PM
So, half a dozen posts over garden drainage & supports.   @)(++(*


Well it does go a long way to prove the parents innocence , and the crime is one of abduction surely... ^*&&

 Oh, No wait...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 18, 2018, 08:47:01 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 18, 2018, 07:21:40 PM

Well it does go a long way to prove the parents innocence , and the crime is one of abduction surely... ^*&&

 Oh, No wait...

Patience, it'll soon be autumn and the conundrum of the funding will rear its head again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 18, 2018, 09:23:49 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 18, 2018, 06:48:31 PM
Congratulations. Give the moderator a banana.

IMO it's where they put the pig on the wall to watch the band go by.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 18, 2018, 10:04:56 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on July 18, 2018, 09:23:49 PM
IMO it's where they put the pig on the wall to watch the band go by.

Ah, the true source of (dispersed) scent alerted to by that pesky cadaver dog.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 18, 2018, 10:41:13 PM
Quote from: misty on July 18, 2018, 10:04:56 PM
Ah, the true source of (dispersed) scent alerted to by that pesky cadaver dog.....
Finally getting to the source of the odour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 24, 2018, 01:04:55 PM
This is interesting on one or two different planes.
Almost comedic if one has that sort of sense of humour.

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/16365284.dr-david-crichton-on-trial-at-winchester-crown-court/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 24, 2018, 02:21:20 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on July 24, 2018, 01:04:55 PM
This is interesting on one or two different planes.
Almost comedic if one has that sort of sense of humour.

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/16365284.dr-david-crichton-on-trial-at-winchester-crown-court/

The things people get up to never ceases to amaze me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 24, 2018, 05:28:16 PM
This is not remotely comedic
https://www.ecowatch.com/wildfires-erupt-in-greece-2589562645.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on July 26, 2018, 09:18:03 PM
And another thing; "you forgot to sign your drivers licence"

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/25/ex-gp-cleared-of-trying-to-hire-hitman-to-kill-financial-adviser
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 30, 2018, 01:41:18 PM
I see the Met is in trouble again - inadequate investigation of a child's death in 2016

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6006239/Murderer-molested-strangled-girl-10-never-caught-police-failings.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 30, 2018, 02:19:17 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 30, 2018, 01:41:18 PM
I see the Met is in trouble again - inadequate investigation of a child's death in 2016

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6006239/Murderer-molested-strangled-girl-10-never-caught-police-failings.html

Yeah but,yeah but,they've got their focus on lines of enquiry elsewhere.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 30, 2018, 02:19:40 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 30, 2018, 01:41:18 PM
I see the Met is in trouble again - inadequate investigation of a child's death in 2016

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6006239/Murderer-molested-strangled-girl-10-never-caught-police-failings.html

This is not a one off either as the paper show. In one case  siblings were returned to the family who may have been under suspicion no charges made.

I often wonder why the Wests who got away with so much for so long , stayed under the radar for so long.
They were arrested and charged with some offences before the big picture was shown.  Again it was a pesky social worker who dug deep to find out more. The police did not seem all that bothered at the time, and the Yorkhire Ripper 'investigation' was way out of order!  Police in this country are not perfect.
 Handing 13 million plus- will not bring justice for MBM IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 30, 2018, 02:59:03 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 30, 2018, 01:41:18 PM
I see the Met is in trouble again - inadequate investigation of a child's death in 2016

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6006239/Murderer-molested-strangled-girl-10-never-caught-police-failings.html

It seems the Police came to the conclusion the little girl had hanged herself,  it was only after the post mortem that suspicions were raised,  by then evidence had gone.  Sad.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 30, 2018, 03:01:14 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 30, 2018, 02:19:40 PM
This is not a one off either as the paper show. In one case  siblings were returned to the family who may have been under suspicion no charges made.

I often wonder why the Wests who got away with so much for so long , stayed under the radar for so long.
They were arrested and charged with some offences before the big picture was shown.  Again it was a pesky social worker who dug deep to find out more. The police did not seem all that bothered at the time, and the Yorkhire Ripper 'investigation' was way out of order!  Police in this country are not perfect.
 Handing 13 million plus- will not bring justice for MBM IMO.

Wasn't it one of the children saying that they were threatened that they would end up under the patio like their sister,  that got the ball rolling with the Wests?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 30, 2018, 08:20:46 PM
Quote from: Lace on July 30, 2018, 02:59:03 PM
It seems the Police came to the conclusion the little girl had hanged herself,  it was only after the post mortem that suspicions were raised,  by then evidence had gone.  Sad.

Yes ,dont you think that strange they never took pictures? or an expert was on hand to declare the cause of death?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 30, 2018, 08:23:28 PM
Quote from: Lace on July 30, 2018, 03:01:14 PM
Wasn't it one of the children saying that they were threatened that they would end up under the patio like their sister,  that got the ball rolling with the Wests?

Yes, that is correct Lace. it was Heather who was under the patio. I still can't grasp how they looked like a normal couple and to be serial killers!  Torturers and rapists. The mother is still claiming innocence. The dad did the decent thing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: IndigoJ on July 31, 2018, 07:17:32 AM
Quote from: jassi on July 30, 2018, 01:41:18 PM
I see the Met is in trouble again - inadequate investigation of a child's death in 2016

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6006239/Murderer-molested-strangled-girl-10-never-caught-police-failings.html

this really makes my blood boil! our police force is a joke , under funded , moral at all time low and crime on the increase !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 31, 2018, 10:16:44 AM
https://news.sky.com/story/raf-gunner-corrie-mckeague-no-longer-missing-and-in-waste-disposal-system-family-say-11454586
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 31, 2018, 11:26:30 AM
Quote from: IndigoJ on July 31, 2018, 07:17:32 AM
this really makes my blood boil! our police force is a joke , under funded , moral at all time low and crime on the increase !

Are any of those contributing factors to the story being discussed? It seems that a certain number of investigating officers failed to consider foul play at the beginning of the investigation. It happens; policemen are no more perfect than anyone else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 01, 2018, 07:21:04 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 31, 2018, 11:26:30 AM
Are any of those contributing factors to the story being discussed? It seems that a certain number of investigating officers failed to consider foul play at the beginning of the investigation. It happens; policemen are no more perfect than anyone else.
Would you say that Operation Grange was affected by under funding, low moral (sic) and crime on the increase?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on August 01, 2018, 09:15:43 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 01, 2018, 07:21:04 AM
Would you say that Operation Grange was affected by under funding, low moral (sic) and crime on the increase?
The main issue re OG is not the funding, which is coming from the public purse.

It is that it appears to be tying up 4 officers, at a time when the Met appears to have higher priorities.

NB Paraphrasing someone else's post, whilst highlighting a minor error, is out of order.  IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 09:49:05 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 01, 2018, 07:21:04 AM
Would you say that Operation Grange was affected by under funding, low moral (sic) and crime on the increase?

How the heck would I know? I haven't got the faintest idea what those four officers are doing. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 10:10:22 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 09:49:05 AM
How the heck would I know? I haven't got the faintest idea what those four officers are doing.
I hope they read the UK Justice forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 10:52:31 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 10:10:22 AM
I hope they read the UK Justice forum.

Who knows? I would recommend they re-examine the files from the first investigation and inform themselves more fully than A C Rowley appears to have done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 01, 2018, 10:58:42 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 10:52:31 AM
Who knows? I would recommend they re-examine the files from the first investigation and inform themselves more fully than A C Rowley appears to have done.

I think Rowley understood the files very well
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 11:28:04 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 01, 2018, 10:58:42 AM
I think Rowley understood the files very well

I disagree. He didn't quite understand the situation at the time of the archiving of the Portuguese investigation.

Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that

A C Rowley 10th anniversary interview.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 12:15:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 11:28:04 AM
I disagree. He didn't quite understand the situation at the time of the archiving of the Portuguese investigation.

Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that

A C Rowley 10th anniversary interview.
"I hope they read the UK Justice forum"  Where else would he get told he didn't understand the case!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 01, 2018, 12:21:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 11:28:04 AM
I disagree. He didn't quite understand the situation at the time of the archiving of the Portuguese investigation.

Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that

A C Rowley 10th anniversary interview.

He seems to understand it quite well...it isn't just Rowley...the PJ have said they are not suspects and no evidence against them
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 12:24:19 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 01, 2018, 12:21:39 PM
He seems to understand it quite well...it isn't just Rowley...the PJ have said they are not suspects and no evidence against them
You believing the PJ now are you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 01, 2018, 12:26:42 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 12:24:19 PM
You believing the PJ now are you?

I believe vthe present investigation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 12:31:07 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 01, 2018, 12:21:39 PM
He seems to understand it quite well...it isn't just Rowley...the PJ have said they are not suspects and no evidence against them

Pedro do Carmo said those things I think. Like so many others both are now yesterday's men I believe
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 01, 2018, 12:34:13 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 12:31:07 PM
Pedro do Carmo said those things I think. Like so many others both are now yesterday's men I believe


Have any of today's men or women said anything other than that they not suspects?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 01, 2018, 12:41:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 12:31:07 PM
Pedro do Carmo said those things I think. Like so many others both are now yesterday's men I believe

I think you are failing to accept reality
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 12:41:55 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 01, 2018, 12:34:13 PM

Have any of today's men or women said anything other than that they not suspects?

All I can hear is a deafening silence. You?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 01, 2018, 12:43:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 12:41:55 PM
All I can hear is a deafening silence. You?

What would  you expect to be hearing?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 12:56:50 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 01, 2018, 12:43:18 PM
What would  you expect to be hearing?

Nothing. Why would I?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 01, 2018, 01:09:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 12:56:50 PM
Nothing. Why would I?

Indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 01, 2018, 01:18:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 12:56:50 PM
Nothing. Why would I?

I think if the mccanns were suspects we would be hearing alot
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 01, 2018, 01:19:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 01, 2018, 01:18:00 PM
I think if the mccanns were suspects we would be hearing alot


Agreed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 01:20:07 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 01, 2018, 01:18:00 PM
I think if the mccanns were suspects we would be hearing alot
Maybe, maybe not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on August 01, 2018, 01:21:27 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 01, 2018, 12:34:13 PM

Have any of today's men or women said anything other than that they not suspects?

Has Nicola Wall said anything at all for public comsumption?

eta or consumption even.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 01, 2018, 01:44:44 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on August 01, 2018, 01:21:27 PM
Has Nicola Wall said anything at all for public comsumption?

eta or consumption even.

She did an interview for Vogue Magazine, I believe  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 01:58:43 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 01, 2018, 01:18:00 PM
I think if the mccanns were suspects we would be hearing alot

So does the silence mean there are no suspects?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 01, 2018, 02:07:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 01:58:43 PM
So does the silence mean there are no suspects?
No
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 01, 2018, 02:40:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 01, 2018, 02:07:14 PM
No

Hoist.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 07:14:44 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 01, 2018, 02:40:52 PM
Hoist.
Hoist?  What does hoist mean in the context?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 01, 2018, 07:40:35 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 07:14:44 PM
Hoist?  What does hoist mean in the context?


This, I imagine  https://www.google.com/search?q=hoist+by+own+petard+meaning&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 08:26:10 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 01, 2018, 07:40:35 PM

This, I imagine  https://www.google.com/search?q=hoist+by+own+petard+meaning&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b
Thanks friend.  "Shakespeare's phrase, "hoist with his own petard," is an idiom that means "to be harmed by one's own plan to harm someone else" or "to fall into one's own trap", implying that one could be lifted (blown) upward by one's own bomb, or in other words, be foiled by one's own plan.

"to fall into one's own trap"  is a saying I understand.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 10:02:31 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 01, 2018, 02:07:14 PM
No

So you think there are suspects but we don't know who. You also think if their names were McCann we would know. Why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 01, 2018, 10:05:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 10:02:31 PM
So you think there are suspects but we don't know who. You also think if their names were McCann we would know. Why?
If they were suspects they would be being investigated...interviewed under caution...I think we would know by now
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 10:08:33 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 01, 2018, 10:05:54 PM
If they were suspects they would be being investigated...interviewed under caution...I think we would know by now
But SY don't leak information like the PJ did.  So I'm not convinced by your opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 10:09:23 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 08:26:10 PM
Thanks friend.  "Shakespeare's phrase, "hoist with his own petard," is an idiom that means "to be harmed by one's own plan to harm someone else" or "to fall into one's own trap", implying that one could be lifted (blown) upward by one's own bomb, or in other words, be foiled by one's own plan.

"to fall into one's own trap"  is a saying I understand.

Boom!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 01, 2018, 10:09:58 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 01, 2018, 01:19:46 PM

Agreed.

And risk prejudicing any future trial ? Do you think after all these years and all the funding OG and the PJ would jeopardise this case by leaking information on any suspects ?

Still if it brings you comfort.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 01, 2018, 10:10:50 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 10:08:33 PM
But SY don't leak information like the PJ did.  So I'm not convinced by your opinion.

im not bothered waht others here might think
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 10:23:53 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 01, 2018, 10:05:54 PM
If they were suspects they would be being investigated...interviewed under caution...I think we would know by now

Who's going to tell us?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 10:25:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 10:23:53 PM
Who's going to tell us?
I'm sure the McCanns would via their website! 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 01, 2018, 10:25:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 10:23:53 PM
Who's going to tell us?

Do you think the police would be able to keep that quiet
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 10:31:35 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 01, 2018, 10:25:44 PM
Do you think the police would be able to keep that quiet
But you don't care what others think!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 10:37:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 01, 2018, 10:25:44 PM
Do you think the police would be able to keep that quiet

Why not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 01, 2018, 10:38:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 01, 2018, 10:23:53 PM
Who's going to tell us?
The media.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 10:40:29 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 01, 2018, 10:38:42 PM
The media.
But how would they know?  How would the media know?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 01, 2018, 10:44:22 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 10:40:29 PM
But how would they know?  How would the media know?
Ask cliff
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 01, 2018, 10:50:09 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 10:40:29 PM
But how would they know?  How would the media know?
You cannot be serious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 10:54:03 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 01, 2018, 10:50:09 PM
You cannot be serious.
I am. How would the media know?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 11:31:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 01, 2018, 10:44:22 PM
Ask cliff
What does "ask Cliff" mean?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 01, 2018, 11:42:54 PM
Davel means Cliff Richard. He has recently sued the BBC and won as they arranged for a helicopter to film his house being searched by police.  Apparently it was a "right to privacy" that he won on.   Somehow I can't see SY phoning up the BBC to tell them they were doing a raid on the McCanns house, IMO it has cost us licence fee payers enough with the Cliff debacle.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 01, 2018, 11:43:27 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 01, 2018, 10:54:03 PM
I am. How would the media know?
It is their job to look for stories and to know what is going on by fair means or foul and to report it.  The McCanns being questioned by the police as suspects again would be a massive news story, papers have their sources, someone could make a fair bit of cash out of divulging such information, it would certainly be on the front pages IMO.  Ask Cliff, refers to Cliff Richard whose house was searched whilst live images were broadcast by the BBC as part of a child sex abuse investigation.  If it can happen to him why not the McCanns?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 02, 2018, 01:18:08 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 01, 2018, 11:43:27 PM
It is their job to look for stories and to know what is going on by fair means or foul and to report it.  The McCanns being questioned by the police as suspects again would be a massive news story, papers have their sources, someone could make a fair bit of cash out of divulging such information, it would certainly be on the front pages IMO.  Ask Cliff, refers to Cliff Richard whose house was searched whilst live images were broadcast by the BBC as part of a child sex abuse investigation.  If it can happen to him why not the McCanns?

Some say there is a Super-Injunction in place which would prevent the media reporting such an event.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2018, 05:51:55 AM
Quote from: misty on August 02, 2018, 01:18:08 AM
Some say there is a Super-Injunction in place which would prevent the media reporting such an event.....
Then wouldn't the super-injunction be a story of itself?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 06:45:02 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2018, 05:51:55 AM
Then wouldn't the super-injunction be a story of itself?

If there is a super injunction the media wouldn't be able to tell us. Adam Tudor of Carter-Ruck knows all about them. He was, I believe, involved in the infamous Trafigura case and a row with the Guardian;

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/oct/20/trafigura-anatomy-super-injunction

Funnily enough, Kevin Halligen was also involved with Trafigura;

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/former-ceo-london-based-company-sentenced-41-months-prison-21-million-fraud-scheme


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 02, 2018, 07:19:41 AM
Quote from: misty on August 02, 2018, 01:18:08 AM
Some say there is a Super-Injunction in place which would prevent the media reporting such an event.....
Some people have an answer for everything.   Can you get a super-injunction to preventing the reporting of police activity?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 02, 2018, 07:42:39 AM
As you all should be aware, discussing Super Injunctions or even the existence of one is a no no.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 02, 2018, 08:02:04 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 02, 2018, 07:42:39 AM
As you all should be aware, discussing Super Injunctions or even the existence of one is a no no.
What super injunction?  Super injunctions make anything and everything possible for the conspiracy theorist.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2018, 08:53:07 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 06:45:02 AM
If there is a super injunction the media wouldn't be able to tell us. Adam Tudor of Carter-Ruck knows all about them. He was, I believe, involved in the infamous Trafigura case and a row with the Guardian;

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/oct/20/trafigura-anatomy-super-injunction

Funnily enough, Kevin Halligen was also involved with Trafigura;

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/former-ceo-london-based-company-sentenced-41-months-prison-21-million-fraud-scheme
What they would even be able to tell us there was a super injunction?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 02, 2018, 09:06:52 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2018, 08:53:07 AM
What they would even be able to tell us there was a super injunction?

One wonders if the writ of the all seeing eye which apparently cannot be mentioned by mere mortals runs not only internationally but also intergalactically to gag the press of America et al and the 'free press' of the internet.
                                                        $6(&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 09:38:26 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 02, 2018, 09:06:52 AM
One wonders if the writ of the all seeing eye which apparently cannot be mentioned by mere mortals runs not only internationally but also intergalactically to gag the press of America et al and the 'free press' of the internet.
                                                        $6(&

In my opinion one of the advantages of the internet is that measures which stop the reporting of misconduct by those with the resources to pay for them is that they are difficult to enforce on the internet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 02, 2018, 09:39:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 09:38:26 AM
One of the advantages of the internet is that measures which stop the reporting of misconduct by those with the resources to pay for them is that they are difficult to enforce on the internet.

Difficult or even impossible
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 02, 2018, 10:17:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 09:38:26 AM
In my opinion one of the advantages of the internet is that measures which stop the reporting of misconduct by those with the resources to pay for them is that they are difficult to enforce on the internet.

  ... and what good is that as far as justice being served goes?  Who appears to be paying for the fake news with the apparent intention of manipulating and influencing we plebs but the super rich who can afford it or the ideologically committed who use the internet to proselytise and quite often corrupt?

The internet could have been a very different place had the original ideals taken root ... but humankind being imperfect in so many ways it is my opinion those imperfections have enjoyed unfettered release ... for example you may not aspire to download and follow instructions to 'print out' an untraceable handgun, but there are those who do.

In my opinion we have allowed children free access to the sweetie shop of the internet without guidance or let or hindrance.  It is something we are just going to have to educate ourselves ... and those by now grossly fat and diabetic children ... in the cause and effect. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 10:42:58 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 02, 2018, 10:17:55 AM
  ... and what good is that as far as justice being served goes?  Who appears to be paying for the fake news with the apparent intention of manipulating and influencing we plebs but the super rich who can afford it or the ideologically committed who use the internet to proselytise and quite often corrupt?

The internet could have been a very different place had the original ideals taken root ... but humankind being imperfect in so many ways it is my opinion those imperfections have enjoyed unfettered release ... for example you may not aspire to download and follow instructions to 'print out' an untraceable handgun, but there are those who do.

In my opinion we have allowed children free access to the sweetie shop of the internet without guidance or let or hindrance.  It is something we are just going to have to educate ourselves ... and those by now grossly fat and diabetic children ... in the cause and effect.

The world could be a very different place, but it isn't. Some of those with power or money will always use any means at their disposal to hang onto their privileges. Their feet of clay are often revealed by the media, but if the media are gagged the internet is another route which can be used to inform.

The internet can't be blamed for the way people use it, any more than food producers can be blamed for people overeating.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 02, 2018, 10:55:46 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 10:42:58 AM
The world could be a very different place, but it isn't. Some of those with power or money will always use any means at their disposal to hang onto their privileges. Their feet of clay are often revealed by the media, but if the media are gagged the internet is another route which can be used to inform.

The internet can't be blamed for the way people use it, any more than food producers can be blamed for people overeating.


I don't believe Brietta is blaming the internet but indeed she is blaming some of humankind and their misuse of it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 12:25:29 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 02, 2018, 10:55:46 AM

I don't believe Brietta is blaming the internet but indeed she is blaming some of humankind and their misuse of it.

Everyone who uses the internet does so in their own way and for their own reasons. It's used fpr good and bad, to inform and misinform, to educate and to propagate. Each to his own, I say. I can criticise others but they can criticise me too. I don't think human nature can be controlled and it can be seen in all it''s forms on the internet. I will always choose freedom of expression over censorship.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 02, 2018, 12:36:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 12:25:29 PM
Everyone who uses the internet does so in their own way and for their own reasons. It's used fpr good and bad, to inform and misinform, to educate and to propagate. Each to his own, I say. I can criticise others but they can criticise me too. I don't think human nature can be controlled and it can be seen in all it''s forms on the internet. I will always choose freedom of expression over censorship.


Does freedom of expression include the freedom to express  racist, homophobic, bigotted etc views?
Does this freedom of expression include the freedom to denigrate others?
Or do you accept that some censorship is necessary.

Just interested to know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 02, 2018, 12:46:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 12:25:29 PM
Everyone who uses the internet does so in their own way and for their own reasons. It's used fpr good and bad, to inform and misinform, to educate and to propagate. Each to his own, I say. I can criticise others but they can criticise me too. I don't think human nature can be controlled and it can be seen in all it''s forms on the internet. I will always choose freedom of expression over censorship.

We are told there is a well hidden dark side to the web ... should freedom of expression reign there too?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 02, 2018, 01:18:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 02, 2018, 12:46:29 PM
We are told there is a well hidden dark side to the web ... should freedom of expression reign there too?

It seems to.  Until they catch them at it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 02:38:23 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 02, 2018, 12:36:58 PM

Does freedom of expression include the freedom to express  racist, homophobic, bigotted etc views?
Does this freedom of expression include the freedom to denigrate others?
Or do you accept that some censorship is necessary.

Just interested to know.

I would never support censorship in any shape or form. What right has anyone to decide what I see, hear or read?
Educating people changes their views, censorship doesn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 02, 2018, 02:47:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 02:38:23 PM
I would never support censorship in any shape or form. What right has anyone to decide what I see, hear or read?
Educating people changes their views, censorship doesn't.

Adolph Hitler educated his population to kill millions of Jews...I think some sort of control on speech is essential..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 03:01:12 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 02, 2018, 02:47:37 PM
Adolph Hitler educated his population to kill millions of Jews...I think some sort of control on speech is essential..

Not exactly. The Nazi Party made use of propaganda and censorship, not education. There were many decent people in Europe, including Germans, who did their best to help the Jews.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 02, 2018, 03:16:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 02:38:23 PM
I would never support censorship in any shape or form. What right has anyone to decide what I see, hear or read?
Educating people changes their views, censorship doesn't.

Yet I understand that a facebook page has been set up to do just that and which at one time included awarding 'educational ' diplomas.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 02, 2018, 03:24:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 02:38:23 PM
I would never support censorship in any shape or form. What right has anyone to decide what I see, hear or read?
Educating people changes their views, censorship doesn't.

Try educating them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 02, 2018, 03:29:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 03:01:12 PM
Not exactly. The Nazi Party made use of propaganda and censorship, not education. There were many decent people in Europe, including Germans, who did their best to help the Jews.
they didn't do enough did they
Total free speech allows extremists to educate ....often with disastrous results
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 02, 2018, 03:37:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 02, 2018, 02:47:37 PM
Adolph Hitler educated his population to kill millions of Jews...I think some sort of control on speech is essential..

I don't think Essential is quite the right word.  It simply must not be allowed to the exclusion of all else.  Some persons will never be "Educated" no matter how hard anyone tries.   Any persons who thinks that this possible is a fool, at best.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 02, 2018, 04:09:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 03:01:12 PM
Not exactly. The Nazi Party made use of propaganda and censorship, not education. There were many decent people in Europe, including Germans, who did their best to help the Jews.

No, they used education as well.
Hitler's beliefs were taught in schools and teachers who did not promote his views were removed.
Children encouraged  to join the Hitler Youth where their "education" was continued.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 02, 2018, 04:15:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 02:38:23 PM
I would never support censorship in any shape or form. What right has anyone to decide what I see, hear or read?
Educating people changes their views, censorship doesn't.

Does this freedom of speech extend to allowing people to to voice  their racist, homophobic and religious intolerance in public places and directed at any individual.
Do you believe that this right of everyone to say whatever they want comes before the right of a person to live without  prejudice and fear.
Surely the right to free speech must be tempered by some law?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 02, 2018, 05:00:28 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 02, 2018, 04:15:33 PM
Does this freedom of speech extend to allowing people to to voice  their racist, homophobic and religious intolerance in public places and directed at any individual.
Do you believe that this right of everyone to say whatever they want comes before the right of a person to live without  prejudice and fear.
Surely the right to free speech must be tempered by some law?

I think you might be on a loser therein, at least for the moment.  But things will change
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 02, 2018, 05:19:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 12:25:29 PM
Everyone who uses the internet does so in their own way and for their own reasons. It's used fpr good and bad, to inform and misinform, to educate and to propagate. Each to his own, I say. I can criticise others but they can criticise me too. I don't think human nature can be controlled and it can be seen in all it''s forms on the internet. I will always choose freedom of expression over censorship.
Why do you post on a forum that does not allow freedom of speech and which censors regularly then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 05:42:23 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 02, 2018, 04:09:21 PM
No, they used education as well.
Hitler's beliefs were taught in schools and teachers who did not promote his views were removed.
Children encouraged  to join the Hitler Youth where their "education" was continued.

You quite correctly put inverted commas round education because you know that's not the right word. Education, like travel, broadens the mind. Not everything that happens in schools is educational.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 05:50:14 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 02, 2018, 04:15:33 PM
Does this freedom of speech extend to allowing people to to voice  their racist, homophobic and religious intolerance in public places and directed at any individual.
Do you believe that this right of everyone to say whatever they want comes before the right of a person to live without  prejudice and fear.
Surely the right to free speech must be tempered by some law?

Why the hyperbole? I was discussing the internet, not people ranting in public places. Of course there should be laws. The internet belongs to no country or government so it's not easy to control.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 05:58:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 02, 2018, 05:19:08 PM
Why do you post on a forum that does not allow freedom of speech and which censors regularly then?

I freely joined a forum with rules. I agreed to take notice of the rules, as did you. I suspect that one of them is that criticising the forum on it's public pages isn't allowed. If I felt that the forum restricted my freedom of speech or censored me I would complain through the proper channels and if my complaint was ignored I would leave. On the odd occasions when I have complained I have been satisfied with the response.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 02, 2018, 06:11:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 05:50:14 PM
Why the hyperbole? I was discussing the internet, not people ranting in public places. Of course there should be laws. The internet belongs to no country or government so it's not easy to control.

There was no "hyperbole" intended.
I appreciate that you do feel that freedom of speech should be tempered by law.
Hopefully these laws will extend in the future to the internet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 02, 2018, 06:34:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 05:58:27 PM
I freely joined a forum with rules. I agreed to take notice of the rules, as did you. I suspect that one of them is that criticising the forum on it's public pages isn't allowed. If I felt that the forum restricted my freedom of speech or censored me I would complain through the proper channels and if my complaint was ignored I would leave. On the odd occasions when I have complained I have been satisfied with the response.
There are rule takers and rule breakers. I don’t believe this forum should be above criticism and I think I should be allowed to express my criticisms of the forum and posters freely if I so wish, and also my thoughts on this case without censorship, provide it is within the law of the land.  No doubt this post will be removed and I will be punished for standing up for exercising the rght to freedom of speech again, but c’est la vie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 06:54:22 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 02, 2018, 06:34:05 PM
There are rule takers and rule breakers. I don’t believe this forum should be above criticism and I think I should be allowed to express my criticisms of the forum and posters freely if I so wish, and also my thoughts on this case without censorship, provide it is within the law of the land.  No doubt this post will be removed and I will be punished for standing up for exercising the rght to freedom of speech again, but c’est la vie.

There are rule takers and breakers in society. The breakers sometimes end up on the wring side of the law. We have little choice when it comes to social rules, but we do when it comes to joining forums. If there are restrictions on your freedom of speech here, in my opinion it's because your speech breaks the rules.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 02, 2018, 07:39:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 06:54:22 PM
There are rule takers and breakers in society. The breakers sometimes end up on the wring side of the law. We have little choice when it comes to social rules, but we do when it comes to joining forums. If there are restrictions on your freedom of speech here, in my opinion it's because your speech breaks the rules.
If there are restrictions and rules then there is no real freedom of speech.  Like in an authoritarian society we have to watch what we say or be punished.  Some people are happy to live under such restrictive regimes, others like to test the limits.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2018, 07:58:31 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 02, 2018, 07:39:43 PM
If there are restrictions and rules then there is no real freedom of speech.  Like in an authoritarian society we have to watch what we say or be punished.  Some people are happy to live under such restrictive regimes, others like to test the limits.
Do you think you should be allowed to be abusive, or to tell lies, or to defame someone on here as a matter of free speech?    OK if you do expect to be banned also.  The Admin here also have the right to free speech and they have spoken.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 02, 2018, 08:35:01 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2018, 07:58:31 PM
Do you think you should be allowed to be abusive, or to tell lies, or to defame someone on here as a matter of free speech?    OK if you do expect to be banned also.  The Admin here also have the right to free speech and they have spoken.
I don’t do any of those things and have had numerous posts deleted or amended.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2018, 08:51:46 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 02, 2018, 08:35:01 PM
I don’t do any of those things and have had numerous posts deleted or amended.
I used to be like that too, and I gradually learned how to do a post that survived.  I don't get to see all the posts that are deleted and hence I can't offer advice as to what you should change.  All I can say is that it is rare for me to delete a post by you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 09:01:20 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2018, 08:51:46 PM
I used to be like that too, and I gradually learned how to do a post that survived.  I don't get to see all the posts that are deleted and hence I can't offer advice as to what you should change.  All I can say is that it is rare for me to delete a post by you.

I think you id a great job of learning. You say what you want to say in the right manner and rarely cause offense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2018, 09:10:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 09:01:20 PM
I think you id a great job of learning. You say what you want to say in the right manner and rarely cause offense.
I have had several periods of being unable to post. 

I don't use smart phones but I have a feeling the use of smart phones has made producing quality posts more difficult.  I still use a desk top computer and I might have 6 windows open at once, so copy and pasting text and copying links into the one post is not an issue.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 02, 2018, 09:11:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 05:58:27 PM
I freely joined a forum with rules. I agreed to take notice of the rules, as did you. I suspect that one of them is that criticising the forum on it's public pages isn't allowed. If I felt that the forum restricted my freedom of speech or censored me I would complain through the proper channels and if my complaint was ignored I would leave. On the odd occasions when I have complained I have been satisfied with the response.

you dont have freedom of speech...you are not allowed to defame the mccanns
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 09:49:58 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2018, 09:10:29 PM
I have had several periods of being unable to post. 

I don't use smart phones but I have a feeling the use of smart phones has made producing quality posts more difficult.  I still use a desk top computer and I might have 6 windows open at once, so copy and pasting text and copying links into the one post is not an issue.

I like my laptop. Those phones are too small as I'm growing a cataract at the moment ha ha.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 09:51:53 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 02, 2018, 09:11:47 PM
you dont have freedom of speech...you are not allowed to defame the mccanns

I don't want to, so that''s OK.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 02, 2018, 09:53:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 02, 2018, 09:51:53 PM
I don't want to, so that''s OK.

whether you want to or not..you re not allowed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 02, 2018, 09:56:43 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 02, 2018, 09:53:26 PM
whether you want to or not..you re not allowed
"whether you want to or not..you re not allowed" but you still can.  Just be prepared to suffer the consequences.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on August 03, 2018, 11:29:24 AM
I have received numerous complaints about the posts made on this thread since last night and frankly I am surprised at some of the comments.  All have been removed and sanctions will be applied where necessary.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on August 03, 2018, 12:14:53 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 02, 2018, 09:53:26 PM
whether you want to or not..you re not allowed


That is the problem -  so why do you think they need you.

It is sad what measures some posters go to to protect the mccanns - when mccs don't need them ...they have all the protection they need.

This post in no way refers to those who do not believe in the abduction

It is not biased either - just there is not a thing backing up why the mccs believe... maddie was abducted..

The start of all this was what happened to maddie ....not the mccanns

All we know for sure 2 facts...is the children were left... something bad happened to maddie.

Just by whom we still do not know....fact the mccs have not been cleared -all imo

It seems to me - is about what happened to maddie or the mccs reputation

What is the truth about what happened that night/week....to maddie.

The mccs version should not be the only one. The protection plans were put in to place very early on starting with all the lawyers.

IMO maddie or what happened is forgotten.

Also D if mccs truly innocent as you believe ...what have they to worry about

POST IMO

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 05:31:44 PM
Quote from: kizzy on August 03, 2018, 12:14:53 PM

That is the problem -  so why do you think they need you.

It is sad what measures some posters go to to protect the mccanns - when mccs don't need them ...they have all the protection they need.

This post in no way refers to those who do not believe in the abduction

It is not biased either - just there is not a thing backing up why the mccs believe... maddie was abducted..

The start of all this was what happened to maddie ....not the mccanns

All we know for sure 2 facts...is the children were left... something bad happened to maddie.

Just by whom we still do not know....fact the mccs have not been cleared -all imo

It seems to me - is about what happened to maddie or the mccs reputation

What is the truth about what happened that night/week....to maddie.

The mccs version should not be the only one. The protection plans were put in to place very early on starting with all the lawyers.

IMO maddie or what happened is forgotten.

Also D if mccs truly innocent as you believe ...what have they to worry about

POST IMO
Their biggest fear would be a miscarriage of justice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 03, 2018, 05:45:53 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 05:31:44 PM
Their biggest fear would be a miscarriage of justice.

You think comments on an internet forum can bring that about ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 06:01:35 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 03, 2018, 05:45:53 PM
You think comments on an internet forum can bring that about ?
Doesn't the Bible say that "anything is possible" or was it "everything is possible".  So yes it is possible just don't ask for an example. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on August 03, 2018, 06:32:44 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 03, 2018, 05:45:53 PM
You think comments on an internet forum can bring that about ?


Some do clearly. Quite how that works with a small predominantly British site influencing foreign nationals in their own country is difficult to conceive. I suppose the first prerequisite is to make the case out to be one of universal interest and global legal importance.
I recall a big hoohah over "That Was The Week That Was" being seditious.
Sample: Millicent Martin saying repeatedly to Roy Kinnear in a strident magpie voice "'ere your flies are undone".
Followed by Spitting Images about 20 years later.
Yeah! It'll be a long time before we hear anything that seditious again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 03, 2018, 06:57:07 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on August 03, 2018, 06:32:44 PM


Some do clearly. Quite how that works with a small predominantly British site influencing foreign nationals in their own country is difficult to conceive. I suppose the first prerequisite is to make the case out to be one of universal interest and global legal importance.
I recall a big hoohah over "That Was The Week That Was" being seditious.
Sample: Millicent Martin saying repeatedly to Roy Kinnear in a strident magpie voice "'ere your flies are undone".
Followed by Spitting Images about 20 years later.
Yeah! It'll be a long time before we hear anything that seditious again.


I think you are missing the point Alice. the ECH thingy is going to pull that cracker. They will read these posts and think what b.....rds ! they have been mccann bashing on that forum..

I have started knitting scarfs and socks for Amaral when he get flung in jail.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 06:59:24 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 03, 2018, 06:57:07 PM

I think you are missing the point Alice. the ECH thingy is going to pull that cracker. They will read these posts and think what b.....rds ! they have been mccann bashing on that forum..

I have started knitting scarfs and socks for Amaral when he get flung in jail.
You are being too kind IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 03, 2018, 07:09:37 PM

John went to a great deal of trouble to clean up posts on this thread ... please have the courtesy to bear that in mind before pressing the 'post' button.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 03, 2018, 07:16:40 PM
Quote from: kizzy on August 03, 2018, 12:14:53 PM

That is the problem -  so why do you think they need you.

It is sad what measures some posters go to to protect the mccanns - when mccs don't need them ...they have all the protection they need.

This post in no way refers to those who do not believe in the abduction

It is not biased either - just there is not a thing backing up why the mccs believe... maddie was abducted..

The start of all this was what happened to maddie ....not the mccanns

All we know for sure 2 facts...is the children were left... something bad happened to maddie.

Just by whom we still do not know....fact the mccs have not been cleared -all imo

It seems to me - is about what happened to maddie or the mccs reputation

What is the truth about what happened that night/week....to maddie.

The mccs version should not be the only one. The protection plans were put in to place very early on starting with all the lawyers.

IMO maddie or what happened is forgotten.

Also D if mccs truly innocent as you believe ...what have they to worry about

POST IMO

What do the McCanns have to worry about? They have already lost their eldest daughter, possibly forever. They will worry that, if the case is never solved, they will lose the trust of and possibly contact with the twins who are now old enough to be influenced by what they read on the internet & in books.
Those who support the parents - and ultimately Madeleine - do not do so purely for the sake of reputation. They do so in order to provide an alternative to the opinions of those who weren't present when Madeleine disappeared.
IMO it is important for the twins to still believe their sister is still worth caring about & searching for.
IMO it is important for the McCann family as a whole to know that not everybody believes the court of public opinion has concluded they have committed an appalling crime. It's important for the twins to know that not everybody believes their parents are the monsters some portray them to be.
IMO In a wider sense. it is also important for the twins to realise that UK police, governments, secret agents et al have not conspired for 11 years to keep their parents out of jail & don't really operate for the common good.
A UK court has a prosecution and a defence for a very good reason. Your apparent desire to only allow the prosecution to have a voice without permitting a counter argument shows a lack of real concern for Madeleine's fate & other potential future victims - but I guess that's a reflection of the Portuguese justice system.

All IMHO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 03, 2018, 07:21:27 PM
The idea that innocent people have nothing to worry about is rather ironic to read on the Miscarriage of Justice forum!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 07:22:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 03, 2018, 07:21:27 PM
The idea that innocent people have nothing to worry about is rather ironic to read on the Miscarriage of Justice forum!
Exactly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on August 03, 2018, 07:24:20 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 03, 2018, 07:21:27 PM
The idea that innocent people have nothing to worry about is rather ironic to read on the Miscarriage of Justice forum!

Innocent people have always had much to fear from rogue police officers and prosecutors.  Been there... worn the T-shirt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 03, 2018, 07:26:26 PM
Those with the backing of wealthy benefactors and a high end team of lawyers will have considerably less to fear  from injustice than your average joe in the street, I fancy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 07:34:08 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 03, 2018, 07:26:26 PM
Those with the backing of wealthy benefactors and a high end team of lawyers will have considerably less to fear  from injustice than your average joe in the street, I fancy.
Were the McCanns something special from the start?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 03, 2018, 07:46:49 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 07:34:08 PM
Were the McCanns something special from the start?

Depends on when you want to call start, but they certainly had top end legal advice within days, as well as the offer of funding from the likes of Branson and 'windows' Kennedy and more than usual Foreign Office input.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 03, 2018, 07:47:31 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 03, 2018, 07:26:26 PM
Those with the backing of wealthy benefactors and a high end team of lawyers will have considerably less to fear  from injustice than your average joe in the street, I fancy.
Oh well that would explain why they were victorious in their court case against Amaral then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 03, 2018, 07:51:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 03, 2018, 07:47:31 PM
Oh well that would explain why they were victorious in their court case against Amaral then.

As well as having the right backers, you need to choose your battles, especially when playing on someone else’s turf to their rules.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 03, 2018, 07:52:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 03, 2018, 07:47:31 PM
Oh well that would explain why they were victorious in their court case against Amaral then.

Their expert legal team is more expert in British law than Portuguese law, which might go some way to explaining their epic fail.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 07:56:19 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 03, 2018, 07:51:57 PM
As well as having the right backers, you need to choose your battles, especially when playing on someone else’s turf to their rules.

The McCann's had no choice other than to sue amaral ..imo..and again imo ...in any fair justice system would have won...
Amaral himself thought he might lose when he said he would go to the ECHR if necessary....it's of not do much importance now they have been virtually cleared...imo..
And will be vindicated in the ECHR...imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 03, 2018, 08:00:01 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 03, 2018, 07:52:19 PM
Their expert legal team is more expert in British law than Portuguese law, which might go some way to explaining their epic fail.
And where would they be tried in the unlikely event that they are charged over Madeleine’s disappearance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 03, 2018, 08:01:01 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 03, 2018, 08:00:01 PM
And whete would they be tried in the unlikely event that they are charged over Madeleine’s disappearance?

Portugal, it’s where it happened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 03, 2018, 08:07:21 PM
The difference being that in the libel trial they had to prove their claims  whereas in a criminal trial, it would be for the State to prove its case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 03, 2018, 08:08:33 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 03, 2018, 08:01:01 PM
Portugal, it’s where it happened.
Exactly, so their wealthy benefactors and expert legal team will probably count for alot less there where justice seems to operate in a weird parallel universe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 08:11:15 PM
But this time it will be on neutral ground..and...If, by some chance, the ECHR finds that Portugal has breached the McCann's human rights they will have achieved more than if they had defeated Amaral. They will have discredited not just him, but his entire country.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 03, 2018, 08:27:54 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 08:11:15 PM
But this time it will be on neutral ground..and...If, by some chance, the ECHR finds that Portugal has breached the McCann's human rights they will have achieved more than if they had defeated Amaral. They will have discredited not just him, but his entire country.

Which helps Madeleine how?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 03, 2018, 08:29:32 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 08:11:15 PM
But this time it will be on neutral ground..and...If, by some chance, the ECHR finds that Portugal has breached the McCann's human rights they will have achieved more than if they had defeated Amaral. They will have discredited not just him, but his entire country.

So if it doesn't, what then? Pages of posts explaining just how wrong the ECHR judges are?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 08:34:29 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 08:11:15 PM
But this time it will be on neutral ground..and...If, by some chance, the ECHR finds that Portugal has breached the McCann's human rights they will have achieved more than if they had defeated Amaral. They will have discredited not just him, but his entire country.

I can't see that ever happening.  By their neglect, the McCanns brought about the situation in which their daughter mysteriously disappeared so I don't see any court upholding their human rights since they put so little value on their own daughters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 08:36:52 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 03, 2018, 08:27:54 PM
Which helps Madeleine how?

its too late to help Madeleine imo...the PJ totally screwed up..imo..

It will certainly help the twins...so thats important...imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 08:38:26 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 03, 2018, 08:27:54 PM
Which helps Madeleine how?

Exactly.  We all know this is about the parent's reputation and little to do with a missing teenager.  They should be putting their efforts into the search instead of taking on the State of Portugal imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 08:38:34 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 08:34:29 PM
I can't see that ever happening.  By their neglect, the McCanns brought about the situation in which their daughter mysteriously disappeared so I don't see any court upholding their human rights since they put so little value on their own daughters.

I can see it happening...based on other ECHR cases

nothing of what you have posted will have any bearing whatsoever on the case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 08:39:52 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 08:38:26 PM
Exactly.  We all know this is about the parent's reputation and little to do with a missing teenager.

I think the parents reoutation is important for teh well being of the twins...dont you...or are you just afraid of portughal being criticised and ridiculed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 08:42:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 08:38:34 PM
I can see it happening...based on other ECHR cases

Isnt the McCann case unique?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 08:44:42 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 08:42:50 PM
Isnt the McCann case unique?

the case to the ECHR is not unique...its a simple 8 v10...plus perhaps others
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 03, 2018, 08:51:30 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 08:34:29 PM
I can't see that ever happening.  By their neglect, the McCanns brought about the situation in which their daughter mysteriously disappeared so I don't see any court upholding their human rights since they put so little value on their own daughters.
The law is not supposed to be that childish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 08:53:05 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 03, 2018, 08:51:30 PM
The law is not supposed to be that childish.

very good point..in most countries it isnt...but im not sure that applies to portugal...imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 08:55:39 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 08:53:05 PM
very good point..in most countries it isnt...but im not sure that applies to portugal...imo

Portuguese law has little in common with UK law, some people still don't realise this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 08:58:08 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 08:55:39 PM
Portuguese law has little in common with UK law, some people still don't realise this.
i realise this ..portuguese law seems to be a law unto itself...with no respect for justice...imo...but hopedfully the ECHR will put the SC in its place
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 03, 2018, 09:03:12 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 08:58:08 PM
i realise this ..portuguese law seems to be a law unto itself...with no respect for justice...imo...but hopedfully the ECHR will put the SC in its place

Did you vote for Brexit?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:04:55 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 03, 2018, 09:03:12 PM
Did you vote for Brexit?

what has that to do with case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:06:09 PM
could someone explain how the portuguese justice system accepts that an alert to cadaver is a proven fact when the experts say it is not proven
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 03, 2018, 09:07:48 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 08:55:39 PM
Portuguese law has little in common with UK law, some people still don't realise this.

Based on the Code Napoleonic, as are a number of other European countries.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:09:50 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 03, 2018, 09:07:48 PM
Based on the Code Napoleonic, as are a number of other European countries.

its still thinks its in the Napolionic age   ......imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:11:56 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 03, 2018, 09:03:12 PM
Did you vote for Brexit?

faith seems to think brexit has some bearing on the case...do you
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:24:55 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 03, 2018, 09:03:12 PM
Did you vote for Brexit?

if your post has no relevance you should delete it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:30:39 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 09:06:09 PM
could someone explain how the portuguese justice system accepts that an alert to cadaver is a proven fact when the experts say it is not proven

interesting...it seems no one has an explanation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:34:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 09:06:09 PM
could someone explain how the portuguese justice system accepts that an alert to cadaver is a proven fact when the experts say it is not proven

so who is wrong...the experts or the portuguese justice system
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 09:34:49 PM
The McCanns thought that their libel action in Portugal against Amaral and the media companies was a walkover after what happened in the UK. It nearly was when the first instance court wrongly found in their favour. Fortunately the appeal court and the supreme court saw it differently and found for the defendants.

The right to free speech is very important in Portugal and imo the upper courts were correct to uphold that right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 09:35:12 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 09:06:09 PM
could someone explain how the portuguese justice system accepts that an alert to cadaver is a proven fact when the experts say it is not proven

Can you prove "the Portuguese justice system accepts that an alert to cadaver is a proven fact"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:37:04 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 09:34:49 PM
The McCanns thought that their libel action in Portugal against Amaral and the media companies was a walkover after what happened in the UK. It nearly was when the first instance court wrongly found in their favour. Fortunately the appeal court and the supreme court saw it differently and found for the defendants.

and now we wait for the ECHR ...who will imo...based on past cases.... find that Portugal has breached the McCann's human rights and this will will have achieved more than if they had defeated Amaral. They will have discredited not just him, but his entire country.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:38:04 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 09:35:12 PM
Can you prove "the Portuguese justice system accepts that an alert to cadaver is a proven fact"?

yes rob ...I can,....its stated in the PROVEN facts...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 09:39:47 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 09:34:49 PM
The McCanns thought that their libel action in Portugal against Amaral and the media companies was a walkover after what happened in the UK. It nearly was when the first instance court wrongly found in their favour. Fortunately the appeal court and the supreme court saw it differently and found for the defendants.

The right to free speech is very important in Portugal and imo the upper court were correct to uphold that right.
Fortunate for Amaral at least.

How happy would the Portuguese be if there was a book produced saying the PJ were corrupt?  Would that be considered free speech?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 09:42:07 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 09:38:04 PM
yes rob ...I can,....its stated in the PROVEN facts...
Could you copy and paste that from the proven facts please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:45:52 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 09:42:07 PM
Could you copy and paste that from the proven facts please?

I will do it tomorrow Rob...its in the SC judgement
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 03, 2018, 09:46:54 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 09:34:49 PM
The McCanns thought that their libel action in Portugal against Amaral and the media companies was a walkover after what happened in the UK. It nearly was when the first instance court wrongly found in their favour. Fortunately the appeal court and the supreme court saw it differently and found for the defendants.

The right to free speech is very important in Portugal and imo the upper courts were correct to uphold that right.

The right to free speech in Portugal often very much depends on who is being spoken about.

http://portugalresident.com/over-9000-call-for-an-end-to-%E2%80%9Ccrimes-against-honour%E2%80%9D

PORTUGALPRESS on August 02, 2018

A petition calling for the end of crimes against honour has been delivered to parliament signed by 9,000 people.

The hope is that Portugal’s “obsolete and medieval” legislation that has been known to ruin lives is finally consigned to the wastebin.

In the words of the petition’s champion Luís Júdice “these rules simply serve to intimidate whomever has an opinion different to that of the system”.

Portugal’s defamation legislation is “considered obsolete and medieval by the European Commission”, he told Público, adding that sending people to prison for it “simply doesn’t make sense.

As a subscriber to the European Convention for Human Rights, Portugal should “kill this issue at its source”, he said, but that is not what is happening.

Only two years ago, “intellectual and artist” Maria de Lurdes Rodrigues was condemned to three years in jail - which she is still serving, purportedly in a cell with two convicted murderers (click here) - for a long-running battle she waged against high-ranking figures in Portugal’s establishment.

As Júdice said at the time, Rodrigues is “not a criminal”.

If people - no matter what position they have in life - feel their honour has been offended, they can take the issue to the civil courts and ask for compensation, he stressed.

This is the second attempt instigated by Júdice to change a law that to a large extent even conditions Portuguese media.
Newspapers are frequently threatened with ‘an action for defamation’ just for printing the truth. Often the threats are empty, but the mere fact that they are made can lead to editors and/ or publishers to spiking perfectly valid material.

Thus this bid is being keenly watched.

Júdice's first attempt, again in the form of a well-signed petition, failed to be admitted for debate due to the fact that it called on parliament to intervene in the specific case of Maria de Lurdes Rodrigues, which was seen as a violation of the principle of separation of powers.

This new bid is much more generic.

It calls principally for an end of crimes against honour but it also “requests the revocation of the Civil Procedure Code” which prohibits “the written or oral use of unnecessary or unjustified expressions which are offensive to the honour or the good name of another, or in respect of institutions”.

The petition further calls for a parliamentary inquiry into the training of judges, and an overview of judicial decisions that have shown themselves to be incompatible with the Convention of Human Rights.

This last point could well involve the controversial recent judgement that ruled in favour of two men who kidnapped a woman and beat her with a nail-spiked club (click here) on the basis that she was an adulteress who, in other countries in the world, could be executed for her behaviour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 09:47:37 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 09:37:04 PM
and now we wait for the ECHR ...who will imo...based on past cases.... find that Portugal has breached the McCann's human rights and this will will have achieved more than if they had defeated Amaral. They will have discredited not just him, but his entire country.

I recall you saying the same thing ahead of the SC decision.  I fear you and the McCanns will be sorely disappointed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:48:23 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 09:34:49 PM
The McCanns thought that their libel action in Portugal against Amaral and the media companies was a walkover after what happened in the UK. It nearly was when the first instance court wrongly found in their favour. Fortunately the appeal court and the supreme court saw it differently and found for the defendants.

The right to free speech is very important in Portugal and imo the upper courts were correct to uphold that right.

the SC has been corrected before and will be again...portugal is governed by ECHR law...the SC judgements fails on several points imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 03, 2018, 09:49:43 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 09:45:52 PM
I will do it tomorrow Rob...its in the SC judgement

I don't think it's in the PROVEN FACTS.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 09:49:47 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 09:38:04 PM
yes rob ...I can,....its stated in the PROVEN facts...

The dogs did alert to the substances they were trained for and that included cadaver odour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:50:03 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 09:47:37 PM
I recall you saying the same thing ahead of the SC decision.  I fear you and the McCanns will be sorely disappointed.

That shows how poor you memeory is....I wont ask for a cite because my memory is very good and I know you are wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:51:00 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 09:49:47 PM
The dogs did alert to the substances they were trained for and that included cadaver odour.

so is it aproven fact taht the dogs alerted to cadaver...not according to the experts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 09:52:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 09:48:23 PM
the SC has been corrected before and will be again...portugal is governed by ECHR law...the SC judgements fails on several points imo

For all anyone knows the application has been rejected already.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 03, 2018, 09:54:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 09:11:56 PM
faith seems to think brexit has some bearing on the case...do you

May have.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:55:10 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 03, 2018, 09:54:00 PM
May have.
in what way...slartis failed to give an answer ...and so have you
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 09:57:37 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 09:52:40 PM
For all anyone knows the application has been rejected already.

there is a notification if actions are rejected...as Ive already posted...so on that basis it hasnt been rejected
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 10:01:50 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 09:49:47 PM
The dogs did alert to the substances they were trained for and that included cadaver odour.
I would accept "The dogs are trained to alert to cadaver odour and to dried human blood"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 10:03:49 PM
Quote from: misty on August 03, 2018, 09:46:54 PM
The right to free speech in Portugal often very much depends on who is being spoken about.

http://portugalresident.com/over-9000-call-for-an-end-to-%E2%80%9Ccrimes-against-honour%E2%80%9D

PORTUGALPRESS on August 02, 2018

A petition calling for the end of crimes against honour has been delivered to parliament signed by 9,000 people.

The hope is that Portugal’s “obsolete and medieval” legislation that has been known to ruin lives is finally consigned to the wastebin.

In the words of the petition’s champion Luís Júdice “these rules simply serve to intimidate whomever has an opinion different to that of the system”.

Portugal’s defamation legislation is “considered obsolete and medieval by the European Commission”, he told Público, adding that sending people to prison for it “simply doesn’t make sense.

As a subscriber to the European Convention for Human Rights, Portugal should “kill this issue at its source”, he said, but that is not what is happening.

Only two years ago, “intellectual and artist” Maria de Lurdes Rodrigues was condemned to three years in jail - which she is still serving, purportedly in a cell with two convicted murderers (click here) - for a long-running battle she waged against high-ranking figures in Portugal’s establishment.

As Júdice said at the time, Rodrigues is “not a criminal”.

If people - no matter what position they have in life - feel their honour has been offended, they can take the issue to the civil courts and ask for compensation, he stressed.

This is the second attempt instigated by Júdice to change a law that to a large extent even conditions Portuguese media.
Newspapers are frequently threatened with ‘an action for defamation’ just for printing the truth. Often the threats are empty, but the mere fact that they are made can lead to editors and/ or publishers to spiking perfectly valid material.

Thus this bid is being keenly watched.

Júdice's first attempt, again in the form of a well-signed petition, failed to be admitted for debate due to the fact that it called on parliament to intervene in the specific case of Maria de Lurdes Rodrigues, which was seen as a violation of the principle of separation of powers.

This new bid is much more generic.

It calls principally for an end of crimes against honour but it also “requests the revocation of the Civil Procedure Code” which prohibits “the written or oral use of unnecessary or unjustified expressions which are offensive to the honour or the good name of another, or in respect of institutions”.

The petition further calls for a parliamentary inquiry into the training of judges, and an overview of judicial decisions that have shown themselves to be incompatible with the Convention of Human Rights.

This last point could well involve the controversial recent judgement that ruled in favour of two men who kidnapped a woman and beat her with a nail-spiked club (click here) on the basis that she was an adulteress who, in other countries in the world, could be executed for her behaviour.
Very interesting.  That kept my interest the full length of the article.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 03, 2018, 10:14:34 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 10:03:49 PM
Very interesting.  That kept my interest the full length of the article.

The article by misty shows just ho badlly portuguese Judges misunderstand their duties re defamation re ECHR law...and that is why ..imo...the mccanns have a rock solid case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on August 03, 2018, 10:39:40 PM
Quote from: misty on August 03, 2018, 09:46:54 PM
The right to free speech in Portugal often very much depends on who is being spoken about.

http://portugalresident.com/over-9000-call-for-an-end-to-%E2%80%9Ccrimes-against-honour%E2%80%9D

PORTUGALPRESS on August 02, 2018

A petition calling for the end of crimes against honour has been delivered to parliament signed by 9,000 people.

The hope is that Portugal’s “obsolete and medieval” legislation that has been known to ruin lives is finally consigned to the wastebin.

In the words of the petition’s champion Luís Júdice “these rules simply serve to intimidate whomever has an opinion different to that of the system”.

Portugal’s defamation legislation is “considered obsolete and medieval by the European Commission”, he told Público, adding that sending people to prison for it “simply doesn’t make sense.

As a subscriber to the European Convention for Human Rights, Portugal should “kill this issue at its source”, he said, but that is not what is happening.

Only two years ago, “intellectual and artist” Maria de Lurdes Rodrigues was condemned to three years in jail - which she is still serving, purportedly in a cell with two convicted murderers (click here) - for a long-running battle she waged against high-ranking figures in Portugal’s establishment.

As Júdice said at the time, Rodrigues is “not a criminal”.

If people - no matter what position they have in life - feel their honour has been offended, they can take the issue to the civil courts and ask for compensation, he stressed.

This is the second attempt instigated by Júdice to change a law that to a large extent even conditions Portuguese media.
Newspapers are frequently threatened with ‘an action for defamation’ just for printing the truth. Often the threats are empty, but the mere fact that they are made can lead to editors and/ or publishers to spiking perfectly valid material.

Thus this bid is being keenly watched.

Júdice's first attempt, again in the form of a well-signed petition, failed to be admitted for debate due to the fact that it called on parliament to intervene in the specific case of Maria de Lurdes Rodrigues, which was seen as a violation of the principle of separation of powers.

This new bid is much more generic.

It calls principally for an end of crimes against honour but it also “requests the revocation of the Civil Procedure Code” which prohibits “the written or oral use of unnecessary or unjustified expressions which are offensive to the honour or the good name of another, or in respect of institutions”.

The petition further calls for a parliamentary inquiry into the training of judges, and an overview of judicial decisions that have shown themselves to be incompatible with the Convention of Human Rights.

This last point could well involve the controversial recent judgement that ruled in favour of two men who kidnapped a woman and beat her with a nail-spiked club (click here) on the basis that she was an adulteress who, in other countries in the world, could be executed for her behaviour.

The problem is I guess that Portuguese Law is based on the Germanic system which remains much the same without attracting too much attention. I wonder why?

The law of Libel and Slander is governed by Sections 185 upto 200 of the German Criminal Code
Sanctions involve imprisonment ranging from three (3) months to five (5) years, plus a fine.

Mods please note I posted cites for this earlier in the week and do not propose to do it again. Delete the post if you wish it makes it none the less true..... 8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 03, 2018, 10:40:35 PM
As if we needed any more proof of the bizarre workings of the Portuguese legal system - you might be forgiven for thinking this happened in Afghanistan not somewhere in Europe!

“This last point could well involve the controversial recent judgement that ruled in favour of two men who kidnapped a woman and beat her with a nail-spiked club (click here) on the basis that she was an adulteress who, in other countries in the world, could be executed for her behaviour”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 03, 2018, 10:45:03 PM

Two appeal court judges are in the spotlight this week for apparently condoning domestic violence when the victim is ‘an adulterous female’.

Quoting passages from the Bible, and citing cultures where adulterous women are stoned to death, judges Neto de Moura and Maria Luísa Abrantes ruled that “the adultery of a woman is a very serious attack on the honour and dignity of (her) man”.

Over 20 pages, the duo ‘demolished’ the woman who in 2014 cheated on her husband and then ended up physically assaulted by him after being held to account, against her will, by her former lover, reports Jornal de Notícias.

A lower court had previously heard the case and handed both men suspended jail terms. The Public Ministry appealed however, hoping for custodial sentences.

These will now not be forthcoming.

Indeed, the Porto appeal court duo stressed that “in the Bible, we can read that an adulterous woman should be punished with death”.

It’s a judgement that has sparked outrage over social media - many commentators complaining that it takes the whole issue of gender equality back to the Dark Ages.

The judges’ feeling however was that the lower court had appreciated all the details “well”, particularly in the context that the husband was acting while suffering from depression.

In other words, the judgement ‘sticks’, the aggressors walk free - albeit saddled with their initial fines and suspended jail terms - and any woman committing adultery within an established relationship and coming a cropper will now be painfully aware that judges may not be totally on her side.

natasha.donn@algarveresident.com
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 11:40:22 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 09:50:03 PM
That shows how poor you memeory is....I wont ask for a cite because my memory is very good and I know you are wrong

You claimed they would win the libel case, you were right.  You claimed they would win the subsequent appeal by Amaral, you were wrong.  You claimed they would win the Supreme Court appeal launched by the parents, you were wrong.  You claimed the SC decision would be set aside on review, you were wrong. You now claim that the parents will win a ECHR review of the case, in my opinion you will again be wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 11:45:47 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 03, 2018, 09:57:37 PM
there is a notification if actions are rejected...as Ive already posted...so on that basis it hasnt been rejected

Always assuming it was accepted as being valid in the first place.  The court has made no reference to the case and so much time has now passed that I suspect it was never accepted or was withdrawn.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 04, 2018, 12:23:08 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 11:40:22 PM
You claimed they would win the libel case, you were right.  You claimed they would win the subsequent appeal by Amaral, you were wrong.  You claimed they would win the Supreme Court appeal launched by the parents, you were wrong.  You claimed the SC decision would be set aside on review, you were wrong. You now claim that the parents will win a ECHR review of the case, in my opinion you will again be wrong.

How many Portuguese national laws did the Appeal/SC have to set aside to repudiate the McCanns' appeals?
1. Appeal court ruled duty of reserve did not apply to Amaral.
2. The definition of Public Person was abused to the benefit of the defendant.
3. The right to Presumption of Innocence was abused by the SC.
4. The SC changed the filing article in the archiving report
5. The SC declared that the book was written as a Value Judgement of the investigation, whereas the real judgement value, in the form of Almeida's interim report, was already in the files. That is acceptable within the confines of a police investigation but against the law when repeated by a private citizen.

ETA Answers are all my opinion only based on facts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2018, 01:00:34 AM
Quote from: misty on August 04, 2018, 12:23:08 AM
How many Portuguese national laws did the Appeal/SC have to set aside to repudiate the McCanns' appeals?
1. Appeal court ruled duty of reserve did not apply to Amaral.
2. The definition of Public Person was abused to the benefit of the defendant.
3. The right to Presumption of Innocence was abused by the SC.
4. The SC changed the filing article in the archiving report
5. The SC declared that the book was written as a Judgement Value of the investigation, whereas the real judgement value, in the form of Almeida's interim report, was already in the files. That is acceptable within the confines of a police investigation but against the law when repeated by a private citizen.

ETA Answers are all my opinion only based on facts.
Have we discussed point #5 at any time?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 04, 2018, 01:39:32 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2018, 01:00:34 AM
Have we discussed point #5 at any time?

Not that I'm aware of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 07:17:06 AM
Quote from: misty on August 04, 2018, 12:23:08 AM
How many Portuguese national laws did the Appeal/SC have to set aside to repudiate the McCanns' appeals?
1. Appeal court ruled duty of reserve did not apply to Amaral.
2. The definition of Public Person was abused to the benefit of the defendant.
3. The right to Presumption of Innocence was abused by the SC.
4. The SC changed the filing article in the archiving report
5. The SC declared that the book was written as a Value Judgement of the investigation, whereas the real judgement value, in the form of Almeida's interim report, was already in the files. That is acceptable within the confines of a police investigation but against the law when repeated by a private citizen.

ETA Answers are all my opinion only based on facts.

2 the McCanns choose to make themselves public persons.
3 presumption of innocence was deemed not in scope as it wasn’t a criminal trial
4 corrected based of the words (the important bit) in the archiving report
5 was GA’s knowledges of the investigation which was allowed by 1

IMO based on the facts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 07:44:11 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 11:40:22 PM
You claimed they would win the libel case, you were right.  You claimed they would win the subsequent appeal by Amaral, you were wrong.  You claimed they would win the Supreme Court appeal launched by the parents, you were wrong.  You claimed the SC decision would be set aside on review, you were wrong. You now claim that the parents will win a ECHR review of the case, in my opinion you will again be wrong.

I claimed they would win the first case and. I was right...I said they may well lose the appeal...I was right...I made no predictions for the SC...or the appeal...you are wrong.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 07:46:56 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 03, 2018, 11:45:47 PM
Always assuming it was accepted as being valid in the first place.  The court has made no reference to the case and so much time has now passed that I suspect it was never accepted or was withdrawn.
Afaiac....if the case is rejected a rejection is published...as happened in a recent case...we have seen no rejection
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 08:04:50 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 07:17:06 AM
2 the McCanns choose to make themselves public persons.
3 presumption of innocence was deemed not in scope as it wasn’t a criminal trial
4 corrected based of the words (the important bit) in the archiving report
5 was GA’s knowledges of the investigation which was allowed by 1

IMO based on the facts.
1. The McCanns have invoked the principle of presumption of innocence to justify the restrictions they want imposed on dr. Amaral's freedom of expression;

2. The Supreme Court stated, in its ruling, that the above is no argument because the McCanns were not considered innocent by the investigation and the case was archived because not enough evidence was found to charge them.


this is based on a transaltion of the original court documents....nothing about it being a civil trial...im fairly sure Ive seen a case on the ECHR where the POI was invoked in a similar civil trial



so according to this very reliable quote...the mccanns were denied the POI because the investigation didnt think they were innocent...what a ridiculous argument by the SC
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 04, 2018, 08:21:47 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 08:04:50 AM
1. The McCanns have invoked the principle of presumption of innocence to justify the restrictions they want imposed on dr. Amaral's freedom of expression;

2. The Supreme Court stated, in its ruling, that the above is no argument because the McCanns were not considered innocent by the investigation and the case was archived because not enough evidence was found to charge them.


this is based on a transaltion of the original court documents....nothing about it being a civil trial...im fairly sure Ive seen a case on the ECHR where the POI was invoked in a similar civil trial



so according to this very reliable quote...the mccanns were denied the POI because the investigation didnt think they were innocent...what a ridiculous argument by the SC

Who wrote that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 08:25:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 04, 2018, 08:21:47 AM
Who wrote that?

Arguição de Nulidade do Acórdão

http://pjga.blogspot.com/?m=0

it must come as a surprise to you....note....the mccanns dont claim innocence...they claim the presumption of innocence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 08:42:37 AM
Im sure everyone would agree that to deny someone the presumpyion of innocence because the investigation did not think them innocent  is a clear breach of ECHR...a massive own goal by the SC. The actual ruling is there in portuguese if anyone wishes to contradict the transaltion and interpretation given
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 08:49:58 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 07:46:56 AM
Afaiac....if the case is rejected a rejection is published...as happened in a recent case...we have seen no rejection

We have also seen no submission to be fair.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 08:57:17 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 08:42:37 AM
Im sure everyone would agree that to deny someone the presumpyion of innocence because the investigation did not think them innocent  is a clear breach of ECHR...a massive own goal by the SC. The actual ruling is there in portuguese if anyone wishes to contradict the transaltion and interpretation given

From the SC ruling...

Quote
It must be reminded that, in the present case, the issue isn't the appellants' penal liability, in other words their innocence or their guilt concerning the facts leading to the disappearance of her daughter doesn't have to be appreciated here.

What is in discussion here is merely the civil liability of the respondents, on the grounds that they have expressed and disclosed the above-mentioned thesis/opinion on the disappearance in question.

It follows that the outcome of the present case is not such as to call into question the extra-procedural dimension of the presumption of innocence.

This means that, even if the action does not proceed, it will not imply, even in the eyes of the community. any consideration of the appellants' liability, because such outcome will never will be able to be equated to an observation of respective culpability (cf. on this topic the judgements Del Latte vs Holland (n°44760/98) of 9/11/2004 and Cheena vs Belgium of 9/5/2016).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 04, 2018, 09:08:02 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 08:25:38 AM
Arguição de Nulidade do Acórdão

http://pjga.blogspot.com/?m=0

it must come as a surprise to you....note....the mccanns dont claim innocence...they claim the presumption of innocence

I can cherry pick too. From the same document (written by the McCann's lawyer btw);

their intimate relationship with the presumption of innocence or, if we wish to be more rigorous, the status of innocence that they enjoy.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Annulment_request.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 09:15:06 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 04, 2018, 09:08:02 AM
I can cherry pick too. From the same document (written by the McCann's lawyer btw);

their intimate relationship with the presumption of innocence or, if we wish to be more rigorous, the status of innocence that they enjoy.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Annulment_request.htm

When it comes to the law cherry picking is the norm

It is clear to me that the SC have stated that the McCanns do not benefit from the POI because the investigation did not deem them innocent....that is a crystal clear  breach of the ECHR
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 04, 2018, 09:57:55 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 09:15:06 AM
When it comes to the law cherry picking is the norm

It is clear to me that the SC have stated that the McCanns do not benefit from the POI because the investigation did not deem them innocent....that is a crystal clear  breach of the ECHR

The law, of course, has to provide cites so that the original quote and it's context can be examined. You keep forgetting to add yours.

You keep repeating your opinions of what occurred, but in my opinion you clearly don't understand the arguments were put forward. .



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 10:40:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 04, 2018, 09:57:55 AM
The law, of course, has to provide cites so that the original quote and it's context can be examined. You keep forgetting to add yours.

You keep repeating your opinions of what occurred, but in my opinion you clearly don't understand the arguments were put forward. .

The cites are on the page I've provided a link to....the documents are all their in Portuguese......I will look at translating them later but from what the site days..the SC have made a massive error


I think I have a very good understanding of the argument s made
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 10:46:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 04, 2018, 09:57:55 AM
The law, of course, has to provide cites so that the original quote and it's context can be examined. You keep forgetting to add yours.

You keep repeating your opinions of what occurred, but in my opinion you clearly don't understand the arguments were put forward. .

1. The McCanns have invoked the principle of presumption of innocence to justify the restrictions they want imposed on dr. Amaral's freedom of expression;

2. The Supreme Court stated, in its ruling, that the above is no argument because the McCanns were not considered innocent by the investigation and the case was archived because not enough evidence was found to charge them.


its you who doesnt understand...this is not MY opinion....its an interpretation and translation by Kazlux....who
 I understand is porttuguese and helped in the translation of the files...and is an amaral supporter
http://pjga.blogspot.com/?m=0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 10:58:36 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 10:46:48 AM
1. The McCanns have invoked the principle of presumption of innocence to justify the restrictions they want imposed on dr. Amaral's freedom of expression;

2. The Supreme Court stated, in its ruling, that the above is no argument because the McCanns were not considered innocent by the investigation and the case was archived because not enough evidence was found to charge them.


its you who doesnt understand...this is not MY opinion....its an interpretation and translation by Kazlux....who
 I understand is porttuguese and helped in the translation of the files...and is an amaral supporter
http://pjga.blogspot.com/?m=0

And you think your understanding will be more objective being english and a McCann supporter ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 11:01:00 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 10:58:36 AM
And you think your understanding will be more objective being english and a McCann supporter ?

no.......im quoting a portuguese amaral supporter.....Im not giving my opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 04, 2018, 11:12:56 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 11:01:00 AM
no.......im quoting a portuguese amaral supporter.....Im not giving my opinion

I would say "I think I have a very good understanding of the argument s made" is giving your opinion IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 11:14:35 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 11:01:00 AM
no.......im quoting a portuguese amaral supporter.....Im not giving my opinion

But you do and will again at some point. So being a McCann supporter do you think that opinion will be any more objective?

This is the thing that always gets me. Supporters moan about the quality of the translations of the files because they were done, in the main, by Portuguese individuals who, in the main, support Amaral. So here’s an idea, why don’t they learn Portuguese and translate them themselves ? It’s been 11 years, ample time you would have thought to learn a new language and what with them being such clever people able to see through all the misinformation to the truth.

The original files are there for all to see. If you are going to accuse individuals of mistranslating because of bias you really do need to base that on an actual knowledge of that which you think is dodgy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 04, 2018, 11:17:21 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 11:14:35 AM
But you do and will again at some point. So being a McCann supporter do you think that that opinion will be any more objective?

This is the thing that always gets me. Supporters moan about the quality of the translations of the files because they were done, in the main, by Portuguese individuals who, in the main, support Amaral. So here’s an idea, why don’t they learn Portuguese and translate them themselves ? It’s been 11 years, ample time you would have thought to learn a new language and what with them being such clever people able to see through all the misinformation to the truth.

The original files are there for all to see. If you are going to accuse individuals of mistranslating because of bias you really do need to base that on an actual knowledge of that which you think is dodgy.

Perhaps because the original translations made by Astro etc are actually quite accurate in most instances. Once the supporters admit the translations are good to go then they lose that stick to beat the sceptics with.

Of course they do have a supposed Portuguese speakers eg Pedro. I am sure he/she could have done a translation in 11 years, assuming they do speak Portuguese of course
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 11:19:28 AM
Quote from: Sunny on August 04, 2018, 11:17:21 AM
Perhaps because the original translations made by Astro etc are actually quite accurate in most instances. Once the supporters admit the translations are good to go then they lose that stick to beat the sceptics with.

Of course they do have a supposed Portuguese speakers eg Pedro. I am sure he/she could have done a translation in 11 years, assuming they do speak Portuguese of course

Oh yes I forgot Pedro McSporran Sunny.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 04, 2018, 11:35:02 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 07:46:56 AM
Afaiac....if the case is rejected a rejection is published...as happened in a recent case...we have seen no rejection

The ECHR rejects many invalid applications before they are even accepted thus never published.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 04, 2018, 11:40:54 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 04, 2018, 11:35:02 AM
The ECHR rejects many invalid applications before they are even accepted thus never published.

I gather a large number get refused before they even leave their country of origin too Angelo222
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 04, 2018, 11:41:52 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 10:40:38 AM
The cites are on the page I've provided a link to....the documents are all their in Portuguese......I will look at translating them later but from what the site days..the SC have made a massive error


I think I have a very good understanding of the argument s made

Except that you don't appear to understand the concept that Portuguese law is valid in Portugal and there is nothing the ECHR can do to change that.  The Portuguese SC ruling cannot be overturned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 04, 2018, 11:44:51 AM
Quote from: Sunny on August 04, 2018, 11:40:54 AM
I gather a large number get refused before they even leave their country of origin too Angelo222

Anyone can submit an application to the ECHR, it's just a matter of filling in a few pages of a preprinted form.  There is no application fee.  The form is posted to the court. The origin country has no input.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 11:45:56 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 11:14:35 AM
But you do and will again at some point. So being a McCann supporter do you think that opinion will be any more objective?

This is the thing that always gets me. Supporters moan about the quality of the translations of the files because they were done, in the main, by Portuguese individuals who, in the main, support Amaral. So here’s an idea, why don’t they learn Portuguese and translate them themselves ? It’s been 11 years, ample time you would have thought to learn a new language and what with them being such clever people able to see through all the misinformation to the truth.

The original files are there for all to see. If you are going to accuse individuals of mistranslating because of bias you really do need to base that on an actual knowledge of that which you think is dodgy.

Your post makes no sense because as I recall I haven't never....moaned about the quality of the translated files....
See if you can provide a cite..

I have questioned the non verbatim twice translated statements made by the McCann's....because we don't have the original statements in English....this means your post makes even less sense because no matter how perfect my Portuguese I would not have an original statement to translate
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 11:47:28 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 04, 2018, 11:35:02 AM
The ECHR rejects many invalid applications before they are even accepted thus never published.

Do you have a cite for the fact that rejections are not published.....Ive seen ones that are
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 11:49:46 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 04, 2018, 11:41:52 AM
Except that you don't appear to understand the concept that Portuguese law is valid in Portugal and there is nothing the ECHR can do to change that.  The Portuguese SC ruling cannot be overturned.

It can rule that Portugal had violated the McCanns human rights and that the SC ruling was incorrect...
Your continual...you don't seem to understand....falls on deaf ears...I'm sure it's clear I understand much more than you...imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 04, 2018, 11:51:20 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 11:01:00 AM
no.......im quoting a portuguese amaral supporter.....Im not giving my opinion

What you are quoting is the (translated) opinion of the McCann's lawyers. I provided a quote from the same document where they claimed that the McCanns were innocent, which you said they didn't claim.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 11:55:39 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 04, 2018, 11:51:20 AM
What you are quoting is the (translated) opinion of the McCann's lawyers. I provided a quote from the same document where they claimed that the McCanns were innocent, which you said they didn't claim.

You have not provided a cite where they claim the McCann's are innocent ...it's clear they are invoking the POI
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 11:58:49 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 04, 2018, 11:51:20 AM
What you are quoting is the (translated) opinion of the McCann's lawyers. I provided a quote from the same document where they claimed that the McCanns were innocent, which you said they didn't claim.


In case you are struggling with the legalese (we do), here is what we understand to be the reasoning behind the request:

1. The McCanns have invoked the principle of presumption of innocence to justify the restrictions they want imposed on dr. Amaral's freedom of expression;



Are you suggesting that's a quote by the McCanns lawyer
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 04, 2018, 12:02:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 11:55:39 AM
You have not provided a cite where they claim the McCann's are innocent ...it's clear they are invoking the POI

snipped from Post #4047

their intimate relationship with the presumption of innocence or, if we wish to be more rigorous, the status of innocence that they enjoy.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Annulment_request.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 12:04:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 04, 2018, 12:02:00 PM
snipped from Post #4047

their intimate relationship with the presumption of innocence or, if we wish to be more rigorous, the status of innocence that they enjoy.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Annulment_request.htm

So what is the status of innocence they enjoy....that's the POI...
That is not a claim to absolute innocence..

I think you have completely misunderstood that statement
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 12:19:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 11:45:56 AM
Your post makes no sense because as I recall I haven't never....moaned about the quality of the translated files....
See if you can provide a cite..

I have questioned the non verbatim twice translated statements made by the McCann's....because we don't have the original statements in English....this means your post makes even less sense because no matter how perfect my Portuguese I would not have an original statement to translate

So this isn’t questioning the translator ?


its you who doesnt understand...this is not MY opinion....its an interpretation and translation by Kazlux....who
 I understand is porttuguese and helped in the translation of the files...and is an amaral supporter
http://pjga.blogspot.com/?m=0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 12:22:06 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 12:19:27 PM
So this isn’t questioning the translator ?


its you who doesnt understand...this is not MY opinion....its an interpretation and translation by Kazlux....who
 I understand is porttuguese and helped in the translation of the files...and is an amaral supporter
http://pjga.blogspot.com/?m=0

I think you are dreaming...where is the criticism...it's purely a statement of fact.    ....I'm actually very grateful to those who have translated the files...they've done a great job
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 12:31:22 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 12:22:06 PM
I think you are dreaming...where is the criticism...it's purely a statement of fact.    ....I'm actually very grateful to those who have translated the files...they've done a great job

Don’t be coy Davel. Why mention the translator was an Amaral supporter if you weren’t implying some kind of bias ?

Still good to know that you are happy with the translations of the files.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 12:58:09 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 12:31:22 PM
Don’t be coy Davel. Why mention the translator was an Amaral supporter if you weren’t implying some kind of bias ?

Still good to know that you are happy with the translations of the files.

once again you make a limited and incorrect assumption...the raeson i mention the poster is an amaral supporter is taht the stateemnt is so damning that I want to make it clear that there is no pro mccann bias in the translation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 01:10:43 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 12:58:09 PM
once again you make a limited and incorrect assumption...the raeson i mention the poster is an amaral supporter is taht the stateemnt is so damning that I want to make it clear that there is no pro mccann bias in the translation

Damning... for who ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2018, 01:17:49 PM
You are all wandering off the topic!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on August 04, 2018, 01:33:01 PM
 ()678%

I has a question.
How can a thread devoted to "Wandering off Topic" ever be off topic?
 *%87
Now let's not become too silly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 01:35:38 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 01:10:43 PM
Damning... for who ?

damning for the SC
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 01:44:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 01:35:38 PM
damning for the SC

You do know that their arguments were jettisoned don’t you ?  In the eyes of the law it is the McCanns who are ‘damned’ when the lost their appeal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 01:44:00 PM
You do know that their arguments were jettisoned don’t you ?  In the eyes of the law it is the McCanns who are ‘damned’ when the lost their appeal.

are you now trying to change the subject......the mccanns lost in portugal and are now taking their case to the ECHR.....the mccanns are not damned in the eyes of the law
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on August 04, 2018, 01:50:05 PM
Posters are reminded of the forum rules and in particular should keep comments, RELATIVE, AMIABLE and CONSTRUCTIVE.  You could call it the RAC of the forum world.

Please do not engage in sniping, goading or name calling as such conduct will attract penalties.

Have a great weekend everyone!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 04:25:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 09:15:06 AM
When it comes to the law cherry picking is the norm

It is clear to me that the SC have stated that the McCanns do not benefit from the POI because the investigation did not deem them innocent....that is a crystal clear  breach of the ECHR

For some reason you have ignored my post (2 before yours) in which the SC Address the POI issue.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 04:31:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 11:55:39 AM
You have not provided a cite where they claim the McCann's are innocent ...it's clear they are invoking the POI

Quote
2.2. The appellants complete their allegations with the following conclusions :

Snip

c. It shakes also the honour, the good name and the image of any innocent person, and already cleared before through the filing dispatch of a criminal investigation

Snip
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 05:21:55 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 04:25:28 PM
For some reason you have ignored my post (2 before yours) in which the SC Address the POI issue.

im only on here 23/7 now
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 05:22:30 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 04:31:06 PM


epic fail by you imo...no mention of the word innocent
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 04, 2018, 05:29:24 PM
Quote from: Sunny on August 04, 2018, 11:17:21 AM
Perhaps because the original translations made by Astro etc are actually quite accurate in most instances. Once the supporters admit the translations are good to go then they lose that stick to beat the sceptics with.

Of course they do have a supposed Portuguese speakers eg Pedro. I am sure he/she could have done a translation in 11 years, assuming they do speak Portuguese of course
I thought you were new to this scene - how do you know about Pedro?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 04, 2018, 05:33:03 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 04, 2018, 05:29:24 PM
I thought you were new to this scene - how do you know about Pedro?

Perhaps only new to this forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 04, 2018, 05:34:25 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 04, 2018, 05:33:03 PM
Perhaps only new to this forum.
Gave the impression of being new to the case too unless I’m very much mistaken.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 04, 2018, 05:46:24 PM
I am new to the case and new to McCann forums too. I became interested because of Brenda leyland.  I did a lot of looking before I decided which forum to join and I decided on this one.

I have spent a lot of time reading up on the case and that has involved me reading forums as well as the files.  I read a lot of posts on here for months before I committed to joining by the way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 04, 2018, 05:58:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 04, 2018, 05:55:52 PM
Yes I do.

OK thanks Vertigo Swirl (great name by the way)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 04, 2018, 06:03:51 PM
Quote from: Sunny on August 04, 2018, 05:58:53 PM
OK thanks Vertigo Swirl (great name by the way)
Thanks!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 06:17:59 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 05:22:30 PM
epic fail by you imo...no mention of the word innocent

What do you think cleared means?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 06:46:58 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 06:17:59 PM
What do you think cleared means?

well it doesnt mean proved innocent does it...cleared of their suspect status posssibly.......I dont think there is a precise legal definition
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 06:54:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 06:46:58 PM
well it doesnt mean proved innocent does it...ckeared of their suspect status posssibly.......I dont think there is a precise legal definition

If cleared doesn’t relate to innocent, then not cleared, which is what the SC said, must likewise be unrelated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 07:01:45 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 06:54:27 PM
If cleared doesn’t relate to innocent, then not cleared, which is what the SC said, must likewise be unrelated.

cleared relates to innocence.....but doesnt mean innocent
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 07:14:19 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 07:01:45 PM
cleared relates to innocence.....but doesnt mean innocent

But as they said they were cleared and the SC said they were, presumption of innocence is a red herring ( as basically stated by the SC)

Quote
And let not be said, too, that the appellants were cleared by the order of filing the criminal proceedings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 07:17:33 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 07:14:19 PM
But as they said they were cleared and the SC said they were, presumption of innocence is a red herring ( as basically stated by the SC)

I think its important to cut teh wheat from the chaff.........the appeal against the SC jdgement claimed thye were entitled to the POI...the SC said they were not because the investigation suspected them...which of course is an invalid argument by the SC
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 07:21:43 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 07:17:33 PM
I think its important to cut teh wheat from the chaff.........the appeal against the SC jdgement claimed thye were entitled to the POI...the SC said they were not because the investigation suspected them...which of course is an invalid argument by the SC

The SC stated that POI did not apply in civil cases. The Cleared/Not Cleared was a separate argument and not related to the POI claim from the judgement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 07:24:47 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 07:21:43 PM
The SC stated that POI did not apply in civil cases. The Cleared/Not Cleared was a separate argument and not related to the POI claim from the judgement.

the SC also said the POI didnt apply because the investigation suspected them and they hadnt been cleared....which is an invalid argument
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 04, 2018, 07:27:46 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 04, 2018, 01:44:00 PM
You do know that their arguments were jettisoned don’t you ?  In the eyes of the law it is the McCanns who are ‘damned’ when the lost their appeal.
That is libellous for sure.  It was a civil case over damages not a criminal case.  So there is no damning going on thank you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 07:33:15 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 04, 2018, 07:24:47 PM
the SC also said the POI didnt apply because the investigation suspected them and they hadnt been cleared....which is an invalid argument

Quote
We consider, therefore, that the invocation of breach of the principle of presumption of innocence should not be upheld. That principle does not fall under the decision about the question that has to be resolved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 04, 2018, 07:37:41 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 04, 2018, 07:33:15 PM


I cant really comment on your posts as you post in such a manner they do not appear when quoted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on August 05, 2018, 11:05:22 AM
Quote from: misty on August 03, 2018, 07:16:40 PM
What do the McCanns have to worry about? They have already lost their eldest daughter, possibly forever. They will worry that, if the case is never solved, they will lose the trust of and possibly contact with the twins who are now old enough to be influenced by what they read on the internet & in books.
Those who support the parents - and ultimately Madeleine - do not do so purely for the sake of reputation. They do so in order to provide an alternative to the opinions of those who weren't present when Madeleine disappeared.
IMO it is important for the twins to still believe their sister is still worth caring about & searching for.
IMO it is important for the McCann family as a whole to know that not everybody believes the court of public opinion has concluded they have committed an appalling crime. It's important for the twins to know that not everybody believes their parents are the monsters some portray them to be.
IMO In a wider sense. it is also important for the twins to realise that UK police, governments, secret agents et al have not conspired for 11 years to keep their parents out of jail & don't really operate for the common good.
A UK court has a prosecution and a defence for a very good reason. Your apparent desire to only allow the prosecution to have a voice without permitting a counter argument shows a lack of real concern for Madeleine's fate & other potential future victims - but I guess that's a reflection of the Portuguese justice system.

All IMHO.


Firstly the same as everyone else - you don't know what happened to maddie or who was involved in her disappearance.

secondly what the twins found out is that they were left alone unsupervised in an apartment and maddie - who went with them never came back.

what ever the twins think of that -  they will come to their own conclusion.

No injustice to mcns -  would have happened there were too many top people as well as lawyers involved .

My point was why i think posters who believe maddie was abducted - constantly protect them.

From very early on imo the fund was used to facilitate the mcns in there quest of protection from media etc

This they achieved as D said -   we are not allowed to say what we really think of mcns

The protection they enjoy as adults - should have been given to maddie the child...they wouldnt be where they are today.

It just seems odd to me how posteres can sit on here constantly defending them when there is no proof whatsoever there was an abduction IMO

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 05, 2018, 03:34:17 PM
Quote from: kizzy on August 05, 2018, 11:05:22 AM

Firstly the same as everyone else - you don't know what happened to maddie or who was involved in her disappearance.

secondly what the twins found out is that they were left alone unsupervised in an apartment and maddie - who went with them never came back.

what ever the twins think of that -  they will come to their own conclusion.

No injustice to mcns -  would have happened there were too many top people as well as lawyers involved .

My point was why i think posters who believe maddie was abducted - constantly protect them.

From very early on imo the fund was used to facilitate the mcns in there quest of protection from media etc

This they achieved as D said -   we are not allowed to say what we really think of mcns

The protection they enjoy as adults - should have been given to maddie the child...they wouldnt be where they are today.

It just seems odd to me how posteres can sit on here constantly defending them when there is no proof whatsoever there was an abduction IMO

It is becoming tiresome that the player is being kicked but not the ball.  Please confine discussion to the content of posts and leave speculation about the poster in the dugout.  TY
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on August 05, 2018, 07:22:31 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 05, 2018, 03:34:17 PM
It is becoming tiresome that the player is being kicked but not the ball.  Please confine discussion to the content of posts and leave speculation about the poster in the dugout.  TY

You never went in for Sunday League stuff then? where there were but two rules. If it's moving kick it; if it ain't moving kick it till it does.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 05, 2018, 07:57:49 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on August 05, 2018, 07:22:31 PM
You never went in for Sunday League stuff then? where there were but two rules. If it's moving kick it; if it ain't moving kick it till it does.
I haven't heard that in the last 40 years or so.

We had a rougher version "If it's moving kick it till it dies; if it ain't moving kick it till it moves, then kill it".

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on August 06, 2018, 10:14:16 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 05, 2018, 03:34:17 PM
It is becoming tiresome that the player is being kicked but not the ball.  Please confine discussion to the content of posts and leave speculation about the poster in the dugout.  TY

where i was concerned it was in content with the post.

How does M know there is an alternate to the abduction - in my opinion there is no proof maddie was abducted.

M was not there either.

As for the twins - they will find out for themselves - like just reading the case files discrepancies ect.

they will decide for themselves
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 06, 2018, 10:43:03 AM
Quote from: kizzy on August 06, 2018, 10:14:16 AM
where i was concerned it was in content with the post.

How does M know there is an alternate to the abduction - in my opinion there is no proof maddie was abducted.

M was not there either.

As for the twins - they will find out for themselves - like just reading the case files discrepancies ect.

they will decide for themselves
"M" stands for whom?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on August 06, 2018, 10:59:47 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 06, 2018, 10:43:03 AM
"M" stands for whom?

The poster i replied to R
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 06, 2018, 11:58:38 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 10:01:50 PM
I would accept "The dogs are trained to alert to cadaver odour and to dried human blood"
And Eddie was trained on pig cadavar, so please add that.

Any training that a dog has had cannot be untrained.  Loads about this in a previious thread

IMO, it would be better to accept:

"The dogs are trained to alert to human cadaver odour, dried human blood and to PIG cadaver."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 06, 2018, 03:53:38 PM
Quote from: sadie on August 06, 2018, 11:58:38 AM
And Eddie was trained on pig cadavar, so please add that.

Any training that a dog has had cannot be untrained.  Loads about this in a previious thread

IMO, it would be better to accept:

"The dogs are trained to alert to human cadaver odour, dried human blood and to PIG cadaver."

And a few other things.  I don't think there is any question Sadie that only dogs trained entirely on human cadavers can be considered a true cadaver dog.  Eddie wasn't such a dog.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on August 06, 2018, 04:44:40 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 06, 2018, 03:53:38 PM
And a few other things.  I don't think there is any question Sadie that only dogs trained entirely on human cadavers can be considered a true cadaver dog.  Eddie wasn't such a dog.

It is really surprising that the UK hasn't got a cadaver farm yet where dogs can be properly trained.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 06, 2018, 05:56:23 PM
Quote from: John on August 06, 2018, 04:44:40 PM
It is really surprising that the UK hasn't got a cadaver farm yet where dogs can be properly trained.

The FBI has body farms, but they were also prepared to pay Martin Grime to work with them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 06, 2018, 06:15:55 PM
Quote from: John on August 06, 2018, 04:44:40 PM
It is really surprising that the UK hasn't got a cadaver farm yet where dogs can be properly trained.

Just goes to show how backward the UK still is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 06, 2018, 06:25:28 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 06, 2018, 06:15:55 PM
Just goes to show how backward the UK still is.

so how backiward was portugal as it had no experience of cadaver dogs...another weak attempt at insulting teh UK
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 06, 2018, 06:32:57 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 06, 2018, 06:15:55 PM
Just goes to show how backward the UK still is.

So the UK developed DNA profiling...the rest of the world copied.......The FSS developed Familial DNA profiling...which has been used world wide to solve crime.......so in what way is the UK backward
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 06, 2018, 06:33:28 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 06, 2018, 06:15:55 PM
Just goes to show how backward the UK still is.
Backward because we don’t bury human corpses in a field for dogs to find??  Perhaps you’d like to start a petition to get one started, maybe in your neighbourhood,  and donate your body to be used for the dogs’ training when the time comes...?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 06, 2018, 06:46:36 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 06, 2018, 06:25:28 PM
so how backiward was portugal as it had no experience of cadaver dogs...another weak attempt at insulting teh UK
There are only two countries in the entire world that have body farms - the USA and Australia.  This means, by Angelo’s reckoning the rest of the world including Germany, France, Japan, Italy, Scandanavia, China, Russia etc are all equally as backward as the UK.  Oh well...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 07, 2018, 04:36:38 PM
It never ceases to amaze me what people will do

German couple who sold son to paedophiles on darknet jailed

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/07/german-couple-who-sold-son-to-paedophiles-on-darknet-jailed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 07, 2018, 05:10:55 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 07, 2018, 04:36:38 PM
It never ceases to amaze me what people will do

German couple who sold son to paedophiles on darknet jailed

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/07/german-couple-who-sold-son-to-paedophiles-on-darknet-jailed
As the father was a convicted paedophile the most surprising thing about this case IMO is that the parents had retained custody of their son.  How was that ever allowed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 07, 2018, 06:56:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 07, 2018, 05:10:55 PM
As the father was a convicted paedophile the most surprising thing about this case IMO is that the parents had retained custody of their son.  How was that ever allowed?

As he was still with the mother, there was probably no reason to do so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 07, 2018, 07:30:27 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 07, 2018, 06:56:15 PM
As he was still with the mother, there was probably no reason to do so.
What?!  Apart from the fact that she was also on the sex offenders register, why would you think a child was safe from the attentions of his step father because he was still with his mother?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 07, 2018, 07:40:25 PM
Probably a situation where the law has limited powers.
If the mother had not offended against her child, there may be no right to remove the child from he r care.
Similarly the law may have no right to prevent the step-father from consorting with the mother, irrespective of his history.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 07, 2018, 08:24:34 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 07, 2018, 07:40:25 PM
Probably a situation where the law has limited powers.
If the mother had not offended against her child, there may be no right to remove the child from he r care.
Similarly the law may have no right to prevent the step-father from consorting with the mother, irrespective of his history.

I think the authorities did have the power to remove the child as they had done before

German media report that child welfare authorities in Baden-Württemberg state have been heavily criticised for failing to stop the couple's abuse.

The boy had been removed from the couple temporarily by social workers, but was then handed back to them.

Spiegel news website reports that welfare officers had not exchanged information about the case that could have led them to the couple's crimes.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45096183
All in all a horrific and upsetting case. I wish the young child well and hope he gets the help he will need to help him get over this and on with his life.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 08, 2018, 08:49:36 AM
Another doctor making a childcare 'mistake'?



Two children aged one and two who were left in a roasting car by their doctor parent in 80F midday heat are saved from vehicle by concerned shoppers sparking police investigation

A parent left two children, aged one and two, alone in a hot car in 80F heat
The incident happened at a Morrison's car park in Reigate, Surrey, on Monday
It is not known how long they were left in the car or if the windows were open
Officers say the parent was a doctor and Surrey Police are now investigating

By CHEYENNE ROUNDTREE FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 08:57, 7 August 2018 | UPDATED: 19:10, 7 August 2018

Two toddlers had to be rescued when they were left in a hot car alone in a supermarket car park in 80F (26C) degree heat.

Members of the public rushed to free the children, aged one and two, from the vehicle that was parked at a Morrison's store in Reigate, Surrey on Monday. 

It is not known how long the children had been in the car or if there were any windows open as temperatures in the area had reached sweltering conditions.

Officers say the parent was a doctor and Surrey Police are now investigating.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6034329/Two-children-left-roasting-car-DOCTOR-parent-80F-midday-heat.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 08, 2018, 11:47:32 AM
Quote from: Sunny on August 07, 2018, 08:24:34 PM
I think the authorities did have the power to remove the child as they had done before

German media report that child welfare authorities in Baden-Württemberg state have been heavily criticised for failing to stop the couple's abuse.

The boy had been removed from the couple temporarily by social workers, but was then handed back to them.

Spiegel news website reports that welfare officers had not exchanged information about the case that could have led them to the couple's crimes.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45096183
All in all a horrific and upsetting case. I wish the young child well and hope he gets the help he will need to help him get over this and on with his life.



This type of abuse is something the child will never forget or get over.   He has been subjected to the 'normalisation' of sadistic sex of young people. He only knows  humiliation from the grooming, and the worst thing for him is the fact that his parents were perpetrators and active in this crime.  Children who are sadistically abused by parents very rarely find love in its real sense. This will take years of intense therapy, and even then no guarantee he will have  a 'normal' loving relationship. In fact some protect their parents and want to stay with them because they fear the alternative- even though they do not know what that is. but the fear has been placed by the sadistic Bs@rds.  This is the one crime I would gladly see the return of the rope/or other induced death.

Being rejected by parents is bad for childs mental health, being abused is evil.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 08, 2018, 11:56:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 08, 2018, 08:49:36 AM
Another doctor making a childcare 'mistake'?



Two children aged one and two who were left in a roasting car by their doctor parent in 80F midday heat are saved from vehicle by concerned shoppers sparking police investigation

A parent left two children, aged one and two, alone in a hot car in 80F heat
The incident happened at a Morrison's car park in Reigate, Surrey, on Monday
It is not known how long they were left in the car or if the windows were open
Officers say the parent was a doctor and Surrey Police are now investigating

By CHEYENNE ROUNDTREE FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 08:57, 7 August 2018 | UPDATED: 19:10, 7 August 2018

Two toddlers had to be rescued when they were left in a hot car alone in a supermarket car park in 80F (26C) degree heat.

Members of the public rushed to free the children, aged one and two, from the vehicle that was parked at a Morrison's store in Reigate, Surrey on Monday. 

It is not known how long the children had been in the car or if there were any windows open as temperatures in the area had reached sweltering conditions.

Officers say the parent was a doctor and Surrey Police are now investigating.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6034329/Two-children-left-roasting-car-DOCTOR-parent-80F-midday-heat.html


In the unlikely event of being called a troll or basher of this 'parent'. I just wonder what the defence will be? it felt safe?

It will be interesting if we hear anything else about this.  What would have happened if the rescuers of these poor children were paedophiles and abducted them? Would the  doctor get time from his/her cell to start up a fund and accuse all and sundry for what happened? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 08, 2018, 12:19:14 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 08, 2018, 11:56:52 AM

In the unlikely event of being called a troll or basher of this 'parent'. I just wonder what the defence will be? it felt safe?

It will be interesting if we hear anything else about this.  What would have happened if the rescuers of these poor children were paedophiles and abducted them? Would the  doctor get time from his/her cell to start up a fund and accuse all and sundry for what happened?

Apparently responsible parents see leaving small children unattended as fine so long as they're checked on every 30 minutes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 08, 2018, 12:52:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 08, 2018, 12:19:14 PM
Apparently responsible parents see leaving small children unattended as fine so long as they're checked on every 30 minutes.

checked as in listening at doors?  ah yes. very secure. And I Suppose the car park had an attendant who would do this?  AND CCTV ? so no problems at all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 08, 2018, 02:40:48 PM
Quote from: sadie on August 06, 2018, 11:58:38 AM
And Eddie was trained on pig cadavar, so please add that.

Any training that a dog has had cannot be untrained.  Loads about this in a previious thread

IMO, it would be better to accept:

"The dogs are trained to alert to human cadaver odour, dried human blood and to PIG cadaver."


Have the McCanns in any interview proclaimed they came in contact with pig cadaver? AND did they spread this odour in 'certain' parts of the apartment and car? I mean if you had a dead pig would you not want to bag it and freeze it? or bury it underground to have a hog roast? hiding it in a bedroom cupboard seems a bit strange to me IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 08, 2018, 02:48:14 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 08, 2018, 02:40:48 PM

Have the McCanns in any interview proclaimed they came in contact with pig cadaver? AND did they spread this odour in 'certain' parts of the apartment and car? I mean if you had a dead pig would you not want to bag it and freeze it? or bury it underground to have a hog roast? hiding it in a bedroom cupboard seems a bit strange to me IMO.
And what about all the other tenants that used the 5A apartment before and after the incident?  Did any of them have dealings with a deceased pig?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 08, 2018, 02:53:29 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 08, 2018, 02:40:48 PM

Have the McCanns in any interview proclaimed they came in contact with pig cadaver? AND did they spread this odour in 'certain' parts of the apartment and car? I mean if you had a dead pig would you not want to bag it and freeze it? or bury it underground to have a hog roast? hiding it in a bedroom cupboard seems a bit strange to me IMO.

Didn't they, or one of their support staff claim that raw pork juices  dripped from a bag all over the back of the car, thereby creating a bad smell?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 08, 2018, 03:07:39 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 08, 2018, 02:53:29 PM
Didn't they, or one of their support staff claim that raw pork juices  dripped from a bag all over the back of the car, thereby creating a bad smell?

I think that was childminder, cook, chauffeur, shopper, removal man, mail ooener, car cleaner and disposer of rubbish Mr Cameron;

I took Patricia to the supermarket. We carried bags in the boot (trunk) of the Renault Scenic; bought various items including fresh fish, shrimp and beef. When we unloaded the shopping bags, we noticed that blood has run out of the bottom of the plastic bag. After this shopping trip and still in the month of July 2007, I began to notice a strange odour in the car. I did not give it much importance and assumed it was likely due to the leakage from the rubbish bags or from the blood which had escaped from the shopping bags. As a result, we removed the carpet from the boot (trunk) in order to clean it. I tossed (beat) the boot carpet to remove any particles and cleaned it with a wet cloth and left it to air out.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/A-J-CAMERON.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 08, 2018, 03:08:06 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 08, 2018, 02:53:29 PM
Didn't they, or one of their support staff claim that raw pork juices  dripped from a bag all over the back of the car, thereby creating a bad smell?

They also mention ^*&& Kate was  GP, who came into contact with dead people...and they may have had pork for supper.. yeah all there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 08, 2018, 03:13:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 08, 2018, 03:07:39 PM
I think that was childminder, cook, chauffeur, shopper, removal man, mail ooener, car cleaner and disposer of rubbish Mr Cameron;

I took Patricia to the supermarket. We carried bags in the boot (trunk) of the Renault Scenic; bought various items including fresh fish, shrimp and beef. When we unloaded the shopping bags, we noticed that blood has run out of the bottom of the plastic bag. After this shopping trip and still in the month of July 2007, I began to notice a strange odour in the car. I did not give it much importance and assumed it was likely due to the leakage from the rubbish bags or from the blood which had escaped from the shopping bags. As a result, we removed the carpet from the boot (trunk) in order to clean it. I tossed (beat) the boot carpet to remove any particles and cleaned it with a wet cloth and left it to air out.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/A-J-CAMERON.htm

G was this in response to an INDEPENDENT witness who saw the car being left with the boot lid open?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 08, 2018, 03:15:16 PM
There was a time when this thread could be an intensely interesting one which covered a wide range of topics in an informative and amicable fashion.
I think if Pegasus ever drops in from time to time he must despair at the degeneration which has occurred since he last posted here.  I know I do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 08, 2018, 03:30:40 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 08, 2018, 03:15:16 PM
There was a time when this thread could be an intensely interesting one which covered a wide range of topics in an informative and amicable fashion.
I think if Pegasus ever drops in from time to time he must despair at the degeneration which has occurred since he last posted here.  I know I do.

I don't recall any amicable threads. How memories differ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 08, 2018, 06:10:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 08, 2018, 03:30:40 PM
I don't recall any amicable threads. How memories differ.

They usually occurred on the graveyard shift.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 08, 2018, 07:25:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 08, 2018, 03:30:40 PM
I don't recall any amicable threads. How memories differ.

We go through periods of calm discussion every now and then...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 08, 2018, 08:10:41 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 08, 2018, 02:48:14 PM
And what about all the other tenants that used the 5A apartment before and after the incident?  Did any of them have dealings with a deceased pig?

Surely any later tenants of 5a who had dealings with a deceased pig would do such a thing in the kitchen and I don't recall the dog alerting there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 08, 2018, 09:19:26 PM
Quote from: Sunny on August 08, 2018, 08:10:41 PM
Surely any later tenants of 5a who had dealings with a deceased pig would do such a thing in the kitchen and I don't recall the dog alerting there.

Doesn't have to be the tenants.
http://www.saomarcosdaserra.com/a-way-of-life.php
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 08, 2018, 09:22:52 PM
Quote from: misty on August 08, 2018, 09:19:26 PM
Doesn't have to be the tenants.
http://www.saomarcosdaserra.com/a-way-of-life.php

Could you tell me the relevance of this post please Misty.  Unless people were actually keeping pigs in 5a I fail to see what the point of sharing this is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 08, 2018, 10:03:16 PM
Quote from: Sunny on August 08, 2018, 09:22:52 PM
Could you tell me the relevance of this post please Misty.  Unless people were actually keeping pigs in 5a I fail to see what the point of sharing this is.

Did you read the top part saying "hotel worker in Albufeira"?
Have you not considered that cross-contamination from such a practice could have occurred prior to the McCanns' arrival? Shoes contaminating a floor, where a suitcase was placed then put in a wardrobe, clothing left on the floor in the same area......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 08, 2018, 10:06:24 PM
Quote from: misty on August 08, 2018, 10:03:16 PM
Did you read the top part saying "hotel worker in Albufeira"?
Have you not considered that cross-contamination from such a practice could have occurred prior to the McCanns' arrival? Shoes contaminating a floor, where a suitcase was placed then put in a wardrobe, clothing left on the floor in the same area......
Exactly and the reason Grime  and Harrison said there had to be corroborating evidence to make sense out of the cadaver alerts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 08, 2018, 10:45:01 PM
Quote from: misty on August 08, 2018, 10:03:16 PM
Did you read the top part saying "hotel worker in Albufeira"?
Have you not considered that cross-contamination from such a practice could have occurred prior to the McCanns' arrival? Shoes contaminating a floor, where a suitcase was placed then put in a wardrobe, clothing left on the floor in the same area......

So is it just a coincidence that it unfortunately happened in the very apartment that a child had gone missing from ? Talk about the luck of the Irish !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 08, 2018, 10:52:26 PM
Misty I have found a case where Grime's testimony was allowed in the USA.

This is from court documents where the defendant (who had been found guilty) was trying to get the judgement overturned

Before trial, Lane moved to exclude the cadaver dog evidence, contending in part that it was not admissible under MRE 702. At the evidentiary hearing, Stockham testified that he had started a science-based victim recovery dog program for the FBI. The program's protocol called for regular single-and double-blind testing of the dogs throughout their working lives. Stockham's program had three full-time dog handlers in its program, including Grime.

Stockham testified that Grime was a recognized expert in the field of animal behavior in the United Kingdom who worked with and trained Morse and Keela. Stockham tested Grime and Morse in 2011. On one occasion, Morse gave a “nonproductive response” when he “barked in a blank room.” No samples were in the room, but Stockham could not exclude the possibility that trace matter was there.

According to Stockham, no instruments can detect and confirm the presence of human remains. It is not clear whether a dog reacts to single compound or a combination of compounds in a decomposing body. Therefore, nonproductive responses cannot be verified as correct or incorrect. Instead, Stockham assumes that the result is correct if the dog has routinely passed testing before and after the incident. Grime admitted that there was no scientific testing method that could corroborate Morse's responses in this case.

Grime submitted Morse and Keela's training reports into evidence. Over the course of 49 tests, Morse gave no false negative or false positive responses to tests in controlled environments. He gave one “unexplained” response, which was a single bark in a “blank” room. Morse scored 100 percent in tests on December 2 and December 6, 2011. Morse was tested on variety of dates between January 21, 2011, and February 13, 2013. Morse scored 100 percent in all but one test, on which he scored 95 to 100 percent. Morse did not give false positive responses to animal remains during his tests.

Following the evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied Lane's motion to exclude the cadaver dog evidence. At trial, the trial court instructed the jury to consider the cadaver dog evidence carefully and not to convict Lane solely on the basis of that evidence.

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.html

I gather he failed in this. yes this is after 2007 but as I hadn't mentioned a date in my post then that is immaterial and I didn't mention half of what you have accused me of saying either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 08, 2018, 11:02:27 PM
Quote from: Sunny on August 08, 2018, 10:52:26 PM
Misty I have found a case where Grime's testimony was allowed in the USA.

This is from court documents where the defendant (who had been found guilty) was trying to get the judgement overturned

Before trial, Lane moved to exclude the cadaver dog evidence, contending in part that it was not admissible under MRE 702. At the evidentiary hearing, Stockham testified that he had started a science-based victim recovery dog program for the FBI. The program's protocol called for regular single-and double-blind testing of the dogs throughout their working lives. Stockham's program had three full-time dog handlers in its program, including Grime.

Stockham testified that Grime was a recognized expert in the field of animal behavior in the United Kingdom who worked with and trained Morse and Keela. Stockham tested Grime and Morse in 2011. On one occasion, Morse gave a “nonproductive response” when he “barked in a blank room.” No samples were in the room, but Stockham could not exclude the possibility that trace matter was there.

According to Stockham, no instruments can detect and confirm the presence of human remains. It is not clear whether a dog reacts to single compound or a combination of compounds in a decomposing body. Therefore, nonproductive responses cannot be verified as correct or incorrect. Instead, Stockham assumes that the result is correct if the dog has routinely passed testing before and after the incident. Grime admitted that there was no scientific testing method that could corroborate Morse's responses in this case.

Grime submitted Morse and Keela's training reports into evidence. Over the course of 49 tests, Morse gave no false negative or false positive responses to tests in controlled environments. He gave one “unexplained” response, which was a single bark in a “blank” room. Morse scored 100 percent in tests on December 2 and December 6, 2011. Morse was tested on variety of dates between January 21, 2011, and February 13, 2013. Morse scored 100 percent in all but one test, on which he scored 95 to 100 percent. Morse did not give false positive responses to animal remains during his tests.

Following the evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied Lane's motion to exclude the cadaver dog evidence. At trial, the trial court instructed the jury to consider the cadaver dog evidence carefully and not to convict Lane solely on the basis of that evidence.

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.html

I gather he failed in this. yes this is after 2007 but as I hadn't mentioned a date in my post then that is immaterial and I didn't mention half of what you have accused me of saying either.

I can't even remember what I accused you of saying but I apologise for whatever it was which offended you.
Thank you for posting that. It confirms that Grime was only a recognised expert in the UK - no mention of the FBI or any other international accreditation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 08, 2018, 11:03:54 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 08, 2018, 10:45:01 PM
So is it just a coincidence that it unfortunately happened in the very apartment that a child had gone missing from ? Talk about the luck of the Irish !

How many apartments at OC did Eddie inspect?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 09, 2018, 12:32:39 AM
Quote from: misty on August 08, 2018, 10:03:16 PM
Did you read the top part saying "hotel worker in Albufeira"?
Have you not considered that cross-contamination from such a practice could have occurred prior to the McCanns' arrival? Shoes contaminating a floor, where a suitcase was placed then put in a wardrobe, clothing left on the floor in the same area......
(http://www.saomarcosdaserra.com/resources/matanca_porco2.jpg)
Today, European law forbids the animal killing at home, for hygienic reasons, while animals rights institutions condemn this practice, because they consider it barbaric.   But new laws don´t mean the immediate end of traditions.  Here it is stll allowed to keep and kill a pig for your own consumption and this tradition will be alive until the rural communities disappear, which I hope will never happen, because it is a part of Portugal.

http://www.saomarcosdaserra.com/a-way-of-life.php
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 09, 2018, 08:55:33 AM
Has anyone seen this document in the PJ files please? I can't find it;

Details of all those who stayed in 5A after the McCanns were disclosed in an internal document written by Chief Inspector Vitor Matos to Goncalo Amaral, who was then leading the investigation,,,,,

On June 12, a couple from Liverpool who were friends of the owner, retired teacher Ruth McCann - who is no relation to Kate and Gerry McCann - stayed in 5A for a week.

A family of four from Falkirk in Scotland stayed from June 28 to July 12, followed by a couple from New Barnet in Hertfordshire.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2523523/Madeleine-McCann-Apartment-was-not-made-crime-scene-for-two-months.html

But from June 12-19, Liverpool couple Robert and Fiona Foulkes holidayed there. They were followed by Sheila and Ryan Fergusson and their kids, from Falkirk, Scotland, who stayed from June 28-July 12.
 
Between July 12 and 19 it was rented by the Parkinsons. Kailao and her two relatives were there from July 19-26.

On July 19, a family of three from Leicester stayed for a week.
Mirror 9/08/2008
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id143.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 09, 2018, 12:28:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 09, 2018, 08:55:33 AM
Has anyone seen this document in the PJ files please? I can't find it;

Details of all those who stayed in 5A after the McCanns were disclosed in an internal document written by Chief Inspector Vitor Matos to Goncalo Amaral, who was then leading the investigation,,,,,

On June 12, a couple from Liverpool who were friends of the owner, retired teacher Ruth McCann - who is no relation to Kate and Gerry McCann - stayed in 5A for a week.

A family of four from Falkirk in Scotland stayed from June 28 to July 12, followed by a couple from New Barnet in Hertfordshire.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2523523/Madeleine-McCann-Apartment-was-not-made-crime-scene-for-two-months.html

But from June 12-19, Liverpool couple Robert and Fiona Foulkes holidayed there. They were followed by Sheila and Ryan Fergusson and their kids, from Falkirk, Scotland, who stayed from June 28-July 12.
 
Between July 12 and 19 it was rented by the Parkinsons. Kailao and her two relatives were there from July 19-26.

On July 19, a family of three from Leicester stayed for a week.
Mirror 9/08/2008
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id143.htm
OFFICIAL INQUIRY FILES and DOCUMENTS
DCCB LETTER DIRECT TO G. AMARAL 27 SEP 07
- At the Ocean Club, apartment 5A had been booked for the nights of 28 April through 4 May (vacating on 5th); the family stayed in apartment 4G from 4 May through 2 July (vacating on 3rd)
- Apartment 5A was subsequently let between 12 and 19 June (to friends of the owner); 28 June to 12 July (to three people with Irish names); 12 to 19 July (to an English couple) and 19 to 26 July (to a family with Southern Asian names).
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DCCB_LETTER.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 09, 2018, 02:48:35 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 09, 2018, 12:28:46 PM
OFFICIAL INQUIRY FILES and DOCUMENTS
DCCB LETTER DIRECT TO G. AMARAL 27 SEP 07
- At the Ocean Club, apartment 5A had been booked for the nights of 28 April through 4 May (vacating on 5th); the family stayed in apartment 4G from 4 May through 2 July (vacating on 3rd)
- Apartment 5A was subsequently let between 12 and 19 June (to friends of the owner); 28 June to 12 July (to three people with Irish names); 12 to 19 July (to an English couple) and 19 to 26 July (to a family with Southern Asian names).
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DCCB_LETTER.htm

Thanks very much.  *&(+(+
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 09, 2018, 04:12:08 PM
Quote from: Sunny on August 08, 2018, 08:10:41 PM
Surely any later tenants of 5a who had dealings with a deceased pig would do such a thing in the kitchen and I don't recall the dog alerting there.


This is really interesting. I mention on another thread about the dogs, Say someone did have raw pig meat, where would this cross contamination be?  It could have been in a bag  which was then placed in the wardrobe.. By what means would the cross contamination be spread- it would have to have been in the scenic  and all over the flat. and stop outside without a further trace. It would have to surely be in the kitchen at some point. <  just guessing at this. So no cite. *%^^&

NB: Brietta my sister in law strongly objects to you flashing her picture -the one lying on her sun bed- naked!
 8**8:/:
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 09, 2018, 07:47:20 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 09, 2018, 04:12:08 PM

...snip...
NB: Brietta my sister in law strongly objects to you flashing her picture -the one lying on her sun bed- naked!
 8**8:/:
I think that is a case of mistaken identity.  I'm sure she feels gutted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 09, 2018, 08:04:34 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 09, 2018, 04:12:08 PM

This is really interesting. I mention on another thread about the dogs, Say someone did have raw pig meat, where would this cross contamination be?  It could have been in a bag  which was then placed in the wardrobe.. By what means would the cross contamination be spread- it would have to have been in the scenic  and all over the flat. and stop outside without a further trace. It would have to surely be in the kitchen at some point. <  just guessing at this. So no cite. *%^^&

NB: Brietta my sister in law strongly objects to you flashing her picture -the one lying on her sun bed- naked!
 8**8:/:

She certainly does look a bit disgruntled.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 09, 2018, 09:37:20 PM
Quote from: misty on August 08, 2018, 11:02:27 PM
I can't even remember what I accused you of saying but I apologise for whatever it was which offended you.
Thank you for posting that. It confirms that Grime was only a recognised expert in the UK - no mention of the FBI or any other international accreditation.

Perhaps you didn't read all of my link - from my link posted earlier.

At trial, FBI Canine Program Manager Rex Stockham testified as an expert in forensic canine operation. Stockham testified about the process of training and testing victim recovery dogs. Stockham's protocol called for regular single-and double-blind testing of dogs throughout their working lives. Stockham's program had three full-time handlers in its program, including Martin Grime. Stockham testified that he had tested Morse and Keela, Grime's dogs, and that both dogs had accuracy ratings in the high 90 percent range. Stockham testified that dogs have been able to smell the odor of decomposition as soon as 2 hours after a victim's death, or years after a victim's burial.

I would say that the FBI Canine Program Manager was praising Martin Grime and his dogs there. So clearly highly regarded in the US and by the FBI Canine Program Manager no less.  IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 09, 2018, 11:09:53 PM
Quote from: Sunny on August 09, 2018, 09:37:20 PM
Perhaps you didn't read all of my link - from my link posted earlier.

At trial, FBI Canine Program Manager Rex Stockham testified as an expert in forensic canine operation. Stockham testified about the process of training and testing victim recovery dogs. Stockham's protocol called for regular single-and double-blind testing of dogs throughout their working lives. Stockham's program had three full-time handlers in its program, including Martin Grime. Stockham testified that he had tested Morse and Keela, Grime's dogs, and that both dogs had accuracy ratings in the high 90 percent range. Stockham testified that dogs have been able to smell the odor of decomposition as soon as 2 hours after a victim's death, or years after a victim's burial.

I would say that the FBI Canine Program Manager was praising Martin Grime and his dogs there. So clearly highly regarded in the US and by the FBI Canine Program Manager no less.  IMO

I would say that the recently appointed manager Stockham (RIP) testified that Grime & his dogs were fit for purpose based on FBI testing - no mention of being expert/internationally acclaimed/enhanced/unique. The article also stated that training records were submitted into evidence.
Furthermore, the Lane trial was 5 years post-Luz & didn't involve Eddie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 10, 2018, 12:35:05 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 08, 2018, 02:40:48 PM

Have the McCanns in any interview proclaimed they came in contact with pig cadaver? AND did they spread this odour in 'certain' parts of the apartment and car? I mean if you had a dead pig would you not want to bag it and freeze it? or bury it underground to have a hog roast? hiding it in a bedroom cupboard seems a bit strange to me IMO.

If anyone had used Pig cadavar odour, it certainly wouldn't have been The Mccanns ... pointing at themselves? IMO The most likely people would be the PJ, or someome trying to make it look as tho' Madeleine had been killed in the apartment.
And it could be something as innocent as someone having been in contact with something that had been in close contact with a cadavar or even its odour ?

Or even as misty wonders, be someone who keeps pigs and slaughters them at home handling the carcase to butcher it?



To remind you of the sequence of posts :
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 03, 2018, 10:01:50 PM
I would accept "The dogs are trained to alert to cadaver odour and to dried human blood"

And my responce

Quote from: sadie on August 06, 2018, 11:58:38 AM
And Eddie was trained on pig cadavar, so please add that.

Any training that a dog has had cannot be untrained.  Loads about this in a previious thread

IMO, it would be better to accept:

"The dogs are trained to alert to human cadaver odour, dried human blood and to PIG cadaver."

No way would the Mccanns have spread pig cadavar odour to indict themselves.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 10, 2018, 12:55:23 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 08, 2018, 02:48:14 PM
And what about all the other tenants that used the 5A apartment before and after the incident?  Did any of them have dealings with a deceased pig?
And how about the ashes and pyjamas of Tasmin Silences grandpa?   

Were they stored in the ONLY place that might have any revelence to a cadaver?  There was ONLY ONE POTENTIALLY RELEVANT PLACE and that was by the wall adjacent to the headboard of the bed ... in just the place that a grieving elderly widow might have kept the ashes / his pyjamas  for comfort, on a bedside table near her head as she lay in bed.. 

If placed on a bedside table there, they would have been at exactly the right spot for Eddies alert.



IMO, there was never any cadaver in 5A.  It was all, at best, a misunderstanding on Amarals part and a huge internet myth has been developed around it by a certain group of people.    I wonder why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 10, 2018, 04:15:37 AM
Quote from: sadie on August 10, 2018, 12:55:23 AM
And how about the ashes and pyjamas of Tasmin Silences grandpa?   

Were they stored in the ONLY place that might have any revelence to a cadaver?  There was ONLY ONE POTENTIALLY RELEVANT PLACE and that was by the wall adjacent to the headboard of the bed ... in just the place that a grieving elderly widow might have kept the ashes / his pyjamas  for comfort, on a bedside table near her head as she lay in bed.. 

If placed on a bedside table there, they would have been at exactly the right spot for Eddies alert.



IMO, there was never any cadaver in 5A.  It was all, at best, a misunderstanding on Amarals part and a huge internet myth has been developed around it by a certain group of people.    I wonder why?
You like arguing don't you!  I have never accepted that the ashes coming back from a crematorium would illicit an alert from a cadaver dog.  I know you will say cadaver dogs are used to recover bodies after a fire, but I'm certain that those bodies won't be reduced to ash in most of these situations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 10, 2018, 06:09:07 AM
Quote from: misty on August 09, 2018, 11:09:53 PM
I would say that the recently appointed manager Stockham (RIP) testified that Grime & his dogs were fit for purpose based on FBI testing - no mention of being expert/internationally acclaimed/enhanced/unique. The article also stated that training records were submitted into evidence.
Furthermore, the Lane trial was 5 years post-Luz & didn't involve Eddie.

There you go with that internationally acclaimed phrase again. I have never said it apart from in response to you saying it to me.   I didn't say either that Eddie was involved all I mentioned was that Grime was highly thought of by Stockham.  Did you notice this bit

Stockham's protocol called for regular single-and double-blind testing of dogs throughout their working lives. Stockham's program had three full-time handlers in its program, including Martin Grime. Stockham testified that he had tested Morse and Keela, Grime's dogs, and that both dogs had accuracy ratings in the high 90 percent range

So Grimes dogs at that time had an accuracy rating in the high 90% range.

I have said that Grime is a professional several times and I believe he was back in 2007 too as he was prior


British dog helps Irish Police and FBI
A SNIFFER dog that helped detectives jail evil killer Trevor Hamilton has just returned from assisting the FBI with a murder probe in America.

Six-year-old English Springer spaniel Eddie's career took off internationally shortly after he returned to Northern Ireland for a third time to help in the hunt for missing Arlene Arkinson.

Eddie helped police nail Hamilton after the victim-recovery dog found blood from Attracta Harron (63) on a mat from Hamilton's burnt-out Hyundai car. Hamilton burned the car the same day that he murdered the retired librarian.

Eddie was drafted in from the UK with his handler to assist in the search for Ms Arkinson’s body. It was Eddie who found her body in a shallow grave in April 2003.

Martin Grime, Eddie's handler at the Dog Unit attached to South Yorkshire Police Station, told how he has recently returned to Tyrone to search for Arlene (15).

She went missing after leaving a disco in Bundoran, Co Donegal, 12 years ago on August 13 1994. Police have recently been concentrating their search in her native Castlederg in Tyrone, where it is thought she was murdered.

Forensic

Mr Grime said: ‘We were over earlier this year and three times in total since the Attracta Harron case. During that investigation we came over for a week and on the last day, before we came back to the UK, we decided we would search the car. The stuff Eddie found was then taken away for forensic examination.

‘Then when a search area was identified Eddie found the body as well. As far as the Arlene case goes, however, there has been nothing to date.’

Eddie has just returned from the US where he has been helping the FBI in a murder case.

Mr Grime said: ‘Dogs like Eddie are very, very good at what they do and he has lots of operational experience. I do some training with him every day.’

Hamilton (23) received Ulster's longest prison sentence after he was jailed for life for the murder of Mrs Harron.


https://www.ourdogs.co.uk/News/2006/August2006/News250806/brit.htm

So Eddie was finding bodies and evidence of bodies prior to 2007.  This is all so sad reading of other peoples deaths but at least partially thanks to Eddie and Martin Grime the guilty murders were jailed.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 10, 2018, 07:29:40 AM
Quote from: sadie on August 10, 2018, 12:55:23 AM
And how about the ashes and pyjamas of Tasmin Silences grandpa?   

Were they stored in the ONLY place that might have any revelence to a cadaver?  There was ONLY ONE POTENTIALLY RELEVANT PLACE and that was by the wall adjacent to the headboard of the bed ... in just the place that a grieving elderly widow might have kept the ashes / his pyjamas  for comfort, on a bedside table near her head as she lay in bed.. 

If placed on a bedside table there, they would have been at exactly the right spot for Eddies alert.



IMO, there was never any cadaver in 5A.  It was all, at best, a misunderstanding on Amarals part and a huge internet myth has been developed around it by a certain group of people.    I wonder why?

Moderator: You have previously stated this without providing a cite please provide one or it will be removed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 10, 2018, 08:10:18 AM
Quote from: Sunny on August 10, 2018, 06:09:07 AM
There you go with that internationally acclaimed phrase again. I have never said it apart from in response to you saying it to me.   I didn't say either that Eddie was involved all I mentioned was that Grime was highly thought of by Stockham.  Did you notice this bit

Stockham's protocol called for regular single-and double-blind testing of dogs throughout their working lives. Stockham's program had three full-time handlers in its program, including Martin Grime. Stockham testified that he had tested Morse and Keela, Grime's dogs, and that both dogs had accuracy ratings in the high 90 percent range

So Grimes dogs at that time had an accuracy rating in the high 90% range.

I have said that Grime is a professional several times and I believe he was back in 2007 too as he was prior


British dog helps Irish Police and FBI
A SNIFFER dog that helped detectives jail evil killer Trevor Hamilton has just returned from assisting the FBI with a murder probe in America.

Six-year-old English Springer spaniel Eddie's career took off internationally shortly after he returned to Northern Ireland for a third time to help in the hunt for missing Arlene Arkinson.

Eddie helped police nail Hamilton after the victim-recovery dog found blood from Attracta Harron (63) on a mat from Hamilton's burnt-out Hyundai car. Hamilton burned the car the same day that he murdered the retired librarian.

Eddie was drafted in from the UK with his handler to assist in the search for Ms Arkinson’s body. It was Eddie who found her body in a shallow grave in April 2003.

Martin Grime, Eddie's handler at the Dog Unit attached to South Yorkshire Police Station, told how he has recently returned to Tyrone to search for Arlene (15).

She went missing after leaving a disco in Bundoran, Co Donegal, 12 years ago on August 13 1994. Police have recently been concentrating their search in her native Castlederg in Tyrone, where it is thought she was murdered.

Forensic

Mr Grime said: ‘We were over earlier this year and three times in total since the Attracta Harron case. During that investigation we came over for a week and on the last day, before we came back to the UK, we decided we would search the car. The stuff Eddie found was then taken away for forensic examination.

‘Then when a search area was identified Eddie found the body as well. As far as the Arlene case goes, however, there has been nothing to date.’

Eddie has just returned from the US where he has been helping the FBI in a murder case.

Mr Grime said: ‘Dogs like Eddie are very, very good at what they do and he has lots of operational experience. I do some training with him every day.’

Hamilton (23) received Ulster's longest prison sentence after he was jailed for life for the murder of Mrs Harron.


https://www.ourdogs.co.uk/News/2006/August2006/News250806/brit.htm

So Eddie was finding bodies and evidence of bodies prior to 2007.  This is all so sad reading of other peoples deaths but at least partially thanks to Eddie and Martin Grime the guilty murders were jailed.

What do you understand by an accuracy rating of 90%...i think you misunderstand what it means... I  think some think this means every alert by eddie is 90% accurate but Im quite sure that is not what it means,...could you also tell us what bodeis eddie ahs found...as I understand...on his own...its one...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 10, 2018, 08:43:19 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 10, 2018, 08:10:18 AM
What do you understand by an accuracy rating of 90%...i think you misunderstand what it means... I  think some think this means every alert by eddie is 90% accurate but Im quite sure that is not what it means,...could you also tell us what bodeis eddie ahs found...as I understand...on his own...its one...
I think that accuracy rate is assessed during Eddie's training runs and it was found that on average 1 in every 10 training runs Eddie would alert at places where the  training sample had not been placed or he went past the place where the training sample had been placed and he didn't bark.

False positives and false negatives.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 10, 2018, 09:06:34 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 10, 2018, 08:10:18 AM
What do you understand by an accuracy rating of 90%...i think you misunderstand what it means... I  think some think this means every alert by eddie is 90% accurate but Im quite sure that is not what it means,...could you also tell us what bodeis eddie ahs found...as I understand...on his own...its one...

It says high 90% range which I take to mean somewhere around 97% or 98% accurate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 10, 2018, 09:21:21 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 10, 2018, 09:06:34 AM
It says high 90% range which I take to mean somewhere around 97% or 98% accurate.
It could be that or if the rating was over 90% it was considered "high". 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 10, 2018, 09:30:48 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 10, 2018, 09:06:34 AM
It says high 90% range which I take to mean somewhere around 97% or 98% accurate.

Accurate at what... What did the test the test involve... How much relevance does that test have to PDL.. Or Jersey..
Are posters, assuming from this statement that every alert Eddie  made in pdl was 90 plus accurate... I would say that's absurd
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 10, 2018, 09:37:49 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 10, 2018, 09:30:48 AM
Accurate at what... What did the test the test involve... How much relevance does that test have to PDL.. Or Jersey..
Are posters, assuming from this statement that every alert Eddie  made in pdl was 90 plus accurate... I would say that's absurd
Did you see my answer?  "I think that accuracy rate is assessed during Eddie's training runs and it was found that on average 1 in every 10 training runs Eddie would alert at places where the  training sample had not been placed or he went past the place where the training sample had been placed and he didn't bark.

Resulting in both false positives and false negatives."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 10, 2018, 09:46:32 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 10, 2018, 09:37:49 AM
Did you see my answer?  "I think that accuracy rate is assessed during Eddie's training runs and it was found that on average 1 in every 10 training runs Eddie would alert at places where the  training sample had not been placed or he went past the place where the training sample had been placed and he didn't bark.

Resulting in both false positives and false negatives."
I'm interested in whether  posters, think eddies alerts in pdl on the whole were 90 accurate  ...this belief is what I think results in an incorrect belief in the value of the alerts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 10, 2018, 09:50:55 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 10, 2018, 04:15:37 AM
You like arguing don't you!  I have never accepted that the ashes coming back from a crematorium would illicit an alert from a cadaver dog.  I know you will say cadaver dogs are used to recover bodies after a fire, but I'm certain that those bodies won't be reduced to ash in most of these situations.

Information regarding dogs alerting to scattered cremation remains can be found in OPERATION RECTANGLE SUMMARY REPORT as follows.

SNIP
The EVRD was deployed in a wide area screening sweep of the site. The following alert indications were forthcoming:

VT / 9 Trench and gun emplacement containing small personnel shelter. Forensic examination revealed recently deposited tissues that appeared to have been used to ‘clean up following sexual intercourse’. It would appear that the shelter had been used as a venue for courting couples. This alert is within the trained parameters of the dog’s repertoire and is a satisfactory explanation of the alert.
Base of an oak tree planted as a memorial to the two sons of Mr Hamon, Flat 2 Delborgho Lodge, Upper Clarendon Road, St Hellier. The cremated remains of the two adult sons had been previously scattered just under the surface of the ground and the tree planted as a permanent memorial together with a plaque. This alert is within the trained parameters of the dog’s repertoire and is a satisfactory explanation of the alert.
There being no other points of interest, intelligence led excavation of the site commenced to locate and investigate defensive positions by excavation, forensic examination and canine screening.


Therefore it is categorically stated by Martin Grime that an alert which was "within the trained parameters of the dog’s repertoire" was made as a result of there being the presence of the scattered ashes resulting from cremation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 10, 2018, 10:01:59 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 10, 2018, 08:43:19 AM
I think that accuracy rate is assessed during Eddie's training runs and it was found that on average 1 in every 10 training runs Eddie would alert at places where the  training sample had not been placed or he went past the place where the training sample had been placed and he didn't bark.

False positives and false negatives.

Where is there a record of Eddie's scores in training?  I've never seen one; so in my opinion his training performance is anecdotal.

The dog whose record is independently validated is Morse.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 10, 2018, 10:28:40 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 10, 2018, 09:46:32 AM
I'm interested in whether  posters, think eddies alerts in pdl on the whole were 90 accurate  ...this belief is what I think results in an incorrect belief in the value of the alerts

High 90s.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 10, 2018, 10:42:20 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 10, 2018, 10:28:40 AM
High 90s.

IMO... The figure is meaningless unless, we know the precise nature of the test... If it's a simple tile type test with fresh cafaver odour or not I would expect a very high score.....the question I asked which hasn't been answerred is, do posters think that shows the alerts in pdl are 90 % accurate.... I think that's an absurd idea
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 10, 2018, 10:58:17 AM
Dear me, years on and these dogs are still causing concern for supporters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 10, 2018, 11:00:39 AM
Quote from: jassi on August 10, 2018, 10:58:17 AM
Dear me, years on and these dogs are still causing concern for supporters.

The dogs are no concern to me... It's rather silly ti suggest they are... Imo... And since the full facts are known re the alerts.. I doubt they are, a concern fir the McCann's either
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 10, 2018, 11:24:31 AM
Quote from: jassi on August 10, 2018, 10:58:17 AM
Dear me, years on and these dogs are still causing concern for supporters.

None so blind ... etc ... etc ...
So called 'supporters' have understood what Martin Grime has said where others choose to ignore him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 10, 2018, 11:39:39 AM
Quote from: jassi on August 10, 2018, 10:58:17 AM
Dear me, years on and these dogs are still causing concern for supporters.

I suppose I could say taht as far as I can see....11 years and sceptics still dont understand the value and reliability of the alerts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on August 10, 2018, 11:55:52 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 10, 2018, 11:39:39 AM
I suppose I could say taht as far as I can see....11 years and sceptics still dont understand the value and reliability of the alerts

Why do you believe that should be so?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 10, 2018, 12:04:16 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 10, 2018, 11:24:31 AM
None so blind ... etc ... etc ...
So called 'supporters' have understood what Martin Grime has said where others choose to ignore him.

The alerts are what they are and will be well understood by the investigating police forces.
Nothing that supporters or sceptics write alters that.

I really don't know why you bother.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on August 10, 2018, 12:28:24 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 10, 2018, 12:04:16 PM
The alerts are what they are and will be well understood by the investigating police forces.
Nothing that supporters or sceptics write alters that.

I really don't know why you bother.

Cato reached the point where he ended any old speech with "delenda est Carthago".
Maybe it is the same kind of syndrome?
"ad redargutionem venire debet canibus" [Googlish translation  8)--))]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 10, 2018, 12:28:59 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 10, 2018, 12:04:16 PM
The alerts are what they are and will be well understood by the investigating police forces.
Nothing that supporters or sceptics write alters that.

I really don't know why you bother.

We bother because it's, a discussion  forum where people discuss.... If you are criticising people from discussing things perhaps you should take your own advice and stop duscussing
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 10, 2018, 12:33:15 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on August 10, 2018, 12:28:24 PM
Cato reached the point where he ended any old speech with "delenda est Carthago".
Maybe it is the same kind of syndrome?
"ad redargutionem venire debet canibus" [Googlish translation  8)--))]

As I recall, Cato ended up committing suicide after he lost the battle against Caesar  - unless you are referring to Cato the Elder.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 10, 2018, 01:02:25 PM
Bob the builder.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on August 10, 2018, 01:45:06 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 10, 2018, 01:02:25 PM
Bob the builder.

That would have been Kato.
Oooer stap me and scroat me gently with a knotted Cuban cigar rollers thigh.
"Bob the Builder and Kato" is one them dreadfully esoteric/ riddle me rhee/ learned /smart arse comments/ [delete as appropriate] that all the site whinge about me making [allegedly]....a thousand apologies he said as insincerely as imaginable 8)--))

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 10, 2018, 06:07:56 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on August 10, 2018, 01:45:06 PM
That would have been Kato.
Oooer stap me and scroat me gently with a knotted Cuban cigar rollers thigh.
"Bob the Builder and Kato" is one them dreadfully esoteric/ riddle me rhee/ learned /smart arse comments/ [delete as appropriate] that all the site whinge about me making [allegedly]....a thousand apologies he said as insincerely as imaginable 8)--))
Sing along https://youtu.be/dO_PL3V1c4Y
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 10, 2018, 07:07:28 PM
Now how does he do it, with the Met allegedly breathing down his neck..?

Leicester cardiology consultant awarded prestigious research professorship
Posted by ap507 at Aug 07, 2018 10:20 AM | Permalink
Professor Gerry McCann has been awarded a prestigious research professorship from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)
Issued by University of Leicester on 7 August 2018

A cardiology consultant from Leicester has been awarded a prestigious research professorship from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR).

Professor Gerry McCann, cardiology consultant at Leicester’s Hospitals and professor of cardiac imaging at the University of Leicester, is just one of five eminent medical researchers in the country to have received the award in this round in a highly competitive process. It is the first time anyone in Leicester has been accepted on the programme.

The aim of the NIHR Research Professorships programme is to “fund future research leaders to promote the effective translation of research from bench to bedside”. This means taking what is learnt in laboratories to improve patient care as quickly as possible.

The post lasts for five years and is supported by £1.95 million to increase the capacity of Professor McCann and his team to conduct more research in his area of expertise – using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to study the early signs of heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes in order to improve diagnosis and management of the condition.

Professor McCann said: “I am grateful to the NIHR for accepting my application onto the Research Professorships programme, and for the opportunities it creates to further develop the heart imaging research team in Leicester.”

On his research aims, Professor McCann said: “We know that heart failure is the most common and deadliest cardiovascular complication of diabetes. With the support of the NIHR, our research will aim to identify which characteristics of patients with type 2 diabetes are most likely to be associated with early heart failure, as detected on a MRI scan. We will also explore whether early heart failure can be reliably diagnosed by a blood test using a combination of proteins.”

The aim will be to check the findings using health data from large samples of the population held by organisations such as UK Biobank. Additional funding will be sought to undertake clinical trials to find the best ways to treat early and established heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes.

McCann and his team eventually hope to develop a clinical risk score and diagnostic blood test that may be used to screen people with type 2 diabetes so that treatments to reduce the risk of heart failure can be initiated. This would improve patients’ health and prevent further illness. It could also save the NHS money by reducing hospital admissions for heart failure and other complications by targeting patients most at risk and empowering them to manage their conditions appropriately.

Professor McCann’s team is based in the NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). Director of the BRC, Professor Melanie Davies CBE, said: “We are delighted that Gerry has been recognised as an outstanding academic through his NIHR Research Professorship. The purpose of the BRC is to speed up the process of taking research findings and using them to improve patient care and Gerry provides exemplary leadership in this approach.”

Professor Nigel Brunskill, Director of Research and Innovation at Leicester’s Hospitals and Professor of Renal Medicine at the University of Leicester’s College of Life Sciences, said: “It is a great honour for Leicester to receive its first NIHR Research Professorship. Gerry should be proud of his achievement. It is important for the research to take place here in Leicester because we have a multi-ethnic population that can have different risk factors for acquiring both heart failure and type 2 diabetes. Research needs to be inclusive of different ethnic groups to ensure that we understand how these illnesses might progress differently according to ethnicity.”

Professor McCann has developed an international reputation for his work on using cardiac imaging to better understand heart disease, including research that changed the guidelines on how MRI scans could be used for patients with coronary heart disease, preventing unnecessary angiographies (a process that requires a catheter to be inserted through the groin area).

You can hear Professor McCann speak at this year's Frank May Prize Lecture at the University of Leicester, titled 'Using MRI to better understand and manage heart disease'. The event, which is on 29 October, begins at 5:30PM and is free and open to the public.

The Frank May Prize Lecture was established in 1991, endowed by the generosity of Dr Frank May and is delivered annually by a member of the University’s College of Life Sciences. The annual Prize Lecture can be delivered by clinical or non-clinical members of the College but the area of research must be medically related.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 10, 2018, 07:13:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 10, 2018, 07:07:28 PM
Now how does he do it, with the Met allegedly breathing down his neck..?

Leicester cardiology consultant awarded prestigious research professorship
Posted by ap507 at Aug 07, 2018 10:20 AM | Permalink
Professor Gerry McCann has been awarded a prestigious research professorship from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)
Issued by University of Leicester on 7 August 2018

A cardiology consultant from Leicester has been awarded a prestigious research professorship from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR).

Professor Gerry McCann, cardiology consultant at Leicester’s Hospitals and professor of cardiac imaging at the University of Leicester, is just one of five eminent medical researchers in the country to have received the award in this round in a highly competitive process. It is the first time anyone in Leicester has been accepted on the programme.

The aim of the NIHR Research Professorships programme is to “fund future research leaders to promote the effective translation of research from bench to bedside”. This means taking what is learnt in laboratories to improve patient care as quickly as possible.

The post lasts for five years and is supported by £1.95 million to increase the capacity of Professor McCann and his team to conduct more research in his area of expertise – using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to study the early signs of heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes in order to improve diagnosis and management of the condition.

Professor McCann said: “I am grateful to the NIHR for accepting my application onto the Research Professorships programme, and for the opportunities it creates to further develop the heart imaging research team in Leicester.”

On his research aims, Professor McCann said: “We know that heart failure is the most common and deadliest cardiovascular complication of diabetes. With the support of the NIHR, our research will aim to identify which characteristics of patients with type 2 diabetes are most likely to be associated with early heart failure, as detected on a MRI scan. We will also explore whether early heart failure can be reliably diagnosed by a blood test using a combination of proteins.”

The aim will be to check the findings using health data from large samples of the population held by organisations such as UK Biobank. Additional funding will be sought to undertake clinical trials to find the best ways to treat early and established heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes.

McCann and his team eventually hope to develop a clinical risk score and diagnostic blood test that may be used to screen people with type 2 diabetes so that treatments to reduce the risk of heart failure can be initiated. This would improve patients’ health and prevent further illness. It could also save the NHS money by reducing hospital admissions for heart failure and other complications by targeting patients most at risk and empowering them to manage their conditions appropriately.

Professor McCann’s team is based in the NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). Director of the BRC, Professor Melanie Davies CBE, said: “We are delighted that Gerry has been recognised as an outstanding academic through his NIHR Research Professorship. The purpose of the BRC is to speed up the process of taking research findings and using them to improve patient care and Gerry provides exemplary leadership in this approach.”

Professor Nigel Brunskill, Director of Research and Innovation at Leicester’s Hospitals and Professor of Renal Medicine at the University of Leicester’s College of Life Sciences, said: “It is a great honour for Leicester to receive its first NIHR Research Professorship. Gerry should be proud of his achievement. It is important for the research to take place here in Leicester because we have a multi-ethnic population that can have different risk factors for acquiring both heart failure and type 2 diabetes. Research needs to be inclusive of different ethnic groups to ensure that we understand how these illnesses might progress differently according to ethnicity.”

Professor McCann has developed an international reputation for his work on using cardiac imaging to better understand heart disease, including research that changed the guidelines on how MRI scans could be used for patients with coronary heart disease, preventing unnecessary angiographies (a process that requires a catheter to be inserted through the groin area).

You can hear Professor McCann speak at this year's Frank May Prize Lecture at the University of Leicester, titled 'Using MRI to better understand and manage heart disease'. The event, which is on 29 October, begins at 5:30PM and is free and open to the public.

The Frank May Prize Lecture was established in 1991, endowed by the generosity of Dr Frank May and is delivered annually by a member of the University’s College of Life Sciences. The annual Prize Lecture can be delivered by clinical or non-clinical members of the College but the area of research must be medically related.


Now there's a chance for all supporters to get up close and personal with the Great Man  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 10, 2018, 07:17:24 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 10, 2018, 07:13:53 PM

Now there's a chance for all supporters to get up close and personal with the Great Man  8(>((
It’s far more likely to attract the sceptic stalker variety - remember a certain Tony Bennett sitting right behind Gerry when he was giving evidence or a talk on something years ago? 

That aside, any thoughts on Gerry’s great achievements in helping to save lives?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 10, 2018, 07:19:31 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 10, 2018, 07:17:24 PM
It’s far more likely to attract the sceptic stalker variety - remember a certain Tony Bennett sitting right behind Gerry when he was giving evidence or a talk on something years ago? 

That aside, any thoughts on Gerry’s great achievements in helping to save lives?


I think there are even fewer of those than there are supporters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 10, 2018, 07:22:26 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 10, 2018, 07:19:31 PM

I think there are even fewer of those than there are supporters.
Thankfully, your little barb notwithstanding.  It seems Gerry has some good support among his peer group, which seems to be richly deserved. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 10, 2018, 07:24:35 PM
I don't think his academic ability has ever been in question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 10, 2018, 07:26:29 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 10, 2018, 07:07:28 PM
Now how does he do it, with the Met allegedly breathing down his neck..?

Leicester cardiology consultant awarded prestigious research professorship
Posted by ap507 at Aug 07, 2018 10:20 AM | Permalink
Professor Gerry McCann has been awarded a prestigious research professorship from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)
Issued by University of Leicester on 7 August 2018

A cardiology consultant from Leicester has been awarded a prestigious research professorship from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR).

Professor Gerry McCann, cardiology consultant at Leicester’s Hospitals and professor of cardiac imaging at the University of Leicester, is just one of five eminent medical researchers in the country to have received the award in this round in a highly competitive process. It is the first time anyone in Leicester has been accepted on the programme.

The aim of the NIHR Research Professorships programme is to “fund future research leaders to promote the effective translation of research from bench to bedside”. This means taking what is learnt in laboratories to improve patient care as quickly as possible.

The post lasts for five years and is supported by £1.95 million to increase the capacity of Professor McCann and his team to conduct more research in his area of expertise – using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to study the early signs of heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes in order to improve diagnosis and management of the condition.

Professor McCann said: “I am grateful to the NIHR for accepting my application onto the Research Professorships programme, and for the opportunities it creates to further develop the heart imaging research team in Leicester.”

On his research aims, Professor McCann said: “We know that heart failure is the most common and deadliest cardiovascular complication of diabetes. With the support of the NIHR, our research will aim to identify which characteristics of patients with type 2 diabetes are most likely to be associated with early heart failure, as detected on a MRI scan. We will also explore whether early heart failure can be reliably diagnosed by a blood test using a combination of proteins.”

The aim will be to check the findings using health data from large samples of the population held by organisations such as UK Biobank. Additional funding will be sought to undertake clinical trials to find the best ways to treat early and established heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes.

McCann and his team eventually hope to develop a clinical risk score and diagnostic blood test that may be used to screen people with type 2 diabetes so that treatments to reduce the risk of heart failure can be initiated. This would improve patients’ health and prevent further illness. It could also save the NHS money by reducing hospital admissions for heart failure and other complications by targeting patients most at risk and empowering them to manage their conditions appropriately.

Professor McCann’s team is based in the NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). Director of the BRC, Professor Melanie Davies CBE, said: “We are delighted that Gerry has been recognised as an outstanding academic through his NIHR Research Professorship. The purpose of the BRC is to speed up the process of taking research findings and using them to improve patient care and Gerry provides exemplary leadership in this approach.”

Professor Nigel Brunskill, Director of Research and Innovation at Leicester’s Hospitals and Professor of Renal Medicine at the University of Leicester’s College of Life Sciences, said: “It is a great honour for Leicester to receive its first NIHR Research Professorship. Gerry should be proud of his achievement. It is important for the research to take place here in Leicester because we have a multi-ethnic population that can have different risk factors for acquiring both heart failure and type 2 diabetes. Research needs to be inclusive of different ethnic groups to ensure that we understand how these illnesses might progress differently according to ethnicity.”

Professor McCann has developed an international reputation for his work on using cardiac imaging to better understand heart disease, including research that changed the guidelines on how MRI scans could be used for patients with coronary heart disease, preventing unnecessary angiographies (a process that requires a catheter to be inserted through the groin area).

You can hear Professor McCann speak at this year's Frank May Prize Lecture at the University of Leicester, titled 'Using MRI to better understand and manage heart disease'. The event, which is on 29 October, begins at 5:30PM and is free and open to the public.

The Frank May Prize Lecture was established in 1991, endowed by the generosity of Dr Frank May and is delivered annually by a member of the University’s College of Life Sciences. The annual Prize Lecture can be delivered by clinical or non-clinical members of the College but the area of research must be medically related.


Excellent news and there will be many who will benefit from this research and expertise.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 10, 2018, 07:26:46 PM
I wonder if those who so intensely dislike and distrust Gerry because they believe he’s a callous body occulter and money grabbing fraud would refuse to submit themselves to then diagnostic test he is developing if it was offered to them to help them with their medical conditons? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 10, 2018, 07:31:39 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 10, 2018, 08:10:18 AM
What do you understand by an accuracy rating of 90%...i think you misunderstand what it means... I  think some think this means every alert by eddie is 90% accurate but Im quite sure that is not what it means,...could you also tell us what bodeis eddie ahs found...as I understand...on his own...its one...

It clearly means that he correctly signalled a positive hit 90% of the time when tested with cadaver remains.  However, as Eddie alerted to several other substances it cannot be inferred that every time he alerted it was to a cadaver so his alerts were pretty useless unless something tangible was found during the search.  That is why Grime called his alerts in PdL as merely indicative.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 10, 2018, 07:36:16 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 10, 2018, 07:31:39 PM
It clearly means that he correctly signalled a positive hit 90% of the time when tested with cadaver remains.  However, as Eddie alerted to several other substances it cannot be inferred that every time he alerted it was to a cadaver so his alerts were pretty useless unless something tangible was found during the search.

Well we know there were not any cadaver remains in PDL so the test result is irrelevant ...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 10, 2018, 07:36:33 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 10, 2018, 07:26:46 PM
I wonder if those who so intensely dislike and distrust Gerry because they believe he’s a callous body occulter and money grabbing fraud would refuse to submit themselves to then diagnostic test he is developing if it was offered to them to help them with their medical conditons?

PASS
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 10, 2018, 07:38:21 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 10, 2018, 07:36:16 PM
Well we know there were not any cadaver remains in PDL so the test result is irrelevant ...

Remains includes scent so your assertion is incorrect.  Welcome back by the way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on August 10, 2018, 07:43:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 10, 2018, 07:07:28 PM
Now how does he do it, with the Met allegedly breathing down his neck..?

Leicester cardiology consultant awarded prestigious research professorship
Posted by ap507 at Aug 07, 2018 10:20 AM | Permalink
Professor Gerry McCann has been awarded a prestigious research professorship from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)
Issued by University of Leicester on 7 August 2018

A cardiology consultant from Leicester has been awarded a prestigious research professorship from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR).

Professor Gerry McCann, cardiology consultant at Leicester’s Hospitals and professor of cardiac imaging at the University of Leicester, is just one of five eminent medical researchers in the country to have received the award in this round in a highly competitive process. It is the first time anyone in Leicester has been accepted on the programme.

The aim of the NIHR Research Professorships programme is to “fund future research leaders to promote the effective translation of research from bench to bedside”. This means taking what is learnt in laboratories to improve patient care as quickly as possible.

The post lasts for five years and is supported by £1.95 million to increase the capacity of Professor McCann and his team to conduct more research in his area of expertise – using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to study the early signs of heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes in order to improve diagnosis and management of the condition.

Professor McCann said: “I am grateful to the NIHR for accepting my application onto the Research Professorships programme, and for the opportunities it creates to further develop the heart imaging research team in Leicester.”

On his research aims, Professor McCann said: “We know that heart failure is the most common and deadliest cardiovascular complication of diabetes. With the support of the NIHR, our research will aim to identify which characteristics of patients with type 2 diabetes are most likely to be associated with early heart failure, as detected on a MRI scan. We will also explore whether early heart failure can be reliably diagnosed by a blood test using a combination of proteins.”

The aim will be to check the findings using health data from large samples of the population held by organisations such as UK Biobank. Additional funding will be sought to undertake clinical trials to find the best ways to treat early and established heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes.

McCann and his team eventually hope to develop a clinical risk score and diagnostic blood test that may be used to screen people with type 2 diabetes so that treatments to reduce the risk of heart failure can be initiated. This would improve patients’ health and prevent further illness. It could also save the NHS money by reducing hospital admissions for heart failure and other complications by targeting patients most at risk and empowering them to manage their conditions appropriately.

Professor McCann’s team is based in the NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). Director of the BRC, Professor Melanie Davies CBE, said: “We are delighted that Gerry has been recognised as an outstanding academic through his NIHR Research Professorship. The purpose of the BRC is to speed up the process of taking research findings and using them to improve patient care and Gerry provides exemplary leadership in this approach.”

Professor Nigel Brunskill, Director of Research and Innovation at Leicester’s Hospitals and Professor of Renal Medicine at the University of Leicester’s College of Life Sciences, said: “It is a great honour for Leicester to receive its first NIHR Research Professorship. Gerry should be proud of his achievement. It is important for the research to take place here in Leicester because we have a multi-ethnic population that can have different risk factors for acquiring both heart failure and type 2 diabetes. Research needs to be inclusive of different ethnic groups to ensure that we understand how these illnesses might progress differently according to ethnicity.”

Professor McCann has developed an international reputation for his work on using cardiac imaging to better understand heart disease, including research that changed the guidelines on how MRI scans could be used for patients with coronary heart disease, preventing unnecessary angiographies (a process that requires a catheter to be inserted through the groin area).

You can hear Professor McCann speak at this year's Frank May Prize Lecture at the University of Leicester, titled 'Using MRI to better understand and manage heart disease'. The event, which is on 29 October, begins at 5:30PM and is free and open to the public.

The Frank May Prize Lecture was established in 1991, endowed by the generosity of Dr Frank May and is delivered annually by a member of the University’s College of Life Sciences. The annual Prize Lecture can be delivered by clinical or non-clinical members of the College but the area of research must be medically related.

Fair enough ; you can't knock it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on August 10, 2018, 07:57:22 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 10, 2018, 07:26:46 PM
I wonder if those who so intensely dislike and distrust Gerry because they believe he’s a callous body occulter and money grabbing fraud would refuse to submit themselves to then diagnostic test he is developing if it was offered to them to help them with their medical conditons?

That is a specious argument. First the research has to be done, proven to be effective then allowed a licence by NICE.
Speaking from first hand experience relating to a fairly rare disease some of us UK G-Pigs are on 18 years and counting waiting. 
None the less the more kick offs the better.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 10, 2018, 08:02:28 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 10, 2018, 07:36:33 PM
PASS


I'm sure that if your medical condition  required you to take advantage of this new research, you would.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 10, 2018, 08:05:33 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 10, 2018, 07:36:33 PM
PASS
???
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 10, 2018, 08:08:56 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on August 10, 2018, 07:57:22 PM
That is a specious argument. First the research has to be done, proven to be effective then allowed a licence by NICE.
Speaking from first hand experience relating to a fairly rare disease some of us UK G-Pigs are on 18 years and counting waiting. 
None the less the more kick offs the better.
The people I am referring to have not allowed their opprobrium to dim in the last 11 years, there’s no reason (short of death) to suppose that their opprobrium will be any less intense in 18 years time, so the question still stands.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on August 10, 2018, 10:51:41 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 10, 2018, 08:08:56 PM
The people I am referring to have not allowed their opprobrium to dim in the last 11 years, there’s no reason (short of death) to suppose that their opprobrium will be any less intense in 18 years time, so the question still stands.

It remains a specious argument on your part. On what basis do you form the opinion "no reason to suppose"?
I'd trade with the very devil if he knew how to rid me of what I have. As would most I feel when it is explained properly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 10, 2018, 11:25:57 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on August 10, 2018, 10:51:41 PM
It remains a specious argument on your part. On what basis do you form the opinion "no reason to suppose"?
I'd trade with the very devil if he knew how to rid me of what I have. As would most I feel when it is explained properly.
I have given the basis upon which I suppose it already, that is the fact that some people have been known to harbour a deep contempt for the man for eleven years already, why should anyone suppose that in a further 11 or 22 years this contempt would have abated?  This is my last word to you on the matter, take it or leave it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on August 10, 2018, 11:34:56 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 10, 2018, 11:25:57 PM
I have given the basis upon which I suppose it already, that is the fact that some people have been known to harbour a deep contempt for the man for eleven years already, why should anyone suppose that in a further 11 or 22 years this contempt would have abated?  This is my last word to you on the matter, take it or leave it.

You do not like debate except on your terms then?
Thanks for clarifying that point to us.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 10, 2018, 11:36:28 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on August 10, 2018, 11:34:56 PM
You do not like debate except on your terms then?
Thanks for clarifying that point to us.
No problem.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 10, 2018, 11:56:33 PM
AP and VS stop bickering - further posts of that nature will be deleted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 13, 2018, 10:48:01 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 10, 2018, 07:07:28 PM
Now how does he do it, with the Met allegedly breathing down his neck..?

Leicester cardiology consultant awarded prestigious research professorship
Posted by ap507 at Aug 07, 2018 10:20 AM | Permalink
Professor Gerry McCann has been awarded a prestigious research professorship from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)
Issued by University of Leicester on 7 August 2018

A cardiology consultant from Leicester has been awarded a prestigious research professorship from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR).

Professor Gerry McCann, cardiology consultant at Leicester’s Hospitals and professor of cardiac imaging at the University of Leicester, is just one of five eminent medical researchers in the country to have received the award in this round in a highly competitive process. It is the first time anyone in Leicester has been accepted on the programme.

The aim of the NIHR Research Professorships programme is to “fund future research leaders to promote the effective translation of research from bench to bedside”. This means taking what is learnt in laboratories to improve patient care as quickly as possible.

The post lasts for five years and is supported by £1.95 million to increase the capacity of Professor McCann and his team to conduct more research in his area of expertise – using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to study the early signs of heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes in order to improve diagnosis and management of the condition.

Professor McCann said: “I am grateful to the NIHR for accepting my application onto the Research Professorships programme, and for the opportunities it creates to further develop the heart imaging research team in Leicester.”

On his research aims, Professor McCann said: “We know that heart failure is the most common and deadliest cardiovascular complication of diabetes. With the support of the NIHR, our research will aim to identify which characteristics of patients with type 2 diabetes are most likely to be associated with early heart failure, as detected on a MRI scan. We will also explore whether early heart failure can be reliably diagnosed by a blood test using a combination of proteins.”

The aim will be to check the findings using health data from large samples of the population held by organisations such as UK Biobank. Additional funding will be sought to undertake clinical trials to find the best ways to treat early and established heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes.

McCann and his team eventually hope to develop a clinical risk score and diagnostic blood test that may be used to screen people with type 2 diabetes so that treatments to reduce the risk of heart failure can be initiated. This would improve patients’ health and prevent further illness. It could also save the NHS money by reducing hospital admissions for heart failure and other complications by targeting patients most at risk and empowering them to manage their conditions appropriately.

Professor McCann’s team is based in the NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). Director of the BRC, Professor Melanie Davies CBE, said: “We are delighted that Gerry has been recognised as an outstanding academic through his NIHR Research Professorship. The purpose of the BRC is to speed up the process of taking research findings and using them to improve patient care and Gerry provides exemplary leadership in this approach.”

Professor Nigel Brunskill, Director of Research and Innovation at Leicester’s Hospitals and Professor of Renal Medicine at the University of Leicester’s College of Life Sciences, said: “It is a great honour for Leicester to receive its first NIHR Research Professorship. Gerry should be proud of his achievement. It is important for the research to take place here in Leicester because we have a multi-ethnic population that can have different risk factors for acquiring both heart failure and type 2 diabetes. Research needs to be inclusive of different ethnic groups to ensure that we understand how these illnesses might progress differently according to ethnicity.”

Professor McCann has developed an international reputation for his work on using cardiac imaging to better understand heart disease, including research that changed the guidelines on how MRI scans could be used for patients with coronary heart disease, preventing unnecessary angiographies (a process that requires a catheter to be inserted through the groin area).

You can hear Professor McCann speak at this year's Frank May Prize Lecture at the University of Leicester, titled 'Using MRI to better understand and manage heart disease'. The event, which is on 29 October, begins at 5:30PM and is free and open to the public.

The Frank May Prize Lecture was established in 1991, endowed by the generosity of Dr Frank May and is delivered annually by a member of the University’s College of Life Sciences. The annual Prize Lecture can be delivered by clinical or non-clinical members of the College but the area of research must be medically related.


Interesting Find- it wasn't headline news!

What we have to remember is -this is being done by a TEAM and we all know from University that being placed in a team some can sit back and watch and some are actually pro active. GM is NOT a diabetic expert, so he will have some input from his field- not a sole medal!

The best way to beat diabetes type 2 is to change lifestyle!- Reduce  possible risk of heart issues.

 Instead of chucking money at this- they should go to CHINA they already have these things in place- with a lot of new technology. It is fantastic what they have in place.

This exercise is purely to set up a diagnostic tool (tick box diagnosis) to prevent patients clogging up hospital beds. It like all the other tick box diagnosis - will not be  an exact science, and some will slip through. So any early claims that GM is going to save peoples lives is a bit much.
  great PR though!

And it is wonderful to see his career has not been affected too much by his daughter's disappearance. Well Done Ger!
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 13, 2018, 11:03:53 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 13, 2018, 10:48:01 AM

Interesting Find- it wasn't headline news!

What we have to remember is -this is being done by a TEAM and we all know from University that being placed in a team some can sit back and watch and some are actually pro active. GM is NOT a diabetic expert, so he will have some input from his field- not a sole medal!

The best way to beat diabetes type 2 is to change lifestyle!- Reduce  possible risk of heart issues.

 Instead of chucking money at this- they should go to CHINA they already have these things in place- with a lot of new technology. It is fantastic what they have in place.

This exercise is purely to set up a diagnostic tool (tick box diagnosis) to prevent patients clogging up hospital beds. It like all the other tick box diagnosis - will not be  an exact science, and some will slip through. So any early claims that GM is going to save peoples lives is a bit much.
  great PR though!

And it is wonderful to see his career has not been affected too much by his daughter's disappearance. Well Done Ger!
 
 

His career seems to have moved away from working hands-on with patients to concentrate on the academic side of things after Madeleine's disappearance. Whether that was coincidental we don't know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 13, 2018, 11:06:07 AM
They did manage to 'get back to normal' quite quickly- for the twins sake apparently. There is an interview where this is expressed. I can't find it...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 13, 2018, 11:17:40 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 13, 2018, 11:03:53 AM
His career seems to have moved away from working hands-on with patients to concentrate on the academic side of things after Madeleine's disappearance. Whether that was coincidental we don't know.

G has mentioned she does not know if this was a deliberate career choice or not. It is left to the reader to decide. It costs a lot of money to gain PHD. I should know!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 13, 2018, 11:18:58 AM
His current post is an academic one, rather than a clinical one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 13, 2018, 11:27:42 AM
Quote from: jassi on August 13, 2018, 11:18:58 AM
His current post is an academic one, rather than a clinical one.

He has done very well for himself. His Professorship would cost a lot of money is all I am saying.. which is very true. I should know!  There is an interview where he and Kate say they are getting back to normal...

[content edited as per rules]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 13, 2018, 11:32:40 AM
I will be applying sanctions if the bitchy comments continue.  Those doing so should consider themselves well warned!

And this applies to ALL threads just in case the silliness migrates.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 13, 2018, 05:27:59 PM
Isn’t it revealing how a positive report about the achievements of Dr McCann can so readily be turned into a big stick with which to beat him?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on August 14, 2018, 01:14:59 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 13, 2018, 05:27:59 PM
Isn’t it revealing how a positive report about the achievements of Dr McCann can so readily be turned into a big stick with which to beat him?


The thing here though VS imo - if you don't believe maddie was abducted how the hell can you praise him on achievements .

You maybe interested in what he has achieved. -  others may not be.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 14, 2018, 06:25:18 PM
Credit where it's due, I say. Martin Grime has also moved into academia as a Visiting Fellow at Staffordshire University. Good on both of them!

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 14, 2018, 06:31:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 14, 2018, 06:25:18 PM
Credit where it's due, I say. Martin Grime has also moved into academia as a Visiting Fellow at Staffordshire University. Good on both of them!

I think the two are hardly comparable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 14, 2018, 06:33:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 14, 2018, 06:25:18 PM
Credit where it's due, I say. Martin Grime has also moved into academia as a Visiting Fellow at Staffordshire University. Good on both of them!
Do you have a cite?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 14, 2018, 06:47:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 14, 2018, 06:25:18 PM
Credit where it's due, I say. Martin Grime has also moved into academia as a Visiting Fellow at Staffordshire University. Good on both of them!

Could you explain exactly  in what capacity... Visiting fellows may not even be a paid position


In the UK, a visiting scholar or visiting academic usually has to pay a so-called bench fee to the university, which will give them access to a shared office space and other university facilities and resources (such as the library). Bench fee amounts vary across the UK universities.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 14, 2018, 06:56:21 PM
A simple Google search - https://uk.linkedin.com/in/martin-grime-9724a78
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 14, 2018, 06:59:26 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 14, 2018, 06:56:21 PM
A simple Google search - https://uk.linkedin.com/in/martin-grime-9724a78
That’s his Linkedin page, nothing from the university itself announcing his achievement? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 14, 2018, 07:14:26 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 14, 2018, 06:31:22 PM
I think the two are hardly comparable

I don't see why not. Both were involved in the Madeleine McCann case. Both have been criticised on forums and websites. Both have forged ahead with their careers nevertheless. Unless you are saying their achievements aren't comparable? They have both achieved, nevertheless.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 14, 2018, 07:16:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 14, 2018, 07:14:26 PM
I don't see why not. Both were involved in the Madeleine McCann case. Both have been criticised on forums and websites. Both have forged ahead with their careers nevertheless. Unless you are saying their achievements aren't comparable? They have both achieved, nevertheless.

Could you tell me what Grime has achieved.... I've heard very lit the about his achievements...what exactly  is he doing now.... Sil is training his own cadaver dog... There doesn't seem. A lot to it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 14, 2018, 07:21:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 14, 2018, 07:16:52 PM
Could you tell me what Grime has achieved.... I've heard very lit the about his achievements...what exactly  is he doing now.... Sil is training his own cadaver dog... There doesn't seem. A lot to it
Plodding on is my guess.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 14, 2018, 08:16:31 PM
Is it me, or are people being selective when it comes to giving credit for achieving progression in one's chosen career?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 14, 2018, 08:20:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 14, 2018, 08:16:31 PM
Is it me, or are people being selective when it comes to giving credit for achieving progression in one's chosen career?

Credit where it's due....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 14, 2018, 08:20:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 14, 2018, 08:16:31 PM
Is it me, or are people being selective when it comes to giving credit for achieving progression in one's chosen career?
That is so unlikely.  It is more that we don't know where one is at.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 14, 2018, 09:14:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 14, 2018, 08:16:31 PM
Is it me, or are people being selective when it comes to giving credit for achieving progression in one's chosen career?
How has Martin Grime’s career progressed recently?  What high profile cases has he worked on recently?  Genuinely interested...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 14, 2018, 09:28:50 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 14, 2018, 09:14:16 PM
How has Martin Grime’s career progressed recently?  What high profile cases has he worked on recently?  Genuinely interested...

Don’t you have a search facility on your computer? I find Google very helpful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 14, 2018, 09:34:49 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 14, 2018, 09:28:50 PM
Don’t you have a search facility on your computer? I find Google very helpful.
What does it tell you about Martin Grime’s latest successes?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 14, 2018, 09:36:03 PM
I found this interesting from the link above.

‘
FBI Evidence Response Team, Forensic Canine Program
USA
November 2010 – September 2014 (3 years 11 months) | USA Washington DC, Virginia
Contract to provide Subject Matter Expert consultancy to the US Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Evidence Response Team in respect of the Forensic Canine Program, Victim Recovery Team.

To provide appropiate canine resources in support of critical case homicide and child abduction.
To design and facilitate training systems in relation to canine search and odor line up screening.
To provide consultancy and appropiate canine resources to the FBI Laboratory Division CFSRU in relation to research being conducted into the detection of human decomposition odor and human blood.
Authorship of relevant papers and publications.
To provide expert witness opinion in relation to casework.’

Not bad for a publicity-seeking incompetent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 14, 2018, 09:38:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 14, 2018, 06:59:26 PM
That’s his Linkedin page, nothing from the university itself announcing his achievement?

Actually there is. Is there a difference between a Visiting Fellow & an Honorary Research Fellow - something like a requirement for a Doctorate?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 14, 2018, 09:39:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 14, 2018, 09:34:49 PM
What does it tell you about Martin Grime’s latest successes?

I don’t know, what does it tell you ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 14, 2018, 09:42:01 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 14, 2018, 09:39:27 PM
I don’t know, what does it tell you ?
Unfortunately I don’t have a search facility on my computer. :-(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 14, 2018, 09:44:22 PM
Quote from: misty on August 14, 2018, 09:38:30 PM
Actually there is. Is there a difference between a Visiting Fellow & an Honorary Research Fellow - something like a requirement for a Doctorate?
I don’t know, but I would like to take this opportunity to extend my congratulations to Mr Grime for his fellowship.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 14, 2018, 09:48:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 14, 2018, 09:44:22 PM
I don’t know, but I would like to take this opportunity to extend my congratulations to Mr Grime for his fellowship.
I hope he does a scientific experiment on the reliability of cadaver dogs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 14, 2018, 10:00:53 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 14, 2018, 09:48:39 PM
I hope he does a scientific experiment on the reliability of cadaver dogs

What sort of experiment would you like to see.

A couple of cases from America.

https://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/13/us/missing-men-bucks-county-cadaver-dogs/index.html

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/06/07/florida.casey.anthony.trial/index.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 14, 2018, 10:01:03 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 14, 2018, 09:48:39 PM
I hope he does a scientific experiment on the reliability of cadaver dogs
I would prefer an unbiased scientific experiment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 14, 2018, 10:46:20 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 14, 2018, 09:42:01 PM
Unfortunately I don’t have a search facility on my computer. :-(

Then I’m sure Misty or Davel will google it for you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 14, 2018, 10:58:33 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 14, 2018, 10:46:20 PM
Then I’m sure Misty or Davel will google it for you.
Here’s hoping!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 14, 2018, 11:00:20 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 14, 2018, 10:58:33 PM
Here’s hoping!

Indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 02:08:40 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 14, 2018, 10:01:03 PM
I would prefer an unbiased scientific experiment.
Well I could imagine Grime designing an experiment relevant to cadaver dog operation.  Why would you say biased?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2018, 08:09:30 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 02:08:40 AM
Well I could imagine Grime designing an experiment relevant to cadaver dog operation.  Why would you say biased?
IMO it would be akin to a tobacco company conducting research into the link between smoking and cancer.  I would prefer such research to be carried out be those with no vested interest in the outcome.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 15, 2018, 09:25:45 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2018, 08:09:30 AM
IMO it would be akin to a tobacco company conducting research into the link between smoking and cancer.  I would prefer such research to be carried out be those with no vested interest in the outcome.

Most research is funded by those with a vested interest in the subject and the outcome. They are likely to fund researchers who share their outlook, rather than those with opposing views.

Perhaps you could explain which research Grime is involved in, who is funding it, how his 'vested interest'  might affect his behaviour and the outcome? Otherwise you're just casting unfounded aspersions in my opinion.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2018, 09:32:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 15, 2018, 09:25:45 AM
Most research is funded by those with a vested interest in the subject and the outcome. They are likely to fund researchers who share their outlook, rather than those with opposing views.

Perhaps you could explain which research Grime is involved in, who is funding it, how his 'vested interest'  might affect his behaviour and the outcome? Otherwise you're just casting unfounded aspersions in my opinion.
You are asking for cites for something I never actually said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 09:35:16 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2018, 09:32:52 AM
You are asking for cites for something I never actually said.
It certainly wasn't a demand for a cite.  Don't panic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 15, 2018, 09:50:35 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2018, 08:09:30 AM
IMO it would be akin to a tobacco company conducting research into the link between smoking and cancer.  I would prefer such research to be carried out be those with no vested interest in the outcome.

If the dogs aren’t useful no one will use them no matter what the scientific research said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2018, 10:07:40 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 15, 2018, 09:50:35 AM
If the dogs aren’t useful no one will use them no matter what the scientific research said.
The dogs are useful, they frequently find bodies or people buried in rubble, who disputes that?  When they find "nothing" but still alert, then that is where it becomes trickier....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2018, 10:08:19 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 09:35:16 AM
It certainly wasn't a demand for a cite.  Don't panic.
OK, it was a demand for an explanation for something I never said.  Better?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 15, 2018, 10:11:24 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2018, 10:07:40 AM
The dogs are useful, they frequently find bodies or people buried in rubble, who disputes that?  When they find "nothing" but still alert, then that is where it becomes trickier....

It can still be useful if corroborating evidence can be gathered, as in the Gilroy case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 15, 2018, 10:15:12 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2018, 10:07:40 AM
The dogs are useful, they frequently find bodies or people buried in rubble, who disputes that?  When they find "nothing" but still alert, then that is where it becomes trickier....

In the McCann case who does it become more trickier for?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 15, 2018, 10:24:23 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 15, 2018, 09:50:35 AM
If the dogs aren’t useful no one will use them no matter what the scientific research said.

Dogs are useful in finding evidence... That's why they are widely used... They are basically untestable scientifically... Because according to grime they are better than science... If keela alerted to blood and nothing was found... Grime would simply claim the residue was too small for scientists to detect

If Eddie alerted in the boot of my car... I can guarantee no cadavers have ever been carried... But grime could claim some sort of contamination at some point..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 10:30:15 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 15, 2018, 10:24:23 AM
Dogs are useful in finding evidence... That's why they are widely used... They are basically untestable scientifically... Because according to grime they are better than science... If keela alerted to blood and nothing was found... Grime would simply claim the residue was too small for scientists to detect

If Eddie alerted in the boot of my car... I can guarantee no cadavers have ever been carried... But grime could claim some sort of contamination at some point..
Has no one else, other than you driven your car?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2018, 10:31:07 AM
Quote from: barrier on August 15, 2018, 10:15:12 AM
In the McCann case who does it become more trickier for?
For everyone because no one can say for certain what the dog alerts mean, or what they were alerting to.  No body was found, no meaningful forensics were found, so....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 15, 2018, 10:33:03 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2018, 10:31:07 AM
For everyone because no one can say for certain what the dog alerts mean, or what they were alerting to.  No body was found, no meaningful forensics were found, so....

A reasoned reply. 8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 10:37:38 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2018, 10:31:07 AM
For everyone because no one can say for certain what the dog alerts mean, or what they were alerting to.  No body was found, no meaningful forensics were found, so....
Exactly but in the Gilroy case circumstantial evidence was used rather that evidence of that calibre.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 15, 2018, 10:38:19 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2018, 10:31:07 AM
For everyone because no one can say for certain what the dog alerts mean, or what they were alerting to.  No body was found, no meaningful forensics were found, so....

Don’t you think the fact the Eddie reacted to items connected to the McCanns and only the McCanns, although not definitive evidence, inferences can be drawn from that fact ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2018, 10:43:26 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 15, 2018, 10:38:19 AM
Don’t you think the fact the Eddie reacted to items connected to the McCanns and only the McCanns, although not definitive evidence, inferences can be drawn from that fact ?
Many inferences can be drawn from it - which one is correct though?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 15, 2018, 10:51:07 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2018, 10:47:20 AM
Yes, of course but as there are other inferences that can be drawn too, what worth are the dog alerts at the end of the day?

The day hasn't ended yet though as it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 15, 2018, 10:53:50 AM


Other inferences ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 11:01:57 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 15, 2018, 10:53:50 AM
Other inferences ?
Yes other inferences.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 15, 2018, 11:56:19 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 10:30:15 AM
Has no one else, other than you driven your car?
Precisely... A cadaver dog could alert anywhere and it could not be proved wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 12:28:19 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 15, 2018, 11:56:19 AM
Precisely... A cadaver dog could alert anywhere and it could not be proved wrong
Are you thinking it can be proved right but never proved wrong?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 12:42:31 PM
Why did the clothes only attract alerts after they were taken by the PJ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 15, 2018, 01:12:46 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 12:42:31 PM
Why did the clothes only attract alerts after they were taken by the PJ.

Taken from where Rob and taken to where?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 01:15:04 PM
Quote from: barrier on August 15, 2018, 01:12:46 PM
Taken from where Rob and taken to where?
From the McCann's villa to the warehouse where the clothes were laid out individually.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 15, 2018, 01:16:48 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 01:15:04 PM
From the McCann's villa to the warehouse where the clothes were laid out individually.

Not forgetting from 5a also.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 15, 2018, 01:52:04 PM
Can you imagine what would happen to his credibility if Madeleine had turned up alive ?

As he says himself that the alerts had to be forensically verified. What would be the use of encouraging Eddie to alert if he knew there would be no forensics to verify those alerts ? What would that achieve?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 15, 2018, 03:28:35 PM
Quote from: barrier on August 15, 2018, 01:12:46 PM
Taken from where Rob and taken to where?

Official record of the canine inspection at 23h20 on 2 August 2007 at the Municipal Pavilion of Lagos, [situated in] Lagos.

- OBJECTS FOR EXAMINATION
1. One (01) pink cloth toy, with yellow paws and ears and blue label, make "cuddle cat", with a third in wood and a green band, alluding to Fatima, that was found in the lounge on top of a large chair [armchair].
2. Clothes, shoes, bags [hand-bags; suitcases] and travel bags [knapsacks] that were packed as follows:
- Lounge, two boxes.
- Master bedroom, two boxes.
- Twins' bedroom, one suitcase.
- Visitors' bedroom, one suitcase.
3. Various papers.
- One bible, bedside table of the master bedroom.
- Two diaries and a notepad that was found in the cupboard of the master bedroom.
- On pair of latex gloves, that was found in a drawer of a bedside table of the visitors' bedroom.
- There being nothing more to record, the present activity was ended at 20h30.
- This document is drawn up to ratify the truth of the above and it is going to be duly signed.
(four signatures)

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

In these terms, the pieces of clothing recovered [from the home] were laid out individually in accordance with instructions given by the British technicians, the dogs [then] walking the area where they [those pieces of clothing] were laid out by order and with the following results described below.

1. Between 23h20 and 23h30 the two dogs were allowed to reconoitre the entire area to guarantee that there were no existing odours - and none were detected by them.

2. Between 23h30 and 23h40 items from the box labelled 'common room' were inspected by the blood dog without result.
- At 23h41 the cadaver dog began its inspection and 'marked' some clothing on the edge of the area. The inspection ended at 23h52 with the clothing having been collected for later direct examination and photographic report.

3. Clothes from the box labelled Lounge ("sitting room") were inspected by the blood dog between 00h02 (now 3 August) and 00h05 without any result. The same clothes were inspected by the cadaver dog between 00h06 and 00h07 also without any result.

4. Then the suitcase labelled 'Twins bedroom' was inspected, followed by two sets of inspections of its contents due to the large number of individual pieces it contained: the blood dog inspected [the first set] between 00h12 and 00h15, and then [the second set] between 00h22 and 00h24 - both without any result.
The cadaver dog inspected [set one] between 00h16 and 00h17, then [set two] between 00h25 and 00h26, also without any result.

5. An empty suitcase labelled 'Visitors bedroom' was inspected, along with sundry clothing packed in a box labelled Outside Clothes rack. Between 00h40 and 00h43 the blood dog inspected without any result, and in its turn the cadaver dog inspected between 00h44 and 00h45, also without any result.

6. The clothes packed in the box labelled "couple's bedroom 1" was inspected by the blood dog between 00h51 and 00h55, while the cadaver dog inspected it between 00h56 and 0057 without any result from either dog.
because there were so many pieces of clothing in the box a second inspection was conducted between 01h04 and 01h07 by the blood dog, and between 01h08 and 01h09 by the cadaver dog, [again] without any result from either dog.

7. The clothes packed in the box labelled "couple's bedroom 2" was inspected by the cadaver dog between 01h20 and 01h22, then the blood dog between 01h23 and 01h25. Nothing abnormal was detected by either dog.

Attached, the photo report which immediately follows and the video recording on MiniDV cassette.

There being nothing more the activity stopped at 01h30.

This document is drawn up to ratify the truth of the above and it is going to be signed by all participants.
(three signatures appended; five missing)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/INSPECTION_SITES.htm

The clothes were in the villa when that was inspected, with no result.
When taken from the villa in Luz to the gymnasium in Lagos nothing was alerted to with the exception of items from the same box ... bit of a strange one that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 15, 2018, 03:31:56 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 15, 2018, 03:28:35 PM
Official record of the canine inspection at 23h20 on 2 August 2007 at the Municipal Pavilion of Lagos, [situated in] Lagos.

- OBJECTS FOR EXAMINATION
1. One (01) pink cloth toy, with yellow paws and ears and blue label, make "cuddle cat", with a third in wood and a green band, alluding to Fatima, that was found in the lounge on top of a large chair [armchair].
2. Clothes, shoes, bags [hand-bags; suitcases] and travel bags [knapsacks] that were packed as follows:
- Lounge, two boxes.
- Master bedroom, two boxes.
- Twins' bedroom, one suitcase.
- Visitors' bedroom, one suitcase.
3. Various papers.
- One bible, bedside table of the master bedroom.
- Two diaries and a notepad that was found in the cupboard of the master bedroom.
- On pair of latex gloves, that was found in a drawer of a bedside table of the visitors' bedroom.
- There being nothing more to record, the present activity was ended at 20h30.
- This document is drawn up to ratify the truth of the above and it is going to be duly signed.
(four signatures)

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

In these terms, the pieces of clothing recovered [from the home] were laid out individually in accordance with instructions given by the British technicians, the dogs [then] walking the area where they [those pieces of clothing] were laid out by order and with the following results described below.

1. Between 23h20 and 23h30 the two dogs were allowed to reconoitre the entire area to guarantee that there were no existing odours - and none were detected by them.

2. Between 23h30 and 23h40 items from the box labelled 'common room' were inspected by the blood dog without result.
- At 23h41 the cadaver dog began its inspection and 'marked' some clothing on the edge of the area. The inspection ended at 23h52 with the clothing having been collected for later direct examination and photographic report.

3. Clothes from the box labelled Lounge ("sitting room") were inspected by the blood dog between 00h02 (now 3 August) and 00h05 without any result. The same clothes were inspected by the cadaver dog between 00h06 and 00h07 also without any result.

4. Then the suitcase labelled 'Twins bedroom' was inspected, followed by two sets of inspections of its contents due to the large number of individual pieces it contained: the blood dog inspected [the first set] between 00h12 and 00h15, and then [the second set] between 00h22 and 00h24 - both without any result.
The cadaver dog inspected [set one] between 00h16 and 00h17, then [set two] between 00h25 and 00h26, also without any result.

5. An empty suitcase labelled 'Visitors bedroom' was inspected, along with sundry clothing packed in a box labelled Outside Clothes rack. Between 00h40 and 00h43 the blood dog inspected without any result, and in its turn the cadaver dog inspected between 00h44 and 00h45, also without any result.

6. The clothes packed in the box labelled "couple's bedroom 1" was inspected by the blood dog between 00h51 and 00h55, while the cadaver dog inspected it between 00h56 and 0057 without any result from either dog.
because there were so many pieces of clothing in the box a second inspection was conducted between 01h04 and 01h07 by the blood dog, and between 01h08 and 01h09 by the cadaver dog, [again] without any result from either dog.

7. The clothes packed in the box labelled "couple's bedroom 2" was inspected by the cadaver dog between 01h20 and 01h22, then the blood dog between 01h23 and 01h25. Nothing abnormal was detected by either dog.

Attached, the photo report which immediately follows and the video recording on MiniDV cassette.

There being nothing more the activity stopped at 01h30.

This document is drawn up to ratify the truth of the above and it is going to be signed by all participants.
(three signatures appended; five missing)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/INSPECTION_SITES.htm

The clothes were in the villa when that was inspected, with no result.
When taken from the villa in Luz to the gymnasium in Lagos nothing was alerted to with the exception of items from the same box ... bit of a strange one that.

I believe the box was also sniffed at by the dog,no alert there so no transference there,strange innit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 15, 2018, 03:49:52 PM
Quote from: barrier on August 15, 2018, 03:31:56 PM
I believe the box was also sniffed at by the dog,no alert there so no transference there,strange innit.
Weird. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 15, 2018, 04:10:01 PM
Any more libel against Mr Grime will attract sanctions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 15, 2018, 05:45:00 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 12:28:19 PM
Are you thinking it can be proved right but never proved wrong?

Correct.. According to grime... It is impossible to prove either dog wrong

For that reason the claim that the dogs have never been wrong is worthless
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on August 15, 2018, 06:40:13 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 15, 2018, 05:45:00 PM
Correct.. According to grime... It is impossible to prove either dog wrong

For that reason the claim that the dogs have never been wrong is worthless
False positives in testing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 15, 2018, 06:44:54 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on August 15, 2018, 06:40:13 PM
False positives in testing?

Has one ever been shown to happen... A false positive could be the result of operator error
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 07:12:58 PM
Quote from: barrier on August 15, 2018, 01:16:48 PM
Not forgetting from 5a also.
The dog examination occurred in August.  By that time there was nothing of the McCann's in 5A - so what are you talking about?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 15, 2018, 08:52:49 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 07:12:58 PM
The dog examination occurred in August.  By that time there was nothing of the McCann's in 5A - so what are you talking about?

5a was their first residence was it not,so the clothes had to have been there first.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 15, 2018, 08:55:57 PM
Quote from: barrier on August 15, 2018, 08:52:49 PM
5a was their first residence was it not,so the clothes had to have been there first.
And some of them would have been brought to Portugal from England or even purchased while they were in PDL.  That is not the point I was making.  All the clothes were collected up and boxed from the villa regardless where they were before that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 17, 2018, 03:51:39 AM
With reference to an off topic mention on another thread to a case which occurred several years ago in which a five year old child was found to have wandered and died as a result.


30th March 1989
Lessons learned from search that failed to save boy

THE policeman who led the search for five-year-old Stephen McKerron after the youngster disappeared from the Wonderwest World Holiday Centre at Ayr yesterday described the lessons he had learned from the hunt.

At the second day of a fatal accident inquiry into the death of Stephen, Chief Superintendent David Gall, Strathclyde police divisional commander at Ayr, said he would now approach a search differently.

However he rejected criticisms of the hunt contained in an anonymous letter delivered yesterday to Sheriff Neil Gow QC, who is conducting the inquiry.

Chief Superintendent Gall gave details of the operation which covered a two-mile radius around the holiday centre and extended along roads to cover ground near lay-bys.

There was also a door-to-door check in the Doonfoot area of Ayr near the holiday centre.

The boy went missing last September 17.

His body was found 15 days later.

Mr Gall said that by 10.15am on September 18 police and a Royal Navy helicopter had made a preliminary search covering a two-mile radius around the centre.

This area was later painstakingly cross-checked. Coastguards and holiday centre staff had by then searched beaches.

Asked what factors influenced his decision to restrict the main search to two miles round Wonderwest World, Chief Superintendent Gall said he weighed up information on Stephen.

Experts had told him there was a 92% probability that the child would be found within 2.2 miles.

The boy's body was found in a ditch by Lady Margaret MacLehose 4.6 miles as the crow flies from the holiday complex.

Chief Superintendent Gall told the sheriff: ''If I had a similar situation tomorrow I would clearly ensure that the search was wider.''

But without the knowledge gained from the search for Stepehen he said he would have carried out an identical search again.

The sheriff put to the chief superintendent the contents of the anonymous letter which dismissed the search as ''an expensive failure in all respects''.

The writer said that every parent in the area would want to know why no civilians, apart from hillwalkers, and no Territorial Army or Navy personnel were allowed to help.

Chief Superintendent Gall told the sheriff that to his knowledge at least 38 civilians were involved.

Detective Chief Superintendent John Fleming, 47, of Strathclyde CID, told the inquiry that during the search he had enlisted the co-operation of West Yorkshire police who provided a Holmes computer terminal at Ayr.
This enabled statements obtained in the search for Stephen to be cross-checked against records of the search for missing girls Susan Maxwell, Caroline Hogg and Sarah Jane Harper.

A total of 493 statements were taken. Exactly a week after Stephen disappeared, 560 questionnaires were completed at road checks on the Ayr-Dunure road.

Detective Chief Inspector Robert Redmond, of Ayr CID, told the sheriff no-one had come forward to confirm any of the three reported sightings of a man seen with a boy who could have been Stephen on the night the child disappeared.

He said when Stephen was found the shoes he was wearing were tied with double bow knots and there was a muddy sock in the boy's trouser pockets.

Despite earlier evidence that Stephen could not tie his own laces, Chief Inspector Redmond said he read nothing sinister into that.
The evidence suggested to him that the boy had got into mud, taken his socks off, then slipped his tied shoes back on.

He said that there had been no apparent effort to conceal the body in the ditch where it was found. There were about 1000 places in the immediate area where a body could have been concealed and probably never found.

Pathologist Dr Nancy Cunningham, who carried out a post mortem examination, told the sheriff Stephen's death was due to exposure.

Asked by Sheriff Gow if she was happy to rule out the possibility of strangulation, she said she could not rule that out because of the lack of tissue on the partly decomposed body.

''All we can say is that there were not ligature marks on the back of the neck,'' she said.

The inquiry closed and Sheriff Gow will give his findings on Friday.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/11893198.Lessons_learned_from_search_that_failed_to_save_boy/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 17, 2018, 03:51:51 AM
Following on from the above post about Stephen's case ... the main difference in the wandered off theory for Madeleine is that Stephen's body was found despite the rough terrain around ... and I think the evidence given of the double knots on his laces and the sock in his pocket leave something hanging in the air.

This post I think shows that irrespective of input from a junior, senior officers will continue with the investigation as they see fit no doubt for the best of reasons and following 'expert' advice, even if it might have been the wrong expert asked for it.

If the search perimeter had been extended the chances are Stephen could have been found sooner; with luck alive but as it was more information could have been gleaned from his remains.


The case I can't forget: Former detective Gerry Gallacher regrets how investigation into tragic Stephen McKerron disappearance was handled
GERRY Gallacher, 59, was part of a team tasked with finding lost five-year-old Stephen McKerron, who went missing from an Ayrshire holiday camp in 1988.

ByDailyrecord.Co.Uk
12:15, 20 MAY 2012

The police search was heavily criticised when Stephen was found dead 16 days later.

To this day, Gerry is still haunted by the missed chances that could have saved his life.

VERY EARLY in an officer's career the realisation dawns that no matter how hard you try, you cannot simply solve every crime of bring every incident you face to a successful conclusion.

Even more so if the situation or crime has involved a child or some other vulnerable individual.

Stephen McKerron was just five when he went missing from ­Wonder Westworld Holiday ­Centre on September 17, 1988.

His disappearance within hours of arriving at the camp sparked one of the largest searches ever seen in Scotland.

The tragedy was intensified by the fact that there were several missed opportunities, which may have led to a happier outcome.

Mistakes were made by the public and police alike and those errors probably cause many involved to occasionally pause and reflect. I know I do.

Stephen had gone to Wonder Westworld with an aunt and uncle for a week’s holiday.

Like many kids, he’d been taken out of school a few days before the beginning of the holidays, but within half an hour of arriving at the camp he’d gone missing.

Although there were initial ­concerns that Stephen may have been abducted, they were offset by a ­witness who saw a boy fitting his ­description and ­wearing the same clothes climbing a six foot perimeter fence.

There were further sightings of a boy walking alone on a road towards nearby Ayr.

Search parameters were ­established by senior ­management and assistance was eventually sought from the RAF, which ­provided a helicopter equipped with infrared sensors.

I was one of scores of detectives drafted in to assist by ­interviewing staff and guests. I’m sure most of the inquiry team were satisfied that Stephen was missing and not the victim of foul play, but that didn’t make things any easier.

The surrounding area was bleak, cold and marshy and he was only a child, woefully ­underdressed for the conditions and night-time temperatures.

In the belief that he was lost I found myself sometimes delaying inquiries I’d been given just so I could take a drive around the ­surrounding terrain in the forlorn hope that I’d catch sight of him or maybe hear him call out. Not long into the ­investigation I needed to speak to a procurator fiscal at Glasgow Sheriff Court about an unrelated matter.

As I stood waiting I began a conversation with a sergeant.


That chance meeting and the resulting conversation would bring me into conflict with the senior officers in charge of Stephen’s ­disappearance.

It almost led to me being thrown off the inquiry, and it remains a source of regret that I could have been more forceful in my arguments.

The sergeant had previously worked on a similar type of enquiry involving a missing boy who was roughly the same age.

In that case, however, the boy – also on foot and alone – had managed to walk a far greater distance than the area designated for search in Stephen’s case.

At the briefing that evening I relayed this new information to senior management and expressed my belief that the allocated search parameters were too narrow.

I was told that “experts” had been consulted when establishing the search area. The expert was, in fact, a paediatrician.

When I suggested that ­consulting a topographer would be more beneficial than a ­paediatrician and reiterated the distance covered by the boy in the other case, I was met with icy glares and even icier responses. “That’s the advice we’ve been given and that’s what we’ll stick to,” I was told in no uncertain terms.

By this time I could feel ­colleagues almost creating a physical space around me as a means of distancing themselves from my suggestions.

Throughout my police service I’d never shied from conflict and besides, this was too important to remain silent about.

I forcefully made my point again that a different type of expert should be consulted and have the search parameters redrawn, but I wasn’t going to alter their opinions.

As I made a final futile effort to change their minds I was nudged by a colleague who whispered to me: “Shut it, you’re about to get binned.” In other words, thrown off the inquiry.

On October 3, 1988, some 16 days after he’d gone missing, Stephen was found dead by a ­passing ­hillwalker.

He was curled up in a ditch, possibly trying to shelter from the cold. He was six miles from the camp and one mile out of the established search parameters.

If a chain is only as strong as the weakest link then the chain relating to Stephen’s ­disappearance was weak from the outset and remained that way for the length of the enquiry.

There were so many “what ifs” and had some of them been acted upon, Stephen’s life might have been saved.

Why didn’t Stephen’s aunt and uncle keep a closer watch over him at the camp?

Why didn’t the person who’d seen him climbing a fence to the outside of the camp intervene?

Why didn’t any of the four motorists who saw a small, ­unaccompanied young boy ­walking a busy road not check to see if he was okay or tell police?

Why did the police limit the search area to five miles and take three days to make use of a ­specially equipped helicopter?

Why wasn’t I more aggressive in demanding the search area be extended? The only salve to my own conscience, I suppose, is that no matter how much I protested, the senior officers in charge had made their minds up and would never have changed course.

At the subsequent fatal ­accident inquiry, the officers in charge conceded that should the same situation arise, they would adopt a different approach.

Why do I think Stephen ran away? I think he was a little boy who was missing his mother and father, who was homesick and who was trying to make his way home to Hamilton, which makes the whole incident even sadder.

As I said, some inquiries remain with you.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/crime/the-case-i-cant-forget-former-detective-878371
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 17, 2018, 05:30:54 AM
Makes you think doesn't it?  "Why do I think Stephen ran away? I think he was a little boy who was missing his mother and father, who was homesick and who was trying to make his way home to Hamilton, which makes the whole incident even sadder."  Incredible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 17, 2018, 09:29:45 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 17, 2018, 05:30:54 AM
Makes you think doesn't it?  "Why do I think Stephen ran away? I think he was a little boy who was missing his mother and father, who was homesick and who was trying to make his way home to Hamilton, which makes the whole incident even sadder."  Incredible.

Indeed so.

No CCTV cameras in those days to record the eye witnesses on their journey or the passage of the man they saw walking and holding a little boy by the hand.

But what I cannot dismiss is the testimony that a little boy who could not tie his own laces managed to remove his shoes then retie the laces with a double knot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on August 17, 2018, 01:23:45 PM
This interview was taken with a murderer within days of killing his pregnant wife and two daughters aged 3 and 4.


Shanann's Facebook account painted a portrait of a happy family, with a constant feed of photos and videos of her family, friends and herself. Her comments were typically upbeat, saying how happy she was, whether she was running errands, playing with her kids or promoting a health program.

She posted selfies of her and her husband smiling in restaurants, in front of the ocean on vacation and at their house. On one from May 5, she wrote: "I love this man! He's my ROCK!"

She posted a photo on June 19 of some texts with her husband after sending him a sonogram. He replied that he loved the baby already.

She posted: "I love Chris! He's the best dad us girls could ask for."

https://abc11.com/timeline-all-we-know-about-the-watts-family-and-the-killings/3979909/

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/16/colorado-man-arrested-after-pregnant-wife-2-children-vanish.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6069735/Chilling-final-picture-posted-murdered-mom-Shanann-Watts-shows-doll-wrapped-FUNERAL-SHROUD.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 17, 2018, 02:28:17 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on August 17, 2018, 01:23:45 PM
This interview was taken with a murderer within days of killing his pregnant wife and two daughters aged 3 and 4.


Shanann's Facebook account painted a portrait of a happy family, with a constant feed of photos and videos of her family, friends and herself. Her comments were typically upbeat, saying how happy she was, whether she was running errands, playing with her kids or promoting a health program.

She posted selfies of her and her husband smiling in restaurants, in front of the ocean on vacation and at their house. On one from May 5, she wrote: "I love this man! He's my ROCK!"

She posted a photo on June 19 of some texts with her husband after sending him a sonogram. He replied that he loved the baby already.

She posted: "I love Chris! He's the best dad us girls could ask for."

https://abc11.com/timeline-all-we-know-about-the-watts-family-and-the-killings/3979909/

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/16/colorado-man-arrested-after-pregnant-wife-2-children-vanish.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6069735/Chilling-final-picture-posted-murdered-mom-Shanann-Watts-shows-doll-wrapped-FUNERAL-SHROUD.html

It's not quite right, is it? I just can't explain why. It must be similar to the 'gut feeling' that some policemen get. A hint which leads them to look a little more closely at that person.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 17, 2018, 06:14:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 17, 2018, 02:28:17 PM
It's not quite right, is it? I just can't explain why. It must be similar to the 'gut feeling' that some policemen get. A hint which leads them to look a little more closely at that person.
It’s “not quite right” because you were watching it with the benefit of hindsight.  You obviously think very highly of yourself, that you share the same “gut feeling” as some expert police officers. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 17, 2018, 06:35:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 17, 2018, 06:14:24 PM
It’s “not quite right” because you were watching it with the benefit of hindsight.  You obviously think very highly of yourself, that you share the same “gut feeling” as some expert police officers.

Don't you get them? My first strong one was Gordon Wardell.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 17, 2018, 06:54:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 17, 2018, 06:35:38 PM
Don't you get them? My first strong one was Gordon Wardell.
You only ever remember the gut feelings when you were right, you conveniently forget the ones when you were wrong, but well done for spotting Chris Watts was a murderer from the video, after he confessed.  Very impressive!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 17, 2018, 06:56:06 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 17, 2018, 06:35:38 PM
Don't you get them? My first strong one was Gordon Wardell.

I find my reaction to the McCanns odd because as a long term member of Liberty and someone who has campaigned for years for prisoners convicted of miscarriages of justice my default position is giving individuals the benefit of the doubt until I’m proved wrong. Right from the beginning though I strongly felt there was something we were not being told.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 17, 2018, 07:01:39 PM
I prefer to make my decisions based on evidence rather than gut feeling.. Aka... Guesswork.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 17, 2018, 07:08:36 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 17, 2018, 06:56:06 PM
I find my reaction to the McCanns odd because as a long term member of Liberty and someone who has campaigned for years for prisoners convicted of miscarriages of justice my default position is giving individuals the benefit of the doubt until I’m proved wrong. Right from the beginning though I strongly felt there was something we were not being told.

I certainly share your opinion that your reaction to the McCanns is decidedly odd.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 17, 2018, 07:14:30 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 17, 2018, 06:56:06 PM
I find my reaction to the McCanns odd because as a long term member of Liberty and someone who has campaigned for years for prisoners convicted of miscarriages of justice my default position is giving individuals the benefit of the doubt until I’m proved wrong. Right from the beginning though I strongly felt there was something we were not being told.

Don't worry about finding it odd... I can explain it.... Basically suffering  from an acute case of confusion.... Your signature talks of knowing suspects are guilty when the available evidence doesn't support it...and yet you are concerned  with miscarriages of justice...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 17, 2018, 07:16:19 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 17, 2018, 06:56:06 PM
I find my reaction to the McCanns odd because as a long term member of Liberty and someone who has campaigned for years for prisoners convicted of miscarriages of justice my default position is giving individuals the benefit of the doubt until I’m proved wrong. Right from the beginning though I strongly felt there was something we were not being told.
Why ditch the benefit of the doubt and the presumption of innocence just in this case though?  Nice bit of virtue signalling btw..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 17, 2018, 07:20:30 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 17, 2018, 06:56:06 PM
I find my reaction to the McCanns odd because as a long term member of Liberty and someone who has campaigned for years for prisoners convicted of miscarriages of justice my default position is giving individuals the benefit of the doubt until I’m proved wrong. Right from the beginning though I strongly felt there was something we were not being told.

How do you feel your fellow members of liberty would feel seeing Cipriano appearing in court... Having been beaten black and blue... When the only evidence was a confession..

Do you think you should reconsider your membership
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 17, 2018, 07:22:32 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 17, 2018, 07:01:39 PM
I prefer to make my decisions based on evidence rather than gut feeling.. Aka... Guesswork.

I haven't made any decisions. I don't know what crime was committed or who did it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 17, 2018, 07:24:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 17, 2018, 07:22:32 PM
I haven't made any decisions. I don't know what crime was committed or who did it.

But you have decided you don't believe kate when she says the window was open
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 17, 2018, 07:28:14 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 17, 2018, 07:08:36 PM
I certainly share your opinion that your reaction to the McCanns is decidedly odd.

She shoots and she scores ! Bit of an open goal though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 17, 2018, 07:30:20 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 17, 2018, 07:22:32 PM
I haven't made any decisions. I don't know what crime was committed or who did it.

Based on the evidence I have decided, abduction is way ahead most likely..... W and W.... Unlikely but possible... Parenatal involvement near, zero
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 17, 2018, 07:33:20 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 17, 2018, 07:24:23 PM
But you have decided you don't believe kate when she says the window was open

You may think that, but in my opinion it's not something I have said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 17, 2018, 07:38:10 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 17, 2018, 07:20:30 PM
How do you feel your fellow members of liberty would feel seeing Cipriano appearing in court... Having been beaten black and blue... When the only evidence was a confession..

Do you think you should reconsider your membership

TBH I don’t think Liberty would touch Cipriano ( interesting you don’t think she deserves a christian name ) with a bargepole. Too many changes of story.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 17, 2018, 07:46:08 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 17, 2018, 07:38:10 PM
TBH I don’t think Liberty would touch Cipriano ( interesting you don’t think she deserves a christian name ) with a bargepole. Too many changes of story.

that wasnt the question I asked...you were unable to answer that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 17, 2018, 08:49:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 17, 2018, 08:20:08 PM
It;s not my opinion. It's your opinion of my opinion.
And other's jumping to conclusions about your opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 17, 2018, 08:59:18 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 17, 2018, 08:57:53 PM
of course gunit does not have to reply   so Im free to state my opinion on what her reply would be
Davel ease up a bit. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 17, 2018, 09:05:06 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 17, 2018, 06:35:38 PM
Don't you get them? My first strong one was Gordon Wardell.

That guy just murdered his wife and children and stands like nothing is wrong... OMG!! 

I get them a lot G... you can spot them a mile off... I found the police suspicions to be spot on  on many occasions. This page if you scroll down will show how they suspected byt the tiny wee inconsistances- inexplicable.. pure brilliance.

snip

Police suspicion
Early during the investigation, police began to suspect that Gordon Wardell's story was not all that it seemed. Wardell had previously been convicted of a serious sexual assault and grievous bodily harm in the 1970s for which he had spent time in prison. This had brought him under suspicion. Members of the press had also discovered this and raised questions about it during press conferences.[8]

During the police reconstruction of the night before the murder, Wardell visited a public house in Coventry called The Brooklands, but none of the staff nor customers remembered seeing Wardell in the pub.[9]

The manner under which Wardell had been found tied and gagged in his home also didn't make sense to investigating officers. He had described being attacked by two men approaching him from the side, just after he had entered his house. Officers noticed that there wasn't enough room near the door for two men to stand or hide.[10]

Wardell had been found by police in his underpants, tied and gagged on the living room floor. It didn't make sense that police found Wardell's clothes and shoes had been placed carefully to one side near where he was found.[11]

Wardell had stated that he had been made unconscious by a drug administered via cloth that had been placed over his face. The drug had left him unconscious for several hours until police arrived the following morning. Experts had stated that there wasn't a drug that could be administered this way that would sedate Wardell for any more than a few minutes. A drug could have been injected but would have required medical knowledge and wouldn't have lasted for more than seven hours.[12]

Police became aware that Wardell had been visiting prostitutes in the red light district of Coventry. Two of the prostitutes came forward to tell Police that they recognised Wardell from regular visits he'd made to them.[13]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Carol_Wardell

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 17, 2018, 09:08:33 PM
And then leave it at that and get onto another subject.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on August 17, 2018, 09:27:04 PM
I know its Friday but can we keep posts constructive please.  TY
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 07:21:38 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 17, 2018, 08:49:53 PM
And other's jumping to conclusions about your opinion.

They are doomed to fail in my opinion. Only I know what I think and I ain't telling.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 18, 2018, 07:28:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 07:21:38 AM
They are doomed to fail in my opinion. Only I know what I think and I ain't telling.
It doesn’t take a genius to work out your views, you’ve dropped enough hints over the years.  Meanwhile I am an open book so if anyone wants to know my opinion on anything just ask...  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 07:40:04 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 18, 2018, 07:28:48 AM
It doesn’t take a genius to work out your views, you’ve dropped enough hints over the years.  Meanwhile I am an open book so if anyone wants to know my opinion on anything just ask...  8(0(*

Many have said they know what I think, but that does't mean they're right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 18, 2018, 08:00:09 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 07:40:04 AM
Many have said they know what I think, but that does't mean they're right.
You prefer to play it coy, but most of us weren’t born yesterday and are pretty good at working it out.  But no matter, if that’s the way you want to play it, your prerogative I guess.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 08:01:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 07:40:04 AM
Many have said they know what I think, but that does't mean they're right.
Challenging!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 18, 2018, 08:23:46 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 08:01:48 AM
Challenging!
Not really.  Do you think if G-Unit was open and honest about her views on this case we would all be shocked and surprised?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 09:04:48 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 18, 2018, 08:23:46 AM
Not really.  Do you think if G-Unit was open and honest about her views on this case we would all be shocked and surprised?
Why I said challenging was that from now on I'm really going to look for opinion in G-unit's posts.  OK I think we have understood her and I'd be surprised if we were wrong, but I'd also love to think we could convert a sceptic into a supporter. 
That would surprise me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 18, 2018, 09:12:34 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 09:04:48 AM
Why I said challenging was that from now on I'm really going to look for opinion in G-unit's posts.  OK I think we have understood her and I'd be surprised if we were wrong, but I'd also love to think we could convert a sceptic into a supporter. 
That would surprise me.

It would be even better if we could convert a supporter into a sceptic, IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 18, 2018, 09:15:18 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 18, 2018, 09:12:34 AM
It would be even better if we could convert a supporter into a sceptic, IMO.
try me - I’m ripe for conversion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 18, 2018, 09:24:32 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 18, 2018, 09:12:34 AM
It would be even better if we could convert a supporter into a sceptic, IMO.

IMO there are only 2 things that might bring about a conversion -
1 Appearance of a live Madeleine.
2 Conviction of a perpetrator.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 09:46:14 AM
Quote from: jassi on August 18, 2018, 09:24:32 AM
IMO there are only 2 things that might bring about a conversion -
1 Appearance of a live Madeleine.
2 Conviction of a perpetrator.
IMO there are only 2 things that might bring about a conversion of me to a true sceptic

1. a confession by the McCanns or one of the Tapas  friends.

2. A conviction against the McCanns in the UK.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 18, 2018, 10:06:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 07:40:04 AM
Many have said they know what I think, but that does't mean they're right.

Untilnyou are more open with your views w e cannot be shown to be wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 10:35:48 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 18, 2018, 10:06:38 AM
Untilnyou are more open with your views w e cannot be shown to be wrong

I don't think I'm secretive at all. I've given my views on more than one occasion but people choose to disbelieve me imo. It seems saying 'I don't know' isn't acceptable for some reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 18, 2018, 10:38:18 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 10:35:48 AM
I don't think I'm secretive at all. I've given my views on more than one occasion but people choose to disbelieve me imo. It seems saying 'I don't know' isn't acceptable for some reason.

It's perfectly acceptable... Then if you don't know if Kate us, telling the truth Re the window you are, sceptical... Which makes you a sceptic... No insult
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 10:57:34 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 18, 2018, 10:38:18 AM
It's perfectly acceptable... Then if you don't know if Kate us, telling the truth Re the window you are, sceptical... Which makes you a sceptic... No insult

I have said I don't know what happened to Madeleine and therefore I don't know who contributed to her disappearance. You want to talk about just one incident.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 18, 2018, 11:00:05 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 10:57:34 AM
I have said I don't know what happened to Madeleine and therefore I don't know who contributed to her disappearance. You want to talk about just one incident.


That one incident is what the abduction theory stands on it seems.imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 18, 2018, 11:02:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 10:57:34 AM
I have said I don't know what happened to Madeleine and therefore I don't know who contributed to her disappearance. You want to talk about just one incident.

It's a defining statement... You obviously  don't believe  her.. Fair enough
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 18, 2018, 11:47:48 AM
Quote from: barrier on August 18, 2018, 11:00:05 AM

That one incident is what the abduction theory stands on it seems.imo


IMO It was the beginning of a narrative to cover the fact that they had left a door unlocked- To remove the woke and wandered version. which could have had them arrested. ALL the Tapas KNEW they had done wrong by their children, and were afraid of the consequenses. IF it were in the UK a whole different story would have emerged. The whole lot of them would have been invited to a police station. The social work would have been called immediately. This what they also knew, hence why they went down the 'we are victims here' the police are not doing anything oh help us find our child.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 11:51:12 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 18, 2018, 11:02:01 AM
It's a defining statement... You obviously  don't believe  her.. Fair enough
Why should she?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 18, 2018, 11:59:04 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 11:51:12 AM
Why should she?

She doesn't have to ...I believe  it because IMO ...based on the evidence... Kate is telling the truth
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 18, 2018, 12:05:05 PM
I suppose an open window carries the same weight in evidence as does the unlocked door for woke wandered and accident and body being hid...

All evidence I guess... 8**8:/:
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 18, 2018, 12:23:58 PM
At this stage it is probably appropriate to call to mind an interesting thread and the words of a member who contributed many worthwhile and interesting posts which won the respect of all ...


GA got this bit wrong. KM's prints were not "in a position of opening the window".
Her 5 prints were actually all on the glass.
Amaral and his break-in expert mistakenly used a photo of a GNR print from the edge of the lounge sliding door (thats how they get "in a position of opening") and treated it as KM's on the bedroom window.
KM is 100% innocent IMO she genuinely found the window already open and leaned on it exactly as she says.
JT likewise, 100% innocent, genuinely passed the chat and saw innocentman carrying his 2yr-old IMO.
Pegasus
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3539.msg147991#msg147991
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 18, 2018, 12:31:15 PM
Peg, was offering his opinion as we all do on certain  matters. It appears if your opinion is against the Tapas version/explanations  you are a 'not nice 'poster. Just my observation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 18, 2018, 12:32:55 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 18, 2018, 12:23:58 PM
At this stage it is probably appropriate to call to mind an interesting thread and the words of a member who contributed many worthwhile and interesting posts which won the respect of all ...


GA got this bit wrong. KM's prints were not "in a position of opening the window".
Her 5 prints were actually all on the glass.
Amaral and his break-in expert mistakenly used a photo of a GNR print from the edge of the lounge sliding door (thats how they get "in a position of opening") and treated it as KM's on the bedroom window.
KM is 100% innocent IMO she genuinely found the window already open and leaned on it exactly as she says.
JT likewise, 100% innocent, genuinely passed the chat and saw innocentman carrying his 2yr-old IMO.
Pegasus
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3539.msg147991#msg147991

That sounds to be very much your personal opinion, which or may not be shared by others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 18, 2018, 05:21:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 10:57:34 AM
I have said I don't know what happened to Madeleine and therefore I don't know who contributed to her disappearance. You want to talk about just one incident.
In the past you have made it clear that in your opinion stranger abduction is virtually impossible, so that certainly narrows it down a bit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 18, 2018, 05:52:51 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 18, 2018, 12:32:55 PM
That sounds to be very much your personal opinion, which or may not be shared by others.

"At this stage it is probably appropriate to call to mind an interesting thread and the words of a member who contributed many worthwhile and interesting posts which won the respect of all ..."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg481062#msg481062

Indeed it is my personal opinion I really don't care too much if it is shared by you and others or not.

It is my opinion that although on many counts Pegasus and I were coming from diametrically opposite sides of the board as far s/he and his posts everything he said was well thought out, well presented and never offensive.

It is my opinion that Pegasus actually is a highly intelligent truth seeker of the highest integrity who used his analytical mind to best advantage ~ always honest ~ never rude, unkind or disrespectful to other posters.

If others don't share my opinion that is entirely their prerogative but as far as I am concerned Pegasus was a huge asset to this forum and I miss his presence from it very much.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 18, 2018, 05:55:40 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 18, 2018, 05:52:51 PM
"At this stage it is probably appropriate to call to mind an interesting thread and the words of a member who contributed many worthwhile and interesting posts which won the respect of all ..."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg481062#msg481062

Indeed it is my personal opinion I really don't care too much if it is shared by you and others or not.

It is my opinion that although on many counts Pegasus and I were coming from diametrically opposite sides of the board as far s/he and his posts everything he said was well thought out, well presented and never offensive.

It is my opinion that Pegasus actually is a highly intelligent truth seeker of the highest integrity who used his analytical mind to best advantage ~ always honest ~ never rude, unkind or disrespectful to other posters.

If others don't share my opinion that is entirely their prerogative but as far as I am concerned Pegasus was a huge asset to this forum and I miss his presence from it very much.

Before my time but who or what drove him away or did he just lose interest?
Looking back over various threads there have been a lot who have faded away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 06:15:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 18, 2018, 05:21:47 PM
In the past you have made it clear that in your opinion stranger abduction is virtually impossible, so that certainly narrows it down a bit.

I have questioned certain theories which have been put forward to explain it, but it was clearly possible for MBM to leave the apartment without anyone seeing if we accept that she entered it at 5.30 pm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 18, 2018, 06:19:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 06:15:30 PM
I have questioned certain theories which have been put forward to explain it, but it was clearly possible for MBM to leave the apartment without anyone seeing if we accept that she entered it at 5.30 pm.

Is that as far as you have got in 11 years
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 18, 2018, 06:23:33 PM
Quote from: barrier on August 18, 2018, 05:55:40 PM
Before my time but who or what drove him away or did he just lose interest?
Looking back over various threads there have been a lot who have faded away.

Some regenerate  Doctor who style under a different name, though they always show the same traits as in their previous reincarnation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 18, 2018, 06:26:17 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 18, 2018, 06:23:33 PM
Some regenerate  Doctor who style under a different name, though they always show the same traits as in their previous reincarnation.
e
Alice admitting to be one of those
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 18, 2018, 06:33:25 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 18, 2018, 05:52:51 PM
"At this stage it is probably appropriate to call to mind an interesting thread and the words of a member who contributed many worthwhile and interesting posts which won the respect of all ..."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg481062#msg481062

Indeed it is my personal opinion I really don't care too much if it is shared by you and others or not.

It is my opinion that although on many counts Pegasus and I were coming from diametrically opposite sides of the board as far s/he and his posts everything he said was well thought out, well presented and never offensive.

It is my opinion that Pegasus actually is a highly intelligent truth seeker of the highest integrity who used his analytical mind to best advantage ~ always honest ~ never rude, unkind or disrespectful to other posters.

If others don't share my opinion that is entirely their prerogative but as far as I am concerned Pegasus was a huge asset to this forum and I miss his presence from it very much.

Pleased to see that you acknowledge it as just an opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 06:36:37 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 18, 2018, 06:19:35 PM
Is that as far as you have got in 11 years

I've never tried to solve the case, so I don't need to have a complete theory. Eleven years is not a fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 18, 2018, 06:43:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 06:36:37 PM
I've never tried to solve the case, so I don't need to have a complete theory. Eleven years is not a fact.

Imo you haven't come to a conclusion because nothing fits the evidence as you see it... That's because you dint understand  the evidence... Imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 06:59:45 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 18, 2018, 06:33:25 PM
Pleased to see that you acknowledge it as just an opinion.
Pegasus had some amazing opinions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 18, 2018, 07:05:06 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 06:59:45 PM
Pegasus had some amazing opinions.

So do a number of other people, but opinion is all they are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 18, 2018, 07:05:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 06:36:37 PM
I've never tried to solve the case, so I don't need to have a complete theory. Eleven years is not a fact.
How convenient.  What is the purpose of your hours research then?  Oops, a question, mustn’t ask!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 07:14:54 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 18, 2018, 07:05:06 PM
So do a number of other people, but opinion is all they are.
Is that your opinion?  What worried me is fact being passed off as opinion.  The direct opposite of what usually happens, opinion passed off as fact.
If I know a fact but say it is opinion, is that confusing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 07:17:34 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 18, 2018, 06:43:47 PM
Imo you haven't come to a conclusion because nothing fits the evidence as you see it... That's because you dint understand  the evidence... Imo

I do understand the evidence...imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 18, 2018, 07:19:59 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 07:14:54 PM
Is that your opinion?  What worried me is fact being passed off as opinion.  The direct opposite of what usually happens, opinion passed off as fact.
If I know a fact but say it is opinion, is that confusing?

Surely if someone makes out a fact is only their opinion it doesn't matter at all. However if someone tries to pass opinion off as fact then that DOES matter, it matters a lot IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 07:22:13 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 07:17:34 PM
I do understand the evidence...imo.
But you wouldn't make comments about Martin Grime the other day.  So you have a full understanding IYO but won't tell us what you know, is that it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 07:25:35 PM
Quote from: Sunny on August 18, 2018, 07:19:59 PM
Surely if someone makes out a fact is only their opinion it doesn't matter at all. However if someone tries to pass opinion off as fact then that DOES matter, it matters a lot IMO.
I disagree strongly, for it was the thing the police are often looking for, i.e. the person who knows more about the case than they should, they then become the suspect and then the focus of the investigation AFAIK. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 18, 2018, 07:30:50 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 07:25:35 PM
I disagree strongly, for it was the thing the police are often looking for, i.e. the person who knows more about the case than they should, they then become the suspect and then the focus of the investigation AFAIK.

Sorry Robittybob1 I was talking about on here and the rules, not in dealings with the police.  Otherwise I don't understand what you are posting about as regards.  Sorry again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 07:35:28 PM
Quote from: Sunny on August 18, 2018, 07:30:50 PM
Sorry Robittybob1 I was talking about on here and the rules, not in dealings with the police.  Otherwise I don't understand what you are posting about as regards.  Sorry again.
The same rules should apply here.  It is all very well having an opinion but if your opinion is beyond the facts known to the public, I feel we have a duty to bring it to the forum's attention.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2018, 08:18:51 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 07:22:13 PM
But you wouldn't make comments about Martin Grime the other day.  So you have a full understanding IYO but won't tell us what you know, is that it?

I repeat, I do understand the evidence imo. If you want to know which evidence, it's the evidence which Davel says I don't understand. I expect he's got a list.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 18, 2018, 09:05:51 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 07:35:28 PM
The same rules should apply here.  It is all very well having an opinion but if your opinion is beyond the facts known to the public, I feel we have a duty to bring it to the forum's attention.

What do you mean Robittybob1.  Or do you mean that if I said my opinion was that Madeleine was taken by a tall man in a white van with a busted windscreen that would be beyond the known facts so I would need to be brought to the forums attention?

If so that is nothing like I was meaning in my last post to be honest.

Opinions should be clearly marked as opinions and facts should always have a cite to show it is a fact not an opinion. 


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 18, 2018, 09:15:06 PM
it seems there is a new rule on the forum...answerring posts aggressively...which i have broken...what absolute rubbish
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 09:51:12 PM
Quote from: Sunny on August 18, 2018, 09:05:51 PM
What do you mean Robittybob1.  Or do you mean that if I said my opinion was that Madeleine was taken by a tall man in a white van with a busted windscreen that would be beyond the known facts so I would need to be brought to the forums attention?

If so that is nothing like I was meaning in my last post to be honest.

Opinions should be clearly marked as opinions and facts should always have a cite to show it is a fact not an opinion.
Yes you would be pulled up for that.  Well yes I may not have understood your post but that was what I was meaning. 
In a NZ case I identified a person with involvement in the case when he kept making hints he knew more than what was in the police file.
The only reason I knew what was in the police file was that earlier I was able to tell this girl knew more about the case than was in the books about it, and I emailed her and she told me she had a pirated copy of the file.  One forum member led me to the other.

With that experience I was conscious it is possible a person or persons involved in the McCann case could come onto the forums to discuss the case. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 18, 2018, 09:55:58 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 09:51:12 PM
Yes you would be pulled up for that.  Well yes I may not have understood your post but that was what I was meaning. 
In a NZ case I identified a person with involvement in the case when he kept making hints he knew more than what was in the police file.
The only reason I knew what was in the police file was that earlier I was able to tell this girl knew more about the case than was in the books about it, and I emailed her and she told me she had a pirated copy of the file.  One forum member led me to the other.

With that experience I was conscious it is possible a person or persons involved in the McCann case could come onto the forums to discuss the case.

Ah now I understand your point. To me if someone joined a forum and started doing that then I wouldn't report them to the forum owner I would go direct to the relevant police department though.

Thanks for clarifying that Robittybob1  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 10:00:14 PM
Quote from: Sunny on August 18, 2018, 09:55:58 PM
Ah now I understand your point. To me if someone joined a forum and started doing that then I wouldn't report them to the forum owner I would go direct to the relevant police department though.

Thanks for clarifying that Robittybob1  8((()*/
I don't think it made any difference in the end, but I have to pat myself on the back now and then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 18, 2018, 10:13:29 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 18, 2018, 09:15:06 PM
it seems there is a new rule on the forum...answerring posts aggressively...which i have broken...what absolute rubbish

It’s not a new rule. Aggressive posting causes problems, don’t do it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on August 18, 2018, 10:40:43 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 18, 2018, 10:00:14 PM
I don't think it made any difference in the end, but I have to pat myself on the back now and then.

No it made it instantly clear to me. You have a well deserved pat on the back there Robittybob1.

Thanks for taking the time to explain it to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 18, 2018, 10:43:53 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 18, 2018, 10:13:29 PM
It’s not a new rule. Aggressive posting causes problems, don’t do it.
”Don’t do it please” is a less aggressive way of asking...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on August 18, 2018, 10:51:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 18, 2018, 10:43:53 PM
”Don’t do it please” is a less aggressive way of asking...

It’s not asking.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 18, 2018, 11:29:34 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on August 18, 2018, 10:51:43 PM
It’s not asking.
Ooops, sorry sir.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 03, 2018, 04:54:26 AM
Quote from: Sunny on August 18, 2018, 10:40:43 PM
No it made it instantly clear to me. You have a well deserved pat on the back there Robittybob1.

Thanks for taking the time to explain it to me.
Do you think persons involved in the McCann case would venture onto the forum to get a sense of how close the police might be at catching them?
As an afterthought this could be like Judas being one of Jesus' disciples. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on September 03, 2018, 05:56:11 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 03, 2018, 04:54:26 AM
Do you think persons involved in the McCann case would venture onto the forum to get a sense of how close the police might be at catching them?
As an afterthought this could be like Judas being one of Jesus' disciples.

No I don't Rob.  We don't know what is happening with the police investigations so what difference would it make.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 03, 2018, 06:06:40 AM
Quote from: Sunny on September 03, 2018, 05:56:11 AM
No I don't Rob.  We don't know what is happening with the police investigations so what difference would it make.
Well as I said it did happen once before in NZ, and it was what Lori was worried about when she reported Robert Murat to the PJ, the possible involvement in the investigation of someone possibly responsible for the abduction of Madeleine.  The police obviously think it is possible to get that feed back loop going.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on September 03, 2018, 06:16:15 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 03, 2018, 06:06:40 AM
Well as I said it did happen once before in NZ, and it was what Lori was worried about when she reported Robert Murat to the PJ, the possible involvement in the investigation of someone possibly responsible for the abduction of Madeleine.  The police obviously think it is possible to get that feed back loop going.

I know what you mean Rob and of course that was why Ian Huntley who is convicted of murdering Holly and Jessica was helpful to the police IMO.  I don't know if you have seen his television interview before he was caught but it is creepy and I actually thought so at the time.

With this many years down the line and no coverage of the actual police investigation going on I can't see the point in the perpetrator joining a forum unless he is looking on there for another reason, gloating etc.

Also of course there are so many fora on the McCann case to chose from. When I started looking for a forum to chose I found at least 6 dedicated ones and regular threads within others too.

I chose here because it seemed a nice mix of supporters and sceptics. Sometimes it is not so nice of course
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 03, 2018, 12:36:51 PM
Quote from: Sunny on September 03, 2018, 06:16:15 AM
I know what you mean Rob and of course that was why Ian Huntley who is convicted of murdering Holly and Jessica was helpful to the police IMO.  I don't know if you have seen his television interview before he was caught but it is creepy and I actually thought so at the time.

With this many years down the line and no coverage of the actual police investigation going on I can't see the point in the perpetrator joining a forum unless he is looking on there for another reason, gloating etc.

Also of course there are so many fora on the McCann case to chose from. When I started looking for a forum to chose I found at least 6 dedicated ones and regular threads within others too.

I chose here because it seemed a nice mix of supporters and sceptics. Sometimes it is not so nice of course

In my opinion you made exactly the right choice for the simple reason that the UK Justice Forum is unique in allowing members of all shades of opinion the opportunity to express a view.
Real freedom of expression in action within the limits of the decency demanded by forum rules and of course the libel laws.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 03, 2018, 07:40:21 PM
Alfred Underwood, defending, said Mr Dure accepted that Mr Farhad was not a paedophile, which was "nowhere suggested" in the Facebook message read out in court.

The victim then produced a screenshot of the post on his mobile phone.

It showed the words "grooming teenagers" had been deleted from the original published message at some stage.

Mr Dure then changed his plea to guilty.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-45395607

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 03, 2018, 09:26:11 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 03, 2018, 07:40:21 PM
Alfred Underwood, defending, said Mr Dure accepted that Mr Farhad was not a paedophile, which was "nowhere suggested" in the Facebook message read out in court.

The victim then produced a screenshot of the post on his mobile phone.

It showed the words "grooming teenagers" had been deleted from the original published message at some stage.

Mr Dure then changed his plea to guilty.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-45395607
" "grooming teenagers" seems rather a mild accusation but the fact he had tried to lie to the judge seems to be the major crime.  Did I get that right?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 03, 2018, 09:50:07 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 03, 2018, 09:26:11 PM
" "grooming teenagers" seems rather a mild accusation but the fact he had tried to lie to the judge seems to be the major crime.  Did I get that right?

Only in part. Try telling "it was only a mild accusation" to the plaintiff. Better yet tell it to The Marines cos The Sailors will not piggin well believe it.
Well taking the piss out of the judiciary is never wise. There is no statute of limitations in UK.
What happened was the defendant changed his plea from not guilty to guilty . Join up the dots yourself but this is not the only case of it's kind. Plenty enough for dossier compilers to suffer from severe bouts of ring twitter and like Muhammed Ali once said "You can run but you can't hide". ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2018, 09:55:10 PM
 
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 03, 2018, 09:50:07 PM
Only in part. Try telling "it was only a mild accusation" to the plaintiff. Better yet tell it to The Marines cos The Sailors will not piggin well believe it.
Well taking the piss out of the judiciary is never wise. There is no statute of limitations in UK.
What happened was the defendant changed his plea from not guilty to guilty . Join up the dots yourself but this is not the only case of it's kind. Plenty enough for dossier compilers to suffer from severe bouts of ring twitter and like Muhammed Ali once said "You can run but you can't hide". ?{)(**
*%87 (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 03, 2018, 10:04:15 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 03, 2018, 09:50:07 PM
Only in part. Try telling "it was only a mild accusation" to the plaintiff. Better yet tell it to The Marines cos The Sailors will not piggin well believe it.
Well taking the piss out of the judiciary is never wise. There is no statute of limitations in UK.
What happened was the defendant changed his plea from not guilty to guilty . Join up the dots yourself but this is not the only case of it's kind. Plenty enough for dossier compilers to suffer from severe bouts of ring twitter and like Muhammed Ali once said "You can run but you can't hide". ?{)(**
You know a lot more about the law than I do, but wasn't there the justification of something like "reasonable conclusion".  Steve would have had some interaction with the person he was accusing.  Had he presented his evidence rather than lying about what he had written would that have made a difference.

Looking this "Stevie Trap" up on YouTube he seems to have had a lot of success in setting up these stings. 

Can you say a person was "grooming teenagers" in a text if you have reasonable grounds to believe that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2018, 10:18:35 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 03, 2018, 10:04:15 PM
You know a lot more about the law than I do, but wasn't there the justification of something like "reasonable conclusion".  Steve would have had some interaction with the person he was accusing.  Had he presented his evidence rather than lying about what he had written would that have made a difference.

Looking this "Stevie Trap" up on YouTube he seems to have had a lot of success in setting up these stings. 

Can you say a person was "grooming teenagers" in a text if you have reasonable grounds to believe that?
I think this case is far more likely to put the willies up the sceptic twitter army than the dossier compilers.  I don’t get why this story would be of any concern to them whatsoever... *%6^
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 03, 2018, 10:23:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 03, 2018, 10:18:35 PM
I think this case is far more likely to put the willies up the sceptic twitter army than the dossier compilers.  I don’t get why this story would be of any concern to them whatsoever... *%6^
It definitely had some similarity to the Brenda Leyland case as one YT channel suggested that a person who Stevie Trap had outed committed suicide 4 days later.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2018, 10:41:59 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 03, 2018, 10:23:42 PM
It definitely had some similarity to the Brenda Leyland case as one YT channel suggested that a person who Stevie Trap had outed committed suicide 4 days later.
The dossier compilers did not have a youtube channel.  They also made no false claims as far as I’m aware. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 03, 2018, 10:51:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 03, 2018, 10:41:59 PM
The dossier compilers did not have a youtube channel.  They also made no false claims as far as I’m aware.

That is scarcely a definitive argument, unless you are a member of the inner sanctum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 03, 2018, 10:59:25 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 03, 2018, 10:51:36 PM
That is scarcely a definitive argument, unless you are a member of the inner sanctum.
Awareness is also dependent on recall.  "They also made no false claims as far as I’m aware"   Could be a case of bad memory. Personally I have no idea whether that was the truth or not, I've never concerned myself to check whether they never made no false claims.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2018, 11:29:26 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 03, 2018, 10:51:36 PM
That is scarcely a definitive argument, unless you are a member of the inner sanctum.
Well put it this way - are you aware of any false claims made by the dossier compilers that have since got into the public domain and caused trouble for those individuals?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 04, 2018, 12:11:05 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 03, 2018, 11:29:26 PM
Well put it this way - are you aware of any false claims made by the dossier compilers that have since got into the public domain and caused trouble for those individuals?
I thought you would have known by now that Alice isn't into research as much as he is into showing up the faults in your arguments.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 04, 2018, 11:30:26 AM
I've been reading Alice Purjorick's posts and I found this one a true classic http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7768.msg363967#msg363967
Quote from: sadie on November 14, 2016, 12:17:08 AM
On about killing again, Alice?   What ever is the matter with you ?

Alice:
Do you mean apart from being a brainless, drunken, homicidal maniac ?


That is so funny.  Sorry Sadie.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on September 04, 2018, 12:44:18 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 03, 2018, 11:29:26 PM
Well put it this way - are you aware of any false claims made by the dossier compilers that have since got into the public domain and caused trouble for those individuals?

I was suggesting they need to be a little less cock sure that they have coppered all their bets.
Nothing more nothing less.
As some appeared to be maintaining a hull down attitude it may well have dawned on them too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2018, 05:58:59 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 04, 2018, 12:11:05 AM
I thought you would have known by now that Alice isn't into research as much as he is into showing up the faults in your arguments.
Faults?  My arguments are faultless!  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2018, 06:04:38 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on September 04, 2018, 12:44:18 PM
I was suggesting they need to be a little less cock sure that they have coppered all their bets.
Nothing more nothing less.
As some appeared to be maintaining a hull down attitude it may well have dawned on them too.
As I said, the dossier compilers made no false claims as far as I’m aware.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 04, 2018, 06:17:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2018, 06:04:38 PM
As I said, the dossier compilers made no false claims as far as I’m aware.

What was in it then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2018, 08:49:37 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 04, 2018, 06:17:53 PM
What was in it then?
A bunch of hateful and abusive tweets and social media posts about the McCanns, from what I can gather.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 06, 2018, 01:26:51 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2018, 08:49:37 PM
A bunch of hateful and abusive tweets and social media posts about the McCanns, from what I can gather.

No names, no pack drill then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 06, 2018, 01:41:10 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 06, 2018, 01:26:51 PM
No names, no pack drill then.

No context either I suspect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 15, 2018, 05:47:13 PM
So it's not always all sweetness and light following an abduction.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6169489/Sarah-repeatedly-raped-twice-forced-marriage-EIGHT-abortions.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 15, 2018, 06:13:06 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 15, 2018, 05:47:13 PM
So it's not always all sweetness and light following an abduction.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6169489/Sarah-repeatedly-raped-twice-forced-marriage-EIGHT-abortions.html
This is a particularly heartless and tasteless post IMO.  Who has EVER suggested that it’s always sweetness and light following a child abduction?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 15, 2018, 06:29:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 15, 2018, 06:13:06 PM
This is a particularly heartless and tasteless post IMO.  Whe has EVER suggested that it’s always sweetness and light following a child abduction?

Have you not seen the posts about Madeleine being able to come forward and have her DNA tested when she's 16? Presumably there's an assumption that she's safe and well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 15, 2018, 06:32:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 15, 2018, 06:29:30 PM
Have you not seen the posts about Madeleine being able to come forward and have her DNA tested when she's 16? Presumably there's an assumption that she's safe and well.
Still sounds a bit sneaky.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 15, 2018, 06:36:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 15, 2018, 06:29:30 PM
Have you not seen the posts about Madeleine being able to come forward and have her DNA tested when she's 16? Presumably there's an assumption that she's safe and well.
That does not answer the question I posed.  Read it again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 16, 2018, 11:53:38 AM
http://www.tucsonnewsnow.com/2018/09/15/man-indicted-deaths-isabel-celis-maribel-gonzales/

Taken from her bed by a stranger.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 16, 2018, 06:39:55 PM
Quote from: misty on September 16, 2018, 11:53:38 AM
http://www.tucsonnewsnow.com/2018/09/15/man-indicted-deaths-isabel-celis-maribel-gonzales/

Taken from her bed by a stranger.

Isabel vanished from her bed.
She was taken through a window.
No-one heard a thing, no-one saw a thing.
"Adding to the mystery of Isabel's disappearance is the dearth of forensic clues that were left behind by her kidnapper, or kidnappers." https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3279135/isabel-celis-disappearance-detective-america-maddie-mccann/

Two years after Isabel disappeared an older child also disappeared from a location nearby and the private detective employed by Isabel's parents two days into her disappearance wondered if the two cases were linked.  Sadly they were.

In my opinion the similarities between Madeleine's case and Isabel's case are uncanny.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 16, 2018, 06:50:56 PM
Quote from: misty on September 16, 2018, 11:53:38 AM
http://www.tucsonnewsnow.com/2018/09/15/man-indicted-deaths-isabel-celis-maribel-gonzales/

Taken from her bed by a stranger.
An interesting article from last year, before this development:

"Was Isabel abducted from her window in the night?  Was she taken while her unknowing family members slept in the next room?  Does Isabel’s father’s bizarrely calm demeanor on the 911 call indicate that he may be culpable?  Or, did authorities fixate on her parents and develop tunnel vision early on in the investigation?

How can a child vanish entirely with little to no evidence left behind?  And, most importantly, where is Isabel Celis?"

Yes, there was no evidence of the child having been taken from her bedroom via the window, and yes at least one parent was suspected because of his demeanour.

More criticism for the father here based on his apparently calm attitude and use of the word "abducted"
https://thestir.cafemom.com/politics_views/137622/911_calls_from_isabel_celis

Say no more.


https://truenoirstories.wordpress.com/2017/02/12/isabel-celis/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 16, 2018, 07:16:54 PM
so many parallels...
https://www.kgun9.com/news/crime/three-years-after-the-disappearance-of-isabel-celis-her-parents-still-searching-for-answers
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 16, 2018, 07:20:44 PM
Nearly half of websleuths polled had the parents or family member involved

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/threads/what-happened-to-isabel-celis.173262/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 16, 2018, 07:24:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 16, 2018, 06:50:56 PM
An interesting article from last year, before this development:

"Was Isabel abducted from her window in the night?  Was she taken while her unknowing family members slept in the next room?  Does Isabel’s father’s bizarrely calm demeanor on the 911 call indicate that he may be culpable?  Or, did authorities fixate on her parents and develop tunnel vision early on in the investigation?

How can a child vanish entirely with little to no evidence left behind?  And, most importantly, where is Isabel Celis?"

Yes, there was no evidence of the child having been taken from her bedroom via the window, and yes at least one parent was suspected because of his demeanour.

More criticism for the father here based on his apparently calm attitude and use of the word "abducted"
https://thestir.cafemom.com/politics_views/137622/911_calls_from_isabel_celis

Say no more.


https://truenoirstories.wordpress.com/2017/02/12/isabel-celis/

There isn't much from the McCann sceptic lexicon that is missing from that, is there?  Reading it makes me feel very sad indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 18, 2018, 10:11:59 PM
No relation to MBM so why her name gets a headline is disrespectful to Isabel. THE comments are interesting on that page...

No evidence of abduction of MBM.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 18, 2018, 10:33:13 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on September 18, 2018, 10:11:59 PM
No relation to MBM so why her name gets a headline is disrespectful to Isabel. THE comments are interesting on that page...

No evidence of abduction of MBM.
if it has to be alleged abductor it also has to be "alleged abduction".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on September 18, 2018, 10:35:55 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 18, 2018, 10:33:13 PM
if it has to be alleged abductor it also has to be "alleged abduction".

Rob, English is quite a flexible language. No evidence of abduction is expressing uncertainty over abduction the same as alleged or IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 18, 2018, 10:50:52 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on September 18, 2018, 10:11:59 PM
No relation to MBM so why her name gets a headline is disrespectful to Isabel. THE comments are interesting on that page...

No evidence of abduction of MBM.
Until the suspect showed the police where Isabel’s body was hidden there was no evidence that Isabel had been abducted apart from a missing child, a forced window screen and her parents insistence that she was abducted.  Apart from that, no relevance to Madeleine’s case whatsoever.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 19, 2018, 07:07:29 PM
One for davel and his faith in british justice,incidently I believe it was 40 yrs today Carl Bridgewater was murdered.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1381563/Latest-victim-of-miscarriages-of-justice.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 19, 2018, 07:14:34 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 19, 2018, 07:07:29 PM
One for davel and his faith in british justice,incidently I believe it was 40 yrs today Carl Bridgewater was murdered.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1381563/Latest-victim-of-miscarriages-of-justice.html

you think thats bad.....montclair posted there are no examples of misscarriages of justice in portugal....perhaps they  just dont admit to them....I have a lot of faith in British justice...nothing is perfect
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 20, 2018, 09:13:47 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 15, 2018, 06:13:06 PM
This is a particularly heartless and tasteless post IMO.  Who has EVER suggested that it’s always sweetness and light following a child abduction?


You missed that whole she could have been abducted by a loving caring childless couple? Having the time of her life  and she came to no harm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on September 20, 2018, 09:17:13 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on September 20, 2018, 09:13:47 PM

You missed that whole she could have been abducted by a loving caring childless couple? Having the time of her life  and she came to no harm.

Possibly what the family of an abducted child wish would be so.
And try to keep that thought, rather than think of the worst.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 20, 2018, 09:19:58 PM
Quote from: Erngath on September 20, 2018, 09:17:13 PM
Possibly what the family of an abducted child wish would be so.
And try to keep that thought, rather than think of the worst.

An unwillingness to face up to reality. Is this another aspect of Gerry's mental state.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 20, 2018, 09:23:25 PM
Quote from: Erngath on September 20, 2018, 09:17:13 PM
Possibly what the family of an abducted child wish would be so.
And try to keep that thought, rather than think of the worst.

Or try to make out she is happy, and came to no harm- as once they were found out to be eating and drinking every night leaving their children alone to fend for themselves, the public  were not quite so 'supportive'

I mean one minute they are screaming she is abducted by a gang of paedophiles the next she came to no harm?  yeah O.K.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 20, 2018, 09:26:17 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 20, 2018, 09:19:58 PM
An unwillingness to face up to reality. Is this another aspect of Gerry's mental state.

They have moved on, years ago, they said as much in one of their interviews. Is there really any evidence of Gerrys depression? or are we just getting his own 'story'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 20, 2018, 09:37:37 PM
Between Gerry's depression and Kate sticking pins into an Amaral hate doll, it must be a bundle of fun at chez McCann.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 20, 2018, 10:05:52 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 20, 2018, 09:37:37 PM
Between Gerry's depression and Kate sticking pins into an Amaral hate doll, it must be a bundle of fun at chez McCann.
Why would you expect there to be a bundle of fun at the McCanns?

I knew it wouldn’t be long before Gerry’s depression became a source of mirth for the sceptics.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 10:07:41 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 20, 2018, 10:05:52 PM
Why would you expect there to be a bundle of fun at the McCanns?

I knew it wouldn’t be long before Gerry’s depression became a source of mirth for the sceptics.

Strange he didn’t mention it in Lisbon when it would have been helpful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 20, 2018, 10:29:08 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 10:07:41 PM
Strange he didn’t mention it in Lisbon when it would have been helpful.
And yet so many people believe the McCanns would sell their own grannies to their own advantage. Do you think it only just crossed his mind recently that it would be a good idea to pretend he suffered from depression then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 10:36:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 20, 2018, 10:29:08 PM
And yet so many people believe the McCanns would sell their own grannies to their own advantage. Do you think it only just crossed his mind recently that it would be a good idea to pretend he suffered from depression then?

I really don’t know but if it’s true it’s odd he didn’t mention it in Lisbon. It would certainly have been to his advantage. Why do you think he didn’t ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 20, 2018, 10:39:09 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 10:36:27 PM
I really don’t know but if it’s true it’s odd he didn’t mention it in Lisbon. It would certainly have been to his advantage. Why do you think he didn’t ?
I have no idea, why don’t you contact him and ask him?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 10:44:00 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 20, 2018, 10:39:09 PM
I have no idea, why don’t you contact him and ask him?

But do you agree that it is strange that he didn’t mention his depression in Lisbon ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on September 20, 2018, 10:55:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 20, 2018, 10:05:52 PM
Why would you expect there to be a bundle of fun at the McCanns?

I knew it wouldn’t be long before Gerry’s depression became a source of mirth for the sceptics.

Quite sickening isn't it!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on September 20, 2018, 10:58:01 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 20, 2018, 09:37:37 PM
Between Gerry's depression and Kate sticking pins into an Amaral hate doll, it must be a bundle of fun at chez McCann.

I assume you have a  cite for "Kate sticking pins into an Amaral hate doll"
This is allowed to remain but my post saying some of the posts tonight give me the boak is removed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 10:58:35 PM
Quote from: Erngath on September 20, 2018, 10:55:14 PM

Quite sickening isn't it!

Not a source of mirth, a sense of disbelief.

If he had suffered depression why didn’t he mention it in Lisbon ? Why now ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on September 20, 2018, 11:02:09 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 10:58:35 PM
Not a source of mirth, a sense of disbelief.

If he had suffered depression why didn’t he mention it in Lisbon ? Why now ?

Perhaps his depression has increased, perhaps it is intermittent, perhaps he now just wants to admit to his depression, perhaps as a man he hid his depression, perhaps the invitation to speak about his depression encouraged him to do so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 11:07:23 PM
Quote from: Erngath on September 20, 2018, 11:02:09 PM
Perhaps his depression has increased, perhaps it is intermittent, perhaps he now just wants to admit to his depression, perhaps as a man he hid his depression, perhaps the invitation to speak about his depression encouraged him to do so.

So he would rather lose his and his wife’s Portuguese litigation, and incur hundreds of thousands of euros in costs, rather admit he had, or was, suffering depression ? Is that what you are saying ?

Odd too that Kate didn’t mention Gerry’s depression in Madeleine either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 20, 2018, 11:14:06 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 10:58:35 PM
Not a source of mirth, a sense of disbelief.

If he had suffered depression why didn’t he mention it in Lisbon ? Why now ?
Because male depression is a hot topic right now?  Perhaps has approached by Radio 4 rather than the other way around?   Or do you think he decided one day to call up R4 and demand they make a programme about his depression?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 20, 2018, 11:15:21 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 11:07:23 PM
So he would rather lose his and his wife’s Portuguese litigation, and incur hundreds of thousands of euros in costs, rather admit he had, or was, suffering depression ? Is that what you are saying ?

Odd too that Kate didn’t mention Gerry’s depression in Madeleine either.
OK, why do you think they decided not to give the full on depression sob story in court?  Surely it is what you would have expected of the contempible pair?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 11:17:37 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 20, 2018, 11:15:21 PM
OK, why do you think they decided not to give the full on depression sob story in court?  Surely it is what you would have expected of the contempible pair?

You tell me ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on September 20, 2018, 11:19:37 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 11:07:23 PM
So he would rather lose his and his wife’s Portuguese litigation, and incur hundreds of thousands of euros in costs, rather admit he had, or was, suffering depression ? Is that what you are saying ?

Odd too that Kate didn’t mention Gerry’s depression in Madeleine either.

Perhaps he has never been depressed.
Perhaps he is  just now pretending to be depressed.
Perhaps he just didn't realise how depressed he was/ is.
Perhaps now he is willing to discuss his depression because it is now acceptable for men to share their depression and feelings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 20, 2018, 11:20:03 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 11:17:37 PM
You tell me ?
I’ve already given you my answer, but surely you must ask yourself why such an allegedly money grasping deceitful pair did ‘t lay it i. thick in court re: the depression and suffering they were caused by Amaral.  It must really be a real conundrum for you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 11:24:21 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 20, 2018, 11:20:03 PM
I’ve already given you my answer, but surely you must ask yourself why such an allegedly money grasping deceitful pair did ‘t lay it i. thick in court re: the depression and suffering they were caused by Amaral.  It must really be a real conundrum for you.

Not in the slightest. To claim depression medical evidence would have to have been presented. Of course that wasn’t going to happen because there was none.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 20, 2018, 11:35:19 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 11:24:21 PM
Not in the slightest. To claim depression medical evidence would have to have been presented. Of course that wasn’t going to happen because there was none.
Faking depression for the purposes of getting medical evidence would be pretty easy to do, don’t you think?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 11:49:33 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 20, 2018, 11:35:19 PM
Faking depression for the purposes of getting medical evidence would be pretty easy to do, don’t you think?

If he had depression why would he have to fake anything ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 20, 2018, 11:59:06 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 20, 2018, 11:49:33 PM
If he had depression why would he have to fake anything ?
What???!! This is one of those absurd circular discussions that do my head in.  Just read back and follow the logic and try not to shift the goalposts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 21, 2018, 09:55:04 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 20, 2018, 11:59:06 PM
What???!! This is one of those absurd circular discussions that do my head in.  Just read back and follow the logic and try not to shift the goalposts.

It’s absolutely simple. If Gerry suffered from depression why did he not present supporting evidence of it at the Lisbon hearing where it could have helped his case ? If Gerry had depression why didn’t his wife mention the fact in her ‘ truthful’ book Madeleine ?

It would have been all but impossible for Gerry to retrospectively obtain evidence of depression years down the line if he had not suffered from it during that time. You can’t simply go to your doctor and say ‘ hey I’ve suffered from depression for years, can you provide me with evidence of it ‘. Or do you think you can ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:00:29 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 21, 2018, 09:55:04 AM
It’s absolutely simple. If Gerry suffered from depression why did he not present supporting evidence of it at the Lisbon hearing where it could have helped his case ? If Gerry had depression why didn’t his wife mention the fact in her ‘ truthful’ book Madeleine ?

It would have been all but impossible for Gerry to retrospectively obtain evidence of depression years down the line if he had not suffered from it during that time. You can’t simply go to your doctor and say ‘ hey I’ve suffered from depression for years, can you provide me with evidence of it ‘. Or do you think you can ?
No, but you are arguing at a tangent to my point.  I’ve already told you I have no idea why Gerry didn’t present evidence of his depression in Lisbon.  You seem to think it would have been a shrewd thing to do so as it might have made a difference to the case against Amaral and seem to think that because he didn’t he must be inventing his depression now.  My point is - if he was going to invent his depression at all, then why not when it would have been advantageous to do so, instead of now, when there doesn’t appear to be any advantage to doing so? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 21, 2018, 10:09:00 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:00:29 AM
No, but you are arguing at a tangent to my point.  I’ve already told you I have no idea why Gerry didn’t present evidence of his depression in Lisbon.  You seem to think it would have been a shrewd thing to do so as it might have made a difference to the case against Amaral and seem to think that because he didn’t he must be inventing his depression now.  My point is - if he was going to invent his depression at all, then why not when it would have been advantageous to do so, instead of now, when there doesn’t appear to be any advantage to doing so?

To present invented evidence to a court is a totally different thing from presenting anecdotal musings to a radio programme.

As to there being no advantage to claiming mental health issues now, that is an assumption on your part.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:17:07 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 21, 2018, 10:09:00 AM
To present invented evidence to a court is a totally different thing from presenting anecdotal musings to a radio programme.

As to there being no advantage to claiming mental health issues now, that is an assumption on your part.
As I said earlier, faking depression to get medical evidence  (especially for a medical professional and super especially for a medical professional whose daughter has disappeared and with a sympathetic GP or psychiatrist ) would be a piece of cake IMO.  Do you (who seem to who believe that the McCanns are ostensibly good people who did a bad thing) think that Kate and Gerry are unlikely to really have suffered from depression in the last 11 years?

Also, I can think of no advantage to claiming depression now, can you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on September 21, 2018, 10:21:15 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:17:07 AM
As I said earlier, faking depression to get medical evidence  (especially for a medical professional and super especially for a medical professional whose daughter has disappeared and with a sympathetic GP or psychiatrist ) would be a piece of cake IMO.  Do you (who seem to who believe that the McCanns are ostensibly good people who did a bad thing) think that Kate and Gerry are unlikely to really have suffered from depression in the last 11 years?

Also, I can think of no advantage to claiming depression now, can you?

So you believe people can fake depression?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 21, 2018, 10:25:52 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:17:07 AM
As I said earlier, faking depression to get medical evidence  (especially for a medical professional and super especially for a medical professional whose daughter has disappeared and with a sympathetic GP or psychiatrist ) would be a piece of cake IMO.  Do you (who seem to who believe that the McCanns are ostensibly good people who did a bad thing) think that Kate and Gerry are unlikely to really have suffered from depression in the last 11 years?

Also, I can think of no advantage to claiming depression now, can you?


Are you saying that more than eight years down the line if Gerry went to a ‘sympathetic GP or psychiatrist’ and said ‘listen I’ve been suffering for years with depression but haven’t told you, could you fake some evidence for me to present to a court’  they would ? Really ?

As to the parents suffering depression we can only go on what they say, and they told the Lisbon court that they hadn’t.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:27:32 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on September 21, 2018, 10:21:15 AM
So you believe people can fake depression?
Of course they can.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:30:17 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 21, 2018, 10:25:52 AM

Are you saying that more than eight years down the line if Gerry went to a ‘sympathetic GP or psychiatrist’ and said ‘listen I’ve been suffering for years with depression but haven’t told you, could you fake some evidence for me to present to a court’  they would ? Really ?

As to the parents suffering depression we can only go on what they say, and they told the Lisbon court that they hadn’t.
Don’t be silly please.  What I am saying that if you felt it necessary to win a court case you could before the case came to court visit your GP and say “I believe I am suffering from depression, please refer me, or give me something to alleviate my symptoms”.   

Do you have a cite for Gerry saying he didn’t suffer from depression?  Also, isn’t one of the symptoms of depression being in denial about your depression?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 21, 2018, 10:32:42 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:30:17 AM
Don’t be silly please.  What I am saying that if you felt it necessary to win a court case you could before the case came to court visit your GP and say “I believe I am suffering from depression, please refer me, or give me something to alleviate my symptoms”.   

Do you have a cite for Gerry saying he didn’t suffer from depression?  Also, isn’t one of the symptoms of depression being in denial about your depression?

Don’t you think that that would look rather convenient?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:33:30 AM
“Denial about depression can run so deep that trying to hide it becomes an emotional task in itself. If they ever decide to talk about it, they’ll likely admit they don’t know what’s wrong with them and why they just can’t change the way they feel by themselves. Mental health care is still shamed in most parts of the world. People are not inclined to reach out for help and realize that they need any”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:34:58 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 21, 2018, 10:32:42 AM
Don’t you think that that would look rather convenient?
To you, yes, just as you seem to think this recent revelation is rather convenient.  But if you have proof that you are being treated for depression, is a judge going to decide you’re lying about it - based on it looking convenient?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on September 21, 2018, 10:38:05 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:27:32 AM
Of course they can.

How insulting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 21, 2018, 10:39:17 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on September 21, 2018, 10:38:05 AM
How insulting.


I suspect it would be to one who truly suffers.Mrs Leyland for one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 21, 2018, 10:41:02 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:34:58 AM
To you, yes, just as you seem to think this recent revelation is rather convenient.  But if you have proof that you are being treated for depression, is a judge going to decide you’re lying about it - based on it looking convenient?

If the answer to ‘how long have you been treated for depression’ is ‘a few months’......yes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:55:43 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on September 21, 2018, 10:38:05 AM
How insulting.
Who has been insulted?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 21, 2018, 10:41:02 AM
If the answer to ‘how long have you been treated for depression’ is ‘a few months’......yes.
You can be depressed for years before seeking treatment you know.  You can also be depressed and never seek treatment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:58:06 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 21, 2018, 10:39:17 AM

I suspect it would be to one who truly suffers.Mrs Leyland for one.
So if I say it’s possible to fake an illness then it’s an insult to all those who have suffered from that illness?  What crazy nonsense is this? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 21, 2018, 10:58:22 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:56:35 AM
You can be depressed for years before seeking treatment you know.  You can also be depressed and never seek treatment.

Of course you can but it would look a tad convenient if help was sought just before the court case, don’t you think ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:59:40 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 21, 2018, 10:58:22 AM
Of course you can but it would look a tad convenient if help was sought just before the court case, don’t you think ?
That’s the second time you’ve asked me that question this morning.  My answer remains the same - see above.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2018, 11:03:47 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 21, 2018, 10:39:17 AM

I suspect it would be to one who truly suffers.Mrs Leyland for one.
What IS insulting is deciding to doubt that Gerry McCann has actually suffered from depression just because you don’t like the man.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 21, 2018, 11:07:42 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 21, 2018, 10:17:07 AM
As I said earlier, faking depression to get medical evidence  (especially for a medical professional and super especially for a medical professional whose daughter has disappeared and with a sympathetic GP or psychiatrist ) would be a piece of cake IMO.  Do you (who seem to who believe that the McCanns are ostensibly good people who did a bad thing) think that Kate and Gerry are unlikely to really have suffered from depression in the last 11 years?

Also, I can think of no advantage to claiming depression now, can you?


You can't go by whether the mccs are depressed...it proves nothing

They would be equally depressed if they had been involved in maddie's disappearance in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2018, 11:12:54 AM
Quote from: xtina on September 21, 2018, 11:07:42 AM

You can't go by whether the mccs are depressed...it proves nothing

They would be equally depressed if they had been involved in maddie's disappearance in my opinion.
Why is it so hard for people to follow a discussion and comment on what has been said not on what hasn’t been said?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 21, 2018, 11:21:43 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 21, 2018, 11:12:54 AM
Why is it so hard for people to follow a discussion and comment on what has been said not on what hasn’t been said?

I wondered if I had missed the point...

My point all the same was...they are going to be depressed etc etc etc...whether involved or not...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 21, 2018, 11:35:45 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 21, 2018, 11:03:47 AM
What IS insulting is deciding to doubt that Gerry McCann has actually suffered from depression just because you don’t like the man.

He's not singled out,I'm totally ambivalent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 21, 2018, 01:08:09 PM
Good to see the Sun is the go to paper for accuracy, not.



"Sir Elton John and David Furnish have accepted “significant” libel damages over a newspaper claim that their dog inflicted “Freddy Krueger-like injuries” on a child at a play date.
The couple, who were not at London’s High Court on Friday, brought proceedings against News Group Newspapers (NGN) over a front page story in The Sun on Sunday in February."

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/john-and-david-furnish-accept-libel-damages-over-‘dog-attack’-slur/ar-AAAqeks?ocid=spartandhp
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 22, 2018, 11:05:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 20, 2018, 11:14:06 PM
Because male depression is a hot topic right now?  Perhaps has approached by Radio 4 rather than the other way around?   Or do you think he decided one day to call up R4 and demand they make a programme about his depression?

"Because male depression is a hot topic right now?"  Yes, The McCanns love a bandwagon to jump on- them who want a private family life.

"Or do you think he decided one day to call up R4 and demand they make a programme about his depression?" No!  but maybe his PR guru did...

Why would they do that? welllllllllllllllllllllll now you ask. He may be depressed due to his wee shop closing down, having to pay court fees and losing his companies 'profits' AND having to fork out for ECHR costs. BUTmst of all they need  the victimhood to get SY to keep investigating  loonie toons theories.

One would have to diagose which type of depression he was suffering from. Also, erm who is he on the celeb table,  that people give a toss about him. Well apart from 'Sun' picture lookers.


Gunit, Kate did mention in her book that their sex life suffered- Gerry was.. well ...

This was plastered all over the Sun headlines.. from a couple who just wanted a quiet private family life.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 23, 2018, 12:09:38 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on September 22, 2018, 11:05:39 PM
"Because male depression is a hot topic right now?"  Yes, The McCanns love a bandwagon to jump on- them who want a private family life.

"Or do you think he decided one day to call up R4 and demand they make a programme about his depression?" No!  but maybe his PR guru did...

Why would they do that? welllllllllllllllllllllll now you ask. He may be depressed due to his wee shop closing down, having to pay court fees and losing his companies 'profits' AND having to fork out for ECHR costs. BUTmst of all they need  the victimhood to get SY to keep investigating  loonie toons theories.

One would have to diagose which type of depression he was suffering from. Also, erm who is he on the celeb table,  that people give a toss about him. Well apart from 'Sun' picture lookers.


Gunit, Kate did mention in her book that their sex life suffered- Gerry was.. well ...

This was plastered all over the Sun headlines.. from a couple who just wanted a quiet private family life.

Now that does give you the dry boak  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2018, 12:19:34 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on September 22, 2018, 11:05:39 PM
"Because male depression is a hot topic right now?"  Yes, The McCanns love a bandwagon to jump on- them who want a private family life.

"Or do you think he decided one day to call up R4 and demand they make a programme about his depression?" No!  but maybe his PR guru did...

Why would they do that? welllllllllllllllllllllll now you ask. He may be depressed due to his wee shop closing down, having to pay court fees and losing his companies 'profits' AND having to fork out for ECHR costs. BUTmst of all they need  the victimhood to get SY to keep investigating  loonie toons theories.

One would have to diagose which type of depression he was suffering from. Also, erm who is he on the celeb table,  that people give a toss about him. Well apart from 'Sun' picture lookers.


Gunit, Kate did mention in her book that their sex life suffered- Gerry was.. well ...

This was plastered all over the Sun headlines.. from a couple who just wanted a quiet private family life.
When anyone asks for a good example of a hateful post about the McCanns one couldn’t do much better than cite this one, it ticks virtually all the boxes, well done!  8@??)(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 23, 2018, 08:14:44 AM
According to the Daily Mail;

Gerry McCann to open up about his mental health struggles

According to the BBC Mr McCann will speak about the bond between fathers and daughters and the difficulties men have in articulating sorrow.

According to Gerry McCann;

"I decided it was a good opportunity to say something about the special bond between fathers and daughters, thinking that speaking openly might help other men in similar positions. It feels like the right time.'

A BBC show spokesperson told MailOnline: 'We look at Gerry's experiences, his thoughts and feelings, and the wider context in society of mental health issues surrounding a loss"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6173813/Gerry-McCann-open-mental-health-struggles-Radio-4-interview.htm

I don't think Gerry McCann will be discussing 'his mental health struggles', I think the Daily Mail is making an assumption.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2018, 09:18:53 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 23, 2018, 08:14:44 AM
According to the Daily Mail;

Gerry McCann to open up about his mental health struggles

According to the BBC Mr McCann will speak about the bond between fathers and daughters and the difficulties men have in articulating sorrow.

According to Gerry McCann;

"I decided it was a good opportunity to say something about the special bond between fathers and daughters, thinking that speaking openly might help other men in similar positions. It feels like the right time.'

A BBC show spokesperson told MailOnline: 'We look at Gerry's experiences, his thoughts and feelings, and the wider context in society of mental health issues surrounding a loss"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6173813/Gerry-McCann-open-mental-health-struggles-Radio-4-interview.htm

I don't think Gerry McCann will be discussing 'his mental health struggles', I think the Daily Mail is making an assumption.
What a strange conclusion, why have you decided that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 23, 2018, 10:01:59 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2018, 12:19:34 AM
When anyone asks for a good example of a hateful post about the McCanns one couldn’t do much better than cite this one, it ticks virtually all the boxes, well done!  8@??)(

Hateful?  oh dear hateful does this make me a McCann basher?  My posts which the supporters hate- are all comments made by the McCanns themselves. They created the story - I comment on it. shooting the messenger doesnt absolve the guilty.

Talk of hate- Kate hates quite a lot of people , apart from the 'abductor, she forgave him/them/her. ^*&&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 23, 2018, 10:07:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 23, 2018, 08:14:44 AM
According to the Daily Mail;

Gerry McCann to open up about his mental health struggles

According to the BBC Mr McCann will speak about the bond between fathers and daughters and the difficulties men have in articulating sorrow.

According to Gerry McCann;

"I decided it was a good opportunity to say something about the special bond between fathers and daughters, thinking that speaking openly might help other men in similar positions. It feels like the right time.'

A BBC show spokesperson told MailOnline: 'We look at Gerry's experiences, his thoughts and feelings, and the wider context in society of mental health issues surrounding a loss"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6173813/Gerry-McCann-open-mental-health-struggles-Radio-4-interview.htm

I don't think Gerry McCann will be discussing 'his mental health struggles', I think the Daily Mail is making an assumption.


Public interest story? what? really? nah.  They could have chosen other more worthy people.  He was the father who said it was OK to leave his  children alone- even after his wife wasn't sure about it.  He was the  father who preferred playing Tennis and jogging while his daughter was missing presumed to have been taken by paedophiles.

He is the father who according to his wife and other tapas was not a 'hands on dad'.  Oooops halo slipped for a moment there.

I am not suggesting  he was a bad father. I am looking at what has been said and relaying it.  My Bad
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 23, 2018, 10:53:26 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2018, 09:18:53 AM
What a strange conclusion, why have you decided that?

Read the quotes. Does Gerry McCann mention his mental health or depression?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 23, 2018, 10:57:25 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 23, 2018, 10:53:26 AM
Read the quotes. Does Gerry McCann mention his mental health or depression?

Gerry probably had enough on his mind coping with Kate, and didn't have time to worry about himself.

It seems to me that Gerry is just trying to help others in bad situations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 23, 2018, 12:08:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 23, 2018, 10:57:25 AM
Gerry probably had enough on his mind coping with Kate, and didn't have time to worry about himself.

It seems to me that Gerry is just trying to help others in bad situations.

Not only Gerry, but his sister and many others had to support Kate.

As soon as the book was published, people’s opinions started to change........Kate was very low, she wasn't able to face daily life and Gerry had to go to work. Kate used to go to the church and visit a counsellor, but she didn't go to the shops and had no social life. TC adds she helped with the cooking and with looking after the other two children.... she used to help her brother and sister in law and had to make sure that someone would watch over them when she had to leave........says she did it every time she had days off or a long week-end. Many people came to help.http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2510.0

Kate was in such a bad state that Gerald had to quit his job for some time to care for her. In the summer of 2009 Kate was not well at all as a direct result of reactions to the documentary. She was helpless; she said she'd prefer not to be there.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2304.0

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 23, 2018, 12:14:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 23, 2018, 12:08:45 PM
Not only Gerry, but his sister and many others had to support Kate.

As soon as the book was published, people’s opinions started to change........Kate was very low, she wasn't able to face daily life and Gerry had to go to work. Kate used to go to the church and visit a counsellor, but she didn't go to the shops and had no social life. TC adds she helped with the cooking and with looking after the other two children.... she used to help her brother and sister in law and had to make sure that someone would watch over them when she had to leave........says she did it every time she had days off or a long week-end. Many people came to help.http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2510.0

Kate was in such a bad state that Gerald had to quit his job for some time to care for her. In the summer of 2009 Kate was not well at all as a direct result of reactions to the documentary. She was helpless; she said she'd prefer not to be there.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2304.0


So it very much sounds the book/documentry caused more distress... than losing maddie O M G.........
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 23, 2018, 12:16:29 PM
Quote from: xtina on September 23, 2018, 12:14:34 PM

So it very much sounds the book/documentry caused more distress... than losing maddie O M G.........

Perhaps her book wasn't such a good idea after all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 23, 2018, 12:20:04 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 23, 2018, 12:16:29 PM
Perhaps her book wasn't such a good idea after all.


Her mental state was intact to write her book but there again it involved more money.... 8(0(*

in my opinion..........
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2018, 03:11:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 23, 2018, 10:53:26 AM
Read the quotes. Does Gerry McCann mention his mental health or depression?
Not directly but he says he will talk of his sorrow and grief, why do you suppose he won’t touch on his own mental health issues?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2018, 03:12:30 PM
Quote from: xtina on September 23, 2018, 12:20:04 PM

Her mental state was intact to write her book but there again it involved more money.... 8(0(*

in my opinion..........
What is an intact mental state?  Can depressed people not write books then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 23, 2018, 04:00:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2018, 03:12:30 PM
What is an intact mental state?  Can depressed people not write books then?

Not and just write about themselves and wonderful hubby in my opinion.......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2018, 04:21:31 PM
Quote from: xtina on September 23, 2018, 04:00:06 PM
Not and just write about themselves and wonderful hubby in my opinion.......
Your post is short on reason and long on spite in my opinion....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 23, 2018, 04:28:46 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2018, 04:21:31 PM
Your post is short on reason and long on spite in my opinion....

Not spite at all .........it was..........in my opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 23, 2018, 04:34:27 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 23, 2018, 10:57:25 AM
Gerry probably had enough on his mind coping with Kate, and didn't have time to worry about himself.

It seems to me that Gerry is just trying to help others in bad situations.


What brought on by themselves in my opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on September 23, 2018, 05:18:46 PM
Quote from: xtina on September 23, 2018, 04:34:27 PM

What brought on by themselves in my opinion

Very often people are depressed because of choices they have made.
It doesn't help depressed people to be told it's all their own fault.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 23, 2018, 05:27:20 PM
Quote from: Erngath on September 23, 2018, 05:18:46 PM
Very often people are depressed because of choices they have made.
It doesn't help depressed people to be told it's all their own fault.


Well that all depends... on the choice they made ....we are talking about....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on September 23, 2018, 05:34:37 PM
Quote from: xtina on September 23, 2018, 05:27:20 PM

Well that all depends... on the choice they made ....we are talking about....

They do say confession is good for the soul.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/snow-white-doesnt-live-here-anymore/200902/is-confession-good-your-soul-can-you-be-forgiven (https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/snow-white-doesnt-live-here-anymore/200902/is-confession-good-your-soul-can-you-be-forgiven)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 23, 2018, 05:45:01 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on September 23, 2018, 05:34:37 PM
They do say confession is good for the soul.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/snow-white-doesnt-live-here-anymore/200902/is-confession-good-your-soul-can-you-be-forgiven (https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/snow-white-doesnt-live-here-anymore/200902/is-confession-good-your-soul-can-you-be-forgiven)

Not if you didn't do it.... As some have discovered
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on September 23, 2018, 05:51:27 PM
Quote from: xtina on September 23, 2018, 05:27:20 PM

Well that all depends... on the choice they made ....we are talking about....

No, it doesn't.
If you are depressed because of a choice you made surely the depression will be aggrivated by the fact you made that choice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on September 23, 2018, 06:29:40 PM
Quote from: Erngath on September 23, 2018, 05:51:27 PM
No, it doesn't.
If you are depressed because of a choice you made surely the depression will be aggrivated by the fact you made that choice.
I may be mistaken, but I don't think that is how true depression works.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2018, 06:39:30 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on September 23, 2018, 06:29:40 PM
I may be mistaken, but I don't think that is how true depression works.
Tell us how true depression works then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 23, 2018, 06:42:28 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2018, 06:39:30 PM
Tell us how true depression works then.


Ask gmcc.......he should know in my opinion.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2018, 12:06:16 AM
Quote from: xtina on September 23, 2018, 06:42:28 PM

Ask gmcc.......he should know in my opinion.....
I was asking Shining In Luz who seems to know how true depression works, still haven’t had an answer mind...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 24, 2018, 08:32:08 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2018, 12:06:16 AM
I was asking Shining In Luz who seems to know how true depression works, still haven’t had an answer mind...


Idont know why he feels he is going to help anyone.....

Depression is a common mental disorder...

snip
Express.
Gerry McCann, 50, will talk about the deep sadness he experienced for years in the hopes of raising awareness of the stigma many male mental health sufferers face.

He said: "I decided it was a good opportunity to say something about the special bond between fathers and daughters, thinking that speaking openly might help other men in similar positions. It feels like the right time.


I doubt there are many men about.... who are depressed because of leaving there children alone.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 24, 2018, 08:47:08 AM
i have no idea how many men suffer from depression, but Radio 4 is very much a minority interest audience so I don't suppose that large numbers of  depressed people will be listening to such a program
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2018, 08:48:39 AM
Quote from: xtina on September 24, 2018, 08:32:08 AM

Idont know why he feels he is going to help anyone.....

Depression is a common mental disorder...

snip
Express.
Gerry McCann, 50, will talk about the deep sadness he experienced for years in the hopes of raising awareness of the stigma many male mental health sufferers face.

He said: "I decided it was a good opportunity to say something about the special bond between fathers and daughters, thinking that speaking openly might help other men in similar positions. It feels like the right time.


I doubt there are many men about.... who are depressed because of leaving there children alone.....
A very ignorant post IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on September 24, 2018, 09:05:31 AM
Quote from: jassi on September 24, 2018, 08:47:08 AM
i have no idea how many men suffer from depression, but Radio 4 is very much a minority interest audience so I don't suppose that large numbers of  depressed people will be listening to such a program

Perhaps relatives and friends and even those working with depressed people may be interested in listening to such a programme.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 24, 2018, 09:06:17 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2018, 08:48:39 AM
A very ignorant post IMO.


Well who do you think he is going to help...apart from himself ...in my opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 09:07:30 AM
It helps some people, especially men, to know that they are not alone in suffering depression, for what ever reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 24, 2018, 09:17:00 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 09:07:30 AM
It helps some people, especially men, to know that they are not alone in suffering depression, for what ever reason.

Exactly men can be depressed for many different reasons ...he is not going to cover that....just him....


There are programs on about depression all the time...giving advice.....there are awareness campaigns...

gmcc it seems is only going to be talking about himself....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2018, 09:19:09 AM
Quote from: xtina on September 24, 2018, 09:17:00 AM
Exactly men can be depressed for many different reasons ...he is not going to cover that....just him....


There are programs on about depression all the time...giving advice.....there are awareness campaigns...

gmcc it seems is only going to be talking about himself....
Why not slag him off after you’ve actually heard what he has to say, rather than beforehand when you don’t know anything about the substance of his contribution? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 24, 2018, 09:33:49 AM
Quote from: jassi on September 24, 2018, 08:47:08 AM
i have no idea how many men suffer from depression, but Radio 4 is very much a minority interest audience so I don't suppose that large numbers of  depressed people will be listening to such a program
That is quite depressing to read that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 24, 2018, 10:00:07 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2018, 09:19:09 AM
Why not slag him off after you’ve actually heard what he has to say, rather than beforehand when you don’t know anything about the substance of his contribution?


Look if he is depressed ...he knows why....

What can he contribute..when he knows what is wrong with him...why speak out now...

There is nothing he can do about it .....think they call it karma ...in my opinion...

many people men especially don't know why they are depressed/suicidal ...its an illness....

Often needing medication....can't see how listening to him ...can help
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2018, 10:03:38 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 24, 2018, 09:33:49 AM
That is quite depressing to read that.
Radio 4 is minority interest?  That’s news to me.  The BBC will report widely on this programme once it is aired anyway so it will reach a wide audience, we all know about it already for a start.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2018, 10:04:45 AM
Quote from: xtina on September 24, 2018, 10:00:07 AM

Look if he is depressed ...he knows why....

What can he contribute..when he knows what is wrong with him...why speak out now...

There is nothing he can do about it .....think they call it karma ...in my opinion...

many people men especially don't know why they are depressed/suicidal ...its an illness....

Often needing medication....can't see how listening to him ...can help
So is it your view that anyone who is depressed has nothing to add to the conversation about depression, and should simply shut up about it, or does that only apply to Gerry McCann...in your opinion?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 24, 2018, 10:06:15 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2018, 10:03:38 AM
Radio 4 is minority interest?  That’s news to me.  The BBC will report widely on this programme once it is aired anyway so it will reach a wide audience, we all know about it already for a start.


Of course.....isn't that what he is doing it for ..publicity...

At a time when more money is needed .....in my opinion....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 24, 2018, 10:07:30 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2018, 10:04:45 AM
So is it your view that anyone who is depressed has nothing to add to the conversation about depression, and should simply shut up about it, or does that only apply to Gerry McCann...in your opinion?


Got it in one...... 8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 10:16:11 AM

Sometimes the unkindness overwhelms me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 24, 2018, 10:21:11 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 10:16:11 AM
Sometimes the unkindness overwhelms me.


Its what they did that overwhelms me........
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 10:30:51 AM
Quote from: xtina on September 24, 2018, 10:21:11 AM

Its what they did that overwhelms me........

I suppose we should thank God for so many perfect parents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 24, 2018, 10:48:51 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 10:30:51 AM
I suppose we should thank God for so many perfect parents.


Don't suppose any are perfect but the majority put their children first...especially there safety...



Didn't Prince Harry do the same thing .....although without an ulterior motive...in my opinion...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 24, 2018, 10:51:53 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2018, 10:04:45 AM
So is it your view that anyone who is depressed has nothing to add to the conversation about depression, and should simply shut up about it, or does that only apply to Gerry McCann...in your opinion?

It remains to be seen whether Gerry McCann will claim to have been depressed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 24, 2018, 11:01:16 AM
Quote from: xtina on September 24, 2018, 10:21:11 AM

Its what they did that overwhelms me........

It also overwhelms them every single day of their lives since then.  They have absolutely no choice in the matter, but one wonders what your motivation could possibly be for in my opinion, dwelling on their often acknowledged error to the point of obsession.

Their ignorance of the dark underbelly of Portuguese life may have led to their mistake ... what do you think is the excuse for compounding that with ~ in my opinion ~ the incompetence of those alleged guardians of the innocent who were very well aware of the lawlessness of their society but ignored it all to wipe the slate clean with a quick arrest and in the process leading the search for Madeleine 'down a blind alley' ... then business as usual.



Snip
Gerry McCann told yesterday of his terrible regret at leaving his children alone on the night Madeleine disappeared.

He admitted: 'We made a mistake, but we are paying more for it than anyone could ever possibly imagine.'

The father of three said he and his wife Kate had thought at the time it was 'perfectly reasonable' to leave Madeleine, then three, and their two-year-old twins alone in an unlocked holiday apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz.

He added: 'Hindsight has proven we made a mistake and we would never leave the children again.'
_______________________________________________________________________________

The President of the Portuguese Order of Lawyers, Antonio Marinho e Pinto, said yesterday that he believes detectives are hiding behind the country's strict secrecy laws.

He added: 'There are strong reasons to fear that judicial secrecy is being used to conceal the fact that the police have gone down a blind alley and don't have a way out.'
 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1016816/Our-mistake-leaving-Madeleine-Gerry-McCann.html





Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2018, 11:07:33 AM
Quote from: xtina on September 24, 2018, 10:06:15 AM

Of course.....isn't that what he is doing it for ..publicity...

At a time when more money is needed .....in my opinion....
More money for what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 24, 2018, 11:09:42 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2018, 11:07:33 AM
More money for what?

I've left some questions for you on the 'Fund wipe out thread'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 11:11:55 AM
Quote from: xtina on September 24, 2018, 10:48:51 AM

Don't suppose any are perfect but the majority put their children first...especially there safety...



Didn't Prince Harry do the same thing .....although without an ulterior motive...in my opinion...

This comment doesn't make sense.  If you think you put your children always first then how can you make a mistake?  Are there variations of a theme, or is it possible to be distracted for some reason?

The comment about Prince Harry leaves me totally bewildered.  Please could you elucidate?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 24, 2018, 11:22:05 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 24, 2018, 11:01:16 AM
It also overwhelms them every single day of their lives since then.  They have absolutely no choice in the matter, but one wonders what your motivation could possibly be for in my opinion, dwelling on their often acknowledged error to the point of obsession.

Their ignorance of the dark underbelly of Portuguese life may have led to their mistake ... what do you think is the excuse for compounding that with ~ in my opinion ~ the incompetence of those alleged guardians of the innocent who were very well aware of the lawlessness of their society but ignored it all to wipe the slate clean with a quick arrest and in the process leading the search for Madeleine 'down a blind alley' ... then business as usual.



Snip
Gerry McCann told yesterday of his terrible regret at leaving his children alone on the night Madeleine disappeared.

He admitted: 'We made a mistake, but we are paying more for it than anyone could ever possibly imagine.'

The father of three said he and his wife Kate had thought at the time it was 'perfectly reasonable' to leave Madeleine, then three, and their two-year-old twins alone in an unlocked holiday apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz.

He added: 'Hindsight has proven we made a mistake and we would never leave the children again.'
_______________________________________________________________________________

The President of the Portuguese Order of Lawyers, Antonio Marinho e Pinto, said yesterday that he believes detectives are hiding behind the country's strict secrecy laws.

He added: 'There are strong reasons to fear that judicial secrecy is being used to conceal the fact that the police have gone down a blind alley and don't have a way out.'
 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1016816/Our-mistake-leaving-Madeleine-Gerry-McCann.html


your post is fine ....if you believe the mccs version of events........ I dont.


one wonders what your motivation could possibly be for in my opinion, dwelling on their often acknowledged error to the point of obsession.


No, I'm not obsessed ....just like to put my opinion across.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on September 24, 2018, 11:25:19 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 24, 2018, 11:01:16 AM
It also overwhelms them every single day of their lives since then.  They have absolutely no choice in the matter, but one wonders what your motivation could possibly be for in my opinion, dwelling on their often acknowledged error to the point of obsession.

Their ignorance of the dark underbelly of Portuguese life may have led to their mistake ... what do you think is the excuse for compounding that with ~ in my opinion ~ the incompetence of those alleged guardians of the innocent who were very well aware of the lawlessness of their society but ignored itall to wipe the slate clean with a quick arrest and in the process leading the search for Madeleine 'down a blind alley' ... then business as usual.



Snip
Gerry McCann told yesterday of his terrible regret at leaving his children alone on the night Madeleine disappeared.

He admitted: 'We made a mistake, but we are paying more for it than anyone could ever possibly imagine.'

The father of three said he and his wife Kate had thought at the time it was 'perfectly reasonable' to leave Madeleine, then three, and their two-year-old twins alone in an unlocked holiday apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz.

He added: 'Hindsight has proven we made a mistake and we would never leave the children again.'
_______________________________________________________________________________

The President of the Portuguese Order of Lawyers, Antonio Marinho e Pinto, said yesterday that he believes detectives are hiding behind the country's strict secrecy laws.

He added: 'There are strong reasons to fear that judicial secrecy is being used to conceal the fact that the police have gone down a blind alley and don't have a way out.'
 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1016816/Our-mistake-leaving-Madeleine-Gerry-McCann.html

dark underbelly - lawlessness of their society.

This is classic Clarence.  If he ever steps down properly, perhaps you should offer your services in PR/propaganda to the McCanns.

 (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 24, 2018, 11:26:57 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on September 24, 2018, 11:25:19 AM
dark underbelly - lawlessness of their society.

This is classic Clarence.  If he ever steps down properly, perhaps you should offer your services in PR/propaganda to the McCanns.

 (&^&


Yes, I think it was written for him ... by a PR....in my opinion... 8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 24, 2018, 11:48:09 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on September 24, 2018, 11:25:19 AM
dark underbelly - lawlessness of their society.

This is classic Clarence.  If he ever steps down properly, perhaps you should offer your services in PR/propaganda to the McCanns.

 (&^&

It is one or the other in my opinion ... either it was safe to eat a meal less than a minute away from your children ... or it was not.

Almost without exception it appears it is agreed it was not. 

Retrospectively we now know about the far too many home invasions endemic in the Algarve at the time Madeleine disappeared which entirely sums up my description of the dark underbelly of lawlessness ... feel free to find an alternative more to your liking ... as long as it fits the facts, as mine does.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on September 24, 2018, 12:04:38 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 24, 2018, 11:48:09 AM
It is one or the other in my opinion ... either it was safe to eat a meal less than a minute away from your children ... or it was not.

Almost without exception it appears it is agreed it was not. 

Retrospectively we now know about the far too many home invasions endemic in the Algarve at the time Madeleine disappeared which entirely sums up my description of the dark underbelly of lawlessness ... feel free to find an alternative more to your liking ... as long as it fits the facts, as mine does.
Actually, we don't.

We have no comparable figures for crime rates in UK seaside towns in 2007.  Nor comparable figures for the Algarve in the year before and the year after.

Consequently, your 'dark underbelly of lawlessness' is a product of your imagination.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 12:22:29 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 24, 2018, 11:48:09 AM
It is one or the other in my opinion ... either it was safe to eat a meal less than a minute away from your children ... or it was not.

Almost without exception it appears it is agreed it was not. 

Retrospectively we now know about the far too many home invasions endemic in the Algarve at the time Madeleine disappeared which entirely sums up my description of the dark underbelly of lawlessness ... feel free to find an alternative more to your liking ... as long as it fits the facts, as mine does.

Could it have happened if The McCanns were asleep?  It seems likely, according to what else was going on.  And then too much risk was taken for this to have been in passing.
So unlikely that this was a paedophile.

I continue to live in hope, as do The McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 24, 2018, 12:28:25 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 11:11:55 AM
This comment doesn't make sense.  If you think you put your children always first then how can you make a mistake?  Are there variations of a theme, or is it possible to be distracted for some reason?

The comment about Prince Harry leaves me totally bewildered.  Please could you elucidate?

Lets say prince harry has already done that...what gmcc is doing....


In a rare and extraordinarily frank interview, Prince Harry again defied British royal tradition, discussing years of pain managing his life and mental health, difficulties that he ties directly to the early death of his mother—and disclosing that he has needed therapy to come to terms with it.



In a podcast interview with Telegraph columnist Bryony Gordon that has been widely broadcast and praised by the media, he admitted to years of attacks both of panic and rage, disclosing that his life was in "total chaos" for two years.

“I just couldn’t put my finger on it," he said. "I just didn’t know what was wrong with me.”











Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 12:45:09 PM
Quote from: xtina on September 24, 2018, 12:28:25 PM
Lets say prince harry has already done that...what gmcc is doing....


In a rare and extraordinarily frank interview, Prince Harry again defied British royal tradition, discussing years of pain managing his life and mental health, difficulties that he ties directly to the early death of his mother—and disclosing that he has needed therapy to come to terms with it.



In a podcast interview with Telegraph columnist Bryony Gordon that has been widely broadcast and praised by the media, he admitted to years of attacks both of panic and rage, disclosing that his life was in "total chaos" for two years.

“I just couldn’t put my finger on it," he said. "I just didn’t know what was wrong with me.”

Ah, I see.  Me too also, although I was a teensy bit younger than Harry when it happened to me.  I don't talk about it.  I dealt with it myself.

But it might have something to do with the occasional Anxiety that I sometimes have to deal with.  However, no one was even remotely interested in my young days, so I will never know if talking about it would have helped.

Gosh.  I nearly lost my breath there for a minute.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 24, 2018, 12:53:47 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 12:45:09 PM
Ah, I see.  Me too also, although I was a teensy bit younger than Harry when it happened to me.  I don't talk about it.  I dealt with it myself.

But it might have something to do with the occasional Anxiety that I sometimes have to deal with.  However, no one was even remotely interested in my young days, so I will never know if talking about it would have helped.

Gosh.  I nearly lost my breath there for a minute.

It’s never too late to seek help Eleanor. You no longer, thankfully, have to just live with the rehabilitating effects of anxiety.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 01:25:30 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on September 24, 2018, 12:53:47 PM
It’s never too late to seek help Eleanor. You no longer, thankfully, have to just live with the rehabilitating effects of anxiety.

I don't need help, Faith.  It was all far too long ago, and all of my children survived my laxidaisical approach to parenting.    But thanks for what I am sure was a kind thought.

Beside, you all keep me going on the rare occasion that it matters.  There is a camaraderie amongst us, even if we don't agree.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 24, 2018, 01:26:41 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 12:45:09 PM
Ah, I see.  Me too also, although I was a teensy bit younger than Harry when it happened to me.  I don't talk about it.  I dealt with it myself.

But it might have something to do with the occasional Anxiety that I sometimes have to deal with.  However, no one was even remotely interested in my young days, so I will never know if talking about it would have helped.

Gosh.  I nearly lost my breath there for a minute.

That's sad...Eleanor

I think it is good if you can deal with it yourself but not at that young age....

Hope you have happy memories of her ....though not the same as growing up with her...



the anxiety can still be treated...

 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 01:50:21 PM
Quote from: xtina on September 24, 2018, 01:26:41 PM
That's sad...Eleanor

I think it is good if you can deal with it yourself but not at that young age....

Hope you have happy memories of her ....though not the same as growing up with her...



the anxiety can still be treated...

My mother was in a sanatorium for several years before she was sent home to die.  So No, I don't have any really happy memories.   Although I do remember her dying.  But The War was shit for a lot of us.  It was the only thing I knew.

As for treating Anxiety.  What?  With drugs at my age?  No thanks.  I'll go on doing what I have always done.

And keep on coming here.  There are worse things to do.  So bear with me when I get a bit cross sometimes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 24, 2018, 02:18:33 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 01:50:21 PM
My mother was in a sanatorium for several years before she was sent home to die.  So No, I don't have any really happy memories.   Although I do remember her dying.  But The War was shit for a lot of us.  It was the only thing I knew.

As for treating Anxiety.  What?  With drugs at my age?  No thanks.  I'll go on doing what I have always done.

And keep on coming here.  There are worse things to do.  So bear with me when I get a bit cross sometimes.

So bear with me when I get a bit cross sometimes.

No problem ... I always do...

I did mean herbal....for times if it gets too much....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 03:20:45 PM
Quote from: xtina on September 24, 2018, 02:18:33 PM
So bear with me when I get a bit cross sometimes.

No problem ... I always do...

I did mean herbal....for times if it gets too much....

I eat a lot of Black Grapes when to going gets a bit rough.  Something to do with Serontin, if that is even the right spelling.  It's all about a dietary imbalance in the end.  Most people eat such rubbish without a thought.  And I would often murder for a chip sandwich.  The two worst things that I could eat if I don't wan to feel ill.  Along with Sugar of course.

Thanks for being  understanding.  It isn't easy being a moderator when one is trying to be fair and sometimes failing.  I sometimes wonder why I took this on because I never can win.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: xtina on September 24, 2018, 04:56:18 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 03:20:45 PM
I eat a lot of Black Grapes when to going gets a bit rough.  Something to do with Serontin, if that is even the right spelling.  It's all about a dietary imbalance in the end.  Most people eat such rubbish without a thought.  And I would often murder for a chip sandwich.  The two worst things that I could eat if I don't wan to feel ill.  Along with Sugar of course.

Thanks for being  understanding.  It isn't easy being a moderator when one is trying to be fair and sometimes failing.  I sometimes wonder why I took this on because I never can win.


St  Johns Wart capsules... are a good source of serotonin ...from most health shops....

What is it in the black grapes ...is it the seeds......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 05:44:18 PM
Quote from: xtina on September 24, 2018, 04:56:18 PM

St  Johns Wart capsules... are a good source of serotonin ...from most health shops....

What is it in the black grapes ...is it the seeds......

Yes, it is in the seeds, and possibly the skin.  St. John's Wort is a bit suspect because it can interfere with other medication, although I don't take any other rubbish that any doctor I know would subscribe.  But if it can interfere then I would want to know why.

It is so much more easy to just buy a bunch of black grapes, and ride the storm of a couple of bad days.

You see, Anxiety is so often the case instead of actual Depression.  But them maybe I am lucky.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 24, 2018, 05:57:49 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on September 24, 2018, 12:04:38 PM
Actually, we don't.

We have no comparable figures for crime rates in UK seaside towns in 2007.  Nor comparable figures for the Algarve in the year before and the year after.

Consequently, your 'dark underbelly of lawlessness' is a product of your imagination.

The fact the dark belly of lawlessness wasn't mentioned in the tourist brochures does not necessarily mean that it was not happening: a reputation as a family friendly zone with an economy reliant on tourism is not one to be squandered by recording all the facts.

Crime escalates in the Algarve
IN ALGARVE · 19-04-2008 00:00:00 · 0 COMMENTS

Data from the Annual Internal Safety Report for 2007 has revealed the Algarve is the region with most crimes (69) per 1000 inhabitants in Portugal.

According to the report, the rise in criminality was in the same proportion as the previous year despite 565 more reported crimes, totalling 27 336 in 2007.
Property damage represented 62 percent of all reported crimes, followed by offences on people (17 percent). The most common felonies are house burglaries and car robberies.
In road inspections, 1717 drivers were caught driving with alcohol levels equal or superior to 1.2 g/l and 1470 were driving illegally.
Violent crimes diminished by 3.6 percent to a total of 1181 cases.
Civil Governor of Faro Isilda Gomes recognises the figures are high but says the real number of people in the Algarve is higher than those accounted for, saying there are around 600,000 instead of the 450,000 claimed, thus changing the figures of the reported crimes per 1,000 inhabitants. The report also doesn’t take into account the tourists in the region, these reporting a large number of the crimes.

http://www.theportugalnews.com/news/crime-escalates-in-the-algarve/24129

Not forgetting ...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on September 24, 2018, 07:21:06 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 24, 2018, 05:57:49 PM
The fact the dark belly of lawlessness wasn't mentioned in the tourist brochures does not necessarily mean that it was not happening: a reputation as a family friendly zone with an economy reliant on tourism is not one to be squandered by recording all the facts.

Crime escalates in the Algarve
IN ALGARVE · 19-04-2008 00:00:00 · 0 COMMENTS

Data from the Annual Internal Safety Report for 2007 has revealed the Algarve is the region with most crimes (69) per 1000 inhabitants in Portugal.

According to the report, the rise in criminality was in the same proportion as the previous year despite 565 more reported crimes, totalling 27 336 in 2007.
Property damage represented 62 percent of all reported crimes, followed by offences on people (17 percent). The most common felonies are house burglaries and car robberies.
In road inspections, 1717 drivers were caught driving with alcohol levels equal or superior to 1.2 g/l and 1470 were driving illegally.
Violent crimes diminished by 3.6 percent to a total of 1181 cases.
Civil Governor of Faro Isilda Gomes recognises the figures are high but says the real number of people in the Algarve is higher than those accounted for, saying there are around 600,000 instead of the 450,000 claimed, thus changing the figures of the reported crimes per 1,000 inhabitants. The report also doesn’t take into account the tourists in the region, these reporting a large number of the crimes.

http://www.theportugalnews.com/news/crime-escalates-in-the-algarve/24129

Not forgetting ...
Thank you for your link.  Now there is some data to work with,

But there is still no dark underbelly of lawlessness.

For a start, as this was an annual report, the figures were out there in full light.

And you appear to have misinterpreted the part you have bolded.  Tourists reported crimes and these were counted.  However, no allowance was made in headcount for the large number of tourists, skewing the figures.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 24, 2018, 09:00:58 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 03:20:45 PM
I eat a lot of Black Grapes when to going gets a bit rough.  Something to do with Serontin, if that is even the right spelling.  It's all about a dietary imbalance in the end.  Most people eat such rubbish without a thought.  And I would often murder for a chip sandwich.  The two worst things that I could eat if I don't wan to feel ill.  Along with Sugar of course.

Thanks for being  understanding.  It isn't easy being a moderator when one is trying to be fair and sometimes failing.  I sometimes wonder why I took this on because I never can win.

Ohhh! Chip butties! Bacon! I feel your pain coz I have to avoid certain foods too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 24, 2018, 09:09:20 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 24, 2018, 09:00:58 PM
Ohhh! Chip butties! Bacon! I feel your pain coz I have to avoid certain foods too.

I'm a pescatarian but the one thing I do miss is a bacon sandwich made with almost burned streaky bacon......and a huge mug of milky tea !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2018, 09:11:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 24, 2018, 09:00:58 PM
Ohhh! Chip butties! Bacon! I feel your pain coz I have to avoid certain foods too.

Oh God.  The misery of thought.  A bacon sandwich.  Thank you very much for reminding me.  Not.  Although I don't have much of a problem with that.  The French don't do Bacon.  Or anything much else half civilised.  Sheesh, you can't even get a half decent Tea Bag here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 26, 2018, 08:52:58 PM
I believe that due to the heavy industralisation of farms -overly processed foods with e numbers and over dosed with sugar we all experience gastro problems.

 Our village had seperate shops, the greengrocer, the general store... and dairy-eggs is still delivered  fresh from the local farms. In the greengocer he sources all veg from organic farms- local for some. It is all dirty- but carrots smell like carrots- when you go to supermarkets all veg is clean and wraped in cling film or plastic to 'look nice'? they smell and taste awful!

Ele needs to have a good scottish brew with her escargo... ?{)(** Fresh scottish water straight from the mountain and tetley T bag or fresh tea as I have.  Relaxes the soul, and makes good with the world... 8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 26, 2018, 09:57:26 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on September 26, 2018, 08:52:58 PM
I believe that due to the heavy industralisation of farms -overly processed foods with e numbers and over dosed with sugar we all experience gastro problems.

 Our village had seperate shops, the greengrocer, the general store... and dairy-eggs is still delivered  fresh from the local farms. In the greengocer he sources all veg from organic farms- local for some. It is all dirty- but carrots smell like carrots- when you go to supermarkets all veg is clean and wraped in cling film or plastic to 'look nice'? they smell and taste awful!

Ele needs to have a good scottish brew with her escargo... ?{)(** Fresh scottish water straight from the mountain and tetley T bag or fresh tea as I have.  Relaxes the soul, and makes good with the world... 8((()*/

We had a local dairy farmer who also delivered his own milk. The cows grazed the fields and his eggs were amazing. Vegetables were seasonal and local. Pies and cakes were baked daily at the cake shop, and the cakes weren't sickly sweet. We even had an ice cream man with a horse pulling his rig. His ice cream was very refreshing, not sweet and had oats in it. 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 27, 2018, 05:16:38 AM

I collect milk from and eggs the local farm at half the price of supermarkets.  Tomatoes, courgettes and marrows are left on my doorstep at this time of year, never to forget apples.  No more marrows, please God, but t thanks for the peaches and quinces.
French bread is as good as they say.

Tea Bags come from England.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 30, 2018, 01:54:27 AM
https://www.kgun9.com/news/local-news/phone-records-implicate-alleged-isabel-celis-killer

Craig Smith
6:59 PM, Sep 28, 2018


TUCSON, Ariz. - We know more now about the tangled web that led to kidnapping and murder charges against Christopher Clements.

Clements is charged in two high profile child murders--the deaths of 6-year-old Isabel Celis and 13-year-old Maribel Gonzalez.

Some key evidence against Clements sat unused for three years.

Isabel Celis and Maribel Garcia died two years apart but their fates are still tied together.

13-year-old Maribel's body was found in this remote part of Avra Valley in June 2014, three days after her family saw her for the last time.

That is the same area convicted sex offender Christopher Clements brought investigators as he led them to the remains of Isabel Celis---five years after she disappeared from her family's home in 2012.

Clements is charged with kidnapping and killing them both.  Detectives say a DNA match ties him to Maribel Gonzalez but a Pima Sheriff's report says some DNA evidence was not processed until three years after Maribel's body was found in 2014. 

In May 2017 a new lead detective on the case decided to review the evidence.  He wrote, "I noted several items of evidence that appeared to have not been previously tested by DNA Labs International or any other forensic lab."  Investigators say of the six samples found, one found DNA on Maribel Gonzalez from Christopher Clements.
     
As Christopher Clements led investigators to Isabel Celis remains, he said he didn't kill her.  He blamed other criminals for that but he said he did pour bleach on her remains to repel animals.
       
But police reports cite other evidence to explain how Isabel Celis may have attracted Clements' attention. 

He made a business of buying, fixing and selling Honda and Acuras.  Police say he went to the Celis house at least twice asking to buy an old Acura there.

Police say he made four short phone calls to a Celis family phone.  And detective reports say Clements phone locked onto a cell tower near the Celis house the day Isabel disappeared and soon after locked onto a cell tower near the Avra Valley site where she was found many years later.  The reports also say the day after Isabel Celis disappeared, Christopher Clements got a new phone and new phone number.

==================================================================

It seems that Clements did have contact with the Celis family prior to her abduction. There is a report that he had pictures on his phone showing the inside of their house. IMO this is a good example of how a chance encounter can later develop into the targeted abduction of a child.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 16, 2018, 07:46:00 PM
It's surprising what the police find suspicious. Apparently everyone looks up if a helicopter hovers above them. In the April Jones case Mark Bridger didn't. He ignored it when walking his dog.
Rinder, ITV, now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on October 22, 2018, 11:12:44 AM
I am reviewing everything that was posted yesterday following several complaints. Inappropriate posting of any sort will not be tolerated and especially so given the number of warnings that have a already been given. Sanctions and/or suspensions could well follow.

Members are free to make representation in defence of themselves or others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on October 23, 2018, 10:10:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 16, 2018, 07:46:00 PM
It's surprising what the police find suspicious. Apparently everyone looks up if a helicopter hovers above them. In the April Jones case Mark Bridger didn't. He ignored it when walking his dog.
Rinder, ITV, now.

Missed your post. Yes, interesting. I can think of one personal (emergency medical) situation in which lots of people gathered to watch an unusual rescue, but I'd been informed beforehand and simply had no time to watch as a spectator.

Since then, I've heard helicopters and / or other loud emergency vehicles passing really near me, any yes, I looked up as they appear quite suddenly for no reason rhat I'd been expecting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 24, 2018, 11:21:14 AM
Quote from: Carana on October 23, 2018, 10:10:49 PM
Missed your post. Yes, interesting. I can think of one personal (emergency medical) situation in which lots of people gathered to watch an unusual rescue, but I'd been informed beforehand and simply had no time to watch as a spectator.

Since then, I've heard helicopters and / or other loud emergency vehicles passing really near me, any yes, I looked up as they appear quite suddenly for no reason rhat I'd been expecting.

I always look too, but it never occurred to me that it could be seen as suspicious if I didn't lol. Where we used to live we were a couple of fields away from an estate with a bad reputation. When being chased by the police the estate's inhabitants had a habit of running into the fields to escape. The police helicopter became a regular feature in our lives. They have a spotlight which they shine down to find people in the darkness. I used to watch from our windows as they 'grid' searched the fields.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on October 24, 2018, 11:14:01 PM

https://portugalresident.com/psp-agents-in-court-for-%E2%80%9Cleaving-child-in-locked-vehicle%E2%80%9D

Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on October 24, 2018


Two PSP agents are in court this week facing the charge of abuse of power over the way they dealt with an incident involving an angry father.

The bottom line was that as the agents marched the father off the local station after arresting him for “protesting” about a parking fine, they left his three-year-old daughter shut inside the family car for half an hour.

Say reports, this is despite the father having made appeals to take his child with him as he was taken into custody.

The incident happened on October 15 in Custoias, Matosinhos, writes Correio da Manhã.

Pedro Sousa, 51, had ‘double-parked’, waiting to collect his wife when he was approached by police who reportedly fined him on the spot.

“After being fined, he protested and was taken to the station without being allowed to take his child with him, in spite of appeals”, says the paper.
====================================================================

Words fail......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 25, 2018, 12:04:30 AM
Quote from: misty on October 24, 2018, 11:14:01 PM
https://portugalresident.com/psp-agents-in-court-for-%E2%80%9Cleaving-child-in-locked-vehicle%E2%80%9D

Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on October 24, 2018


Two PSP agents are in court this week facing the charge of abuse of power over the way they dealt with an incident involving an angry father.

The bottom line was that as the agents marched the father off the local station after arresting him for “protesting” about a parking fine, they left his three-year-old daughter shut inside the family car for half an hour.

Say reports, this is despite the father having made appeals to take his child with him as he was taken into custody.

The incident happened on October 15 in Custoias, Matosinhos, writes Correio da Manhã.

Pedro Sousa, 51, had ‘double-parked’, waiting to collect his wife when he was approached by police who reportedly fined him on the spot.

“After being fined, he protested and was taken to the station without being allowed to take his child with him, in spite of appeals”, says the paper.
====================================================================

Words fail......

It will be interesting to see what sort of penalty is handed down by the court.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on October 25, 2018, 01:59:33 AM
Quote from: misty on October 24, 2018, 11:14:01 PM
https://portugalresident.com/psp-agents-in-court-for-%E2%80%9Cleaving-child-in-locked-vehicle%E2%80%9D

Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on October 24, 2018


Two PSP agents are in court this week facing the charge of abuse of power over the way they dealt with an incident involving an angry father.

The bottom line was that as the agents marched the father off the local station after arresting him for “protesting” about a parking fine, they left his three-year-old daughter shut inside the family car for half an hour.

Say reports, this is despite the father having made appeals to take his child with him as he was taken into custody.

The incident happened on October 15 in Custoias, Matosinhos, writes Correio da Manhã.

Pedro Sousa, 51, had ‘double-parked’, waiting to collect his wife when he was approached by police who reportedly fined him on the spot.

“After being fined, he protested and was taken to the station without being allowed to take his child with him, in spite of appeals”, says the paper.
====================================================================

Words fail......

Poor kid must have been frantic and her Dad too.

I hope that it wasn't a hot day shut in a car!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on October 25, 2018, 08:19:03 AM
Quote from: sadie on October 25, 2018, 01:59:33 AM
Poor kid must have been frantic and her Dad too.

I hope that it wasn't a hot day shut in a car!

Double parked, waiting to collect the mother. No mention of if a policeman left with the car or how long the mother took to arrive.

I’m sure the Portuguese press are doing some police bashing but then some use it for PT bashing.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 25, 2018, 09:55:09 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on October 25, 2018, 08:19:03 AM
Double parked, waiting to collect the mother. No mention of if a policeman left with the car or how long the mother took to arrive.

I’m sure the Portuguese press are doing some police bashing but then some use it for PT bashing.

Maybe natasha.donn@algarveresident.com could clarify the situation for you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 25, 2018, 10:39:44 AM
Quote from: sadie on October 25, 2018, 01:59:33 AM
Poor kid must have been frantic and her Dad too.

I hope that it wasn't a hot day shut in a car!

According to Jornal de Noticas the car had been moved ... "Multado por esperar em segunda fila, o condutor tirou o carro, mas protestou e até disse que ia falar com o comandante." ... wonder if the mother would have been able to see it when she came out of the shop?
I think the town was busy because of a fair.  https://www.jn.pt/justica/interior/agentes-da-psp-deixaram-crianca-sozinha-no-carro-10071711.html?target=conteudo_fechado


I think the charge should have included "stupidity" as well as abuse of power.. 

Snip
The police are accused of abuse of power and the driver is being tried for resistance and coercion.

One of the policemen said he had been ordered detained for being pulled by the driver, and another officer corroborated the allegation and said he had to go and help his colleague immobilize the man, who denies this version.

The driver says that he turned to go to the car to get the documents and that he was seized by the arm and arrested, further alleges that the two agents were indifferent to their requests not to leave their daughter, who continued to sleep in the back, alone in the car. The police say the father never spoke of the child.

A man and a woman who witnessed the scene were also heard in court and both said they heard their father yell repeatedly that he had his daughter in the car, asking them to let her take her because she could not be alone.

The couple also said that he was next to the car to ensure the child's welfare, following the police's indifference to their father's appeals.
https://sol.sapo.pt/artigo/631256/agentes-da-psp-deixam-crianca-sozinha-dentro-do-carro-apos-pai-ser-detido
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 28, 2018, 10:10:16 AM
If this is PJ bashing  for the sake of it to show that the McCanns were treated badly then I would like to introduce to you...Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes- on a train...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 28, 2018, 10:12:23 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on October 28, 2018, 10:10:16 AM
If this is PJ bashing  for the sake of it to show that the McCanns were treated badly then I would like to introduce to you...Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes- on a train...
How pathetic.  If you want to start a thread bashing British police (and god knows some of them deserve it) then why not do so?  I will gladly join in.  No police force anywhere in the world should be exempt from valid criticism.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 28, 2018, 10:23:00 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 28, 2018, 10:12:23 AM
How pathetic.  If you want to start a thread bashing British police (and god knows some of them deserve it) then why not do so?  I will gladly join in.  No police force anywhere in the world should be exempt from valid criticism.

We all know there's no such thing as a perfect police force, but some people do seem determined to highlight any inadequacies in Portugal's policing at every available opportunity. Perhaps it's time to stop doing that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 28, 2018, 10:30:47 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 28, 2018, 10:12:23 AM
How pathetic.  If you want to start a thread bashing British police (and god knows some of them deserve it) then why not do so?  I will gladly join in.  No police force anywhere in the world should be exempt from valid criticism.

It is pathetic. a man double parking has got nothing to do with this thread or this forum.  SO maybe all snidey remarks about the Portugese police  should be removed.

 Because if some supporters  insist, and some are mods, insist on PJ bashing at all or any costs then I feel so obliged to 'bring it on home'.

Also I am getting rather bored with mods deleting and amending my posts because they 'don't like  what i type' and their irrelevent posts get to stay even if they take it off topic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 28, 2018, 10:38:34 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on October 28, 2018, 10:10:16 AM
If this is PJ bashing  for the sake of it to show that the McCanns were treated badly then I would like to introduce to you...Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes- on a train...

Then the woman in charge is made Commissioner of the MET,couldn't make it up,oh wait...………….
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 28, 2018, 10:45:37 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 28, 2018, 10:23:00 AM
We all know there's no such thing as a perfect police force, but some people do seem determined to highlight any inadequacies in Portugal's policing at every available opportunity. Perhaps it's time to stop doing that.

Why.... The inadequacies are very relevant to the case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 28, 2018, 10:49:06 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on October 28, 2018, 10:10:16 AM
If this is PJ bashing  for the sake of it to show that the McCanns were treated badly then I would like to introduce to you...Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes- on a train...

If the PJ had killed an innocent man I'm sure the proven facts, would show he wasn't innocent..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 28, 2018, 10:49:50 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 28, 2018, 10:45:37 AM
Why.... The inadequacies are very relevant to the case

If SY fail what would that make their investigation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 28, 2018, 10:50:22 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 28, 2018, 10:45:37 AM
Why.... The inadequacies are very relevant to the case

Are you implying SY will shoot whom they think is a suspect? If going by what you say there is relevence?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 28, 2018, 10:52:40 AM
Quote from: barrier on October 28, 2018, 10:49:50 AM
If SY fail what would that make their investigation?

To supporters it would mean the Parents are innocent...

To everyone else. a fail.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 28, 2018, 10:59:32 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 28, 2018, 10:45:37 AM
Why.... The inadequacies are very relevant to the case

The only inadequacies which are relevant to the Madeleine McCann case are those allegedly connected to the case. It's possible to destroy police force's reputation quite easily; the Metropolitan Police included, but it doesn't follow that they messed up in their cases. In my opinion people continually throw mud at the Portuguese police in the hope that some of it will stick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 28, 2018, 11:07:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 28, 2018, 10:59:32 AM
The only inadequacies which are relevant to the Madeleine McCann case are those allegedly connected to the case. It's possible to destroy police force's reputation quite easily; the Metropolitan Police included, but it doesn't follow that they messed up in their cases. In my opinion people continually throw mud at the Portuguese police in the hope that some of it will stick.

could you give us an example...a cite. Its beyond doubt amaral and the fitst investigation misunderstood the evidence...amaral claimed he could prove maddie died in the apartmrnt.......which gave them little chance of solving the case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on October 28, 2018, 11:30:12 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 28, 2018, 11:07:32 AM
could you give us an example...a cite. Its beyond doubt amaral and the fitst investigation misunderstood the evidence...amaral claimed he could prove maddie died in the apartmrnt.......which gave them little chance of solving the case

The story posted a page of so back by Lace covers that cite IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 28, 2018, 11:31:57 AM
Quote from: Sunny on October 28, 2018, 11:30:12 AM
The story posted a page of so back by Lace covers that cite IMO.

a proper link should be provided...or are cites only important when requested from supporters
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on October 28, 2018, 11:35:11 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 28, 2018, 11:31:57 AM
a proper link should be provided...or are cites only important when requested from supporters

Apologies it was misty who posted. Here is the link
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg498363#msg498363
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on October 28, 2018, 11:49:59 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 28, 2018, 10:45:37 AM
Why.... The inadequacies are very relevant to the case
Errors and/or inadequacies in the investigation are highly relevant.

So it's a dreadful shame that these are being drowned out in a sea of GNR/PJ bashing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on October 28, 2018, 12:18:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 28, 2018, 11:07:32 AM
could you give us an example...a cite. Its beyond doubt amaral and the fitst investigation misunderstood the evidence...amaral claimed he could prove maddie died in the apartmrnt.......which gave them little chance of solving the case

Was that during the investigation when he was part of it?
If so you had better provide a cite or state it is your unsubstantiated opinion. One or the other will do.
What happened after he was awarded his D.C.M is irrelevant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 01, 2018, 09:50:07 AM
From RT.com

‘Police have been blasted over what some see as a misuse of resources.

“These figures bear out what we’ve been saying: that police are wasting more and more time investigating people for comments online that are offensive but not criminal,” Jodie Ginsberg, chief executive of Index on Censorship, told the Times.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Nicholas on November 01, 2018, 09:57:33 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on November 01, 2018, 09:50:07 AM
From RT.com

‘Police have been blasted over what some see as a misuse of resources.

“These figures bear out what we’ve been saying: that police are wasting more and more time investigating people for comments online that are offensive but not criminal,” Jodie Ginsberg, chief executive of Index on Censorship, told the Times.

"Stephen Kavanagh of the National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) defended the figures, saying officers have been working to keep up with the “changing nature of harm in our society.”

https://www.rt.com/uk/406467-hate-crime-twitter-troll/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Nicholas on November 01, 2018, 10:07:01 AM
People spend too much time online, often devouring fake and biased items. They grow hateful of each other rather than closer in understanding
http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/04/17/concerns-about-the-future-of-peoples-well-being/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 01, 2018, 03:33:33 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on November 01, 2018, 09:50:07 AM
From RT.com

‘Police have been blasted over what some see as a misuse of resources.

“These figures bear out what we’ve been saying: that police are wasting more and more time investigating people for comments online that are offensive but not criminal,” Jodie Ginsberg, chief executive of Index on Censorship, told the Times.
Snip
Using Freedom of Information requests, the Times found that 3,395 people across 29 forces were arrested last year under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.

The act allows officers to investigate messages and posts which are “grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character.”

In 2014 there were 2,315 arrests, compared with 2,755 in 2015.

This means there has been a rise of almost 50 percent between 2014 and 2016.

However, 15 forces did not submit data, meaning the real figure is likely to be higher.

Last year 1,696 people were charged and 1,399 convicted – despite almost 4,000 arrests.
https://www.rt.com/uk/406467-hate-crime-twitter-troll/

Of those charged with an offence a very high percentage were convicted ... I would imagine that might give a measure of relief to the victims of what is a crime.
Why not cut expenses entirely and dispense with policing crime entirely ... let the crims get on with it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 01, 2018, 05:04:53 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 01, 2018, 03:33:33 PM
Snip
Using Freedom of Information requests, the Times found that 3,395 people across 29 forces were arrested last year under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.

The act allows officers to investigate messages and posts which are “grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character.”

In 2014 there were 2,315 arrests, compared with 2,755 in 2015.

This means there has been a rise of almost 50 percent between 2014 and 2016.

However, 15 forces did not submit data, meaning the real figure is likely to be higher.

Last year 1,696 people were charged and 1,399 convicted – despite almost 4,000 arrests.
https://www.rt.com/uk/406467-hate-crime-twitter-troll/

Of those charged with an offence a very high percentage were convicted ... I would imagine that might give a measure of relief to the victims of what is a crime.
Why not cut expenses entirely and dispense with policing crime entirely ... let the crims get on with it?

Not exactly being a bit mean on the Internet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 01, 2018, 06:07:46 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on November 01, 2018, 05:04:53 PM
Not exactly being a bit mean on the Internet.

All a matter of opinion what constitutes "being a bit mean on the internet.  In my opinion worthy of highlight is that "Last year 1,696 people were charged and 1,399 convicted" which I think is a pretty sizeable cache of lawbreaking.

Just as in America we have them here and they do immeasurable harm to themselves and others ... Police accuse two students, age 12, of cyberbullying in suicidehttps://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/23/us/florida-cyberstalking-charges-girl-suicide/index.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 01, 2018, 07:38:32 PM
All very interesting. Ultimately it comes down to money.
I have no objection to all public sector bodies demanding and receiving more ackers if it is genuinely required to enable them to perform to the standard required.
But remember public sector bodies are funded by the government and district councils. Their only source of revenue being borrowing and taxation.
So have it all, but how much are you prepared to pay for it in increased taxation and police precepts?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 01, 2018, 07:53:48 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on November 01, 2018, 07:38:32 PM
All very interesting. Ultimately it comes down to money.
I have no objection to all public sector bodies demanding and receiving more ackers if it is genuinely required to enable them to perform to the standard required.
But remember public sector bodies are funded by the government and district councils. Their only source of revenue being borrowing and taxation.
So have it all, but how much are you prepared to pay for it in increased taxation and police precepts?

I don't think it's, a simple as that... Perhaps the whole budget should be liked at to see where savings could be made elsewhere

It seems we spend more on overseas aid than we do on police
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 01, 2018, 09:22:22 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 01, 2018, 07:53:48 PM
1)I don't think it's, a simple as that... 2)Perhaps the whole budget should be liked at to see where savings could be made elsewhere

It seems we spend more on overseas aid than we do on police


I never said it was simple. It's a matter of cutting your cloth etc
I can think of a few good places to start.
NHS: If you can afford to pay for your treatment you should, on a sliding scale.
Child Care; Any household with a joint income > £40k should receive no child care allowance. Stop sponging off me.
Any one in the top ten percent of earners should not receive a winter fuel allowance, which starts at age 60.
PIP and what was DLA should be revisited and "grandfather rights" reassessed for present applicability.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 02, 2018, 08:09:11 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on November 01, 2018, 09:22:22 PM

I never said it was simple. It's a matter of cutting your cloth etc
I can think of a few good places to start.
NHS: If you can afford to pay for your treatment you should, on a sliding scale.
Child Care; Any household with a joint income > £40k should receive no child care allowance. Stop sponging off me.
Any one in the top ten percent of earners should not receive a winter fuel allowance, which starts at age 60.
PIP and what was DLA should be revisited and "grandfather rights" reassessed for present applicability.
You need to be born before November 5 1953 or reach pensionable age before being allowed to claim.

A bit more info on that.

"You must be old enough to qualify for a state pension during the ‘qualifying week’ in the autumn before you get the payment. Because the pensionable age is changing on a sliding scale each year, the winter fuel payment eligibility age also changes annually.
Here are a few examples:
A woman born on 1 January 1953 will reach state pension age at 62 years, 8 months and 5 days (i.e. on 6 September 2015)
A man born on 1 January 1954 will reach state pension age at 65 years, 2 months and 5 days (i.e. on 6 March 2019)
From 2020 onwards, everyone will get it from the age of 66"

https://www.ovoenergy.com/guides/energy-guides/the-winter-fuel-payment-helping-pensioners-keep-warm.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 02, 2018, 08:47:23 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on November 01, 2018, 09:22:22 PM

I never said it was simple. It's a matter of cutting your cloth etc
I can think of a few good places to start.
NHS: If you can afford to pay for your treatment you should, on a sliding scale.
Child Care; Any household with a joint income > £40k should receive no child care allowance. Stop sponging off me.
Any one in the top ten percent of earners should not receive a winter fuel allowance, which starts at age 60.
PIP and what was DLA should be revisited and "grandfather rights" reassessed for present applicability.

Who would decide ? - More paperwork

Gross earnings can be misleading - 40k will go further is some areas of the country than others,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 02, 2018, 01:51:51 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/02/met-police-opens-criminal-inquiry-into-labour-[ censored word]emitism-claims

Scotland Yard has opened a criminal investigation into allegations of [ censored word]emitic hate crimes linked to Labour party members, according to the commissioner of the Metropolitan police.

Cressida Dick said officers had reviewed a leaked party dossier detailing 45 cases of alleged [ censored word]emitism that was passed to her in September by the radio station LBC.

The UK’s most senior police officer told the BBC she believed there could be a case to answer and, as a result, the force was consulting with prosecutors on the next steps.

“We have been assessing some material that was passed to me, in a radio studio of all things, about two months ago and we are now investigating some of that material because it appears there may have been a crime committed,” Dick said.


“We are liaising immediately with the Crown Prosecution Service and I hope we will be able to clear that up very quickly.”
t

LBC received an internal Labour dossier detailing 45 cases involving messages posted by party members on social media, including one that read: “We shall rid the Jews who are a cancer on us all.”

The broadcaster passed the leaked material to the former senior police officer Mark Chishty to review, who said 17 instances should have been reported to the police for investigation, and another four were potential race hate crimes.

These four included the message detailed above; the sharing of a link to an allegedly [ censored word]emitic blog; and an entry referring to “a Zionist extremist MP … who hates civilised people, about to get a good kicking”.

Another related to a Labour councillor being accused of putting a child through “10 years of hell”, slurring him racially and calling him a Jew boy.

Tom Watson, Labour’s deputy leader, said the announcement was “thoroughly depressing, although sadly I am not surprised. All I can say to you again, if people have committed hate crimes they need to be dealt with by the full force of the law.”

He added that he hoped the Met inquiry would “silence a very small number of people who believe that [ censored word]emitism doesn’t exist in my party, or in other parties”.

The dossier was handed to Dick on 4 September. A spokesman for the Met added: “The complainant alleged that the documentation included evidence of [ censored word]emitic hate crimes. The contents have been examined by specialist officers. A criminal investigation has commenced into some of the allegations within the documentation.

The Labour party said it had not been contacted by the police but was ready to cooperate with the investigation. The Labour party has a robust system for investigating complaints of alleged breaches of Labour party rules by its members,” a spokesman said. “Where someone feels they have been a victim of crime, they should report it to the police in the usual way.”

=================================================================

Another dossier. Alleged online hate crimes.
Is the expense of a criminal investigation justifiable?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 02, 2018, 01:55:26 PM
I am only speaking from personal experience and opinion.
At age 60 I received 200 quid heating allowance as a matter of course. I didn't need it nor did I want it. It offended my "benevolent socialism" ideals. I phoned to try to hand it back only to be told "you have to have it but you can give it to any charity or little old gadget of your choosing". As the Inland Revenue/HMRC have a record of what everyone earns it can't be too difficult to control it*.

I was a single parent. I had to earn most of what I lobbed out in child care. In those days it was about 5% of my gross, child allowance was less than 2% leaving me to stump up 3% of the costs from my taxed income.

The best one of the lot is PIP. If you did not have it as DLA before PIP(finishes at age 65) then forget it. Because, and I was told this by the DWP, "you are old and do not have to go out much, PIP is to help people back to work". In fact putting it crudely, under the new system , provided you can go for a crap by yourself in the middle of the night you are entitled to naff all. However under "grandfather rights" there are more than enough folk receiving mobility allowances, exemption from car tax etc whilst still walking up to 1km per day from choice.
You don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows on that one [PIP].

* caveat. Successive British governments and their departments have shown themselves to be incompetent with IT systems. Funny how multinational corporations can control off one server in their head office in whatever country.

It ever was thus and no doubt will not change. To him that hath shall be given  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2018, 02:11:41 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on November 02, 2018, 01:55:26 PM
I am only speaking from personal experience and opinion.
At age 60 I received 200 quid heating allowance as a matter of course. I didn't need it nor did I want it. It offended my "benevolent socialism" ideals. I phoned to try to hand it back only to be told "you have to have it but you can give it to any charity or little old gadget of your choosing". As the Inland Revenue/HMRC have a record of what everyone earns it can't be too difficult to control it*.

I was a single parent. I had to earn most of what I lobbed out in child care. In those days it was about 5% of my gross, child allowance was less than 2% leaving me to stump up 3% of the costs from my taxed income.

The best one of the lot is PIP. If you did not have it as DLA before PIP(finishes at age 65) then forget it. Because, and I was told this by the DWP, "you are old and do not have to go out much, PIP is to help people back to work". In fact putting it crudely, under the new system , provided you can go for a crap by yourself in the middle of the night you are entitled to naff all. However under "grandfather rights" there are more than enough folk receiving mobility allowances, exemption from car tax etc whilst still walking up to 1km per day from choice.
You don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows on that one [PIP].

* caveat. Successive British governments and their departments have shown themselves to be incompetent with IT systems. Funny how multinational corporations can control off one server in their head office in whatever country.

It ever was thus and no doubt will not change. To him that hath shall be given  8(0(*

True.

They took away my Winter Fuel Allowance just when I needed it most.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 04, 2018, 12:19:51 PM
Mark Williams Thomas who amongst others has had is say on the McCann case is outed as a self promoting tv detective.

Quote
How a self-promoting TV detective, obsessed with celebrity sex abusers, helped police ruin the lives of Sir Cliff and a string of other famous faces... who all turned out to be TOTALLY INNOCENT


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6350331/Self-promoting-TV-detective-obsessed-celebrity-sex-abusers-helped-police-ruin-lives.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 04, 2018, 12:27:39 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 04, 2018, 12:19:51 PM
Mark Williams Thomas who amongst others has had is say on the McCann case is outed as a self promoting tv detective.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6350331/Self-promoting-TV-detective-obsessed-celebrity-sex-abusers-helped-police-ruin-lives.html
Perhaps he was wrong about the extent of  Savile's crimes too...? 

This report will be scoffed at by all those who believe fervently that there is a paedo ring among the  "high ups" and who strive in vain to link this to the McCanns, some of these conspiracy theorists regularly occupy (or used to, I haven't looked for years) the #McCann twitter feed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 04, 2018, 12:39:26 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 04, 2018, 12:27:39 PM
Perhaps he was wrong about the extent of  Savile's crimes too...? 

This report will be scoffed at by all those who believe fervently that there is a paedo ring among the  "high ups" and who strive in vain to link this to the McCanns, some of these conspiracy theorists regularly occupy (or used to, I haven't looked for years) the #McCann twitter feed.

I think he was wrong about Jimmy Savile.  Among other things.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Nicholas on November 04, 2018, 12:44:40 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 04, 2018, 12:39:26 PM
I think he was wrong about Jimmy Savile.  Among other things.

I've posted a plethora of info regarding MWT on this forum - search his name

The truth always out
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 04, 2018, 12:55:48 PM
Quote from: Stephanie on November 04, 2018, 12:44:40 PM
I've posted a plethora of info regarding MWT on this forum - search his name

The truth always out

Thank you, Stephanie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Nicholas on November 04, 2018, 12:57:40 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 04, 2018, 02:14:21 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 04, 2018, 12:19:51 PM
Mark Williams Thomas who amongst others has had is say on the McCann case is outed as a self promoting tv detective.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6350331/Self-promoting-TV-detective-obsessed-celebrity-sex-abusers-helped-police-ruin-lives.html

Whom the Mail helped to promote. The media will listen to anyone and then complain when it all turns out to be rubbish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Nicholas on November 04, 2018, 02:16:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 04, 2018, 02:14:21 PM
Whom the Mail helped to promote. The media will listen to anyone and then complain when it all turns out to be rubbish.

That may be so but there are some who learn from their mistakes and others who don't!

I for one will be interested to see how it all unfolds for MWT
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 04, 2018, 02:50:03 PM
Quote from: Stephanie on November 04, 2018, 02:16:57 PM
That may be so but there are some who learn from their mistakes and others who don't!

I for one will be interested to see how it all unfolds for MWT


No change possibly,no such this as bad publicity is there?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Nicholas on November 04, 2018, 03:24:43 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 04, 2018, 02:50:03 PM

No change possibly,no such this as bad publicity is there?

IMO men like MWT get their comeuppance eventually
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 04, 2018, 03:30:21 PM
Quote from: Stephanie on November 04, 2018, 03:24:43 PM
IMO men like MWT get their comeuppance eventually

This one has just taken a bit longer than first we thought.  But then Jimmy Savile was already dead, so couldn't fight back.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Nicholas on November 04, 2018, 03:34:10 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 04, 2018, 03:30:21 PM
This one has just taken a bit longer than first we thought.  But then Jimmy Savile was already dead, so couldn't fight back.

https://mobile.twitter.com/KingOfHits/status/1059026246737256448

https://annaraccoon.com/2010/06/05/intimidation-and-coercion/

http://matthewscott.org.uk/tackling-hate-crime-is-important
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 04, 2018, 04:01:07 PM
Quote from: Stephanie on November 04, 2018, 03:34:10 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/KingOfHits/status/1059026246737256448

https://annaraccoon.com/2010/06/05/intimidation-and-coercion/

http://matthewscott.org.uk/tackling-hate-crime-is-important

I have known about Anna Raccoon for a long time.

What your Link doesn't say is that Anna Raccoon uncovered a lot of false information about Jimmy Savile.  Often downright lies.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on November 04, 2018, 04:52:19 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 04, 2018, 04:01:07 PM
I have known about Anna Raccoon for a long time.

What your Link doesn't say is that Anna Raccoon uncovered a lot of false information about Jimmy Savile.  Often downright lies.

Sad to hear she had died.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 05, 2018, 08:13:03 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 04, 2018, 03:30:21 PM
This one has just taken a bit longer than first we thought.  But then Jimmy Savile was already dead, so couldn't fight back.

Jimmy Saviie had accusations made against him form many quarters of the country by children who were not believed or were shuushed!

Many people in the BBC knew about his  predatory sexual abuse of children for years and covered it up. Or stood by the status to keep their jobs. The most shocking revelation was Esther Ranzen calimong oh she heard rumours but did nothing? what really> you couldn't tip off the police or anything? what really?

To say this is a figment of MWT imagination  to spout Saviles crimes is a disgrace. and slaps in the face the victims of his crimes.  I am very well aware of his crimes from people who did KNOW and nothing was done to stop him.

So what he can't defend himself-  many people are worried their names will crop up!

What MWT did do was to cast aspersions on people as he believed in his own 'powers of detection' were also involved with a 'ring'.  The wrong accusations against innocent men is equally vile- he should be imprisioned for that alone!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on November 05, 2018, 10:55:31 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on November 04, 2018, 04:52:19 PM
Sad to hear she had died.

Me, too. I always found her to be a scrupulous researcher and a decent person, whether I agreed with her on the topic of the day or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 09, 2018, 04:55:17 PM
Quote from: Carana on November 05, 2018, 10:55:31 PM
Me, too. I always found her to be a scrupulous researcher and a decent person, whether I agreed with her on the topic of the day or not.

I agree Carana,   very good researcher,   she will be missed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 10, 2018, 10:34:00 AM
I see disgraced is not just a word for the sole reserve to be used on of Mr Amaral,heaven forbid the Mail describes a former MET chief of being disgraced,yep a former head of the MET who'd have ever thunk it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6373499/Disgraced-former-Met-Police-chief-Ali-Dizaei-parties-Hollywood-good-friend-Mel-Gibson.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 10, 2018, 11:51:42 AM
Quote from: barrier on November 10, 2018, 10:34:00 AM
I see disgraced is not just a word for the sole reserve to be used on of Mr Amaral,heaven forbid the Mail describes a former MET chief of being disgraced,yep a former head of the MET who'd have ever thunk it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6373499/Disgraced-former-Met-Police-chief-Ali-Dizaei-parties-Hollywood-good-friend-Mel-Gibson.html

Dizael lost his job and spent four years in prison.  Who'd a thunk it?

And he lost his Pension.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 10, 2018, 12:14:58 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 10, 2018, 10:34:00 AM
I see disgraced is not just a word for the sole reserve to be used on of Mr Amaral,heaven forbid the Mail describes a former MET chief of being disgraced,yep a former head of the MET who'd have ever thunk it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6373499/Disgraced-former-Met-Police-chief-Ali-Dizaei-parties-Hollywood-good-friend-Mel-Gibson.html

There are obviously more disgraced criminally convicted police officers.. Amaral is just one of them
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 10, 2018, 03:38:55 PM
Amaral left on his own accord and wasn't dismissed for being a disgrace like Ali Dizaei. The McCanns mistake was to take him on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 10, 2018, 03:46:49 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on November 10, 2018, 03:38:55 PM
Amaral left on his own accord and wasn't dismissed for being a disgrace like Ali Dizaei. The McCanns mistake was to take him on.

still disgraced for having a criminal record...the mccanns mistake was thinking they would get justice in portugal
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 10, 2018, 05:11:13 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 10, 2018, 03:46:49 PM
still disgraced for having a criminal record...the mccanns mistake was thinking they would get justice in portugal
What kind of justice were you thinking of?  they were not charged with anything.

 Infact, they were teated very differently from what they would expect if the 'crime' did happen in the UK. That is a fact!  They would be automatically be designated as suspects, and their socialising while leaving children alone(and one to disappear) would certainly not have accured sympathy or vasts sums of money. Their company in the name of their child- who would have no benefit from- would have been treated with a different set of moral standards. Would they sue a police officer in the UK for discussing what may have happened? Oh I don't think so.

They did very very well, since their daughters disppearance...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 10, 2018, 06:15:06 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 10, 2018, 11:51:42 AM
Dizael lost his job and spent four years in prison.  Who'd a thunk it?

And he lost his Pension.

He trumps Amaral though,good to see which force is the most  disgraceful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 10, 2018, 06:16:51 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 10, 2018, 05:11:13 PM
What kind of justice were you thinking of?  they were not charged with anything.

 Infact, they were teated very differently from what they would expect if the 'crime' did happen in the UK. That is a fact!  They would be automatically be designated as suspects, and their socialising while leaving children alone(and one to disappear) would certainly not have accured sympathy or vasts sums of money. Their company in the name of their child- who would have no benefit from- would have been treated with a different set of moral standards. Would they sue a police officer in the UK for discussing what may have happened? Oh I don't think so.

They did very very well, since their daughters disppearance...
Very, very well in what sense?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 10, 2018, 06:19:27 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 10, 2018, 10:34:00 AM
I see disgraced is not just a word for the sole reserve to be used on of Mr Amaral,heaven forbid the Mail describes a former MET chief of being disgraced,yep a former head of the MET who'd have ever thunk it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6373499/Disgraced-former-Met-Police-chief-Ali-Dizaei-parties-Hollywood-good-friend-Mel-Gibson.html
Amaral must be green wiith envy - when’s he getting his invite to Hollywood?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 12, 2018, 11:29:34 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 10, 2018, 05:11:13 PM
What kind of justice were you thinking of?  they were not charged with anything.

 Infact, they were teated very differently from what they would expect if the 'crime' did happen in the UK. That is a fact!  They would be automatically be designated as suspects, and their socialising while leaving children alone(and one to disappear) would certainly not have accured sympathy or vasts sums of money. Their company in the name of their child- who would have no benefit from- would have been treated with a different set of moral standards. Would they sue a police officer in the UK for discussing what may have happened? Oh I don't think so.

They did very very well, since their daughters disppearance...

Quote -  They did very very well since their daughters disappearance  end of quote.

Oh yes,   they were made arguidos,   Kate has gone back to work and Madeleine is still missing,  very very well I don't think so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 12, 2018, 04:24:32 PM
The met have failed to find anything in the search for Suzy Lamplugh.


"Met finds no evidence in Suzy Lamplugh case after digging up garden"

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/12/met-finds-no-evidence-in-suzy-lamplugh-case-after-digging-up-sutton-coldfield-garden
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 12, 2018, 04:38:30 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 12, 2018, 04:24:32 PM
The met have failed to find anything in the search for Suzy Lamplugh.


"Met finds no evidence in Suzy Lamplugh case after digging up garden"

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/12/met-finds-no-evidence-in-suzy-lamplugh-case-after-digging-up-sutton-coldfield-garden

"After digging up garden."   So The Police do sometimes dig up places and find nothing.

My only problem in The Lamplugh Case is that it should have been done so much sooner.  Just as The PJ should have dug up that piece of ground in Praia da Luz.

These things are necessary in the cases of Missing People.  They often don't find anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 12, 2018, 04:48:35 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 12, 2018, 04:38:30 PM
"After digging up garden."   So The Police do sometimes dig up places and find nothing.

My only problem in The Lamplugh Case is that it should have been done so much sooner.  Just as The PJ should have dug up that piece of ground in Praia da Luz.

These things are necessary in the cases of Missing People.  They often don't find anything.

You miss out flawed intelligence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 12, 2018, 05:02:51 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 12, 2018, 04:48:35 PM
You miss out flawed intelligence.

What Flawed Intelligence?  And in which Case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 12, 2018, 05:28:58 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 12, 2018, 05:02:51 PM
What Flawed Intelligence?  And in which Case?


McCann and Lamplugh.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 12, 2018, 06:17:18 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 12, 2018, 04:24:32 PM
The met have failed to find anything in the search for Suzy Lamplugh.


"Met finds no evidence in Suzy Lamplugh case after digging up garden"

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/12/met-finds-no-evidence-in-suzy-lamplugh-case-after-digging-up-sutton-coldfield-garden
Must we now mock and deride them as they were by certain members here after after they failed to find anything in PdL?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 12, 2018, 06:22:52 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 12, 2018, 05:28:58 PM

McCann and Lamplugh.

So someone sent The Police on a wild goose chase?  How does that work?

Do you think they might dig over my vegetable patch?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 12, 2018, 06:57:28 PM


Quote from: Eleanor on November 12, 2018, 06:22:52 PM
So someone sent The Police on a wild goose chase?  How does that work?

Do you think they might dig over my vegetable patch?

Do you think it was  done both on a whim then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 12, 2018, 07:15:18 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 12, 2018, 04:24:32 PM
The met have failed to find anything in the search for Suzy Lamplugh.


"Met finds no evidence in Suzy Lamplugh case after digging up garden"

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/12/met-finds-no-evidence-in-suzy-lamplugh-case-after-digging-up-sutton-coldfield-garden

And not a cadaver dog in sight.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 12, 2018, 11:45:13 PM
Quote from: misty on November 12, 2018, 07:15:18 PM
And not a cadaver dog in sight.....
It does make you wonder why not.  This could all have been done and dusted in the time it took Eddie to search Apt 5a.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 12, 2018, 11:53:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 12, 2018, 11:45:13 PM
It does make you wonder why not.  This could all have been done and dusted in the time it took Eddie to search Apt 5a.

Local news said they used GPR & forensic archaeologists. IMO the Met do not currently have full trust in cadaver dogs for uncovering historical human remains.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2018, 07:50:43 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 12, 2018, 11:45:13 PM
It does make you wonder why not.  This could all have been done and dusted in the time it took Eddie to search Apt 5a.

They are looking for remains... But not a cadaver dog in sight.... Why
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 13, 2018, 08:40:01 AM
Quote from: misty on November 12, 2018, 11:53:54 PM
Local news said they used GPR & forensic archaeologists. IMO the Met do not currently have full trust in cadaver dogs for uncovering historical human remains.

I don't see that as a reason for not using them.
When searching for a body, all methods should be employed - findings can be evaluated later.
IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 13, 2018, 10:18:21 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2018, 07:50:43 AM
They are looking for remains... But not a cadaver dog in sight.... Why

They had information to where the body may be buried ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 13, 2018, 10:27:53 AM
Quote from: misty on November 12, 2018, 11:53:54 PM
Local news said they used GPR & forensic archaeologists. IMO the Met do not currently have full trust in cadaver dogs for uncovering historical human remains.

We can assume that the police had a reason to believe that there was a body buried in that garden, so they didn't need dog alerts to suggest that to them. What they needed was to try to pinpoint the location. This is difficult using a cadaver dog because scent moves around underground. Hence GPR being used, which van 'see' any anomalies beneath the surface. In my opinion the Met used the correct tool for the job in hand. Had the search area been larger, dogs may well have been used to reduce the search area imo.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 13, 2018, 10:38:50 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 13, 2018, 08:40:01 AM
I don't see that as a reason for not using them.
When searching for a body, all methods should be employed - findings can be evaluated later.
IMO
Surely the GPR would have confirmed the presence of disturbance in the strata around the area where they were tipped off to look? There would be no requirement for a dog search, on this occasion the technology was deemed acceptable enough to continue to rip the place up.
With or without a dog they would be digging the place up anyway - so no dog required.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 13, 2018, 10:47:43 AM
Quote from: The General on November 13, 2018, 10:38:50 AM
Surely the GPR would have confirmed the presence of disturbance in the strata around the area where they were tipped off to look? There would be no requirement for a dog search, on this occasion the technology was deemed acceptable enough to continue to rip the place up.
With or without a dog they would be digging the place up anyway - so no dog required.

A cadaver dog would tell them if a body had been there or not though wouldn't it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 13, 2018, 10:51:21 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 13, 2018, 10:47:43 AM
A cadaver dog would tell them if a body had been there or not though wouldn't it?
Yes, but my point is, there's little point in bringing the dog in because as soon as they see a disturbance in the strata they were digging anyway. And they would always use the GPR first, dog maybe second. Even if they weren't sure about the GPR results, they were always going to dig, they were duty bound.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2018, 11:00:59 AM
It’s dog had given the garden the once over at the beginning and given no alert then wouldn’t that mean “no cadaver”?  Given that they can detect remains through concrete...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2018, 11:56:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 13, 2018, 10:27:53 AM
We can assume that the police had a reason to believe that there was a body buried in that garden, so they didn't need dog alerts to suggest that to them. What they needed was to try to pinpoint the location. This is difficult using a cadaver dog because scent moves around underground. Hence GPR being used, which van 'see' any anomalies beneath the surface. In my opinion the Met used the correct tool for the job in hand. Had the search area been larger, dogs may well have been used to reduce the search area imo.

do you have a cite for scent moves around underground..it sounds like a ridiculous suggestion....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 13, 2018, 12:14:37 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2018, 11:56:01 AM
do you have a cite for scent moves around underground..it sounds like a ridiculous suggestion....

A lot of things sound ridiculous to those with no knowledge of them. It's discussed quite thoroughly by Mark Harrison;

The generation, storage and migration of natural gases and body scent
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2018, 01:00:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 13, 2018, 12:14:37 PM
A lot of things sound ridiculous to those with no knowledge of them. It's discussed quite thoroughly by Mark Harrison;

The generation, storage and migration of natural gases and body scent
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm

The scent doesn't move around..... It can follow water drainage obviously.... It can travel through cracks in rock... Obviously... The idea it moves around is ridiculous... This happens in air but not underground... Underground it may follow pathways... That's, what Harrison is, saying
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 13, 2018, 01:07:18 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2018, 01:00:49 PM
The scent doesn't move around..... It can follow water drainage obviously.... It can travel through cracks in rock... Obviously... The idea it moves around is ridiculous... This happens in air but not underground... Underground it may follow pathways... That's, what Harrison is, saying
I'm fairly sure he's saying the exact opposite of that statement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2018, 01:17:20 PM
Quote from: The General on November 13, 2018, 01:07:18 PM
I'm fairly sure he's saying the exact opposite of that statement.

Sobtell us what you think he's saying
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 13, 2018, 01:27:26 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2018, 01:17:20 PM
Sobtell us what you think he's saying
So the scent is carried around, but not like 'on the breeze' over ground, as you would expect, but it's 'dissolved' in water and transported by varying means, and depending on various parameters he listed, it's released via gaseous emissions and  / or leachate plumes. In effect the 'scent' is moving all over the gaffe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 13, 2018, 01:41:07 PM
Quote from: The General on November 13, 2018, 01:27:26 PM
So the scent is carried around, but not like 'on the breeze' over ground, as you would expect, but it's 'dissolved' in water and transported by varying means, and depending on various parameters he listed, it's released via gaseous emissions and  / or leachate plumes. In effect the 'scent' is moving all over the gaffe.

Consequently a cadaver can be some distance from the spot where a cadaver dog alerts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2018, 03:08:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 13, 2018, 01:41:07 PM
Consequently a cadaver can be some distance from the spot where a cadaver dog alerts.

But YOU would expect the dog to alert in a garden if a body was buried there... Why were they not used..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on November 13, 2018, 03:25:09 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2018, 03:08:59 PM
But YOU would expect the dog to alert in a garden if a body was buried there... Why were they not used..

Perhaps you should ask the Met Police that one Davel.  8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 13, 2018, 03:30:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2018, 03:08:59 PM
But YOU would expect the dog to alert in a garden if a body was buried there... Why were they not used..
Because they were going to dig the place up anyway. They had to, they had a tip off. So they used GPR to narrow the search area. No need for a dog. From what I've seen the search was extensive and thorough.
Even if they did use a dog and it alerted or didn't, it wouldn't matter, they were always going to dig the gaff up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2018, 03:34:49 PM
Quote from: The General on November 13, 2018, 03:30:40 PM
Because they were going to dig the place up anyway. They had to, they had a tip off. So they used GPR to narrow the search area. No need for a dog. From what I've seen the search was extensive and thorough.
Even if they did use a dog and it alerted or didn't, it wouldn't matter, they were always going to dig the gaff up.
By using the dog first they would have known if a body was there or not... They didn't because the digs, are not that reliable imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 13, 2018, 03:39:12 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2018, 03:34:49 PM
By using the dog first they would have known if a body was there or not... They didn't because the digs, are not that reliable imo
Why? In this case, unlike the McCann case, the GPR would be way more effective and accurate and garner better results that the operatives could interpret. And, as I've mentioned at length, it would be utterly futile, they were going to dig it up any way. It's not as if they deploy a dog, it doesn't alert, so they move on, they would still dig up due to a duty of care post a serious tip off. Not because they wouldn't trust it, but because it's utterly pointless in this case.
Can't use GPR in a maisonette in Portugal
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 13, 2018, 05:52:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 13, 2018, 01:41:07 PM
Consequently a cadaver can be some distance from the spot where a cadaver dog alerts.

Dependant on the terrain and recoverable once the coordinates have been worked out.  It is very difficult to locate a body even if the person who buried it cooperates in indicating it's location if no body was ever present it is of course an impossibility.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 23, 2018, 06:28:04 PM
apropos the documentary presented by Jane Corbin on last night's tv about the Novichok attack in Salisbury.
Comment from a former head of a British Intelligence dept  regarding the Russian response to UK assertions; here I paraphrase a bit:
"Well we knew what they would say before they said it; it would be the four "disses"
Dismiss,Distort,Distract and Dismay" ............................... *%87.    That M.O. seems to have a familiar ring to it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 23, 2018, 07:01:43 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on November 23, 2018, 06:28:04 PM
apropos the documentary presented by Jane Corbin on last night's tv about the Novichok attack in Salisbury.
Comment from a former head of a British Intelligence dept  regarding the Russian response to UK assertions; here I paraphrase a bit:
"Well we knew what they would say before they said it; it would be the four "disses"
Dismiss,Distort,Distract and Dismay" ............................... *%87.    That M.O. seems to have a familiar ring to it.
Doesn’t it just!  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 23, 2018, 08:19:12 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 23, 2018, 07:01:43 PM
Doesn’t it just!  8(0(*

A picture paints a thousand words.
 8((()*/        8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 23, 2018, 08:33:20 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on November 23, 2018, 08:19:12 PM
A picture paints a thousand words.
 8((()*/        8)--))
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush...  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on November 23, 2018, 11:34:43 PM
The weekend beckons once again and with it will come the usual silliness. However, members are warned that referring to other members as naive, immature, hypocritical, stupid etc is a breach of forum etiquette and as such will attract sanctions.

Please keep posts amiable and constructive and above all please avoid goading or demeaning comments. TY.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 24, 2018, 05:52:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 23, 2018, 08:33:20 PM
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush...  8(>((

A hand in the bush of two birds will do for  me   8(*(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 24, 2018, 05:56:30 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 24, 2018, 05:52:14 PM
A hand in the bush of two birds will do for  me   8(*(
That sounds quite disgusting tbh. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 24, 2018, 06:11:05 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 24, 2018, 05:52:14 PM
A hand in the bush of two birds will do for  me   8(*(

I don't know whether to delete this or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 24, 2018, 07:38:47 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 24, 2018, 06:11:05 PM
I don't know whether to delete this or not.

Waaaaaay beneath the standard expected of our members ... adolescent smut.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 24, 2018, 07:39:57 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 24, 2018, 07:38:47 PM
Waaaaaay beneath the standard expected of our members ... adolescent smut.

Yep.  Best leave it there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 24, 2018, 07:41:19 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 24, 2018, 07:38:47 PM
Waaaaaay beneath the standard expected of our members ... adolescent smut.

but its not from an adolescent which makes it worse
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 24, 2018, 08:11:51 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 24, 2018, 07:38:47 PM
Waaaaaay beneath the standard expected of our members ... adolescent smut.

It's difficult to conceive it was not "lead out" for ; the winner of the sprint was the surprise  ?{)(**

No bloke however old can ever resist the old schoolboy smirk at Uranus and Huddersfield. All due to a basic design defect that failed to address the problem of a blood supply that fails to operate more than one organ at a time. It would have showed up earlier had there been proper scientific testing  8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 25, 2018, 10:01:41 AM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on November 24, 2018, 08:11:51 PM
It's difficult to conceive it was not "lead out" for ; the winner of the sprint was the surprise  ?{)(**

No bloke however old can ever resist the old schoolboy smirk at Uranus and Huddersfield. All due to a basic design defect that failed to address the problem of a blood supply that fails to operate more than one organ at a time. It would have showed up earlier had there been proper scientific testing  8)--))

Is the dislike of such humour due to nature or nurture I wonder?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 25, 2018, 08:53:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 25, 2018, 10:01:41 AM
Is the dislike of such humour due to nature or nurture I wonder?

Posing, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 29, 2018, 04:00:09 PM
Levenson 2 not to go ahead.


"Leveson 2 inquiry will not go ahead after press intrusion victims lose High Court battle"

"Four victims of intrusion by the UK press have lost a High Court fight against the government over its decision to scrap the second part of the Leveson Inquiry into media standards.
Christopher Jefferies, Kate and Gerry McCann and Jacqui Hames had brought a judicial review against the government’s move".

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/leveson-2-inquiry-high-court-ruling-kate-gerry-mccann-christopher-jefferies-media-press-a8659151.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 29, 2018, 04:17:20 PM
Who'll be picking up the legal costs - Hacked Off or the individuals ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 29, 2018, 06:18:06 PM
[Name removed]o bro of BoJo on BBC News this eve, described Brexit negots as "botched and bungled".
I wonder who wrote his script ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 29, 2018, 06:21:04 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 29, 2018, 04:17:20 PM
Who'll be picking up the legal costs - Hacked Off or the individuals ?

Hacked Off via crowdfunding.
https://hackinginquiry.org/campaigns/leveson-part-2/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 29, 2018, 06:32:21 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 29, 2018, 04:00:09 PM
Levenson 2 not to go ahead.


"Leveson 2 inquiry will not go ahead after press intrusion victims lose High Court battle"

"Four victims of intrusion by the UK press have lost a High Court fight against the government over its decision to scrap the second part of the Leveson Inquiry into media standards.
Christopher Jefferies, Kate and Gerry McCann and Jacqui Hames had brought a judicial review against the government’s move".

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/leveson-2-inquiry-high-court-ruling-kate-gerry-mccann-christopher-jefferies-media-press-a8659151.html

They[the claimants] said cancelling it was therefore 'unlawful', because the four had a 'legitimate expectation' it would go ahead.

"The judge also said he found it 'unacceptable' that the case was based on a covert recording made of the meeting, despite everyone present having agreed that 'what is said in this room stays in this room' at the outset.

He said the case failed 'at almost every level'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 30, 2018, 01:23:23 PM
I see there is a development in the Needham case have posted on the relevant thread for those interested.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on November 30, 2018, 04:06:00 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on November 29, 2018, 06:18:06 PM
[Name removed]o bro of BoJo on BBC News this eve, described Brexit negots as "botched and bungled".
I wonder who wrote his script ?

Unlike big bro, [Name removed]o seems quite sensible. Sadly, I hadn't heard of him until he resigned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 30, 2018, 07:51:43 PM
Quote from: Alice Purjorick on November 29, 2018, 06:32:21 PM
They[the claimants] said cancelling it was therefore 'unlawful', because the four had a 'legitimate expectation' it would go ahead.

"The judge also said he found it 'unacceptable' that the case was based on a covert recording made of the meeting, despite everyone present having agreed that 'what is said in this room stays in this room' at the outset.

He said the case failed 'at almost every level'.

Kate N Gerry just don't seem to be winning their court cases these days... I wonder if they can get BOGOF (a buy one get one legal fight free0 at the ECHR... two governments one off payment?

Oh Gerry wants to silence the press? oh no wait... he just wants to control it...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 10, 2018, 07:05:54 PM
Excellent news that justice has finally been won for Karen Hadaway and Nicola Fellows some 32 years after they were murdered by Russell Bishop.

I often have a gut feeling when someone is not telling the truth and I always felt that with Bishop, even when he was acquitted in his first trial.

Thank goodness for double jeopardy and the advances in DNA that secured Bishop’s conviction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2018, 07:24:29 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on December 10, 2018, 07:05:54 PM
Excellent news that justice has finally been won for Karen Hadaway and Nicola Fellows some 32 years after they were murdered by Russell Bishop.

I often have a gut feeling when someone is not telling the truth and I always felt that with Bishop, even when he was acquitted in his first trial.

Thank goodness for double jeopardy and the advances in DNA that secured Bishop’s conviction.
Gosh, I always thought the convicted paedophile was telling the truth, aren’t you terribly clever!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on December 10, 2018, 08:00:24 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2018, 07:24:29 PM
Gosh, I always thought the convicted paedophile was telling the truth, aren’t you terribly clever!



Take heed in the maddie case then - don't make the same mistake again imo VS
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 10, 2018, 08:09:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2018, 07:24:29 PM
Gosh, I always thought the convicted paedophile was telling the truth, aren’t you terribly clever!

Don't forget the hatchet job they tried to do on the father of one of the victims.  That was a disgrace.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2018, 08:31:23 PM
Quote from: kizzy on December 10, 2018, 08:00:24 PM


Take heed in the maddie case then - don't make the same mistake again imo VS
what mistake would that be dear Kizzy?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 10, 2018, 09:03:46 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 10, 2018, 08:09:55 PM
Don't forget the hatchet job they tried to do on the father of one of the victims.  That was a disgrace.

Indeed Eleanor. It would appear Mr Fellows and his lodger at the time Douglas Judd were arrested on the say so of an ex girlfriend of Bishop. The allegation was originally made in 1987 at a time when the victim’s boyfriend was facing trial for the murders of Mr Fellows daughter and her friend. Her allegation was later found to be without foundation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 10, 2018, 09:06:40 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on December 10, 2018, 09:03:46 PM
Indeed Eleanor. It would appear Mr Fellows and his lodger at the time Douglas Judd were arrested on the say so of an ex girlfriend of Bishop. The allegation was originally made in 1987 at a time when the victim’s boyfriend was facing trial for the murders of Mr Fellows daughter and her friend. Her allegation was later found to be without foundation.

Thanks for that, Faith.  Did it not rear its head again in this last trial?  I was a bit unclear about that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 10, 2018, 09:32:18 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 10, 2018, 09:06:40 PM
Thanks for that, Faith.  Did it not rear its head again in this last trial?  I was a bit unclear about that.

It did. It was brought up by the defence.

I believe Mr Fellows has passed away.

Apologies it was Mr Hadaway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 10, 2018, 09:53:49 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on December 10, 2018, 09:32:18 PM
It did. It was brought up by the defence.

I believe Mr Fellows has passed away.

That is really sad.  All of those years waiting for justice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2018, 10:40:01 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on December 10, 2018, 09:32:18 PM
It did. It was brought up by the defence.

I believe Mr Fellows has passed away.
He was alive on 20th November of this year.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-46275917
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on December 10, 2018, 10:54:34 PM
https://portugalresident.com/parents-of-cliff-fall-death-aussie-condemn-pj-police-investigation-as-%E2%80%9Canother-stuff-up%E2%80%9D

Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on December 10, 2018

Parents of cliff-fall death Aussie condemn PJ police investigation as “another stuff up”

Referring to the ‘botched’ investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, the parents of a young Australian who fell 30 metres to his death from an Ericeira clifftop six months ago, say they feel his case is “bloody right up the same alley - another stuff up”. The parents of specialist electrician Michael Kearns are not satisfied that police properly investigated the possible involvement of a third party.

This is not the first time doubts have been raised by Australian media (click here).

The agony of Kathy and Bill Kearns comes after the couple received the PJ’s final report which ruled their son’s death, and that of his British girlfriend Louise Benson, was “accidental”.

The report indicates that the police spoke to only one witness - the beach cleaner who found the couple’s bodies at the foot of the cliff. Yet, other media found and spoke to a number of people who saw and spent time with the holidaymakers, including one woman who was walking her dog near the cliff-top just after 5am and heard someone shout or scream “as if in fright”.

But even more worrying is the clump of hair Michael was found to have in one of his hands.

Says website Perth Now: “the Kearns were desperate to know if it belonged to their son or a third party. But in the report, it states the hair was collected for DNA sampling but no determination could be made”.

And that for grieving parents - who do not buy the police ‘theory’ that the couple died taking a selfie - is simply not good enough.

“All we want is answers ... and we’re guessing, which breaks your heart. We’re not saying (the Portuguese police) haven’t done their job, but they haven’t reported it, they haven’t given us the complete report”, says the couple.

For now, the PJ investigation appears to have been closed. Whether Michael Kearns parents “accept it and do nothing or get legal advice”, they have not decided, but they admit they are “resigned to the fact” that they may never get the answers they’re looking for.

As to the ‘selfie theory’, they say it’s “insulting”, because it makes their son and his girlfriend “sound like they’re stupid…”

No one would take a photograph of themselves in the dark, is the couple’s contention.

What Kathy and Bill Kearns did reveal however is that Louise Benson’s iPhone is with her family and they are “trying to get it unlocked to see if it holds answers”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2018, 11:12:41 PM
Quote from: misty on December 10, 2018, 10:54:34 PM
https://portugalresident.com/parents-of-cliff-fall-death-aussie-condemn-pj-police-investigation-as-%E2%80%9Canother-stuff-up%E2%80%9D

Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on December 10, 2018

Parents of cliff-fall death Aussie condemn PJ police investigation as “another stuff up”

Referring to the ‘botched’ investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, the parents of a young Australian who fell 30 metres to his death from an Ericeira clifftop six months ago, say they feel his case is “bloody right up the same alley - another stuff up”. The parents of specialist electrician Michael Kearns are not satisfied that police properly investigated the possible involvement of a third party.

This is not the first time doubts have been raised by Australian media (click here).

The agony of Kathy and Bill Kearns comes after the couple received the PJ’s final report which ruled their son’s death, and that of his British girlfriend Louise Benson, was “accidental”.

The report indicates that the police spoke to only one witness - the beach cleaner who found the couple’s bodies at the foot of the cliff. Yet, other media found and spoke to a number of people who saw and spent time with the holidaymakers, including one woman who was walking her dog near the cliff-top just after 5am and heard someone shout or scream “as if in fright”.

But even more worrying is the clump of hair Michael was found to have in one of his hands.

Says website Perth Now: “the Kearns were desperate to know if it belonged to their son or a third party. But in the report, it states the hair was collected for DNA sampling but no determination could be made”.

And that for grieving parents - who do not buy the police ‘theory’ that the couple died taking a selfie - is simply not good enough.

“All we want is answers ... and we’re guessing, which breaks your heart. We’re not saying (the Portuguese police) haven’t done their job, but they haven’t reported it, they haven’t given us the complete report”, says the couple.

For now, the PJ investigation appears to have been closed. Whether Michael Kearns parents “accept it and do nothing or get legal advice”, they have not decided, but they admit they are “resigned to the fact” that they may never get the answers they’re looking for.

As to the ‘selfie theory’, they say it’s “insulting”, because it makes their son and his girlfriend “sound like they’re stupid…”

No one would take a photograph of themselves in the dark, is the couple’s contention.

What Kathy and Bill Kearns did reveal however is that Louise Benson’s iPhone is with her family and they are “trying to get it unlocked to see if it holds answers”.
‘another stuff up” sounds about right :-(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on December 10, 2018, 11:25:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2018, 11:12:41 PM
‘another stuff up” sounds about right :-(
Yes. If in 2018 Portuguese forensics cannot obtain a DNA profile from a clump of hair found in one victim's clutch (which presumably had roots & was not cuttings from the floor of the local barber's) what chance of solving a crime back in 2007 by testing all the shed hairs collected from 5A?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 07:14:17 AM
The lady who died did seem to like taking photos in high places.

(https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article12698014.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/THP_CHP_130618SLUG_2743JPG.jpg)

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/first-picture-british-tourist-boyfriend-12697956

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on December 11, 2018, 07:18:59 AM
Quote from: misty on December 10, 2018, 11:25:53 PM
Yes. If in 2018 Portuguese forensics cannot obtain a DNA profile from a clump of hair found in one victim's clutch (which presumably had roots & was not cuttings from the floor of the local barber's) what chance of solving a crime back in 2007 by testing all the shed hairs collected from 5A?

You certainly make assumptions misty. Hair can be removed without roots without being cut by a barber or hairdresser as you surely will know. 

Anything to bash the PJ some more eh misty?

Edited

Even with a root it seems it is only upto 60 to 70% successful, and

Success Rate of Hair Samples
The success rate in terms of extraction of DNA from any samples is dependent on a number of factors:

Chemical treatment using dyes can alter the cuticle. Dyes can easily penetrate the spaces between the scaly cells forming the hair cuticle or even raise them in order to be better absorbed by the hair. Peroxides, one of the main constituent chemicals in hair dyes, heavily contribute to the degradation of DNA in hair. Peroxides act by specifically breaking the phosphodiester bonds in DNA. Once the hair is exposed to water on washing, the DNA is easily washed out of the hair fibers. The higher the number of washes, the more DNA is lost from the hairs. This loss of DNA is not only due to the degradation and breaking down of the phosphodiester bonds in DNA but also to the damage caused to the hair by simply washing it.

We cannot discount the importance and possible effects of other factors which would affect any type of DNA samples: the age of the sample, the way the sample has been collected and stored, and any external forces that may have altered the state of the DNA (for example, exposure to very high temperatures, soaps and cleaning agents, or to corrosive substances).

https://www.forensicmag.com/article/2013/04/challenges-dna-testing-and-forensic-analysis-hair-samples
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 10:04:16 AM
Quote from: Sunny on December 11, 2018, 07:18:59 AM
You certainly make assumptions misty. Hair can be removed without roots without being cut by a barber or hairdresser as you surely will know. 

Anything to bash the PJ some more eh misty?

Edited

Even with a root it seems it is only upto 60 to 70% successful, and

Success Rate of Hair Samples
The success rate in terms of extraction of DNA from any samples is dependent on a number of factors:

Chemical treatment using dyes can alter the cuticle. Dyes can easily penetrate the spaces between the scaly cells forming the hair cuticle or even raise them in order to be better absorbed by the hair. Peroxides, one of the main constituent chemicals in hair dyes, heavily contribute to the degradation of DNA in hair. Peroxides act by specifically breaking the phosphodiester bonds in DNA. Once the hair is exposed to water on washing, the DNA is easily washed out of the hair fibers. The higher the number of washes, the more DNA is lost from the hairs. This loss of DNA is not only due to the degradation and breaking down of the phosphodiester bonds in DNA but also to the damage caused to the hair by simply washing it.

We cannot discount the importance and possible effects of other factors which would affect any type of DNA samples: the age of the sample, the way the sample has been collected and stored, and any external forces that may have altered the state of the DNA (for example, exposure to very high temperatures, soaps and cleaning agents, or to corrosive substances).

https://www.forensicmag.com/article/2013/04/challenges-dna-testing-and-forensic-analysis-hair-samples

The judicial police appear to have started and ended their investigation into the fall from the finish and not the beginning.

According to newspaper reports the only witness interviewed was the person who had found the bodies.

I think that leaves a lot of space for criticism.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 12:10:33 PM
Neil Mackay: Look around this nasty nation and you will see hatred everywhere
By Neil Mackay
Writer at large
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17289367.neil-mackay-look-around-this-nasty-nation-and-you-will-see-hatred-everywhere/


While reading Neil McKay’s article on hatred I couldn’t help but make the comparison and the connection between the situations he describes and the vitriol spewed out against the McCann family, not by the day or by the hour but by the nanosecond in industrial loads.

According to MacKay, the element of hatred is described in the long term as having become synonymous with how we as a nation are forging a lasting opinion of who we are in the world arena.


“This is what we’ve become – hatred everywhere, hatred on the streets, hatred in debate, hatred eating us from the inside out.

It makes one wonder, though, if we were ever a nation of decency.

No truly decent society could split and sunder and curdle so quickly as we have if we had goodness at our core.

Surely, some rot was in the heart of this nation for a long time for us to crumble so quickly.

Has the masked just slipped dramatically in the last two years revealing the truly ugly face of Britain?”  Neil MacKay


Just add the word “McCann” into that somewhere and you may see why I made the connection with so many – many – many hostile fora based on and nurturing McCann family hatred.
Is this our legacy for future generations?  I find the resonance of MacKay’s description painfully apt … “ … a diminished nation and a uniquely UK-style of troll – nasty, British and short …”



The second connection I made was with the successful action at the European Court of Justice.
I can’t find a link on the internet as yet … but the application to the ECJ can be explained here … https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16894721.landmark-legal-victory-could-see-brexit-halted-at-11th-hour/

The paper version carries the headline ... Scotland's landmark legal case: A year-long fight against the odds JUDGES' RULING Tom Gordon

Food for thought.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 01:30:40 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 12:10:33 PM
Neil Mackay: Look around this nasty nation and you will see hatred everywhere
By Neil Mackay
Writer at large
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17289367.neil-mackay-look-around-this-nasty-nation-and-you-will-see-hatred-everywhere/


While reading Neil McKay’s article on hatred I couldn’t help but make the comparison and the connection between the situations he describes and the vitriol spewed out against the McCann family, not by the day or by the hour but by the nanosecond in industrial loads.

According to MacKay, the element of hatred is described in the long term as having become synonymous with how we as a nation are forging a lasting opinion of who we are in the world arena.


“This is what we’ve become – hatred everywhere, hatred on the streets, hatred in debate, hatred eating us from the inside out.

It makes one wonder, though, if we were ever a nation of decency.

No truly decent society could split and sunder and curdle so quickly as we have if we had goodness at our core.

Surely, some rot was in the heart of this nation for a long time for us to crumble so quickly.

Has the masked just slipped dramatically in the last two years revealing the truly ugly face of Britain?”  Neil MacKay


Just add the word “McCann” into that somewhere and you may see why I made the connection with so many – many – many hostile fora based on and nurturing McCann family hatred.
Is this our legacy for future generations?  I find the resonance of MacKay’s description painfully apt … “ … a diminished nation and a uniquely UK-style of troll – nasty, British and short …”



The second connection I made was with the successful action at the European Court of Justice.
I can’t find a link on the internet as yet … but the application to the ECJ can be explained here … https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16894721.landmark-legal-victory-could-see-brexit-halted-at-11th-hour/

The paper version carries the headline ... Scotland's landmark legal case: A year-long fight against the odds JUDGES' RULING Tom Gordon

Food for thought.

This reporter seems to be ignoring the fact that our 'nation' has never been harmonious.The Irish, Scottish and Welsh people have a history of conflict with the English going back centuries. A lot of Scottish people would like to get out of the United Kingdom.

I don't think the Brexit Leavers and Remainers hate each other at all. Well, they might do in Scotland, where 'hate'
seems to be one of their favourite words.

What we should all be concerned about is the low esteem in which a democratic vote is held by our political classes throughout the UK. The Labour politicians rejected the democratic election of their Leader and now most of our MP's seem quite happy to ignore the result of the Brexit Referendum.

I'm not a supporter of Theresa May, but she seems to be the only one attempting to carry out the will of the people.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 02:17:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 01:30:40 PM
This reporter seems to be ignoring the fact that our 'nation' has never been harmonious.The Irish, Scottish and Welsh people have a history of conflict with the English going back centuries. A lot of Scottish people would like to get out of the United Kingdom.

I don't think the Brexit Leavers and Remainers hate each other at all. Well, they might do in Scotland, where 'hate'
seems to be one of their favourite words.

What we should all be concerned about is the low esteem in which a democratic vote is held by our political classes throughout the UK. The Labour politicians rejected the democratic election of their Leader and now most of our MP's seem quite happy to ignore the result of the Brexit Referendum.

I'm not a supporter of Theresa May, but she seems to be the only one attempting to carry out the will of the people.

The chaos of Brexit is a hiccup in history and is not to be confused with the apparent endemic hatred which it appears to reflect.

Not once did I mention Brexit in my post which concerned the wider connotation of the hatred which abounds in our society as outlined by Neil MacKay in relation to the deliberate targeting of an innocent family as international hated objects.

Rather interesting that on this board ... you chose to raise the telescope to a blind eye.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on December 11, 2018, 02:59:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 02:17:44 PM
The chaos of Brexit is a hiccup in history and is not to be confused with the apparent endemic hatred which it appears to reflect.

Not once did I mention Brexit in my post which concerned the wider connotation of the hatred which abounds in our society as outlined by Neil MacKay in relation to the deliberate targeting of an innocent family as international hated objects.

Rather interesting that on this board ... you chose to raise the telescope to a blind eye.


N M didnt mention mcns either - obviously your opinion.

Just add the word “McCann” into that somewhere and you may see why I made the connection with so many – many – many hostile fora based on and nurturing McCann family hatred.
Is this our legacy for future generations?  I find the resonance of MacKay’s description painfully apt … “ … a diminished nation and a uniquely UK-style of troll – nasty, British and short …”



What is your proof its hatred - does it occur to you its just maybe they don't believe the mcns version or maddie was abducted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 06:04:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 02:17:44 PM
The chaos of Brexit is a hiccup in history and is not to be confused with the apparent endemic hatred which it appears to reflect.

Not once did I mention Brexit in my post which concerned the wider connotation of the hatred which abounds in our society as outlined by Neil MacKay in relation to the deliberate targeting of an innocent family as international hated objects.

Rather interesting that on this board ... you chose to raise the telescope to a blind eye.

The journalist seems to be using Brexit to pontificate about hatred just as you seem to use the McCanns to do it.   I think hatred, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. I see more kindness in society now than I did 50 years ago, so I disagree with both of you.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 06:22:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 06:04:36 PM
The journalist seems to be using Brexit to pontificate about hatred just as you seem to use the McCanns to do it.   I think hatred, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. I see more kindness in society now than I did 50 years ago, so I disagree with both of you.

Make no mistake about it.  There is nothing that I "seem" to think about the constant stream of hatred directed at the McCann family ... I am very firm about it and the horrible effect it must have on the hated but more particularly on the psyche of the perpetrators of that hate.
Pontificate?? maybe so as far as some may be concerned ... and there is at least one brand of kindness shown today that was unnecessary fifty years ago in the efforts of those running food banks and those contributing to them to feed working families.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 11, 2018, 06:23:55 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 02:17:44 PM
The chaos of Brexit is a hiccup in history and is not to be confused with the apparent endemic hatred which it appears to reflect.

Not once did I mention Brexit in my post which concerned the wider connotation of the hatred which abounds in our society as outlined by Neil MacKay in relation to the deliberate targeting of an innocent family as international hated objects.

Rather interesting that on this board ... you chose to raise the telescope to a blind eye.

Why do you think that the McCanns, who should be the subject of overwhelming sympathy, find themselves ‘international hated objects’ ? Amongst the parents of missing and murdered children aren’t these parents unique in this ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 11, 2018, 06:28:19 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on December 11, 2018, 06:23:55 PM
Why do you think that the McCanns, who should be the subject of overwhelming sympathy, find themselves ‘international hated objects’ ? Amongst the parents of missing and murdered children aren’t these parents unique in this ?
No, that woman whose baby was stolen by a dingo was not very popular either, and that was pre-internet. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 06:29:17 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on December 11, 2018, 06:23:55 PM
Why do you think that the McCanns, who should be the subject of overwhelming sympathy, find themselves ‘international hated objects’ ? Amongst the parents of missing and murdered children aren’t these parents unique in this ?

I haven't a clue ... but I am sure you would be able to elucidate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 11, 2018, 06:31:01 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 06:22:19 PM
Make no mistake about it.  There is nothing that I "seem" to think about the constant stream of hatred directed at the McCann family ... I am very firm about it and the horrible effect it must have on the hated but more particularly on the psyche of the perpetrators of that hate.
Pontificate?? maybe so as far as some may be concerned ... and there is at least one brand of kindness shown today that was unnecessary fifty years ago in the efforts of those running food banks and those contributing to them to feed working families.

I go to a Food Bank every week.  No one ever makes me feel somehow diminished.  They are all very kind.  But then France is so much more understanding of the need.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 11, 2018, 06:36:08 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 11, 2018, 06:31:01 PM
I go to a Food Bank every week.  No one ever makes me feel somehow diminished.  They are all very kind.  But then France is so much more understanding of the need.

In the Uk, these are only supposed to be for the occasional user.
People are not supposed to go on a weekly basis
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 11, 2018, 06:45:26 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 11, 2018, 06:31:01 PM
I go to a Food Bank every week.  No one ever makes me feel somehow diminished.  They are all very kind.  But then France is so much more understanding of the need.

No one should ever feel diminished because they need help. Every one of us are just a few wage packets from penury.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 11, 2018, 06:48:16 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 11, 2018, 06:36:08 PM
In the Uk, these are only supposed to be for the occasional user.
People are not supposed to go on a weekly basis

Not supposed to but unfortunately, certainly in the UK, weekly use is becoming more and more the norm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 06:54:24 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 11, 2018, 06:36:08 PM
In the Uk, these are only supposed to be for the occasional user.
People are not supposed to go on a weekly basis

Yes, just like in Victorian times they have to be recommended as 'deserving' the food. Being on a low income isn't enough to justify giving someone three day's food.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 06:57:48 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 06:22:19 PM
Make no mistake about it.  There is nothing that I "seem" to think about the constant stream of hatred directed at the McCann family ... I am very firm about it and the horrible effect it must have on the hated but more particularly on the psyche of the perpetrators of that hate.
Pontificate?? maybe so as far as some may be concerned ... and there is at least one brand of kindness shown today that was unnecessary fifty years ago in the efforts of those running food banks and those contributing to them to feed working families.

What I meant was that some people see hatred where others don't. It's an opinion, not a fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 11, 2018, 07:00:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 06:04:36 PM
The journalist seems to be using Brexit to pontificate about hatred just as you seem to use the McCanns to do it.   I think hatred, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. I see more kindness in society now than I did 50 years ago, so I disagree with both of you.
If you think that the McCanns would have been treated less kindly 50 years ago, I’d have to say you were dreaming IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 11, 2018, 07:09:20 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 11, 2018, 06:36:08 PM
In the Uk, these are only supposed to be for the occasional user.
People are not supposed to go on a weekly basis

The need in France is based on monthly income which has to be proved.  I qualify due to my Basic British State Pension. 

If you are correct then obviously Britain doesn't know how to run a Food Bank.

Food doesn't get dumped in bins around here, and hasn't been for a very long time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 11, 2018, 07:17:35 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 11, 2018, 07:09:20 PM
The need in France is based on monthly income which has to be proved.  I qualify due to my Basic British State Pension. 

If you are correct then obviously Britain doesn't know how to run a Food Bank.

Food doesn't get dumped in bins around here, and hasn't been for a very long time.

I don't know what the rules are, or just how they are applied, other than recipients require a voucher that they can obtain from a number of agencies.

I donate monthly and like to think that the food goes to genuinely needy cases.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 07:20:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 11, 2018, 07:00:48 PM
If you think that the McCanns would have been treated less kindly 50 years ago, I’d have to say you were dreaming IMO.

I was discussing this apparent outbreak of 'hatred' which some thin has suddenly pervaded our 'nation'. I disagree with that idea.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 07:48:11 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 11, 2018, 07:09:20 PM
The need in France is based on monthly income which has to be proved.  I qualify due to my Basic British State Pension. 

If you are correct then obviously Britain doesn't know how to run a Food Bank.

Food doesn't get dumped in bins around here, and hasn't been for a very long time.

In the UK the lowest amount paid to a single pensioner is £163 per week. If their State Pension is below that they get Pension Credit to make up the difference. If they're eligible for Pension Credit and pay rent they will get Housing Benefit to cover that. They will pay very little or no Council Tax. The £163 is for everything else.

The thing I find strange is that a single person on benefits gets £73.10 to live on; less than half the amount allowed to pensioners, although they will have similar outgoings.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 11, 2018, 07:55:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 07:48:11 PM
In the UK the lowest amount paid to a single pensioner is £163 per week. If their State Pension is below that they get Pension Credit to make up the difference. If they're eligible for Pension Credit and pay rent they will get Housing Benefit to cover that. They will pay very little or no Council Tax. The £163 is for everything else.

The thing I find strange is that a single person on benefits gets £73.10 to live on; less than half the amount allowed to pensioners, although they will have similar outgoings.

There's no making any sense of the British Benefit system.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 09:20:46 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 11, 2018, 06:31:01 PM
I go to a Food Bank every week.  No one ever makes me feel somehow diminished.  They are all very kind.  But then France is so much more understanding of the need.

Nor should it be so that anyone should feel diminished.  The disgrace is that food banks are needed particularly in Britain where throughout my lifetime it was supposed a safety net was in existence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 09:23:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 06:57:48 PM
What I meant was that some people see hatred where others don't. It's an opinion, not a fact.

While there are those who see guilt where none exists.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 09:35:29 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 11, 2018, 07:09:20 PM
The need in France is based on monthly income which has to be proved.  I qualify due to my Basic British State Pension. 

If you are correct then obviously Britain doesn't know how to run a Food Bank.

Food doesn't get dumped in bins around here, and hasn't been for a very long time.

The first food bank in my area was set up as a charity by one of the churches and then and now a referral was required.
Initially it was intended as an emergency measure ... now they are a necessity.

By your description I think you are correct that France has one over on us if the organisation is based on entitlement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 09:38:23 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 11, 2018, 07:55:34 PM
There's no making any sense of the British Benefit system.

The discrepancy exists to 'encourage' those on benefits to get a job. Pensioners are excused, although Owen Paterson suggested putting us to work picking fruit and vegetables in place of migrant workers, didn't he?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 09:40:04 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 09:23:14 PM
While there are those who see guilt where none exists.

Also a matter of opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 10:22:11 PM
In my opinion there are other nasty pieces of work around, not just Owen Paterson.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 11, 2018, 10:29:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 11, 2018, 10:22:11 PM
In my opinion there are other nasty pieces of work around, not just Owen Paterson.
Yes, you’re absolutely right there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 12, 2018, 02:34:30 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 11, 2018, 09:35:29 PM
The first food bank in my area was set up as a charity by one of the churches and then and now a referral was required.
Initially it was intended as an emergency measure ... now they are a necessity.

By your description I think you are correct that France has one over on us if the organisation is based on entitlement.

The first Food Banks in France were set up by Catholic Charities some seventy years ago when things were often dire.  They are much better organised these days and the local Communes are now involved.  Much of this was to do with the obscene waste of food when people were going hungry.

The Commune bench mark is 716 Euros per month for the next six months and the local Marie issues a ticket for that period, if you qualify.

My Pension is also affected by the Exchange Rate which hasn't been good for several years, but that is to do with a weak Pound, and nothing to do with The Euro.

No UK Expat in France gets The Winter Fuel Allowance anymore, and no UK Benefits are available to Expats.

French State Pensions are far superior to UK and people generally are horrified by the amount that UK Pensioners are expected to live on.

Some people come and go, depending on being temporarily out of work.

The people who man these stations are mainly elderly volunteers, but there are paid organisers who collect donations and sell by date food, which all goes into freezers.
There is quite a lot of organisation involved.

I am simply grateful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 16, 2018, 06:17:53 PM
Food banks are now a growth industry. Yes it is an industry now. CEOs of  these charities. who incidentaly never started one up OR helped with the free delivery are lapping up a nice salary.  One gets the feeling  a notice should be highlighted for those who seek bread should eat cake instead... hmm

There really should be no need for food banks it is an insult to those who worked all their lives, a living pension is not unafordable at all. However, I shall not go into where a lot of money goes as I would be given a rascist tag, not that it bothers me,. but my last visit to Africa to see the 'starving/dying/ children. My eyes were opened and I was shocked beyond belief. I will never give any money to any charity who has a paid hierarchy.

For those who do want to know where millions of our hard earned tax goes then look no further that the greedy universities. and perhaps a FOI request would shock you if you asked how many foreign students get their £4500,00 fees paid in scotland and don't have to pay back, and the loans?how much gets paid back... The NHS will provide funds/bursaries for students from Turkey- not even in the EU.

But anyway, we can lay the blame fairly and quarely at the BLIAR government for wasting billions on a non winnable war against a country which did not threaten us. And for producing a refugee surge , crimes against humanity comes to my mind. I do not favour any particular political party they areall the same.

The rest of the world hate the UK but love our 'rich country with free money and housing' aint that the truth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2018, 06:21:33 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on December 16, 2018, 06:17:53 PM
Food banks are now a growth industry. Yes it is an industry now. CEOs of  these charities. who incidentaly never started one up OR helped with the free delivery are lapping up a nice salary.  One gets the feeling  a notice should be highlighted for those who seek bread should eat cake instead... hmm

There really should be no need for food banks it is an insult to those who worked all their lives, a living pension is not unafordable at all. However, I shall not go into where a lot of money goes as I would be given a rascist tag, not that it bothers me,. but my last visit to Africa to see the 'starving/dying/ children. My eyes were opened and I was shocked beyond belief. I will never give any money to any charity who has a paid hierarchy.

For those who do want to know where millions of our hard earned tax goes then look no further that the greedy universities. and perhaps a FOI request would shock you if you asked how many foreign students get their £4500,00 fees paid in scotland and don't have to pay back, and the loans?how much gets paid back... The NHS will provide funds/bursaries for students from Turkey- not even in the EU.

But anyway, we can lay the blame fairly and quarely at the BLIAR government for wasting billions on a non winnable war against a country which did not threaten us. And for producing a refugee surge , crimes against humanity comes to my mind. I do not favour any particular political party they areall the same.

The rest of the world hate the UK but love our 'rich country with free money and housing' aint that the truth.

absolutely    so the 11 million spent on the search for maddie really is small change...good post
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 16, 2018, 07:51:07 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on December 16, 2018, 06:17:53 PM
Food banks are now a growth industry. Yes it is an industry now. CEOs of  these charities. who incidentaly never started one up OR helped with the free delivery are lapping up a nice salary.  One gets the feeling  a notice should be highlighted for those who seek bread should eat cake instead... hmm

There really should be no need for food banks it is an insult to those who worked all their lives, a living pension is not unafordable at all. However, I shall not go into where a lot of money goes as I would be given a rascist tag, not that it bothers me,. but my last visit to Africa to see the 'starving/dying/ children. My eyes were opened and I was shocked beyond belief. I will never give any money to any charity who has a paid hierarchy.

For those who do want to know where millions of our hard earned tax goes then look no further that the greedy universities. and perhaps a FOI request would shock you if you asked how many foreign students get their £4500,00 fees paid in scotland and don't have to pay back, and the loans?how much gets paid back... The NHS will provide funds/bursaries for students from Turkey- not even in the EU.

But anyway, we can lay the blame fairly and quarely at the BLIAR government for wasting billions on a non winnable war against a country which did not threaten us. And for producing a refugee surge , crimes against humanity comes to my mind. I do not favour any particular political party they areall the same.

The rest of the world hate the UK but love our 'rich country with free money and housing' aint that the truth.

I wouldn't dream of contributing to those large scale charities because they are too much like businesses.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2018, 07:59:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 16, 2018, 07:51:07 PM
I wouldn't dream of contributing to those large scale charities because they are too much like businesses.

I spent a day collecting fir the, RNLI...as a, schoolboy... When I git home my box came open.. I counted 3 pounds 5 shillings and sealed it back up... 3 months later I got a lettter saying thank you for helping... You collected 3 pounds... I don't like giving to charities... I wonder if sunny will ask for a cite
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 16, 2018, 08:22:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 16, 2018, 07:51:07 PM
I wouldn't dream of contributing to those large scale charities because they are too much like businesses.
What’s wrong with businesses?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 16, 2018, 10:01:19 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2018, 06:21:33 PM
absolutely    so the 11 million spent on the search for maddie really is small change...good post

A day centre was closed down which cost just under £30000.00 per annum running costs- this enabled children with learning difficulties and physical disabilities to have extra help with socialising and school work.

God Bless MBM. Worth much more than these  undeserving kids- The investigation was worth every penny and more besides  SY didn't leave a stone unturned and came to the very important conclusion.. um err  oh  yeah  same conclusion as the sardine munching cops in that horroble place called Portugal...

WHOOD DAH THUNK IT
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 16, 2018, 11:22:35 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on December 16, 2018, 10:01:19 PM
A day centre was closed down which cost just under £30000.00 per annum running costs- this enabled children with learning difficulties and physical disabilities to have extra help with socialising and school work.

God Bless MBM. Worth much more than these  undeserving kids- The investigation was worth every penny and more besides  SY didn't leave a stone unturned and came to the very important conclusion.. um err  oh  yeah  same conclusion as the sardine munching cops in that horroble place called Portugal...

WHOOD DAH THUNK IT
Site for "same conclusion" please.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 04, 2019, 09:01:18 AM
Worth a watch?

Manhunt.

Sunday January 6th at 9 pm on ITV.

Starring Martin Clunes as DCI Colin Sutton and telling the story of the capture of Levi Bellfield

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 04, 2019, 09:21:09 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 04, 2019, 09:01:18 AM
Worth a watch?

Manhunt.

Sunday January 6th at 9 pm on ITV.

Starring Martin Clunes as DCI Colin Sutton and telling the story of the capture of Levi Bellfield
I will watch with interest.  In the mid nineties I came close to buying a flat opposite the Green where one of his victims was murdered, and ended up living a few minutes away, so this case has extra poignancy for me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 04, 2019, 09:29:05 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 04, 2019, 09:21:09 AM
I will watch with interest.  In the mid nineties I came close to buying a flat opposite the Green where one of his victims was murdered, and ended up living a few minutes away, so this case has extra poignancy for me.

I will watch because I like Martin Clunes and it's all about how an investigation is conducted, which should be interesting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 04, 2019, 09:41:53 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 04, 2019, 09:01:18 AM
Worth a watch?

Manhunt.

Sunday January 6th at 9 pm on ITV.

Starring Martin Clunes as DCI Colin Sutton and telling the story of the capture of Levi Bellfield

Is that the same Colin Sutton that gets bad-mouthed over the McCann case ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 04, 2019, 09:50:50 AM
Quote from: jassi on January 04, 2019, 09:41:53 AM
Is that the same Colin Sutton that gets bad-mouthed over the McCann case ?
you know it is, it’s the only reason the programme has been advertised here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 04, 2019, 09:57:01 AM
Quote from: jassi on January 04, 2019, 09:41:53 AM
Is that the same Colin Sutton that gets bad-mouthed over the McCann case ?

If he... Bad mouths... His colleagues at SY..... When he admits he has no more knowledge of the investigation than we do... What should he expect... He's also been bad mouthed on CMOMM
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 04, 2019, 10:10:14 AM
We will I fear witness a rather childish logic at play after the programme has been aired in which because CS is portrayed as some sort of supersleuth hero who gets his man that it follows his views on the McCann case must be correct, whatever they are - does anyone actually know, beyond a few vaguely critical tweets?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 04, 2019, 10:15:36 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 04, 2019, 10:10:14 AM
We will I fear witness a rather childish logic at play after the programme has been aired in which because CS is portrayed as some sort of supersleuth hero who gets his man that it follows his views on the McCann case must be correct, whatever they are - does anyone actually know, beyond a few vaguely critical tweets?

I don't think Colin Sutton is any better than Amaral.  Worse in fact.  At least Amaral had a passing knowledge of what was going on.

But I also like Martin Clune, so would be grateful for a link if possible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 04, 2019, 11:02:04 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 04, 2019, 10:15:36 AM
I don't think Colin Sutton is any better than Amaral.  Worse in fact.  At least Amaral had a passing knowledge of what was going on.

But I also like Martin Clune, so would be grateful for a link if possible.

https://www.radiotimes.com/news/tv/2019-01-04/manhunt-itv-air-date-time-channel-new-crime-drama-itv-martin-clunes/

Can you receive ITV in your part of France?  If not, you might be able to watch on line via a catch-up service
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 04, 2019, 11:19:06 AM
Colin Sutton’s views on the present investigation can be seen in Sonia Poulton’s documentary.

1:02:00

https://youtu.be/k76X53yfONY
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 04, 2019, 11:27:54 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 04, 2019, 10:15:36 AM
I don't think Colin Sutton is any better than Amaral.  Worse in fact.  At least Amaral had a passing knowledge of what was going on.

But I also like Martin Clune, so would be grateful for a link if possible.

You will be able to watch in real time here, assuming it's not just for UK viewers.
https://www.itv.com/hub/itv
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 04, 2019, 11:47:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 04, 2019, 11:27:54 AM
You will be able to watch in real time here, assuming it's not just for UK viewers.
https://www.itv.com/hub/itv

I think you might need a UK postcode (not Scotland, so not much hope for France imo)


Shows on the main ITV channel aren’t available to viewers in Scotland so, if you're watching on our website, you may be directed to STV to watch there instead. If you're watching on your mobile or TV, shows from ITV2, ITV3, ITVBe, ITV4 and CITV will be available, but not from ITV main channel. This needs to be done to comply with our broadcasting and rights regulations (the legal stuff!).

If you are experiencing this issue and are not in Scotland, please make sure you have inputted your post code correctly by going to your account section
https://help.itv.com/hc/en-us/articles/360002742054-Why-can-t-I-see-any-programmes-from-ITV-main-channel-
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 04, 2019, 11:56:50 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 04, 2019, 11:19:06 AM
Colin Sutton’s views on the present investigation can be seen in Sonia Poulton’s documentary.

https://youtu.be/k76X53yfONY
Happy New Year Faith, good to know you're still reading my posts even if you're not choosing to reply directly.  Thanks for the link but I'd prefer not to wade through an hour of that woman's "nails-down-a-blackboard" commentary again just to satisfy my idle curiosity. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 04, 2019, 12:03:07 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 04, 2019, 11:02:04 AM
https://www.radiotimes.com/news/tv/2019-01-04/manhunt-itv-air-date-time-channel-new-crime-drama-itv-martin-clunes/

Can you receive ITV in your part of France?  If not, you might be able to watch on line via a catch-up service

Many Thanks, Jassi.  I don't actually know because I mainly watch Pirate Television.  How else does anyone think I manage to be here most of the time?  I just pause the latest episode of Luther and pick up the Justice Forum emails.  And No, I don't need to get a life.  This is my life.

Anyway, I don't care about what most of you think about the case.  We are a convoluted family whether you all like it or not.  I have come a long way in the years that I have been moderating this Forum.  And Less is Best, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 04, 2019, 12:04:32 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 04, 2019, 11:19:06 AM
Colin Sutton’s views on the present investigation can be seen in Sonia Poulton’s documentary.

1:02:00

https://youtu.be/k76X53yfONY

OMG, not her again.  I shall watch that later, so thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 04, 2019, 12:07:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 04, 2019, 11:27:54 AM
You will be able to watch in real time here, assuming it's not just for UK viewers.
https://www.itv.com/hub/itv

Thanks also.  I might even get to see this.  And of course, it will keep us all going for a bit.  We are all communicating you know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 04, 2019, 12:14:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 04, 2019, 11:56:50 AM
Happy New Year Faith, good to know you're still reading my posts even if you're not choosing to reply directly.  Thanks for the link but I'd prefer not to wade through an hour of that woman's "nails-down-a-blackboard" commentary again just to satisfy my idle curiosity.

Oh do come on.  Sonia Poulton is a howl a minute.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 04, 2019, 12:32:44 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 04, 2019, 11:19:06 AM
Colin Sutton’s views on the present investigation can be seen in Sonia Poulton’s documentary.

1:02:00

https://youtu.be/k76X53yfONY

Monday 24 April 2017

Madeleine McCann may have been kidnapped by slave traders and sold to a rich family, an ex-Scotland Yard detective has claimed.

The theory suggests Madeleine, who went missing in 2007, may have been smuggled to Africa via a ferry.

Gangs who operate in Mauritania, West Africa, reportedly sell children to rich Middle Eastern families.

“The Mauritania line is certainly a possibility and needs to be looked at,” Colin Sutton told the Mirror.

“If someone wanted to get a three-year-old child into Africa it’s the obvious route. The infrastructure and contacts for people smuggling are clearly there.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/madeleine-mccann-latest-kidnapped-slave-traders-rich-family-missing-scotland-yard-detective-colin-a7699511.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 04, 2019, 12:37:16 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 04, 2019, 12:32:44 PM
Monday 24 April 2017

Madeleine McCann may have been kidnapped by slave traders and sold to a rich family, an ex-Scotland Yard detective has claimed.

The theory suggests Madeleine, who went missing in 2007, may have been smuggled to Africa via a ferry.

Gangs who operate in Mauritania, West Africa, reportedly sell children to rich Middle Eastern families.

“The Mauritania line is certainly a possibility and needs to be looked at,” Colin Sutton told the Mirror.

“If someone wanted to get a three-year-old child into Africa it’s the obvious route. The infrastructure and contacts for people smuggling are clearly there.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/madeleine-mccann-latest-kidnapped-slave-traders-rich-family-missing-scotland-yard-detective-colin-a7699511.html

And it happens.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 04, 2019, 01:40:52 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 04, 2019, 12:04:32 PM
OMG, not her again.  I shall watch that later, so thanks.

TBH I don’t have much time for her myself Eleanor but the Colin Sutton pieces to camera are interesting. I think it would be naive to think that Sutton wasn’t privy to information relayed through old colleagues about OG.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 04, 2019, 01:54:24 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 04, 2019, 12:32:44 PM
Monday 24 April 2017

Madeleine McCann may have been kidnapped by slave traders and sold to a rich family, an ex-Scotland Yard detective has claimed.

The theory suggests Madeleine, who went missing in 2007, may have been smuggled to Africa via a ferry.

Gangs who operate in Mauritania, West Africa, reportedly sell children to rich Middle Eastern families.

“The Mauritania line is certainly a possibility and needs to be looked at,” Colin Sutton told the Mirror.

“If someone wanted to get a three-year-old child into Africa it’s the obvious route. The infrastructure and contacts for people smuggling are clearly there.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/madeleine-mccann-latest-kidnapped-slave-traders-rich-family-missing-scotland-yard-detective-colin-a7699511.html

I prefer to hear opinions from directly from those who gave them.

https://mobile.twitter.com/i/web/status/1041444656368762880


Colin Sutton
Colin Sutton
@colinsutton
This doesn’t represent my view at all - & is nothing like the short phone call I had with the journalist.  Something I shall not be doing again.

For clarity, as I told him, I believe that unless Grange is looking at lines of enquiry which it has so far ignored it should end
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 04, 2019, 01:56:30 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 04, 2019, 12:32:44 PM
Monday 24 April 2017

Madeleine McCann may have been kidnapped by slave traders and sold to a rich family, an ex-Scotland Yard detective has claimed.

The theory suggests Madeleine, who went missing in 2007, may have been smuggled to Africa via a ferry.

Gangs who operate in Mauritania, West Africa, reportedly sell children to rich Middle Eastern families.

“The Mauritania line is certainly a possibility and needs to be looked at,” Colin Sutton told the Mirror.

“If someone wanted to get a three-year-old child into Africa it’s the obvious route. The infrastructure and contacts for people smuggling are clearly there.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/madeleine-mccann-latest-kidnapped-slave-traders-rich-family-missing-scotland-yard-detective-colin-a7699511.html

There's a tradition of slavery in Mauritania involving local people and those from nearby countries. I can find no evidence that European children are affected.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 04, 2019, 02:03:06 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 04, 2019, 01:40:52 PM
TBH I don’t have much time for her myself Eleanor but the Colin Sutton pieces to camera are interesting. I think it would be naive to think that Sutton wasn’t privy to information relayed through old colleagues about OG.

I don't know quite what to say.  Gosh, I inadvertently escaped a Split Infinitive there.  But just how informed were Colin Sutton's old colleagues?  Were they any more informed than he was?

Yes, I am somewhat naive, what little there is left in me.  I am not the nice person I used to be nearly twelve years ago now.

But should Colin Sutton have been saying these things?  It won't have helped anyone.

Sonia Poulton?  She did liven things up for a bit, but she ultimately did more harm to herself, not least in doorstepping Kate McCann, and because she never comes across.

Sorry, I seem to have lost the plot again.  What was it we were talking about?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on January 04, 2019, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 04, 2019, 11:19:06 AM
Colin Sutton’s views on the present investigation can be seen in Sonia Poulton’s documentary.

1:02:00

https://youtu.be/k76X53yfONY

Colin Sutton was very clear about it in that in the last six years, every MSM organisation except Sky News refused to allow him to reveal the fact that he had been warned off the Madeleine McCann case. If that doesn't alert people to something extremely unsavoury in this case then I don't know what will.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 04, 2019, 02:36:30 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 04, 2019, 01:54:24 PM
I prefer to hear opinions from directly from those who gave them.

https://mobile.twitter.com/i/web/status/1041444656368762880


Colin Sutton
Colin Sutton
@colinsutton
This doesn’t represent my view at all - & is nothing like the short phone call I had with the journalist.  Something I shall not be doing again.

For clarity, as I told him, I believe that unless Grange is looking at lines of enquiry which it has so far ignored it should end

So even when journalists add quotation marks we can't always believe them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 04, 2019, 02:55:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 04, 2019, 02:36:30 PM
So even when journalists add quotation marks we can't always believe them.
Why do you believe Colin Sutton without question?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 04, 2019, 03:42:20 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on January 04, 2019, 02:32:08 PM
Colin Sutton was very clear about it in that in the last six years, every MSM organisation except Sky News refused to allow him to reveal the fact that he had been warned off the Madeleine McCann case. If that doesn't alert people to something extremely unsavoury in this case then I don't know what will.

could you provide a cite for the red highlight...without a cite all it alerts us to is that you have got your facts wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 04, 2019, 03:48:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on January 04, 2019, 03:42:20 PM
could you provide a cite for the red highlight...without a cite all it alerts us to is that you have got your facts wrong

Colin Sutton never named the person who warned him off.  So not worth Jack Sh*t.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 04, 2019, 03:59:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 04, 2019, 03:48:45 PM
Colin Sutton never named the person who warned him off.  So not worth Jack Sh*t.

and colin sutton never said what angelo claimed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 04, 2019, 05:48:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 04, 2019, 02:55:39 PM
Why do you believe Colin Sutton without question?

Hmm. An ex-Met detective or a journalist? It's a close call, but in my opinion a public statement which is not denied tends to be the truth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 04, 2019, 06:12:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 04, 2019, 05:48:40 PM
Hmm. An ex-Met detective or a journalist? It's a close call, but in my opinion a public statement which is not denied tends to be the truth.
Which statement are you expecting to be denied that wasn’t and by whom? It’s a bit of an arbitrary rule isn’t it?  The Met made a public statement that the McCanns are not suspects.  It hasn’t been denied so it must be the truth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on January 04, 2019, 06:14:54 PM
Quote from: Davel on January 04, 2019, 03:59:45 PM
and colin sutton never said what angelo claimed

Yes he did, I think you need to watch the video.

From 1.02

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 04, 2019, 06:17:18 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on January 04, 2019, 06:14:54 PM
Yes he did, I think you need to watch the video.

no he didnt...ive watched the video.....could you quote his words...you still have not provided a cite
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 04, 2019, 06:19:56 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on January 04, 2019, 06:14:54 PM
Yes he did, I think you need to watch the video.

From 1.02


that's over an hour long....you need to be more precise
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on January 04, 2019, 06:32:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on January 04, 2019, 06:19:56 PM
that's over an hour long....you need to be more precise

I was precise, it is just after 1.02.00 on the video.

Colin Sutton made it very clear that in the last six years no main stream media organisation would touch his claim that he was warned off the Madeleine McCann case. I cannot be any clearer than that, happy viewing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 04, 2019, 06:33:09 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on January 04, 2019, 06:14:54 PM
Yes he did, I think you need to watch the video.

From 1.02


you posted...

Colin Sutton was very clear about it in that in the last six years, every MSM organisation except Sky News refused to allow him to reveal the fact that he had been warned off the Madeleine McCann case...

he said.....he was told....thats not an avenue we wish to explore.....not that they refused to allow him to reveal the fact....I knew you had it wrong



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on January 04, 2019, 06:34:35 PM
Quote from: Davel on January 04, 2019, 06:33:09 PM
you posted...

Colin Sutton was very clear about it in that in the last six years, every MSM organisation except Sky News refused to allow him to reveal the fact that he had been warned off the Madeleine McCann case...

he said.....he was told....thats not an avenue we wish to explore.....not that they refused to allow him to reveal the fact....I knew you had it wrong

You can mince his words all you like but they all refused, only Sky News agreed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 04, 2019, 06:35:41 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on January 04, 2019, 06:34:35 PM
You can mince his words all you like but they all refused, only Sky News agreed.

I havent minced his words...you have....Ive given his precise words
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on January 04, 2019, 10:23:20 PM
Quote from: Davel on January 04, 2019, 06:35:41 PM
I havent minced his words...you have....Ive given his precise words

You appear to have some trouble understanding him then.   *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 04, 2019, 10:46:42 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 04, 2019, 01:54:24 PM
I prefer to hear opinions from directly from those who gave them.

https://mobile.twitter.com/i/web/status/1041444656368762880


Colin Sutton
Colin Sutton
@colinsutton
This doesn’t represent my view at all - & is nothing like the short phone call I had with the journalist.  Something I shall not be doing again.

For clarity, as I told him, I believe that unless Grange is looking at lines of enquiry which it has so far ignored it should end



I agree Faith!  too many people are happy to mis quote just for headlines and to fit their own agenda.  Sonia isn't my go to person for info but she does have some interesting points.

IF we are going along the 'kidknapping- stole to order scenario, then we have to go back and look at how and when this was  carried out, was it with or without parental consent?

And this is not what we have ben hearing from OG... they are looking at woke and wandered...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 05, 2019, 12:00:45 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 04, 2019, 10:46:42 PM


I agree Faith!  too many people are happy to mis quote just for headlines and to fit their own agenda.  Sonia isn't my go to person for info but she does have some interesting points.

IF we are going along the 'kidknapping- stole to order scenario, then we have to go back and look at how and when this was  carried out, was it with or without parental consent?

And this is not what we have ben hearing from OG... they are looking at woke and wandered...
Could it have been part of the reason to wake and then wander?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 06, 2019, 05:16:18 PM
Just to remind people that this 'Manhunt' program starts tonight on ITV.
Have just set my recorder for the 3 nights, though not sure if I'll get around to actually watching any of it.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 06, 2019, 05:18:29 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 06, 2019, 05:16:18 PM
Just to remind people that this 'Manhunt' program starts tonight on ITV.
Have just set my recorder for the 3 nights, though not sure if I'll get around to actually watching any of it.
I’ll be watching Les Miserables but thanks for thr reminder.  Will have to go on catch up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 06, 2019, 05:51:11 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on January 04, 2019, 10:23:20 PM
You appear to have some trouble understanding him then.   *%87

I understand him perfectly well
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 06, 2019, 09:00:31 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 05, 2019, 12:00:45 AM
Could it have been part of the reason to wake and then wander?

I don't know Rob. I haven't put forward a theory. I wasn't there- I don't know or claim to know what happened. I just read and listen and observe from many outlets regarding this case. And I dismiss the more outlandish theories based on my research.

I do not believe the parents version of what happened, analysing their stories and timelines suggests all sorts IMO. What it is  - I do not know. I can guess, and put forward a theory about that, but that would attract uncalled for criticism.  ^*&&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 06, 2019, 10:11:05 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 06, 2019, 09:00:31 PM
I don't know Rob. I haven't put forward a theory. I wasn't there- I don't know or claim to know what happened. I just read and listen and observe from many outlets regarding this case. And I dismiss the more outlandish theories based on my research.

I do not believe the parents version of what happened, analysing their stories and timelines suggests all sorts IMO. What it is  - I do not know. I can guess, and put forward a theory about that, but that would attract uncalled for criticism.  ^*&&
But you are clever enough to pick up a bit about what is going on. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 06, 2019, 10:19:52 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 06, 2019, 10:11:05 PM
But you are clever enough to pick up a bit about what is going on.

I do not believe the parents version of account because it makes no sense whatsoever!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 07, 2019, 11:17:05 AM

For those interested in solving cases pre-CCTV and pre-DNA advances, BBC2 is showing a documentary tonight at 11.15 called "The Babes in the Wood Murders: The Prosecutors"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 07, 2019, 12:14:34 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 07, 2019, 11:17:05 AM
For those interested in solving cases pre-CCTV and pre-DNA advances, BBC2 is showing a documentary tonight at 11.15 called "The Babes in the Wood Murders: The Prosecutors"

The case was solved due to advances in DNA techniques not pre-DNA advances.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 07, 2019, 02:22:06 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 07, 2019, 12:27:57 PM
Such was the distrust of the police recognised by Jenny Murat who set up her information stall to combat it.


Is that why we have crimestoppers and crimewatch and annonymous reporting of crime?

 This was a holiday resort, she may have felt she was helping and supporting the family by offering extra pair of hands. And as there was rumours of suspected burglars, she may have wanted to be a go between for anyone who was perhaps commiting a crime and may have saw something that night. Which does make sense actually.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on January 07, 2019, 04:43:59 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 07, 2019, 02:22:06 PM

Is that why we have crimestoppers and crimewatch and annonymous reporting of crime?

 This was a holiday resort, she may have felt she was helping and supporting the family by offering extra pair of hands. And as there was rumours of suspected burglars, she may have wanted to be a go between for anyone who was perhaps commiting a crime and may have saw something that night. Which does make sense actually.

Or perhaps she was interested in the case as we all are.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 07, 2019, 05:42:08 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 07, 2019, 11:49:58 AM
Do you think so?  I really don't.

Extremely lucky imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 07, 2019, 05:46:59 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 07, 2019, 12:09:39 PM
There is little which connects the conduct of Madeleine's case with even the Gene Hunt era in British policing and if you don't think failure to check one of the very few CCTV cameras in Luz is an investigative failure that is your prerogative.

Of course the camera may not even have been working at the time in question, as sometimes seems to be the case with these pesky cameras.
Missed opportunity to tick a box though
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 07, 2019, 05:49:31 PM

Wasn't there another camera that Amaral got to too late?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 07, 2019, 05:57:31 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 07, 2019, 05:46:59 PM
Of course the camera may not even have been working at the time in question, as sometimes seems to be the case with these pesky cameras.
Missed opportunity to tick a box though

On 26/5/2007 the Smiths undertook a "secret" reconstruction for the PJ. Did no-one at that time notice the presence of the CCTV on Estrela da Luz or during subsequent checks on possible routes from 5A to the Smiths' sighting location? Aside from that, the journalist met at Hugo Beatty's in the same hotel for daily updates....and no-one thought to check?
Paiva got the CCTV from the Paraiso Beach Restaurant on 9/5/07.......http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/OA3_8/03_volume_III_o_apenso_VIII_Page_675.jpg.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 07, 2019, 06:53:42 PM
Quote from: misty on January 07, 2019, 05:57:31 PM
On 26/5/2007 the Smiths undertook a "secret" reconstruction for the PJ. Did no-one at that time notice the presence of the CCTV on Estrela da Luz or during subsequent checks on possible routes from 5A to the Smiths' sighting location? Aside from that, the journalist met at Hugo Beatty's in the same hotel for daily updates....and no-one thought to check?
Paiva got the CCTV from the Paraiso Beach Restaurant on 9/5/07.......http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/OA3_8/03_volume_III_o_apenso_VIII_Page_675.jpg.

Estrela da Luz is a complex of apartments not a hotel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 07, 2019, 07:01:06 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 07, 2019, 06:53:42 PM
Estrela da Luz is a complex of apartments not a hotel.

An Aparthotel then. It's described as a hotel on the top google link for Estrela da Luz.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 07, 2019, 07:05:32 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 07, 2019, 02:22:06 PM

Is that why we have crimestoppers and crimewatch and annonymous reporting of crime?

 This was a holiday resort, she may have felt she was helping and supporting the family by offering extra pair of hands. And as there was rumours of suspected burglars, she may have wanted to be a go between for anyone who was perhaps commiting a crime and may have saw something that night. Which does make sense actually.
If something was reported through "Crimestoppers" would the police even admit to that, if the request was to keep the information confidential?  The fact that the information is kept confidential is paramount to the way "Crimestoppers" works.  So we end up making guesses as to whether anyone happened to contact "Crimestoppers".

If someone admitted to a crime via "Crimestoppers" that wouldn't be subject to confidentiality, maybe they would still keep it quiet that "Crimestoppers" was involved.

What is the wording on the site?

"Give information on crime anonymously online."

"What we mean by anonymous
Anonymous means no-one will ever know you contacted Crimestoppers to pass on information about crime.
We know our guarantee to never ask for your name and never to make available details of your call is vitally important to you.

It makes it easier for you to come forward and break the silence around criminal activity.

Anonymous means
You will never be asked for your name.
Your call details will never be made available.
Your call or secure online web form will not be traced.
You will not have to make a statement to the police.
You will not appear in court.
We create a report from the information you give us. Our call takers will make sure it contains nothing that might identify you, eg if the call is about your neighbour we will not mention this, unless you volunteer this information. We don’t even make a note of your gender.

We understand how hard it can be to call, which is why all our call takers are trained to help you tell us everything you know.

We pass on any useful information to the relevant authorities, making sure your identity cannot be discovered.

Did you know…?
Crimestoppers’ promise of anonymity has never been broken.

To give information anonymously to Crimestoppers now, call 0800 555 111 or fill out our secure, anonymous online Giving Information Form."

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 07, 2019, 11:01:32 PM
Quote from: misty on January 07, 2019, 07:01:06 PM
An Aparthotel then. It's described as a hotel on the top google link for Estrela da Luz.

I have stayed there and I can assure you it’s apartments not a hotel. In fact it’s much the same as the Mark Warner site, apartments surrounding a pool and restaurants.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 08, 2019, 12:14:53 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 07, 2019, 11:01:32 PM
I have stayed there and I can assure you it’s apartments not a hotel. In fact it’s much the same as the Mark Warner site, apartments surrounding a pool and restaurants.

Estrela is fully secure with a 24hr reception & CCTV so not at all like MW site.
Perhaps you would address the point in my post as to why no-one apparently noticed the CCTV & management failed to offer the tapes to the police immediately just in case there was something relevant on them.
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 08, 2019, 01:00:38 AM
Quote from: misty on January 08, 2019, 12:14:53 AM
Estrela is fully secure with a 24hr reception & CCTV so not at all like MW site.
Perhaps you would address the point in my post as to why no-one apparently noticed the CCTV & management failed to offer the tapes to the police immediately just in case there was something relevant on them.
Can you be sure they didn't offer the tapes to the PJ?  It was 2 weeks before the Smiths notified the PJ so IMO that is where the problem lies.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 08, 2019, 07:22:19 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 08, 2019, 01:00:38 AM
Can you be sure they didn't offer the tapes to the PJ?  It was 2 weeks before the Smiths notified the PJ so IMO that is where the problem lies.
If they offered the police the tapes and they didn’t even bother to look at them that would be even worse.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 08, 2019, 07:28:37 AM
BTW, while you were watching Colin Sutton on ITV there was a truly brilliant drama on C4 entitled “An Uncivil War” - catch it if you can.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 08, 2019, 08:13:27 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 08, 2019, 07:22:19 AM
If they offered the police the tapes and they didn’t even bother to look at them that would be even worse.
You would be unlikely to get the PJ to admit to that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 08, 2019, 08:45:37 AM
Seems to me that we don't know if they got the tapes so critisising them for not looking at them seems a leap too far.
Rather like mobile phone data, cameras don't always show what you believe they will.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 08, 2019, 09:00:01 AM
Quote from: jassi on January 08, 2019, 08:45:37 AM
Seems to me that we don't know if they got the tapes so critisising them for not looking at them seems a leap too far.
Rather like mobile phone data, cameras don't always show what you believe they will.

As I understand it, Portuguese law doesn't allow cameras to be placed where they might pick up members of the public.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 08, 2019, 09:02:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 08, 2019, 09:00:01 AM
As I understand it, Portuguese law doesn't allow cameras to be placed where they might pick up members of the public.

I thought that was true, and I did read it somewhere.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 08, 2019, 09:04:09 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 08, 2019, 07:28:37 AM
BTW, while you were watching Colin Sutton on ITV there was a truly brilliant drama on C4 entitled “An Uncivil War” - catch it if you can.

Haven't seen it yet, but the Guardian critic doesn't rate it - though not sure if that's the acting or the content
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/jan/07/brexit-the-uncivil-war-review-superficial-irresponsible-tv-cumberbatch

The Independent rates it higher -
 https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/reviews/brexit-uncivil-war-review-benedict-cumberbatch-hbo-channel-4-dominic-cummings-vote-leave-remain-a8700286.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 08, 2019, 09:04:34 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 08, 2019, 09:02:00 AM
I thought that was true, and I did read it somewhere.

Apparently France has the same attitude to CCTV.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 08, 2019, 09:06:22 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 08, 2019, 09:04:34 AM
Apparently France has the same attitude to CCTV.

Really?  Although I must say that I have never seen one.

Except on Motorways catching Speeders.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 08, 2019, 09:20:22 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 08, 2019, 09:06:22 AM
Really?  Although I must say that I have never seen one.

Except on Motorways catching Speeders.

I think ATM's have them, but otherwise it's private property only. That means you can train a camera onto your front door or garden, but not onto the street outside your house.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 08, 2019, 09:26:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 08, 2019, 09:20:22 AM
I think ATM's have them, but otherwise it's private property only. That means you can train a camera onto your front door or garden, but not onto the street outside your house.

No one does a lot of robbing around here.  But I suppose the time might come.

But in principal, I don't have a problem with CCTV.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 08, 2019, 10:07:59 AM
Quote from: misty on January 08, 2019, 12:14:53 AM
Estrela is fully secure with a 24hr reception & CCTV so not at all like MW site.
Perhaps you would address the point in my post as to why no-one apparently noticed the CCTV & management failed to offer the tapes to the police immediately just in case there was something relevant on them.

Not sure why you are addressing the question to me. I think writing to the appropriate employees might be more productive.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 08, 2019, 10:14:08 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 08, 2019, 09:26:00 AM
No one does a lot of robbing around here.  But I suppose the time might come.

But in principal, I don't have a problem with CCTV.

I don't have a problem with it because I don't do anything wrong and it can do good. I expect those countries who have rejected it have reasons for doing so, however.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 08, 2019, 10:29:01 AM
I suppose it will be to do with rights of the individual  and not wishing to introduce unnecessary surveillance into their society.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 08, 2019, 10:30:54 AM

We don't actually need CCTV in this village.  Everyone sees everything.  Due to the boring rural lives we all lead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 08, 2019, 01:43:10 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 08, 2019, 10:29:01 AM
I suppose it will be to do with rights of the individual  and not wishing to introduce unnecessary surveillance into their society.

I was converted on viewing the CCTV coverage of the two older children leading James Bulger from the shopping precinct to the place where they murdered him.

Until that time few people would have credited two young boys with such a crime.

I think CCTV probably saved lots of investigative time and deployment of personnel looking for an adult perpetrator because who would have given immediate thought to children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 08, 2019, 06:10:45 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 08, 2019, 09:04:09 AM
Haven't seen it yet, but the Guardian critic doesn't rate it - though not sure if that's the acting or the content
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/jan/07/brexit-the-uncivil-war-review-superficial-irresponsible-tv-cumberbatch

The Independent rates it higher -
 https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/reviews/brexit-uncivil-war-review-benedict-cumberbatch-hbo-channel-4-dominic-cummings-vote-leave-remain-a8700286.html
I don’t rate the Guardian, bunch of po-faced holier-than-thous.  The Times gave it four stars but best make your own mind up about it. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 08, 2019, 08:54:41 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 08, 2019, 10:30:54 AM
We don't actually need CCTV in this village.  Everyone sees everything.  Due to the boring rural lives we all lead.


You are better out from the rat race (big city)Eleanor... It just aint pretty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 08, 2019, 08:57:43 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 08, 2019, 01:43:10 PM
I was converted on viewing the CCTV coverage of the two older children leading James Bulger from the shopping precinct to the place where they murdered him.

Until that time few people would have credited two young boys with such a crime.

I think CCTV probably saved lots of investigative time and deployment of personnel looking for an adult perpetrator because who would have given immediate thought to children.


Oh I don't believe I am agreeing with you... but I do concur with those sentiments. I cried watching that cctv it just pierced my heart.

In Scotland all pubs must have CCTV cameras at the door , even if they have 'security'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on January 09, 2019, 12:08:35 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 09, 2019, 10:17:05 AM
When you saw how the NOTW’s threat to publish information about the investigation before the suspect’s arrest could have skewed the whole investigation you can see what the PJ were up against with half the world’s media camped on their doorstep, looking for copy.

I found that particularly interesting given the demise of that Murdoch rag and some who worked at it. The Press have always had far too much power to influence events in this country with the current Brexit debacle being a current example.

The fact that the Met couldn't stop the News of the World from printing a story concerning a live murder enquiry is worrying.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 09, 2019, 01:08:41 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 09, 2019, 11:03:33 AM
It's about the tools, techniques, procedure and organisation used by 'Britain's finest", shortly before Madeleine disappeared.

It puts the capability of a large team of UK detectives into direct comparison with the PJ.

And @VS, it would be relevant whatever Sutton has done recently.

Then you could pluck any case out of the air and make comparison if ignoring like for like.  Why not the Hatton Garden heist? 

Perhaps it also illustrates the value of looking in before looking out and learning the lesson of past error.

In the five years after Madeleine's disappearance it was reported that the alert system introduced in 2009 had not once been activated ... I think that really is groundhog day.

30 Children Have Gone Missing In Portugal Since Madeleine McCann Disappeared
Keith KendrickParentdish UK
Madeleine McCann's disappearance was not a rare and unique abduction, according to official figures which revealed that THIRTY children went missing in Portugal in the last five years.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/05/04/30-children-have-gone-missing-in-portugal-since-madeleine-mccann-disappeared_n_7378200.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 09, 2019, 01:50:39 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 09, 2019, 01:08:41 PM
Then you could pluck any case out of the air and make comparison if ignoring like for like.  Why not the Hatton Garden heist? 

Perhaps it also illustrates the value of looking in before looking out and learning the lesson of past error.

In the five years after Madeleine's disappearance it was reported that the alert system introduced in 2009 had not once been activated ... I think that really is groundhog day.

30 Children Have Gone Missing In Portugal Since Madeleine McCann Disappeared
Keith KendrickParentdish UK
Madeleine McCann's disappearance was not a rare and unique abduction, according to official figures which revealed that THIRTY children went missing in Portugal in the last five years.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/05/04/30-children-have-gone-missing-in-portugal-since-madeleine-mccann-disappeared_n_7378200.html

According to which 'official figures'?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 09, 2019, 02:56:33 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 09, 2019, 01:08:41 PM
Then you could pluck any case out of the air and make comparison if ignoring like for like.  Why not the Hatton Garden heist? 

Perhaps it also illustrates the value of looking in before looking out and learning the lesson of past error.

In the five years after Madeleine's disappearance it was reported that the alert system introduced in 2009 had not once been activated ... I think that really is groundhog day.

30 Children Have Gone Missing In Portugal Since Madeleine McCann Disappeared
Keith KendrickParentdish UK
Madeleine McCann's disappearance was not a rare and unique abduction, according to official figures which revealed that THIRTY children went missing in Portugal in the last five years.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/05/04/30-children-have-gone-missing-in-portugal-since-madeleine-mccann-disappeared_n_7378200.html

So no details of those children. Were the missing children abducted ? Where they runaways ? Were they parental abductions. Facts please Brietta.......facts !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 09, 2019, 03:00:51 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 09, 2019, 02:56:33 PM
So no details of those children. Were the missing children abducted ? Where they runaways ? Were they parental abductions. Facts please Brietta.......facts !

It also said youngsters up to the age of 18, so some not really children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 09, 2019, 03:27:18 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 09, 2019, 02:56:33 PM
So no details of those children. Were the missing children abducted ? Where they runaways ? Were they parental abductions. Facts please Brietta.......facts !

The newspaper reports weren't specific and there was quite a bit of work being done circa 2012 in the EU concerning missing and exploited children in member states.
However my money would be from Portuguese initiatives on the subject current in the 2012 news such as those reported in the Portugal Resident below.

Posted by PORTUGALDAILYNEWS on May 01, 2012
Justice Minister defends creation of national sex offender
By INÊS LOPES ines.lopes@algarveresident.comChild sexual exploitation debates mark International Missing Children’s Day in PortugalPolice authorities have investigated nearly 900 cases of missing children since January, representing an average of six children disappearing in Portugal each day.According to data revealed by the Instituto de Apoio à Criança (IAC) during a conference to mark International Missing Children’s Day on May 25, the vast majority of these cases (869) have had a happy ending with the children found and returned to their families. However, the authorities are yet to locate 23 minors.The IAC reported that last year the number of missing children was “alarmingly high” – a total of 2,842 children were reported missing and of these 27 are yet to be found.Aurora Dantier, sub commissioner from the Lisbon PSP police, said more and more cases of missing children and child sexual abuse result from perpetrators inducing or coercing minors via the internet, a phenomenon that requires urgent attention and harsh penalties.During the conference, held at the Assembleia da República (Parliament) under the theme ‘Missing Children and Child Sexual Exploitation’, Justice Minister Paula Teixeira da Cruz defended the electronic monitoring of convicted sex offenders and paedophiles as well as the creation of a national sex offender registry.The minister also spoke about the new European Union Directive, passed in December, which introduces EU-wide requirements on prevention, prosecution of offenders and protection of child victims, including harsher penalties for sex offenders and new types of criminal offences.Member States, which have two years to implement the new rules into their national laws, will also be entitled to take other measures, such as listing convicted persons in sex offender registers, similar to those included in Megan’s Law (www.meganslaw.ca.gov), which aims to provide the public with internet access to detailed information on registered sex offenders.As part of the new directive, Member States will also have to ensure the prompt removal of web pages containing or disseminating child pornography hosted in their territory while coercing a child into sexual actions or forcing a child into prostitution will be punishable by a minimum of 10 years in prison. Child pornography producers will face at least three years incarceration, and viewers of child pornography on the web at least one year.Dulce Rocha, vice president of the IAC, also believes periodical risk assessments of sex offenders should be undertaken to calculate the likelihood of re-offending, which in most cases is “very high”.Child trafficking Sadly, the vice president of the Portuguese Association of Missing Children said last Friday that the trafficking and exploitation of children was “cheaper, more profitable and safer than drugs and arms trafficking”.During another conference to debate the problem of missing children in Portugal, held in Matosinhos last Friday, Margarida Durão Barroso said the number of child trafficking and exploitation cases was rising because “international mafias” were investing more into this type of crime as they know “police authorities are more inclined to investigate cases of drug and weapon trafficking”.She said: “The International Centre for Missing and Exploited Children and Missing Children Europe (the European Federation for Missing and Sexually Exploited Children) need to work together to tackle the problem.”Also attending the conference, Derek Foster, a retired British police forensic chief who is responsible for the international investigation of missing people, said each country needed to find their own solution to deal with the problem, which will always be “multi-institutional”, and that each case needed to be investigated thoroughly even if the missing person is believed to have disappeared of their own accord, the situation with most teenagers. “There is always an element of risk,” he said.Eu hotlineThe European Commission hotline for missing children - 116 000 - available in 16 countries in Europe, reported more than 3,000 cases of missing children in 2011.Missing Children Europe, which incorporates 28 non-governmental organisations in 19 EU Member States, including Portugal through the Instituto de Apoio à Criança, marked International Missing Children’s Day last week with a campaign to bring attention to the problem and debates about the new EU directive to combat sexual abuse and exploitation of children and child pornography.The hotline for missing children is a free number operating 24 hours a day. Calls are answered by specialists working with the NGOs of each country.A list of reported missing people in Portugal can be found on the Polícia Judiciária website - go to www.policiajudiciaria.pt and click under ‘Pessoas Desaparecidas’ on the left-hand side of the homepage.
1">news
http://portugalresident.com/justice-minister-defends-creation-of-national-sex-offender
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 09, 2019, 05:59:18 PM
There's about 6 on the PJ site now, including MBM, so the other 24 must have been resolved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 09, 2019, 07:06:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 09, 2019, 05:59:18 PM
There's about 6 on the PJ site now, including MBM, so the other 24 must have been resolved.
According to their missing persons page there are only 33 missing people (including children) in the whole country.  Astounding really. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 09, 2019, 08:16:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 09, 2019, 05:59:18 PM
There's about 6 on the PJ site now, including MBM, so the other 24 must have been resolved.

I do not know how the information is collated in Portugal but the Judicial Police were being kept busy in 2013 as well as 2012 if reports and the Justice Minister are anything to go by.

Police investigating 64 missing children's cases
BY TPN/LUSA, IN NEWS · 25-05-2013 14:57:00 · 1 COMMENTS
The Portuguese justice minister has revealed police were currently investigating the cases of 64 missing children, 31 of which occurred this year.

Minister Paula Teixeira da Cruz said at the end of a conference on “Missing Children and Sexual Exploitation”, that over 4,000 children were reported missing every year, though the numbers were dropping slowly.

Most children aged under nine who were reported missing were cases of being taken by their mother or father without the spouse's consent and most of these cases occurred in August, during the summer holidays.
http://www.theportugalnews.com/news/police-investigating-64-missing-childrens-cases/28502
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 09, 2019, 08:23:13 PM
I wonder what the stats for the UK are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 09, 2019, 10:55:20 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 09, 2019, 07:06:03 PM
According to their missing persons page there are only 33 missing people (including children) in the whole country.  Astounding really.

Perhaps they use a more precise meaning of missing. Adults who deliberately go missing have committed no offense, it's quite legal to disappear if someone wants to. Children who are abducted by a parent aren't technically missing as it's known who they're with, even if their exact location isn't known. Teenage runaways are technically missing, but will not always be forced to return if they had good reasons for leaving. The term 'missing' includes a lot of different scenarios.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 09, 2019, 11:00:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 09, 2019, 10:55:20 PM
Perhaps they use a more precise meaning of missing. Adults who deliberately go missing have committed no offense, it's quite legal to disappear if someone wants to. Children who are abducted by a parent aren't technically missing as it's known who they're with, even if their exact location isn't known. Teenage runaways are technically missing, but will not always be forced to return if they had good reasons for leaving. The term 'missing' includes a lot of different scenarios.
I don't think that's it.  One of the missing children on their website was taken by her father for example.  And - who decides if an adult has deliberately gone missing or not?  Teenage runaways are usually very vulnerable for one reason or another - why wouldn't they be on a police website of missing people? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 11, 2019, 06:41:27 PM
Why weren't the neighbours  of the McCann's not interviewed by the PJ?    Robert Murat for example.  I know he was interviewed  later on but why didn't the Police interview him and Mrs Fenn the day after Madeleine went missing?   Especially as Tanner man was walking in the direction of his house.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 11, 2019, 07:48:47 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 11, 2019, 06:41:27 PM
Why weren't the neighbours  of the McCann's not interviewed by the PJ?    Robert Murat for example.  I know he was interviewed  later on but why didn't the Police interview him and Mrs Fenn the day after Madeleine went missing?   Especially as Tanner man was walking in the direction of his house.

There was a door knocking exercise, perhaps they were out or answered the door and saif they knew nothing. Jeremy Wilkins was visited, but he didn't tell them he had seen Gerry McCann the previous evening, did he? I don't suppose it seemed relevant at the time. When Gerry told the PJ about it they had it checked out by LP.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 11, 2019, 11:43:38 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 11, 2019, 06:41:27 PM
Why weren't the neighbours  of the McCann's not interviewed by the PJ?    Robert Murat for example.  I know he was interviewed  later on but why didn't the Police interview him and Mrs Fenn the day after Madeleine went missing?   Especially as Tanner man was walking in the direction of his house.
Draw a circle based on the radius from 5A to Murat's house.  Count the number of properties in that circle.  How many men do you need to interview all of them the next day?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 12, 2019, 11:15:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 11, 2019, 07:48:47 PM
There was a door knocking exercise, perhaps they were out or answered the door and saif they knew nothing. Jeremy Wilkins was visited, but he didn't tell them he had seen Gerry McCann the previous evening, did he? I don't suppose it seemed relevant at the time. When Gerry told the PJ about it they had it checked out by LP.

IMO Jeremy Wilkins was visited as Gerry had met him and chatted with him.   That was taken seriously,  why wasn't the man Jane saw taken seriously and the houses around where Jane saw the man headed visited?

Where did you get the information that there was a 'door knocking exercise' ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 12, 2019, 11:16:31 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 11, 2019, 11:43:38 PM
Draw a circle based on the radius from 5A to Murat's house.  Count the number of properties in that circle.  How many men do you need to interview all of them the next day?

Sorry that is irrelevent.  Door to door is normal Policee procedure as far as I'm concerned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 12, 2019, 11:51:33 AM
Quote from: Lace on January 12, 2019, 11:15:10 AM
IMO Jeremy Wilkins was visited as Gerry had met him and chatted with him.   That was taken seriously,  why wasn't the man Jane saw taken seriously and the houses around where Jane saw the man headed visited?

Where did you get the information that there was a 'door knocking exercise' ?

We visited 443 homes, some of which were occupied as the inhabitants of those respective homes were questioned whether they had any information relating to the disappearance of the child, Madeleine McCann or if they witnessed another situation and/or suspicious activity during the dates preceding the events......

The present inquiry was undertaken by a total of six teams composed of PJ officers and maintenance technicians of the Ocean Club
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EXTERNAL.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 12, 2019, 04:17:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 12, 2019, 11:51:33 AM
We visited 443 homes, some of which were occupied as the inhabitants of those respective homes were questioned whether they had any information relating to the disappearance of the child, Madeleine McCann or if they witnessed another situation and/or suspicious activity during the dates preceding the events......

The present inquiry was undertaken by a total of six teams composed of PJ officers and maintenance technicians of the Ocean Club
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EXTERNAL.htm
Were all the homes associated with the Ocean Club then.  Why did the PJ use " maintenance technicians of the Ocean Club"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 12, 2019, 04:36:43 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 12, 2019, 04:17:03 PM
Were all the homes associated with the Ocean Club then. Why did the PJ use " maintenance technicians of the Ocean Club"?

Maybe to gain access to some empty apartments. It was the 'off-season' so hardly full occupancy
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 12, 2019, 04:56:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 12, 2019, 11:51:33 AM
We visited 443 homes, some of which were occupied as the inhabitants of those respective homes were questioned whether they had any information relating to the disappearance of the child, Madeleine McCann or if they witnessed another situation and/or suspicious activity during the dates preceding the events......

The present inquiry was undertaken by a total of six teams composed of PJ officers and maintenance technicians of the Ocean Club
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EXTERNAL.htm

Was Mrs Fenn out when they called I wonder?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 12, 2019, 05:02:00 PM
Having heard that Jane had seen a man with a child walking in the direction of Murats house,  wouldn't it have been a good idea to knock on his door the night of the 3rd of May and ask if he had seen anything?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 12, 2019, 05:03:01 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 12, 2019, 05:02:00 PM
Having heard that Jane had seen a man with a child walking in the direction of Murats house,  wouldn't it have been a good idea to knock on his door the night of the 3rd of May and ask if he had seen anything?

Why his in particular ? Were there not other houses in that direction?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 12, 2019, 05:05:09 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 12, 2019, 05:03:01 PM
Why his in particular ? Were there not other houses in that direction?

All of them in that direction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 12, 2019, 05:20:47 PM
Presumably they were among the 443 homes visited.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 12, 2019, 05:46:10 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 12, 2019, 05:20:47 PM
Presumably they were among the 443 homes visited.

Murat wasn't called on  the night of the 3rd he said the first he knew about Madeleine being missing was the morning of the 4th when he joined the search.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 12, 2019, 05:57:26 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 12, 2019, 05:46:10 PM
Murat wasn't called on  the night of the 3rd he said the first he knew about Madeleine being missing was the morning of the 4th when he joined the search.

Why should he have been ? Why him in particular?

I imagine the the portuguese police were rather short of manpower and thin on the ground in the early hours of the morning.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 12, 2019, 07:34:23 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 12, 2019, 05:57:26 PM
Why should he have been ? Why him in particular?

I imagine the the portuguese police were rather short of manpower and thin on the ground in the early hours of the morning.
The PJ Files contain the names of all officers that we know of who responded.

From memory, half of them were dragged out of their sleep, off-duty, and hauled in.

If ANYONE can tell me the number of properties between 5A and Casa Liliana I will buy him/her the finest Cuban cigar or Cuba Libre.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 12, 2019, 07:55:06 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 12, 2019, 04:36:43 PM
Maybe to gain access to some empty apartments. It was the 'off-season' so hardly full occupancy
Don't they need search warrants in Portugal?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 12, 2019, 07:58:53 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 12, 2019, 07:55:06 PM
Don't they need search warrants in Portugal?

If they were apartments belonging to Ocean Club, why would they need warrents as the OC was cooperating with the searching ?
If they were searching private accommodation, I imagine it would be different.
I think they were unable to gain access to some properties because the owners could not be contacted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 12, 2019, 08:33:59 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 12, 2019, 07:58:53 PM
If they were apartments belonging to Ocean Club, why would they need warrents as the OC was cooperating with the searching ?
If they were searching private accommodation, I imagine it would be different.
I think they were unable to gain access to some properties because the owners could not be contacted
Very little record of these searches in the PJ file. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 13, 2019, 10:46:57 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 12, 2019, 07:34:23 PM
The PJ Files contain the names of all officers that we know of who responded.

From memory, half of them were dragged out of their sleep, off-duty, and hauled in.

If ANYONE can tell me the number of properties between 5A and Casa Liliana I will buy him/her the finest Cuban cigar or Cuba Libre.


let's create  two new victims! the parents told family back home that nobody was doing anything and they were left all alone to search for their daughter... who was allegedly abducted, and the abductor was hanging around waiting to be 'spotted'?   OH you need to think that one through...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 14, 2019, 09:57:33 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 13, 2019, 10:46:57 PM

let's create  two new victims! the parents told family back home that nobody was doing anything and they were left all alone to search for their daughter... who was allegedly abducted, and the abductor was hanging around waiting to be 'spotted'?   OH you need to think that one through...

They were left all alone,  the Police said see you in the morning.

IMO The McCann's believed Madeleine to have been abducted,  due to the fact the window was open which they  left closed, Madeleine was missing and not found anywhere in the surrounding areas where they had searched for her.   Would you have not thought of that?   If you were the McCann's would abduction have not crossed your mind?   

What are you talking about 'the abductor was hanging around waiting to be spotted'   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 14, 2019, 09:59:22 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 12, 2019, 07:34:23 PM
The PJ Files contain the names of all officers that we know of who responded.

From memory, half of them were dragged out of their sleep, off-duty, and hauled in.

If ANYONE can tell me the number of properties between 5A and Casa Liliana I will buy him/her the finest Cuban cigar or Cuba Libre.

'dragged out of their sleep,  off duty,  hauled in'   what a shame.   That is normal procedure with any Police force,  detectives work through the night,  they want to find a missing child.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 14, 2019, 10:17:58 AM
Quote from: Lace on January 14, 2019, 09:59:22 AM
'dragged out of their sleep,  off duty,  hauled in'   what a shame.   That is normal procedure with any Police force,  detectives work through the night,  they want to find a missing child.
You have run another canard up the flag.

There was no record of Murat when the GNR first responded.  He would not turn up until later.  Ditto, no mention of Casa Liliana.

That leaves you with the entire eastern half of Luz for your door-to-door search/enquiries.

So how many officers do you think should have been assigned to this diligence? How many would you have assigned to this, had you been in charge?

 *&(+(+
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 14, 2019, 10:44:47 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 14, 2019, 10:17:58 AM
You have run another canard up the flag.

There was no record of Murat when the GNR first responded.  He would not turn up until later.  Ditto, no mention of Casa Liliana.

That leaves you with the entire eastern half of Luz for your door-to-door search/enquiries.

So how many officers do you think should have been assigned to this diligence? How many would you have assigned to this, had you been in charge?

 *&(+(+


Most of the GNR officers if not all of them speak about Jane and her seeing a man carrying a child.   One of them thinks that because it was dark and Jane couldn't give much of a description of the man but decribes the pyjamas this wasn't a credible sighting.

Another says because the sighting had already been given he did nothing about what Jane had said.


There is a lot of talk of searching,  lorries etc.   yet not one of them thought to knock on the doors of the houses where Jane said she saw her man heading towards.    Murat even says he was still up when he heard sirens.  I'm sorry but to me this just beggars belief.


As to how many Police I would assign to the task of door to door,  as many as it took.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 14, 2019, 11:19:02 AM
Quote from: Lace on January 14, 2019, 10:44:47 AM

Most of the GNR officers if not all of them speak about Jane and her seeing a man carrying a child.   One of them thinks that because it was dark and Jane couldn't give much of a description of the man but decribes the pyjamas this wasn't a credible sighting.

Another says because the sighting had already been given he did nothing about what Jane had said.


There is a lot of talk of searching,  lorries etc.   yet not one of them thought to knock on the doors of the houses where Jane said she saw her man heading towards.    Murat even says he was still up when he heard sirens.  I'm sorry but to me this just beggars belief.


As to how many Police I would assign to the task of door to door,  as many as it took.
At a first estimate, there are perhaps 2,000 properties in eastern Luz, the direction of Tannerman.

So 'as many as it took' is how many?  From where are you getting this enormous reserve of manpower?  Would you halt the next day searches that were carried out on a woke-and-wandered basis?  Would you stop all of the other 'normal' police activities in the western Algarve to resource your door-to-door priority?

I am going to assume you have never visited Luz and consequently you have no idea just how impractical your idea is.  If you ever make to this neck of the woods, let me know.  I'll be happy to take you around the area, and let you decide for yourself if you still think it can be done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 14, 2019, 11:39:47 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 14, 2019, 11:19:02 AM
At a first estimate, there are perhaps 2,000 properties in eastern Luz, the direction of Tannerman.

So 'as many as it took' is how many?  From where are you getting this enormous reserve of manpower?  Would you halt the next day searches that were carried out on a woke-and-wandered basis?  Would you stop all of the other 'normal' police activities in the western Algarve to resource your door-to-door priority?

I am going to assume you have never visited Luz and consequently you have no idea just how impractical your idea is.  If you ever make to this neck of the woods, let me know.  I'll be happy to take you around the area, and let you decide for yourself if you still think it can be done.

What I am saying is and which you appear to be ignoring.   There doesn't seem to have been any door to door undertaken in the immediate area where Jane saw a man carrying a child.  Murat didn't have anyone knocking on his door to ask if he had seen anyone,  for all the Police knew Madeleine could have been lying in Murat's garden having been abandoned by the abductor.

The rest of the door to door could have been carried out at a later date,  the Police did have cars you know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 14, 2019, 11:59:14 AM
Quote from: jassi on January 14, 2019, 11:45:11 AM
Again, why are you obsessed with Murat ? There were any number of other dwellings in the area. Why ot somebody else's garden ?

I just used Murat as an example his house was nearest,  I don't know the names of the owners of the other houses.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 14, 2019, 12:23:33 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 14, 2019, 12:01:48 PM
Is his house the nearest dwelling? There is not an apartment block just across the road from 5A ?

Why is it always written that the man Kate saw was heading in the direction of Murat's house?   I'm not saying he was heading in that direction because Murat had something to do with it,  but that is what I have read.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 14, 2019, 12:27:41 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 14, 2019, 12:25:12 PM
You seem confused. Kate never saw anyone.

Correction 'Jane'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on January 14, 2019, 12:28:34 PM
Please cut out the libel by innuendo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 14, 2019, 01:02:53 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on January 14, 2019, 12:28:34 PM
Please cut out the libel by innuendo.

What libel by innuendo?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 14, 2019, 04:51:37 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on January 14, 2019, 12:28:34 PM
Please cut out the libel by innuendo.
could you explain that please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 14, 2019, 05:28:38 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 14, 2019, 11:19:02 AM
At a first estimate, there are perhaps 2,000 properties in eastern Luz, the direction of Tannerman.

So 'as many as it took' is how many?  From where are you getting this enormous reserve of manpower?  Would you halt the next day searches that were carried out on a woke-and-wandered basis?  Would you stop all of the other 'normal' police activities in the western Algarve to resource your door-to-door priority?

I am going to assume you have never visited Luz and consequently you have no idea just how impractical your idea is.  If you ever make to this neck of the woods, let me know.  I'll be happy to take you around the area, and let you decide for yourself if you still think it can be done.
And yet some people think this is EXACTLY what the McCanns themselves should have done that night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 14, 2019, 05:29:56 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on January 14, 2019, 12:28:34 PM
Please cut out the libel by innuendo.
Probably time to close the forum if you’ve finally cottoned on to “libel by innuendo”.  LOL.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 14, 2019, 06:40:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 14, 2019, 05:28:38 PM
And yet some people think this is EXACTLY what the McCanns themselves should have done that night.

Who are 'some people'? Do you have a cite?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 14, 2019, 06:51:37 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 14, 2019, 09:57:33 AM
They were left all alone,  the Police said see you in the morning.

IMO The McCann's believed Madeleine to have been abducted,  due to the fact the window was open which they  left closed, Madeleine was missing and not found anywhere in the surrounding areas where they had searched for her.   Would you have not thought of that?   If you were the McCann's would abduction have not crossed your mind?   

What are you talking about 'the abductor was hanging around waiting to be spotted'


"
What are you talking about 'the abductor was hanging around waiting to be spotted' "

Oh that is my way of saying WTF who are they trying to kid... IMO

Kate claimed she knew  right away MBM was abducted... when exactly did she relay this  to ANYONE. ahh yes when the police were called and, when they had to tell the parents they left the children alone every night  and this night MBM's door was unlocked...

 But well, that makes them out to be 'complicit' in their childs disappearance as some would claim neglectful- so an abduction was erm  thought of... I mean It was JT who what saw him like, and ,well she also saw Gerry and Jez but like well.. they didn't see her or the abductor... make of that what you will eh?

And to make matters even more hilarious after KNOWING right away her daughter was abducted she went back to the apartment to look for her  and all the tapas went into the room as well. because it was such a very large room it took many, many people to check if the abducter as still on premis or miles and miles away and even across  oceans, hence why they needed a global search eventually.

Shorter version : if she was abducted when seen by JT -30 minutes earlier- what are the chances of the abducter still hanging around the apartnement/in the room and or the area for that matter.

IMO  the abductor was a get out of any responsibility clause- an after thought, a PR job.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 14, 2019, 07:23:04 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 14, 2019, 06:51:37 PM

"
What are you talking about 'the abductor was hanging around waiting to be spotted' "

Oh that is my way of saying WTF who are they trying to kid... IMO

Kate claimed she knew  right away MBM was abducted... when exactly did she relay this  to ANYONE. ahh yes when the police were called and, when they had to tell the parents they left the children alone every night  and this night MBM's door was unlocked...

 But well, that makes them out to be 'complicit' in their childs disappearance as some would claim neglectful- so an abduction was erm  thought of... I mean It was JT who what saw him like, and ,well she also saw Gerry and Jez but like well.. they didn't see her or the abductor... make of that what you will eh?

And to make matters even more hilarious after KNOWING right away her daughter was abducted she went back to the apartment to look for her  and all the tapas went into the room as well. because it was such a very large room it took many, many people to check if the abducter as still on premis or miles and miles away and even across  oceans, hence why they needed a global search eventually.

Shorter version : if she was abducted when seen by JT -30 minutes earlier- what are the chances of the abducter still hanging around the apartnement/in the room and or the area for that matter.

IMO  the abductor was a get out of any responsibility clause- an after thought, a PR job.
Coooeee, Slarti, libel by a little bit more than innuendo...do you think?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 14, 2019, 07:38:21 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 14, 2019, 07:23:04 PM
Coooeee, Slarti, libel by a little bit more than innuendo...do you think?


No!  I claim it as my opinion. It is allowed. call it freedom of speech... it is what I believe. you believe in something different you don't hear me moaning about it. ^*&&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 14, 2019, 07:48:02 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 14, 2019, 07:38:21 PM

No!  I claim it as my opinion. It is allowed. call it freedom of speech... it is what I believe. you believe in something different you don't hear me moaning about it. ^*&&
Perhaps Slart can clarify then Is it permissable to say: “in my opinion the McCanns discovered their daughter dead in the apartment and hid her body”, for example?    I was under the impression that even implying unproven criminal activity as opinion was stictly verboten.  Slarti, where are yooooou?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 14, 2019, 11:26:24 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 14, 2019, 05:28:38 PM
And yet some people think this is EXACTLY what the McCanns themselves should have done that night.
Surely the T9 should have headed east after Tannerman?

And phoned the police?

Oh dear!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 14, 2019, 11:39:36 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 14, 2019, 11:26:24 PM
Surely the T9 should have headed east after Tannerman?

And phoned the police?

Oh dear!

You would have thought so, wouldn’t you ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 14, 2019, 11:43:48 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 14, 2019, 11:26:24 PM
Surely the T9 should have headed east after Tannerman?

And phoned the police?

Oh dear!
The police were phoned weren’t they?  Or did they just drop by on a whim? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 01:17:48 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 14, 2019, 11:26:24 PM
Surely the T9 should have headed east after Tannerman?

And phoned the police?

Oh dear!
When Jane saw the man she had no idea it could be Madeleine.  When Kate came back in the alarmed state Jane wasn't there to tell the others about what she saw.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 15, 2019, 08:39:25 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 14, 2019, 11:43:48 PM
The police were phoned weren’t they?  Or did they just drop by on a whim?
Not phoned by the T9 they weren't.  Were they?   *&^^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 15, 2019, 09:10:39 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 15, 2019, 08:39:25 AM
Not phoned by the T9 they weren't.  Were they?   *&^^&

Hardly relevant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 15, 2019, 09:14:27 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 01:17:48 AM
When Jane saw the man she had no idea it could be Madeleine.  When Kate came back in the alarmed state Jane wasn't there to tell the others about what she saw.

Exactly Rob,  Jane was in her apartment when Kate give the alarm and they came back to 5a.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 15, 2019, 09:15:22 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 15, 2019, 08:39:25 AM
Not phoned by the T9 they weren't.  Were they?   *&^^&

No reception was supposed to have phoned the Police.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 15, 2019, 09:17:32 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 14, 2019, 06:51:37 PM

"
What are you talking about 'the abductor was hanging around waiting to be spotted' "

Oh that is my way of saying WTF who are they trying to kid... IMO

Kate claimed she knew  right away MBM was abducted... when exactly did she relay this  to ANYONE. ahh yes when the police were called and, when they had to tell the parents they left the children alone every night  and this night MBM's door was unlocked...

 But well, that makes them out to be 'complicit' in their childs disappearance as some would claim neglectful- so an abduction was erm  thought of... I mean It was JT who what saw him like, and ,well she also saw Gerry and Jez but like well.. they didn't see her or the abductor... make of that what you will eh?

And to make matters even more hilarious after KNOWING right away her daughter was abducted she went back to the apartment to look for her  and all the tapas went into the room as well. because it was such a very large room it took many, many people to check if the abducter as still on premis or miles and miles away and even across  oceans, hence why they needed a global search eventually.

Shorter version : if she was abducted when seen by JT -30 minutes earlier- what are the chances of the abducter still hanging around the apartnement/in the room and or the area for that matter.

IMO  the abductor was a get out of any responsibility clause- an after thought, a PR job.

I am not replying to this garbled excuse for a post,  only to say you are guilty of libel by innuendo.   IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 09:19:22 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 01:17:48 AM
When Jane saw the man she had no idea it could be Madeleine.  When Kate came back in the alarmed state Jane wasn't there to tell the others about what she saw.

By 22.20 at least three of the nine knew about Jane's sighting. They didn't seem to inform those searching to concentrate on the area the man was heading towards, however. Matthew went to the Millenium on the off chance that Madeleine had wandered in that direction. He doesn't remember when he learmed of Jane's sighting. Rusell was told by Jane, but it didn't seem to affect where he searched.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 15, 2019, 09:29:06 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 15, 2019, 09:10:39 AM
Hardly relevant.
Quite important actually.

No phone call was made to the GNR until 40 minutes after the alarm was raised, and it wasn't by the T9.

Meantime, between the alarm being raised and the GNR being called, the T9 did what, precisely?

Oh, an offer by Mrs Fenn to use her phone to call the police was rejected.

So Matthew O did a non-check around 9.30.  Matthew O did a non-call around 10.15.  Someone, presumably Gerry, rejected the opportunity to make a call, around 10.30.

With friends like these, did Madeleine need enemies?   *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 15, 2019, 09:31:53 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 15, 2019, 09:29:06 AM
Quite important actually.

No phone call was made to the GNR until 40 minutes after the alarm was raised, and it wasn't by the T9.

Meantime, between the alarm being raised and the GNR being called, the T9 did what, precisely?

Oh, an offer by Mrs Fenn to use her phone to call the police was rejected.

So Matthew O did a non-check around 9.30.  Matthew O did a non-call around 10.15.  Someone, presumably Gerry, rejected the opportunity to make a call, around 10.30.

With friends like these, did Madeleine need enemies?   *%87

So just another opportunity to slag off The McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 09:58:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 09:19:22 AM
By 22.20 at least three of the nine knew about Jane's sighting. They didn't seem to inform those searching to concentrate on the area the man was heading towards, however. Matthew went to the Millenium on the off chance that Madeleine had wandered in that direction. He doesn't remember when he learned of Jane's sighting. Russell was told by Jane, but it didn't seem to affect where he searched.
That to me is a great bit of research.  Can you think of why they would continue looking for her as if she had wandered off?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 15, 2019, 10:03:53 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 09:58:44 AM
That to me is a great bit of research.  Can you think of why they would continue looking for her as if she had wandered off?

I can, but would be accused of all sorts of things if I posted it on here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 15, 2019, 10:05:00 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 15, 2019, 09:31:53 AM
So just another opportunity to slag off The McCanns.
Just another opportunity to tell guests the truth.   &%54%
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 15, 2019, 10:26:01 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 15, 2019, 10:05:00 AM
Just another opportunity to tell guests the truth.   &%54%

You could tell them that Kate McCann was in a state of collapse immediately after she discovered her daughter was missing, and Gerry wasn't much better.  And that someone had to go to Reception some distance away to get them to make the call because none of them spoke Portuguese.

That would be the truth.

How anyone wouldn't be able to understand that is a mystery to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 10:56:49 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 15, 2019, 10:26:01 AM
You could tell them that Kate McCann was in a state of collapse immediately after she discovered her daughter was missing, and Gerry wasn't much better.  And that someone had to go to Reception some distance away to get them to make the call because none of them spoke Portuguese.

That would be the truth.

How anyone wouldn't be able to understand that is a mystery to me.

There is certainly evidence that the McCann's were in a state but they would be in a state no matter what happened, wouldn't they?

According to Kate McCann when the police hadn't arrived by 10.30, Gerry asked Matthrew to go back to reception to check why not, although Matthw doesnn't mention that. In addition;

Our friends were running to and from the Tapas area, pleading with people to ring the police again from there. [madeleine]

None of their friends mentions doing that, and if they did were they ignored?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 15, 2019, 11:02:15 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 10:56:49 AM
There is certainly evidence that the McCann's were in a state but they would be in a state no matter what happened, wouldn't they?

According to Kate McCann when the police hadn't arrived by 10.30, Gerry asked Matthrew to go back to reception to check why not, although Matthw doesnn't mention that. In addition;

Our friends were running to and from the Tapas area, pleading with people to ring the police again from there. [madeleine]

None of their friends mentions doing that, and if they did were they ignored?

It seems to me that The Ocean Club Reception hoped that Madeleine had wandered, so were a bit slow in phoning The Police.
I can understand that, and wouldn't blame anyone.

But to blame The McCanns for not phoning personally is just plain nasty.  In My Opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 15, 2019, 11:28:55 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 15, 2019, 11:02:15 AM
It seems to me that The Ocean Club Reception hoped that Madeleine had wandered, so were a bit slow in phoning The Police.
I can understand that, and wouldn't blame anyone.

But to blame The McCanns for not phoning personally is just plain nasty.  In My Opinion.

Mrs Fenn offered. Why wasn’t the offer accepted...even if the police had already been called ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 15, 2019, 11:32:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 10:56:49 AM
There is certainly evidence that the McCann's were in a state but they would be in a state no matter what happened, wouldn't they?

According to Kate McCann when the police hadn't arrived by 10.30, Gerry asked Matthrew to go back to reception to check why not, although Matthw doesnn't mention that. In addition;

Our friends were running to and from the Tapas area, pleading with people to ring the police again from there. [madeleine]

None of their friends mentions doing that, and if they did were they ignored?

So many versions.
I suppose the truth might be in there, somewhere
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 15, 2019, 11:32:40 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 15, 2019, 11:02:15 AM
It seems to me that The Ocean Club Reception hoped that Madeleine had wandered, so were a bit slow in phoning The Police.
I can understand that, and wouldn't blame anyone.

But to blame The McCanns for not phoning personally is just plain nasty.  In My Opinion.
If you read my allegedly 'just plain nasty' post again, you will find the 'culprit' was Matthew Oldfield.

That makes your opinion 'just plain stupid'.  In my opinion.

And if you don't get censured for your 'just plain stupid' comment, presumably my response will be allowed to stand also.

Let's see.   &^^&*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 15, 2019, 11:42:30 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 15, 2019, 11:28:55 AM
Mrs Fenn offered. Why wasn’t the offer accepted...even if the police had already been called ?

What would have been the point if it had already been done?

Did Mrs. Fenn speak Portuguese, by the way?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 15, 2019, 11:46:15 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 15, 2019, 11:32:40 AM
If you read my allegedly 'just plain nasty' post again, you will find the 'culprit' was Matthew Oldfield.

That makes your opinion 'just plain stupid'.  In my opinion.

And if you don't get censured for your 'just plain stupid' comment, presumably my response will be allowed to stand also.

Let's see.   &^^&*

I didn't accuse you of being Just Plain Stupid.  I won't be censoring any of this.

I, however, am known for my stupidity, which, of the two, I prefer to be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 15, 2019, 12:12:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 09:19:22 AM
By 22.20 at least three of the nine knew about Jane's sighting. They didn't seem to inform those searching to concentrate on the area the man was heading towards, however. Matthew went to the Millenium on the off chance that Madeleine had wandered in that direction. He doesn't remember when he learmed of Jane's sighting. Rusell was told by Jane, but it didn't seem to affect where he searched.

 From Russell O'Brian's statement -

 Erm, the next, so, you know, at some point I think I felt, I was starting to feel sort of useless again, just hanging around the apartment, you know, there were a lot of people, you know, going around at this point, so I opted, after the pictures and after a period of time back in the flat and conversations to go away again, erm, and this time I searched over and on towards the Millennium Restaurant, so in a, in a completely different direction to where I had been before.  As I said, I don’t think the, although people, there was some coordination within small groups of individuals, there wasn’t really a systematic route to anyone being searched, so I may have been covering ground that had been done before, but, nonetheless, I chose somewhere that I hadn’t been before, erm, searched along those roads, there’s a few alleys that kind of, well alleys the wrong word, erm, roads that I presume higher up just sort of go, you know, lead out of town, that run parallel to the road that goes up past Millennium, erm, I went round a few of, erm, a couple of these with increasing futility really, and I think despite there being a bit of moonlight, I couldn’t really see very much, erm, there were sort of dog barks and you kind of think, you know, ‘I’m just going to walk into some field of rabid dogs’, so in the end I kind of double back.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 15, 2019, 12:14:09 PM
The Police could have been knocking on doors.   Robert Murat and the other neighbours could have seen something,  they could have seen the abductor passing by.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 15, 2019, 12:19:33 PM
I believe they did knock on doors, just not at 4 o'clock in the morning.

For a resident to have seen anything, they would have had to have been out and about themselves, or looking out of windows.
Dark night, little moonlight , according to Russell - little chance of seeing anything .  IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 15, 2019, 12:41:39 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 15, 2019, 11:42:30 AM
What would have been the point if it had already been done?

Did Mrs. Fenn speak Portuguese, by the way?

But it wasn’t obvious whether it had been done. The police certainly were not there. Surely the more calls the better ? As to Mrs Fenn speaking Portuguese, I’m sure she wouldn’t have offered to call the police if she didn’t think she’d have been understood.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 12:43:28 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 15, 2019, 12:12:25 PM
From Russell O'Brian's statement -

 Erm, the next, so, you know, at some point I think I felt, I was starting to feel sort of useless again, just hanging around the apartment, you know, there were a lot of people, you know, going around at this point, so I opted, after the pictures and after a period of time back in the flat and conversations to go away again, erm, and this time I searched over and on towards the Millennium Restaurant, so in a, in a completely different direction to where I had been before.  As I said, I don’t think the, although people, there was some coordination within small groups of individuals, there wasn’t really a systematic route to anyone being searched, so I may have been covering ground that had been done before, but, nonetheless, I chose somewhere that I hadn’t been before, erm, searched along those roads, there’s a few alleys that kind of, well alleys the wrong word, erm, roads that I presume higher up just sort of go, you know, lead out of town, that run parallel to the road that goes up past Millennium, erm, I went round a few of, erm, a couple of these with increasing futility really, and I think despite there being a bit of moonlight, I couldn’t really see very much, erm, there were sort of dog barks and you kind of think, you know, ‘I’m just going to walk into some field of rabid dogs’, so in the end I kind of double back.

He also makes no mention of Jane's sighting in relation to his searches. He went north simply because he hadn't looked up there before.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 01:10:23 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 15, 2019, 12:41:39 PM
But it wasn’t obvious whether it had been done. The police certainly were not there. Surely the more calls the better ? As to Mrs Fenn speaking Portuguese, I’m sure she wouldn’t have offered to call the police if she didn’t think she’d have been understood.

In Rachael's rog interview she mentions ringing Matthew'at least once or twice' to ask him if he had called the police. Unfortunately she doesn't say was his reply was. Eventually he returned and was sent back to reception by Gerry to check if the police had been called. The receptionist mentions neither of these visits.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 15, 2019, 04:31:19 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 01:17:48 AM
When Jane saw the man she had no idea it could be Madeleine.  When Kate came back in the alarmed state Jane wasn't there to tell the others about what she saw.

Everything is always so clear in hindsight isn't it though.  Even if Jane had been at the table to hear Kate's screams would she even have had time to analyse what she had seen to be able to impart that information before everyone raced off to start looking for Madeleine?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 15, 2019, 04:40:43 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 15, 2019, 04:31:19 PM
Everything is always so clear in hindsight isn't it though.  Even if Jane had been at the table to hear Kate's screams would she even have had time to analyse what she had seen to be able to impart that information before everyone raced off to start looking for Madeleine?

The idea of it being Madeleine came later.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 04:42:00 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 15, 2019, 11:28:55 AM
Mrs Fenn offered. Why wasn’t the offer accepted...even if the police had already been called ?
What were her words that confirm that Mrs Fenn offered to call the police?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on January 15, 2019, 04:45:29 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 04:42:00 PM
What were her words that confirm that Mrs Fenn offered to call the police?

From Mrs Fenn's statement

At that moment she offered Gerry help, saying that he could use her phone to contact the authorities, to which he replied that this had already been done. It was just after 22.30.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAMELA_FENN.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 15, 2019, 04:47:12 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 15, 2019, 11:42:30 AM
What would have been the point if it had already been done?

Did Mrs. Fenn speak Portuguese, by the way?

The Police eventually got round to conducting an interview with Mrs Fenn on the 20th of August of the year in which Madeleine disappeared on 3rd May.

Mrs Fenn neither spoke or read Portuguese and required an interpreter.

Snip
Being of British nationality and in spite of living in Portugal, does not have knowledge of the Portuguese language in its oral and written form, therefore a police interpreter is present, UEVE VAN LOOCK.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAMELA_FENN.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 04:48:02 PM
Quote from: Sunny on January 15, 2019, 04:45:29 PM
From Mrs Fenn's statement

At that moment she offered Gerry help, saying that he could use her phone to contact the authorities, to which he replied that this had already been done. It was just after 22.30.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAMELA_FENN.htm
She offered a phone not offered to call the police. Thanks Sunny.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 15, 2019, 04:48:52 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 04:42:00 PM
What were her words that confirm that Mrs Fenn offered to call the police?


"She found it strange that Gerry when said that a girl had been abducted, he did not mention that it was his daughter and that he did not mention any other scenarios. At that moment she offered Gerry help, saying that he could use her phone to contact the authorities, to which he replied that this had already been done. It was just after 22.30."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAMELA_FENN.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on January 15, 2019, 04:50:15 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 04:48:02 PM
She offered a phone not offered to call the police.

SIL said this Rob


Oh, an offer by Mrs Fenn to use her phone to call the police was rejected.

Which is EXACTLY what she did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 15, 2019, 04:55:14 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 15, 2019, 04:40:43 PM
The idea of it being Madeleine was only in its infancy at that moment.  Barely conceived, one might  even say.
I don't think your post contains one iota of sense.  "At that moment" there had been no "conception" or "infancy" associated with the alarm of Madeleine's disappearance being raised.  It has been stated in other posts that at the time the only witness to the male child carrier was Jane Tanner who was not present at the table when the others became aware of Madeleine's disappearance.
Unless you have a cite to the differ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 15, 2019, 04:56:58 PM
Quote from: Sunny on January 15, 2019, 04:45:29 PM
From Mrs Fenn's statement

At that moment she offered Gerry help, saying that he could use her phone to contact the authorities, to which he replied that this had already been done. It was just after 22.30.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAMELA_FENN.htm

Nothing to see there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 05:03:51 PM
Quote from: Sunny on January 15, 2019, 04:50:15 PM
SIL said this Rob


Oh, an offer by Mrs Fenn to use her phone to call the police was rejected.

Which is EXACTLY what she did.
Once you reminded me that Mrs Fenn offered her phone, I recalled the situation.  It was just that I couldn't remember that anyone offered to call the police, even though at times people can be indirect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 15, 2019, 06:10:46 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 15, 2019, 08:39:25 AM
Not phoned by the T9 they weren't.  Were they?   *&^^&
Did the “T9” not wish to call the police then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 15, 2019, 06:18:46 PM
Quote from: Sunny on January 15, 2019, 04:45:29 PM
From Mrs Fenn's statement

At that moment she offered Gerry help, saying that he could use her phone to contact the authorities, to which he replied that this had already been done. It was just after 22.30.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAMELA_FENN.htm
So if the police had just been called why would anyone think it necessary to call them again straight after? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 15, 2019, 07:00:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 15, 2019, 06:18:46 PM
So if the police had just been called why would anyone think it necessary to call them again straight after?
Why would anyone think the police had just been called?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 07:02:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 15, 2019, 06:10:46 PM
Did the “T9” not wish to call the police then?
There are 9 people involved in the T9.  What reason would they have to all think alike.   IMO Kate and Fiona wanted the police to be rung immediately.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 07:10:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 15, 2019, 06:18:46 PM
So if the police had just been called why would anyone think it necessary to call them again straight after?

If the group were confident that the police had been called why did Rachael phone her husband twice to ask him if he'd done it? What was his reply? He could only say he didn't know, which is what he saiid in his rog interview. Did he say that to Rachael? Twice? As everything in Luz seems to be ten minutes away from everything else why didn't he go back and check with the receptionist? Why didm't the receptionist mention either of his alleged visits?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 07:23:45 PM
It seems The Met dug a lot of holes and caused a lot of damage in Sutton Coldfield searching for the remains of Suzy Lamplugh. The family were happy to help, but Christmas was difficult and their house still hasn't been repaired.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-46878100
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 15, 2019, 07:30:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 07:23:45 PM
It seems The Met dug a lot of holes and caused a lot of damage in Sutton Coldfield searching for the remains of Suzy Lamplugh. The family were happy to help, but Christmas was difficult and their house still hasn't been repaired.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-46878100
IF only they’d used a dog all of this could have been avoided.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 15, 2019, 07:32:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 07:10:43 PM
If the group were confident that the police had been called why did Rachael phone her husband twice to ask him if he'd done it? What was his reply? He could only say he didn't know, which is what he saiid in his rog interview. Did he say that to Rachael? Twice? As everything in Luz seems to be ten minutes away from everything else why didn't he go back and check with the receptionist? Why didm't the receptionist mention either of his alleged visits?
Sorry, I don’t know the answers to any of your very many questions, but do you think they are in any way relevant to discovering what happened to Madeleine McCann?  If so please can you explain why.  Many thanks
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 09:10:12 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 15, 2019, 07:32:43 PM
Sorry, I don’t know the answers to any of your very many questions, but do you think they are in any way relevant to discovering what happened to Madeleine McCann?  If so please can you explain why.  Many thanks

The PJ were criticised for their alleged slow response in monitoring motorways and borders, but the half hour lost by their friend has never been mentioned. It has also never been explained.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on January 15, 2019, 09:30:47 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 15, 2019, 09:29:06 AM
Quite important actually.

No phone call was made to the GNR until 40 minutes after the alarm was raised, and it wasn't by the T9.

Meantime, between the alarm being raised and the GNR being called, the T9 did what, precisely?

Oh, an offer by Mrs Fenn to use her phone to call the police was rejected.

So Matthew O did a non-check around 9.30.  Matthew O did a non-call around 10.15.  Someone, presumably Gerry, rejected the opportunity to make a call, around 10.30.

With friends like these, did Madeleine need enemies?   *%87

I have to agree.  The language barrier has always been put forward as some sort of excuse for not immediately telephoning the police.  Utter nonsense imo.  If my kid disappeared in those circumstances and I felt that I couldn't dial 112, I would insist the tapas manager telephone the police immediately and if there wasn't one on duty any waiter could have done the same thing and summoned police very quickly.  Walking down to main reception to summon police was simply time wasting imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 15, 2019, 09:31:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 09:10:12 PM
The PJ were criticised for their alleged slow response in monitoring motorways and borders, but the half hour lost by their friend has never been mentioned. It has also never been explained.
Never been mentioned?!  You’re having a laugh aren’t you!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 15, 2019, 09:34:41 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on January 15, 2019, 09:30:47 PM
I have to agree.  The language barrier has always been put forward as some sort of excuse for not immediately telephoning the police.  Utter nonsense imo.  If my kid disappeared in those circumstances I would insist the tapas manager telephone the police immediately and if there wasn't one on duty any waiter could have done the same thing and summoned police very quickly.  Walking down to main reception to summon police was simply time wasting imo.
So, although you fervently believe Madeleine woke and wandered, your first action on finding that your kid had left your house under her own steam would be to call the police, not go looking for her?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on January 15, 2019, 09:43:34 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 15, 2019, 09:34:41 PM
So, although you fervently believe Madeleine woke and wandered, your first action on finding that your kid had left your house under her own steam would be to call the police, not go looking for her?

Read my post again, that's not what I stated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on January 15, 2019, 09:46:49 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 05:03:51 PM
Once you reminded me that Mrs Fenn offered her phone, I recalled the situation.  It was just that I couldn't remember that anyone offered to call the police, even though at times people can be indirect.

Can you not see a pattern here?  Offers of help from various people rejected out of hand?  The tapas group did not want any outsiders gaining access to their inner circle for some reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 15, 2019, 09:50:52 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on January 15, 2019, 09:43:34 PM
Read my post again, that's not what I stated.
You think Madeleine woke and wandered, you think the McCanns should have phoned the police immeadiately.  What am I missing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 09:54:00 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on January 15, 2019, 09:30:47 PM
I have to agree.  The language barrier has always been put forward as some sort of excuse for not immediately telephoning the police.  Utter nonsense imo.  If my kid disappeared in those circumstances and I felt that I couldn't dial 112, I would insist the tapas manager telephone the police immediately and if there wasn't one on duty any waiter could have done the same thing and summoned police very quickly.  Walking down to main reception to summon police was simply time wasting imo.
As part of their policy OC may have insisted on doing a search first before calling the GNR.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 15, 2019, 09:58:59 PM
I lost my toddler in a public place for a few minutes once.  I didn’t call the police immediately, should I have done?  I thought she’d probably wandered off when I was momentarily distracted, but it also crossed my mind she might have been taken.  I searched frantically and was beside myself but I did not immediately think to phone the police straight away.  I guess that makes me a bad person.  Child was found after a few minutes btw. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 15, 2019, 10:13:26 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 15, 2019, 09:58:59 PM
I lost my toddler in a public place for a few minutes once.  I didn’t call the police immediately, should I have done?  I thought she’d probably wandered off when I was momentarily distracted, but it also crossed my mind she might have been taken.  I searched frantically and was beside myself but I did not immediately think to phone the police straight away.  I guess that makes me a bad person.  Child was found after a few minutes btw.
IMO - There wouldn't be enough police to attend to all the situations as you have described.  I'm sure they would said something like: "have a look around and get back to us if you don't find the child after an hour or so".

I found stipulating a time of initial searching to be quite difficult to estimate, should it be an hour  or two hours or even a day?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 10:45:47 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on January 15, 2019, 09:30:47 PM
I have to agree.  The language barrier has always been put forward as some sort of excuse for not immediately telephoning the police.  Utter nonsense imo.  If my kid disappeared in those circumstances and I felt that I couldn't dial 112, I would insist the tapas manager telephone the police immediately and if there wasn't one on duty any waiter could have done the same thing and summoned police very quickly.  Walking down to main reception to summon police was simply time wasting imo.

According to Kate McCann's bookI her friends pleaded with those in the Tapas complex to call the police. They seem to have been ignored just as Matthew was ignored twice by the receptionist. I find it all very difficult to believe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 15, 2019, 10:55:17 PM
Who is going to admit that someone begged them to call the police because a child had gone missing but they ignored their request?  No one that’s who. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 15, 2019, 11:34:36 PM
Who was actually responsible for ensuring the receptionist called the police for the first time at 2241hrs?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 16, 2019, 12:35:11 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 15, 2019, 10:45:47 PM
According to Kate McCann's bookI her friends pleaded with those in the Tapas complex to call the police. They seem to have been ignored just as Matthew was ignored twice by the receptionist. I find it all very difficult to believe.

And Kate’s fervent appeals to the police that there was something wrong with the twins also seem to have been ignored.
Those poor, unfortunate holidaymakers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 16, 2019, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 16, 2019, 12:35:11 AM
And Kate’s fervent appeals to the police that there was something wrong with the twins also seem to have been ignored.
Those poor, unfortunate holidaymakers.
Can we have a cite for “fervent appeals” please? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on January 16, 2019, 07:29:17 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 16, 2019, 07:19:00 AM
Can we have a cite for “fervent appeals” please?

I can't give you one as I can't find one made at the time of Madeleine's disappearance.

Kate McCann on 4th May 2007

Faced with this situation,she verified that the twins were in their respective beds, unlike Madeleine, who had disappeared. The cover was pulled back and the toys were on the pillow as usual. After searching the whole apartment thoroughly, the interviewee went back, scared and shocked, to the restaurant, to alert her husband and the others to the disappearance. The whole group then set about searching for Madeleine throughout the complex, looked in all the buildings, swimming pool, tennis courts etc....as well as in the apartment with the help of employees, who, at the same time, contacted the authorities.


No mention of the twins sleeping/drugged just that they were in their respective beds.

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on January 16, 2019, 08:00:25 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 15, 2019, 10:55:17 PM
Who is going to admit that someone begged them to call the police because a child had gone missing but they ignored their request?  No one that’s who.

Can we have a cite fo “begged”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 16, 2019, 08:10:41 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on January 16, 2019, 08:00:25 AM
Can we have a cite fo “begged”.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.4890
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 16, 2019, 11:08:53 AM
Quote from: Sunny on January 16, 2019, 07:29:17 AM
I can't give you one as I can't find one made at the time of Madeleine's disappearance.

Kate McCann on 4th May 2007

Faced with this situation,she verified that the twins were in their respective beds, unlike Madeleine, who had disappeared. The cover was pulled back and the toys were on the pillow as usual. After searching the whole apartment thoroughly, the interviewee went back, scared and shocked, to the restaurant, to alert her husband and the others to the disappearance. The whole group then set about searching for Madeleine throughout the complex, looked in all the buildings, swimming pool, tennis courts etc....as well as in the apartment with the help of employees, who, at the same time, contacted the authorities.


No mention of the twins sleeping/drugged just that they were in their respective beds.

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm

From Madeleine

‘We tried to explain what had happened. David reiterated his concerns about roadblocks and border notification and I reported my fears that all three children could have been sedated. A lady called Sílvia, who worked at the Ocean Club, had arrived to help out with translation. We learned later that she was the maintenance and services manager. I remember her telling me that she had two grown-up daughters herself. She was very kind and I was glad of her help and support.’


Strange that not one of the people who the parents called that night report either of them voicing any fears that the twins may have been sedated and that their concerns were being ignored. Sílvia Batista, who would have translated any concerns, makes no mention of Kate raising any concerns either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 16, 2019, 11:17:32 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 16, 2019, 11:08:53 AM
From Madeleine

‘We tried to explain what had happened. David reiterated his concerns about roadblocks and border notification and I reported my fears that all three children could have been sedated. A lady called Sílvia, who worked at the Ocean Club, had arrived to help out with translation. We learned later that she was the maintenance and services manager. I remember her telling me that she had two grown-up daughters herself. She was very kind and I was glad of her help and support.’


Strange that not one of the people who the parents called that night report either of them voicing any fears that the twins may have been sedated and that their concerns were being ignored. Sílvia Batista, who would have translated any concerns, makes no mention of Kate raising any concerns either.
Did Silvia Batista give a detailed account of everything that was said by Kate and others that night?  If so where is it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 16, 2019, 11:40:28 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 16, 2019, 11:17:32 AM
Did Silvia Batista give a detailed account of everything that was said by Kate and others that night?  If so where is it?

Are you seriously suggesting that a mature woman and two police officers would have ignored a statement by a qualified doctor that her children were showing signs of having been sedated by a criminal? In my opinion no-one would have let such a statement pass without comment or action.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 16, 2019, 11:54:34 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 16, 2019, 11:40:28 AM
Are you seriously suggesting that a mature woman and two police officers would have ignored a statement by a qualified doctor that her children were showing signs of having been sedated by a criminal? In my opinion no-one would have let such a statement pass without comment or action.
Are you seriously suggesting that the distraught mother of a missing child, with two seemingly drugged children would make up such a lie, one that could be so easily refuted not only by Silivia Batista but by two officers of the law, who would be able to use this as evidence of deceit on the part of the one time suspect?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 16, 2019, 11:56:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 16, 2019, 11:40:28 AM
Are you seriously suggesting that a mature woman and two police officers would have ignored a statement by a qualified doctor that her children were showing signs of having been sedated by a criminal? In my opinion no-one would have let such a statement pass without comment or action.

And, if drugged, Kate would have known that her children may be in mortal danger so why didn’t she push the issue or even mention her fears to the friends and family she talked with on the phone ? If the Portuguese police had ignored Kate’s ‘reports’ and put her children in danger don’t you think we’d have heard about it before 2011 ? I mean what a huge stick that would have been to beat the PJ with. Imagine the headlines ‘ Heartless Portuguese Police Ignored Traumatised Parents Pleas to Help Save Twins’.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 16, 2019, 12:04:22 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 16, 2019, 11:56:12 AM
And, if drugged, Kate would have known that her children may be in mortal danger so why didn’t she push the issue or even mention her fears to the friends and family she talked with on the phone ? If the Portuguese police had ignored Kate’s ‘reports’ and put her children in danger don’t you think we’d have heard about it before 2011 ? I mean what a huge stick that would have been to beat the PJ with. Imagine the headlines ‘ Heartless Portuguese Police Ignored Traumatised Parents Pleas to Help Save Twins’.

*Groundhog Day Klaxon*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on January 16, 2019, 01:18:44 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 16, 2019, 11:08:53 AM
From Madeleine

‘We tried to explain what had happened. David reiterated his concerns about roadblocks and border notification and I reported my fears that all three children could have been sedated. A lady called Sílvia, who worked at the Ocean Club, had arrived to help out with translation. We learned later that she was the maintenance and services manager. I remember her telling me that she had two grown-up daughters herself. She was very kind and I was glad of her help and support.’


Strange that not one of the people who the parents called that night report either of them voicing any fears that the twins may have been sedated and that their concerns were being ignored. Sílvia Batista, who would have translated any concerns, makes no mention of Kate raising any concerns either.

Odd that isn't it, Faithlilly. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 16, 2019, 02:09:13 PM
Quote from: Sunny on January 16, 2019, 01:18:44 PM
Odd that isn't it, Faithlilly.

Very Sunny.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 16, 2019, 02:11:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 16, 2019, 11:54:34 AM
Are you seriously suggesting that the distraught mother of a missing child, with two seemingly drugged children would make up such a lie, one that could be so easily refuted not only by Silivia Batista but by two officers of the law, who would be able to use this as evidence of deceit on the part of the one time suspect?

AFAIK the claim that she raised the matter with the GNR officers via Silvia Batista'a translation was made in 2011, four years after the event.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 16, 2019, 03:32:23 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 16, 2019, 02:09:13 PM
Very Sunny.
Rainy here. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 16, 2019, 03:35:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 16, 2019, 02:11:16 PM
AFAIK the claim that she raised the matter with the GNR officers via Silvia Batista'a translation was made in 2011, four years after the event.
So?  Did Silvia Batista and the two GNR officers pass away prior to this astounding revelation in 2011, allowing her to make stuff up without fear of contradiction?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 16, 2019, 03:42:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 16, 2019, 03:35:43 PM
So?  Did Silvia Batista and the two GNR officers pass away prior to this astounding revelation in 2011, allowing her to make stuff up without fear of contradiction?

Unless they've read the book what she wrote they are unlikely to have any  idea what she has said and no means to dispute it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on January 16, 2019, 03:47:46 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 16, 2019, 11:54:34 AM
Are you seriously suggesting that the distraught mother of a missing child, with two seemingly drugged children would make up such a lie, one that could be so easily refuted not only by Silivia Batista but by two officers of the law, who would be able to use this as evidence of deceit on the part of the one time suspect?

Well who was it who made up "such a lie". Either a lie by omission by the police, Sylvia Batista and possibly even some Mark Warner Employees or a lie by Kate McCann. Someone has been economical with the truth IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 16, 2019, 03:53:53 PM
Quote from: Sunny on January 16, 2019, 03:47:46 PM
Well who was it who made up "such a lie". Either a lie by omission by the police, Sylvia Batista and possibly even some Mark Warner Employees or a lie by Kate McCann. Someone has been economical with the truth IMO
It would not be a "lie by omission" by the police or Sylvia Batista, were they asked to recount all of Kate's articulations, fears and outbursts no.  I'm sure she said a lot of things that night, some of it probably quite incoherent and deranged sounding, there must be plenty she said that was never recounted in any great detail.  At the time the GNR and Batista may well have thought her fears were the rantings of an hysterical woman, particularly as none of them seemed to buy into the abduction theory, and therefore not worth mentioning.  Why do you have to be so binary and black and white about it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 16, 2019, 03:55:50 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 16, 2019, 03:42:30 PM
Unless they've read the book what she wrote they are unlikely to have any  idea what she has said and no means to dispute it
Why is it unlikely that people directly involved in the events of that night would have any interest in reading a book about it or their role in it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 16, 2019, 04:01:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 16, 2019, 03:55:50 PM
Why is it unlikely that people directly involved in the events of that night would have any interest in reading a book about it or their role in it?

I didn't comment on likelihood, I said IF they had read it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 16, 2019, 04:03:08 PM
Quote from: Sunny on January 16, 2019, 03:47:46 PM
Well who was it who made up "such a lie". Either a lie by omission by the police, Sylvia Batista and possibly even some Mark Warner Employees or a lie by Kate McCann. Someone has been economical with the truth IMO

This is not the same thing.  And this is bordering on Libel.  Please don't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 16, 2019, 04:14:48 PM
Didn't Sylvia Batista feature prominently in the files and the Amaral account of events with an opinion depending which one of her statements you chose to read?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 16, 2019, 04:32:54 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 16, 2019, 04:14:48 PM
Didn't Sylvia Batista feature prominently in the files and the Amaral account of events with an opinion depending which one of her statements you chose to read?

No.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 16, 2019, 05:27:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 16, 2019, 11:40:28 AM
Are you seriously suggesting that a mature woman and two police officers would have ignored a statement by a qualified doctor that her children were showing signs of having been sedated by a criminal? In my opinion no-one would have let such a statement pass without comment or action.
If Kate is talking to Silvia and Silvia translates and talks in Portuguese to the officers the officers are not part of the conversation, and Kate does not know what is being said in Portuguese.
I think your question should be:
"Are you seriously suggesting that a mature woman would have ignored a statement by a qualified doctor that her children were showing signs of having been sedated by someone else?"
And when you consider that Silvia could have a possible conflict of interest in the situation, anything becomes possible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 16, 2019, 05:31:36 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 16, 2019, 11:08:53 AM
From Madeleine

‘We tried to explain what had happened. David reiterated his concerns about roadblocks and border notification and I reported my fears that all three children could have been sedated. A lady called Sílvia, who worked at the Ocean Club, had arrived to help out with translation. We learned later that she was the maintenance and services manager. I remember her telling me that she had two grown-up daughters herself. She was very kind and I was glad of her help and support.’


Strange that not one of the people who the parents called that night report either of them voicing any fears that the twins may have been sedated and that their concerns were being ignored. Sílvia Batista, who would have translated any concerns, makes no mention of Kate raising any concerns either.

What she writes about David is not happening on the night but possibly when they were being interviewed by the UK police a couple of days later, when Silvia is not involved.

Even though reading the paragraph again it is more like that night rather than a couple of days later.

Does David say he asked for "his concerns about roadblocks and border notification" in his statement?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 16, 2019, 05:34:00 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 16, 2019, 04:01:19 PM
I didn't comment on likelihood, I said IF they had read it
Would Kate write a bunch of deliberate lies about events others were witnessed to, knowing that there was a likelihood or even a possibility that those individuals would call her out on it at a later date? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 16, 2019, 05:42:38 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 16, 2019, 05:27:26 PM
If Kate is talking to Silvia and Silvia translates and talks in Portuguese to the officers the officers are not part of the conversation, and Kate does not know what is being said in Portuguese.
I think your question should be:
"Are you seriously suggesting that a mature woman would have ignored a statement by a qualified doctor that her children were showing signs of having been sedated by someone else?"
And when you consider that Silvia could have a possible conflict of interest in the situation, anything becomes possible.

I think there could very well be more than one potential conflict of interest interestingly enough raised on a sceptic blog which I seldom read because quite simply it does my head in; and it has  nothing at all to do with the tapas nine and all to do with familial relationships within Mark Warner staff in Luz.

I am sure the alleged relationships have nothing at all to do with Madeleine's disappearance but as an area not subject to the 'groundhog day' syndrome it is nonetheless diverting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 16, 2019, 05:44:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 16, 2019, 05:34:00 PM
Would Kate write a bunch of deliberate lies about events others were witnessed to, knowing that there was a likelihood or even a possibility that those individuals would call her out on it at a later date?

I wouldn't think so ... particularly as our libel laws appear to be more robust than some.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 16, 2019, 06:05:06 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 16, 2019, 05:44:27 PM
I wouldn't think so ... particularly as our libel laws appear to be more robust than some.

But Kate herself admitted that she lied when she thought that she had no other choice, I can give you the quote if you wish.

Not sure why you think it would be libellous to write that she had reported the twins comatose state to an unnamed officer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 16, 2019, 06:09:32 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 16, 2019, 03:35:43 PM
So?  Did Silvia Batista and the two GNR officers pass away prior to this astounding revelation in 2011, allowing her to make stuff up without fear of contradiction?

She might have thought she said it but it seems unlikely to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 16, 2019, 06:24:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 16, 2019, 06:09:32 PM
She might have thought she said it but it seems unlikely to me.
And of course you would know better than the woman who actually lived through the whole event.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 16, 2019, 06:30:23 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 16, 2019, 06:05:06 PM
But Kate herself admitted that she lied when she thought that she had no other choice, I can give you the quote if you wish.

Not sure why you think it would be libellous to write that she had reported the twins comatose state to an unnamed officer.
Why lie about something like this, a lie that can so easily be called out?  Sometimes you believe Kate is telling the truth (when it suits you to) yet you seem to think her admission in her book that she lied about something proves she is a liar, but also only when it suits you.  *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 16, 2019, 07:05:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 16, 2019, 06:24:38 PM
And of course you would know better than the woman who actually lived through the whole event.

Either she has perfect recall or she was so distraught she got confused. It seems both arguments are used by her supporters depending on the discussion.

Rather than relying on Kate's imagined state of mind, it makes more sense to take note of the fact that no response was triggered. I'm no doctor but I'd have insisted on something being done if the doctor mother of two cheldren told me she feared they'd been sedated by persons unknown.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 16, 2019, 07:08:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 16, 2019, 07:05:49 PM
Either she has perfect recall or she was so distraught she got confused. It seems both arguments are used by her supporters depending on the discussion.

Rather than relying on Kate's imagined state of mind, it makes more sense to take note of the fact that no response was triggered. I'm no doctor but I'd have insisted on something being done if the doctor mother of two cheldren told me she feared they'd been sedated by persons unknown.
Did Silvia Batista know that night that Kate McCann was a doctor, and not just some seemingly hysterical foreign woman whose daughter had probably wandered off?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 16, 2019, 07:09:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 16, 2019, 07:05:49 PM
Either she has perfect recall or she was so distraught she got confused. It seems both arguments are used by her supporters depending on the discussion.

Rather than relying on Kate's imagined state of mind, it makes more sense to take note of the fact that no response was triggered. I'm no doctor but I'd have insisted on something being done if the doctor mother of two cheldren told me she feared they'd been sedated by persons unknown.

you are no doctor...kate is...and she was happy the twins were in no danger...weve already done many pages on this topic...you have your opinion ...tahts all
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 16, 2019, 07:41:56 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 16, 2019, 06:24:38 PM
And of course you would know better than the woman who actually lived through the whole event.
Theoretically true.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 07:35:42 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 16, 2019, 07:08:31 PM
Did Silvia Batista know that night that Kate McCann was a doctor, and not just some seemingly hysterical foreign woman whose daughter had probably wandered off?

No-one with any sense ignores a mother who says she thinks her children have been sedated. As the supposed sedation was carried out by a criminal there's clearly a danger to their lives. It would have to be taken seriously and checked out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 17, 2019, 08:02:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 07:35:42 AM
No-one with any sense ignores a mother who says she thinks her children have been sedated. As the supposed sedation was carried out by a criminal there's clearly a danger to their lives. It would have to be taken seriously and checked out.

This has been discussed at length.... No point in going over the same ground.... Just another excuse to Bash the mccanns
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 17, 2019, 08:04:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 07:35:42 AM
No-one with any sense ignores a mother who says she thinks her children have been sedated. As the supposed sedation was carried out by a criminal there's clearly a danger to their lives. It would have to be taken seriously and checked out.
I see you have avoided my question - your previous post mentioned “doctor mother” as if this was the reason why Kate should have been taken seriously, now you have dropped this to be any hysterical mother whose child most probably wandered off should be taken seriously.  Did Batista actually at any point  take seriously the possibility  that Madeleine had been kidnapped by a stranger?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on January 17, 2019, 09:06:32 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 16, 2019, 08:10:41 AM
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.4890

So no cite then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 09:25:24 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 17, 2019, 08:04:23 AM
I see you have avoided my question - your previous post mentioned “doctor mother” as if this was the reason why Kate should have been taken seriously, now you have dropped this to be any hysterical mother whose child most probably wandered off should be taken seriously.  Did Batista actually at any point  take seriously the possibility  that Madeleine had been kidnapped by a stranger?

If they knew that Kate and Gerry were doctors that would add weight to her 'fears', but even if they didn't know the children's welfare would have been a priority in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 17, 2019, 09:45:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 09:25:24 AM
If they knew that Kate and Gerry were doctors that would add weight to her 'fears', but even if they didn't know the children's welfare would have been a priority in my opinion.
I think you are looking at it from your point of view, but not from Ocean Club Management perspective.

It is on record that even John Hill did not accept that Madeleine had been abducted,  I would think Silvia felt the same way too.  In her opinion Madeleine had either wandered off or for reasons noted during the time she was with Kate she was wondering if the McCanns had something to do with it, especially when she noted Kate wanting a priest that night.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm
"She wanted to mention that around 3h00 Madeleine's parents asked for a priest to be present. They didn't explain why they wanted a priest but she (the witness) was amazed, because there were no indications that the little girl was dead and only in these circumstances is usually asked the presence of a priest."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 10:45:59 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 17, 2019, 09:45:44 AM
I think you are looking at it from your point of view, but not from Ocean Club Management perspective.

It is on record that even John Hill did not accept that Madeleine had been abducted,  I would think Silvia felt the same way too.  In her opinion Madeleine had either wandered off or for reasons noted during the time she was with Kate she was wondering if the McCanns had something to do with it, especially when she noted Kate wanting a priest that night.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm
"She wanted to mention that around 3h00 Madeleine's parents asked for a priest to be present. They didn't explain why they wanted a priest but she (the witness) was amazed, because there were no indications that the little girl was dead and only in these circumstances is usually asked the presence of a priest."

I'm a cynic too, but if I thought there was even the slightest posibility of a child being harmed I would err on the side of caution and act to safeguard that child. Even if I suspected the parents, the child still has to be considered first and foremost.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 17, 2019, 11:17:19 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 10:45:59 AM
I'm a cynic too, but if I thought there was even the slightest posibility of a child being harmed I would err on the side of caution and act to safeguard that child. Even if I suspected the parents, the child still has to be considered first and foremost.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that in the circumstances the first priority should have been the safeguarding of the children in the party.

The fact that it was considered appropriate to leave them secure in the unsupervised care of their parents is an indication that the police had no concerns whatsoever about their welfare.

If they had I am sure they would have taken appropriate measures; but quite obviously the assessment of the scene dictated that the best place for the children to be was in the care of their parents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 01:16:26 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 17, 2019, 11:17:19 AM
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that in the circumstances the first priority should have been the safeguarding of the children in the party.

The fact that it was considered appropriate to leave them secure in the unsupervised care of their parents is an indication that the police had no concerns whatsoever about their welfare.

If they had I am sure they would have taken appropriate measures; but quite obviously the assessment of the scene dictated that the best place for the children to be was in the care of their parents.

Which suggests that they had no reason to suspect that the children were not OK.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 17, 2019, 02:02:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 01:16:26 PM
Which suggests that they had no reason to suspect that the children were not OK.
I was thinking are there cases where the crime is unproven against the parents but they take the kids away just in case.  In the Jonbenet Ramsey case even when the police thought the parents were involved the older son was not taken from the parents.  So I don't know if you are correct here.  Do you know of a case where children are removed from a family just in case the parents are later convicted?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 17, 2019, 02:06:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 10:45:59 AM
I'm a cynic too, but if I thought there was even the slightest posibility of a child being harmed I would err on the side of caution and act to safeguard that child. Even if I suspected the parents, the child still has to be considered first and foremost.
So what should they have done to safeguard the children?  Were they being protected by having 5 or so family liaison officers on hand?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 05:09:54 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 17, 2019, 02:02:55 PM
I was thinking are there cases where the crime is unproven against the parents but they take the kids away just in case.  In the Jonbenet Ramsey case even when the police thought the parents were involved the older son was not taken from the parents.  So I don't know if you are correct here.  Do you know of a case where children are removed from a family just in case the parents are later convicted?

If the mother of a missing child tells the police she fears her other children have been sedated the police are duty bound to call medical help, I would have thought.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 17, 2019, 06:44:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 05:09:54 PM
If the mother of a missing child tells the police she fears her other children have been sedated the police are duty bound to call medical help, I would have thought.
They don't go and set up roadblocks just because Kate said Madeleine was abducted.  OK so which of the things said by a frantic mother are the GNR or PJ going to take notice of in the first day?
Next day the twins might have appeared 100% normal.  I can see why nothing is being done.

The other person there with Kate was Fiona also a doctor, had she backed up Kate on her request maybe things would have been different.  There is a second opinion there right on hand.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 17, 2019, 07:10:09 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on January 17, 2019, 09:06:32 AM
So no cite then.
What exactly are you wanting a cite for? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 17, 2019, 07:11:31 PM
Just to remind us what Fiona thought 1 year after the event:
"Erm, tut, I looked, when I went into the room that Madeleine was sleeping in, the room was dark, Madeleine, erm, Madeleine's bed was sort of folded back, the sheets, quite kind of neatly really, erm, Sean and Amelie were fast asleep in their cots, they didn't stir, you know, I was opening the cupboards in the room and moving around the room, they didn't stir at all, which that was, that was odd. Erm, we were trying to ascertain whether Madeleine could have got out, and I've already said earlier the shutters were very heavy, and I was almost trying to convince Kate that she could have opened the shutter and climbed out, although knowing that wasn't a likely thing, but at that point we were just trying to pacify Kate in that Madeleine was going to be alright. Erm, and I, I think I touched the webbing in that room, but because Sean and Amelie were asleep, I didn't actually open the shutter in that room, we went, I went to the front of the house and I was trying to lift the shutter at the, at the back, just to prove whether, you know, whether it could have been opened and whether Madeleine could have opened it from the inside'.
 
 00.50.31
 1485
 'And''
 
 
 Reply
 'I mean, it was fairly obviously, I think, that that wasn't what had happened and what could have happened'."

So Fiona is trying to get Kate to accept that Madeleine opened the shutters and by implication the window herself.  One year later she is saying it was odd the twins remained asleep but did she say anything at the time?

Fiona goes on to describe what happened when the GNR arrive.  Strangely to me she is not mentioning and confirming Silvia's account of arriving along with the GNR and being the interpreter.

"Reply
 'Erm, well the next thing really was that the Police, two Policemen arriving, erm, at Kate and Gerry's apartment and they were Portuguese obviously, didn't really speak any English and that was, that was awful again really, because we were obviously desperate and frantic and at that point time, we were just conscious of every second that was passing by and by that time it was over an hour, I'm sure, before they arrived, but it felt like longer. Erm, and they wanted to come in the room, obviously, and, you know, see where Madeleine had been sleeping and they were checking the shutters and we were just trying to get over the urgency and it just didn't almost feel that they were recognising the urgency, although obviously with the language barrier, I can appreciate, you know, it's very, very hard. Erm, and Kate was getting hysterical at this point, erm, she, you know, screaming, erm, because she just wanted somebody who she felt was doing, doing something that was going to make a difference. Tut, erm, and then, they were the only two Police Officers we saw for, it seemed like quite, I don't know, this is where the time gets difficult, but another hour I'd say, erm, and then I was conscious of more sort of uniformed Police being around, sort of out the front. I mean, we were to'ing and fro'ing between the front of the apartment and the back of the apartment. And, erm, there were loads of MARK WARNER staff obviously running around the streets, they kept coming up the stairs at the back saying 'Have you checked the apartment' and we're like, you know, 'Yeah, she's not here'. Erm, tut, and there were some other locals who were all trying to be helpful, some helpful, some not. There was a woman who worked, I think she was work, had worked in the bar in Praia da Luz and she had actually almost invited herself up onto the balcony and was just quite drunk and not being, just not saying anything very helpful and I remember getting quite cross with her, saying 'Look', you know, 'Why are you here', you know, 'If you're going to be helpful get out and look for her' and, erm, and I remember Gerry actually asking her quite politely if she wouldn't mind just leaving them. Erm, I think she was the only one really that, that actually came anywhere near the apartment that wasn't one of us or a Policeman."

Does she mention Silvia at all?

No but he makes a point that some male person was doing translating on the night.

That is two major contradictions appearing in Fiona's statement.
1.  Where is Silvia and what is she doing?
2.  Who is this male person who the GNR don't see  yet according to Fiona they are talking to him?



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 17, 2019, 07:12:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 09:25:24 AM
If they knew that Kate and Gerry were doctors that would add weight to her 'fears', but even if they didn't know the children's welfare would have been a priority in my opinion.
A priority for Silvia Batista?  Why so?   Wouldn’t the missing child’s welfare be the main most urgent focus of attention?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 17, 2019, 07:14:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 10:45:59 AM
I'm a cynic too, but if I thought there was even the slightest posibility of a child being harmed I would err on the side of caution and act to safeguard that child. Even if I suspected the parents, the child still has to be considered first and foremost.
So why didn’tshe then?  Maybe that’s why she was too embarrassed to admit that Kate had mentioned the sedation cos she did nothing about it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 17, 2019, 07:16:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 01:16:26 PM
Which suggests that they had no reason to suspect that the children were not OK.
Erm...didn’t they immediately suspect the parents of being up to no good with one kid already missing?  How does that equate to “no reason to suspect that the children were not ok”?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 17, 2019, 07:16:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 05:09:54 PM
If the mother of a missing child tells the police she fears her other children have been sedated the police are duty bound to call medical help, I would have thought.
Then they were derelict in their duties weren’t they.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 17, 2019, 07:37:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 17, 2019, 07:16:54 PM
Then they were derelict in their duties weren’t they.
Which police are you talking about?  The first two GNR could NOT speak English, so Kate can't tell them anything without Silvia's help, but according to Fiona there is no one called Silvia there.
The next were the PJ to arrive and they wanted the apartment empty, so they wanted the sleeping twins moved so they too weren't concerned for their safety.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 17, 2019, 07:41:58 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 17, 2019, 07:37:25 PM
Which police are you talking about.  The first two GNR could NOT speak English, so Kate can't tell them anything without Silvia's help, but according to Fiona there is no one called Silvia there.
The next were the PJ to arrive and they wanted the apartment empty, so they wanted the sleeping twins moved so they too weren't concerned for there safety.
We are told that pretty much every police person that came into contact with the McCanns and their friends that night viewed them with suspicion and / or incredulity.  Couple this with the fact that one child had gone missing but others remained in the care of their parents then, if the police’s number one duty should have been to protect the remaining children they clearly failed to do so and are all therefore derelict in their duties.  At least according to G-Unit logic that is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 08:48:39 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 17, 2019, 06:44:50 PM
They don't go and set up roadblocks just because Kate said Madeleine was abducted.  OK so which of the things said by a frantic mother are the GNR or PJ going to take notice of in the first day?
Next day the twins might have appeared 100% normal.  I can see why nothing is being done.

The other person there with Kate was Fiona also a doctor, had she backed up Kate on her request maybe things would have been different.  There is a second opinion there right on hand.

So a mother tells two policemen she fears her twins have been sedated. She is clearly hysterical so the police ignore her. Meanwhile the twins have been sedated with something quite dangerous and are deteriorating into unconciousness. By the time sineone checks them they are near death. Who's fault is it if they die?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 17, 2019, 08:59:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2019, 08:48:39 PM
So a mother tells two policemen she fears her twins have been sedated. She is clearly hysterical so the police ignore her. Meanwhile the twins have been sedated with something quite dangerous and are deteriorating into unconciousness. By the time sineone checks them they are near death. Who's fault is it if they die?
Whoever gave them the drug, ultimately.  The police would have  been guilty of not taking a mother’s fears seriously.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 18, 2019, 05:35:55 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 17, 2019, 08:59:34 PM
Whoever gave them the drug, ultimately.  The police would have  been guilty of not taking a mother’s fears seriously.

That's why the police wouldn't ignore a mother who was worried about her children. They would have acted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 18, 2019, 07:25:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 18, 2019, 05:35:55 AM
That's why the police wouldn't ignore a mother who was worried about her children. They would have acted.
Weird logic.  The police always do the right thing, always act correctly, never get done for errors of judgement, or incompetence, well at least they do  in Portugal I expect, where everything is practically perfect. 

It’s the equivalent of me saying a doctor would never ignore a patient ‘s life threatening symptoms , because they are professionals who would be blamed if the patient died.  Now I’m almost certain you don’t buy that logic!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 18, 2019, 08:01:10 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 18, 2019, 07:25:10 AM
Weird logic.  The police always do the right thing, always act correctly, never get done for errors of judgement, or incompetence, well at least they do  in Portugal I expect, where everything is practically perfect. 

It’s the equivalent of me saying a doctor would never ignore a patient ‘s life threatening symptoms , because they are professionals who would be blamed if the patient died.  Now I’m almost certain you don’t buy that logic!

If the police had ignored Kate McCann's fears she had the option of telling John Hill, Emma Knight, and various others. If she really feared her children had been sedated by a criminal why did she mention if just once, was ignored and dropped the subject?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 18, 2019, 08:35:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 18, 2019, 08:01:10 AM
If the police had ignored Kate McCann's fears she had the option of telling John Hill, Emma Knight, and various others. If she really feared her children had been sedated by a criminal why did she mention if just once, was ignored and dropped the subject?
Maybe she had other worries on her mind?  Maybe her kids showed signs of movement and dispelled any immediate fears for their safety?  Maybe she did, and her fears were played down or ignored by others?   Was the issue of sedation not raised by the McCanns in the immediate aftermath of Madeleine’s disappearance?

See how I answered your questions?  Shame you never address mine in the same direct and forthright way.

Why would Kate McCann lie about this issue?  What does she gain from doing so?  Some say the McCanns raised the issue of sedation just in case Madeleine’s body was found and contained sedatives.  What difference would it have made to the case if this had happened and the McCanns had not mentioned their concerns about the twins?  Is it logical to assume that a would be abductor would definitely have administered drugs to ALL the kids not just the one he planned to abduct?  Conversely is it beyond the realms of possibility that a would be abductor with evil intent might have planned to remove all three children and therefore drugged them all?   Just what is the significance of Kate mentioning or not mentioning the possible sedation of her kids that evening?

A straight and direct answer to these questions would be much appreciated but I know it’s unlikely you will, therefore see these all as rhetorical and not aimed at you specifically. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 18, 2019, 08:42:23 AM
oh, and one more (rhetorical) question - why do you believe some of the things in Kate’s book to be true but not others?  On what basis do you pick and choose?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 18, 2019, 08:44:49 AM
and here’s another question.  Is the fact that no one that night mentioned Kate’s sedation claims in their statements evidence that Kate is a liar.  In otherwords is absence of evidence, evidence she is a liar?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 18, 2019, 09:20:18 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 18, 2019, 08:35:12 AM
Maybe she had other worries on her mind?  Maybe her kids showed signs of movement and dispelled any immediate fears for their safety?  Maybe she did, and her fears were played down or ignored by others?   Was the issue of sedation not raised by the McCanns in the immediate aftermath of Madeleine’s disappearance?

See how I answered your questions?  Shame you never address mine in the same direct and forthright way.

Why would Kate McCann lie about this issue?  What does she gain from doing so?  Some say the McCanns raised the issue of sedation just in case Madeleine’s body was found and contained sedatives.  What difference would it have made to the case if this had happened and the McCanns had not mentioned their concerns about the twins?  Is it logical to assume that a would be abductor would definitely have administered drugs to ALL the kids not just the one he planned to abduct?  Conversely is it beyond the realms of possibility that a would be abductor with evil intent might have planned to remove all three children and therefore drugged them all?   Just what is the significance of Kate mentioning or not mentioning the possible sedation of her kids that evening?

A straight and direct answer to these questions would be much appreciated but I know it’s unlikely you will, therefore see these all as rhetorical and not aimed at you specifically.

The problem as I see it is the disjointed nature of Kate's narrative. She tells us what she said, but not what the reaction was. Her next statement is that the officers 'looked around'. We don't know if they heard her, answered her, or ignored her. It seems she made no further attempt to get her fears acknowledged.

You have answered my questions by speculating about what the answers might be, not by telling me what the answers are. I can only answer your questions by speculating also.

You ask why Kate McCann would lie. Amswer; I don't know.

There is one question of interest. The significance is that Kate McCann criticises the Portuguese police because they didn't test the twin's urine, hair or blood for sedatives. In order for them to do that they would need to suspect sedation had taken place. She claims to have told them of her suspicions on 3rd and several times after that. The police say she didn't. They tried to find out if she told the UK FLO's, but their questions were changed by Stuart Prior. Markley and McGarvey volunteered the information that drugging was mentioned, but not in connection to the twins.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 18, 2019, 09:41:35 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 18, 2019, 09:20:18 AM
The problem as I see it is the disjointed nature of Kate's narrative. She tells us what she said, but not what the reaction was. Her next statement is that the officers 'looked around'. We don't know if they heard her, answered her, or ignored her. It seems she made no further attempt to get her fears acknowledged.

You have answered my questions by speculating about what the answers might be, not by telling me what the answers are. I can only answer your questions by speculating also.

You ask why Kate McCann would lie. Amswer; I don't know.

There is one question of interest. The significance is that Kate McCann criticises the Portuguese police because they didn't test the twin's urine, hair or blood for sedatives. In order for them to do that they would need to suspect sedation had taken place. She claims to have told them of her suspicions on 3rd and several times after that. The police say she didn't. They tried to find out if she told the UK FLO's, but their questions were changed by Stuart Prior. Markley and McGarvey volunteered the information that drugging was mentioned, but not in connection to the twins.
So your criticism seems to be more about her authorship then on this occasion, in that she didn’t recount faithfully word for word every thought and deed that took place that evening.  I think that’s somewhat unreasonable but you’re entitled to your view.
You ask me to speculate and then seem critical of the fact that I did, well again that’s somewhat unreasonable too in my opinion, but not unusual.
The fact that you in turn refuse to speculate is also unreasonable considering you asked me to do it, but predictable. 
You don’t know why Kate would lie, but have you actually given any thought to why she might or are you just content to leave it at that?  Because in my opinion that shows a lack of critical thinking, and it’s what any investigator worth their salt would do in an attempt to understand individual suspects’ motivations for their actions.  Again IMO.
Do you have a cite for the police saying Kate McCann did not raise any concerns about sedation with them?  Which police?  Stuart prior “changed the questions”.  There seems to be an implication in your mentioning this, beyond simply stating a fact, IMO you will deny this, as usual.  Finally, do you think it’s up to the mother of a missing child to suggest to the police that they investigate all possibilities including examining the brother and sister of the missing child who were either a) the only other human beings in the room when Madeleine was taken by person(s) of ill intent or b) the surviving children of negligent parents who may possibly have killed their child deliberately or not and hidden the body?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 18, 2019, 10:43:42 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 18, 2019, 09:41:35 AM
So your criticism seems to be more about her authorship then on this occasion, in that she didn’t recount faithfully word for word every thought and deed that took place that evening.  I think that’s somewhat unreasonable but you’re entitled to your view.
You ask me to speculate and then seem critical of the fact that I did, well again that’s somewhat unreasonable too in my opinion, but not unusual.
The fact that you in turn refuse to speculate is also unreasonable considering you asked me to do it, but predictable. 
You don’t know why Kate would lie, but have you actually given any thought to why she might or are you just content to leave it at that?  Because in my opinion that shows a lack of critical thinking, and it’s what any investigator worth their salt would do in an attempt to understand individual suspects’ motivations for their actions.  Again IMO.
Do you have a cite for the police saying Kate McCann did not raise any concerns about sedation with them?  Which police?  Stuart prior “changed the questions”.  There seems to be an implication in your mentioning this, beyond simply stating a fact, IMO you will deny this, as usual.  Finally, do you think it’s up to the mother of a missing child to suggest to the police that they investigate all possibilities including examining the brother and sister of the missing child who were either a) the only other human beings in the room when Madeleine was taken by person(s) of ill intent or b) the surviving children of negligent parents who may possibly have killed their child deliberately or not and hidden the body?
Madeleine's disappearance became a police matter as soon as it was reported to them and the responsibility to gather evidence was their remit.

I believe they did sniff Madeleine's bedclothes for a sedative which might have left a trace but perhaps a routine blood test for the twins the next morning might have been useful. 
But that would have been a decision for the investigators to make ... not the victims.

The children were very closely monitored by doctors, at least one of whom was a practising anaesthetist, http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm who obviously did not consider them to be in any immediate danger as a result of sedation.
So the evidence was that the twins were physically fine ... but there was no evidence collected and checked for traces of drugs in their systems.

That was a diligence which was the responsibility of the investigating authorities to perform.  They didn't order the necessary checks to be carried out resulting in no evidence being collected allowing free rein on nonsensical lies and fables to be used to smear of Madeleine's parents as a result.
Not least of which was Amaral's misunderstanding of the properties of 'Calpol'.

'Syringe Found In Madeleine's Apartment'
POLICE hunting for missing Madeleine McCann discovered a syringe in her parents’ bedroom, it was dramatically claimed last night
In the latest slur against Kate and Gerry McCann, the hypodermic needle was allegedly found in a cupboard at the apartment where their daughter vanished.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/4aug7/express-30-08-07.htm


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 18, 2019, 11:16:49 AM
Seems strange things do indeed happen regarding the capabilities of sniffer dogs.  I'm still puzzling why he could ... then he couldn't ... and why he couldn't be trained up again once his handler was back at work.

New appeal to fund another sniffer dog on Orkney launched after first one lost its sense of smell

(http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2019/01/014NO1601PJA_Story__3-2-Read-Only-277x372.jpg)
The search is on for another drugs sniffer dog crowdfunded by islanders on Orkney after the first one lost its sense of smell because it had waited too long to be set loose.


January 16, 2019

The search is on for another drugs sniffer dog crowdfunded by islanders on Orkney after the first one lost its sense of smell because it had waited too long to be set loose.

Just days before the dog was due to start to crack down on drugs dealers on the northern archipelago in October, his new handler, Kevin Moar, twisted his knee during a fitness test – delaying the groundbreaking service by three months.

Mr Moar, 50, is now in post and raring to go.

But Andrew Drever, chairman of Orkney Drugs Dog, said Whisky, who was a retiring Police Scotland dog, was not.

“With everything that happened he has not been on active duty for 12 weeks and no longer has the ability to smell drugs. He constantly needs to be on patrol.

“It is very frustrating, but we are now actively looking for another dog through police, RAF and other contacts. We have not found one yet, but we hope to have a dog in place perhaps next month.”

In September Whisky made his first swoop – even before he officially started!

Whisky was brought to Orkney for a two day introduction to meet the community with his handler PC Matthew Watson, who has since retired from the force. He agreed to keep Whisky while his new handler recovered.

But Whisky was involved in “enforcement activity” during his visit to the island – after a search of two properties at Andersquoy in Kirkwall resulted in herbal cannabis valued at approximately £300 being seized.

Whisky, a fully-trained golden Labrador, was enlisted from Police Scotland with Inverness-based PC Watson retiring.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/islands/orkney/1653561/new-appeal-to-fund-another-sniffer-dog-on-orkney-launched-after-first-one-lost-its-sense-of-smell/

  ... and one specially for Robitty ...
VIDEO: Specially-trained dog flown in from New Zealand to sniff out Orkney’s stoats
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/highlands/1532767/video-specially-trained-dog-flown-in-from-new-zealand-to-sniff-out-orkneys-stoats/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 18, 2019, 11:28:44 AM
Quote from: Brietta on January 18, 2019, 10:43:42 AM
Madeleine's disappearance became a police matter as soon as it was reported to them and the responsibility to gather evidence was their remit.

I believe they did sniff Madeleine's bedclothes for a sedative which might have left a trace but perhaps a routine blood test for the twins the next morning might have been useful. 
But that would have been a decision for the investigators to make ... not the victims.

The children were very closely monitored by doctors, at least one of whom was a practising anaesthetist, http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm who obviously did not consider them to be in any immediate danger as a result of sedation.
So the evidence was that the twins were physically fine ... but there was no evidence collected and checked for traces of drugs in their systems.

That was a diligence which was the responsibility of the investigating authorities to perform.  They didn't order the necessary checks to be carried out resulting in no evidence being collected allowing free rein on nonsensical lies and fables to be used to smear of Madeleine's parents as a result.
Not least of which was Amaral's misunderstanding of the properties of 'Calpol'.

'Syringe Found In Madeleine's Apartment'
POLICE hunting for missing Madeleine McCann discovered a syringe in her parents’ bedroom, it was dramatically claimed last night
In the latest slur against Kate and Gerry McCann, the hypodermic needle was allegedly found in a cupboard at the apartment where their daughter vanished.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/4aug7/express-30-08-07.htm
I would really like to know why the PJ never seemed to consider the possibility that Madeleine was murdered by someone she knew.  Why did they never apparently explore that possibility?  What made them so sure her death was as a result of an accident?  Why do none of the sceptics on this forum seem to consider this as a possible explanation?  Surely it makes more sense than the theories they attempt to cobble together to explain accidental death and frantic cover up?  Surely it’s not just the fear of being “done for libel” because I don’t see any of the devil-may-care mouthy sceptics on other forums that don’t care about expressing libellous opinions ever seriously putting this forward as a likely explanation, which is especially odd considering they seem to view the McCanns as despicable, neglectful liars on all matters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 18, 2019, 11:45:22 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 18, 2019, 09:41:35 AM
So your criticism seems to be more about her authorship then on this occasion, in that she didn’t recount faithfully word for word every thought and deed that took place that evening.  I think that’s somewhat unreasonable but you’re entitled to your view.
You ask me to speculate and then seem critical of the fact that I did, well again that’s somewhat unreasonable too in my opinion, but not unusual.
The fact that you in turn refuse to speculate is also unreasonable considering you asked me to do it, but predictable. 
You don’t know why Kate would lie, but have you actually given any thought to why she might or are you just content to leave it at that?  Because in my opinion that shows a lack of critical thinking, and it’s what any investigator worth their salt would do in an attempt to understand individual suspects’ motivations for their actions.  Again IMO.
Do you have a cite for the police saying Kate McCann did not raise any concerns about sedation with them?  Which police?  Stuart prior “changed the questions”.  There seems to be an implication in your mentioning this, beyond simply stating a fact, IMO you will deny this, as usual.  Finally, do you think it’s up to the mother of a missing child to suggest to the police that they investigate all possibilities including examining the brother and sister of the missing child who were either a) the only other human beings in the room when Madeleine was taken by person(s) of ill intent or b) the surviving children of negligent parents who may possibly have killed their child deliberately or not and hidden the body?

If Kate McCann had recounted her story verbally the obvious question is 'What did the police say when you told them of your fears?' Assuming she was truly fearful she must know the answer, imo, but she has chosen not to share it.

I may have asked rhetorical questions, but that isn't the same as asking for speculatory answers.

Amaral said in his book that it was three months before Kate suggested testing the twins.

You would have to ask Stuart Prior why he didn't want the FLO's to be asked if the McCanns mentioned the possibility of the twins being sedated. 

It isn't up to the mother of a missing child to tell the police what they should do. If she fears her children might have been interfered with to the extent that she suggests, however, it's ip to her to make sure that the authorities are both aware of her concerns and that they act on them.




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 18, 2019, 11:56:43 AM
Quote from: Brietta on January 18, 2019, 10:43:42 AM
Madeleine's disappearance became a police matter as soon as it was reported to them and the responsibility to gather evidence was their remit.

I believe they did sniff Madeleine's bedclothes for a sedative which might have left a trace but perhaps a routine blood test for the twins the next morning might have been useful. 
But that would have been a decision for the investigators to make ... not the victims.

The children were very closely monitored by doctors, at least one of whom was a practising anaesthetist, http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm who obviously did not consider them to be in any immediate danger as a result of sedation.
So the evidence was that the twins were physically fine ... but there was no evidence collected and checked for traces of drugs in their systems.

That was a diligence which was the responsibility of the investigating authorities to perform.  They didn't order the necessary checks to be carried out resulting in no evidence being collected allowing free rein on nonsensical lies and fables to be used to smear of Madeleine's parents as a result.
Not least of which was Amaral's misunderstanding of the properties of 'Calpol'.

'Syringe Found In Madeleine's Apartment'
POLICE hunting for missing Madeleine McCann discovered a syringe in her parents’ bedroom, it was dramatically claimed last night
In the latest slur against Kate and Gerry McCann, the hypodermic needle was allegedly found in a cupboard at the apartment where their daughter vanished.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/4aug7/express-30-08-07.htm

People seem to take different viewpoints on different subjects.

snip/
"Madeleine's disappearance became a police matter as soon as it was reported to them and the responsibility to gather evidence was their remit."

If Kate McCann told them she feared her twins had been sedated that was evidence. If the police ignored her evidence why didn't she complain at the time?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 18, 2019, 12:41:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 18, 2019, 11:56:43 AM
People seem to take different viewpoints on different subjects.

snip/
"Madeleine's disappearance became a police matter as soon as it was reported to them and the responsibility to gather evidence was their remit."

If Kate McCann told them she feared her twins had been sedated that was evidence. If the police ignored her evidence why didn't she complain at the time?
I know the thread is entitled "Wandering Off Topic" ...
(http://cdn5.vectorstock.com/i/thumb-large/91/29/cute-little-dog-wondering-cartoon-character-vector-20769129.jpg)
... but I have to admit to puzzlement about how your post relates to the post of mine which you have answered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 18, 2019, 06:38:13 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 18, 2019, 11:45:22 AM
If Kate McCann had recounted her story verbally the obvious question is 'What did the police say when you told them of your fears?' Assuming she was truly fearful she must know the answer, imo, but she has chosen not to share it.

I may have asked rhetorical questions, but that isn't the same as asking for speculatory answers.

Amaral said in his book that it was three months before Kate suggested testing the twins.

You would have to ask Stuart Prior why he didn't want the FLO's to be asked if the McCanns mentioned the possibility of the twins being sedated. 

It isn't up to the mother of a missing child to tell the police what they should do. If she fears her children might have been interfered with to the extent that she suggests, however, it's ip to her to make sure that the authorities are both aware of her concerns and that they act on them.
Which police did Kate McCann say she told?  Did they speak English?  If you want to know what the police said in response why don’t you write and ask them?  Or ask Angelo when he goes to visit them?  If Kate can make up telling the police about her concerns it stands to reason she can make up a reply from the police, so had she included it in her book would you have believed it?  No.  As you don’t have the complete transcript of every word uttered by Kate McCann that night or the following day to the authorities you are in no position to know whether or not she mentioned her concerns to them.  But perhaps she should have been more insistent, forceful and slammed her fists on a few police desks to wake the police up and get them to do their jobs properly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 18, 2019, 07:23:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 18, 2019, 06:38:13 PM
Which police did Kate McCann say she told?  Did they speak English?  If you want to know what the police said in response why don’t you write and ask them?  Or ask Angelo when he goes to visit them?  If Kate can make up telling the police about her concerns it stands to reason she can make up a reply from the police, so had she included it in her book would you have believed it?  No.  As you don’t have the complete transcript of every word uttered by Kate McCann that night or the following day to the authorities you are in no position to know whether or not she mentioned her concerns to them.  But perhaps she should have been more insistent, forceful and slammed her fists on a few police desks to wake the police up and get them to do their jobs properly.

I don't see the point of continuing this discussion. You are determined to see nothing strange about a mother failing to insist that her children were safeguatded.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 18, 2019, 07:29:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 18, 2019, 07:23:58 PM
I don't see the point of continuing this discussion. You are determined to see nothing strange about a mother failing to insist that her children were safeguatded.
Your claim is false, IMO.  End of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 18, 2019, 09:05:10 PM
@Robbitybob1.

A good first day for your boys and girls Rob.... 8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 19, 2019, 11:42:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 18, 2019, 08:01:10 AM
If the police had ignored Kate McCann's fears she had the option of telling John Hill, Emma Knight, and various others. If she really feared her children had been sedated by a criminal why did she mention if just once, was ignored and dropped the subject?


This is the main issue surronding the "were they sedated" .We can ask  questions regarding Kate and her remarks.

As a qualified anaesthetist- and with the commotion going on- when did you first become suspicious that the children may have been sedated

And what did you do about it- who did you tell, why did you not try to wake your children yourself

What time did the twins wake up, and it this normal for them not to wake up during the night?

 Did you pursue the people you told for an investigation to your claim.

I believe that would establish some sense on a nonsensical claim.


It is very apparents that the story grew legs after a time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2019, 03:41:08 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 19, 2019, 11:42:24 AM

This is the main issue surronding the "were they sedated" .We can ask  questions regarding Kate and her remarks.

As a qualified anaesthetist- and with the commotion going on- when did you first become suspicious that the children may have been sedated

And what did you do about it- who did you tell, why did you not try to wake your children yourself

What time did the twins wake up, and it this normal for them not to wake up during the night?

 Did you pursue the people you told for an investigation to your claim.

I believe that would establish some sense on a nonsensical claim.


It is very apparents that the story grew legs after a time.

She could have told the PJ when they arrived. She didn't. She could have told them the following day. She didn't. She could havr told the UK FLO's the day after that. She didn't. Four years later she had the cheek to say the police should have tested the twin's urine, hair and blood for sedatives.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 19, 2019, 05:24:57 PM
http://checktheevidencecom.ipage.com/checktheevidence.com/pdf/Goncalo%20Amaral%20-%20Truth%20of%20the%20Lie%20-%20Madeleine%20McCann.pdf

*snipped" page 85-86

"From the start, the way the children slept had seemed suspicious to us and we wanted to have screening tests carried out: nevertheless, faced with the media coverage of the case we put this off, worried about exposing the parents to trial by public. This was a mistake."

Those are Amaral's words. If this was an abduction, why didn't he treat the possible drugging issue with due diligence like any good policeman would, rather than stressing about the media & its impact on the parents? Had the group not comprised of doctors  and the twins had been drugged, there could have been a triple tragedy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 19, 2019, 05:29:17 PM
Quote from: misty on January 19, 2019, 05:24:57 PM
http://checktheevidencecom.ipage.com/checktheevidence.com/pdf/Goncalo%20Amaral%20-%20Truth%20of%20the%20Lie%20-%20Madeleine%20McCann.pdf

*snipped" page 85-86

"From the start, the way the children slept had seemed suspicious to us and we wanted to have screening tests carried out: nevertheless, faced with the media coverage of the case we put this off, worried about exposing the parents to trial by public. This was a mistake."

Those are Amaral's words. If this was an abduction, why didn't he treat the possible drugging issue with due diligence like any good policeman would, rather than stressing about the media & its impact on the parents? Had the group not comprised of doctors  and the twins had been drugged, there could have been a triple tragedy.
8((()*/ More admitted incompetence by the PJ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 19, 2019, 05:31:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 19, 2019, 03:41:08 PM
She could have told the PJ when they arrived. She didn't. She could have told them the following day. She didn't. She could havr told the UK FLO's the day after that. She didn't. Four years later she had the cheek to say the police should have tested the twin's urine, hair and blood for sedatives.
She says she did tell the police.  So you know she didn’t and are stating as a fact that she is a liar are you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2019, 05:48:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 19, 2019, 05:31:37 PM
She says she did tell the police.  So you know she didn’t and are stating as a fact that she is a liar are you?
We would still be unsure who delivered the sedatives if the results came back positive.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2019, 06:32:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 19, 2019, 05:31:37 PM
She says she did tell the police.  So you know she didn’t and are stating as a fact that she is a liar are you?

She says she told the GNR, She has never claimed she rold any of those I listed in my post. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 19, 2019, 06:45:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 19, 2019, 06:32:58 PM
She says she told the GNR, She has never claimed she rold any of those I listed in my post.
And you don’t think Kate viewed the GNR as being “the police” then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2019, 06:51:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 19, 2019, 06:45:09 PM
And you don’t think Kate viewed the GNR as being “the police” then?

Of course she thought Tweedledum and Tweedledee were the police. She told them and they ignored her so she left it at that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 19, 2019, 07:00:20 PM
Quote from: misty on January 19, 2019, 05:24:57 PM
http://checktheevidencecom.ipage.com/checktheevidence.com/pdf/Goncalo%20Amaral%20-%20Truth%20of%20the%20Lie%20-%20Madeleine%20McCann.pdf

*snipped" page 85-86

"From the start, the way the children slept had seemed suspicious to us and we wanted to have screening tests carried out: nevertheless, faced with the media coverage of the case we put this off, worried about exposing the parents to trial by public. This was a mistake."

Those are Amaral's words. If this was an abduction, why didn't he treat the possible drugging issue with due diligence like any good policeman would, rather than stressing about the media & its impact on the parents? Had the group not comprised of doctors  and the twins had been drugged, there could have been a triple tragedy.

If those same doctors had been at work and had treated a child displaying the same symptoms as the twins in the same nonchalant way then they would be facing a disciplinary hearing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 19, 2019, 07:05:39 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 19, 2019, 07:00:20 PM
If those same doctors had been at work and had treated a child displaying the same symptoms as the twins in the same nonchalant way then they would be facing a disciplinary hearing.
What symptoms were the twins displaying then?  Were they at death’s door in your opinion? in what way were the doctors you refer to that evening behaving nonchalantly? 
nonchalant
/ˈnɒnʃ(ə)l(ə)nt/Submit
adjective
(of a person or manner) feeling or appearing casually calm and relaxed; not displaying anxiety, interest, or enthusiasm.
Do you have a cite?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 19, 2019, 07:06:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 19, 2019, 06:51:42 PM
Of course she thought Tweedledum and Tweedledee were the police. She told them and they ignored her so she left it at that.
Do you have a cite for her “leaving it at that” please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on January 19, 2019, 10:53:41 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 19, 2019, 07:06:45 PM
Do you have a cite for her “leaving it at that” please?

Did she mention it to the Leicester Police FLO's at the time? Clearly not or they would have mentioned it specifically.

I don't also see the "team McCann" family statements mention it at that time either.

Why? VS? Please explain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 19, 2019, 11:26:02 PM
Quote from: Sunny on January 19, 2019, 10:53:41 PM
Did she mention it to the Leicester Police FLO's at the time? Clearly not or they would have mentioned it specifically.

I don't also see the "team McCann" family statements mention it at that time either.

Why? VS? Please explain.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN_MARKLEY.htm

Make what you will of the comment about facilitating abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 19, 2019, 11:55:06 PM
Quote from: Sunny on January 19, 2019, 10:53:41 PM
Did she mention it to the Leicester Police FLO's at the time? Clearly not or they would have mentioned it specifically.

I don't also see the "team McCann" family statements mention it at that time either.

Why? VS? Please explain.
See Misty’s post.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 20, 2019, 12:27:42 AM
Quote from: misty on January 19, 2019, 11:26:02 PM
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN_MARKLEY.htm

Make what you will of the comment about facilitating abduction.

I make of that- they wanted to know if any evidence was avaliable. How would this evidence be procured exactly? but then add that to:- did the parents push  the PJ  to have their children checked?. Portugal does have hospitals!

They could have taken samples themselves and asked for them to be analysed...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 12:29:56 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 20, 2019, 12:27:42 AM
I make of that- they wanted to know if any evidence was avaliable. How would this evidence be procured exactly? but then add that to:- did the parents push  the PJ  to have their children checked?. Portugal does have hospitals!

They could have taken samples themselves and asked for them to be analysed...
The PJ believed the kids were sedated from the off, the parents mentioned sedation that night and two days later but you think the parents should have pushed the police to gather the evidence or done it themselves?  Perhaps they should have gathered other forensic evidence while they were at it, they’d probably have done a better job.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 20, 2019, 12:37:41 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 20, 2019, 12:29:56 AM
The PJ believed the kids were sedated from the off, the parents mentioned sedation that night and two days later but you think the parents should have pushed the police to gather the evidence or done it themselves?  Perhaps they should have gathered other forensic evidence while they were at it, they’d probably have done a better job.

Oh I think the 'evidence ' was well managed by the tapas searching the bedroom  I mean   hahahahahaha really!

If I thought my children were drugged I would take them to hospital right away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 01:14:38 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 20, 2019, 12:37:41 AM
Oh I think the 'evidence ' was well managed by the tapas searching the bedroom  I mean   hahahahahaha really!

If I thought my children were drugged I would take them to hospital right away.

Of course you would. Any right thinking person would and the excuse put forward that they were doctors makes it worse not better. We know from Kate, Fiona and Diane that the twins were in a worryingly unresponsive state. Kate, we are lead to believe, even alerted the nearby police officers she was so worried, and this is a trained anaesthetist. She, and of course Fiona, out of everyone who entered that room must have known the catastrophic effect a drug admistered inexpertly could have on an adult never mind a child. Yet they did nothing.

It is interesting though that Kate managed to make her request for a priest understood, I believe at least one police officer and SB mention it in their statements, therefore why not medical help for the children she was so worried about ? She was certainly in no state, or had the equipment, to help them herself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 20, 2019, 08:39:38 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 20, 2019, 12:37:41 AM
Oh I think the 'evidence ' was well managed by the tapas searching the bedroom  I mean   hahahahahaha really!

If I thought my children were drugged I would take them to hospital right away.

There is no logic in this comment.  But then there never is.

I have really tried to give you some leeway.  But I am done with that now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 08:40:52 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 01:14:38 AM
Of course you would. Any right thinking person would and the excuse put forward that they were doctors makes it worse not better. We know from Kate, Fiona and Diane that the twins were in a worryingly unresponsive state. Kate, we are lead to believe, even alerted the nearby police officers she was so worried, and this is a trained anaesthetist. She, and of course Fiona, out of everyone who entered that room must have known the catastrophic effect a drug admistered inexpertly could have on an adult never mind a child. Yet they did nothing.

It is interesting though that Kate managed to make her request for a priest understood, I believe at least one police officer and SB mention it in their statements, therefore why not medical help for the children she was so worried about ? She was certainly in no state, or had the equipment, to help them herself.
*groundhog day klaxon*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 20, 2019, 08:43:22 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 20, 2019, 08:36:04 AM
yeah sure you would hahahahaha really, even if one of your kids had just disappeared and all the people around you were doctors, yeah you’d really do that, hahahaha you know exactly how you would react in such circumstances, lolololol, hahahahaha.
And you could read all the street signs and know where to go, and who to ask for when you got there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 09:04:13 AM
WRT this IMO non-issue, one of these scenarios is correct.  Which do the sceptics believe it is?

1) The McCanns drugged all three children, one of them died, the other two hung possibly perilously close to death but fortunately pulled though without any adverse effects the next day, and despite mentioning their concerns to the police about possible involvement of drugs that night, they hoped the police wouldn’t insist on testing the kids because the McCanns guessed they probably weren’t that thorough, and the McCanns didn’t care enough about any of their children’s lives to try and save them.

2) The McCanns didn’t drug the twins, only Madeleine, a course of action which resulted in her death, and so their concerns about the twins being sedated were mentioned to the police for reasons which simply can’t be explained  and strangely the twins unwittingly played along with this scenario by giving the police themselves cause for concern, but the McCanns knew all along their twins were fine which is why they didn’t insist on taking them to hospital.

Libel police please note:  the above are only scenarios not my opinion, nor what I believe happenrd, though some folk do, which IMO, is more worthy of discussion than what actually hsppened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 20, 2019, 09:57:03 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 20, 2019, 09:04:13 AM
WRT this IMO non-issue, one of these scenarios is correct.  Which do the sceptics believe it is?

1) The McCanns drugged all three children, one of them died, the other two hung possibly perilously close to death but fortunately pulled though without any adverse effects the next day, and despite mentioning their concerns to the police about possible involvement of drugs that night, they hoped the police wouldn’t insist on testing the kids because the McCanns guessed they probably weren’t that thorough, and the McCanns didn’t care enough about any of their children’s lives to try and save them.

2) The McCanns didn’t drug the twins, only Madeleine, a course of action which resulted in her death, and so their concerns about the twins being sedated were mentioned to the police for reasons which simply can’t be explained  and strangely the twins unwittingly played along with this scenario by giving the police themselves cause for concern, but the McCanns knew all along their twins were fine which is why they didn’t insist on taking them to hospital.

Libel police please note:  the above are only scenarios not my opinion, nor what I believe happenrd, though some folk do, which IMO, is more worthy of discussion than what actually hsppened.

In my opinion it's fine to point out the weaknesses in a story without needing to speculate on the reason. The 'sedated twins' story has several weaknesses.

Although Kate McCann says she told the GNR of her fears neither they or the interpreter reported it or reacted.
Although Kate McCann says she checked the twins several times for ;signs of life' she left them in a darkened room with the door closed.
The checks which Kare McCann says she carried out on her twins were not those recommended by healthcare professionals.
No-one mentioned the possibility of sedated twins to the PJ or the FLO's.
Kate McCann criticised the PJ for not testing the twin's urine, hair or blood. It's not standard police practice ASAIK to carry out such tests unless there's a reason to do so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 10:00:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 20, 2019, 09:57:03 AM
In my opinion it's fine to point out the weaknesses in a story without needing to speculate on the reason. The 'sedated twins' story has several weaknesses.

Although Kate McCann says she told the GNR of her fears neither they or the interpreter reported it or reacted.
Although Kate McCann says she checked the twins several times for ;signs of life' she left them in a darkened room with the door closed.
The checks which Kare McCann says she carried out on her twins were not those recommended by healthcare professionals.
No-one mentioned the possibility of sedated twins to the PJ or the FLO's.
Kate McCann criticised the PJ for not testing the twin's urine, hair or blood. It's not standard police practice ASAIK to carry out such tests unless there's a reason to do so.
How jolly convenient to avoid considering the motive(s) for all these IYO suspicious activities and behaviours. 
If the police thought there was no reason to do checks on the twins then (them being the experts) we can only conclude the rest is just the mad rantings of an hysterical and over anxious woman, not in her right mind at the time, there all explained.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 20, 2019, 10:03:09 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 20, 2019, 09:57:03 AM
In my opinion it's fine to point out the weaknesses in a story without needing to speculate on the reason. The 'sedated twins' story has several weaknesses.

Although Kate McCann says she told the GNR of her fears neither they or the interpreter reported it or reacted.
Although Kate McCann says she checked the twins several times for ;signs of life' she left them in a darkened room with the door closed.
The checks which Kare McCann says she carried out on her twins were not those recommended by healthcare professionals.
No-one mentioned the possibility of sedated twins to the PJ or the FLO's.
Kate McCann criticised the PJ for not testing the twin's urine, hair or blood. It's not standard police practice ASAIK to carry out such tests unless there's a reason to do so.

could you give a cite for the tests reccommennded by healthcare professionals
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 10:17:47 AM
The McCanns and their friends were all trained medical experts but should have deferred to the doctors and nurses in a local Portuguese hospital, they should have immediately left the vicinity of their eldest child’s last known whereabouts to spend hours waiting in a hospital a & e to ascertain thst their children were either a) very deep sleepers or had been given a drug which, as it happened turned out not life threstening.  Meanwhile the sceptics concoct an alternative set of suspcisons and criticisms around this particular verdion of events.  “The McCanns cared more about the twins than Maddie”, “how could they have left the scene of the disappearance, were they running scared?”, “it was all a big deflection”, “how arrogant of them to call the ambulance as well when there was nothing wrong with the twins” blah blah blah blah blah
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 20, 2019, 10:18:16 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 20, 2019, 10:00:55 AM
How jolly convenient to avoid considering the motive(s) for all these IYO suspicious activities and behaviours. 
If the police thought there was no reason to do checks on the twins then (them being the experts) we can only conclude the rest is just the mad rantings of an hysterical and over anxious woman, not in her right mind at the time, there all explained.

It's nothing to do with convenience it's to do with avoiding speculation. The PJ didn't think anything; no-one told them there were concerns about the twins. Any mad rantings were allegedly aimed at the GNR.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 20, 2019, 10:33:26 AM
Quote from: Davel on January 20, 2019, 10:03:09 AM
could you give a cite for the tests reccommennded by healthcare professionals

Cites have been provided before and dismissed as you believe Kate McCann's actions were adequate because she was a doctor. I can assure you, however, that her actions would have been inadequate in any A & E Department had she been asked to attend a child with possible sedation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 11:10:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 20, 2019, 10:33:26 AM
Cites have been provided before and dismissed as you believe Kate McCann's actions were adequate because she was a doctor. I can assure you, however, that her actions would have been inadequate in any A & E Department had she been asked to attend a child with possible sedation.

Indeed. Several of the witnesses remember Kate’s request for a priest but, interestingly, not telling them of her fears for her children. Surely if she was out of her mind ( as supporters contend ) and desperately pleading that her children were unresponsive someone, anyone, would certainly have remembered it......Fiona, interestingly,  mentions Kate checking the twins for ‘signs of life’ but no mention of concern voiced to the police.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 11:43:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 20, 2019, 10:18:16 AM
It's nothing to do with convenience it's to do with avoiding speculation. The PJ didn't think anything; no-one told them there were concerns about the twins. Any mad rantings were allegedly aimed at the GNR.
You are speculating about how you think a doctor should act when her eldest child has just disappeared and her other children seem unresponsive.  You think Kate's behaviour is "a weakness", based on your opinion of what should have happened. 
"The PJ didn't think anything.  No-one told them there were concerns about the twins".  Aren't investigators supposed to think?  Arent' they supposed to think "outside the box"?  Are they only to act when others tell them to?  Are the PJ really that passive, and well, stupid? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 11:49:15 AM
This whole non-issue is based on sceptics' beliefs about what they would do in this highly unusual situation with absolutely no thought given whatsoever to the motivations for such (in) action as they see it.  It's all very well being critical about Kate's actions but if you can't or won't speculate on the whys and wherefores of your suspicions then they are simply bitching for nowt.  What are you actually hoping to achieve?  That someone with a greater mind than you will see what you have written and be able work out the sum of 2 + 2 that you yourselves are clearly unable to do?  Year after year the same criticisms over and over again and where has it got you?  Do you enjoy repeating yourselves, do you gain some comfort from it? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 11:51:13 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 20, 2019, 10:33:26 AM
Cites have been provided before and dismissed as you believe Kate McCann's actions were adequate because she was a doctor. I can assure you, however, that her actions would have been inadequate in any A & E Department had she been asked to attend a child with possible sedation.
Talk us through step by step exactly what the A & E department would have done with the twins when they arrived at hospital.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 20, 2019, 11:56:08 AM
Quote from: misty on January 19, 2019, 05:24:57 PM
http://checktheevidencecom.ipage.com/checktheevidence.com/pdf/Goncalo%20Amaral%20-%20Truth%20of%20the%20Lie%20-%20Madeleine%20McCann.pdf

*snipped" page 85-86

"From the start, the way the children slept had seemed suspicious to us and we wanted to have screening tests carried out: nevertheless, faced with the media coverage of the case we put this off, worried about exposing the parents to trial by public. This was a mistake."

Those are Amaral's words. If this was an abduction, why didn't he treat the possible drugging issue with due diligence like any good policeman would, rather than stressing about the media & its impact on the parents? Had the group not comprised of doctors  and the twins had been drugged, there could have been a triple tragedy.

It  all sounds a bit fishy to me.   Kate says she told the Police she thought the twins may have been sedated.   The Police officers in their statements say it was unusual the way in which the twins slept through the noise.   It is obvious to me that these Police officers reported to Amaral about the twins.   I believe Kate when she said she told the officers.   Amaral revealing that they were concerned about the twins from the start,  proves that he was told.   He did nothing.   Kate was probably thinking they would be doing something.   Then Amaral had the nerve to say that the McCann's had given their children Calpol to help them sleep!!    IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 12:01:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 20, 2019, 10:18:16 AM
It's nothing to do with convenience it's to do with avoiding speculation. The PJ didn't think anything; no-one told them there were concerns about the twins. Any mad rantings were allegedly aimed at the GNR.

Even if the police were the most incompetent people on the face of God’s earth it still does not excuse, or explain, a group of doctors, two of them anaesthetists, leaving two small children in an unresponsive state without taking any action.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 12:07:35 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 20, 2019, 11:56:08 AM
It  all sounds a bit fishy to me.   Kate says she told the Police she thought the twins may have been sedated.   The Police officers in their statements say it was unusual the way in which the twins slept through the noise.   It is obvious to me that these Police officers reported to Amaral about the twins.   I believe Kate when she said she told the officers.   Amaral revealing that they were concerned about the twins from the start,  proves that he was told.   He did nothing.   Kate was probably thinking they would be doing something.   Then Amaral had the nerve to say that the McCann's had given their children Calpol to help them sleep!!    IMO

If Kate told the officers then why did no one mention it, not even her friends ? Ignoring the pleas of a mother who believes her children are in anger is a pretty big deal so why does no one mentions it the next day...not the parents, not the friends, not the family who were called, not the translator, not the police, not the Mark Warner staff...in fact not one single solitary soul ? What makes you believe Kate ?

Further do we know that Amaral was told that night or sometime in the following days ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 12:25:03 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 12:07:35 PM
If Kate told the officers then why did no one mention it, not even her friends ? Ignoring the pleas of a mother who believes her children are in anger is a pretty big deal so why does no one mentions it the next day...not the parents, not the friends, not the family who were called, not the translator, not the police, not the Mark Warner staff...in fact not one single solitary soul ? What makes you believe Kate ?

Further do we know that Amaral was told that night or sometime in the following days ?
All the people you mention could very easily (in a court of law for example) have stood up and denounced Kate as a liar if she had never mentioned to any of them her concerns.  And what would be the benefits of lying about it in the first place, would they be so great as to be worth the risk of being shown up as a liar?  Just how much begging and pleading about the twins did Kate say she did that evening by the way?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 12:27:52 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 12:01:35 PM
Even if the police were the most incompetent people on the face of God’s earth it still does not excuse, or explain, a group of doctors, two of them anaesthetists, leaving two small children in an unresponsive state without taking any action.
Well then in your opinion they are all guilty of gross negligence and dereliction of duty.  Why not campaign to have them investigated by the General Medical Council to get them struck off?  That would make a change from constantly whingeing about it to no avail on a internet forums at least once a year, every year for many years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 20, 2019, 01:00:40 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 12:07:35 PM
If Kate told the officers then why did no one mention it, not even her friends ? Ignoring the pleas of a mother who believes her children are in anger is a pretty big deal so why does no one mentions it the next day...not the parents, not the friends, not the family who were called, not the translator, not the police, not the Mark Warner staff...in fact not one single solitary soul ? What makes you believe Kate ?

Further do we know that Amaral was told that night or sometime in the following days ?

The twins were fine the next day.   I don't know if the friends were in 5a were there when Kate mentioned it to the Police.  So why would they mention it?


I don't think Kate was listened to,  they thought Madeleine had wandered out.   It was a while later that the Police made their statements.   I have no doubt that Kate mentioned it to the Police that it was reported to Amaral who just dismissed it thinking Madeleine had wandered out.   Then when it came to his theory decided ah yes we were concerned about the twins from the beginning,  it fitted with his Calpol theory.   IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 20, 2019, 01:08:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 20, 2019, 10:33:26 AM
Cites have been provided before and dismissed as you believe Kate McCann's actions were adequate because she was a doctor. I can assure you, however, that her actions would have been inadequate in any A & E Department had she been asked to attend a child with possible sedation.

I haven't seen any cites.... Your assurances are meaningless as you have no experience in sedation.... Sedation is not a medical emergency..
So no cite... As someone with experience in sedation I don't find Kate's actions inadequate
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 01:41:12 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 20, 2019, 01:00:40 PM
The twins were fine the next day.   I don't know if the friends were in 5a were there when Kate mentioned it to the Police.  So why would they mention it?


I don't think Kate was listened to,  they thought Madeleine had wandered out.   It was a while later that the Police made their statements.   I have no doubt that Kate mentioned it to the Police that it was reported to Amaral who just dismissed it thinking Madeleine had wandered out.   Then when it came to his theory decided ah yes we were concerned about the twins from the beginning,  it fitted with his Calpol theory.   IMO

An awful lot of assumptions there, so let’s look at what we know.

Kate said she was so concerned at the twins unresponsive state that she informed the police. We can also ascertain that as a trained anaesthesist she would know the difference between a child merely in a deep sleep and one who was unnaturally unresponsive. She appears to have believed the later.

That the twins were okay the next day is a nonsense argument. It’s a bit like saying because that the child, after drinking bleach, survived the night and therefore her parents decision not to take her to the hospital was the right one. Can you not see how ridiculous that argument is ?

We know that Fiona was with Kate most of the night and witnessed Kate’s ‘looking for signs of life’. She mentioned this in her statement so why not Kate’s appeals for help ? If Kate was that concerned for the twins that she was actually checking that they were alive but her concerns were being ignored why didn’t she mention it to any of the family she called that night ? Further SB and the officers present recounted Kate’s request for a priest but not medical help for her unresponsive twins. Why do you think that is ?

Amaral has nothing to do with Kate’s actions that night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 20, 2019, 02:03:08 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 12:01:35 PM
Even if the police were the most incompetent people on the face of God’s earth it still does not excuse, or explain, a group of doctors, two of them anaesthetists, leaving two small children in an unresponsive state without taking any action.
Were the twins floppy, indicating damage to central nervous system? Were they convulsing, agitated, vomiting or suffering diarrhoea? Was their breathing depressed? Were they tachycardic? Was their skin tone different or their body temperature noticeably altered?
If Kate had had the twins rushed off to A&E, all sirens blazing & nothing was subsequently found to be wrong with them, wouldn't you be accusing her of being a drama queen & faking concern in order to distance herself from the police & her missing eldest daughter? Would it be proof she cared more about the twins than Madeleine?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 02:04:13 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 01:41:12 PM
An awful lot of assumptions there, so let’s look at what we know.

Kate said she was so concerned at the twins unresponsive state that she informed the police. We can also ascertain that as a trained anaesthesist she would know the difference between a child merely in a deep sleep and one who was unnaturally unresponsive. She appears to have believed the later.

That the twins were okay the next day is a nonsense argument. It’s a bit like saying because that the child, after drinking bleach, survived the night and therefore her parents decision not to take her to the hospital was the right one. Can you not see how ridiculous that argument is ?

We know that Fiona was with Kate most of the night and witnessed Kate’s ‘looking for signs of life’. She mentioned this in her statement so why not Kate’s appeals for help ? If Kate was that concerned for the twins that she was actually checking that they were alive but her concerns were being ignored why didn’t she mention it to any of the family she called that night ? Further SB and the officers present recounted Kate’s request for a priest but not medical help for her unresponsive twins. Why do you think that is ?

Amaral has nothing to do with Kate’s actions that night.
So either Kate McCann was grossly negligent, the twins were in danger of succumbing to an overdose of sedatives but she didn't care enough to prevent this happening, or she was lying, she wasn't really concerned for their safety at all and made it all up?  Which is it? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 02:05:35 PM
Quote from: misty on January 20, 2019, 02:03:08 PM
Were the twins floppy, indicating damage to central nervous system? Were they convulsing, agitated, vomiting or suffering diarrhoea? Was their breathing depressed? Were they tachycardic? Was their skin tone different or their body temperature noticeably altered?
If Kate had had the twins rushed off to A&E, all sirens blazing & nothing was subsequently found to be wrong with them, wouldn't you be accusing her of being a drama queen & faking concern in order to distance herself from the police & her missing eldest daughter? Would it be proof she cared more about the twins than Madeleine?
Pre-CISE-ly!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 02:45:55 PM
Quote from: misty on January 20, 2019, 02:03:08 PM
Were the twins floppy, indicating damage to central nervous system? Were they convulsing, agitated, vomiting or suffering diarrhoea? Was their breathing depressed? Were they tachycardic? Was their skin tone different or their body temperature noticeably altered?
If Kate had had the twins rushed off to A&E, all sirens blazing & nothing was subsequently found to be wrong with them, wouldn't you be accusing her of being a drama queen & faking concern in order to distance herself from the police & her missing eldest daughter? Would it be proof she cared more about the twins than Madeleine?


Not sure the point you’re trying to make. Are you saying that Kate didn’t have her unresponsive children treated because the public would think she was a drama queen ? If not then your point has no relevance Wouldit be proof that Kate cared more for the twins than Madeleine? Of course not. What a ridiculous conclusion. What it would show is that her alleged concerns tallied with the actions she undertook.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 02:55:34 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 02:45:55 PM

Not sure the point you’re trying to make. Are you saying that Kate didn’t have her unresponsive children treated because the public would think she was a drama queen ? If not then your point has no relevance Wouldit be proof that Kate cared more for the twins than Madeleine? Of course not. What a ridiculous conclusion. What it would show is that her alleged concerns tallied with the actions she undertook.
You know full well that whatever course of action Kate had taken she would have been slagged off for it, please don’t pretend otherwise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 20, 2019, 03:08:47 PM
Quote from: misty on January 20, 2019, 02:03:08 PM
Were the twins floppy, indicating damage to central nervous system? Were they convulsing, agitated, vomiting or suffering diarrhoea? Was their breathing depressed? Were they tachycardic? Was their skin tone different or their body temperature noticeably altered?
If Kate had had the twins rushed off to A&E, all sirens blazing & nothing was subsequently found to be wrong with them, wouldn't you be accusing her of being a drama queen & faking concern in order to distance herself from the police & her missing eldest daughter? Would it be proof she cared more about the twins than Madeleine?


There's a mismatch between what Kate McCann says and what she did. She says it seemed unnatural that the twins should sleep through the noise and lights. She says the thought came to her that all three children may have been sedated. She says she became scared for the twins.

So what did she do? She 'wandered' into their room several rimes before the GNR arrived to check on them. She placed her hands on their backs to check for signs of life.

She didn't stay with them or ask for a second opinion. She didn't check any of the things you mention.

When the GNR arrived the twins were in a dark room with the door closed. There they remained while their mother sat on the bed in her room.

I don't think she thought the twins were in any danger at all judging by her actions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 03:26:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 20, 2019, 03:08:47 PM

There's a mismatch between what Kate McCann says and what she did. She says it seemed unnatural that the twins should sleep through the noise and lights. She says the thought came to her that all three children may have been sedated. She says she became scared for the twins.

So what did she do? She 'wandered' into their room several rimes before the GNR arrived to check on them. She placed her hands on their backs to check for signs of life.

She didn't stay with them or ask for a second opinion. She didn't check any of the things you mention.

When the GNR arrived the twins were in a dark room with the door closed. There they remained while their mother sat on the bed in her room.

I don't think she thought the twins were in any danger at all judging by her actions.
Therefore we can conclude that the twins were not sedated by their parents and Kate is a bare faced liar who went out of her way to write up a big fat whopper that everyone who was there that night would know was a complete fabrication, and she did this because...because....because...oh what does it matter...just because!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 03:43:07 PM
From Madeleine by Kate McCann.

‘We’d never lied about anything – not to the police, not to the media, not to anyone else. But now we found ourselves in one of those tricky situations where we just didn’t seem to have a choice. As it happened, Gerry had a mild stomach upset which we used as an excuse to postpone the trip. We didn’t feel good about this at all, but even if the judicial secrecy law had not prevented us from giving the main reason, can you imagine what would have happened if we’d announced to the journalists heading for Huelva that the police were coming to do some forensic work in our villa? We were not to know our excuse would prove to be no more than a temporary holding measure. If we had, we wouldn’t have bothered trying to keep the scurrilous headlines at bay.’

As Kate says herself, she lies when she doesn’t have a choice.

Can you imagine what would happened if it had been discovered that Kate thought the twins lives were in danger but did nothing ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 03:57:32 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 03:43:07 PM
From Madeleine by Kate McCann.

‘We’d never lied about anything – not to the police, not to the media, not to anyone else. But now we found ourselves in one of those tricky situations where we just didn’t seem to have a choice. As it happened, Gerry had a mild stomach upset which we used as an excuse to postpone the trip. We didn’t feel good about this at all, but even if the judicial secrecy law had not prevented us from giving the main reason, can you imagine what would have happened if we’d announced to the journalists heading for Huelva that the police were coming to do some forensic work in our villa? We were not to know our excuse would prove to be no more than a temporary holding measure. If we had, we wouldn’t have bothered trying to keep the scurrilous headlines at bay.’

As Kate says herself, she lies when she doesn’t have a choice.
She had absolutely no motive to lie about telling the cops she thought her kids seemed unresponsive.  She could easily have chosen not to mention it at all.  Your logic has a great big gaping hole in it (as usual).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 20, 2019, 04:12:41 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 20, 2019, 03:57:32 PM
She had absolutely no motive to lie about telling the cops she thought her kids seemed unresponsive.  She could easily have chosen not to mention it at all.  Your logic has a great big gaping hole in it (as usual).

Debatable. Could be just an effort to discredit Portuguese authorities.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 20, 2019, 04:13:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 20, 2019, 03:08:47 PM

There's a mismatch between what Kate McCann says and what she did. She says it seemed unnatural that the twins should sleep through the noise and lights. She says the thought came to her that all three children may have been sedated. She says she became scared for the twins.

So what did she do? She 'wandered' into their room several rimes before the GNR arrived to check on them. She placed her hands on their backs to check for signs of life.

She didn't stay with them or ask for a second opinion. She didn't check any of the things you mention.

When the GNR arrived the twins were in a dark room with the door closed. There they remained while their mother sat on the bed in her room.

I don't think she thought the twins were in any danger at all judging by her actions.

The Twins weren't in any danger, and didn't appear to be.  But they could still have been sedated.  How else would an abductor have carried Madeleine out of the room without her waking.

Try Googling Chloroform.  Very easy to make from household products.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 04:17:43 PM
Interesting that supporters seem to have less belief in Kate’s claims than sceptics.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 05:02:37 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 20, 2019, 04:12:41 PM
Debatable. Could be just an effort to discredit Portuguese authorities.
There was aleady an over abundance of evidence of sloppy, shoddy, incompetent behaviour from the PJ to highlight without the need to start making stuff up years later and risk providing the courts cast iron evidence of lying IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 05:23:01 PM
Poor old Kate. Sceptics don’t believe her even when she might be telling the truth. Supporters don’t believe her even when she admits to lying to cover up inconvenient events. What is a girl to do ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on January 20, 2019, 06:36:57 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 05:23:01 PM
Poor old Kate. Sceptics don’t believe her even when she might be telling the truth. Supporters don’t believe her even when she admits to lying to cover up inconvenient events. What is a girl to do ?

All credibility is lost once a suspect refuses to answer police questions. There's no recovery from that point imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 09:23:13 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 05:23:01 PM
Poor old Kate. Sceptics don’t believe her even when she might be telling the truth. Supporters don’t believe her even when she admits to lying to cover up inconvenient events. What is a girl to do ?
What you have wriitten about supporters  is complete rubbish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 10:31:54 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 03:43:07 PM
From Madeleine by Kate McCann.

‘We’d never lied about anything – not to the police, not to the media, not to anyone else. But now we found ourselves in one of those tricky situations where we just didn’t seem to have a choice. As it happened, Gerry had a mild stomach upset which we used as an excuse to postpone the trip. We didn’t feel good about this at all, but even if the judicial secrecy law had not prevented us from giving the main reason, can you imagine what would have happened if we’d announced to the journalists heading for Huelva that the police were coming to do some forensic work in our villa? We were not to know our excuse would prove to be no more than a temporary holding measure. If we had, we wouldn’t have bothered trying to keep the scurrilous headlines at bay.’

As Kate says herself, she lies when she doesn’t have a choice.

Can you imagine what would happened if it had been discovered that Kate thought the twins lives were in danger but did nothing ?
Erm...isn’t that exactly what you are saying DID happen?   So no need to imagine, we know exactly what would happen:  a small handful of people would go on and on about it for years on the internet to anyone foolish enough to engage with them - and that’s it! 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 20, 2019, 10:47:48 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on January 20, 2019, 06:36:57 PM
All credibility is lost once a suspect refuses to answer police questions. There's no recovery from that point imo.
Kate recovered quite well.  She never was charged, the case against her was shelved, she is sympathetically treated by tv and news media, she has a high profile amassadorial role, rubs shoulders with prime ministers and archbishops, carries on with her life as a free woman, is able to go on holiday, out to dinner, hold down a job, all without immediate threat to her life or liberty, so what exactly are you on about? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 21, 2019, 08:38:37 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 03:43:07 PM
From Madeleine by Kate McCann.

‘We’d never lied about anything – not to the police, not to the media, not to anyone else. But now we found ourselves in one of those tricky situations where we just didn’t seem to have a choice. As it happened, Gerry had a mild stomach upset which we used as an excuse to postpone the trip. We didn’t feel good about this at all, but even if the judicial secrecy law had not prevented us from giving the main reason, can you imagine what would have happened if we’d announced to the journalists heading for Huelva that the police were coming to do some forensic work in our villa? We were not to know our excuse would prove to be no more than a temporary holding measure. If we had, we wouldn’t have bothered trying to keep the scurrilous headlines at bay.’

As Kate says herself, she lies when she doesn’t have a choice.

Can you imagine what would happened if it had been discovered that Kate thought the twins lives were in danger but did nothing ?

Did you miss the bit where Kate says 'Judicial secrecy law prevented them from giving the real reason.'    They were not allowed to speak about the case. So what do you suggest they should have done?   They exaggerated Gerry's stomach upset that's all,  for god's sake. IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 21, 2019, 08:54:50 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 20, 2019, 01:41:12 PM
An awful lot of assumptions there, so let’s look at what we know.

Kate said she was so concerned at the twins unresponsive state that she informed the police. We can also ascertain that as a trained anaesthesist she would know the difference between a child merely in a deep sleep and one who was unnaturally unresponsive. She appears to have believed the later.

That the twins were okay the next day is a nonsense argument. It’s a bit like saying because that the child, after drinking bleach, survived the night and therefore her parents decision not to take her to the hospital was the right one. Can you not see how ridiculous that argument is ?

We know that Fiona was with Kate most of the night and witnessed Kate’s ‘looking for signs of life’. She mentioned this in her statement so why not Kate’s appeals for help ? If Kate was that concerned for the twins that she was actually checking that they were alive but her concerns were being ignored why didn’t she mention it to any of the family she called that night ? Further SB and the officers present recounted Kate’s request for a priest but not medical help for her unresponsive twins. Why do you think that is ?

Amaral has nothing to do with Kate’s actions that night.



You said -That the twins were okay the next day is a nonsense argument. It’s a bit like saying because that the child, after drinking bleach, survived the night and therefore her parents decision not to take her to the hospital was the right one. Can you not see how ridiculous that argument is ?   

I was replying about you asking why the friends didn't mention anything about the twins.   They weren't there to witness the twins sleeping through the noise , they weren't  there when Kate told the Police,  the twins were fine the next day so why would they mention anything about them in their statements?   Fiona told Kate the twins were fine,  so it seems to me she thought Kate was just hysterical over everything. IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 21, 2019, 09:57:25 AM
Quote from: Lace on January 21, 2019, 08:54:50 AM


You said -That the twins were okay the next day is a nonsense argument. It’s a bit like saying because that the child, after drinking bleach, survived the night and therefore her parents decision not to take her to the hospital was the right one. Can you not see how ridiculous that argument is ?   

I was replying about you asking why the friends didn't mention anything about the twins.   They weren't there to witness the twins sleeping through the noise , they weren't  there when Kate told the Police,  the twins were fine the next day so why would they mention anything about them in their statements?   Fiona told Kate the twins were fine,  so it seems to me she thought Kate was just hysterical over everything. IMO

Fiona Payne was there, and confirms that Kate 'put her hands' on the twins to check they were breathing..She says they were fine, but not that she said that to Kate. She also found it strange that they continued to sleep.She was also there when the GNR arrived, but doesm't mention sedation being mentioned by Kate. 

it was me, Emma and Kate with Gerry and Dave sort of to'ing and fro'ing until the first lot of Police arrived'.......

she kept going into the twins, she kept putting her hands on the twins to check they were breathing, she was very much concerned in checking that they were okay. But they were okay, I mean, they were fine, they didn't, they were asleep, but at the time it did seem weird, I remember thinking, you know, when the Police came they turned the lights on, there was loads of noise, obviously from the moment Kate discovered that Madeleine was gone, the screaming and the shouting and there was a lot of noise and they, they didn't, you know, so much as blink'.......

they wanted to come in the room, obviously, and, you know, see where Madeleine had been sleeping and they were checking the shutters and we were just trying to get over the urgency
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 21, 2019, 10:55:43 AM
Quote from: Lace on January 21, 2019, 08:38:37 AM
Did you miss the bit where Kate says 'Judicial secrecy law prevented them from giving the real reason.'    They were not allowed to speak about the case. So what do you suggest they should have done?   They exaggerated Gerry's stomach upset that's all,  for god's sake. IMO

She lied. She admits it herself. She lied because she was placed in a position where telling the truth would raise questions. She appears to have done the same in Madeleine to counter questions about not seeking help when she obviously thought her children were in danger.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 21, 2019, 01:45:37 PM
Some people seem to think audited accounts are more reliable. Not necessarily;

KPMG suspends Carillion’s lead auditor
http://www.constructionenquirer.com/2019/01/21/kpmg-suspends-carillions-lead-auditor/


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 21, 2019, 05:49:13 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 21, 2019, 10:55:43 AM
She lied. She admits it herself. She lied because she was placed in a position where telling the truth would raise questions. She appears to have done the same in Madeleine to counter questions about not seeking help when she obviously thought her children were in danger.
Everyone lies Faithlilly, even you I’m sure, though perhaps unlike Kate you don’t like to admit it when you do?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 21, 2019, 06:26:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 21, 2019, 01:45:37 PM
Some people seem to think audited accounts are more reliable. Not necessarily;

KPMG suspends Carillion’s lead auditor
http://www.constructionenquirer.com/2019/01/21/kpmg-suspends-carillions-lead-auditor/
More reliable than what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 21, 2019, 06:55:07 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 21, 2019, 06:26:22 PM
More reliable than what?

Accounts which are not audited.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 21, 2019, 07:20:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 21, 2019, 06:55:07 PM
Accounts which are not audited.
In much the same way as me supplying a link to a sniffer dog that makes a series of mistakes demonstrates that using sniffer dogs is not necessarily as reliable as not using sniffer dogs.  I get you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 21, 2019, 08:28:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 21, 2019, 07:20:33 PM
In much the same way as me supplying a link to a sniffer dog that makes a series of mistakes demonstrates that using sniffer dogs is not necessarily as reliable as not using sniffer dogs.  I get you.

Just letting people know that auditing is not a gurantee of anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 21, 2019, 09:00:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 21, 2019, 08:28:06 PM
Just letting people know that auditing is not a gurantee of anything.
Nothing is a guarantee of anything, thanks for the reminder.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 22, 2019, 09:47:07 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 21, 2019, 10:55:43 AM
She lied. She admits it herself. She lied because she was placed in a position where telling the truth would raise questions. She appears to have done the same in Madeleine to counter questions about not seeking help when she obviously thought her children were in danger.
a

So it seems you would rather Kate have broken the law in Portugal than tell a white lie.   So what would you have done in Kates situation,  broken the law and risked being put in prison?   It sounds as if you would.


As for Kate lying about not seeking help for the twins,  again you know nothing as do I.   The Police seemed to know a lot about the twins though,  after only looking in on them and searching the room.   How did they know they hadn't woken up after they went out of the room and one of the friends had gone in to see them?   How did they know it wasn't normal for them to sleep through the noise?   They could have been heavy sleepers.  How did they know they hadn't woken up before they had arrived and gone back to sleep?    Amaral says they were worried about the twins from the beginning,   because he knew!!!   and did nothing about it.  IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 22, 2019, 11:06:44 AM
Quote from: Lace on January 22, 2019, 09:47:07 AM
a

So it seems you would rather Kate have broken the law in Portugal than tell a white lie.   So what would you have done in Kates situation,  broken the law and risked being put in prison?   It sounds as if you would.


As for Kate lying about not seeking help for the twins,  again you know nothing as do I.   The Police seemed to know a lot about the twins though,  after only looking in on them and searching the room.   How did they know they hadn't woken up after they went out of the room and one of the friends had gone in to see them?   How did they know it wasn't normal for them to sleep through the noise?   They could have been heavy sleepers.  How did they know they hadn't woken up before they had arrived and gone back to sleep?    Amaral says they were worried about the twins from the beginning,   because he knew!!!   and did nothing about it.  IMO

What should Kate have done ? Was it beyond her to just say nothing ?

A mother checks her children for signs of life yet does not summon help. Whose fault is that ? As you say the police didn’t know that one of the friends had settled the twins or whether it was normal for the twins to sleep so deeply......but Kate did and still did nothing.

So you think Kate did voice her concerns. When, to whom, who translated, how vociferous was she in her pleas, did she get a reply, when nothing happened did she try again, what was the outcome ? Did she tell family back home that the police were ignoring her and that she was worried that the twins were unresponsive? Did she mention it to the officers she spoke to on the 4th and ask for the officers to be reprimanded ? Did Fiona mention it as she was with Kate most of the night ?  Do you really think that police officers faced with pleas from a mother that her children may have been drugged, did nothing ? So many questions.

And again Amaral had nothing to do with Kate’s actions that night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 22, 2019, 11:53:36 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 22, 2019, 11:06:44 AM
What should Kate have done ? Was it beyond her to just say nothing ?

A mother checks her children for signs of life yet does not summon help. Whose fault is that ? As you say the police didn’t know that one of the friends had settled the twins or whether it was normal for the twins to sleep so deeply......but Kate did and still did nothing.

So you think Kate did voice her concerns. When, to whom, who translated, how vociferous was she in her pleas, did she get a reply, when nothing happened did she try again, what was the outcome ? Did she tell family back home that the police were ignoring her and that she was worried that the twins were unresponsive? Did she mention it to the officers she spoke to on the 4th and ask for the officers to be reprimanded ? Did Fiona mention it as she was with Kate most of the night ?  Do you really think that police officers faced with pleas from a mother that her children may have been drugged, did nothing ? So many questions.

And again Amaral had nothing to do with Kate’s actions that night.

Have you read the statements from the friends especially Fiona's?   Kate was hysterical,  NOT FUNCTIONING PROPERLY.   You make it sound as though Kate was calmly sitting around checking the twins for signs of life.  You sound as if you have no idea what affect something like this would have on someone's ability to behave normally.   

Kate was worried about the twins,  but Fiona was telling her they were fine.   I believe Kate did say something to the Police but because of her behaviour and the fact they thought Madeleine had just wandered out they just took her pleas as hysterical ramblings as they could see that Kate was not behaving in a rational way.   Though they thought they would mention the twins slept through the noise and mention it to Amaral, who I beleive also took her worries as nonsense.   Later though when Amaral comes to write his book he is saying he was worried about the twins from the beginning,  now why say that if he had'nt had a report that the twins had slept through the noise,  I'll tell you why, because by then he had thought his theory up after the dog alerts and the Calpol was the centre of his theory.IMO


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 22, 2019, 09:00:17 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 22, 2019, 09:47:07 AM
a

So it seems you would rather Kate have broken the law in Portugal than tell a white lie.   So what would you have done in Kates situation,  broken the law and risked being put in prison?   It sounds as if you would.


As for Kate lying about not seeking help for the twins,  again you know nothing as do I.   The Police seemed to know a lot about the twins though,  after only looking in on them and searching the room.   How did they know they hadn't woken up after they went out of the room and one of the friends had gone in to see them?   How did they know it wasn't normal for them to sleep through the noise?   They could have been heavy sleepers.  How did they know they hadn't woken up before they had arrived and gone back to sleep?    Amaral says they were worried about the twins from the beginning,   because he knew!!!   and did nothing about it.  IMO

I find some posts hilarious  in support of the parents...

Aw Kate only told a white lie.. which is much better than a big black lie I guess...

"Did you miss the bit where Kate says 'Judicial secrecy law prevented them from giving the real reason.'    They were not allowed to speak about the case"

And yet there they were blabbing to family about windows and shutters and cutains which no one else saw or noticed?  The police certainly didn't see what Kate  claims she saw...

"Kate was worried about the twins,  but Fiona was telling her they were fine. "

Well there you go... now why bother mentioning about the police not doing anything- Her friend said they were fine-was her friend lying?


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 23, 2019, 08:14:28 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 22, 2019, 09:00:17 PM
I find some posts hilarious  in support of the parents...

Aw Kate only told a white lie.. which is much better than a big black lie I guess...

"Did you miss the bit where Kate says 'Judicial secrecy law prevented them from giving the real reason.'    They were not allowed to speak about the case"

And yet there they were blabbing to family about windows and shutters and cutains which no one else saw or noticed?  The police certainly didn't see what Kate  claims she saw...

"Kate was worried about the twins,  but Fiona was telling her they were fine. "

Well there you go... now why bother mentioning about the police not doing anything- Her friend said they were fine-was her friend lying?

You seem to find a lot of things funny about a missing child don't you.

When the McCann's were 'blabbing' about Madeleine being missing as you put it,   there wasn't an investigation going on by the Portuguese Police was there?

Kate was hysterical,   Fiona was trying to calm her down she said the twins were fine,  why would Fiona lie?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 09:29:54 AM
Quote from: Lace on January 23, 2019, 08:14:28 AM
You seem to find a lot of things funny about a missing child don't you.

When the McCann's were 'blabbing' about Madeleine being missing as you put it,   there wasn't an investigation going on by the Portuguese Police was there?

Kate was hysterical,   Fiona was trying to calm her down she said the twins were fine,  why would Fiona lie?
[/b]

When did the bolded bit happen?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 23, 2019, 10:05:04 AM
Quote from: Lace on January 23, 2019, 08:14:28 AM
You seem to find a lot of things funny about a missing child don't you.

When the McCann's were 'blabbing' about Madeleine being missing as you put it,   there wasn't an investigation going on by the Portuguese Police was there?

Kate was hysterical,   Fiona was trying to calm her down she said the twins were fine,  why would Fiona lie?

I fancy that it is supporter comments that are found amusing, rather than that a child is missing.
Having said that, her absence has no bearing on our lives other than the time wasted on  this and/or other forums.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 10:13:54 AM
Quote from: jassi on January 23, 2019, 10:05:04 AM
I fancy that it is supporter comments that are found amusing, rather than that a child is missing.
Having said that, her absence has no bearing on our lives other than the time wasted on  this and/or other forums.
I fancy that what amused the poster in question is the idea of people standing up for the parents of a missing child in the face of unrelenting criticism and hostility towards them for nearly 12 years, and in this instance pointing out that Kate told a white lie (which she admitted to in her book) so as to keep on the right side of the Judicial Secrecy law.   Perhaps that IS truly hilarious to some, it takes all sorts I guess.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 23, 2019, 10:31:21 AM
In  life, one must take amusement where one finds it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 23, 2019, 10:34:35 AM
Quote from: Lace on January 23, 2019, 08:14:28 AM
You seem to find a lot of things funny about a missing child don't you.

When the McCann's were 'blabbing' about Madeleine being missing as you put it,   there wasn't an investigation going on by the Portuguese Police was there?

Kate was hysterical,   Fiona was trying to calm her down she said the twins were fine,  why would Fiona lie?

Kate gave the green light to family, and their spokesperson Justine McGuiness to tell anyone who would listen what was happening in the police station when questioned in her arguido interview. Gerry spoke to David Jones on the QT about the investigation. What do you think were their thoughts on judicial secrecy then ? Handy that judicial secrecy only kicked in when the parents had something to hide.

Nowhere does it say Fiona was trying to calm Kate down and as a trained professional she is just as guilty of failing to get help for two unresponsive children as her friend. If either of the two of them had acted that when in their professional life they would have been up in front of the GMC quicker than you could say comatose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 10:51:07 AM
Quote from: jassi on January 23, 2019, 10:31:21 AM
In  life, one must take amusement where one finds it.
True.  It's the only reason I read this forum I have to admit. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 10:53:29 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 23, 2019, 10:34:35 AM
Kate gave the green light to family, and their spokesperson Justine McGuiness to tell anyone who would listen what was happening in the police station when questioned in her arguido interview. Gerry spoke to David Jones on the QT about the investigation. What do you think were their thoughts on judicial secrecy then ? Handy that judicial secrecy only kicked in when the parents had something to hide.

Nowhere does it say Fiona was trying to calm Kate down and as a trained professional she is just as guilty of failing to get help for two unresponsive children as her friend. If either of the two of them had acted that when in their professional life they would have been up in front of the GMC quicker than you could say comatose.
Please describe exactly how they behaved and what they actually did that night vis-a-vis the twins.  Do you know that Fiona did not try to calm Kate down?  What did she in fact say to her?  Is it unlikely that she tried to calm and reassure her distressed friend? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 23, 2019, 11:00:04 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 23, 2019, 10:34:35 AM
Kate gave the green light to family, and their spokesperson Justine McGuiness to tell anyone who would listen what was happening in the police station when questioned in her arguido interview. Gerry spoke to David Jones on the QT about the investigation. What do you think were their thoughts on judicial secrecy then ? Handy that judicial secrecy only kicked in when the parents had something to hide.

Nowhere does it say Fiona was trying to calm Kate down and as a trained professional she is just as guilty of failing to get help for two unresponsive children as her friend. If either of the two of them had acted that when in their professional life they would have been up in front of the GMC quicker than you could say comatose.

What evidence is there that the twins were unresponsive... Is that a myth... Someone who is sedated IS responsive... That is one if the differences between sedation and general anaesthesia
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 23, 2019, 11:05:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 09:29:54 AM
[/b]

When did the bolded bit happen?

Please check out Fiona Payne's rogatory statement ... I think the answer to your question may be found therein
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 11:19:09 AM
Quote from: Brietta on January 23, 2019, 11:05:14 AM
Please check out Fiona Payne's rogatory statement ... I think the answer to your question may be found therein
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm

I have, and was unable to find the appropriate passage. Fiona says the twins were fine, but she doesn't claim to have said that to Kate, which is what seems to be being suggested.

'No, and that was the other thing, she kept going into the twins, she kept putting her hands on the twins to check they were breathing, she was very much concerned in checking that they were okay. But they were okay, I mean, they were fine, they didn't, they were asleep, but at the time it did seem weird
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 23, 2019, 12:59:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 11:19:09 AM
I have, and was unable to find the appropriate passage. Fiona says the twins were fine, but she doesn't claim to have said that to Kate, which is what seems to be being suggested.

'No, and that was the other thing, she kept going into the twins, she kept putting her hands on the twins to check they were breathing, she was very much concerned in checking that they were okay. But they were okay, I mean, they were fine, they didn't, they were asleep, but at the time it did seem weird

Of course if you’re an anaesthesiologist and you’ve left two children who were unresponsive to their fate you’re going to say that the were fine. Of course it’s just about here, if Kate had voiced her concerns to the police, that you would have thought that Fiona would have recollected it. Strange she didn’t.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 23, 2019, 01:04:14 PM
I didn't notice any mention of hysteria in Fiona's statement.
Maybe I missed it, or maybe it was said by someone else, or maybe by nobody.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 01:09:53 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 23, 2019, 12:59:03 PM
Of course if you’re an anaesthesiologist and you’ve left two children who were unresponsive to their fate you’re going to say that the were fine. Of course it’s just about here, if Kate had voiced her concerns to the police, that you would have thought that Fiona would have recollected it. Strange she didn’t.
"Left to their fate"??  What, were they put out with the milk bottles or something?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 23, 2019, 01:45:27 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 23, 2019, 01:04:14 PM
I didn't notice any mention of hysteria in Fiona's statement.
Maybe I missed it, or maybe it was said by someone else, or maybe by nobody.

You are wrong.

Not only does Fiona describe a heartrending and awful scenario in the aftermath of discovering their child was missing ... she describes the hysteria of both Kate and Gerry.

_______________________________________________________________


  ...  but I do remember her coming back, erm, you know, I never will forget'.  ...  she sort of raced back and she just appeared at the doors of the sort of reception area and just shouted across, erm, 'She's gone. Gerry, Madeleine's gone'. And, you know, well you can just imagine the shock maybe.  ...

  ...  panic was starting really  ...

  ...  1485  ...  'How was Kate''
  ...  Reply  ...  'Awful, erm, I've never seen such horrible raw emotion in my life and I've seen a lot of it in my job. Erm, tut, she, she was just bereft, she didn't know what to do, she was just panicking, extremely frightened, extremely frightened for Madeleine ...
  ...  And the helplessness  ...  she was angry, really angry, tut, punching walls, kicking walls, she was covered in bruises the next day, because she just didn't know what, what else to do. She was angry at herself, she kept saying 'I've let her down. We've let her down Gerry', you know, 'We should have been here'. Erm, tut, she was praying a lot. Erm, I just don't think she knew what to do, what to do. And she was just howling. It was just, just awful.  ...  but she wasn't functioning

  ...  from the moment Kate discovered that Madeleine was gone, the screaming and the shouting and there was a lot of noise ...

  ... This was all in immediate panic' ...

  ...  at that point she was just in no state to be left alone ...

  ...  I know Gerry phoned his sister, Trish, and he was just sobbing and hysterical on the phone' ...

  ...  we were obviously desperate and frantic   ...

  ...   and Kate was getting hysterical at this point, erm, she, you know, screaming, erm, because she just wanted somebody who she felt was doing, doing something that was going to make a difference  ...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 23, 2019, 01:56:23 PM
Thank you. As I said in my earlier post, 'maybe I missed it' Clearly I did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 23, 2019, 02:33:33 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 23, 2019, 01:45:27 PM
You are wrong.

Not only does Fiona describe a heartrending and awful scenario in the aftermath of discovering their child was missing ... she describes the hysteria of both Kate and Gerry.

_______________________________________________________________


  ...  but I do remember her coming back, erm, you know, I never will forget'.  ...  she sort of raced back and she just appeared at the doors of the sort of reception area and just shouted across, erm, 'She's gone. Gerry, Madeleine's gone'. And, you know, well you can just imagine the shock maybe.  ...

  ...  panic was starting really  ...

  ...  1485  ...  'How was Kate''
  ...  Reply  ...  'Awful, erm, I've never seen such horrible raw emotion in my life and I've seen a lot of it in my job. Erm, tut, she, she was just bereft, she didn't know what to do, she was just panicking, extremely frightened, extremely frightened for Madeleine ...
  ...  And the helplessness  ...  she was angry, really angry, tut, punching walls, kicking walls, she was covered in bruises the next day, because she just didn't know what, what else to do. She was angry at herself, she kept saying 'I've let her down. We've let her down Gerry', you know, 'We should have been here'. Erm, tut, she was praying a lot. Erm, I just don't think she knew what to do, what to do. And she was just howling. It was just, just awful.  ...  but she wasn't functioning

  ...  from the moment Kate discovered that Madeleine was gone, the screaming and the shouting and there was a lot of noise ...

  ... This was all in immediate panic' ...

  ...  at that point she was just in no state to be left alone ...

  ...  I know Gerry phoned his sister, Trish, and he was just sobbing and hysterical on the phone' ...

  ...  we were obviously desperate and frantic   ...

  ...   and Kate was getting hysterical at this point, erm, she, you know, screaming, erm, because she just wanted somebody who she felt was doing, doing something that was going to make a difference  ...

Yep, so they were hysterical, we get that. Not hysterical enough to ask for a priest though but hysterical enough not to be able to verbalise that their children may need medical help. How does that work then ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 02:41:54 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 23, 2019, 01:45:27 PM
You are wrong.

Not only does Fiona describe a heartrending and awful scenario in the aftermath of discovering their child was missing ... she describes the hysteria of both Kate and Gerry.

_______________________________________________________________


  ...  but I do remember her coming back, erm, you know, I never will forget'.  ...  she sort of raced back and she just appeared at the doors of the sort of reception area and just shouted across, erm, 'She's gone. Gerry, Madeleine's gone'. And, you know, well you can just imagine the shock maybe.  ...

  ...  panic was starting really  ...

  ...  1485  ...  'How was Kate''
  ...  Reply  ...  'Awful, erm, I've never seen such horrible raw emotion in my life and I've seen a lot of it in my job. Erm, tut, she, she was just bereft, she didn't know what to do, she was just panicking, extremely frightened, extremely frightened for Madeleine ...
  ...  And the helplessness  ...  she was angry, really angry, tut, punching walls, kicking walls, she was covered in bruises the next day, because she just didn't know what, what else to do. She was angry at herself, she kept saying 'I've let her down. We've let her down Gerry', you know, 'We should have been here'. Erm, tut, she was praying a lot. Erm, I just don't think she knew what to do, what to do. And she was just howling. It was just, just awful.  ...  but she wasn't functioning

  ...  from the moment Kate discovered that Madeleine was gone, the screaming and the shouting and there was a lot of noise ...

  ... This was all in immediate panic' ...

  ...  at that point she was just in no state to be left alone ...

  ...  I know Gerry phoned his sister, Trish, and he was just sobbing and hysterical on the phone' ...

  ...  we were obviously desperate and frantic   ...

  ...   and Kate was getting hysterical at this point, erm, she, you know, screaming, erm, because she just wanted somebody who she felt was doing, doing something that was going to make a difference  ...

Just the kind of scenario which would result in absolute panic at the thought that her remaining children might not be breathing. No such reaction was onserved, however, not even basic first aid advice was followed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 02:47:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 02:41:54 PM
Just the kind of scenario which would result in absolute panic at the thought that her remaining children might not be breathing. No such reaction was onserved, however, not even basic first aid advice was followed.
So what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 02:48:05 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 23, 2019, 02:33:33 PM
Yep, so they were hysterical, we get that. Not hysterical enough to ask for a priest though but hysterical enough not to be able to verbalise that their children may need medical help. How does that work then ?
So what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 23, 2019, 02:51:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 02:41:54 PM
Just the kind of scenario which would result in absolute panic at the thought that her remaining children might not be breathing. No such reaction was onserved, however, not even basic first aid advice was followed.

Might I refer you once again to Fiona Payne's rogatory statement http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm where she as a practising anaesthetist assessed the twins as being "fine" and "sleeping"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 02:51:42 PM
You people think this point is hugely significant but won't spell out why you think it is important to keep going on and on about it - please explain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 23, 2019, 02:59:05 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 23, 2019, 02:51:12 PM
Might I refer you once again to Fiona Payne's rogatory statement http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm where she as a practising anaesthetist assessed the twins as being "fine" and "sleeping"

Just by looking ? Makes you wander why the NHS squanders money on blood tests, machines and things like that, doesn’t it when all that is really needed is for a traumatised tourist to have a quick shufty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 03:10:31 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 23, 2019, 02:59:05 PM
Just by looking ? Makes you wander why the NHS squanders money on blood tests, machines and things like that, doesn’t it when all that is really needed is for a traumatised tourist to have a quick shufty.
Did she make a wrong call?  What is the significance of all this wrt to disappearance of Madeleine McCann?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 03:29:43 PM
Come on sceptics - it's got to be one of the following reasons, which one do you think?
1) Lack of interest or care in whether the twins survived the night or not
2) Knew all along that the twins were fine and that sedatives were not involved (even though their heavy sleep was considered odd by the police)
3) Concern for the twins was outweighed by frantic worry about Madeleine so relied on observation only.

If you've got any more possible reasons please add to the list, or does considering the possible reasons for the decisions made on that night not interest you because it forces you to think logically? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 06:53:56 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 23, 2019, 02:51:12 PM
Might I refer you once again to Fiona Payne's rogatory statement http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm where she as a practising anaesthetist assessed the twins as being "fine" and "sleeping"

It depends what Fiona was talling about. At the rime of being interviewed she knew the twins were 'fine' and 'sleeping'. That doesn't mean she knew that on 3rd. She tells us what she thought on 3rd;

 at the time it did seem weird, I remember thinking, you know, when the Police came they turned the lights on, there was loads of noise, obviously from the moment Kate discovered that Madeleine was gone, the screaming and the shouting and there was a lot of noise and they, they didn't, you know, so much as blink'.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 07:05:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 06:53:56 PM
It depends what Fiona was talling about. At the rime of being interviewed she knew the twins were 'fine' and 'sleeping'. That doesn't mean she knew that on 3rd. She tells us what she thought on 3rd;

 at the time it did seem weird, I remember thinking, you know, when the Police came they turned the lights on, there was loads of noise, obviously from the moment Kate discovered that Madeleine was gone, the screaming and the shouting and there was a lot of noise and they, they didn't, you know, so much as blink'.
Weird, but not overly concerning as the children were breathing normally and not in any apparent distress.  So what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 23, 2019, 07:07:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 06:53:56 PM
It depends what Fiona was talling about. At the rime of being interviewed she knew the twins were 'fine' and 'sleeping'. That doesn't mean she knew that on 3rd. She tells us what she thought on 3rd;

 at the time it did seem weird, I remember thinking, you know, when the Police came they turned the lights on, there was loads of noise, obviously from the moment Kate discovered that Madeleine was gone, the screaming and the shouting and there was a lot of noise and they, they didn't, you know, so much as blink'.

Of course if the parents had sedated the children themselves I’m sure they wouldn’t have wanted them tested.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 07:09:06 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 23, 2019, 07:07:12 PM
Of course if the parents had sedated the children themselves I’m sure they wouldn’t have wanted them tested.
Yeah, I'm sure they'd rather they die, than have them tested (which of course they would have been in such an eventuality).  So it seems Faithlilly believes the parents really don't care about the well-being of the twins - option 1.  Anyone else?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 07:14:08 PM
Remember, Faithlilly's theory is that the parents WANTED Madeleine's body to be found quickly which is why they hid  it in a bin ( *%87)  In such an eventuality the body would have been found to contain sedative drugs, according to Faithlilly's theory which would have matched any found in the twins.  Faithlilly;s theory is that the McCanns would have blamed this all on the abductor, so why wouldn't they have wanted the twins tested that night?  Makes no sense at all this theory, I'm sure you'll all agree.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 23, 2019, 07:28:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 06:53:56 PM
It depends what Fiona was talling about. At the rime of being interviewed she knew the twins were 'fine' and 'sleeping'. That doesn't mean she knew that on 3rd. She tells us what she thought on 3rd;

 at the time it did seem weird, I remember thinking, you know, when the Police came they turned the lights on, there was loads of noise, obviously from the moment Kate discovered that Madeleine was gone, the screaming and the shouting and there was a lot of noise and they, they didn't, you know, so much as blink'.

Everything is in the syntax ... Fiona might have thought it strange that the children slept through the police arrival ... but she did so only after ascertaining and forming the professional opinion that the twins were "fine" and "sleeping" while under continued close observation and close monitoring.

She of course had the advantage of being there to enable her to form her opinion which I think may well outweigh your speculation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 23, 2019, 07:31:48 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 23, 2019, 07:28:31 PM
Everything is in the syntax ... Fiona might have thought it strange that the children slept through the police arrival ... but she did so only after ascertaining and forming the professional opinion that the twins were "fine" and "sleeping" while under continued close observation and close monitoring.

She of course had the advantage of being there to enable her to form her opinion which I think may well outweigh your speculation.

How long exactly did this observation take because I’m sure she and Kate spent most of the night in Kate’s bedroom with the door shut ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 08:51:16 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 23, 2019, 07:28:31 PM
Everything is in the syntax ... Fiona might have thought it strange that the children slept through the police arrival ... but she did so only after ascertaining and forming the professional opinion that the twins were "fine" and "sleeping" while under continued close observation and close monitoring.

She of course had the advantage of being there to enable her to form her opinion which I think may well outweigh your speculation.

You have no evidence that Fiona ascertained anything, formed any [rofessional opinion or that anyone continued to monitor and observe the twins. Those are all assumptions.

Fiona tells us that 'fairly soon' Emma Knight arrived and from then on until the GNR arrived it was Kate, Emma and herself in the apartment with Gerry and David 'coming and going'.

Emma mentions no concerns about the twins and no monitoring or observation of them;

I went to the McCann's apartment, entered by the patio doors and introduced myself to Kate and Mrs Payne. I entered the apartment living room and Kate and Mrs Payne stayed in the main bedroom, from where I could hear them both crying.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EMMA-LOUISE.htm

When Silvia Batista and the GNR arrived the twins were in the bedroom with the door closed.;

She also recalls entering in the room where Madeleine should be sleeping and remembers now that the door was closed. The room was dark. The blinds were down, some light entering through their holes. The windows were closed and the curtains slightly open. Gerry, who followed her and the elements of the GNR, said he did close the window because of the babies sleeping in the room, a fact she confirms.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 09:01:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 08:51:16 PM
You have no evidence that Fiona ascertained anything, formed any [rofessional opinion or that anyone continued to monitor and observe the twins. Those are all assumptions.

Fiona tells us that 'fairly soon' Emma Knight arrived and from then on until the GNR arrived it was Kate, Emma and herself in the apartment with Gerry and David 'coming and going'.

Emma mentions no concerns about the twins and no monitoring or observation of them;

I went to the McCann's apartment, entered by the patio doors and introduced myself to Kate and Mrs Payne. I entered the apartment living room and Kate and Mrs Payne stayed in the main bedroom, from where I could hear them both crying.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EMMA-LOUISE.htm

When Silvia Batista and the GNR arrived the twins were in the bedroom with the door closed.;

She also recalls entering in the room where Madeleine should be sleeping and remembers now that the door was closed. The room was dark. The blinds were down, some light entering through their holes. The windows were closed and the curtains slightly open. Gerry, who followed her and the elements of the GNR, said he did close the window because of the babies sleeping in the room, a fact she confirms.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm
How many minutes was Batista in the apartment before the police turned up and the twins were moved?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 10:02:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 23, 2019, 09:01:31 PM
How many minutes was Batista in the apartment before the police turned up and the twins were moved?

Silvia entered with the GNR at about 11.15. She remained there. The PJ appeared after midnight, chucked everyone out and asked for a new apartment to be organised. I don't know how long it took to arrange that and take the twins out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 10:09:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 10:02:23 PM
Silvia entered with the GNR at about 11.15. She remained there. The PJ appeared after midnight, chucked everyone out and asked for a new apartment to be organised. I don't know how long it took to arrange that and take the twins out.
At what point in the evening was Kate checking on their breathing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 10:33:46 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 23, 2019, 10:09:36 PM
At what point in the evening was Kate checking on their breathing?

She places it before the arrival of the GNR. She doesn't say it continued after they arrived.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 23, 2019, 10:48:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 10:33:46 PM
She places it before the arrival of the GNR. She doesn't say it continued after they arrived.
Does she give a minute by minute account of her actions during that period? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 24, 2019, 09:41:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 08:51:16 PM
You have no evidence that Fiona ascertained anything, formed any [rofessional opinion or that anyone continued to monitor and observe the twins. Those are all assumptions.

Fiona tells us that 'fairly soon' Emma Knight arrived and from then on until the GNR arrived it was Kate, Emma and herself in the apartment with Gerry and David 'coming and going'.

Emma mentions no concerns about the twins and no monitoring or observation of them;

I went to the McCann's apartment, entered by the patio doors and introduced myself to Kate and Mrs Payne. I entered the apartment living room and Kate and Mrs Payne stayed in the main bedroom, from where I could hear them both crying.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EMMA-LOUISE.htm

When Silvia Batista and the GNR arrived the twins were in the bedroom with the door closed.;

She also recalls entering in the room where Madeleine should be sleeping and remembers now that the door was closed. The room was dark. The blinds were down, some light entering through their holes. The windows were closed and the curtains slightly open. Gerry, who followed her and the elements of the GNR, said he did close the window because of the babies sleeping in the room, a fact she confirms.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm

Fiona knew the twins were just sleeping,   maybe they moved position,  this is a sign that they wouldn't be unconscious.  I doubt very much that Fiona would leave the twins die of sedation.  IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 24, 2019, 09:44:03 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 23, 2019, 02:33:33 PM
Yep, so they were hysterical, we get that. Not hysterical enough to ask for a priest though but hysterical enough not to be able to verbalise that their children may need medical help. How does that work then ?

Asking for a priest shows how hysterical Kate was IMO  she felt the only way she could help Madeleine was through prayer,  she obviously out of her mind with worry.   Maybe she wasn't able to verbalise properly to the Police that she thought the twins may have been sedated,   that is why they ignored her.  IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 24, 2019, 09:53:51 AM
Quote from: Lace on January 24, 2019, 09:44:03 AM
Asking for a priest shows how hysterical Kate was IMO  she felt the only way she could help Madeleine was through prayer,  she obviously out of her mind with worry.   Maybe she wasn't able to verbalise properly to the Police that she thought the twins may have been sedated,   that is why they ignored her.  IMO

Did Silvia Batista ignore her too ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 24, 2019, 10:02:45 AM
I wasn't aware that it was necessary to have a priest present in order to pray.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 24, 2019, 10:12:19 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 24, 2019, 09:53:51 AM
Did Silvia Batista ignore her too ?

Could be she couldn't understand what Kate was trying to say,  and just said the twins were sleeping through the noise.

They didn't interview Kate the next day,  she was too traumatised,  which tells me she wasn't functioning at all.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 24, 2019, 10:14:04 AM
Quote from: jassi on January 24, 2019, 10:02:45 AM
I wasn't aware that it was necessary to have a priest present in order to pray.

I'm not religious,  but I think they have the Priest pray with them and bless Madeleine etc.  I don't know,  it was something that Kate obviously wanted at the time of feeling helpless.   IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 24, 2019, 10:44:40 AM
Quote from: Lace on January 24, 2019, 10:14:04 AM
I'm not religious,  but I think they have the Priest pray with them and bless Madeleine etc.  I don't know,  it was something that Kate obviously wanted at the time of feeling helpless.   IMO

I do not believe it is unusual for Catholics to seek solace from a priest in times of crisis; what I find unusual is that individuals find it necessary to question Kate's need for a priest and prayers for Madeleine to the extent it was satirised in Amaral's book and documentary and has continued on internet fora many years after the event.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 24, 2019, 11:15:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 23, 2019, 08:51:16 PM
You have no evidence that Fiona ascertained anything, formed any [rofessional opinion or that anyone continued to monitor and observe the twins. Those are all assumptions.

Fiona tells us that 'fairly soon' Emma Knight arrived and from then on until the GNR arrived it was Kate, Emma and herself in the apartment with Gerry and David 'coming and going'.

Emma mentions no concerns about the twins and no monitoring or observation of them;

I went to the McCann's apartment, entered by the patio doors and introduced myself to Kate and Mrs Payne. I entered the apartment living room and Kate and Mrs Payne stayed in the main bedroom, from where I could hear them both crying.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EMMA-LOUISE.htm

When Silvia Batista and the GNR arrived the twins were in the bedroom with the door closed.;

She also recalls entering in the room where Madeleine should be sleeping and remembers now that the door was closed. The room was dark. The blinds were down, some light entering through their holes. The windows were closed and the curtains slightly open. Gerry, who followed her and the elements of the GNR, said he did close the window because of the babies sleeping in the room, a fact she confirms.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm

So, what have we learned by these people.
1. Kate was not all that concerned as she didnt' scream for help as her twins may be in danger, but she screamed and wanted a priest. OK
2. As if on a mission - she complains that the police did nothing when she 'screams'?  mentions? her twins may be in danger get them to a hospital

3. apparently they didn't want to wake the twins- so the trampled all over the room- lights on - off, windows closed (suspected crime scene tampered with) by Gerry- shutters almost down?

Yes, it does NOT make a lot of sense.

On anothrer point SILVIA mentions how dark it was in that bedroom. If that was the case, how could Gerry see Maddie lying on her bed the night she disappeared?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 24, 2019, 11:26:22 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 24, 2019, 11:15:38 AM

So, what have we learned by these people.
1. Kate was not all that concerned as she didnt' scream for help as her twins may be in danger, but she screamed and wanted a priest. OK
2. As if on a mission - she complains that the police did nothing when she 'screams'?  mentions? her twins may be in danger get them to a hospital

3. apparently they didn't want to wake the twins- so the trampled all over the room- lights on - off, windows closed (suspected crime scene tampered with) by Gerry- shutters almost down?

Yes, it does NOT make a lot of sense.

On anothrer point SILVIA mentions how dark it was in that bedroom. If that was the case, how could Gerry see Maddie lying on her bed the night she disappeared?

Kate was not functioning,  do you know what that means?    She had found her daughter missing,  according to you she should have been behaving normally,  calmly.   You are unable to imagine what distress Kate was in and wanting a priest for comfort,   that just shows what state she was in,  desperate, helpless.

Gerry went out to see if the shutters could be opened from the outside,  they could,  that means they were broken.   They searched the room for Madeleine,  wouldn't you have?

It was earlier in the evening when Gerry did his check so lighter outside.   All IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 24, 2019, 11:28:29 AM
Miss Taken Identity,   by the way not making excuses for the McCann's,   just have a different view to you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 24, 2019, 11:30:18 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 24, 2019, 11:15:38 AM

So, what have we learned by these people.
1. Kate was not all that concerned as she didnt' scream for help as her twins may be in danger, but she screamed and wanted a priest. OK
2. As if on a mission - she complains that the police did nothing when she 'screams'?  mentions? her twins may be in danger get them to a hospital

3. apparently they didn't want to wake the twins- so the trampled all over the room- lights on - off, windows closed (suspected crime scene tampered with) by Gerry- shutters almost down?

Yes, it does NOT make a lot of sense.

On anothrer point SILVIA mentions how dark it was in that bedroom. If that was the case, how could Gerry see Maddie lying on her bed the night she disappeared?

I think we have learned nothing from the nit picking that has taken place on the internet over the years except for perhaps witnessing the portrayal of a side of human nature it would have been impossible to envisage otherwise.

Is there anyone who really imagines that today's investigations by the Judicial Police and Scotland Yard are stuck in the time-warp of the minutia of files written many years ago and have not progressed the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance well into the present day?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 24, 2019, 12:01:29 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 24, 2019, 11:28:29 AM
Miss Taken Identity,  by the way not making excuses for the McCann's,   just have a different view to you.

That's a change, for many supporters spend their life doing just that. - IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 24, 2019, 12:31:52 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 24, 2019, 11:30:18 AM
I think we have learned nothing from the nit picking that has taken place on the internet over the years except for perhaps witnessing the portrayal of a side of human nature it would have been impossible to envisage otherwise.

Is there anyone who really imagines that today's investigations by the Judicial Police and Scotland Yard are stuck in the time-warp of the minutia of files written many years ago and have not progressed the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance well into the present day?



People are going to talk about this and the parents behaviour wether you like it or not. You and the McCanns do not have control of peoples thoughts - censorship just doesn't work that way. It only makes those being censored more interesting and believed. And using this forum  as a personal punch bag to moan about it will not change a thing.

I am glad to say &%54%
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 24, 2019, 12:51:14 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 24, 2019, 11:30:18 AM
I think we have learned nothing from the nit picking that has taken place on the internet over the years except for perhaps witnessing the portrayal of a side of human nature it would have been impossible to envisage otherwise.

Is there anyone who really imagines that today's investigations by the Judicial Police and Scotland Yard are stuck in the time-warp of the minutia of files written many years ago and have not progressed the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance well into the present day?

With OG and the PJ allegedly looking at woke and wondered, present day doesn't even come into it,best add a imo I suppose
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 24, 2019, 01:02:47 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 24, 2019, 12:51:14 PM
With OG and the PJ allegedly looking at woke and wondered, present day doesn't even come into it,best add a imo I suppose

The problem as I see it is taking what suits from whatever a tabloid chooses to print without any provenance whatsoever;  or did I miss the information of "woke and wandered" released by the Judicial Police and Scotland Yard.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 24, 2019, 01:14:27 PM


Allegedly


used to convey that something is claimed to be the case or have taken place, although there is no proof.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 24, 2019, 01:16:14 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 24, 2019, 01:14:27 PM

Allegedly


used to convey that something is claimed to be the case or have taken place, although there is no proof.

Could be a mistaken attempt to excuse Libel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 24, 2019, 01:23:03 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 24, 2019, 12:31:52 PM


People are going to talk about this and the parents behaviour wether you like it or not. You and the McCanns do not have control of peoples thoughts - censorship just doesn't work that way. It only makes those being censored more interesting and believed. And using this forum  as a personal punch bag to moan about it will not change a thing.

I am glad to say &%54%

I am sorry to say that I think you are correct that a rump of individuals will continue to discuss conspiracy theories on the internet whatever the outcome if any, of Madeleine's case should be.

I think though that the intense scrutiny of case material carried out by the Judicial Police and Scotland Yard started in 2010 and ending with enough evidence to allow the search for the miscreants who took her to be resumed in 2013 has largely drawn the poison from the sting of such conspiracy theorists.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 24, 2019, 01:32:12 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 24, 2019, 01:14:27 PM

Allegedly


used to convey that something is claimed to be the case or have taken place, although there is no proof.

Yes I did notice your use of "allegedly" in justification of tabloid speculation ... don't you think it is terribly strange that the investigative authorities don't feature in either in their rehash or have made any comment before, during or since?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 24, 2019, 01:39:30 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 24, 2019, 01:23:03 PM
I am sorry to say that I think you are correct that a rump of individuals will continue to discuss conspiracy theories on the internet whatever the outcome if any, of Madeleine's case should be.

I think though that the intense scrutiny of case material carried out by the Judicial Police and Scotland Yard started in 2010 and ending with enough evidence to allow the search for the miscreants who took her to be resumed in 2013 has largely drawn the poison from the sting of such conspiracy theorists.

Ah, but I wasn't talking about the Bennetts and other loonie toons. I am talking about actual and factual reports which challenges  the parents version of accounts.  The parents and supporters have had free reign for too long- based on hysterical accounts by distraught parents- alledgedly. One minute they are too distraught, then years later they can't recall due to memory lapses, then they can recall other things without memory lapses.

As my gran would say *selective memory* The truth never changes- regardless of the winners and losers.

Aint that the truth!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 24, 2019, 01:59:06 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 24, 2019, 01:32:12 PM
Yes I did notice your use of "allegedly" in justification of tabloid speculation ... don't you think it is terribly strange that the investigative authorities don't feature in either in their rehash or have made any comment before, during or since?

Good to see there is a realisation that tabloid speculation is the last thing to be relied on for cites.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 24, 2019, 02:30:06 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 24, 2019, 01:39:30 PM
Ah, but I wasn't talking about the Bennetts and other loonie toons. I am talking about actual and factual reports which challenges  the parents version of accounts.  The parents and supporters have had free reign for too long- based on hysterical accounts by distraught parents- alledgedly. One minute they are too distraught, then years later they can't recall due to memory lapses, then they can recall other things without memory lapses.

As my gran would say *selective memory* The truth never changes- regardless of the winners and losers.

Aint that the truth!

Do you seriously believe there are "winners and losers" in the games people play with their intrusion and obsession into the lives of others?

Of course the truth changes when all the information is considered and analysed.  The "100% DNA" truth rapidly becoming the lie when the forensic results were returned and properly understood being just one example.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 24, 2019, 02:33:05 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 24, 2019, 01:59:06 PM
Good to see there is a realisation that tabloid speculation is the last thing to be relied on for cites.

I've known it for some time which is probably why I didn't fall for the tabloid headline I think you may have.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 24, 2019, 02:34:44 PM
I don't fall for anything which is probably why I'm on a certain side of the fence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 24, 2019, 04:39:34 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on January 24, 2019, 01:39:30 PM
Ah, but I wasn't talking about the Bennetts and other loonie toons. I am talking about actual and factual reports which challenges  the parents version of accounts.  The parents and supporters have had free reign for too long- based on hysterical accounts by distraught parents- alledgedly. One minute they are too distraught, then years later they can't recall due to memory lapses, then they can recall other things without memory lapses.

As my gran would say *selective memory* The truth never changes- regardless of the winners and losers.

Aint that the truth!

Or, despite being hysterical and non-functioning, they can assess the condition of a patient simply by laying hands on them in a dark room.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on January 24, 2019, 05:05:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 24, 2019, 04:39:34 PM
Or, despite being hysterical and non-functioning, they can assess the condition of a patient simply by laying hands on them in a dark room.

That’s the problem with having to be all things to all arguments.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 24, 2019, 05:47:08 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 24, 2019, 10:12:19 AM
Could be she couldn't understand what Kate was trying to say,  and just said the twins were sleeping through the noise.

They didn't interview Kate the next day,  she was too traumatised,  which tells me she wasn't functioning at all.

I’ve a feeling I could show you footage of Kate not asking for help and you would still believe her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 24, 2019, 06:01:29 PM
I’m going to ask it again as it seems such an important issue, but - so what? Kate didn’t insist the twins were rushed to hospital.  What can we glean from this vital snippet on information which gets regurgitated with alarming regularity on this forum.  It’s obviously very relevant but why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on February 01, 2019, 01:47:20 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 24, 2019, 06:01:29 PM
I’m going to ask it again as it seems such an important issue, but - so what? Kate didn’t insist the twins were rushed to hospital.  What can we glean from this vital snippet on information which gets regurgitated with alarming regularity on this forum.  It’s obviously very relevant but why?

It is all relevent to piece together the parents version of what may have happpened to their daughter. THEY seem to not want any other possible scenario to be looked at- even after no evidence of an stranger intruder carrying MBM away has been found!

And this is ofcourse a forum for MBM. Even though it smacks of PR for and on behalf of the Parents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 01, 2019, 02:23:27 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on January 24, 2019, 05:47:08 PM
I’ve a feeling I could show you footage of Kate not asking for help and you would still believe her.

I took into account what the Police said in their statements what Amaral said and what Kate said she did,  I didn't come to my conclusion by what Kate said alone.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 01, 2019, 02:29:49 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on February 01, 2019, 01:47:20 PM
It is all relevent to piece together the parents version of what may have happpened to their daughter. THEY seem to not want any other possible scenario to be looked at- even after no evidence of an stranger intruder carrying MBM away has been found!

And this is ofcourse a forum for MBM. Even though it smacks of PR for and on behalf of the Parents.
You haven’t explained how it is relevant only claimed that (in your opinion) it is. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 01, 2019, 03:43:13 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 01, 2019, 02:23:27 PM
I took into account what the Police said in their statements what Amaral said and what Kate said she did,  I didn't come to my conclusion by what Kate said alone.

The police didn’t mention Kate asking for help for the twins. Silvia Batista didn’t mention Kate asking for help. None of their friends mention Kate asking for help. Gerry doesn’t mention Kate asking for help.....so I’m the face of all the evidence you still think she did.....why ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 07, 2019, 09:42:46 PM
By portugalresident  2019-02-06

Posted  2019-02-06 

Judge who ‘condoned’ vicious attack on woman with nail-spiked club gets off with a warning

Joaquim Neto de Moura – the judge who essentially ruled that domestic violence is okay when applied to an adulteress – has been sanctioned by his peers… to the lightest possible ‘punishment’ of all: a warning.

His co-judge, who signed off on the ruling that ‘went viral’ in 2017 (without apparently even reading it ) – saw the disciplinary case against her archived.

Say reports in the Portuguese press today, it was the president of the Supreme Court of Justice who ‘saved’ Neto de Moura’s proverbial bacon.

Four members of the superior council of magistrates wanted to ‘fine him’, explains Diário de Notícias, while four were in favour of simply giving him a warning.

Thus the president had the final vote – and he “chose the lighter term”.

DN also stresses that “in spite of various rulings having been identified in which Neto de Moura used the same “justification or argument” for belittling cases of domestic violence against women – always arguing that the victim’s adultery, whether real or suspected, was the cause of the aggression – the council only set out to pronounce on the most recent case”: the one that saw the UK Guardian comment that “ultra-orthodox patriarchy – one of the cornerstones of the fascist dictatorship of António Salazar up until the 1974 revolution – still survives in parts of Portugal”.

This has been a dismal chapter for Portuguese justice and it comes in a week when a violent father, who had been repeatedly denounced to the authorities by his terrified ex-partner, stabbed his mother-in-law to death and then strangled his own baby daughter before committing suicide.

The ‘institutional failings’ that led to this week’s tragedies are, say pundits, part-and-parcel of the mindset of elements of the judiciary, of which Neto de Moura is simply one example.

Talking on her regular TV slot before the ‘sanction’ was made public, commentator Manuela Moura Guedes said she was “shocked” – not simply by Neto de Moura’s words and rulings, but by the fact that seven fellow judges on the superior council of magistrates had actually wanted the disciplinary case against him archived.

These seven abstained from voting in the final instance, which is why in the end only eight magistrates were involved.

“This judge should not stay in office ”, Moura Guedes told news anchors. “Women are not the property of men”.

Neto de Moura, however, is not even content to accept his ‘warning’. His lawyer has told Lusa news agency that he means to appeal.

WHAT IS THIS ALL ABOUT?

The story goes back years and was neatly explained by the Washington Post as a situation in which “a married Portuguese woman began seeing another man. The affair was brief — and after two months, the woman wanted to end it.

“In response, the woman’s former lover turned to her husband, telling him his wife had been unfaithful. The couple divorced. But the two men, both enraged, worked together to plan an attack on the woman.

“In June 2015, the former paramour kidnapped the woman and held her down while the ex-husband beat her viciously with a nail-spiked club, leaving bruises and lashes all over her body.

“After charges were filed in the assault, the ex-husband was given a 15-month suspended sentence and a fine of about $2,000.

“A prosecutor thought he deserved a harsher sentence, and asked an appeals court in Porto, Portugal’s second largest city, for prison time of three years and six months.

“But the appeals judges (of which Neto de Moura was the boss) decided against it.

“Why? Because they felt it was somewhat understandable that a husband in a “depressive state” would act out against an ex-wife who had betrayed him”.

Neto de Moura’s 20-page ruling quoted passages from the Bible “in which one can read that an adulterous women should be punished with death”, cited cultures still in existence where “adulterous women are stoned to death” and even quoted the penal code of 1886 which “not so long ago punished with a little more than a symbolic penalty a man who, believing his wife to be an adulteress, kills her”.

The document insisted that “the adultery of a woman is a very serious attack on the honour and dignity of (her) man”.

The case prompted outrage and street protests in both Lisbon and Porto.

Left-wing MP Catarina Martins joined calls for Neto de Moura’s ‘removal from all cases involving domestic violence’ saying: ““We know that this is not a one-off isolated case for this judge”, and stressing that “only 16% of complaints about domestic violence get to court and in more than 90% condemnations result in suspended sentences”.

Nonetheless, there are those who believe this ruling sends a powerful message to the judiciary.

It is the first time any judge has been ‘disciplined’ in this way, says Inês Ferreira Leite, lecturer in penal law – and this explains the reason perhaps for magistrates being divided.

“We all want judges to have the liberty of decision” she told reporters, “but a ruling like the one in question is intolerable in light of contemporary social conceptions and the fact that it contradicts the Constitution”.

It was absolutely right that Neto de Moura’s justifications and expressions were censured, she said.

It now remains to be seen if the judge really does move forwards with an appeal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The old boys' club really do like to look after their own IMO. It really does make you wonder how unbiased any SCJ ruling is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 07, 2019, 09:49:29 PM
Quote from: misty on February 07, 2019, 09:42:46 PM
By portugalresident  2019-02-06

Posted  2019-02-06 

Judge who ‘condoned’ vicious attack on woman with nail-spiked club gets off with a warning

Joaquim Neto de Moura – the judge who essentially ruled that domestic violence is okay when applied to an adulteress – has been sanctioned by his peers… to the lightest possible ‘punishment’ of all: a warning.

His co-judge, who signed off on the ruling that ‘went viral’ in 2017 (without apparently even reading it ) – saw the disciplinary case against her archived.

Say reports in the Portuguese press today, it was the president of the Supreme Court of Justice who ‘saved’ Neto de Moura’s proverbial bacon.

Four members of the superior council of magistrates wanted to ‘fine him’, explains Diário de Notícias, while four were in favour of simply giving him a warning.

Thus the president had the final vote – and he “chose the lighter term”.

DN also stresses that “in spite of various rulings having been identified in which Neto de Moura used the same “justification or argument” for belittling cases of domestic violence against women – always arguing that the victim’s adultery, whether real or suspected, was the cause of the aggression – the council only set out to pronounce on the most recent case”: the one that saw the UK Guardian comment that “ultra-orthodox patriarchy – one of the cornerstones of the fascist dictatorship of António Salazar up until the 1974 revolution – still survives in parts of Portugal”.

This has been a dismal chapter for Portuguese justice and it comes in a week when a violent father, who had been repeatedly denounced to the authorities by his terrified ex-partner, stabbed his mother-in-law to death and then strangled his own baby daughter before committing suicide.

The ‘institutional failings’ that led to this week’s tragedies are, say pundits, part-and-parcel of the mindset of elements of the judiciary, of which Neto de Moura is simply one example.

Talking on her regular TV slot before the ‘sanction’ was made public, commentator Manuela Moura Guedes said she was “shocked” – not simply by Neto de Moura’s words and rulings, but by the fact that seven fellow judges on the superior council of magistrates had actually wanted the disciplinary case against him archived.

These seven abstained from voting in the final instance, which is why in the end only eight magistrates were involved.

“This judge should not stay in office ”, Moura Guedes told news anchors. “Women are not the property of men”.

Neto de Moura, however, is not even content to accept his ‘warning’. His lawyer has told Lusa news agency that he means to appeal.

WHAT IS THIS ALL ABOUT?

The story goes back years and was neatly explained by the Washington Post as a situation in which “a married Portuguese woman began seeing another man. The affair was brief — and after two months, the woman wanted to end it.

“In response, the woman’s former lover turned to her husband, telling him his wife had been unfaithful. The couple divorced. But the two men, both enraged, worked together to plan an attack on the woman.

“In June 2015, the former paramour kidnapped the woman and held her down while the ex-husband beat her viciously with a nail-spiked club, leaving bruises and lashes all over her body.

“After charges were filed in the assault, the ex-husband was given a 15-month suspended sentence and a fine of about $2,000.

“A prosecutor thought he deserved a harsher sentence, and asked an appeals court in Porto, Portugal’s second largest city, for prison time of three years and six months.

“But the appeals judges (of which Neto de Moura was the boss) decided against it.

“Why? Because they felt it was somewhat understandable that a husband in a “depressive state” would act out against an ex-wife who had betrayed him”.

Neto de Moura’s 20-page ruling quoted passages from the Bible “in which one can read that an adulterous women should be punished with death”, cited cultures still in existence where “adulterous women are stoned to death” and even quoted the penal code of 1886 which “not so long ago punished with a little more than a symbolic penalty a man who, believing his wife to be an adulteress, kills her”.

The document insisted that “the adultery of a woman is a very serious attack on the honour and dignity of (her) man”.

The case prompted outrage and street protests in both Lisbon and Porto.

Left-wing MP Catarina Martins joined calls for Neto de Moura’s ‘removal from all cases involving domestic violence’ saying: ““We know that this is not a one-off isolated case for this judge”, and stressing that “only 16% of complaints about domestic violence get to court and in more than 90% condemnations result in suspended sentences”.

Nonetheless, there are those who believe this ruling sends a powerful message to the judiciary.

It is the first time any judge has been ‘disciplined’ in this way, says Inês Ferreira Leite, lecturer in penal law – and this explains the reason perhaps for magistrates being divided.

“We all want judges to have the liberty of decision” she told reporters, “but a ruling like the one in question is intolerable in light of contemporary social conceptions and the fact that it contradicts the Constitution”.

It was absolutely right that Neto de Moura’s justifications and expressions were censured, she said.

It now remains to be seen if the judge really does move forwards with an appeal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The old boys' club really do like to look after their own IMO. It really does make you wonder how unbiased any SCJ ruling is.
Absolute bloody joke.  8()(((@#
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 07, 2019, 10:39:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 07, 2019, 09:49:29 PM
Absolute bloody joke.  8()(((@#
  ... and unconstitutional into the bargain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 13, 2019, 10:22:49 AM
Following the setting up of Operation Grange Sir Paul Stephenson was questioned by the London Assembly. He said something very inyeresting;

The Government will reimburse the Met on a quarterly basis as the review goes on, he said.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/49may11/BELFAST_T_26_05-2011.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 13, 2019, 11:40:34 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 13, 2019, 10:22:49 AM
Following the setting up of Operation Grange Sir Paul Stephenson was questioned by the London Assembly. He said something very inyeresting;

The Government will reimburse the Met on a quarterly basis as the review goes on, he said.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/49may11/BELFAST_T_26_05-2011.htm
He was referring to the review and not the re-investigation wasn’t he?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sunny on February 13, 2019, 01:20:38 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 01, 2019, 02:23:27 PM
I took into account what the Police said in their statements what Amaral said and what Kate said she did,  I didn't come to my conclusion by what Kate said alone.
Could you provide cites where the Police said that Kate had alerted them to the twins condition on the night of 3rd May 2007 please.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 14, 2019, 11:34:48 PM
Quote from: Sunny on February 13, 2019, 01:20:38 PM
Could you provide cites where the Police said that Kate had alerted them to the twins condition on the night of 3rd May 2007 please.   
There would be no cites for this other than what Kate could claim in her book.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on February 17, 2019, 03:12:58 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 14, 2019, 11:34:48 PM
There would be no cites for this other than what Kate could claim in her book.

That is the problem with Kate's Book. a lot cannot be independantly verified. she is just writing her version with some wee bits added on or removed to suit her agenda. IMO. The Blacksmiths  blog mentions a great deal about some annomolies.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 05, 2019, 09:43:10 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/2019/03/04/judge-pilloried-in-press-for-rulings-on-domestic-violence-sues-dozens/
By portugalresident  2019-03-04

The extraordinary news emerged over the weekend: Judge Joaquim Neto de Moura – the man pilloried in the press recently over his controversial decisions in cases of domestic violence – has decided to sue everyone who has either publicly derided or made fun of him.

The list is said to include at least 20 politicians, journalists, commentators and cartoonists, and this is only the beginning.

The judge’s lawyer told reporters on Saturday: “We are still looking into all the people who have offended his dignity. We cannot accept that a State governed by law can insult someone”.

Catarina Martins, leader of the country’s Left Bloc whose MP Mariana Mortágua is among those already made the subject of ‘civil actions’, has quipped that Neto de Moura will ultimately have to sue ‘most of the whole country’.

Indeed his arguably most controversial decision – to reduce sentencing on two men who battered an adulterous woman, on the basis that ‘adultery is a grave attack on a man’s honour and dignity’ – has also been the subject of derision within the international press.

The UK Guardian for example, concluded its report on the story that hit national headlines two years ago, saying it showed that “ultra-orthodox patriarchy – one of the cornerstones of the fascist dictatorship of António Salazar up until the 1974 revolution – still survives in parts of Portugal”, while the Washington Post commented that Neto de Moura and his supporting magistrate on the bench “felt it was somewhat understandable that a husband in a depressive state would act out against an ex-wife who had betrayed him”.

This situation comes in a year when domestic violence has been brought sharply into focus: 11 women have been killed since the start of the year, prompting the creation of the first ‘national day of mourning’ for victims of domestic violence (click here).

It also shines a light on Portugal’s laws of defamation which critics say need bringing up to speed with the 21st century.

This is still a country where anyone can take out a civil case against another party for so-called offences against one’s honour.

Over 9000 people delivered a petition to parliament last year, calling for an end to the law which they denounce as “medieval and obsolete” (click here).

Meantime, some of the ‘insults’ thrown at Judge Neto include contentions that he needs a ‘psychological exam’, that he is “an insult to all judges”, and that he reaches his decisions on the basis of his own personal feelings.

Neto de Moura has been a judge for the last 30 years.

Say reports, he is known as the ‘judge who does not laugh’.

His retaliation against critics follows two recent rulings. The one referring to the woman beaten (with a nail spiked club) for her adultery, and another in which he removed an electronic bracelet from a man who had beaten his former partner so badly that her eardrum ruptured (click here).

The first ruling has led to him being given a ‘warning’ by the Supreme Court of Justice (click here).

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

The judge obviously feels he has the law on his side.  ?>)()<
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 06, 2019, 03:20:44 PM

So Portugal is still in The Dark Ages, and those Elders of The Judiciary are not to be trusted to be impartial.  Well, I knew that already.  Doesn't everyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on March 08, 2019, 02:56:53 PM
Quote from: misty on March 05, 2019, 09:43:10 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/2019/03/04/judge-pilloried-in-press-for-rulings-on-domestic-violence-sues-dozens/
By portugalresident  2019-03-04

The extraordinary news emerged over the weekend: Judge Joaquim Neto de Moura – the man pilloried in the press recently over his controversial decisions in cases of domestic violence – has decided to sue everyone who has either publicly derided or made fun of him.

The list is said to include at least 20 politicians, journalists, commentators and cartoonists, and this is only the beginning.

The judge’s lawyer told reporters on Saturday: “We are still looking into all the people who have offended his dignity. We cannot accept that a State governed by law can insult someone”.

Catarina Martins, leader of the country’s Left Bloc whose MP Mariana Mortágua is among those already made the subject of ‘civil actions’, has quipped that Neto de Moura will ultimately have to sue ‘most of the whole country’.

Indeed his arguably most controversial decision – to reduce sentencing on two men who battered an adulterous woman, on the basis that ‘adultery is a grave attack on a man’s honour and dignity’ – has also been the subject of derision within the international press.

The UK Guardian for example, concluded its report on the story that hit national headlines two years ago, saying it showed that “ultra-orthodox patriarchy – one of the cornerstones of the fascist dictatorship of António Salazar up until the 1974 revolution – still survives in parts of Portugal”, while the Washington Post commented that Neto de Moura and his supporting magistrate on the bench “felt it was somewhat understandable that a husband in a depressive state would act out against an ex-wife who had betrayed him”.

This situation comes in a year when domestic violence has been brought sharply into focus: 11 women have been killed since the start of the year, prompting the creation of the first ‘national day of mourning’ for victims of domestic violence (click here).

It also shines a light on Portugal’s laws of defamation which critics say need bringing up to speed with the 21st century.

This is still a country where anyone can take out a civil case against another party for so-called offences against one’s honour.

Over 9000 people delivered a petition to parliament last year, calling for an end to the law which they denounce as “medieval and obsolete” (click here).

Meantime, some of the ‘insults’ thrown at Judge Neto include contentions that he needs a ‘psychological exam’, that he is “an insult to all judges”, and that he reaches his decisions on the basis of his own personal feelings.

Neto de Moura has been a judge for the last 30 years.

Say reports, he is known as the ‘judge who does not laugh’.

His retaliation against critics follows two recent rulings. The one referring to the woman beaten (with a nail spiked club) for her adultery, and another in which he removed an electronic bracelet from a man who had beaten his former partner so badly that her eardrum ruptured (click here).

The first ruling has led to him being given a ‘warning’ by the Supreme Court of Justice (click here).

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

The judge obviously feels he has the law on his side.  ?>)()<




No system is perfect- how about this having an effect on a child of 3 being left alone by her parents- to be'abducted'? Nothing to see here...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 08, 2019, 03:06:16 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on March 08, 2019, 02:56:53 PM



No system is perfect- how about this having an effect on a child of 3 being left alone by her parents- to be'abducted'? Nothing to see here...

The Portuguese Prosecutors https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2504246/Madeleine-McCann-files-Portuguese-prosecutors-criticise-police.html went out of their way to exonerate the parents from blame and gave very succinct and humane reasons for doing so.
What a shame that humanity has not been replicated by some which I think may well have made life a bit easier for the actual perpetrator/s.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 08, 2019, 05:02:40 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 08, 2019, 03:06:16 PM
The Portuguese Prosecutors https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2504246/Madeleine-McCann-files-Portuguese-prosecutors-criticise-police.html went out of their way to exonerate the parents from blame and gave very succinct and humane reasons for doing so.
What a shame that humanity has not been replicated by some which I think may well have made life a bit easier for the actual perpetrator/s.

The Supreme Court Judges went out of their way to quote chunks of the archiving dispatch where the prosecutors expressed their doubts about the story told by the parents and Jane Tanner, about the timeline and the possibility of Madeleine being alive.

Had they been bending over backwards  to exonerate them why did they include details of those doubts in their dispatch?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 08, 2019, 05:50:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 08, 2019, 05:02:40 PM
The Supreme Court Judges went out of their way to quote chunks of the archiving dispatch where the prosecutors expressed their doubts about the story told by the parents and Jane Tanner, about the timeline and the possibility of Madeleine being alive.

Had they been bending over backwards  to exonerate them why did they include details of those doubts in their dispatch?
If you think for one nano second that the public prosecutors bent over backwards to 'exonerate' the McCanns I rather think you are barking up the wrong tree.

They went by the evidence and they went by the law and the archiving dispatch was the result.

The supreme court judges quoted from the existing files and the final PJ report from which the public prosecutors constructed their ruling exonerating the McCanns and Murat. 

I haven't as yet rationalised the significance of judges in a civil case overturning a legal dispatch concerning a criminal case ... maybe the ECHR will explain?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 08, 2019, 08:52:33 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 08, 2019, 05:50:52 PM
If you think for one nano second that the public prosecutors bent over backwards to 'exonerate' the McCanns I rather think you are barking up the wrong tree.

They went by the evidence and they went by the law and the archiving dispatch was the result.

The supreme court judges quoted from the existing files and the final PJ report from which the public prosecutors constructed their ruling exonerating the McCanns and Murat. 

I haven't as yet rationalised the significance of judges in a civil case overturning a legal dispatch concerning a criminal case ... maybe the ECHR will explain?

So sorry, I was under the impression that was your opinion;

Snip/
The Portuguese Prosecutors went out of their way to exonerate the parents from blame
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg514769#msg514769

I think you'll find the prosecutors quoted the archiving dispatch, not the PJ report.

The Supreme Court Judges examined the archiving dispatch for one reason only; the McCann's lawyers brought it up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on March 08, 2019, 10:21:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 08, 2019, 08:52:33 PM
So sorry, I was under the impression that was your opinion;

Snip/
The Portuguese Prosecutors went out of their way to exonerate the parents from blame
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg514769#msg514769

I think you'll find the prosecutors quoted the archiving dispatch, not the PJ report.

The Supreme Court Judges examined the archiving dispatch for one reason only; the McCann's lawyers brought it up.

Some people can get so excited about mis quoting to fit an agenda. NO ONE has exonerated the McCanns of anything on the basis  THE crime has not been established!

They have not been charged- because the Crime has not been established- due to LACK of proscecutable evidence

- by not being established they do not believe in the abduction story put forward ny McCann and Co. Hence not exonerated.

 ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 08, 2019, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 08, 2019, 08:52:33 PM
So sorry, I was under the impression that was your opinion;

Snip/
The Portuguese Prosecutors went out of their way to exonerate the parents from blame
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg514769#msg514769

I think you'll find the prosecutors quoted the archiving dispatch, not the PJ report.

The Supreme Court Judges examined the archiving dispatch for one reason only; the McCann's lawyers brought it up.

Did the public prosecutors Jose de Magalhaes and Joao Melchior Gomes magic up the content of the archiving dispatch from thin air?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on March 08, 2019, 11:18:55 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 08, 2019, 11:15:30 PM
Did the public prosecutors Jose de Magalhaes and Joao Melchior Gomes magic up the content of the archiving dispatch from thin air?


Many seniors also opined that the McCanns should have been charged with neglect or some such other 'crime' to take some responsibility about a childs disappearance.  Funny you don't copy and paste those bits...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 08, 2019, 11:30:35 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on March 08, 2019, 11:18:55 PM

Many seniors also opined that the McCanns should have been charged with neglect or some such other 'crime' to take some responsibility about a childs disappearance.  Funny you don't copy and paste those bits...
How about this one for you direct from the public prosecutors themselves ...
Snip
Mr Magalhaes defended the McCanns' decision to leave their children alone in the apartment on the night Madeleine vanished.

There was speculation that the couple, from Rothley in Leicestershire, may have ben charged with "abandonment", which can incur a prison sentence of up to 10 years.

But Mr Magalhaes said Mr and Mrs McCann did not believe their children were in any danger when they left Madeleine and her younger twin siblings.

"It is obvious that neither of the defendants, Gerald or Kate, acted with intent," they said.

"They could not predict that the resort where they had chosen to spend a few days holiday would leave the lives of any of their children in danger.

"It was located in a quiet place, where the majority of residents are foreign citizens of the same nationality and without any known history of this type of crime.

"Although they left their daughter alone with her siblings in the apartment, sometimes for extended periods, it is true that, in any case, they were keeping an eye on them."

Both prosecutors went on to say that they felt the parents had suffered enough.

"We must also recognise that the parents are already paying a heavy penalty - the disappearance of Madeleine - for their carelessness in monitoring and protecting their children.

"It seems obvious to us that the crimes of exposure or abandonment can be eliminated."

Mr Magalhaes said all the theories – including the possibility that the couple had accidentally killed their daughter and disposed of her body – had come to nothing.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2504246/Madeleine-McCann-files-Portuguese-prosecutors-criticise-police.html

I believe that might be summed up as "bending over backwards" to exonerate two bereft parents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on March 08, 2019, 11:33:37 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 08, 2019, 11:30:35 PM
How about this one for you direct from the public prosecutors themselves ...
Snip
Mr Magalhaes defended the McCanns' decision to leave their children alone in the apartment on the night Madeleine vanished.

There was speculation that the couple, from Rothley in Leicestershire, may have ben charged with "abandonment", which can incur a prison sentence of up to 10 years.

But Mr Magalhaes said Mr and Mrs McCann did not believe their children were in any danger when they left Madeleine and her younger twin siblings.

"It is obvious that neither of the defendants, Gerald or Kate, acted with intent," they said.

"They could not predict that the resort where they had chosen to spend a few days holiday would leave the lives of any of their children in danger.

"It was located in a quiet place, where the majority of residents are foreign citizens of the same nationality and without any known history of this type of crime.

"Although they left their daughter alone with her siblings in the apartment, sometimes for extended periods, it is true that, in any case, they were keeping an eye on them."

Both prosecutors went on to say that they felt the parents had suffered enough.

"We must also recognise that the parents are already paying a heavy penalty - the disappearance of Madeleine - for their carelessness in monitoring and protecting their children.

"It seems obvious to us that the crimes of exposure or abandonment can be eliminated."

Mr Magalhaes said all the theories – including the possibility that the couple had accidentally killed their daughter and disposed of her body – had come to nothing.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2504246/Madeleine-McCann-files-Portuguese-prosecutors-criticise-police.html

I believe that might be summed up as "bending over backwards" to exonerate two bereft parents.

The telegraph?  you believe?
pfft!

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 08, 2019, 11:58:18 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on March 08, 2019, 11:33:37 PM
The telegraph?  you believe?
pfft!
Yes I do because I have read the archiving dispatch ... but for those who doubt, taken directly from the translated dispatch ...
Snip
It seems evident to us and because the files contain enough elements for such, that the crime of exposure or abandonment according to article 138 of the Penal Code can be eliminated from that range:
 
“1 – Whoever places another person’s life in danger,
 
a) By exposing her in a location where she is subject to a situation from which she, on her own, cannot defend herself against; or
 
b) Abandoning her without defence, whenever the agent had the duty to guard her, to watch over her or to assist her;”
 
This legal type of crime is only fulfilled with intent, and this intent has to cover the creation of danger to the victim’s life, as well as the absence of a capacity to defend herself, on the victim’s behalf. In the case of the files and facing the elements that were collected it is evident that none of the arguidos Gerald or Kate acted with intent. The parents could not foresee that in the resort that they chose to spend a brief holiday, they could place the life of any of their children in danger, nor was that demanded from them: it was located in a peaceful area, where most of the residents are foreign citizens of the same nationality and without any known history of this type of criminality.

The parents didn’t even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children that were in their respective apartments.
 
Reinforcing what was said is also the fact that despite leaving their daughter alone with her siblings in the apartment during more or less dilated moments, it is certain that in any case they checked on them. Without any pretension or compensatory effect, we must also recognise that the parents already expiate a heavy penalty – the disappearance of Madeleine – due to their lack of caution in the surveillance and protection of their children.
 
Concerning the other indicated crimes, they are no more than that and despite our perception that, due to its high degree of probability, the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded, such cannot be more than a mere supposition, due to the lack of sustaining elements in the files.
 
The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics’ conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.
 
To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media – before the police – was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous.
 
Even if, hypothetically, one could admit that Gerald and Kate McCann might be responsible over the child’s death, it would still have to be explained how, where through, when, with what means, with the help of whom and where to they freed themselves of her body within the restricted time frame that would have been available to them to do so. Their daily routine, until the 3rd of May, had been circumscribed to the narrow borders of the ‘Ocean Club’ resort and to the beach that lies next to it, unknowing the surrounding terrain and, apart from the English friends that were with them on holiday there, they had no known friends or contacts in Portugal.

The parents didn’t even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children that were in their respective apartments.
 
Reinforcing what was said is also the fact that despite leaving their daughter alone with her siblings in the apartment during more or less dilated moments, it is certain that in any case they checked on them. Without any pretension or compensatory effect, we must also recognise that the parents already expiate a heavy penalty – the disappearance of Madeleine – due to their lack of caution in the surveillance and protection of their children.
 
Concerning the other indicated crimes, they are no more than that and despite our perception that, due to its high degree of probability, the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded, such cannot be more than a mere supposition, due to the lack of sustaining elements in the files.
 
The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics’ conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.
 
To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media – before the police – was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous.
 
Even if, hypothetically, one could admit that Gerald and Kate McCann might be responsible over the child’s death, it would still have to be explained how, where through, when, with what means, with the help of whom and where to they freed themselves of her body within the restricted time frame that would have been available to them to do so. Their daily routine, until the 3rd of May, had been circumscribed to the narrow borders of the ‘Ocean Club’ resort and to the beach that lies next to it, unknowing the surrounding terrain and, apart from the English friends that were with them on holiday there, they had no known friends or contacts in Portugal.
http://madeleinemccann.org/blog/2014/04/20/the-pjs-final-report-the-archiving-dispatch/

There is more ... I recommend you read it all ... as it may serve to allow you a better understanding of more aspects of the case based on the limited information we have to hand.
There must be so much more available now ... this dispatch was signed off in 2008 ... there's all the information from the intervening years available to the police but not to us.  Which is as it should be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 09, 2019, 09:06:53 AM
The most salient piece from the archive being.

Quote
Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively – the most dramatic – to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.

Still remains the case today,thats why its where its at.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 09, 2019, 10:04:28 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 09, 2019, 09:06:53 AM
The most salient piece from the archive being.

Still remains the case today,thats why its where its at.

Do you really think that time has stood still in investigative terms since the archiving dispatch was published back in 2008 with nothing more being gleaned in the intervening years?

That may be "that's why its where its at" in 2008.  That was then ... this is now ... and things have moved on.

Before you say anything NB the archive of 2008 was published at the close of play as far as the Portuguese were concerned.
We haven't reached that stage yet in 2019 ... so there is more to come,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 09, 2019, 10:38:19 AM
Oh its moved on alright a few paces in fact according to the rags last November, walking out herself rather than a bogey man taking her out of a window.

Quote
BRITISH police are re-examining the theory that Madeleine McCann walked out of her family’s Portugal holiday apartment to look for her parents.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1050074/madeleine-mccann-Praia-da-Luz-algarve-portugal-police-scotland-yard-kate-gerry-mccann
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 09, 2019, 11:04:22 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 09, 2019, 10:38:19 AM
Oh its moved on alright a few paces in fact according to the rags last November, walking out herself rather than a bogey man taking her out of a window.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1050074/madeleine-mccann-Praia-da-Luz-algarve-portugal-police-scotland-yard-kate-gerry-mccann
You go with uncorroborated press speculation if it keeps you happy ... I'm content to bide my time and wait for the official version of what is actually happening to be released.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 09, 2019, 11:06:24 AM
Quote from: Brietta on March 09, 2019, 11:04:22 AM
You go with uncorroborated press speculation if it keeps you happy ... I'm content to bide my time and wait for the official version of what is actually happening to be released.


Hopefully you'll bear that in mind when you next cite a news article.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 09, 2019, 11:14:12 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 09, 2019, 11:06:24 AM

Hopefully you'll bear that in mind when you next cite a news article.

I consider the cites I choose to post very carefully indeed.  Surprised you hadn't clocked that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on March 09, 2019, 12:02:27 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 09, 2019, 11:14:12 AM
I consider the cites I choose to post very carefully indeed.  Surprised you hadn't clocked that.

But we had...like this one from your good self on the 3rd of February.


“I really don't know why they bother.  Just yet another illustration of an own goal over a fuss about nothing ... if I didn't know better I would think it was nothing but an attempt to throw a spanner into the works.


Snip
"Two of the allegations made against the cops were withdrawn and the final one was dropped by Scotland Yard when they decided there was no case to answer ...
____________________________________________________

One said: “Because the precise details of the allegations aren’t made public, it’s entirely possible good officers have been subjected to a complaints process even though there may be little merit in the allegations against them.”
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/757467/Madeleine-McCann-police-investigated-misconduct-Kate-Gerry-McCann-Portugal-missing-person?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+daily-star-latest-news+%28Daily+Star+%3A%3A+News+Feed%29”

The Daily Star ? Really ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on March 10, 2019, 01:41:30 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 09, 2019, 11:14:12 AM
I consider the cites I choose to post very carefully indeed.  Surprised you hadn't clocked that.

If you stop quoting the press you can call us names ....untill then...

The daily Star???? ^*&& (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 10, 2019, 03:17:05 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on March 10, 2019, 01:41:30 PM
If you stop quoting the press you can call us names ....untill then...

The daily Star???? ^*&& (&^&

Sorry ... I find that unintelligible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 18, 2019, 09:22:39 AM
Not relevant to the McCann case but I think it brings a bit of reality to just what SY can be expected to do.


Claudia Lawrence disappeared ten years ago, not a child who some imagine to be easily smuggled but a fully grown woman,not a trace has been found since,nine persons have been arrested in connection but no charges have been laid through lack of evidence,the police believe the answer lies locally.


Now compare this to a crime committed far away,just what do people in all honesty  expect from SY when a local force cannot solve a case with out it seems that local vital clue.

I suspect the same answer to the Mccann case can be explained to be the same as the Lawrence headline.


Quote
Ten years on, Claudia Lawrence search frustrated by withheld information
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/crime/ten-years-on-claudia-lawrence-search-frustrated-by-withheld-information/ar-BBUTwYB?ocid=spartandhp
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on March 18, 2019, 05:36:06 PM
Just to let everyone know that John Blacksmith has sadly passed away. I will be raising a glass to him tonight.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 18, 2019, 05:40:28 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on March 18, 2019, 05:36:06 PM
Just to let everyone know that John Blacksmith has sadly passed away. I will be raising a glass to him tonight.

I agree ...whatever our diferences...sad news
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 18, 2019, 05:42:42 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on March 18, 2019, 05:36:06 PM
Just to let everyone know that John Blacksmith has sadly passed away. I will be raising a glass to him tonight.


Not heard that,where have you seen that faith?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on March 18, 2019, 05:54:22 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 18, 2019, 05:42:42 PM

Not heard that,where have you seen that faith?

It has been announced on the maddiecasefiles by Astro Barrier.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 18, 2019, 06:04:07 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on March 18, 2019, 05:54:22 PM
It has been announced on the maddiecasefiles by Astro Barrier.


Many thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 21, 2019, 06:39:04 PM
From the Judge’s sentencing report in the Alesha McPhail case, which puts paid to the following myths:
1) burglars don’t steal children
2) children would scream the place down if abducted from their beds

(Not to mention the myth that a child can be taken by an abductor who leaves no physical evidence, and the myth that having responsible adults in the house prevents abductions from happening at all).

“Your account in brief was that you had been drinking but wanted cannabis and decided to break into the house to get some. You took a kitchen knife because you wanted to protect yourself but having gained entry you left the house and disposed of it. You returned to the house and entered Alesha's bedroom.

Amongst other things Dr Macpherson records that you told him that you had consumed one and a half bottles of wine between 8pm and 8.30 pm but that you did not feel intoxicated, although you told the social worker that you still felt the effects of it. You were not under the influence of any illicit substances.

He records that when you saw Alesha your reaction, according to you, was as follows:

"... A moment of opportunity... At any other time in life, murder wouldn't have been the conclusion. If I was a year younger I don't think I would have done it. ... All I thought about was killing her once I saw her.

You told both Dr Macpherson and the social worker in some detail what you did. You said that Alesha was drowsy and became a bit more awake when you went outside. At one point she asked who you were and where you were going. You said you were a friend of her father's and that you were taking her home.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 22, 2019, 10:37:41 PM
Kate Stewart: Madeleine McCann has become nothing but a lucrative business
WHANGANUI CHRONICLE | Opinion

Yes, I'm an occasional columnist, of questionable repute, but I'm always a human being who is entitled to voice my own opinion in other forums.

A right I use, albeit occasionally. A right that, in sheer outrage, I felt forced to voice on the NZH Facebook page when I read of the latest bullshit story circulating about Madeleine McCann.


We were captivated from day one ... but 4000 or so days later, I'm just gonna jump right in and say I'm over it. Enough is enough.

Next please. #yawn

No surprises there really, most governments are more than happy to spend big on anything they think will gain them favour in the public eye.

As a true crime buff of more than 35 years, I've studied this case from day one and prided myself in researching it, beyond what MSM would have me believe.

I've seen live videotaped footage of the best cadaver dogs in the world, at the time, alerting on two locations in the holiday apartment before alerting on the car, dogs with a 100 per cent strike rate ... until this case.

The dogs' findings, however, were buried better than a bone!
Facts such as these were not conducive to gathering millions of pounds in public and state-funded donations.

I've also seen documented evidence that shows every person the McCann's hired, at great expense, was either bent, a crook or a swindling opportunist prepared to perpetuate the lie that Maddy was abducted.

What predatory child abductor is going to leave behind two even younger kids and just happen to time the kidnapping to the short window between alleged adult checks?

The hopeful and gullible may have had their doubts in the beginning but this case stank like a dirty diaper from day one.

Many of us picked up on it, just like the dogs did.

That instinctual feeling that we're constantly being told not to ignore because it's usually right.


https://www.nzherald.co.nz/wanganui-chronicle/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503423&objectid=12212915


(This article has been edited in order to comply with forum rules)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 23, 2019, 08:53:27 AM
Mail on line are doing a three parter on the unsolved murder of Jill Dando,a small piece immeadiately jumped out at me.

"The unusual lack of forensic evidence at the crime scene would become a hallmark of the Dando case. And it was not absent because of the cunning of the killer, as we shall see in Part 2"


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6840799/Jill-Dandos-murder-20-years-fresh-witness-accounts-raise-disturbing-questions.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 23, 2019, 10:13:02 AM
Hamish Campbell was the SIO of Operation Grange when it was set up. His boss was Simon Foy and Campbell appointed DCI Andy Redwood as his IO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 23, 2019, 10:14:19 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 23, 2019, 08:53:27 AM
Mail on line are doing a three parter on the unsolved murder of Jill Dando,a small piece immeadiately jumped out at me.

"The unusual lack of forensic evidence at the crime scene would become a hallmark of the Dando case. And it was not absent because of the cunning of the killer, as we shall see in Part 2"


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6840799/Jill-Dandos-murder-20-years-fresh-witness-accounts-raise-disturbing-questions.html

That was a most interesting read.  Many  *&(+(+
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 23, 2019, 05:34:51 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 23, 2019, 08:53:27 AM
Mail on line are doing a three parter on the unsolved murder of Jill Dando,a small piece immeadiately jumped out at me.

"The unusual lack of forensic evidence at the crime scene would become a hallmark of the Dando case. And it was not absent because of the cunning of the killer, as we shall see in Part 2"


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6840799/Jill-Dandos-murder-20-years-fresh-witness-accounts-raise-disturbing-questions.html
Very interesting indeed, but what relevance do you see that I don’t to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 23, 2019, 10:25:12 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on March 23, 2019, 05:34:51 PM
Very interesting indeed, but what relevance do you see that I don’t to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann?

The same people investigated both cases, just like the Cipriano and McCann cases. The Cipriano case is alleged by some to have been a miscarriage of justice. The conviction of Barry George was overturned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 23, 2019, 10:28:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 23, 2019, 10:25:12 PM
The same people investigated both cases, just like the Cipriano and McCann cases. The Cipriano case is alleged by some to have been a miscarriage of justice. The conviction of Barry George was overturned.
Tenuous.  There were no charges or convictions brought in the Madeleine case while Andy Redwood was in charge, and he hasn’t been in charge for years.  So what exactly is the point?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 27, 2019, 11:14:48 PM
They want me in a Zodiac Killer documentary but not bothered.

Hello pathfinder,

The following is an e-mail sent to you by via your account on
"Zodiackillersite.com". If this message is spam, contains abusive or other
comments you find offensive please contact the webmaster of the board at
the following address:

@@@@zodiackillersite.com

Include this full e-mail (particularly the headers). Please note that the
reply address to this e-mail has been set to that of ****.

Message sent to you follows
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello,

My name's @@@@ and I'm a documentary filmmaker from the UK. I'm
currently working on a film about the legacy of the Zodiac case, and I was
hoping you might be willing to speak to me about Rick Marshall.

The film is funded by Field of Vision and exec produced by Oscar-winner
Laura Poitras.

The film will present the stories of a number of key suspects in the Zodiac
case. I'm keen to include all the most credible theories and have spent the
last six months reading everything I can get my hands on. Your posts from
the forum about Rick Marshall are the most concise, persuasive account I've
read of his ties to the case, and I'd love to interview you for the film if
possible.

The interview would be audio-only, so it would just involve me and a sound
recordist travelling out to you. Questions would be strictly about the case
and your suspect, and you could be credited as "pathfinder" or "anonymous"
if you wanted to be, or under your real name.

It'd be great to hear from you either way. Let me know if you have any
questions about the project, or want to hop on the phone at some point to
discuss it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 28, 2019, 12:01:45 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 27, 2019, 11:14:48 PM
They want me in a Zodiac Killer documentary but not bothered.

Hello pathfinder,

The following is an e-mail sent to you by via your account on
"Zodiackillersite.com". If this message is spam, contains abusive or other
comments you find offensive please contact the webmaster of the board at
the following address:

@@@@zodiackillersite.com

Include this full e-mail (particularly the headers). Please note that the
reply address to this e-mail has been set to that of ****.

Message sent to you follows
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello,

My name's @@@@ and I'm a documentary filmmaker from the UK. I'm
currently working on a film about the legacy of the Zodiac case, and I was
hoping you might be willing to speak to me about Rick Marshall.

The film is funded by Field of Vision and exec produced by Oscar-winner
Laura Poitras.

The film will present the stories of a number of key suspects in the Zodiac
case. I'm keen to include all the most credible theories and have spent the
last six months reading everything I can get my hands on. Your posts from
the forum about Rick Marshall are the most concise, persuasive account I've
read of his ties to the case, and I'd love to interview you for the film if
possible.

The interview would be audio-only, so it would just involve me and a sound
recordist travelling out to you. Questions would be strictly about the case
and your suspect, and you could be credited as "pathfinder" or "anonymous"
if you wanted to be, or under your real name.

It'd be great to hear from you either way. Let me know if you have any
questions about the project, or want to hop on the phone at some point to
discuss it.

My advice to is to participate, and here's why.

I scrupulously rejected media advances until I realised that either I 'controlled' the media, or the media would cover 'my' agenda as they wished.

As most media have a surprisingly poor understanding of the MBM case, I found that I had to go back to basics.  I sat with a team from AFP having a drink outside Kelly's, and to my astonishment they had no idea why Kelly's was important. 

I you have expertise in the Zodiac case, seriously consider spreading some of it to a wider public.  The venture will go out with your expertise, or without.

Of course, the decision is entirely yours.  &^^&*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 28, 2019, 02:50:28 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on March 27, 2019, 11:14:48 PM
They want me in a Zodiac Killer documentary but not bothered.

Hello pathfinder,

The following is an e-mail sent to you by via your account on
"Zodiackillersite.com". If this message is spam, contains abusive or other
comments you find offensive please contact the webmaster of the board at
the following address:

@@@@zodiackillersite.com

Include this full e-mail (particularly the headers). Please note that the
reply address to this e-mail has been set to that of ****.

Message sent to you follows
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello,

My name's @@@@ and I'm a documentary filmmaker from the UK. I'm
currently working on a film about the legacy of the Zodiac case, and I was
hoping you might be willing to speak to me about Rick Marshall.

The film is funded by Field of Vision and exec produced by Oscar-winner
Laura Poitras.

The film will present the stories of a number of key suspects in the Zodiac
case. I'm keen to include all the most credible theories and have spent the
last six months reading everything I can get my hands on. Your posts from
the forum about Rick Marshall are the most concise, persuasive account I've
read of his ties to the case, and I'd love to interview you for the film if
possible.

The interview would be audio-only, so it would just involve me and a sound
recordist travelling out to you. Questions would be strictly about the case
and your suspect, and you could be credited as "pathfinder" or "anonymous"
if you wanted to be, or under your real name.

It'd be great to hear from you either way. Let me know if you have any
questions about the project, or want to hop on the phone at some point to
discuss it.

Without knowing very much about the case, I don't think you have anything to lose by contributing your opinion. Marshall certainly resembles some efits. However, from the little I have read, I do not think all the deaths attributed to the Zodiac killer were committed by the same person. Presumably the  latest DNA testing on the underside of the stamps produced no positive conclusions.
Why did the killings stop around 1970?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 28, 2019, 07:04:42 PM
Rick Marshall is not his real name. His walk was unique and it gave him away - those cops had him then let him go re Stine murder but what they described was very important when I was doing background checks on him. There's a lot more that I've posted on that forum  - his basement in SF etc. I've looked at the Zodiac case but not much as this one! Actually I've not posted a great deal on that forum but I do move quickly in these unsolved cases.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 29, 2019, 01:02:11 PM
Where were the nannies and children in this clip? It looks a bit like the Tapas entrance except for the staircase in the foreground.
https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/exterior-shots-of-the-ocean-club-apartments-after-the-news-footage/649701658
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 29, 2019, 05:23:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 29, 2019, 01:02:11 PM
Where were the nannies and children in this clip? It looks a bit like the Tapas entrance except for the staircase in the foreground.
https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/exterior-shots-of-the-ocean-club-apartments-after-the-news-footage/649701658
Are we looking at the entrance from the inside  rather than the more usual looking from the outside in?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 29, 2019, 07:27:16 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 29, 2019, 05:23:37 PM
Are we looking at the entrance from the inside  rather than the more usual looking from the outside in?

I thiught so until I zoomed out and noticed the staircase on the right in the foreground. I don't think there were stairs inside the inner door.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 29, 2019, 08:12:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 29, 2019, 07:27:16 PM
I thought so until I zoomed out and noticed the staircase on the right in the foreground. I don't think there were stairs inside the inner door.
I getting confused with all the references to inner and exterior.   The reception was a building with two doors.  One on to the footpath and the other to the pool side.   There appears to be 3 options on the inside (poolside).
1. Turn to the left
2. Go down some steps
3. Go up some steps.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 29, 2019, 09:20:30 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 29, 2019, 08:12:58 PM
I getting confused with all the references to inner and exterior.   The reception was a building with two doors.  One on to the footpath and the other to the pool side.   There appears to be 3 options on the inside (poolside).
1. Turn to the left
2. Go down some steps
3. Go up some steps.

It looks to me more like the main reception but it was allegedly filmed on 4th May and the McCann twins are there. We have been told that all the cildren went to the tented building at the Tapas complex on 4th.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 29, 2019, 09:31:13 PM
Steps from Tapas Reception leading to pool area
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on March 29, 2019, 09:36:34 PM


'DOWNRIGHT LIES' Madeleine McCann conspiracy theorists paying £172 for copies of memoir written by disgraced Portuguese cop Amaral as greedy book sellers cash in

The discredited book Truth of the Lie was written by disgraced former Portuguese detective Gonçalo Amaral, who led the bungled probe into Maddie's 2007 disappearance.


GREEDY book sellers are cashing in on the suffering of Gerry and Kate McCann by charging as much as £172 for a book the couple has branded "downright lies".

The Truth of the Lie was written by former Portuguese detective Gonçalo Amaral, who led the bungled probe into Maddie's 2007 disappearance.

(https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8738452/madeleine-mccann-portuguese-cop-amaral-memoir/#)

It has been listed for sale online - with asking prices reaching as high as £172
The controversial title was banned and Gerry and Kate were awarded around £375,000 in libel damages in 2015.

Amaral claims three-year-old Maddie died in the family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz and her parents Gerry and Kate faked her abduction to cover up the tragedy.

There has been a surge of interest in the book after he featured on a new Netflix documentary about Maddie.

Paperback copies translated into English have surfaced online, after it was only previously available in Portuguese, to cope with demand.

DZK Books EU in Buenos Aires is selling the book for £172 on Amazon with free delivery.

Paper Cavalier UK in London has the book priced at £146.99, with £2.80 postage.

One seller, from Blackburn, Lancs, who has copies for £9.99 on eBay, said: "It’s a tough one, isn’t it? I feel so sorry for the child. I dread to think what actually happened to her."

The book became a best-seller in Portugal when it was first published in 2008, selling more than 200,000 copies.

'GROSSLY DEFAMATORY'

It was banned for several years after the McCanns launched a legal action against Amaral in 2009, claiming the book was "unfounded and grossly defamatory".

In 2015, Kate and Gerry were awarded around £357,000 in libel damages by a Portuguese court. A judge also banned further sales of Amaral's book.

However, in April 2016, Amaral won an appeal against the decision, meaning he could sue them for damages potentially in the tens of thousands.

The McCann's lost a subsequent appeal in Portugal's Supreme Court in February 2017.

Top judges also ruled that Maddie's parents had not been ruled innocent with regard to their daughter's disappearance.

The McCanns, of Rothley, Leicestershire, have appealed to the European Court of Human Rights in a bid to silence Amaral.

The spotlight has been thrown back on the case by a new eight-part documentary called The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann on Netflix. The McCanns, both 51, refused to take part.

The Sun on Sunday revealed last week how the McCanns were hit with £29,500 in legal fees for Amaral, after losing their libel case.

By Corey Charlton
28th March 2019, 9:30 pmUpdated: 29th March 2019, 7:42 am

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8738452/madeleine-mccann-portuguese-cop-amaral-memoir/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 29, 2019, 09:37:15 PM
Aerial view of steps.
Bit of a nuisance having to crop all SS now due to 300kb size restriction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 29, 2019, 09:40:56 PM
Quote from: misty on March 29, 2019, 09:31:13 PM
Steps from Tapas Reception leading to pool area

Thanks Misty. Where are they coming from and going to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 29, 2019, 09:41:20 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on March 29, 2019, 09:36:34 PM

'DOWNRIGHT LIES' Madeleine McCann conspiracy theorists paying £172 for copies of memoir written by disgraced Portuguese cop Amaral as greedy book sellers cash in

The discredited book Truth of the Lie was written by disgraced former Portuguese detective Gonçalo Amaral, who led the bungled probe into Maddie's 2007 disappearance.


GREEDY book sellers are cashing in on the suffering of Gerry and Kate McCann by charging as much as £172 for a book the couple has branded "downright lies".

The Truth of the Lie was written by former Portuguese detective Gonçalo Amaral, who led the bungled probe into Maddie's 2007 disappearance.

(https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8738452/madeleine-mccann-portuguese-cop-amaral-memoir/#)

It has been listed for sale online - with asking prices reaching as high as £172
The controversial title was banned and Gerry and Kate were awarded around £375,000 in libel damages in 2015.

Amaral claims three-year-old Maddie died in the family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz and her parents Gerry and Kate faked her abduction to cover up the tragedy.

There has been a surge of interest in the book after he featured on a new Netflix documentary about Maddie.

Paperback copies translated into English have surfaced online, after it was only previously available in Portuguese, to cope with demand.

DZK Books EU in Buenos Aires is selling the book for £172 on Amazon with free delivery.

Paper Cavalier UK in London has the book priced at £146.99, with £2.80 postage.

One seller, from Blackburn, Lancs, who has copies for £9.99 on eBay, said: "It’s a tough one, isn’t it? I feel so sorry for the child. I dread to think what actually happened to her."

The book became a best-seller in Portugal when it was first published in 2008, selling more than 200,000 copies.

'GROSSLY DEFAMATORY'

It was banned for several years after the McCanns launched a legal action against Amaral in 2009, claiming the book was "unfounded and grossly defamatory".

In 2015, Kate and Gerry were awarded around £357,000 in libel damages by a Portuguese court. A judge also banned further sales of Amaral's book.

However, in April 2016, Amaral won an appeal against the decision, meaning he could sue them for damages potentially in the tens of thousands.

The McCann's lost a subsequent appeal in Portugal's Supreme Court in February 2017.

Top judges also ruled that Maddie's parents had not been ruled innocent with regard to their daughter's disappearance.

The McCanns, of Rothley, Leicestershire, have appealed to the European Court of Human Rights in a bid to silence Amaral.

The spotlight has been thrown back on the case by a new eight-part documentary called The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann on Netflix. The McCanns, both 51, refused to take part.

The Sun on Sunday revealed last week how the McCanns were hit with £29,500 in legal fees for Amaral, after losing their libel case.

By Corey Charlton
28th March 2019, 9:30 pmUpdated: 29th March 2019, 7:42 am

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8738452/madeleine-mccann-portuguese-cop-amaral-memoir/

It never bothered Amaral or his publishers enough to sue during the last 10 years various English versions have remained online. Good luck to anyone who can get £172 for selling a copy. Hilarious IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 29, 2019, 09:59:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 29, 2019, 09:40:56 PM
Thanks Misty. Where are they coming from and going to?

I have a vague recollection of reading only the main creche was open first thing on the Friday morning. The footage was shot in the morning. Presumably the Jellyfish group children who arrived were then taken to the other creche to the west of the Tapas Bar.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 29, 2019, 11:03:40 PM
If we Brexit on 12th April with no deal that means there are just two weeks left for the Portuguese to issue a EAW for the McCanns.  Why haven’t they done so as yet?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 30, 2019, 06:06:53 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on March 29, 2019, 11:03:40 PM
If we Brexit on 12th April with no deal that means there are just two weeks left for the Portuguese to issue a EAW for the McCanns.  Why haven’t they done so as yet?
Simliatrly If OG haven't come up with a solution it'll soon be over then.All those £millions and years for nowt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 30, 2019, 06:26:52 AM

There are some places from which there is no extradition.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 30, 2019, 07:15:27 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 30, 2019, 06:06:53 AM
Simliatrly If OG haven't come up with a solution it'll soon be over then.All those £millions and years for nowt.
Not entirely for nowt.  It gave you something to moan about for one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 30, 2019, 07:48:39 AM
Quote from: misty on March 29, 2019, 09:59:47 PM
I have a vague recollection of reading only the main creche was open first thing on the Friday morning. The footage was shot in the morning. Presumably the Jellyfish group children who arrived were then taken to the other creche to the west of the Tapas Bar.

The Tapas Creche was the only one open on 4th. It looks like they took that group out somewhere.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 30, 2019, 08:53:57 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 30, 2019, 07:48:39 AM
The Tapas Creche was the only one open on 4th. It looks like they took that group out somewhere.

So what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 30, 2019, 10:54:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 29, 2019, 09:40:56 PM
Thanks Misty. Where are they coming from and going to?
It is not a flat section.  Raised sun lounger area behind pool.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 30, 2019, 11:22:48 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on March 29, 2019, 11:03:40 PM
If we Brexit on 12th April with no deal that means there are just two weeks left for the Portuguese to issue a EAW for the McCanns.  Why haven’t they done so as yet?

If it arises Portugal can issue an international arrest warranr just as Sweden did with Assange. A more interesting question is what would happen to the McCann's application to the ECHR?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 30, 2019, 11:39:06 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 30, 2019, 11:22:48 AM
If it arises Portugal can issue an international arrest warranr just as Sweden did with Assange. A more interesting question is what would happen to the McCann's application to the ECHR?

why would brexit affect it...do you not realise the EcHR is not part of the EU
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 30, 2019, 12:24:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 30, 2019, 11:39:06 AM
why would brexit affect it

In theory it wouldn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 30, 2019, 12:30:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 30, 2019, 12:24:42 PM
In theory it wouldn't.

you posted,,,,...A more interesting question is what would happen to the McCann's application to the ECHR?...


so how would it be affected...or did you just not think about it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 07, 2019, 11:28:48 PM
Interesting article with some considerations for this case, if you care to read through...

Politicians may not even know they’re lying
Daniel FinkelsteinMay 7 2019, 5:00pm,
When Gavin Williamson swears he isn’t a leaker, it could be that he has really convinced himself he’s telling the truth


One day, on their way back from dinner in Washington DC, Leslie Meltzer and her husband Tyce Palmaffy saw something dreadful. They were stopped at some traffic lights watching a man slowly cycle towards them, when suddenly another man came out of nowhere and knocked the cyclist over. And then he began stabbing the cyclist as he lay on the ground.

I thought of this story when, last week, it was reported that the former defence secretary Gavin Williamson had sworn on his children’s lives that he was innocent of leaking the proceedings of the National Security Council. It seemed such an odd thing to say. What could possibly explain such vehemence?

Well, the first possibility is that Mr Williamson is just a rogue. He knows full well he did it but is willing to lie about it, even involving his children in his ghastly deceit. People do lie. Look at Jeffrey Archer. Or Jonathan Aitken. And Harvey Weinstein was quite fond of swearing on his children’s lives.

Another possibility, of course, is that Mr Williamson is, as he claims, not guilty at all. His oath may be crass, but you get pretty desperate when accused of something you didn’t do. It’s possible, isn’t it? People have been hanged in the past for crimes they didn’t commit. It has to be said that everyone I’ve talked to who is in the know seems completely confident that in Williamson they’ve got their man, but then again they would be, wouldn’t they?

There is, however, a third possibility. One that will sound almost ridiculous but is actually very plausible. Mr Williamson did it, but he can’t remember that he did it. He thinks he’s innocent. He is sure he didn’t do it. He’d swear on his kids’ lives. But all along, it was actually him.

Let’s go back to Palmaffy and Meltzer. In their book The Invisible Gorilla Christopher Chabris and Daniel Simons tell their story, recording how over the folowing six years the two began to remember the event in very different ways. Meltzer, for instance, remembers calling the US emergency number, 911, from the passenger seat while Palmaffy was driving. Palmaffy says he called 911 and Melzer was driving.

Still, by the time of this confusion years had gone by, so perhaps the differing recall is not that surprising and not at all like the Williamson case. What is more startling is that this divergence began during the 911 call. The moment after the stabbing. One of them thought the assailant was wearing jeans, the other sweatpants. They disagreed about how tall he was, the shirt he was wearing, even whether he might have been an African American or Hispanic.

In other words, we start creating false memories of things almost as soon as they happen. Palmaffy and Meltzer are typical. There is really a vast literature on this. As Julia Shaw says in her recent book The Memory Illusion, “Any event, no matter how important, emotional or traumatic it may seem, can be forgotten, misremembered, or even be entirely fictitious”.

More than that, we have little understanding that we do this. We are immensely confident in our own memory. We’d swear we were right on our kids’ lives.

A fascinating example of this confidence is provided by an ingenious study into memories of 9/11. Thinking quickly after the terrible terrorist attack, two psychologists (Jennifer Talarico and David Rubin) thought to gather a group of students the very next day and ask them what they were up to when they heard the news. They also asked them for another, less momentous, personal memory from the same week.

Over the coming days and months the psychologists returned to check the memories of their subjects. And as time passed the recollections changed, often quite radically. This was true of both 9/11 and of the personal events, and to the same degree. Yet while the subjects were willing to accept that they had forgotten the exact circumstances of the less important event, they were certain they were still right about 9/11. Even though they weren’t.

What that means is that you don’t remember exactly where you were when you heard that John F Kennedy was shot or what you were doing at the precise instance that you heard about 9/11. You just think you do.

The extent of our confidence in recollection was brought home to me recently when the shadow lord chancellor Richard Burgon got himself in trouble. He’d been accused of saying in a speech in 2016 that “Zionism is the enemy of peace”. He went on television to deny repeatedly that he had ever said such a thing. He couldn’t have done, he said, because he had no recall of it, there was no evidence of it and he didn’t think it. So he hadn’t said it. And then a video showed up. He had said it.

The lie appeared blatant. He tried denying it because he thought he’d get away with it and got caught. I got absolutely nowhere trying to explain to people that it was entirely plausible that Mr Burgon had forgotten what he said and was now amazed that he even thought it. It is particularly likely to happen when the new memory, vivid and strong, is more convenient or comfortable than the old one. When I talked about this to one of my colleagues he told me that if he ever wanted to commit fraud he would pick me as the target.

The memory issue arises again and again in politics. Hillary Clinton, for instance, has long been excoriated for her claim that she landed in Bosnia and had to run for cover to avoid sniper fire. Pictures emerged of her being greeted by smiling officials and an eight-year-old girl reading a poem.

Yet the guru of studies of false memories, Elizabeth Loftus, has shown beyond doubt that it is possible to remember very clearly things that did not happen. So, for example, she prompted subjects to recall seeing Bugs Bunny at Disneyland, when he is a Warner Brothers character. Or to remember, in some detail, being lost in a shopping mall when no such thing had happened.

We routinely conduct political discourse and even court cases on the basis that we witness things and remember them in an objective way, as if we were video cameras. But we are not.

For Gavin Williamson to admit to himself that he was responsible for the leak — he helped the journalist on his way, he confirmed what had been a hunch, he initiated the whole thing, whatever — would be psychologically very hard. Much easier to forget you did it. To really, really believe that you didn’t. But it’s not a good idea to swear your innocence on your children’s lives unless you aren’t fond of them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2019, 12:53:34 AM
"We WERE friends" WS and I were discussing this case on PM last week and both said he did it.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2019, 10:03:14 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2019, 12:53:34 AM
"We WERE friends" WS and I were discussing this case on PM last week and both said he did it.


Indeed, in this extended interview he say's towards the end they weren't romantically involved.

Jasmine Lovett and Aliyah Sanderson's live-in landlord speaks out following his arrest


https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/jasmine-lovett-and-aliyah-sanderson-s-live-in-landlord-speaks-out-following-his-arrest-1.4396334

“They were here on the next day. I went somewhere else and they weren’t here when I came back.”

The landlord says he is not responsible for their disappearance and disputes the likelihood that they're no longer alive. “Of course not. Of course not. Who says that they’re dead? That’s crazy. I don’t know where they are and that’s the biggest thing is…if they were dead than the CPS would know, right? But they’re not. They don’t know. That doesn’t necessarily mean it has anything to do with me.”

According to Leeming, police will find nothing incriminating during the search of his garage. "They will find nothing because I did nothing wrong."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 08, 2019, 10:10:24 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2019, 10:03:14 AM
Indeed, in this extended interview he say's towards the end they weren't romantically involved.

Jasmine Lovett and Aliyah Sanderson's live-in landlord speaks out following his arrest


https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/jasmine-lovett-and-aliyah-sanderson-s-live-in-landlord-speaks-out-following-his-arrest-1.4396334

“They were here on the next day. I went somewhere else and they weren’t here when I came back.”

The landlord says he is not responsible for their disappearance and disputes the likelihood that they're no longer alive. “Of course not. Of course not. Who says that they’re dead? That’s crazy. I don’t know where they are and that’s the biggest thing is…if they were dead than the CPS would know, right? But they’re not. They don’t know. That doesn’t necessarily mean it has anything to do with me.”

According to Leeming, police will find nothing incriminating during the search of his garage. "They will find nothing because I did nothing wrong."

Theres a update to this.

Briton Robert Leeming charged with murder of mother and daughter in Canada

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/05/07/briton-robert-leeming-rearrested-bodies-woman-daughter-found/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2019, 10:48:27 AM

Quote from: barrier on May 08, 2019, 10:10:24 AM
Theres a update to this.

Briton Robert Leeming charged with murder of mother and daughter in Canada

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/05/07/briton-robert-leeming-rearrested-bodies-woman-daughter-found/

Yes, I'm aware. 

Pathfinder & I were discussing this case in PM's.
We both knew he dunnit, on account of him being the last to see them & by way of his media interviews.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2019, 10:51:26 AM

Missing girl Maleah Davis: Stepfather tells of waking up after 24 hours
He says little girl was abducted after he was knocked unconscious

A Texas man whose 4-year-old stepdaughter is missing told police that he was knocked unconscious for nearly 24 hours and when he awoke at the side of a highway the girl was gone.

Darion Vence said he was driving to the Houston airport Friday night to pick up the girl’s mother, with the girl — Maleah Davis — and his 1-year-old son in the car.

On Highway 59 near the airport, he said, he heard a “popping noise,” like a popped tire, and pulled over to check on it. That’s when a blue pickup truck pulled up behind the car and two Hispanic males got out, according to Vence’s narrative to police.

One of the men commented, “Maleah looks very nice, looks very sweet,” according to Vence’s account.

The other man hit Vence in the head and he lost consciousness, he told police.

At one point, Vence said, he woke up and he was in the back of the truck with Maleah and her brother. Three Hispanic males were also in the vehicle.

He then passed out again, and when he awoke around 6 p.m. Saturday he was at the side of Highway 6 in the west Houston suburb of Sugar Land, about 40 miles from where he said he had encountered the men. His little boy was with him but Maleah was not, he said.

Vence said he walked to a hospital where he received treatment and reported her missing.

The stepfather’s story has “a lot of blanks,” Houston police Sgt. Mark Holbrook said, but he said he’s hoping the public can help them determine what happened.

Maleah and her two brothers were removed from their home last summer after reports of abuse, the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services told CNN.

The children were placed with a relative following physical abuse allegations, stemming from a head injury to Maleah, CPS said Monday night. A judge ordered their return home in February.

In a news conference Sunday, Holbrook said Maleah had had multiple brain surgeries, including one in recent months.

Maleah is about 3 feet tall and weighs 30 to 40 pounds. She was last seen wearing a light blue Under Armour jacket, blue jeans, gray Under Armour tennis shoes with pink and white details and a pink bow in her hair.

Maleah’s mother, Brittany Bowens, told CNN affiliate KTRK she feels “so lost.”

Through sobs, the mother pleaded for help saying losing the young girl is “too much to bear.”

“I can’t concentrate, I can’t focus,” she told the affiliate. “It’s so overwhelming for me. It doesn’t seem real.”

Bowens, who was returning from a trip to Massachusetts, got another family member to pick her up from the airport when Vence didn’t show up with the children, Holbrook said.

“(There’s) so many thoughts going on in my mind on what could have happened,” she told KTRK.

Police posted a representative photo of the blue pickup truck that Vence said the abductors were driving.

An Amber Alert describes the car as a blue, crew-cab Chevy pickup truck, possibly a 2010 year model.

The car Vence was driving — a silver Nissan Altima belonging to Bowens — is also missing, police said.

A traffic camera captured an image of the Altima just before 3 p.m. Saturday, driving through a Sugar Land intersection near the shopping mall where Vence said he woke up.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/05/07/missing-girl-maleah-davis-stepfather-tells-of-waking-up-after-24-hours/


Here's a shakey abduction tale if ever I saw one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 08, 2019, 10:53:10 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2019, 10:48:27 AM
Yes, I'm aware. 

Pathfinder & I were discussing this case in PM's.
We both knew he dunnit, on account of him being the last to see them & by way of his media interviews.


A bit like this then imo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEGRfyQq2yU



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2019, 08:24:31 PM
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 08, 2019, 09:00:18 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 08, 2019, 08:24:31 PM


There is a Uk version of these creepsters. They include those horrific gruesome two some philpots...

Notice every one of them have a smile at some point when they Talk... they try to hide it...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2019, 09:23:50 PM

Mitchell Quy.

Made numerous, smiling, TV appeals for his missing partner, whom he'd dismembered in a bathtub & disposed of in plastic bags.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 08, 2019, 09:54:51 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2019, 09:23:50 PM
Mitchell Quy.

Made numerous, smiling, TV appeals for his missing partner, whom he'd dismembered in a bathtub & disposed of in plastic bags.

From time to time posts become akin to the foulest cesspit imaginable ... if we are not there already at the moment we are rushing head long in that direction.
Your posts are really incredible and I think you should take immediate and urgent remedial action regarding them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 08, 2019, 10:15:31 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2019, 09:23:50 PM
Mitchell Quy.

Made numerous, smiling, TV appeals for his missing partner, whom he'd dismembered in a bathtub & disposed of in plastic bags.
And from this we can deduce what exactly?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2019, 10:21:00 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 08, 2019, 10:15:31 PM
And from this we can deduce what exactly?

Whatever you like. I was just replying to Mistaken ID's post. She mentioned the smiling guilty..& Mitchell came to mind.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 08, 2019, 10:23:25 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2019, 10:21:00 PM
Whatever you like. I was just replying to Mistaken ID's post. She mentioned the smiling guilty..& Mitchell came to mind.
What’s Mitchell guilty of then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 08, 2019, 10:25:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 08, 2019, 10:23:25 PM
What’s Mitchell guilty of then?

You're tempting the teeth, lies, as many, mouth quote again.
Hopefully not!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 08, 2019, 10:28:09 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 08, 2019, 10:25:58 PM
You're tempting the teeth, lies, as many, mouth quote again.
Hopefully not!
@)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2019, 10:29:39 PM
I was talking about Mitchell Quy.
Nothing to do with Clarence Mitchell.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 08, 2019, 10:33:51 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2019, 10:29:39 PM
I was talking about Mitchell Quy.
Nothing to do with Clarence Mitchell.

Just googled him.
Definitely one nasty, nasty person.

Do I need to read back to see if you are comparing him to the McCanns?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 08, 2019, 10:56:08 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2019, 10:29:39 PM
I was talking about Mitchell Quy.
Nothing to do with Clarence Mitchell.
What’s he got to do with Madeleine McCann?  The Quy fella, not Clarence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 09, 2019, 12:35:39 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 08, 2019, 10:56:08 PM
What’s he got to do with Madeleine McCann?  The Quy fella, not Clarence.

 &%%6

It's obvious.

Does it need spelling out?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 09, 2019, 06:22:56 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2019, 09:54:51 PM
From time to time posts become akin to the foulest cesspit imaginable ... if we are not there already at the moment we are rushing head long in that direction.
Your posts are really incredible and I think you should take immediate and urgent remedial action regarding them.

Not far to go, I would say.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 09, 2019, 07:11:56 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 09, 2019, 12:35:39 AM
&%%6

It's obvious.

Does it need spelling out?
Yes it does.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 09, 2019, 10:49:19 AM

If you read back from post #5202 you'll see why I mentioned him.

He claimed his partner was missing, made TV appeals, all the while knowing where she was.

Forgive me for wandering off topic in a thread called wandering off topic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 09, 2019, 11:57:57 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2019, 09:54:51 PM
From time to time posts become akin to the foulest cesspit imaginable ... if we are not there already at the moment we are rushing head long in that direction.
Your posts are really incredible and I think you should take immediate and urgent remedial action regarding them.

Quote from: Eleanor on May 09, 2019, 06:22:56 AM
Not far to go, I would say.

Reminds me of a quote attributed to someone.
‘I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,’


Caveat: This in no way suggest's support for the content of supposedly upsetting post,merely the authors right as long as it doesn't break any rules.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 09, 2019, 12:37:04 PM
Does anyone else think this a strange video from the sun

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2238940/madeleine-mccann-investigation-latest-theories/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 09, 2019, 12:43:34 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 09, 2019, 12:37:04 PM
Does anyone else think this a strange video from the sun


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2238940/madeleine-mccann-investigation-latest-theories/
I won't even open links to that rag, but if that's the clip I'm thinking about, where the copper grips his arm and jostles him in to position - I would have swivelled and chinned him in front of the world's press if he'd have gripped me like that.
Maybe not, but I'd have definitely lost my cool, so fair play to him for maintaining composure given the circumstances.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 09, 2019, 01:05:37 PM
Quote from: The General on May 09, 2019, 12:43:34 PM
I won't even open links to that rag, but if that's the clip I'm thinking about, where the copper grips his arm and jostles him in to position - I would have swivelled and chinned him in front of the world's press if he'd have gripped me like that.
Maybe not, but I'd have definitely lost my cool, so fair play to him for maintaining composure given the circumstances.


Oh ok -  @)(++(*

What my point was how they show a pic of Ney as suspect - then show gmcc coming out of the police station.

IMO looking very similar to Ney- just wondered if anyone else thinks the same.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 09, 2019, 01:11:40 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 09, 2019, 01:05:37 PM

Oh ok -  @)(++(*

What my point was how they show a pic of Ney as suspect - then show gmcc coming out of the police station.

IMO looking very similar to Ney- just wondered if anyone else thinks the same.

Nah.... don't see it myself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 06:24:57 PM


It's been a week since anyone has seen 4-year-old Maleah Davis. Here's what we know

(CNN)Exactly one week ago was the last time anyone saw little Maleah Davis.

Darion Vence, the 4-year-old's stepfather, initially told police that he was driving to a Houston airport with Maleah and her 1-year-old brother on May 3 when he was attacked and the three were abducted by three Hispanic men. The abductors eventually dumped Vence and the boy alongside a road, he said, but Maleah was gone.

(https://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/190507113247-maleah-davis-exlarge-169.jpg)

Police say the stepfather's account of what happened last Friday night has changed several times, and Maleah's mother, Brittany Bowens, says she doesn't believe his story.

Police and Bowens said they have been trying to contact Vence now for several days, but they have not heard from him.

Here's what we know about the case:

Stepfather says he was attacked and abducted

Vence told police he and the two children were driving to George Bush Intercontinental Airport in north Houston to pick up Maleah's mother, who had been in Massachusetts.

Vence says he heard a "popping noise." Thinking it was a tire, he stopped to check. A blue pickup truck then pulled up behind his car and two Hispanic men got out.

One of the men said, "Maleah looks very nice, looks very sweet," Vence told the police.

That's when the other man hit Vence in the head, and Vence blacked out.

Going in and out of consciousness, Vence said that at some point, he was aware of being in the back of a pickup with both children and three Hispanic men.


When the stepfather comes to, Maleah is gone

Vence says he didn't fully regain consciousness until the next day.

At about 6 p.m. Saturday, he awoke to find himself and the boy on Highway 6 in Sugar Land, southwest of Houston. Maleah was gone.

Vence then walked to a nearby hospital and was treated. An off-duty police officer noticed that Vence had fresh wounds, CNN affiliate KTRK reported.

(https://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/190506085614-02-maleah-davis-houston-exlarge-169.jpg)


Police issued an Amber Alert for Maleah on Sunday.

"I realize there's a lot of blanks in the story," Sgt. Mark Holbrook of the Houston Police Department's Homicide Division told reporters. Police hoped the public could help them "fill in the blanks" in the narrative provided to them by Vence.




Maleah's mother pleads for her return

In the meantime, Maleah's mother, Brittany Bowens, had gotten a ride home from the airport from another relative after Vence didn't show up.

(https://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/190507081514-brittany-bowens-maleah-mother-emotional-exlarge-169.jpg)

Sobbing, Bowens pleaded for help in an interview with CNN affiliate KTRK earlier this week, saying she is "terrified" for her daughter.
"I can't concentrate, I can't focus," Bowens said. "It's so overwhelming for me. It doesn't seem real."


Police: Story doesn't add up

Vence's account of what happened "did not add up," Sugar Land police spokesman Doug Adolph told CNN Wednesday.

Also, "the substantive details of what he described to us changed" over the days since he first recounted the events to police, Adolph said, declining to give details.

Bowens told CNN on Friday that she doesn't believe Vence's story and thinks he is partially responsible for her child's disappearance, because "the way he's going about things is suspicious."

"He hasn't called me, I haven't heard from him since Monday, I don't know what's going on," Bowens told CNN's Nick Valencia in an exclusive phone interview. "If you're innocent, why can't you say it yourself? Why aren't you defending yourself?"

CNN has reached out to Vence several times, but hasn't been able to talk to him.

Stepfather's car is found

The car Vence was driving, a silver Nissan Altima, was found Thursday morning in the parking lot of a shopping mall in Missouri City, Texas, about 4 or 5 miles from where Bowens said he regained consciousness.

(https://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/190510121338-missing-houston-girl-car-found-exlarge-169.jpg)

The car's condition appeared normal, with no visible blood or any obvious signs that something may have happened inside, said Ken Fregia, a homicide detective with the Houston Police Department.

Police are running forensic tests on the car as well as looking for surveillance video from the shopping mall and a nearby Walmart.

Allegations of abuse

Maleah and her two brothers were taken from their home and placed with a relative after allegations of abuse last year, the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services told CNN.

Bowens said the children had not been abused, and that Maleah's head injury, which had led to the allegations, was only discovered after a number of hospital visits.

Maleah was first treated for a strange lethargy, and a week later, she fell and cut her head while sitting at a table. The doctors discharged Maleah without performing a CT scan, Bowens said.

Maleah had a seizure five days later, and that's when doctors discovered bleeding on the left side of her brain and operated on her, Bowens said.

Child Protective Services showed up a few days later, Bowens said.
"They didn't find anything because we're not those kinds of people," she said.

But authorities soon placed Maleah and her two brothers with relatives, where they stayed until a judge ordered them to be returned home in February.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/10/us/missing-houston-girl/index.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 06:25:24 PM


Anyone buying this?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 10, 2019, 06:27:53 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 06:25:24 PM

Anyone buying this?
Well I’m a McCann supporter so obviously I believe the father’s story unquestioningly.  Is that the answer you were hoping for?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 10, 2019, 06:31:04 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 06:25:24 PM

Anyone buying this?

what have the dogs said...waht does pat brown say
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 06:32:20 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 10, 2019, 06:27:53 PM
Well I’m a McCann supporter so obviously I believe the father’s story unquestioningly.  Is that the answer you were hoping for?

Yes, that's it. The stepfather is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Even though it's obvious he dunnit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 10, 2019, 06:35:10 PM
d
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 10, 2019, 06:36:07 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 06:32:20 PM
Yes, that's it. The stepfather is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Even though it's obvious he dunnit.

Well, let's not bother with the court of law.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 10, 2019, 06:36:36 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 06:32:20 PM
Yes, that's it. The stepfather is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Even though it's obvious he dunnit.

no hes not...hes entitled to the presumption of innocence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 10, 2019, 06:36:59 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 10, 2019, 06:31:04 PM
what have the dogs said...waht does pat brown say
Let's ask Pat Brown's dog.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 10, 2019, 06:37:37 PM
Quote from: The General on May 10, 2019, 06:36:59 PM
Let's ask Pat Brown's dog.

now youre talking
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 10, 2019, 06:38:55 PM
Quote from: The General on May 10, 2019, 06:36:59 PM
Let's ask Pat Brown's dog.


Have you real flu?
Or man flu?
Hoping you are feeling a little better.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 06:40:39 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 10, 2019, 06:36:36 PM
no hes not...hes entitled to the presumption of innocence

Yes you're right. He should be presumed innocent.

Maybe there really is a gang of hispanic child abductors, riding around in a pick up truck & rounding up little girls.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 10, 2019, 06:42:06 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 10, 2019, 06:38:55 PM

Have you real flu?
Or man flu?
Hoping you are feeling a little better.
Thanks Ern. It's man flu, so quite deadly if not treated. ;)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 10, 2019, 06:58:10 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 06:40:39 PM
Yes you're right. He should be presumed innocent.

Maybe there really is a gang of hispanic child abductors, riding around in a pick up truck & rounding up little girls.
How would you prefer to treat this man?  How about a lynch mob and strung up from the nearest tree?  It’s obvious he’s guilty so let’s not bother presuming anything, yah?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 07:21:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 10, 2019, 06:58:10 PM
How would you prefer to treat this man?  How about a lynch mob and strung up from the nearest tree?  It’s obvious he’s guilty so let’s not bother presuming anything, yah?

I expect sceptics to be sceptical & supporters to start a fundraiser.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 10, 2019, 07:43:05 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 07:21:15 PM
I expect sceptics to be sceptical & supporters to start a fundraiser.

You mean for legal expenses and things like that.. Nice
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 10, 2019, 07:48:35 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 07:21:15 PM
I expect sceptics to be sceptical & supporters to start a fundraiser.
Pathetic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 07:52:26 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 10, 2019, 07:43:05 PM
You mean for legal expenses and things like that.. Nice

Yes, for mortgage repayments & private eyes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 07:55:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 10, 2019, 07:48:35 PM
Pathetic.

There's a gang of abductors on the loose. Don't waste time insulting me.
You should be out there searching for Meleah, like you do for Maddie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 10, 2019, 07:56:07 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 07:52:26 PM
Yes, for mortgage repayments & private eyes.
I believe several stars have already donated and Trump has phoned him
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 10, 2019, 07:56:43 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 07:55:40 PM
There's a gang of abductors on the loose. Don't waste time insulting me.
You should be out there searching for Meleah, like you do for Maddie.

Actually I think he looks guilty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 10, 2019, 08:03:22 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 07:55:40 PM
There's a gang of abductors on the loose. Don't waste time insulting me.
You should be out there searching for Meleah, like you do for Maddie.
Pathetic again.You do realise you’re u are using a human tragedy to score points.  What does that make you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 08:03:57 PM
Allegations of abuse against stepfather in Maleah Davis case, community activist says

HOUSTON - There are new developments in the case of missing 4-year-old girl, Maleah Davis.

Davis was reported missing Sunday after her stepfather told police that he, Maleah and his 2-year-old son were abducted by three men in a blue Chevrolet truck.

Investigators have said Maleah’s stepfather, Darion Vence, is a person of interest in connection with her disappearance, citing inconsistencies in his story about how she was taken.

Maleah's mother, Brittany Bowens, with community activist Quanell X speaking for her, claimed Friday afternoon that there is surveillance video of Vence coming out of his apartment with a bottle of Clorox and a laundry basket with a garbage bag inside.

"When he spoke to the mother, he told her he was cleaning up the apartment, and she didn't understand why he would be cleaning up the apartment," Quanell X said. "He went and bought an extra bottle of Clorox... to clean out the apartment."

Quanell X said Bowens and Vence got into an argument after Bowens caught Vence sending naked photos to another man and she confronted him.

"She told him that she was giving back his ring and that she was not going to marry him, and I believe that caused him to snap in anger against young Maleah," he said.

Quanell X claimed Bowens was concerned months ago about Vence 'whooping' Maleah because she was special needs and too small.

"There is a reason to believe, based on what I know now, that there are issues of him possibly molesting Maleah," Quanell X said.

He said Bowens had not told law enforcement about the allegations.

When asked why Bowens kept the information a secret, Quanell X said "(She) did not want to believe by any stretch of the imagination that this man was capable of what is obvious that has taken place here. She has suffered a lot of abuse in her life."

The allegations come one day after a vehicle that police said was stolen from Maleah's family was recovered around 10:30 a.m. Thursday in Missouri City.

Police are checking surveillance video at stores in the shopping center to see if they can determine when the silver Nissan Altima was dropped off and by whom.

Investigators said Thursday they have not been able to reach Vence and that they would like for him to help assemble a sketch of the people who he says were involved in the abduction.

Court documents show Maleah's maternal grandmother has requested that the children stay in her care.

Maleah is still missing.

https://www.click2houston.com/news/new-developments-in-maleah-davis-case-community-activist-says
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 08:10:20 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 10, 2019, 08:03:22 PM
Pathetic again.You do realise you’re u are using a human tragedy to score points.  What does that make you?

What tragedy?  That the child is missing?

There's no proof she's come to any harm, just like with Maddie.

I don't know what your opinion of me is, why don't you spell it out for us?  Score some points of your own.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 10, 2019, 08:13:00 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 08:10:20 PM
What tragedy?  That the child is missing?

There's no proof she's come to any harm, just like with Maddie.

I don't know what your opinion of me is, why don't you spell it out for us?  Score some points of your own.
No need, you’re making quite a show of yourself. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 10, 2019, 10:27:36 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 09, 2019, 01:11:40 PM
Nah.... don't see it myself.

I wonder if we shouldn't really assume he is innocent until proved guilty of abducting and killing MBM..

Nah lets just go for it..Hang the B...

Now I have upset some of his supporters, I am sure there are many...Tsk
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 10, 2019, 10:34:05 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2019, 06:25:24 PM

Anyone buying this?

I am sceptical...

What a beautiful child who could harm such a lovely little girl.

I wonder what caused the lethargy  diagnosis in little Maleah, that could have been an annurism-no one to blame.

Thinking about abduction  it is a popular choice for missing children...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 11, 2019, 10:41:40 AM
Can anyone make sense of this.



MADELEINE McCann’s parents have turned down help from a psychic to track down their daughter who has been missing for 12 years.

Kate, 51, and Gerry, 50, insisted they still have "complete confidence in Scotland Yard" as the investigation into the possible abduction continues.

Possible abduction - not abduction.


Yet ?????????

Uncle Brian says this.


Brian Kennedy, Maddie’s great uncle, said the family are upset that names of alleged suspects have been publicly revealed saying it is “not very helpful”.

Speaking with The Sun Online, he said: "If police start broadcasting names of suspects it will only send them running.”

The retired headmaster said such revelations could enable the suspect time to “get away”.

He added: “That’s the thing… let people know there is a potential new lead and then let that person of interest get away. It’s very frustrating.


The mcn family -  doesn't sound very confident IMO.

Seems te mcns are to busy now to return to   Praia da Luz - where kmcc feels close to Maddie.IMO


Brian, the brother of Kate’s mum Susan Healy, told how Maddie’s parents still visit Praia da Luz but had been "too busy” recently to return.

He added: “They are such a busy family and Gerry’s work has international connections.

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/4224605/madeleine-mccanns-parents-turn-down-psychics-offer-to-help-find-missing-daughter-after-12-years/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1557476000


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 11, 2019, 01:21:36 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 11, 2019, 10:41:40 AM
Can anyone make sense of this.



MADELEINE McCann’s parents have turned down help from a psychic to track down their daughter who has been missing for 12 years.

Kate, 51, and Gerry, 50, insisted they still have "complete confidence in Scotland Yard" as the investigation into the possible abduction continues.

Possible abduction - not abduction.


Yet ?????????

Uncle Brian says this.


Brian Kennedy, Maddie’s great uncle, said the family are upset that names of alleged suspects have been publicly revealed saying it is “not very helpful”.

Speaking with The Sun Online, he said: "If police start broadcasting names of suspects it will only send them running.”

The retired headmaster said such revelations could enable the suspect time to “get away”.

He added: “That’s the thing… let people know there is a potential new lead and then let that person of interest get away. It’s very frustrating.


The mcn family -  doesn't sound very confident IMO.

Seems te mcns are to busy now to return to   Praia da Luz - where kmcc feels close to Maddie.IMO


Brian, the brother of Kate’s mum Susan Healy, told how Maddie’s parents still visit Praia da Luz but had been "too busy” recently to return.

He added: “They are such a busy family and Gerry’s work has international connections.

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/4224605/madeleine-mccanns-parents-turn-down-psychics-offer-to-help-find-missing-daughter-after-12-years/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1557476000

If it comes from the Sun albeit the Scottish one I don't think there'll any chance of making sense to it,but what is of note is saying the police releasing names of suspects won't be helpful,must have missed that bit about some suspect/s names being released.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 01:28:22 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 11, 2019, 01:21:36 PM
If it comes from the Sun albeit the Scottish one I don't think there'll any chance of making sense to it,but what is of note is saying the police releasing names of suspects won't be helpful,must have missed that bit about some suspect/s names being released.

It's amaral
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 11, 2019, 01:54:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2019, 01:28:22 PM
It's amaral


Get it right D - Goncalo said "quote" a German scapegoat.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 02:28:05 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 11, 2019, 01:54:46 PM

Get it right D - Goncalo said "quote" a German scapegoat.

So where did amaral get that from... And he's wrong... As usual
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 11, 2019, 03:13:41 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 11, 2019, 10:41:40 AM
Can anyone make sense of this.



MADELEINE McCann’s parents have turned down help from a psychic to track down their daughter who has been missing for 12 years.

Kate, 51, and Gerry, 50, insisted they still have "complete confidence in Scotland Yard" as the investigation into the possible abduction continues.

Possible abduction - not abduction.


Yet ?????????

Uncle Brian says this.


Brian Kennedy, Maddie’s great uncle, said the family are upset that names of alleged suspects have been publicly revealed saying it is “not very helpful”.

Speaking with The Sun Online, he said: "If police start broadcasting names of suspects it will only send them running.”

The retired headmaster said such revelations could enable the suspect time to “get away”.

He added: “That’s the thing… let people know there is a potential new lead and then let that person of interest get away. It’s very frustrating.


The mcn family -  doesn't sound very confident IMO.

Seems te mcns are to busy now to return to   Praia da Luz - where kmcc feels close to Maddie.IMO


Brian, the brother of Kate’s mum Susan Healy, told how Maddie’s parents still visit Praia da Luz but had been "too busy” recently to return.

He added: “They are such a busy family and Gerry’s work has international connections.

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/4224605/madeleine-mccanns-parents-turn-down-psychics-offer-to-help-find-missing-daughter-after-12-years/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1557476000

With regard to Gerald McCann, he constantly insisted in giving the undersigned letters and emails that he was receiving, mostly from psychics and mediums, whom he had selected and which mainly contained information without much credibility about the possible whereabouts of Madeleine and her presumed abduc
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SERVICE_INFORMATION.htm

I spoke to Kate McCann on Tuesday 8th of May 07. She told me that a friend of her Aunt & Uncle from Leicester had a friend that had a strong vision that Madeleine was on a boat with a man in the Marina in Logos.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BOATS_VISION.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2019, 03:38:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2019, 03:13:41 PM
With regard to Gerald McCann, he constantly insisted in giving the undersigned letters and emails that he was receiving, mostly from psychics and mediums, whom he had selected and which mainly contained information without much credibility about the possible whereabouts of Madeleine and her presumed abduc
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SERVICE_INFORMATION.htm

I spoke to Kate McCann on Tuesday 8th of May 07. She told me that a friend of her Aunt & Uncle from Leicester had a friend that had a strong vision that Madeleine was on a boat with a man in the Marina in Logos.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BOATS_VISION.htm

Indeed, the pair are either Roman Catholic or believe in spiritual, psychic mumbo jumbo as & when it suits.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 11, 2019, 03:39:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2019, 02:28:05 PM
So where did amaral get that from... And he's wrong... As usual


Well, wasn't the media/news full of German suspect - a couple of days after he said that.

who knows where he got it from - but IMO he got it right what was to come.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 11, 2019, 03:44:49 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2019, 03:38:40 PM
Indeed, the pair are either Roman Catholic or believe in spiritual, psychic mumbo jumbo as & when it suits.

And are not adverse to going to services presided over by an Anglican minister when there was a priest lead mass.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2019, 03:56:25 PM

11th May 2019

MADDIE TEST Madeleine McCann suspect challenged to take lie detector test to prove he’s innocent by top polygraph expert

Don Cargill, president of the European and British Polygraph Association, wants him to show he wasn't involved in the disappearance of the Brit youngster


A CHILD killer identified as a suspect in Madeleine McCann's disappearance has been challenged to take a lie detector test to prove his innocence by a polygraph expert.

Martin Ney, whose name was given to Scotland Yard as a possible suspect, is serving a life sentence for strangling three boys.

The German is said to resemble the photofit of a man seen carrying a child from the Portuguese holiday complex where the youngster vanished.

Don Cargill, president of the European and British Polygraph Association, has told Ney to prove his claim of not being involved in Maddie’s disappearance.

She vanished 12 years ago on May 3, 2007, when her family, from Leicestershire, were holidaying in Praia da Luz, in the Algarve, Portugal.

Parents Gerry and Kate left their three children – including toddler twins Sean and Amelie – sleeping in their apartment while they dined at a tapas bar - 120 metres away.

When Kate returned to check on the kids at around 10pm that evening, she discovered that Maddie was not in her bed and was missing.

Ney, 48, emerged as a key suspect in May 2019 - and it is believed he was in Portugal when Maddie went missing.

He was working for an evangelical church on a project for the homeless, it's claimed.

Mr Cargill insists lie detector tests are 90-95 per cent accurate and would conclusively prove if Ney was telling the truth about not being involved.

TAKE A TEST

The polygraph expert has been involved in two major successes involving lie detectors.

He got farmer Adrian Prout to admit in jail he murdered his missing wife, and proved Liverpool FC fan Michael Shields was innocent of attacking a waiter in Bulgaria.

Mr Cargill, 67, has invited Met Police detectives to contact him to establish if Ney is willing to undergo the 90 minute test, which monitors a patient’s blood pressure, heart and sweat rates, while they answer questions.

He said: “If Ney’s telling the truth, he’s got nothing to hide or fear from me. I think he’d welcome the chance of clearing his name.”

Scotland Yard and Portugal’s Polícia Judiciária have kept the new suspect’s name secret, but former Portuguese cop Gonçalo Amaral claimed he has knowledge of a German being investigated.

He refused to identify Ney by name but says a German suspect was quizzed by PJ detectives as part of their 2008 probe.

Mr Amaral said he was ruled out of the investigation but jailed in Germany for "offences unconnected to the Maddie case".

Mr Cargill said: "Perhaps he was only interested in boys, in which case he should undergo the test to prove he isn’t interested in girls, and didn’t abduct Maddie.”

Paedophiles in British jails take regular lie detector tests when seeking parole, under a new Home Office initiative.

Lie tests are commonly used as evidence in US courts where officials also claim it is 90-95 per cent accurate.


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9052060/madeleine-mccann-suspect-martin-ney-lie-detector-test/

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2019, 03:58:01 PM
Now Kate McCann refuses to take a lie detector test to clear her name


Monday 19 November 2007

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/now-kate-mccann-refuses-to-take-a-lie-detector-test-to-clear-her-name-6690085.html

McCann spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "Of course they are not going to take the test. It's inadmissible in Portugal and there are doubts about the accuracy.

"Gerry and Kate don't need to do one as they are telling the truth."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2019, 04:03:53 PM


Martin Ney doesn't need to do a lie detector because he is telling the truth.

If Ney has to do one I think it only fair that Kate & Gerry go first.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 11, 2019, 04:11:20 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2019, 03:58:01 PM
Now Kate McCann refuses to take a lie detector test to clear her name


Monday 19 November 2007

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/now-kate-mccann-refuses-to-take-a-lie-detector-test-to-clear-her-name-6690085.html

McCann spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "Of course they are not going to take the test. It's inadmissible in Portugal and there are doubts about the accuracy.

"Gerry and Kate don't need to do one as they are telling the truth."

 Aw lol -  god you can't make it up.

So if Ney refuses they will probably use that as guilt.

Yet mcns don't have to - yet they the ones who are still not cleared of any involvement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 11, 2019, 04:32:47 PM
Sigh ... the old rehash of the lie detector idiocy ... must be that time of year again when we go through every fable imaginable then get back to the very beginning again.

Maybe a deal should be made with Cristovao about lie detectors et al ... he is after all the only one connected to Madeleine's case currently the focus of serious criminal charges in the Portuguese courts.
If memory serves me well one of which was kidnapping.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 04:34:20 PM
Amaral said SY were winding up the case and would blame a German already in prison as a Patsy..

SY... To my knowledge are not winding up the case and Ney is not a suspect... So amarals quite wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 06:49:07 PM
I'd like more use of the polygraph test. In the US it is used a lot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2019, 06:50:11 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 06:49:07 PM
I'd like more use of the polygraph test. In the US it is used a lot.
That’s not a very good reason IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 06:53:59 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 06:49:07 PM
I'd like more use of the polygraph test. In the US it is used a lot.

Evidently  it's easy to beat so is unreliable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 07:04:51 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2019, 06:50:11 PM
That’s not a very good reason IMO.
It is very useful to sort out those that the police should focus on in the investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 07:07:24 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2019, 06:53:59 PM
Evidently  it's easy to beat so is unreliable
Repeat the test at least 3 times then.    If there is no evidence plus 3 clear polygraph results, why  keep focusing on that person?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2019, 07:08:58 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 07:04:51 PM
It is very useful to sort out those that the police should focus on in the investigation.
Did you know that innocent people have failed polygraph tests?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 07:09:09 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 07:07:24 PM
Repeat the test at least 3 times then.    If there is no evidence plus 3 clear polygraph results, why  keep focusing on that person?
Best rely on evidence... If it was reliable... It would be widely used
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 07:40:00 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2019, 07:08:58 PM
Did you know that innocent people have failed polygraph tests?
So what! 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 07:41:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2019, 07:09:09 PM
Best rely on evidence... If it was reliable... It would be widely used
It is widely used in the USA and IMO it is a useful tool.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 07:41:36 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 07:40:00 PM
So what!

so they are not relaible
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 07:43:02 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 07:41:27 PM
It is widely used in the USA and IMO it is a useful tool.

how widely used...in what instances...imo...its not a useful tool because it can be fooled...false negatives and false positives
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 11, 2019, 08:24:44 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 06:49:07 PM
I'd like more use of the polygraph test. In the US it is used a lot.

They do a lot of things we don't ... some states still have the death penalty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 08:27:22 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 11, 2019, 08:24:44 PM
They do a lot of things we don't ... some states still have the death penalty.

if you look at lie detectors they are very good instruments for the prosecution...but not for suspects...particularly innocent suspects
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 08:30:48 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2019, 08:27:22 PM
if you look at lie detectors they are very good instruments for the prosecution...but not for suspects...particularly innocent suspects
Have you got an example where innocent suspects were disadvantaged?    They talk of the court of public opinion.  Is that court affected by the polygraph outcome?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 08:34:10 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 08:30:48 PM
Have you got an example where innocent suspects were disadvantaged?    They talk of the court of public opinion.  Is that court affected by the polygraph outcome?

do a bit of research
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 08:35:10 PM
wandering off topic...great win for the Villa today
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2019, 08:35:53 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 08:30:48 PM
Have you got an example where innocent suspects were disadvantaged?    They talk of the court of public opinion.  Is that court affected by the polygraph outcome?

Brenda Leyland might still be alive had the McCanns passed a polygraph.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 08:37:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2019, 08:34:10 PM
do a bit of research
You made the claim first.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 08:38:37 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2019, 08:35:53 PM
Brenda Leyland might still be alive had the McCanns passed a polygraph.

she may have committed suicide due to her persoanl problems anyway...i think its very bad taste to make such apost to try and make your point...let brenda RIP...if you have any compassion or morals
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 08:39:25 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 08:37:50 PM
You made the claim first.
and i stick by it ...you introduced polygraphs and made this calim....

It is very useful to sort out those that the police should focus on in the investigation.

so wheres your cite...and its your opinion...not fact....correct your post
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 08:42:55 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2019, 08:39:25 PM
and i stick by it ...you introduced polygraphs and made this calim....

It is very useful to sort out those that the police should focus on in the investigation.

so wheres your cite...and its your opinion...not fact....correct your post
It was someone else before I put my comment in.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 08:44:01 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 08:42:55 PM
It was someone else before I put my comment in.

your comment was...

It is very useful to sort out those that the police should focus on in the investigation.

thats opinion as fact...correct your post
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 08:47:31 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2019, 08:44:01 PM
your comment was...

It is very useful to sort out those that the police should focus on in the investigation.

thats opinion as fact...correct your post
That is my opinion and a fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 08:48:08 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 08:47:31 PM
That is my opinion and a fact.

no its not a fact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 11, 2019, 08:49:19 PM
Delete.
WS already posted it.

Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2019, 03:56:25 PM
11th May 2019

MADDIE TEST Madeleine McCann suspect challenged to take lie detector test to prove he’s innocent by top polygraph expert

Don Cargill, president of the European and British Polygraph Association, wants him to show he wasn't involved in the disappearance of the Brit youngster


A CHILD killer identified as a suspect in Madeleine McCann's disappearance has been challenged to take a lie detector test to prove his innocence by a polygraph expert.

Martin Ney, whose name was given to Scotland Yard as a possible suspect, is serving a life sentence for strangling three boys.

The German is said to resemble the photofit of a man seen carrying a child from the Portuguese holiday complex where the youngster vanished.

Don Cargill, president of the European and British Polygraph Association, has told Ney to prove his claim of not being involved in Maddie’s disappearance.

She vanished 12 years ago on May 3, 2007, when her family, from Leicestershire, were holidaying in Praia da Luz, in the Algarve, Portugal.

Parents Gerry and Kate left their three children – including toddler twins Sean and Amelie – sleeping in their apartment while they dined at a tapas bar - 120 metres away.

When Kate returned to check on the kids at around 10pm that evening, she discovered that Maddie was not in her bed and was missing.

Ney, 48, emerged as a key suspect in May 2019 - and it is believed he was in Portugal when Maddie went missing.

He was working for an evangelical church on a project for the homeless, it's claimed.

Mr Cargill insists lie detector tests are 90-95 per cent accurate and would conclusively prove if Ney was telling the truth about not being involved.

TAKE A TEST

The polygraph expert has been involved in two major successes involving lie detectors.

He got farmer Adrian Prout to admit in jail he murdered his missing wife, and proved Liverpool FC fan Michael Shields was innocent of attacking a waiter in Bulgaria.

Mr Cargill, 67, has invited Met Police detectives to contact him to establish if Ney is willing to undergo the 90 minute test, which monitors a patient’s blood pressure, heart and sweat rates, while they answer questions.

He said: “If Ney’s telling the truth, he’s got nothing to hide or fear from me. I think he’d welcome the chance of clearing his name.”

Scotland Yard and Portugal’s Polícia Judiciária have kept the new suspect’s name secret, but former Portuguese cop Gonçalo Amaral claimed he has knowledge of a German being investigated.

He refused to identify Ney by name but says a German suspect was quizzed by PJ detectives as part of their 2008 probe.

Mr Amaral said he was ruled out of the investigation but jailed in Germany for "offences unconnected to the Maddie case".

Mr Cargill said: "Perhaps he was only interested in boys, in which case he should undergo the test to prove he isn’t interested in girls, and didn’t abduct Maddie.”

Paedophiles in British jails take regular lie detector tests when seeking parole, under a new Home Office initiative.

Lie tests are commonly used as evidence in US courts where officials also claim it is 90-95 per cent accurate.


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9052060/madeleine-mccann-suspect-martin-ney-lie-detector-test/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 08:50:37 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 11, 2019, 08:49:19 PM
Talking of polygraphs the Sun has come out with some bollocks,its not up to anyone to prove their innocence its up to a prosecution to prove guilt.

MADDIE TEST Madeleine McCann suspect challenged to take lie detector test to prove he’s innocent by top polygraph expert


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9052060/madeleine-mccann-suspect-martin-ney-lie-detector-test/

according to rob this is a very sensible suggestion...obviously its rubbish
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 08:53:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2019, 08:50:37 PM
according to rob this is a very sensible suggestion...obviously its rubbish
Are you happy?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2019, 09:00:02 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 11, 2019, 08:49:19 PM
Delete.
WS already posted it.

You have to get up pretty early to beat me. I have insomnia.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2019, 09:03:32 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2019, 08:38:37 PM
she may have committed suicide due to her persoanl problems anyway...i think its very bad taste to make such apost to try and make your point...let brenda RIP...if you have any compassion or morals

Also, she may not have commited suicide had Martin Brunt picked on someone his own size.
But I agree, the post was made in poor taste just to make a point, but then, when have I ever done tasteful?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 09:07:10 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2019, 09:03:32 PM
Also, she may not have commited suicide had Martin Brunt picked on someone his own size.
But I agree, the post was made in poor taste just to make a point, but then, when have I ever done tasteful?
at least you admit it...Brenda had a history of psychiatric problems...had attempted suicide before ..and committed suicide on he estranged sons birthday...how sad ...let her RIP ...second request
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 11, 2019, 09:41:18 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 08:30:48 PM
Have you got an example where innocent suspects were disadvantaged?    They talk of the court of public opinion.  Is that court affected by the polygraph outcome?

Snip
In 2003, Gary Ridgway admitted he was the Green River Killer, having murdered 49 women in the Seattle area. Ridgway had passed a lie detector test in 1987, while another man - who turned out to be innocent - failed.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22467640
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2019, 09:48:37 PM
no innocent person in their right mind would take a polygraph...they have nothing to gain.... a guilty person may thin they coud beat it...i could certainly beat a ploygraph...I can lower my heart rate and blood pressure at,will
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 11, 2019, 09:49:42 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 11, 2019, 09:41:18 PM
Snip
In 2003, Gary Ridgway admitted he was the Green River Killer, having murdered 49 women in the Seattle area. Ridgway had passed a lie detector test in 1987, while another man - who turned out to be innocent - failed.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22467640
I'm not saying the test is 100% accurate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2019, 10:19:06 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2019, 08:35:53 PM
Brenda Leyland might still be alive had the McCanns passed a polygraph.
???
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 12, 2019, 01:11:42 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2019, 09:48:37 PM
no innocent person in their right mind would take a polygraph...they have nothing to gain.... a guilty person may thin they coud beat it...i could certainly beat a ploygraph...I can lower my heart rate and blood pressure at,will

Bless. You do make me laugh Davel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 12, 2019, 01:21:54 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2019, 09:48:37 PM
no innocent person in their right mind would take a polygraph...they have nothing to gain.... a guilty person may thin they coud beat it...i could certainly beat a ploygraph...I can lower my heart rate and blood pressure at,will

So can I, as it happens.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 12, 2019, 11:44:10 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 12, 2019, 01:21:54 AM
So can I, as it happens.

I don’t have to....mine’s a swinging brick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 12, 2019, 11:49:44 AM
Something to think about.

https://news.sky.com/story/louis-theroux-still-confused-about-quite-liking-jimmy-savile-11717706
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 12, 2019, 12:30:44 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 12, 2019, 11:44:10 AM
I don’t have to....mine’s a swinging brick.

It's actually quite an interesting exercise.  I was amazed when I sussed how to do it.  Mind over matter, basically.  A rapidly beating heart is quite normal after activity.  It's how long it takes to bring it back to its normal that counts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 12, 2019, 12:36:52 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 12, 2019, 11:49:44 AM
Something to think about.

https://news.sky.com/story/louis-theroux-still-confused-about-quite-liking-jimmy-savile-11717706

I am still waiting to see the evidence, let alone proof.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 12, 2019, 12:46:35 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 12, 2019, 12:36:52 PM
I am still waiting to see the evidence, let alone proof.
A bit late to the party here - evidence of what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 12:58:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2019, 09:48:37 PM
no innocent person in their right mind would take a polygraph...they have nothing to gain.... a guilty person may thin they coud beat it...i could certainly beat a ploygraph...I can lower my heart rate and blood pressure at,will
The way you react to minor insults I'd say you would fail each time if you tried to lie on a polygraph.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2019, 01:46:46 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 12:58:27 PM
The way you react to minor insults I'd say you would fail each time if you tried to lie on a polygraph.
Can you please give yourself a warning for goading?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 12, 2019, 02:19:29 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 12, 2019, 11:49:44 AM
Something to think about.

https://news.sky.com/story/louis-theroux-still-confused-about-quite-liking-jimmy-savile-11717706

Many forms of abuse involve an abuse of trust, imo. In order to abuse trust you first have to be trusted. Savile persuaded many people to trust him and then took advantage. Theroux wasn't the pnly one fooled by an expert manipulator.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 02:20:17 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 12:58:27 PM
The way you react to minor insults I'd say you would fail each time if you tried to lie on a polygraph.

you are wrong on both counts.....I dont really care what anyone on this forum calls me or what their opinion is of me...faith can call me nything she likes...her opinion as you can imagine is of little importance to me. i highlight insults that are allowed to stand purely to highlight unfair moderation...as for the lie detector...i have quite a lot of experience in hypnosis...self hypnosis and meditation....using those tecniques its quite easy to control herat rate and blood pressure....youve come to a conclusion of me based on limited information..thats a basic mistake
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 12, 2019, 04:50:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 02:20:17 PM
you are wrong on both counts.....I dont really care what anyone on this forum calls me or what their opinion is of me...faith can call me nything she likes...her opinion as you can imagine is of little importance to me. i highlight insults that are allowed to stand purely to highlight unfair moderation...as for the lie detector...i have quite a lot of experience in hypnosis...self hypnosis and meditation....using those tecniques its quite easy to control herat rate and blood pressure....youve come to a conclusion of me based on limited information..thats a basic mistake

My friend who was unable to have general anaesthesia delivered both her children by Cesarean section using self hypnosis ... makes me cringe even now to think about it. But that is a measure of her desperation to have children.

I think she would have been able to train herself to pass a polygraph had the situation ever arisen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 12, 2019, 05:08:33 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 12:58:27 PM
The way you react to minor insults I'd say you would fail each time if you tried to lie on a polygraph.

The polygraph is fake science and the sooner everyone accepts that the better imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 12, 2019, 06:05:09 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 02:20:17 PM
you are wrong on both counts.....I dont really care what anyone on this forum calls me or what their opinion is of me...faith can call me nything she likes...her opinion as you can imagine is of little importance to me. i highlight insults that are allowed to stand purely to highlight unfair moderation...as for the lie detector...i have quite a lot of experience in hypnosis...self hypnosis and meditation....using those tecniques its quite easy to control herat rate and blood pressure....youve come to a conclusion of me based on limited information..thats a basic mistake

For an opinion that means nothing to you you don’t half go on about it  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 06:11:53 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 12, 2019, 06:05:09 PM
For an opinion that means nothing to you you don’t half go on about it  @)(++(*
I'm sorry to disappoint you...but your insults don't bother me in the slightest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 12, 2019, 06:57:11 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 12, 2019, 05:08:33 PM
The polygraph is fake science and the sooner everyone accepts that the better imo.

But lucky Adrian Prout took one.

Cool and calculating Prout thought he would sail through the polygraph, which measures breathing, heart rate and perspiration and has 99% accuracy.

But when he failed the examination, paid for by his loyal fiancee Debbie Garlick as she campaigned to prove his innocence, he realised the game was up.

The expert who tested him three months ago, British and European Polygraph Association chairman Don Cargill, recalled yesterday: “I said, ‘You’re a murderer.’ He just said ‘Ummmh.’ So I said, ‘Are you saying my test is wrong?’

“He actually replied, ‘No, your test is not wrong.’”

Don, 59, also said: “He smiled in what was one of the most surreal and chilling experiences of my life.

“There was no emotion at all, he was really calm and cool, chillingly so.

“He’d been so used to being in control. He didn’t fool the jury but he’s fooled a lot of other people, his family and friends and his fiancee.

“Debbie campaigned very heavily to prove his innocence but after he failed she was devastated. She realised she had been lied to all along.”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 07:17:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2019, 01:46:46 PM
Can you please give yourself a warning for goading?
So what was Davel's claim that he could pass on a lie detector test?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 07:22:03 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 02:20:17 PM
you are wrong on both counts.....I dont really care what anyone on this forum calls me or what their opinion is of me...faith can call me nything she likes...her opinion as you can imagine is of little importance to me. i highlight insults that are allowed to stand purely to highlight unfair moderation...as for the lie detector...i have quite a lot of experience in hypnosis...self hypnosis and meditation....using those techniques its quite easy to control heart rate and blood pressure....youve come to a conclusion of me based on limited information..that's a basic mistake
Is the lie detector dependant on heart rate or blood pressure?  [Answered in post above "the polygraph, which measures breathing, heart rate and perspiration"]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 07:22:21 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 07:17:43 PM
So what was Davel's claim that he could pass on a lie detector test?

why was it goading.....its amatter of fact they can be beaten
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 07:23:13 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 07:22:03 PM
Is the lie detector dependant on heart rate or blood pressure?

as you have made claims about them I would have thought you would know...I do..lets not have 50 posts of you attacking me  and me defending myself
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 07:30:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 07:22:21 PM
why was it goading.....its amatter of fact they can be beaten
That is all what a challenge is about, you say you can and I say you can't.    Neither statement is goading.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2019, 07:31:53 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 07:17:43 PM
So what was Davel's claim that he could pass on a lie detector test?
An opinion about his own abilities.  You were goading him plain and simple.  IMO.  In fact I think goading Davel is a bit of a sport on this forum. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 07:32:38 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 07:23:13 PM
as you have made claims about them I would have thought you would know...I do..lets not have 50 posts of you attacking me  and me defending myself
It was the words "skin conductivity" I was hoping you'd mention.  That is probably what they term perspiration. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 07:32:59 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 07:30:02 PM
That is all what a challenge is about, you say you can and I say you can't.    Neither statement is goading.

but that isnt what you said...this is..

The way you react to minor insults I'd say you would fail each time if you tried to lie on a polygraph.

thats a personal criticism and is goading
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 07:34:30 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 07:32:38 PM
It was the words "skin conductivity" I was hoping you'd mention.  That is probably what they term perspiration.

and heart rate and BP...its all related to being able to become relaxed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 07:37:49 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 07:32:59 PM
but that isnt what you said...this is..

The way you react to minor insults I'd say you would fail each time if you tried to lie on a polygraph.

thats a personal criticism and is goading
Look at the way you are reacting now.  I'd say the same would happen if you were accused of lying you'd want to fight back and your skin would perspire, hence fail a polygraph test.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 07:41:44 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 07:37:49 PM
Look at the way you are reacting now.  I'd say the same would happen if you were accused of lying you'd want to fight back and your skin would perspire, hence fail a polygraph test.

you really are  a poor analyst...Im a s cool as a cucumber ..its you who appears tense
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 12, 2019, 07:44:11 PM
I used to been able to summon forth demons from The 4th Realm to wreak havoc on the mortal plane when in a self-induced hypnagogic state. It's all about controlling your breathing. And blinking.
Can't do it any more.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 07:45:39 PM
Quote from: The General on May 12, 2019, 07:44:11 PM
I used to been able to summon forth demons to from The 4th Realm to wreak havoc on the mortal plane when in a self-induced hypnagogic state. It's all about controlling your breathing. And blinking.
Can't do it any more.

mindlefulness of breathing is teh key
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 07:48:18 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 07:41:44 PM
you really are  a poor analyst...Im a s cool as a cucumber ..its you who appears tense
No.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 07:49:45 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 07:48:18 PM
No.

calm down
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 12, 2019, 07:50:09 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 07:45:39 PM
mindlefulness of breathing is teh key
I'll try it again. Cheers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 07:51:07 PM
Quote from: The General on May 12, 2019, 07:50:09 PM
I'll try it again. Cheers.

cheers
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 08:03:03 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 07:51:07 PM
cheers
Polygraph answers are either Yes or No, but if you think you can beat it you would need to answer one question with a lie, so what would you lie about in the test?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 08:08:14 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 08:03:03 PM
Polygraph answers are either Yes or No, but if you think you can beat it you would need to answer one question with a lie, so what would you lie about in the test?

www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/09/25/nsa-whistleblower-reveals-how-to-beat-a-polygraph-test....

I could beat it ...I was in the SOS
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 08:13:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 08:08:14 PM
www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/09/25/nsa-whistleblower-reveals-how-to-beat-a-polygraph-test....

I could beat it ...I was in the SOS
I think we call them SAS.  SOS sounds more like an emergency call.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 08:14:40 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 08:13:04 PM
I think we call them SAS.  SOS sounds more like an emergency call.

it was  a joke......and also a little play on words re your question...what lie would you tell....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 08:26:53 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 08:14:40 PM
it was  a joke......and also a little play on words re your question...what lie would you tell....
You can't be tested on a joke.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2019, 08:31:49 PM
Quote from: The General on May 12, 2019, 07:44:11 PM
I used to been able to summon forth demons from The 4th Realm to wreak havoc on the mortal plane when in a self-induced hypnagogic state. It's all about controlling your breathing. And blinking.
Can't do it any more.
I can bend spoons - with my mind (in conjunction with both hands). 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 08:33:02 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2019, 08:31:49 PM
I can bend spoons - with my mind (in conjunction with both hands).

my wife can make money disappear
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 12, 2019, 08:37:09 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2019, 08:31:49 PM
I can bend spoons - with my mind (in conjunction with both hands).
Uncanny. Utterly spellbinding. Embrace your gift.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 08:42:09 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 08:33:02 PM
my wife can make money disappear
Does she know you said that about her?  Yes or No?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 12, 2019, 08:44:09 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 08:42:09 PM
Does she know you said that about her?  Yes or No?
[loosens tie and shuffles uncomfortably in the seat, eyes darting around the room]....'errr, yes'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 08:44:25 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 08:42:09 PM
Does she know you said that about her?  Yes or No?

is taht any of your business...yes or no
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 08:45:06 PM
Quote from: The General on May 12, 2019, 08:44:09 PM
[loosens tie and shuffles uncomfortably in the seat, eyes darting around the room]....'errr, yes'.

it seems a stupid question to me
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 12, 2019, 08:46:33 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 08:45:06 PM
it seems a stupid question to me
Answer the question dammit. And put your trousers back on man.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 08:49:18 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 08:44:25 PM
is taht any of your business...yes or no
Yes we are giving Davel an "on line" interactive lie detector test.  Since he never answered that question I think it is safe to say he failed his polygraph.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 08:53:18 PM
If you refuse to answer have you failed the polygraph test?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 09:09:38 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 08:49:18 PM
Yes we are giving Davel an "on line" interactive lie detector test.  Since he never answered that question I think it is safe to say he failed his polygraph.
why is it so important to you...

I havent failed any test.....the whole point of  a lie detector test is its voluntary...you dont just give someone a test...do a little more research
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 09:10:23 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 08:53:18 PM
If you refuse to answer have you failed the polygraph test?

I didnt agree to take the test...so there is no test
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 09:21:38 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 09:10:23 PM
I didnt agree to take the test...so there is no test
Who knows, but the question still remains "If you refuse to answer have you failed the polygraph test?"

Are questions allowed to be ignored in a real polygraph examination?

"Those who are unable to think of a lie related to the relevant question will automatically fail the test"  There is no such thing as an unanswered question.

If the person being examined (subject) was to answer all questions with a lie I think the test would be abandoned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 09:26:15 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 09:21:38 PM
Who knows, but the question still remains "If you refuse to answer have you failed the polygraph test?"

Are questions allowed to be ignored in a real polygraph examination?

"Those who are unable to think of a lie related to the relevant question will automatically fail the test"  There is no such thing as an unanswered question.

If the person being examined (subject) was to answer all questions with a lie I think the test would be abandoned.

you have to agree to the test.....you have to agree to answer the questions....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 09:30:10 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 09:26:15 PM
you have to agree to the test.....you have to agree to answer the questions....
The test started when you said you would pass the test.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 09:31:24 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 09:30:10 PM
The test started when you said you would pass the test.

the only test is in your imagination
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 09:32:57 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2019, 09:31:24 PM
the only test is in your imagination
Yes and I imagined you failed, because you didn't answer all the questions.  The General asked you to answer the question too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2019, 09:34:00 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 09:32:57 PM
Yes and I imagined you failed, because you didn't answer all the questions.

correct...you imagined I failed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 12, 2019, 09:34:07 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 09:21:38 PM
Who knows, but the question still remains "If you refuse to answer have you failed the polygraph test?"

Are questions allowed to be ignored in a real polygraph examination?

"Those who are unable to think of a lie related to the relevant question will automatically fail the test"  There is no such thing as an unanswered question.

If the person being examined (subject) was to answer all questions with a lie I think the test would be abandoned.

If they need you to answer a question with a lie to see how you will react then they haven't got much idea of what they are doing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 12, 2019, 09:42:41 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 12, 2019, 09:34:07 PM
If they need you to answer a question with a lie to see how you will react then they haven't got much idea of what they are doing.
Most of us have nothing to hide so we answer all questions with the truth.  Well I only have to listen to Coronation Street for about 5 minutes to hear a lie.  Do the UK people have an issue with telling the truth?  But it keeps the story going for every lie there has to be a scene where they are found out.

You can answer every question with the truth if you like, but that will be like making a confession.

Did you murder Madeleine?  "Yes".  OK you pass the lie detector test but you have made a terrible confession.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 12, 2019, 11:23:32 PM
Quote from: The General on May 12, 2019, 07:44:11 PM
I used to been able to summon forth demons from The 4th Realm to wreak havoc on the mortal plane when in a self-induced hypnagogic state. It's all about controlling your breathing. And blinking.
Can't do it any more.

 @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 13, 2019, 07:31:05 AM

Dogs detect human decomposition in car of man arrested in case of missing girl Maleah Davis, 4

Jorge L. Ortiz  USA TODAY
Published 4:05 PM EDT May 12, 2019

Trained dogs detected the scent of human decomposition in the car of a man arrested in connection with the puzzling disappearance of Maleah Davis, 4, outside Houston, a prosecutor said.

Derion Vence was in jail Sunday on a $1 million bond after he was arrested Saturday and charged with tampering with evidence – a human corpse. Vence is set to appear in court Monday.

Vence, 26, lived with Maleah’s mother, Brittany Bowens, and is believed to be the last person to see the girl before her disappearance more than a week ago.

Houston police said Maleah has not been found and the investigation is continuing. Authorities have declined to say whether they believe Vence killed the girl, but prosecutors said in court documents filed Saturday that Vence could face additional charges, including murder.

Police have said blood found in Vence’s apartment was linked to Maleah.

More: Intensive search underway for girl, 4, whose stepfather says she was abducted on a Texas highway

Vence initially told police he was assaulted by three men in a truck after stopping for a flat tire on the way to pick up Bowens at the airport on the night of May 4.

Vence said Maleah and his 2-year-old son were with him and they were all abducted by the three men, who knocked him unconscious. When he came to the next day in Sugar Land, about 20 miles southwest of Houston, the girl was missing, Vence told police. He also said the Nissan Altima he was driving was stolen.

Police said surveillance video showed Vence getting dropped off at Methodist Sugar Land Hospital in the silver Altima last Sunday. Police found the car in a parking lot Thursday.

At Vence’s probable cause court hearing Saturday night, Harris County prosecutor Pat Stayton said two dogs trained to find cadavers reacted to the trunk of the car.

“The dogs were responding to the scent of human decomposition in the vehicle,” Stayton said.

Surveillance video from a neighbor had shown Vence carrying a large, blue laundry basket with a large trash bag from his apartment on May 3, Stayton said. Vence returned three minutes later without the basket and later he was seen leaving the apartment with cleaning supplies, including bleach.

In the car, police found a laundry basket that looked like the one Vence took out of his apartment, Stayton said.

More: 'Where is my baby?': Car found, but 4-year-old Maleah Davis still missing, police say

Police have described Vence as Maleah’s stepfather, but Bowens said through a spokesman that Vence is her former fiancé.

Child Protective Services removed Maleah and her brothers from the home Vence and Bowens shared in August after the girl sustained a head wound, but the children were returned in February, according to an agency spokeswoman.

The Houston Chronicle reported that Maleah’s grandmother, Brenda Bowens, had tried to get the kids placed at her home instead of in foster care when Child Protective Services conducted an investigation starting in August.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/05/12/maleah-davis-houston-missing-girl-case/1183866001/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 13, 2019, 07:34:39 AM

MALEAH DAVIS: Surveillance photos show last time missing girl seen alive

New surveillance images show Maleah Davis and her mother's ex-fiance Derion Vence walk into the family's apartment, but she was never seen coming out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6RP9_En6yU
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 13, 2019, 07:48:33 AM
Hurrah, this proves the McCanns dunnit.  Lock ‘em up. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 13, 2019, 08:00:23 AM

Whilst it doesn't prove the McCanns dunnit, there are certainly some similarities between the two cases.

Maleah's body is still missing, blood was found in the apartment, cadaver dogs alerted to the car, there was a simulation of abduction & Vance was seen carrying a big black bag.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 13, 2019, 08:13:02 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 13, 2019, 08:00:23 AM
Whilst it doesn't prove the McCanns dunnit, there are certainly some similarities between the two cases.

Maleah's body is still missing, blood was found in the apartment, cadaver dogs alerted to the car, there was a simulation of abduction & Vance was seen carrying a big black bag.
You state there was a simulation of an abduction.  Is that a troo fact now?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 13, 2019, 08:17:53 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 13, 2019, 08:13:02 AM
You state there was a simulation of an abduction.  Is that a troo fact now?

Always has been to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 13, 2019, 08:19:05 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 13, 2019, 08:17:53 AM
Always has been to me.
So it’s only your opinion, glad we got that sorted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 13, 2019, 10:51:12 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 13, 2019, 08:00:23 AM
Whilst it doesn't prove the McCanns dunnit, there are certainly some similarities between the two cases.

Maleah's body is still missing, blood was found in the apartment, cadaver dogs alerted to the car, there was a simulation of abduction & Vance was seen carrying a big black bag.

The whole thing is a farce ... child protection services were involved with this family ... that should tell you something.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 13, 2019, 10:53:59 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 13, 2019, 10:51:12 AM
The whole thing is a farce ... child protection services were involved with this family ... that should tell you something.

Theres a whole raft of children that have suffered in this country when child protection failed miserably.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 13, 2019, 06:05:59 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 13, 2019, 10:53:59 AM
Theres a whole raft of children that have suffered in this country when child protection failed miserably.
This country, that country, the point still stands unless you are trying to make this about how shit Britain is too? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 13, 2019, 06:11:18 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 13, 2019, 08:00:23 AM
Whilst it doesn't prove the McCanns dunnit, there are certainly some similarities between the two cases.

Maleah's body is still missing, blood was found in the apartment, cadaver dogs alerted to the car, there was a simulation of abduction & Vance was seen carrying a big black bag.

yes all thats needed is the fridge...has amaral commented yet?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 13, 2019, 06:27:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 13, 2019, 06:11:18 PM
yes all thats needed is the fridge...has amaral commented yet?

Yes, he said her stepfather should take part in a reconstruction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 13, 2019, 06:57:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 13, 2019, 06:05:59 PM
This country, that country, the point still stands unless you are trying to make this about how shit Britain is too?


Its all relevant,no country it appears is below another in failing its children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 13, 2019, 07:09:53 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 13, 2019, 06:57:13 PM

Its all relevant,no country it appears is below another in failing its children.
Who claimed any different?  However now you come to mention it I’m sure some countries have a far worse record with regard to the way its children are cared for and treated than others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 13, 2019, 07:19:22 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 13, 2019, 10:53:59 AM
Theres a whole raft of children that have suffered in this country when child protection failed miserably.
FYI the homicide rate for children is 0.7 per 100,000 in the UK, versus 2.5 per 100,000 in the US. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 13, 2019, 07:22:03 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 13, 2019, 07:19:22 PM
FYI the homicide rate for children is 0.7 per 100,000 in the UK, versus 2.5 per 100,000 in the US.
Although opportunity and compulsion are increased exponentially with the proliferation of firearms in the latter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 13, 2019, 07:28:50 PM
Quote from: The General on May 13, 2019, 07:22:03 PM
Although opportunity and compulsion are increased exponentially with the proliferation of firearms in the latter.
A knife is just as deadly
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 13, 2019, 07:32:03 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 13, 2019, 07:28:50 PM
A knife is just as deadly
Indeed. Just throwing it out there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 13, 2019, 07:44:09 PM
Quote from: The General on May 13, 2019, 07:32:03 PM
Indeed. Just throwing it out there.

unfortunately we have  a lot of child on child crime here...US is probably the same...absolutely tragic
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 13, 2019, 07:46:39 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 13, 2019, 07:44:09 PM
unfortunately we have  a lot of child on child crime here...US is probably the same...absolutely tragic
It is, and exactly what I was driving at.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 13, 2019, 08:07:56 PM
Interesting...according to this 2019 analysis the UK is the safest country in the world for children, astonishing really considering the fact we all prefer to leave our kids alone when we go out for dinner!

https://www.undispatch.com/here-is-how-every-country-ranks-on-child-safety/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 13, 2019, 08:11:28 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 13, 2019, 08:07:56 PM
Interesting...according to this 2019 analysis the UK is the safest country in the world for children, astonishing really considering the fact we all prefer to leave our kids alone when we go out for dinner!

https://www.undispatch.com/here-is-how-every-country-ranks-on-child-safety/

No, we don't.  You leave your kids alone while you go out to dinner.  I prefer to look after ours.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 13, 2019, 09:05:32 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 13, 2019, 08:11:28 PM
No, we don't.  You leave your kids alone while you go out to dinner.  I prefer to look after ours.
Give yourself a medal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 16, 2019, 11:14:41 PM
Another prominent contra-McCann speaker & associate of Amaral's in trouble....

https://www.portugalresident.com/2019/05/16/tv-crime-commentator-accused-of-five-crimes/

By portugalresident  2019-05-16 Posted  2019-05-16  InTop Stories 
TV crime commentator accused of five crimes
 TV crime commentator accused of five crimes
Francisco Moita Flores – one of the country’s most popular and insightful criminal commentators – has been accused of five crimes relating to his years as mayor of Santarém.

Say reports coming out this afternoon, the public prosecutor’s office has accused him of three crimes of prevarication and two of economic participation in business.

The crimes go back to the years 2009-2011.

Moita Flores was mayor of Santarém between 2005 and 2012.

Today’s news has not in fact specified names.

Official suspects were described as the former mayor of Santarém and a former employee.

But the dates leave no doubt as to which mayor the details relate to.

Texts say the alleged crimes concern building works at a local school.

A statement released by Évora DIAP (the department of investigation and penal action)said: “On the one hand, these works were not preceded by a contractual procedure, and on another, the former mayor signed documentation corresponding to a transfer of credits from the building company to a bank, in which he bound the municipality to pay two bills emitted by the builder, to the value of €300,000 and €200,000, without the costs in question corresponding to any responsibility, commitment or adjudicatory decision. This (was done) to viabilize payments to the building company as they could not be have been effected directly by the municipality”.

This case will now pass to what’s called the instruction phase for a judge to hear all parties and determine whether there is a case to answer.

Moita Flores started his professional life as a Biology teacher in the State secondary school system. He then moved on to the PJ judicial police, where he worked as an inspector, ultimately specialising in serious crime, armed robberies and homicides.

A brief return to the world of academia to complete a History degree, saw him returning to the PJ in 1992 in a directional capacity, involved in studying criminal movements.

It was in his quality as a PJ advisor that he began participating in ‘crime-watch type’ television programmes which changed the way the police related to journalists in this country.

Moita Flores entered politics in 2005 when he stood for, and won, the presidency of Santarém council.

Says Wikipedia, in 2009 he was honoured with the Order of Dom Infante Henrique.

natasha.donn@algarveresident.com
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 16, 2019, 11:24:06 PM
Has he been in trouble before?  I lose track with all these shady mates of Mr Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 16, 2019, 11:33:18 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 16, 2019, 11:24:06 PM
Has he been in trouble before?  I lose track with all these shady mates of Mr Amaral.

He was accused of libelling the ex-PJ Inspector Ana Saltao on TV..see http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6455.msg250473#msg250473
There maybe something else from his time as Mayor of Santarem; I will check that out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 01:14:40 AM
Quote from: misty on May 16, 2019, 11:33:18 PM
He was accused of libelling the ex-PJ Inspector Ana Saltao on TV..see http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6455.msg250473#msg250473
There maybe something else from his time as Mayor of Santarem; I will check that out.

I can’t believe you have nothing better to do than trawl  the internet for individuals involved in alleged criminal behaviour who had a connection to Amaral. What does it prove ? That all Amaral’s mates are dodgy...perhaps, but how does that help find Madeleine?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 17, 2019, 02:12:05 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 01:14:40 AM
I can’t believe you have nothing better to do than trawl  the internet for individuals involved in alleged criminal behaviour who had a connection to Amaral. What does it prove ? That all Amaral’s mates are dodgy...perhaps, but how does that help find Madeleine?

Like Cristovao, Flores is very vocal about Madeleine's case. Strange that both of the stone-throwers live in glass houses. I have a faint hope that if Cristovao is sentenced to serve time in prison for crimes he's currently on trial for that he will try to cut a deal & tell the authorities what really happened to Madeleine.

It's not necessary to spend hours trawling the internet when I can google in both English & Portuguese. Flores is the main news in the Portugal Resident today, a news outlet I read.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2019, 07:06:12 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 01:14:40 AM
I can’t believe you have nothing better to do than trawl  the internet for individuals involved in alleged criminal behaviour who had a connection to Amaral. What does it prove ? That all Amaral’s mates are dodgy...perhaps, but how does that help find Madeleine?
@)(++(*.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2019, 07:17:41 AM
Quote from: misty on May 17, 2019, 02:12:05 AM
Like Cristovao, Flores is very vocal about Madeleine's case. Strange that both of the stone-throwers live in glass houses. I have a faint hope that if Cristovao is sentenced to serve time in prison for crimes he's currently on trial for that he will try to cut a deal & tell the authorities what really happened to Madeleine.

It's not necessary to spend hours trawling the internet when I can google in both English & Portuguese. Flores is the main news in the Portugal Resident today, a news outlet I read.
Oh Misty, you’ve upset a couple of sceptics over night, shame on you.  Perhaps you could find a new article about a parent covering up the death of a child to make Faithlilly happy?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 12:13:23 PM
Quote from: misty on May 17, 2019, 02:12:05 AM
Like Cristovao, Flores is very vocal about Madeleine's case. Strange that both of the stone-throwers live in glass houses. I have a faint hope that if Cristovao is sentenced to serve time in prison for crimes he's currently on trial for that he will try to cut a deal & tell the authorities what really happened to Madeleine.

It's not necessary to spend hours trawling the internet when I can google in both English & Portuguese. Flores is the main news in the Portugal Resident today, a news outlet I read.

Whatever floats your boat I suppose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 03:33:57 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 03:27:44 PM
Wow that was quick. My post gone in a flash.  I had reckoned on a mod being about so there was no reason for misty’s libellous post to still stand.


Amaral & his associates are crooks & liars & they probably conspired to abduct Maddie.

Libel is only a libel if you accuse the McCanns, at least, that's my understanding of things.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 03:42:51 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 03:33:57 PM

Amaral & his associates are crooks & liars & they probably conspired to abduct Maddie.

Libel is only a libel if you accuse the McCanns, at least, that's my understanding of things.

Indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2019, 03:43:53 PM
Love how the sceptics on here get their knickers in a twist about libel when it suits them, other times its freedom of speech, innit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 17, 2019, 04:01:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 17, 2019, 07:17:41 AM
Oh Misty, you’ve upset a couple of sceptics over night, shame on you.  Perhaps you could find a new article about a parent covering up the death of a child to make Faithlilly happy?

I was wearing my boots on the wrong feet last night. 8(0(*
There don't appear to be any Portuguese cases of parents covering up the death of a child as they all confess to homicide immediately, even if they didn't do it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 04:09:42 PM
Quote from: misty on May 17, 2019, 04:01:55 PM
I was wearing my boots on the wrong feet last night. 8(0(*
There don't appear to be any Portuguese cases of parents covering up the death of a child as they all confess to homicide immediately, even if they didn't do it.

And even when they do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 17, 2019, 04:44:03 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 03:33:57 PM

Amaral & his associates are crooks & liars & they probably conspired to abduct Maddie.

Libel is only a libel if you accuse the McCanns, at least, that's my understanding of things.


Its not libel when it's the truth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 04:45:27 PM
Quote from: Lace on May 17, 2019, 04:44:03 PM

Its not libel when it's the truth.

So does Cristowhatshisface know what happened to Madeleine?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 04:46:23 PM
Quote from: Lace on May 17, 2019, 04:44:03 PM

Its not libel when it's the truth.

Is it true that Cristovao was involved in Madeleine's disappearance?

That was the allegation made.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 04:47:40 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 04:45:27 PM
So does Cristowhatshisface know what happened to Madeleine?

You beat me to it.

The PJ abducted Maddie  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 17, 2019, 04:50:53 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 04:46:23 PM
Is it true that Cristovao was involved in Madeleine's disappearance?

That was the allegation made.

I don't know but he is a crook.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 17, 2019, 04:51:34 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 04:46:23 PM
Is it true that Cristovao was involved in Madeleine's disappearance?

That was the allegation made.

I didn't say he was involved, did I? He may well know what really happened to her.  Despite not working on the investigation he was one of the first to write a book about the case & cash in on her disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 04:52:04 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 04:47:40 PM
You beat me to it.

The PJ abducted Maddie  @)(++(*

The theory that dare not speak its name   @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 04:52:50 PM
Quote from: misty on May 17, 2019, 04:51:34 PM
I didn't say he was involved, did I? He may well know what really happened to her.  Despite not working on the investigation he was one of the first to write a book about the case & cash in on her disappearance.

Why would he know ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 04:54:22 PM
Quote from: misty on May 17, 2019, 04:51:34 PM
I didn't say he was involved, did I? He may well know what really happened to her.  Despite not working on the investigation he was one of the first to write a book about the case & cash in on her disappearance.

Kate & Gerry may well know what really happened to Madeleine.

Is this libel?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 04:55:39 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 04:52:50 PM
Why would he know ?

Because the PJ abducting Maddie is a credible theory!

 (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2019, 04:57:41 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 04:52:04 PM
The theory that dare not speak its name   @)(++(*
Yep, I’ve heard dafter theories.  Police corruption is not unheard of, even in Portugal and it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that officers can be susceptible to being bribed or blackmailed to look the other way, or to stitch someone else up, if they just can’t be arsed to investigate properly.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2019, 04:58:23 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 04:54:22 PM
Kate & Gerry may well know what really happened to Madeleine.

Is this libel?
If it is it’s been suggested umpteen times on this forum without censure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 17, 2019, 05:00:07 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 04:55:39 PM
Because the PJ abducting Maddie is a credible theory!

 (&^&

I would say thers far more chance of a memeber of the pj being involved than the mccanns
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 05:00:55 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 17, 2019, 05:00:07 PM
I would say thers far more chance of a memeber of the pj being involved than the mccanns

Yes, you would say that.

Doesn't make it true though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 17, 2019, 05:02:16 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 04:52:50 PM
Why would he know ?

If you go back to the original post I said I had a faint hope of him having knowledge & cutting a deal. He's already up to his neck in trouble & has a four year suspended sentence for other crimes to take into consideration.
He may know nothing & just be another crooked opportunist ex-cop.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2019, 05:06:10 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 17, 2019, 05:00:07 PM
I would say thers far more chance of a memeber of the pj being involved than the mccanns
These sceptic types are the first to scream police cover up when it suits them - Hillsborough, Savile, etc.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 05:07:51 PM
Quote from: misty on May 17, 2019, 05:02:16 PM
If you go back to the original post I said I had a faint hope of him having knowledge & cutting a deal. He's already up to his neck in trouble & has a four year suspended sentence for other crimes to take into consideration.
He may know nothing & just be another crooked opportunist ex-cop.

You still haven’t explained why he may have knowledge.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 05:09:30 PM

No doubt SY have considered Cristovao's involvement.

Maybe that's why there's no joint investigation, incase the PJ dunnit  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 17, 2019, 05:12:20 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 05:07:51 PM
You still haven’t explained why he may have knowledge.

 The same reason as anyone else who may have knowledge. Please refrain from your attempts to make me libel someone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2019, 05:20:18 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 05:09:30 PM
No doubt SY have considered Cristovao's involvement.

Maybe that's why there's no joint investigation, incase the PJ dunnit  @)(++(*
Prove the PJ aren’t involved in some corrupt way in this case. They have failed to prove their innocence haven’t they?   ?  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 05:26:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 17, 2019, 05:20:18 PM
Prove the PJ aren’t involved in some corrupt way in this case. They have failed to prove their innocence haven’t they?   ?  8(>((

Yes, you're right, & apparently they refused to answer numerous questions they asked themselves  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 05:28:34 PM


Amaral's theory was just a smoke screen, & Martin Grime was in on it  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2019, 05:40:53 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 05:26:55 PM
Yes, you're right, & apparently they refused to answer numerous questions they asked themselves  @)(++(*
There you go then.  They must be guilty if they haven’t taken the opportunity to prove their innocence.  Sorted!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2019, 05:41:58 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 05:28:34 PM

Amaral's theory was just a smoke screen, & Martin Grime was in on it  @)(++(*
You said it, not me...  8**8:/:
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 05:51:19 PM
Quote from: misty on May 17, 2019, 05:12:20 PM
The same reason as anyone else who may have knowledge. Please refrain from your attempts to make me libel someone.

But why specifically Cristowhatshisface ? Do you think he may have any more knowledge than say you or I and if so why ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 05:55:19 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 05:51:19 PM
But why specifically Cristowhatshisface ? Do you think he may have any more knowledge than say you or I and if so why ?

Apparently he looks like the Smiths E-Fit.

It was a well organised abduction, him making off on foot & all  *%87
 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 17, 2019, 06:02:10 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 05:55:19 PM
Apparently he looks like the Smiths E-Fit.

It was a well organised abduction, him making off on foot & all  *%87

Perhaps the Smiths contacted the police after watching him on Neflix & gave a 100% positive ID. Case solved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2019, 06:09:51 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 05:55:19 PM
Apparently he looks like the Smiths E-Fit.

It was a well organised abduction, him making off on foot & all  *%87

I don't think he fits the descriptions given by the Smiths.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 17, 2019, 06:10:44 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 17, 2019, 05:26:55 PM
Yes, you're right, & apparently they refused to answer numerous questions they asked themselves  @)(++(*

Tis lost in translation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2019, 06:14:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2019, 06:09:51 PM
I don't think he fits the descriptions given by the Smiths.
He looks just like one of the photofits. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 17, 2019, 06:33:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 17, 2019, 06:14:04 PM
He looks just like one of the photofits.


60/80% sure?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2019, 06:45:34 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 17, 2019, 06:33:42 PM

60/80% sure?
Yup.  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2019, 07:06:04 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 17, 2019, 06:14:04 PM
He looks just like one of the photofits.

But he's too tall and too chunky to fit the descriptions.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2019, 07:09:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2019, 07:06:04 PM
But he's too tall and too chunky to fit the descriptions.
How tall is he?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 17, 2019, 07:11:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2019, 07:06:04 PM
But he's too tall and too chunky to fit the descriptions.

I don't recall DCI Redwood giving a description of Smithman's height & stature on Crimewatch 2013 (but I do agree 100% with your comment).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2019, 07:34:14 PM
Quote from: misty on May 17, 2019, 07:11:38 PM
I don't recall DCI Redwood giving a description of Smithman's height & stature on Crimewatch 2013 (but I do agree 100% with your comment).

Perhaps he didn't read the Smith statements.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 17, 2019, 07:46:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2019, 07:34:14 PM
Perhaps he didn't read the Smith statements.

That would be rather remiss, given his appeal to an audience of millions to identify a man seen in Luz at 10pm on 3rd May 2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 17, 2019, 08:21:37 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 17, 2019, 05:51:19 PM
But why specifically Cristowhatshisface ? Do you think he may have any more knowledge than say you or I and if so why ?

You can often judge a man by the company he keeps...
https://sicnoticias.pt/desporto/2019-05-17-Mustafa-em-prisao-preventiva-1
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2019, 09:47:02 PM
Quote from: misty on May 17, 2019, 07:46:17 PM
That would be rather remiss, given his appeal to an audience of millions to identify a man seen in Luz at 10pm on 3rd May 2007.

Why didn't he give a full description I wonder?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 17, 2019, 09:58:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2019, 09:47:02 PM
Why didn't he give a full description I wonder?

My opinion is he had a face for the 9.15pm Tanner sighting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 18, 2019, 07:04:22 AM
Quote from: misty on May 17, 2019, 09:58:50 PM
My opinion is he had a face for the 9.15pm Tanner sighting.

Why do his best to eliminate that sighting then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 20, 2019, 12:13:34 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 18, 2019, 07:04:22 AM
Why do his best to eliminate that sighting then?

I didn't hear ex-DCI Redwood say that Tannerman had been identified or eliminated. Did you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 20, 2019, 12:16:44 AM
Quote from: misty on May 20, 2019, 12:13:34 AM
I didn't hear ex-DCI Redwood say that Tannerman had been identified or eliminated. Did you?

He said almost certain. What did you take that to mean ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 20, 2019, 12:40:17 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 20, 2019, 12:16:44 AM
He said almost certain. What did you take that to mean ?

He said SY were almost certain the sighting was not the abductor. He didn't say anything about it not being an accomplice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 20, 2019, 01:09:46 AM
Quote from: misty on May 20, 2019, 12:40:17 AM
He said SY were almost certain the sighting was not the abductor. He didn't say anything about it not being an accomplice.

Redwood said that they had identified the man they thought was the sighting and that the man himself also thought it could be him. Where in that do you find room for the suggestion that he was an accomplice ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 20, 2019, 01:16:45 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 20, 2019, 01:09:46 AM
Redwood said that they had identified the man they thought was the sighting and that the man himself also thought it could be him. Where in that do you find room for the suggestion that he was an accomplice ?

Can you provide Redwood's quote in which he confirms SY had identified the Tanner sighting?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 20, 2019, 07:00:02 AM
Quote from: misty on May 20, 2019, 12:40:17 AM
He said SY were almost certain the sighting was not the abductor. He didn't say anything about it not being an accomplice.

I know how wedded some were to the Tanner sighting, but that's pretty desperate imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 20, 2019, 01:54:15 PM
Quote from: misty on May 20, 2019, 01:16:45 AM
Can you provide Redwood's quote in which he confirms SY had identified the Tanner sighting?

Didn't  you watch CW in October 2013 - when they ruled out Tannerman and their focus shifted to Smithman? They showed photos of the father aka Tannerman.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 20, 2019, 06:26:41 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 20, 2019, 01:54:15 PM
Didn't  you watch CW in October 2013 - when they ruled out Tannerman and their focus shifted to Smithman? They showed photos of the father aka Tannerman.
1)  Directions
All the exits from 5A were to the west of the fathers flat.   

Tannerman was coming from the west, the correct direction for anyone leaving 5A ...   But the father and little girl were coming from OC evening creche, directly in the east

Tannerman coming from the opposite direction to the anonymous father.   How does that equate to the situation ?


2)  Different times too, IIRC


https://youtu.be/OZ8jmdWlB8Y   

The two images seemed to be of different types of men.
i)  Tannerman athletic and casual, youthful looking, fairly long striding (especially in some of the earlier images.)  And slicked back, close to the head, straightish hair

ii)  The father looking like a professional on holiday; rather stiff and too upright altogether … can you imagine any father with child carrying experienced father carrying his daughter any distance at all, as Jane Tanner witnessed her little girl being carried?   With the child across his chest and over both sets of arms?  Altogether too exhausting for anyone but Charles Atlas and the father was hardly a Charles Atlas type and probably wouldn't want to be either ! This father  had a head full of  soft wavy hair.


Very different types and the directions are wrong .

The times too

Sorry, but I think that CI Redwood got this one wrong.   I don't think that the father was Janes Tannerman
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 06:35:35 PM


Jane Tanner is clearly satisfied she never witnessed an abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 20, 2019, 06:42:55 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 06:35:35 PM

Jane Tanner is clearly satisfied she never witnessed an abduction.
How did you come to that fact?  Cite please or logical reasoning please.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 20, 2019, 06:43:12 PM
Just the mode of carrying alone is hard to believe, given the build up of lactic acid in the biceps and shoulders after about a minute.
It's as if she's thought 'what's the most uncomfortable, unnatural way I can carry a child?'
I actually witnessed a young father carrying his sleeping child like this while on the tube the other day. He had his hands clasped under the child, but with arms out, as if carrying a log, but with forearms close to the body. It's the only way to relieve the pain I imagine. He didn't last long, he slung the child over his shoulder - then got off at Old Street.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 06:47:51 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 20, 2019, 06:42:55 PM
How did you come to that fact?  Cite please or logical reasoning please.

She was quick to talk to the press previously, not a peep from her since.

If she felt SY were mistaken she would have said something by now.

But she hasn't said a word, ergo, she is quite satisfied she never witnessed an abduction, & she knows best

Simples.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2019, 06:59:50 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 06:47:51 PM
She was quick to talk to the press previously, not a peep from her since.

If she felt SY were mistaken she would have said something by now.

But she hasn't said a word, ergo, she is quite satisfied she never witnessed an abduction, & she knows best

Simples.
@)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 20, 2019, 07:05:56 PM
Quote from: The General on May 20, 2019, 06:43:12 PM
Just the mode of carrying alone is hard to believe, given the build up of lactic acid in the biceps and shoulders after about a minute.
It's as if she's thought 'what's the most uncomfortable, unnatural way I can carry a child?'
I actually witnessed a young father carrying his sleeping child like this while on the tube the other day. He had his hands clasped under the child, but with arms out, as if carrying a log, but with forearms close to the body. It's the only way to relieve the pain I imagine. He didn't last long, he slung the child over his shoulder - then got off at Old Street.

Key point.

Even at the distance that Tannerman was away from 5A when Jane saw him, the small of his back must have been creaking.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 07:09:01 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 20, 2019, 06:59:50 PM
@)(++(*

Hilarious I'm sure.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2019, 07:10:03 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 07:09:01 PM
Hilarious I'm sure.
Yes, the logic, or lack of it on display in your post did have me chortling, thanks!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 20, 2019, 07:10:49 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 06:47:51 PM
She was quick to talk to the press previously, not a peep from her since.

If she felt SY were mistaken she would have said something by now.

But she hasn't said a word, ergo, she is quite satisfied she never witnessed an abduction, & she knows best

Simples.
Have you got an cite showing where Jane Tanner talked to the press?

"If she felt SY were mistaken she would have said something by now"  Logically incorrect IMO.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 07:11:04 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 20, 2019, 07:10:03 PM
Yes, the logic, or lack of it on display in your post did have me chortling, thanks!

I'm sorry,  care to explain what's so illogical about it then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 20, 2019, 07:12:14 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 20, 2019, 07:05:56 PM
Key point.

Even at the distance that Tannerman was away from 5A when Jane saw him, the small of his back must have been creaking.
I also noticed that by clasping his hands, his forearms turned in, thus making a sling, relying on grip as well as lower bicep.
I don't go around looking for blokes carrying kids by the way, but it struck me as unusual knowing the little I do about this case, so I thought I'd monitor his progress. Fair play to him, his biceps must have been on fire when he finally swapped position. The child woke up, which is probably what he was trying to prevent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 07:12:56 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 20, 2019, 07:10:49 PM
Have you got an cite showing where Jane Tanner talked to the press?

"If she felt SY were mistaken she would have said something by now"  Logically incorrect IMO.

She told the press in 2007 that she saw a man carrying a child, she thought it was an abduction.

She has since changed her mind, as is evidenced by the fact that SY have ruled her sighting out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 20, 2019, 07:14:23 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 07:11:04 PM
I'm sorry,  care to explain what's so illogical about it then?
To me it is illogical as it is only one of many possible reasons for saying nothing further.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2019, 07:15:52 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 07:11:04 PM
I'm sorry,  care to explain what's so illogical about it then?
Your belief that Jane Tanner would go to the press to contradict Operation Grange, and your belief that because she didn’t do something it proves what is in her mind.  It’s illogical, twice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 07:18:44 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 20, 2019, 07:14:23 PM
To me it is illogical as it is only one of many possible reasons for saying nothing further.

What other reasons are there for her keeping silent?

If she feels her sighting was still relevant then she's doing a disservice to Maddie by keeping tight lipped about it.

Maybe she just doesn't care about her anymore.

Poor Maddie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 07:23:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 20, 2019, 07:15:52 PM
Your belief that Jane Tanner would go to the press to contradict Operation Grange, and your belief that because she didn’t do something it proves what is in her mind.  It’s illogical, twice.

She has previous for going to the press against police advice.

No reason to believe she wouldn't do it twice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2019, 07:25:10 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 07:18:44 PM
What other reasons are there for her keeping silent?

If she feels her sighting was still relevant then she's doing a disservice to Maddie by keeping tight lipped about it.

Maybe she just doesn't care about her anymore.

Poor Maddie.
Or maybe she never got the memo telling her she had to communicate with the police via the tabloids.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 07:27:40 PM

Miss Tanner, who has kept a silence since Madeleine went missing on May 3, said she had decided to tell her story to fight back against claims that she was a "liar and a fantasist."

She defied the Portuguese authorities who have told Mr and Mrs McCann - and those with them on the night Madeleine vanished - not to talk about the case.

Miss Tanner insisted that she saw a man in the street carrying a little girl 45 minutes before Madeleine disappeared but thought nothing of it until the girl's bed was found empty.

"I have not spoken because the Portuguese police told us not to talk about the case at all and from day one we have done everything we can to help them with the investigation," she told a BBC Television's Panorama programme.

"I think maybe I am talking now because I am being called a liar and a fantasist and I know what I saw. I think it is important that people know what I saw because I believe Madeleine was abducted."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1569668/McCann-friend-saw-Madeleines-abductor.html

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2019, 08:07:33 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 07:27:40 PM
Miss Tanner, who has kept a silence since Madeleine went missing on May 3, said she had decided to tell her story to fight back against claims that she was a "liar and a fantasist."

She defied the Portuguese authorities who have told Mr and Mrs McCann - and those with them on the night Madeleine vanished - not to talk about the case.

Miss Tanner insisted that she saw a man in the street carrying a little girl 45 minutes before Madeleine disappeared but thought nothing of it until the girl's bed was found empty.

"I have not spoken because the Portuguese police told us not to talk about the case at all and from day one we have done everything we can to help them with the investigation," she told a BBC Television's Panorama programme.

"I think maybe I am talking now because I am being called a liar and a fantasist and I know what I saw. I think it is important that people know what I saw because I believe Madeleine was abducted."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1569668/McCann-friend-saw-Madeleines-abductor.html
And?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 08:09:48 PM

And....there's no reason to believe Jane Tanner would be keeping her trap shut if she believed SY had got it wrong.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2019, 08:21:25 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 08:09:48 PM
And....there's no reason to believe Jane Tanner would be keeping her trap shut if she believed SY had got it wrong.
So she talked to the Telegraph once, means she must gush incontinently to the media at every opportunity?  I see.  Good logic.  Not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 08:26:47 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 20, 2019, 08:21:25 PM
So she talked to the Telegraph once, means she must gush incontinently to the media at every opportunity?  I see.  Good logic.  Not.

She spoke to BBC Panorama, then, in 2013 her sighting was ruled out by the worlds finest police force.

She has never complained about it since.

If she thought her sighting was still of relevance she's had plenty of time to protest as much.

She hasn't, because she's quite satisfied she was mistaken.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2019, 08:31:08 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 08:26:47 PM
She spoke to BBC Panorama, then, in 2013 her sighting was ruled out by the worlds finest police force.

She has never complained about it since.

If she thought her sighting was still of relevance she's had plenty of time to protest as much.

She hasn't, because she's quite satisfied she was mistaken.
Just like Mr Smith then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 20, 2019, 08:31:16 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 07:23:17 PM
She has previous for going to the press against police advice.

No reason to believe she wouldn't do it twice.

And lest we forget while the details she was gabbing about were still under judicial secrecy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 08:34:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 20, 2019, 08:31:08 PM
Just like Mr Smith then.

When was the Smith's sighting ruled out?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2019, 08:35:09 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 08:34:16 PM
When was the Smith's sighting ruled out?
Who said it was?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 08:37:59 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on May 20, 2019, 08:31:16 PM
And lest we forget while the details she was gabbing about were still under judicial secrecy.

Oh but she's alright with it now.

She was adamant she might have witnessed Maddie's abduction, SY have said they're almost certain she didn't & she's fine with that.

Why won't Jane say anything?  For Maddie's sake!  8)><(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 20, 2019, 09:03:06 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 08:37:59 PM
Oh but she's alright with it now.

She was adamant she might have witnessed Maddie's abduction, SY have said they're almost certain she didn't & she's fine with that.

Why won't Jane say anything?  For Maddie's sake!  8)><(
To be honest, I don't think she comes across as a Mensa stalwart. She may be a bit confused that they didn't catch Mr. Eggman.

If that would have been a quip directed at Amaral, I doubt the hatchet would have been wielded.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 20, 2019, 10:34:47 PM
Quote from: sadie on May 20, 2019, 06:26:41 PM
1)  Directions
All the exits from 5A were to the west of the fathers flat.   

Tannerman was coming from the west, the correct direction for anyone leaving 5A ...   But the father and little girl were coming from OC evening creche, directly in the east

Tannerman coming from the opposite direction to the anonymous father.   How does that equate to the situation ?


2)  Different times too, IIRC


https://youtu.be/OZ8jmdWlB8Y   

The two images seemed to be of different types of men.
i)  Tannerman athletic and casual, youthful looking, fairly long striding (especially in some of the earlier images.)  And slicked back, close to the head, straightish hair

ii)  The father looking like a professional on holiday; rather stiff and too upright altogether … can you imagine any father with child carrying experienced father carrying his daughter any distance at all, as Jane Tanner witnessed her little girl being carried?   With the child across his chest and over both sets of arms?  Altogether too exhausting for anyone but Charles Atlas and the father was hardly a Charles Atlas type and probably wouldn't want to be either ! This father  had a head full of  soft wavy hair.


Very different types and the directions are wrong .

The times too

Sorry, but I think that CI Redwood got this one wrong.   I don't think that the father was Janes Tannerman

Delighted to see you posting again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2019, 10:37:47 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2019, 08:37:59 PM
Oh but she's alright with it now.

She was adamant she might have witnessed Maddie's abduction, SY have said they're almost certain she didn't & she's fine with that.

Why won't Jane say anything?  For Maddie's sake!  8)><(
What is it about sceptics who seem to think the McCanns and their friends should be updating them via the media on a regular basis?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 20, 2019, 11:26:12 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 20, 2019, 10:34:47 PM
Delighted to see you posting again.

Thankyou Erngath

But I am not entering any battles atm … and it will be rare, popping a bit of logic in now and then
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 21, 2019, 12:37:13 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 20, 2019, 01:54:15 PM
Didn't  you watch CW in October 2013 - when they ruled out Tannerman and their focus shifted to Smithman? They showed photos of the father aka Tannerman.

Again - where is the direct quote from Redwood saying that Tannerman had been ruled out & was no longer a person of interest?
If you watch Amaral's documentary O Enigma, you will see that Amaral portrays Tannerman becoming Smithman. Why would he do that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 21, 2019, 01:38:22 PM
Quote from: sadie on May 20, 2019, 06:26:41 PM
1)  Directions
All the exits from 5A were to the west of the fathers flat.   

Tannerman was coming from the west, the correct direction for anyone leaving 5A ...   But the father and little girl were coming from OC evening creche, directly in the east

Tannerman coming from the opposite direction to the anonymous father.   How does that equate to the situation ?


2)  Different times too, IIRC


https://youtu.be/OZ8jmdWlB8Y   

The two images seemed to be of different types of men.
i)  Tannerman athletic and casual, youthful looking, fairly long striding (especially in some of the earlier images.)  And slicked back, close to the head, straightish hair

ii)  The father looking like a professional on holiday; rather stiff and too upright altogether … can you imagine any father with child carrying experienced father carrying his daughter any distance at all, as Jane Tanner witnessed her little girl being carried?   With the child across his chest and over both sets of arms?  Altogether too exhausting for anyone but Charles Atlas and the father was hardly a Charles Atlas type and probably wouldn't want to be either ! This father  had a head full of  soft wavy hair.


Very different types and the directions are wrong .

The times too

Sorry, but I think that CI Redwood got this one wrong.   I don't think that the father was Janes Tannerman

I still think that Janes Tannerman did his dirty deed immediately after Gerry left and as he was talking to Jez.  There is a whole section about my mini theory about the time of the actual abduction and how it could have been achieved.   This was in one of the threads a couple of years ago. 

Thanks to her searching questions, which challenged me to think deeper, Gunit helped me with it, and we developed a scenario that could very well have happened, with a number of back up points which confirmed that.  Thanks G for your help.

Nobody could find any flaws with it IIRC, but it soon got drowned out by people who it seems cannot bear for The Mccanns to be innocent


No-one knows if my theory is what happened but at least we proved that it is totally feasible and could have happened.     Let's not forget that.   

Maybe the theory should be revisited, if it hasn't been wiped?  Some people have short memories if they are so inclined!

Just to remind people
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 21, 2019, 01:49:57 PM
Not possible. No open window or moving curtains at that time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 21, 2019, 02:04:48 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 21, 2019, 01:49:57 PM
Not possible. No open window or moving curtains at that time.

You mean no window or shutter was reportedly noticed open, which doesn't mean they weren't open.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 21, 2019, 03:20:16 PM
Quote from: sadie on May 21, 2019, 01:38:22 PM
I still think that Janes Tannerman did his dirty deed immediately after Gerry left and as he was talking to Jez.  There is a whole section about my mini theory about the time of the actual abduction and how it could have been achieved.   This was in one of the threads a couple of years ago. 

Thanks to her searching questions, which challenged me to think deeper, Gunit helped me with it, and we developed a scenario that could very well have happened, with a number of back up points which confirmed that.  Thanks G for your help.

Nobody could find any flaws with it IIRC, but it soon got drowned out by people who it seems cannot bear for The Mccanns to be innocent


No-one knows if my theory is what happened but at least we proved that it is totally feasible and could have happened.     Let's not forget that.   

Maybe the theory should be revisited, if it hasn't been wiped?  Some people have short memories if they are so inclined!

Just to remind people
Sadie's theory, the watcher and a getaway car.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1327.msg37641#msg37641
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 21, 2019, 06:47:53 PM
What getaway car? Nobody saw one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 21, 2019, 07:03:52 PM
Quote from: sadie on May 21, 2019, 01:38:22 PM
I still think that Janes Tannerman did his dirty deed immediately after Gerry left and as he was talking to Jez.  There is a whole section about my mini theory about the time of the actual abduction and how it could have been achieved.   This was in one of the threads a couple of years ago. 

Thanks to her searching questions, which challenged me to think deeper, Gunit helped me with it, and we developed a scenario that could very well have happened, with a number of back up points which confirmed that.  Thanks G for your help.

Nobody could find any flaws with it IIRC, but it soon got drowned out by people who it seems cannot bear for The Mccanns to be innocent


No-one knows if my theory is what happened but at least we proved that it is totally feasible and could have happened.     Let's not forget that.   

Maybe the theory should be revisited, if it hasn't been wiped?  Some people have short memories if they are so inclined!

Just to remind people

For the record Sadie's story has no evidence to support it in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 21, 2019, 07:06:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 21, 2019, 07:03:52 PM
For the record Sadie's story has no evidence to support it in my opinion.
Neither does amarals
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 21, 2019, 07:31:07 PM

There is plenty of evidence to support Amaral's theory.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 21, 2019, 07:33:54 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 21, 2019, 07:31:07 PM
There is plenty of evidence to support Amaral's theory.

no there isnt...he got it all wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 21, 2019, 07:35:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 21, 2019, 07:33:54 PM
no there isnt...he got it all wrong

Yes there is. He got it all right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 21, 2019, 07:36:38 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 21, 2019, 07:35:17 PM
Yes there is. He got it all right.

sorry...yes hes absolutely brilliant...thats why he was removed from teh investigation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 21, 2019, 07:37:02 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 21, 2019, 07:31:07 PM
There is plenty of evidence to support Amaral's theory.
This thread is for wandering off topic.  We are too much on topic ATM.  Keep off topic!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 21, 2019, 08:00:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 21, 2019, 07:06:00 PM
Neither does amarals

Did he mention my name in connection with his theory?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 21, 2019, 08:02:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 21, 2019, 08:00:27 PM
Did he mention my name in connection with his theory?

who cares
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 21, 2019, 08:58:56 PM
Is this still being trundled out ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 21, 2019, 10:03:55 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 21, 2019, 03:20:16 PM
Sadie's theory, the watcher and a getaway car.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1327.msg37641#msg37641

Thank you Brie.

You always take the time and care to read and analyse my often over long posts.  I know that is a chore, but sometimes my posts uncover hitherto never before seen new info.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 21, 2019, 10:34:05 PM
I found the following of interest ...

Date: 2007/07/05

Service Information

To: The Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation, G. Amaral

From: Ricardo Paiva

Subject: Emails about the whereabouts of Madeleine McCann

I compliance with your instructions, during the course of last week, the undersigned officer went to Praia da Luz to offer support and to accompany the couple Gerry and Kate McCann, parents of missing Madeleine McCann, following various emails received by the couple during the last two weeks coming from Holland, sent from the email address AMSTERDAMVU@gnail.com reporting supposed information about the whereabouts of the girl as well as about the identity and location of the abductors and referring that the author was prepared to provide this information in exchange for a large financial compensation.

The stress and anxiety of the McCann couple was visible and notable with regard to the situation, they replied quickly to the emails, which, from the beginning they believed to be genuine, given the fact that Gerry had lived in Holland and because of this the couple attributed greater importance to the emails, both expressing their conviction that the information in the emails would certainly help them to get their daughter back, even if it where necessary to spend the sum of 2 million euros demanded by the author in exchange for information about Madeleine McCann's whereabouts.

I bring this to your attention.

Signed

Inspector Ricardo Paiva

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 22, 2019, 01:47:28 AM
ENTER lollipop man!

Informed of these mails, the Portuguese PJ, acting in agreement with the English and Dutch police, engage in negotiations by email with the informant. The police advise Gerald McCann on how to act in order to obtain the maximum information. If the lead turned out to be credible, Madeleine might be freed and her abductors captured.

One day, we were all together at the PJ in Portimão - inspectors and negotiators, members of Scotland Yard and the Leicestershire police - waiting for a contact to define the place and the conditions for the handing over of the money in Holland; when the tension was at its height and we were all holding our breath, Gerald McCann displayed a nonchalance that surprised all of the police officers present, including the English. The atmosphere got heavier as the waiting drew out, but McCann, relaxed, was reading trivia on the internet and discussing rugby and football with the English police, while licking a lollipop. On the telephone, he laughed with friends who called him. Perhaps this was nervousness; sometimes it's totally displaced, given what is at stake at the time. His attitude shocked. When, two days later the dutch police informed us that the individual had been arrested, that he was not holding any information and had lied from start to finish with the sole objective of extorting money from the couple, we were not surprised. (TOTL)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 22, 2019, 02:19:51 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 22, 2019, 01:47:28 AM
ENTER lollipop man!

Informed of these mails, the Portuguese PJ, acting in agreement with the English and Dutch police, engage in negotiations by email with the informant. The police advise Gerald McCann on how to act in order to obtain the maximum information. If the lead turned out to be credible, Madeleine might be freed and her abductors captured.

One day, we were all together at the PJ in Portimão - inspectors and negotiators, members of Scotland Yard and the Leicestershire police - waiting for a contact to define the place and the conditions for the handing over of the money in Holland; when the tension was at its height and we were all holding our breath, Gerald McCann displayed a nonchalance that surprised all of the police officers present, including the English. The atmosphere got heavier as the waiting drew out, but McCann, relaxed, was reading trivia on the internet and discussing rugby and football with the English police, while licking a lollipop. On the telephone, he laughed with friends who called him. Perhaps this was nervousness; sometimes it's totally displaced, given what is at stake at the time. His attitude shocked. When, two days later the dutch police informed us that the individual had been arrested, that he was not holding any information and had lied from start to finish with the sole objective of extorting money from the couple, we were not surprised. (TOTL)
Your source is after all a book written about lies by a convicted perjurer ... probably best then to take it with a pinch of salt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 22, 2019, 12:15:59 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 22, 2019, 01:47:28 AM
ENTER lollipop man!

Informed of these mails, the Portuguese PJ, acting in agreement with the English and Dutch police, engage in negotiations by email with the informant. The police advise Gerald McCann on how to act in order to obtain the maximum information. If the lead turned out to be credible, Madeleine might be freed and her abductors captured.

One day, we were all together at the PJ in Portimão - inspectors and negotiators, members of Scotland Yard and the Leicestershire police - waiting for a contact to define the place and the conditions for the handing over of the money in Holland; when the tension was at its height and we were all holding our breath, Gerald McCann displayed a nonchalance that surprised all of the police officers present, including the English. The atmosphere got heavier as the waiting drew out, but McCann, relaxed, was reading trivia on the internet and discussing rugby and football with the English police, while licking a lollipop. On the telephone, he laughed with friends who called him. Perhaps this was nervousness; sometimes it's totally displaced, given what is at stake at the time. His attitude shocked. When, two days later the dutch police informed us that the individual had been arrested, that he was not holding any information and had lied from start to finish with the sole objective of extorting money from the couple, we were not surprised. (TOTL)

As usual Amaral  tries to give the impression that Gerry was cold and unconcerned.   When others were probably trying to lighten the mood for him     Then at the end Amaral makes an innuendo that Gerry was somehow 'in on it'   disgusting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 06:07:11 PM
Quote from: Lace on May 22, 2019, 12:15:59 PM
As usual Amaral  tries to give the impression that Gerry was cold and unconcerned.   When others were probably trying to lighten the mood for him     Then at the end Amaral makes an innuendo that Gerry was somehow 'in on it'   disgusting.

I do wonder why Amaral felt the need to portray Gerry as being cold and unconcerned, apart from his portrayal of Gerry and Kate in the "praying Arabs" scenario in his documentary which he admitted in the Netflix documentary was very exaggerated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 06:16:23 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 06:07:11 PM
I do wonder why Amaral felt the need to portray Gerry as being cold and unconcerned, apart from his portrayal of Gerry and Kate in the "praying Arabs" scenario in his documentary which he admitted in the Netflix documentary was very exaggerated.
Did he really make that admission?  To get someone like Amaral to admit to an exaggeration is significant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 22, 2019, 06:17:59 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 06:16:23 PM
Did he really make that admission?  To get someone like Amaral to admit to an exaggeration is significant.

 dont think its of any importance now...imo...the present investigation ...both PJ and SY  think amaral hadnt got  a clue
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 06:27:41 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 06:16:23 PM
Did he really make that admission?  To get someone like Amaral to admit to an exaggeration is significant.

He did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 06:28:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 22, 2019, 06:17:59 PM
dont think its of any importance now...imo...the present investigation ...both PJ and SY  think amaral hadnt got  a clue

It isn't.
And obviously he didn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 06:32:05 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 22, 2019, 06:17:59 PM
dont think its of any importance now...imo...the present investigation ...both PJ and SY  think amaral hadnt got  a clue
Having Amaral himself admitting he didn't have a clue would be more significant.  I nearly deleted your post because I don't think you can actually prove your statement when you say: "both PJ and SY  think amaral hadnt got  a clue".  Don't exaggerate yourself either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 06:34:00 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 06:28:40 PM
It isn't.
And obviously he didn't.
Remember when it is opinion let the forum know - 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 22, 2019, 06:34:40 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 06:32:05 PM
Having Amaral himself admitting he didn't have a clue would be more significant.  I nearly deleted your post because I don't think you can actually prove your statement when you say: "both PJ and SY  think amaral hadnt got  a clue".  Don't exaggerate yourself either.

read the post again...I said imo.....could you delete your insulting comment to me..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 22, 2019, 06:35:42 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 06:34:00 PM
Remember when it is opinion let the forum know -

it states its opinion...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 22, 2019, 06:39:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 22, 2019, 06:17:59 PM
dont think its of any importance now...imo...the present investigation ...both PJ and SY  think amaral hadnt got  a clue

the first part of the psot says  think...indicating opinion...teh second half is prefaced by ...imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 06:39:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 22, 2019, 06:34:40 PM
read the post again...I said imo.....could you delete your insulting comment to me..
You need to stop using ..... in your posts.  It is confusing as to which bit is opinion and which bit isn't.  We are talking about correct interpretation and translation, we need to be correct ourselves. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 06:41:09 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 06:34:00 PM
Remember when it is opinion let the forum know -

In my opinion Amaral did not have a clue.
In my opinion Amaral's theory is a load of mince.
In my opinion both current investigations are not basing their investigation on Amaral's theory.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 06:42:35 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 22, 2019, 06:39:17 PM
the first part of the psot says  think...indicating opinion...teh second half is prefaced by ...imo
I'm not a mind reader.  You make yourself clear from the start please. 

Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 06:41:09 PM
In my opinion Amaral did not have a clue.
In my opinion Amaral's theory is a load of mince.
In my opinion both current investigations are not basing their investigation on Amaral's theory.
That is making it clear.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 06:48:43 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 06:39:45 PM
You need to stop using ..... in your posts.  It is confusing as to which bit is opinion and which bit isn't.  We are talking about correct interpretation and translation, we need to be correct ourselves.

Is one IMO in a post not enough to express that it is?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 22, 2019, 06:49:39 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 06:41:09 PM
In my opinion Amaral did not have a clue.
In my opinion Amaral's theory is a load of mince.
In my opinion both current investigations are not basing their investigation on Amaral's theory.

If rob needs posts such as taht ,,,its his problem...thers lots of opinion posted as fact he ignores
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 22, 2019, 06:55:27 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 06:39:45 PM
You need to stop using ..... in your posts.  It is confusing as to which bit is opinion and which bit isn't.  We are talking about correct interpretation and translation, we need to be correct ourselves.

your post is opinion.....add IMO ...in future
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 07:04:24 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 22, 2019, 06:50:33 PM
my post had I think...and ...IMO...rob is suffering from harrassmnet syndrome

It did have one IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:08:30 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 06:48:43 PM
Is one IMO in a post not enough to express that it is?
Of course it isn't.  Each idea is either opinion or fact.  A sentence could be partially opinion and part fact.  Each part has to be made clear.  The use of "...." is not defined as far as I know. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:12:33 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 22, 2019, 06:55:27 PM
your post is opinion.....add IMO ...in future
It is the opinion of one of the moderators of this forum. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 22, 2019, 07:13:14 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:08:30 PM
Of course it isn't.  Each idea is either opinion or fact.  A sentence could be partially opinion and part fact.  Each part has to be made clear.  The use of "...." is not defined as far as I know.

you contribute very little to the forum apart from harrassing me..........I on the other hand contribute a lot...i think john needs to make his mind up...does he  support your continued harrassmnet or do i simply stop posting...
The forum is dying...im one of the posters keeping it alive....my post toady was totally within the rules ,,...but you have made a massive issue of it....lets see what John has to say
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 07:13:41 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:08:30 PM
Of course it isn't.  Each idea is either opinion or fact.  A sentence could be partially opinion and part fact.  Each part has to be made clear.  The use of "...." is not defined as far as I know.

Is every poster's posts subject to such scrutiny?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 22, 2019, 07:14:38 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:12:33 PM
It is the opinion of one of the moderators of this forum.

it is still opinion...and should contain ...IMO...do you not understand taht simple fact...or can moderators ignore the rules
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:19:25 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 22, 2019, 07:13:14 PM
you contribute very little to the forum apart from harrassing me..........I on the other hand contribute a lot...i think john needs to make his mind up...does he  support your continued harrassmnet or do i simply stop posting...
The forum is dying...im one of the posters keeping it alive....my post toady was totally within the rules ,,...but you have made a massive issue of it....lets see what John has to say

I don't see this forum dying.  Look at that thread on Mark Saunokonoko and its nearly 300 pages long. Threads that long become a big task for the moderators to read all that writing and assessing each post.  You might think you are vital  but I don't think that is the case really.

The fact is you don't like being moderated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 22, 2019, 07:22:18 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:19:25 PM
I don't see this forum dying.  Look at that thread on Mark Saunokonoko and its nearly 300 pages long. Threads that long become a big task for the moderators to read all that writing and assessing each post.  You might think you are vital  but I don't think that is the case really.

The fact is you don't like being moderated.

That is not a fact...its your opinion.......and you should either edit your post or remove it.

I wont post again unless john assures me moderation is fair and your harrassment will stop...i will pm John now
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:26:00 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 07:13:41 PM
Is every poster's posts subject to such scrutiny?
You go back, and recall I said to Davel I nearly deleted the offending post.  In other words it got through, but only just.  I am fair and I do look at every post but really long posts bore me and probably get the tick of approval.  I am only going to get one life, and there are pages and pages of posts to assess every day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 07:27:09 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:19:25 PM
I don't see this forum dying.  Look at that thread on Mark Saunokonoko and its nearly 300 pages long. Threads that long become a big task for the moderators to read all that writing and assessing each post.  You might think you are vital  but I don't think that is the case really.

The fact is you don't like being moderated.

It is my opinion that Davel is vital to the forum, as are many posters but not including myself and it is my opinion and at the risk of being given warning points that you do over moderate him !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:30:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 22, 2019, 07:22:18 PM
That is not a fact...its your opinion.......and you should either edit your post or remove it.

I wont post again unless john assures me moderation is fair and your harrassment will stop...i will pm John now
Moderation is fair.  I have read posts where Angelo has told you to stop and you outright disagreed with him.  That is why I stand by saying you don't like moderation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 07:30:15 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:26:00 PM
You go back, and recall I said to Davel I nearly deleted the offending post.  In other words it got through, but only just.  I am fair and I do look at every post but really long posts bore me and probably get the tick of approval.  I am only going to get one life, and there are pages and pages of posts to assess every day.

I can understand that you don't have time to moderate all posts but there are posts which IMO do not adhere to forum rules which manage to bypass any moderation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 22, 2019, 07:30:40 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:26:00 PM
You go back, and recall I said to Davel I nearly deleted the offending post.  In other words it got through, but only just.  I am fair and I do look at every post but really long posts bore me and probably get the tick of approval.  I am only going to get one life, and there are pages and pages of posts to assess every day.

You have to learn to speed read.  And anything debatable passes in my book.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 07:31:20 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:30:06 PM
Moderation is fair.  I have read posts where Angelo has told you to stop and you outright disagreed with him.  That is why I stand by saying you don't like moderation.

Who does?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:36:44 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 07:30:15 PM
I can understand that you don't have time to moderate all posts but there are posts which IMO do not adhere to forum rules which manage to bypass any moderation.
If you note any just reply to the offending post  with a comment like ""that was opinion not fact".

I often read posts that complain: "that was opinion not fact"  so the forum has a degree of self moderation.  It sorts itself out largely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 07:38:09 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 07:31:20 PM
Who does?
Davel  did.  IIRC.  That post was a direct reply to Davel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 22, 2019, 08:08:12 PM
I wonder why Gerry McCann said David Payne checked the children in 5A on Wednesday 2nd? That seems to have passed beneath the radar too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 08:11:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 22, 2019, 08:08:12 PM
I wonder why Gerry McCann said David Payne checked the children in 5A on Wednesday 2nd? That seems to have passed beneath the radar too.

Why do you believe Gerry said that ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 22, 2019, 08:41:50 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 08:11:37 PM
Why do you believe Gerry said that ?

Why not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 08:46:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 22, 2019, 08:41:50 PM
Why not?

When you see these discrepancies do you have the opinion that Someone was deliberately lying?
Or just mistaken in their recall?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 22, 2019, 09:57:09 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 08:46:37 PM
When you see these discrepancies do you have the opinion that Someone was deliberately lying?
Or just mistaken in their recall?

There appear to be two facts that most of the group agree on.

1. The Paynes had a state of the art baby monitor.
2. Therefore they never took part in the child checking routine.

So either DP checked the McCann children and only Gerry McCann knew about it or he didn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 10:15:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 22, 2019, 09:57:09 PM
There appear to be two facts that most of the group agree on.

1. The Paynes had a state of the art baby monitor.
2. Therefore they never took part in the child checking routine.

So either DP checked the McCann children and only Gerry McCann knew about it or he didn't.

I appreciate that you have concerns about what is recorded in the files.
Hopefully both current investigations have investigated these discrepancies.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 22, 2019, 10:21:17 PM

Month long search of landfill continues for 6-year-old believed murdered by relatives

(https://www.latimes.com/resizer/vuxWJM1BQ-TTDF5mnGdp22mR4vE=/800x0/www.trbimg.com/img-5ce2dda1/turbine/la-1558371743-zswl2dnpbe-snap-image)

Police say Duke Flores, 6, was killed by his mother and aunt and dumped in a trash can. (Apple Valley Police Department)



More than a month after the disappearance of a 6-year-old Apple Valley boy, police continue to comb an area landfill for the remains of Duke Flores, who authorities believe was killed by his mother and aunt.

On Monday morning, detectives resumed searching a Victorville landfill, where they think the boy’s body was dumped.

Dozens of people — including homicide detectives, San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department volunteers and landfill staff — have joined in the search, which is focused on an area that’s 70 feet wide, 70 feet long and 10 feet deep. Search dogs also are being used to scour the trash site.

The Sheriff’s Department has given daily updates of the ongoing search on Twitter, but so far, nothing has been found, sheriff’s spokeswoman Jodi Miller said.

The search for the boy began in late April, when authorities responded to family members’ request for a welfare check at his Apple Valley home. When deputies arrived, Duke’s mother, 29-year-old Jackee Contreras, said she had not seen him for about two weeks.

Detectives later arrested and charged Contreras, along with her twin sister, Jennifer Contreras, in connection with the boy’s disappearance. Both women remain in custody on murder charges and have not yet entered a plea.

Since April 29, detectives have been picking through the 1,200 tons of trash in the search area, beginning about 7 a.m. daily and ending at 5 p.m., Miller said.

No trash is being dumped or moved in the area while the search continues.

“It’s a very meticulous search,” Miller said, “so therefore it takes some time.”

Over the weekend, Apple Valley community members gathered for a vigil to remember Duke, although most did not know the boy.

“I’m just so tired of them doing this to the children,” Apple Valley resident Robert Collins told KCAL-TV Channel 9. “I just can’t fathom how evil somebody has to be to either kidnap, murder or harm a child.”

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-landfill-search-duke-flores-20190520-story.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 10:29:57 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 22, 2019, 10:21:17 PM
Month long search of landfill continues for 6-year-old believed murdered by relatives

(https://www.latimes.com/resizer/vuxWJM1BQ-TTDF5mnGdp22mR4vE=/800x0/www.trbimg.com/img-5ce2dda1/turbine/la-1558371743-zswl2dnpbe-snap-image)

Police say Duke Flores, 6, was killed by his mother and aunt and dumped in a trash can. (Apple Valley Police Department)



More than a month after the disappearance of a 6-year-old Apple Valley boy, police continue to comb an area landfill for the remains of Duke Flores, who authorities believe was killed by his mother and aunt.

On Monday morning, detectives resumed searching a Victorville landfill, where they think the boy’s body was dumped.

Dozens of people — including homicide detectives, San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department volunteers and landfill staff — have joined in the search, which is focused on an area that’s 70 feet wide, 70 feet long and 10 feet deep. Search dogs also are being used to scour the trash site.

The Sheriff’s Department has given daily updates of the ongoing search on Twitter, but so far, nothing has been found, sheriff’s spokeswoman Jodi Miller said.

The search for the boy began in late April, when authorities responded to family members’ request for a welfare check at his Apple Valley home. When deputies arrived, Duke’s mother, 29-year-old Jackee Contreras, said she had not seen him for about two weeks.

Detectives later arrested and charged Contreras, along with her twin sister, Jennifer Contreras, in connection with the boy’s disappearance. Both women remain in custody on murder charges and have not yet entered a plea.

Since April 29, detectives have been picking through the 1,200 tons of trash in the search area, beginning about 7 a.m. daily and ending at 5 p.m., Miller said.

No trash is being dumped or moved in the area while the search continues.

“It’s a very meticulous search,” Miller said, “so therefore it takes some time.”

Over the weekend, Apple Valley community members gathered for a vigil to remember Duke, although most did not know the boy.

“I’m just so tired of them doing this to the children,” Apple Valley resident Robert Collins told KCAL-TV Channel 9. “I just can’t fathom how evil somebody has to be to either kidnap, murder or harm a child.”

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-landfill-search-duke-flores-20190520-story.html


Why bring this child's death to this forum?
Don't you have any regard for his short life ?
What point are you making ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 10:32:18 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 10:29:57 PM

Why bring this child's death to this forum?
Don't you have any regard for his short life ?
What point are you making ?
It shows how it might be possible to dispose of a body through a landfill operation, and then how difficult it is to find a body disposed of this way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 22, 2019, 10:49:29 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 10:29:57 PM

Why bring this child's death to this forum?
Don't you have any regard for his short life ?
What point are you making ?

See Robitty's post, & I fail to see how sharing a news article equates to disregard for the child.

I feel sorry for the poor kid, as it happens.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 11:03:42 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 22, 2019, 10:49:29 PM
See Robitty's post, & I fail to see how sharing a news article equates to disregard for the child.

I feel sorry for the poor kid, as it happens.


Yes  I know you do.
It's just that  sometimes it does seem that examples of a child's death when members of his/her family are involved are brought to the forum as some evidence that Madeleine's family are involved in her disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 11:08:21 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 22, 2019, 10:32:18 PM
It shows how it might be possible to dispose of a body through a landfill operation, and then how difficult it is to find a body disposed of this way.

And you believe or have the opinion that this is relevant to Madeleine's disappearance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 22, 2019, 11:13:39 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 10:29:57 PM

Why bring this child's death to this forum?
Don't you have any regard for his short life ?
What point are you making ?

I have to admit this constant theme perplexes me.  None of the dead or missing children's cases paraded through the forum bear any relation to Madeleine's case and are therefore irrelevant even on an 'off topic' thread such as this one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 22, 2019, 11:54:29 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 22, 2019, 11:13:39 PM
I have to admit this constant theme perplexes me.  None of the dead or missing children's cases paraded through the forum bear any relation to Madeleine's case and are therefore irrelevant even on an 'off topic' thread such as this one.

The Maleah Davis case certainly does.

She is still missing, a cadaver dog alerted, & the last person to see her claims she was abducted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 12:23:04 AM
Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 10:29:57 PM

Why bring this child's death to this forum?
Don't you have any regard for his short life ?
What point are you making ?

Glaringly obvious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 12:26:04 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 22, 2019, 11:54:29 PM
The Maleah Davis case certainly does.

She is still missing, a cadaver dog alerted, & the last person to see her claims she was abducted.

In the majority of the cases posted the family is dysfunctional or already known to the authorities ... I reiterate that bears no resemblance to Madeleine or to her family.  I am not sure the intent you have specified and constant posting of such on the McCann board doesn't amount to libellous innuendo and should be treated as such.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 12:30:41 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 12:23:04 AM
Glaringly obvious.

If you think so and it seems quite a few other members including myself think so ... and no doubt visitors to the forum may think so too ... I would say it is glaringly obvious that a libel is being perpetrated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 12:45:55 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 12:30:41 AM
If you think so and it seems quite a few other members including myself think so ... and no doubt visitors to the forum may think so too ... I would say it is glaringly obvious that a libel is being perpetrated.

Nope.

It shows how a child might go into the rubbish system and his remains be hard to find.

Like Corrie McKeague.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 23, 2019, 12:46:51 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 12:26:04 AM
In the majority of the cases posted the family is dysfunctional or already known to the authorities ... I reiterate that bears no resemblance to Madeleine or to her family.  I am not sure the intent you have specified and constant posting of such on the McCann board doesn't amount to libellous innuendo and should be treated as such.

The idea that simply because the McCann's have no previous, this makes them incapable of faking an abduction following the accidental death of their child is well, laughable really.
The Police in 2007 concluded that is what happened, I've seen nothing presented since, despite two current police investigations, that disproves that particular theory, No evidence, nothing, just the words 'Not Suspects' for what they're worth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 23, 2019, 12:48:15 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 12:45:55 AM
Nope.

It shows how a child might go into the rubbish system and his remains be hard to find.

Like Corrie McKeague.
Shame the PJ never thought to do this, or bring in the dogs like I suggested before (and was told it would have been pointless because of the methane).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 23, 2019, 12:53:07 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 12:45:55 AM
Nope.

It shows how a child might go into the rubbish system and his remains be hard to find.

Like Corrie McKeague.

Indeed it does.

It's quite possible the paedophile/abductor/murderer guy, who wore a mask, smelled funny & had a fat belly, committed his evil deeds & then disposed of Madeleine's body in the trash.

That might explain why she still hasn't been found after 12 years, &, if so, why she probably never will be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 01:17:05 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 23, 2019, 12:48:15 AM
Shame the PJ never thought to do this, or bring in the dogs like I suggested before (and was told it would have been pointless because of the methane).

Which dogs?

Do think the PJ had access to cadaver dogs?

That would have made Eddie and Keela redundant.

Don't think so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 02:13:33 AM
Quote from: Erngath on May 22, 2019, 11:08:21 PM
And you believe or have the opinion that this is relevant to Madeleine's disappearance?
Those doing the searches looked in the bins.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 02:21:50 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 02:13:33 AM
Those doing the searches looked in the bins.

The PJ searches were after many bins had been emptied and taken to landfill.

I have no reason to believe there was any 'systematic' search before that.

And why should Madeleine have been put into a wheelie bin anywhere near Luz?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 02:49:07 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 02:21:50 AM
The PJ searches were after many bins had been emptied and taken to landfill.

I have reason to believe there was any 'systematic' search before that.

And why should Madeleine have been put into a wheelie bin anywhere near Luz?

Did you mean "I have reason to believe there was NOT any 'systematic' search before that"?
I suppose "I have no reason to believe there was any 'systematic' search before that."  says the same thing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 23, 2019, 02:55:14 AM
I have removed all argumentative posts which have no place here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 23, 2019, 07:23:04 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 02:21:50 AM
The PJ searches were after many bins had been emptied and taken to landfill.

I have no reason to believe there was any 'systematic' search before that.

And why should Madeleine have been put into a wheelie bin anywhere near Luz?
A systematic search would have taken the form of emptying them individually,imo.Maybe this is one criticism the PJ failed in ,which could be justified.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 23, 2019, 08:04:56 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 23, 2019, 07:23:04 AM
A systematic search would have taken the form of emptying them individually,imo.Maybe this is one criticism the PJ failed in ,which could be justified.

As I understand it the bins were emptied each night. Undertaking a complete search of all the bins in Luz that night was never going to happen imo. In fact would any police force anywhere have done that so quickly?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 23, 2019, 08:34:39 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 01:17:05 AM
Which dogs?

Do think the PJ had access to cadaver dogs?

That would have made Eddie and Keela redundant.

Don't think so.
Why couldn’t Eddie have been brought in earlier?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 23, 2019, 08:36:13 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 02:21:50 AM
The PJ searches were after many bins had been emptied and taken to landfill.

I have no reason to believe there was any 'systematic' search before that.

And why should Madeleine have been put into a wheelie bin anywhere near Luz?
Because the sceptic view is that Gerry disposed of her while carrying her on foot within a very limited time window.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 23, 2019, 08:45:47 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 02:21:50 AM
The PJ searches were after many bins had been emptied and taken to landfill.

I have no reason to believe there was any 'systematic' search before that.

And why should Madeleine have been put into a wheelie bin anywhere near Luz?

When did the bin men arrive as there is no mention of it during the search.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 23, 2019, 09:03:43 AM
I have to say I’d be bloody pissed off if I lived in Luz and had my sleep interrupted every night by the dustcarts. How do people put up with it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 09:31:25 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 23, 2019, 09:03:43 AM
I have to say I’d be bloody pissed off if I lived in Luz and had my sleep interrupted every night by the dustcarts. How do people put up with it?
Wouldn't that just be in the commercial district?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 10:37:07 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 23, 2019, 08:34:39 AM
Why couldn’t Eddie have been brought in earlier?

I am not aware of the date when such a suggestion arose, nor who raised the possibility.

AFAIK, Portugal did not operate cadaver dogs at the time.  If correct, I can see no reason for them to suspect that the UK did.  Can you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 11:02:46 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 23, 2019, 07:23:04 AM
A systematic search would have taken the form of emptying them individually,imo.Maybe this is one criticism the PJ failed in ,which could be justified.

There were 4 different designs of bin systems in use in Luz at that time.  These require more than one design of bin lorry to empty them.  However, all automate the process as far as possible,which makes perfect sense.

The operator does not see the detailed contents of the rubbish as it goes in.  To check thoroughly, you would need to get into the back of the lorry and rake around on every bin emptying.

There were over 180 bins in Luz in May 2007.  The search process was carried out on Monday 7th, as I remember.  The total was searched by 2 PJ officers and 3 council bin workers.

I wasn't convinced this was sufficient, so I looked at how rubbish was processed after this.

In one case in Lisbon, an 8 month old baby was detected in this way.  However, Corrie McKeague and Duke Flores both suggest bodies larger than Madeline can escape detection. and end up in landfill.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 11:06:44 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 23, 2019, 08:36:13 AM
Because the sceptic view is that Gerry disposed of her while carrying her on foot within a very limited time window.

Do you think the PJ took advice from such 'sceptics' in May 2007?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 11:17:26 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 23, 2019, 09:03:43 AM
I have to say I’d be bloody pissed off if I lived in Luz and had my sleep interrupted every night by the dustcarts. How do people put up with it?

They run nearly every night, but I don't believe every bin gets emptied once per day.  In our last place, the bins were normally emptied during the day, because we got very little traffic, so access was easy.

Plus there seems to be a common sense approach.  Bins that get filled up most often got emptied most frequently.  Ours were emptied less frequently.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 11:28:30 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 23, 2019, 12:46:51 AM
The idea that simply because the McCann's have no previous, this makes them incapable of faking an abduction following the accidental death of their child is well, laughable really.
The Police in 2007 concluded that is what happened, I've seen nothing presented since, despite two current police investigations, that disproves that particular theory, No evidence, nothing, just the words 'Not Suspects' for what they're worth.

You are wrong. 
The Amaral theory prevailed enough to have constituted Kate and Gerry as arguidos.  Rebelo's investigation totally dismissed that by relying on organisation and proper interpretation of the evidence.  All as detailed in the PJ final report.

Snip
The document outlines the different hypothesis explored by detectives and provides details of the extensive forensic research carried out.

But it admits that the McCanns were made arguidos "due to the mere possibility of their involvement" in Madeleine's disappearance and that subsequent forensic tests failed to link them to the death of their daughter.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2445177/Madeleine-McCann-Kate-and-Gerry-made-arguidos-on-mere-possibility-of-involvement.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 11:42:14 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 10:37:07 AM
I am not aware of the date when such a suggestion arose, nor who raised the possibility.

AFAIK, Portugal did not operate cadaver dogs at the time.  If correct, I can see no reason for them to suspect that the UK did.  Can you?

It was raised in the early stages of Madeleine's disappearance when their skills might have been put to beneficial use.

Snip
The question is ... why did they not deploy the dogs in the first place at a time when they might have been of some value to the investigation ... like actually discovering where Madeleine was.

The dogs were on stand by; but had to be stood down; I find the fact far more intriguing that their use was turned down when it might have been of assistance to Madeleine rather than them being used to implicate her parents.

Quote
Police in the Algarve appear no nearer to finding Maddie 20 days after she was snatched from her bed in the family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz. But the sniffer dogs are still being snubbed.
 
A senior UK police source said: "It is an absolute scandal, time is fast running out for this little girl.
 
"These dogs have immense capability. Their tracking skills are among the finest in the world.
 
"The dogs were put on standby to go to the Algarve within days of Madeleine’s disappearance.
 
"You would expect the Portuguese to make use of the best resources available to them, but they repeatedly ignore the offers of assistance."
 
The dogs include a spaniel whose sense of smell is so keen she can sniff traces of blood on a weapon even after it has been scrubbed clean.
 
But the source warned: "They work most effectively within a 28-day time frame. After that the scent becomes much weaker."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2890.msg100808#msg100808

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8044.msg397660#msg397660

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 11:55:31 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 11:42:14 AM
It was raised in the early stages of Madeleine's disappearance when their skills might have been put to beneficial use.

Snip
The question is ... why did they not deploy the dogs in the first place at a time when they might have been of some value to the investigation ... like actually discovering where Madeleine was.

The dogs were on stand by; but had to be stood down; I find the fact far more intriguing that their use was turned down when it might have been of assistance to Madeleine rather than them being used to implicate her parents.

Quote
Police in the Algarve appear no nearer to finding Maddie 20 days after she was snatched from her bed in the family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz. But the sniffer dogs are still being snubbed.
 
A senior UK police source said: "It is an absolute scandal, time is fast running out for this little girl.
 
"These dogs have immense capability. Their tracking skills are among the finest in the world.
 
"The dogs were put on standby to go to the Algarve within days of Madeleine’s disappearance.
 
"You would expect the Portuguese to make use of the best resources available to them, but they repeatedly ignore the offers of assistance."
 
The dogs include a spaniel whose sense of smell is so keen she can sniff traces of blood on a weapon even after it has been scrubbed clean.
 
But the source warned: "They work most effectively within a 28-day time frame. After that the scent becomes much weaker."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2890.msg100808#msg100808

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8044.msg397660#msg397660

That appears to be a reference to Keela and sniffer dogs, not Eddie.

I take it as Eddie and Keela both alerted 4 months later, the 28 day time limit applies solely to sniffer dogs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 23, 2019, 12:16:52 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 11:28:30 AM
You are wrong. 
The Amaral theory prevailed enough to have constituted Kate and Gerry as arguidos.  Rebelo's investigation totally dismissed that by relying on organisation and proper interpretation of the evidence.  All as detailed in the PJ final report.

Snip
The document outlines the different hypothesis explored by detectives and provides details of the extensive forensic research carried out.

But it admits that the McCanns were made arguidos "due to the mere possibility of their involvement" in Madeleine's disappearance and that subsequent forensic tests failed to link them to the death of their daughter.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2445177/Madeleine-McCann-Kate-and-Gerry-made-arguidos-on-mere-possibility-of-involvement.html

I said the police concluded in 2007.....the Robelo investigation didn't end until 2008....
As I understand it, the Robelo investigation neither found Maddie nor was able to confirm an abduction had occurred.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 12:23:47 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 11:55:31 AM
That appears to be a reference to Keela and sniffer dogs, not Eddie.

I take it as Eddie and Keela both alerted 4 months later, the 28 day time limit applies solely to sniffer dogs.
IMO refers to both EVRD abd CSI dogs i.e Eddie and Keela.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 12:27:25 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 23, 2019, 12:16:52 PM
I said the police concluded in 2007.....the Robelo investigation didn't end until 2008....
As I understand it, the Robelo investigation neither found Maddie nor was able to confirm an abduction had occurred.
What do you mean by "I said the police concluded in 2007"?  Please explain?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 23, 2019, 12:38:34 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 12:27:25 PM
What do you mean by "I said the police concluded in 2007"?  Please explain?

The interim report signed by Almeida.
I don't need to post it, we all know what it said, those were the conclusions of the investigation at that time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 12:46:20 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 12:23:47 PM
IMO refers to both EVRD abd CSI dogs i.e Eddie and Keela.

You are entitled to your opinion.  I see no reference to Eddie.  He definitely wasn't a she.  He definitely wasn't a sniffer dog.  And he alerted long after 28 days.

I don't know for certain if the blood dog was Keela.  It sounds like her, but I don't know the total number of blood dogs in the UK back then.

Do you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 12:51:26 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 23, 2019, 12:38:34 PM
The interim report signed by Almeida.
I don't need to post it, we all know what it said, those were the conclusions of the investigation at that time.
An interim report is hardly a conclusion.  IMO it was their "conclusions" at the time based on the misconceptions that the DNA results were a match.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 01:11:56 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 23, 2019, 12:16:52 PM
I said the police concluded in 2007.....the Robelo investigation didn't end until 2008....
As I understand it, the Robelo investigation neither found Maddie nor was able to confirm an abduction had occurred.
You said ... "The Police in 2007 concluded that is what happened, ..." which is entirely wrong.  The police concluded nothing in 2007 except the removal of Amaral from Madeleine's case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 01:17:38 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 12:46:20 PM
You are entitled to your opinion.  I see no reference to Eddie.  He definitely wasn't a she.  He definitely wasn't a sniffer dog.  And he alerted long after 28 days.

I don't know for certain if the blood dog was Keela.  It sounds like her, but I don't know the total number of blood dogs in the UK back then.

Do you?
This is how I see it: Keela has to be within inches of the "blood" before she is effective.  They needed to run a cadaver dog over an area first to get sites where there was an alert, and then bring in Keela to look for sites that could be analysed.
Without a doubt Eddie is a sniffer dog, he smells cadaver odour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 01:22:14 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 12:23:47 PM
IMO refers to both EVRD abd CSI dogs i.e Eddie and Keela.

I think that is a logical supposition.
The team consisted of Martin Grime ~ Eddie ~ and Keela. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 23, 2019, 01:27:09 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 11:42:14 AM
It was raised in the early stages of Madeleine's disappearance when their skills might have been put to beneficial use.

Snip
The question is ... why did they not deploy the dogs in the first place at a time when they might have been of some value to the investigation ... like actually discovering where Madeleine was.

The dogs were on stand by; but had to be stood down; I find the fact far more intriguing that their use was turned down when it might have been of assistance to Madeleine rather than them being used to implicate her parents.

Quote
Police in the Algarve appear no nearer to finding Maddie 20 days after she was snatched from her bed in the family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz. But the sniffer dogs are still being snubbed.
 
A senior UK police source said: "It is an absolute scandal, time is fast running out for this little girl.
 
"These dogs have immense capability. Their tracking skills are among the finest in the world.
 
"The dogs were put on standby to go to the Algarve within days of Madeleine’s disappearance.
 
"You would expect the Portuguese to make use of the best resources available to them, but they repeatedly ignore the offers of assistance."
 
The dogs include a spaniel whose sense of smell is so keen she can sniff traces of blood on a weapon even after it has been scrubbed clean.
 
But the source warned: "They work most effectively within a 28-day time frame. After that the scent becomes much weaker."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2890.msg100808#msg100808

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8044.msg397660#msg397660

That Sun article, which appeared on 23rd May 2007 seems to have confused sniifer dogs and CSI dogs.

"Two dogs attached to Britain's National Policing Improvement Agency have developed such powerful tracking skills they can follow a scent for miles, even one up to 28 days old.
 
By sniffing an item of Maddie's clothing, they could trace a trail that might finally unlock the mystery of the four-year-old's disappearance."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2890.msg100808#msg100808
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 01:31:07 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 23, 2019, 01:27:09 PM
That Sun article, which appeared on 23rd May 2007 seems to have confused sniifer dogs and CSI dogs.

"Two dogs attached to Britain's National Policing Improvement Agency have developed such powerful tracking skills they can follow a scent for miles, even one up to 28 days old.
 
By sniffing an item of Maddie's clothing, they could trace a trail that might finally unlock the mystery of the four-year-old's disappearance."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2890.msg100808#msg100808
There are those types of sniffer dogs too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 01:39:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 23, 2019, 01:27:09 PM
That Sun article, which appeared on 23rd May 2007 seems to have confused sniifer dogs and CSI dogs.

"Two dogs attached to Britain's National Policing Improvement Agency have developed such powerful tracking skills they can follow a scent for miles, even one up to 28 days old.
 
By sniffing an item of Maddie's clothing, they could trace a trail that might finally unlock the mystery of the four-year-old's disappearance."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2890.msg100808#msg100808

Goodness gracious me ... we are talking Red Top 07 here  🙄  ... and way before any of us were aware that not only in the repertoire did we have victim recovery dogs they could even be enhanced too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 01:42:57 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 01:17:38 PM
This is how I see it: Keela has to be within inches of the "blood" before she is effective.  They needed to run a cadaver dog over an area first to get sites where there was an alert, and then bring in Keela to look for sites that could be analysed.
Without a doubt Eddie is a sniffer dog, he smells cadaver odour.

Without a doubt Eddie was not a sniffer dog.  Those are dogs that are given something from the individual to smell, then try to follow the scent trail.  Eddie did not have that capability.

The videos show that Eddie had to be deployed in a highly structured manner before he might give an alert.

Keela was the same.  She had no ability to track a person via scent.  She had to be deployed in a structured  search before she could smell blood.

The GNR deployed at least 4 tracker dogs, and the relevant statements make it clear those would be no good as a cadaver dog or a blood dog.  It's also clear they were deployed early, much sooner than the alleged 28 day limit.  And the handlers' statements make it clear the obstacles they faced.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 01:46:04 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 01:31:07 PM
There are those types of sniffer dogs too.

I think whatever their respective training all dogs use their noses and can therefore be described as sniffer dogs.
I'm sure that would be an OK description back in 2007.
We are far more sophisticated now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 01:49:18 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 01:42:57 PM
Without a doubt Eddie was not a sniffer dog.  Those are dogs that are given something from the individual to smell, then try to follow the scent trail.  Eddie did not have that capability.

The videos show that Eddie had to be deployed in a highly structured manner before he might give an alert.

Keela was the same.  She had no ability to track a person via scent.  She had to be deployed in a structured  search before she could smell blood.

The GNR deployed at least 4 tracker dogs, and the relevant statements make it clear those would be no good as a cadaver dog or a blood dog.  It's also clear they were deployed early, much sooner than the alleged 28 day limit.  And the handlers' statements make it clear the obstacles they faced.

I believe Eddie started off as a Victim Recovery Dog ... which by nature of the task they are trained for ... are wide ranging.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 23, 2019, 01:53:43 PM
Tell me the difference between a Victim Recovery dog and a cadaver dog?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 23, 2019, 01:57:46 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 01:42:57 PM
Without a doubt Eddie was not a sniffer dog.  Those are dogs that are given something from the individual to smell, then try to follow the scent trail.  Eddie did not have that capability.

The videos show that Eddie had to be deployed in a highly structured manner before he might give an alert.

Keela was the same.  She had no ability to track a person via scent.  She had to be deployed in a structured  search before she could smell blood.

The GNR deployed at least 4 tracker dogs, and the relevant statements make it clear those would be no good as a cadaver dog or a blood dog.  It's also clear they were deployed early, much sooner than the alleged 28 day limit.  And the handlers' statements make it clear the obstacles they faced.

They can track the scent they are trained to find i.e. cadaver or blood.


In order to confirm that the dog had effectively 'marked' the car key, that was found in the
map/glove pocket on the side of the driver's door, at 04h13, that key was retrieved from the car
and concealed in a place far distant from the vehicle on parking level -3 of the underground car
park.
At 04h14, it was verified that the dog 'marked' the area of a sandbox [bucket of sand] of the Fire
System where the car key had been concealed beneath the sand.
At 04h50, a new inspection was performed by Eddy on the parking level -4 where the above car
key was concealed in an area far distant from the vehicle.
At 04h51, it was verified that the dog 'marked' the area of a sandbox [bucket of sand] of the Fire
System where the car key had been concealed beneath the sand.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 02:00:39 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 01:42:57 PM
Without a doubt Eddie was not a sniffer dog.  Those are dogs that are given something from the individual to smell, then try to follow the scent trail.  Eddie did not have that capability.

The videos show that Eddie had to be deployed in a highly structured manner before he might give an alert.

Keela was the same.  She had no ability to track a person via scent.  She had to be deployed in a structured  search before she could smell blood.

The GNR deployed at least 4 tracker dogs, and the relevant statements make it clear those would be no good as a cadaver dog or a blood dog.  It's also clear they were deployed early, much sooner than the alleged 28 day limit.  And the handlers' statements make it clear the obstacles they faced.
As you did also, I tend to call them "tracker dogs"    Who defines a "sniffer dog"?  Isn't that just a dog that uses its nose?

Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 23, 2019, 01:57:46 PM


Of course they can track the scent they are trained to find i.e. cadaver or blood.


In order to confirm that the dog had effectively 'marked' the car key, that was found in the
map/glove pocket on the side of the driver's door, at 04h13, that key was retrieved from the car
and concealed in a place far distant from the vehicle on parking level -3 of the underground car
park.
At 04h14, it was verified that the dog 'marked' the area of a sandbox [bucket of sand] of the Fire
System where the car key had been concealed beneath the sand.
At 04h50, a new inspection was performed by Eddy on the parking level -4 where the above car
key was concealed in an area far distant from the vehicle.
At 04h51, it was verified that the dog 'marked' the area of a sandbox [bucket of sand] of the Fire
System where the car key had been concealed beneath the sand.



Not in the usual way of tracking scent .  A cadaver isn't moving from place to place leaving a continuous trail to track.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 02:23:23 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 23, 2019, 01:53:43 PM
Tell me the difference between a Victim Recovery dog and a cadaver dog?

Why don't you look it up ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 23, 2019, 02:24:30 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 01:46:04 PM
I think whatever their respective training all dogs use their noses and can therefore be described as sniffer dogs.
I'm sure that would be an OK description back in 2007.
We are far more sophisticated now.

Of course they use their noses

A dog or dogs used by an American international airport screen inbound passengers for carrying larger amounts of cash than they have declared.  There was a particularly amusing incident when one Asian couple brought in a suitcase and box after box of 100US$ notes.  There was so much, customs officers did not have the time to count the notes, so they weighed it.  From that, the estimated value was 2.2 million.

Upon closer examination, Customs decided the notes were forgeries.

They asked the couple why they were carrying vast numbers of forged banknotes.  The Asian couple explained they were going a family ceremony in the US, and in Asian culture you burn cash as an 'offering'.  Their story checked out so they were permitted to leave.

Without the forged notes, which customs confiscated and incinerated.

It's clear that doggies do all sorts of fascinating things, many but not all using their nose.  To classify all as sniffer dogs is overly simplistic.  The 28 day period mentioned earlier might well be true for tracker dogs, I'm no expert.

But it did not apply to Eddie and Keela, because they were not tracker dogs,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 23, 2019, 02:39:09 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 01:39:34 PM
Goodness gracious me ... we are talking Red Top 07 here  🙄  ... and way before any of us were aware that not only in the repertoire did we have victim recovery dogs they could even be enhanced too.

But only one of them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 23, 2019, 08:39:22 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 23, 2019, 02:23:23 PM
Why don't you look it up ?

I don't need to because a victim recovery dog is a cadaver dog so the differences that you believe, a non-expert, is peculiar. Care to elaborate?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 23, 2019, 09:24:26 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 23, 2019, 08:39:22 PM
I don't need to because a victim recovery dog is a cadaver dog so the differences that you believe, a non-expert, is peculiar. Care to elaborate?

You may find this an interesting read. Eddie seems to fit the "Decomposition dog" classification.
https://www.prsar.org/cadaver-dogs.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 10:22:38 PM
Quote from: misty on May 23, 2019, 09:24:26 PM
You may find this an interesting read. Eddie seems to fit the "Decomposition dog" classification.
https://www.prsar.org/cadaver-dogs.html
As I thought "In today's world the Cadaver Dog is known by many names such as  Human Remains Detector Dog (HRD), Evidence dog, Decomposition K9, Grave Detection Dog, Victim Recovery Dog (VR), Drowned Victim Dog, Forensics K9 or Historical Human Recovery Dog (HHRD). All these terms really mean the same thing. A dog that has been imprinted and trained to locate and indicate the presence of the odor of Human Remains. These dogs are trained to indicate in the various stages and amount of human decomposition odor."  From: https://www.prsar.org/cadaver-dogs.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 23, 2019, 11:08:33 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 23, 2019, 10:22:38 PM
As I thought "In today's world the Cadaver Dog is known by many names such as  Human Remains Detector Dog (HRD), Evidence dog, Decomposition K9, Grave Detection Dog, Victim Recovery Dog (VR), Drowned Victim Dog, Forensics K9 or Historical Human Recovery Dog (HHRD). All these terms really mean the same thing. A dog that has been imprinted and trained to locate and indicate the presence of the odor of Human Remains. These dogs are trained to indicate in the various stages and amount of human decomposition odor."  From: https://www.prsar.org/cadaver-dogs.html

Was Eddie a Jack-of-all-trades type of cadaver dog or a master of none?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 23, 2019, 11:37:21 PM
He was in the Attracta Harron case.

"The court also heard Sheffield-based officer Martin Grime describe how his police sniffer dog, Springer Spaniel 'Eddie', first uncovered traces of Mrs Harron's blood from a burnt-out car and later her remains wrapped in a meal sack and dumped at the riverbank."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 24, 2019, 12:38:47 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on May 23, 2019, 11:37:21 PM
He was in the Attracta Harron case.

"The court also heard Sheffield-based officer Martin Grime describe how his police sniffer dog, Springer Spaniel 'Eddie', first uncovered traces of Mrs Harron's blood from a burnt-out car and later her remains wrapped in a meal sack and dumped at the riverbank."

Was the blood found in the car burnt or were the victim's remains buried in the river bed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 24, 2019, 11:22:45 AM
Another PM bites the dust,the case certainly has legs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 24, 2019, 07:29:30 PM
Quote from: misty on May 24, 2019, 12:38:47 AM
Was the blood found in the car burnt or were the victim's remains buried in the river bed?

The hushed crowded No. 1 Courtroom at Dungannon Crown Court also heard that Mrs Harron died from blunt force trauma to the head and face, causing fractures and brain damage, and that she was wrapped in a ‘shroud’ made from a meal bag, while slabs of stone were used to conceal the dead woman’s remains, which lay undiscovered for almost five months.

The car mat which was taken for examination also showed blood traces, and a DNA profile was made which matched that of Mrs Harron.

http://murderpedia.org/male.H/h/hamilton-trevor-william.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 24, 2019, 07:46:22 PM
Quote from: misty on May 23, 2019, 11:08:33 PM
Was Eddie a Jack-of-all-trades type of cadaver dog or a master of none?
If you were a victim (science forbid), would you give a rats ass what the dog was labelled as if it was helping the police to find someone or bring someone to justice?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 24, 2019, 08:02:12 PM
Quote from: The General on May 24, 2019, 07:46:22 PM
If you were a victim (science forbid), would you give a rats ass what the dog was labelled as if it was helping the police to find someone or bring someone to justice?


Many would, however as Kate tells us they thought it was funny  (haha funny)that the dogs would not be great witnesses in court,  and Gerry wanting the Dogs to talk to him like a human in order to believe they could assist woith anything... bizarre seriously bizarre
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 12:42:04 AM
Just one true story for your doggie file.

I was watching a programme called Developments in Forensic Science, in the small hours of yesterday morning.  It's the sort of programme I like in the middle of the night.  I found it very interesting.

There was a fairly brief section on the use of dogs by the UK police.

Let me introduce Gunner.  He is a 5 year old black Labrador, trained as a Fire Inspection Dog.  He gets wheeled out to check on possible accelerants, when humans are not sure of the cause of a fire.

He is trained to detect minute traces.

In a test session in a large, multi-storey building, a cigarette butt had 2 very small traces of accelerant added, then it was placed in a locker, in a long room filled with dozens and dozens of similar lockers.

Gunner was put to work, but only after he was fitted with fire-proof boots.

His handler conducted a structured search, starting on the top floor, going down a level, then down to the ground floor.

There Gunner got excited and romped off faster than his handler could keep up.

And then Gunner alerted to the locker containing the small traces of accelerants.

It was very impressive.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 25, 2019, 02:25:09 AM
Quote from: The General on May 24, 2019, 07:46:22 PM
If you were a victim (science forbid), would you give a rats ass what the dog was labelled as if it was helping the police to find someone or bring someone to justice?

As a victim, I'd be too dead to care.
As a person closely associated with a victim, I'd want to see the dog's actual  training records before I placed my faith in any of its findings relating to remnant scent alerted to weeks later in cross-contaminated area
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 25, 2019, 02:26:38 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 12:42:04 AM
Just one true story for your doggie file.

I was watching a programme called Developments in Forensic Science, in the small hours of yesterday morning.  It's the sort of programme I like in the middle of the night.  I found it very interesting.

There was a fairly brief section on the use of dogs by the UK police.

Let me introduce Gunner.  He is a 5 year old black Labrador, trained as a Fire Inspection Dog.  He gets wheeled out to check on possible accelerants, when humans are not sure of the cause of a fire.

He is trained to detect minute traces.

In a test session in a large, multi-storey building, a cigarette butt had 2 very small traces of accelerant added, then it was placed in a locker, in a long room filled with dozens and dozens of similar lockers.

Gunner was put to work, but only after he was fitted with fire-proof boots.

His handler conducted a structured search, starting on the top floor, going down a level, then down to the ground floor.

There Gunner got excited and romped off faster than his handler could keep up.

And then Gunner alerted to the locker containing the small traces of accelerants.

It was very impressive.

Did the exercise take place in a fire-damaged building?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 02:30:21 AM
Quote from: misty on May 25, 2019, 02:26:38 AM
Did the exercise take place in a fire-damaged building?

No.  There was a programme presenter and a video cameraman on site, which would have precluded that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 25, 2019, 02:33:29 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 02:30:21 AM
No.  There was a programme presenter and a video cameraman on site, which would have precluded that.

Thank you. So the exercise to find the accelerant was a simple test with a known outcome.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 02:47:29 AM
Quote from: misty on May 25, 2019, 02:33:29 AM
Thank you. So the exercise to find the accelerant was a simple test with a known outcome.

The test shows there is yet another category of police dog - a Fire Investigation dog.

I can understand how you can train this type.

Can you work out how you can train an 'excess currency' dog?  How does the dog tell that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 25, 2019, 02:58:41 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 02:47:29 AM
The test shows there is yet another category of police dog - a Fire Investigation dog.

I can understand how you can train this type.

Can you work out how you can train an 'excess currency' dog?  How does the dog tell that?

Bank notes have a odour I was quite partial to the smell of a crisp new paper fiver. UK has now switched to polymer bank notes, so I guess the dogs will need dual training (possibly involving maple syrup). I guess a large quantity of bank notes produces a stronger odour than a regulation quantity. However, I'm sure the criminal element will try to keep one step ahead of the dogs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 03:03:37 AM
Quote from: misty on May 25, 2019, 02:58:41 AM
Bank notes have a odour I was quite partial to the smell of a crisp new paper fiver. UK has now switched to polymer bank notes, so I guess the dogs will need dual training (possibly involving maple syrup). I guess a large quantity of bank notes produces a stronger odour than a regulation quantity. However, I'm sure the criminal element will try to keep one step ahead of the dogs.

The examples I have seen is they are trained to smell the ink.

Your up late?

I'm posting in the adverts section in crime programmes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 25, 2019, 03:12:02 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 03:03:37 AM
The examples I have seen is they are trained to smell the ink.

Your up late?

I'm posting in the adverts section in crime programmes.

It seems the metameric ink is used during the printing process of polymer notes. I will have a look tomorrow to see how it differs chemically from the type used on paper notes.
I'm often up late. Quiet time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 25, 2019, 07:12:34 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 12:42:04 AM
Just one true story for your doggie file.

I was watching a programme called Developments in Forensic Science, in the small hours of yesterday morning.  It's the sort of programme I like in the middle of the night.  I found it very interesting.

There was a fairly brief section on the use of dogs by the UK police.

Let me introduce Gunner.  He is a 5 year old black Labrador, trained as a Fire Inspection Dog.  He gets wheeled out to check on possible accelerants, when humans are not sure of the cause of a fire.

He is trained to detect minute traces.

In a test session in a large, multi-storey building, a cigarette butt had 2 very small traces of accelerant added, then it was placed in a locker, in a long room filled with dozens and dozens of similar lockers.

Gunner was put to work, but only after he was fitted with fire-proof boots.

His handler conducted a structured search, starting on the top floor, going down a level, then down to the ground floor.

There Gunner got excited and romped off faster than his handler could keep up.

And then Gunner alerted to the locker containing the small traces of accelerants.

It was very impressive.
Do you believe a human nose could have detected that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 25, 2019, 10:04:08 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 25, 2019, 07:12:34 AM
Do you believe a human nose could have detected that?

The dogs are not evolved like humans they still have al their sences. Smell, sound are very sharp indeed.  Dogs can also sense danger- and in the case of My Grandad on my sisters wedding night, he was feeling restless, our dog went upstairs to lay by his bedside which was strange because he was never allowed upstairs, as we were all enjoying the evening we heard a loudest screeching bark ever... My Grandad had a heart attack and died instantly.

Dogs can also sniff for certainm medical conditions- like cancer and pregnancy.  Dogs are wonderful creatures if treated properly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 25, 2019, 11:06:26 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on May 25, 2019, 10:04:08 AM
The dogs are not evolved like humans they still have al their sences. Smell, sound are very sharp indeed.  Dogs can also sense danger- and in the case of My Grandad on my sisters wedding night, he was feeling restless, our dog went upstairs to lay by his bedside which was strange because he was never allowed upstairs, as we were all enjoying the evening we heard a loudest screeching bark ever... My Grandad had a heart attack and died instantly.

Dogs can also sniff for certainm medical conditions- like cancer and pregnancy.  Dogs are wonderful creatures if treated properly.

I believe we can sniff out our mates. Scientists have explored this and found that we are drawn to the smell of someone who is a good genetic match for us.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/sep/08/can-you-smell-perfect-partner
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 12:50:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 25, 2019, 07:12:34 AM
Do you believe a human nose could have detected that?

Human nose trained extensively on accelerants?  Yes, but a pretty dumb thing to train on.

Human noses get trained on things much more important to humans.  Such as detecting the ripeness of cheese.  I dare say one could train Cheese Testing dogs, but I don't see the point.  Or as a Wine Smelling dog, again pretty pointless.

The dogs cover a larger area per unit time than is possible for a human.  The clearest example is Tito and Muzzy.  It would have been hilarious to see handlers on their hands combing that gorse.

It is just a case of the right tool for the job.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 25, 2019, 05:27:42 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 12:50:39 PM
Human nose trained extensively on accelerants?  Yes, but a pretty dumb thing to train on.

Human noses get trained on things much more important to humans.  Such as detecting the ripeness of cheese.  I dare say one could train Cheese Testing dogs, but I don't see the point.  Or as a Wine Smelling dog, again pretty pointless.

The dogs cover a larger area per unit time than is possible for a human.  The clearest example is Tito and Muzzy.  It would have been hilarious to see handlers on their hands combing that gorse.

It is just a case of the right tool for the job.
If a human can be trained to detect cadaver odour to the degree that the dogs can, then think how very useful it would be.  Martin Grime could be trained to confirm the dog alerts by actually speaking his findings to us, rather than have us guess what the dogs may or may not be alerting to.  Interesting that you maintain dogs and human have the same olfactory abilities.  Out of interest what is the science that backs up your claim?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 05:47:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 25, 2019, 05:27:42 PM
If a human can be trained to detect cadaver odour to the degree that the dogs can, then think how very useful it would be.  Martin Grime could be trained to confirm the dog alerts by actually speaking his findings to us, rather than have us guess what the dogs may or may not be alerting to.  Interesting that you maintain dogs and human have the same olfactory abilities.  Out of interest what is the science that backs up your claim?

It wouldn't be useful as I have already explained.  Are you seriously suggesting that Martin Grime should spend ages training so that he can trace very small amounts of cadaver odour, then go round on his hands and knees smelling for it?  How bizarre!  He's a dog handler, not a cadaver dog.

For the science, search for Vanessa Mae, where it has already been covered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 25, 2019, 05:48:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 25, 2019, 05:27:42 PM
If a human can be trained to detect cadaver odour to the degree that the dogs can, then think how very useful it would be.  Martin Grime could be trained to confirm the dog alerts by actually speaking his findings to us, rather than have us guess what the dogs may or may not be alerting to.  Interesting that you maintain dogs and human have the same olfactory abilities.  Out of interest what is the science that backs up your claim?

 (&^&  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 25, 2019, 06:19:24 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 05:47:17 PM
It wouldn't be useful as I have already explained.  Are you seriously suggesting that Martin Grime should spend ages training so that he can trace very small amounts of cadaver odour, then go round on his hands and knees smelling for it?  How bizarre!  He's a dog handler, not a cadaver dog.

For the science, search for Vanessa Mae, where it has already been covered.
Yes, I am seriously suggesting that.  The one down side of cadaver dogs is that they can’t talk.  Humans can.  Most of them are also able to get down on their hands and knees if necessary to verify a dog alert and confirm the alert verbally rather than by barking. 
Is Vanessa Mae an expert in the human olfactory system?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 06:30:47 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 25, 2019, 06:19:24 PM
Yes, I am seriously suggesting that.  The one down side of cadaver dogs is that they can’t talk.  Humans can.  Most of them are also able to get down on their hands and knees if necessary to verify a dog alert and confirm the alert verbally rather than by barking. 
Is Vanessa Mae an expert in the human olfactory system?

Exactly where would that take us?

Do you seriously think a court would accept a human alert, because the human can talk?

It leads up the same cul-de-sac.  It still needs corroboration by forensics before it would ever surface as evidence in a court.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 25, 2019, 06:43:57 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 25, 2019, 06:30:47 PM
Exactly where would that take us?

Do you seriously think a court would accept a human alert, because the human can talk?

It leads up the same cul-de-sac.  It still needs corroboration by forensics before it would ever surface as evidence in a court.
What do you make of this?

Dogs' sense of smell overpowers our own by orders of magnitude—it's 10,000 to 100,000 times as acute, scientists say. "Let's suppose they're just 10,000 times better," says James Walker, former director of the Sensory Research Institute at Florida State University, who, with several colleagues, came up with that jaw-dropping estimate during a rigorously designed, oft-cited study. "If you make the analogy to vision, what you and I can see at a third of a mile, a dog could see more than 3,000 miles away and still see as well."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 25, 2019, 06:53:06 PM
“What do dogs have that we don't? For one thing, they possess up to 300 million olfactory receptors in their noses, compared to about six million in us”.  https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/dogs-sense-of-smell/
Yet SIL writes this in his blog
“I have also checked on the ability of dogs, in general, to smell. Despite popular belief, scientific research shows dogs do NOT have a superior ability to smell than me.”

So either SIL is completely ill informed or he is a dog that has learned to use a computer to converse. 

Which is it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 25, 2019, 07:22:22 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 25, 2019, 06:19:24 PM
Yes, I am seriously suggesting that.  The one down side of cadaver dogs is that they can’t talk.  Humans can.  Most of them are also able to get down on their hands and knees if necessary to verify a dog alert and confirm the alert verbally rather than by barking. 
Is Vanessa Mae an expert in the human olfactory system?
What I think is that scientists would end up making a machine that analyses the volatile organic chemicals emanating from an area that has elicited a cadaver dog alert.  Are there specific signature molecules that define past presence of human cadaver?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 12:22:48 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 25, 2019, 06:43:57 PM
What do you make of this?

Dogs' sense of smell overpowers our own by orders of magnitude—it's 10,000 to 100,000 times as acute, scientists say. "Let's suppose they're just 10,000 times better," says James Walker, former director of the Sensory Research Institute at Florida State University, who, with several colleagues, came up with that jaw-dropping estimate during a rigorously designed, oft-cited study. "If you make the analogy to vision, what you and I can see at a third of a mile, a dog could see more than 3,000 miles away and still see as well."

Am I permitted to say cobblers?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 12:31:49 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 25, 2019, 07:22:22 PM
What I think is that scientists would end up making a machine that analyses the volatile organic chemicals emanating from an area that has elicited a cadaver dog alert.  Are there specific signature molecules that define past presence of human cadaver?

Body decomposition is alleged to go through 5 distinct stages of decomposition.  At each stage, different VOCs are produced.

Don't ask me for a cite.  It's in my backlog for a blog entry.  And I have more important articles to write before that one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 26, 2019, 01:22:23 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 12:31:49 AM
Body decomposition is alleged to go through 5 distinct stages of decomposition.  At each stage, different VOCs are produced.

Don't ask me for a cite.  It's in my backlog for a blog entry.  And I have more important articles to write before that one.
So that would be helpful to the investigators.  They would not just get a dog alert but if you are right there might be different chemical profiles depending on the history of the cadaver at the site.  I.e. they might be able to tell if the cadaver was there soon after death or was it deposited there at a later stage of decomposition.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 26, 2019, 07:08:17 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 26, 2019, 01:22:23 AM
So that would be helpful to the investigators.  They would not just get a dog alert but if you are right there mighty be different chemical profiles depending on the history of the cadaver at the site.  I.e. they might be able to tell if the cadaver was there soon after death or was it deposited there at a later stage of decomposition.
Post mortems determine that don't they?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 08:15:11 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 12:22:48 AM
Am I permitted to say cobblers?
Yes, but it would require an “IMO” and it would be helpful if you would provide a link to the research which refutes the science.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 08:16:46 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 26, 2019, 07:08:17 AM
Post mortems determine that don't they?
Only if there is a body.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 08:39:06 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 12:31:49 AM
Body decomposition is alleged to go through 5 distinct stages of decomposition.  At each stage, different VOCs are produced.

Don't ask me for a cite.  It's in my backlog for a blog entry.  And I have more important articles to write before that one.
Could one of your important blog entries expand upon your theory that dogs’ sense of smell is no better than humans, citing all the research which proves your point?  Putting down a food bowl for Goncalo (who sounds about as good at finding things as his namesake) doesn’t count.  Ta.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 26, 2019, 08:47:50 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 08:16:46 AM
Only if there is a body.

What rob is suggesting needs a body.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 09:15:04 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 26, 2019, 08:47:50 AM
What rob is suggesting needs a body.
Fair enough, but think how useful a cadaver human would be when there was no body.  “I can tell just by sniffing that the body was only here for a short while after death” for example.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 26, 2019, 09:40:45 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 09:15:04 AM
Fair enough, but think how useful a cadaver human would be when there was no body.  “I can tell just by sniffing that the body was only here for a short while after death” for example.

Would they run avout on all fours with their noses close to the ground like the dogs do? That would make an interesting sight.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 10:02:09 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 26, 2019, 09:40:45 AM
Would they run avout on all fours with their noses close to the ground like the dogs do? That would make an interesting sight.
No, they would let the dogs do that bit and then provide the final verification.  What’s your view on SIL’s contention that dogs have no better a sense of smell than humans?  You seem quite anti science so it would be interesting to get your input too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 26, 2019, 10:22:05 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 26, 2019, 08:47:50 AM
What rob is suggesting needs a body.


And the whole point of having cadaver sniffers is to detect if a cadaver was present in a designated area.. No point in sniffing a dead body to confirm it is dead... lol

SIL I disagree with you on this point. Dogs have a better scent detection that humans- Sorry...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 10:52:32 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on May 26, 2019, 10:22:05 AM

And the whole point of having cadaver sniffers is to detect if a cadaver was present in a designated area.. No point in sniffing a dead body to confirm it is dead... lol

SIL I disagree with you on this point. Dogs have a better scent detection that humans- Sorry...
It’s amazing that you find yourself needing to state the obvious but well done for doing so.  I look forward to SIL explaining why you are wrong, only he won’t, he’ll direct all his scorn and contempt at me for challenging his loopy views.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 26, 2019, 10:58:22 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 10:02:09 AM
No, they would let the dogs do that bit and then provide the final verification.  What’s your view on SIL’s contention that dogs have no better a sense of smell than humans?  You seem quite anti science so it would be interesting to get your input too.

Dogs can smell things that humans can't because they have more scent receptors; we all know that, I think. Therefore even trained humans couldn't verify a scent signalled by a dog imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 26, 2019, 10:59:39 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 10:52:32 AM
It’s amazing that you find yourself needing to state the obvious but well done for doing so.  I look forward to SIL explaining why you are wrong, only he won’t, he’ll direct all his scorn and contempt at me for challenging his loopy views.


Sounds good to me  ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 26, 2019, 11:00:46 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on May 26, 2019, 10:22:05 AM

And the whole point of having cadaver sniffers is to detect if a cadaver was present in a designated area.. No point in sniffing a dead body to confirm it is dead... lol

SIL I disagree with you on this point. Dogs have a better scent detection that humans- Sorry...

Never seen a pack of men,hunting a scent of the deer or fox,packs of men following the hounds  though.
What were/are bloodhounds trained for?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 26, 2019, 11:04:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 26, 2019, 10:58:22 AM
Dogs can smell things that humans can't because they have more scent receptors; we all know that, I think. Therefore even trained humans couldn't verify a scent signalled by a dog imo.

Indeed G. It is like I said... dogs still have their 6th Sense IMO.  they hear sounds we cannot- even with our perfect hearing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 26, 2019, 11:11:58 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 26, 2019, 11:00:46 AM
Never seen a pack of men,hunting a scent of the deer or fox,packs of men following the hounds  though.
What were/are bloodhounds trained for?

We stopped fox hunters from entering our land after Great Grandad died. It is a vile 'sport'. Even though I do support fox numbers being reduced they are bad for farming.

The dogs!

https://www.wonderopolis.org/wonder/what-makes-bloodhounds-good-detectives/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 26, 2019, 11:17:49 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 26, 2019, 07:08:17 AM
Post mortems determine that don't they?
Yes they do but cadaver dogs pick up the past presence of a cadaver.  In other words there may be no cadaver to do a post mortem on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 26, 2019, 11:19:56 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 26, 2019, 08:47:50 AM
What rob is suggesting needs a body.
No, it was the machine analysis of the same odour that a cadaver dog smells.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 26, 2019, 11:25:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 26, 2019, 10:58:22 AM
Dogs can smell things that humans can't because they have more scent receptors; we all know that, I think. Therefore even trained humans couldn't verify a scent signalled by a dog imo.
I was dying to say this but IMO it is the amount of the brain devoted to the analysis of the signal coming from the scent receptors that is the most important.  It is the way the dog can consciously interpret what is being picked up that is important.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 26, 2019, 11:27:00 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 26, 2019, 11:17:49 AM
Yes they do but cadaver dogs pick up the past presence of a cadaver.  In other words there may be no cadaver to do a post mortem on.

Then it can't be known at what stage of decomposition a dog alerted to the cadaver then can it.


Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 26, 2019, 01:22:23 AM
So that would be helpful to the investigators.  They would not just get a dog alert but if you are right there might be different chemical profiles depending on the history of the cadaver at the site. I.e. they might be able to tell if the cadaver was there soon after death or was it deposited there at a later stage of decomposition.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 12:29:39 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 26, 2019, 10:59:39 AM

Sounds good to me  ?{)(**
Why, when I am clearly right and he is clearly barking up the wrong tree? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 12:55:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 08:39:06 AM
Could one of your important blog entries expand upon your theory that dogs’ sense of smell is no better than humans, citing all the research which proves your point?  Putting down a food bowl for Goncalo (who sounds about as good at finding things as his namesake) doesn’t count.  Ta.

As you appear fond of bringing chunks of my blog here, you should have noticed that I'm not fond of bogging down my blog with cite after cite.

Therefore, no.

Particularly as you have chosen to diss Gonçalo without knowing much about him.  Don't bite the hand that feeds springs to mind.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 01:02:17 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 12:55:43 PM
As you appear fond of bringing chunks of my blog here, you should have noticed that I'm not fond of bogging down my blog with cite after cite.

Therefore, no.

Particularly as you have chosen to diss Gonçalo without knowing much about him.  Don't bite the hand that feeds springs to mind.
I believe it is the first time I have quoted from your cite-free blog, however I may be wrong about that.  Nevertheless, we can now draw our own conclusions about how important your blog is, and how many fact based claims are contained therein.  You seem to be on your own with your “humans have the same sense of smell as dogs” nonsense.  I suppose I shouldn’t highlight such glaringly bizarre entries  as it could be considered cruel to do so, but when you set yourself up as the fount of all knowledge who must not be contradcted, it’s difficult to resist.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 01:14:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 01:02:17 PM
I believe it is the first time I have quoted from your cite-free blog, however I may be wrong about that.  Nevertheless, we can now draw our own conclusions about how important your blog is, and how many fact based claims are contained therein.  You seem to be on your own with your “humans have the same sense of smell as dogs” nonsense.  I suppose I shouldn’t highlight such glaringly bizarre entries  as it could be considered cruel to do so, but when you set yourself up as the fount of all knowledge who must not be contradcted, it’s difficult to resist.  @)(++(*

Don't worry.  From memory, my blog entry explains your misconception.

The nearest comparable misconception I can think of is that humans only use about 10% of their brain.

Or in the MBM case it is the Scandal At Chaplin's.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 01:26:57 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 01:14:43 PM
Don't worry.  From memory, my blog entry explains your misconception.

The nearest comparable misconception I can think of is that humans only use about 10% of their brain.

Or in the MBM case it is the Scandal At Chaplin's.
Your blog entry explains nothing except your very unscientific opinions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 01:56:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 01:26:57 PM
Your blog entry explains nothing except your very unscientific opinions.

That's obviously IYO, so you might care to amend your post to that effect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on May 26, 2019, 02:05:56 PM
Some posts have been unnecessarily aggressive and combative recently which is not conducive to constructive debate. By all means promote opinion and explore theories as long as such are based on facts and accepted understanding.

Finally, please keep posts amicable and informative at all times. TY.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 02:07:00 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 01:56:19 PM
That's obviously IYO, so you might care to amend your post to that effect.
As there are no cites in your blog it is ONLY YOUR OPINION.  Right? 
Now, do you think Martin Grime is wrong when he writes:

“Canine olfaction is far more sensitive and discriminatory than that of humans”

http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/1/Forensic%20Canine%20Foundation%20.pdf

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 26, 2019, 03:51:24 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 26, 2019, 11:27:00 AM
Then it can't be known at what stage of decomposition a dog alerted to the cadaver then can it.

I think dogs can probably tell what stage of decomposition a cadaver is at.  Mine reacts differently to dead birds or fish she finds on the beach.

She either does a stiff legged waltz around if the carcass is fresh ... approaching then retreating, but never touching; or there is nothing like a good roll if it is smelly enough; or she paws it then pees on it: if there is nothing left she will roll in the place it was lying. 

She never combines these reactions, each one is individual and from observation I think each one is prompted by the condition of what she is smelling whether fresh, mummified or in bits.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 26, 2019, 04:59:12 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 26, 2019, 03:51:24 PM
I think dogs can probably tell what stage of decomposition a cadaver is at.  Mine reacts differently to dead birds or fish she finds on the beach.

She either does a stiff legged waltz around if the carcass is fresh ... approaching then retreating, but never touching; or there is nothing like a good roll if it is smelly enough; or she paws it then pees on it: if there is nothing left she will roll in the place it was lying. 

She never combines these reactions, each one is individual and from observation I think each one is prompted by the condition of what she is smelling whether fresh, mummified or in bits.

They also roll in poo. Nobody really knows why dogs like rolling in nasty smelling things, but all dogs do it.
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170608-the-many-reasons-why-dogs-might-roll-in-smelly-poo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 05:06:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 02:07:00 PM
As there are no cites in your blog it is ONLY YOUR OPINION.  Right? 
Now, do you think Martin Grime is wrong when he writes:

“Canine olfaction is far more sensitive and discriminatory than that of humans”

http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/1/Forensic%20Canine%20Foundation%20.pdf

Yes.

Vanessa Mae.

What is the sound of a dead horse being flogged?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 26, 2019, 05:08:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 26, 2019, 04:59:12 PM
They also roll in poo. Nobody really knows why dogs like rolling in nasty smelling things, but all dogs do it.
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170608-the-many-reasons-why-dogs-might-roll-in-smelly-poo

My ghastly Dachshund only rolls on dead bodies.  He isn't fussy about which.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 05:11:31 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 26, 2019, 03:51:24 PM
I think dogs can probably tell what stage of decomposition a cadaver is at.  Mine reacts differently to dead birds or fish she finds on the beach.

She either does a stiff legged waltz around if the carcass is fresh ... approaching then retreating, but never touching; or there is nothing like a good roll if it is smelly enough; or she paws it then pees on it: if there is nothing left she will roll in the place it was lying. 

She never combines these reactions, each one is individual and from observation I think each one is prompted by the condition of what she is smelling whether fresh, mummified or in bits.

Now that is a quite interesting food for thought.    *&(+(+
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 26, 2019, 05:17:54 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 26, 2019, 03:51:24 PM
I think dogs can probably tell what stage of decomposition a cadaver is at.  Mine reacts differently to dead birds or fish she finds on the beach.

She either does a stiff legged waltz around if the carcass is fresh ... approaching then retreating, but never touching; or there is nothing like a good roll if it is smelly enough; or she paws it then pees on it: if there is nothing left she will roll in the place it was lying. 

She never combines these reactions, each one is individual and from observation I think each one is prompted by the condition of what she is smelling whether fresh, mummified or in bits.

But if say a body is found in a particular place a dog will never tell you where it died where as a human might not be able to as well,but a post mortem will determine if the death occurred in situ or the body was moved post mortem.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 26, 2019, 05:30:35 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 05:11:31 PM
Now that is a quite interesting food for thought.    *&(+(+

On rereading ... the only time she is vocal is when she encounters the 'fresh' remains she circles.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 05:37:58 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 05:06:38 PM
Yes.

Vanessa Mae.

What is the sound of a dead horse being flogged?
So in your opinion Martin Grime the dog handler is wrong and some bird you keep referring to called Vanessa Mae (the classical violinist?) but whom you refuse to provide any cites for is correct about dogs and humans olfactory abilities.  Do you have any idea how foolish you are appearing to the “guests” who read this forum and to your fellow forum members?   *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 05:50:33 PM
For SIL.  Perhaps he could re-write it for Wikipedia so that it accurately explains his belief that dogs have no better sense if smell than humans:

While the human brain is dominated by a large visual cortex, the dog brain is dominated by a large olfactory cortex.[23] Dogs have roughly forty times more smell-sensitive receptors than humans, ranging from about 125 million to nearly 300 million in some dog breeds, such as bloodhounds.[23] This is thought to make its sense of smell up to 40 times more sensitive than human's.[38]:246 These receptors are spread over an area about the size of a pocket handkerchief (compared to 5 million over an area the size of a postage stamp for humans).[39][40] Dogs' sense of smell also includes the use of the vomeronasal organ, which is used primarily for social interactions.

The dog has mobile nostrils that help it determine the direction of the scent. Unlike humans, the dog does not need to fill up his lungs as he continuously brings the odor into his nose in bursts of 3-7 sniffs. The dog's nose has a bony structure inside that humans don't have, which allows the air that has been sniffed to pass over a bony shelf and many odor molecules stick to it. The air above this shelf is not washed out when the dog breathes normally, so the scent molecules accumulate in the nasal chambers and the scent builds with intensity, allowing the dog to detect the faintest of odors.[38]:247

One study into the learning ability of dogs compared to wolves indicated that dogs have a better sense of smell than wolves when locating hidden food, but there has yet been no experimental data to support this view.[41]

The wet nose, or rhinarium, is essential for determining the direction of the air current containing the smell. Cold receptors in the skin are sensitive to the cooling of the skin by evaporation of the moisture by air currents.[42]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 06:07:30 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 26, 2019, 05:30:35 PM
On rereading ... the only time she is vocal is when she encounters the 'fresh' remains she circles.

OK, perhaps I was not clear enough the first time, so let me have a second bite at the cherry.

It appears that human cadavers normally go through 5 distinct stages of decomposition.  I'm talking about bodies buried in shallow graves etc., not those sent to undertakers.  Think CSI type cadavers and cadaver dogs.

Here's my sanity check.  How does a handler train a dog to recognise 5 different stages of human decomposition, each giving off a different smell?  Without a body farm, that is one tough challenge.

So the fact that your dog reacts differently to different stages of decomposition in a dead fish is interesting.  I don't really have access to an intact, whole dead fish, nor a beach.  So I'm not sure if I can replicate your findings.  But it is an extremely interesting thought.

Equally, I have no evidence as to the issue of fish decomposition v human decomposition.


PS.  I reckon your dog is a cadaver dog.  What's her name?

 *&(+(+
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2019, 06:18:34 PM
I think sils confusing scent and smell...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 06:25:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 05:37:58 PM
So in your opinion Martin Grime the dog handler is wrong and some bird you keep referring to called Vanessa Mae (the classical violinist?) but whom you refuse to provide any cites for is correct about dogs and humans olfactory abilities.  Do you have any idea how foolish you are appearing to the “guests” who read this forum and to your fellow forum members?   *%87

Do you remember going to my blog, cherry picking a copy and paste, and posting it on here?

Forum rules do not require that I give a cite for your post.  That is called a no-brainer.

Guests on here can go to my blog and decide for themselves.  Equally, they can comment on my blog, whether they agree or disagree with my article.  From memory, Anne Guedes, one of my magnificent six, disagreed.  Her comment still stands.

Parting comment.  Vanessa Mae.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 06:31:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 05:50:33 PM
For SIL.  Perhaps he could re-write it for Wikipedia so that it accurately explains his belief that dogs have no better sense if smell than humans:

While the human brain is dominated by a large visual cortex, the dog brain is dominated by a large olfactory cortex.[23] Dogs have roughly forty times more smell-sensitive receptors than humans, ranging from about 125 million to nearly 300 million in some dog breeds, such as bloodhounds.[23] This is thought to make its sense of smell up to 40 times more sensitive than human's.[38]:246 These receptors are spread over an area about the size of a pocket handkerchief (compared to 5 million over an area the size of a postage stamp for humans).[39][40] Dogs' sense of smell also includes the use of the vomeronasal organ, which is used primarily for social interactions.

The dog has mobile nostrils that help it determine the direction of the scent. Unlike humans, the dog does not need to fill up his lungs as he continuously brings the odor into his nose in bursts of 3-7 sniffs. The dog's nose has a bony structure inside that humans don't have, which allows the air that has been sniffed to pass over a bony shelf and many odor molecules stick to it. The air above this shelf is not washed out when the dog breathes normally, so the scent molecules accumulate in the nasal chambers and the scent builds with intensity, allowing the dog to detect the faintest of odors.[38]:247

One study into the learning ability of dogs compared to wolves indicated that dogs have a better sense of smell than wolves when locating hidden food, but there has yet been no experimental data to support this view.[41]

The wet nose, or rhinarium, is essential for determining the direction of the air current containing the smell. Cold receptors in the skin are sensitive to the cooling of the skin by evaporation of the moisture by air currents.[42]

I don't feel the inclination to rewrite anything in Wikipedia.

Do you know what a 'large olfactory cortex' means?

Vanessa Mae.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 06:33:06 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 06:25:42 PM
Do you remember going to my blog, cherry picking a copy and paste, and posting it on here?

Forum rules do not require that I give a cite for your post.  That is called a no-brainer.

Guests on here can go to my blog and decide for themselves.  Equally, they can comment on my blog, whether they agree or disagree with my article.  From memory, Anne Guedes, one of my magnificent six, disagreed.  Her comment still stands.

Parting comment.  Vanessa Mae.
And here’s my parting comment to you.  When it comes to expertise regarding dogs’ olfactory senses Martin Grime undoubtedly knows more about the subject than you or Vanessa Mae, or even Vanessa Feltz or Vanessa Redgrave.  Now every time you respond with yet another “parting comment”  to try and dig yourself out of this embarrassing hole, I will be there with another parting comment of my own.  Your call.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 06:33:50 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 06:31:52 PM
I don't feel the inclination to rewrite anything in Wikipedia.

Do you know what a 'large olfactory cortex' means?

Vanessa Mae.
@)(++(*. Yes.  Do you?

Martin Grime.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 06:45:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 06:33:50 PM
@)(++(*. Yes.  Do you?

Martin Grime.

No it doesn't mean Martin Grime.

No it doesn't mean a dog's nose sensors.

It's all to do with Vanessa Mae.

Mind you, it is humourous to see you trotting out Martin Grime in support of your stance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 26, 2019, 06:54:11 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 06:45:39 PM
No it doesn't mean Martin Grime.

No it doesn't mean a dog's nose sensors.

It's all to do with Vanessa Mae.

Mind you, it is humourous to see you trotting out Martin Grime in support of your stance.
John earlier wrote to the forum saying posts need to be "informative".  SIL what you wrote here is not informative in the slightest.  Please change track.
"Some posts have been unnecessarily aggressive and combative recently which is not conducive to constructive debate. By all means promote opinion and explore theories as long as such are based on facts and accepted understanding.

Finally, please keep posts amicable and informative at all times. TY."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 07:16:20 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 06:45:39 PM
No it doesn't mean Martin Grime.

No it doesn't mean a dog's nose sensors.

It's all to do with Vanessa Mae.

Mind you, it is humourous to see you trotting out Martin Grime in support of your stance.
You seem to have a thing for Vanessa Mae.  It’s kind of tragic.  Apart from a pretty face and being a dab hand at the fiddle, what are Mae’s credentials in the field of dog olfactory abilities?  I won’t hold my breath for a straight answer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 07:21:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 07:16:20 PM
You seem to have a thing for Vanessa Mae.  It’s kind of tragic.  Apart from a pretty face and being a dab hand at the fiddle, what are Mae’s credentials in the field of dog olfactory abilities?  I won’t hold my breath for a straight answer.

She has none.

Is that straight enough?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 08:19:27 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 07:21:19 PM
She has none.

Is that straight enough?
Why do you keep on naming her as a cite for your claim then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 08:28:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 08:19:27 PM
Why do you keep on naming her as a cite for your claim then?

A cite for which claim?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 09:00:52 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 26, 2019, 08:28:58 PM
A cite for which claim?
Have you forgotten already?  Oh dear.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 26, 2019, 09:56:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 09:00:52 PM
Have you forgotten already?  Oh dear.
This is a messed up conversation.  OK it is not particularly aggressive or abusive but it is not particularly informative.  I personally have admired Vanessa Mae as an entertainer, so I just love seeing her name.
Can we get over it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 26, 2019, 09:59:23 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 26, 2019, 09:56:49 PM
This is a messed up conversation.  OK it is not particularly aggressive or abusive but it is not particularly informative.  I personally have admired Vanessa Mae as an entertainer, so I just love seeing her name.
Can we get over it?
As long as next time I am asked for a cite I can just write “Roger Moore” or “Kenneth Williams” and that will be acceptable to the mods.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 27, 2019, 12:08:29 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2019, 09:59:23 PM
As long as next time I am asked for a cite I can just write “Roger Moore” or “Kenneth Williams” and that will be acceptable to the mods.
That may or may not be acceptable depending on the situation.

Sir Roger George Moore KBE (14 October 1927 – 23 May 2017) was an English actor best known for playing British secret agent James Bond in seven feature films from 1973 to 1985, beginning with Live and Let Die.

Kenneth Charles Williams (22 February 1926 – 15 April 1988) was an English actor, best known for his comedy roles and in later life as a raconteur and diarist.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 27, 2019, 05:33:01 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 27, 2019, 12:08:29 AM
That may or may not be acceptable depending on the situation.

Sir Roger George Moore KBE (14 October 1927 – 23 May 2017) was an English actor best known for playing British secret agent James Bond in seven feature films from 1973 to 1985, beginning with Live and Let Die.

Kenneth Charles Williams (22 February 1926 – 15 April 1988) was an English actor, best known for his comedy roles and in later life as a raconteur and diarist.

Was that the Kenneth Williams in the 'Carry On Films' ?   Remember watching one where they were on a boat I think at sea, they were all dying of thirst and  one man was saying 'water'  and Kenneth Williams replied 'yes please'   I remember finding that very funny.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 27, 2019, 06:11:42 PM
I just spotted Clarence Mitchell on a BBC news clip. Apparently he was an MEP candidate for the South East.
Given the poor performance of the Conservatives, he failed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 27, 2019, 06:22:51 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 27, 2019, 06:11:42 PM
I just spotted Clarence Mitchell on a BBC news clip. Apparently he was an MEP candidate for the South East.
Given the poor performance of the Conservatives, he failed.
MEP - can you tell me what those letters stand for please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 27, 2019, 06:24:41 PM
Ah, I forgot that you are from the far side of the world.
 MEP  Member of European Parliament
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 27, 2019, 06:25:39 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 27, 2019, 06:11:42 PM
I just spotted Clarence Mitchell on a BBC news clip. Apparently he was an MEP candidate for the South East.
Given the poor performance of the Conservatives, he failed.

What was he doing on a BBC News clip?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 27, 2019, 06:27:50 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 27, 2019, 06:25:39 PM
What was he doing on a BBC News clip?
Losing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 27, 2019, 06:29:10 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 27, 2019, 06:24:41 PM
Ah, I forgot that you are from the far side of the world.
 MEP  Member of European Parliament
So in the previous sentence "I just spotted Clarence Mitchell on a BBC news clip. Apparently he was a Member of European Parliament [MEP] candidate for the South East.
Given the poor performance of the Conservatives, he failed.

Is MEP a political party as well?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 27, 2019, 06:29:32 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 27, 2019, 06:25:39 PM
What was he doing on a BBC News clip?

BBC were showing film of candidates at the counting centre and there he was - briefly
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 27, 2019, 06:32:08 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 27, 2019, 06:29:10 PM
So in the previous sentence "I just spotted Clarence Mitchell on a BBC news clip. Apparently he was a Member of European Parliament [MEP] candidate for the South East.
Given the poor performance of the Conservatives, he failed.

Is MEP a political party as well?

No, it's the Parliament of the European Union.
 He was standing as a conservative candidate. They did particularly badly, I'm delighted to say.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 27, 2019, 06:34:45 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 27, 2019, 06:29:32 PM
BBC were showing film of candidates at the counting centre and there he was - briefly

Ah.   *&(+(+

I find it difficult to stay awake during such events.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 28, 2019, 10:02:20 AM
I don't know who this man is, and his knowledge of the case isn't perfect, but I agree with a lot of what he says. In oarticular the lack of evidence means that no-one can be sure that their opinion is correct.

https://twitter.com/saunokonoko/status/1121563936870948864

Scroll down to the link to the video "Madeleine McCann parents innocent?"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 28, 2019, 10:25:03 AM

Documentary on Investigation Discovery,Joana's take on it.

https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-only-thing-that-didnt-happen-was.html

"The only thing that didn't happen was an abduction" says Moita Flores about Maddie in a new documentary


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 28, 2019, 11:06:22 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 28, 2019, 10:25:03 AM
Documentary on Investigation Discovery,Joana's take on it.

https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-only-thing-that-didnt-happen-was.html

"The only thing that didn't happen was an abduction" says Moita Flores about Maddie in a new documentary

He is saying that because he thinks   'no one could get through the window with a child'    for goodness sake give it a rest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2019, 11:24:30 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 28, 2019, 10:25:03 AM
Documentary on Investigation Discovery,Joana's take on it.

https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-only-thing-that-didnt-happen-was.html

"The only thing that didn't happen was an abduction" says Moita Flores about Maddie in a new documentary

The most interesting thing I picked from that is there is a blogger in Uruguay writing on the case.

Wordpress stats give me a photo and list of countries who have visited my blog, so I'm popping off to see if Uruguay is one of them.

 *&(+(+
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2019, 11:36:32 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2019, 11:24:30 AM
The most interesting thing I picked from that is there is a blogger in Uruguay writing on the case.

Wordpress stats give me a photo and list of countries who have visited my blog, so I'm popping off to see if Uruguay is one of them.

 *&(+(+

The answer is yes, but with only 7 views since my blog started.

I have always assumed that when I got viewers from non-English-speaking countries, it was probably an English speaker visiting or working out there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 28, 2019, 11:50:28 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2019, 11:36:32 AM
The answer is yes, but with only 7 views since my blog started.

I have always assumed that when I got viewers from non-English-speaking countries, it was probably an English speaker visiting or working out there.
Your audience might be more diverse than you think.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2019, 11:56:43 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 28, 2019, 11:50:28 AM
Your audience might be more diverse than you think.

I get viewers from all over the world, with one major exception.

I have yet to breach the Great fire-Wall of China.

 (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 28, 2019, 12:03:40 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2019, 11:56:43 AM
I get viewers from all over the world, with one major exception.

I have yet to breach the Great fire-Wall of China.

 (&^&

Perhaps you should get yourself a Huawei router    ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2019, 12:12:30 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 28, 2019, 12:03:40 PM
Perhaps you should get yourself a Huawei router    ?{)(**

I appreciate this is a joke.   &^^&*

Funny thing is, we've got a Huawei router, and the d*mn thing keeps trying to get me to identify myself 'for security purposes'.

Apart from that, it works better than Vodafone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 28, 2019, 12:16:34 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2019, 12:12:30 PM
I appreciate this is a joke.   &^^&*

Funny thing is, we've got a Huawei router, and the d*mn thing keeps trying to get me to identify myself 'for security purposes'.

Apart from that, it works better than Vodafone.

Tell it you're shining in luz,that'll fool the damn thing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2019, 12:25:30 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 28, 2019, 12:16:34 PM
Tell it you're shining in luz,that'll fool the damn thing.

I very definitely could use SIL.

However, it wants other details, such as a verifiable email address.

That sounds like Chinese Big Brother to me.

By the way, Portugal appears to be more relaxed about using Huawei than other countries in the world.

We have smaller fish to fry.  Anyone fancy a sardine?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 28, 2019, 12:29:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 28, 2019, 10:02:20 AM
I don't know who this man is, and his knowledge of the case isn't perfect, but I agree with a lot of what he says. In oarticular the lack of evidence means that no-one can be sure that their opinion is correct.

https://twitter.com/saunokonoko/status/1121563936870948864

Scroll down to the link to the video "Madeleine McCann parents innocent?"
https://youtu.be/qADoUpzEOu8
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 28, 2019, 07:04:05 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on May 28, 2019, 12:25:30 PM
I very definitely could use SIL.

However, it wants other details, such as a verifiable email address.

That sounds like Chinese Big Brother to me.

By the way, Portugal appears to be more relaxed about using Huawei than other countries in the world.

We have smaller fish to fry.  Anyone fancy a sardine?


lol China is a difficult media to access. They have a block on everything. They imprison anyone using VPNs to circumnavigate the stringent net they have.   Interesting they want open countries to buy into their 'internet' bt close off everything to their own citizens.  They can get google or you tube that is banned!

AND  you dare not mention anything about a disappearance-  oh hell no!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 29, 2019, 07:58:15 AM
Interesting programme's on bbc2 recently,managed to catch up on i player last night,its called real csi,it follows a csi unit looking at forensics,the last one followed a case of  rape,the victim alleged penetration and oral,a guy was captured on cctv wearing a addidas coat and trainers with a flash strip on the back.A suspect was pulled in but he had disposed of the clothes,these were subsequently found but no dna of the girl was found on them.Now the really interesting and fascinating part for me was,digital forensics,they had his phone but he said he couldn't remember the unlock code,not a problem sir,they delivered it their digital forensics unit,who connected it up to some soft ware and its unlocked in seconds,depending on the size of storage, (this phone was 32gb) it would take 24 hrs to download the info,including what you think you delete,thats left there to be traced.Any how not long after the time of the rape he been looking at how long do finger prints last,previously how to rape a white girl,it all added to circumstantial evidence and at the plea hearing once presented with the evidence he pleaded guilty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 29, 2019, 09:40:41 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2019, 07:58:15 AM
Interesting programme's on bbc2 recently,managed to catch up on i player last night,its called real csi,it follows a csi unit looking at forensics,the last one followed a case of  rape,the victim alleged penetration and oral,a guy was captured on cctv wearing a addidas coat and trainers with a flash strip on the back.A suspect was pulled in but he had disposed of the clothes,these were subsequently found but no dna of the girl was found on them.Now the really interesting and fascinating part for me was,digital forensics,they had his phone but he said he couldn't remember the unlock code,not a problem sir,they delivered it their digital forensics unit,who connected it up to some soft ware and its unlocked in seconds,depending on the size of storage, (this phone was 32gb) it would take 24 hrs to download the info,including what you think you delete,thats left there to be traced.Any how not long after the time of the rape he been looking at how long do finger prints last,previously how to rape a white girl,it all added to circumstantial evidence and at the plea hearing once presented with the evidence he pleaded guilty.

That sounds like a US case to me. It also sounds like the suspect wasn't white. This sounds to me like a plea bargain. Whether this man was guilty or not it was in his interest to plead guilty and hope for a lesser sentence. That's because the US Justice system is racially biased.
https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/un-report-on-racial-disparities/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 29, 2019, 10:21:16 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2019, 07:58:15 AM
Interesting programme's on bbc2 recently,managed to catch up on i player last night,its called real csi,it follows a csi unit looking at forensics,the last one followed a case of  rape,the victim alleged penetration and oral,a guy was captured on cctv wearing a addidas coat and trainers with a flash strip on the back.A suspect was pulled in but he had disposed of the clothes,these were subsequently found but no dna of the girl was found on them.Now the really interesting and fascinating part for me was,digital forensics,they had his phone but he said he couldn't remember the unlock code,not a problem sir,they delivered it their digital forensics unit,who connected it up to some soft ware and its unlocked in seconds,depending on the size of storage, (this phone was 32gb) it would take 24 hrs to download the info,including what you think you delete,thats left there to be traced.Any how not long after the time of the rape he been looking at how long do finger prints last,previously how to rape a white girl,it all added to circumstantial evidence and at the plea hearing once presented with the evidence he pleaded guilty.
How to rape a white girl?  Are you sure??  Are white girls different to rape than non-white girls?? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 29, 2019, 11:05:23 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 29, 2019, 10:21:16 AM
How to rape a white girl?  Are you sure??  Are white girls different to rape than non-white girls??

Sorry the police said the history showed, how to ambush a white girl,the history of his phone also showed rapeandabuse sites.

48 minutes in, Forensics:the real csi,bbc i player,the 3rd one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 29, 2019, 11:37:27 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 29, 2019, 09:40:41 AM
That sounds like a US case to me. It also sounds like the suspect wasn't white. This sounds to me like a plea bargain. Whether this man was guilty or not it was in his interest to plead guilty and hope for a lesser sentence. That's because the US Justice system is racially biased.
https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/un-report-on-racial-disparities/

No it was the uk.Even the CPS were surprised he pleaded guilty with out appearing before a jury of his peers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 29, 2019, 12:37:12 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2019, 11:37:27 AM
No it was the uk.Even the CPS were surprised he pleaded guilty with out appearing before a jury of his peers.

I am too then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 29, 2019, 02:03:31 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2019, 11:05:23 AM
Sorry the police said the history showed, how to ambush a white girl,the history of his phone also showed rapeandabuse sites.

48 minutes in, Forensics:the real csi,bbc i player,the 3rd one.


That was a very good series.    There was one episode where a girl had been raped by two men.   There was DNA of the two men,  but they couldn't seperate them until they had arrested one of the men,  when they had they could find the DNA of the second man.   This is why I don't think that giving the DNA of the mixture the Police found in the car for further examination,  it is impossible to seperate the DNA.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 29, 2019, 03:18:47 PM
Quote from: Lace on May 29, 2019, 02:03:31 PM

That was a very good series.    There was one episode where a girl had been raped by two men.   There was DNA of the two men,  but they couldn't seperate them until they had arrested one of the men,  when they had they could find the DNA of the second man.   This is why I don't think that giving the DNA of the mixture the Police found in the car for further examination,  it is impossible to seperate the DNA.

Unless one can be determined then yes I agree.although who knows where new techniques can lead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 29, 2019, 03:34:48 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2019, 03:18:47 PM
Unless one can be determined then yes I agree.although who knows where new techniques can lead.

In my opinion no new techniques could ever be able to say whose DNA is whose from a mixture without having something to check with such as a person or four in the case of the soup in the car,  they could only guess without the people whose DNA was left there.   It could be up to five people the scientist  said about the sample taken from the car boot and it was a hire car,  so it could belong to anyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 29, 2019, 03:53:51 PM
Quote from: Lace on May 29, 2019, 03:34:48 PM
In my opinion no new techniques could ever be able to say whose DNA is whose from a mixture without having something to check with such as a person or four in the case of the soup in the car,  they could only guess without the people whose DNA was left there.   It could be up to five people the scientist  said about the sample taken from the car boot and it was a hire car,  so it could belong to anyone.

Bit of a leap to say no new techniques,it wasn't that long ago no DNA sampling was available.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 29, 2019, 03:55:14 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2019, 03:18:47 PM
Unless one can be determined then yes I agree.although who knows where new techniques can lead.

Quite right. Major scientific developments occur all the time, so it is a foolish person who says that determination of the nature of the DNA mixture would be impossible - IMO, of course.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 29, 2019, 04:14:20 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 29, 2019, 03:55:14 PM
Quite right. Major scientific developments occur all the time, so it is a foolish person who says that determination of the nature of the DNA mixture would be impossible - IMO, of course.

How would they find out whose DNA it was then?   You tell me.    They swabbed the car,  found DNA which could be from five different people,   who are they?   They could be anyone it was a rental car,  it could be a bit of DNA from one person and a bit of DNA from another,  how are they going to find out whose DNA it was?   If they had the DNA of four of these people then great they can cross off whose DNA belonged to them then they would have one lot of DNA left and that would solve it all.   Yet it could be parts of DNA from these five people couldn't it so how on earth would they find out then? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 29, 2019, 04:26:51 PM
Quote from: Lace on May 29, 2019, 04:14:20 PM
How would they find out whose DNA it was then?   You tell me.    They swabbed the car,  found DNA which could be from five different people,   who are they?   They could be anyone it was a rental car,  it could be a bit of DNA from one person and a bit of DNA from another,  how are they going to find out whose DNA it was?   If they had the DNA of four of these people then great they can cross off whose DNA belonged to them then they would have one lot of DNA left and that would solve it all.   Yet it could be parts of DNA from these five people couldn't it so how on earth would they find out then?

   
Unless you work at the leading edge of forensic science research, you will have no idea of what might be achievable now or in the near future.
That you don't believe it can be done is neither here nor there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 29, 2019, 04:37:27 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 29, 2019, 04:26:51 PM
   
Unless you work at the leading edge of forensic science research, you will have no idea of what might be achievable now or in the near future.
That you don't believe it can be done is neither here nor there.

So they say part of Madeleine's DNA was in the mix,  or was it?   Madeleine shares her DNA with her parents and the public,   so there to start with is a brick wall.   Don't need to work in forensic science research to work that out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 29, 2019, 04:42:48 PM
Quote from: Lace on May 29, 2019, 04:37:27 PM
So they say part of Madeleine's DNA was in the mix,  or was it?   Madeleine shares her DNA with her parents and the public,   so there to start with is a brick wall.   Don't need to work in forensic science research to work that out.

Obviously that's your view, but I find it interesting that you have the need to deny that a resolution of the DNA mix might be achievable even though you admit you don't understand the proposed technology.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 30, 2019, 02:19:05 AM
An update on the pending charges against the man who accused Clarence Mitchell of "lying with as many teeth as he had in his head"  & also assured us that the only thing that didn't happen in the McCann case was an abduction....aka Moita Flores...
https://www.publico.pt/2019/05/20/sociedade/noticia/ministerio-publico-encontrou-635-mil-euros-contas-moita-flores-explicacao-1873325
Just a mere €635.000 of deposits in his company accounts under investigation.

Meanwhile, in the ongoing trial of another McCann-vocal ex-PJ Inspector, one of his co-accused has maintained that Paulo Cristovao was the mastermind behind home invasions.
https://sicnoticias.pt/pais/2019-05-29-Mustafa-diz-que-ex-inspetor-da-PJ-Pereira-Cristovao-foi-o-mandante-dos-assaltos

Cristovao is also linked to Bruno Carvalho, the pair having worked together at Sporting Lisbon. Amongst other crimes still under investigation, Carvalho may be involved in a € 500,000 social media fraud.
https://www.90min.com/posts/6113419-ex-sporting-cp-president-embroiled-in-500-000-per-year-communications-company-scandal

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2019, 07:19:19 AM
Quote from: jassi on May 29, 2019, 04:26:51 PM
   
Unless you work at the leading edge of forensic science research, you will have no idea of what might be achievable now or in the near future.
That you don't believe it can be done is neither here nor there.
Yes, and one day humans will be able to travel back in time and find out what really happened, just because the science tells us that this is impossible who knows what might be achievable in the future .   (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 30, 2019, 08:08:11 AM
Quote from: jassi on May 29, 2019, 04:42:48 PM
Obviously that's your view, but I find it interesting that you have the need to deny that a resolution of the DNA mix might be achievable even though you admit you don't understand the proposed technology.

The only way it is achievable in my opinion is if they know who left the DNA.    If you don't know who left the DNA you can't just have a wild guess at the DNA of five people.   Do you think when forensics is faced with a mixture of DNA from say two people they can guess which markers are in each person's  DNA?   No they can't.  Only when they have one of the people who left one of the DNA samples can they ascertain the DNA of the other person as they would be left with the other person's markers after taking out the DNA of the person they have in custody.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 30, 2019, 08:43:49 AM
Quote from: Lace on May 30, 2019, 08:08:11 AM
The only way it is achievable in my opinion is if they know who left the DNA.    If you don't know who left the DNA you can't just have a wild guess at the DNA of five people.   Do you think when forensics is faced with a mixture of DNA from say two people they can guess which markers are in each person's  DNA?   No they can't.  Only when they have one of the people who left one of the DNA samples can they ascertain the DNA of the other person as they would be left with the other person's markers after taking out the DNA of the person they have in custody.


I know its your opinion - you've said so on a number of occasions.

Science and technology move on and the claim is that this development can resolve the 'too difficult to interpret' DNA mix.
Is that a problem ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 30, 2019, 08:53:02 AM
Quote from: jassi on May 30, 2019, 08:43:49 AM

I know its your opinion - you've said so on a number of occasions.

Science and technology move on and the claim is that this development can resolve the 'too difficult to interpret' DNA mix.
Is that a problem ?

How many times have we read about advancements in DNA analysis solving old crimes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2019, 09:31:55 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2019, 07:19:19 AM
Yes, and one day humans will be able to travel back in time and find out what really happened, just because the science tells us that this is impossible who knows what might be achievable in the future .   (&^&

Comedy isn't really your strong point is it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 30, 2019, 09:36:45 AM
Quote from: jassi on May 30, 2019, 08:43:49 AM

I know its your opinion - you've said so on a number of occasions.

Science and technology move on and the claim is that this development can resolve the 'too difficult to interpret' DNA mix.
Is that a problem ?

Yes it is a problem if they haven't got anyone to match the DNA to,  if they don't it's all guess work.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 30, 2019, 09:39:05 AM
Quote from: Lace on May 30, 2019, 09:36:45 AM
Yes it is a problem if they haven't got anyone to match the DNA to,  if they don't it's all guess work.

Merely your opinion and of no consequence.

Why not let the scientists do their thing?

One can discuss what the results might mean if/when they become available.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2019, 09:52:50 AM
Quote from: Lace on May 30, 2019, 09:36:45 AM
Yes it is a problem if they haven't got anyone to match the DNA to,  if they don't it's all guess work.

Is that your opinion or the opinion of someone with expertise in the subject?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 30, 2019, 10:33:08 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2019, 09:52:50 AM
Is that your opinion or the opinion of someone with expertise in the subject?

I have always said it's my own opinion.

A machine who can take a mix of five people DNA and say that lot belongs to that person I don't know who that person is,  that sequence belongs to a another person I don't know who that person is etc etc   That's not science it's a miracle.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 30, 2019, 10:39:41 AM
But it would  be good if the claimed technology achieved that, surely ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2019, 10:43:11 AM
Quote from: Lace on May 30, 2019, 10:33:08 AM
I have always said it's my own opinion.

A machine who can take a mix of five people DNA and say that lot belongs to that person I don't know who that person is,  that sequence belongs to a another person I don't know who that person is etc etc   That's not science it's a miracle.   

I think your opinion would carry more weight if you used expert opinion to support it. .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 30, 2019, 10:49:16 AM
Quote from: misty on May 30, 2019, 02:19:05 AM
An update on the pending charges against the man who accused Clarence Mitchell of "lying with as many teeth as he had in his head"  & also assured us that the only thing that didn't happen in the McCann case was an abduction....aka Moita Flores...
https://www.publico.pt/2019/05/20/sociedade/noticia/ministerio-publico-encontrou-635-mil-euros-contas-moita-flores-explicacao-1873325
Just a mere €635.000 of deposits in his company accounts under investigation.

Meanwhile, in the ongoing trial of another McCann-vocal ex-PJ Inspector, one of his co-accused has maintained that Paulo Cristovao was the mastermind behind home invasions.
https://sicnoticias.pt/pais/2019-05-29-Mustafa-diz-que-ex-inspetor-da-PJ-Pereira-Cristovao-foi-o-mandante-dos-assaltos

Cristovao is also linked to Bruno Carvalho, the pair having worked together at Sporting Lisbon. Amongst other crimes still under investigation, Carvalho may be involved in a € 500,000 social media fraud.
https://www.90min.com/posts/6113419-ex-sporting-cp-president-embroiled-in-500-000-per-year-communications-company-scandal

I find it amazing that the proponents of an industry of heinous accusations against innocent people have either been found guilty of criminal offences ~ including Amaral ~ and/or are under investigation for serious criminal activity.

Remember the interview with Amaral where they mused about Kate and Gerry being made arguidos ...

Snip
MF – What really made them mad was being made arguidos.

MF – Things were different in my time. She would have been under such an attack that before she realised anything, she'd be in jail.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id173.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 30, 2019, 11:34:20 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2019, 10:43:11 AM
I think your opinion would carry more weight if you used expert opinion to support it. .

Its a surprise to me that we haven't had someone on claiming that they are that expert opinion. Still, early days.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2019, 11:42:42 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 30, 2019, 10:49:16 AM
I find it amazing that the proponents of an industry of heinous accusations against innocent people have either been found guilty of criminal offences ~ including Amaral ~ and/or are under investigation for serious criminal activity.

Remember the interview with Amaral where they mused about Kate and Gerry being made arguidos ...

Snip
MF – What really made them mad was being made arguidos.

MF – Things were different in my time. She would have been under such an attack that before she realised anything, she'd be in jail.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id173.htm

You do realise that MF isn't Amaral, don't you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 30, 2019, 01:12:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2019, 11:42:42 AM
You do realise that MF isn't Amaral, don't you?
Moita Flores (MF)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 30, 2019, 01:19:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2019, 11:42:42 AM
You do realise that MF isn't Amaral, don't you?

Yeah, but he's Portuguese isn't he? That should be damning enough surely
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 30, 2019, 01:25:00 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 30, 2019, 01:19:42 PM
Yeah, but he's Portuguese isn't he? That should be damning enough surely

Only if he is a sardine-muncher, surely?

The annual allowance for sardine catches has just been announced.

It should be enough for us to munch sardines as and when we like this year.

Yummy!   (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2019, 02:13:49 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 30, 2019, 10:39:41 AM
But it would  be good if the claimed technology achieved that, surely ?

How could it find genetic information that wasn't there to begin with?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 30, 2019, 02:18:15 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2019, 02:13:49 PM
How could it find genetic information that wasn't there to begin with?

You are making assumptions about what was there. The mix was too complex to interpret,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 30, 2019, 05:02:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2019, 11:42:42 AM
You do realise that MF isn't Amaral, don't you?

You did note that I was replying to a post referring to Moita Flores ... did you not?
Snip
An update on the pending charges against the man who accused Clarence Mitchell of "lying with as many teeth as he had in his head"  & also assured us that the only thing that didn't happen in the McCann case was an abduction....aka Moita Flores...
https://www.publico.pt/2019/05/20/sociedade/noticia/ministerio-publico-encontrou-635-mil-euros-contas-moita-flores-explicacao-1873325
Just a mere €635.000 of deposits in his company accounts under investigation.
_____________________________________________________________________________

  ... and the link provided in my post was to ... Moita Flores interviews Gonçalo Amaral TV Guia https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id173.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2019, 06:37:50 PM
Amazing how many of these whiter-than-white ex-PJ TV pundits are under scrutiny themselves...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 30, 2019, 06:39:42 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2019, 06:37:50 PM
Amazing how many of these whiter-than-white ex-PJ TV pundits are under scrutiny themselves...

The Law of Unintended Consequences.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2019, 07:03:50 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2019, 09:31:55 AM
Comedy isn't really your strong point is it.
Ooh, cutting.  8)><(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2019, 07:50:58 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 30, 2019, 05:02:46 PM
You did note that I was replying to a post referring to Moita Flores ... did you not?
Snip
An update on the pending charges against the man who accused Clarence Mitchell of "lying with as many teeth as he had in his head"  & also assured us that the only thing that didn't happen in the McCann case was an abduction....aka Moita Flores...
https://www.publico.pt/2019/05/20/sociedade/noticia/ministerio-publico-encontrou-635-mil-euros-contas-moita-flores-explicacao-1873325
Just a mere €635.000 of deposits in his company accounts under investigation.
_____________________________________________________________________________

  ... and the link provided in my post was to ... Moita Flores interviews Gonçalo Amaral TV Guia https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id173.htm

I do apologise. my mistake. I tend not to read Misty's critical posts about anything and anyone Portuguese any more.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 30, 2019, 10:58:12 PM
Quote from: misty on May 30, 2019, 02:19:05 AM
An update on the pending charges against the man who accused Clarence Mitchell of "lying with as many teeth as he had in his head"  & also assured us that the only thing that didn't happen in the McCann case was an abduction....aka Moita Flores...
https://www.publico.pt/2019/05/20/sociedade/noticia/ministerio-publico-encontrou-635-mil-euros-contas-moita-flores-explicacao-1873325
Just a mere €635.000 of deposits in his company accounts under investigation.

Meanwhile, in the ongoing trial of another McCann-vocal ex-PJ Inspector, one of his co-accused has maintained that Paulo Cristovao was the mastermind behind home invasions.
https://sicnoticias.pt/pais/2019-05-29-Mustafa-diz-que-ex-inspetor-da-PJ-Pereira-Cristovao-foi-o-mandante-dos-assaltos

Cristovao is also linked to Bruno Carvalho, the pair having worked together at Sporting Lisbon. Amongst other crimes still under investigation, Carvalho may be involved in a € 500,000 social media fraud.
https://www.90min.com/posts/6113419-ex-sporting-cp-president-embroiled-in-500-000-per-year-communications-company-scandal

I had no idea that this man was the source of the lies, mouth, teeth as many as.
How deliciously ironic. Lol.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 10:03:45 AM
I thought it was Carlos Anjos who accused Clarence Mitchell of lying; "He lies with as many teeth as he has in his mouth..." he is reported as saying.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559675/Portuguese-police-accuse-McCanns-spokesman-Clarence-Mitchell-lying-teeth.html

The fuss was triggered by the leaking of what were alleged to be the McCann's police statements to Spanish journalist Nacho Abad. Mitchell accused the PJ of leaking, but they denied it. Anjos thought Mitchell himself had given the journalist the information.

Given that the information the journalist broadcasted contained information which wasn't in the McCann's police statements I don't believe they are what Abad had got hold of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 31, 2019, 10:17:28 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 10:03:45 AM
I thought it was Carlos Anjos who accused Clarence Mitchell of lying; "He lies with as many teeth as he has in his mouth..." he is reported as saying.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559675/Portuguese-police-accuse-McCanns-spokesman-Clarence-Mitchell-lying-teeth.html

The fuss was triggered by the leaking of what were alleged to be the McCann's police statements to Spanish journalist Nacho Abad. Mitchell accused the PJ of leaking, but they denied it. Anjos thought Mitchell himself had given the journalist the information.

Given that the information the journalist broadcasted contained information which wasn't in the McCann's police statements I don't believe they are what Abad had got hold of.

I couldn't care less for any of those who are now being brought to book by the judiciary in Portugal.
I hope that the same happens to anyone in this country who is shown to be corrupt.!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 31, 2019, 12:33:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 10:03:45 AM
I thought it was Carlos Anjos who accused Clarence Mitchell of lying; "He lies with as many teeth as he has in his mouth..." he is reported as saying.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559675/Portuguese-police-accuse-McCanns-spokesman-Clarence-Mitchell-lying-teeth.html

The fuss was triggered by the leaking of what were alleged to be the McCann's police statements to Spanish journalist Nacho Abad. Mitchell accused the PJ of leaking, but they denied it. Anjos thought Mitchell himself had given the journalist the information.

Given that the information the journalist broadcasted contained information which wasn't in the McCann's police statements I don't believe they are what Abad had got hold of.

Why would Clarence have given the so-called "why didn't you come" bit to a Spanish journalist?

Did the McCanns have a copy of their statements?

Even if they did, why would they have given them to Clarence to leak at a time when they were focusing on support for an EU-wide alert system for missing children?
 
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=IM-PRESS&reference=20080407STO25859&language=EN
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2019, 12:38:35 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 31, 2019, 12:33:19 PM
Why would Clarence have given the so-called "why didn't you come" bit to a Spanish journalist?

Did the McCanns have a copy of their statements?

Even if they did, why would they have given them to Clarence to leak at a time when they were focusing on support for an EU-wide alert system for missing children?
 
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=IM-PRESS&reference=20080407STO25859&language=EN

Was that leaked when Rebelo was out of the country with his team dealing with the FSS and Rogatory Interviews necessitating him cutting short his visit to return to Portugal to get a grip?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 31, 2019, 12:53:17 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2019, 12:38:35 PM
Was that leaked when Rebelo was out of the country with his team dealing with the FSS and Rogatory Interviews necessitating him cutting short his visit to return to Portugal to get a grip?

The FSS visit was late November 2007
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/01/madeleine-mccanns-investigative-team.html

But, yes, it was when Rebelo et al were in the UK for the rogs.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1008821/Portuguese-detectives-set-quiz-Tapas-Seven-London-Madeleine-s-disappearance.html#ixzz2PensMDN1

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 31, 2019, 01:10:23 PM
There's a short thread on this: I'd got confused between the two visits, which is why I remember that they were indeed at different times.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1146.0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 31, 2019, 01:14:31 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 31, 2019, 01:10:23 PM
There's a short thread on this: I'd got confused between the two visits, which is why I remember that they were indeed at different times.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1146.0

Rebelo also left before David Payne's Rogatory Interview.  He obviously wasn't interested in that.   IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 31, 2019, 01:35:39 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 31, 2019, 01:14:31 PM
Rebelo also left before David Payne's Rogatory Interview.  He obviously wasn't interested in that.   IMO.

It would be interesting to know if the visit was cut short or not. Doubt we'll ever know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on May 31, 2019, 02:45:20 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 31, 2019, 10:17:28 AM
I couldn't care less for any of those who are now being brought to book by the judiciary in Portugal.
I hope that the same happens to anyone in this country who is shown to be corrupt.!

Had the McCanns exercised just a little common sense we wouldn't be here discussing them and their troubles now some ten years on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 31, 2019, 03:26:12 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 31, 2019, 02:45:20 PM
Had the McCanns exercised just a little common sense we wouldn't be here discussing them and their troubles now some ten years on.

It's such a pity that many  people  in a variety of situations don't exercise a little common sense.
Much heartache could be avoided.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 31, 2019, 03:43:02 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 30, 2019, 06:39:42 PM
The Law of Unintended Consequences.

In terms of placing themselves in the media spotlight (for a fee?) to speculate on the case, I'd agree.

Others will be quick to point out that the McCanns did as well, but to appeal to the public that their daughter was still missing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 03:57:51 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 31, 2019, 12:33:19 PM
Why would Clarence have given the so-called "why didn't you come" bit to a Spanish journalist?

Did the McCanns have a copy of their statements?

Even if they did, why would they have given them to Clarence to leak at a time when they were focusing on support for an EU-wide alert system for missing children?
 
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=IM-PRESS&reference=20080407STO25859&language=EN

Clatence's job was PR. This incident was brilliant PR. The PJ were accused of leaking confidential information in an attempt to damage the McCann's reputation just as they were campaigning on behalf of missing children.

It also served to publicise their campaign.

What is clear to me is that the reporter got the wrong facts. In my opinion nowhere in the McCann's police statements do these words appear when the crying incident was reported;

"Gerry and I talked about it for several minutes and decided to watch over the children more carefully at night."
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-left-crying-in-bedroom-302219
"Gerry and I talked about it for several
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 31, 2019, 04:05:01 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 03:57:51 PM
Clatence's job was PR. This incident was brilliant PR. The PJ were accused of leaking confidential information in an attempt to damage the McCann's reputation just as they were campaigning on behalf of missing children.

It also served to publicise their campaign.

What is clear to me is that the reporter got the wrong facts. In my opinion nowhere in the McCann's police statements do these words appear when the crying incident was reported;

"Gerry and I talked about it for several minutes and decided to watch over the children more carefully at night."
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-left-crying-in-bedroom-302219
"Gerry and I talked about it for several




If that was being more careful, what were the earlier arrangements?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 31, 2019, 04:33:05 PM
How would it have served their campaign?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 31, 2019, 05:03:57 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 31, 2019, 10:17:28 AM
I couldn't care less for any of those who are now being brought to book by the judiciary in Portugal.
I hope that the same happens to anyone in this country who is shown to be corrupt.!

Moderation Note: General comments about people who delight in others misfortunes is fine, targeted comments about individual or a group of members is not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 05:06:48 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 31, 2019, 04:33:05 PM
How would it have served their campaign?

Those poor parents are doing their best to save others from the despair they have faced and the PJ are picking on them again!!  Help them, MEP's!! Heartrending, isn't it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 31, 2019, 05:11:32 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on May 31, 2019, 05:03:57 PM
Moderation Note: General comments about people who delight in others misfortunes is fine, targeted comments about individual or a group of members is not.

Noted!

So if I had posted those who delight in the McCanns troubles, that would have passed muster?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 31, 2019, 05:56:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 05:06:48 PM
Those poor parents are doing their best to save others from the despair they have faced and the PJ are picking on them again!!  Help them, MEP's!! Heartrending, isn't it?

So do you think they orchestrated a session at the European Parliament to justify how "mean" the PJ were? Just at the time that Rebelo was away?

Who had access to the McCann arguido interviews?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on May 31, 2019, 06:20:05 PM
Quote from: Erngath on May 31, 2019, 05:11:32 PM
Noted!

So if I had posted those who delight in the McCanns troubles, that would have passed muster?

Yes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on May 31, 2019, 06:28:49 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on May 31, 2019, 06:20:05 PM
Yes.

Excellent
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 31, 2019, 06:55:26 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on May 31, 2019, 02:45:20 PM
Had the McCanns exercised just a little common sense we wouldn't be here discussing them and their troubles now some ten years on.

Indeed some mothers take risks with their children- then blame others when things go wrong..

https://www.news18.com/news/world/isis-brides-lawyer-accuses-uk-of-failing-to-protect-her-2167519.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 08:45:57 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 31, 2019, 05:56:51 PM
So do you think they orchestrated a session at the European Parliament to justify how "mean" the PJ were? Just at the time that Rebelo was away?

Who had access to the McCann arguido interviews?

No.

Access to statements they never made?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 09:15:16 PM
I found this interesting;

You’ll recall that, back in October, we had supplied the Portuguese public prosecutor with a list of people from whom we felt statements should have been taken. In response the Portuguese police had decided to come to Leicester to be present while the police interviewed Fiona, Dave, Russ, Jane, Matt, Rachael and Dianne, as well as many other individuals whose testimony had never been sought.

The questions to be asked were those Gerry and I had suggested to the prosecutor (obvious and pertinent ones, I hasten to add), with a few additions from the PJ.
[madeleine. Kate McCann]

I thought the McCanns asked for their questions to be added to the PJ questions. Kate makes it soound like they instigated the rogatory questions and the PJ tagged theirs on at the end.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 31, 2019, 09:17:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 08:45:57 PM
No.

Access to statements they never made?
Can you remind me what you are talking about please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 31, 2019, 09:20:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 09:15:16 PM
I found this interesting;

You’ll recall that, back in October, we had supplied the Portuguese public prosecutor with a list of people from whom we felt statements should have been taken. In response the Portuguese police had decided to come to Leicester to be present while the police interviewed Fiona, Dave, Russ, Jane, Matt, Rachael and Dianne, as well as many other individuals whose testimony had never been sought.

The questions to be asked were those Gerry and I had suggested to the prosecutor (obvious and pertinent ones, I hasten to add), with a few additions from the PJ.
[madeleine. Kate McCann]

I thought the McCanns asked for their questions to be added to the PJ questions. Kate makes it soound like they instigated the rogatory questions and the PJ tagged theirs on at the end.


With an expert spin doctor at their beck and call, would you expect any different ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 31, 2019, 09:27:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 09:15:16 PM
I found this interesting;

You’ll recall that, back in October, we had supplied the Portuguese public prosecutor with a list of people from whom we felt statements should have been taken. In response the Portuguese police had decided to come to Leicester to be present while the police interviewed Fiona, Dave, Russ, Jane, Matt, Rachael and Dianne, as well as many other individuals whose testimony had never been sought.

The questions to be asked were those Gerry and I had suggested to the prosecutor (obvious and pertinent ones, I hasten to add), with a few additions from the PJ.
[madeleine. Kate McCann]

I thought the McCanns asked for their questions to be added to the PJ questions. Kate makes it soound like they instigated the rogatory questions and the PJ tagged theirs on at the end.


 *%87  Yes,  Kate and Gerry were organising the police and the PJ just went along with their excellent investigative prowess... The envy of SY I'm sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 31, 2019, 09:38:01 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on May 31, 2019, 09:27:24 PM

 *%87  Yes,  Kate and Gerry were organising the police and the PJ just went along with their excellent investigative prowess... The envy of SY I'm sure.
IMO - There is no doubt this did happen.   Kate and Gerry made a list of people they wanted interviewed and wrote up a list of questions.  No doubt with the agreement of the PJ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 31, 2019, 09:44:14 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 31, 2019, 09:38:01 PM
IMO - There is no doubt this did happen.   Kate and Gerry made a list of people they wanted interviewed and wrote up a list of questions.  No doubt with the agreement of the PJ.

From what I remember of the 'files', pretty sure  the McCann questions were  tagged on the end of those of the PJ
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 31, 2019, 09:47:23 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 31, 2019, 09:38:01 PM
IMO - There is no doubt this did happen.   Kate and Gerry made a list of people they wanted interviewed and wrote up a list of questions.  No doubt with the agreement of the PJ.

 @)(++(*  As if the pj would even consider jumping to their tune, but if you have a cite (what Kate says IS NOT A CITE), then please share.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 10:22:36 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 31, 2019, 09:17:44 PM
Can you remind me what you are talking about please?

I was replying to Carana;

snip

So do you think they orchestrated a session at the European Parliament to justify how "mean" the PJ were? Just at the time that Rebelo was away?

Who had access to the McCann arguido interviews?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 10:32:27 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 31, 2019, 09:38:01 PM
IMO - There is no doubt this did happen.   Kate and Gerry made a list of people they wanted interviewed and wrote up a list of questions.  No doubt with the agreement of the PJ.

They did indeed; the T7 were asked questions raised by both the PJ and the McCanns. The PJ questions were asked first, however. They were designed to try to uncover the truth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 01, 2019, 03:25:18 AM
Quote from: jassi on May 31, 2019, 09:44:14 PM
From what I remember of the 'files', pretty sure  the McCann questions were  tagged on the end of those of the PJ
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MCCANNS-WANTED.htm which is a "LIST OF PEOPLE MCCANN'S WANTED INTERVIEWED"   
later in the same file "Faxed copy of Letter with questions to ask persons whom McCanns want interviewed (in English and Portuguese"
So it seems pretty well organised.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 01, 2019, 06:38:45 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 01, 2019, 03:25:18 AM
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MCCANNS-WANTED.htm which is a "LIST OF PEOPLE MCCANN'S WANTED INTERVIEWED"   
later in the same file "Faxed copy of Letter with questions to ask persons whom McCanns want interviewed (in English and Portuguese"
So it seems pretty well organised.


Thanks, Rob. I hadn't reread that in a while. Aside from who they had questions for, upon rereading it, I find the rationale quite interesting...

1 - Since the applicants stopped being considered witnesses, moving to suspects of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, witnesses central to the discovery of truth were not questioned, or re-questioned.

2 - With the recent investigations, witness interviews and interrogations of the applicants, new questions were raised and doubts aroused, broadening, in this way, the object of the investigation, as well as matters of fact considered relevant to the investigations.

3 - Indeed, the Investigation departed from confining itself to the disappearance of the minor, proceeding to embrace other matters, allegedly connected with her.

4 - It is therefore essential to hear these witnesses who can explain facts now very relevant, such as the way the couple treated their children, their personality and routine and, even, the reactions manifested by them after the disappearance and the consequent psychological and emotional state.

5 - So, and because it is believed essential and indispensable for the establishment of the facts and consequent discovery of the truth, they come to request the hearing of the following groups of witnesses, all present and with direct knowledge of the facts:
(...)

6 - It is certain that some of these witnesses have already been heard, at least once, in the investigation.

7 - But, at that time, the direction of the investigation was apparently different, [that being] the reason why some of these witnesses were not heard on the matters mentioned above, currently considered relevant to the prosecution of the investigation and who already were, furthermore, the object of actual proceedings, namely the questioning and the interrogations of the applicants.

We submit that, their testimony [being] essential to the discovery of the truth...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 01, 2019, 12:55:22 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 01, 2019, 06:38:45 AM

Thanks, Rob. I hadn't reread that in a while. Aside from who they had questions for, upon rereading it, I find the rationale quite interesting...

1 - Since the applicants stopped being considered witnesses, moving to suspects of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, witnesses central to the discovery of truth were not questioned, or re-questioned.

2 - With the recent investigations, witness interviews and interrogations of the applicants, new questions were raised and doubts aroused, broadening, in this way, the object of the investigation, as well as matters of fact considered relevant to the investigations.

3 - Indeed, the Investigation departed from confining itself to the disappearance of the minor, proceeding to embrace other matters, allegedly connected with her.

4 - It is therefore essential to hear these witnesses who can explain facts now very relevant, such as the way the couple treated their children, their personality and routine and, even, the reactions manifested by them after the disappearance and the consequent psychological and emotional state.

5 - So, and because it is believed essential and indispensable for the establishment of the facts and consequent discovery of the truth, they come to request the hearing of the following groups of witnesses, all present and with direct knowledge of the facts:
(...)

6 - It is certain that some of these witnesses have already been heard, at least once, in the investigation.

7 - But, at that time, the direction of the investigation was apparently different, [that being] the reason why some of these witnesses were not heard on the matters mentioned above, currently considered relevant to the prosecution of the investigation and who already were, furthermore, the object of actual proceedings, namely the questioning and the interrogations of the applicants.

We submit that, their testimony [being] essential to the discovery of the truth...
That all being claimed by the McCann's lawyer IIRC.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2019, 02:40:14 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 01, 2019, 12:55:22 PM
That all being claimed by the McCann's lawyer IIRC.

With defensive intentions obviously. The people and the questions are listed here;

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MCCANNS-WANTED.htm

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 01, 2019, 05:29:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2019, 09:15:16 PM
I found this interesting;

You’ll recall that, back in October, we had supplied the Portuguese public prosecutor with a list of people from whom we felt statements should have been taken. In response the Portuguese police had decided to come to Leicester to be present while the police interviewed Fiona, Dave, Russ, Jane, Matt, Rachael and Dianne, as well as many other individuals whose testimony had never been sought.

The questions to be asked were those Gerry and I had suggested to the prosecutor (obvious and pertinent ones, I hasten to add), with a few additions from the PJ.
[madeleine. Kate McCann]

I thought the McCanns asked for their questions to be added to the PJ questions. Kate makes it soound like they instigated the rogatory questions and the PJ tagged theirs on at the end.

I think you may be misinterpreting what Kate said in her book. 

From reading http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MCCANNS-WANTED.htm it is self evident that the initiative came from Kate, Gerry and their legal team.

Snip
We submit that, their testimony [being] essential to the discovery of the truth, and given that the witnesses designated above actually live in the United Kingdom, where they will be found, (except Dan Smith and Emma Knights who will be found in Portugal), it is requested further, under Arts. 229 and following of CPP, 145 and following of Law 14-4/99 of 31 August (Law of International Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters) and 3 and following of the European Convention on Mutual Legal Support in Criminal Matters, that a Rogatory Letter be expedited for them to be heard in the United Kingdom.

They ask that the request be granted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 01, 2019, 07:26:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2019, 02:40:14 PM
With defensive intentions obviously. The people and the questions are listed here;

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MCCANNS-WANTED.htm
Wouldn't anyone want to show themselves as being of good character?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 01, 2019, 07:27:47 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 01, 2019, 07:26:00 PM
Wouldn't anyone want to show themselves as being of good character?


Most people wouldn't need to - IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 01, 2019, 08:03:09 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 01, 2019, 07:27:47 PM

Most people wouldn't need to - IMO
These two in particular were called arguidos in this case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2019, 08:37:30 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 01, 2019, 07:26:00 PM
Wouldn't anyone want to show themselves as being of good character?

Well it worked. They come across as perfect in every way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 02, 2019, 03:30:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2019, 08:37:30 PM
Well it worked. They come across as perfect in every way.

A cross between Mary Poppins and Sound of Music- Maria
They tried this at their'trial' the one where Amaral was going to hung from the neck till  he be dead - yeah that one.

Dragging in 'friends' to say how they were wonderful and how unwell they had been blah blah blah. They tried to control that event as well but the canny judge told Gerry to shut up in a Portuguese kind of way.

That was just priceless.  erm, was the same one where the judge asked what was worse -losing daughter or the book... You will not believe the reply to that one.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2019, 06:46:11 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 02, 2019, 03:30:28 PM
A cross between Mary Poppins and Sound of Music- Maria
They tried this at their'trial' the one where Amaral was going to hung from the neck till  he be dead - yeah that one.

Dragging in 'friends' to say how they were wonderful and how unwell they had been blah blah blah. They tried to control that event as well but the canny judge told Gerry to shut up in a Portuguese kind of way.

That was just priceless.  erm, was the same one where the judge asked what was worse -losing daughter or the book... You will not believe the reply to that one.

Practically perfect in every way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2019, 08:24:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2019, 06:46:11 PM
Practically perfect in every way.
A bit like yourselves then, you perfect models of parenting and morality.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2019, 08:34:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2019, 08:24:45 PM
A bit like yourselves then, you perfect models of parenting and morality.

Really? I thought the best parents took their kids on busmen's holidays and left them home alone every night. I never did that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 02, 2019, 08:43:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2019, 08:34:13 PM
Really? I thought the best parents took their kids on busmen's holidays and left them home alone every night. I never did that.

my 12 yera old daughter wants to walk everywere herself....I actually think shes at more risk than maddie was in taht apartment
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2019, 09:39:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2019, 08:34:13 PM
Really? I thought the best parents took their kids on busmen's holidays and left them home alone every night. I never did that.
Don’t lie, you didn’t think that at all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 02, 2019, 09:48:29 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2019, 09:39:28 PM
Don’t lie, you didn’t think that at all.
I fell into that trap once before too.  It could well be irony.  In fact it could be double irony.  Or even triple irony.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2019, 10:04:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2019, 09:39:28 PM
Don’t lie, you didn’t think that at all.

You're not the only one who can be sarcastic
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2019, 10:06:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2019, 10:04:13 PM
You're not the only one who can be sarcastic
Be careful, you might get a warning.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 02, 2019, 10:07:42 PM
Both of you stop all the irony and sarcasm right now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2019, 10:10:26 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2019, 10:06:14 PM
Be careful, you might get a warning.
lol.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 02, 2019, 10:36:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 02, 2019, 08:43:21 PM
my 12 yera old daughter wants to walk everywere herself....I actually think shes at more risk than maddie was in taht apartment

It's a difficult one, isn't it? My children began by wanting to go to town with their friends on Sarurday afternoons. I was a nervous wreck until they got back. My other one was ny son getting a motor bike. I would go to bed but not skeep until I heard him come home. You have to let them stand on their own feet in the end but it's not easy. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2019, 10:56:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 02, 2019, 10:36:40 PM
It's a difficult one, isn't it? My children began by wanting to go to town with their friends on Sarurday afternoons. I was a nervous wreck until they got back. My other one was ny son getting a motor bike. I would go to bed but not skeep until I heard him come home. You have to let them stand on their own feet in the end but it's not easy.
There is no more welcome sound in the world than the sound of your child’s key turning in the front door lock at five in the morning.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on June 02, 2019, 11:12:10 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 02, 2019, 10:56:11 PM
There is no more welcome sound in the world than the sound of your child’s key turning in the front door lock at five in the morning.

Ours were at that stage about thirty years ago.
The clubs  maybe finished earlier then, it was usually about three AM when we heard the key turning.
Now it's the eldest ones turn to have that experience.
Pay back!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on June 03, 2019, 07:53:58 AM
Quote from: Erngath on June 02, 2019, 11:12:10 PM
Ours were at that stage about thirty years ago.
The clubs  maybe finished earlier then, it was usually about three AM when we heard the key turning.
Now it's the eldest ones turn to have that experience.
Pay back!!
That makes you about 106, Ern. :)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on June 03, 2019, 08:04:13 AM
Quote from: The General on June 03, 2019, 07:53:58 AM
That makes you about 106, Ern. :)

Eldest is now 49.

Thirty years ago he was 19 and going to clubs.

His eldest is now  20 and going to clubs.

Doesn't make me 106!

Though sometimes my knees feel that old . @)(++(*


ETA
I can see where you may have reached that conclusion.
The thirty years ago could have been read as our children were waiting for their children to turn the key, whereas I meant our children were turning the key.

Just shows how we don't always express our thoughts clearly which can lead to statements being misconstrued.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 03, 2019, 09:50:23 AM
Quote from: Erngath on June 03, 2019, 08:04:13 AM
Eldest is now 49.

Thirty years ago he was 19 and going to clubs.

His eldest is now  20 and going to clubs.

Doesn't make me 106!

Though sometimes my knees feel that old . @)(++(*


ETA
I can see where you may have reached that conclusion.
The thirty years ago could have been read as our children were waiting for their children to turn the key, whereas I meant our children were turning the key.

Just shows how we don't always express our thoughts clearly which can lead to statements being misconstrued.

My eldest is 54 and I'm 75. I only retired 5 years ago though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 03, 2019, 10:02:15 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2019, 09:50:23 AM
My eldest is 54 and I'm 75. I only retired 5 years ago though.

Really?  My eldest is 56 and I went on working until I was 75.  The Ghastly British State Pension.  But I've got The Food Bank now, so that's okay.

PS.  I have never had to lock my front door here, or the back door either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 03, 2019, 10:58:17 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 03, 2019, 10:02:15 AM
Really?  My eldest is 56 and I went on working until I was 75.  The Ghastly British State Pension.  But I've got The Food Bank now, so that's okay.

PS.  I have never had to lock my front door here, or the back door either.

I may have carried on longer but my job disappeared due to company reorganisation.  There were family reasons to be at home too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 03, 2019, 11:01:33 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2019, 10:58:17 AM
I may have carried on longer but my job disappeared due to company reorganisation.  There were family reasons to be at home too.

Ah well, I made my own job.  I then handed my clients to a neighbour who has since handed them back to my son.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 03, 2019, 05:48:20 PM

Maleah Davis' remains have been identified, authorities said Monday

By Chuck Johnston, CNN

June 3, 2019


(CNN)The remains of 4-year-old Maleah Davis have been identified, authorities said Monday.

Located in Arkansas on Friday during a search, the remains now have been positively identified as those of the missing Houston girl, the Harris County Institute of Forensic Sciences in Texas said.

The cause and manner of her death are still pending, according to the forensic institute.

Maleah was reported missing in early May by her mother's former fiancé, Derion Vence.

Vence initially told police that Maleah had been abducted by a group of men -- but investigators found signs of decay in his car and blood evidence in his apartment.

Earlier Friday, Houston police had said remains found in a bag in southwest Arkansas might belong to Maleah.
Vence was arrested and booked into the Harris County jail in May on suspicion of tampering with a human corpse, according to police.

Story raised questions

At the beginning of May, Vence told police he was driving with the young girl and his toddler son in the car when he heard a loud noise and pulled over. A group of men pulled up behind him, he said, and knocked him unconscious for nearly 24 hours. When he woke up, Vence claimed he was on the side of a road with his son, but Maleah was gone.

He said he walked to a nearby hospital, where he received treatment for his injuries and reported Maleah missing. But as detectives began collecting evidence, his account began to fall apart.

Video shows Vence was dropped off at the hospital in the car he claims was stolen, authorities said. Investigators also collected blood from his apartment that was "consistent' with DNA taken from Maleah's toothbrush.

Investigators also viewed footage captured from the porch of an apartment next to Vence's, according to the affidavit.

The footage shows Maleah entering the apartment, but she is not on video coming back out. Instead, Vence is seen leaving the apartment on May 3 carrying a large blue laundry basket with a black trash bag inside.

He returned a few minutes later and walked out of the apartment carrying cleaning supplies, including bleach, according to court documents.

Searching in Arkansas

The search for Maleah moved to Arkansas after Vence allegedly confessed to Quanell X, who visited him in jail Friday, that he dumped Maleah's body there. Quanell is a community activity who used to represent the young girl's mother.

"One thing he wanted to make clear to me was (that) what happened to Maleah was an accident, he says it was an accident. And he confessed to me where he dumped the body," the activist told CNN affiliate KTRK.

Houston police detectives along with search and rescue teams immediately headed to Arkansas. Houston police requested that local authorities begin searching near Hope, a town about 30 miles northeast of the Texas-Arkansas border.

A roadside mowing crew spotted a garbage bag emitting a foul odor near Hope, which contained the remains of a child, Hempstead County Sheriff James Singleton told CNN affiliate KTAL.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/03/us/texas-maleah-davis/index.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 16, 2019, 03:55:30 PM
A murder without a body: Detective reveals how cops proved victim Janet Brown was dead

Manipulative Donald Graham was jailed for life for killing his partner despite the fact that her body was never found

By Sophie Doughty
21:00, 15 JUN 2019 UPDATED 09:42, 16 JUN 2019

He came close to committing the 'perfect murder' because for years no one knew his victim was dead.

Motivated by greed, Donald Graham killed his wealthy partner Janet Brown to get his hands on her money.

And the manipulative killer managed to maintain a pretence that his victim was still alive for five years after the crime, meaning Janet's murder went uninvestigated.

But arrogant Graham was eventually caught out when an eagle-eyed bank clerk spotted a forged signature as he continued to plunder her bank account long after her death.

Graham is today behind bars for his cruel and calculated crime, but how Janet died and what happened to her body remains a mystery.

The case is thought to be Northumbria Police's only murder conviction without a body.

Today the detective that lead the investigation has lifted the lid on the bizarre and challenging case as he reveals how cops proved that Janet was dead.

Det Chief Insp Paul Woods, of Northumbria Police, said: "It could have been the perfect murder, that no one would know had taken place.

"We had to show beyond all reasonable doubt that Janet Brown was dead. There were literally thousands of enquiries that needed top be conducted to show that Janet Brown wasn't alive.

"There were a lot of questions that had to be answered. We had to look at how we prove this person is dead. We didn't have to prove how they died, but we needed to show when they died, that the death was unlawful and who was responsible for the death.  We don't have to prove motive, but that can be important evidence.

"Crucially we showed that the only reasonable explanation was that Janet Browns' murder was down to Donald Graham. "

Janet was an independent woman who enjoyed travelling and loved animals. She came from a well off family and had made her own money developing properties, which enabled her to take on casual work as a television extra and mystery shopper while spending a lot of time travelling the world alone.

She had been in a relationship with married Donald Graham for a number of years, but Graham was already married.

And Janet had moved in with her elderly parents Olive and Eric Brown, who lived at Plane Trees Farm in Lowgate, Hexham

Janet vanished in June 2005, but her disappearance was not discovered until 2010, when an investigation into suspected fraudulent activity on her bank account turned into a murder probe.

Police were alerted by a bank employee who spotted some signatures on documents relating to Janet's bank accounts did not quite match-up.

A fraud investigation was launched by Northumbria Police, but when all efforts to trace Janet failed detectives handed the case on to the force's murder squad.

Det Chief Insp Woods, who was a Detective Inspector at the time, was placed in charge.

But this was to be no straight forward investigation. While there was no trace of Janet, no body had been found.

So unlike other probes where detectives' job is to prove who killed a murder victim, Det Chief Insp Woods first had to prove that Janet was in fact dead.

Read more here:

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/murder-without-body-detective-reveals-16410597
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 16, 2019, 04:22:44 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 16, 2019, 03:55:30 PM
A murder without a body: Detective reveals how cops proved victim Janet Brown was dead

Manipulative Donald Graham was jailed for life for killing his partner despite the fact that her body was never found

By Sophie Doughty
21:00, 15 JUN 2019 UPDATED 09:42, 16 JUN 2019

He came close to committing the 'perfect murder' because for years no one knew his victim was dead.

Motivated by greed, Donald Graham killed his wealthy partner Janet Brown to get his hands on her money.

And the manipulative killer managed to maintain a pretence that his victim was still alive for five years after the crime, meaning Janet's murder went uninvestigated.

But arrogant Graham was eventually caught out when an eagle-eyed bank clerk spotted a forged signature as he continued to plunder her bank account long after her death.

Graham is today behind bars for his cruel and calculated crime, but how Janet died and what happened to her body remains a mystery.

The case is thought to be Northumbria Police's only murder conviction without a body.

Today the detective that lead the investigation has lifted the lid on the bizarre and challenging case as he reveals how cops proved that Janet was dead.

Det Chief Insp Paul Woods, of Northumbria Police, said: "It could have been the perfect murder, that no one would know had taken place.

"We had to show beyond all reasonable doubt that Janet Brown was dead. There were literally thousands of enquiries that needed top be conducted to show that Janet Brown wasn't alive.

"There were a lot of questions that had to be answered. We had to look at how we prove this person is dead. We didn't have to prove how they died, but we needed to show when they died, that the death was unlawful and who was responsible for the death.  We don't have to prove motive, but that can be important evidence.

"Crucially we showed that the only reasonable explanation was that Janet Browns' murder was down to Donald Graham. "

Janet was an independent woman who enjoyed travelling and loved animals. She came from a well off family and had made her own money developing properties, which enabled her to take on casual work as a television extra and mystery shopper while spending a lot of time travelling the world alone.

She had been in a relationship with married Donald Graham for a number of years, but Graham was already married.

And Janet had moved in with her elderly parents Olive and Eric Brown, who lived at Plane Trees Farm in Lowgate, Hexham

Janet vanished in June 2005, but her disappearance was not discovered until 2010, when an investigation into suspected fraudulent activity on her bank account turned into a murder probe.

Police were alerted by a bank employee who spotted some signatures on documents relating to Janet's bank accounts did not quite match-up.

A fraud investigation was launched by Northumbria Police, but when all efforts to trace Janet failed detectives handed the case on to the force's murder squad.

Det Chief Insp Woods, who was a Detective Inspector at the time, was placed in charge.

But this was to be no straight forward investigation. While there was no trace of Janet, no body had been found.

So unlike other probes where detectives' job is to prove who killed a murder victim, Det Chief Insp Woods first had to prove that Janet was in fact dead.

Read more here:

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/murder-without-body-detective-reveals-16410597


It Takes a long time to gather circumstancial evidence in these cases. I don't know if I read this correctly- she had arranged for some one to look after her dog for a short term. did those people not become suspicious?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 16, 2019, 04:27:16 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jun/14/margaret-fleming-carers-found-guilty-of-murder



Carers found guilty of missing woman's murder 20 years ago
Edward Cairney and Avril Jones killed Margaret Fleming to get vulnerable teenager’s benefits
Press Association
Fri 14 Jun 2019 13.44 BST Last modified on Fri 14 Jun 2019 17.34 BST

Shares
41
 Margaret Fleming
 Margaret Fleming went to live with Edward Cairney and Avril Jones after the death of her father. Photograph: Crown Office/PA
A man and a woman have been convicted of murdering a vulnerable woman they should have been caring for almost two decades ago.

Margaret Fleming, who had learning difficulties, vanished “from the face of the Earth” around December 1999. Her body has never been found.

Following a seven-week trial at the high court in Glasgow, Edward Cairney, 77, and Avril Jones, 59, were found guilty of murdering the missing woman.

Jurors found the couple murdered her by unknown means between 18 December 1999 and 5 January 2000 at their home in Inverkip, Inverclyde, or elsewhere in Scotland, and then tried to cover up the crime for almost 18 years.

Advertisement

Jones was also convicted unanimously of fraudulently claiming £182,000 in benefits by pretending Fleming, who would now have been in her late 30s, was alive.

The pair will be sentenced on 17 July.

Police launched an investigation after it became apparent in October 2016 that Fleming was missing. Routine social services inquiries were said to have sparked concerns over her whereabouts.

The case attracted major police resources and significant media attention as it was claimed the last independent sighting of her had been at a family event on 17 December 1999.

As the inquiry progressed, it appeared something “sinister” had happened and that she may have come to harm. Specialist teams combed the cottage where she had lived and excavated its grounds in their search for clues that might to help track her down.

Her supposed carers were arrested in October 2017. During their trial, which began in April, Fleming was described by prosecutors as a “friendless and lonely” young woman who had significant difficulties.

She went to live at the pair’s Seacroft home as a teenager after the death of her father because those closest to her “didn’t want her”. By October 1999, various benefits for Fleming flowed into the household, which was said to have had financial difficulties.

The crown suggested it had been tempting for the couple to have the money but not the “inconvenience” of looking after her. How and exactly when Fleming died may never be clearly known. It remains, as the defence highlighted, a case without a body or crime scene.

Holding them jointly responsibility for the death, the crown claimed the couple “literally got away with murder for 16 years”. Money was the motive for them to cook up an “elaborate scheme” to conceal her disappearance, the court heard.

They were brought down by “greed, arrogance and lies” after Jones made claims of Fleming having “fantastical” illnesses and conditions in correspondence with benefits officials.

As police closed in on the couple, they struggled to reconcile claims she both worked as a gangmaster and was capable of travelling overseas, and that she had major difficulties that entitled her to a number of benefits.

Det Supt Paul Livingstone, the senior investigating officer, said: “Margaret was a very vulnerable young woman who was manipulated, abused, neglected and ultimately murdered by the two people who should have been looking after her.

“It is clear that one of Cairney and Jones’ motivations was money … For many years, Cairney and Jones kept up the pretence that Margaret was still alive, going as far as to write letters claiming to be from her.

“Margaret was described as being a funny, caring young woman who, despite having some mild learning difficulties, just wanted to be liked and to have friends. The treatment which she was subjected to can only be described as horrific and the conditions in which she lived in were utterly disgusting and uninhabitable..”


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 16, 2019, 04:32:05 PM
Where’s our summer? Lost at sea, says Met Office amid new storm warnings
June 16 2019, 12:01pm,
Jonathan Leake, Science Editor

A man wades through water in Wainfleet, Lincolnshire, where hundreds of properties were evacuated
A man wades through water in Wainfleet, Lincolnshire, where hundreds of properties were evacuated
For deep-sea fishermen and yachties, it could be the best summer yet. As Britain soaks in one of its wettest Junes, the mid-Atlantic is basking in blue skies, sunshine and calm, warm seas.

Satellite imagery shows how the large zone of sunny high pressure that would normally be warming the UK by this time in the summer is trapped far out to sea.

It means the powerful rain-soaked depression that has lodged itself over the UK for the past week will stay in place — and be reinforced by a tropical storm over southern England and Wales on Tuesday or Wednesday.

Linconlshire police said residents should be prepared to spend two days away from their homes
Linconlshire police said residents should be prepared to spend two days away from their homesJOE GIDDENS/PA
“Summer is happening — there’s glorious sunshine and high pressure — if you’re in the mid-Atlantic,” said Simon Partridge, a Met Office forecaster. “The jet stream has formed a loop which is blocking it from reaching us.

“There’s also a deep low-pressure system forming off Spain which will head our way on Tuesday or Wednesday laden with warm moist tropical air. We could see temperatures of 26C but with rain and thunderstorms, too.”

The warning comes after a week of below-average temperatures, torrential rain and flooding across much of Britain. The wettest UK June was in 2012, with more than double the average rainfall, but with two weeks of the month left to go — and more rain likely — this year could be a record-breaker.

Yesterday 16 flood warnings remained in force in England, mostly across a section of the country stretching from Hull down to the Wash in the east and then across to Gloucester, Birmingham and Shrewsbury in the west.

Hundreds of properties in Wainfleet, Lincolnshire, were evacuated and residents moved to temporary accommodation amid fears of flooding from the River Steeping, which burst its banks. Linconlshire police said residents should be prepared to spend two days away from their homes.

A driver in Kent trapped in his car by rising floodwater described how he was saved only by his wife and son who broke into the vehicle with a claw hammer.

“I really thought my number was up,” said Pip Bassett, 65, who was driving near Gravesend when chest-high floods carried his car into a dip and jammed his doors. Bassett used his mobile phone to call his family, who rescued him.

Forecasters say the rest of the summer looks unsettled and potentially disappointing. One even described it as the “Brexit summer”.

The Met Office’s three-month predictions say that July and August are likely to be unusually warm — but also warn there is a risk of above-average rain.

“It could be a long, grey summer,” said one forecaster.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 18, 2019, 10:23:21 PM
You couldn't make it up.....


https://www.portugalresident.com/2019/06/18/gnr-torture-case-fails-on-appeal/
By portugalresident  2019-06-18 Posted  2019-06-18  InTop Stories 
A GNR agent accused of torture eight years ago has seen his tardy condemnation overturned on appeal.

At the initial trial which went ahead after the case was reopened due to complaints by the European Committee Against Torture, one of the judges said: “It’s not by chance that Portugal is targeted by international entities. Their police officers and prison guards go far beyond what should be their conduct”.

But a procedural ‘error’ in the trial meant that it has been annulled on appeal by a new panel of judges in Évora.

Now it is unclear what will happen. The GNR officer in question – no longer ‘in the field’ and since promoted – may have to face another trial, or the whole issue could end up being forgotten.

The torture involved the officer allegedly whipping four known felons with a very unpleasant homemade weapon known as a ‘picha de bói’ (made of animal skin), punching them and cutting one on the buttocks as he warned the group to keep away from what he called ‘his territory’.

The officer – a corporal at the time – denied the charges.

As Público explains, the case may never have got to trial. It was only that in 2013 the European Committee Against Torture dedicated an entire chapter in one of its reports on the story, saying that the authorities in Portugal had not conducted a diligent investigation into the victims’ complaints.

Two years later the case was ‘reopened’ and a panel of judges condemned the now Major to four and a half years in jail, ruling that his answers over how the victims got their injuries were ‘contemptible’.

However, the leader of the bench slipped up in the form that he delivered the sentence. The officer was condemned for one crime of torture, when it should have been four (corresponding to the number of victims). And it was that omission that caused the ruling to be overturned.

Had judges in Évora not annulled the lower court’s sentence, it would have been the first time that a GNR officer was condemned to jail-time for torture, explains Público.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2019, 10:15:57 PM
I’ve just watched the first two parts of the Docu-drama “When They See Us” about the Central Park Five, a truly appalling case of miscarriage of justice.  It has reinforced to me why you should always answer no comment to police questions, but if the police start roughing you up and torturing you, then it’s easy for them to get you to say anything they want you to say, regardless of the fact that there is literally no evidence against you.  This is a brilliant series, and should be watched by anyone with an interest in miscarriages of justice and prejudiced, corrupt and brutal police tactics in their pursuit of a conviction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 21, 2019, 06:58:56 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 20, 2019, 10:15:57 PM
I’ve just watched the first two parts of the Docu-drama “When They See Us” about the Central Park Five, a truly appalling case of miscarriage of justice.  It has reinforced to me why you should always answer no comment to police questions, but if the police start roughing you up and torturing you, then it’s easy for them to get you to day anything they want you to say, regardless of the fact that there is literally no evidence against you.  This is a brilliant series, and should be watched by anyone with an interest in miscarriages of justice and prejudiced, corrupt and brutal police tactics in their pursuit of a conviction.

High on my to-watch list.

False confessions and incriminating statements lead to wrongful convictions in approximately 25 percent of cases. Looking only at the homicide cases, false confessions are the leading contributor to wrongful convictions, contributing to 64 (62%) of the 104 homicide wrongful convictions that were overturned by DNA evidence, where as misidentifications contributed to only 32 (31%) of the homicide wrongful convictions. Twenty-nine of the DNA exonerees pled guilty to crimes they did not commit. The Innocence Project encourages police departments to electronically record all custodial interrogations in their entirety in order to prevent coercion and to provide an accurate record of the proceedings.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/DNA_Exonerations_Nationwide.php
(Dead link, but I originally posted this several years ago.)

And guess who took out a full-page ad to advocate their execution? *
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Paf8MPhSG08

That's one of the reasons why I wouldn't necessarily hold up the US as a leading light in the conduct of criminal justice. To be fair, though, DNA was in its infancy in '89 and at least someone bothered to keep the evidence.

Heaven help those who get convicted when there is no DNA evidence, or none kept, that could exonerate them.

* A bit more on the Orange-one's stance on this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LdIBdqTJ84

Rather than the above, I found this by Chris Cuomo more informative.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U60Vk-xt8tI


A few more statistics on DNA exonerations:
https://www.innocenceproject.org/dna-exonerations-in-the-united-states/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 21, 2019, 09:07:10 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 20, 2019, 10:15:57 PM
I’ve just watched the first two parts of the Docu-drama “When They See Us” about the Central Park Five, a truly appalling case of miscarriage of justice.  It has reinforced to me why you should always answer no comment to police questions, but if the police start roughing you up and torturing you, then it’s easy for them to get you to say anything they want you to say, regardless of the fact that there is literally no evidence against you.  This is a brilliant series, and should be watched by anyone with an interest in miscarriages of justice and prejudiced, corrupt and brutal police tactics in their pursuit of a conviction.

You don't need to watch miscarriages of justice in other countries,the Birmingham six is of the same,torture.


For 16 years every other aspect of the case was disregarded; that the men were, in Paddy Hill's words, "tortured and framed" on arrest, beaten, subjected to mock executions, threatened with being thrown from a high building or a car on the motorway, and burnt with cigarettes; that their torturers were the infamous West Midlands serious crime squad, or that the scientist called to Heysham was the incompetent Dr Skuse. They were failed by everyone. Cut and visibly bruised when they were taken from the police station to the magistrates' court, the solicitors who saw them first succeeded in getting legal aid forms signed, but failed to log their injuries.
https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2011/mar/12/gareth-peirce-birmingham-six


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 21, 2019, 11:14:54 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 21, 2019, 09:07:10 AM
You don't need to watch miscarriages of justice in other countries,the Birmingham six is of the same,torture.


For 16 years every other aspect of the case was disregarded; that the men were, in Paddy Hill's words, "tortured and framed" on arrest, beaten, subjected to mock executions, threatened with being thrown from a high building or a car on the motorway, and burnt with cigarettes; that their torturers were the infamous West Midlands serious crime squad, or that the scientist called to Heysham was the incompetent Dr Skuse. They were failed by everyone. Cut and visibly bruised when they were taken from the police station to the magistrates' court, the solicitors who saw them first succeeded in getting legal aid forms signed, but failed to log their injuries.
https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2011/mar/12/gareth-peirce-birmingham-six

Even the Met aren't whiter than white;

Scotland Yard facing biggest corruption scandal in 40 years
https://www.theweek.co.uk/95221/scotland-yard-facing-biggest-corruption-scandal-in-40-years
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2019, 11:58:02 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2019, 11:14:54 AM
Even the Met aren't whiter than white;

Scotland Yard facing biggest corruption scandal in 40 years
https://www.theweek.co.uk/95221/scotland-yard-facing-biggest-corruption-scandal-in-40-years

You think that anyone thinks that these things are acceptable?  Or are you suggesting that Operation Grange is Corrupt?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 21, 2019, 12:15:28 PM
As another weekend approaches can I ask everyone to please follow the forum rules. The hard pressed moderators do an excellent job in keeping things moving so do consider them next time you feel you need to have a go at someone. 

Let's try and set a new record this weekend by drastically cutting the number of moderated posts. As an incentive, the prize for the member whose has the most posts moderated/deleted over Saturday and Sunday will be a two day ban.

Happy posting!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2019, 12:45:10 PM
Quote from: John on June 21, 2019, 12:15:28 PM
As another weekend approaches can I ask everyone to please follow the forum rules. The hard pressed moderators do an excellent job in keeping things moving so do consider them next time you feel you need to have a go at someone. 

Let's try and set a new record this weekend by drastically cutting the number of moderated posts. As an incentive, the prize for the member whose has the most posts moderated/deleted over Saturday and Sunday will be a two day ban.

Happy posting!

Good.  Although no doubt some will think it is unfair.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 21, 2019, 01:11:33 PM
Quote from: John on June 21, 2019, 12:15:28 PM
As another weekend approaches can I ask everyone to please follow the forum rules. The hard pressed moderators do an excellent job in keeping things moving so do consider them next time you feel you need to have a go at someone. 

Let's try and set a new record this weekend by drastically cutting the number of moderated posts. As an incentive, the prize for the member whose has the most posts moderated/deleted over Saturday and Sunday will be a two day ban.

Happy posting!

Its going to be a quiet weekend.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2019, 01:36:49 PM

My Nephew, Ian Orriss, was the Runner Up in The Final of Master Mind 2019.  I am his only Aunt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 21, 2019, 01:42:44 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 21, 2019, 01:36:49 PM
My Nephew, Ian Orriss, was the Runner Up in The Final of Master Mind 2019.  I am his only Aunt.

Congrats to him... I'll se if I can watch it on catch up
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2019, 02:00:14 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 21, 2019, 01:42:44 PM
Congrats to him... I'll se if I can watch it on catch up

There is a load of kerfuffle about Gerbil or Gerbo, but she would have won anyway because she had one less Pass.

Ian's family aren't getting precious about this.  We are all mightily proud of him.  Especially his Mum, my only sister.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 21, 2019, 02:08:55 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 21, 2019, 02:00:14 PM
There is a load of kerfuffle about Gerbil or Gerbo, but she would have won anyway because she had one less Pass.

Ian's family aren't getting precious about this.  We are all mightily proud of him.  Especially his Mum, my only sister.

Well done to him! Quite a feat.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2019, 02:20:43 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 21, 2019, 02:08:55 PM
Well done to him! Quite a feat.

Isn't it ever.  His Specialist Subject was some unpronounceable phrase in Welsh related to the first Prince of Wales.  My sister lives in Wales so he grew up there, and she can pronounce it, but it rather sailed over my head.

I shall have to catch up with it on You Tube.  I just happened to read about it this morning on The Mail on Line.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on June 21, 2019, 02:21:36 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 21, 2019, 02:00:14 PM
There is a load of kerfuffle about Gerbil or Gerbo, but she would have won anyway because she had one less Pass.

Ian's family aren't getting precious about this.  We are all mightily proud of him.  Especially his Mum, my only sister.

Excellent.
Well done to him.
Your family are rightly proud.

I read that one of the finalists, I believe  he came fourth has since died.
The final was shown on the day of his funeral but his family wanted the show to be televised.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2019, 02:22:18 PM

PS.  You can tell where he gets his brains from, of course.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2019, 02:23:31 PM
Quote from: Erngath on June 21, 2019, 02:21:36 PM
Excellent.
Well done to him.
Your family are rightly proud.

I read that one of the finalists, I believe  he came fourth has since died.
The final was shown on the day of his funeral but his family wanted the show to be televised.

Yes, my sister was a bit sad about that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 21, 2019, 04:46:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2019, 11:14:54 AM
Even the Met aren't whiter than white;

Scotland Yard facing biggest corruption scandal in 40 years
https://www.theweek.co.uk/95221/scotland-yard-facing-biggest-corruption-scandal-in-40-years

Delicious piece of irony,officers from its anti corruption unit being investigated for corruption.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2019, 05:06:10 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 21, 2019, 09:07:10 AM
You don't need to watch miscarriages of justice in other countries,the Birmingham six is of the same,torture.


For 16 years every other aspect of the case was disregarded; that the men were, in Paddy Hill's words, "tortured and framed" on arrest, beaten, subjected to mock executions, threatened with being thrown from a high building or a car on the motorway, and burnt with cigarettes; that their torturers were the infamous West Midlands serious crime squad, or that the scientist called to Heysham was the incompetent Dr Skuse. They were failed by everyone. Cut and visibly bruised when they were taken from the police station to the magistrates' court, the solicitors who saw them first succeeded in getting legal aid forms signed, but failed to log their injuries.
https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2011/mar/12/gareth-peirce-birmingham-six
So you can see why answering police questions in custody is a very foolish thing to do, especially if you’re innocent, and why torturing suspects does not get to the truth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 21, 2019, 07:52:40 PM
For those who missed this earlier...

As another weekend approaches can I ask everyone to please follow the forum rules. The hard pressed moderators do an excellent job in keeping things moving so do consider them next time you feel you need to have a go at someone. 

Let's try and set a new record this weekend by drastically cutting the number of moderated posts. As an incentive, the prize for the member whose has the most posts moderated/deleted over Saturday and Sunday will be a two day ban.

Happy posting!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 21, 2019, 07:57:15 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 21, 2019, 04:46:48 PM
Delicious piece of irony,officers from its anti corruption unit being investigated for corruption.

Time to send for Ted Hastings
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 21, 2019, 09:30:20 PM
Mr Grime and his dogs.

The dog handler, Martin Grime, was hired by the FBI to come to America and help establish a cadaver dog program.  He brought his two dogs, Morse the cadaver dog, and Keela the blood detection dog, to the Castillo home 17 days after the body was located. Morse alerted to the basement bathroom where the body was found, and also to the foot of her bed in the master bedroom.

In a statement to the Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office following the appeal, Grimes said prosecutors’ “support for our search philosophy and strategy ensured that all relevant forensic intelligence was secured and helped solve the case. It is that sort of forward thinking and acceptance of science and support of research that makes your team a cut above the rest.”

https://loudounnow.com/2019/06/20/appeals-court-upholds-castillo-murder-conviction/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 22, 2019, 12:41:56 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 21, 2019, 09:30:20 PM
Mr Grime and his dogs.

The dog handler, Martin Grime, was hired by the FBI to come to America and help establish a cadaver dog program.  He brought his two dogs, Morse the cadaver dog, and Keela the blood detection dog, to the Castillo home 17 days after the body was located. Morse alerted to the basement bathroom where the body was found, and also to the foot of her bed in the master bedroom.

In a statement to the Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office following the appeal, Grimes said prosecutors’ “support for our search philosophy and strategy ensured that all relevant forensic intelligence was secured and helped solve the case. It is that sort of forward thinking and acceptance of science and support of research that makes your team a cut above the rest.”

https://loudounnow.com/2019/06/20/appeals-court-upholds-castillo-murder-conviction/

What was the point of bringing Morse 17 days after the body had already been found?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 22, 2019, 02:03:58 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 22, 2019, 12:41:56 AM
What was the point of bringing Morse 17 days after the body had already been found?
to help build up the scenario, where had the body been prior to where it was found.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 22, 2019, 06:23:23 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 22, 2019, 12:41:56 AM
What was the point of bringing Morse 17 days after the body had already been found?
Wot Rob said.
The case also featured testimony by a cadaver dog handler that was used to argue that the death had actually occurred in an upstairs bedroom—a legally ground-breaking approach in Virginia.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 22, 2019, 09:08:48 AM
In this case, there were also two room alerts - behind the sofa in the living room and in the parent's bedroom.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 22, 2019, 11:26:26 AM
https://www.theportugalnews.com/news/portugal-world-class-for-peace-and-family/50007

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/uk-maternity-leave-paternity-family-friendly-table-france-germany-sweden-a8956731.html

Portugal one of the most family friendly countries, UK one of the least.

Interesting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 22, 2019, 11:38:38 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 22, 2019, 11:26:26 AM
https://www.theportugalnews.com/news/portugal-world-class-for-peace-and-family/50007

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/uk-maternity-leave-paternity-family-friendly-table-france-germany-sweden-a8956731.html

Portugal one of the most family friendly countries, UK one of the least.

Interesting.

Amaral wasn't very Family Friendly, was he.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 22, 2019, 11:48:45 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 22, 2019, 11:38:38 AM
Amaral wasn't very Family Friendly, was he.

Sorry, not sure the point you’re making ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 22, 2019, 11:50:40 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 22, 2019, 11:48:45 AM
Sorry, not sure the point you’re making ?

And I am not about to elaborate since you know it all anyway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 22, 2019, 11:52:14 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 22, 2019, 11:50:40 AM
And I am not about to elaborate since you know it all anyway.

No point in mentioning it then I suppose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 22, 2019, 11:57:48 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 22, 2019, 11:52:14 AM
No point in mentioning it then I suppose.

Gosh, I thought that I have just as much right to comment as you do, on something with which I do not agree.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 22, 2019, 12:07:20 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 22, 2019, 11:26:26 AM
https://www.theportugalnews.com/news/portugal-world-class-for-peace-and-family/50007

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/uk-maternity-leave-paternity-family-friendly-table-france-germany-sweden-a8956731.html

Portugal one of the most family friendly countries, UK one of the least.

Interesting.


And Embarrassing.  Shameful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 22, 2019, 12:27:47 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 22, 2019, 11:57:48 AM
Gosh, I thought that I have just as much right to comment as you do, on something with which I do not agree.

You do indeed. What were you not agreeing with ? That’s the part that’s not clear.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 22, 2019, 12:40:32 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 22, 2019, 12:27:47 PM
You do indeed. What were you not agreeing with ? That’s the part that’s not clear.

I don't want to be Banned for Two Days for being Insulting.  So I am being a bit careful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 22, 2019, 01:00:17 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 22, 2019, 12:40:32 PM
I don't want to be Banned for Two Days for being Insulting.  So I am being a bit careful.

If it’s true I’m sure you’ll be okay.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2019, 05:11:12 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 22, 2019, 11:26:26 AM
https://www.theportugalnews.com/news/portugal-world-class-for-peace-and-family/50007

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/uk-maternity-leave-paternity-family-friendly-table-france-germany-sweden-a8956731.html

Portugal one of the most family friendly countries, UK one of the least.

Interesting.
But not as bad as Australia and New Zealand.  As this is just about maternity and paternity leave I don’t really see what point is trying to be made here other than UK = bad Portugal = good.  Reverse xenophobia in other words.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 22, 2019, 07:32:35 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 22, 2019, 12:40:32 PM
I don't want to be Banned for Two Days for being Insulting.  So I am being a bit careful.

Does the world stop for two days if that happens,not just to you but anyone receiving their penance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 24, 2019, 11:00:53 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 22, 2019, 06:23:23 AM
Wot Rob said.
The case also featured testimony by a cadaver dog handler that was used to argue that the death had actually occurred in an upstairs bedroom—a legally ground-breaking approach in Virginia.

Was corroborating forensic evidence found there?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 24, 2019, 11:05:01 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 21, 2019, 09:30:20 PM
Mr Grime and his dogs.

The dog handler, Martin Grime, was hired by the FBI to come to America and help establish a cadaver dog program.  He brought his two dogs, Morse the cadaver dog, and Keela the blood detection dog, to the Castillo home 17 days after the body was located. Morse alerted to the basement bathroom where the body was found, and also to the foot of her bed in the master bedroom.

In a statement to the Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office following the appeal, Grimes said prosecutors’ “support for our search philosophy and strategy ensured that all relevant forensic intelligence was secured and helped solve the case. It is that sort of forward thinking and acceptance of science and support of research that makes your team a cut above the rest.”

https://loudounnow.com/2019/06/20/appeals-court-upholds-castillo-murder-conviction/

Grime was not taken to America to establish  a cadave dog programme... They already had one
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on June 24, 2019, 11:16:08 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 24, 2019, 11:05:01 AM
Grime was not taken to America to establish  a cadave dog programme... They already had one


Cite ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 24, 2019, 12:15:24 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on June 24, 2019, 11:16:08 AM

Cite ?
Wasn't the USA training better than the UK for the USA trained their dogs on human cadaver parts but the UK dogs were trained only on decomposed piglets.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 24, 2019, 12:31:32 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 24, 2019, 12:15:24 PM
Wasn't the USA training better than the UK for the USA trained their dogs on human cadaver parts but the UK dogs were trained only on decomposed piglets.

Of course it was better... From the article quoted it looks as though the source for all the information in the article is from Grime himself
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 24, 2019, 12:34:53 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 24, 2019, 12:15:24 PM
Wasn't the USA training better than the UK for the USA trained their dogs on human cadaver parts but the UK dogs were trained only on decomposed piglets.

I find the initial request for a cite a bit strange as most know that American training could well be considered superior to ours thanks to certain states having body farms and as a result animals trained on nothing but human decomposition at all its stages.

But sigh ... here is one I think may suffice ...
Snip
Since 1972 Andy Rebmann and Marcia Koenig have each trained and worked search and rescue dogs. Andy started out with the Connecticut State Police, while Marcia started with volunteer unit, Texas SARDA, a founding member of the American Rescue Dog Association.

After his retirement from the CT State Police, Andy started K9 Specialty Search Associates in 1991. Marcia joined in 1993, and together they have taught seminars throughout the United States, Canada, Mexico, Germany, Czech Republic and Japan.

Courses taught include basic and advanced cadaver, trailing, wilderness area search, disaster search, water search and crime scene search. Andy wrote the Cadaver Dog Handbook, while Marcia produced the Water Search DVD. Both are available in the store.
https://www.cadaverdog.com/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2019, 12:26:55 PM

Police search for 2-year-old boy who ‘vanished from his bed’


Police and the FBI are searching for a two-year-old boy who reportedly vanished in the middle of the night.

Noah Tomlin’s mother said she last saw her son in his bed at 1 am on Monday morning in their mobile home in Norfolk, Virginia, according to Hampton Police Chief Terry Sult.
Sult said ‘We’re turning over every stone’ in a video the police department posted on Facebook on Monday.

Noah was reported missing by his mother who called police at 11:35 am on Monday morning.

Sult did not get into the specific details of the case, but said ‘We are not ruling anything out until we find the child’ when asked if he suspected an abduction.

‘We’re considering everything from the child just walking away, all the way up to foul play. We are looking at all potential possibilities,’ Sult said. He added: ‘We’re going to take it as worst case and hope for the best case.’

Police spokesman Reginald Williams told the Daily Press that authorities have ‘searched and re-searched’ the Bayside Mobile Home Village where the boy’s family lives.

He also said investigators have searched the Chesapeake Bay shoreline.
First responders were seen using a airboat to search the nearby Mill Creek.

The boy’s parents have reportedly been interviewed by police although no charges have been announced. Residents have been told to avoid the areas that police are focusing on and have been told authorities are not looking for help from civilian search teams.

https://metro.co.uk/2019/06/25/police-search-2-year-old-boy-vanished-bed-10071489/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2019, 12:28:43 PM

Search continues for missing Hampton 2-year-old, trash collection suspended in area

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SbvrTjZRv4
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 26, 2019, 12:59:45 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 24, 2019, 12:15:24 PM
Wasn't the USA training better than the UK for the USA trained their dogs on human cadaver parts but the UK dogs were trained only on decomposed piglets.

The point, though, is when the FBI set up it's own cadaver dog training programme.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 26, 2019, 01:22:59 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2019, 12:28:43 PM
Search continues for missing Hampton 2-year-old, trash collection suspended in area

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SbvrTjZRv4

Mother has previous. I think we can predict how this one's going to end.  8(8-))

https://www.facebook.com/MissingPersonsCasesNetwork/posts/390559911804189
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2019, 01:42:23 PM
Quote from: misty on June 26, 2019, 01:22:59 PM
Mother has previous. I think we can predict how this one's going to end.  8(8-))

https://www.facebook.com/MissingPersonsCasesNetwork/posts/390559911804189

I didn't want to jump the gun but this story did sound a bit off to me.

No mention so far of the status of the trailer, whether doors windows were locked or discovered open.

.............

'Police also have a presence at Bethel Landfill just in case their search leads them there. We're told this is a "preliminary step” but that they’re taking pictures there now to “preserve and identify potential areas that may be of future evidentiary value.”

Trash collection is temporarily suspended in the immediate search area.'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 26, 2019, 01:47:06 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 24, 2019, 12:15:24 PM
Wasn't the USA training better than the UK for the USA trained their dogs on human cadaver parts but the UK dogs were trained only on decomposed piglets.

What happened to the saying 'You can't train an old dog new tricks?'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 28, 2019, 09:37:57 PM
Investigator: Cadaver dogs alert on human remains at campground where DeOrr Kunz Jr. disappeared

Private investigator David Marshburn told KTVB authorities may have finally gotten the break in the case they have been waiting for.

Author: KTVB Staff
Published: 2:27 PM MDT June 27, 2019
Updated: 7:50 AM MDT June 28, 2019

LEADORE, Idaho — A pair of dogs specially trained to detect human remains have alerted on an area in the Lemhi County campground where an Idaho toddler vanished without a trace nearly four years ago, according to a private investigator.

DeOrr Kunz Jr., 2, went missing during a family trip to Timber Creek Campground near Leadore on July 10, 2015. Extensive searches of the area have turned up no sign of the boy.

But on Thursday, North Carolina-based private investigator David Marshburn told KTVB authorities may have gotten the break in the case they have been waiting for.

Marshburn said he was asked by family friends and community members to take the case. He said he took his two trained cadaver dogs up to the Timber Creek Campground June 8, searching the area for about a week. He said he was accompanied by Lemhi County Sheriff Steve Penner during the searches.

It took some time for his dogs to acclimatize to the thinner mountain air, Marshburn said, but on the third day, both dogs separately performed "a hard alert" on a specific area of the campground, indicating the presence of a body or remains. The dogs have been trained only to alert on human remains, not a decomposing animal, he said.

According to Marshburn, his dogs are trained only with human cadavers, human bone and teeth so they only alert to human remains. He also added that the dogs are trained to detect remains up to six feet underground.

“Our dogs are cadaver dogs," he explained. "They find cadaver scent – human cadaver scent. So when they do an alert we are pretty confident that they’re finding remains of a human. But are we saying, or can we say it’s 100 percent DeOrr? No. Can we say it’s an Indian from way back? No. We don’t know what’s 100 percent there, we just know the confidence in our dogs that there is human remains of some sort there – it’s just, 'What?'”

The private investigator acknowledged the remains his dogs smelled could belong to someone other than the missing 2-year-old. But Marshburn stressed he was hired to locate DeOrr, and said he believes he has accomplished that.

 "I feel it, the closure that everybody needed," he said. After Marshburn's dogs' alert, Penner also brought in an independent cadaver dog, which alerted on the same area of the campground, he said. Marshburn would not say specifically where in the campground the dogs alerted.

The next steps will be up to the Lemhi County Sheriff's Office and local law enforcement to identify exactly what the dogs found.

“I know my dogs and I know what we do and they have their past history of finding people and I’m pretty confident – we feel we have got what we need," Marshburn told KTVB. "And we went back and now the sheriff’s office has got to do their part.”

Marshburn owns a nonprofit called Search For Me Foundation, which deals with missing persons cases. To date, Marshburn said he and his dogs have been part of helping solve 13 cases.

He tells KTVB community members raised $1,900 to bring Marshburn and his team to Idaho to help with the case. The rest of the  expenses were paid for out-of-pocket by he and his wife.

The Lemhi County Sheriff's Office announced Wednesday that the Timber Creek Campground will be closed Friday, June 28 through the weekend for a search connected to the DeOrr case.

The campsite was searched with cadaver dogs in the weeks after DeOrr went missing in 2015, but those dogs came up empty.

Former Lemhi County Sheriff Lynn Bowerman has said publicly that he believes DeOrr is dead and that he considers the toddler's parents to be suspects, a body has not been recovered, and no charges have ever been filed.
 
https://www.ktvb.com/article/news/investigator-cadaver-dogs-alert-on-human-remains-at-campground-where-deorr-kunz-jr-disappeared/277-b9dedc16-1e4d-4a63-b401-20b212b2f770
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 28, 2019, 10:10:22 PM
So one set of cadaver dogs is wrong, which set?  The 2015 ones or the 2019 ones?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 28, 2019, 10:22:51 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 28, 2019, 10:10:22 PM
So one set of cadaver dogs is wrong, which set?  The 2015 ones or the 2019 ones?

There were cadaver dog alerts in 2015.

"Today we’re going to announce that there was a cadaver dog interaction with certain equipment at the site and that cadaver dog did hit positive. I can’t go any further than that other than we do have a dog that did hit in the initial two weeks of the primary investigation."

https://www.eastidahonews.com/2016/03/kunz-investigator-jessica-mitchell-knows-where-deorrs-body-is/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 28, 2019, 10:27:30 PM
Chance the cadaver dog also alerted at the camp ground June 2016.

https://www.eastidahonews.com/2016/07/private-investigator-issues-lengthy-report-deorr-kunz-case/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 28, 2019, 10:46:43 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 28, 2019, 10:27:30 PM
Chance the cadaver dog also alerted at the camp ground June 2016.

https://www.eastidahonews.com/2016/07/private-investigator-issues-lengthy-report-deorr-kunz-case/
So how many times are these dogs going to alert before anyone gets round to finding something?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 28, 2019, 11:22:08 PM
They detect remnant scent where a body was but no longer is. They will probably dig at the alert spot locations. They have closed it this weekend for 3 days investigation work.



Marshburn said one of his dogs went to the water and all of a sudden dashed to a spot in the water.

"Our oldest dog, Caz, the way he alerts, he lays down.  He just lays down on the spot.  Now it can be a foot over, a foot here, or a foot in front, but he lays on the strongest scent, or at it," said Marshburn.

Marshburn said the Sheriff's office brought another dog the next day. It also hit on the same spot.

https://www.localnews8.com/news/cadaver-dogs-smell-scent-in-area-where-deorr-kunz-disappeared/1089957013
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 29, 2019, 12:50:03 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 28, 2019, 10:10:22 PM
So one set of cadaver dogs is wrong, which set?  The 2015 ones or the 2019 ones?
The later search seems very intensive.  It went on for a week, could have just been missed the first time. Finding 1 tooth in a 10,000 acre property isn't going to happen overnight other than by good luck IMO.

"Experts say a properly-trained cadaver dog can detect a single tooth in a 10,000-acre area – something beyond the scope of coverage law enforcement can provide."  https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/cadaver-dogs-train-in-lakewood/132593466
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 29, 2019, 01:15:16 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on June 28, 2019, 11:22:08 PM
They detect remnant scent where a body was but no longer is. They will probably dig at the alert spot locations. They have closed it this weekend for 3 days investigation work.



Marshburn said one of his dogs went to the water and all of a sudden dashed to a spot in the water.

"Our oldest dog, Caz, the way he alerts, he lays down.  He just lays down on the spot.  Now it can be a foot over, a foot here, or a foot in front, but he lays on the strongest scent, or at it," said Marshburn.

Marshburn said the Sheriff's office brought another dog the next day. It also hit on the same spot.

https://www.localnews8.com/news/cadaver-dogs-smell-scent-in-area-where-deorr-kunz-disappeared/1089957013

What Marshburn didn't say was whether this water was the creek or Stone Reservoir, where cadaver dogs did alert within a few days of Deorr's disappearance (quickly dismissed as unrelated cremains).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 29, 2019, 06:40:08 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 29, 2019, 12:50:03 AM
The later search seems very intensive.  It went on for a week, could have just been missed the first time. Finding 1 tooth in a 10,000 acre property isn't going to happen overnight other than by good luck IMO.

"Experts say a properly-trained cadaver dog can detect a single tooth in a 10,000-acre area – something beyond the scope of coverage law enforcement can provide."  https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/cadaver-dogs-train-in-lakewood/132593466

You really do contradict yourself... When I quoted a newspaper article reporting what grime had said you dismissed it as guesswork . Now you quote unnamed experts making claims.... So who are these experts and what are their qualifications and what exactly did they say..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 29, 2019, 11:17:11 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 29, 2019, 06:40:08 AM
You really do contradict yourself... When I quoted a newspaper article reporting what grime had said you dismissed it as guesswork . Now you quote unnamed experts making claims.... So who are these experts and what are their qualifications and what exactly did they say..
It was irony.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 04, 2019, 09:13:23 PM
The MET have faith in the dogs.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7213453/Hunt-Suzy-Lamplugh-hones-trees.html


Police cadaver dogs that can smell dead bodies were used today to search a field for the remains of estate agent Suzy Lamplugh 33 years after she vanished.

Metropolitan Police officers started searching the field after receiving new evidence from a witness who recalled someone acting suspiciously there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 04, 2019, 09:16:50 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 04, 2019, 09:13:23 PM
The MET have faith in the dogs.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7213453/Hunt-Suzy-Lamplugh-hones-trees.html


Police cadaver dogs that can smell dead bodies were used today to search a field for the remains of estate agent Suzy Lamplugh 33 years after she vanished.

Metropolitan Police officers started searching the field after receiving new evidence from a witness who recalled someone acting suspiciously there.

Also believe that some people have good memories too by the sound of it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 04, 2019, 09:18:30 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 04, 2019, 09:13:23 PM
The MET have faith in the dogs.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7213453/Hunt-Suzy-Lamplugh-hones-trees.html


Police cadaver dogs that can smell dead bodies were used today to search a field for the remains of estate agent Suzy Lamplugh 33 years after she vanished.

Metropolitan Police officers started searching the field after receiving new evidence from a witness who recalled someone acting suspiciously there.


So they know for sure now if she's there or not
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 04, 2019, 09:19:19 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 04, 2019, 09:16:50 PM
Also believe that some people have good memories too by the sound of it.

They either have good faith in the intelligence or they're being led a merry dance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 04, 2019, 09:21:03 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 04, 2019, 09:19:19 PM
They either have good faith in the intelligence or they're being led a merry dance.

I suppose they would be criticised if they ignored a new lead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 04, 2019, 09:27:03 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 04, 2019, 09:21:03 PM
I suppose they would be criticised if they ignored a new lead.
Why would someone sit on information like that for 33 years?   Could I recall seeing someone acting suspiciously 33 years ago?   Fascinating that some people remember minor things for so long.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 04, 2019, 09:29:55 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 04, 2019, 09:21:03 PM
I suppose they would be criticised if they ignored a new lead.
I don't know how anyone can rely on the bark of a bloody dog.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 04, 2019, 09:34:36 PM
Quote from: The General on July 04, 2019, 09:29:55 PM
I don't know how anyone can rely on the bark of a bloody dog.
The likelihood is if they don’t find remains there we’ll never know if dog barked or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 05, 2019, 12:30:49 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 04, 2019, 09:13:23 PM
The MET have faith in the dogs.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7213453/Hunt-Suzy-Lamplugh-hones-trees.html


Police cadaver dogs that can smell dead bodies were used today to search a field for the remains of estate agent Suzy Lamplugh 33 years after she vanished.

Metropolitan Police officers started searching the field after receiving new evidence from a witness who recalled someone acting suspiciously there.


I wonder who identified the dogs.

The cadaver dogs used in the investigation into missing schoolgirl Madeleine McCann and murdered Newent woman Kate Prout have been spotted at the dig.

The death dogs are supporting forensics teams looking in a field just over the Gloucestershire border for the remains of Cheltenham-born estate agent who vanished in July 1986.

https://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/news/cheltenham-news/death-dogs-help-search-cheltenham-3053873
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 05, 2019, 01:19:02 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 05, 2019, 12:30:49 PM
I wonder who identified the dogs.

The cadaver dogs used in the investigation into missing schoolgirl Madeleine McCann and murdered Newent woman Kate Prout have been spotted at the dig.

The death dogs are supporting forensics teams looking in a field just over the Gloucestershire border for the remains of Cheltenham-born estate agent who vanished in July 1986.

https://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/news/cheltenham-news/death-dogs-help-search-cheltenham-3053873


Maybe it was the handlers that were recognised, rather than the dogs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 05, 2019, 07:22:46 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 05, 2019, 12:30:49 PM
I wonder who identified the dogs.

The cadaver dogs used in the investigation into missing schoolgirl Madeleine McCann and murdered Newent woman Kate Prout have been spotted at the dig.

The death dogs are supporting forensics teams looking in a field just over the Gloucestershire border for the remains of Cheltenham-born estate agent who vanished in July 1986.

https://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/news/cheltenham-news/death-dogs-help-search-cheltenham-3053873
The cadaver dogs site used in cases such as Madeleine McCann ....

The only thing in common IMO is that they are using cadaver dogs in the search.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 05, 2019, 07:26:20 PM
That's the headline. In the body of the text -

"The cadaver dogs used in the investigation into missing schoolgirl Madeleine McCann and murdered Newent woman Kate Prout have been spotted at the dig."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 05, 2019, 07:43:35 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 05, 2019, 07:26:20 PM
That's the headline. In the body of the text -

"The cadaver dogs used in the investigation into missing schoolgirl Madeleine McCann and murdered Newent woman Kate Prout have been spotted at the dig."
Amateur detectives and amateur journalists too.  Was Madeleine McCann a "schoolgirl"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 05, 2019, 07:56:27 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 05, 2019, 07:43:35 PM
Amateur detectives and amateur journalists too.  Was Madeleine McCann a "schoolgirl"?

A trifle pedantic perhaps. She wasn't actually at primary school but attended pre-school activities.

I  suppose 'toddler' or 'child' might be considered more accurate

Strewth, what trivia we are reduced to discussing
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 05, 2019, 07:58:41 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 05, 2019, 07:56:27 PM
A trifle pedantic perhaps. She wasn't actually at primary school but attended pre-school activities.

I  suppose 'toddler' or 'child' might be considered more accurate

Strewth, what trivia we are reduced to discussing

Yes nursery/kindergarden age.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 05, 2019, 08:13:13 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 05, 2019, 07:56:27 PM
A trifle pedantic perhaps. She wasn't actually at primary school but attended pre-school activities.

I  suppose 'toddler' or 'child' might be considered more accurate

Strewth, what trivia we are reduced to discussing
The point I was making was for us not to take that article as being well researched.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on July 06, 2019, 02:11:03 PM
'Helen's Law': Killers who conceal victims' bodies face parole refusal under new rules

Murderers who refuse to reveal the location of their victims’ bodies could be prevented from leaving prison under a new law.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/helens-law-body-murder-victim-refuse-parole-mccourt-simms-a8990966.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on July 06, 2019, 02:16:37 PM
Paedophiles should have to pass a lie detector test to prove they are safe to leave prison, former police chief says

'Every person involved in sexual offence should be subject to a polygraph,' Mr Gamble said in an interview with The Telegraph.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7118573/Paedophiles-pass-lie-detector-test-former-police-chief-says.html?ico=fbia_related_article

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/06/07/paedophiles-should-face-lie-detector-tests-released-jail-former/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 06, 2019, 02:23:47 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on July 06, 2019, 02:11:03 PM
'Helen's Law': Killers who conceal victims' bodies face parole refusal under new rules

Murderers who refuse to reveal the location of their victims’ bodies could be prevented from leaving prison under a new law.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/helens-law-body-murder-victim-refuse-parole-mccourt-simms-a8990966.html

The problem with that is that if the convicted person is not actually guilty, then he cannot say where a body is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 06, 2019, 02:40:41 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on July 06, 2019, 02:11:03 PM
'Helen's Law': Killers who conceal victims' bodies face parole refusal under new rules

Murderers who refuse to reveal the location of their victims’ bodies could be prevented from leaving prison under a new law.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/helens-law-body-murder-victim-refuse-parole-mccourt-simms-a8990966.html

Tough Titty if they are Innocent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on July 06, 2019, 04:42:53 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 06, 2019, 02:40:41 PM
Tough Titty if they are Innocent.

That would be my concern.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 06, 2019, 06:26:47 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 06, 2019, 02:40:41 PM
Tough Titty if they are Innocent.

That’s okay until it’s your son.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 06, 2019, 06:38:39 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 06, 2019, 06:26:47 PM
That’s okay until it’s your son.

You appear to have misunderstood my comment.

However, none of my sons are ever likely to be in that position.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 06, 2019, 06:44:10 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 06, 2019, 06:38:39 PM
You appear to have misunderstood my comment.

However, none of my sons are ever likely to be in that position.

Apologies if I misunderstood. Please explain ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 06, 2019, 07:05:17 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 06, 2019, 06:44:10 PM
Apologies if I misunderstood. Please explain ?

I think it is a bad decision to keep people in prison just because they won't reveal where the body is.

Tough Titty means Hard Luck.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on July 06, 2019, 07:12:53 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 06, 2019, 07:05:17 PM
I think it is a bad decision to keep people in prison just because they won't reveal where the body is.

Tough Titty means Hard Luck.

I think if they have admitted to the murder it is different matter and possibly in a cast iron case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 06, 2019, 07:16:00 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 06, 2019, 07:05:17 PM
I think it is a bad decision to keep people in prison just because they won't reveal where the body is.

Tough Titty means Hard Luck.

Of course they refuse parole already if the prisoner will not admit their crime.

As you say tough titty for the innocent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 07, 2019, 02:36:58 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on July 06, 2019, 02:16:37 PM
Paedophiles should have to pass a lie detector test to prove they are safe to leave prison, former police chief says

'Every person involved in sexual offence should be subject to a polygraph,' Mr Gamble said in an interview with The Telegraph.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7118573/Paedophiles-pass-lie-detector-test-former-police-chief-says.html?ico=fbia_related_article

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/06/07/paedophiles-should-face-lie-detector-tests-released-jail-former/


I don't agree- using a lie detector test would be IMO unethical.  A confession which was backed up with substancial evidence to be convicted would be my preferred choice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 16, 2019, 01:17:44 AM
@ShiningInLuz

I seem to remember you were following this case of the murdered triathlete. What do you make of this revelation about the alleged murder weapon & the contamination of the gun barrel in the chain of evidence?

https://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/investigacao-cm--reviravolta-no-julgamento-de-luis-grilo-arma-que-matou-triatleta-nao-pertence-a-antonio-joaquim-veja-agora-na-cmtv?ref=HP_PrimeirosDestaques
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 16, 2019, 01:34:55 AM

https://www.portugalresident.com/2019/07/10/parents-kidnap-child-from-foster-care-and-keep-her-in-cupboard/

By Natasha Donn  2019-07-10 Posted  2019-07-10  InPortugal

An investigation into what happened to an 11-year-old girl who went missing from foster care two years ago ended yesterday with police discovering her living in a cupboard.

The now 13-year-old had been ‘kidnapped by her parents’ and hidden with relatives in Porto.

She has now been removed to an institution in Lisbon, explains tabloid Correio da Manhã, giving no indication whether the child was compliant in her two-year ordeal.

The history of the case suggests otherwise. The girl was removed from her biological family as a result of “continuous mistreatment”, says the paper.

She was then snatched back (it is not explained how) after being fostered with a family in Cascais.

The family reported her disappearance to authorities which have been trying to find the girl ever since, says CM.

The paper explains that whenever authorities visited the house where the child was being kept, she was made to hide in the cupboard which had been designed for her to sleep in.

The youngster was eventually found and freed on Tuesday morning at 7am.

The relatives who have been hiding her (described as an uncle and aunt) are now due to appear in court.

They apparently have children of their own, says CM.

Neighbours have described their surprise at the situation, saying they ‘never saw’ the hidden child and had no idea she had been living with the family for so long.

natasha.donn@algarveresident.com

============================================================


The above is a chilling example of just how easy it was to conceal a child from the authorities for a sustained period of time. What hope did Madeleine have after being written off as dead?  8(8-))

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 16, 2019, 06:28:17 AM
Quote from: misty on July 16, 2019, 01:17:44 AM
@ShiningInLuz

I seem to remember you were following this case of the murdered triathlete. What do you make of this revelation about the alleged murder weapon & the contamination of the gun barrel in the chain of evidence?

https://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/investigacao-cm--reviravolta-no-julgamento-de-luis-grilo-arma-que-matou-triatleta-nao-pertence-a-antonio-joaquim-veja-agora-na-cmtv?ref=HP_PrimeirosDestaques

First, many thanks for this.   *&(+(+

I may be reading this a different way to you.  To me, this says a bullet retrieved from the triathlete's head does not match a bullet from the boyfriend's gun.  A mismatch of striations.

So although the boyfiend's gun is the right calibre (a common calibre), it appears a different gun is involved.

The boyfriend is seeking immediate release from preventative prison.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 16, 2019, 06:33:33 AM
Quote from: misty on July 16, 2019, 01:34:55 AM
https://www.portugalresident.com/2019/07/10/parents-kidnap-child-from-foster-care-and-keep-her-in-cupboard/

By Natasha Donn  2019-07-10 Posted  2019-07-10  InPortugal

An investigation into what happened to an 11-year-old girl who went missing from foster care two years ago ended yesterday with police discovering her living in a cupboard.

The now 13-year-old had been ‘kidnapped by her parents’ and hidden with relatives in Porto.

She has now been removed to an institution in Lisbon, explains tabloid Correio da Manhã, giving no indication whether the child was compliant in her two-year ordeal.

The history of the case suggests otherwise. The girl was removed from her biological family as a result of “continuous mistreatment”, says the paper.

She was then snatched back (it is not explained how) after being fostered with a family in Cascais.

The family reported her disappearance to authorities which have been trying to find the girl ever since, says CM.

The paper explains that whenever authorities visited the house where the child was being kept, she was made to hide in the cupboard which had been designed for her to sleep in.

The youngster was eventually found and freed on Tuesday morning at 7am.

The relatives who have been hiding her (described as an uncle and aunt) are now due to appear in court.

They apparently have children of their own, says CM.

Neighbours have described their surprise at the situation, saying they ‘never saw’ the hidden child and had no idea she had been living with the family for so long.

natasha.donn@algarveresident.com

============================================================


The above is a chilling example of just how easy it was to conceal a child from the authorities for a sustained period of time. What hope did Madeleine have after being written off as dead?  8(8-))

It's an interesting thought.

If a girl of Madeleine's age turned up at our neighbours' complex tomorrow, I doubt if I would notice anything remiss.  Unless she started a conversation with me in English.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on July 17, 2019, 09:18:03 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 06, 2019, 02:23:47 PM
The problem with that is that if the convicted person is not actually guilty, then he cannot say where a body is.

Agree. Reminds me of the potential situation in a different missing child's case...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 19, 2019, 02:24:07 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 16, 2019, 06:28:17 AM
First, many thanks for this.   *&(+(+

I may be reading this a different way to you.  To me, this says a bullet retrieved from the triathlete's head does not match a bullet from the boyfriend's gun.  A mismatch of striations.

So although the boyfiend's gun is the right calibre (a common calibre), it appears a different gun is involved.

The boyfriend is seeking immediate release from preventative prison.
I was wondering how the victim's DNA found its way onto the barrel of gun which could not have been the murder weapon.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 19, 2019, 02:28:20 AM
Quote from: misty on July 19, 2019, 02:24:07 AM
I was wondering how the victim's DNA found its way onto the barrel of gun which could not have been the murder weapon.....

OK, I shall re-read in the morning.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on July 19, 2019, 09:07:55 AM
Quote from: misty on July 19, 2019, 02:24:07 AM
I was wondering how the victim's DNA found its way onto the barrel of gun which could not have been the murder weapon.....

What type of DNA test was used?  Did the victim have reason at any time to have contact with the murder weapon?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 22, 2019, 11:41:22 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on July 19, 2019, 09:07:55 AM
What type of DNA test was used?  Did the victim have reason at any time to have contact with the murder weapon?

No idea what type of DNA test was used. The co-accused is (I think) a police officer so I would presume access to his firearm was restricted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 23, 2019, 12:13:52 AM
Quote from: misty on July 22, 2019, 11:41:22 PM
No idea what type of DNA test was used. The co-accused is (I think) a police officer so I would presume access to his firearm was restricted.

Standard GNR issue is a 9 mm Glock.

PS.  I have not forgotten I need to read your link again.  It's been very hectic here for the last 5 days or so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 23, 2019, 12:23:18 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 23, 2019, 12:13:52 AM
Standard GNR issue is a 9 mm Glock.

PS.  I have not forgotten I need to read your link again.  It's been very hectic here for the last 5 days or so.

No worries. A Google search brings up doubts about Joaquim's pistol being the murder weapon as far back as last November so I'm unsure why the PP included it in the charges.
Are the fires getting worse?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 24, 2019, 09:10:11 PM
Ooh, where's everyone gone all of a sudden  ?

9pm Wednesday 24th
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 24, 2019, 09:12:52 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 24, 2019, 09:10:11 PM
Ooh, where's everyone gone all of a sudden  ?

9pm Wednesday 24th

Cooking for doggie, cooking for us.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 24, 2019, 09:16:49 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 24, 2019, 09:12:52 PM
Cooking for doggie, cooking for us.
does he eat the same food as you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 24, 2019, 09:23:37 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 24, 2019, 09:16:49 PM
does he eat the same food as you?

Yes and no.  I'm cooking one meal which will go in his kibble.  I'm cooking a second meal of curry for us.  Mr doggie does not get fed curry.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 24, 2019, 09:32:13 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 24, 2019, 09:23:37 PM
Yes and no.  I'm cooking one meal which will go in his kibble.  I'm cooking a second meal of curry for us.  Mr doggie does not get fed curry.
I seldom eat curry, so why don't you feed it to your dog?  Is it supposed to be bad for them and the vet doesn't know! 
"Dogs actually cannot eat several types of veggies too. Do not give your dog anything with leeks, garlic, onions, scallions or mushrooms. Garlic and onions can cause toxic anemia in dogs. Mushrooms can affect many systems in the dog's body and even be fatal. Since all these veggies can be harmful to canines, don't let them eat the stuffings or casseroles since both dishes typically contain one or more of the aforementioned veggies."

Toxic anaemia - what who feeds their dog just on raw onions?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 24, 2019, 09:49:29 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 24, 2019, 09:32:13 PM
I seldom eat curry, so why don't you feed it to your dog?  Is it supposed to be bad for them and the vet doesn't know! 
"Dogs actually cannot eat several types of veggies too. Do not give your dog anything with leeks, garlic, onions, scallions or mushrooms. Garlic and onions can cause toxic anemia in dogs. Mushrooms can affect many systems in the dog's body and even be fatal. Since all these veggies can be harmful to canines, don't let them eat the stuffings or casseroles since both dishes typically contain one or more of the aforementioned veggies."

Toxic anaemia - what who feeds their dog just on raw onions?

The dog gets fed on a 'pure' diet.  No processed meat.  No salt or pepper.  No garlic or chilli.  He eats most things that are put down in his feed bowl.

He likes most fruit, but he is not keen on strawberries.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 24, 2019, 09:53:31 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 24, 2019, 09:10:11 PM
Ooh, where's everyone gone all of a sudden  ?

9pm Wednesday 24th

I went out to feed a Hedgehog,also watching bats emerge from next doors roof.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 08:09:48 AM
In reply to misty's earlier question re the murder of Luis Grilo, triathlete, here's the relevant section in Portuguese.

"Para a defesa de António Joaquim a prova é inequívoca e não deixa dúvidas. Se aquela não é a arma do crime não há mais nada que justifique a prisão preventiva.

Rosa Grilo continua a garantir que o amante nada sabia, enquanto a polícia judiciária também não recolheu provas que o coloquem no local do crime.

Falta explicar o ADN no cano da arma, mas a defesa do funcionário judicial admite que tenha sido contaminação da cadeia de provas."

And here's the relevant section in Googlish.

"For António Joaquim's defense the evidence is unambiguous and leaves no doubt. If that is not the weapon of crime there is nothing else to justify pre-trial detention.

Rosa Cricket continues to assure that her lover knew nothing, while the judicial police also did not gather evidence to put him at the scene of the crime.

The DNA in the gun barrel remains to be explained, but the defense official admits it was contamination of the evidence chain."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 08:46:59 AM
Very briefly, triathlete Luis Grilo was married to his wife, Rosa Grilo.  All appeared well externally, but his wife had a lover.

Luis was shot in the head and eventually found some distance away from home.

Rosa at first reported Luis was missing after a training run on his bicycle.  This morphed into 3 men from Angola (a former Portuguese colony) had killed him.  There was a convoluted story about going near to the body dump site to explain phone signals.

Googlish has very clear limitations.  The word grilo means cricket, squeak or hang-up, but with a capital on it, it should have been translated as Grilo.

The word 'no' in Portuguese can mean 'in the' or 'on the', and there is no way to tell which.  In the barrel? On the barrel?

For those who think there is only one level of arguidodom, think again.  The boyfriend is seeking release from preventative prison.  That was never slapped on the McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 25, 2019, 08:51:21 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 08:46:59 AM
Very briefly, triathlete Luis Grilo was married to his wife, Rosa Grilo.  All appeared well externally, but his wife had a lover.

Luis was shot in the head and eventually found some distance away from home.

Rosa at first reported Luis was missing after a training run on his bicycle.  This morphed into 3 men from Angola (a former Portuguese colony) had killed him.  There was a convoluted story about going near to the body dump site to explain phone signals.

Googlish has very clear limitations.  The word grilo means cricket, squeak or hang-up, but with a capital on it, it should have been translated as Grilo.

The word 'no' in Portuguese can mean 'in the' or 'on the', and there is no way to tell which.  In the barrel? On the barrel?

For those who think there is only one level of arguidodom, think again.  The boyfriend is seeking release from preventative prison.  That was never slapped on the McCanns.

So held in custody awaiting trial arguido?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 09:21:59 AM
Quote from: barrier on July 25, 2019, 08:51:21 AM
So held in custody awaiting trial arguido?

Yes.

AFAIK, the lowest level is the one applied to the McCanns.  Free to leave the country, though I reckon they had to inform the PJ of this.

Next up is electronic tagging.  A nice ankle bracelet.

Then there is house arrest.  I have no idea how restrictive this might be in terms of communication.  Seems stupid to detain someone at home if visitors can come and go, and if the detainee has access to phones or Internet.

Top level is preventative prison, where one gets a nice orange jump suit.  I think it is the choice if the arguido might offend again, or flee the country.

The McCanns got the lowest level there is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 25, 2019, 09:29:59 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 09:21:59 AM
Yes.

AFAIK, the lowest level is the one applied to the McCanns.  Free to leave the country, though I reckon they had to inform the PJ of this.

Next up is electronic tagging.  A nice ankle bracelet.

Then there is house arrest.  I have no idea how restrictive this might be in terms of communication.  Seems stupid to detain someone at home if visitors can come and go, and if the detainee has access to phones or Internet.

Top level is preventative prison, where one gets a nice orange jump suit.  I think it is the choice if the arguido might offend again, or flee the country.

The McCanns got the lowest level there is.

Are you sure they didn't do a wrist version, in tasteful yellow and green ?   8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 25, 2019, 10:22:22 AM
Quote from: jassi on July 25, 2019, 09:29:59 AM
Are you sure they didn't do a wrist version, in tasteful yellow and green ?   8(0(*

Ouch!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 10:31:04 AM
Quote from: jassi on July 25, 2019, 09:29:59 AM
Are you sure they didn't do a wrist version, in tasteful yellow and green ?   8(0(*

Oddly enough, wristbands were in evidence at the 10th anniversary memorial service at St Vincent's in Luz. But I only remember yellow.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on July 25, 2019, 10:41:38 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 10:31:04 AM
Oddly enough, wristbands were in evidence at the 10th anniversary memorial service at St Vincent's in Luz. But I only remember yellow.

I recall my last trip to Portugal we stayed in Vilamoura just chilling but did some nice coastal walks on the cliffs and booked a trip to St Vincent's but missed the *coach  8)><(  For some reason I really wanted to visit that place.  I think I had a fascination with it as its the most southwesternmost point of mainland Europe.  Is it worth a trip?

= a sad tourist on a coach trip  8(8-))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 11:18:57 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on July 25, 2019, 10:41:38 AM
I recall my last trip to Portugal we stayed in Vilamoura just chilling but did some nice coastal walks on the cliffs and booked a trip to St Vincent's but missed the *coach  8)><(  For some reason I really wanted to visit that place.  I think I had a fascination with it as its the most southwesternmost point of mainland Europe.  Is it worth a trip?

= a sad tourist on a coach trip  8(8-))

St Vincent is the Anglican name used for the Catholic church of Nossa Senhora da Luz, in Luz.

I don't know where yours is, sorry.

I believe the southern-most part of Portugal would be Sagres, famous for beer and the sailing academy of Prince Henry The Navigator. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 12:04:56 PM
OK, in direct reply to misty, so that I am down to 14 items in my backlog, here we go.

A gun that appears to mismatch to the weapon used by Grilo.

DNA on (or in) the gun barrel.

The defence claiming contamination of evidence.  Presumably claiming that because it is the boyfriend's DNA on the gun.  If the gun did not fire the death bullet, why care?  If it turns out this gun was owned by the boyfriend and it's Grilo's DNA on the gun, things get tasty, even if this was not the murder weapon.

The Grilo case interests me for 2 main reasons linked to the Madeleine case.  Body occultation and decomposition.  And the amount of information emerging into the public domain during an active investigation.

NB.  This story has evolved rapidly in the media since it first emerged.  From memory, it started with disappeared triathlete.  Then to his body found.  I was puzzled by why his bike had not been found.  Later, his wife claimed she had tossed it over the side of a river bridge.  I still don't know if the bike has been retrieved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 25, 2019, 01:37:59 PM
In light of a post on another thread, it might be useful to discuss what is acceptable as a cite and who should make that decision.

Most cites come from on line media sources of one sort or another so should be equally acceptable on the forum

My view is that if a quoted cite supports the view being expressed by the poster, then that is acceptable. unless it is merely an opinion piece from another blog or forum.

What are posters' views ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 25, 2019, 03:03:56 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 25, 2019, 01:37:59 PM
In light of a post on another thread, it might be useful to discuss what is acceptable as a cite and who should make that decision.

Most cites come from on line media sources of one sort or another so should be equally acceptable on the forum

My view is that if a quoted cite supports the view being expressed by the poster, then that is acceptable. unless it is merely an opinion piece from another blog or forum.

What are posters' views ?
providing cites is a waste of time if people are allowed to claim that the cite proves nothing when it clearly does, imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on July 25, 2019, 03:21:25 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 11:18:57 AM
St Vincent is the Anglican name used for the Catholic church of Nossa Senhora da Luz, in Luz.

I don't know where yours is, sorry.

I believe the southern-most part of Portugal would be Sagres, famous for beer and the sailing academy of Prince Henry The Navigator.

I don't believe in deities although happy to wander around churches/cathedrals appreciating the architecture.

Is the Sagres brewery still in existence?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 25, 2019, 05:07:41 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 11:18:57 AM
St Vincent is the Anglican name used for the Catholic church of Nossa Senhora da Luz, in Luz.

I don't know where yours is, sorry.

I believe the southern-most part of Portugal would be Sagres, famous for beer and the sailing academy of Prince Henry The Navigator.

Cape St. Vincent is the Portuguese equivalent of Lands End in UK. I seem to recall Nick van der Leek mentioned it in one of his Madeleine case books, due to the legendary ravens (guarding the grave of Deacon St. Vincent) which Nick used as a metaphor for doubt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 25, 2019, 05:47:18 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 25, 2019, 09:29:59 AM
Are you sure they didn't do a wrist version, in tasteful yellow and green ?   8(0(*

What a lovely tasteful person you are  8)-)))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 25, 2019, 06:12:24 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on July 25, 2019, 10:41:38 AM
I recall my last trip to Portugal we stayed in Vilamoura just chilling but did some nice coastal walks on the cliffs and booked a trip to St Vincent's but missed the *coach  8)><(  For some reason I really wanted to visit that place.  I think I had a fascination with it as its the most southwesternmost point of mainland Europe.  Is it worth a trip?

= a sad tourist on a coach trip  8(8-))

When we were there I was struck by long and very high cliffs, a kind of barren landscape and a mighty fort

it was many years ago, but somehow we were made aware of some of the History.  They were, rightly so, very proud of their adventuring and brave sea farers.  They discovered all sorts of places around the world and brought immense wealth to Portugal. 


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 07:51:51 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on July 25, 2019, 03:21:25 PM
I don't believe in deities although happy to wander around churches/cathedrals appreciating the architecture.

Is the Sagres brewery still in existence?

Nossa Senhora da Luz is quite small.  I've never been inside it, only seen the photos.  It features in the alleged tale of people seen sneaking in at night to secrete MBM in the coffin of a woman lying in rest before cremation, which I rate as cobblers.  It also features in whether it connects by underground passages to the sea, another rumour I'm dismissive of.

Sagres beer is one of the main brands of beer in Portugal. It's not to my taste, so I've never bothered to locate the brewery.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 08:02:02 PM
Quote from: misty on July 25, 2019, 05:07:41 PM
Cape St. Vincent is the Portuguese equivalent of Lands End in UK. I seem to recall Nick van der Leek mentioned it in one of his Madeleine case books, due to the legendary ravens (guarding the grave of Deacon St. Vincent) which Nick used as a metaphor for doubt.

OK, I've looked it up now. It's on the SW, some distance from Sagres.  I've never visited that.  I note Google maps advertises a fork and knife named 'the last sausage before America'.

 (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 25, 2019, 10:18:28 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 25, 2019, 01:37:59 PM
In light of a post on another thread, it might be useful to discuss what is acceptable as a cite and who should make that decision.

Most cites come from on line media sources of one sort or another so should be equally acceptable on the forum

My view is that if a quoted cite supports the view being expressed by the poster, then that is acceptable. unless it is merely an opinion piece from another blog or forum.

What are posters' views ?

Sounds good to me (especially the "not suspects" quote) as long as counter-argument is accepted in the same way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 25, 2019, 11:56:24 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/2019/07/25/shock-and-disbelief-after-portuguese-justice-frees-israeli-sex-trafficking-kingpin/

By Natasha Donn  2019-07-25 Posted  2019-07-25  InTop Stories 

Shock and disbelief after Portuguese justice frees Israeli ‘sex trafficking kingpin’

Authorities hunting a former Israeli soldier wanted for sex trafficking minors in Colombia heard with a mixture of shock and disbelief that a Portuguese judge has freed him.

National and international media were full of the arrest of Assi Moosh in Oeiras two months ago (click here).

Dubbing him “the baron of sex tourism” and “the devil of Taganga” (after the Colombian village where young women and minors were sexually exploited), the stories explained how authorities of various countries had been hunting Moosh down, with the purposes of getting him extradited to Colombia to face charges, including drug trafficking and money-laundering.

There was even talk of Moosh, 46, being involved in a possible homicide.

Focus on the holiday island of Ibiza led authorities to Barcelona, and later to Portugal.

Then, the ‘grand announcement’ that he had been ‘caught’ in an operation involving Spanish and Portuguese police, and would be held in preventive custody pending extradition to Colombia.

And then it all went quiet.

Now, both Israeli and Colombian sources have heard Moosh was released from custody on June 28 and “could be anywhere”.

“It’s completely crazy”, an Israeli journalist who has been tracking Moosh for years told us.
“None of us can understand it”.

Requests by the Resident for information – from the Public Ministry and PJ – elicited no response, but a news story in Colombian newspaper El Tiempo claims Moosh was freed by Lisbon judge María Guillhermina Vaz Pereira Santos, on the basis that legal time limits for his detention had expired, that the case was ‘complicated’ because Moosh claimed to understand no Spanish, and that Portugal anyway has no extradition agreement with Colombia.

Citing a Colombian official, El Tiempo said authorities in that country will now be trying, through Interpol, to secure another Blue Notice for Moosh’s recapture.

He is still wanted in Colombia for a multitude of offences, not least the “possible disappearance of one of his partners”.

El Tiempo adds that Moosh insists he is innocent, and that everything the media has said about him is false.
But this is not the only instance recently where an apparent wanted felon has been suddenly released after high-profile capture.

Back in March, newspapers here were full of the arrest in Malaga, Spain, of “the largest drug trafficker in Portugal”.

Frankelim Lobo was wanted in connection with Operation Achilles – an investigation that had been ongoing for years into a network of drug trafficking which has also implicated high-ranking policemen (click here).

But judge Ana Peres has now freed him from preventive custody, accepting that prosecutors’ arguments that he had ‘fled Portuguese justice’ were not in fact true. Lobo had apparently notified authorities “after leaving jail in 2014” that he would be moving permanently to Malaga.

Lobo is now bound to periodic reporting into his local police station – and the charge of criminal association has been dropped.

Say reports, the decision has dealt a major blow to the whole Achilles case, bearing in mind it is already being tried in the courts, and prosecutors’ case implicated Lobo as having a “principal role” within it.

Coincidentally perhaps, Achilles has a strong Colombian connection.

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

See https://www.portugalresident.com/2016/04/14/operation-achilles-sees-pj-top-brass-behind-bars/  for a few more details about Operation Achilles.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 26, 2019, 01:41:01 AM
Quote from: misty on July 25, 2019, 11:56:24 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/2019/07/25/shock-and-disbelief-after-portuguese-justice-frees-israeli-sex-trafficking-kingpin/

By Natasha Donn  2019-07-25 Posted  2019-07-25  InTop Stories 

Shock and disbelief after Portuguese justice frees Israeli ‘sex trafficking kingpin’

Authorities hunting a former Israeli soldier wanted for sex trafficking minors in Colombia heard with a mixture of shock and disbelief that a Portuguese judge has freed him.

National and international media were full of the arrest of Assi Moosh in Oeiras two months ago (click here).

Dubbing him “the baron of sex tourism” and “the devil of Taganga” (after the Colombian village where young women and minors were sexually exploited), the stories explained how authorities of various countries had been hunting Moosh down, with the purposes of getting him extradited to Colombia to face charges, including drug trafficking and money-laundering.

There was even talk of Moosh, 46, being involved in a possible homicide.

Focus on the holiday island of Ibiza led authorities to Barcelona, and later to Portugal.

Then, the ‘grand announcement’ that he had been ‘caught’ in an operation involving Spanish and Portuguese police, and would be held in preventive custody pending extradition to Colombia.

And then it all went quiet.

Now, both Israeli and Colombian sources have heard Moosh was released from custody on June 28 and “could be anywhere”.

“It’s completely crazy”, an Israeli journalist who has been tracking Moosh for years told us.
“None of us can understand it”.

Requests by the Resident for information – from the Public Ministry and PJ – elicited no response, but a news story in Colombian newspaper El Tiempo claims Moosh was freed by Lisbon judge María Guillhermina Vaz Pereira Santos, on the basis that legal time limits for his detention had expired, that the case was ‘complicated’ because Moosh claimed to understand no Spanish, and that Portugal anyway has no extradition agreement with Colombia.

Citing a Colombian official, El Tiempo said authorities in that country will now be trying, through Interpol, to secure another Blue Notice for Moosh’s recapture.

He is still wanted in Colombia for a multitude of offences, not least the “possible disappearance of one of his partners”.

El Tiempo adds that Moosh insists he is innocent, and that everything the media has said about him is false.
But this is not the only instance recently where an apparent wanted felon has been suddenly released after high-profile capture.

Back in March, newspapers here were full of the arrest in Malaga, Spain, of “the largest drug trafficker in Portugal”.

Frankelim Lobo was wanted in connection with Operation Achilles – an investigation that had been ongoing for years into a network of drug trafficking which has also implicated high-ranking policemen (click here).

But judge Ana Peres has now freed him from preventive custody, accepting that prosecutors’ arguments that he had ‘fled Portuguese justice’ were not in fact true. Lobo had apparently notified authorities “after leaving jail in 2014” that he would be moving permanently to Malaga.

Lobo is now bound to periodic reporting into his local police station – and the charge of criminal association has been dropped.

Say reports, the decision has dealt a major blow to the whole Achilles case, bearing in mind it is already being tried in the courts, and prosecutors’ case implicated Lobo as having a “principal role” within it.

Coincidentally perhaps, Achilles has a strong Colombian connection.

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

See https://www.portugalresident.com/2016/04/14/operation-achilles-sees-pj-top-brass-behind-bars/  for a few more details about Operation Achilles.

Neither of your ' click heres'  opens up misty and neither does the website in blue.  Did they originally?


What interesting names the first Judge has.   María Guillhermina Vaz Pereira Santos



So much for Justice in Portugal
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 26, 2019, 02:08:29 AM
Quote from: sadie on July 26, 2019, 01:41:01 AM
Neither of your ' click heres'  opens up misty and neither does the website in blue.  Did they originally?


What interesting names the first Judge has.   María Guillhermina Vaz Pereira Santos



So much for Justice in Portugal

For the "click here" links you have to go to the main news article url at top of post.
Blue link opens OK for me.
The judge is the Vice President of the Appeal Court.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 26, 2019, 12:00:58 PM
Quote from: misty on July 26, 2019, 02:08:29 AM
For the "click here" links you have to go to the main news article url at top of post.
Blue link opens OK for me.
The judge is the Vice President of the Appeal Court.

What an interesting name she has


 María Guillhermina Vaz Pereira Santos


And she is the Vice President of the Appeal Court.   Would that be the national Vice President ... or just a regional Appeal Court ?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 26, 2019, 01:07:46 PM
Quote from: sadie on July 26, 2019, 12:00:58 PM
What an interesting name she has


 María Guillhermina Vaz Pereira Santos


And she is the Vice President of the Appeal Court.   Would that be the national Vice President ... or just a regional Appeal Court ?

There are 4 regional Appeal Courts according to Wiki. She is VP at the Lisbon court.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on July 26, 2019, 10:49:03 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 07:51:51 PM
Nossa Senhora da Luz is quite small.  I've never been inside it, only seen the photos.  It features in the alleged tale of people seen sneaking in at night to secrete MBM in the coffin of a woman lying in rest before cremation, which I rate as cobblers.  It also features in whether it connects by underground passages to the sea, another rumour I'm dismissive of.

Sagres beer is one of the main brands of beer in Portugal. It's not to my taste, so I've never bothered to locate the brewery.

It looks quite charming though and aesthetically pleasing to my eye.  I don't buy into any of the tales though.

I bought a few bottles of Super Bock today, which I may well have sampled in Portugal although I don't recall, and yeah its a nice beer imo.  It's not widely marketed though unlike other premium brands?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 26, 2019, 11:02:18 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on July 26, 2019, 10:49:03 PM
It looks quite charming though and aesthetically pleasing to my eye.  I don't buy into any of the tales though.

I bought a few bottles of Super Bock today, which I may well have sampled in Portugal although I don't recall, and yeah its a nice beer imo.  It's not widely marketed though unlike other premium brands?

I don't know about market share in Portugal, but you can get a Super Bock nearly everywhere here.  IMO it's a nice beer.  Please come back with your opinion when you have sampled it.

 &^^&*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 27, 2019, 01:38:28 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on July 25, 2019, 12:04:56 PM
OK, in direct reply to misty, so that I am down to 14 items in my backlog, here we go.

A gun that appears to mismatch to the weapon used by Grilo.

DNA on (or in) the gun barrel.

The defence claiming contamination of evidence.  Presumably claiming that because it is the boyfriend's DNA on the gun.  If the gun did not fire the death bullet, why care?  If it turns out this gun was owned by the boyfriend and it's Grilo's DNA on the gun, things get tasty, even if this was not the murder weapon.

The Grilo case interests me for 2 main reasons linked to the Madeleine case.  Body occultation and decomposition.  And the amount of information emerging into the public domain during an active investigation.

NB.  This story has evolved rapidly in the media since it first emerged.  From memory, it started with disappeared triathlete.  Then to his body found.  I was puzzled by why his bike had not been found.  Later, his wife claimed she had tossed it over the side of a river bridge.  I still don't know if the bike has been retrieved.

I understand it was Luis Grilo's blood which was found on the gun barrel. Presumably there must be some incriminating DNA evidence on the black bag found tied around Luis's head and the quilt in which he was wrapped - mustn't there?? Then there is the small matter of the vehicle used to transport the body over 100km.....
I note the case is to be heard by a jury. It will be interesting. Will the Angolans & missing diamonds feature?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on July 27, 2019, 02:52:42 AM
Quote from: misty on July 27, 2019, 01:38:28 AM
I understand it was Luis Grilo's blood which was found on the gun barrel. Presumably there must be some incriminating DNA evidence on the black bag found tied around Luis's head and the quilt in which he was wrapped - mustn't there?? Then there is the small matter of the vehicle used to transport the body over 100km.....
I note the case is to be heard by a jury. It will be interesting. Will the Angolans & missing diamonds feature?

If the case goes to trial, and I think it will, Tânia Laranjo of CdM appears to have her jaws firmly locked on this case, so we should get to hear more.

Without Angolans and diamonds, Rosa Grilo is like the Titanic.  Unless she changes her story yet again, and dobs her boyfriend in.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 06, 2019, 10:48:34 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/2019/08/06/vulnerable-british-woman-missing-in-faro/

A ‘vulnerable’ British woman is ‘missing’ in Faro, last seen on her way to the fuel station outside the airport.

Victoria Cunningham has a history of mental illness and appears to have been involved in some kind of fracas just as she was due to fly out of Faro to return to UK.

As a result, she ‘dumped her passport’, brother John Whaites has explained, admitting that she was ‘intoxicated’ and suffering from the results of a breakdown linked to PMDD (pre-menstrual dysphoric disorder).

Whaites wrote that his sister was meant to be travelling with her boyfriend and his children on Saturday.

But things spiralled out of control and the boyfriend “left her at the airport” – flying without her.

She was due to take another plane yesterday (Monday), but something happened to cause her to leave without her baggage and possibly without any money either.

“We are all worried for her welfare”, Whaite tweeted yesterday. “Portuguese police aren’t interested in helping us search for her”.

This appears since to have changed as a new tweet says the British Consulate and British police have put pressure on police in Portugal to search.

Thus the appeal today (Tuesday) is please keep a look out for this woman, and “if you see her, please tell her that her family just want her home safe and sound”.

Fears are that Victoria poses a danger to herself. Her condition is such that she could self-harm or even attempt suicide.

The British Consulate number to call is: 282 490 750

Portuguese police can be contacted via 112.

natasha.donn@algarveresident.com

================================================================

UPDATE: Victoria has been found, alive, very distressed – apparently in the nick of time.

Her brother has recently tweeted that “a stranger recognised her and took her to her house”.

His emotional tweet continues: “Each and every one of you, who has tweeted, shared and commented, has saved a life today. And I cannot thank you enough – you are all angels”.

For the original story see below, but this particular drama is now over, and has ended in the best possible way.

As John Whaite says: “We are now going to focus on getting her home and back in good health in the privacy and protection of our family.

My gratitude to each one of you is undying. You’ve helped save a sister, a daughter and a mother – thank you”.

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

IMO an excellent example of the positive power of social media is portrayed above. It's sad to read that the Portuguese police still display a disinterested attitude to reports of missing people. Had it not been for the swift & concentrated effort by the missing woman's family to circulate the news, the outcome may well have been rather different. I appreciate that Twitter wasn't around when Madeleine went missing but I cannot understand why there was/is so much objection to the early involvement of the press enlisted by the wider family & Tapas group.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 08, 2019, 08:58:51 PM
Quote from: misty on August 06, 2019, 10:48:34 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/2019/08/06/vulnerable-british-woman-missing-in-faro/

A ‘vulnerable’ British woman is ‘missing’ in Faro, last seen on her way to the fuel station outside the airport.

Victoria Cunningham has a history of mental illness and appears to have been involved in some kind of fracas just as she was due to fly out of Faro to return to UK.

As a result, she ‘dumped her passport’, brother John Whaites has explained, admitting that she was ‘intoxicated’ and suffering from the results of a breakdown linked to PMDD (pre-menstrual dysphoric disorder).

Whaites wrote that his sister was meant to be travelling with her boyfriend and his children on Saturday.

But things spiralled out of control and the boyfriend “left her at the airport” – flying without her.

She was due to take another plane yesterday (Monday), but something happened to cause her to leave without her baggage and possibly without any money either.

“We are all worried for her welfare”, Whaite tweeted yesterday. “Portuguese police aren’t interested in helping us search for her”.

This appears since to have changed as a new tweet says the British Consulate and British police have put pressure on police in Portugal to search.

Thus the appeal today (Tuesday) is please keep a look out for this woman, and “if you see her, please tell her that her family just want her home safe and sound”.

Fears are that Victoria poses a danger to herself. Her condition is such that she could self-harm or even attempt suicide.

The British Consulate number to call is: 282 490 750

Portuguese police can be contacted via 112.

natasha.donn@algarveresident.com

================================================================

UPDATE: Victoria has been found, alive, very distressed – apparently in the nick of time.

Her brother has recently tweeted that “a stranger recognised her and took her to her house”.

His emotional tweet continues: “Each and every one of you, who has tweeted, shared and commented, has saved a life today. And I cannot thank you enough – you are all angels”.

For the original story see below, but this particular drama is now over, and has ended in the best possible way.

As John Whaite says: “We are now going to focus on getting her home and back in good health in the privacy and protection of our family.

My gratitude to each one of you is undying. You’ve helped save a sister, a daughter and a mother – thank you”.

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

IMO an excellent example of the positive power of social media is portrayed above. It's sad to read that the Portuguese police still display a disinterested attitude to reports of missing people. Had it not been for the swift & concentrated effort by the missing woman's family to circulate the news, the outcome may well have been rather different. I appreciate that Twitter wasn't around when Madeleine went missing but I cannot understand why there was/is so much objection to the early involvement of the press enlisted by the wider family & Tapas group.

So The PJ take the blame again?  This woman was drunk and upset at her situation, what are the police to do? she is an adult! Brits who go abroad and behave like drunken louts get what they ask for IMO. the PJ are not baby sitters.

" I appreciate that Twitter wasn't around when Madeleine went missing but I cannot understand why there was/is so much objection to the early involvement of the press enlisted by the wider family & Tapas group."

The huge difference is the woman was found and MBM is still missing- it never dod MBM any good did it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 08, 2019, 10:18:26 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 08, 2019, 08:58:51 PM
So The PJ take the blame again?  This woman was drunk and upset at her situation, what are the police to do? she is an adult! Brits who go abroad and behave like drunken louts get what they ask for IMO. the PJ are not baby sitters.

" I appreciate that Twitter wasn't around when Madeleine went missing but I cannot understand why there was/is so much objection to the early involvement of the press enlisted by the wider family & Tapas group."

The huge difference is the woman was found and MBM is still missing- it never dod MBM any good did it?

It's sad that you don't see the need for police involvement in helping the citizens they serve to safely recover a vulnerable adult.
It's equally sad you haven't recognised the role media played in a stranger recognising the missing woman using the image circulated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 09, 2019, 10:23:29 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 08, 2019, 08:58:51 PM
So The PJ take the blame again?  This woman was drunk and upset at her situation, what are the police to do? she is an adult! Brits who go abroad and behave like drunken louts get what they ask for IMO. the PJ are not baby sitters.

" I appreciate that Twitter wasn't around when Madeleine went missing but I cannot understand why there was/is so much objection to the early involvement of the press enlisted by the wider family & Tapas group."

The huge difference is the woman was found and MBM is still missing- it never dod MBM any good did it?

Why should the police get involved? No crime was reported. Her boyfriend flew home without her, so he'd clearly had enough. Was she on medication? Antidepressants are prescribed for PMDD and alcohol should be avoided. It's pssible that she was vulnerable because of her own actions rather than because of her illness.

Blaming the Portuguese police is easy when the full facts aren't known imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 09, 2019, 06:32:40 PM
Quote from: misty on August 08, 2019, 10:18:26 PM
It's sad that you don't see the need for police involvement in helping the citizens they serve to safely recover a vulnerable adult.
It's equally sad you haven't recognised the role media played in a stranger recognising the missing woman using the image circulated.

It is even sadder that you expect police officers to waste time on drunks who get lost on holiday. She had a phone? The family must have known she was a risk her being 'vulnerable' so should have weighed up those risks.  Stop dumping responsibility on others- it is ugly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 09, 2019, 06:37:29 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 09, 2019, 06:32:40 PM
It is even sadder that you expect police officers to waste time on drunks who get lost on holiday. She had a phone? The family must have known she was a risk her being 'vulnerable' so should have weighed up those risks.  Stop dumping responsibility on others- it is ugly.
Gosh, I know who looks ugly in this exchange and it ain’t Misty, IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 09, 2019, 06:45:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 09, 2019, 06:37:29 PM
Gosh, I know who looks ugly in this exchange and it ain’t Misty, IMO.



I did not call lMisty ugly-so stop troublemaking and gaoding.

I repeat - it is ugly to dump  responsibility on others!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 09, 2019, 07:14:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 09, 2019, 10:23:29 AM
Why should the police get involved? No crime was reported. Her boyfriend flew home without her, so he'd clearly had enough. Was she on medication? Antidepressants are prescribed for PMDD and alcohol should be avoided. It's pssible that she was vulnerable because of her own actions rather than because of her illness.

Blaming the Portuguese police is easy when the full facts aren't known imo.
Many people are vulnerable because of their own actions, eg students who go out clubbing and walk home drunk, getting raped and murdered or who fall into a river and drown.  Before their fate is known, should the police simply not get involved in such cases when these people are reported missing, in your opinion?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 09, 2019, 07:46:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 09, 2019, 07:14:10 PM
Many people are vulnerable because of their own actions, eg students who go out clubbing and walk home drunk, getting raped and murdered or who fall into a river and drown.  Before their fate is known, should the police simply not get involved in such cases when these people are reported missing, in your opinion?

It depends on the circumstances, I would imagine.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 09, 2019, 07:58:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 09, 2019, 07:46:42 PM
It depends on the circumstances, I would imagine.

It does indeed. Why not take a trip to local A&E dept on Friday.Sat nights early morning. Great place to be if you are seriously ill=NOT  it is filled with drunk/drug fulled  aggressive citizens demanding to be seen. In one evening

25  police and medical staff were attacked- while trying to help 'these vulnerable people'
They frieghten genuinley ill people, throw up over patients and staff.urinate against wallls and in the ambulance.

I will leave the really very intelligent ones to add up the cost of all this baby sitting service OR why not just do an FOI  request to get a better picture.

People need to start taking responsibility for themselves.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 09, 2019, 08:25:54 PM
Something to keep an eye on.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/commission-on-disappeared-to-investigate-claims-robert-nairac-buried-in-louth-1.3981085

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 09, 2019, 08:38:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 09, 2019, 07:46:42 PM
It depends on the circumstances, I would imagine.
When should the police have begun looking for Cory McKeague in you view?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on August 12, 2019, 05:35:34 PM
Irish teen Nóra Quoirin (15) disappears while on holiday in Malaysia.

Please be advised that this topic has been given its own thread in the current news board...

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10965.msg550928#msg550928
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 16, 2019, 08:08:06 AM
Quote from: barrier on August 09, 2019, 08:25:54 PM
Something to keep an eye on.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/commission-on-disappeared-to-investigate-claims-robert-nairac-buried-in-louth-1.3981085

A little bit more,doesn't look as if a search of the ground is going to happen anytime soon.

https://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/frederick-forsyth/1166280/robert-nairac-body-enquiry-ira-northern-ireland-veterans
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 16, 2019, 11:49:34 AM
Quote from: barrier on August 16, 2019, 08:08:06 AM
A little bit more,doesn't look as if a search of the ground is going to happen anytime soon.

https://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/frederick-forsyth/1166280/robert-nairac-body-enquiry-ira-northern-ireland-veterans

It should be treated as a cold case murder, but that seems unlikely. What a mess!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 29, 2019, 07:06:58 AM
The ignore function is running again. 8@??)(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 29, 2019, 07:24:27 AM
Quote from: barrier on August 29, 2019, 07:06:58 AM
The ignore function is running again. 8@??)(
Great.  As one of the most contemptible posters on this forum I fully expect to be able to post in peace now as everyone will have me on ignore.  Bliss!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 29, 2019, 07:33:35 AM
Quote from: barrier on August 29, 2019, 07:06:58 AM
The ignore function is running again. 8@??)(


As previously posted, it is my opinion that using an ignore button shows a lack of maturity, an unwillingness to consider a difference in opinion and utterly pointless if one wishes to be a member of a forum where debate with others is the supposed goal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 29, 2019, 07:57:37 AM
Quote from: Erngath on August 29, 2019, 07:33:35 AM

As previously posted, it is my opinion that using an ignore button shows a lack of maturity, an unwillingness to consider a difference in opinion and utterly pointless if one wishes to be a member of a forum where debate with others is the supposed goal.

It's merely a device used by some to pretend they don't read certain posters posts... A, little childish imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 29, 2019, 08:00:48 AM
Quote from: Erngath on August 29, 2019, 07:33:35 AM

As previously posted, it is my opinion that using an ignore button shows a lack of maturity, an unwillingness to consider a difference in opinion and utterly pointless if one wishes to be a member of a forum where debate with others is the supposed goal.
Some snowflakes are clearly afraid of having their views challenged but what they don’t realise is it doesn’t stop their views from being challenged, and, by ignoring the challenge it looks to the average reader like they have nothing to say in response, which means the challenger wins the debate every time. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 29, 2019, 10:49:20 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 29, 2019, 07:57:37 AM
It's merely a device used by some to pretend they don't read certain posters posts... A, little childish imo

I find it quite a bizarre function and have never really understood the need for it.  Takes all sorts though 👀👀
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 29, 2019, 10:52:51 AM
Quote from: barrier on August 16, 2019, 08:08:06 AM
A little bit more,doesn't look as if a search of the ground is going to happen anytime soon.

https://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/frederick-forsyth/1166280/robert-nairac-body-enquiry-ira-northern-ireland-veterans


Is there any viable reason for not giving up the whareabouts of this mans body by the IRA?

  I thought the peace and forgiveness of sins by the UK governament of terrorists was part  of the agreement- obviously one sided.

I was reading a paper about paedophiles and the different persuasions of them, they come in all flavors. 

Moors murderers loved knowing where their victims were-  it turned them on, being smarter that the police. then you have the dump without bothering too much- victims are eventually found, next are those who remove all signs of the body. using butchering and acid bath type techniques, or placing in an already open grave.

If Madeleine is no longer with us (I suspect she isn't) he remains are well hidden/destroyed. And may never be found.


NB is there any reason why posters cannot mention bias regarding politicians agendas.  Tony Bliar became a devout catholic after leaving the pm office after being 'involved' with the peace process. All was to be forgiven, so why are the IRA not giving up this mans body. Surely Tony could have insisted by appeaking to their'religious leaders'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on August 29, 2019, 01:59:01 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 29, 2019, 10:52:51 AM

Is there any viable reason for not giving up the whareabouts of this mans body by the IRA?

  I thought the peace and forgiveness of sins by the UK governament of terrorists was part  of the agreement- obviously one sided.

I was reading a paper about paedophiles and the different persuasions of them, they come in all flavors. 

Moors murderers loved knowing where their victims were-  it turned them on, being smarter that the police. then you have the dump without bothering too much- victims are eventually found, next are those who remove all signs of the body. using butchering and acid bath type techniques, or placing in an already open grave.

If Madeleine is no longer with us (I suspect she isn't) he remains are well hidden/destroyed. And may never be found.


NB is there any reason why posters cannot mention bias regarding politicians agendas.  Tony Bliar became a devout catholic after leaving the pm office after being 'involved' with the peace process. All was to be forgiven, so why are the IRA not giving up this mans body. Surely Tony could have insisted by appeaking to their'religious leaders'

I have a feeling that the small group involved in the abduction and murder of Captain Nairac will fear any DNA testing which would accompany the retrieval of any remains given the current policy to pursue the terrorist criminals involved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 29, 2019, 08:58:40 PM
It looks as if a search was done but nothing found.


https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/republic-of-ireland/nothing-found-in-search-for-remains-of-captain-robert-nairac-38403112.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 30, 2019, 11:59:36 AM
Quote from: barrier on August 29, 2019, 08:58:40 PM
It looks as if a search was done but nothing found.


https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/republic-of-ireland/nothing-found-in-search-for-remains-of-captain-robert-nairac-38403112.html


Could it have been moved?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 30, 2019, 12:22:10 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 30, 2019, 11:59:36 AM

Could it have been moved?

One'll never know I suspect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on September 01, 2019, 01:27:30 PM
Posters are reminded of the forum rules and should not engage in any conduct which breaches those rules. Sniping, goading, use of inappropriate language, posting insulting comments and unnecessary criticism of other members should be avoided. Moderators are also reminded of the need to lead by example and should avoid inappropriate comment or unnecessary moderation.

Members can message me at any time if necessary.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on September 05, 2019, 12:31:13 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49586503

Details are sparse, but this part caught my attention
"Ms Fernández's body was found by a tracking dog on Wednesday."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 05, 2019, 07:47:23 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on September 05, 2019, 12:31:13 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49586503

Details are sparse, but this part caught my attention
"Ms Fernández's body was found by a tracking dog on Wednesday."
That's all very good, but how do we know the handler didn't give the dog unconscious cues? Where's the proof? Are we saying the presence of an actual corpse is proof? Come off it!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2019, 07:51:43 AM
Quote from: The General on September 05, 2019, 07:47:23 AM
That's all very good, but how do we know the handler didn't give the dog unconscious cues? Where's the proof? Are we saying the presence of an actual corpse is proof? Come off it!

This is an example of a VRD dog doing what it's trained to do. If you think those who question the alerts think otherwise you are sadly misguided
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 05, 2019, 07:54:33 AM
Quote from: Davel on September 05, 2019, 07:51:43 AM
This is an example of a VRD dog doing what it's trained to do. If you think those who question the alerts think otherwise you are sadly misguided
A bit early for veiled ad hom isn't it Davros?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2019, 07:58:23 AM
Quote from: The General on September 05, 2019, 07:54:33 AM
A bit early for veiled ad hom isn't it Davros?

Take the plank out of your eye...never to early for the Bible
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2019, 08:45:33 AM
Quote from: The General on September 05, 2019, 07:47:23 AM
That's all very good, but how do we know the handler didn't give the dog unconscious cues? Where's the proof? Are we saying the presence of an actual corpse is proof? Come off it!
Yes, the presence of the corpse is proof the dog found the body.  What we don‘t know is how many false alerts he made before arriving at the body.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 08:45:59 AM
At the time of MM's disappearance 5A was owned by Mrs Ruth McCann whose husband passed away in NW England during 2006.  Prior to this I believe it was owned by Tasmin Sillence's grandmother who passed away during ownership of the property (1994 - 2002).  I've no idea whether or not the grandmother passed away inside the apartment but it seems to me at the very least the potential existed for odour contamination from both sets of relatives.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 08:53:13 AM
Is anyone able to upload a copy of the MW brochure used to market the holiday booked by T9?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 05, 2019, 09:43:26 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2019, 08:45:33 AM
Yes, the presence of the corpse is proof the dog found the body.  What we don‘t know is how many false alerts he made before arriving at the body.
You call it false alerts, I call it the dogs continuing to search until successful.
Her body may never have been found if it were not for the persistence of those good boys.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2019, 09:52:38 AM
Quote from: The General on September 05, 2019, 09:43:26 AM
You call it false alerts, I call it the dogs continuing to search until successful.
Her body may never have been found if it were not for the persistence of those good boys.

The dogs are excellent at victim recovery... That's why they are used worldwide.  No one would, argue with that.  It's the value if the alerts that are questionable ...but this has been done to death and I don't think we need another dog thread
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 05, 2019, 10:06:03 AM
Quote from: Davel on September 05, 2019, 09:52:38 AM
The dogs are excellent at victim recovery... That's why they are used worldwide.  No one would, argue with that.  It's the value if the alerts that are questionable ...but this has been done to death and I don't think we need another dog thread
You're the only one still talking about it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2019, 10:14:39 AM
Quote from: The General on September 05, 2019, 10:06:03 AM
You're the only one still talking about it.

Really... So sil posts about a victim recovered by cadaver dogs.. You comment on the dogs... VS comments on the dogs... Holly comments on the dogs... And you think I'm the only one still talking about it... How long does that peyote last
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 05, 2019, 10:29:55 AM
Holly, this is all I could find.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 05, 2019, 10:43:16 AM
Quote from: Davel on September 05, 2019, 10:14:39 AM
Really... So sil posts about a victim recovered by cadaver dogs.. You comment on the dogs... VS comments on the dogs... Holly comments on the dogs... And you think I'm the only one still talking about it... How long does that peyote last
You're still talking about it.......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2019, 10:43:44 AM
Quote from: The General on September 05, 2019, 09:43:26 AM
You call it false alerts, I call it the dogs continuing to search until successful.
Her body may never have been found if it were not for the persistence of those good boys.
If in this case the dog had alerted to a spot where no body or evidence was found what would you call this?  A positive alert?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2019, 10:45:31 AM
Quote from: The General on September 05, 2019, 10:43:16 AM
You're still talking about it.......
People still talk about the McCanns leaving their kids unattended - to what end exactly? WE KNOW ALREADY!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 10:46:45 AM
Quote from: Anthro on September 05, 2019, 10:29:55 AM
Holly, this is all I could find.

Thanks.  Is this definitely for MW OC @ PDL 2007 season?  If so its clear the baby listening service is unavailable by its  absence.  Hence I guess the reason for the Paynes taking the monitor.

Are you able to upload a MW hol where the baby listening service is available so we can see how it is marketed?   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 05, 2019, 10:48:47 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2019, 10:45:31 AM
People still talk about the McCanns leaving their kids unattended - to what end exactly? WE KNOW ALREADY!
He said he didn't want to talk about it. He's still talking about it. Now I'm talking about him not wanting to talk about it, but talking about it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 10:49:20 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2019, 10:45:31 AM
People still talk about the McCanns leaving their kids unattended - to what end exactly? WE KNOW ALREADY!

Its factually correct and imo pivotal to the case.  The dog alerts as a stand alone are meaningless.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 05, 2019, 10:50:52 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2019, 10:43:44 AM
If in this case the dog had alerted to a spot where no body or evidence was found what would you call this?  A positive alert?
I call that progress. Business as usual.
Same as a SOCO search. Dust for prints - none found - progress.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2019, 11:04:04 AM
Quote from: The General on September 05, 2019, 10:50:52 AM
I call that progress. Business as usual.
Same as a SOCO search. Dust for prints - none found - progress.
*Itching to respond but won't*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2019, 11:07:01 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 10:49:20 AM
Its factually correct and imo pivotal to the case.  The dog alerts as a stand alone are meaningless.
It's factually correct to state it, but it is never stated in a factual way, only in a judgey, sanctimonious what-shit-parents-I-would-never-let-the-children-out-of-my-sight-for-one-second way.  It gets tiresome, same way as discussing dogs get tiresome, but after 12 years what is left to say?  Heard back from the Met yet?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 11:10:52 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2019, 11:07:01 AM
It's factually correct to state it, but it is never stated in a factual way, only in a judgey, sanctimonious what-shit-parents-I-would-never-let-the-children-out-of-my-sight-for-one-second way.  It gets tiresome, same way as discussing dogs get tiresome, but after 12 years what is left to say?  Heard back from the Met yet?

Why would the MET keep me in the loop?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2019, 11:24:55 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 11:10:52 AM
Why would the MET keep me in the loop?
Did they send you an acknowledgement or give you any indication at all that they are treating your theory seriously?  I mean if you've solved the case I think at the very least a "thank you" would be nice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 11:28:10 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2019, 11:24:55 AM
Did they send you an acknowledgement or give you any indication at all that they are treating your theory seriously?  I mean if you've solved the case I think at the very least a "thank you" would be nice.

I said at the time I received an automated acknowledgement.  I might well receive a personal 'thank-you' if/when the case is solved. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 11:46:49 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 11:28:10 AM
I said at the time I received an automated acknowledgement.  I might well receive a personal 'thank-you' if/when the case is solved.

If I'm right it will be a huge embarrassment for the British police.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2019, 11:57:06 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 11:46:49 AM
If I'm right it will be a huge embarrassment for the British police.

I'm sure they are safe
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 12:00:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 05, 2019, 11:57:06 AM
I'm sure they are safe

Oh so am I.  There are few organisations on planet earth that have been found guilty of so much but still walk away individually and collectively unscathed. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2019, 12:18:36 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 12:00:52 PM
Oh so am I.  There are few organisations on planet earth that have been found guilty of so much but still walk away individually and collectively unscathed.

I think that's a ridiculous statement...with little fact to support it.. And that puts, everything you say into perspective
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 12:26:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 05, 2019, 12:18:36 PM
I think that's a ridiculous statement...with little fact to support it.. And that puts, everything you say into perspective

Hmmm now let me think... MacPherson report, Operation Tiberius and even the MET's anti-corruption unit faces investigation and these are just 3 that spring to mind.  The MET has a long history of corruption, incompetence and wrongdoing. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 12:28:43 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 12:26:27 PM
Hmmm now let me think... MacPherson report, Operation Tiberius and even the MET's anti-corruption unit faces investigation and these are just 3 that spring to mind.  The MET has a long history of corruption, incompetence and wrongdoing.

The lead detective on the murder of Stephen Cameron hand-picked a few officers he could trust fearing many would tip off Noye.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2019, 12:30:58 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 12:26:27 PM
Hmmm now let me think... MacPherson report, Operation Tiberius and even the MET's anti-corruption unit faces investigation and these are just 3 that spring to mind.  The MET has a long history of corruption, incompetence and wrongdoing.

your examples dont support your claim.

You said there are few organisations on planet earth. You can criticise the MET but what knowledge do you have of the record of other police forces worldwide to compare...none I would think. THe met is a massive organisation and its bound to have failures but to suggest other police forces are not similar or better when you have no evidence is ridiculous and wrong. It may well be one of the most successful and best run police forces in the world but without data from other forces we just dont know
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2019, 12:37:39 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 12:28:43 PM
The lead detective on the murder of Stephen Cameron hand-picked a few officers he could trust fearing many would tip off Noye.

are you making the assumption that other police forces dont have similar problems or worse
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 12:40:11 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 05, 2019, 12:37:39 PM
are you making the assumption that other police forces dont have similar problems or worse

We are talking about the force I sent my email to are we not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 12:41:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 05, 2019, 12:30:58 PM
your examples dont support your claim.

You said there are few organisations on planet earth. You can criticise the MET but what knowledge do you have of the record of other police forces worldwide to compare...none I would think. THe met is a massive organisation and its bound to have failures but to suggest other police forces are not similar or better when you have no evidence is ridiculous and wrong. It may well be one of the most successful and best run police forces in the world but without data from other forces we just dont know

We are talking about the recipients of my email are we not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2019, 12:45:03 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 12:41:45 PM
We are talking about the recipients of my email are we not?

your post..There are few organisations on planet earth

as I said...the met may have had some problems but to compare them to all the organisations on planet erath is ridiculous. The Met may well be one of the best forces in the world
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 01:00:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 05, 2019, 12:45:03 PM
your post..There are few organisations on planet earth

as I said...the met may have had some problems but to compare them to all the organisations on planet erath is ridiculous. The Met may well be one of the best forces in the world

And your post:

I think that's a ridiculous statement...with little fact to support it.. And that puts, everything you say into perspective

What is ridiculous in calling the MET out when it has a long history of corruption, incompetence and wrongdoing. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2019, 01:24:33 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 01:00:28 PM
And your post:

I think that's a ridiculous statement...with little fact to support it.. And that puts, everything you say into perspective

What is ridiculous in calling the MET out when it has a long history of corruption, incompetence and wrongdoing.

Nothing... Its when you imply it ranks lowly compared to all the other organisations in the while world.
You feel you've succeeded where the met had failed..I think you are extremely misguided
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 01:37:22 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 05, 2019, 01:24:33 PM
Nothing... Its when you imply it ranks lowly compared to all the other organisations in the while world.
You feel you've succeeded where the met had failed..I think you are extremely misguided

Ok lets stick with UK.  Can you name any other organisation whether publicly or privately owned that has a long history of corruption, incompetence and wrongdoing that exceeds the MET?  My former industry, financial services, was not without its problems but I do not know of any single organisation that could be put in the same category as the MET. 

Now I have a garden shed to finish off painting, willow, and generally tidying up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2019, 01:45:59 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 01:37:22 PM
Ok lets stick with UK.  Can you name any other organisation whether publicly or privately owned that has a long history of corruption, incompetence and wrongdoing that exceeds the MET?  My former industry, financial services, was not without its problems but I do not know of any single organisation that could be put in the same category as the MET. 

Now I have a garden shed to finish off painting, willow, and generally tidying up.

You were referring to the whole world so there must be thousands... The Catholic church for one.. But it's an off topic pointless exercise
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 03:19:08 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 05, 2019, 01:45:59 PM
You were referring to the whole world so there must be thousands... The Catholic church for one.. But it's an off topic pointless exercise

Back for a t break with a g in front of it  8)-)))

Ok lets agree the MPS is not equivalent of the British army, navy or raf.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on September 05, 2019, 05:17:55 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 08:45:59 AM
At the time of MM's disappearance 5A was owned by Mrs Ruth McCann whose husband passed away in NW England during 2006.  Prior to this I believe it was owned by Tasmin Sillence's grandmother who passed away during ownership of the property (1994 - 2002).  I've no idea whether or not the grandmother passed away inside the apartment but it seems to me at the very least the potential existed for odour contamination from both sets of relatives.

I agree Holly, imo the cadaver dog most probably picked up on a substance for which he was trained so some connection to former deceased occupants of 5a is an absolute distinct possibility. It was remiss of the PJ not to have followed up on this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 05, 2019, 06:55:00 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 10:46:45 AM
Thanks.  Is this definitely for MW OC @ PDL 2007 season?  If so its clear the baby listening service is unavailable by its  absence.  Hence I guess the reason for the Paynes taking the monitor.

Are you able to upload a MW hol where the baby listening service is available so we can see how it is marketed?

Here is the link to MW brochure on website @04/1/07.

https://web.archive.org/web/20070105161139/http://www.markwarner.co.uk/

Click on "Summer" & it will take you to another page where Childcare is listed. Click on Childcare the Further Details & you will see how the child listening service was marketed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 09:13:14 PM
Quote from: misty on September 05, 2019, 06:55:00 PM
Here is the link to MW brochure on website @04/1/07.

https://web.archive.org/web/20070105161139/http://www.markwarner.co.uk/

Click on "Summer" & it will take you to another page where Childcare is listed. Click on Childcare the Further Details & you will see how the child listening service was marketed.

Thanks misty.  So the brochure clearly states what services were available:

- Creche if dining at Millennium or Tapas
- Baby sitting services

There's no reason for anyone to think listening services were available since the brochure makes no mention of.

DP instigated and organised the trip and the Paynes were the only family who had a monitor.  I wonder what made the Paynes decide on a monitor and why ROB/JT, Oldfields and McCanns either didn't think to take one or did think and decided against? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 05, 2019, 09:18:57 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 09:13:14 PM
Thanks misty.  So the brochure clearly states what services were available:

- Creche if dining at Millennium or Tapas
- Baby sitting services

There's no reason for anyone to think listening services were available since the brochure makes no mention of.

DP instigated and organised the trip and the Paynes were the only family who had a monitor.  I wonder what made the Paynes decide on a monitor and why ROB/JT, Oldfields and McCanns either didn't think to take one or did think and decided against?
It has been established that Russell and Jane had a baby monitor as well.  They brought one with them from England but it didn't work well enough in the actual situation of the Tapas Restaurant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 09:24:35 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 05, 2019, 09:18:57 PM
It has been established that Russell and Jane had a baby monitor as well.  They brought one with them from England but it didn't work well enough in the actual situation of the Tapas Restaurant.

Oh right.  I believe the one the Payne's had was hi-tech so the range probably wasn't good enough on the ROB/JT one. 

They must surely have had some idea how they were going to spend the evenings prior to arriving so you would think they might have all thought it through beforehand? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 05, 2019, 09:33:59 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 09:24:35 PM
Oh right.  I believe the one the Payne's had was hi-tech so the range probably wasn't good enough on the ROB/JT one. 

They must surely have had some idea how they were going to spend the evenings prior to arriving so you would think they might have all thought it through beforehand?
It was never determined why it didn't work properly, but Jane tested it and wasn't happy with the outcome.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 09:48:27 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 05, 2019, 09:33:59 PM
It was never determined why it didn't work properly, but Jane tested it and wasn't happy with the outcome.

One thing I did pick up on recently, I think it might have been the GA vid:'Truth of the lie' was that if JT did a left down the alley and entered her apartment via the little gate/steps/patio doors this might account for the fact that she observed 'Tannerman' and GM/JW but they didn't observe her.  So it begs the question were they all carrying out the checks via the unlocked patio doors as opposed to walking round the front?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 05, 2019, 09:58:10 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 09:48:27 PM
One thing I did pick up on recently, I think it might have been the GA vid:'Truth of the lie' was that if JT did a left down the alley and entered her apartment via the little gate/steps/patio doors this might account for the fact that she observed 'Tannerman' and GM/JW but they didn't observe her.  So it begs the question were they all carrying out the checks via the unlocked patio doors as opposed to walking round the front?
Amaral seems to have free reign to alter people's statements.  Jane never says she'd go that way unless there was someone already in the apartment.  On that visit Russell was the table supposedly".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 05, 2019, 10:01:47 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 09:13:14 PM
Thanks misty.  So the brochure clearly states what services were available:

- Creche if dining at Millennium or Tapas
- Baby sitting services

There's no reason for anyone to think listening services were available since the brochure makes no mention of.

DP instigated and organised the trip and the Paynes were the only family who had a monitor.  I wonder what made the Paynes decide on a monitor and why ROB/JT, Oldfields and McCanns either didn't think to take one or did think and decided against?

Did you miss this part on the link I provided?
*snipped*
Room listening service
Each evening our nannies tour the rooms to check on your children so that you can relax over dinner.This free listening service is available between 8pm and 12 midnight at all our resorts (except Pedras D'el Rei, Portugal where we offer a drop-in evening creche service) to all children under the age of 13 years.

However, the families were made aware AFTER they had made the bookings.  that no listening service was available in the newly-acquired PdL complex.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 10:09:24 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 05, 2019, 09:58:10 PM
Amaral seems to have free reign to alter people's statements.  Jane never says she'd go that way unless there was someone already in the apartment.  On that visit Russell was at the table supposedly".

Found out for leaving such small children home alone is bad enough but if you need to add in the fact that the apartments were unsecured its a double whammy.  In reality we have no way of knowing who was checking, when and what routes were taken etc.  But if JT did enter via the back it would explain why she observed Tannerman straight ahead and GM/JW but they didn't observe her. 

I've only recently watched the GA vid and hadn't until then appreciated that entering round the front was much further than entering via the back.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 10:16:15 PM
Quote from: misty on September 05, 2019, 10:01:47 PM
Did you miss this part on the link I provided?
*snipped*
Room listening service
Each evening our nannies tour the rooms to check on your children so that you can relax over dinner.This free listening service is available between 8pm and 12 midnight at all our resorts (except Pedras D'el Rei, Portugal where we offer a drop-in evening creche service) to all children under the age of 13 years.

However, the families were made aware AFTER they had made the bookings.  that no listening service was available in the newly-acquired PdL complex.

I followed your instructions and arrived here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20061210030256/http://www.markwarner.co.uk/summer_holidays/portugal/ocean_club/childcare

No mention of any listening service?  It just refers to the creche or baby sitting services:

[We offer a ‘dining out service’ (only available for parents using the Millenium and Tapas restaurants). in the crèche on a drop-in basis in the evenings for children aged 4 months to 9 years. For those parents wishing to dine at alternative restaurants in the village, babysitting is available on request at additional charge. Our Indy Club for 14-17 year olds is situated near the Ocean Club Gardens.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 05, 2019, 10:17:12 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 10:09:24 PM
Found out for leaving such small children home alone is bad enough but if you need to add in the fact that the apartments were unsecured its a double whammy.  In reality we have no way of knowing who was checking, when and what routes were taken etc.  But if JT did enter via the back it would explain why she observed Tannerman straight ahead and GM/JW but they didn't observe her. 

I've only recently watched the GA vid and hadn't until then appreciated that entering round the front was much further than entering via the back.
You are making the classic mistake of confusing the front and the back (well at least I think so).
The side of the apartment with the front door is the front.
The side with the patio door is the back.
You say:
"But if JT did enter via the back it would explain why she observed Tannerman straight ahead and GM/JW but they didn't observe her."

well I'll change back to patio door:
"But if JT did enter via the "Patio Door" it would explain why she observed Tannerman straight ahead and GM/JW but they didn't observe her.

Can you explain that to us please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 05, 2019, 10:26:06 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 10:16:15 PM
I followed your instructions and arrived here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20061210030256/http://www.markwarner.co.uk/summer_holidays/portugal/ocean_club/childcare

No mention of any listening service?  It just refers to the creche or baby sitting services:

[We offer a ‘dining out service’ (only available for parents using the Millenium and Tapas restaurants). in the crèche on a drop-in basis in the evenings for children aged 4 months to 9 years. For those parents wishing to dine at alternative restaurants in the village, babysitting is available on request at additional charge. Our Indy Club for 14-17 year olds is situated near the Ocean Club Gardens.


It's on the main MW page here https://web.archive.org/web/20061111225804/http://www.markwarner.co.uk/summer_holidays/summer_childcare/childcare_details
You don't need to go to the Portugal link.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 10:42:48 PM
Quote from: misty on September 05, 2019, 10:26:06 PM

It's on the main MW page here https://web.archive.org/web/20061111225804/http://www.markwarner.co.uk/summer_holidays/summer_childcare/childcare_details
You don't need to go to the Portugal link.

Are you trying to mystify me?!  Yes thanks I see what you mean but it doesn't mention in the OC section about the listening service.  Reading KM's book it doesn't appear she was under any illusion the child listening service was available.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 11:00:09 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 05, 2019, 10:17:12 PM
You are making the classic mistake of confusing the front and the back (well at least I think so).
The side of the apartment with the front door is the front.
The side with the patio door is the back.
You say:
"But if JT did enter via the back it would explain why she observed Tannerman straight ahead and GM/JW but they didn't observe her."

well I'll change back to patio door:
"But if JT did enter via the "Patio Door" it would explain why she observed Tannerman straight ahead and GM/JW but they didn't observe her.

Can you explain that to us please?

Front door overlooks car park.  Back/patio doors overlook swimming pool. 

The alley leading to the front of the apartments precedes the small gate to 5A meaning when JT left tapas she would have in her line of sight Tannerman crossing the top of the road and GM/JW chatting if stood around the small gate to 5A but if she then turned left into the alley between the apartments and swimming pool this might account for the fact GM/JW did not observe her as she would not have passed them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 05, 2019, 11:12:45 PM
From 9:27 on the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atfDV7imHHY Jane Tanner knows exactly where she was and what she saw and makes that perfectly clear.
There is absolutely no suggestion that she turned left to walk up the path she is adamant she continued to walk towards the car park entrance to block 5.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 05, 2019, 11:34:25 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 05, 2019, 11:12:45 PM
From 9:27 on the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atfDV7imHHY Jane Tanner knows exactly where she was and what she saw and makes that perfectly clear.
There is absolutely no suggestion that she turned left to walk up the path she is adamant she continued to walk towards the car park entrance to block 5.
We sort of know that, but Amaral must think Jane is confused somewhat.  What I find is that OK if Jane turned off into the alley way that becomes and even longer way to get to her front door.  At no time when walking the alley way will Jane see Tannerman cross her field of vision from the left to the right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 11:42:20 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 05, 2019, 11:12:45 PM
From 9:27 on the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atfDV7imHHY Jane Tanner knows exactly where she was and what she saw and makes that perfectly clear.
There is absolutely no suggestion that she turned left to walk up the path she is adamant she continued to walk towards the car park entrance to block 5.

Are you able to upload the cctv? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 05, 2019, 11:48:59 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 11:42:20 PM
Are you able to upload the cctv?
I have no idea how long it will remain:  the programme seems to be systematically in the process of being deleted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 06, 2019, 09:48:07 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 05, 2019, 11:48:59 PM
I have no idea how long it will remain:  the programme seems to be systematically in the process of being deleted

Thanks.  Given you are so sure of what JT did or didn't do I thought you had cctv footage but I understand now you're working off a reconstruction.  This reconstruction in terms of precise positions of JT, GM and JW is as good as useless since JW did not avail himself of the opportunity to partake probably on the basis his recollection does not accord with GM's.  As DE said there will always be inconsistencies. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 06, 2019, 03:49:30 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 05, 2019, 11:34:25 PM
We sort of know that, but Amaral must think Jane is confused somewhat.  What I find is that OK if Jane turned off into the alley way that becomes and even longer way to get to her front door.  At no time when walking the alley way will Jane see Tannerman cross her field of vision from the left to the right.

That's not the way I see it.  If JT turned left upon leaving OC reception she would have in her line of sight 'Tannerman' crossing the road at the T junction and GM/JW chatting outside the small gate of 5A.  If she then turned left into the alley to access her apartment 5D, GM/JW would not necessarily see her since there would be no need for her to pass them. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 06, 2019, 07:21:06 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 06, 2019, 03:49:30 PM
That's not the way I see it.  If JT turned left upon leaving OC reception she would have in her line of sight 'Tannerman' crossing the road at the T junction and GM/JW chatting outside the small gate of 5A.  If she then turned left into the alley to access her apartment 5D, GM/JW would not necessarily see her since there would be no need for her to pass them.

But that's not the way she told it.
If she was untruthful about that, why should anything she said be believed ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 06, 2019, 07:33:47 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 06, 2019, 09:48:07 AM
Thanks.  Given you are so sure of what JT did or didn't do I thought you had cctv footage but I understand now you're working off a reconstruction.  This reconstruction in terms of precise positions of JT, GM and JW is as good as useless since JW did not avail himself of the opportunity to partake probably on the basis his recollection does not accord with GM's.  As DE said there will always be inconsistencies.

I see where you are coming from now.  I did not mention cctv in my post probably for the simple reason there was none in that location.  What was there in the link I provided was the material witness who knew exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it ... it is your privilege to gainsay what she said to camera.
She became rather used to sceptics calling her unwavering evidence into question over the years until the invisible Dr Totman put in an appearance and made them look rather silly.
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 06, 2019, 09:14:05 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 06, 2019, 03:49:30 PM
That's not the way I see it.  If JT turned left upon leaving OC reception she would have in her line of sight 'Tannerman' crossing the road at the T junction and GM/JW chatting outside the small gate of 5A.  If she then turned left into the alley to access her apartment 5D, GM/JW would not necessarily see her since there would be no need for her to pass them.
OK so Tannerman is still seen at the "T" junction walking in the direction she said, but only seen from a distance of 50 meters or so, not the 5 meters she says in one interview.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 07, 2019, 09:10:00 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 06, 2019, 07:33:47 PM
I see where you are coming from now.  I did not mention cctv in my post probably for the simple reason there was none in that location.  What was there in the link I provided was the material witness who knew exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it ... it is your privilege to gainsay what she said to camera.
She became rather used to sceptics calling her unwavering evidence into question over the years until the invisible Dr Totman put in an appearance and made them look rather silly.
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

I saw a "material witness who knew exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it" being contradicted on camera and told she didn't see what she said she saw.

If it was Dr Totman Redwood found then it was Redwood who looked silly because 'Totman' wasn't coming from the direction of the night creche according to Jane Tanner.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on September 07, 2019, 09:32:50 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 07, 2019, 09:10:00 AM
I saw a "material witness who knew exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it" being contradicted on camera and told she didn't see what she said she saw.

If it was Dr Totman Redwood found then it was Redwood who looked silly because 'Totman' wasn't coming from the direction of the night creche according to Jane Tanner.

If the night creche ran until 11.30pm, then technically he could have been putting his daughter into it, before nipping off for a beer or three.

Two problems with this.  Totman's movements are a poor fit with either coming from or going to the creche.  It can be done, but it is not a logical route.  And from memory, there was a second Totman child.  If correct, Mrs Totman should have been in tow.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 07, 2019, 12:04:26 PM
Shining in Luz, is the shorter route to the night creche past 5A, then left through the car park (opposite OC entrance) of Block 6?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 07, 2019, 12:09:36 PM
Totman - short route to night creche?

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on September 07, 2019, 12:16:01 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 07, 2019, 12:04:26 PM
Shining in Luz, is the shorter route to the night creche past 5A, then left through the car park (opposite OC entrance) of Block 6?

Yes, though that car park is not for block 6.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 07, 2019, 12:20:15 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 07, 2019, 09:10:00 AM
I saw a "material witness who knew exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it" being contradicted on camera and told she didn't see what she said she saw.

If it was Dr Totman Redwood found then it was Redwood who looked silly because 'Totman' wasn't coming from the direction of the night creche according to Jane Tanner.

But the mind can play tricks if you will.  JT observes a man carrying a child at a time she has no reason to think there's anything sinister about him.  She then learns of MM's disappearance and her mind races ahead 'OMG I saw a man walking away from block 5 with a child in his arms'.  I'm not saying this is what happened.  All I'm saying is that its a possibility.  People react differently upon receiving new info.  Had MM not disappeared those who produced efits would in all probability have never given those observed a second thought.  But upon learning of MM's disappearance everything takes on a new meaning.  We know all the efits, Tannerman and Smithman, none of whom look remotely similar, cannot all have been involved in MM's disappearance. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 07, 2019, 12:33:17 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 07, 2019, 12:09:36 PM
Totman - short route to night creche?

What does the yellow line represent?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 07, 2019, 01:01:55 PM
Yellow line is the short route from Tapas bar to night creche. I have added the red line to indicate what the short route would be given Totman’s position when Tanner saw him at the top of the road.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 07, 2019, 01:35:56 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 07, 2019, 01:01:55 PM
Yellow line is the short route from Tapas bar to night creche. I have added the red line to indicate what the short route would be given Totman’s position when Tanner saw him at the top of the road.
Was he going to the night creche or from it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 07, 2019, 01:38:47 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 06, 2019, 07:21:06 PM
But that's not the way she told it.
If she was untruthful about that, why should anything she said be believed ?

I know its not the way she told it but if she did what I'm suggesting she had no idea at the time her movements from tapas to 5D would be placed under the microscope.  With the benefit of hindsight T7 must realise the decision to leave the children without any sort of supervision while they wined and dined at tapas every night was a disaster.  Worse still at the very least the McCanns were leaving the apartment unsecured and in the case of JT/ROB leaving a child who was unwell and at some stage vomiting.  If on the Thu eve JT/ROB were exiting/entering 5D via the back/alley/unlocked patio door they might have thought a damage limitation exercise was called for and said they were exiting/entering via the locked front door overlooking the car park.

GM claims when he was talking to JW he was standing around the entrance to the alley but on the opposite side of the road.

JW claims when he was talking to GM it was outside the small gate to 5A.

JT claims when she observed GM and JW chatting they were outside the small gate to 5A.

If GM is correct I guess its possible GM and JW did not notice JT pass the other side of the road.

If JW/JT are correct I can't see how JT passed them and they did not notice. 

So taking all of the above into account imo I think the most likely scenario is that on the Thu eve (perhaps due to the situation with EOB) JT/ROB were exiting and entering 5D via the alley.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 07, 2019, 01:41:29 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 07, 2019, 01:01:55 PM
Yellow line is the short route from Tapas bar to night creche. I have added the red line to indicate what the short route would be given Totman’s position when Tanner saw him at the top of the road.

But is there any evidence that Dr T visited the tapas bar on 3rd May?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 07, 2019, 01:47:12 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 07, 2019, 01:41:29 PM
But is there any evidence that Dr T visited the tapas bar on 3rd May?

According to the brochure the creche is only available to guests whilst they make use of the Tapas or Millennium restaurants.  So unless Dr T tried to blag it or was one for flouting the rules he must have been at one of these eateries. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 07, 2019, 01:55:10 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 07, 2019, 01:47:12 PM
According to the brochure the creche is only available to guests whilst they make use of the Tapas or Millennium restaurants.  So unless Dr T tried to blag it or was one for flouting the rules he must have been at one of these eateries.
....'don't you know who I am?'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 07, 2019, 02:06:27 PM
Quote from: The General on September 07, 2019, 01:55:10 PM
....'don't you know who I am?'

How strange...I didn't have you down as tall, dark and handsome working in the caring profession  8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 07, 2019, 02:09:28 PM
Is someone able to upload a map of PDL highlighting Dr T's apartment, the night creche, Millennium and Tapas restaurants so we can consider the routes.  Thanks. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 07, 2019, 02:09:54 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 07, 2019, 02:06:27 PM
How strange...I didn't have you down as tall, dark and handsome working in the caring profession  8)--))
You're right. I'm not in the caring profession.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 07, 2019, 02:40:07 PM
Totman’s apartment.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 07, 2019, 02:42:56 PM
Totman

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 07, 2019, 02:45:54 PM
There were claims that this is Dr Julian Totman (?).

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 07, 2019, 02:50:18 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 07, 2019, 02:45:54 PM
There were claims that this is Dr Julian Totman (?).
That certainly could be Jules 'Long Hands' Totman, for sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 07, 2019, 10:54:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 07, 2019, 09:10:00 AM
I saw a "material witness who knew exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it" being contradicted on camera and told she didn't see what she said she saw.

If it was Dr Totman Redwood found then it was Redwood who looked silly because 'Totman' wasn't coming from the direction of the night creche according to Jane Tanner.

That situation might well have been resolved had the third known person present in the locale been able to participate in the documentary, but it is unimportant because they saw no-one.  But as pointed out on camera the putative positioning of Jes and Gerry was immaterial to what Jane saw as her vision of the important event was not obscured wherever Jes and Gerry had been standing.

Therefore the only witness to the unknown man carrying a child away from the direction of Block 5 was Jane Tanner who has remained resolute in describing exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it.

DCI Redwood never identified anyone nor did he mention any direction of travel unless you can provide a quote showing he did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 08, 2019, 08:40:43 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 07, 2019, 10:54:19 PM
That situation might well have been resolved had the third known person present in the locale been able to participate in the documentary, but it is unimportant because they saw no-one.  But as pointed out on camera the putative positioning of Jes and Gerry was immaterial to what Jane saw as her vision of the important event was not obscured wherever Jes and Gerry had been standing.

Therefore the only witness to the unknown man carrying a child away from the direction of Block 5 was Jane Tanner who has remained resolute in describing exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it.

DCI Redwood never identified anyone nor did he mention any direction of travel unless you can provide a quote showing he did.

The 'third person' may not have been there, but we know he agreed with Jane. What you and the person who said the position of the men was immaterial are misunderstanding is that when witnesses disagree one of them is wrong. Therefore one of them could be wrong about other things too.

I know Redwood never named anyone; was it you who mentioned the name? I said 'if'. I'm sure the Crimewatch programme said the child had been collected from the night cheche, so whoever it was they were heading towards the creche, not away from it.

For those who need to see a map here is one with certain areas marked. Block 4 (where Totman stayed) is labelled next to block 5, which is circled) and the night creche was above main reception. (4 & 5 are the Mini and Baby clubs which were also there in the daytime)


(https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P1/01_VOLUME_Ia_Page_49.jpg)





Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 08, 2019, 08:52:18 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 07, 2019, 10:54:19 PM
That situation might well have been resolved had the third known person present in the locale been able to participate in the documentary, but it is unimportant because they saw no-one.  But as pointed out on camera the putative positioning of Jes and Gerry was immaterial to what Jane saw as her vision of the important event was not obscured wherever Jes and Gerry had been standing.

Therefore the only witness to the unknown man carrying a child away from the direction of Block 5 was Jane Tanner who has remained resolute in describing exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it.

DCI Redwood never identified anyone nor did he mention any direction of travel unless you can provide a quote showing he did.

I've been on about Redwood not identifying any one by name for a long time,but what Redwood says is:

The work that we have done is to identify a british holiday maker who was returning to their apartment through the exactly same area Jane tanner saw which up till this point believed to have been Madeleine abductor.

Plain as day, identified tannerman.

https://youtu.be/1-4fp4kPi60

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 09:04:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2019, 08:40:43 AM
The 'third person' may not have been there, but we know he agreed with Jane. What you and the person who said the position of the men was immaterial are misunderstanding is that when witnesses disagree one of them is wrong. Therefore one of them could be wrong about other things too.

I know Redwood never named anyone; was it you who mentioned the name? I said 'if'. I'm sure the Crimewatch programme said the child had been collected from the night cheche, so whoever it was they were heading towards the creche, not away from it.

For those who need to see a map here is one with certain areas marked. Block 4 (where Totman stayed) is labelled next to block 5, which is circled) and the night creche was above main reception. (4 & 5 are the Mini and Baby clubs which were also there in the daytime)


(https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P1/01_VOLUME_Ia_Page_49.jpg)

What do you mean by "one of them is wrong".  The witnesses make their statements as they see what happened it is then down to the police to collate and evaluate the evidence from there.

Jane Tanner is the only witness who witnessed and reported as soon as she could that she had witnessed a man carrying a child from the direction of the location from which she later discovered a child had gone missing.

Why did the police not follow through on that one?

Missing child.  Unidentified man carrying a child from the location.  No yellow alert given the witness sighting but continuing the search for a lost or wandered child ... and briefing the press one might say immediately on a "badly told story" setting the scene for years and years of pain and distress.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 09:08:05 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 08, 2019, 08:52:18 AM
I've been on about Redwood not identifying any one by name for a long time,but what Redwood says is:

The work that we have done is to identify a british holiday maker who was returning to their apartment through the exactly same area Jane tanner saw which up till this point believed to have been Madeleine abductor.

Plain as day, identified tannerman.

https://youtu.be/1-4fp4kPi60

Funny how native English speakers can put very different interpretations on the English word, n'est-ce pas?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 08, 2019, 09:15:03 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 09:08:05 AM
Funny how native English speakers can put very different interpretations on the English word, n'est-ce pas?

Best take it up with Scotland yard they made the identification.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 08, 2019, 09:21:50 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 09:04:52 AM
What do you mean by "one of them is wrong".  The witnesses make their statements as they see what happened it is then down to the police to collate and evaluate the evidence from there.

Jane Tanner is the only witness who witnessed and reported as soon as she could that she had witnessed a man carrying a child from the direction of the location from which she later discovered a child had gone missing.

Why did the police not follow through on that one?

Missing child.  Unidentified man carrying a child from the location.  No yellow alert given the witness sighting but continuing the search for a lost or wandered child ... and briefing the press one might say immediately on a "badly told story" setting the scene for years and years of pain and distress.

If people disagree about which side of the road an incident took place one of them is definitely wrong because one of them didn't report what actually happened. I don't know who was wrong or why, I just know that one of them was.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 08, 2019, 01:14:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2019, 08:40:43 AM
The 'third person' may not have been there, but we know he agreed with Jane. What you and the person who said the position of the men was immaterial are misunderstanding is that when witnesses disagree one of them is wrong. Therefore one of them could be wrong about other things too.

I know Redwood never named anyone; was it you who mentioned the name? I said 'if'. I'm sure the Crimewatch programme said the child had been collected from the night cheche, so whoever it was they were heading towards the creche, not away from it.

For those who need to see a map here is one with certain areas marked. Block 4 (where Totman stayed) is labelled next to block 5, which is circled) and the night creche was above main reception. (4 & 5 are the Mini and Baby clubs which were also there in the daytime)


(https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P1/01_VOLUME_Ia_Page_49.jpg)


"The 'third person' may not have been there, but we know he agreed with Jane. What you and the person who said the position of the men was immaterial are misunderstanding is that when witnesses disagree one of them is wrong. Therefore one of them could be wrong about other things too."

And we do know Gerry did give different versions of incidents. As an example. Bed time: Kate  last sight left  Maddie all snuggled up in bed as it was a cold night.
 Gerry last sight he saw Maddie on top of the covers as  he left her at bedtime as it was a warm night.


Front door / Back door ... watch / no watch?????
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 02:05:47 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 08, 2019, 09:15:03 AM
Best take it up with Scotland yard they made the identification.
Indeed they did.
The problem seems to be they didn't appear to tell the whole story by passing it on and you seem to have missed the gist of what was said.

Gunit failed to provide me with a cite for what you have said in your post; can you do any better?  When did Scotland Yard put the name of the individual to whom you refer into the public domain?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 08, 2019, 02:07:52 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 02:05:47 PM
Indeed they did.
The problem seems to be they didn't appear to tell the whole story by passing it on and you seem to have missed the gist of what was said.

Gunit failed to provide me with a cite for what you have said in your post; can you do any better?  When did Scotland Yard put the name of the individual to whom you refer into the public domain?


I've never claimed they have,I've always said they have identified who it was,ongoing investigation why would you expect them to name him.What we do know is he never saw anything suspicious that is why OG moved onto Smithman,always back to him,he's the key imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 02:17:14 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 08, 2019, 02:07:52 PM

I've never claimed they have,I've always said they have identified who it was,ongoing investigation why would you expect them to name him.What we do know is he never saw anything suspicious that is why OG moved onto Smithman,always back to him,he's the key imo.

Please refer to your speculations as just your opinion.  Unless SY have opened a direct line only to you of exactly what they are doing and why they are doing it, which I really don't think they have
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 08, 2019, 03:01:13 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 02:17:14 PM
Please refer to your speculations as just your opinion.  Unless SY have opened a direct line only to you of exactly what they are doing and why they are doing it, which I really don't think they have
Please refer to your speculations as just your opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 08, 2019, 04:33:40 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 08, 2019, 02:07:52 PM

I've never claimed they have,I've always said they have identified who it was,ongoing investigation why would you expect them to name him.What we do know is he never saw anything suspicious that is why OG moved onto Smithman,always back to him,he's the key imo.

Quote from: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 02:17:14 PM
Please refer to your speculations as just your opinion.  Unless SY have opened a direct line only to you of exactly what they are doing and why they are doing it, which I really don't think they have

Could have swore imo means just that.

Still its not speculation Redwood said it himself.

Quote
The work that we have done is to identify a british holiday maker who was returning to their apartment through the exactly same area Jane tanner saw which up till this point believed to have been Madeleine abductor.

Adding :
Quote
And its that second sighting with a child in his arms that we are now really keen to try and indentify.

So unless its known of another sighting then what I have posted using Mr Andy Redwood as my source then its far from speculation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-4fp4kPi60&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 05:10:32 PM
Quote from: The General on September 08, 2019, 03:01:13 PM
Please refer to your speculations as just your opinion.

What speculation would that be? Certainly not regarding anything I have posted regarding Jane Tanner or what she witnessed unless you are calling Jane's testimony into question?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 05:14:23 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 08, 2019, 04:33:40 PM
Could have swore imo means just that.

Still its not speculation Redwood said it himself.

Adding :
So unless its known of another sighting then what I have posted using Mr Andy Redwood as my source then its far from speculation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-4fp4kPi60&feature=youtu.be

I think you are totally misunderstanding the information DCI Redwood imparted in his public statement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 08, 2019, 05:17:26 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 05:10:32 PM
What speculation would that be? Certainly not regarding anything I have posted regarding Jane Tanner or what she witnessed unless you are calling Jane's testimony into question?
Unless SY have opened a direct line only to you of exactly what they are doing and why they are doing it, which I really don't think they have

This.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 08, 2019, 05:18:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 05:14:23 PM
I think you are totally misunderstanding the information DCI Redwood imparted in his public statement.
Why don't you enlighten us with your obviously superior grasp of Redwood's statement?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 05:31:42 PM
Quote from: The General on September 08, 2019, 05:18:46 PM
Why don't you enlighten us with your obviously superior grasp of Redwood's statement?

I generally find WindUpMerchants tremendously tiresome.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 08, 2019, 07:59:25 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 05:14:23 PM
I think you are totally misunderstanding the information DCI Redwood imparted in his public statement.

What is your understanding of the information he was imparting?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 08:08:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2019, 07:59:25 PM
What is your understanding of the information he was imparting?
Certainly nothing approaching Barrier's interpretation. Do you have an opinion you may wish to share to get the discussion going?  On a share and share alike basis even.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 08, 2019, 08:28:01 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 08:08:14 PM
Certainly nothing approaching Barrier's interpretation. Do you have an opinion you may wish to share to get the discussion going?  On a share and share alike basis even.

No interpretation needed its in plain English,Redwoods team identified the person in the exactly the same area Jane Tanner saw which up to that point was believed to be Madeleine's abductor, they were almost certain that was not the case,he then went onto say the person seen walking toward the ocean with a child in his arms and they were really keen to try and identify.Nothing since then by anyone appealing for anything relating to the disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 08, 2019, 08:54:41 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 08:08:14 PM
Certainly nothing approaching Barrier's interpretation. Do you have an opinion you may wish to share to get the discussion going?  On a share and share alike basis even.

I know you don't agree with Barrier. I want to hear your interpretation please.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 08, 2019, 09:49:15 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2019, 08:54:41 PM
I know you don't agree with Barrier. I want to hear your interpretation please.

As Barrier said no interpretation is required at all. Very plain to me.  However, as per usual it will be leaning towards something in the McCanns favour- re invent to make sure it fits with the 'program' known as 'innocent parents'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 10:11:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2019, 08:54:41 PM
I know you don't agree with Barrier. I want to hear your interpretation please.

What gives you that impression?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on September 08, 2019, 11:59:13 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 05, 2019, 09:48:27 PM
One thing I did pick up on recently, I think it might have been the GA vid:'Truth of the lie' was that if JT did a left down the alley and entered her apartment via the little gate/steps/patio doors this might account for the fact that she observed 'Tannerman' and GM/JW but they didn't observe her.  So it begs the question were they all carrying out the checks via the unlocked patio doors as opposed to walking round the front?
Hi Holly,

Had you been to PdL, you would understand why the women in particular would not likely check by the back alleyway route.   

From memory, I am fairly confident that there was no lighting along the alleyway.  So it would be intimidating to leave a lit roadway to go into the darkness.  No moon remember at the times they were checking on May 3rd.  Going away from the apartments would be a little better because one would be going towards the light.

Not nice tho for it to be very dark behind you, either, as you walked back along the alleyway towards the restaurant.


I think this was the main reason that The Tapas group apart from The Mccanns, seemed to prefer the longer route





Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on September 09, 2019, 12:30:10 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 07, 2019, 01:38:47 PM
I know its not the way she told it but if she did what I'm suggesting she had no idea at the time her movements from tapas to 5D would be placed under the microscope.  With the benefit of hindsight T7 must realise the decision to leave the children without any sort of supervision while they wined and dined at tapas every night was a disaster.  Worse still at the very least the McCanns were leaving the apartment unsecured and in the case of JT/ROB leaving a child who was unwell and at some stage vomiting.  If on the Thu eve JT/ROB were exiting/entering 5D via the back/alley/unlocked patio door they might have thought a damage limitation exercise was called for and said they were exiting/entering via the locked front door overlooking the car park.

GM claims when he was talking to JW he was standing around the entrance to the alley but on the opposite side of the road.

JW claims when he was talking to GM it was outside the small gate to 5A.

JT claims when she observed GM and JW chatting they were outside the small gate to 5A.

If GM is correct I guess its possible GM and JW did not notice JT pass the other side of the road.

If JW/JT are correct I can't see how JT passed them and they did not notice. 

So taking all of the above into account imo I think the most likely scenario is that on the Thu eve (perhaps due to the situation with EOB) JT/ROB were exiting and entering 5D via the alley.

JW also drew a map where he showed their chatting spot.  He carefully placed it at the alleyway entrance.

JW also states that when he was at the little car park opposite Tapas Reception, he saw Gerry was coming down the steps at the little gate as he exited 5A.  If they walked towards each other, they would have met somewhere in the region that Gerry states.  I think they met in the middle of the road and moved back to the safety of a gap in parked cars when a vehicle wanted to come thru. 


They moved back to the pavement edge / road where Jane Tanner saw them, which co-incidentally is exactly the spot that JW drew on his map.


And a further co-incidence is that Amaral in one of his videos shows the same pavement at end of alleyway spot.


Three co-incidences = one to many ?



Most car headlamps give a monotone light.  The stret lights gave a sickly yellow colour light.  I actually think that vehicle, wanting to come thru', was the getaway vehicle and it was of a limited group that had the correct lighting to show colour.  A flash of these lights on Tannerman allowed Jane to see  the colour of the little carried girls Pjays.


This in my opinion but the various elements form a coherent whole.


Holly, I know that you are fairly recent to the forum and may not know this, but all this has been very thoroughly discussed in previous threads; you might benefit by reading them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 09, 2019, 06:08:30 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 10:11:58 PM
What gives you that impression?

So you don't have a different interpretation than Barrier's. Why not just say so?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 09, 2019, 06:24:07 AM
Quote from: sadie on September 09, 2019, 12:30:10 AM
JW also drew a map where he showed their chatting spot.  He carefully placed it at the alleyway entrance.

JW also states that when he was at the little car park opposite Tapas Reception, he saw Gerry was coming down the steps at the little gate as he exited 5A.  If they walked towards each other, they would have met somewhere in the region that Gerry states.  I think they met in the middle of the road and moved back to the safety of a gap in parked cars when a vehicle wanted to come thru. 


They moved back to the pavement edge / road where Jane Tanner saw them, which co-incidentally is exactly the spot that JW drew on his map.


And a further co-incidence is that Amaral in one of his videos shows the same pavement at end of alleyway spot.


Three co-incidences = one to many ?



Most car headlamps give a monotone light.  The stret lights gave a sickly yellow colour light.  I actually think that vehicle, wanting to come thru', was the getaway vehicle and it was of a limited group that had the correct lighting to show colour.  A flash of these lights on Tannerman allowed Jane to see  the colour of the little carried girls Pjays.


This in my opinion but the various elements form a coherent whole.


Holly, I know that you are fairly recent to the forum and may not know this, but all this has been very thoroughly discussed in previous threads; you might benefit by reading them.

At no point imo does JW say he saw Gerry McCann coming down any steps or exiting any gate, unless you can provide a cite.

None of the witnesses mention encountering a moving vehicle.

All this has been pointed out before.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on September 09, 2019, 09:14:44 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 08, 2019, 02:17:14 PM
Please refer to your speculations as just your opinion.  Unless SY have opened a direct line only to you of exactly what they are doing and why they are doing it, which I really don't think they have

SY said they had identified. Not opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 09, 2019, 09:19:15 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on September 09, 2019, 09:14:44 AM
SY said they had identified. Not opinion.

As I remember they weren't 100% sure.... So it's not fact... It's opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 09, 2019, 09:20:52 AM
Quote from: Davel on September 09, 2019, 09:19:15 AM
As I remember they weren't 100% sure.... So it's not fact... It's opinion
Considered opinion, a finding, a decision.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on September 09, 2019, 09:21:51 AM
Quote from: Davel on September 09, 2019, 09:19:15 AM
As I remember they weren't 100% sure.... So it's not fact... It's opinion

Enough to stop looking for tannerman.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 09, 2019, 09:24:37 AM
Quote from: slartibartfast on September 09, 2019, 09:21:51 AM
Enough to stop looking for tannerman.

Still opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 09, 2019, 09:25:06 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 09, 2019, 09:20:52 AM
Considered opinion, a finding, a decision.

Still opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 09, 2019, 09:42:37 AM
Quote from: Davel on September 09, 2019, 09:25:06 AM
Still opinion
Yeah OK.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 10:27:46 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 07, 2019, 10:54:19 PM
That situation might well have been resolved had the third known person present in the locale been able to participate in the documentary, but it is unimportant because they saw no-one.  But as pointed out on camera the putative positioning of Jes and Gerry was immaterial to what Jane saw as her vision of the important event was not obscured wherever Jes and Gerry had been standing.

Therefore the only witness to the unknown man carrying a child away from the direction of Block 5 was Jane Tanner who has remained resolute in describing exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it.

DCI Redwood never identified anyone nor did he mention any direction of travel unless you can provide a quote showing he did.

But BO makes clear in her wit stat that it wasn't unusual to observe adults walking around with children in arms at night due to the fact a night creche operated.

Why would DCI Redwood, or any other police officer, identify Dr T?  Surely to do so would be unprofessional hence DCI R refers to a British holidaymaker.  We have no idea exactly what communication has taken place between DCI R and the British holidaymaker.  If 'Tannerman' has been ruled out by the MET I wouldn't mind betting it was not only based on the location and time but also the physical descriptions and clothes matching 'Tannerman' and child.  Now what would be the chances of MM's abductor also being in the same location at the same time, matching the same physical descriptions and clothes worn.  Plus the s&r dogs did not track MM in that location. 

Imo this whole 'Tannerman' sighting needs consigning to the bin. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 09, 2019, 11:05:24 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 10:27:46 AM
But BO makes clear in her wit stat that it wasn't unusual to observe adults walking around with children in arms at night due to the fact a night creche operated.

Why would DCI Redwood, or any other police officer, identify Dr T?  Surely to do so would be unprofessional hence DCI R refers to a British holidaymaker.  We have no idea exactly what communication has taken place between DCI R and the British holidaymaker.  If 'Tannerman' has been ruled out by the MET I wouldn't mind betting it was not only based on the location and time but also the physical descriptions and clothes matching 'Tannerman' and child.  Now what would be the chances of MM's abductor also being in the same location at the same time, matching the same physical descriptions and clothes worn.  Plus the s&r dogs did not track MM in that location. 

Imo this whole 'Tannerman' sighting needs consigning to the bin.


"Imo this whole 'Tannerman' sighting needs consigning to the bin."


It has by SY.  they obviously checked this out, identified  someone who maybe came forward. And this changed the timeine again for the T9.

Although I am still of the opinion that the time of MBM's disappearance could have been just after parents left at appx 8.30- 10 pm. huge window and MBM would have been long gone if she got lost/run over by a car/fell down  and picked up by someone.   This is not a theory, just a reminder that a longer time was possible, why stick to minutes for an abduction to take place inbetween many checks that eve (coincedence;the most checks were that eve including two physical checks claimed.) and the circumstances in which Kate found MBM missing. (moving doors)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on September 09, 2019, 11:19:23 AM
Quote from: sadie on September 09, 2019, 12:30:10 AM
JW also drew a map where he showed their chatting spot.  He carefully placed it at the alleyway entrance.

JW also states that when he was at the little car park opposite Tapas Reception, he saw Gerry was coming down the steps at the little gate as he exited 5A.  If they walked towards each other, they would have met somewhere in the region that Gerry states.  I think they met in the middle of the road and moved back to the safety of a gap in parked cars when a vehicle wanted to come thru. 


They moved back to the pavement edge / road where Jane Tanner saw them, which co-incidentally is exactly the spot that JW drew on his map.


That is not strictly correct Sadie.  Jeremy Wilkins first noticed Gerry McCann walking along the footpath on the other side of the road to where he was.  He assumed that GM had emerged from 5a via the front gate.  Wilkins added that he crossed the road to intercept him, thereafter both stood chatting by the side of the road with Gerry still on the footpath while he remained on the road with the pram.  This is also how Jane Tanner explained the event. Gerry McCann however insists that it was he who crossed the road to chat to Jeremy Wilkins, clearly he remembers the event incorrectly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 09, 2019, 11:28:54 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 10:27:46 AM
But BO makes clear in her wit stat that it wasn't unusual to observe adults walking around with children in arms at night due to the fact a night creche operated.

Why would DCI Redwood, or any other police officer, identify Dr T?  Surely to do so would be unprofessional hence DCI R refers to a British holidaymaker.  We have no idea exactly what communication has taken place between DCI R and the British holidaymaker.  If 'Tannerman' has been ruled out by the MET I wouldn't mind betting it was not only based on the location and time but also the physical descriptions and clothes matching 'Tannerman' and child.  Now what would be the chances of MM's abductor also being in the same location at the same time, matching the same physical descriptions and clothes worn.  Plus the s&r dogs did not track MM in that location. 

Imo this whole 'Tannerman' sighting needs consigning to the bin.

You many years after the event and  at the time the Judicial Police led by Amaral.  In the meantime Madeleine remains missing.  Wonder if that is partly as a result of consigning witness evidence 'to the bin' before it was properly investigated?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 11:38:30 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 09, 2019, 11:28:54 AM
You many years after the event and  at the time the Judicial Police led by Amaral.  In the meantime Madeleine remains missing.  Wonder if that is partly as a result of consigning witness evidence 'to the bin' before it was properly investigated?

I'm sorry I don't understand the first sentence? 

But we can see the British police are also guilty for not investigating witness evidence thoroughly.  Dr T and Mrs T claim they contacted British police in the early days but it then took years to connect this with 'Tannerman' and when it was connected it was done through the creche records. 

As I've said previously if my theory/suspect(s) are correct it will reflect very badly on British police. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 11:41:39 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on September 09, 2019, 11:05:24 AM

"Imo this whole 'Tannerman' sighting needs consigning to the bin."


It has by SY.  they obviously checked this out, identified  someone who maybe came forward. And this changed the timeine again for the T9.

Although I am still of the opinion that the time of MBM's disappearance could have been just after parents left at appx 8.30- 10 pm. huge window and MBM would have been long gone if she got lost/run over by a car/fell down  and picked up by someone.   This is not a theory, just a reminder that a longer time was possible, why stick to minutes for an abduction to take place inbetween many checks that eve (coincedence;the most checks were that eve including two physical checks claimed.) and the circumstances in which Kate found MBM missing. (moving doors)

Well if the British holidaymaker DCI Redwood refers to is Dr T then according to The Sun Dr T and Mrs T apparently came forward in the early days and said they thought 'Tannerman' and Dr T might be one and the same:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6225547/madeleine-mccann-gp-sighting-waste/

With regard to why he might have been walking in the opposite direction to the one expected this might be down to JT suffering confirmation bias, just wrong with her recollections or maybe Dr T had some reason for walking in that direction. 

I agree imo MM disappearing from 5A could have happened at any time from approx 8.30 pm - 10 pm.  I'm not convinced about GM's claims of a physical check on the children at circa 9pm and I'm not convinced JT/ROB and MO were checking at the front.  This potentially means the abductor could have crept in the side gate at any time after the McCanns left and he/she had free reign at the front.  I guess the only exception to this is whether or not the Paynes and DW left via the front or back?   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 09, 2019, 11:46:51 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 11:38:30 AM
I'm sorry I don't understand the first sentence? 

But we can see the British police are also guilty for not investigating witness evidence thoroughly.  Dr T and Mrs T claim they contacted British police in the early days but it then took years to connect this with 'Tannerman' and when it was connected it was done through the creche records. 

As I've said previously if my theory/suspect(s) are correct it will reflect very badly on British police.

Cite please for "Dr T and Mrs T claim they contacted British police in the early days"  The information as I understand it is ...

"Dr Totman matches the physical description of the man and also wore the same clothes.

He was quizzed by the Guarda Nacional Republicana soon after Madeleine, three, vanished.

His wife Rachel told The Sun: "My husband had told the local police it could be him but we didn’t hear anything for years."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-detectives-spent-four-12495545
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 09, 2019, 11:49:08 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 11:38:30 AM
I'm sorry I don't understand the first sentence? 

But we can see the British police are also guilty for not investigating witness evidence thoroughly.  Dr T and Mrs T claim they contacted British police in the early days but it then took years to connect this with 'Tannerman' and when it was connected it was done through the creche records. 

As I've said previously if my theory/suspect(s) are correct it will reflect very badly on British police.

That's OK as I don't understand yours either.  To me BO refers to body odour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 12:01:48 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 09, 2019, 11:46:51 AM
Cite please for "Dr T and Mrs T claim they contacted British police in the early days"  The information as I understand it is ...

"Dr Totman matches the physical description of the man and also wore the same clothes.

He was quizzed by the Guarda Nacional Republicana soon after Madeleine, three, vanished.

His wife Rachel told The Sun: "My husband had told the local police it could be him but we didn’t hear anything for years."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-detectives-spent-four-12495545

I posted a cite above.

I'm not aware of GNR quizzing any holidaymakers other than T9?  Most departed on Sat 5th.  When did Dr T depart?

Does local police mean local in Portugal or local when arriving home in England?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 09, 2019, 12:30:28 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 12:01:48 PM
I posted a cite above.

I'm not aware of GNR quizzing any holidaymakers other than T9?  Most departed on Sat 5th.  When did Dr T depart?

Does local police mean local in Portugal or local when arriving home in England?

As far as I can ascertain, the Totman's were booked to stay until 12th May. During that time the PJ set up an office in Block 6 where people could go with information. The GNR were aware of it and would have directed people there if they were approached. In addition the McCann's were moved into block 4 where the Totmans were staying, so they could have approached them or their friends and relatives. If all else failed they could have raised their problem with the MW management, rung the British Consulate or even told the British reporters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 12:53:46 PM
Quote from: sadie on September 08, 2019, 11:59:13 PM
Hi Holly,

Had you been to PdL, you would understand why the women in particular would not likely check by the back alleyway route.   

From memory, I am fairly confident that there was no lighting along the alleyway.  So it would be intimidating to leave a lit roadway to go into the darkness.  No moon remember at the times they were checking on May 3rd.  Going away from the apartments would be a little better because one would be going towards the light.

Not nice tho for it to be very dark behind you, either, as you walked back along the alleyway towards the restaurant.


I think this was the main reason that The Tapas group apart from The Mccanns, seemed to prefer the longer route

But they all said they felt safe hence they left the children alone every night unsupervised and in the case of the McCanns left the patio door unlocked so I'm not sure they would fear walking a few steps along the alley?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 09, 2019, 12:56:16 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 09, 2019, 11:49:08 AM
That's OK as I don't understand yours either.  To me BO refers to body odour.
It is one of those unfortunate initials but BO I figured was Bridget O'Donnell.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 09, 2019, 01:02:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 09, 2019, 12:30:28 PM
As far as I can ascertain, the Totman's were booked to stay until 12th May. During that time the PJ set up an office in Block 6 where people could go with information. The GNR were aware of it and would have directed people there if they were approached. In addition the McCann's were moved into block 4 where the Totmans were staying, so they could have approached them or their friends and relatives. If all else failed they could have raised their problem with the MW management, rung the British Consulate or even told the British reporters.

"If all else failed they could have raised their problem with the MW management, rung the British Consulate or even told the British reporters.

However, that would have had an adverse affect on their  theory about Jane seeing the abductor fleeing with Maddie.

The PJ would have done nothing if Dr T  did say it was him- what would they do, apart from dismiss the abductor theory which they did!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 01:12:02 PM
Quote from: sadie on September 09, 2019, 12:30:10 AM
JW also drew a map where he showed their chatting spot.  He carefully placed it at the alleyway entrance.

JW also states that when he was at the little car park opposite Tapas Reception, he saw Gerry was coming down the steps at the little gate as he exited 5A.  If they walked towards each other, they would have met somewhere in the region that Gerry states.  I think they met in the middle of the road and moved back to the safety of a gap in parked cars when a vehicle wanted to come thru. 


They moved back to the pavement edge / road where Jane Tanner saw them, which co-incidentally is exactly the spot that JW drew on his map.


And a further co-incidence is that Amaral in one of his videos shows the same pavement at end of alleyway spot.


Three co-incidences = one to many ?



Most car headlamps give a monotone light.  The stret lights gave a sickly yellow colour light.  I actually think that vehicle, wanting to come thru', was the getaway vehicle and it was of a limited group that had the correct lighting to show colour.  A flash of these lights on Tannerman allowed Jane to see  the colour of the little carried girls Pjays.


This in my opinion but the various elements form a coherent whole.


Holly, I know that you are fairly recent to the forum and may not know this, but all this has been very thoroughly discussed in previous threads; you might benefit by reading them.

JW produced a map and marked an X on it where he thought he chatted to GM.  The X is placed at the gate leading up to 5A not outside the alley.  This also aligns with his verbal description where he describes leaving the loos at tapas and walking along the footpath the same side. 

I was pushing the pram around the complex and went to the toilet near the bar. I could not see inside the restaurant. As I got the baby to sleep, I was on my way back to the apartment. I came out at the top road.

I met him near the stairs of a ground floor. There was a gate leading up to some stairs. I was pretty certain that he had left the apartment. We spoke for a few minutes. He said you're on walking duty. I said I was staying in and pros and cons and what to do with the children.

I have read many of the historic threads/posts and I'm sure it has all been said before but sometimes someone new can offer a different perspective/view so you could also potentially learn something new.  Its why the police cold review cases ie a fresh pair of eyes! 

I spent years on the Bamber case and when someone new came along I welcomed the opportunity to review the case and hear from someone new.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 09, 2019, 01:48:36 PM
It's even clearer here, he wasn't near the pathway at all;

He crossed the road and engaged in general conversation with Gerry. At this time they were stood with Gerry's back to the building near to the gate and Jeremy facing him. Rua Dr Agostino was about 10-15 meters to his right and the pathway leading to the front of the apartment blocks about 5 meters to his left.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY_BRIGET.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 02:07:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 09, 2019, 01:48:36 PM
It's even clearer here, he wasn't near the pathway at all;

He crossed the road and engaged in general conversation with Gerry. At this time they were stood with Gerry's back to the building near to the gate and Jeremy facing him. Rua Dr Agostino was about 10-15 meters to his right and the pathway leading to the front of the apartment blocks about 5 meters to his left.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY_BRIGET.htm

I don't think JW can be any clearer from his verbal descriptions and his map that as far as he's concerned he and GM chatted literally outside the gate to 5A?  This aligns with JT's description but does beg the question if she was entering 5D on that occasion via the front how did she manage to pass them and yet they didn't see her?  If she entered 5D on that occasion via the back/pathway/patio door it then becomes explainable and imo this is what happened at least on this occasion perhaps due to the situation with EOB and the fact ROB or JT intended spending most of the evening in 5D.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 09, 2019, 02:21:53 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 02:07:46 PM
I don't think JW can be any clearer from his verbal descriptions and his map that as far as he's concerned he and GM chatted literally outside the gate to 5A?  This aligns with JT's description but does beg the question if she was entering 5D on that occasion via the front how did she manage to pass them and yet they didn't see her? If she entered 5D on that occasion via the back/pathway/patio door it then becomes explainable and imo this is what happened at least on this occasion perhaps due to the situation with EOB and the fact ROB or JT intended spending most of the evening in 5D.

If this were true, then how good a look could she have got of Tannerman, who must have been more than 15 yards away ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 09, 2019, 02:32:57 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 02:07:46 PM
I don't think JW can be any clearer from his verbal descriptions and his map that as far as he's concerned he and GM chatted literally outside the gate to 5A?  This aligns with JT's description but does beg the question if she was entering 5D on that occasion via the front how did she manage to pass them and yet they didn't see her?  If she entered 5D on that occasion via the back/pathway/patio door it then becomes explainable and imo this is what happened at least on this occasion perhaps due to the situation with EOB and the fact ROB or JT intended spending most of the evening in 5D.

There have been many different suggestions as to why Jane wasn't seen. Whatever the reason was, it casts doubt on everything else she said. For a start if she went up the passageway that means she was 34 meters away from the top of the road. If that was my road it would be impossible to see what she says she could see from that distance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 09, 2019, 02:35:48 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 09, 2019, 02:21:53 PM
If this were true, then how good a look could she have got of Tannerman, who must have been more than 15 yards away ?

It was nearer 35 yards/108 feet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 02:38:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 09, 2019, 02:32:57 PM
There have been many different suggestions as to why Jane wasn't seen. Whatever the reason was, it casts doubt on everything else she said. For a start if she went up the passageway that means she was 34 meters away from the top of the road. If that was my road it would be impossible to see what she says she could see from that distance.

Yes it would reduce her visibility due to the further distance but there is a lamppost on the corner of Rua Dr Agostinho da Silva and Rua Dr Francisco Gentil Martins on the side she claims Dr T was walking towards. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 09, 2019, 02:40:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 09, 2019, 02:35:48 PM
It was nearer 35 yards/108 feet.

Thanks. Not having been there with my laser measuring system, I was erring on the cautious side  ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 02:40:29 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 09, 2019, 02:21:53 PM
If this were true, then how good a look could she have got of Tannerman, who must have been more than 15 yards away ?

See post 6096.  If he was walking in the direction she claims he would have been walking towards a lamppost.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 02:44:25 PM
It takes a few seconds to load:

https://earth.google.com/web/@37.08885583,-8.73084775,36.48631772a,53.86192483d,35y,0h,0t,0r
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 02:53:35 PM
Hopefully we can all agree its a lamppost and not a tall stick man.  It certainly seems to have a smell of dog urine around the base  8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 09, 2019, 04:28:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 09, 2019, 02:32:57 PM
There have been many different suggestions as to why Jane wasn't seen. Whatever the reason was, it casts doubt on everything else she said. For a start if she went up the passageway that means she was 34 meters away from the top of the road. If that was my road it would be impossible to see what she says she could see from that distance.

I am thinking the PJ thought the very same thing.  Amazingly Kate n Gerry on Oprah claimed JT saw the abductor by identifying pyjamas [held up to the audience]. all made up rubbish she could not have seen that detail in that light from that distance.

The irony- while she left her own sick child alone, but highlights the child being carried with out shoes on as if the 'parent' was bad.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on September 09, 2019, 05:16:04 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 02:44:25 PM
It takes a few seconds to load:

https://earth.google.com/web/@37.08885583,-8.73084775,36.48631772a,53.86192483d,35y,0h,0t,0r (https://earth.google.com/web/@37.08885583,-8.73084775,36.48631772a,53.86192483d,35y,0h,0t,0r)
A few seconds?!!!... won't load at all for me. This is quicker...

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.0884768,-8.7306285,3a,35.1y,340.41h,89.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sR8A4wgWD5Xj00rwx3frV3A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.0884768,-8.7306285,3a,35.1y,340.41h,89.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sR8A4wgWD5Xj00rwx3frV3A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

The direction was discussed aeons ago when the McCannics first invaded.  Yes, Dr. T (then unknown) was walking towards the creche not away from it, which flummoxed posters at the time...

2013: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-anyone-saying-were-2965383 (https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-anyone-saying-were-2965383)

2018: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6225547/madeleine-mccann-gp-sighting-waste/ (https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6225547/madeleine-mccann-gp-sighting-waste/)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 05:57:09 PM
Quote from: Myster on September 09, 2019, 05:16:04 PM
A few seconds?!!!... won't load at all for me. This is quicker...

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.0884768,-8.7306285,3a,35.1y,340.41h,89.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sR8A4wgWD5Xj00rwx3frV3A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.0884768,-8.7306285,3a,35.1y,340.41h,89.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sR8A4wgWD5Xj00rwx3frV3A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

The direction was discussed aeons ago when the McCannics first invaded.  Yes, Dr. T (then unknown) was walking towards the creche not away from it, which flummoxed posters at the time...

2013: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-anyone-saying-were-2965383 (https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-anyone-saying-were-2965383)

2018: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6225547/madeleine-mccann-gp-sighting-waste/ (https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6225547/madeleine-mccann-gp-sighting-waste/)

Hi Mr Myster  8**8:/:  Thanks.  The GE map I uploaded doesn't make clear the lamppost opposite 5A but its clear on your upload.  This case is an absolute walk in the park compared with JB/WHF but the McCannics keep insisting I know nothing, pointing out I'm a newbie and should still be wearing L-plates  8)><(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 09, 2019, 06:18:48 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 05:57:09 PM
Hi Mr Myster  8**8:/:  Thanks. The GE map I uploaded doesn't make clear the lamppost opposite 5A but its clear on your upload.  This case is an absolute walk in the park compared with JB/WHF but the McCannics keep insisting I know nothing, pointing out I'm a newbie and should still be wearing L-plates  8)><(

I'm glad you said that, for I couldn't see where the lam post in question was when I downloaded your link, but didn't wish to appear awkward by saying  so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 06:23:33 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 09, 2019, 02:21:53 PM
If this were true, then how good a look could she have got of Tannerman, who must have been more than 15 yards away ?

Well if you consider there was a lamppost opposite 5A and another at the top of the t-junction which Dr T was walking towards it was reasonably well lit.  Her description given on 4th May was not particularly detailed:

( * ) Dark skinned individual, male sex, aged between 35-40, slim physical appearance, about 1.70m tall. Very dark, thick hair, longer at the back (she could only see him from behind). He was wearing linen type cloth trousers, beige to golden in colour, a "duffy" sic type jacket (but not that thick). His shoes were dark in colour, classic type. He had a hurried walk. He was carrying a child, who was lying on both his arms, in front of his chest. By the way he was dressed, he gave her the impression that he was not a tourist, because he was very "warmly dressed".

(**) About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 06:29:02 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 09, 2019, 06:18:48 PM
I'm glad you said that, for I couldn't see where the lam post in question was when I downloaded your link, but didn't wish to appear awkward by saying  so.

On the map I downloaded I can see the lamppost on the t-junction which according to JT Dr T was walking towards but I couldn't see the lamppost opposite 5A depicted on Myster's map. 

You don't appear to me to be the awkward type jassi.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 09, 2019, 07:00:36 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on September 09, 2019, 06:29:02 PM
On the map I downloaded I can see the lamppost on the t-junction which according to JT Dr T was walking towards but I couldn't see the lamppost opposite 5A depicted on Myster's map. 

You don't appear to me to be the awkward type jassi.

You can see it on this photo.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/fl/4926901275_7deb6e7074_z.jpg
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on September 11, 2019, 09:18:56 AM
Quote from: misty on September 09, 2019, 07:00:36 PM
You can see it on this photo.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/fl/4926901275_7deb6e7074_z.jpg

Thanks Misty.  I see there's a white vehicle on your image as there is on the GE download:

https://earth.google.com/web/@37.08885583,-8.73084775,36.48631772a,53.86192483d,35y,0h,0t,0r

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 17, 2019, 08:09:24 AM
Wow!

Woman who was lost by her family aged four when her father fell asleep on a train in Belarus is reunited with her parents TWENTY YEARS later after new boyfriend Googled 'train girl'
We're sorry, this video cannot be played from your current location.

Video provided by Nine News
A woman whose father lost her on a train as a four-year-old has been reunited with her parents two decades later.

Yulia Gorina, 24, was raised by adoptive parents after she mysteriously managed to cross from Belarus into Russia, and her real family could not be traced.

Twenty years later she found her parents after her new boyfriend Ilya Kryukov, 31, did a simple internet search.

Heartwarming pictures show Yulia after she was reunited with her mother and the father who lost her when he dozed off to sleep on a 60-mile train journey from Minsk to Asipovichy.

 a group of people posing for the camera: Yulia pictured with father Viktor, mother Lyudmila, and boyfriend Ilya Kryukov © Provided by Associated Newspapers Limited Yulia pictured with father Viktor, mother Lyudmila, and…
A DNA test has now proved that she is the daughter of Viktor and Lyudmila Moiseenko - and her father has 'begged her forgiveness' for losing her.

Her parents now in their late 50s searched frantically for their lost child at the time, as did local police, but ended up under suspicion of killing the girl.

As recently as 2017 when police reopened the case, they underwent lie detector tests which they both passed.

It remains unclear how Yulia got from Asipovichy to Ryazan, except she has a memory of a train journey.

A couple - who possibly kidnapped the lost girl - was believed to have been involved. 'I do believe it's all true now,' said Yulia after finding and hugging her real parents.

'It was proved by a DNA test, but it was clear even before, we are so much alike, as soon as we saw the photographs of each other.

'Nobody had any doubts – we are one family.

 a couple of people posing for the camera: Her parents now in their late 50s searched frantically for their lost child at the time, as did local police, but ended up under suspicion of killing the girl. Yulia pictured with boyfriend Ilya Kryukov, 31 © Provided by Associated Newspapers Limited Her parents now in their late 50s searched frantically for their lost child at the time, as did local police, but ended up under suspicion of killing the girl. Yulia… 'I found not only my mother and father in Belarus, but also brother Dmitry and elder sister Nadezhda (Nadya).'

Yulia still lives in Ryazan where she was found on a railway siding in 1999. It is some 550 miles from Asipovichy where she was lost.

Her real mother Lyudmila said: 'Twenty years is like a whole life, but we never lost hope, we believed – and so we found each other.'

The reunion was in a police station in Marjina Horka settlement. 'We were all in tears,' said Yulia.

'We could not even talk, we only cried and hugged each other.

'My parents have told me that they were searching for me for a long time, that they believed they would find me one day.

'My mother could not stop hugging me, she made me sit on her lap as if I was a little girl.

'We were chatting till 3 am, and then Ilya and I had to go back to Russia – my daughter was waiting for me.'

Before leaving she walked with her father around the station where the train ended its journey in 1999.

'Father begged me to forgive him for what happened,' she said.

'Of course I do.

'We were at the station where I went missing, we all walked around it, in floods of tears.'

 a close up of text on a white background: Yulia's identity. Yulia says now: 'I was always searching for my family, checking internet, trying to browse…but I found nothing' © Provided by Associated Newspapers Limited Yulia's identity. Yulia says now: 'I was always searching for… There were three weeks between Yulia being lost and her discovery by a policeman in Ryazan on 21 October 1999.

She recalled as a child how she was travelling with a man and woman who were hiding from police.

'We slept in some abandoned houses,' she said.

'I do not remember all this now.

'I was told I did speak with a Belarus accent, using local words for vegetables like potatoes and onions but I do not know why Russian policemen did not pay any attention to it when they were searching for my family.'

The police sent her to an orphanage and after a fruitless search in Russia for her family, she was given up for adoption by March the following year to Irina and Oleg who had two sons and wanted a daughter.

Yulia says now: 'I was always searching for my family, checking internet, trying to browse…but I found nothing.'

She told Ilya about her story - and miraculously he found details of a girl lost in Belarus shortly before Yulia was found in Russia.

'I began to read and realised that so many facts were the same, so my tears were running,' she said.

'When I was found, they put 1 October as my birthday in the documents – it was the day when I was lost.'

 a close up of a womans face with her hand to her face: Yulia pictured with daughter Kristina. There were three weeks between Yulia being lost and her discovery by a policeman in Ryazan on 21 October 1999 © Provided by Associated Newspapers Limited Yulia pictured with daughter Kristina. There were three…
After several false starts they made contact via police in Pukhovichesky.

She tried to contact her father on social media - but he didn't reply. She didn't know this was because he didn't know how to text.

'Why didn't I call them? I knew that by then police told them about me but I was still so deeply worried about the first chat. For me and for them it was nerve-wracking.

 a woman standing in front of a tree: Nothing is known about the couple who presumably took her to Russia rather than report her to local police © Provided by Associated Newspapers Limited Nothing is known about the couple who presumably took… 'So I messaged Dad and sat down waiting for his reply. Minutes turned to hours but he stayed quiet.

'I was dying from worry that he wasn't replying, but later I learned that he simply didn't know how to text.'

Then a woman called saying: 'Hello, my name is Nadya.

'I am your big sister and I am so happy that we found you.'

Yulia said: 'Then she passed the phone to Mum, who burst into tears straight away.

'She asked me to say the biggest possible thank you to my foster parents for taking care of me during all these years.

'We are now constantly in touch with my big sister, we are messaging each other and sending pictures.'

 a group of people posing for the camera: Yulia (centre) with her mother Lyudmila (right) and another female relative (left) © Provided by Associated Newspapers Limited Yulia (centre) with her mother Lyudmila (right) and another… She said; 'I knew that they were desperate to hear me calling them 'mama' and 'papa', who wouldn't want it.

'I am a mother myself, and I can feel completely what heartbreak they went through. I wouldn't wish this to anyone.'

Yulia said a catastrophic combination of coincidences led to her not being found.

'They were looking for me in Belarus and didn't think that I might have been in Russia.

'In Russia they didn't think that I could have been from Belarus.'

She crossed a border where at the time passports were not required.

'It's a great pity that people who found me and were walking me around before I was taken into foster care didn't report their find to police,' she said.

'I've no clue how I got to Ryazan, I simply can't imagine it. I remember going on a train but all memories are vague.'

 a group of people sitting posing for the camera: Yulia with her father (first from left), eldest sister Nadezhda (first from right), and Nadezhda's daughters © Provided by Associated Newspapers Limited Yulia with her father (first from left), eldest sister…
Nothing is known about the couple who presumably took her to Russia rather than report her to local police.

Lyudmila told how she and Viktor had hunted for their missing daughter.

'For days we were searching ourselves, taking every train from Minsk to Asipovichy and back, asking passengers if they had seen Yulia, checking wells, shops, deserted houses, everything.,' she said.

'It was impossibly painful to live all these years with the heartache of not knowing what happened to our daughter. It was beyond awful.'

They eventually moved house.

'We couldn't stay in the house where just days ago she was laughing and playing.

'We couldn't walk the same roads and hated to be anywhere near the railway. We both hate seeing trains.

'In the end we moved the house because staying there in the same place by that railway.

'Two years after she went missing we left to another area where there are no trains and no stations.'

A report in 2017 quoted Lyudmila saying: 'We were asked to go through a lie detector test to avoid any suspicions.

'We did so. I am waiting for Yulia, she is now 22 years old, I believe that she is alive and that we will see her again.'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 17, 2019, 06:59:22 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 17, 2019, 08:09:24 AM
Wow!

Woman who was lost by her family aged four when her father fell asleep on a train in Belarus is reunited with her parents TWENTY YEARS later after new boyfriend Googled 'train girl'
We're sorry, this video cannot be played from your current location.

Video provided by Nine News
A woman whose father lost her on a train as a four-year-old has been reunited with her parents two decades later.

Yulia Gorina, 24, was raised by adoptive parents after she mysteriously managed to cross from Belarus into Russia, and her real family could not be traced.

Twenty years later she found her parents after her new boyfriend Ilya Kryukov, 31, did a simple internet search.

Heartwarming pictures show Yulia after she was reunited with her mother and the father who lost her when he dozed off to sleep on a 60-mile train journey from Minsk to Asipovichy.

 a group of people posing for the camera: Yulia pictured with father Viktor, mother Lyudmila, and boyfriend Ilya Kryukov © Provided by Associated Newspapers Limited Yulia pictured with father Viktor, mother Lyudmila, and…
A DNA test has now proved that she is the daughter of Viktor and Lyudmila Moiseenko - and her father has 'begged her forgiveness' for losing her.

Her parents now in their late 50s searched frantically for their lost child at the time, as did local police, but ended up under suspicion of killing the girl.

As recently as 2017 when police reopened the case, they underwent lie detector tests which they both passed.

It remains unclear how Yulia got from Asipovichy to Ryazan, except she has a memory of a train journey.

A couple - who possibly kidnapped the lost girl - was believed to have been involved. 'I do believe it's all true now,' said Yulia after finding and hugging her real parents.

'It was proved by a DNA test, but it was clear even before, we are so much alike, as soon as we saw the photographs of each other.

'Nobody had any doubts – we are one family.

 a couple of people posing for the camera: Her parents now in their late 50s searched frantically for their lost child at the time, as did local police, but ended up under suspicion of killing the girl. Yulia pictured with boyfriend Ilya Kryukov, 31 © Provided by Associated Newspapers Limited Her parents now in their late 50s searched frantically for their lost child at the time, as did local police, but ended up under suspicion of killing the girl. Yulia… 'I found not only my mother and father in Belarus, but also brother Dmitry and elder sister Nadezhda (Nadya).'

Yulia still lives in Ryazan where she was found on a railway siding in 1999. It is some 550 miles from Asipovichy where she was lost.

Her real mother Lyudmila said: 'Twenty years is like a whole life, but we never lost hope, we believed – and so we found each other.'

The reunion was in a police station in Marjina Horka settlement. 'We were all in tears,' said Yulia.

'We could not even talk, we only cried and hugged each other.

'My parents have told me that they were searching for me for a long time, that they believed they would find me one day.

'My mother could not stop hugging me, she made me sit on her lap as if I was a little girl.

'We were chatting till 3 am, and then Ilya and I had to go back to Russia – my daughter was waiting for me.'

Before leaving she walked with her father around the station where the train ended its journey in 1999.

'Father begged me to forgive him for what happened,' she said.

'Of course I do.

'We were at the station where I went missing, we all walked around it, in floods of tears.'

 a close up of text on a white background: Yulia's identity. Yulia says now: 'I was always searching for my family, checking internet, trying to browse…but I found nothing' © Provided by Associated Newspapers Limited Yulia's identity. Yulia says now: 'I was always searching for… There were three weeks between Yulia being lost and her discovery by a policeman in Ryazan on 21 October 1999.

She recalled as a child how she was travelling with a man and woman who were hiding from police.

'We slept in some abandoned houses,' she said.

'I do not remember all this now.

'I was told I did speak with a Belarus accent, using local words for vegetables like potatoes and onions but I do not know why Russian policemen did not pay any attention to it when they were searching for my family.'

The police sent her to an orphanage and after a fruitless search in Russia for her family, she was given up for adoption by March the following year to Irina and Oleg who had two sons and wanted a daughter.

Yulia says now: 'I was always searching for my family, checking internet, trying to browse…but I found nothing.'

She told Ilya about her story - and miraculously he found details of a girl lost in Belarus shortly before Yulia was found in Russia.

'I began to read and realised that so many facts were the same, so my tears were running,' she said.

'When I was found, they put 1 October as my birthday in the documents – it was the day when I was lost.'

 a close up of a womans face with her hand to her face: Yulia pictured with daughter Kristina. There were three weeks between Yulia being lost and her discovery by a policeman in Ryazan on 21 October 1999 © Provided by Associated Newspapers Limited Yulia pictured with daughter Kristina. There were three…
After several false starts they made contact via police in Pukhovichesky.

She tried to contact her father on social media - but he didn't reply. She didn't know this was because he didn't know how to text.

'Why didn't I call them? I knew that by then police told them about me but I was still so deeply worried about the first chat. For me and for them it was nerve-wracking.

 a woman standing in front of a tree: Nothing is known about the couple who presumably took her to Russia rather than report her to local police © Provided by Associated Newspapers Limited Nothing is known about the couple who presumably took… 'So I messaged Dad and sat down waiting for his reply. Minutes turned to hours but he stayed quiet.

'I was dying from worry that he wasn't replying, but later I learned that he simply didn't know how to text.'

Then a woman called saying: 'Hello, my name is Nadya.

'I am your big sister and I am so happy that we found you.'

Yulia said: 'Then she passed the phone to Mum, who burst into tears straight away.

'She asked me to say the biggest possible thank you to my foster parents for taking care of me during all these years.

'We are now constantly in touch with my big sister, we are messaging each other and sending pictures.'

 a group of people posing for the camera: Yulia (centre) with her mother Lyudmila (right) and another female relative (left) © Provided by Associated Newspapers Limited Yulia (centre) with her mother Lyudmila (right) and another… She said; 'I knew that they were desperate to hear me calling them 'mama' and 'papa', who wouldn't want it.

'I am a mother myself, and I can feel completely what heartbreak they went through. I wouldn't wish this to anyone.'

Yulia said a catastrophic combination of coincidences led to her not being found.

'They were looking for me in Belarus and didn't think that I might have been in Russia.

'In Russia they didn't think that I could have been from Belarus.'

She crossed a border where at the time passports were not required.

'It's a great pity that people who found me and were walking me around before I was taken into foster care didn't report their find to police,' she said.

'I've no clue how I got to Ryazan, I simply can't imagine it. I remember going on a train but all memories are vague.'

 a group of people sitting posing for the camera: Yulia with her father (first from left), eldest sister Nadezhda (first from right), and Nadezhda's daughters © Provided by Associated Newspapers Limited Yulia with her father (first from left), eldest sister…
Nothing is known about the couple who presumably took her to Russia rather than report her to local police.

Lyudmila told how she and Viktor had hunted for their missing daughter.

'For days we were searching ourselves, taking every train from Minsk to Asipovichy and back, asking passengers if they had seen Yulia, checking wells, shops, deserted houses, everything.,' she said.

'It was impossibly painful to live all these years with the heartache of not knowing what happened to our daughter. It was beyond awful.'

They eventually moved house.

'We couldn't stay in the house where just days ago she was laughing and playing.

'We couldn't walk the same roads and hated to be anywhere near the railway. We both hate seeing trains.

'In the end we moved the house because staying there in the same place by that railway.

'Two years after she went missing we left to another area where there are no trains and no stations.'

A report in 2017 quoted Lyudmila saying: 'We were asked to go through a lie detector test to avoid any suspicions.

'We did so. I am waiting for Yulia, she is now 22 years old, I believe that she is alive and that we will see her again.'

This is a beautiful story. very heartwarming.

I am not sure abut this bit though "She recalled as a child how she was travelling with a man and woman who were hiding from police.

'We slept in some abandoned houses,' she said.

'I do not remember all this now.

'I was told I did speak with a Belarus accent, using local words for vegetables like potatoes and onions but I do not know why Russian policemen did not pay any attention to it when they were searching for my family.'

The police sent her to an orphanage and after a fruitless search in Russia for her family, she was given up for adoption by March the following year to Irina and Oleg who had two sons and wanted a daughter."

If she was abducted how did she end up with police?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 21, 2019, 10:38:24 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/2019/09/13/ana-gomes-says-bring-it-on-as-former-minister-presses-forwards-with-case-for-defamation/

Former Euro MP and ‘anti-corruption firebrand’ Ana Gomes has been heard this week as an ‘arguida’ (official suspect) in a case for corruption brought out against her by former defence minister José Pedro Aguiar-Branco.

This has been a long drawn-out affair: Gomes infuriated Aguiar-Branco years ago when she suggested there may have been collusion between his lawyers’ office and the Martifer group that won the contract to take over Viana do Castelo’s formerly State-owned shipyards.

Aguiar-Branco wanted to sue her for defamation there and then, but was thwarted by the fact that she enjoyed parliamentary immunity.

Now that Gomes is no longer a Euro MP, her immunity has gone.

Aguiar-Branco – the minister who signed the Martifer deal – asked for his case against her to be ‘resurrected’ practically the day Gomes left the European Parliament, say reports.

But certainly Gomes is unruffled.

Frequently threatened with legal action over statements she has made (click here) and (click here), she told journalists that she will wait now to see what happens “calmly and very amused” – particularly as she not only stands behind every word she said back in 2013, but has added further ‘elements’ to the picture for DIAP investigators.

Coincidentally, economist João Pedro Martins caused a commotion in the press earlier this year when he too suggested there was “high corruption” in the closure of the Viana do Castelo shipyard (click here).

Public prosecutors were described as following up on his allegations about a “clear intention of mismanagement and then privatisation” on the part of the then PSD government.

In other words, Ana Gomes isn’t the only inconvenient voice on the horizon – though there is no suggestion yet that Aguiar-Branco is suing João Pedro Martins.

The closure of the shipyards was a dark day in Portuguese labour history, and one that saw the local Socialist Mayor stage his own protest in a bid to show the ‘man-in-the-street’ was not convinced that the process had been fully transparent.

natasha.donn@algarveresident.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This will be fascinating to watch in relation to the extent & duration of Parliamentary privilege wrt freedom of speech. The person alleging defamation is a former justice minister in Portuguese government & also a lawyer; it appears he believes immunity from prosecution ceased immediately the MEP left office.
Ana Gomes has been in Portuguese news a lot this year & is currently championing the cause of Rui Pinto, the football whistleblower, currently in a Portuguese jail facing 147 charges.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 25, 2019, 01:57:49 PM
Man arrested in Swindon over disappearance of two-year-old Katrice Lee in 1981
September 25 2019, 12:00pm,
new

Tom Ball | Will Humphries

Specialist teams use ground penetrating radar to search a garden of a house in the Moredon area of Swindon in connection with the disappearance of Katrice Lee
Specialist teams use ground penetrating radar to search a garden of a house in the Moredon area of Swindon in connection with the disappearance of Katrice LeePA
The father of a British toddler who went missing 38 years ago in Germany has said he never gave up hope that she might still be alive as police arrested a man over her disappearance.

Military police announced yesterday that they were questioning a man in connection with the case of Katrice Lee, who vanished from a supermarket on her second birthday near a British military base in Germany in November 1981.

Officers reportedly began searching a terraced house in the Moredon area of Swindon in Wiltshire on Monday and made an arrest at the property the next day.

Katrice Lee, who vanished on her second birthday in 1981
Katrice Lee, who vanished on her second birthday in 1981PA
Katrice’s father, Richard Lee, 69, a retired sergeant major who had been stationed in Germany at the time of his daughter’s disappearance, said that he still believes she may be alive.

“I have never given up hope that she’ll be found,” Mr Lee told The Daily Telegraph. “Sometimes it’s like living with a torture, your mind turns over and over looking for explanations.

“You never stop turning over the possibilities. But it’s the very fact that I can’t let it rest, won’t accept she will never be found — that has kept this investigation alive and led to this most recent development.”

Katrice went missing from a Navy, Army and Air Force Institutes (NAAFI) supermarket in Paderborn, West Germany, while shopping with her mother, Sharon, and aunt Wendy.

Her mother realised in the checkout queue that she had forgotten crisps and asked her sister to watch Katrice. When she returned in what she has estimated was less than a minute, Katrice was gone. Her sister said Katrice had run after her and she believed they were together.

The investigation into the toddler’s disappearance was reopened in 2017 after Royal Military Police chiefs admitted mistakes had been made in the initial search for her.

A year later a forensic search on the bank of the River Alma, near where Katrice went missing, got under way. The river site was identified after the release of an age-progressed photofit of a man seen at the Naafi holding a child similar to Katrice. He was seen in a parked green car on a bridge over the river the day after she went missing.

More than 100 soldiers took part in the five-week search that unearthed bone fragments, but tests confirmed they were non-human.

In April 2018 Katrice’s mother, Sharon, who is no longer married to Mr Lee, told The Sun: “Nearly 37 years ago as a family we became members of an exclusive club that we didn’t ask for membership of. We became parents of a missing daughter. I would dearly love to be able to revoke that membership.

“And although I would like a fairytale ending to our story, I fully appreciate that might not be. But at the end of the day we will have closure, and any emotions that come from that closure we will learn to live with and deal with as we have for the past nearly 37 years.”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 25, 2019, 02:10:49 PM
I assume there is a source for this?

Be interesting to see what develops.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 25, 2019, 02:53:28 PM


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7500449/Arrest-disappearance-British-toddler-Katrice-Lee.html

"There was a dramatic development in the case this week when military police announced they had arrested a man and were searching the garden of a property in Swindon - 500 miles away from where Katrice went missing.

But the Army announced today that the former serviceman has now been released without charge."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on September 26, 2019, 02:17:01 AM
Quote from: jassi on September 25, 2019, 02:53:28 PM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7500449/Arrest-disappearance-British-toddler-Katrice-Lee.html

"There was a dramatic development in the case this week when military police announced they had arrested a man and were searching the garden of a property in Swindon - 500 miles away from where Katrice went missing.

But the Army announced today that the former serviceman has now been released without charge."
In the UK there is a time limit that the police can detain a person for questioning.   Once the person is released it is possible the suspect will attempt to make a run for it.  I'd imagine the police will be keeping a degree of surveillance on the suspect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 26, 2019, 11:45:40 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on September 26, 2019, 02:17:01 AM
In the UK there is a time limit that the police can detain a person for questioning.   Once the person is released it is possible the suspect will attempt to make a run for it.  I'd imagine the police will be keeping a degree of surveillance on the suspect.

In the UK Military Police cannot arrest civilians imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 26, 2019, 12:42:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 26, 2019, 11:45:40 AM
In the UK Military Police cannot arrest civilians imo.

Anyone can make a citizens arrest.

oh look here...https://www.quora.com/Can-British-citizens-perform-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-cop

Q Can you citizen arrest a police officer UK?

Any person may arrest without warrant any person who they know to have committed a criminal offence. This means that you have arrested the person and they are your prisoner until you hand over custody of the suspect to a Police Officer. ... Notice the any person may … any person so yes you can arrest a Police Officer.Dec 29, 2017
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 26, 2019, 03:45:01 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on September 26, 2019, 12:42:08 PM
Anyone can make a citizens arrest.

oh look here...https://www.quora.com/Can-British-citizens-perform-a-citizens-arrest-on-a-cop

Q Can you citizen arrest a police officer UK?

Any person may arrest without warrant any person who they know to have committed a criminal offence. This means that you have arrested the person and they are your prisoner until you hand over custody of the suspect to a Police Officer. ... Notice the any person may … any person so yes you can arrest a Police Officer.Dec 29, 2017

As the MP's are said to have released the man, the bolded words didn't apply. The only people Military Policepersons have jurisdiction over are military personnel. (and their families in certain conditions)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 26, 2019, 03:45:36 PM
I'm not going to start another dog thread so will just leave this here for posters to view. Someone may wish to spin off specific aspects for discussion. I have SS 3 sections which I feel are of particular relevance to Madeleine's case.
http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/1/Forensic%20Canine%20Foundation%20.pdf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 26, 2019, 08:30:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 26, 2019, 03:45:01 PM
As the MP's are said to have released the man, the bolded words didn't apply. The only people Military Policepersons have jurisdiction over are military personnel. (and their families in certain conditions)

Ah yes... they arrested as MPs  not wore civvies lol .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 28, 2019, 10:12:45 AM
Japan 19 Ireland 12. (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on October 04, 2019, 05:13:56 AM

If you've got nothing better to do you might wish to read Tracey's latest opus.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10045518/kate-and-gerry-mccann-slam-new-theatre-play/

Then again, you might not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 04, 2019, 09:03:25 AM
Judging by the comments I've just read, her little piece has not been well received by the readership

Perhaps it would have been better not to have made an issue of it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 04, 2019, 10:49:04 AM
Why should anyone seek their endorsement? The details of the case are in the public sphere and aren't their private business.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 04, 2019, 11:01:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 04, 2019, 10:49:04 AM
Why should anyone seek their endorsement? The details of the case are in the public sphere and aren't their private business.


I did wonder about that myself.
From what I read in the article, its not as if its a play about Madeleine, just that her disappearance acts as a trigger for a parent's obsessive anxiety.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 04, 2019, 11:41:10 AM
Labelled previously as institutionally racist Scotland Yard are now labelled  stupid.
Now I'm not saying any officers involved in OG are of the same,but they do belong to a force which is labelled as such.
Scotland Yard guilty of 'institutional stupidity': Damning report says 'poor judgement and failure to evaluate facts' led to Met police bungling its probe into 'Nick the fantasist's' VIP paedophile ring claims

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7537095/Ex-MP-Harvey-Proctor-says-Met-Police-chief-Cressida-Dick-consider-position.html

The words institutional stupid come from Geoffrey Robertson QC

He said: "Operation Midland was conducted incompetently, negligently and almost with institutional stupidity.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/04/nick-carl-beech-operation-midland-vip-paedophile-ring-henriques/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 04, 2019, 06:50:23 PM
Quote from: barrier on October 04, 2019, 11:41:10 AM
Labelled previously as institutionally racist Scotland Yard are now labelled  stupid.
Now I'm not saying any officers involved in OG are of the same,but they do belong to a force which is labelled as such.
Scotland Yard guilty of 'institutional stupidity': Damning report says 'poor judgement and failure to evaluate facts' led to Met police bungling its probe into 'Nick the fantasist's' VIP paedophile ring claims

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7537095/Ex-MP-Harvey-Proctor-says-Met-Police-chief-Cressida-Dick-consider-position.html

The words institutional stupid come from Geoffrey Robertson QC

He said: "Operation Midland was conducted incompetently, negligently and almost with institutional stupidity.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/04/nick-carl-beech-operation-midland-vip-paedophile-ring-henriques/

  ... and there was me thinking that as far as the internet conspirasphere was concerned ... they couldn't get enough of the sordid details supplied by Nick and his ilk.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 04, 2019, 06:58:49 PM
Just goes to show how wrong you can be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 04, 2019, 07:07:15 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 04, 2019, 06:58:49 PM
Just goes to show how wrong you can be.

Absolutely ... believing every word that comes out of the mouth of a fantasist is never a good idea ... pity so many who should know better allow themselves to fall hook line etc etc ...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 04, 2019, 07:13:34 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 04, 2019, 07:07:15 PM
Absolutely ... believing every word that comes out of the mouth of a fantasist is never a good idea ... pity so many who should know better allow themselves to fall hook line etc etc ...

Fancy Scotland Yard falling for it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 04, 2019, 07:17:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 04, 2019, 07:13:34 PM
Fancy Scotland Yard falling for it.

They certainly weren't the first 😁😁
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 04, 2019, 07:22:11 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 04, 2019, 06:58:49 PM
Just goes to show how wrong you can be.
Why is it that so many people who (on twitter and elsewhere on social media)apparently fell for every word of Nick’s lies were and are also convinced the McCanns dunnit?  Is it just because people love a good old conspiracy even if they don’t really believe it, especially if it involves people they don’t like much?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 04, 2019, 10:12:37 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 04, 2019, 07:22:11 PM
Why is it that so many people who (on twitter and elsewhere on social media)apparently fell for every word of Nick’s lies were and are also convinced the McCanns dunnit?  Is it just because people love a good old conspiracy even if they don’t really believe it, especially if it involves people they don’t like much?

Are they the same people? How would you know that? By your rather poor reasoning the Met (who believed 'Nick') also think the McCanns dunnit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 04, 2019, 10:25:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 04, 2019, 10:12:37 PM
Are they the same people? How would you know that? By your rather poor reasoning the Met (who believed 'Nick') also think the McCanns dunnit.
You clearly haven’t understood what I wrote, which certainly does not by any stretch reason that the Met must believe the McCanns dunnit.  How do I know that many Nick believers were also McCann sceptics?  Because I read their posts on social media which revealed their beliefs on both cases.  I suppose that’s not evidence as far as you’re concerned and I really don’t care if you choose to dismiss what I know to be true. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 05, 2019, 08:29:33 AM
How many people commenting on the Met’s failings in the Nick case believe that murder of children took place at Haut de la Garenne but was covered up?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 05, 2019, 08:56:25 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 05, 2019, 08:29:33 AM
How many people commenting on the Met’s failings in the Nick case believe that murder of children took place at Haut de la Garenne but was covered up?

The general public can believe anything they like. The police are supposed to rely on evidence, not on belief. In my opinion the Met have made the same mistake in the McCann case. There's no difinitive evidence that a stranger abducted Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 05, 2019, 09:06:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 05, 2019, 08:56:25 AM
The general public can believe anything they like. The police are supposed to rely on evidence, not on belief. In my opinion the Met have made the same mistake in the McCann case. There's no difinitive evidence that a stranger abducted Madeleine.

Do you think the met should not have investigated nicks claims....wouldnt there then be accusations of protection of public figures.

I think the mccanns are far more believable than nick
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 05, 2019, 09:20:02 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 05, 2019, 09:06:32 AM
Do you think the met should not have investigated nicks claims....wouldnt there then be accusations of protection of public figures.

I think the mccanns are far more believable than nick

Investigate yes, believe no.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 05, 2019, 09:37:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 05, 2019, 09:20:02 AM
Investigate yes, believe no.

From what I have read they had to publicly say the believed nick in order not to deter other witnesses coming forward
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 05, 2019, 11:16:20 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 05, 2019, 08:56:25 AM
The general public can believe anything they like. The police are supposed to rely on evidence, not on belief. In my opinion the Met have made the same mistake in the McCann case. There's no difinitive evidence that a stranger abducted Madeleine.

If there is no definitive evidence that a stranger abducted Madeleine McCann why is it do you think, that independent of each other ...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 05, 2019, 12:20:50 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 05, 2019, 11:16:20 AM
If there is no definitive evidence that a stranger abducted Madeleine McCann why is it do you think, that independent of each other ...
  • Scotland Yard and ...
  • the Policia Judiciria ... have spent the last six years pursuing such an entity?


They are not interdependent of each other,OG are there in a support role,and where's the evidence that the PJ are pursuing an alleged abduction?

The Portuguese authorities retain the lead and the Met continues to work in support of them.



https://www.met.police.uk/notices/met/operation-grange/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 05, 2019, 12:29:50 PM
Quote from: barrier on October 05, 2019, 12:20:50 PM

They are not interdependent of each other,OG are there in a support role,and where's the evidence that the PJ are pursuing an alleged abduction?

The Portuguese authorities retain the lead and the Met continues to work in support of them.



https://www.met.police.uk/notices/met/operation-grange/

You are quite right it's pointless criticising Grange in this instance because the investigation is Portuguese led... As Grange has said they are looking for an abductor it therefore
follows that they are following Portuguese instruction
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 05, 2019, 12:45:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 05, 2019, 12:29:50 PM
You are quite right it's pointless criticising Grange in this instance because the investigation is Portuguese led... As Grange has said they are looking for an abductor it therefore
follows that they are following Portuguese instruction

            Precisely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 05, 2019, 03:38:07 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 05, 2019, 11:16:20 AM
If there is no definitive evidence that a stranger abducted Madeleine McCann why is it do you think, that independent of each other ...
  • Scotland Yard and ...
  • the Policia Judiciria ... have spent the last six years pursuing such an entity?

I have seen no evidence that the PJ are pursuing a stranger abductor. Do you have any?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on October 05, 2019, 04:38:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 05, 2019, 03:38:07 PM
I have seen no evidence that the PJ are pursuing a stranger abductor. Do you have any?

I find it hard to believe that an under resourced Portuguese police force are expending any resources whatsoever on this case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 05, 2019, 06:06:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 05, 2019, 08:56:25 AM
The general public can believe anything they like. The police are supposed to rely on evidence, not on belief. In my opinion the Met have made the same mistake in the McCann case. There's no difinitive evidence that a stranger abducted Madeleine.
Was there any evidence of child murder at Haut de la Garenne? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 05, 2019, 06:31:35 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on October 05, 2019, 04:38:37 PM
I find it hard to believe that an under resourced Portuguese police force are expending any resources whatsoever on this case.

Perhaps you can discuss it with them and keep us informed when you have your meeting with them LAST year
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 05, 2019, 06:39:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 05, 2019, 08:56:25 AM
The general public can believe anything they like. The police are supposed to rely on evidence, not on belief. In my opinion the Met have made the same mistake in the McCann case. There's no difinitive evidence that a stranger abducted Madeleine.
Is the Gaspar statement evidence of wrongdoing that should be taken seriously in this case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 05, 2019, 07:54:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 05, 2019, 03:38:07 PM
I have seen no evidence that the PJ are pursuing a stranger abductor. Do you have any?

Let's put it this way ... Madeleine's parents and their friends have been exhaustively investigated ~ there is absolutely no evidence against any one of them.
Similarly, Robert Murat has been exhaustively investigated ~ there is no evidence against him.

The Policia Judiciaria ~ supported by Scotland Yard ~ have been involved in working Madeleine McCann's reopened case for over seven years now.

These are the facts.

What is it you think Scotland Yard and the Policia Judiciaria are doing if not looking for Madeleine's abductor?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 05, 2019, 08:35:20 PM
We're busy doin' nothin'
Workin' the whole day through
Tryin' to find lots of things not to do
We're busy goin' nowhere
Isn't it just a crime
We'd like to be unhappy, but
We never do have the time
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 05, 2019, 08:54:40 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 05, 2019, 07:54:51 PM
Let's put it this way ... Madeleine's parents and their friends have been exhaustively investigated ~ there is absolutely no evidence against any one of them.
Similarly, Robert Murat has been exhaustively investigated ~ there is no evidence against him.

The Policia Judiciaria ~ supported by Scotland Yard ~ have been involved in working Madeleine McCann's reopened case for over seven years now.

These are the facts.

What is it you think Scotland Yard and the Policia Judiciaria are doing if not looking for Madeleine's abductor?

I assume from your answer that you don't have any evidence of what the PJ are investigating, you're assuming.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 05, 2019, 10:23:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 05, 2019, 08:54:40 PM
I assume from your answer that you don't have any evidence of what the PJ are investigating, you're assuming.
I’m assuming you’re assuming she’s assuming.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 05, 2019, 10:53:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 05, 2019, 08:54:40 PM
I assume from your answer that you don't have any evidence of what the PJ are investigating, you're assuming.

I know for an absolute certainty that they are not investigating Kate and Gerry ... and I know that back in 2013 the only game in town being played by the Porto PJ was abduction.

Snip
Madeleine McCann's parents, Kate and Gerry, were in Portugal last week informally summoned by the Judiciary Police (PJ) who informed them of plans to reopen the investigation, a request that the Public Prosecutor (MP) announced Thursday to have accepted. .

The meeting took place last Thursday, the 17th, at the end of a meeting with Scotland Yard inspectors who are also investigating the disappearance of the English girl while vacationing with her family in Praia de Luz, Algarve, in May. of 2007.

The information is contained in a statement issued Thursday by the London Metropolitan Police and confirmed by a source from the PJ national directorate, who stated that the meeting took place at that police headquarters in Lisbon. The McCann lawyer, Rogério Alves, confirms that clients have been informed of the request to reopen the investigation. “This means the police understand that there are new ways that can be explored. And that has given parents a legitimate expectation that not only will the truth be discovered, but Madeleine can be discovered alive, which is the only goal of this effort they have been making, ”says the lawyer.
_______________________________________________________________________________#

The PUBLIC reported in the print edition this Thursday that the Portuguese authorities were considering reopening the case . PJ's request was the result of more than two years of work reviewing the process by a PJ do Porto team established in March 2011. A group of four inspectors led by research coordinator Helena Monteiro - who had never before contacted with the inquiry, thus avoiding any contamination in the appraisal - it will have identified witnesses who were never interviewed while the process was ongoing until July 2008.

This is confirmed in a statement released Thursday by PJ. “This review work, which took place over the last two and a half years, allowed us to discover new evidence that, by imposing further investigation, fulfills the requirements (...) for the reopening of the inquiry,” reads the note. According to PJ, as with all cases of missing children, despite the formal closure of the inquiry, “it continued to be attentive to any information that would make it possible to know the whereabouts of minor Madeleine McCann, the circumstances in which its disappearance and the identity of its author (s) occurred ”

Investigation focused on the kidnapping thesis
https://www.publico.pt/2013/10/24/sociedade/noticia/ministerio-publico-reabre-processo-do-desaparecimento-de-maddie-1610207
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on October 05, 2019, 11:46:46 PM
They won't say what the final lead is so you know nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 06, 2019, 12:08:40 AM
Quote from: Brietta on October 05, 2019, 10:53:34 PM
I know for an absolute certainty that they are not investigating Kate and Gerry ... and I know that back in 2013 the only game in town being played by the Porto PJ was abduction.

Snip
Madeleine McCann's parents, Kate and Gerry, were in Portugal last week informally summoned by the Judiciary Police (PJ) who informed them of plans to reopen the investigation, a request that the Public Prosecutor (MP) announced Thursday to have accepted. .

The meeting took place last Thursday, the 17th, at the end of a meeting with Scotland Yard inspectors who are also investigating the disappearance of the English girl while vacationing with her family in Praia de Luz, Algarve, in May. of 2007.

The information is contained in a statement issued Thursday by the London Metropolitan Police and confirmed by a source from the PJ national directorate, who stated that the meeting took place at that police headquarters in Lisbon. The McCann lawyer, Rogério Alves, confirms that clients have been informed of the request to reopen the investigation. “This means the police understand that there are new ways that can be explored. And that has given parents a legitimate expectation that not only will the truth be discovered, but Madeleine can be discovered alive, which is the only goal of this effort they have been making, ”says the lawyer.
_______________________________________________________________________________#

The PUBLIC reported in the print edition this Thursday that the Portuguese authorities were considering reopening the case . PJ's request was the result of more than two years of work reviewing the process by a PJ do Porto team established in March 2011. A group of four inspectors led by research coordinator Helena Monteiro - who had never before contacted with the inquiry, thus avoiding any contamination in the appraisal - it will have identified witnesses who were never interviewed while the process was ongoing until July 2008.

This is confirmed in a statement released Thursday by PJ. “This review work, which took place over the last two and a half years, allowed us to discover new evidence that, by imposing further investigation, fulfills the requirements (...) for the reopening of the inquiry,” reads the note. According to PJ, as with all cases of missing children, despite the formal closure of the inquiry, “it continued to be attentive to any information that would make it possible to know the whereabouts of minor Madeleine McCann, the circumstances in which its disappearance and the identity of its author (s) occurred ”

Investigation focused on the kidnapping thesis
https://www.publico.pt/2013/10/24/sociedade/noticia/ministerio-publico-reabre-processo-do-desaparecimento-de-maddie-1610207

English police confirm in their note that the line of investigation followed by the Portuguese is distinct from that being explored by Scotland Yard.
https://www.publico.pt/2013/10/24/sociedade/noticia/ministerio-publico-reabre-processo-do-desaparecimento-de-maddie-1610207
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 06, 2019, 12:20:02 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on October 05, 2019, 11:46:46 PM
They won't say what the final lead is so you know nothing.
You’re pretty certain you know though aren’t  you? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 06, 2019, 12:35:14 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on October 05, 2019, 11:46:46 PM
They won't say what the final lead is so you know nothing.
lol
“IMO Smithman will be known within the walls of SY/PJ and a main reason why the case is on-going with unprecedented funding. They eliminated Tannerman a long time ago. They know who they are after!” - you, from another thread, claiming to know what the final lead is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 06, 2019, 08:04:59 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 06, 2019, 12:35:14 AM
lol
“IMO Smithman will be known within the walls of SY/PJ and a main reason why the case is on-going with unprecedented funding. They eliminated Tannerman a long time ago. They know who they are after!” - you, from another thread, claiming to know what the final lead is.

I think the panic may be that Madeleine's case is still very much an active ongoing one with the police of both countries knowing exactly what leads are being followed.

It is risible to imagine that centres around the ancient conspiracy theories interminably mulled over by some denizens of the internet and long ago discarded when scrutinised properly.

Logic indicates that the police are following certain lines of enquiry which are not made public in an active investigation.  The fact remains that back in 2013 when the investigation was opened, both Scotland Yard and the Policia Judiciaria stated the abduction theory publicly.
In the subsequent years they have not announced any change to that.

In my opinion they know exactly what they are doing or else Madeleine's case would not still be active;  and I think the conclusion to it may reveal a far bigger outcome than expected by any.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 06, 2019, 09:25:09 AM
I would like to see evidence that the PJ were investigating 'abduction' in 2013.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 06, 2019, 09:34:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 06, 2019, 09:25:09 AM
I would like to see evidence that the PJ were investigating 'abduction' in 2013.
Here you go.  No doubt you won’t accept this as evidence.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/19/madeleine-mccann-police-intruder-girls-algarve
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 06, 2019, 09:44:32 AM
The Met got the case reopened based on new leads they had uncovered re: stranger abduction.  The Portuguese authorities would not have agreed to re-open the case on this premise if they did not accept that there were grounds to do so.  To suggest that the PJ re-opened the case but ignored the Met’s direction of travel to pursue their own previously abandoned theory that the McCanns dunnit (based on no new leads) is nothing short of fantastical, IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 06, 2019, 09:47:39 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 06, 2019, 09:34:23 AM
Here you go.  No doubt you won’t accept this as evidence.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/19/madeleine-mccann-police-intruder-girls-algarve

Does it say the PJ were investigating an abduction?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 06, 2019, 10:16:05 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 06, 2019, 09:47:39 AM
Does it say the PJ were investigating an abduction?
It says that since the previous October 2013 their primary lines of investigation were  sex attacks on children in their holiday apartments in the Algarve.  What does that suggest to you?  That they were investigating the parents?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 06, 2019, 10:45:52 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 06, 2019, 10:16:05 AM
It says that since the previous October 2013 their primary lines of investigation were  sex attacks on children in their holiday apartments in the Algarve.  What does that suggest to you?  That they were investigating the parents?

No, it says that according to an unnamed source at the PJ's Lisbon headquarters 'evidence of a string of crimes had been the driving force behind Portuguese officials re-opening the case'.

So, was that true, or was it suspicions about a dead tractor driver?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2480161/Madeleine-McCann-investigations-main-suspect-died-4-years-ago.html



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 06, 2019, 10:47:07 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 06, 2019, 10:45:52 AM
No, it says that according to an unnamed source at the PJ's Lisbon headquarters 'evidence of a string of crimes had been the driving force behind Portuguese officials re-opening the case'.

So, was that true, or was it suspicions about a dead tractor driver?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2480161/Madeleine-McCann-investigations-main-suspect-died-4-years-ago.html
What string of crimes and how is th PJ investigating them as part of the McCann case NOT evidence that they were looking at stranger abduction in 2013?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 06, 2019, 10:56:44 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 06, 2019, 10:47:07 AM
What string of crimes and how is th PJ investigating them as part of the McCann case NOT evidence that they were looking at stranger abduction in 2013?

Nobody said what the string of crimes were, did they? The newspaper tried to imply it was the villa incursions, but nobody confirmed that. The PJ may well have looked at stranger abduction, but according to Pedro do Carmo they never concluded that it was the crime which was committed on 3rd May 2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 06, 2019, 11:07:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 06, 2019, 10:56:44 AM
Nobody said what the string of crimes were, did they? The newspaper tried to imply it was the villa incursions, but nobody confirmed that. The PJ may well have looked at stranger abduction, but according to Pedro do Carmo they never concluded that it was the crime which was committed on 3rd May 2007.
So when the PJ talk about a “string of crimes” they have been investigating in their own country do you think it’s possible they are referring to a string of crimes involving the McCanns?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 06, 2019, 11:13:33 AM
So, G-Unit, let’s get this straight:  when the PJ say they  re-opened the investigation into Madeleinee’s disappearance in 2013  by investigating a string of crimes in their country, then you don’t see that as evidence that they are considering stranger abduction as the cause of the disappearance? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 06, 2019, 12:48:02 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 06, 2019, 11:13:33 AM
So, G-Unit, let’s get this straight:  when the PJ say they  re-opened the investigation into Madeleinee’s disappearance in 2013  by investigating a string of crimes in their country, then you don’t see that as evidence that they are considering stranger abduction as the cause of the disappearance?
G-Unit has declined to reply, so draw your own conclusions.  It seems some people really do believe that when the Met asked the PJ to re-open the case so that they could investigate a stranger abduction, the PJ agreed but then pursued a completely separate investigation into a "string of crimes" that had nothing to do with the Met's theory of stranger abduction.  Go figure. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 06, 2019, 08:43:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 06, 2019, 12:48:02 PM
G-Unit has declined to reply, so draw your own conclusions.  It seems some people really do believe that when the Met asked the PJ to re-open the case so that they could investigate a stranger abduction, the PJ agreed but then pursued a completely separate investigation into a "string of crimes" that had nothing to do with the Met's theory of stranger abduction.  Go figure.


As recently as 2017  Pedro do Carmo said in relation to a question asking if they accepted the girl was abducted replied we don't know what happened and have to be prepared for different scenarios's.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 06, 2019, 09:20:32 PM
Quote from: barrier on October 06, 2019, 08:43:43 PM

As recently as 2017  Pedro do Carmo said in relation to a question asking if they accepted the girl was abducted replied we don't know what happened and have to be prepared for different scenarios's.
G-Unit said:

I would like to see evidence that the PJ were investigating 'abduction' in 2013.

I provided the evidence that they were.

She rejected that evidence.

Do you too?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 06, 2019, 09:33:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 06, 2019, 09:20:32 PM
G-Unit said:

I would like to see evidence that the PJ were investigating 'abduction' in 2013.

I provided the evidence that they were.

She rejected that evidence.

Do you too?

You were unable to provide evidence, just newspaper speculations and rumours.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 06, 2019, 09:42:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 06, 2019, 09:33:43 PM
You were unable to provide evidence, just newspaper speculations and rumours.
If you are able to think this through logically you will see that obviously the PJ reopened the investigation in tandem with the Met based on new information pointing to a stranger abduction.  ALL the news reports at the time, including those in Portugal make this clear.  Another rather large clue is the fact that several individuals who were not the McCanns nor their friends were made arguidos by the PJ as part of the reinvestigation.  Of course if logical thought is not available to you, then that opens up any old daft alternative scenarios to you.  Believe what you wish, it matters not a jot to me. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 07, 2019, 08:40:56 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 06, 2019, 09:20:32 PM
G-Unit said:

I would like to see evidence that the PJ were investigating 'abduction' in 2013.

I provided the evidence that they were.

She rejected that evidence.

Do you too?


If they did,coupled with what was said in 2017 then its likely to have moved on from abduction. IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 07, 2019, 09:09:34 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 06, 2019, 09:42:41 PM
If you are able to think this through logically you will see that obviously the PJ reopened the investigation in tandem with the Met based on new information pointing to a stranger abduction.  ALL the news reports at the time, including those in Portugal make this clear.  Another rather large clue is the fact that several individuals who were not the McCanns nor their friends were made arguidos by the PJ as part of the reinvestigation.  Of course if logical thought is not available to you, then that opens up any old daft alternative scenarios to you.  Believe what you wish, it matters not a jot to me.

What I noticed was that the Portuguese investigation was reopened immediately after the Crimewatch programme when the efits of Smithman were (finally) released.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 07, 2019, 03:29:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 07, 2019, 09:09:34 AM
What I noticed was that the Portuguese investigation was reopened immediately after the Crimewatch programme when the efits of Smithman were (finally) released.
Meaning?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 13, 2019, 08:29:22 PM
There's an interesting programme regarding the MET and  investigation's,its focusing on last year with what then was record numbers of people being killed, also a robbery with the robber brandishing a firearm.A rape case and successful prosecution also featured. I would think imo anyway that the OG inquiry would feature way down on the list of priorities.
Its available on bbc  i player,the third part is due to be on this coming Thursday.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on October 13, 2019, 09:42:54 PM
Quote from: barrier on October 13, 2019, 08:29:22 PM
There's an interesting programme regarding the MET and  investigation's,its focusing on last year with what then was record numbers of people being killed, also a robbery with the robber brandishing a firearm.A rape case and successful prosecution also featured. I would think imo anyway that the OG inquiry would feature way down on the list of priorities.
Its available on bbc  i player,the third part is due to be on this coming Thursday.

I would agree, the Portuguese police have more important things to do rather than chase ghosts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 13, 2019, 09:59:38 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on October 13, 2019, 09:42:54 PM
I would agree, the Portuguese police have more important things to do rather than chase ghosts.

Indeed in 2007 they appeared to have more important things to do than solve burglaries in their resorts; track down an intruder or perhaps even more than one who appeared to have carte blanche to make free with children in the holiday homes which were invaded without let or hindrance; they also appeared to have a very laid back attitude when it came to tracking individuals, having missed out on Tannerman and Smithman to name but two of many; they also appeared relaxed about determining exactly what sort of crime might have been committed against Madeleine McCann ... didn't stop them from throwing everything they could dream up at trying to determine the parents dunnit ... they couldn't even manage that though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on October 13, 2019, 10:26:05 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 13, 2019, 09:59:38 PM
Indeed in 2007 they appeared to have more important things to do than solve burglaries in their resorts; track down an intruder or perhaps even more than one who appeared to have carte blanche to make free with children in the holiday homes which were invaded without let or hindrance; they also appeared to have a very laid back attitude when it came to tracking individuals, having missed out on Tannerman and Smithman to name but two of many; they also appeared relaxed about determining exactly what sort of crime might have been committed against Madeleine McCann ... didn't stop them from throwing everything they could dream up at trying to determine the parents dunnit ... they couldn't even manage that though.

True colours shining through.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 13, 2019, 10:30:46 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on October 13, 2019, 10:26:05 PM
True colours shining through.

Please refrain from hurling insults.

I have made statements.  Refute them if you can.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on October 14, 2019, 05:39:01 AM
Quote from: Brietta on October 13, 2019, 10:30:46 PM
Please refrain from hurling insults.

I have made statements.  Refute them if you can.

Here's true statements for you.  Refute them if you can.

You were selected as a moderator because you were biased.

R6179 clearly shows what that bias was/is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 14, 2019, 07:46:47 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on October 14, 2019, 05:39:01 AM
Here's true statements for you.  Refute them if you can.

You were selected as a moderator because you were biased.

R6179 clearly shows what that bias was/is.
Has Brietta ever claimed to be a fencesitter?  We all know she supports the McCanns and believes them to be innicent so why the need for such a goading post?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on October 14, 2019, 08:14:03 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 14, 2019, 07:46:47 AM
Has Brietta ever claimed to be a fencesitter?  We all know she supports the McCanns and believes them to be innicent so why the need for such a goading post?

You might, being such an old-timer.

Guests might not realise that Brietta's post was biased.

I do hope we are not going to have an extended debate over this.  The water has long since flowed under the bridge.

Adele 25 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo2AqRD0_7g
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 14, 2019, 08:17:33 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on October 14, 2019, 08:14:03 AM
You might, being such an old-timer.

Guests might not realise that Brietta's post was biased.

I do hope we are not going to have an extended debate over this.  The water has long since flowed under the bridge.

Adele 25 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo2AqRD0_7g

I think you need to look at the meaning of the word biased....it implies an opinion based on prejudice.
i seee briettas opinion to be based on logic so in that sense she is not biased. You are once again posting your opinion as fact.....imo it isnt
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on October 14, 2019, 08:39:17 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 14, 2019, 08:17:33 AM
I think you need to look at the meaning of the word biased....it implies an opinion based on prejudice.
i seee briettas opinion to be based on logic so in that sense she is not biased. You are once again posting your opinion as fact.....imo it isnt

You are welcome to your opinion. 

I don't need to research words before posting.

If a moderator finds my post was in breach of forum rules then the correct action would be to delete it.

I'm happy to let our guests make an evaluation of your opinion, so hopefully we can move on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 14, 2019, 08:44:49 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on October 14, 2019, 08:39:17 AM
You are welcome to your opinion. 

I don't need to research words before posting.

If a moderator finds my post was in breach of forum rules then the correct action would be to delete it.

I'm happy to let our guests make an evaluation of your opinion, so hopefully we can move on.

I think by guests you mean spiders and bots... And yes... Let's move on
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 14, 2019, 10:04:10 AM
Quote from: Brietta on October 13, 2019, 09:59:38 PM
Indeed in 2007 they appeared to have more important things to do than solve burglaries in their resorts; track down an intruder or perhaps even more than one who appeared to have carte blanche to make free with children in the holiday homes which were invaded without let or hindrance; they also appeared to have a very laid back attitude when it came to tracking individuals, having missed out on Tannerman and Smithman to name but two of many; they also appeared relaxed about determining exactly what sort of crime might have been committed against Madeleine McCann ... didn't stop them from throwing everything they could dream up at trying to determine the parents dunnit ... they couldn't even manage that though.

In my opinion it's not possible to demonstrate that the above opinions are correct. There's no evidence that the burglary and holiday home invasions were reported to the police.

There's also no evidence that the Portuguese police could have identified Tannerman if he was a British tourist, that was LP's area of responsibility.

I accept that the PJ failed to pin down the group's timeline, which may have helped to move forward the identification of Smithman.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 14, 2019, 10:26:17 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 14, 2019, 08:44:49 AM
I think by guests you mean spiders and bots... And yes... Let's move on
hehehe....spiders and bots....and spider bots.
I've mentioned this before,  but I know from old that most of the guests are indeed 'webcrawlers' or 'bots' harvesting information for search engines. I know it's off topic, but we are wandering off-topic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 14, 2019, 10:27:26 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 14, 2019, 10:04:10 AM
In my opinion it's not possible to demonstrate that the above opinions are correct. There's no evidence that the burglary and holiday home invasions were reported to the police.

There's also no evidence that the Portuguese police could have identified Tannerman if he was a British tourist, that was LP's area of responsibility.

I accept that the PJ failed to pin down the group's timeline, which may have helped to move forward the identification of Smithman.

It is fact not opinion that the Algarve was a hot spot for burglaries.

It is fact not opinion that female British children were subject to assault by an intruder/s in holiday accommodation in the Algarve and in Luz itself as their parents slept under the same roof.

British parents with children of Madeleine's age who were walking children home from evening creche around the relevant time of the disappearance were quite firmly under the jurisdiction of the Portuguese police.  At least one parent claims to have reported their movements to them and heard nothing more.

It is sheer nonsense to suggest that any information given by the McCanns or their friends could possibly have any bearing whatsoever on the Smith sighting.
The Smiths did not report their sighting for fourteen days after the event.  No one knew about it except the Smiths.  Don't you think that might have been a major factor in the fact that not only was identification not 'moved forward' at the time, but as far as we know he has never been identified?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 14, 2019, 10:29:07 AM
Quote from: The General on October 14, 2019, 10:26:17 AM
hehehe....spiders and bots....and spider bots.
I've mentioned this before,  but I know from old that most of the guests are indeed 'webcrawlers' or 'bots' harvesting information for search engines. I know it's off topic, but we are wandering off-topic.

I raised the issue before but you have supplied the answer... These so called guests never seem to read any of the threads
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 14, 2019, 10:48:02 AM
Quote from: The General on October 14, 2019, 10:26:17 AM
hehehe....spiders and bots....and spider bots.
I've mentioned this before,  but I know from old that most of the guests are indeed 'webcrawlers' or 'bots' harvesting information for search engines. I know it's off topic, but we are wandering off-topic.


If any one thinks there's lots of interest imo they are sadly mistaken.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 14, 2019, 11:12:26 AM
Quote from: Brietta on October 14, 2019, 10:27:26 AM
It is fact not opinion that the Algarve was a hot spot for burglaries.

It is fact not opinion that female British children were subject to assault by an intruder/s in holiday accommodation in the Algarve and in Luz itself as their parents slept under the same roof.

British parents with children of Madeleine's age who were walking children home from evening creche around the relevant time of the disappearance were quite firmly under the jurisdiction of the Portuguese police.  At least one parent claims to have reported their movements to them and heard nothing more.

It is sheer nonsense to suggest that any information given by the McCanns or their friends could possibly have any bearing whatsoever on the Smith sighting.
The Smiths did not report their sighting for fourteen days after the event.  No one knew about it except the Smiths.  Don't you think that might have been a major factor in the fact that not only was identification not 'moved forward' at the time, but as far as we know he has never been identified?

Do you have figures demonstrating that the Algarve was a 'hot spot' for burglaries in 2007? Do you have evidence that the villa invasions were reported to the PJ?

Do we have to believe those who say they approached the Portuguese police and were ignored? If so, do we have to believe those who say the UK police ignored them?

The PJ and the Prosecutor said that Gerry McCann was seated in the Tapas restaurant at the time of the Smith sighting, but that's not something they were able to prove or disprove. There were conflicting statements about the time that the alarm was raised.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 14, 2019, 11:19:25 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 14, 2019, 10:29:07 AM
I raised the issue before but you have supplied the answer... These so called guests never seem to read any of the threads
How do you know that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 14, 2019, 11:24:25 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on October 14, 2019, 11:19:25 AM
How do you know that?

Because if you look at how many guests are reading each post you can work it out
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 14, 2019, 11:25:02 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on October 14, 2019, 11:19:25 AM
How do you know that?

Have a look,there are currently around 150 guest's on the Madeleine board,what do you suppose they are doing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 14, 2019, 11:28:03 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 14, 2019, 11:12:26 AM
Do you have figures demonstrating that the Algarve was a 'hot spot' for burglaries in 2007? Do you have evidence that the villa invasions were reported to the PJ?

Do we have to believe those who say they approached the Portuguese police and were ignored? If so, do we have to believe those who say the UK police ignored them?

The PJ and the Prosecutor said that Gerry McCann was seated in the Tapas restaurant at the time of the Smith sighting, but that's not something they were able to prove or disprove. There were conflicting statements about the time that the alarm was raised.

Well Mrs Fenn claims in her wit stat dated 20th Aug 2007 that she was the victim of an attempted burglary a week prior to the McCanns arrival.

Danny Collins mentions another burglary (attempted ?) in his book.  From memory I think this was block 4 but I've no idea how reliable this is.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 14, 2019, 11:29:15 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 14, 2019, 11:24:25 AM
Because if you look at how many guests are reading each post you can work it out

But I think the numbers might be based on those active during the previous X number of minutes?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 14, 2019, 11:30:06 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 14, 2019, 11:24:25 AM
Because if you look at how many guests are reading each post you can work it out
OK there are boards, threads, and posts.  When I look at the JonBenet board, there are usually myself and one other guest on the board, and that guest is usually on the thread I'm working on.  How can I tell if they read the posts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 14, 2019, 11:32:32 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on October 14, 2019, 08:14:03 AM
You might, being such an old-timer.

Guests might not realise that Brietta's post was biased.

I do hope we are not going to have an extended debate over this.  The water has long since flowed under the bridge.

Adele 25 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo2AqRD0_7g
Perhaps you should campaign for a new rule that we must all declare our position before making any further posts, so that all our poor guests are fully aware of it for the avoidance of any potential misunderstanding.  Consideration  of our undeclared guests is obviously of some great importance to you, though god knows why.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 14, 2019, 11:40:22 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on October 14, 2019, 11:30:06 AM
OK there are boards, threads, and posts.  When I look at the JonBenet board, there are usually myself and one other guest on the board, and that guest is usually on the thread I'm working on.  How can I tell if they read the posts.

I would say the only way you can tell if someone reads a post is if they reply and make reference to a post.  Otherwise we just have viewing figures and this doesn't necessarily mean that if someone has 'viewed' they've actually read the content. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 14, 2019, 11:42:27 AM
https://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/index.php?mod=295
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 14, 2019, 11:47:20 AM
At the time of making this post it says no members and five guests are reading.  I must be one of the guests then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 14, 2019, 11:52:25 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 14, 2019, 11:47:20 AM
At the time of making this post it says no members and five guests are reading.  I must be one of the guests then.

I believe the world population currently stands around 7.7 billion so I think its safe to say our viewing figs by any measures are a drop in the ocean!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 14, 2019, 11:58:20 AM
 (ty6e[a
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on October 14, 2019, 11:52:25 AM
I believe the world population currently stands around 7.7 billion so I think its safe to say our viewing figs by any measures are a drop in the ocean!
But that being said we must  ensure that all the 150 bots and spiders are not lulled into the false belief that Brietta is anything other than a McCann supporter who considers it likely that Madeleine was abducted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 14, 2019, 12:01:03 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 14, 2019, 11:58:20 AM
(ty6e[aBut that being said we must  ensure that all the 150 bots and spiders are not lulled into the false belief that Brietta is anything other than a McCann supporter who considers it likely that Madeleine was abducted.

If anyone is that concerned create an avatar and tagline that doesn't leave anyone: human, bot or spider in any doubt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 14, 2019, 07:37:07 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 14, 2019, 11:47:20 AM
At the time of making this post it says no members and five guests are reading.  I must be one of the guests then.
There is a setting for members to appear as guests.  You are definitely a member therefore I'd say it is because of your settings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 14, 2019, 09:03:02 PM

For God's sake, do you all not know about Bots?  Bots hoover up shite.

I personally don't care, but according to Tony Bennett then CMof MM has Six Thousands Members, all of whom are active all of the time.  The fact that only about six of them actually have anything to say can only be here or there.

I no longer contribute to their stats because it all got too ridiculous, but I would have done if I had thought the Site was worth reading.  Actually, I meant Shite as opposed to Site, but The Word Thingy got me there for a minute.

Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday.  Thursday won't do you see.  Because there is nothing to support that one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 14, 2019, 09:10:41 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 14, 2019, 09:03:02 PM
For God's sake, do you all not know about Bots?  Bots hoover up shite.

I personally don't care, but according to Tony Bennett then CMof MM has Six Thousands Members, all of whom are active all of the time.  The fact that only about six of them actually have anything to say can only be here or there.

I no longer contribute to their stats because it all got too ridiculous, but I would have done if I had thought the Site was worth reading.  Actually, I meant Shite as opposed to Site, but The Word Thingy got me there for a minute.

Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday.  Thursday won't do you see.  Because there is nothing to support that one.
Are you having a bad day?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 14, 2019, 10:08:54 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on October 14, 2019, 09:10:41 PM
Are you having a bad day?

What?  Of course I am having a bad day.  My Leaseholders think that I have lost my marbles yet again, despite the last debacle of "Right to Manage".  Google that if you are interested.  I was only 70 years old on the last occasion that this happened some ten years ago, which all ended in chaos.

And there is sweet b....r all that I can do about it yet again.  My Leaseholders are free to abuse and neglect my property at their will, even for their own sake.

And I don't suppose that you expected that for an answer.

Full Moon has passed now, and I will cope.  It just caught me at the wrong time.  I get a bit negative at Full Moon. 

I cannot actually beat them, but I can't half make life a bit difficult for them.  I haven't forgotten the last time.  And nor will they by the time I have finished with them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 15, 2019, 12:29:44 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 14, 2019, 10:08:54 PM
What?  Of course I am having a bad day.  My Leaseholders think that I have lost my marbles yet again, despite the last debacle of "Right to Manage".  Google that if you are interested.  I was only 70 years old on the last occasion that this happened some ten years ago, which all ended in chaos.

And there is sweet b....r all that I can do about it yet again.  My Leaseholders are free to abuse and neglect my property at their will, even for their own sake.

And I don't suppose that you expected that for an answer.

Full Moon has passed now, and I will cope.  It just caught me at the wrong time.  I get a bit negative at Full Moon. 

I cannot actually beat them, but I can't half make life a bit difficult for them.  I haven't forgotten the last time.  And nor will they by the time I have finished with them.
Doesn't sound like a good situation to be in.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 15, 2019, 01:18:34 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on October 15, 2019, 12:29:44 AM
Doesn't sound like a good situation to be in.

No, it isn't.  Presuming that someone like me would actually care.  Which I do.

Not very many ordinary people actually own Freeholds.  And if they do then most of them have no real conception of what it means.

I own the Freehold of a very nice building of five flats, none of which I could afford to live in.  But come hell or high water my Leaseholders have a right to some protection from me, which I am about to be deprived of. 

One of my Leaseholders has decided that she can do better than my Managing Agent, and such is The Law that I can do nothing about.

Forget that it was a total cock up the last time her husband tried this.  I still have no right of say.  And who knows. perhaps she might be better at it than her husband was.  She can't possibly be worse.

Eventually, I will have to pick up the pieces.  Managing a Leasehold Property is never as easy as it seems, mainly because no one ever actually wants to pay, or even thinks that they have to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on October 15, 2019, 02:23:23 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 15, 2019, 01:18:34 AM
No, it isn't.  Presuming that someone like me would actually care.  Which I do.

Not very many ordinary people actually own Freeholds.  And if they do then most of them have no real conception of what it means.

I own the Freehold of a very nice building of five flats, none of which I could afford to live in.  But come hell or high water my Leaseholders have a right to some protection from me, which I am about to be deprived of. 

One of my Leaseholders has decided that she can do better than my Managing Agent, and such is The Law that I can do nothing about.

Forget that it was a total cock up the last time her husband tried this.  I still have no right of say.  And who knows. perhaps she might be better at it than her husband was.  She can't possibly be worse.

Eventually, I will have to pick up the pieces.  Managing a Leasehold Property is never as easy as it seems, mainly because no one ever actually wants to pay, or even thinks that they have to.

Does each flat owner have a copy of the reglement de copropriété?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 15, 2019, 04:46:06 AM
Quote from: misty on October 15, 2019, 02:23:23 AM
Does each flat owner have a copy of the reglement de copropriété?

Absolutely.  No one buys a flat without signing The Lease.  Unfortunately they don't make a habit of reading it before they sign it.  And then they get a bit cross when the odd problem occurs that doesn't appear to be anything to do with them, like The Roof, if they don't live precisely underneath it.

However, if this is something else that I haven't yet come across, does it do anything for me as The Freeholder?  I certainly need something on my side at the moment because there is sweet b....r all else.

Any of my Leaseholders collectively can take over my property without so much as an if you please.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on October 16, 2019, 07:22:03 PM
Maddie case: In their first interview since they quit being suspects in the disappearance of their daughter, Kate and Gerry McCann spoke about the re-launch of the investigation, the fear that they felt in Portugal and the unshakable certainty that Madeleine was abducted

“Nothing in the process says that Madeleine has died”

Q – What are you presently doing to find Madeleine?
Gerry – We have had private investigators working with us for several months. Now that the case has been archived, it’s easier because we accessed the process. We carried out new interviews with those that had already testified. And we interviewed others who approached us and had never spoken before.
Kate – As we didn’t know what the PJ had done, we repeated everything that seemed important to us.

Q – Do the new witnesses offer clues about the disappearance?
Gerry – Some report sightings, but it’s not likely that they lead to our daughter. We are more interested in persons that offer credible information that can be verified through photographs or in another form; persons who know who may be involved.

Q – What impression did you get from the process? Were you shocked over its contents?
Gerry – We were investigated into the smallest detail. There are entire volumes about us. We can jump those. It must be disquieting information that will not help us to find Madeleine.

Q – Don’t you think that everything that was possible to do, was done? The investigation reached Poland, the Netherlands, Spain, Morocco…
Gerry – Morocco is a good example of what went wrong. A sighting was reported and it was said that there were cameras at the petrol station. When the inspectors went there, they concluded that there were none. The truth is that there were none in the pump area, but in the shop. And when the PJ returned, the tape had been recorded over.
Kate – It’s difficult to describe how it feels to have our daughter taken away… We want to see action everywhere. We wanted spotlights, we wanted helicopters, we wanted everyone on the street, searching.

Q – If Madeleine had disappeared in England, would things have been different?
Gerry – If it had happened in a British city, I have no doubts. But I don’t know if it would have been different if we had been in a small village in Scotland. Clearly, the English police are more experienced in abductions, they are more alert.

Q – If you have an important clue concerning Madeleine’s whereabouts, will you transmit it to the Portuguese police?
Gerry – If something needs to be done in Portugal, we’ll have to. We cannot go around breaking doors down or arresting people. But only when we feel that we cannot advance any further on our own.

Q – Do you trust the Portuguese authorities, after having been considered suspects?
Gerry – We wouldn’t mind if we had been investigated at the beginning, if they thought that could help. But months later, when the evidence had been lost? It’s that once the suspicion is installed, we can never prove our innocence again.

Q – Didn’t you find it strange that the dogs found traces of blood in your room and in your rental car…
Gerry – There was no blood found! The indicia are worthless if they are not corroborated by forensic information. And they were not.

Q – 40 apartments were investigated and the dogs only marked yours. Ten cars and they only reacted to yours.
Gerry – These dogs’ frailty was proved by a study that was carried out in the USA, in the case of a man that had been accused of murder. They had ten rooms, and in each room four boxes were placed, containing vegetables, bones, trash. Some contained human remains. They stayed there for ten hours. Eight hours after the boxes were removed, the dogs came in. And the dogs failed two thirds of the attempts. Imagine the reliability when these dogs test an apartment three months after the disappearance of a child.

Q – Were you surprised when you were made arguidos?
Kate – It was not surprising after weeks with the media saying that we were suspects. And there we have to ask why the information that reached the media was disfigured. Why do the newspapers say that blood was found in the apartment when the police report does not confirm it? Why was it said that the DNA that was found in the car was a 100% match with Madeleine’s?
Gerry – In a way, we would like to have been accused so we could defend ourselves openly. Now, reading the process, there is no evidence that justifies the suspicion, apart from the dogs’ action. There was never a sustained explanation. And the questioning: ‘What happened to Madeleine? How did you get rid of her? Who helped you? Where did you put her? All fantasy! If they had found DNA – so what? And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment – why would that be our fault?

Q – Do you investigate information that point towards Madeleine’s death?
Kate – We want to find her alive, but if she is dead we want to know.

Q – Do you still believe that she’s alive?
Kate – There are great possibilities that she is alive, isn’t it? There is nothing in the process to indicate that something bad has happened to her…

Q – But there are no indicia that she has been abducted, either.
Gerry – We firmly believe that she was abducted by a man, minutes after I went to see her in the bedroom. There are two independent witnesses that saw a child of around four years of age being carried that evening. Our friend Jane Tanner and also the Smith family.

Q – The PJ discredits Jane Tanner’s testimony. They say that when she saw said man with the child, you [Gerry] were chatting nearby and it was impossible that you hadn’t seen him as well…
Gerry – I didn’t see her because my back was turned to the location where she passed. I was talking to a friend. And there is also the couple with children that saw a man carrying a child with a pyjama that was similar to Madeleine’s, blond hair, the same age.

Q – Later on, that family stated that the man they saw was Gerry…
Gerry – At that time I was at the restaurant. The fact that we became suspects has probably influenced the Smiths’ testimony.

Q – Was it a coincidence that you were made arguidos on one day and returned home the next day?
Gerry – They questioned us on that day because the PJ knew about our return.

Q – Were you afraid of being arrested?
Kate – Obviously. At a certain point we didn’t know very well what could happen.
Gerry – From the information in the newspapers, of course we were afraid. It was scary.

Q – Being in England, you would not be extradited anymore.
Gerry – We asked the inspector that was in charge of the case of he had any objection: the answer was no. It’s obvious that we were afraid that people might think we were escaping, but it was better not to be in Portugal at that point in time.

Q – Why?
Kate – Because of the hostile environment. We couldn’t even leave the house.

Q – Why did Kate refuse to answer questions during your interrogation, that Gerry accepted to clarify the next day?
Kate – I was advised by my Portuguese lawyer not to reply.
Gerry – I received the same advice but decided to disobey. My plan was to remain silent, but the first question was: are you involved in your daughter’s disappearance? It was nonsense and I decided to answer. From there onwards, I replied to all of them.

Q – Why didn’t you authorize the police to see the messages that you sent and received on your mobile phone on the eve of Maddie’s disappearance.
Gerry – Nobody asked to see my messages. On the day before and on the day of the disappearance I did not receive or send 16 messages. I could hardly write a text message. I received three or four phone calls and two were from work. After the disappearance I received hundreds. And when the police asked me for the registry, I told them to ask the service provider. My phone only registers the last ten.

Q – The chief inspector in the case, Tavares de Almeida, writes a report where he says that your friends lied to save you, that Maddie died in the living room, and that you hid the body.
Gerry – What can we say? You will have to ask the police chiefs why they wrote that, why they saw us as suspects.

Q – The majority of crimes where the victims are children are committed by the parents.
Gerry – Not in the case of abducted children. And this is a case of an abducted child. It’s an exceptional case.

Q – When he archived the case, the prosecutor said that the investigation can be reopened if a new clue appears. Do you think that is possible?
Kate – Of course! It could happen at any moment. All that it takes is for one person to make the phone call that we wait for so much. We know that she was abducted in Portugal and we vehemently believe that someone knows or suspects something.

“Mr Amaral’s behaviour is a disgrace”

They have not read the book that is a best-seller in Portugal. And they don’t spare the author and former PJ inspector

Q – Former inspector Gonçalo Amaral remains convinced of your involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance. Did you read ‘The Truth of the Lie’, the book that he wrote?
Kate and Gerry – No.
Kate – Why would I?
Gerry – I won’t learn anything from reading it.

Q – It was a success in Portugal.
Gerry – Was it? How many copies did it sell?

Q – Approximately 200 thousand. Next week, it is edited in Spain.
Gerry – That is what can be called illicit enrichment.

Q – Your English lawyers already have a translated copy and they are analyzing it. Do you intend to sue Gonçalo Amaral?
Gerry – At this moment we are focused on what we can do to find Madeleine and not in suing anyone.
Kate – All that I am going to say about this – because I’m not going to waste any time on Mr Amaral – is that as a professional and as a person his behaviour has been a disgrace.

Q – Aren’t you curious to know what the book says?
Kate – What for? It must be nothing but a load of rubbish. It is so secondary… It certainly won’t help to find our daughter. My consolation is that on the cover he calls her Maddie, the name that the media have invented. We never called her anything like that.

Q – But you do know the theory that Gonçalo Amaral defends: Madeleine accidentally died in the Ocean Club apartment and you concealed the body.
Gerry – It really is a waste of time. And we need all the time that we can get to analyze the investigation’s documents, which contain a lot of information that we didn’t know about.
Kate – You just have to cross, loosely, his theory with the process in order to understand that the facts that he reports are not correct.

Q – There is a theory that defends that the coordinator was removed from the investigation due to British political pressure.
Gerry – Who dismissed him?

Q – The PJ’s national director.
Gerry – Then you have to ask him if he was pressured. Or if Gordon Brown discussed the case with him. He surely didn’t.

Q – He also resigned. And largely due to this process.
Gerry – That was not what I was told. Apparently he had a vision of the police itself that was different from the one held by the Justice Minister.

Q – In a final analysis, they both left the PJ because the investigation failed.
Gerry – That’s not our fault. I do not criticize the authorities over not trying to find Madeleine. It doesn’t matter anymore. Now all that matters is that we do everything to try to find her, through our own methods.

Q – Did you ever get to know Gonçalo Amaral?
Kate – The question is the other way around: did he get to know us?

There are photographs of her all over the house

Gerry has returned to his work as a cardiologist. Kate did not exercise medicine again. Twins Sean and Amelie fill up her days as a mother.

Q – How has your life changed with the disappearance of Madeleine?
Gerry – Independently of what happens, it will never be the same again. If you talk to the parents of other abducted children, they also mention this parallel life which we entered. Sean and Amelie, being so young, force us to introduce a certain normalcy in our lives, to make it normal for them. And it’s them who, for moments, make it normal for us. But it will never be normal for us. They are aged three and a half, and they are very, very happy.

Q – Did you explain to the twins what happened to their sister?
Kate – They perceive Madeleine’s absence perfectly. I have no doubt whatsoever. But they don’t know the details. They know that she disappeared and that we’re looking for her.
Gerry – We were advised concerning what we should tell them, how and when. Larger explanations are kept for later. We realize that they miss their older sister. They know that her not being with us is not a good thing, and they hope that she returns.

Q – How do you keep Madeleine present in your lives?
Kate – There are photographs of her all over the house. And we speak about her with the twins every day – it’s an important part of their lives. Sean and Amelie talk about her and still include her in their playing… If they receive sweets, they say “Let’s keep one for Madeleine”. Or “When she comes home I’ll give her this or that”. It’s endearing and it makes our days less difficult.

Q – Did you fear that you might lose custody over Sean and Amelie because your behaviour was considered to be negligent?
Gerry – We were not negligent, we did what any reasonable parent would do. But we deeply lament what happened, because in our action, someone saw an opportunity to take Madeleine. I’m an optimist person. I never thought that something like this could happen.

Q – Did you change the manner in which you deal with Sean and Amelie?
Gerry – We are more protective and less trusting. We never left our children alone again and many families will never do so again because of us.
Kate – Now we think about everything that can happen, about predators, abductors. We don’t even let go of them in the shopping centre.

€1.200.000

The McCanns say that the fund has spent €1.2 million with the private investigation. But the reward of €3 million still stands

Q – How much have you spent on the private investigation so far?
Gerry – Approximately one million pounds, over the past ten months, paid with money from the FindMadeleine fund. A substantial sum was also spent on our defence, but two benefactors have covered that expense, which means that the fund was solely used in the search for our daughter.

Q – Do you maintain the offer of 2.5 million ponds to whoever finds Madeleine?
Gerry – We do not control that reward, but everything leads me to believe that it still stands. And that there will also be money available for whoever supplies credible information.
Kate – It’s a lot of money, but we cannot set limits, a child is priceless. We’ll pay whatever is necessary.

Q – Is there still money left in the fund?
Gerry – There is still some money left. Recently, British newspapers (‘Express newspapers’) paid us a compensation of 550 thousand pounds, which fed the fund. That had an important impact. And there are still donations, people who send money directly.

Q – But less than in the beginning, before you were made arguidos.
Gerry – Of course! Those who were in doubt stopped contributing. Many write to us asking for forgiveness because they believed in our guilt. We know that we have to make an effort for people to know that there is no evidence that Madeleine is dead and that we were not involved in the disappearance.

Other issues

Dogs – “We read everything that we found about these dogs that detect cadavers. It was due to them that we became suspects”

Clues – “The sightings continue. Since May we received one thousand phone calls and an equal number of emails, some containing relevant data”

Media exposure – “Appearing in the media was never good. We did it to publicize Madeleine’s face and to find her. We failed”

Background

Details of two hours of conversation

Kate and Gerry are different. More relaxed, or conformed. It is difficult to tell. “The twins force us to a certain normalcy”, the mother explains. It’s been 16 months and the mystery of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann remains unsolved.

The parents have already been victims of a tragedy and suspects of a terrible crime. The process was archived, but they are judged every day. Gerry agrees: “From the moment when the suspicion is installed, we can never prove our innocence”.

This is the first interview since the process was archived, on the 21st of July. It is scheduled in Rothley, a small village in the British Midlands where nobody suspects the McCanns’ guilt. Even less the owner of the Court House Hotel, which is installed in a medieval building and where the interview is held, in the late afternoon last Monday. There is tea with milk and biscuits. There is no guide and there are no forbidden questions.

In almost two hours of interview, Kate and Gerry, both 40, clearly state the intention that supports their availability for the conversation. “We believe that in Portugal someone knows about Madeleine, that it is where the solution for our daughter’s disappearance lies”. And they want that person, whether singular or collective, to know that they search for him, that they ensure his anonymity and that they even give him 2.5 million pounds if he tells them where Madeleine is.

Every day, in their very British house of little bricks, they study a little more of the process of the Polícia Judiciária’s investigation, which they personally consult as it is being translated. They understand “nothing” of Portuguese. From a first reading they reinforced their hope of finding Maddie alive. Nothing tells them that she is dead. The volumes about themselves, from the time when they were made arguidos, have been put aside. “We do not intend to read them”.

They remind them of the days when they were afraid of being arrested in Portugal, accused of Madeleine’s death.

article by: Raquel Moleiro and Rui Gustavo

source: Expresso, paper edition, 06.09.2008
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 17, 2019, 07:22:48 AM
Yesterday the parents of a Sandy Hook victim won nearly $500k in a defamation lawsuit against a c0nspiral00n: 

On Tuesday, Mr Pozner emphasised that the case was not about First Amendment protections for free speech.
"Mr Fetzer has the right to believe that Sandy Hook never happened. He has the right to express his ignorance," he said, according to the Wisconsin State Journal.
"This award, however, further illustrates the difference between the right of people like Mr Fetzer to be wrong and the right of victims like myself and my child to be free from defamation, free from harassment and free from the intentional infliction of terror."

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 17, 2019, 08:01:15 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 17, 2019, 07:22:48 AM
Yesterday the parents of a Sandy Hook victim won nearly $500k in a defamation lawsuit against a c0nspiral00n: 

On Tuesday, Mr Pozner emphasised that the case was not about First Amendment protections for free speech.
"Mr Fetzer has the right to believe that Sandy Hook never happened. He has the right to express his ignorance," he said, according to the Wisconsin State Journal.
"This award, however, further illustrates the difference between the right of people like Mr Fetzer to be wrong and the right of victims like myself and my child to be free from defamation, free from harassment and free from the intentional infliction of terror."

Snip
Pozner's six-year-old son Noah was the youngest of 26 victims who died in the 2012 shooting.

He filed a defamation claim against Fetzer, reports CBS. Pozner says the book caused him to receive hateful messages and death threats.

"It causes people to believe that I lied about my son's death, that my son didn't die, and that I'm somehow doing that for some other reasons," said Pozner.

When Fetzer took the stand on Tuesday the retired professor attempted to argue his book is not defamatory as the statements in it are true.

The judge would not allow him to argue the legitimacy of false statements, reports CBS.

Fetzer said the amount of the damages was "absurd" and plans to appeal.
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2019/10/author-of-conspiracy-book-nobody-died-at-sandy-hook-must-pay-over-nz-700-000-to-victim-s-father.html


What does that remind you of?

I think it demonstrates that victims have the right not to be further victimised by any old nonsense written about them whatever the beliefs of the author.

Noah had the right to dignity in death.  Madeleine had the right to presumption she was alive in the absence of proof to the contrary.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 17, 2019, 10:51:33 AM
Sandy Hook, I assume, can be proved to have happened, so the writer can be proved to be wrong. Amaral can't be proved to be wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 17, 2019, 12:37:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 17, 2019, 10:51:33 AM
Sandy Hook, I assume, can be proved to have happened, so the writer can be proved to be wrong. Amaral can't be proved to be wrong.

Snip
He filed a defamation claim against Fetzer, reports CBS. Pozner says the book caused him to receive hateful messages and death threats.

"It causes people to believe that I lied about my son's death, that my son didn't die, and that I'm somehow doing that for some other reasons," said Pozner.
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2019/10/author-of-conspiracy-book-nobody-died-at-sandy-hook-must-pay-over-nz-700-000-to-victim-s-father.html


All of which happened to Kate and Gerry McCann with the exception of having to bury their murdered child.

As a result of 'false statements' repeated in the press, the McCanns ~ their friends ~ Murat and his friends, were awarded substantial damages by the courts.
There was no evidence supporting the false claims made by Amaral in his book and other media and it will be interesting to see what is made of the Portuguese appeal court judges' opinion when it is reviewed in Europe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 17, 2019, 12:56:23 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 17, 2019, 12:37:12 PM
Snip
He filed a defamation claim against Fetzer, reports CBS. Pozner says the book caused him to receive hateful messages and death threats.

"It causes people to believe that I lied about my son's death, that my son didn't die, and that I'm somehow doing that for some other reasons," said Pozner.
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2019/10/author-of-conspiracy-book-nobody-died-at-sandy-hook-must-pay-over-nz-700-000-to-victim-s-father.html


All of which happened to Kate and Gerry McCann with the exception of having to bury their murdered child.

As a result of 'false statements' repeated in the press, the McCanns ~ their friends ~ Murat and his friends, were awarded substantial damages by the courts.
There was no evidence supporting the false claims made by Amaral in his book and other media and it will be interesting to see what is made of the Portuguese appeal court judges' opinion when it is reviewed in Europe.

I don't know about the others, but the UK courts awarded no damages to the McCanns, because the case never reached trial. Express Newspaper Group offered damages and costs and the McCanns accepted the offer;

Media lawyer Paul Gilbert, from Finers Stephens Innocent, said the courts encourage early settlement of defamation cases.

"Clearly the Express' lawyers felt this was a case they should settle without a high-profile trial - which it would be - and as a result have saved considerable costs," he said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7303801.stm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on October 17, 2019, 03:23:27 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 15, 2019, 04:46:06 AM
Absolutely.  No one buys a flat without signing The Lease.  Unfortunately they don't make a habit of reading it before they sign it.  And then they get a bit cross when the odd problem occurs that doesn't appear to be anything to do with them, like The Roof, if they don't live precisely underneath it.

However, if this is something else that I haven't yet come across, does it do anything for me as The Freeholder?  I certainly need something on my side at the moment because there is sweet b....r all else.

Any of my Leaseholders collectively can take over my property without so much as an if you please.

This document, written from a prospective lessee's point of view, may be of some help.
https://www.french-property.com/news/french_property/buying_copropriete_france/
Having lived in a leasehold property in UK & at one time been part of a collective which undertook the role of managing agents, we found that the freeholder still had ultimate power. A majority of lessee's had to agree to adopt the same role of managing agents, a committee was formed, etc. All funds collected were held by the freeholder who also had the last word on any work proposed. As the freeholder, do you not have any right in France to repossess a flat if the lessee refuses to comply with/pay bills related to the service charge?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 17, 2019, 05:17:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 17, 2019, 10:51:33 AM
Sandy Hook, I assume, can be proved to have happened, so the writer can be proved to be wrong. Amaral can't be proved to be wrong.
If Sandy Hook can be proved to have happened how come so many people believe it did not? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 17, 2019, 05:37:32 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 17, 2019, 05:17:38 PM
If Sandy Hook can be proved to have happened how come so many people believe it did not?

Good question.

Among other obvious explanations regarding the mental capacity which drives conspiracy theorists; I think there is a vested interest at play in the gun lobby tolerance of the massacre of American children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 17, 2019, 08:30:17 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 17, 2019, 05:37:32 PM
Good question.

Among other obvious explanations regarding the mental capacity which drives conspiracy theorists; I think there is a vested interest at play in the gun lobby tolerance of the massacre of American children.

It's not that the gun lobby are indifferent to the massacre of American children. In my opinion they argue that someone who wants to get a gun and shoot people will find a way, regardless of the gun laws.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 17, 2019, 09:01:20 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 17, 2019, 08:30:17 PM
It's not that the gun lobby are indifferent to the massacre of American children. In my opinion they argue that someone who wants to get a gun and shoot people will find a way, regardless of the gun laws.
We have had our own problems but at least we have attempted to minimise the risk of mass shootings and have probably had some measure of success.
The gun lobby in the USA doesn't seem to think there is a problem. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 17, 2019, 09:06:56 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 17, 2019, 09:01:20 PM
We have had our own problems but at least we have attempted to minimise the risk of mass shootings and have probably had some measure of success.
The gun lobby in the USA doesn't seem to think there is a problem.


A large proportion of the US population don't seem to think there is a problem
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 17, 2019, 09:13:29 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 17, 2019, 09:06:56 PM

A large proportion of the US population don't seem to think there is a problem

Half the population are below average intelligence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 19, 2019, 03:17:50 PM
The Redwine trial where cadaver dog alerts are to be allowed has been put back.

https://denver.cbslocal.com/2019/08/13/mark-redwine-dylan-redwine-murder-trial-durango/


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 21, 2019, 10:24:41 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 17, 2019, 09:13:29 PM
Half the population are below average intelligence

Cite please.  If half the population are of below intelligence I very much doubt society would function as it does. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 21, 2019, 11:03:10 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on October 21, 2019, 10:24:41 AM
Cite please.  If half the population are of below intelligence I very much doubt society would function as it does.
Exactly the reason society is such a mess. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 21, 2019, 11:10:45 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on October 21, 2019, 11:03:10 AM
Exactly the reason society is such a mess.

Afaik there's no evidence half the population is below average intelligence?

What 'mess' are you referring to and what evidence do you have that any such mess is caused by low levels of intelligence?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 21, 2019, 12:03:18 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on October 21, 2019, 11:10:45 AM
Afaik there's no evidence half the population is below average intelligence?

What 'mess' are you referring to and what evidence do you have that any such mess is caused by low levels of intelligence?

How do you work out an average? Half will be above the average level and half below.  It's an old joke.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 21, 2019, 12:10:28 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on October 21, 2019, 12:03:18 PM
How do you work out an average? Half will be above the average level and half below.  It's an old joke.

The bell curve distribution which is generally accepted by all those who have studied 'intelligence'. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj3jPE04nGM
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2019, 12:16:40 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on October 21, 2019, 10:24:41 AM
Cite please.  If half the population are of below intelligence I very much doubt society would function as it does.

I said below average....... Half are below average height too
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 21, 2019, 12:38:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 21, 2019, 12:16:40 PM
I said below average....... Half are below average height too

Half the population isn't below average in 'intelligence'.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2019, 01:05:34 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on October 21, 2019, 12:38:40 PM
Half the population isn't below average in 'intelligence'.

As  Rob said... It's an old joke... But there is some truth in it.
It doesn't mean half the population is not intelligent... It just means they are below average for that population
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 21, 2019, 01:32:25 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 21, 2019, 01:05:34 PM
As  Rob said... It's an old joke... But there is some truth in it.
It doesn't mean half the population is not intelligent... It just means they are below average for that population

There's not a shred of evidence anywhere to suggest half the population has below average 'intelligence'. 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 21, 2019, 03:23:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 21, 2019, 12:16:40 PM
I said below average....... Half are below average height too

Not true. It depends how you find the average.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2019, 03:34:12 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on October 21, 2019, 01:32:25 PM
There's not a shred of evidence anywhere to suggest half the population has below average 'intelligence'.

Of course there is.... The clue is in the word average
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2019, 03:35:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2019, 03:23:28 PM
Not true. It depends how you find the average.

Is there more than one method of finding the average
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 21, 2019, 03:40:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 21, 2019, 03:34:12 PM
Of course there is.... The clue is in the word average

Please explain how you've calculated that half the population is below average in 'intelligence'. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 21, 2019, 06:11:25 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on October 21, 2019, 03:40:02 PM
Please explain how you've calculated that half the population is below average in 'intelligence'.

Before you try and calculate the data  you need to provide the data and confirm its integrity.

Seperate: gender, age. and actual diagnosis of the  mental capacity of selected population. Probably using a data mart from a matrix.

So  once Davel provides that information we can all look at averages. :)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2019, 06:20:24 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on October 21, 2019, 03:40:02 PM
Please explain how you've calculated that half the population is below average in 'intelligence'.

because if you look at the average....roughly half will be above...and half below...thats what average means
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 21, 2019, 06:52:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 21, 2019, 06:20:24 PM
because if you look at the average....roughly half will be above...and half below...thats what average means

We know what average means. We want to know how you know half are below average intellegence?

Can you provide the data please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2019, 07:43:27 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on October 21, 2019, 06:52:06 PM
We know what average means. We want to know how you know half are below average intellegence?

Can you provide the data please?

Look at the post above yours
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2019, 07:44:32 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on October 21, 2019, 06:52:06 PM
We know what average means. We want to know how you know half are below average intellegence?

Can you provide the data please?

Half above... Half below
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 21, 2019, 08:44:54 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 21, 2019, 03:35:04 PM
Is there more than one method of finding the average

There's the mean, the mode and the median for a start. None of which will be based on true figures anyway. To be sure every member of the population would need to take an IQ test.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2019, 08:49:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2019, 08:44:54 PM
There's the mean, the mode and the median for a start. None of which will be based on true figures anyway. To be sure every member of the population would need to take an IQ test.

I used the word average.. No one would need to take any test
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 21, 2019, 10:51:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2019, 08:44:54 PM
There's the mean, the mode and the median for a start. None of which will be based on true figures anyway. To be sure every member of the population would need to take an IQ test.
A representative sample would be enough.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 22, 2019, 07:59:13 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on October 21, 2019, 10:51:41 PM
A representative sample would be enough.

my stateemnt is based on logic ...it seems Richard Dawkins agrees with me....anyone here heard of Richard Dawkins...


https://twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/656398623333179392?lang=en-gb
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on October 22, 2019, 08:12:51 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 22, 2019, 07:59:13 AM
my stateemnt is based on logic ...it seems Richard Dawkins agrees with me....anyone here heard of Richard Dawkins...


https://twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/656398623333179392?lang=en-gb

It would appear he doesn't understand GCSE Statistics either.   (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 22, 2019, 08:14:03 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 22, 2019, 07:59:13 AM
my stateemnt is based on logic ...it seems Richard Dawkins agrees with me....anyone here heard of Richard Dawkins...


https://twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/656398623333179392?lang=en-gb

It was a joke apparently;


Richard Dawkins
@RichardDawkins
·
21 Oct 2015
@OlgaLeonenko
 Obviously my joke depended on my  using "average" in only one of its three meanings, namely "median". Otherwise it's not funny
https://twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/656398623333179392?lang=en-gb


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 22, 2019, 08:16:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 22, 2019, 08:14:03 AM
It was a joke apparently;


Richard Dawkins
@RichardDawkins
·
21 Oct 2015
@OlgaLeonenko
 Obviously my joke depended on my  using "average" in only one of its three meanings, namely "median". Otherwise it's not funny
https://twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/656398623333179392?lang=en-gb

If you read my posts you will see i said its a joke....but it has avery strong element of truth. I think Im in good company with Richard Dawkins
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 22, 2019, 08:18:40 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on October 22, 2019, 08:12:51 AM
It would appear he doesn't understand GCSE Statistics either.   (&^&

he is...professor of evolutionary biology at Oxford University...has written several best selling books...has lectured worldwide.....but of course you know better
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 22, 2019, 08:51:41 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 22, 2019, 08:18:40 AM
he is...professor of evolutionary biology at Oxford University...has written several best selling books...has lectured worldwide.....but of course you know better
I've met the great man and had a book signed at a lecture. When I say 'met', I mean passed him my book, said hello, took my book back and walked away.

The average human has 3.99999 limbs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 22, 2019, 09:32:48 AM
Quote from: The General on October 22, 2019, 08:51:41 AM
I've met the great man and had a book signed at a lecture. When I say 'met', I mean passed him my book, said hello, took my book back and walked away.

The average human has 3.99999 limbs.

Which book and would you recommend? 

I often listen to him on YouTube vids:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKjiSu4zD5Y   8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 22, 2019, 09:40:35 AM
Quote from: The General on October 22, 2019, 08:51:41 AM
I've met the great man and had a book signed at a lecture. When I say 'met', I mean passed him my book, said hello, took my book back and walked away.

The average human has 3.99999 limbs.

I bet he remembers it well
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 22, 2019, 09:42:45 AM
I remember seeing him having a debate with Cardinal Pell... In Sydney
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 22, 2019, 10:58:09 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on October 22, 2019, 09:32:48 AM
Which book and would you recommend? 

I often listen to him on YouTube vids:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKjiSu4zD5Y   8((()*/
Maybe start with The Selfish Gene, but The God Delusion was the one I had signed. As a ex-indoctrinated catholic this book, along with Hitchens' 'God is Not Great' validated and expounded my atheistic position.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 22, 2019, 11:13:44 AM
Quote from: The General on October 22, 2019, 10:58:09 AM
Maybe start with The Selfish Gene, but The God Delusion was the one I had signed. As a ex-indoctrinated catholic this book, along with Hitchens' 'God is Not Great' validated and expounded my atheistic position.

Thanks. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 22, 2019, 11:30:16 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 22, 2019, 08:16:36 AM
If you read my posts you will see i said its a joke....but it has avery strong element of truth. I think Im in good company with Richard Dawkins
He died didn't he?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on October 22, 2019, 11:46:19 AM
Do you not have Google in Oz, Bob?... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 22, 2019, 12:24:52 PM
Quote from: Myster on October 22, 2019, 11:46:19 AM
Do you not have Google in Oz, Bob?... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins)
I was thinking of Christopher Hitchens, sorry.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 23, 2019, 09:20:07 AM
One for all you dog fans, from today’s Times.  Controversially the article claims dogs sense of smell is 100,100 greater than humans, but as we all know thanks to our resident cadaver dog handler, this is nonsense and humans could just as easily be able to find cats with their noses if they could be bothered to wander around on all fours.

Lost cat? Call the canine pet detective
October 23 2019, 12:01am,
The world’s top kitten finder isn’t Ace Ventura, after all — it’s a cocker spaniel called Molly. Michael Odell meets the hound and the sleuth she works with

Colin Butcher with Molly the pet detective
Colin Butcher with Molly the pet detectiveRACHEL OATES
A couple of years ago our cat Pip disappeared. One minute he was weaving between my legs, canvassing for a snack, the next, gone. Dutifully I made some “missing” posters, including a photo and mobile number, then taped them to local lampposts. A huge tactical error. We live in an area with a large student population, so I was woken at all hours by drunk teenagers miaowing down the phone. Or else there was silence followed by half-stifled giggles, then: “Hey, are you still looking for pussy?”

I wish I’d known Colin Butcher then. The 59-year-old runs a pet detective agency, the only one in the UK. In fact, he claims to be the only one in the world with cat-detection skills. When it comes to searches and investigations Butcher has serious chops. He served as a diver, then as a member of a helicopter search-and-rescue team in the Royal Navy. And after 11 years doing that he spent 14 years with Surrey Police, rising to the rank of detective inspector in the major crimes unit. “Yes, Molly and I know how to investigate,” he says with an assured grin.

Molly is his specially trained cat-detection dog. We meet in a café near his home in Guildford, Surrey. Both are very much in investigation mode. “You obviously own a dog,” says Butcher, noticing a single strand of fur on my trouser leg.

Molly has olfactory capabilities 100,000 times more powerful than any human
Molly has olfactory capabilities 100,000 times more powerful than any human
Meanwhile, Molly, a boisterous black cocker spaniel with olfactory capabilities 100,000 times more powerful than any human, has already detected a toasted cheese and ham sandwich being prepared on a counter next to us. Butcher picks her up and puts her in his lap. She leans across the table and slurps my tea. “She gets restless if she isn’t working,” Butcher says. “I’m sure she’s excited because the next cat we find will be her hundredth.”

They make a cute couple, but I can’t help wondering how does a high-ranking cop who has put away murderers and drug dealers end up going door-to-door seeking information regarding the whereabouts of Smudge and Cuddles? Butcher has written a book, Molly the Pet Detective Dog, that documents his investigations regarding these missing animals. Sometimes the intensity he brings to the job is startling. Such as when a cat called Oscar gets locked in a neighbour’s shed. Butcher finds it, but it has become so dehydrated it later dies.

“ ‘Damn, if only I’d got to him sooner,’ I told myself, slamming my hand against the steering wheel in frustration,” Butcher writes. He sounds like Sherlock Holmes enraged by a particularly dastardly act of his arch-enemy, Moriarty. Yet it was just a cat, locked in a shed.

“In the navy I rescued people and in the police we halted the activities of some very serious criminals, but there is a sense that I was paid and trained to do those jobs. We didn’t high-five or punch the air. I do when we find a lost pet. I can honestly say finding my first cat I got the same high as the day I got my wings [when qualifying as a crewman on Royal Navy helicopters] or watching a major drug gang go to prison.”

Butcher saw some terrible things while working for the police. In 2000 the body of a teenage boy was found by a police cadaver dog in the River Wey, which runs through Guildford. He had been in the water a long time and Butcher was handed a key found in the trousers of the badly decomposed corpse. The family of a missing teenage boy came forward. Butcher had to tell them that if the key fitted the lock on their front door, this was their son.

“About 20 family members turned up to see me try the key. I slipped it in and the door opened. The mother collapsed and howled in a way I never want to hear again. In the end, the danger is you become hardened and institutionalised, so I eventually decided I needed a new challenge.”

A poster pinned to a tree
A poster pinned to a treeGETTY IMAGES
Butcher became a private eye, investigating company fraud or cases of suspected marital infidelity. One time he investigated a high-ranking fast food executive suspected of taking a secret recipe for dough balls to his new job. Another time he liaised between a football club and a woman who claimed she had compromising photos of one of their married star players. “In that sort of work you are often helping someone leverage an advantage over someone else. Finding a much-loved lost pet has a lot more emotional value,” Butcher says.

When he decided to focus his investigative talents on lost cats people told him he was insane. Few believed a dog could be trained to find a cat without their obvious inter-species hostility becoming a problem. “I was like the guy who invented the ballpoint pen. Everyone told him, ‘We don’t need those’ or, ‘It can’t be done’,” he says.

First Butcher decided to find out everything he could about cats, placing an advertisement in a local magazine called The Guildford asking for volunteers, then setting up surveillance cameras around their homes to find out where their cats went and what they did (some of his research was used in the 2013 BBC Horizon documentary The Secret Life of the Cat).

Then he set about finding a suitable dog. As a child living in Singapore (his father was also in the navy and the family were briefly posted there), Butcher had once seen a man drown a sack of unwanted puppies. The experience convinced him to get a rescue dog.

A friend found Molly, an unwanted dog living in the Midlands, and Butcher sent her for a year’s training at the Milton Keynes-based company Medical Detection Dogs. The organisation can train dogs to smell low blood sugar levels in the body odour of people suffering with type 1 diabetes and even some cancers. Butcher asked them to train Molly to find cats. “It’s just a question of honing the cocker spaniel skill-set,” he says, “but there were definitely doubters and the day we recovered our first cat, our ‘proof of concept’, was one of the best days of my life.”

That first case was a missing cat called Rusty, last seen near St Albans in Hertfordshire. The owner, Tim, was distraught, so Butcher put his recovery plan into action for the first time. He interviewed Tim in detail. He checked for sheds and lock-up garages on Google Maps. He did a weather assessment because wind and rain can negatively affect a sniffer dog’s accuracy. As hopes faded Tim mentioned the recent death of an elderly neighbour on his street, and Butcher’s ears (as well as those, presumably, of Molly) pricked up.

It didn’t take Butcher long to deduce that Rusty’s was a case of “involuntary transportation”: Rusty had been taken away in the back of the private ambulance carrying the corpse of a 90-year-old woman to the undertaker. Butcher traced the undertaker. Molly searched the village where it was based. Rusty was found. Tim burst into tears and delighted villagers applauded. Butcher writes: “I had adopted the strategic and analytical role, drawing upon my raft of detecting experience to assess the probabilities and possibilities regarding Rusty’s whereabouts and to establish the credibility and reliability of witnesses.”

Fair enough, but Butcher charges £95 an hour with a minimum four-hour booking, plus travel expenses. And all along it was the fault of the world’s least vigilant undertakers, who had allowed a cat to stroll into their hearse, ride to a neighbouring village next to a corpse, then disembark without being noticed. To me it sounded like a plotline from the film Ace Ventura: Pet Detective.

Butcher doesn’t agree. And few things rile him more than mention of Jim Carrey’s 1994 comedy hit. “That guy has been the bane of my life,” he says in a rare lapse in mood. “There will always be people who think a pet detective is a joke, but Molly is the only dog in the world who can trace a specific cat using scent-match discrimination and if I hadn’t asked appropriate questions and analysed the situation, Rusty might never have been found.”

Butcher and Molly have cat detection down to a fine art. By the end of the book they have tracked down 74 cats out of 100 cases. And recovered one tortoise. I can’t help thinking that there ought to have been a discount for that one. “We take each investigation on its merits,” Butcher says coolly. “And if you have the right pet insurance, then you can claim these costs back.”

One of the most striking things about his investigations is how members of the public respond. Butcher goes door-to-door and, more often than not, they let him search their cellars and sheds. I wonder if that’s because he wears a fleece with a UKPD logo on it. UKPD stands for United Kingdom Pet Detectives, but it sounds a bit like LAPD and I think of hard-bitten cops eating doughnuts during a stake-out. I wonder what Butcher and Molly snack on during a stake-out? Choc drops? A chew toy? “The uniform establishes trust,” Butcher insists. “It shows we are serious and that often makes the difference whether people talk to you or not.”

I also wonder what effect Butcher and Molly’s obvious camaraderie has on his personal life. Butcher describes how his long-term partner, Sarah, isn’t very keen on Molly and I am struck too how, when he writes about his dog, he gives her a human voice. “There’s no cat here, Dad, let’s go,” she “says” during one search.

“It’s an intense working relationship, sure, but that’s pets for you,” Butcher says. “Molly receives thank-you cards from satisfied clients who write in the voice of their cats. We got one recently saying, ‘Molly, it’s a year since you rescued me. Thank you. I will never forget you.’ ”

Business is booming for UKPD. Not only because pets wander off or get trapped in sheds, but also because the increasing popularity of high-value breeds makes some pets obvious targets for thieves. In one very impressive investigation Butcher traces a dog stolen in west London through painstaking detective work. The thieves also stole the dog owner’s car. The car contained very little petrol. Butcher questions local petrol stations, one of which reports a recent “pump and run”. CCTV gives him a numberplate and the car is traced to a pound. Inside the car, discarded under the driver’s seat, is a parking ticket with an address. “I got Buffy back through an intermediary, no questions asked. A really good day in the office,” he says.

I mention my cat, Pip. It’s become a more complex case. I’ve seen him strolling through the neighbourhood and asleep on a neighbour’s sofa. I have even stroked him while he sits on a car roof. He’s not missing. He has just moved on. “Sometimes cats just prefer someone else,” Butcher says, a tad brutally. “Not a case for us.”
Molly the Pet Detective Dog by Colin Butcher is out in paperback on October 31

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 23, 2019, 09:32:29 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 23, 2019, 09:20:07 AM
One for all you dog fans, from today’s Times.  Controversially the article claims dogs sense of smell is 100,100 greater than humans, but as we all know thanks to our resident cadaver dog handler, this is nonsense and humans could just as easily be able to find cats with their noses if they could be bothered to wander around on all fours.

Lost cat? Call the canine pet detective
October 23 2019, 12:01am,
The world’s top kitten finder isn’t Ace Ventura, after all — it’s a cocker spaniel called Molly. Michael Odell meets the hound and the sleuth she works with

Colin Butcher with Molly the pet detective
Colin Butcher with Molly the pet detectiveRACHEL OATES
A couple of years ago our cat Pip disappeared. One minute he was weaving between my legs, canvassing for a snack, the next, gone. Dutifully I made some “missing” posters, including a photo and mobile number, then taped them to local lampposts. A huge tactical error. We live in an area with a large student population, so I was woken at all hours by drunk teenagers miaowing down the phone. Or else there was silence followed by half-stifled giggles, then: “Hey, are you still looking for pussy?”

I wish I’d known Colin Butcher then. The 59-year-old runs a pet detective agency, the only one in the UK. In fact, he claims to be the only one in the world with cat-detection skills. When it comes to searches and investigations Butcher has serious chops. He served as a diver, then as a member of a helicopter search-and-rescue team in the Royal Navy. And after 11 years doing that he spent 14 years with Surrey Police, rising to the rank of detective inspector in the major crimes unit. “Yes, Molly and I know how to investigate,” he says with an assured grin.

Molly is his specially trained cat-detection dog. We meet in a café near his home in Guildford, Surrey. Both are very much in investigation mode. “You obviously own a dog,” says Butcher, noticing a single strand of fur on my trouser leg.

Molly has olfactory capabilities 100,000 times more powerful than any human
Molly has olfactory capabilities 100,000 times more powerful than any human
Meanwhile, Molly, a boisterous black cocker spaniel with olfactory capabilities 100,000 times more powerful than any human, has already detected a toasted cheese and ham sandwich being prepared on a counter next to us. Butcher picks her up and puts her in his lap. She leans across the table and slurps my tea. “She gets restless if she isn’t working,” Butcher says. “I’m sure she’s excited because the next cat we find will be her hundredth.”

They make a cute couple, but I can’t help wondering how does a high-ranking cop who has put away murderers and drug dealers end up going door-to-door seeking information regarding the whereabouts of Smudge and Cuddles? Butcher has written a book, Molly the Pet Detective Dog, that documents his investigations regarding these missing animals. Sometimes the intensity he brings to the job is startling. Such as when a cat called Oscar gets locked in a neighbour’s shed. Butcher finds it, but it has become so dehydrated it later dies.

“ ‘Damn, if only I’d got to him sooner,’ I told myself, slamming my hand against the steering wheel in frustration,” Butcher writes. He sounds like Sherlock Holmes enraged by a particularly dastardly act of his arch-enemy, Moriarty. Yet it was just a cat, locked in a shed.

“In the navy I rescued people and in the police we halted the activities of some very serious criminals, but there is a sense that I was paid and trained to do those jobs. We didn’t high-five or punch the air. I do when we find a lost pet. I can honestly say finding my first cat I got the same high as the day I got my wings [when qualifying as a crewman on Royal Navy helicopters] or watching a major drug gang go to prison.”

Butcher saw some terrible things while working for the police. In 2000 the body of a teenage boy was found by a police cadaver dog in the River Wey, which runs through Guildford. He had been in the water a long time and Butcher was handed a key found in the trousers of the badly decomposed corpse. The family of a missing teenage boy came forward. Butcher had to tell them that if the key fitted the lock on their front door, this was their son.

“About 20 family members turned up to see me try the key. I slipped it in and the door opened. The mother collapsed and howled in a way I never want to hear again. In the end, the danger is you become hardened and institutionalised, so I eventually decided I needed a new challenge.”

A poster pinned to a tree
A poster pinned to a treeGETTY IMAGES
Butcher became a private eye, investigating company fraud or cases of suspected marital infidelity. One time he investigated a high-ranking fast food executive suspected of taking a secret recipe for dough balls to his new job. Another time he liaised between a football club and a woman who claimed she had compromising photos of one of their married star players. “In that sort of work you are often helping someone leverage an advantage over someone else. Finding a much-loved lost pet has a lot more emotional value,” Butcher says.

When he decided to focus his investigative talents on lost cats people told him he was insane. Few believed a dog could be trained to find a cat without their obvious inter-species hostility becoming a problem. “I was like the guy who invented the ballpoint pen. Everyone told him, ‘We don’t need those’ or, ‘It can’t be done’,” he says.

First Butcher decided to find out everything he could about cats, placing an advertisement in a local magazine called The Guildford asking for volunteers, then setting up surveillance cameras around their homes to find out where their cats went and what they did (some of his research was used in the 2013 BBC Horizon documentary The Secret Life of the Cat).

Then he set about finding a suitable dog. As a child living in Singapore (his father was also in the navy and the family were briefly posted there), Butcher had once seen a man drown a sack of unwanted puppies. The experience convinced him to get a rescue dog.

A friend found Molly, an unwanted dog living in the Midlands, and Butcher sent her for a year’s training at the Milton Keynes-based company Medical Detection Dogs. The organisation can train dogs to smell low blood sugar levels in the body odour of people suffering with type 1 diabetes and even some cancers. Butcher asked them to train Molly to find cats. “It’s just a question of honing the cocker spaniel skill-set,” he says, “but there were definitely doubters and the day we recovered our first cat, our ‘proof of concept’, was one of the best days of my life.”

That first case was a missing cat called Rusty, last seen near St Albans in Hertfordshire. The owner, Tim, was distraught, so Butcher put his recovery plan into action for the first time. He interviewed Tim in detail. He checked for sheds and lock-up garages on Google Maps. He did a weather assessment because wind and rain can negatively affect a sniffer dog’s accuracy. As hopes faded Tim mentioned the recent death of an elderly neighbour on his street, and Butcher’s ears (as well as those, presumably, of Molly) pricked up.

It didn’t take Butcher long to deduce that Rusty’s was a case of “involuntary transportation”: Rusty had been taken away in the back of the private ambulance carrying the corpse of a 90-year-old woman to the undertaker. Butcher traced the undertaker. Molly searched the village where it was based. Rusty was found. Tim burst into tears and delighted villagers applauded. Butcher writes: “I had adopted the strategic and analytical role, drawing upon my raft of detecting experience to assess the probabilities and possibilities regarding Rusty’s whereabouts and to establish the credibility and reliability of witnesses.”

Fair enough, but Butcher charges £95 an hour with a minimum four-hour booking, plus travel expenses. And all along it was the fault of the world’s least vigilant undertakers, who had allowed a cat to stroll into their hearse, ride to a neighbouring village next to a corpse, then disembark without being noticed. To me it sounded like a plotline from the film Ace Ventura: Pet Detective.

Butcher doesn’t agree. And few things rile him more than mention of Jim Carrey’s 1994 comedy hit. “That guy has been the bane of my life,” he says in a rare lapse in mood. “There will always be people who think a pet detective is a joke, but Molly is the only dog in the world who can trace a specific cat using scent-match discrimination and if I hadn’t asked appropriate questions and analysed the situation, Rusty might never have been found.”

Butcher and Molly have cat detection down to a fine art. By the end of the book they have tracked down 74 cats out of 100 cases. And recovered one tortoise. I can’t help thinking that there ought to have been a discount for that one. “We take each investigation on its merits,” Butcher says coolly. “And if you have the right pet insurance, then you can claim these costs back.”

One of the most striking things about his investigations is how members of the public respond. Butcher goes door-to-door and, more often than not, they let him search their cellars and sheds. I wonder if that’s because he wears a fleece with a UKPD logo on it. UKPD stands for United Kingdom Pet Detectives, but it sounds a bit like LAPD and I think of hard-bitten cops eating doughnuts during a stake-out. I wonder what Butcher and Molly snack on during a stake-out? Choc drops? A chew toy? “The uniform establishes trust,” Butcher insists. “It shows we are serious and that often makes the difference whether people talk to you or not.”

I also wonder what effect Butcher and Molly’s obvious camaraderie has on his personal life. Butcher describes how his long-term partner, Sarah, isn’t very keen on Molly and I am struck too how, when he writes about his dog, he gives her a human voice. “There’s no cat here, Dad, let’s go,” she “says” during one search.

“It’s an intense working relationship, sure, but that’s pets for you,” Butcher says. “Molly receives thank-you cards from satisfied clients who write in the voice of their cats. We got one recently saying, ‘Molly, it’s a year since you rescued me. Thank you. I will never forget you.’ ”

Business is booming for UKPD. Not only because pets wander off or get trapped in sheds, but also because the increasing popularity of high-value breeds makes some pets obvious targets for thieves. In one very impressive investigation Butcher traces a dog stolen in west London through painstaking detective work. The thieves also stole the dog owner’s car. The car contained very little petrol. Butcher questions local petrol stations, one of which reports a recent “pump and run”. CCTV gives him a numberplate and the car is traced to a pound. Inside the car, discarded under the driver’s seat, is a parking ticket with an address. “I got Buffy back through an intermediary, no questions asked. A really good day in the office,” he says.

I mention my cat, Pip. It’s become a more complex case. I’ve seen him strolling through the neighbourhood and asleep on a neighbour’s sofa. I have even stroked him while he sits on a car roof. He’s not missing. He has just moved on. “Sometimes cats just prefer someone else,” Butcher says, a tad brutally. “Not a case for us.”
Molly the Pet Detective Dog by Colin Butcher is out in paperback on October 31

I think it's best not to take too much notice of the poster who claims to be an expert and also a cadaver dog trainer
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 23, 2019, 10:16:32 PM
Quote from: The General on October 22, 2019, 10:58:09 AM
Maybe start with The Selfish Gene, but The God Delusion was the one I had signed. As a ex-indoctrinated catholic this book, along with Hitchens' 'God is Not Great' validated and expounded my atheistic position.

'God is Not Great'  is a brilliant book. I miss him. I enjoy all his debates, his humour. It got boring when he had cancer as interviewers would try  to find out if he had changed his mind, knowing he was dying. he could have spent that time giving us an insight into more interesting subjects- I thiught they were trying to 'catch him out'. His Brother Peter is also a great orator.

I agree with most of  Richard Dawkins  claims. However, Science hasn't conquered, and maybe never will, the human brain and thought process. I say this because he argues,very eloquently, about some therapies not havng been scientificly, proven. such as alternative remedies,homeopathy etc.  Does placebo affect really work?

It is a very interesting subject-one of my many favourites.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 24, 2019, 11:01:26 AM
I'm really reluctant to bring up any mention of dogs and their abilities, but I found this article interesting -

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/oct/24/dogs-show-nose-archaeology-sniffing-out-ancient-tombs

I wonder just what it is that they are sniffing out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 24, 2019, 11:11:07 AM
Quote from: jassi on October 24, 2019, 11:01:26 AM
I'm really reluctant to bring up any mention of dogs and their abilities, but I found this article interesting -

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/oct/24/dogs-show-nose-archaeology-sniffing-out-ancient-tombs

I wonder just what it is that they are sniffing out.
McCann sceptics seem to adore cadaver dogs. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 24, 2019, 11:15:07 AM
This one doesn't, but if these dogs can genuinely sniff out ancient graves, then it gives a new insight into residual scents - IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 24, 2019, 11:16:12 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 24, 2019, 11:11:07 AM
McCann sceptics seem to adore cadaver dogs.

Jassi has asked what the dogs are scenting at ancient burial sites.  Are they scenting on cadaver odour?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 24, 2019, 11:16:51 AM
Quote from: jassi on October 24, 2019, 11:15:07 AM
This one doesn't, but if these dogs can genuinely sniff out ancient graves, then it gives a new insight into residual scents - IMO
Oh?  What new insights does it give us wrt to this case?  Do explain further. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 24, 2019, 11:19:13 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on October 24, 2019, 11:16:12 AM
Jassi has asked what the dogs are scenting at ancient burial sites.  Are they scenting on cadaver odour?
Ask her - she has apparently gained new insights into the subject.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 24, 2019, 11:20:57 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 24, 2019, 11:16:51 AM
Oh?  What new insights does it give us wrt to this case?  Do explain further.

this is the Wandering off Topic topic and doesn't need to be directly related.  8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 24, 2019, 11:23:41 AM
Quote from: jassi on October 24, 2019, 11:20:57 AM
this is the Wandering off Topic topic and doesn't need to be directly related.  8)--))
OK, well just generally then - what insights have you gained?  To me it seems to suggest that dog alerts cannot be relied on to find bodies in criminal cases, as there's always the chance that they are alerting to the body of Rameses II that was buried 2000 years ago, and has since been moved by grave robbers, and not to the freshly murdered child whose body was removed from the ground above Rameses II's erstwhile grave and chucked in a bin. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 24, 2019, 11:24:19 AM
Quote from: jassi on October 24, 2019, 11:15:07 AM
This one doesn't, but if these dogs can genuinely sniff out ancient graves, then it gives a new insight into residual scents - IMO

Could it be they are scenting on microorganisms that feed off ancient burial sites similar to the following:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halomonas_titanicae

I am always reminded of the awful smell in charity shops which is simply not present in non-charity shops; what is it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 24, 2019, 11:27:50 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 24, 2019, 11:23:41 AM
OK, well just generally then - what insights have you gained?  To me it seems to suggest that dog alerts cannot be relied on to find bodies in criminal cases, as there's always the chance that they are alerting to the body of Rameses II that was buried 2000 years ago, and has since been moved by grave robbers, and not to the freshly murdered child whose body was removed from the ground above Rameses II's erstwhile grave and chucked in a bin.

There's no doubt that cadaver odour is transferable on inanimate objects as per the police review into the disappearance of Shannon Matthews so in terms of Grimes/the dog alerts at 5A and the hire car it means squat.  If others want to believe otherwise they are perfectly entitled to do so but evidence is not on their side. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 24, 2019, 11:30:50 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on October 24, 2019, 11:27:50 AM
There's no doubt that cadaver odour is transferable on inanimate objects as per the police review into the disappearance of Shannon Matthews so in terms of Grimes/the dog alerts at 5A and the hire car it means squat.  If others want to believe otherwise they are perfectly entitled to do so but evidence is not on their side.

there isnt any real evidence on either side....the claim in the mathews case is nothing more than conjecture. What evidence have they given to support it...theres no doubt residual scent is transferable but no evidence how long it would last
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 24, 2019, 12:27:16 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 24, 2019, 11:30:50 AM
there isnt any real evidence on either side....the claim in the mathews case is nothing more than conjecture. What evidence have they given to support it...theres no doubt residual scent is transferable but no evidence how long it would last

No it isn't conjecture.  The police review of the SM case found that the dogs alerted to second-hand furniture where the original owners had passed away. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 24, 2019, 12:31:00 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on October 24, 2019, 12:27:16 PM
No it isn't conjecture.  The police review of the SM case found that the dogs alerted to second-hand furniture where the original owners had passed away.

How can the police be sure the alerts were to second hand furniture... It was an explanation offered... Nothing more
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on October 24, 2019, 12:41:56 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 24, 2019, 12:31:00 PM
How can the police be sure the alerts were to second hand furniture... It was an explanation offered... Nothing more

I would suggest because they didn't find any dead bodies and the person they were seeking was found alive. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 24, 2019, 12:51:00 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on October 24, 2019, 12:41:56 PM
I would suggest because they didn't find any dead bodies and the person they were seeking was found alive.

so its a suggestion...no proof. It could have also been a false positive
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 24, 2019, 01:23:56 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 24, 2019, 12:51:00 PM
so its a suggestion...no proof. It could have also been a false positive
Coupled with the remarkable coincidence that the dogs alerted to a 2nd hand piece of furniture that had indeed had a dead guy on it.
So no dead missing person, but dogs alerted to the couch. Pretty compelling. Would seem that the dogs were right on this occasion, which corroborates the theory.
Nice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on October 24, 2019, 01:30:47 PM
Quote from: The General on October 24, 2019, 01:23:56 PM
Coupled with the remarkable coincidence that the dogs alerted to a 2nd hand piece of furniture that had indeed had a dead guy on it.
So no dead missing person, but dogs alerted to the couch. Pretty compelling. Would seem that the dogs were right on this occasion, which corroborates the theory.
Nice.

Problem is 5a had other families stay there before Eddie alerted,  so he could have alerted to something to do with one of those families. 




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 24, 2019, 01:34:52 PM
Quote from: The General on October 24, 2019, 01:23:56 PM
Coupled with the remarkable coincidence that the dogs alerted to a 2nd hand piece of furniture that had indeed had a dead guy on it.
So no dead missing person, but dogs alerted to the couch. Pretty compelling. Would seem that the dogs were right on this occasion, which corroborates the theory.
Nice.
where did it say the dogs alerted to the couch....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 24, 2019, 03:39:49 PM
Quote from: Lace on October 24, 2019, 01:30:47 PM
Quote from: The General on October 24, 2019, 01:23:56 PM
Coupled with the remarkable coincidence that the dogs alerted to a 2nd hand piece of furniture that had indeed had a dead guy on it.
So no dead missing person, but dogs alerted to the couch. Pretty compelling. Would seem that the dogs were right on this occasion, which corroborates the theory.
Nice.
Problem is 5a had other families stay there before Eddie alerted,  so he could have alerted to something to do with one of those families.
It's not a problem, as I was referring to the Shannon Matthews case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 26, 2019, 10:59:24 AM
Congratulations to England on going through to the Rugby World Cup final in Japan.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 26, 2019, 06:29:18 PM
Any news about new banned words? is there a list somewhere?


Heil book burners.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 26, 2019, 07:32:02 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on October 26, 2019, 06:29:18 PM
Any news about new banned words? is there a list somewhere?


Heil book burners.
book is banned as is Amaral.  I don’t think you can say [ censored word ] or [ censored word] either, can you?  Let’s see...

ETA Aha!  We have autocorrect on the first two.  Ingenious!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 27, 2019, 11:15:27 AM
Well done Bokke on joining England in the Rugby World Cup final. Proudly South African.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 27, 2019, 11:24:48 AM
Quote from: Anthro on October 27, 2019, 11:15:27 AM
Well done Bokke on joining England in the Rugby World Cup final. Proudly South African.

Bit of a dour affair but a win is a win.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 27, 2019, 11:28:37 AM
Quote from: barrier on October 27, 2019, 11:24:48 AM
Bit of a dour affair but a win is a win.
You must be gutted that Wales weren't "smashed". 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 27, 2019, 12:05:14 PM
Quote from: Anthro on October 27, 2019, 11:15:27 AM
Well done Bokke on joining England in the Rugby World Cup final. Proudly South African.

Congratulations from England!  May the best team win.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 27, 2019, 12:41:59 PM
Hi G-Unit, indeed. Good luck to both teams.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on October 27, 2019, 12:49:13 PM
I have observed an increasing tendency by some posters recently to flaunt the forum rules. There is no place for cheap remarks, sniping or goading on these boards. Do not assume that your comments go unnoticed by the admin team.

The forum rules are there to protect all users from unnecssary abuse, they should be adhered to strictly.

Admin
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 27, 2019, 01:36:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 27, 2019, 12:05:14 PM
Congratulations from England!  May the best team win.


And from Scottish folks who don't h8 the English and love rugby! lol

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on October 27, 2019, 11:12:11 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on October 27, 2019, 01:36:18 PM

And from Scottish folks who don't h8 the English and love rugby! lol
 

And from me.  Well done SA.

May the best team win.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on October 27, 2019, 11:28:54 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on October 27, 2019, 01:36:18 PM

And from Scottish folks who don't h8 the English and love rugby! lol

And from the many, many Scots , including myself who have no hate  of anyone who lives in England ( such a peculiar thing to say but as one would expect from said poster) and from one who has not a great interest in Rugby, unless Scotland is playing , may the better team win.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on October 31, 2019, 07:18:20 PM
It appears some bright spark in McDonald's Portugal has tried to promote Sundae Bloody Sundae without realising it was highly offensive.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-50251779
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 31, 2019, 07:25:13 PM
Don't suppose it would be too popular in Northern Ireland either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 02, 2019, 05:31:32 PM
United we shall stand. Congratulations to England and New Zealand, taking 2nd and 3rd place in the RWC 2019 final.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on November 03, 2019, 11:59:55 AM
Congratulations to South Africa, worthy winners.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 03, 2019, 10:19:48 PM
Yep congratulations to SA.  The best team won.

How cute is Faf De Klerk?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KbqMA5deRI

Very imo  8**8:/:

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 03, 2019, 11:32:01 PM
Congratulations to RSA. England deserved to lose that game.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 04, 2019, 06:24:01 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 03, 2019, 10:19:48 PM
Yep congratulations to SA.  The best team won.

How cute is Faf De Klerk?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KbqMA5deRI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KbqMA5deRI)

Very imo  8**8:/:
I thought you didn't fancy diminutive, hirsuite, bearded tossers?

Is Brietta about?  Maybe a hairless cowboy manqué instead... 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 04, 2019, 01:44:47 PM
Quote from: Myster on November 04, 2019, 06:24:01 AM
I thought you didn't fancy diminutive, hirsuite, bearded tossers?

Is Brietta about?  Maybe a hairless cowboy manqué instead...

 (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 05, 2019, 10:44:22 AM
Quote from: Myster on November 04, 2019, 06:24:01 AM
I thought you didn't fancy diminutive, hirsuite, bearded tossers?

Is Brietta about?  Maybe a hairless cowboy manqué instead...

Given I'm only 5' 3.5" he's not diminutive in my eyes!  He reminds me of my favourite dog: Jack Russell!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 05, 2019, 11:13:34 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 03, 2019, 10:19:48 PM
Yep congratulations to SA.  The best team won.

How cute is Faf De Klerk?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KbqMA5deRI

Very imo  8**8:/:

He wouldn't have made it onto my teenage bedroom wall, but my type is very different.

(https://www.sheknows.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/fckwk1a2rglagqarvpp6.jpeg?w=695&h=391&crop=1)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 05, 2019, 12:06:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2019, 11:13:34 AM
He wouldn't have made it onto my teenage bedroom wall, but my type is very different.

(https://www.sheknows.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/fckwk1a2rglagqarvpp6.jpeg?w=695&h=391&crop=1)
You mean to say you no longer have pin ups on your bedroom wall?   8(8-))

I tend to fancy sports 'stars' as they have good bods and personality traits I admire: Will Carling, Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Freddie Ljunberg to name but a few.  Historian Niall Ferguson is cerebral and cute and there's something quite sexy about Keir Starmer who I would vote for on that basis alone  8(0(*   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 05, 2019, 01:13:57 PM
Hi Holly, Faf is 5’8”/1,72 m.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 05, 2019, 01:39:23 PM
Quote from: Anthro on November 05, 2019, 01:13:57 PM
Hi Holly, Faf is 5’8”/1,72 m.

Hi. Thanks.  I read 5' 3" and then 5' 7" what's a few inches!  He has kind/smiling eyes, a cheeky smile, nice locks and of course he is an exceptionally gifted player  8(>((  Sports stars usually have good personality traits too to get where they have got.  What more could a girl ask for  8**8:/:
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 05, 2019, 02:37:19 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 05, 2019, 12:06:54 PM
You mean to say you no longer have pin ups on your bedroom wall?   8(8-))

I tend to fancy sports 'stars' as they have good bods and personality traits I admire: Will Carling, Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Freddie Ljunberg to name but a few.  Historian Niall Ferguson is cerebral and cute and there's something quite sexy about Keir Starmer who I would vote for on that basis alone  8(0(*   

Christiano Ronaldo dos Santos Aveiro!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 05, 2019, 04:10:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2019, 02:37:19 PM
Christiano Ronaldo dos Santos Aveiro!

Adonis!  According to those who have worked with him his work rate is exceptional in terms of training. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2019, 06:11:06 PM
Ronaldo gives me the creeps.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 05, 2019, 09:47:51 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 05, 2019, 04:10:21 PM
Adonis!  According to those who have worked with him his work rate is exceptional in terms of training.

I never took much notice of him, then I saw Piers Morgan interviewing him. He never skimps or misses his training no matter what. I have the feeling that Andy Murray is the same. Talent is no longer enough these days.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 05, 2019, 10:33:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2019, 09:47:51 PM
I never took much notice of him, then I saw Piers Morgan interviewing him. He never skimps or misses his training no matter what. I have the feeling that Andy Murray is the same. Talent is no longer enough these days.

I think the fact a hard taskmaster like Sir Alex Ferguson only has good things to say about CR says it all.

If you read up about any top flight sports person the sacrifices they have to make and hours they put in are phenomenal. 

My parents lived near Paula Radcliffe and I recall one Christmas day we were off to visit my bro around lunch time and saw PR out running. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2019, 12:56:45 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 05, 2019, 10:33:33 PM
I think the fact a hard taskmaster like Sir Alex Ferguson only has good things to say about CR says it all.

If you read up about any top flight sports person the sacrifices they have to make and hours they put in are phenomenal. 

My parents lived near Paula Radcliffe and I recall one Christmas day we were off to visit my bro around lunch time and saw PR out running.

My grandson-in-law has just had the same hip operation as Murray. The speed that Murray got over it was phenominal. I imagine his pain threshhold is very high; the op is more painful than a hip replacement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 06, 2019, 07:00:44 PM
Cheslin Kolbe (RWC) is a cousin of Wayde van Niekerk. Talent, seemingly runs in their genes. Wayde lives in the same wildlife estate that me and my family do. Proudly South African.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 06, 2019, 11:08:34 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/young-welsh-woman-illegally-jailed-for-four-months-in-portugal-wins-e55000-in-civil-damages/
Young Welsh woman ‘illegally jailed for four months in Portugal wins €55,000 in civil damages
By portugalresident -6th November 2019
 
A young Welsh woman illegally jailed in Portugal for four truly miserable months has seen a Portuguese judge award her €55,000 in civil damages.

Sophie Grey, 25, was refused bail back in the summer of 2017 for the simple reason that she didn’t have a fixed address here.

Her family were fully prepared to post bail/ pay for Sophie to rent a place to stay but public prosecutors argued that she posed a flight risk, and the judge hearing her case agreed (click here).

It took four months of pressure, and an appeal against the first judge’s ruling, before Sophie was finally freed, to remain in Portugal until her case came to trial.

Even that was ‘an outrage’ according to her family, as Sophie was condemned to six-months in jail, suspended, for assaulting a police officer who told the court that she didn’t mean to hit him “she was just flailing her arms around”.

At the time, Roger Grey – Sophie’s father – told his local paper that the family was considering seeking compensation as they felt the whole situation had been dealt with appallingly, and more importantly, illegally (click here).

At some point last year, Sophie officially lodged a civil case for damages against the Portuguese State, maintaining this last point – and this week Público reveals that a female judge at Lisbon’s central civil court has found in her favour.

Say reports, judge Isabel Lourenço agreed that Sophie Grey’s incarceration was illegal as it “seriously compromised her personal integrity because for four months she was imprisoned a long way from her own country and family who couldn’t visit her with any regularity in a place where few people spoke her language”.

As Sophie’s father explained back in 2017, Sophie was barely aware of what her offence even was, and “the first person she met who could speak English was a murderer”.

This story hasn’t yet been released in UK, thus it is unclear how the Grey family has reacted to the award for damages.
============================================================

I wonder how a male judge would have ruled.......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 06, 2019, 11:14:03 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/missing-pensioner-found-in-aljezur-thanks-to-drone/

Missing pensioner found in Aljezur thanks to drone
By portugalresident -6th November 20
A 90-year-old man who went missing for 12 hours in Aljezur was found alive but debilitated by GNR police with the help of a thermal-imaging drone.

The pensioner was found “conscious but motionless” on the ground at around 3am on Wednesday (October 30) in a dark and barren area around 400 metres away from the local old people’s home where he lives.

According to Correio da Manhã, he was “debilitated, tired, very cold and unable to move”. As a precaution, he was taken to Portimão Hospital.

The Portuguese tabloid reports that the nonagenarian went for his usual Tuesday afternoon walk at 3pm but had not returned by 5pm, which worried the staff at the Estrutura Residencial para Pessoas Idosas de Aljezur.

GNR police were alerted and quickly searched the areas where the pensioner usually walked along but to no avail.

As night approached and temperatures dropped, the local police force requested assistance from the GNR Emergency, Protection and Rescue Unit in Lisbon.

The searches were then aided by a drone with thermal sensors which finally helped locate the man.

=================================================================

It's good to see the GNR embracing modern technology which produced a positive outcome on this occasion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2019, 11:21:52 PM
Quote from: misty on November 06, 2019, 11:08:34 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/young-welsh-woman-illegally-jailed-for-four-months-in-portugal-wins-e55000-in-civil-damages/
Young Welsh woman ‘illegally jailed for four months in Portugal wins €55,000 in civil damages
By portugalresident -6th November 2019
 
A young Welsh woman illegally jailed in Portugal for four truly miserable months has seen a Portuguese judge award her €55,000 in civil damages.

Sophie Grey, 25, was refused bail back in the summer of 2017 for the simple reason that she didn’t have a fixed address here.

Her family were fully prepared to post bail/ pay for Sophie to rent a place to stay but public prosecutors argued that she posed a flight risk, and the judge hearing her case agreed (click here).

It took four months of pressure, and an appeal against the first judge’s ruling, before Sophie was finally freed, to remain in Portugal until her case came to trial.

Even that was ‘an outrage’ according to her family, as Sophie was condemned to six-months in jail, suspended, for assaulting a police officer who told the court that she didn’t mean to hit him “she was just flailing her arms around”.

At the time, Roger Grey – Sophie’s father – told his local paper that the family was considering seeking compensation as they felt the whole situation had been dealt with appallingly, and more importantly, illegally (click here).

At some point last year, Sophie officially lodged a civil case for damages against the Portuguese State, maintaining this last point – and this week Público reveals that a female judge at Lisbon’s central civil court has found in her favour.

Say reports, judge Isabel Lourenço agreed that Sophie Grey’s incarceration was illegal as it “seriously compromised her personal integrity because for four months she was imprisoned a long way from her own country and family who couldn’t visit her with any regularity in a place where few people spoke her language”.

As Sophie’s father explained back in 2017, Sophie was barely aware of what her offence even was, and “the first person she met who could speak English was a murderer”.

This story hasn’t yet been released in UK, thus it is unclear how the Grey family has reacted to the award for damages.
============================================================

I wonder how a male judge would have ruled.......
It’ll probably end up in the supreme court, the female judge’s verdict overturned and she’ll get ten years in prison. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 06, 2019, 11:27:06 PM
Quote from: misty on November 06, 2019, 11:08:34 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/young-welsh-woman-illegally-jailed-for-four-months-in-portugal-wins-e55000-in-civil-damages/
Young Welsh woman ‘illegally jailed for four months in Portugal wins €55,000 in civil damages
By portugalresident -6th November 2019
 
A young Welsh woman illegally jailed in Portugal for four truly miserable months has seen a Portuguese judge award her €55,000 in civil damages.

Sophie Grey, 25, was refused bail back in the summer of 2017 for the simple reason that she didn’t have a fixed address here.

Her family were fully prepared to post bail/ pay for Sophie to rent a place to stay but public prosecutors argued that she posed a flight risk, and the judge hearing her case agreed (click here).

It took four months of pressure, and an appeal against the first judge’s ruling, before Sophie was finally freed, to remain in Portugal until her case came to trial.

Even that was ‘an outrage’ according to her family, as Sophie was condemned to six-months in jail, suspended, for assaulting a police officer who told the court that she didn’t mean to hit him “she was just flailing her arms around”.

At the time, Roger Grey – Sophie’s father – told his local paper that the family was considering seeking compensation as they felt the whole situation had been dealt with appallingly, and more importantly, illegally (click here).

At some point last year, Sophie officially lodged a civil case for damages against the Portuguese State, maintaining this last point – and this week Público reveals that a female judge at Lisbon’s central civil court has found in her favour.

Say reports, judge Isabel Lourenço agreed that Sophie Grey’s incarceration was illegal as it “seriously compromised her personal integrity because for four months she was imprisoned a long way from her own country and family who couldn’t visit her with any regularity in a place where few people spoke her language”.

As Sophie’s father explained back in 2017, Sophie was barely aware of what her offence even was, and “the first person she met who could speak English was a murderer”.

This story hasn’t yet been released in UK, thus it is unclear how the Grey family has reacted to the award for damages.
============================================================

I wonder how a male judge would have ruled.......

Aren't we regularly assured that everyone in Portugal speaks English?  Apparently this is not so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 06, 2019, 11:37:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 06, 2019, 11:21:52 PM
It’ll probably end up in the supreme court, the female judge’s verdict overturned and she’ll get ten years in prison.

You may well be right. I can't see the Portuguese State accepting the judge's verdict & award in light of the plaintiff's 6 month suspended sentence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 12:08:06 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 06, 2019, 11:27:06 PM
Aren't we regularly assured that everyone in Portugal speaks English?  Apparently this is not so.

Which jail were the McCanns in?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2019, 07:37:38 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 12:08:06 AM
Which jail were the McCanns in?
And not a word of criticism about Portugal’s treatment of this young British woman.  What a surprise.  Not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 07, 2019, 07:45:13 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 07, 2019, 07:37:38 AM
And not a word of criticism about Portugal’s treatment of this young British woman.  What a surprise.  Not.
Seems the validity of some Portuguese convictions are cast in boiler plate on these 'ere boards, while others are dubious / wrong / abhorrent, dependent upon the plaintiff.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 07, 2019, 08:00:43 AM
Quote from: The General on November 07, 2019, 07:45:13 AM
Seems the validity of some Portuguese convictions are cast in boiler plate on these 'ere boards, while others are dubious / wrong / abhorrent, dependent upon the plaintiff.
not depending on the plaintiff but depending on the evidence presented...amarals convicion...overwhelming evidence for instance
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2019, 08:05:40 AM
Quote from: The General on November 07, 2019, 07:45:13 AM
Seems the validity of some Portuguese convictions are cast in boiler plate on these 'ere boards, while others are dubious / wrong / abhorrent, dependent upon the plaintiff.
No, depending on the circumstances, and clearly in this case an injustice had been done, as even the Portuguese legal system has now acknowledged (though knowing how that works who really would be surprised if the woman in question ends up being re-arrested and forced to cough up her damages).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 08:44:40 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 07, 2019, 07:37:38 AM
And not a word of criticism about Portugal’s treatment of this young British woman.  What a surprise.  Not.

Does that in any way, shape or form relate to Brietta's point re the number of people in Portugal who speak English?

No.

No surprise there then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2019, 08:47:29 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 08:44:40 AM
Does that in any way, shape or form relate to Brietta's point re the number of people in Portugal who speak English?

No.

No surprise there then.
No,  it relates to your completely off topic post about the McCanns being in jail, which was hardly an insightful,  or intelligent response to Brietta’s point.  IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 09:02:00 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 07, 2019, 08:47:29 AM
No,  it relates to your completely off topic post about the McCanns being in jail, which was hardly an insightful,  or intelligent response to Brietta’s point.  IMO.

An off-topic post on the 'wandering off topic' thread?

That would be a novelty.   (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2019, 09:13:25 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 09:02:00 AM
An off-topic post on the 'wandering off topic' thread?

That would be a novelty.   (&^&
Then why are you complaining about my post not relating to Brietta’s - make your mind up petal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 09:22:42 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 07, 2019, 09:13:25 AM
Then why are you complaining about my post not relating to Brietta’s - make your mind up petal.

The discussion was about the proportion of people in Portugal who speak English.

Comments that relate to each other make a conversation.

Then there's being fractious or issuing propaganda, snowflake.   &^^&*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 07, 2019, 09:56:49 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 07, 2019, 08:05:40 AM
No, depending on the circumstances, and clearly in this case an injustice had been done, as even the Portuguese legal system has now acknowledged (though knowing how that works who really would be surprised if the woman in question ends up being re-arrested and forced to cough up her damages).
Check it out. Amaral, 'perjury,' look robust, act robust, robust. Count toothpicks to your cards. Narcissistic, sure. Not robust. You know, 'Leonor.' Slow, yes. Robust, maybe. Crap parent. But she charmed the pants off the guards and won a ping-pong competition - 10 year stretch in the jug man, come aarn, gosh darn it - not robust now? That ain't robust. 'Welsh woman'. Happy slaps the fuzz, gets a ticket to Sing Sing - not robust. But the 2nd court decision, writin' dem wrongs man, doin' god's work, yessir, old tin legs Bader himself would say robust. You went full robust, man. Never go full robust."




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2019, 09:58:45 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 09:22:42 AM
The discussion was about the proportion of people in Portugal who speak English.

Comments that relate to each other make a conversation.

Then there's being fractious or issuing propaganda, snowflake.   &^^&*
What are your views on the case Misty highlighted about the young British woman?  Do you have any or would you prefer not to say?  Also, don’t call me a snowflake, please, I find it very offensive.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 07, 2019, 09:59:48 AM
Quote from: The General on November 07, 2019, 09:56:49 AM
Check it out. Amaral, 'perjury,' look robust, act robust, robust. Count toothpicks to your cards. Narcissistic, sure. Not robust. You know, 'Leonor.' Slow, yes. Robust, maybe. Crap parent. But she charmed the pants off the guards and won a ping-pong competition - 10 year stretch in the jug man, come aarn, gosh darn it - not robust now? That ain't robust. 'Welsh woman'. Happy slaps the fuzz, gets a ticket to Sing Sing - not robust. But the 2nd court decision, writin' dem wrongs man, doin' god's work, yessir, old tin legs Bader himself would say robust. You went full robust, man. Never go full robust."

with respect you probably know little about the evidence produced in each case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2019, 10:02:49 AM
Quote from: The General on November 07, 2019, 09:56:49 AM
Check it out. Amaral, 'perjury,' look robust, act robust, robust. Count toothpicks to your cards. Narcissistic, sure. Not robust. You know, 'Leonor.' Slow, yes. Robust, maybe. Crap parent. But she charmed the pants off the guards and won a ping-pong competition - 10 year stretch in the jug man, come aarn, gosh darn it - not robust now? That ain't robust. 'Welsh woman'. Happy slaps the fuzz, gets a ticket to Sing Sing - not robust. But the 2nd court decision, writin' dem wrongs man, doin' god's work, yessir, old tin legs Bader himself would say robust. You went full robust, man. Never go full robust."
Erm, yes ok, if you say so... I would say there was nothing robust about any of it, as anything could change at any time in Portugal.  Literally nothing would surprise me about their judicial system anymore.  So when the Courts found in favour of the McCanns first time round one just knew that it would all go Pete Tong (or right, if you’re a McB) and they’d change their minds at a later date, and so it came to pass....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 07, 2019, 10:04:02 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 07, 2019, 09:59:48 AM
with respect you probably know little about the evidence produced in each case
Whenever a reply starts 'with respect', it generally means the opposite, as in this case.
I perhaps know as much about the evidence as you - neither of us know, Godot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 10:05:42 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 07, 2019, 09:58:45 AM
What are your views on the case Misty highlighted about the young British woman?  Do you have any or would you prefer not to say?  Also, don’t call me a snowflake, please, I find it very offensive.

I am not familiar with the case, so I have no comment to make on it.  Which is why I chose to make no comment.

Don't call me petal again.  It's just a wum.   &^^&*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2019, 10:16:44 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 10:05:42 AM
I am not familiar with the case, so I have no comment to make on it.  Which is why I chose to make no comment.

Don't call me petal again.  It's just a wum.   &^^&*
Right, so tell us what you do know about then, the use or otherwise of the English language in Portuguese prisons. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 07, 2019, 11:07:00 AM
Quote from: The General on November 07, 2019, 10:04:02 AM
Whenever a reply starts 'with respect', it generally means the opposite, as in this case.
I perhaps know as much about the evidence as you - neither of us know, Godot.
I was in fact being polite...
I can assure you I know quite a lot about the evidence in both these cases.
I posted a phd thesis from a portuguese law student on the cipriano case and read the Portuguese judgement on amarals case

Where does your knowledge come from
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 07, 2019, 11:14:55 AM
I doubt there will be any comments from the Portuguese justice supporters.  4 months on remand for allededly hitting a police officer.  No need for remand when she could have returned home and been the subject of a european arrest warrant if necessary.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 12:15:07 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 07, 2019, 10:16:44 AM
Right, so tell us what you do know about then, the use or otherwise of the English language in Portuguese prisons.

No need, as the McCanns were never in prison.

We got to this point many a post ago.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 07, 2019, 12:26:55 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 12:15:07 PM
No need, as the McCanns were never in prison.

We got to this point many a post ago.

Just as the mccanns have never been charged with any crime and therefore do not have to prove/demonstrate/show their innocence.  Someone needs to tell the SC and the entire Portuguese justice system
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 12:49:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 07, 2019, 12:26:55 PM
Just as the mccanns have never been charged with any crime and therefore do not have to prove/demonstrate/show their innocence.  Someone needs to tell the SC and the entire Portuguese justice system

That someone would be the McCanns' lawyer, in the case they lost at the SC.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 07, 2019, 01:15:13 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 12:49:28 PM
That someone would be the McCanns' lawyer, in the case they lost at the SC.

you need to read the archiving reprt which criticised the mccanns for not proving their innocence and the SC also for claiming that the archiving report was not proof of innocence...have you read either
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 01:27:15 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 07, 2019, 01:15:13 PM
you need to read the archiving reprt which criticised the mccanns for not proving their innocence and the SC also for claiming that the archiving report was not proof of innocence...have you read either

I know what the debate is about, given the large number of times it has been debated in the past.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 07, 2019, 01:33:46 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 01:27:15 PM
I know what the debate is about, given the large number of times it has been debated in the past.

then you will realise the archiving report expected the mccanns to prove their innocence...strange when they hadnt been charged with anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 01:44:11 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 07, 2019, 01:33:46 PM
then you will realise the archiving report expected the mccanns to prove their innocence...strange when they hadnt been charged with anything.

That's not my understanding.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 07, 2019, 01:59:27 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 01:44:11 PM
That's not my understanding.

perhaps this will help you understand...why should the mccanns be expected to prove their innocence?

We believe that the main damage was caused to the McCann arguidos, who lost the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were constituted arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also disturbed, because said facts remain unclarified.

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 02:06:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 07, 2019, 01:59:27 PM
perhaps this will help you understand...why should the mccanns be expected to prove their innocence?

We believe that the main damage was caused to the McCann arguidos, who lost the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were constituted arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also disturbed, because said facts remain unclarified.

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

To repeat, that's not my understanding.

Can we move on now?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 07, 2019, 02:12:05 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 02:06:50 PM
To repeat, that's not my understanding.

Can we move on now?

as you obviously dont understand even when the facts are placed in front of you...you have no other option....i presume those readng the posts can understand
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 02:17:07 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 07, 2019, 02:12:05 PM
as you obviously dont understand even when the facts are placed in front of you...you have no other option....i presume those readng the posts can understand

I am happy to leave readers to their own interpretation.

Can we move on now?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 07, 2019, 02:40:38 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 07, 2019, 01:59:27 PM
perhaps this will help you understand...why should the mccanns be expected to prove their innocence?

We believe that the main damage was caused to the McCann arguidos, who lost the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were constituted arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also disturbed, because said facts remain unclarified.

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

In my opinion that wasn't an expression of expectation it was an observation of fact. The facts were;

the McCanns insisted that they were innocent.
the reconstitution could possibly have eliminated them.
it didn't take place so they weren't eliminated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 07, 2019, 02:54:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 07, 2019, 02:40:38 PM
In my opinion that wasn't an expression of expectation it was an observation of fact. The facts were;

the McCanns insisted that they were innocent.
the reconstitution could possibly have eliminated them.
it didn't take place so they weren't eliminated.

lol...we are talking about elimination...the archiving report claimed they could have proved their innocence...a recon would have done neither imo.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 07, 2019, 03:14:13 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 07, 2019, 11:07:00 AM
I was in fact being polite..
I can assure you I know quite a lot about the evidence in both these cases.
I posted a phd thesis from a portuguese law student on the cipriano case and read the Portuguese judgement on amarals case

Where does your knowledge come from
I understand your confusion; like a cat that gradually becomes self-aware by gazing nonplussed in to a mirror - revelatory realisation. Paradigm shift. Only in this case, another poster has obtained wisdom beyond your comprehension. And I'm going to leave it that way, for fear of the incongruence fusing your consciousness irreparably. Be at peace with the fact that I chose not to encumber you with this wisdom.
Shalom.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 07, 2019, 03:17:29 PM
Quote from: The General on November 07, 2019, 03:14:13 PM
I understand your confusion; like a cat that gradually becomes self-aware by gazing nonplussed in to a mirror - revelatory realisation. Paradigm shift. Only in this case, another poster has obtained wisdom beyond your comprehension. And I'm going to leave it that way, for fear of the incongruence fusing your consciousness irreparably. Be at peace with the fact that I chose not to encumber you with this wisdom.
Shalom.

What your posts lack in relevant facts to back up your argument they make up for in their literary beauty... A story... But a well told story
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on November 07, 2019, 03:48:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 07, 2019, 02:40:38 PM
In my opinion that wasn't an expression of expectation it was an observation of fact. The facts were;

the McCanns insisted that they were innocent.
the reconstitution could possibly have eliminated them.
it didn't take place so they weren't eliminated.

Anyone with a full and comprehensive knowledge of what took place will know that you are 100% correct.  The archive report merely pointed out that the McCanns had every opportunity to 'demonstrate' their innocence in the disappearance of their eldest child but failed to do so. There was no onus on them to do so but their continuous claims of innocence were not backed up by any evidence despite those claims.

The Supreme Court issued a supplement to their final decision when the McCanns again claimed that they had been cleared. They were never cleared and remain so to this day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on November 07, 2019, 03:53:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 07, 2019, 02:54:02 PM
lol...we are talking about elimination...the archiving report claimed they could have proved their innocence...a recon would have done neither imo.

I tend to agree but for the entirely different reason that the stories and times would not match thus attracting even more suspicion their way.  It is patently apparent that the group were afraid to partake in a reconstitution of the events for those very reasons.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 07, 2019, 03:53:58 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on November 07, 2019, 03:48:12 PM
Anyone with a full and comprehensive knowledge of what took place will know that you are 100% correct.  The archive report merely pointed out that the McCanns had every opportunity to 'demonstrate' their innocence in the disappearance of their eldest child but failed to do so. There was no onus on them to do so but their continuous claims of innocence were not backed up by any evidence despite those claims.

The Supreme Court issued a supplement to their final decision when the McCanns again claimed that they had been cleared. They were never cleared and remain so to this day.

Could you explain why they have to demonstrate innocence and what they haven't been cleatred of since they haven't been charged.  They certainly been cleared of arguido status
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 07, 2019, 03:55:01 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on November 07, 2019, 03:53:02 PM
I tend to agree but for the entirely different reason that the stories and times would not match this attracting even more suspicion their way.

So how would the recon demonstrate innocence... It wouldnt
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on November 07, 2019, 03:58:31 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 07, 2019, 03:53:58 PM
Could you explain why they have to demonstrate innocence and what they haven't been cleatred of since they haven't been charged.  They certainly been cleared of arguido status

They claimed to be innocent but failed to demonstrate it when investigated.  In fact. I will go further and say that their actions with conducive with guilt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on November 07, 2019, 04:08:42 PM
A reminder to all users that abusive language will attract appropriate sanction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on November 07, 2019, 04:20:22 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on November 07, 2019, 03:58:31 PM
They claimed to be innocent but failed to demonstrate it when investigated.  In fact. I will go further and say that their actions with conducive with guilt.

I assume this is all in your opinion?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 07, 2019, 04:54:28 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on November 07, 2019, 03:58:31 PM
They claimed to be innocent but failed to demonstrate it when investigated.  In fact. I will go further and say that their actions with conducive with guilt.


Indeed Angelo. The most interesting part for me would be GM's visit,already been attempted with a British television show (for your entertainment).  Gerry claims he went into the apartment via one door then changed his mind, Let us say, he was in the apartment for 3/10 mins.as he left he bumped into Jez as he was talking to Jez for a few moments Jane Tanner passes them and sees an abductor. OK the alleged abductor, whilst Gerry is talking to Jez just outside, Jemmies a shutter-opens a window- grabs MBM- leaves without a trace  via the window in a hurry. No one hears a car or van on the road at the same time drive off. So we are to believe Kate N Gerry all this was done within minutes while Gerry was chatting?
Sr Amaral and the PJ just was not buying this and who could blame them. The parents are just upset and humiliated  they were ridiculed as was their story. IMO.

Why did Madeliene not wake up when her warm body was instantly thrust into a very cold night. [Not wearing shoes or a coat or blanket- as observed by the loving mother going to check her sick daughter who was left alone]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on November 07, 2019, 05:31:16 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 07, 2019, 04:54:28 PM

Indeed Angelo. The most interesting part for me would be GM's visit,already been attempted with a British television show (for your entertainment).  Gerry claims he went into the apartment via one door then changed his mind, Let us say, he was in the apartment for 3/10 mins.as he left he bumped into Jez as he was talking to Jez for a few moments Jane Tanner passes them and sees an abductor. OK the alleged abductor, whilst Gerry is talking to Jez just outside, Jemmies a shutter-opens a window- grabs MBM- leaves without a trace  via the window in a hurry. No one hears a car or van on the road at the same time drive off. So we are to believe Kate N Gerry all this was done within minutes while Gerry was chatting?
Sr Amaral and the PJ just was not buying this and who could blame them. The parents are just upset and humiliated  they were ridiculed as was their story. IMO.

Why did Madeliene not wake up when her warm body was instantly thrust into a very cold night. [Not wearing shoes or a coat or blanket- as observed by the loving mother going to check her sick daughter who was left alone]

There can only be two possibilities to this question. She was already dead or alternatively she was rendered unconscious by some means imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2019, 05:41:59 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 12:15:07 PM
No need, as the McCanns were never in prison.

We got to this point many a post ago.
No the McCanns were never in prison.  And your point is...?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2019, 05:44:42 PM
Quote from: Erngath on November 07, 2019, 04:20:22 PM
I assume this is all in your opinion?
Angelo doesn’t do opinion, he doesn’t have to - he’s a mod, and his word is the law.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2019, 05:47:00 PM
Quote from: John on November 07, 2019, 05:31:16 PM
There can only be two possibilities to this question. She was already dead or alternatively she was rendered unconscious by some means imo.
There is a third possibility, she just didn’t wake up, unless you can demonstrate that this is impossible then it could have happened that she stirred momentarily and as she had only just been brought outside would not yet have been stirred by the change in temperature.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on November 07, 2019, 05:56:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 07, 2019, 05:47:00 PM
There is a third possibility, she just didn’t wake up, unless you can demonstrate that this is impossible then it could have happened that she stirred momentarily and as she had only just been brought outside would not yet have been stirred by the change in temperature.

If I recall correctly, Kate McCann previously stated that Madeleine was a light sleeper and would not have gone off with any stranger.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 06:01:32 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 07, 2019, 05:41:59 PM
No the McCanns were never in prison.  And your point is...?

Here we go round the mulberry bush, yet again.

What is spoken in Portuguese prisons has nothing to do with the McCanns.

Is this the third time round, or the fourth time.

The facts don't change because a question is repeated ad nauseam.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on November 07, 2019, 06:04:19 PM
Quote from: John on November 07, 2019, 05:56:15 PM
If I recall correctly, Kate McCann previously stated that Madeleine was a light sleeper and would not have gone off with any stranger.


Parents often believe their child would not go off with a stranger but sadly the child does.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2019, 06:09:38 PM
Quote from: John on November 07, 2019, 05:56:15 PM
If I recall correctly, Kate McCann previously stated that Madeleine was a light sleeper and would not have gone off with any stranger.
I wasn’t suggesting she went off with a stranger, I’m suggesting she dis not immediately go from fast asleep to wide awake.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2019, 06:10:43 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 06:01:32 PM
Here we go round the mulberry bush, yet again.

What is spoken in Portuguese prisons has nothing to do with the McCanns.

Is this the third time round, or the fourth time.

The facts don't change because a question is repeated ad nauseam.
Then why did you mention the McCanns?  No one had until you did.  Bizarre!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 06:28:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 07, 2019, 06:10:43 PM
Then why did you mention the McCanns?  No one had until you did.  Bizarre!

How tiresome.  Brietta talked of prison populations.  I pointed out this had nothing to do with the McCanns.

Care to do another Clari Light and go for round 6?

The forum population fell asleep long ago.   &^^&*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 07, 2019, 06:30:30 PM
Quote from: John on November 07, 2019, 05:56:15 PM
If I recall correctly, Kate McCann previously stated that Madeleine was a light sleeper and would not have gone off with any stranger.

Yes that is what I recall- to make us believe walk and wandred was NOT an option for the police to look at.

I am sure I also recall kate or her mum saying Maddie would give them her 'tuppence worth'- my understanding of this  was she would be 'cheeky' give up a bit of lip back(?) I also understood  the 'they' being  the paedo gang abductors.

Very strange thing to say about your' abducted daughter'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2019, 06:40:58 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 06:28:11 PM
How tiresome.  Brietta talked of prison populations.  I pointed out this had nothing to do with the McCanns.

Care to do another Clari Light and go for round 6?

The forum population fell asleep long ago.   &^^&*
So basically you made a non-sequitur of a post that we should all have ignored, dammit if I could turn back time...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 06:54:47 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 07, 2019, 06:40:58 PM
So basically you made a non-sequitur of a post that we should all have ignored, dammit if I could turn back time...

I made a highly relevant post that Brietta was intelligent enough to let pass without comment.

How deep is that mamut lanudo trap you have been digging?  About 1.7m deep by 25m diameter did the trick for the Mexicans.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-50330717

 (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 07, 2019, 07:23:12 PM
Quote from: Erngath on November 07, 2019, 06:04:19 PM

Parents often believe their child would not go off with a stranger but sadly the child does.

I watched a programme last night about a girl who liked to sleep in her mothers bed there was no father in the house,  but one night her mother [I think because she was being a bit restless in bed and her mother couldn't sleep and she had to be up early the next morning]  asked if she would sleep in her own bed, the little girl who was 8 went to her own room but kept the light on.   A man who just by chance parked outside saw the light and looked in and saw the little girl,  the window was open a bit and he got in and took the little girl from her bed [with the mother in the other room]   when she started to cry and protest,  he told her he was a Police Officer.  Now I know she was 8 and Madeleine was nearly 4 but a younger child would be even easier to dupe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 07, 2019, 07:30:46 PM
“Parents often believe their child would not go off with a stranger but sadly the child does”.

I agree, Erngath. To me it is possible that Madeleine heard her father’s voice while he was talking to Jeremy. At that moment, someone might have been at her bedroom window/front door/in the room and convinced her that s/he will take her to her father. Therefore, she did not put her shoes on or take cuddlecat because she was secure in knowing that she will will be taken to her dad.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 07, 2019, 07:31:02 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 07, 2019, 07:23:12 PM
I watched a programme last night about a girl who liked to sleep in her mothers bed there was no father in the house,  but one night her mother [I think because she was being a bit restless in bed and her mother couldn't sleep and she had to be up early the next morning]  asked if she would sleep in her own bed, the little girl who was 8 went to her own room but kept the light on.   A man who just by chance parked outside saw the light and looked in and saw the little girl,  the window was open a bit and he got in and took the little girl from her bed [with the mother in the other room]   when she started to cry and protest,  he told her he was a Police Officer.  Now I know she was 8 and Madeleine was nearly 4 but a younger child would be even easier to dupe.

So what happened next?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2019, 07:37:46 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 07, 2019, 06:54:47 PM
I made a highly relevant post that Brietta was intelligent enough to let pass without comment.

How deep is that mamut lanudo trap you have been digging?  About 1.7m deep by 25m diameter did the trick for the Mexicans.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-50330717

 (&^&
Yes, I should have ignored your post like any sensible person, I realise that now, my bad...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 07, 2019, 08:18:05 PM
Quote from: Anthro on November 07, 2019, 07:30:46 PM
“Parents often believe their child would not go off with a stranger but sadly the child does”.

I agree, Erngath. To me it is possible that Madeleine heard her father’s voice while he was talking to Jeremy. At that moment, someone might have been at her bedroom window/front door/in the room and convinced her that s/he will take her to her father. Therefore, she did not put her shoes on or take cuddlecat because she was secure in knowing that she will will be taken to her dad.

What evidence do you have of a stranger ? The Moyes were on their balcony above having a few drinks and heard nothing. Mrs Fenn directly above claims to have heard nothing until 22:30. SY claim to have found and cleared Tannerman.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 07, 2019, 10:57:14 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/social-workers-accused-of-falsifying-statements-to-ensure-mother-lost-custody-of-children/

Social workers accused of falsifying statements to ensure mother lost custody of children
By portugalresident -7th November 201
Two social workers will be answering charges of falsifying statements to ensure a mother lost custody of her two daughters.

The two technicians for ‘Segurança Social’ are further accused of abuse of power and prevarication.

Lisbon’s Court of Appeal has this week found in favour of the mother who for four years has been fighting authorities for the return of children “who should never have been taken” from her.

The woman told SIC television news “this will be the beginning of restoring the truth” to a truly dreadful situation.

“This isn’t a question of vengeance or money in compensation”, stresses Ana Maximiano.

Rerunning an old video clip of her struggle for justice, SIC says the mother staged a hunger strike for 26 days outside Social Security offices in Cascais shortly after her daughters were taken, but had to give up as “her body couldn’t take any more”.

At the time, tearful and exhausted, the woman told reporters, “this is an aggression. You don’t take a daughter from her mother without proof that the mother is a bad mother. The accusations are that I left my (four-year-old) daughter in a café when there are witnesses to say that I didn’t, and that I wanted to run away (with the children) when I have ever done anything like that…”

But in spite of clear indications that all was not right in this case, Ana Maximiano has had to wait all this time to hear a court finally find in her favour.

Even now, her children are not back home. This will only come after the decision by the Court of Appeal is accepted by the Family and Minors court and the latter makes a change to the girls’ arrangements.

Tragically, the mother tells SIC the girls loathe their current lives and “cannot sleep” on the last night of any period they get to stay with their mother ‘as they don’t want to go back’.

As to the background of the story, tabloid Correio da Manhã says they were “handed to their father who has condemnations for aggravated domestic violence”.

Indeed, according to CM, the social workers’ actions were “all to benefit the father”.
Appeal court judges have concluded that the social workers “knew the facts given were false. They aimed to make the court believe the children ran the risk of serious danger and obtain their withdrawal via legal mechanisms that were unjust”, said the ruling.

Ana Maximiano’s lawyer Gameiro Fernandes calls the judges’ ruling “historic”. “This is the first time in Portugal that technicians of Social Security are to be taken to court for malpractice in the exercising of their duties”.

It is unclear whether the workers involved are still even employed by Social Services. What is clear however is that this story is not yet over.

Ana Maximiano told SIC her daughters are desperate to be allowed to stay with her, but for the time being at least, they remain in their father’s custody notwithstanding that two criminal cases alleging violence having been taken out against him.

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

It's worrying to think what could have happened to the (McCann) twins without such a high level of UK protection in Portugal 2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 07, 2019, 11:59:32 PM
Quote from: misty on November 07, 2019, 10:57:14 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/social-workers-accused-of-falsifying-statements-to-ensure-mother-lost-custody-of-children/

Social workers accused of falsifying statements to ensure mother lost custody of children
By portugalresident -7th November 201
Two social workers will be answering charges of falsifying statements to ensure a mother lost custody of her two daughters.

The two technicians for ‘Segurança Social’ are further accused of abuse of power and prevarication.

Lisbon’s Court of Appeal has this week found in favour of the mother who for four years has been fighting authorities for the return of children “who should never have been taken” from her.

The woman told SIC television news “this will be the beginning of restoring the truth” to a truly dreadful situation.

“This isn’t a question of vengeance or money in compensation”, stresses Ana Maximiano.

Rerunning an old video clip of her struggle for justice, SIC says the mother staged a hunger strike for 26 days outside Social Security offices in Cascais shortly after her daughters were taken, but had to give up as “her body couldn’t take any more”.

At the time, tearful and exhausted, the woman told reporters, “this is an aggression. You don’t take a daughter from her mother without proof that the mother is a bad mother. The accusations are that I left my (four-year-old) daughter in a café when there are witnesses to say that I didn’t, and that I wanted to run away (with the children) when I have ever done anything like that…”

But in spite of clear indications that all was not right in this case, Ana Maximiano has had to wait all this time to hear a court finally find in her favour.

Even now, her children are not back home. This will only come after the decision by the Court of Appeal is accepted by the Family and Minors court and the latter makes a change to the girls’ arrangements.

Tragically, the mother tells SIC the girls loathe their current lives and “cannot sleep” on the last night of any period they get to stay with their mother ‘as they don’t want to go back’.

As to the background of the story, tabloid Correio da Manhã says they were “handed to their father who has condemnations for aggravated domestic violence”.

Indeed, according to CM, the social workers’ actions were “all to benefit the father”.
Appeal court judges have concluded that the social workers “knew the facts given were false. They aimed to make the court believe the children ran the risk of serious danger and obtain their withdrawal via legal mechanisms that were unjust”, said the ruling.

Ana Maximiano’s lawyer Gameiro Fernandes calls the judges’ ruling “historic”. “This is the first time in Portugal that technicians of Social Security are to be taken to court for malpractice in the exercising of their duties”.

It is unclear whether the workers involved are still even employed by Social Services. What is clear however is that this story is not yet over.

Ana Maximiano told SIC her daughters are desperate to be allowed to stay with her, but for the time being at least, they remain in their father’s custody notwithstanding that two criminal cases alleging violence having been taken out against him.

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

It's worrying to think what could have happened to the (McCann) twins without such a high level of UK protection in Portugal 2007.

Mistakes get made everywhere; Mrs Justice Hogg made a huge one concerning Ellie Butler, didn't she?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 08, 2019, 01:40:08 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 07, 2019, 11:59:32 PM
Mistakes get made everywhere; Mrs Justice Hogg made a huge one concerning Ellie Butler, didn't she?
Parental mistakes are made everywhere. Where should the line be drawn between a mistake & a deliberate action by the authorities when it comes to the fate of children in their care?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 08, 2019, 01:57:13 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 07, 2019, 11:59:32 PM
Mistakes get made everywhere; Mrs Justice Hogg made a huge one concerning Ellie Butler, didn't she?
Snip
Appeal court judges have concluded that the social workers “knew the facts given were false. They aimed to make the court believe the children ran the risk of serious danger and obtain their withdrawal via legal mechanisms that were unjust”, said the ruling.
https://www.portugalresident.com/social-workers-accused-of-falsifying-statements-to-ensure-mother-lost-custody-of-children/


To err is human.
The Portuguese courts will be considering if these Social Security Workers (public employees, I presume) are guilty of malfeasance.   
It will be interesting to see if the court will conclude that they've made a simple mistake or if their alleged negligent professional misconduct was deliberate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 08, 2019, 01:58:36 AM
Quote from: misty on November 08, 2019, 01:40:08 AM
Parental mistakes are made everywhere. Where should the line be drawn between a mistake & a deliberate action by the authorities when it comes to the fate of children in their care?

I would have qualms about leaving children in the custody of a violent man.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 08, 2019, 06:50:42 AM
“What evidence do you have of a stranger ? The Moyes were on their balcony above having a few drinks and heard nothing. Mrs Fenn directly above claims to have heard nothing until 22:30. SY claim to have found and cleared Tannerman”.

Of course I have no evidence. Perhaps you do? I wasn’t referring to Tannerman. The fact that no one ‘heard’ anything is irrelevant. A person skilled enough, would be able to act swiftly and without commotion. This is my personal view. Police indicated that they are looking at/for a lone, foreign intruder, who apparently is not Martin Ney but someone else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 08, 2019, 08:09:27 AM
Quote from: misty on November 08, 2019, 01:40:08 AM
Parental mistakes are made everywhere. Where should the line be drawn between a mistake & a deliberate action by the authorities when it comes to the fate of children in their care?

Each case is different.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2019, 08:21:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 07, 2019, 11:59:32 PM
Mistakes get made everywhere; Mrs Justice Hogg made a huge one concerning Ellie Butler, didn't she?
”Don’t look there, look here”. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 08, 2019, 09:29:43 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 07, 2019, 07:31:02 PM
So what happened next?

It was very gruesome,   so I won't go into details.   He basically assaulted her and left her for dead,  but she survived to tell her story,  it took years to find him and she was getting ready to face him in court when she heard he had committed suicide.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jennifer-schuett-case-afraid-of-the-dark-texas-woman-seeks-justice-in-childhood-kidnapping-attack/

The fact is he got in through the window,  took her back out through the window and she only woke up when they were heading off down the path outside.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 08, 2019, 12:24:43 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 08, 2019, 09:29:43 AM
It was very gruesome,   so I won't go into details.   He basically assaulted her and left her for dead,  but she survived to tell her story,  it took years to find him and she was getting ready to face him in court when she heard he had committed suicide.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jennifer-schuett-case-afraid-of-the-dark-texas-woman-seeks-justice-in-childhood-kidnapping-attack/

The fact is he got in through the window,  took her back out through the window and she only woke up when they were heading off down the path outside.

That would make an interesting thread on its own.

Particularly given the string of sex assaults reported on the Algarve.

He said she was picked up totally at random.  She says he took her to her school, which suggests otherwise.  And she appears to be a highly reliable witness.

Excellent find Lace  *&(+(+
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2019, 05:19:04 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 08, 2019, 09:29:43 AM
It was very gruesome,   so I won't go into details.   He basically assaulted her and left her for dead,  but she survived to tell her story,  it took years to find him and she was getting ready to face him in court when she heard he had committed suicide.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jennifer-schuett-case-afraid-of-the-dark-texas-woman-seeks-justice-in-childhood-kidnapping-attack/

The fact is he got in through the window,  took her back out through the window and she only woke up when they were heading off down the path outside.
There are some here who would surely dispute the possibility that a child could be taken from her bed at night by a perfect stranger, with her mother on the premises, through an open window and without screaming the place down.  They would surely say it was “virtually impossible”.  I wonder how they cope with this account?  How to rationalise its near impossibility?  It would be interesting to know but I expect nothing but silence on the matter from those individuals. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 08, 2019, 09:01:39 PM
Let's see your leads on a stranger if you believe it happened. Or are you all mouth and no trousers?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 08, 2019, 09:10:45 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 08, 2019, 05:19:04 PM
There are some here who would surely dispute the possibility that a child could be taken from her bed at night by a perfect stranger, with her mother on the premises, through an open window and without screaming the place down.  They would surely say it was “virtually impossible”.  I wonder how they cope with this account?  How to rationalise its near impossibility?  It would be interesting to know but I expect nothing but silence on the matter from those individuals.

You seem to think that quoting other cases has a bearing on the McCann case. In reality every case is different.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 08, 2019, 10:07:44 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 08, 2019, 05:19:04 PM
There are some here who would surely dispute the possibility that a child could be taken from her bed at night by a perfect stranger, with her mother on the premises, through an open window and without screaming the place down.  They would surely say it was “virtually impossible”.  I wonder how they cope with this account?  How to rationalise its near impossibility?  It would be interesting to know but I expect nothing but silence on the matter from those individuals.
It is nothing short of a miracle that Jennifer survived; I doubt I have ever seen a better likeness in an efit ... what an artist and what amazing recall from a child so recently brought back from the jaws of death and still unable to speak as a result of the injuries she had suffered.

The perpetrator's profile is food for thought ...
Jennifer was eight years old when she was abducted with ease by a local familiar with the area ... how much easier would it have been to abduct a sleeping three year old ?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 08, 2019, 10:11:02 PM
Hi Lace, your post on Jennifer Schuett is very informative. It amazes me that an 8-year old could give such a precise description and e-fit. Also the advances in DNA sampling to get to a positive match. Someone pointed out that Jeni Weinberger, an artist, was involved in creating the e-fit of spottyman. My view has always been that whoever took Madeleine, will only be discovered once s/he’s DNA has been captured on a database.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 08, 2019, 10:22:31 PM
Quote from: Anthro on November 08, 2019, 10:11:02 PM
Hi Lace, your post on Jennifer Schuett is very informative. It amazes me that an 8-year old could give such a precise description and e-fit. Also the advances in DNA sampling to get to a positive match. Someone pointed out that Jeni Weinberger, an artist, was involved in creating the e-fit of spottyman. My view has always been that whoever took Madeleine, will only be discovered once s/he’s DNA has been captured on a database.

It is interesting that the perpetrator acted alone.  He alleged remorse ... I wonder if his suicide was less to do with remorse for his actions than it was to the detectives doing their homework which gave him a glimpse of living out what was left of his life in jail.
I think the only remorse he felt was that he had been caught ... I think he thought he had got away with it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2019, 10:45:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 08, 2019, 09:10:45 PM
You seem to think that quoting other cases has a bearing on the McCann case. In reality every case is different.
When people say “there is no way Madeleine would have not screamed the place down if taken from her bed” what are they basing that on, exactly?  Is it an assumption that all children would behave in that way, or only Madeleine?  Clearly the case being referenced puts paid to that assumption.  If the latter, is that based on their personal knowledge of the child?  Over to you...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2019, 10:46:15 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on November 08, 2019, 09:01:39 PM
Let's see your leads on a stranger if you believe it happened. Or are you all mouth and no trousers?
Who are you addressing Rudeboy?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 09, 2019, 12:59:28 AM
As you have no clue about who then it's addressed to you.

No point believing it's a stranger without anything to lead you to them. A stranger does not exist unless you have some evidence of one and there was none on that open window or tidy bed. Kate left the apartment and her remaining defenceless children alone again with the window still open. David Payne went into the apartment after the alarm was raised and did not see the open window. I thought that would be the first thing to see after being told that it was open but nothing is what it seems with these characters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2019, 06:27:08 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 08, 2019, 10:45:29 PM
When people say “there is no way Madeleine would have not screamed the place down if taken from her bed” what are they basing that on, exactly?  Is it an assumption that all children would behave in that way, or only Madeleine?  Clearly the case being referenced puts paid to that assumption.  If the latter, is that based on their personal knowledge of the child?  Over to you...

People quote Kate McCann on the basis that she knew Madeleine so was an expert on what the child might or could do. What about her grandmother? She claimed to know Madeleine too;

“I really believe they (whoever took her) gave her a drug.

“There is no way they carried her out of there without her awakening.

“If she was taken when she was sleeping by somebody she did not know, she would have screamed the place down.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564727/Madeleine-McCann-drugged-says-grandmother.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2019, 07:21:35 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on November 09, 2019, 12:59:28 AM
As you have no clue about who then it's addressed to you.

No point believing it's a stranger without anything to lead you to them. A stranger does not exist unless you have some evidence of one and there was none on that open window or tidy bed. Kate left the apartment and her remaining defenceless children alone again with the window still open. David Payne went into the apartment after the alarm was raised and did not see the open window. I thought that would be the first thing to see after being told that it was open but nothing is what it seems with these characters.
”A stranger does not exist unless you have some evidence of one” - extremely poor logic IMO.  Didn’t bother with the rest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2019, 07:25:09 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2019, 06:27:08 AM
People quote Kate McCann on the basis that she knew Madeleine so was an expert on what the child might or could do. What about her grandmother? She claimed to know Madeleine too;

“I really believe they (whoever took her) gave her a drug.

“There is no way they carried her out of there without her awakening.

“If she was taken when she was sleeping by somebody she did not know, she would have screamed the place down.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564727/Madeleine-McCann-drugged-says-grandmother.html
No one, not even a child’s mother can predict how a child will behave when it is picked up sleeping from its bed and abducted.  They can assume but as we know you think very little of their assumptions (eg: they assumed the kids would be perfectly safe if left alone) I am surprised you even give them the time of day.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2019, 08:29:41 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2019, 07:21:35 AM
”A stranger does not exist unless you have some evidence of one” - extremely poor logic IMO.  Didn’t bother with the rest.

The police are supposed to follow the evidence. If there's no evidence of a stranger then they're not following the evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 08:36:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2019, 08:29:41 AM
The police are supposed to follow the evidence. If there's no evidence of a stranger then they're not following the evidence.
      What about the missing child? Doesn't she count?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2019, 08:45:30 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2019, 08:29:41 AM
The police are supposed to follow the evidence. If there's no evidence of a stranger then they're not following the evidence.
So in a serious crime with no tangible evidence (ie forensics etc) police should just stop investigating?  No evidence of a stranger abductor means there is no stranger abductor - you believe that is logical do you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 09, 2019, 09:00:36 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2019, 08:45:30 AM
So in a serious crime with no tangible evidence (ie forensics etc) police should just stop investigating?  No evidence of a stranger abductor means there is no stranger abductor - you believe that is logical do you?

Aren't they called 'cold cases'? - when an investigation is terminated due to lack of useful evidence.


How can you look for something of which there is no trace?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 09:04:55 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 09, 2019, 09:00:36 AM
Aren't they called 'cold cases'? - when an investigation is terminated due to lack of useful evidence.


How can you look for something of which there is no trace?

What can you expect to find if you don't look for it ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 09, 2019, 09:06:27 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 09, 2019, 09:00:36 AM
Aren't they called 'cold cases'? - when an investigation is terminated due to lack of useful evidence.


How can you look for something of which there is no trace?


These cases then are reopened should advances be made in forensics or such like as has happened in the likes of the Lesley Moseley case or other new evidence comes up,some false as in the recent digs concerning the disappearance of Suzi lamplugh show.IMO in the Madeleine case, history will show it falls between these two,should a confession not be forthcoming.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 09, 2019, 09:07:23 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 09:04:55 AM
What can you expect to find if you don't look for it ?

What would you be looking for ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 09, 2019, 09:09:18 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 09:04:55 AM
What can you expect to find if you don't look for it ?


What would  the expectation of Grange digging the earth in Luz  back in 2014 be?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 09, 2019, 10:06:19 AM
Quote from: barrier on November 09, 2019, 09:09:18 AM

What would  the expectation of Grange digging the earth in Luz  back in 2014 be?

Either a body or no body.   they had to follow up on what the witness said didn't they?   There was no body.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 09, 2019, 10:48:23 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 09, 2019, 10:06:19 AM
Either a body or no body.   they had to follow up on what the witness said didn't they?   There was no body.


What witness's,we know it wasn't the 3 amigos's,they were questioned afterwards.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 09, 2019, 10:56:04 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 09, 2019, 10:06:19 AM
Either a body or no body.   they had to follow up on what the witness said didn't they?   There was no body.

The problem with digging holes is that unless you find what you are looking for, there is the distinct possibility that you have not dug in the correct place.

No trace of the object does not mean the object is not somewhere else, possibly  nearby.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2019, 11:25:10 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 08:36:38 AM
      What about the missing child? Doesn't she count?

Of course the child counts, but sometimes there's no definitive evidence. The Portuguese investigators were quite right to archive the case in my opinion. Not all cases are solvable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 12:13:17 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 09, 2019, 09:06:27 AM

These cases then are reopened should advances be made in forensics or such like as has happened in the likes of the Lesley Moseley case or other new evidence comes up,some false as in the recent digs concerning the disappearance of Suzi lamplugh show.IMO in the Madeleine case, history will show it falls between these two,should a confession not be forthcoming.

What if it is discovered that evidence which had been given to the police had never been investigated at all but filed away as being irrelevant.  I think that is either enormously corrupt or enormously incompetent if not both.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 12:14:52 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 09, 2019, 09:09:18 AM

What would  the expectation of Grange digging the earth in Luz  back in 2014 be?

A process of elimination.  Isn't that what police do in an investigation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 12:18:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2019, 11:25:10 AM
Of course the child counts, but sometimes there's no definitive evidence. The Portuguese investigators were quite right to archive the case in my opinion. Not all cases are solvable.

Particularly if the conduct of the investigation is incompetent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 09, 2019, 12:21:05 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 09:04:55 AM
What can you expect to find if you don't look for it ?

So once again what was the expectation of Grange digging up the waste ground.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 12:24:27 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 09, 2019, 12:21:05 PM
So once again what was the expectation of Grange digging up the waste ground.
A process of elimination.  Isn't that what police do in an investigation?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg561229#msg561229
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 09, 2019, 12:30:25 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 08:36:38 AM
      What about the missing child? Doesn't she count?
Err...yeah, hence the extensive investigation. They even chased 'strangers' who turned out to be non-existent, sometimes to other continents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 09, 2019, 12:32:16 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 09, 2019, 10:48:23 AM

What witness's,we know it wasn't the 3 amigos's,they were questioned afterwards.
Krugel maybe? I mean, he was pretty convincing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 09, 2019, 12:35:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 12:13:17 PM
What if it is discovered that evidence which had been given to the police had never been investigated at all but filed away as being irrelevant.  I think that is either enormously corrupt or enormously incompetent if not both.
I thought some 'theories' were allowed to be consigned to the 'nutty bin'?
Do you seriously expect the police to 'investigate' every scrap of evidence, irrespective of its likely veracity, even if it's patently ludicrous, to coin a phrase? Every major crime since ever has received stupid 'leads' or evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 12:36:51 PM
Quote from: The General on November 09, 2019, 12:32:16 PM
Krugel maybe? I mean, he was pretty convincing.

            Apparently convincing enough for the PJ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 09, 2019, 12:42:27 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 09, 2019, 10:48:23 AM

What witness's,we know it wasn't the 3 amigos's,they were questioned afterwards.

This witness,  they were following up what this witness said she heard.   I'm sure I've given you this link before -

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/488487/EXCLUSIVE-Potential-key-witness-McCann-case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 09, 2019, 12:42:48 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 12:36:51 PM
            Apparently convincing enough for the PJ.
Certainly Mr and Mrs McCann. Gerry even conjured a hair when none were to be found. 'OK Hansie, you bang the two housebricks together and I'll fire up the whirleygig in the shopping trolley'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 12:43:50 PM
Quote from: The General on November 09, 2019, 12:35:36 PM
I thought some 'theories' were allowed to be consigned to the 'nutty bin'?
Do you seriously expect the police to 'investigate' every scrap of evidence, irrespective of its likely veracity, even if it's patently ludicrous, to coin a phrase? Every major crime since ever has received stupid 'leads' or evidence.

  ... and perhaps it can sometimes be a "stupid" lead slotting into place which solves a crime.  The point is that in Madeleine's case it was discovered in 2010 that the police simply hadn't followed anything through and investigated nothing since 2008 when Madeleine's case was archived..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 09, 2019, 12:46:57 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 12:43:50 PM
  ... and perhaps it can sometimes be a "stupid" lead slotting into place which solves a crime.  The point is that in Madeleine's case it was discovered in 2010 that the police simply hadn't followed anything through and investigated nothing since 2008 when Madeleine's case was archived..
That's probably the process in most police investigations in the western world. They have a cut off and 'cold case' it. If compelling new evidence is presented, then it's evaluated.
I suggest, given the decade long squeeze on UK police resources, that innumerable crimes have gone unsolved, despite relatively credible evidence coming to light, purely through lack of resources - arses in chairs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 09, 2019, 01:00:57 PM
They seemed to have opened it after SY got their hands on the missing HE file which included Smithman efits. The Portuguese came on board just as the efits were released on CW.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 09, 2019, 01:01:08 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 09, 2019, 12:42:27 PM
This witness,  they were following up what this witness said she heard.   I'm sure I've given you this link before -

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/488487/EXCLUSIVE-Potential-key-witness-McCann-case

Ah! the lead investigators,the press.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 09, 2019, 01:02:31 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 12:24:27 PM
A process of elimination.  Isn't that what police do in an investigation?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg561229#msg561229

Not if they were looking for something,after all how to they expect to find anything if they don't look.I'd venture not finding anything was not on their list of to do's.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 09, 2019, 01:11:37 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 09, 2019, 10:06:19 AM
Either a body or no body.   they had to follow up on what the witness said didn't they?   There was no body.


I feel sre that they would have been searching for traces of Madeleine.

Bur also, could be that they were looking for traces of Jos Brech.  Maybe they had noticed the sketch similarities of Jos to 'spotty man', as Anthro had.  He liked to live rough and was an expert at it.

Anyone know if they examined empty derelict buildings?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 09, 2019, 01:18:11 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 09, 2019, 12:42:27 PM
This witness,  they were following up what this witness said she heard.   I'm sure I've given you this link before -

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/488487/EXCLUSIVE-Potential-key-witness-McCann-case


"The woman gave an interview to Portuguese detectives 13 days after the disappearance but the report on the informal interview does not mention her overhearing a conversation about disposing of a body.
However, in April 2008 the woman made a further statement in which she recounted hearing the astonishing comment, saying she heard it days after the abduction."

She heard it days after but did not reveal it to police on 16 May 2007.  *%87




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 09, 2019, 01:22:00 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on November 09, 2019, 01:18:11 PM

"The woman gave an interview to Portuguese detectives 13 days after the disappearance but the report on the informal interview does not mention her overhearing a conversation about disposing of a body.
However, in April 2008 the woman made a further statement in which she recounted hearing the astonishing comment, saying she heard it days after the abduction."

She heard it days after but did not reveal it to police on 16 May 2007.  *%87
The incompetent fools, they should have known she was holding back.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 09, 2019, 01:30:18 PM
Quote from: The General on November 09, 2019, 01:22:00 PM
The incompetent fools, they should have known she was holding back.

 @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2019, 01:47:33 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2019, 12:18:49 PM
Particularly if the conduct of the investigation is incompetent.

That's a matter of opinion, not fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2019, 02:05:04 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 09, 2019, 12:42:27 PM
This witness,  they were following up what this witness said she heard.   I'm sure I've given you this link before -

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/488487/EXCLUSIVE-Potential-key-witness-McCann-case

A witness who said nothing at the time but allegedly remembered it years later? Yeah, that sounds convincing....not!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 09, 2019, 02:27:22 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on November 09, 2019, 01:18:11 PM

"The woman gave an interview to Portuguese detectives 13 days after the disappearance but the report on the informal interview does not mention her overhearing a conversation about disposing of a body.
However, in April 2008 the woman made a further statement in which she recounted hearing the astonishing comment, saying she heard it days after the abduction."

She heard it days after but did not reveal it to police on 16 May 2007.  *%87

The Police felt they had to investigate just in case IMO

Some people take a while to  go to the police perhaps she was thinking 'did I really hear what I think I heard'  then decided she would go and tell the Police anyway
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2019, 03:11:45 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 09, 2019, 02:27:22 PM
The Police felt they had to investigate just in case IMO

Some people take a while to  go to the police perhaps she was thinking 'did I really hear what I think I heard'  then decided she would go and tell the Police anyway

I wonder which police she spoke to in May 2008? There's nothing in the PJ Files imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 09, 2019, 03:13:28 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 09, 2019, 02:27:22 PM
The Police felt they had to investigate just in case IMO

Some people take a while to  go to the police perhaps she was thinking 'did I really hear what I think I heard'  then decided she would go and tell the Police anyway

I thought she had overheard a conversation on the night - 'Why did you bring her here' but according to the report it was days after. I suppose a body hidden on the night then moved somewhere else days later cannot be ruled out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 09, 2019, 05:48:08 PM
Does anyone know what the origin of the photo to the left is and how it relates to Madeleine? Madeleine is on the right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2019, 05:53:12 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 09, 2019, 09:00:36 AM
Aren't they called 'cold cases'? - when an investigation is terminated due to lack of useful evidence.


How can you look for something of which there is no trace?
Ask the police, those who have spent years looking for Ben Needham, Claudia Lawrence, etc.  Should they have given up as soon as it was established there was no actual evidence regarding what happened the day they went missing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2019, 05:54:00 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 09, 2019, 09:09:18 AM

What would  the expectation of Grange digging the earth in Luz  back in 2014 be?
You are obsessed with those digs - why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2019, 05:55:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2019, 11:25:10 AM
Of course the child counts, but sometimes there's no definitive evidence. The Portuguese investigators were quite right to archive the case in my opinion. Not all cases are solvable.
And yet the Met found all sorts of new investigative opportunities prior to re-opening the case.  Why were they not followed up by the initial investigation? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 09, 2019, 06:47:00 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2019, 05:55:44 PM
And yet the Met found all sorts of new investigative opportunities prior to re-opening the case.  Why were they not followed up by the initial investigation?

And what useful leads they were too, hence the reason Maddie is home safe & w.......Oh, no wait, that's right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 09, 2019, 06:51:26 PM
Quote from: Anthro on November 09, 2019, 05:48:08 PM
Does anyone know what the origin of the photo to the left is and how it relates to Madeleine? Madeleine is on the right.
The photo on the left could be Madeleine McCann, it is not one I recall.   Where did you get it from?  The way there is eye shadow applied it has similarities to the make-up photo taken in PDL (I think).
(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/_lWXrpwC28yU/S92teCM4eUI/AAAAAAAAHfQ/RulXTg92k3Q/s640/15623768.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2019, 06:52:42 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 09, 2019, 06:47:00 PM
And what useful leads they were too, hence the reason Maddie is home safe & w.......Oh, no wait, that's right.
So in the wonderful world of Spam police shouldn’t follow up on investigative leads because probably nothing will come of them.  Best to ignore them, it saves time, money and bother.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2019, 06:54:43 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 09, 2019, 06:51:26 PM
The photo on the left could be Madeleine McCann, it is not one I recall.   Where did you get it from?
The nose is a very good match to Madeleine’s.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 09, 2019, 06:59:42 PM
Quote from: Anthro on November 09, 2019, 05:48:08 PM
Does anyone know what the origin of the photo to the left is and how it relates to Madeleine? Madeleine is on the right.

I have a recollection it was taken from a video about child abuse & posted on twitter by a prominent troll.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 09, 2019, 07:08:55 PM
Hi Rob and Misty, it was on a forum and apparently from a group creating awareness of exploited children. I was hoping someone here could provide more information.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 10, 2019, 01:03:49 AM
Quote from: Anthro on November 09, 2019, 07:08:55 PM
Hi Rob and Misty, it was on a forum and apparently from a group creating awareness of exploited children. I was hoping someone here could provide more information.
(http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7060.0;attach=16160;image)

My goodness, that is a good likeness.  In my opinion it isn't quite right about the philtrum ( infranasal depression ) area, but it is remarkably like Madeleine.  The mystery  face also looks a little lobsided with one eyebrow a little lifted relative to the other.

But what a remarkable likeness.

Where do you find all these look alikes Anthro.  You are very observant.  Well done:  8((()*/


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 10, 2019, 07:12:44 AM
Hi Sadie, thank you. Forensic anthropology is one of my fields of interest. I have been collecting photographic and video material since 2007 and sometimes there seems to be some sort of likeness.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 10, 2019, 03:14:35 PM
Quote from: Anthro on November 10, 2019, 07:12:44 AM
Hi Sadie, thank you. Forensic anthropology is one of my fields of interest. I have been collecting photographic and video material since 2007 and sometimes there seems to be some sort of likeness.
(http://i.imgur.com/zUkFJ8B.png?1)
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3340.msg130930#msg130930

I have been intrigued by this little girl seen in Brussels from the first time I heard about her ... I wonder how the Belgian authorities confirmed she was who they were told she was?


Madeleine McCann Brussels sighting dismissed
A possible sighting of Madeleine in Brussels has been dismissed by the Belgian authorities.

By Graham Tibbetts
12:23PM BST 12 Aug 2008

The father of a young blonde girl who appeared on film on August 4 came forward to explain that his daughter was not the missing girl.

Lieve Pellens, spokesman for the Belgian federal prosecutor’s office, said: “He saw this picture and obviously for him it was very easy recognising the girl accompanied by a woman in a veil.
“It’s her nanny - she is a young Moroccan woman who is qualified to look after children and works in a care centre.”

Clarence Mitchell said: “I am very pleased that this little girl has been identified and that she can be ruled out, from her family’s perspective.
“Clearly for Kate and Gerry it is a disappointment. But we have had many of these before and the search for Madeleine will continue.”

The girl and woman were also seen on CCTV by a security guard at KBC bank to the west of Brussels. The guard said afterwards he would 'bet everything he owned' that the child he saw was the missing Briton.
Speculation over the girl's identity increased after an ice cream seller in the city reported serving someone fitting Madeleine's description.
Madeleine was nearly four when she went missing while on a family holiday in Portugal in May last year.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2545633/Madeleine-McCann-Brussels-sighting-dismissed.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 10, 2019, 03:28:18 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 10, 2019, 03:14:35 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/zUkFJ8B.png?1)
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3340.msg130930#msg130930

I have been intrigued by this little girl seen in Brussels from the first time I heard about her ... I wonder how the Belgian authorities confirmed she was who they were told she was?


Madeleine McCann Brussels sighting dismissed
A possible sighting of Madeleine in Brussels has been dismissed by the Belgian authorities.

By Graham Tibbetts
12:23PM BST 12 Aug 2008

The father of a young blonde girl who appeared on film on August 4 came forward to explain that his daughter was not the missing girl.

Lieve Pellens, spokesman for the Belgian federal prosecutor’s office, said: “He saw this picture and obviously for him it was very easy recognising the girl accompanied by a woman in a veil.
“It’s her nanny - she is a young Moroccan woman who is qualified to look after children and works in a care centre.”

Clarence Mitchell said: “I am very pleased that this little girl has been identified and that she can be ruled out, from her family’s perspective.
“Clearly for Kate and Gerry it is a disappointment. But we have had many of these before and the search for Madeleine will continue.”

The girl and woman were also seen on CCTV by a security guard at KBC bank to the west of Brussels. The guard said afterwards he would 'bet everything he owned' that the child he saw was the missing Briton.
Speculation over the girl's identity increased after an ice cream seller in the city reported serving someone fitting Madeleine's description.
Madeleine was nearly four when she went missing while on a family holiday in Portugal in May last year.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2545633/Madeleine-McCann-Brussels-sighting-dismissed.html


The usual manner, I imagine - investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 10, 2019, 03:56:42 PM
Hi Brietta, there were also claims that the woman in the Belgium photo, is the same one in this photo taken by a Spanish tourist in Zinat, Morocco.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 10, 2019, 04:19:14 PM
Quote from: Anthro on November 10, 2019, 03:56:42 PM
Hi Brietta, there were also claims that the woman in the Belgium photo, is the same one in this photo taken by a Spanish tourist in Zinat, Morocco.


Were these ever substantiated or do they remain just claims ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 10, 2019, 04:46:46 PM
Hi Jassi, as far as I know it had never been substantiated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 10, 2019, 05:13:40 PM
Quote from: Anthro on November 10, 2019, 03:56:42 PM
Hi Brietta, there were also claims that the woman in the Belgium photo, is the same one in this photo taken by a Spanish tourist in Zinat, Morocco.
Sadie has gone into it in some depth, Anthro: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3340.msg130233#msg130233
I agree that far from her thinking that Bushra Binhisa was the child being carried in the tourist photograph that is not her thinking at all.  She makes a very good case in support of her opinion as detailed in the post linked to above.

I think the woman in the Belgium photograph and the woman in the Moroccan photograph are strikingly similar: what I hadn't appreciated until fairly recently was just how dangerous it would have been to have carried out any inquiries in the Molenbeek area which is apparently where the child seen in her company lived with her father.

I am as convinced as the people who saw the child in the street that her resemblance to Madeleine McCann is uncanny.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 10, 2019, 05:18:49 PM
Thank you for the link, Brietta.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 10, 2019, 07:30:59 PM
If I may, this has been on my mind for a long time. All of us here, seemingly feel connected to Madeleine and her disappearance in some or other way. Mine stems from television reports on the 4th of May 2007 when Madeleine’s disappearance had been broadcasted globally. We learnt on that day that we were expecting a baby girl.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 11, 2019, 07:20:21 AM
Quote from: Anthro on November 10, 2019, 03:56:42 PM
Hi Brietta, there were also claims that the woman in the Belgium photo, is the same one in this photo taken by a Spanish tourist in Zinat, Morocco.
Who claims that? Even at a glance it is patently obvious that they are two very different people. The Belgium woman is slight and short and obviously relatively old, almost frail; the Zinat woman is built like a Rory Best.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 11, 2019, 07:46:07 AM
Quote from: The General on November 11, 2019, 07:20:21 AM
Who claims that? Even at a glance it is patently obvious that they are two very different people. The Belgium woman is slight and short and obviously relatively old, almost frail; the Zinat woman is built like a Rory Best.

Perhaps she'd been dieting.  @)(++(*

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 11, 2019, 08:33:53 AM
Quote from: The General on November 11, 2019, 07:20:21 AM
Who claims that? Even at a glance it is patently obvious that they are two very different people. The Belgium woman is slight and short and obviously relatively old, almost frail; the Zinat woman is built like a Rory Best.

Fine hooker he is/was too,retired now? any how back to off topic,keep revisiting 2014 folks,imo Grange are of an opinion Madeleine never left Luz alive.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 11, 2019, 09:14:01 AM
Hi Barrier, if Madeleine never left Praia da Luz alive, what is your opinion on OG’s opinion, as to her remains’ whereabouts?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 11, 2019, 09:24:21 AM
Quote from: Anthro on November 11, 2019, 09:14:01 AM
Hi Barrier, if Madeleine never left Praia da Luz alive, what is your opinion on OG’s opinion, as to her remains’ whereabouts?

We know some 12 months later the team was dramatically scaled back,to just four from at one stage upward of 81 former officers plus the 30 or so employed in the MET,the bulk of the work was done and its again imo the only way save from a confession it'll end is along the lines of,person/persons unknown removed Madeleine from 5a with out leaving a trace to her whereabouts.They probably know who was involved but hard evidence will prevent any names being suggested.
Professional opinion ended the search for Ben Needham,nothing to suggest it'll not be the same with this case some 25 yrs down the line.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 11, 2019, 03:14:45 PM
Davel often claimed that the visitor numbers to this site was due to "Bots".  I have been following the visitor number to a thread I have been developing and I'm more convinced the visitor numbers are guests following the thread.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10611.0  Best thing about guests is that they don't say anything that interferes with the train of thought as I develop my new theory.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 11, 2019, 05:48:34 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 11, 2019, 03:14:45 PM
Davel often claimed that the visitor numbers to this site was due to "Bots".  I have been following the visitor number to a thread I have been developing and I'm more convinced the visitor numbers are guests following the thread.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10611.0  Best thing about guests is that they don't say anything that interferes with the train of thought as I develop my new theory.

Quite few of us I believe, read the forum for a while prior to applying for membership.  I know I did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 11, 2019, 07:33:13 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 10, 2019, 05:13:40 PM
Sadie has gone into it in some depth, Anthro: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3340.msg130233#msg130233
I agree that far from her thinking that Bushra Binhisa was the child being carried in the tourist photograph that is not her thinking at all.  She makes a very good case in support of her opinion as detailed in the post linked to above.

I think the woman in the Belgium photograph and the woman in the Moroccan photograph are strikingly similar: what I hadn't appreciated until fairly recently was just how dangerous it would have been to have carried out any inquiries in the Molenbeek area which is apparently where the child seen in her company lived with her father.

I am as convinced as the people who saw the child in the street that her resemblance to Madeleine McCann is uncanny.

That would be because Molenbeek St John in central Brussels is a major drug processing and distributing centre globally.

It's raw materials were extensively grown in the Rif Mountains of Morocco and processed into Cannabis and other illicit drugs, then distributed from Molenbeek St John around the World.  Molenbeek St John = Drug Baron country ... and so is Zinat; both are Drug Baron country.

Leh in tha Himalayas likewise; it is where almost all the Hash smoked in India enters the country.


So why was this 'respectable' man living in such a dangerous and undesirable pl;ace ?

Do you think the police there were bought or even in  fear of their lives ?   can we trust repoprts from these threre places?

All three places were where Madeleine was sighted?

What might we deduce from that ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 12, 2019, 08:29:30 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 11, 2019, 05:48:34 PM
Quite few of us I believe, read the forum for a while prior to applying for membership.  I know I did.
They're overwhelmingly bots / crawlers, mainly Google. I would suggest up to 80%, as up to 38% of all internet activity is bots.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 12, 2019, 08:46:34 AM
Quote from: sadie on November 11, 2019, 07:33:13 PM
That would be because Molenbeek St John in central Brussels is a major drug processing and distributing centre globally.

It's raw materials were extensively grown in the Rif Mountains of Morocco and processed into Cannabis and other illicit drugs, then distributed from Molenbeek St John around the World.  Molenbeek St John = Drug Baron country ... and so is Zinat; both are Drug Baron country.

Leh in tha Himalayas likewise; it is where almost all the Hash smoked in India enters the country.


So why was this 'respectable' man living in such a dangerous and undesirable pl;ace ?

Do you think the police there were bought or even in  fear of their lives ?   can we trust repoprts from these threre places?

All three places were where Madeleine was sighted?

What might we deduce from that ?

Really? You mean 'supposedly' sighted and later dismissed.
There's nothing to deduce from any of it. It's another rabbit hole. The evidence, apart from the two women depicted looking absolutely nothing like each other (one 'Mother' Theresa - does not look capable of carrying a child on her back, the other Rory Best, looks capable of carrying a Mini Cooper on her back), is that both of the girls were positively ID'd.*





*all of the above is the opinion of 'The General'. 'The General' freely admits that most of the content he posts is irrelevant and erroneous and should be treated with the contempt it deserves. The rest of the content is solid gold internet fodder, that's been verified by a crack team of ex-special forces and intelligence service operatives, operating from a converted grain silo in Herefordshire, most of whom think they're working for someone else.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 09:03:53 AM
Quote from: The General on November 12, 2019, 08:46:34 AM
Really? You mean 'supposedly' sighted and later dismissed.
There's nothing to deduce from any of it. It's another rabbit hole. The evidence, apart from the two women depicted looking absolutely nothing like each other (one 'Mother' Theresa - does not look capable of carrying a child on her back, the other Rory Best, looks capable of carrying a Mini Cooper on her back), is that both of the girls were positively ID'd.*





*all of the above is the opinion of 'The General'. 'The General' freely admits that most of the content he posts is irrelevant and erroneous and should be treated with the contempt it deserves. The rest of the content is solid gold internet fodder, that's been verified by a crack team of ex-special forces and intelligence service operatives, operating from a converted grain silo in Herefordshire, most of whom think they're working for someone else.

The little girl seen on the CCTV footage outside the bank was identified when her father popped down and did so at the local police station where he claimed she was his daughter and the woman with her was her nanny..
I wonder, why was his word enough??
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 12, 2019, 09:10:16 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 09:03:53 AM
The little girl seen on the CCTV footage outside the bank was identified when her father popped down and did so at the local police station where he claimed she was his daughter and the woman with her was her nanny..
I wonder, why was his word enough??
I would expect that veracity of the claim to be checked in some manner, given that, you know, it's pretty easy to do, check if a guy has a child. Besides, if the man is now thrust in to the public eye across the globe, you'd have to be a special kind of stupid to not be the father of the child and pop down to the local police station and make the claim.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 10:44:46 AM
Quote from: The General on November 12, 2019, 09:10:16 AM
I would expect that veracity of the claim to be checked in some manner, given that, you know, it's pretty easy to do, check if a guy has a child. Besides, if the man is now thrust in to the public eye across the globe, you'd have to be a special kind of stupid to not be the father of the child and pop down to the local police station and make the claim.

We are talking here about the country where public demonstrations occurred in protest at the police handling of the cases involving Marc Dutroux.
Snip
The official explanation for the delay is that hysterical conspiracy theories forced investigators to search for paedophile networks which didn't exist. But far from being investigated, leads pointing to a network seem rather to have been ignored or buried.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/may/05/dutroux.featuresreview

In a country where apparently the mother of a murdered child was not allowed to see her body but the alleged murderer was allowed to identify the victim ... a little girl resembling a missing child is seen on CCTV footage and a man claiming to be her father is enough to resolve the issue ??

You think his claim must have been verified officially ... where can you or I see an account of that as we wonder what is taking up the precious time of Scotland Yard and the Policia Judiciaria ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 12, 2019, 11:28:39 AM
Why do you think you are entitled to see an account of this?
Would you expect to see similar in UK?

Can I assume you have added Belgium police to your list of incompetents ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 12, 2019, 12:16:45 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 10:44:46 AM
We are talking here about the country where public demonstrations occurred in protest at the police handling of the cases involving Marc Dutroux.
Snip
The official explanation for the delay is that hysterical conspiracy theories forced investigators to search for paedophile networks which didn't exist. But far from being investigated, leads pointing to a network seem rather to have been ignored or buried.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/may/05/dutroux.featuresreview

In a country where apparently the mother of a murdered child was not allowed to see her body but the alleged murderer was allowed to identify the victim ... a little girl resembling a missing child is seen on CCTV footage and a man claiming to be her father is enough to resolve the issue ??

You think his claim must have been verified officially ... where can you or I see an account of that as we wonder what is taking up the precious time of Scotland Yard and the Policia Judiciaria ?
What are you going on about? Is the Belgian justice system knackered as well now?
It's not her. Move on. Or are we going to start dredging up the birth certificates of more kids to satisfy your lust for transparent rigour?
And you accuse 'sceptics' of being fantasists? The brass neck of it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 12:17:27 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 12, 2019, 11:28:39 AM
Why do you think you are entitled to see an account of this?
Would you expect to see similar in UK?

Can I assume you have added Belgium police to your list of incompetents ?

You obviously didn't bother to read the link I provided ... here is another one which may be more to your liking?

300,000 Protest Belgium’s Handling of Pedophile Case
By DEAN E. MURPHY
OCT. 21, 1996 12 AM
TIMES STAFF WRITER

BRUSSELS —  Capping an extraordinary week of public demonstrations, about 300,000 people marched through the streets of the Belgian capital Sunday to protest the authorities’ handling of a highly charged pedophile scandal and to draw attention to the unknown fate of about 10 missing children.
________________________________________________________

Authorities said the orderly and sometimes teary crowd, carrying white flowers and balloons as symbols of innocence and purity, was among the largest in Belgian history. It surpassed the size of protests during the tense Cold War years of the early 1980s, when peace activists across Europe took to the streets to oppose the deployment of U.S. missiles on the Continent.
________________________________________________________

Even veterans of other demonstrations--including the legendary social upheavals of 1968--said none carried the moral grounding and genuine grass-roots concern that presided at Sunday’s event like the guiding hand of a watchful parent.
________________________________________________________

But the inward questioning has been increasingly overshadowed by intense rage toward the country’s political and judicial systems, which have come under scrutiny because of allegations of incompetence, corruption and complicity in the pedophile case. Recently, there have been reports in the Belgian media that investigators are pursuing evidence that might link senior political figures to Dutroux.

The enormous public anger began spilling into the streets last week when a respected state investigator was removed from the case by the country’s top court.
________________________________________________________

Auto workers blocked roads. Bus drivers refused to drive. Postal workers delivered sacks of spaghetti to judicial officials. And firefighters in Liege, where much of the scandal has been centered, turned their water jets on the Palace of Justice.

“When justice goes bad, people have to do what they have to do, just like in the old times,” said Johan, a 28-year-old unemployed construction worker who would not give his last name because he is related to a main suspect in the pedophile case.

“If you are going to rule by the letter of the law, then it should be that way for everyone, not just working Belgians with no political connections.”

The political fallout has not been lost on the country’s rulers. In a rare break with accepted protocol limiting his involvement in politics, Belgian King Albert II hosted a seminar on child abuse Friday, during which he called for a “moral revival and a profound change in our country.”
________________________________________________________

After the rally on Sunday, Prime Minister Jean-Luc Dehaene met with leaders of the protest, promising to push for several significant reforms in the Belgian justice system that could make a repeat of the Dutroux affair less likely, including depoliticizing the method for choosing magistrates.

The prime minister also pledged that the Dutroux investigation will be pursued “to its end” without any political interference and that disciplinary action will be taken against anyone found to have bungled the case.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-10-21-mn-56209-story.html
________________________________________________________



Please don't bother to assume anything about my unstated opinions.  Rather pay some attention to the opinions of the people most directly affected by corruption and or incompetence and in this case spare a thought for the murdered children the two who were starved to death and those missing with no-one knowing their fate.






Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 12, 2019, 12:17:53 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 12, 2019, 11:28:39 AM
Why do you think you are entitled to see an account of this?
Would you expect to see similar in UK?

Can I assume you have added Belgium police to your list of incompetents ?

I notice no-one ever gets excited about the sightings in the UK, of which there were plenty in Appenso 5
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 12, 2019, 12:36:58 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 12:17:27 PM
You obviously didn't bother to read the link I provided ... here is another one which may be more to your liking?

300,000 Protest Belgium’s Handling of Pedophile Case
By DEAN E. MURPHY
OCT. 21, 1996 12 AM
TIMES STAFF WRITER

BRUSSELS —  Capping an extraordinary week of public demonstrations, about 300,000 people marched through the streets of the Belgian capital Sunday to protest the authorities’ handling of a highly charged pedophile scandal and to draw attention to the unknown fate of about 10 missing children.
________________________________________________________

Authorities said the orderly and sometimes teary crowd, carrying white flowers and balloons as symbols of innocence and purity, was among the largest in Belgian history. It surpassed the size of protests during the tense Cold War years of the early 1980s, when peace activists across Europe took to the streets to oppose the deployment of U.S. missiles on the Continent.
________________________________________________________

Even veterans of other demonstrations--including the legendary social upheavals of 1968--said none carried the moral grounding and genuine grass-roots concern that presided at Sunday’s event like the guiding hand of a watchful parent.
________________________________________________________

But the inward questioning has been increasingly overshadowed by intense rage toward the country’s political and judicial systems, which have come under scrutiny because of allegations of incompetence, corruption and complicity in the pedophile case. Recently, there have been reports in the Belgian media that investigators are pursuing evidence that might link senior political figures to Dutroux.

The enormous public anger began spilling into the streets last week when a respected state investigator was removed from the case by the country’s top court.
________________________________________________________

Auto workers blocked roads. Bus drivers refused to drive. Postal workers delivered sacks of spaghetti to judicial officials. And firefighters in Liege, where much of the scandal has been centered, turned their water jets on the Palace of Justice.

“When justice goes bad, people have to do what they have to do, just like in the old times,” said Johan, a 28-year-old unemployed construction worker who would not give his last name because he is related to a main suspect in the pedophile case.

“If you are going to rule by the letter of the law, then it should be that way for everyone, not just working Belgians with no political connections.”

The political fallout has not been lost on the country’s rulers. In a rare break with accepted protocol limiting his involvement in politics, Belgian King Albert II hosted a seminar on child abuse Friday, during which he called for a “moral revival and a profound change in our country.”
________________________________________________________

After the rally on Sunday, Prime Minister Jean-Luc Dehaene met with leaders of the protest, promising to push for several significant reforms in the Belgian justice system that could make a repeat of the Dutroux affair less likely, including depoliticizing the method for choosing magistrates.

The prime minister also pledged that the Dutroux investigation will be pursued “to its end” without any political interference and that disciplinary action will be taken against anyone found to have bungled the case.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-10-21-mn-56209-story.html
________________________________________________________



Please don't bother to assume anything about my unstated opinions.  Rather pay some attention to the opinions of the people most directly affected by corruption and or incompetence and in this case spare a thought for the murdered children the two who were starved to death and those missing with no-one knowing their fate.

In the UK all they had to do was get a job looking after unfortunate children.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/oct/09/sarahhall
https://www.essexlive.news/news/essex-news/meet-billericay-author-who-overcame-1671738
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 12, 2019, 12:41:39 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 12:17:27 PM

By DEAN E. MURPHY
OCT. 21, 1996 12 AM


1996.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 12:52:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 12, 2019, 12:17:53 PM
I notice no-one ever gets excited about the sightings in the UK, of which there were plenty in Appenso 5

Yeah ... seems to be a conspiracy ... complete with bank guard, ice cream vendor, Guardian journalist et al 😎😎😎

Snip
The father of a young blonde girl who appeared on film on August 4 came forward to explain that his daughter was not the missing girl.

Lieve Pellens, spokesman for the Belgian federal prosecutor’s office, said: “He saw this picture and obviously for him it was very easy recognising the girl ... "
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2545633/Madeleine-McCann-Brussels-sighting-dismissed.html


Snip
The youngster was in Brussels with a North African-looking woman who bought her a chocolate ice cream - Madeleine's favourite - from a street vendor.

The sighting on Monday last week occurred around the time the pair were picked up on CCTV footage by a security guard at a nearby bank.

Antonio Migliardi, who sold them the ice cream, said the woman was "very severe" with the child.

"he held her hand firmly and kept pulling her closer.

"When I gave the ice cream to the child she stood frozen. The lady took it in her place," said Mr Migliardi, 44.

"Normally a happy child always takes the ice. This was not a normal situation."

He said the girl was around five years old with blonde hair and distinctive mark in her eye.

"The little girl looked healthy but very sad. She had her eyes towards the floor and was too shy to look up.

"The lady asked her in a mixture of French and English what she wanted.

"The girl answered in English. She looked up for only a second, with an unhappy face, and said, 'Chocolate please'. then she looked down again," he said.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2544450/Madeleine-McCann-seen-again-in-Brussels.html#:~:targetText=A%20girl%20resembling%20Madeleine%20McCann,sighting%2C%20it%20has%20been%20reported.&targetText=The%20youngster%20was%20in%20Brussels,favourite%20%2D%20from%20a%20street%20vendor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 12:54:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 12, 2019, 12:36:58 PM
In the UK all they had to do was get a job looking after unfortunate children.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/oct/09/sarahhall
https://www.essexlive.news/news/essex-news/meet-billericay-author-who-overcame-1671738
                   ... and the relevance of your post is ???
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 12, 2019, 12:57:39 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 12:17:27 PM
You obviously didn't bother to read the link I provided ... here is another one which may be more to your liking?

300,000 Protest Belgium’s Handling of Pedophile Case
By DEAN E. MURPHY
OCT. 21, 1996 12 AM
TIMES STAFF WRITER

BRUSSELS —  Capping an extraordinary week of public demonstrations, about 300,000 people marched through the streets of the Belgian capital Sunday to protest the authorities’ handling of a highly charged pedophile scandal and to draw attention to the unknown fate of about 10 missing children.
________________________________________________________

Authorities said the orderly and sometimes teary crowd, carrying white flowers and balloons as symbols of innocence and purity, was among the largest in Belgian history. It surpassed the size of protests during the tense Cold War years of the early 1980s, when peace activists across Europe took to the streets to oppose the deployment of U.S. missiles on the Continent.
________________________________________________________

Even veterans of other demonstrations--including the legendary social upheavals of 1968--said none carried the moral grounding and genuine grass-roots concern that presided at Sunday’s event like the guiding hand of a watchful parent.
________________________________________________________

But the inward questioning has been increasingly overshadowed by intense rage toward the country’s political and judicial systems, which have come under scrutiny because of allegations of incompetence, corruption and complicity in the pedophile case. Recently, there have been reports in the Belgian media that investigators are pursuing evidence that might link senior political figures to Dutroux.

The enormous public anger began spilling into the streets last week when a respected state investigator was removed from the case by the country’s top court.
________________________________________________________

Auto workers blocked roads. Bus drivers refused to drive. Postal workers delivered sacks of spaghetti to judicial officials. And firefighters in Liege, where much of the scandal has been centered, turned their water jets on the Palace of Justice.

“When justice goes bad, people have to do what they have to do, just like in the old times,” said Johan, a 28-year-old unemployed construction worker who would not give his last name because he is related to a main suspect in the pedophile case.

“If you are going to rule by the letter of the law, then it should be that way for everyone, not just working Belgians with no political connections.”

The political fallout has not been lost on the country’s rulers. In a rare break with accepted protocol limiting his involvement in politics, Belgian King Albert II hosted a seminar on child abuse Friday, during which he called for a “moral revival and a profound change in our country.”
________________________________________________________

After the rally on Sunday, Prime Minister Jean-Luc Dehaene met with leaders of the protest, promising to push for several significant reforms in the Belgian justice system that could make a repeat of the Dutroux affair less likely, including depoliticizing the method for choosing magistrates.

The prime minister also pledged that the Dutroux investigation will be pursued “to its end” without any political interference and that disciplinary action will be taken against anyone found to have bungled the case.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-10-21-mn-56209-story.html
________________________________________________________



Please don't bother to assume anything about my unstated opinions.  Rather pay some attention to the opinions of the people most directly affected by corruption and or incompetence and in this case spare a thought for the murdered children the two who were starved to death and those missing with no-one knowing their fate.

I don't read 90% of what you cut & paste as its of no interest to me.  ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 12:58:37 PM
Quote from: The General on November 12, 2019, 12:41:39 PM
1996.....
... and ? ? ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 12, 2019, 01:13:41 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 12:58:37 PM
... and ? ? ?
And what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 01:32:47 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 12, 2019, 12:57:39 PM
I don't read 90% of what you cut & paste as its of no interest to me.  ?{)(**

I did not cut and paste the link which I provided.  Hardly surprising that I find your posts contain so little of substance if you are not interested or bothered in keeping up with the information which informs debate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 12, 2019, 01:45:13 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 01:32:47 PM
I did not cut and paste the link which I provided.  Hardly surprising that I find your posts contain so little of substance if you are not interested or bothered in keeping up with the information which informs debate.
You provided a story from the last century. I understand you would have been well in to middle age in 1996, but have some consideration for us youngsters who were still sniffing glue outside the youth club at that point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 12, 2019, 01:52:38 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 12:52:04 PM
Yeah ... seems to be a conspiracy ... complete with bank guard, ice cream vendor, Guardian journalist et al 😎😎😎

Snip
The father of a young blonde girl who appeared on film on August 4 came forward to explain that his daughter was not the missing girl.

Lieve Pellens, spokesman for the Belgian federal prosecutor’s office, said: “He saw this picture and obviously for him it was very easy recognising the girl ... "
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2545633/Madeleine-McCann-Brussels-sighting-dismissed.html


Snip
The youngster was in Brussels with a North African-looking woman who bought her a chocolate ice cream - Madeleine's favourite - from a street vendor.

The sighting on Monday last week occurred around the time the pair were picked up on CCTV footage by a security guard at a nearby bank.

Antonio Migliardi, who sold them the ice cream, said the woman was "very severe" with the child.

"he held her hand firmly and kept pulling her closer.

"When I gave the ice cream to the child she stood frozen. The lady took it in her place," said Mr Migliardi, 44.

"Normally a happy child always takes the ice. This was not a normal situation."

He said the girl was around five years old with blonde hair and distinctive mark in her eye.

"The little girl looked healthy but very sad. She had her eyes towards the floor and was too shy to look up.

"The lady asked her in a mixture of French and English what she wanted.

"The girl answered in English. She looked up for only a second, with an unhappy face, and said, 'Chocolate please'. then she looked down again," he said.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2544450/Madeleine-McCann-seen-again-in-Brussels.html#:~:targetText=A%20girl%20resembling%20Madeleine%20McCann,sighting%2C%20it%20has%20been%20reported.&targetText=The%20youngster%20was%20in%20Brussels,favourite%20%2D%20from%20a%20street%20vendor.

I suppose it makes a change doing a bit of Belgian police bashing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 12, 2019, 02:07:08 PM

I'm learning a lot about the family McCann's eating habits.  Tapas, pizza, Chinese buffet, sea bass.

Now it appears Mr Tibbetts has added chocolate ice cream to the list.

I wonder how he learned chocolate was Madeleine's favourite.   *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 12, 2019, 02:31:35 PM

"He said the girl was around five years old with blonde hair and distinctive mark in her eye."
 

He'd have to be right up close to see that.


"The little girl looked healthy but very sad. She had her eyes towards the floor and was too shy to look up."


"The girl answered in English. She looked up for only a second"

 
In the 1 second she looked up he was able to spot her eye defect. Incredible!

This one is on par with "My name is Maddie, they took me from my holiday"

What an absolute crock of sh1t.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 12, 2019, 02:54:41 PM

Okay.  Getting fed up with the sniping, so pack it in.  Thank You.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on November 12, 2019, 02:59:31 PM
Quote from: Anthro on November 11, 2019, 09:14:01 AM
Hi Barrier, if Madeleine never left Praia da Luz alive, what is your opinion on OG’s opinion, as to her remains’ whereabouts?

IMO Scotland Yard are no closer to determining this mystery than they were at the outset. They spend a small fortune digging up some scrubland near the beach but came up empty, that must have been so disappointing for DCI Redwood who has since retired. I don't believe they are any further forward even now and just don't know what happened to the child. All scenarios are still wide open imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on November 12, 2019, 03:01:12 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 12, 2019, 02:54:41 PM
Okay.  Getting fed up with the sniping, so pack it in.  Thank You.

I'll second that.  8@??)(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 12, 2019, 03:58:21 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on November 12, 2019, 03:01:12 PM
I'll second that.  8@??)(
Indeed, although that intervention killed the only active thread today.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 12, 2019, 04:07:16 PM
Quote from: The General on November 12, 2019, 03:58:21 PM
Indeed, although that intervention killed the only active thread today.

Well, just behave yourselves.  There is no need for it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 05:59:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 12, 2019, 01:52:38 PM
I suppose it makes a change doing a bit of Belgian police bashing.

I'm doing no 'bashing'.  It was the populace directly affected by most aspects of their judiciary from first to last who were vociferously complaining as their children were being used and abused and killed by paedophiles who appeared to be untouchable.

Why do you feel the need to post in defence of such horror; the Portuguese had Casa Pia and the Belgiums had Dutroux and his associates.  Were those, who some insist 'kept an open mind' in Madeleine's case, as ignorant of Doutroux ~ Casa Pia ~ a loose cannon? attacking sleeping children in the Algarve as sceptics apparently expect everyone else to be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 12, 2019, 07:50:43 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 05:59:10 PM
I'm doing no 'bashing'.  It was the populace directly affected by most aspects of their judiciary from first to last who were vociferously complaining as their children were being used and abused and killed by paedophiles who appeared to be untouchable.

Why do you feel the need to post in defence of such horror; the Portuguese had Casa Pia and the Belgiums had Dutroux and his associates.  Were those, who some insist 'kept an open mind' in Madeleine's case, as ignorant of Doutroux ~ Casa Pia ~ a loose cannon? attacking sleeping children in the Algarve as sceptics apparently expect everyone else to be.

I'm not defending anyone, I just don't see the relevance of those other cases to the McCann one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 08:07:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 12, 2019, 07:50:43 PM
I'm not defending anyone, I just don't see the relevance of those other cases to the McCann one.

Then it appears you haven't been following what members have been posting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on November 12, 2019, 08:57:38 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 07, 2019, 03:55:01 PM
So how would the recon demonstrate innocence... It wouldnt

The reconstitution as undertaken in Portugal involves the original people taking part in order to demonstrate what they have claimed took place. Any discrepancies will be immediately apparent. The refusal of the tapas group to take part is a sad indictment on them and renders their pledges to do whatever they could to assist the case worthless.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 12, 2019, 09:20:29 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on November 12, 2019, 08:57:38 PM
The reconstitution as undertaken in Portugal involves the original people taking part in order to demonstrate what they have claimed took place. Any discrepancies will be immediately apparent. The refusal of the tapas group to take part is a sad indictment on them and renders their pledges to do whatever they could to assist the case worthless.
It’s about time you adopted forum rules and used “in my opinion” in your posts or are you exempt because you are a mod?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 12, 2019, 11:08:53 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 12, 2019, 08:07:27 PM
Then it appears you haven't been following what members have been posting.

I've been reading the posts about Belgium and Morocco for years but can't see why they're significant. In my opinion the Morocco sightings were no more significant than any others, and the Belgian sightings were nothing to do with either Morocco or drug barons. Red herrings, imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 13, 2019, 12:11:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 12, 2019, 11:08:53 PM
I've been reading the posts about Belgium and Morocco for years but can't see why they're significant. In my opinion the Morocco sightings were no more significant than any others, and the Belgian sightings were nothing to do with either Morocco or drug barons. Red herrings, imo.

Just because you disagree with a subject under discussion doesn't make it an irrelevance or a red herring.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 13, 2019, 09:23:39 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 13, 2019, 12:11:23 AM
Just because you disagree with a subject under discussion doesn't make it an irrelevance or a red herring.

Equally, you considering it all relevant does not make it so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2019, 10:01:06 AM
And this is what it has boiled down to.   Nothing anyone says here is remotely relevant to Madeleine or what happened to her.  It’s all just a long and protracted exercise in point scoring, not valuable work as some people appear to view it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on November 13, 2019, 10:10:54 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 12, 2019, 11:08:53 PM
I've been reading the posts about Belgium and Morocco for years but can't see why they're significant. In my opinion the Morocco sightings were no more significant than any others, and the Belgian sightings were nothing to do with either Morocco or drug barons. Red herrings, imo.

It seems to me that there were attempts very early on to shift scrutiny of the Algarve to places like north Africa with bogus sightings. The Método 3 clowns in Barcelona being the principal culprits.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 13, 2019, 10:16:07 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 13, 2019, 10:01:06 AM
And this is what it has boiled down to.   Nothing anyone says here is remotely relevant to Madeleine or what happened to her.  It’s all just a long and protracted exercise in point scoring, not valuable work as some people appear to view it.

Well beggar me, for once I'm in full agreement.  Better go and have a lie down.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 13, 2019, 10:21:23 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 13, 2019, 10:16:07 AM
Well beggar me, for once I'm in full agreement.  Better go and have a lie down.

Me Too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 13, 2019, 11:15:34 AM
The sighting at the petrol station has stayed with me.   A little girl standing looking sad next to a man who didn't look anything like her  she says 'can we see Mummy now?'  and he says 'soon'.   Very strange,  for one wouldn't a small child if it had been her father be more likely to say 'Daddy will we see Mummy soon'  and wouldn't a father be more likely to say 'yes name of child or something such as darling or sweetheart,  we'll see her soon'  have some kind of reaction towards her a cuddle or holding her hand,  it all seems weird and cold.  Shame they had taped over the video footage before the Police could examine it.   Then another sighting at an hotel not far from the petrol station.  I really believe that was Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 13, 2019, 11:19:29 AM
Quote from: John on November 13, 2019, 10:10:54 AM
It seems to me that there were attempts very early on to shift scrutiny of the Algarve to places like north Africa with bogus sightings. The Método 3 clowns in Barcelona being the principal culprits.

As far as I can work out this story was broken by The Sun. The incident happened on 4th August 2008, seemingly. What the reports have in common is phrases such as 'according to reports' and 'it was reported', but by whom and to whom isn't revealed. The security guard, reported as a female initially, becomes male in later stories.

The CCTV footage seems to have been given to the press before it was given to the police;

"Belgian police planned to show the CCTV footage on national television if nobody came forward to explain the sighting."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-brussels-cctv-sighting-326596

In my opinion this has Metodo 3's fingerprints all over it.

"Their private detectives followed up the report with the help of investigators in Brussels and video enhancement experts in the US."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-brussels-cctv-sighting-326596

How did The Sun get CCTV images from 5 security cameras? From the KBC bank staff, or from the Security staff?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZvUd5cWKqM
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 13, 2019, 11:27:33 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 13, 2019, 11:15:34 AM
The sighting at the petrol station has stayed with me.   A little girl standing looking sad next to a man who didn't look anything like her  she says 'can we see Mummy now?'  and he says 'soon'.   Very strange,  for one wouldn't a small child if it had been her father be more likely to say 'Daddy will we see Mummy soon'  and wouldn't a father be more likely to say 'yes name of child or something such as darling or sweetheart,  we'll see her soon'  have some kind of reaction towards her a cuddle or holding her hand,  it all seems weird and cold.  Shame they had taped over the video footage before the Police could examine it.   Then another sighting at an hotel not far from the petrol station.  I really believe that was Madeleine.

The child reportedly said that. I wonder what 'with an accent' meant?
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8737819/madeleine-mccann-morocco-petrol-station-sighting/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 13, 2019, 12:36:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 13, 2019, 11:27:33 AM
The child reportedly said that. I wonder what 'with an accent' meant?
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8737819/madeleine-mccann-morocco-petrol-station-sighting/

So if she didn't say it,  they stood silently together,  a little distance apart,  still strange.    I would presume she meant an English accent.

More about the sightings -

Marie Olli, a Norwegian woman living in the Spanish town of Fuengirola, contacted the police on 10 May 2007, claiming she had seen a girl matching Madeleine's description in a petrol station in Marrakech, Morocco. The girl, who was said to have appeared sad, was allegedly accompanied by a man in his late 30s.[21] At about the same time, a British tourist reported seeing Madeleine near the Marrakech Ibis hotel.[22] Although Interpol subsequently discounted these sightings, officers from Leicestershire police remained in Morocco for some days afterwards.[23] A Spanish tourist saw a girl resembling Madeleine as she drove through the town of Zaio in northern Morocco at the end of May.[24] Attention switched back to Morocco on 4 June, after GCHQ in Cheltenham picked up phone intercept messages in Arabic referring to "the little blonde girl", a German man, and a ferry from Tarifa in Spain.[25]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 13, 2019, 12:40:06 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 13, 2019, 11:15:34 AM
The sighting at the petrol station has stayed with me.   A little girl standing looking sad next to a man who didn't look anything like her  she says 'can we see Mummy now?'  and he says 'soon'.   Very strange,  for one wouldn't a small child if it had been her father be more likely to say 'Daddy will we see Mummy soon'  and wouldn't a father be more likely to say 'yes name of child or something such as darling or sweetheart,  we'll see her soon'  have some kind of reaction towards her a cuddle or holding her hand,  it all seems weird and cold.  Shame they had taped over the video footage before the Police could examine it.   Then another sighting at an hotel not far from the petrol station.  I really believe that was Madeleine.

Madeleine was crying for Daddy on Tuesday for over an hour NOT Mummy so that is ruled out. Apparently she was Daddy's little girl.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 13, 2019, 01:35:56 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on November 13, 2019, 12:40:06 PM
Madeleine was crying for Daddy on Tuesday for over an hour NOT Mummy so that is ruled out. Apparently she was Daddy's little girl.

I don't believe Madeleine was crying for her daddy for over an hour [but that's a different discussion]   Maybe the abductor had been saying 'I'm taking you to see Mummy'   as Mummy would be the obvious one to choose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 13, 2019, 01:47:23 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on November 13, 2019, 12:40:06 PM
Madeleine was crying for Daddy on Tuesday for over an hour NOT Mummy so that is ruled out. Apparently she was Daddy's little girl.

I was surprised to hear that she travelled with her father via car and ferry from Amsterdam to Leicester at the age of 18 months.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 13, 2019, 01:50:43 PM

Brazenly walking the streets with the worlds most high profile missing child.

Taking her on a tour of Europe & North Africa  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2019, 02:06:01 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 13, 2019, 01:47:23 PM
I was surprised to hear that she travelled with her father via car and ferry from Amsterdam to Leicester at the age of 18 months.
What do you find remarkable about this?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 13, 2019, 04:17:31 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 13, 2019, 01:50:43 PM
Brazenly walking the streets with the worlds most high profile missing child.

Taking her on a tour of Europe & North Africa  @)(++(*

Who was brazenly walking the streets with the worlds most high profile missing chid?

If you are talking about the man in the petrol station,  he had probably arrived in a car.  The woman who witnessed seeing the child didn't know anything about Madeleine McCann being missing until she saw it on the news.   Madeleine wasn't the worlds most high profile missing child when she was sighted in Morocco.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 13, 2019, 04:37:44 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 13, 2019, 04:17:31 PM
Who was brazenly walking the streets with the worlds most high profile missing chid?

If you are talking about the man in the petrol station,  he had probably arrived in a car.  The woman who witnessed seeing the child didn't know anything about Madeleine McCann being missing until she saw it on the news.   Madeleine wasn't the worlds most high profile missing child when she was sighted in Morocco.
The dude could've left her in the car, or the boot of the car, but no, let's go and buy kindling, ciggies and pick and mix.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 13, 2019, 04:40:26 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 13, 2019, 04:17:31 PM
Who was brazenly walking the streets with the worlds most high profile missing chid?

If you are talking about the man in the petrol station,  he had probably arrived in a car.  The woman who witnessed seeing the child didn't know anything about Madeleine McCann being missing until she saw it on the news.   Madeleine wasn't the worlds most high profile missing child when she was sighted in Morocco.

allegedly sighted in Morocco.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 13, 2019, 05:12:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 13, 2019, 01:47:23 PM
I was surprised to hear that she travelled with her father via car and ferry from Amsterdam to Leicester at the age of 18 months.

Wow ... is there anything at all that doesn't surprise you about the minutiae of private lives which are really of little concern to any but the private individuals the lives belong to.

I have absolutely no idea nor do I have the slightest interest in the travel arrangements made by families with a mother in the very late stages of what I believe was a difficult pregnancy carrying twins.
The word I would use is not "surprised" but a much different emotion, that you feel compelled to post about such meaningless trivia.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 13, 2019, 05:37:33 PM
Much of this forum reminds me of trivial pursuits
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2019, 05:55:06 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 13, 2019, 05:37:33 PM
Much of this forum reminds me of trivial pursuits
Perhaps someome should bring out a McTrivial Pursuit board game.  I reckon there’s a few on here who would love to unwrap that on Christmas Day. 
Category: Travel
Question: Why did Gerry McCann travel back to England with Madeleine on a ferry from the Netherlands when she was just 18 months old?
Was it
a) who knows
b) don’t care
c) gosh is that the time
d) Because the McCanns are just weird, creepy and do stuff I would never in a million years contemplate, fancy doing that, shocking behaviour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 13, 2019, 07:09:13 PM
Quote from: The General on November 13, 2019, 04:37:44 PM
The dude could've left her in the car, or the boot of the car, but no, let's go and buy kindling, ciggies and pick and mix.

He obviously wanted to keep a close eye on her.   IMO he was meeting someone,  would really have looked dodgy getting her out of the boot when that someone arrived.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 13, 2019, 07:18:32 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 13, 2019, 07:09:13 PM
He obviously wanted to keep a close eye on her.   IMO he was meeting someone,  would really have looked dodgy getting her out of the boot when that someone arrived.   

As would any caring parent
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 14, 2019, 09:23:21 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 13, 2019, 07:18:32 PM
As would any caring parent

Ah couldn't think of anything to say to continue the discussion,  fell back on the 'leaving them alone'  shame.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 10:57:05 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 13, 2019, 01:47:23 PM
I was surprised to hear that she travelled with her father via car and ferry from Amsterdam to Leicester at the age of 18 months.

In what way surprised?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 14, 2019, 11:01:55 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 10:57:05 AM
In what way surprised?

I'm probably old-fashioned because I never had access to child seats to immobilise my children. What do drivers do if the child cries on the motorway, for example?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 11:11:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 14, 2019, 11:01:55 AM
I'm probably old-fashioned because I never had access to child seats to immobilise my children. What do drivers do if the child cries on the motorway, for example?

According to KM's PB she experienced a difficult pregnancy with the twins and had to make a choice of whether to remain in Amsterdam or get back to UK where she would have family support.  She flew back with Aunt Janet and GM took the car/ferry with MM and their belongings.  Maybe it was a night ferry and MM slept. 

If child cries on motorway determine the sort of cry and then act accordingly either carry on or pull off at next exit and sort out crying.   8((()*/

I wonder why SH didn't accompany her?  She also makes ref to BH visiting in Amsterdam but no SH. 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 11:12:31 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 11:11:23 AM
According to KM's PB she experienced a difficult pregnancy with the twins and had to make a choice of whether to remain in Amsterdam or get back to UK where she would have family support.  She flew back with Aunt Janet and GM took the car/ferry with MM and their belongings.  Maybe it was a night ferry and MM slept. 

If child cries on motorway determine the sort of cry and then act accordingly either carry on or pull off at next exit and sort out crying.   8((()*/

I wonder why SH didn't accompany her?  She also makes ref to BH visiting in Amsterdam but no SH.

Aunt Janet and Uncle Brian seem to play a pivotal role in KM's life.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 14, 2019, 11:43:34 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 11:11:23 AM
According to KM's PB she experienced a difficult pregnancy with the twins and had to make a choice of whether to remain in Amsterdam or get back to UK where she would have family support.  She flew back with Aunt Janet and GM took the car/ferry with MM and their belongings.  Maybe it was a night ferry and MM slept. 

If child cries on motorway determine the sort of cry and then act accordingly either carry on or pull off at next exit and sort out crying.   8((()*/

I wonder why SH didn't accompany her?  She also makes ref to BH visiting in Amsterdam but no SH.

We once travelled from Rotterdam to Hull on the night ferry, so my husband got a break from driving (I wasn't a driver). Never again. I love the sea, boats and ships, but our cabin was below the lorry deck and the car deck; a death trap if anything went wrong. My daughters slept but I didn't.

I never let my children cry; things are different now.

Perhaps SH was still working at the time.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 12:16:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 14, 2019, 11:43:34 AM
We once travelled from Rotterdam to Hull on the night ferry, so my husband got a break from driving (I wasn't a driver). Never again. I love the sea, boats and ships, but our cabin was below the lorry deck and the car deck; a death trap if anything went wrong. My daughters slept but I didn't.

I never let my children cry; things are different now.

Perhaps SH was still working at the time.

But there's  8)><( and there's crying!  Bored/tired/whiny crying can be ok for a period and hopefully they self-soothe or learn to self-soothe!  I practiced things I learned on my psychology course with my children eg object permanence  @)(++(*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gWJrZ7MHpY

I sense from KM's PB that she might not be that close to her mother but I might be completely wrong. 



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 12:27:35 PM
Perhaps you can help me out here G-Unit, I'm sure I recall listening to a vid clip somewhere where SH states KM called her during the hol, pre MM's disappearance, and KM commented on the weather ie hadn't been great but improving?  And yet when MM went missing and SH was told she claims her first words were 'Where were you'?  If all of this is correct then it seems to stand to reason that KM did not tell SH pre MM's disappearance about dining out at tapas every night whilst the children were left sleeping unsupervised in 5A?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 14, 2019, 12:33:13 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 12:27:35 PM
Perhaps you can help me out here G-Unit, I'm sure I recall listening to a vid clip somewhere where SH states KM called her during the hol, pre MM's disappearance, and KM commented on the weather ie hadn't been great but improving?  And yet when MM went missing and SH was told she claims her first words were 'Where were you'?  If all of this is correct then it seems to stand to reason that KM did not tell SH pre MM's disappearance about dining out at tapas every night whilst the children were left sleeping unsupervised in 5A?

Is there any reason why she should ?
The McCanns obviously considered this normal practice - well within the bounds or responsible parenting - and not worthy of mention.

IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 01:11:35 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 14, 2019, 12:33:13 PM
Is there any reason why she should ?
The McCanns obviously considered this normal practice - well within the bounds or responsible parenting - and not worthy of mention.

IMO

Well if KM had a tel con with her mother whilst on hol pre MM's disappearance which involved conversations about the weather it might have involved conversations about what was going down of an evening.  I wonder if KM kept this from her mother perhaps knowing she would not have approved of the children being left.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 14, 2019, 01:58:32 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 12:16:43 PM
But there's  8)><( and there's crying!  Bored/tired/whiny crying can be ok for a period and hopefully they self-soothe or learn to self-soothe!  I practiced things I learned on my psychology course with my children eg object permanence  @)(++(*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gWJrZ7MHpY

I sense from KM's PB that she might not be that close to her mother but I might be completely wrong.

There's still the possibility of an urgent cry.

What an annoying man! Children will learn that lesson in their own time when they're ready, it's part of normal development. I'm sure every woman in hearing/watching distance of his performance knew that.

I too got the impression that mother and daughter weren't close.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 03:22:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 14, 2019, 01:58:32 PM
There's still the possibility of an urgent cry.

What an annoying man! Children will learn that lesson in their own time when they're ready, it's part of normal development. I'm sure every woman in hearing/watching distance of his performance knew that.

I too got the impression that mother and daughter weren't close.

But its usually possible to distinguish between an urgent/uncomfortable cry which needs attention and a bored/tired/whiny cry? 

I'm not sure most parents are familiar with Piaget's theory of child development and object permanence?  In the Bamber case I banged on about 'Attachment Theory' thinking most would have some understanding but no one had a clue including the lawyers and psychologists.  Both cases, MM and Bamber, involve the science of sleep ie sleeping through noise and again no one seems to have any idea.  I doubt I would have any idea about these topics if I hadn't covered them on my psychology course. 

 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 03:42:44 PM
KM tells us in her book that her parents adore MM and when she disappeared KM could not bring herself to tell her parents.  I wonder if this was the only reason?  Maybe KM thought her mother would tear her off a strip for leaving the children and she did not want to hear it at that particular time?

Growing up an only child but be a different dynamic to having to share everything with a sibling.  By sharing I mean parents attention and financial resources.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 14, 2019, 05:48:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 14, 2019, 11:43:34 AM
We once travelled from Rotterdam to Hull on the night ferry, so my husband got a break from driving (I wasn't a driver). Never again. I love the sea, boats and ships, but our cabin was below the lorry deck and the car deck; a death trap if anything went wrong. My daughters slept but I didn't.

I never let my children cry; things are different now.

Perhaps SH was still working at the time.
So if you were traveling as a passenger in a car on the motorway and the kids in the back start crying what do you do that Gerry was unable to do? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 14, 2019, 06:37:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 14, 2019, 05:48:48 PM
So if you were traveling as a passenger in a car on the motorway and the kids in the back start crying what do you do that Gerry was unable to do?

I didn't leave an 18 month old child alone in the back of the car, are you mad? There were no seatbelts then, a child of that age couldn't travel with just the driver.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 14, 2019, 08:07:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 14, 2019, 06:37:48 PM
I didn't leave an 18 month old child alone in the back of the car, are you mad? There were no seatbelts then, a child of that age couldn't travel with just the driver.
How rude!  No I am not mad.  There were child seats and seatbelts when Gerry made the trip with Madeleine so I repeat my question (hopefully without being accused of insanity).  If you were in the car as a passenger (as Kate might have been - your sniffy observation seems to suggest you think she should have been there) and the kids in the back start crying as you drive along the motorway what would you have been able to do that Gerry wasn’t?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 08:10:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 14, 2019, 06:37:48 PM
I didn't leave an 18 month old child alone in the back of the car, are you mad? There were no seatbelts then, a child of that age couldn't travel with just the driver.

I think my mum did with us.  She learned to drive when she married my dad as she moved away from her family and wanted to visit when my dad was working.  I think when we were babies we went in the back in a carry cot which was strapped down and then later I think I recall some sort of booster seat.  This is 60's/70's when the traffic was minimal and cars were not capable of the sort of acceleration/speeds of today's cars.  Lol I recall my mum with her poodle headscarf opening the window of her Ford Anglia to perform an arm signal to indicate turning left/right  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 14, 2019, 08:11:24 PM
The passenger would be able to give the offending brat a good slap for a start.
Not something the driver could easily managed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 14, 2019, 08:12:37 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 14, 2019, 08:11:24 PM
The passenger would be able to give the offending brat a good slap for a start.
Not something the driver could easily managed
@)(++(* Yeah, slap a crying child works every time, I’m sure G-Unit will approve.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 14, 2019, 08:14:34 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 14, 2019, 08:10:53 PM
I think my mum did with us.  She learned to drive when she married my dad as she moved away from her family and wanted to visit when my dad was working.  I think when we were babies we went in the back in a carry cot which was strapped down and then later I think I recall some sort of booster seat.  This is 60's/70's when the traffic was minimal and cars were not capable of the sort of acceleration/speeds of today's cars.  Lol I recall my mum with her poodle headscarf opening the window of her Ford Anglia to perform an arm signal to indicate turning left/right  @)(++(*
My OH as a small boy used to sit on a little stool perched on top of the bit in the middle between the driver and passenger seat, very caring and safe I’m sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 14, 2019, 08:16:29 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 14, 2019, 08:12:37 PM
@)(++(* Yeah, slap a crying child works every time, I’m sure G-Unit will approve.

Well, if they are going to cry they may as well have something to cry about, that's what my old mam used to say.  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 15, 2019, 05:26:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 14, 2019, 06:37:48 PM
I didn't leave an 18 month old child alone in the back of the car, are you mad? There were no seatbelts then, a child of that age couldn't travel with just the driver.

Not seat belts for adults maybe, but caring parents bought special baby/child safety seats.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 15, 2019, 09:15:29 AM
https://petrolicious.com/articles/a-graphic-history-of-child-safety-seats
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 15, 2019, 11:35:29 AM
Those early seats were marketed more as devices to keep children still than to keep children safe, imo. The alternative was holding them on someone's lap.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 15, 2019, 05:23:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 14, 2019, 08:07:39 PM
How rude!  No I am not mad.  There were child seats and seatbelts when Gerry made the trip with Madeleine so I repeat my question (hopefully without being accused of insanity).  If you were in the car as a passenger (as Kate might have been - your sniffy observation seems to suggest you think she should have been there) and the kids in the back start crying as you drive along the motorway what would you have been able to do that Gerry wasn’t?
Well?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 15, 2019, 07:48:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 15, 2019, 11:35:29 AM
Those early seats were marketed more as devices to keep children still than to keep children safe, imo. The alternative was holding them on someone's lap.
Afaik they have a large selection at Mothercare.. Perhaps at a discount... Not sure what the situation is in Portugal... Perhaps sil can advise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 15, 2019, 10:04:14 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 15, 2019, 07:48:55 PM
Afaik they have a large selection at Mothercare.. Perhaps at a discount... Not sure what the situation is in Portugal... Perhaps sil can advise.
Yeh Sil, tell us about the Portuguese equivalent of Mothercare's range of stock pertaining to modern child car seats and potential discounts attributed to same.
3 active threads, one of which has resorted to this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 15, 2019, 10:12:31 PM
Quote from: The General on November 15, 2019, 10:04:14 PM
Yeh Sil, tell us about the Portuguese equivalent of Mothercare's range of stock pertaining to modern child car seats and potential discounts attributed to same.
 3 active threads, one of which has resorted to this.

I’d say that there is nothing left to say, apart from bin, dogs, neglect rinse and spin cycle and repeat.  YAWN.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 15, 2019, 10:25:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 15, 2019, 10:12:31 PM
I’d say that there is nothing left to say, apart from bin, dogs, neglect rinse and spin cycle and repeat.  YAWN.
My post has been deleted. It was really interesting too, kid.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on November 15, 2019, 10:29:08 PM
Quote from: The General on November 15, 2019, 10:25:30 PM
My post has been deleted. It was really interesting too, kid.

There is a specific board for discussing moderation issues which negates the need to clutter up other threads. These rules have been developed over many years and are there for good reason. Hope this helps.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on November 15, 2019, 11:02:21 PM
Abuse will not be tolerated.  Please don't assume that I am not monitoring these discussions simply because I am not logged on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 21, 2019, 06:41:54 PM
Two things from my side of the world:

About three weeks ago, a story across South Africa’s main media broke about a former teacher/turned journalist at a major media group who is accused of sexually assaulting boys at one of SA’s most prestigious boys’ schools, 20 years ago. Today he was named in the press by his victim, a professional person, and it was revealed other former learners have also come forward about the allegations against him. The case is now under investigation. To our horror, we learnt the abuse took place at my son’s school and my husband’s alma mater.

Over the past week our media has also reported that kidnappings are on the rise in the country. The modus operandi being to grab children and teenagers and demanding ransom for their release or be killed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 07:15:50 PM
Quote from: Anthro on November 21, 2019, 06:41:54 PM
Two things from my side of the world:

About three weeks ago, a story across South Africa’s main media broke about a former teacher/turned journalist at a major media group who is accused of sexually assaulting boys at one of SA’s most prestigious boys’ schools, 20 years ago. Today he was named in the press by his victim, a professional person, and it was revealed other former learners have also come forward about the allegations against him. The case is now under investigation. To our horror, we learnt the abuse took place at my son’s school and my husband’s alma mater.

Over the past week our media has also reported that kidnappings are on the rise in the country. The modus operandi being to grab children and teenagers and demanding ransom for their release or be killed.


That is the reality of men and violence in this world, not just your country. This has been happening globally for years- just swept under a large carpet. Like:The slave trade is alive and well, they just don't all go chained together in long boats to work in them cotton fields in the  Americas. It is an open secret in Europe. they call themselves'refugees' from countries they couldn't spell the name of.

Paedophiles, as we are now all aware come in all shapes, sizes, colours ,sexual orientation ,cultures, religions and professions. It is a sexual preference to rape /abuse children from babies to young teens. Many did nothing for the global sex abuse by Priests and nuns on a horrific scale!

 The vatican being the christian church of Rome- after Peter sold the idea to the Romans to stop the lions killing the 'Christians'.  Had eunics and vestle virgins- stuff the Romans approved of. :)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 21, 2019, 07:21:56 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 07:15:50 PM

That is the reality of men and violence in this world, not just your country. This has been happening globally for years- just swept under a large carpet. Like:The slave trade is alive and well, they just don't all go chained together in long boats to work in them cotton fields in the  Americas. It is an open secret in Europe. they call themselves'refugees' from countries they couldn't spell the name of.

Paedophiles, as we are now all aware come in all shapes, sizes, colours ,sexual orientation ,cultures, religions and professions. It is a sexual preference to rape /abuse children from babies to young teens. Many did nothing for the global sex abuse by Priests and nuns on a horrific scale!

 The vatican being the christian church of Rome- after Peter sold the idea to the Romans to stop the lions killing the 'Christians'.  Had eunics and vestle virgins- stuff the Romans approved of. :)

eunics and vestle virgins.....LOL..its eunuch and vestal.....

who are you to lecture Anthro on the growing violence in SA .....i think you will find its grown since the end of white rule....interesting
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 21, 2019, 07:41:16 PM

That went well, didn't it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 07:50:26 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 21, 2019, 07:21:56 PM
eunics and vestle virgins.....LOL..its eunuch and vestal.....

who are you to lecture Anthro on the growing violence in SA .....i think you will find its grown since the end of white rule....interesting

I was going to type nestle (offer children chocolate) but thought better of it.  I am laughing at you correcting my typos. I won't do the same back. I couldn't be bothered and it's time consuming.

I never lectured Anthro on anything.  but SA is growing since bad white man left Government... Soweto has swelled well beyond expectations-under Black rule. Poverty has grown as has violence and HIV.  according to my sister who lived in SA for three years.  Black on black murders is a real worry- leaving many children orphaned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 07:53:27 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 21, 2019, 07:41:16 PM
That went well, didn't it.

Pathetic post and off topic. no doubt it will be 'monitored' by the ever monitoring admin person who can see without logging in.  which is a good thing. Apparently.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 21, 2019, 07:56:35 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 07:50:26 PM
I was going to type nestle (offer children chocolate) but thought better of it.  I am laughing at you correcting my typos. I won't do the same back. I couldn't be bothered and it's time consuming.

I never lectured Anthro on anything.  but SA is growing since bad white man left Government... Soweto has swelled well beyond expectations-under Black rule. Poverty has grown as has violence and HIV.  according to my sister who lived in SA for three years.  Black on black murders is a real worry- leaving many children orphaned.

yours are not typos....but never mind.....your punctuation and grammar is even worse in the above post....but lets leave it there..
black on white violence seems to have grown in SA and I cant see any connection to Rome...eunuchs.....and vestal virgins
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 21, 2019, 08:03:05 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 21, 2019, 07:56:35 PM
yours are not typos....but never mind.....your punctuation and grammar is even worse in the above post....but lets leave it there

A Davel lecture on typos, punctuation and grammar?

 (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 21, 2019, 08:04:11 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 21, 2019, 08:03:05 PM
A Davel lecture on typos, punctuation and grammar?

 (&^&

not  a lecture just pointing out gross errors...whats your problem with that...emojis are for those who do not have the linguistic skills to express themselves imo....you seem to use  a lot
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 21, 2019, 08:04:19 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 21, 2019, 07:56:35 PM
yours are not typos....but never mind.....your punctuation and grammar is even worse in the above post....but lets leave it there
And here it is; the watershed of humanity. Davel correcting grammar and punctuation.
Lad, you spell like you're pulling letters from a Scrabble bag. You couldn't punctuate a pregnant pause.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 21, 2019, 08:07:09 PM
Quote from: The General on November 21, 2019, 08:04:19 PM
And here it is; the watershed of humanity. Davel correcting grammar and punctuation.
Lad, you spell like you're pulling letters from a Scrabble bag. You couldn't punctuate a pregnant pause.

if you would like to point out where my corrections are wrong please do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 21, 2019, 08:14:31 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 21, 2019, 08:07:09 PM
if you would like to point out where my corrections are wrong please do.
That would take the same resources as Operation Grange - 9 years, £12m and 4 fellas sat in Starbuck's sifting through dross - or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 21, 2019, 08:18:11 PM
Quote from: The General on November 21, 2019, 08:14:31 PM
That would take the same resources as Operation Grange - 9 years, £12m and 4 fellas sat in Starbuck's sifting through dross - or not.

you...like others...do not understand why grange has cost as much as it has ....but moving on. Perhaps you could explin why its fair game to criticise my typos but not for me to criticise spelling mistakes by others. When you can come up with  a reasonable answer your post might have some value...as it is...it doesnt
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 08:24:03 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 21, 2019, 08:04:11 PM
not  a lecture just pointing out gross errors...whats your problem with that...emojis are for those who do not have the linguistic skills to express themselves imo....you seem to use  a lot

I really shouldn't....

Davel just this once.

not  a lecture just pointing out gross errors...whats your problem with that...emojis are for those who do not have the linguistic skills to express themselves imo....you seem to use  a lot

Begining of a sentence should have a capital letter.

A full stop at end of sentence, followed by a space and next letter should be a capital.

the word whats is missing an apostrophie to let the reader know you are abbreviating  the words what is




whats [/color]your problem with that.. instead ofn using e   you should use a question mark and another sentence.

You misuse ellipsis, most of your posts can be short sentences.

Laughing my head off at your errors or (&^&

lets  should be let us or abbreviated should be let's

oh how about this..."Perhaps you could explin why its     doesnt."  ouch!





Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 21, 2019, 08:24:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 21, 2019, 08:18:11 PM
you...like others...do not understand why grange has cost as much as it has ....but moving on. Perhaps you could explin why its fair game to criticise my typos but not for me to criticise spelling mistakes by others. When you can come up with  a reasonable answer your post might have some value...as it is...it doesnt
It's called hypocrisy. At least I am open about my multiple shortcomings.
Besides, you are constantly at pains to point out that nothing on here matters, we're all irrelevant and inferior, so you labelling my opinion as having no value is of no value.
You may have your sycophants here providing you solace, but someone's always going to point out the fact that the king isn't wearing any clothes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 21, 2019, 08:27:28 PM
I love it when Miss Taken ventures back on here and raises the calibre of discussion in her inimitable way.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 08:29:51 PM
Quote from: The General on November 21, 2019, 08:24:27 PM
It's called hypocrisy. At least I am open about my multiple shortcomings.
Besides, you are constantly at pains to point out that nothing on here matters, we're all irrelevant and inferior, so you labelling my opinion as having no value is of no value.
You may have your sycophants here providing you solace, but someone's always going to point out the fact that the king isn't wearing any clothes.


As my gran says, "people who live in glass houses shoudn't throw stones"!

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 21, 2019, 08:33:26 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 21, 2019, 08:27:28 PM
I love it when Miss Taken ventures back on here and raises the calibre of discussion in her inimitable way.
Well it has been a bit dull, apart from the nightly cull of my most amusing material. [momentarily stares at the wall]
I should write this sh1t down.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 21, 2019, 08:34:30 PM
Quote from: The General on November 21, 2019, 08:24:27 PM
It's called hypocrisy. At least I am open about my multiple shortcomings.
Besides, you are constantly at pains to point out that nothing on here matters, we're all irrelevant and inferior, so you labelling my opinion as having no value is of no value.
You may have your sycophants here providing you solace, but someone's always going to point out the fact that the king isn't wearing any clothes.

I actually thought a little more of you....Im obviously wrong sometimes...you are  a hypocrite when you support crititicism of my typos but resent it when I criticise others.

what really is your problem....have you read the art of war by that japanese bloke....dont let your enemies know they are getting to you....its in there somewhere..if it isnt it should be
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 08:37:16 PM
 I come here for discussion on a missing child to interact with like minded people or to get other peoples points of view.

However, I am aware that there are others who come here to troll and get attention by sniping and goaing. While they are wasting their own time- it amuses me.

 All the while My husband who also shares the abuse (of whom the abuseres who claim to h8 abusers) is using his time saving lives- funny ole world innit!


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 21, 2019, 08:38:04 PM
Quote from: Anthro on November 21, 2019, 06:41:54 PM
Two things from my side of the world:

About three weeks ago, a story across South Africa’s main media broke about a former teacher/turned journalist at a major media group who is accused of sexually assaulting boys at one of SA’s most prestigious boys’ schools, 20 years ago. Today he was named in the press by his victim, a professional person, and it was revealed other former learners have also come forward about the allegations against him. The case is now under investigation. To our horror, we learnt the abuse took place at my son’s school and my husband’s alma mater.

Over the past week our media has also reported that kidnappings are on the rise in the country. The modus operandi being to grab children and teenagers and demanding ransom for their release or be killed.

Anthro, I think your contributions are a breath of fresh air for this forum and I am sure most other members would agree with me.

I can appreciate the shock your husband had about the latest news; I doubt very much there is an organisation anywhere in the world which hasn't been abused by these evil people with their insidious ways; I think people are more aware and there is less chance of them remaining under the radar now and hopefully attitudes have changed for whistle blowers making it easier for them to come forward.

Kidnapping is an horrific crime.  Hypothetically the way to stop it is to make it unprofitable and pay no ransom. That is until it is your loved one who is lifted.  I hope it gets stamped out sooner rather than later.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 21, 2019, 08:38:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 21, 2019, 08:34:30 PM
I actually thought a little more of you....Im obviously wrong sometimes...you are  a hypocrite when you support crititicism of my typos but resent it when I criticise others.

what really is your problem....have you read the art of war by that japanese bloke....dont let your enemies know they are getting to you....its in there somewhere..if it isnt it should be

Surely not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 08:41:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 21, 2019, 08:38:27 PM
Surely not?


Yes, I had a outburst with that one.

Oh dear, the  General is on the 'list' 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 21, 2019, 08:44:15 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 21, 2019, 08:34:30 PM
I actually thought a little more of you....Im obviously wrong sometimes...you are  a hypocrite when you support crititicism of my typos but resent it when I criticise others.

what really is your problem....have you read the art of war by that japanese bloke....dont let your enemies know they are getting to you....its in there somewhere..if it isnt it should be

Sun Tsu and the art of war.  Which is mostly to do with doing not much at all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 21, 2019, 08:45:17 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 08:37:16 PM
I come here for discussion on a missing child to interact with like minded people or to get other peoples points of view.

However, I am aware that there are others who come here to troll and get attention by sniping and goaing. While they are wasting their own time- it amuses me.

 All the while My husband who also shares the abuse (of whom the abuseres who claim to h8 abusers) is using his time saving lives- funny ole world innit!

if your husband is going to post it would be better if he posted under his own account....my wife has been abused on this forum yet she has never posted here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 21, 2019, 08:47:01 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 08:37:16 PM
I come here for discussion on a missing child to interact with like minded people or to get other peoples points of view.

However, I am aware that there are others who come here to troll and get attention by sniping and goaing. While they are wasting their own time- it amuses me.

 All the while My husband who also shares the abuse (of whom the abuseres who claim to h8 abusers) is using his time saving lives- funny ole world innit!
I thought you employed him to write your posts for you when you were called away to the phone?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 21, 2019, 08:51:42 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 21, 2019, 08:44:15 PM
Sun Tsu and the art of war.  Which is mostly to do with doing not much at all.

the wise warrior avoids the battle
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 21, 2019, 08:56:54 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 21, 2019, 08:34:30 PM
I actually thought a little more of you....Im obviously wrong sometimes...you are  a hypocrite when you support crititicism of my typos but resent it when I criticise others.

what really is your problem....have you read the art of war by that japanese bloke....dont let your enemies know they are getting to you....its in there somewhere..if it isnt it should be
He actually says 'If you know the enemy and know yourself, then you can safely sneak up on him and kick his arse'.
Davros, I wish no ill will on the inhabitants of this place. I make no bones of the fact that I bring absolutely nothing to the party. I've never pored over the files, or been to Luz licking windows and falling down dimly lit flights of stairs. I haven't dined at the Tapas Bar and ordered a macabre selection of Tapas that the T9 ordered, or harangued Tony Bennett to the point of lunacy on another forum, or got in to a fist fight with a Luz taxi driver when asking him to 'take me to where Smithman was'. I haven't searched Google Earth looking for suitable child-shaped holes on Portuguese golf course in forensic detail. I don't even know the names of the T9: Russell, Dave, Keith, Bingo, Karen, Bjorn, Benny, the small one.

I stumbled across this place by chance, as I search the internet for meaning. There is none. You're right; it's all futile. I have gone back several years on the threads of this forum. You are all having the same arguments every day - FOR THE LAST 8 YEARS - Groundhog Day meets The Truman Show.
But your spelling is terrible. Just saying.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 08:58:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 21, 2019, 08:45:17 PM
if your husband is going to post it would be better if he posted under his own account....my wife has been abused on this forum yet she has never posted here.


Oh Davel, we all sit and read the BS supporters type in defence of a group of self proclaimed 'victims'. I leave my laptop on when cooking or playing card games, so may people can reply if I am busy. Tsk.

 'eyes rolling around sockets'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 21, 2019, 09:04:46 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 08:58:28 PM

Oh Davel, we all sit and read the BS supporters type in defence of a group of self proclaimed 'victims'. I leave my laptop on when cooking or playing card games, so may people can reply if I am busy. Tsk.

 'eyes rolling around sockets'.
I sometimes stay logged in to the internet cafe PC I use in Hanoi - hence the warnings I've received recently. But that's the price of being in demand as 'the English crazy man who gets things' down on Hang Be Street.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 21, 2019, 09:13:22 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 21, 2019, 08:51:42 PM
the wise warrior avoids the battle

Some of us know that.  But tis mortal hard sometimes.

I am involved in a battle with my Leaseholders at the moment, which is not of my making,  and finding it very difficult to say nothing.  But you give away the game the minute you open your mouth.

Very strange it is now that I try not to comment.  I get the blame for all sorts when it was nae me.  But that's okay because I really don't care.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 21, 2019, 09:16:25 PM
Quote from: The General on November 21, 2019, 08:56:54 PM
He actually says 'If you know the enemy and know yourself, then you can safely sneak up on him and kick his arse'.
Davros, I wish no ill will on the inhabitants of this place. I make no bones of the fact that I bring absolutely nothing to the party. I've never pored over the files, or been to Luz licking windows and falling down dimly lit flights of stairs. I haven't dined at the Tapas Bar and ordered a macabre selection of Tapas that the T9 ordered, or harangued Tony Bennett to the point of lunacy on another forum, or got in to a fist fight with a Luz taxi driver when asking him to 'take me to where Smithman was'. I haven't searched Google Earth looking for suitable child-shaped holes on Portuguese golf course in forensic detail. I don't even know the names of the T9: Russell, Dave, Keith, Bingo, Karen, Bjorn, Benny, the small one.

I stumbled across this place by chance, as I search the internet for meaning. There is none. You're right; it's all futile. I have gone back several years on the threads of this forum. You are all having the same arguments every day - FOR THE LAST 8 YEARS - Groundhog Day meets The Truman Show.
But your spelling is terrible. Just saying.

Don't knock it, Love.  Some of us have nothing better to do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 21, 2019, 09:18:31 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 08:58:28 PM

Oh Davel, we all sit and read the BS supporters type in defence of a group of self proclaimed 'victims'. I leave my laptop on when cooking or playing card games, so may people can reply if I am busy. Tsk.

 'eyes rolling around sockets'.

Xcuse me.  Some of us are having an intellectual conversation around here.  Even if only briefly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 21, 2019, 09:19:10 PM
Quote from: The General on November 21, 2019, 08:56:54 PM
He actually says 'If you know the enemy and know yourself, then you can safely sneak up on him and kick his arse'.
Davros, I wish no ill will on the inhabitants of this place. I make no bones of the fact that I bring absolutely nothing to the party. I've never pored over the files, or been to Luz licking windows and falling down dimly lit flights of stairs. I haven't dined at the Tapas Bar and ordered a macabre selection of Tapas that the T9 ordered, or harangued Tony Bennett to the point of lunacy on another forum, or got in to a fist fight with a Luz taxi driver when asking him to 'take me to where Smithman was'. I haven't searched Google Earth looking for suitable child-shaped holes on Portuguese golf course in forensic detail. I don't even know the names of the T9: Russell, Dave, Keith, Bingo, Karen, Bjorn, Benny, the small one.

I stumbled across this place by chance, as I search the internet for meaning. There is none. You're right; it's all futile. I have gone back several years on the threads of this forum. You are all having the same arguments every day - FOR THE LAST 8 YEARS - Groundhog Day meets The Truman Show.
But your spelling is terrible. Just saying.

its not my spelling that is terrible...its my typing. You see how you can come to the wrong conclussions so easily
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 09:19:34 PM
Quote from: The General on November 21, 2019, 09:04:46 PM
I sometimes stay logged in to the internet cafe PC I use in Hanoi - hence the warnings I've received recently. But that's the price of being in demand as 'the English crazy man who gets things' down on Hang Be Street.

I think I remember you! white shorts, black trilby, knee length socks, man that tweed jacket was OTT in that heat!

I am very proud of my typos-I laugh them off like...  hahaha    hahaha   hahaha -with a snort at the end. And sometimes followed by a coughing fit with tears and ...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 21, 2019, 09:21:45 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 08:58:28 PM

Oh Davel, we all sit and read the BS supporters type in defence of a group of self proclaimed 'victims'. I leave my laptop on when cooking or playing card games, so may people can reply if I am busy. Tsk.

 'eyes rolling around sockets'.

no one i know bothers to read anything here and they all wonder why I bother to post
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 21, 2019, 09:23:25 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 21, 2019, 09:21:45 PM
no one i know bothers to read anything here and they all wonder why I bother to post
So do we.
Joke.
C'maarn.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 21, 2019, 09:24:19 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 21, 2019, 09:21:45 PM
no one i know bothers to read anything here and they all wonder why I bother to post

You are not alone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 21, 2019, 09:26:21 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 08:58:28 PM

Oh Davel, we all sit and read the BS supporters type in defence of a group of self proclaimed 'victims'. I leave my laptop on when cooking or playing card games, so may people can reply if I am busy. Tsk.

 'eyes rolling around sockets'.
Most of my posts are actually written by my mother and the window cleaner, apart from this one which is being written by Richard Madeley. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 21, 2019, 09:27:26 PM
Quote from: The General on November 21, 2019, 09:23:25 PM
So do we.
Joke.
C'maarn.

funny thing is I know its  a joke and I dont take any offence...why should I .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 21, 2019, 09:32:10 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 21, 2019, 09:19:34 PM
I think I remember you! white shorts, black trilby, knee length socks, man that tweed jacket was OTT in that heat!

I am very proud of my typos-I laugh them off like...  hahaha    hahaha   hahaha -with a snort at the end. And sometimes followed by a coughing fit with tears and ...

they are not typos...typos are when you hit the key next to the one you intended....bad spelling is when you just cant spell
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 21, 2019, 09:38:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 21, 2019, 09:26:21 PM
Most of my posts are actually written by my mother and the window cleaner, apart from this one which is being written by Richard Madeley.

Never forget The Chimps.  I am off out at the moment, so my nasty little baby boy is writing this one.

The dog meanwhile is not pissing on the floor because he thinks he might get a biscuit if he doesn't.  Don't ask.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 22, 2019, 09:03:38 AM
Was listening to a piece of the Today program about how the identity of the murderer of Grace Millane  has been kept a secret and thought it an interesting concept.  After all, why should it matter that a criminal's identity be known to the public , particularly in advance of a conviction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 22, 2019, 09:13:30 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 22, 2019, 09:03:38 AM
Was listening to a piece of the Today program about how the identity of the murderer of Grace Millane  has been kept a secret and thought it an interesting concept.  After all, why should it matter that a criminal's identity be known to the public , particularly in advance of a conviction.

Don't name the alleged victim either and hold all criminal cases in camera ... didn't it used to be a bit like that before Magna Carta?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 22, 2019, 09:42:02 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 22, 2019, 09:03:38 AM
Was listening to a piece of the Today program about how the identity of the murderer of Grace Millane  has been kept a secret and thought it an interesting concept.  After all, why should it matter that a criminal's identity be known to the public , particularly in advance of a conviction.

It was done because of the media, it seems. If they reported objectively it wouldn't be necessary imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 22, 2019, 12:12:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 22, 2019, 09:42:02 AM
It was done because of the media, it seems. If they reported objectively it wouldn't be necessary imo.

Sub Judice Rule

The term sub judice literally means "under judicial consideration". The sub judice rule is part of the law relating to contempt of court. The rule governs what public statements can be made about ongoing legal proceedings before, principally, the courts.

The basis for the sub judice rule is that, in Ontario's legal system, it is the role of the courts to deal with legal issues that are before it. The courts' role should not be usurped by others making public statements about how these issues should be dealt with.

The rule applies where court proceedings are ongoing, and through all stages of appeal until the matter is completed. It may also apply where court proceedings have not yet been started, but are imminent.

The rule is not limited to parties in a case or their lawyers. It applies to the public and to statements by public officials. The principles underlying the rule also apply to statements made by MPPs in the Legislature, and are overseen by the Speaker, by virtue of the Standing Orders of the Legislative Assembly.

The sub judice rule may be breached by public statements that risk prejudging matters or issues that are before the courts. It is the concept of prejudging that is central to the rule.

A breach of the sub judice rule can include, for instance, statements urging the court to reach a particular result in a matter, comments on the strength or weakness of a party's case or particular issue, or comments on witnesses or evidence in a case.

The sub judice rule does not prohibit fair and accurate reporting of the factual content of ongoing judicial proceedings by the media, as long as the report does not usurp the court's role by prejudging the case or its legal issues.

In addition to the sub judice rule, there may be other limitations on what can be said about a legal proceeding. For example, the Youth Criminal Justice Act limits what can be said about proceedings involving young persons who are in conflict with the criminal justice system. Also, courts can issue publication bans that limit what can be published about a particular matter.

Whether any particular statement raises sub judice concerns depends on the nature of the statement, the case involved and other circumstances. Members of the media should therefore consult with their legal counsel for advice on what may and may not be said about ongoing legal proceedings.

https://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/legis/subjudicerule.php#:~:targetText=The%20term%20sub%20judice%20literally,before%2C%20principally%2C%20the%20courts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 22, 2019, 12:40:39 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 22, 2019, 12:12:48 PM
Sub Judice Rule

The term sub judice literally means "under judicial consideration". The sub judice rule is part of the law relating to contempt of court. The rule governs what public statements can be made about ongoing legal proceedings before, principally, the courts.

The basis for the sub judice rule is that, in Ontario's legal system, it is the role of the courts to deal with legal issues that are before it. The courts' role should not be usurped by others making public statements about how these issues should be dealt with.

The rule applies where court proceedings are ongoing, and through all stages of appeal until the matter is completed. It may also apply where court proceedings have not yet been started, but are imminent.

The rule is not limited to parties in a case or their lawyers. It applies to the public and to statements by public officials. The principles underlying the rule also apply to statements made by MPPs in the Legislature, and are overseen by the Speaker, by virtue of the Standing Orders of the Legislative Assembly.

The sub judice rule may be breached by public statements that risk prejudging matters or issues that are before the courts. It is the concept of prejudging that is central to the rule.

A breach of the sub judice rule can include, for instance, statements urging the court to reach a particular result in a matter, comments on the strength or weakness of a party's case or particular issue, or comments on witnesses or evidence in a case.

The sub judice rule does not prohibit fair and accurate reporting of the factual content of ongoing judicial proceedings by the media, as long as the report does not usurp the court's role by prejudging the case or its legal issues.

In addition to the sub judice rule, there may be other limitations on what can be said about a legal proceeding. For example, the Youth Criminal Justice Act limits what can be said about proceedings involving young persons who are in conflict with the criminal justice system. Also, courts can issue publication bans that limit what can be published about a particular matter.

Whether any particular statement raises sub judice concerns depends on the nature of the statement, the case involved and other circumstances. Members of the media should therefore consult with their legal counsel for advice on what may and may not be said about ongoing legal proceedings.

https://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/legis/subjudicerule.php#:~:targetText=The%20term%20sub%20judice%20literally,before%2C%20principally%2C%20the%20courts.

What has Canada got to do with anything?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 22, 2019, 03:18:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 22, 2019, 12:40:39 PM
What has Canada got to do with anything?
Wall of text TL:DR CBA
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 22, 2019, 04:47:42 PM
Quote from: The General on November 22, 2019, 03:18:34 PM
Wall of text TL:DR CBA

Skim reading is a handy skill, I find.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 22, 2019, 04:50:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 22, 2019, 04:47:42 PM
Skim reading is a handy skill, I find.


Especially with a overload of nonsense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 22, 2019, 05:50:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 22, 2019, 12:40:39 PM
What has Canada got to do with anything?

As much as New Zealand has.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 22, 2019, 05:51:38 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 22, 2019, 09:03:38 AM
Was listening to a piece of the Today program about how the identity of the murderer of Grace Millane  has been kept a secret and thought it an interesting concept.  After all, why should it matter that a criminal's identity be known to the public , particularly in advance of a conviction.
Perhaps Robbity will know as it’s his country’s daft (imo) decision.  That said, his name and picture were revealed in the Evening Standard today if you’re interested.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 22, 2019, 05:58:04 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 22, 2019, 05:51:38 PM
Perhaps Robbity will know as it’s his country’s daft (imo) decision.  That said, his name and picture were revealed in the Evening Standard today if you’re interested.

I'm in full agreement with the verdict of the New Zealand jury.  Having read a little of the evidence I was of the opinion had this been a British trial there was a huge probability he might have walked.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 22, 2019, 06:04:45 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 22, 2019, 05:51:38 PM
Perhaps Robbity will know as it’s his country’s daft (imo) decision.  That said, his name and picture were revealed in the Evening Standard today if you’re interested.
Yeah, saw that earlier this afternoon.
Naming after conviction seems reasonable to me
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 22, 2019, 06:15:03 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 22, 2019, 05:58:04 PM
I'm in full agreement with the verdict of the New Zealand jury.  Having read a little of the evidence I was of the opinion had this been a British trial there was a huge probability he might have walked.
Me too, I thought witholding his name from the press during the trial was daft though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 22, 2019, 06:18:15 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 22, 2019, 06:04:45 PM
Yeah, saw that earlier this afternoon.
Naming after conviction seems reasonable to me

According to this a suspect in NZ can get a suppression order,it doesn't apply out side of NZ though.


The identity of Grace Millane's killer was kept a secret during his trial due to a suppression order that bans New Zealand media from naming and picturing him.

The 27-year-old man cannot be unmasked there even though a jury found him guilty of strangling the British backpacker in his Auckland hotel room and burying her body in a suitcase.

The law doesn't extend to international media, including agencies in Britain, meaning they are free to name the man despite the strict and unusual reporting restrictions in New Zealand.




https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/grace-millane-suppression-order-cant-20933973
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 22, 2019, 11:32:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 22, 2019, 09:42:02 AM
It was done because of the media, it seems. If they reported objectively it wouldn't be necessary imo.


I agree G. There is always that case of 'trial by media' which has no place in the already dodgy criminal justice system.  It can also lead to vigilanites harming and killing innocent people.

I also agree that  some of those accused of sex offences should be withheld until a verdict is made. Too many innocent men and women are being hounded without a proper investigation, while guilty are protected in some way.

I do not buy newspapers- never have. I hear snippets and if it is interesting I call my friend who is an independant journalist for more info. I sometimes catch the news at other  friends house,but the social media is another step back to the 16th century with witch hunts.   Name calling and bullying  of people who are independant thinkers.

Being shoiuted down by the 'chosen woke people' about fake climate change, Vegans , gender fluidity. They have names for those who are unwoke mentally ill aka being phobic  like it is a bad thing. ^*&&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 22, 2019, 11:40:06 PM
I guess you’re absolutely disgusted that the Gasoar Statement was released and condemn it being made public in the strongest possible terms?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 23, 2019, 10:18:17 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 22, 2019, 11:32:53 PM

I agree G. There is always that case of 'trial by media' which has no place in the already dodgy criminal justice system.  It can also lead to vigilanites harming and killing innocent people.

I also agree that  some of those accused of sex offences should be withheld until a verdict is made. Too many innocent men and women are being hounded without a proper investigation, while guilty are protected in some way.

I do not buy newspapers- never have. I hear snippets and if it is interesting I call my friend who is an independant journalist for more info. I sometimes catch the news at other  friends house,but the social media is another step back to the 16th century with witch hunts.   Name calling and bullying  of people who are independant thinkers.

Being shoiuted down by the 'chosen woke people' about fake climate change, Vegans , gender fluidity. They have names for those who are unwoke mentally ill aka being phobic  like it is a bad thing. ^*&&

I stopped buying newspapers as the quality dropped. Now I read them online if I need to, but they are really not reliable sources of facts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 23, 2019, 10:22:11 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 23, 2019, 10:18:17 AM
I stopped buying newspapers as the quality dropped. Now I read them online if I need to, but they are really not reliable sources of facts.

The Express on line is a case in common,all they seem to do is bring some dramatic non news about a the weather,its be going to be a severe winter so they say the met office  said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on November 23, 2019, 10:50:48 AM
Please keep to the topic guys and cut the snide remarks otherwise I will impose sanctions.

And by the way, the mass deletion of post content by any member is seen as disruption and will result in permanent account deletion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 23, 2019, 05:33:13 PM
Does anyone know if the Ocean Club staff wore any type of uniform?  Badge or whatever? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 23, 2019, 05:40:22 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 23, 2019, 05:33:13 PM
Does anyone know if the Ocean Club staff wore any type of uniform?  Badge or whatever?

On the occasion I visited, there was nothing to distinguish staff from guests.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 23, 2019, 05:43:01 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 23, 2019, 10:18:17 AM
I stopped buying newspapers as the quality dropped. Now I read them online if I need to, but they are really not reliable sources of facts.
What do you consider a reliable source of facts about any given news subject?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 23, 2019, 06:50:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 23, 2019, 10:18:17 AM
I stopped buying newspapers as the quality dropped. Now I read them online if I need to, but they are really not reliable sources of facts.

I read papers; I read on-line; I watch various news channels.  I consider that I am perfectly capable of separating the wheat from the chaff on most issues.  I think it is one of life's skills to be able to do so ... maybe not essential, but definitely useful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 23, 2019, 09:13:04 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 23, 2019, 05:33:13 PM
Does anyone know if the Ocean Club staff wore any type of uniform?  Badge or whatever?

SS from Sky News footage 4/5/07.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 24, 2019, 12:18:48 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 23, 2019, 05:40:22 PM
On the occasion I visited, there was nothing to distinguish staff from guests.

The Mark Warner nannies had a uniform.

(https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/50fdc822e4b03aa4e2b9f11a/1441229057723-LYY1TEYVY6HSYO8VK11Z/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kMTLu8sgmHFNwUXrcQJxFOcUqsxRUqqbr1mOJYKfIPR7LoDQ9mXPO[Name removed]oqy81S2I8N_N4V1vUb5AoIIIbLZhVYy7Mythp_T-mtop-vrsUOmeInPi9iDjx9w8K4ZfjXt2dhi97jUa2TytcCum8ByYudXKQnYk-km6tMsXf96SbiOUZDqXZYzu2fuaodM4POSZ4w/image-asset.jpeg?format=1500w)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2019, 01:31:09 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 24, 2019, 12:18:48 AM
The Mark Warner nannies had a uniform.

(https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/50fdc822e4b03aa4e2b9f11a/1441229057723-LYY1TEYVY6HSYO8VK11Z/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kMTLu8sgmHFNwUXrcQJxFOcUqsxRUqqbr1mOJYKfIPR7LoDQ9mXPO[Name removed]oqy81S2I8N_N4V1vUb5AoIIIbLZhVYy7Mythp_T-mtop-vrsUOmeInPi9iDjx9w8K4ZfjXt2dhi97jUa2TytcCum8ByYudXKQnYk-km6tMsXf96SbiOUZDqXZYzu2fuaodM4POSZ4w/image-asset.jpeg?format=1500w)

Can anyone remember, or better still, post the photograph of the nannies using large pushchairs to safely transport the little ones around?

Which uniform were they wearing then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2019, 02:03:00 AM
Quote from: sadie on November 24, 2019, 01:31:09 AM
Can anyone remember, or better still, post the photograph of the nannies using large pushchairs to safely transport the little ones around?

Which uniform were they wearing then?

I think that Mistys post on another thread gives the answer probably:

https://www.gettyimages.pt/detail/v%C3%ADdeo/exterior-shots-of-the-ocean-club-apartments-after-filme-de-not%C3%ADcias/649701658?uiloc=thumbnail_more_from_this_event_adp&uiloc=thumbnail_more_from_this_event_adp

Red shorts with yellow spots and white shirts.


Maybe the uniform designs were changed regularly?  We don't know that, do we ?

But we have the choice of three different ones here ... so take your pick
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 24, 2019, 02:06:55 AM
Quote from: sadie on November 24, 2019, 02:03:00 AM
I think that Mistys post on another thread gives the answer probably:

https://www.gettyimages.pt/detail/v%C3%ADdeo/exterior-shots-of-the-ocean-club-apartments-after-filme-de-not%C3%ADcias/649701658?uiloc=thumbnail_more_from_this_event_adp&uiloc=thumbnail_more_from_this_event_adp

Red shorts with yellow spots and white shirts.


Maybe the uniform designs were changed regularly?  We don't know that, do we ?

But we have the choice of three different ones here ... so take your pick
(https://c8.alamy.com/comp/B0E5C5/apartment-of-the-ocean-club-resort-where-madeleine-mccann-disappeared-B0E5C5.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2019, 02:16:25 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 24, 2019, 02:06:55 AM
(https://c8.alamy.com/comp/B0E5C5/apartment-of-the-ocean-club-resort-where-madeleine-mccann-disappeared-B0E5C5.jpg)

Oh thank you Brie.  You are so brilliant at coming up with the goods.

So now we have 4 uniforms to choose from !!!


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 24, 2019, 06:53:57 AM
Quote from: sadie on November 24, 2019, 02:16:25 AM
Oh thank you Brie.  You are so brilliant at coming up with the goods.

So now we have 4 uniforms to choose from !!!
Kinda ruled out an inside jobbie with no description of Jimmy abductor  wearing a uniform.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 24, 2019, 08:40:15 AM
Quote from: barrier on November 24, 2019, 06:53:57 AM
Kinda ruled out an inside jobbie with no description of Jimmy abductor  wearing a uniform.
I think the staff are allowed timo off and to wear their own clothes occasionally, though I may be mistaken.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 24, 2019, 09:20:56 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 24, 2019, 12:18:48 AM
The Mark Warner nannies had a uniform.

(https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/50fdc822e4b03aa4e2b9f11a/1441229057723-LYY1TEYVY6HSYO8VK11Z/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kMTLu8sgmHFNwUXrcQJxFOcUqsxRUqqbr1mOJYKfIPR7LoDQ9mXPO[Name removed]oqy81S2I8N_N4V1vUb5AoIIIbLZhVYy7Mythp_T-mtop-vrsUOmeInPi9iDjx9w8K4ZfjXt2dhi97jUa2TytcCum8ByYudXKQnYk-km6tMsXf96SbiOUZDqXZYzu2fuaodM4POSZ4w/image-asset.jpeg?format=1500w)


Looks like the kids have a uniform as well, judging by that picture.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 24, 2019, 04:33:07 PM
If I may, on a celebratory note. The start to our 7-week summer holiday.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 24, 2019, 04:42:47 PM
Please delete if this is inappropriate. I am just grateful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 24, 2019, 05:19:54 PM
Quote from: Anthro on November 24, 2019, 04:33:07 PM
If I may, on a celebratory note. The start to our 7-week summer holiday.
Well done, you!...  8(>((   Shades on for Mauritius?

Meanwhile, on a miserable note, here in UK we've got a four week rain-sodden run-up to Christmas made worse by endless political tub-thumping. 8)><(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 24, 2019, 05:30:05 PM
Hi Myster, this is central South Africa. A very good time to visit. Especially at the coast which is 800 km from where I am.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 24, 2019, 05:43:28 PM
Quote from: Anthro on November 24, 2019, 05:30:05 PM
Hi Myster, this is central South Africa. A very good time to visit. Especially at the coast which is 800 km from where I am.
Yes, I gathered that from your posts, but thought you might be off to one of the eastern islands for a change of scenery - Mauritius, Madagascar, etc.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 24, 2019, 06:17:28 PM
Lots to do in Mzansi. But yes, off to the southern part of the country.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 26, 2019, 09:55:17 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7728711/Police-launch-manhunt-pervert-broke-sexually-assaulted-young-son-bedroom.html?ico=pushly-notifcation-small

"No evidence of forced entry".
CCTV image of the suspect has been published in the article.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 26, 2019, 10:03:39 PM
Quote from: misty on November 26, 2019, 09:55:17 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7728711/Police-launch-manhunt-pervert-broke-sexually-assaulted-young-son-bedroom.html?ico=pushly-notifcation-small

"No evidence of forced entry".
CCTV image of the suspect has been published in the article.
How appalling.  I don’t suppose it will be long however before doubt is being cast on this report by those who think they know what is and isn’t possible and what children will and won’t do in such circumstances.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 26, 2019, 10:12:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 26, 2019, 10:03:39 PM
How appalling.  I don’t suppose it will be long however before doubt is being cast on this report by those who think they know what is and isn’t possible and what children will and won’t do in such circumstances.

It is scary that we are still so unsafe within our own home. Thank heaven for CCTV which should allow this pervert to be identified & removed from our streets.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 26, 2019, 11:17:16 PM
Quote from: misty on November 26, 2019, 10:12:13 PM
It is scary that we are still so unsafe within our own home. Thank heaven for CCTV which should allow this pervert to be identified & removed from our streets.
Anyone who knows that man will recognise him from that image, it is very clear.  If he doesn't hand himself in the sooner someone else does the sooner the police will be able to rule him in or out ... and the sooner the better.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 26, 2019, 11:33:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 26, 2019, 10:03:39 PM
How appalling.  I don’t suppose it will be long however before doubt is being cast on this report by those who think they know what is and isn’t possible and what children will and won’t do in such circumstances.

   "No evidence of forced entry"   Yet he managed to enter and attack a child.  I think it is way beyond time for those who seem to have adopted the daily persecution of Kate and Gerry McCann as their mission in life,  to give that knowledge some serious thought.


My thoughts are with the family and in particular with the boy who was assaulted in what should have been the safest place in the world for him ... his own home and his own bed.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 27, 2019, 07:19:40 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 26, 2019, 11:33:16 PM
   "No evidence of forced entry"   Yet he managed to enter and attack a child.  I think it is way beyond time for those who seem to have adopted the daily persecution of Kate and Gerry McCann as their mission in life,  to give that knowledge some serious thought.


My thoughts are with the family and in particular with the boy who was assaulted in what should have been the safest place in the world for him ... his own home and his own bed.

Perhaps the house wasn't secured as the police also said;

"I would encourage people to ensure that their homes are kept secure at all times"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 27, 2019, 07:20:32 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 26, 2019, 11:33:16 PM
   "No evidence of forced entry"   Yet he managed to enter and attack a child.  I think it is way beyond time for those who seem to have adopted the daily persecution of Kate and Gerry McCann as their mission in life,  to give that knowledge some serious thought.


My thoughts are with the family and in particular with the boy who was assaulted in what should have been the safest place in the world for him ... his own home and his own bed.
'My thoughts are with his family', but first let me use this terrible crime as a device of opportunity to kick sceptics in the head with.

Most of what you can conceive has either been perpetrated, or can be. I certainly don't dispute that. It's the context that you fail to factor in.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2019, 07:51:20 AM
Quote from: The General on November 27, 2019, 07:20:32 AM
'My thoughts are with his family', but first let me use this terrible crime as a device of opportunity to kick sceptics in the head with.

Most of what you can conceive has either been perpetrated, or can be. I certainly don't dispute that. It's the context that you fail to factor in.
Factor it in then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 27, 2019, 09:56:35 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 27, 2019, 07:51:20 AM
Factor it in then.
Or just don't say.
Look at this terrible crime, thoughts and prayers - but now will you listen, stupid sceptics?!
Facile. Pointless. Just stop at thoughts and prayers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 27, 2019, 10:14:02 AM
Quote from: The General on November 27, 2019, 09:56:35 AM
Or just don't say.
Look at this terrible crime, thoughts and prayers - but now will you listen, stupid sceptics?!
Facile. Pointless. Just stop at thoughts and prayers.
You are not trying to monitor Briettas words and thoughts, are you Mr General, Sir

Do you not wish her to bring it to peoples attention that again we have an intuder getting in and assaulting children in their beds.   Yet the parents were there with their son and the building was locked.  And no sign of entry.


How did it happen ?   A mystery, just as Madeleines abduction is a mystery. 
I hope the sceptics take note that it can happen even with the parents in the home with him ... and even with the place secure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 27, 2019, 10:17:26 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 27, 2019, 07:19:40 AM
Perhaps the house wasn't secured as the police also said;

"I would encourage people to ensure that their homes are kept secure at all times"

Does that give anyone the right to enter and do what they will ??? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 27, 2019, 10:26:41 AM
Quote from: sadie on November 27, 2019, 10:14:02 AM
You are not trying to monitor Briettas words and thoughts, are you Mr General, Sir

Do you not wish her to bring it to peoples attention that again we have an intuder getting in and assaulting children in their beds.   Yet the parents were there with their son and the building was locked.  And no sign of entry.


How did it happen ?   A mystery, just as Madeleines abduction is a mystery. 
I hope the sceptics take note that it can happen even with the parents in the home with him ... and even with the place secure.

The one thing we can be sure of Sadie is that if the investigating officers were to discover the horrible event had been "staged" they would have the evidence for that ... no 'gut reaction' or 'theories'.

We can also be very sure that whatever evidence there may be will be collected and processed professionally.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 27, 2019, 10:27:27 AM
Quote from: sadie on November 27, 2019, 10:14:02 AM
You are not trying to monitor Briettas words and thoughts, are you Mr General, Sir

Do you not wish her to bring it to peoples attention that again we have an intuder getting in and assaulting children in their beds.   Yet the parents were there with their son and the building was locked.  And no sign of entry.


How did it happen ?   A mystery, just as Madeleines abduction is a mystery. 
I hope the sceptics take note that it can happen even with the parents in the home with him ... and even with the place secure.

We get it, there's all sorts of crimes perpetrated in ways we can only imagine. Your logic is way off.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 27, 2019, 10:32:52 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 27, 2019, 10:17:26 AM
Does that give anyone the right to enter and do what they will ???

I don't think that's what I said. I was merely pointing out that if a door or window wasn't secured then it's little wonder there was no evidence of forced entry!!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 27, 2019, 10:35:11 AM
Who says it's impossible? Nobody. It's obviously possible. There's all sorts of unspeakable crimes that one would think were beyond the moral code of man to perpetrate - but it happens all the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 27, 2019, 10:36:16 AM
Quote from: The General on November 27, 2019, 10:35:11 AM
Who says it's impossible? Nobody. It's obviously possible. There's all sorts of unspeakable crimes that one would think were beyond the moral code of man to perpetrate - but it happens all the time.

I think you are totally over reacting
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 27, 2019, 10:37:12 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 27, 2019, 10:36:16 AM
I think you are totally over reacting
Perhaps. But I'm right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 27, 2019, 10:45:18 AM
Quote from: The General on November 27, 2019, 10:37:12 AM
Perhaps. But I'm right.

No you are not
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 27, 2019, 10:50:43 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 27, 2019, 10:45:18 AM
No you are not
Neh neh, it's my ball, I'm going home. Are we actually doing this?
Come on, let's move this on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2019, 10:55:10 AM
Quote from: The General on November 27, 2019, 09:56:35 AM
Or just don't say.
Look at this terrible crime, thoughts and prayers - but now will you listen, stupid sceptics?!
Facile. Pointless. Just stop at thoughts and prayers.
Are you getting all sanctimonious on my ass?  You do realise the second a news report about a child murdered by a parent and their body hidden it’s brought straight here with an “I told you so” flourish.  And every time a cadaver dog correctly alerts to the remains of some missing dead person, exactly the same thing.  I don’t see you reacting negatively then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 27, 2019, 10:56:53 AM
Quote from: The General on November 27, 2019, 10:37:12 AM
Perhaps. But I'm right.

It's the same old refrain; the supporters are caring, sympathetic, empathetic and lovely in every way. Then comes the nasty sideswipe at the uncaring, unsympathetic, unempathetic and unlovely sceptics. White is white and black is black and grey doesn't exist.

All IMO obviously.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 27, 2019, 11:52:08 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 27, 2019, 10:56:53 AM
It's the same old refrain; the supporters are caring, sympathetic, empathetic and lovely in every way. Then comes the nasty sideswipe at the uncaring, unsympathetic, unempathetic and unlovely sceptics. White is white and black is black and grey doesn't exist.

All IMO obviously.

At least when our children are crying we don't give them another clout to make sure they have something to cry sbout.


What dregs of inhumanity some of you are.

All IMO , of course.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 27, 2019, 11:56:23 AM
Quote from: The General on November 27, 2019, 10:27:27 AM
....and now you're at it. Using this heinous crime as a device to stomp on sceptics.
We get it, there's all sorts of crimes perpetrated in ways we can only imagine. Your logic is way off.
How about you personalise your message to the family verbatim? Then report back.

And by the way, to use the vernacular, Bruschetta has seen her arse and has seemingly decided to ignore my posts, having decided not to enter in to a conversation about her moderation of my posts. Which is fair enough. Nothing lost this side.

Can you give examples of where my logic is way off please, or withdraw that assertion.   TY
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 27, 2019, 12:00:26 PM
Quote from: sadie on November 27, 2019, 11:52:08 AM
At least when our children are crying we don't give them another clout to make sure they have something to cry sbout.


What dregs of inhumanity some of you are.

All IMO , of course.

Now we have the inference that anyone who questions the McCann story is a bad parent. Well done for proving my point.  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 27, 2019, 12:08:49 PM
Quote from: sadie on November 27, 2019, 11:56:23 AM
Can you give examples of where my logic is way off please, or withdraw that assertion.   TY
No. CBA
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 27, 2019, 12:14:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 27, 2019, 12:00:26 PM
Now we have the inference that anyone who questions the McCann story is a bad parent. Well done for proving my point.  8((()*/
Are you confusing infer with imply... Seeing as you criticised my English
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 27, 2019, 12:29:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 27, 2019, 12:00:26 PM
Now we have the inference that anyone who questions the McCann story is a bad parent. Well done for proving my point.  8((()*/

I dont mind reasonable questioning of The Mccanns .... but I do mind that some people on here think it is OK to give a crying child another wallop, to make sure he/she has something to cry about.

Call in the NSPCC


And I did not generalise to all sceptics, as you said.       I was specific to some of you.

Were you one of them that said that?  I think you were.   Please correct me if I am wrong.


More disinformation from you.  Can't you stop yourself ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2019, 12:42:50 PM
Quote from: The General on November 27, 2019, 10:27:27 AM
....and now you're at it. Using this heinous crime as a device to stomp on sceptics.
We get it, there's all sorts of crimes perpetrated in ways we can only imagine. Your logic is way off.
How about you personalise your message to the family verbatim? Then report back.

And by the way, to use the vernacular, Bruschetta has seen her arse and has seemingly decided to ignore my posts, having decided not to enter in to a conversation about her moderation of my posts. Which is fair enough. Nothing lost this side.
FFS.  When did you decide that "thoughts and prayers" were simply not enough for you in the Madeleine McCann case and that putting the boot in to her parents about this heinous crime was necessary instead?  What a hypocrite. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 27, 2019, 12:45:18 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 24, 2019, 06:53:57 AM
Kinda ruled out an inside jobbie with no description of Jimmy abductor  wearing a uniform.

It doesn't rule out an inside job at all,  if the abductor wore a uniform and informed Madeleine he was taking her to her Mummy,  then passed her out to an accomplice.

Of course,  someone not working there could have got hold of a uniform.  IMO


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2019, 12:47:07 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 27, 2019, 12:00:26 PM
Now we have the inference that anyone who questions the McCann story is a bad parent. Well done for proving my point.  8((()*/
Which of course is nothing like the overt accusation that McCann supporters are child neglect apologists that we have had to put up with for over 12 years. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 27, 2019, 12:58:46 PM
Quote from: sadie on November 27, 2019, 12:29:16 PM
I dont mind reasonable questioning of The Mccanns .... but I do mind that some people on here think it is OK to give a crying child another wallop, to make sure he/she has something to cry about.

Call in the NSPCC


And I did not generalise to all sceptics, as you said.       I was specific to some of you.

Were you one of them that said that?  I think you were.   Please correct me if I am wrong.


More disinformation from you.  Can't you stop yourself ?

Once again the accusations fly without a shred of evidence to support them.  @)(++(*

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 27, 2019, 12:59:43 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 27, 2019, 12:45:18 PM
It doesn't rule out an inside job at all, if the abductor wore a uniform and informed Madeleine he was taking her to her Mummy,  then past her out to an accomplice.

Of course,  someone not working there could have got hold of a uniform.  IMO

More make-believe - nothing to support that  at all - IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 27, 2019, 01:16:04 PM
Can everyone cool it please and under no circumstances use foul language in a post directed at another poster even if the foul language is in abbreviated form. 

If I find myself having to micro-manage certain members because they choose to continually flout the rules I will make the case for temporary bans. 


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2019, 01:19:58 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 27, 2019, 01:16:04 PM
Can everyone cool it please and under no circumstances use foul language in a post directed at another poster even if the foul language is in abbreviated form. 

If I find myself having to micro-manage certain members because they choose to continually flout the rules I will make the case for temporary bans.
Is that aimed at me?  Perhaps you'd like to threaten the General too, who referred to Brietta as Bruschetta and used the "foul" term "arse" in his post.  I'm sure it would be most convenient to ban me seeing as how you're struggling to justify your continual misplaced scrutiny of innocent witnesses in this case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 27, 2019, 01:23:46 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 27, 2019, 01:19:58 PM
Is that aimed at me?  Perhaps you'd like to threaten the General too, who referred to Brietta as Bruschetta and used the "foul" term "arse" in his post.  I'm sure it would be most convenient to ban me seeing as how you're struggling to justify your continual misplaced scrutiny of innocent witnesses in this case.

Did I mention you?  No. 

Any further off-topic posts will be removed on sight.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2019, 01:45:04 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 27, 2019, 01:23:46 PM
Did I mention you?  No. 

Any further off-topic posts will be removed on sight.
Perhaps you’d like to clarify what topic we should be discussing on this thread then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 27, 2019, 01:50:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 27, 2019, 01:45:04 PM
Perhaps you’d like to clarify what topic we should be discussing on this thread then.

I think its self-explanatory. 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2019, 02:01:50 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 27, 2019, 01:50:55 PM
I think its self-explanatory.
Really?  So anymore off topic posts on the Off Topic thread will be deleted.  Perfect. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 27, 2019, 02:06:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 27, 2019, 02:01:50 PM
Really?  So anymore off topic posts on the Off Topic thread will be deleted.  Perfect.

Really?  No.

I was referring to the contents of your post challenging my post re moderation.

How many more times do you expect me to ask you nicely to contribute constructively? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2019, 02:17:56 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 27, 2019, 02:06:11 PM
Really?  No.

I was referring to the contents of your post challenging my post re moderation.

How many more times do you expect me to ask you nicely to contribute constructively?
You're pulling rank on me now.  I'd better pipe down, fall into line or be punished hadn't I?   8)><(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 27, 2019, 03:12:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 27, 2019, 02:17:56 PM
You're pulling rank on me now.  I'd better pipe down, fall into line or be punished hadn't I?   8)><(

Sounds a good idea to me  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2019, 03:15:02 PM
Who do we think's going to win the election then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 27, 2019, 03:18:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 27, 2019, 03:15:02 PM
Who do we think's going to win the election then?
You dobbed me in to the rozzers!

I hope Boris Corbyn wins the gold medal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on November 27, 2019, 03:21:32 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 27, 2019, 03:15:02 PM
Who do we think's going to win the election then?

Preferably one without a beard  8(0(*

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 27, 2019, 03:34:49 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 27, 2019, 12:59:43 PM
More make-believe - nothing to support that  at all - IMO

You don't know though do you?   I did say IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 27, 2019, 03:37:35 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 27, 2019, 03:34:49 PM
You don't know though do you?   I did say IMO

You mean you have evidence to support your idea ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2019, 03:47:11 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on November 27, 2019, 03:21:32 PM
Preferably one without a beard  8(0(*
Oh but he was so masterful under Andrew neil's interrogation last night.  In fact it reminded me of a Holly Goodhead vs Vertigo Swirl showdown (Holly's the one with the beard, in case you were wondering).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on November 27, 2019, 03:49:22 PM
Please remember everyone that all views and opinions are welcome on this forum. Attacking sceptics or supporters merely because they have an opposing viewpoint is a breach of our rules. Please play fair and show consideration to others. TY. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 27, 2019, 03:51:51 PM
I'm looking forward to seeing how Neil handles Boris the Blusterer. 8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2019, 03:54:19 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 27, 2019, 03:51:51 PM
I'm looking forward to seeing how Neil handles Boris the Blusterer. 8)--))
Boris will have come down with something nasty by then, poor love. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 27, 2019, 03:55:30 PM
Probably - there does seem to be some difficulty in arranging a date - https://twitter.com/BBCNewsPR/status/1199697628545650688?s=19
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 27, 2019, 05:37:48 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 27, 2019, 03:37:35 PM
You mean you have evidence to support your idea ?

How would I have evidence of an OC employee taking Madeleine?  If I did I would have gone to the Police by now.

It is an idea yes,  have you got evidence that this couldn't have happened?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 27, 2019, 05:45:03 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 27, 2019, 05:37:48 PM
How would I have evidence of an OC employee taking Madeleine?  If I did I would have gone to the Police by now.

It is an idea yes,  have you got evidence that this couldn't have happened?

It doesn't work like that. Investigators can only advance an idea if there is something to support it.

However, considering that no one saw this alleged abductor, it wouldn't matter whether they were wearing a uniform, or were stark naked, as no one saw them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 27, 2019, 05:45:29 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 27, 2019, 05:37:48 PM
How would I have evidence of an OC employee taking Madeleine?  If I did I would have gone to the Police by now.

It is an idea yes,  have you got evidence that this couldn't have happened?

I don't have evidence that the McCanns didn't do it but that doesn't mean they didn't imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on November 27, 2019, 07:43:22 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 27, 2019, 05:45:29 PM
I don't have evidence that the McCanns didn't do it but that doesn't mean they didn't imo.

Evidence of what occurred to Maddie appears to be somewhat sparse in both directions but post disappearance is another story given what we know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 27, 2019, 07:45:29 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on November 27, 2019, 07:43:22 PM
Evidence of what occurred to Maddie appears to be somewhat sparse in both directions but post disappearance is another story given what we know.

In your opinion...remember
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 27, 2019, 08:24:23 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 27, 2019, 07:45:29 PM
In your opinion...remember
"Appears" and "what we know", are expressions of opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 27, 2019, 08:30:20 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 27, 2019, 08:24:23 PM
"Appears" and "what we know", are expressions of opinion.

I don't see... What we know.. As an expression of opinion... More an expression of fact... Angelo is implying certain facts exist... I don't agree
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 27, 2019, 11:27:50 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on November 27, 2019, 07:43:22 PM
Evidence of what occurred to Maddie appears to be somewhat sparse in both directions but post disappearance is another story given what we know.

What do we know?  Angelo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 28, 2019, 09:46:03 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 27, 2019, 05:45:03 PM
It doesn't work like that. Investigators can only advance an idea if there is something to support it.

However, considering that no one saw this alleged abductor, it wouldn't matter whether they were wearing a uniform, or were stark naked, as no one saw them.

It would matter if the person who took Madeleine from her bed wore a uniform of sorts.  Madeleine would have probably trusted that person.  IMO

Also when people were asked if they saw anyone hanging around 5a, would they mention an OC employee?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 28, 2019, 09:55:05 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 28, 2019, 09:46:03 AM
It would matter if the person who took Madeleine from her bed wore a uniform of sorts.  Madeleine would have probably trusted that person.  IMO

Also when people were asked if they saw anyone hanging around 5a, would they mention an OC employee?

Please explain how that would make any difference?

And just supposing the alleged abductor was wearing a uniform, how would advance anything ?


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 28, 2019, 10:08:24 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 28, 2019, 09:55:05 AM
Please explain how that would make any difference?

And just supposing the alleged abductor was wearing a uniform, how would advance anything ?

I think Lace has explained it perfectly well.  In my opinion in plain sight but invisible ... no-one is going to notice a laundryman, a repair man or anyone in a uniform being in a location where they could legitimately be expected to be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 28, 2019, 10:27:53 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 28, 2019, 10:08:24 AM
I think Lace has explained it perfectly well.  In my opinion in plain sight but invisible ... no-one is going to notice a laundryman, a repair man or anyone in a uniform being in a location where they could legitimately be expected to be.

And where does this idea lead?

It hinges on 'could'      No supporting evidence to give the slightest credence - IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on November 28, 2019, 11:59:27 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 28, 2019, 10:27:53 AM
And where does this idea lead?

It hinges on 'could'      No supporting evidence to give the slightest credence - IMO
Come on, open your mind - a man disguised as a laundryman / repairman / milkman mooching about at 10 pm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 28, 2019, 12:56:48 PM
Quote from: The General on November 28, 2019, 11:59:27 AM
Come on, open your mind - a man disguised as a laundryman / repairman / milkman mooching about at 10 pm.

Strangely no-one saw anyone in R Dr FGM after 8.30pm except for Gerry and Jes seeing each other. They didn't see the thirteen journeys up and down to block 5 by the group, the return of the Moyes from dinner, the arrival of the executive chef at the Tapas or the departure of the Carpenter's from the Tapas. They all managed to avoid seeing each other too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 28, 2019, 01:06:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 28, 2019, 12:56:48 PM
Strangely no-one saw anyone in R Dr FGM after 8.30pm except for Gerry and Jes seeing each other. They didn't see the thirteen journeys up and down to block 5 by the group, the return of the Moyes from dinner, the arrival of the executive chef at the Tapas or the departure of the Carpenter's from the Tapas. They all managed to avoid seeing each other too.


Spooky
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 28, 2019, 07:15:19 PM
For information: Birch on facebook yesterday.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 28, 2019, 07:16:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 28, 2019, 12:56:48 PM
Strangely no-one saw anyone in R Dr FGM after 8.30pm except for Gerry and Jes seeing each other. They didn't see the thirteen journeys up and down to block 5 by the group, the return of the Moyes from dinner, the arrival of the executive chef at the Tapas or the departure of the Carpenter's from the Tapas. They all managed to avoid seeing each other too.

Very strange indeed.

Who saw Mr and Mrs Moyes ... who saw the Tapas chef ... who saw the Carpenters crossing the road to block 6 ... who saw the employees leaving block 6 and passing block 5 ... who saw Mrs Murat doing anything ... who saw the Irish teenager who saw it all ... who saw the waiter having a quick ciggie ... why did only Jane Tanner see the occupant of block 4 wending his way into somewhere ... ???????????????????
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 28, 2019, 07:30:08 PM

Don't forget Gerry & Jerry not seeing Tanner

Perhaps  nobody saw anybody else, including Tanner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 28, 2019, 08:55:36 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 28, 2019, 07:30:08 PM
Don't forget Gerry & Jerry not seeing Tanner

Perhaps  nobody saw anybody else, including Tanner.

They don't count.  Gerry saw Jes.  Jes saw Gerry.  Just in case anyone thinks they weren't there Jane saw them both.  Jane would have been invisible if the Irish teenager who saw all hadn't seen her.  Did anyone see the Sperreys in the street ??? or anyone else who ate in the Tapas that evening.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2019, 08:56:51 PM
WOW.  There can only be one conclusion.  EVERYONE was in on it.  A bit like “Murder On the Orient Express”.  I solved it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 28, 2019, 09:27:22 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 28, 2019, 08:55:36 PM
They don't count. Gerry saw Jes.  Jes saw Gerry. Just in case anyone thinks they weren't there Jane saw them both.  Jane would have been invisible if the Irish teenager who saw all hadn't seen her.  Did anyone see the Sperreys in the street ??? or anyone else who ate in the Tapas that evening.


I'm sure the Carpenters saw each other as well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 28, 2019, 09:54:35 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 28, 2019, 09:27:22 PM

I'm sure the Carpenters saw each other as well.

Can you reeeeeeeally be sure 👽👽👽👽👽👽👽 it is all very strange after all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2019, 10:02:34 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 28, 2019, 09:27:22 PM

I'm sure the Carpenters saw each other as well.
Great band.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 28, 2019, 10:50:08 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 28, 2019, 08:55:36 PM
They don't count.  Gerry saw Jes.  Jes saw Gerry.  Just in case anyone thinks they weren't there Jane saw them both.  Jane would have been invisible if the Irish teenager who saw all hadn't seen her.  Did anyone see the Sperreys in the street ??? or anyone else who ate in the Tapas that evening.

What Irish teenager?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 28, 2019, 10:57:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 28, 2019, 10:50:08 PM
What Irish teenager?
The Irish teenager who saw it all but who no-one saw just as no-one saw anyone else on the street that night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 29, 2019, 12:01:19 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 28, 2019, 10:57:00 PM
The Irish teenager who saw it all but who no-one saw just as no-one saw anyone else on the street that night.

If you are reduced to saying Aoife Smith saw it all when in reality she was dining with her family in the Dolphin, then this forum has been reduced to a shambles.

British tracker dogs that are not trained to track, followed by a mysterious Irish teenager.

Not a good day, was it?  Perhaps your Thanksgiving turkey went down better?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 29, 2019, 12:54:53 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 29, 2019, 12:01:19 AM
If you are reduced to saying Aoife Smith saw it all when in reality she was dining with her family in the Dolphin, then this forum has been reduced to a shambles.

British tracker dogs that are not trained to track, followed by a mysterious Irish teenager.

Not a good day, was it?  Perhaps your Thanksgiving turkey went down better?

Nah, not Aoife.

I think that Brietta is referring to a teenage girl who was in the alleyway catching a quick fag away from her family.   It was reported in the early days and there are sufficient people here who will know about it, so I am not even trying for a cite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 29, 2019, 01:46:57 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on November 29, 2019, 12:01:19 AM
If you are reduced to saying Aoife Smith saw it all when in reality she was dining with her family in the Dolphin, then this forum has been reduced to a shambles.

British tracker dogs that are not trained to track, followed by a mysterious Irish teenager.

Not a good day, was it?  Perhaps your Thanksgiving turkey went down better?

Aoife Smith ??? who mentioned Aoife ... as the song goes ... only you  ... although the celebrated duo of Reis and Levy might possibly be able to tell you far more about the Irish teenager than I ever could.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3550.msg134591#msg134591
Interesting thread that one. 

I was enthralled to find you share Holly's 'thing' about witness statements and incrimination.
Snip
If you are correct that they were visiting 605, an excellent place to monitor the Tapas bar up to the rear of 5A, then they have put themselves into the suspect box.  Right place, right time, car to whizz Madeleine away.

Parked cars? Standard.  I suspect this helps to explain the Tannerman sighting. 
_______________________________________________________________________

As I said, interesting and a thread well worth revisiting. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3550.msg228314#msg228314
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 29, 2019, 02:11:29 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 29, 2019, 01:46:57 AM
As I said, interesting and a thread well worth revisiting. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3550.msg228314#msg228314
_______________________________________________________________________
Looking at that topic, there was an observation by DCI regarding the spelling of Gerry's name in Martin Smith's Jan 2008 statement...all in English & presumably signed by Martin as correct.
Why is Gerry referred to as "Gerard" 4 times?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P16/16_VOLUME_XVIa_Page_4136.jpg
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3550.msg228331#msg228331
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 29, 2019, 06:22:20 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 28, 2019, 10:57:00 PM
The Irish teenager who saw it all but who no-one saw just as no-one saw anyone else on the street that night.

The Irish teenager who may or may not have actually existed, you mean? I was discussing real people.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 29, 2019, 11:04:37 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 29, 2019, 06:22:20 AM
The Irish teenager who may or may not have actually existed, you mean? I was discussing real people.

Just because they are not real people does that mean they do not exist particularly if married to a grain of truth; Goncalo Amaral by his account speaks to many of them while respecting their right to privacy by keeping them all anonymous.  Whether they may or may not exist has never been questioned by the sceptics who comment on them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 29, 2019, 01:09:20 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 29, 2019, 11:04:37 AM
Just because they are not real people does that mean they do not exist particularly if married to a grain of truth; Goncalo Amaral by his account speaks to many of them while respecting their right to privacy by keeping them all anonymous.  Whether they may or may not exist has never been questioned by the sceptics who comment on them.

The Irish teenager was a rumour imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 29, 2019, 01:14:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 29, 2019, 01:09:20 PM
The Irish teenager was a rumour imo.
Oh ... I would never have guessed.  Why do you think the rumour might have been started by Reis who first reported it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 29, 2019, 01:56:08 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 28, 2019, 08:55:36 PM
They don't count.  Gerry saw Jes.  Jes saw Gerry.  Just in case anyone thinks they weren't there Jane saw them both.  Jane would have been invisible if the Irish teenager who saw all hadn't seen her.  Did anyone see the Sperreys in the street ??? or anyone else who ate in the Tapas that evening.

Nope,Jane says she saw them there,whether they were there we'll see when Jimmy abductor is in court and the defence gets to question the chief prosecution witness's.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 29, 2019, 02:09:10 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 28, 2019, 10:08:24 AM
I think Lace has explained it perfectly well.  In my opinion in plain sight but invisible ... no-one is going to notice a laundryman, a repair man or anyone in a uniform being in a location where they could legitimately be expected to be.

Well Smithy was never described as wearing a uniform,kinda narrows it down a bit.
Nor was tannerman come to that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on November 30, 2019, 09:48:21 AM
Happy Saint Andrew's day to all.
A nice crisp and frosty morning here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 30, 2019, 11:13:09 AM
Quote from: Erngath on November 30, 2019, 09:48:21 AM
Happy Saint Andrew's day to all.
A nice crisp and frosty morning here.

Pissing down here.  Again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 30, 2019, 11:49:28 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 30, 2019, 11:13:09 AM
Pissing down here.  Again.
Should change your name to RainingInLourdes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 30, 2019, 12:46:01 PM
Quote from: Myster on November 30, 2019, 11:49:28 AM
Should change your name to RainingInLourdes.

Call me Your Majesty.  It rains a lot in Aquitaine as well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 01, 2019, 11:48:28 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 27, 2019, 10:56:53 AM
It's the same old refrain; the supporters are caring, sympathetic, empathetic and lovely in every way. Then comes the nasty sideswipe at the uncaring, unsympathetic, unempathetic and unlovely sceptics. White is white and black is black and grey doesn't exist.

All IMO obviously.

How observant of you G. You and the rest of us Independent thinkers can see the wolf through the sheeps clothing.


Mwahahahahahahah
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 01, 2019, 06:02:05 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on December 01, 2019, 11:48:28 AM
How observant of you G. You and the rest of us Independent thinkers can see the wolf through the sheeps clothing.


Mwahahahahahahah
Oh dear, how “special” you are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 03, 2019, 11:48:19 AM
Quote from: barrier on November 29, 2019, 02:09:10 PM
Well Smithy was never described as wearing a uniform,kinda narrows it down a bit.
Nor was tannerman come to that.

That is because he is the accomplice.   The person who takes Madeleine from her bed,  could have been wearing a sort of uniform, so that if Madeleine woke up,  he/she could say it was ok she was working at the Ocean Club and was taking her to Mummy,   then this person passes her out to the accomplice and goes back to work at the Ocean Club.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 03, 2019, 11:50:58 AM
Quote from: barrier on November 29, 2019, 02:09:10 PM
Well Smithy was never described as wearing a uniform,kinda narrows it down a bit.
Nor was tannerman come to that.

That is because he  may have been the accomplice.   If the person who took Madeleine from her bed was wearing some sort of uniform,  if Madeleine had woken up he/she could say 'its ok I work here and Mummy asked me to take you down to her'  then this person hands Madeleine over to the accomplice and goes back to work at the Ocean Club.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 03, 2019, 12:01:47 PM
Quote from: Lace on December 03, 2019, 11:50:58 AM
That is because he  may have been the accomplice.   If the person who took Madeleine from her bed was wearing some sort of uniform,  if Madeleine had woken up he/she could say 'its ok I work here and Mummy asked me to take you down to her'  then this person hands Madeleine over to the accomplice and goes back to work at the Ocean Club.
You had me at 'goes back to work at the Ocean Club'. And you suggest Gerry would have to be pathological to either carry on playing tennis, or hide his daughter's body and calmly chat to Jez. Isn't this the same? Maria the chef, recruited to conduct child abduction, then coolly walks back and flip the steaks over.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 03, 2019, 12:03:13 PM
Quote from: The General on December 03, 2019, 12:01:47 PM
You had me at 'goes back to work at the Ocean Club'. And you suggest Gerry would have to be pathological to either carry on playing tennis, or hide his daughter's body and calmly chat to Jez. Isn't this the same? Maria the chef, recruited to conduct child abduction, then coolly walks back and flip the steaks over.

The difference being it was Gerry's daughter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 03, 2019, 12:07:48 PM
Quote from: Lace on December 03, 2019, 12:03:13 PM
The difference being it was Gerry's daughter.
Granted. But you'd have to be a very specific chef, with a very specific set of skills, in the Algarve, off season. Good luck with finding a chef, let alone one skilled in child abduction. This phantom, it's a female, right? English speaking, trustworthy, blends in nicely - FOR SEVERAL MONTHS BEFOREHAND? They played the long game?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 03, 2019, 12:34:01 PM
Quote from: The General on December 03, 2019, 12:07:48 PM
Granted. But you'd have to be a very specific chef, with a very specific set of skills, in the Algarve, off season. Good luck with finding a chef, let alone one skilled in child abduction. This phantom, it's a female, right? English speaking, trustworthy, blends in nicely - FOR SEVERAL MONTHS BEFOREHAND? They played the long game?

"If you are looking for ransom, I can tell you I don't have money. But what I do have are a very particular set of skills, skills I have acquired over a very long career.......I flip burgers & steal kids  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 03, 2019, 12:38:30 PM
Quote from: Lace on December 03, 2019, 12:03:13 PM
The difference being it was Gerry's daughter.

You obviously think that there are occasions when people are incapable of functioning. Is that a fact or are people's reactions as varied as their personalities?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 03, 2019, 01:05:21 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 03, 2019, 12:34:01 PM
"If you are looking for ransom, I can tell you I don't have money. But what I do have are a very particular set of skills, skills I have acquired over a very long career.......I flip burgers & steal kids  @)(++(*

I didn't mention the chef The General did.

I wonder what occupations other abductors have had,  do you think they are all unemployed?   That would make it a bit easier for finding suspects though wouldn't it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 03, 2019, 01:08:37 PM
Quote from: The General on December 03, 2019, 12:07:48 PM
Granted. But you'd have to be a very specific chef, with a very specific set of skills, in the Algarve, off season. Good luck with finding a chef, let alone one skilled in child abduction. This phantom, it's a female, right? English speaking, trustworthy, blends in nicely - FOR SEVERAL MONTHS BEFOREHAND? They played the long game?

Why are you talking about the chef?    I didn't mention the chef I said an OC employee.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 03, 2019, 01:12:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 03, 2019, 12:38:30 PM
You obviously think that there are occasions when people are incapable of functioning. Is that a fact or are people's reactions as varied as their personalities?

The crisis  councillor a specialist in his field said that Kate and Gerry were not functioning in the aftermath of their daughters disappearance.   Witnesses saw Gerry crying on the shoulder of his friend,  breaking down on the floor.  I'm sorry but Gerry was not acting like a father who was not concerned about his daughter.  To be eating dinner laughing and joking one minute to behaving in an absolute distraught way, well give him an Oscar.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 03, 2019, 01:57:08 PM
Quote from: Lace on December 03, 2019, 01:12:32 PM
The crisis  councillor a specialist in his field said that Kate and Gerry were not functioning in the aftermath of their daughters disappearance.   Witnesses saw Gerry crying on the shoulder of his friend,  breaking down on the floor.  I'm sorry but Gerry was not acting like a father who was not concerned about his daughter.  To be eating dinner laughing and joking one minute to behaving in an absolute distraught way, well give him an Oscar.

Perhaps they should have. He proved capable of searching upstairs in block 5, responding to Mrs Fenn, the GNR and the PJ, deleting his phone history and making many phone calls.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 03, 2019, 03:11:03 PM
Quote from: Lace on December 03, 2019, 01:05:21 PM
I didn't mention the chef The General did.

I wonder what occupations other abductors have had,  do you think they are all unemployed?   That would make it a bit easier for finding suspects though wouldn't it?
Not the same. You're suggesting that this particular abductor was recruited for the task. Unless, of course, you're suggesting that this employee decided to take advantage of a chance opportunity, pass MM to an accomplice - then go about their business in the OC? This unflappable female abductor (of indeterminate role at the OC), with such powers of persuasion, guile, cunning and meticulous planning. Now who should get an Oscar? She's back stirring the meatballs ten minutes later ffs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 03, 2019, 03:33:47 PM

'She's back stirring the meatballs ten minutes later ffs.'

 @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 03, 2019, 04:31:48 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 03, 2019, 03:33:47 PM
'She's back stirring the meatballs ten minutes later ffs.'

 @)(++(*

Who is 'she'  I didn't mention any particular  OC employee.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 03, 2019, 04:33:08 PM
Quote from: The General on December 03, 2019, 03:11:03 PM
Not the same. You're suggesting that this particular abductor was recruited for the task. Unless, of course, you're suggesting that this employee decided to take advantage of a chance opportunity, pass MM to an accomplice - then go about their business in the OC? This unflappable female abductor (of indeterminate role at the OC), with such powers of persuasion, guile, cunning and meticulous planning. Now who should get an Oscar? She's back stirring the meatballs ten minutes later ffs.

Female abductor?   I didn't mention anyone.   It could even be someone who happened to get an OC badge.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 03, 2019, 04:40:01 PM
Quote from: Lace on December 03, 2019, 04:33:08 PM
Female abductor?   I didn't mention anyone.  It could even be someone who happened to get an OC badge.

If there was such a person, of course.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 03, 2019, 04:41:23 PM
Quote from: Lace on December 03, 2019, 04:33:08 PM
Female abductor?   I didn't mention anyone.   It could even be someone who happened to get an OC badge.
So this abductor could be a male? (Perhaps an English speaking maintenance operative, or middle management). Persuading MM to trot off to see her mummy, leaving her siblings alone?
pfffft.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 03, 2019, 05:11:34 PM
Quote from: The General on December 03, 2019, 04:41:23 PM
So this abductor could be a male? (Perhaps an English speaking maintenance operative, or middle management). Persuading MM to trot off to see her mummy, leaving her siblings alone?
pfffft.

Madeleine would be very sleepy,  if she saw someone wearing an OC badge or if the person said he/she worked for the OC then I think she may have been reassured enough to be carried away.  IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 03, 2019, 05:18:07 PM
Quote from: Lace on December 03, 2019, 05:11:34 PM
Madeleine would be very sleepy,  if she saw someone wearing an OC badge or if the person said he/she worked for the OC then I think she may have been reassured enough to be carried away.  IMO
But I thought this window of opportunity was negligible, given the rigorous checking regime and the fact the Tapas Bar was essentially like dining in your back yard?
The audacity of these disguised, elusive, ingenious, persuasive, successful abductors - who can also knock up a mean chilli dog and conduct a kids club wi.........hang on.........kids club! Why didn't this criminal mastermind take their opportunity when there were 30 kids to choose from, being chaperoned by two teenage girls? Or were they waiting to cherry pick David's progeny?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 03, 2019, 05:43:20 PM
I find it odd that some people here seem to believe that taking part in a planned abduction of someone else’s kid would have the same debilitating emotional and physical impact on that person as someone discovering their child had just been killed in an accident and deciding to hastily dispose of the body.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 03, 2019, 05:53:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 03, 2019, 05:43:20 PM
I find it odd that some people here seem to believe that taking part in a planned abduction of someone else’s kid would have the same debilitating emotional and physical impact on that person as someone discovering their child had just been killed in an accident and deciding to hastily dispose of the body.

Just because you assume otherwise?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 03, 2019, 05:54:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 03, 2019, 05:53:06 PM
Just because you assume otherwise?
I beg your pardon?  It’s not me doing the assuming, if you care to re-read my post.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 03, 2019, 06:05:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 03, 2019, 05:54:40 PM
I beg your pardon?  It’s not me doing the assuming, if you care to re-read my post.

If you're not assuming that a relative would react differently than a stranger what do you find odd?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 03, 2019, 06:12:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 03, 2019, 06:05:52 PM
If you're not assuming that a relative would react differently than a stranger what do you find odd?
I’ve told you what I find odd, the belief that a stranger would be just as emotionally and physically affected by kidnapping a living child as a father would be on discovering his own flesh and blood dead.  Now tell me that I’m the odd one!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 03, 2019, 09:46:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 03, 2019, 12:38:30 PM
You obviously think that there are occasions when people are incapable of functioning. Is that a fact or are people's reactions as varied as their personalities?

psychopaths and serial killers are highly functional after they commit serious crimes. Sometimes even on a high-elated even.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 03, 2019, 10:00:08 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on December 03, 2019, 09:46:44 PM
psychopaths and serial killers are highly functional after they commit serious crimes. Sometimes even on a high-elated even.
Exactly.  And that is why a child abductor may be able to return to work straight after committing such a serious crime. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 03, 2019, 10:09:22 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 03, 2019, 10:00:08 PM
Exactly.  And that is why a child abductor may be able to return to work straight after committing such a serious crime.

Yes, even go and have a pudding after main course...

Oh we agree on something at last.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 03, 2019, 10:10:40 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on December 03, 2019, 09:46:44 PM
psychopaths and serial killers are highly functional after they commit serious crimes. Sometimes even on a high-elated even.

Adrenaline-related I expect. Focuses the mind.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 03, 2019, 10:18:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 03, 2019, 10:10:40 PM
Adrenaline-related I expect. Focuses the mind.


Yes. Many serial killers talk about an urge-comparing it to  an addiction.

There is some talk that paedophilia is a mental illness. it isn't, it is a sexual preference. on many levels. It is learned behaviour in many instances.  Good example levi bellend
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on December 05, 2019, 01:49:33 AM
https://www.portugalresident.com/judges-pre-empt-trial-and-expel-one-of-their-own/


By Natasha Donn -4th December 2019
In an extraordinary move, the Superior Council of Magistrates has expelled one of their own before his ‘culpability’ has been proved in a court of law.

Rui Rangel is the judge who consistently sided with former prime minister José Sócrates in his dozens of appeal bids against prosecution for corruption (click here), and indeed tried to close down the investigation, now hearing pre-trial evidence (click here).

He is also the judge who decided to return millions of euros worth of confiscated property to the former head of BES Angola who has never fully answered questions on the bank’s missing hundreds of millions (click here).

Explain reports today, Mr Rangel may appeal the Superior Council of Magistrates’ decision, in which case his expulsion could be suspended. But it is definitely the first time that a disciplinary process of this kind has been decided before the lawmaker in question has faced formal accusation.

Rangel is “suspected of various crimes”, explained Público earlier this year when he ‘returned to active duty’ after a period of suspension relating to the disciplinary process.

He is an ‘arguido’ (official suspect) in the Operation Lex investigation (a spin-off from another probe, involving corruption in international trade, tax fraud, money-laundering and influence peddling click here).

His name has also been linked to other investigations. Thus the disciplinary process was all about whether or not Mr Rangel has been acting as a judge should act, or whether he left himself open to corruption. Reports explain how “he was investigated to determine whether he had been receiving money ‘unduly’, and whether his lifestyle and assets reflected his earnings”.

Mr Rangel’s lawyer told journalists during in October that proof collected during a criminal investigation “cannot be transported to a disciplinary process” – particularly as his client refutes having committed any crimes.

But Mr Rangel’s “bank accounts and the thousands of euros that were in the possession of lawyer Santos Martins, but used by the judge as if they were his, culminated in the most serious decision by the Superior Council of Magistrates”, writes Correio da Manhã today.

Also ‘disciplined’ by the council was Mr Rangel’s estranged wife and judge herself Fátima Galante.

She faces compulsory retirement, although she will be allowed to keep her pension and “some perks of the magistracy”, adds CM.

Coincidentally, the paper is running another story in today’s edition concerning another judge which it claims is under investigation for “allegedly furnishing information on judicial cases” to a Viseu hotel boss, “in exchange for money, stays in hotels and the use of a Mercedes car”.

The hotel boss received an initial jail sentence of five years and three months, but this was reduced on appeal to four years and three months, suspended.

CM says it has tried to contact both the hotel boss and the judge in question – who has yet to be cited as an ‘arguido’ – to no avail.
=========================================================

For those unfamiliar with the name Rui Rangel, he contributed to Amaral's book Justiça e Delinquência & has appeared in Portuguese TV shows commenting on Madeleine's case.
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/06/justica-e-delinquencia-book.html

Rangel's ex-wife involved in corruption in the late 90's 
https://observador.pt/especiais/caso-patuleia-a-primeira-vez-que-fatima-galante-foi-investigada-por-corrupcao/

 It really makes me wonder why Amaral ever needed the public to fund his legal defence.....



 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 06, 2019, 10:13:00 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on December 03, 2019, 10:18:02 PM

Yes. Many serial killers talk about an urge-comparing it to  an addiction.

There is some talk that paedophilia is a mental illness. it isn't, it is a sexual preference. on many levels. It is learned behaviour in many instances.  Good example levi bellend

I expect there are many possible reasons why people do what they do. Just as there are many reactions possible to a traumatic event. Anyone who claims to 'know' what another person might be capable of is fooling themselves in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 06, 2019, 05:50:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 06, 2019, 10:13:00 AM
I expect there are many possible reasons why people do what they do. Just as there are many reactions possible to a traumatic event. Anyone who claims to 'know' what another person might be capable of is fooling themselves in my opinion.
You believe you know what the McCanns are capable of, do you not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 06, 2019, 07:59:37 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 06, 2019, 05:50:56 PM
You believe you know what the McCanns are capable of, do you not?

Of course I don't. Neither does anyone else except possibly they themselves.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 06, 2019, 08:09:07 PM
In the meantime we have an exemplary justice system where a criminal is let out by mistake then goes on a rape and sexual assault spree,that following hard on the heels of a convicted terrorist allowed out to kill.


The convicted burglar had been released from prison following a probation error in February before he embarked on a cocaine and vodka-fuelled rampage.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-50684470
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 06, 2019, 08:23:03 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 06, 2019, 08:09:07 PM
In the meantime we have an exemplary justice system where a criminal is let out by mistake then goes on a rape and sexual assault spree,that following hard on the heels of a convicted terrorist allowed out to kill.


The convicted burglar had been released from prison following a probation error in February before he embarked on a cocaine and vodka-fuelled rampage.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-50684470

Convicted burglars in Portugal are nice guys who would never dream of doing anything untoward like that though would they. 

Can you give examples of British judges being suspended ~ one of whom is a "True Crime" television personality and author ??
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 06, 2019, 10:26:23 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 06, 2019, 08:09:07 PM
In the meantime we have an exemplary justice system where a criminal is let out by mistake then goes on a rape and sexual assault spree,that following hard on the heels of a convicted terrorist allowed out to kill.


The convicted burglar had been released from prison following a probation error in February before he embarked on a cocaine and vodka-fuelled rampage.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-50684470
A truly evil McCann.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on December 06, 2019, 10:50:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 06, 2019, 10:26:23 PM
A truly evil McCann.

Is he related?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 06, 2019, 11:36:01 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 06, 2019, 10:50:40 PM
Is he related?
Is that your idea of a joke?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 07, 2019, 01:53:55 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 06, 2019, 10:50:40 PM
Is he related?

Sadie might be able to help  she has all that evidence about the bloodline. OMG the thought...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 12:18:07 PM
There are cultural differences between the UK and Portugal which didn't help in the Madeleine McCann case in my opinion. Like the Spanish, the Portuguese way of life treats children very differently. In both countries it's not unusual for children to be out with their parents all evening. The British habit of going out without children is much less common. Hence the incomprehension of Portuguese people towards the McCann's childcare arrangements.

Respect for one's 'elders and betters' survives in Portugal too. Treating officials as equals is frowned on and is likely to cause problems. Telling the PJ how to conduct an investigation would be more likely to be seen as lack of respect than to be seen as helpful imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 02:00:15 PM
It seems like the GNR in Albufeira are losing patience with drunken Brits, just as the Spanish police did;
https://metro.co.uk/2019/08/02/fed-portuguese-police-crack-drunken-british-tourists-10507015/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2019, 02:23:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 02:00:15 PM
It seems like the GNR in Albufeira are losing patience with drunken Brits, just as the Spanish police did;
https://metro.co.uk/2019/08/02/fed-portuguese-police-crack-drunken-british-tourists-10507015/

its a  a paramilitary security force..

would the uk public accept paramilitaries on the streets here. Personally I would like to see it.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 03:26:26 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 08, 2019, 02:23:38 PM
its a  a paramilitary security force..

would the uk public accept paramilitaries on the streets here. Personally I would like to see it.

As in other European countries it's not unusual. The UK took a different approach.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2019, 04:41:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 03:26:26 PM
As in other European countries it's not unusual. The UK took a different approach.

I think in Portugal Spain and France the police know they can get away with far more violence...in prtugal....a new wave of fascism seems to be on the rise

https://www.huckmag.com/perspectives/activism-2/in-portugal-protestors-march-against-a-new-wave-of-fascism/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2019, 05:05:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 02:00:15 PM
It seems like the GNR in Albufeira are losing patience with drunken Brits, just as the Spanish police did;
https://metro.co.uk/2019/08/02/fed-portuguese-police-crack-drunken-british-tourists-10507015/
Perhaps the drunken Brits should stop going there and then see how the Portuguese like it - all quiet, with just tumbleweed roaming the streets and passing the empty bars.  Post Brexit the youth of Britain should be forced to holiday in Margate and Cleethopes anyway, much better for the environment, for local businesses etc.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 05:55:04 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 08, 2019, 05:05:02 PM
Perhaps the drunken Brits should stop going there and then see how the Portuguese like it - all quiet, with just tumbleweed roaming the streets and passing the empty bars.  Post Brexit the youth of Britain should be forced to holiday in Margate and Cleethopes anyway, much better for the environment, for local businesses etc.

Perhaps British people need to change their ways and show some sense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2019, 06:12:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 05:55:04 PM
Perhaps British people need to change their ways and show some sense.

Is it only British youths getting drunk in these resorts.. Or are you just on your normal anti British  rant

Is it all British people you have a problem with or just this small minority
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2019, 06:17:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 05:55:04 PM
Perhaps British people need to change their ways and show some sense.
Perhaps you’d like to start a campaign to instruct the British on how to behave abroad, I’m sure it would be time better spent than examining the minutiae of the Madeleine McCann case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2019, 06:19:10 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 08, 2019, 06:12:17 PM
Is it only British youths getting drunk in these resorts.. Or are you just on your normal anti British  rant

Is it all British people you have a problem with or just this small minority
1.83m British tourists to Portugal last year, how many needed to be hit round the head with a Portuguese truncheon, I wonder?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2019, 06:22:38 PM
Apparently the Portuguese are very worried about a sharp decline in British tourists to their country (and it’s not even the McCanns fault this time) and are trying to lure the bloody Brit troublemakers back.  https://www.euronews.com/2019/08/02/portugal-tourism-growth-slowed-sharply-as-fewer-brits-visit
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 08, 2019, 06:26:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 08, 2019, 04:41:44 PM
I think in Portugal Spain and France the police know they can get away with far more violence...in prtugal....a new wave of fascism seems to be on the rise

https://www.huckmag.com/perspectives/activism-2/in-portugal-protestors-march-against-a-new-wave-of-fascism/

Cobblers.

Do you have any clue as to what fascism means?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2019, 07:14:34 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on December 08, 2019, 06:26:50 PM
Cobblers.

Do you have any clue as to what fascism means?

And cobblers to you too... With bells on... Seeing as you've lowered the standard of debate I may as, well respond.

Yes I know exactly what fascism means... Portugal has a history of it in case you didn't know
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2019, 07:15:51 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 08, 2019, 06:19:10 PM
1.83m British tourists to Portugal last year, how many needed to be hit round the head with a Portuguese truncheon, I wonder?

According to gunit all of them...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 08, 2019, 07:17:22 PM

1.83 million visitors, & none of them managed to lose any children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2019, 07:40:46 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 08, 2019, 07:17:22 PM
1.83 million visitors, & none of them managed to lose any children.
Then they must all be brilliant parents and worthy of praise not censure and truncheons round the head.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 08:46:29 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 08, 2019, 07:14:34 PM
And cobblers to you too... With bells on... Seeing as you've lowered the standard of debate I may as, well respond.

Yes I know exactly what fascism means... Portugal has a history of it in case you didn't know

Are you referring to the Estado Novo? (1926-1974). Not purely Fascist imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 08, 2019, 09:00:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 08:46:29 PM
Are you referring to the Estado Novo? (1926-1974). Not purely Fascist imo.

What exactly purely was it then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 09:59:01 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 08, 2019, 09:00:12 PM
What exactly purely was it then?

However, the fascist governments of Portugal and Spain did not take part in World War II, and stayed in power until the 1970s. Many scholars consider these governments to have been or evolved into traditionalist and conservative rather than fascist. Fascism, while supporting order and stability as conservatism does, wants to transform society in new ways.
https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 08, 2019, 10:03:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 09:59:01 PM
However, the fascist governments of Portugal and Spain did not take part in World War II, and stayed in power until the 1970s. Many scholars consider these governments to have been or evolved into traditionalist and conservative rather than fascist. Fascism, while supporting order and stability as conservatism does, wants to transform society in new ways.
https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

My husband was in Portugal on a Naval Mission before The Glorious Revolution and he said it was scary and definitely Fascist.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2019, 10:10:53 PM
Some people will argue back is white IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 08, 2019, 10:24:34 PM

Mendes.  Portuguese Ambassador to Marseille during the war.  He was dispossessed and banished from Portugal by Salazar because he helped to save a few Jews.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 08, 2019, 10:51:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 09:59:01 PM
However, the fascist governments of Portugal and Spain did not take part in World War II, and stayed in power until the 1970s. Many scholars consider these governments to have been or evolved into traditionalist and conservative rather than fascist. Fascism, while supporting order and stability as conservatism does, wants to transform society in new ways.
https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
(https://www.pablopicasso.org/images/paintings/guernica.jpg)
Guernica

At about 16:30 on Monday, 26 April 1937, warplanes of the German Condor Legion, commanded by Colonel Wolfram von Richthofen, bombed Guernica for about two hours. Germany, at this time led by Hitler, had lent material support to the Nationalists and were using the war as an opportunity to test out new weapons and tactics. Later, intense aerial bombardment became a crucial preliminary step in the Blitzkrieg tactic.
https://www.pablopicasso.org/guernica.jsp
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 11:54:39 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 08, 2019, 10:03:54 PM
My husband was in Portugal on a Naval Mission before The Glorious Revolution and he said it was scary and definitely Fascist.

Well that's one opinion, but not exactly an expert one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2019, 11:55:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2019, 11:54:39 PM
Well that's one opinion, but not exactly an expert one.
And yours is I suppose?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 12:18:41 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 08, 2019, 10:51:44 PM
(https://www.pablopicasso.org/images/paintings/guernica.jpg)
Guernica

At about 16:30 on Monday, 26 April 1937, warplanes of the German Condor Legion, commanded by Colonel Wolfram von Richthofen, bombed Guernica for about two hours. Germany, at this time led by Hitler, had lent material support to the Nationalists and were using the war as an opportunity to test out new weapons and tactics. Later, intense aerial bombardment became a crucial preliminary step in the Blitzkrieg tactic.
https://www.pablopicasso.org/guernica.jsp

And?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 09, 2019, 03:00:25 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 08, 2019, 10:51:44 PM
(https://www.pablopicasso.org/images/paintings/guernica.jpg)
Guernica

At about 16:30 on Monday, 26 April 1937, warplanes of the German Condor Legion, commanded by Colonel Wolfram von Richthofen, bombed Guernica for about two hours. Germany, at this time led by Hitler, had lent material support to the Nationalists and were using the war as an opportunity to test out new weapons and tactics. Later, intense aerial bombardment became a crucial preliminary step in the Blitzkrieg tactic.
https://www.pablopicasso.org/guernica.jsp

Guernica is not in Portugal.

It's the SPANISH civil war.

And it has been totally misrepresented.

Other than that .......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 04:24:10 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on December 09, 2019, 03:00:25 AM
Guernica is not in Portugal.

It's the SPANISH civil war.

And it has been totally misrepresented.

Other than that .......

(http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/images/guernica3.jpg)
Guernica
"The Bombing of Guernica, 1937," EyeWitness to History, www.eyewitnesstohistory.com (2005).


You said ...
"Cobblers.

Do you have any clue as to what fascism means?"   http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg564847#msg564847
___________________________________________________________

Lest we forget ... "a picture is worth more than  thousand words" and far from 'misrepresenting' fascism 'Guernica' has always been for me, the epitome of the evils of the fascism which my parents' generation fought a war against.
A war against fascism in Europe which in the beginning gave us Guernica; a war against fascism the justness of which was proved when the allies liberated the concentration camps of Europe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 07:45:35 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 04:24:10 AM
(http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/images/guernica3.jpg)
Guernica
"The Bombing of Guernica, 1937," EyeWitness to History, www.eyewitnesstohistory.com (2005).


You said ...
"Cobblers.

Do you have any clue as to what fascism means?"   http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg564847#msg564847
___________________________________________________________

Lest we forget ... "a picture is worth more than  thousand words" and far from 'misrepresenting' fascism 'Guernica' has always been for me, the epitome of the evils of the fascism which my parents' generation fought a war against.
A war against fascism in Europe which in the beginning gave us Guernica; a war against fascism the justness of which was proved when the allies liberated the concentration camps of Europe.

I think you are confused, but please don't try to equate Portugal with Nazi Germany.

The number of refugees that has escaped through Portugal during the war has estimates that range from one hundred thousand to one million, an impressive number considering the size of the country's population at that time (circa 6 million).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Portugal#World_War_II
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 09, 2019, 08:01:47 AM
Mussolini’s Italy was a fascist state but they weren’t as beastly to the Jews as Hitler’s Germany, so not sure what that has got to do with the price of fish.  I don’t think Jew-hating is a distinctly fascist thing - just ask Jeremy Corbyn.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 10:12:24 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 09, 2019, 08:01:47 AM
Mussolini’s Italy was a fascist state but they weren’t as beastly to the Jews as Hitler’s Germany, so not sure what that has got to do with the price of fish.  I don’t think Jew-hating is a distinctly fascist thing - just ask Jeremy Corbyn.

I agree. Trying to relate the two things is a non starter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 10:32:20 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 09, 2019, 08:01:47 AM
Mussolini’s Italy was a fascist state but they weren’t as beastly to the Jews as Hitler’s Germany, so not sure what that has got to do with the price of fish.  I don’t think Jew-hating is a distinctly fascist thing - just ask Jeremy Corbyn.
Opportunity and scale being two main differences. Both states began fostering contempt for supposed cabals of 'judeo-bolsheviks' being to blame for The Great Depression. Hitler, the opportunist and absolute lunatic seized the model and used it at a time of total flux to instil National Socialism at a time when the Weimar Republic was on its knees. Italy was still a monarchy aligned to the Catholic church past 1945, and Mussolini was actually arrested by the King in '43 - and the country then fell in to civil war - during a war!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 10:41:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 07:45:35 AM
I think you are confused, but please don't try to equate Portugal with Nazi Germany.

The number of refugees that has escaped through Portugal during the war has estimates that range from one hundred thousand to one million, an impressive number considering the size of the country's population at that time (circa 6 million).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Portugal#World_War_II

Snip
During World War II under the dictatorship of Salazar, Portugal was allegedly a so-called “neutral” nation, however it was clearly and unofficially pro-Hitler.
The Portuguese government issued the wicked “Circular 14” to all its diplomats to deny safe haven to refugees, including explicitly Jews, Russians and stateless persons.
But a man defied these dreadful orders and raised the voice of his consciousness, saving 30.000 persons from a certain death.
Aristides de Sousa Mendes was severely punished by Salazar, who deprived him from his job and from any form of earning a living, which proved to be tragic, since Sousa Mendes had 15 children, who were blacklisted and prevented to attend university.
____________________________________________________________________

  ... Aristides de Sousa Mendes informed the Rabi that he would issue the visas, for he knew that the refugees were doomed to die on the horrific Nazi concentration camps.

The house of the family – Casa do Passal located in Cabanas de Viriato, Viseu – was repossessed by the bank and eventually sold to cover debts.
The Judaic Association of Lisbon was the only help that the Sousa Mendes family had, providing them with food and medical assistance.
Aristides de Sousa Mendes died on April 3rd 1954 in poverty, but he fought for the justice of his deeds until his last breath.
https://www.centerofportugal.com/article/aristides-de-sousa-mendes-the-insubordinate-consul/
____________________________________________________________________



Did you even bother to look up Eleanor's post about Aristides de Sousa Mendes: the insubordinate consul  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg564861#msg564861 who was one of the Greatest and bravest sons of Portugal who suffered because he followed his conscience in the stance he took against fascism?


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 10:49:46 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 10:41:10 AM
Snip
During World War II under the dictatorship of Salazar, Portugal was allegedly a so-called “neutral” nation, however it was clearly and unofficially pro-Hitler.
The Portuguese government issued the wicked “Circular 14” to all its diplomats to deny safe haven to refugees, including explicitly Jews, Russians and stateless persons.
But a man defied these dreadful orders and raised the voice of his consciousness, saving 30.000 persons from a certain death.
Aristides de Sousa Mendes was severely punished by Salazar, who deprived him from his job and from any form of earning a living, which proved to be tragic, since Sousa Mendes had 15 children, who were blacklisted and prevented to attend university.
____________________________________________________________________

  ... Aristides de Sousa Mendes informed the Rabi that he would issue the visas, for he knew that the refugees were doomed to die on the horrific Nazi concentration camps.

The house of the family – Casa do Passal located in Cabanas de Viriato, Viseu – was repossessed by the bank and eventually sold to cover debts.
The Judaic Association of Lisbon was the only help that the Sousa Mendes family had, providing them with food and medical assistance.
Aristides de Sousa Mendes died on April 3rd 1954 in poverty, but he fought for the justice of his deeds until his last breath.
https://www.centerofportugal.com/article/aristides-de-sousa-mendes-the-insubordinate-consul/
____________________________________________________________________



Did you even bother to look up Eleanor's post about Aristides de Sousa Mendes: the insubordinate consul  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg564861#msg564861 who was one of the Greatest and bravest sons of Portugal who suffered because he followed his conscience in the stance he took against fascism?
Very admirable, but this too is a little more complicated. Circular 14 was more an economic decision, rather than an ideology. And, in fact, when the pogrom started Salazar made a stand as I recall.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 11:10:09 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 10:41:10 AM
Snip
During World War II under the dictatorship of Salazar, Portugal was allegedly a so-called “neutral” nation, however it was clearly and unofficially pro-Hitler.
The Portuguese government issued the wicked “Circular 14” to all its diplomats to deny safe haven to refugees, including explicitly Jews, Russians and stateless persons.
But a man defied these dreadful orders and raised the voice of his consciousness, saving 30.000 persons from a certain death.
Aristides de Sousa Mendes was severely punished by Salazar, who deprived him from his job and from any form of earning a living, which proved to be tragic, since Sousa Mendes had 15 children, who were blacklisted and prevented to attend university.
____________________________________________________________________

  ... Aristides de Sousa Mendes informed the Rabi that he would issue the visas, for he knew that the refugees were doomed to die on the horrific Nazi concentration camps.

The house of the family – Casa do Passal located in Cabanas de Viriato, Viseu – was repossessed by the bank and eventually sold to cover debts.
The Judaic Association of Lisbon was the only help that the Sousa Mendes family had, providing them with food and medical assistance.
Aristides de Sousa Mendes died on April 3rd 1954 in poverty, but he fought for the justice of his deeds until his last breath.
https://www.centerofportugal.com/article/aristides-de-sousa-mendes-the-insubordinate-consul/
____________________________________________________________________



Did you even bother to look up Eleanor's post about Aristides de Sousa Mendes: the insubordinate consul  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg564861#msg564861 who was one of the Greatest and bravest sons of Portugal who suffered because he followed his conscience in the stance he took against fascism?

As usual you seem interested only in besmirching Portugal by any means at your disposal. Portugal trod a difficult path with pressure from both sides during WW2. In Churchill's opinion they managed the situation satisfactorily;

I take this opportunity of placing on record the appreciation by His Majesty's Government, which I have no doubt is shared by Parliament and the British nation, of the attitude of the Portuguese Government, whose loyalty to their British Ally never wavered in the darkest hours of the war
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portugal_during_World_War_II
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 11:19:28 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 11:10:09 AM
As usual you seem interested only in besmirching Portugal by any means at your disposal. Portugal trod a difficult path with pressure from both sides during WW2. In Churchill's opinion they managed the situation satisfactorily;

I take this opportunity of placing on record the appreciation by His Majesty's Government, which I have no doubt is shared by Parliament and the British nation, of the attitude of the Portuguese Government, whose loyalty to their British Ally never wavered in the darkest hours of the war
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portugal_during_World_War_II
They were never a fascist state in the pure sense. Dictatorship, yes, technically, but it was never going to be a Nation state in the quasi-marxist sense. Yes they were under extreme pressure regarding immigration / refugee influx, as other countries were primarily because they were neutral. We must remember that, as soon as Hitler invaded Poland, then of course most refugees were Jewish, as Poland was home to the biggest concentration of Jewish population in Europe. Foreign and domestic policy / conservatism / missplaced imperialism all led to a parlous economic state in the early 20th century and this country of limited means simply couldn't cope with the influx.

I don't understand this continued referencing of alleged Portuguese shortcomings almost as a means of propping up this third-world, backward looking, insular, despotic regime with a toxic, brutalistic  police force.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 11:23:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 11:10:09 AM
As usual you seem interested only in besmirching Portugal by any means at your disposal. Portugal trod a difficult path with pressure from both sides during WW2. In Churchill's opinion they managed the situation satisfactorily;

I take this opportunity of placing on record the appreciation by His Majesty's Government, which I have no doubt is shared by Parliament and the British nation, of the attitude of the Portuguese Government, whose loyalty to their British Ally never wavered in the darkest hours of the war
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portugal_during_World_War_II

Portugal didn't tread as difficult a path as the UK..
How many people did the UK save from the tyranny of Hitler.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 11:23:36 AM
Portugal didn't tread as difficult a path as the UK..
How many people did the UK save from the tyranny of Hitler.
Save? In the literal sense? At the time?
Lemmeesee. Difficult one this. In fact........impossible to know.

I mean, are you driving down the path of why Portugal remained neutral?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 11:31:28 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 10:41:10 AM
Snip
During World War II under the dictatorship of Salazar, Portugal was allegedly a so-called “neutral” nation, however it was clearly and unofficially pro-Hitler.
The Portuguese government issued the wicked “Circular 14” to all its diplomats to deny safe haven to refugees, including explicitly Jews, Russians and stateless persons.
But a man defied these dreadful orders and raised the voice of his consciousness, saving 30.000 persons from a certain death.
Aristides de Sousa Mendes was severely punished by Salazar, who deprived him from his job and from any form of earning a living, which proved to be tragic, since Sousa Mendes had 15 children, who were blacklisted and prevented to attend university.
____________________________________________________________________

  ... Aristides de Sousa Mendes informed the Rabi that he would issue the visas, for he knew that the refugees were doomed to die on the horrific Nazi concentration camps.

The house of the family – Casa do Passal located in Cabanas de Viriato, Viseu – was repossessed by the bank and eventually sold to cover debts.
The Judaic Association of Lisbon was the only help that the Sousa Mendes family had, providing them with food and medical assistance.
Aristides de Sousa Mendes died on April 3rd 1954 in poverty, but he fought for the justice of his deeds until his last breath.
https://www.centerofportugal.com/article/aristides-de-sousa-mendes-the-insubordinate-consul/
____________________________________________________________________



Did you even bother to look up Eleanor's post about Aristides de Sousa Mendes: the insubordinate consul  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg564861#msg564861 who was one of the Greatest and bravest sons of Portugal who suffered because he followed his conscience in the stance he took against fascism?

There is a really good film about this.  How he trekked across the mountains from france, through Spain and into Portugal with some of the Jewish Refugees.

I think it was in French but that didn't matter as it was riveting in itself.  I really must watch it again now that my French has improved somewhat.

Thanks for doing that, Brietta.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 11:34:54 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 11:23:36 AM
Portugal didn't tread as difficult a path as the UK..
How many people did the UK save from the tyranny of Hitler.

Not enough.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 11:37:30 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 11:31:28 AM
There is a really good film about this.  How he trekked across the mountains from france, through Spain and into Portugal with some of the Jewish Refugees.

I think it was in French but that didn't matter as it was riveting in itself.  I really must watch it again now that my French has improved somewhat.

Thanks for doing that, Brietta.
Technically the man was a liar, counterfeiter and traitor from what I've just read.
20th century political history is my thang, but I'll be honest, I'd never come across this dude.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 11:37:37 AM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 11:30:17 AM
Save? In the literal sense? At the time?
Lemmeesee. Difficult one this. In fact........impossible to know.

I mean, are you driving down the path of why Portugal remained neutral?

I'm not driving down any path...I just don't think portugal deserve a great deal of credit for staying neutral... It was the easy option.
The UK could have ignored the suffering of those who Hitler opressed... They didn't take the easy option and deserve a lot of credit
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 11:41:09 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 11:34:54 AM
Not enough.
Well you know the story of how Chamberlain came back with a piece of paper in his arse pocket from Berlin and 'peace for our time'?
So maybe it could have been 'nearly all of them'. But probably not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 11:42:05 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 11:37:37 AM
I'm not driving down any path...I just don't think portugal deserve a great deal of credit for staying neutral... It was the easy option.
The UK could have ignored the suffering of those who Hitler opressed... They didn't take the easy option and deserve a lot of credit
It's way more complicated than that and nothing to do with cowardice or valour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 11:43:10 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 11:23:36 AM
Portugal didn't tread as difficult a path as the UK..
How many people did the UK save from the tyranny of Hitler.

More Jewish refugees entered Portugal than entered the UK during WW2 in my opinion.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 11:46:35 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 11:43:10 AM
More Jewish refugees entered Portugal than entered the UK during WW2 in my opinion.
Could be a true reflection - 6,000 a day in September '39, but we must caveat that, as the reason was because they were neutral - you're not going to find much refuge in a country that's going to be overrun in a couple of months - i.e. France.
So neutrality can be construed as vital during times of mass upheaval,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 11:47:18 AM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 11:30:17 AM
Save? In the literal sense? At the time?
Lemmeesee. Difficult one this. In fact........impossible to know.

I mean, are you driving down the path of why Portugal remained neutral?

Portugal was crawling with Nazis during the War, on rest and recuperation it seems.  Although there was a small Brit Community also.  I think that The Duke of Windsor was there at one point.  And we all know about him.  He was going to be King of England if The Nazis had won.

This stinks of Salazar keeping his options open if you ask me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 11:47:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 11:43:10 AM
More Jewish refugees entered Portugal than entered the UK during WW2 in my opinion.

Can you not give the UK any credit for the part it played in stopping hitler... How many concentration camps did portugal liberate

You seem to despise the UK which I find very odd
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 11:53:57 AM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 11:37:30 AM
Technically the man was a liar, counterfeiter and traitor from what I've just read.
20th century political history is my thang, but I'll be honest, I'd never come across this dude.

Oh, Yer.  He wrote out a pile of false Visas, personally himself, to save a few worthless Jews from the death camps.  How frightfully reprehensible.

At the time The Vichy Government were helping The Germans to round up stray jews trying to escape.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 11:55:36 AM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 11:30:17 AM
Save? In the literal sense? At the time?
Lemmeesee. Difficult one this. In fact........impossible to know.

I mean, are you driving down the path of why Portugal remained neutral?

I'm not driving down any path...I just don't think portugal deserve a great deal of credit for staying neutral... It was the easy option.
The UK could have ignored the suffering of those who Hitler opressed... They didn't take the easy option and deserve a lot of credit
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 11:56:02 AM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 11:46:35 AM
Could be a true reflection - 6,000 a day in September '39, but we must caveat that, as the reason was because they were neutral - you're not going to find much refuge in a country that's going to be overrun in a couple of months - i.e. France.
So neutrality can be construed as vital during times of mass upheaval,

The French Government actively cooperated with the Nazis, didn't they? French police and gendarmes rounded up Jewish people for deportation to the death camps. As opposed to Denmark, for example, where almost all of it's Jewish citizens were smuggled out to Sweden.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 11:59:14 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 11:47:52 AM
Can you not give the UK any credit for the part it played in stopping hitler... How many concentration camps did portugal liberate

You seem to despise the UK which I find very odd
You seem to be wrong again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 11:59:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 11:56:02 AM
The French Government actively cooperated with the Nazis, didn't they? French police and gendarmes rounded up Jewish people for deportation to the death camps. As opposed to Denmark, for example, where almost all of it's Jewish citizens were smuggled out to Sweden.

The Vichy Government, largely.  They bogged off down South and helped The Nazis from there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 12:00:40 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 11:59:14 AM
You seem to be wrong again.

In your opinion... gunit makes a lot of anti UK posts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 12:01:56 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 11:59:23 AM
The Vichy Government, largely.  They bogged off down South and helped The Nazis from there.

Fortunately the British army helped drive the Germans out of france
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 09, 2019, 12:04:42 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 04:24:10 AM
(http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/images/guernica3.jpg)
Guernica
"The Bombing of Guernica, 1937," EyeWitness to History, www.eyewitnesstohistory.com (2005).


You said ...
"Cobblers.

Do you have any clue as to what fascism means?"   http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg564847#msg564847
___________________________________________________________

Lest we forget ... "a picture is worth more than  thousand words" and far from 'misrepresenting' fascism 'Guernica' has always been for me, the epitome of the evils of the fascism which my parents' generation fought a war against.
A war against fascism in Europe which in the beginning gave us Guernica; a war against fascism the justness of which was proved when the allies liberated the concentration camps of Europe.

I hope you enjoyed your rant.

The problem is simple.  Guernica has SFA to do with the current state of affairs in Portugal
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 12:07:10 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 11:53:57 AM
Oh, Yer.  He wrote out a pile of false Visas, personally himself, to save a few worthless Jews from the death camps.  How frightfully reprehensible.

At the time The Vichy Government were helping The Germans to round up stray jews trying to escape.
No, you miss the point. His first 'indiscretions' were before the war, dear thing.
I know nothing of the dude, apart from what I just read. If he saved loads of Jewish people - sound.
But my somewhat obscure point was that it would seem that moral relativism is permissible when discussed contemporaneously.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 12:08:49 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 12:07:10 PM
No, you miss the point. His first 'indiscretions' were before the war, dear thing.
I know nothing of the dude, apart from what I just read. I'd he saved loads of Jewish people - sound.
But my somewhat obscure point was that it would seem that moral relativism is permissible when discussed contemporaneously.

How do you know this if you've never heard of him?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 12:14:02 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 12:08:49 PM
How do you know this if you've never heard of him?
How do I know that it would seem that moral relativism is permissible when discussed contemporaneously?
Because, and let's not paint this as anything other than about those evil fckers Christovao, Amaral, et al, y'all on the Blame Train, girl.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 12:19:26 PM
Anyway, let's get back to pre- WW2 European history....hit me up girlfriends.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 12:27:37 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 12:14:02 PM
How do I know that it would seem that moral relativism is permissible when discussed contemporaneously?
Because, and let's not paint this as anything other than about those evil fckers Christovao, Amaral, et al, y'all on the Blame Train, girl.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 12:45:24 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on December 09, 2019, 12:04:42 PM
I hope you enjoyed your rant.

The problem is simple.  Guernica has SFA to do with the current state of affairs in Portugal

You asked the question "Do you have any clue as to what fascism means?"

The fact you disagree with my answer on what fascism means to me comes as no surprise at all.

In the midst of your vexation please pause for thought and wonder why the populace of Portugal thought it might be an excellent idea to have a revolution to get rid of fascism and replace it with democracy.
(https://66.media.tumblr.com/8375c9d667b614e8fce636451ffea276/tumblr_n4k64o[Name removed]w11rno41do1_400.jpg)
carnation revolution

That of course did not happen overnight but is an ongoing process as the old order slowly changes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 12:46:46 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 12:14:02 PM
How do I know that it would seem that moral relativism is permissible when discussed contemporaneously?
Because, and let's not paint this as anything other than about those evil fckers Christovao, Amaral, et al, y'all on the Blame Train, girl.

That is the best bit of deflection and evasion that I have ever seen.  Well done for that.  Unfortunately, it doesn't make sense.

I am talking documented history, some of which I was around to see.  It has nothing much at all to do with The McCanns.

Although strangely enough Amaral does appear to be quite closely related to this very brave man.

I bet you missed that one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 12:55:01 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 12:45:24 PM
You asked the question "Do you have any clue as to what fascism means?"

The fact you disagree with my answer on what fascism means to me comes as no surprise at all.

In the midst of your vexation please pause for thought and wonder why the populace of Portugal thought it might be an excellent idea to have a revolution to get rid of fascism and replace it with democracy.
(https://66.media.tumblr.com/8375c9d667b614e8fce636451ffea276/tumblr_n4k64o[Name removed]w11rno41do1_400.jpg)
carnation revolution

That of course did not happen overnight but is an ongoing process as the old order slowly changes.

There were Two Revolution and during the gap the Old School reinvented themselves, and joined the New Judiciary and The PJ.  Same old same old..

I was actually in Portugal while all of this was going on.  It was really quite exciting.  But then I am a You and Whose Army sort of person.

I am just sad that nothing much changed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 12:58:37 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 12:45:24 PM
You asked the question "Do you have any clue as to what fascism means?"

The fact you disagree with my answer on what fascism means to me comes as no surprise at all.

In the midst of your vexation please pause for thought and wonder why the populace of Portugal thought it might be an excellent idea to have a revolution to get rid of fascism and replace it with democracy.
(https://66.media.tumblr.com/8375c9d667b614e8fce636451ffea276/tumblr_n4k64o[Name removed]w11rno41do1_400.jpg)
carnation revolution

That of course did not happen overnight but is an ongoing process as the old order slowly changes.
Not fascist in the far-right, ultranationalism sense. Authoritarian, yes. More Christian Corporativism. Salazar himself was a pious, devout catholic, which isn't quite inkeeping with the stereotypical genocidal megalomaniac mode.
And look at all of those simple-minded savages with their flowers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 01:04:08 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 12:58:37 PM
Not fascist in the far-right, ultranationalism sense. Authoritarian, yes. More Christian Corporativism. Salazar himself was a pious, devout catholic, which isn't quite inkeeping with the stereotypical genocidal megalomaniac mode.
And look at all of those simple-minded savages with their flowers.

Hitler was, a catholic... Not sure how devout either if them were
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 09, 2019, 01:14:59 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 12:45:24 PM
You asked the question "Do you have any clue as to what fascism means?"

The fact you disagree with my answer on what fascism means to me comes as no surprise at all.

In the midst of your vexation please pause for thought and wonder why the populace of Portugal thought it might be an excellent idea to have a revolution to get rid of fascism and replace it with democracy.
(https://66.media.tumblr.com/8375c9d667b614e8fce636451ffea276/tumblr_n4k64o[Name removed]w11rno41do1_400.jpg)
carnation revolution

That of course did not happen overnight but is an ongoing process as the old order slowly changes.

At least you have moved on to 1974.  That's only 45 years out of date.  At this rate you might be current by Christmas.

 &^^&*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 01:29:14 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 01:04:08 PM
Hitler was, a catholic... Not sure how devout either if them were
Maybe I wasn't clear, despite being really clear. Salazar was devout. Hence why I used the word 'devout'.
Hitler, on the other hand......

The Pope and an atheist are having a discussion...

and it slowly gets more and more heated until eventually the Pope can't take it anymore and he says to the atheist - "You are like a man who is blindfolded, in a dark room who is looking for a black cat that isn't there."

The atheist laughs and says - "With all due respect, we sound awfully similar. You are like a man who is blindfolded, in a dark room who is looking for a black cat that isn't there but the difference is you've found it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 01:39:03 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 01:04:08 PM
Hitler was, a catholic... Not sure how devout either if them were

Matthew Hopkins was a Catholic.  He slaughtered quite a few people.

And then there was whatsisname in medieval times.  Catholics don't have a good record on this one.  Especially if they think they are important.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 01:41:12 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 01:29:14 PM
Maybe I wasn't clear, despite being really clear. Salazar was devout. Hence why I used the word 'devout'.
Hitler, on the other hand......

The Pope and an atheist are having a discussion...

and it slowly gets more and more heated until eventually the Pope can't take it anymore and he says to the atheist - "You are like a man who is blindfolded, in a dark room who is looking for a black cat that isn't there."

The atheist laughs and says - "With all due respect, we sound awfully similar. You are like a man who is blindfolded, in a dark room who is looking for a black cat that isn't there but the difference is you've found it.

What does Devout actually mean.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 01:42:05 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 01:29:14 PM
Maybe I wasn't clear, despite being really clear. Salazar was devout. Hence why I used the word 'devout'.
Hitler, on the other hand......

The Pope and an atheist are having a discussion...

and it slowly gets more and more heated until eventually the Pope can't take it anymore and he says to the atheist - "You are like a man who is blindfolded, in a dark room who is looking for a black cat that isn't there."

The atheist laughs and says - "With all due respect, we sound awfully similar. You are like a man who is blindfolded, in a dark room who is looking for a black cat that isn't there but the difference is you've found it.

Whether portugal was fascist is, a contentious point.  Salazar may not have considered himself fascist and there may be some who agree with him.  There, are I'm sure others who consider his govt to be fascist
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 01:44:37 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 01:41:12 PM
What does Devout actually mean.

And what is it's relevance.

The Iman from the mosque where the latest london bridge terrorist worshipped said he condemned the killings completely  as Islam does not support unjust killings
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 01:57:43 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 01:44:37 PM
And what is it's relevance.

The Iman from the mosque where the latest london bridge terrorist worshipped said he condemned the killings completely  as Islam does not support unjust killings
Well I'm not suggesting that religious leaning is an indicator of morality - in fact I may argue the opposite is true. But then you knew that.
The point, as you probably knew when you cherry picked the word 'devout', was in answer to a previous comment from Bruschetta, asking the age old question 'do you have any clue as to what fascism is?' To which I gegged in, bearing in mind it's a public forum, and interjected, giving my take on Portugal's previous regime not being 'fascist' in the popularly understood context.
Whilst Salazar was a catholic and pretty pious in his beliefs and habits (he basically had naff all), I was demonstrating that the lazy comparison to the archetypal 'fascist' dictator is not quite accurate or indeed fair. And as I also previously stated, the Circular 14 was more of an economic defence, as opposed to some ideological dictate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 01:59:41 PM
What's with the deleted post Eleanor? Bored? Poor old Davey? C'mon, give it a rest, it's embarrassing.
Ever deleted any of Davey's posts, such as the character slur on GUnit earlier today?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 02:00:42 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on December 09, 2019, 01:14:59 PM
At least you have moved on to 1974.  That's only 45 years out of date.  At this rate you might be current by Christmas.

 &^^&*

Such a pity that The PJ and some of The Judges haven't caught up either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 02:02:37 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 01:57:43 PM
Well I'm not suggesting that religious leaning is an indicator of morality - in fact I may argue the opposite is true. But then you knew that.
The point, as you probably knew when you cherry picked the word 'devout', was in answer to a previous comment from Bruschetta, asking the age old question 'do you have any clue as to what fascism is?' To which I gegged in, bearing in mind it's a public forum, and interjected, giving my take on Portugal's previous regime not being 'fascist' in the popularly understood context.
Whilst Salazar was a catholic and pretty pious in his beliefs and habits (he basically had naff all), I was demonstrating that the lazy comparison to the archetypal 'fascist' dictator is not quite accurate or indeed fair. And as I also previously stated, the Circular 14 was more of an economic defence, as opposed to some ideological dictate.

But the opinion on whether he was or wasn't fascist seems to be divided..

. Scholars such as Stanley G. Payne, Thomas Gerard Gallagher, Juan José Linz, António Costa Pinto, Roger Griffin, Robert Paxton and Howard J. Wiarda, prefer to consider the Portuguese Estado Novo (Portugal) as conservative authoritarian rather than fascist. On the other hand Portuguese scholars like Fernando Rosas, Manuel Villaverde Cabral, Manuel de Lucena and Manuel Loff think that the Estado Novo should be considered fascist.[3]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 02:03:18 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 01:59:41 PM
What's with the deleted post Eleanor? Bored? Poor old Davey? C'mon, give it a rest, it's embarrassing.
Ever deleted any of Davey's posts, such as the character slur on GUnit earlier today?

I haven't Deleted anything.  I am enjoying this discussion.  So you are wrong again, Sweet Cheeks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 02:05:25 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 01:59:41 PM
What's with the deleted post Eleanor? Bored? Poor old Davey? C'mon, give it a rest, it's embarrassing.
Ever deleted any of Davey's posts, such as the character slur on GUnit earlier today?

Eleanor has in fact deleted posts of mine... And I missed the slur on gunit
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 02:06:03 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 02:00:42 PM
Such a pity that The PJ and some of The Judges haven't caught up either.
How far back should we go trace this unbroken line of ineptitude and barbarity? '74? Coup de tat 1926?
WHO IS TO BLAME FOR CREATING AMARAL? ALFONSO 1?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 02:08:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 02:05:25 PM
Eleanor has in fact deleted posts of mine... And I missed the slur on gunit

I am not a Deleter.  Unless it can't be avoided.

Unfortunately, I can't tell anyone who did because they would have to kill me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 02:10:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 02:05:25 PM
Eleanor has in fact deleted posts of mine... And I missed the slur on gunit

Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 11:47:52 AM

You seem to despise the UK which I find very odd
Despise the UK? What an odd, crass, lame statement to make.
But it goes unchecked by your gatekeepers. Got it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 02:13:59 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 02:10:17 PM
Despise the UK? What an odd, crass, lame statement to make.
But it goes unchecked by your gatekeepers. Got it.

Gunit does seem to me to despise the UK... It's police.. It's young people...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 02:15:16 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 02:02:37 PM
But the opinion on whether he was or wasn't fascist seems to be divided..

. Scholars such as Stanley G. Payne, Thomas Gerard Gallagher, Juan José Linz, António Costa Pinto, Roger Griffin, Robert Paxton and Howard J. Wiarda, prefer to consider the Portuguese Estado Novo (Portugal) as conservative authoritarian rather than fascist. On the other hand Portuguese scholars like Fernando Rosas, Manuel Villaverde Cabral, Manuel de Lucena and Manuel Loff think that the Estado Novo should be considered fascist.[3]
It does. It is. Hence my point, it's by no means clear cut.
If I were to ask the same about Nazi Germany, I think it's quite unequivocal as to what most rational scholars would say.
I say again, and the reason for me entering the discussion in the first instance; Portugal circa WW2 was not a 'traditional' fascist state, as was purported.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 02:18:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 02:13:59 PM
Gunit does seem to me to despise the UK... It's police.. It's young people...
Put the boot on the Bruschetta / Eleanor foot - it could be argued that they 'despise' Portugal - it's the police, it's the young people, it's the paedo gangs....
I wouldn't argue that, because it's a crass statement to make.

And the post that was deleted by nobody? It was really funny - you would have had a wee giggle, I know it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 02:18:13 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 02:15:16 PM
It does. It is. Hence my point, it's by no means clear cut.
If I were to ask the same about Nazi Germany, I think it's quite unequivocal as to what most rational scholars would say.
I say again, and the reason for me entering the discussion in the first instance; Portugal circa WW2 was not a 'traditional' fascist state, as was purported.

Who said it was a traditional fascist state.... Or is that an inference you have made
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 02:22:19 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 02:18:00 PM
Put the boot on the Bruschetta / Eleanor foot - it could be argued that they 'despise' Portugal - it's the police, it's the young people, it's the paedo gangs....
I wouldn't argue that, because it's a crass statement to make.

And the post that was deleted by nobody? It was really funny - you would have had a wee giggle, I know it.

I find gunits attitude odd... Even my post Re the British army and it's role in saving people from the tyranny of hitler  didn't seem to deserve any credit from her
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 02:23:44 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 02:18:13 PM
Who said it was a traditional fascist state.... Or is that an inference you have made
Purely fascist, was the actual term.

Quote from: Eleanor on December 08, 2019, 09:00:12 PM
What exactly purely was it then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 02:24:43 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 01:57:43 PM
Well I'm not suggesting that religious leaning is an indicator of morality - in fact I may argue the opposite is true. But then you knew that.
The point, as you probably knew when you cherry picked the word 'devout', was in answer to a previous comment from Bruschetta, asking the age old question 'do you have any clue as to what fascism is?' To which I gegged in, bearing in mind it's a public forum, and interjected, giving my take on Portugal's previous regime not being 'fascist' in the popularly understood context.
Whilst Salazar was a catholic and pretty pious in his beliefs and habits (he basically had naff all), I was demonstrating that the lazy comparison to the archetypal 'fascist' dictator is not quite accurate or indeed fair. And as I also previously stated, the Circular 14 was more of an economic defence, as opposed to some ideological dictate.

You never do get it quite right do you.  I know what fascism is and it is not a question I would pose to a. n. other nor did I ever believe the lie that under it the trains all ran on time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 02:26:58 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 02:23:44 PM
Purely fascist, was the actual term.

You will find it was gunit who used the term purely fascist...

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 02:40:42 PM

Please may I have an apology from The General who has yet again accused me of deleting comments when I didn't done it.

Or do I have to take the weight of every deleted comment on my shoulders?

I have to say that I don't really care.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 02:40:57 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 02:22:19 PM
I find gunits attitude odd... Even my post Re the British army and it's role in saving people from the tyranny of hitler  didn't seem to deserve any credit from her
I think it's more to do with the general tone of animosity creating a defence response.
So we have this curious dynamic whereby a number of supporters seem bent on besmirching the whole Portuguese nation and it's 20th century history, simply to bolster this regressive, barbaric, despotic state narrative, which apparently, ultimately led to the disappearance of Madeleine. I mean, of course, now you see it in text, it's obvious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 09, 2019, 02:42:31 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 02:26:58 PM
You will find it was gunit who used the term purely fascist...
I was referring to the question posed by the original comment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 09, 2019, 02:47:32 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 02:00:42 PM
Such a pity that The PJ and some of The Judges haven't caught up either.

If you remember correctly, this alleged 'debate' started because the GNR separated two drunken Brit groups in Albufeira.

Much like I see the Brit cops doing on The Force : Essex.

And more drunken Brits on The Force : North East.

So what is the common denominator?  Fascist police? Or drunken Brits?

 *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 02:52:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 02:22:19 PM
I find gunits attitude odd... Even my post Re the British army and it's role in saving people from the tyranny of hitler  didn't seem to deserve any credit from her

What do you want from me? Utter and complete worship of anything 'British' and utter and complete condemnation of anything Portuguese? Sorry, that's not going to happen. The British Army's role is and always has been to do as ordered. Sometimes the results are good, sometimes not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 02:55:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 02:52:02 PM
What do you want from me? Utter and complete worship of anything 'British' and utter and complete condemnation of anything Portuguese? Sorry, that's not going to happen. The British Army's role is and always has been to do as ordered. Sometimes the results are good, sometimes not.

I dont want anything from you but your strange outburst confirms my thoughts... What complete disrespect for our armed forces
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 09, 2019, 03:10:55 PM
Quote from: The General on December 09, 2019, 02:40:57 PM
I think it's more to do with the general tone of animosity creating a defence response.
So we have this curious dynamic whereby a number of supporters seem bent on besmirching the whole Portuguese nation and it's 20th century history, simply to bolster this regressive, barbaric, despotic state narrative, which apparently, ultimately led to the disappearance of Madeleine. I mean, of course, now you see it in text, it's obvious.


Lusophobia is the word you're looking for.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 09, 2019, 03:19:10 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on December 09, 2019, 02:47:32 PM
If you remember correctly, this alleged 'debate' started because the GNR separated two drunken Brit groups in Albufeira.

Much like I see the Brit cops doing on The Force : Essex.

And more drunken Brits on The Force : North East.

So what is the common denominator?  Fascist police? Or drunken Brits?

 *%87

Lack of drink seems to be a problem here,must have been johnny foreigner our lads wouldn't engage.

One onlooker told MailOnline about a number of other violent incidents that led to at least a dozen people being thrown out of the popular Christmas attraction.

They said: 'The first big fight happened while people were queuing to get into the main beer hall in the Bavarian Village. 'It had shut for an hour and was re-opening and a huge queue had formed outside. Security were saying it would take two hours to get in and people started getting agitated and pushing to get to the top.

'Then two men started fighting and throwing punches and everyone was getting pushed back but there was nowhere to go. Security had to move back a barrier to stop people getting trampled, it was quite scary and it's really lucky nobody was hurt.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7770623/Horrifying-moment-vicious-BRAWL-breaks-Winter-Wonderland-event-shocked-families.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 06:36:03 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 02:55:53 PM
I dont want anything from you but your strange outburst confirms my thoughts... What complete disrespect for our armed forces

What is disrespectful about the truth? The Army's job is to go where it's told and fight who it's told when it's told. The only choice it's members have is to obey or disobey their orders. They may be the Queen's soldiers, but it's the politicans who decide where they go and what they do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 06:45:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 06:36:03 PM
What is disrespectful about the truth? The Army's job is to go where it's told and fight who it's told when it's told. The only choice it's members have is to obey or disobey their orders. They may be the Queen's soldiers, but it's the politicans who decide where they go and what they do.

I find that extremely disrespectful... Soldiers fight and die for ours and others freedom... They deserve some appreciation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 09, 2019, 06:48:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 02:52:02 PM
What do you want from me? Utter and complete worship of anything 'British' and utter and complete condemnation of anything Portuguese? Sorry, that's not going to happen. The British Army's role is and always has been to do as ordered. Sometimes the results are good, sometimes not.
Give us an example of something in which you think the British excel or lead the world.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 09, 2019, 07:18:57 PM
Invading Iraq & toppling Saddam worked out well didn't it.
Great move by our glorious armed forces.
Remind us, have they found the WMD's yet?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on December 09, 2019, 07:29:19 PM
Could we stay on topic chaps. ie wandering off topic  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 08:11:13 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 06:45:28 PM
I find that extremely disrespectful... Soldiers fight and die for ours and others freedom... They deserve some appreciation.

Soldiers fight and die because they are trained to do so on command. They're trained to obey orders without question. Some have a higher purpose in mind, others don't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 08:15:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 08:11:13 PM
Soldiers fight and die because they are trained to do so on command. They're trained to obey orders without question. Some have a higher purpose in mind, others don't.
British soldiers aren't conscripts. They are proactively making a choice when they join up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 09, 2019, 08:19:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 08:11:13 PM
Soldiers fight and die because they are trained to do so on command. They're trained to obey orders without question. Some have a higher purpose in mind, others don't.

So the hundreds of thousands who fought a died to save Europe from nazi tyranny deserve no respect or thanks... Disgraceful
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 08:19:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 09, 2019, 06:48:49 PM
Give us an example of something in which you think the British excel or lead the world.

I don't understand why you think excelling or leading the world are important. I love my country unconditionally just as I love my children unconditionally.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 08:26:03 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 08:15:44 PM
British soldiers aren't conscripts. They are proactively making a choice when they join up.

They are these days, but the reasons for joining up are many.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 08:29:48 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 08:19:09 PM
So the hundreds of thousands who fought a died to save Europe from nazi tyranny deserve no respect or thanks... Disgraceful

Let me be absolutely clear. I haven't said any of that, you have. It's disgraceful in my opinion that you are trying to suggest that those are my thoughts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 09, 2019, 08:35:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 09, 2019, 08:19:09 PM
So the hundreds of thousands who fought a died to save Europe from nazi tyranny deserve no respect or thanks... Disgraceful

I think the world would be a better place had the Nazis won.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 09, 2019, 09:17:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 08:19:36 PM
I don't understand why you think excelling or leading the world are important. I love my country unconditionally just as I love my children unconditionally.
Perhaps you could point to where I used the word “important”.  Perhaps you could answer my question now?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 09, 2019, 09:17:55 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 09, 2019, 08:35:46 PM
I think the world would be a better place had the Nazis won.
Jew [ censored word ] are you?  That censored word is a word used to describe someone who hates.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 09, 2019, 09:19:49 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 09, 2019, 08:35:46 PM
I think the world would be a better place had the Nazis won.

What a waste of space you are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 09:48:01 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 09, 2019, 08:35:46 PM
I think the world would be a better place had the Nazis won.
I think you have just invoked Godwin's law and totally destroyed yourself in the process. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 09, 2019, 10:16:28 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 09, 2019, 09:48:01 PM
I think you have just invoked Godwin's law and totally destroyed yourself in the process.
Only a sceptic would write something as idiotic and offensive as that IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 10:45:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 09, 2019, 09:17:16 PM
Perhaps you could point to where I used the word “important”.  Perhaps you could answer my question now?

In my opinion your question was pointless.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 09, 2019, 11:06:06 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 10:45:57 PM
In my opinion your question was pointless.
I think our exchange has made my point very well actually.  You have nothing positive to say about the country you profess to love.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 11:22:12 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 09, 2019, 11:06:06 PM
I think our exchange has made my point very well actually.  You have nothing positive to say about the country you profess to love.

I don't get the connection I'm afraid. Love involves acceptance not admiration in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 09, 2019, 11:38:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 11:22:12 PM
I don't get the connection I'm afraid. Love involves acceptance not admiration in my opinion.
How utterly odd imo, that love does not also include admiration, nor inspire positivity in you.  How strange to love something or someone but not be able to say what qualities in it or them that you admire above those things and people you do not love.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 12:04:08 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 09, 2019, 11:38:47 PM
How utterly odd imo, that love does not also include admiration, nor inspire positivity in you.  How strange to love something or someone but not be able to say what qualities in it or them that you admire above those things and people you do not love.

When it comes to love of one's country you seem to be confusing nationalism and patriotism. As to people, love means wanting them to be happy and fulfilled, whether one admires them or not. Did you not know that it's possible to love someone even if you don't always like them?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 07:06:33 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 12:04:08 AM
When it comes to love of one's country you seem to be confusing nationalism and patriotism. As to people, love means wanting them to be happy and fulfilled, whether one admires them or not. Did you not know that it's possible to love someone even if you don't always like them?
What a patronising post.  I’m confusing nothing, just noting that you are completely unable to say anything positive about the country you profess to love. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 07:17:07 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 09, 2019, 06:48:49 PM
Give us an example of something in which you think the British excel or lead the world.
22 SAS Squadron.
Gregg's Sausage Rolls.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 07:21:55 AM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 07:17:07 AM
22 SAS Squadron.
Gregg's Sausage Rolls.

Bomb disposal.
Meat and potato pies.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 07:24:15 AM
Keep ‘em coming.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 07:24:32 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2019, 07:06:33 AM
What a patronising post.  I’m confusing nothing, just noting that you are completely unable to say anything positive about the country you profess to love.
From the dude who stated only sceptics of the official MM narrative could possibly come out with a statement in support of genocidal mania.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 07:26:01 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2019, 07:24:15 AM
Keep ‘em coming.
Shoes. Closely followed by Italy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 07:46:00 AM
Greetings cards
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 07:46:42 AM
Single Malt Scotch Whiskey. Made by the Scotch.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 07:58:18 AM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 07:46:42 AM
Single Malt Scotch Whiskey. Made by the Scotch.

Don't the Scotts make whisky and it's the Irish who make whiskey
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 08:02:28 AM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 07:24:32 AM
From the dude who stated only sceptics of the official MM narrative could possibly come out with a statement in support of genocidal mania.
I’m not a dude, and I don’t see the problem with my position.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 08:04:43 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 08:29:48 PM
Let me be absolutely clear. I haven't said any of that, you have. It's disgraceful in my opinion that you are trying to suggest that those are my thoughts.
You have had several opprtunities to show support and appreciation for the British army playing a major role in saving millions from the tyranny of hitler. Your response was that portugal received more jewish refugees. This lack of support and appreciation can only be understood in one way..imo....you dont support their efforts in WW2
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 08:04:58 AM
Apart from sausage rolls and meat pies, what about universities?  We have the two of the three best in the world.  Pretty world beating I would say
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2020/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 08:05:29 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 09, 2019, 08:19:36 PM
I don't understand why you think excelling or leading the world are important. I love my country unconditionally just as I love my children unconditionally.

I love my children but i certainly dont love my country
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 08:18:13 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2019, 08:04:58 AM
Apart from sausage rolls and meat pies, what about universities?  We have the two of the three best in the world.  Pretty world beating I would say
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2020/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

So if the UK didn't have any 'best' universities it would be unworthy of being loved?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 08:22:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 08:18:13 AM
So if the UK didn't have any 'best' universities it would be unworthy of being loved?

you are the only person to profess love for your country
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 08:25:53 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 08:18:13 AM
So if the UK didn't have any 'best' universities it would be unworthy of being loved?
You brought love into this, not me.  I asked you to say something positive about the UK you profess to love like your own children, remember?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 08:40:34 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2019, 08:04:43 AM
You have had several opprtunities to show support and appreciation for the British army playing a major role in saving millions from the tyranny of hitler. Your response was that portugal received more jewish refugees. This lack of support and appreciation can only be understood in one way..imo....you dont support their efforts in WW2

I applaud and admire every single person who contributed to the defeat of the Nazis, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, whether British or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 08:44:04 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2019, 08:25:53 AM
You brought love into this, not me.  I asked you to say something positive about the UK you profess to love like your own children, remember?

You were the one to equate love with positive statements, not me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 08:48:54 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 08:40:34 AM
I applaud and admire every single person who contributed to the defeat of the Nazis, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, whether British or not.

So once again you refuse to acknowledge the particular input of the British army... Which in my view makes all my criticisms of your posts perfectly valid
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 09:24:21 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2019, 08:48:54 AM
So once again you refuse to acknowledge the particular input of the British army... Which in my view makes all my criticisms of your posts perfectly valid

You need to explain what you mean by 'British Army'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 09:40:43 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2019, 07:58:18 AM
Don't the Scotts make whisky and it's the Irish who make whiskey
That was an Easter egg planted for the first sad, pedant to spot it. Well done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 09:53:57 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 09:24:21 AM
You need to explain what you mean by 'British Army'.

I don't need to explain anything
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 10, 2019, 09:55:05 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 09, 2019, 07:29:19 PM
Could we stay on topic chaps. ie wandering off topic  @)(++(*

Its passing time til the inevitable we can't find who wot dunnit announcement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 09:55:53 AM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 09:40:43 AM
That was an Easter egg planted for the first sad, pedant to spot it. Well done.
That makes you and others habitual sad pedants fir pointing out my typos
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 10:59:55 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2019, 09:53:57 AM
I don't need to explain anything

In that case you are making a meaningless statement when you speak of 'the British Army'. It isn't something which exists in a stand alone context. It's part of the Armed Forces and of the Ministry of Defence. It can also be seen as the total of it's personnel, assuming they are all agreed as to their aims and acheivements.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 11:22:17 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2019, 09:55:53 AM
That makes you and others habitual sad pedants fir* pointing out my typos
Tell me something new.



*for
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 11:26:30 AM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 11:22:17 AM
Tell me something new.



*for

I saw the fir and could have changed it... But why bother..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 11:28:16 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 10:59:55 AM
In that case you are making a meaningless statement when you speak of 'the British Army'. It isn't something which exists in a stand alone context. It's part of the Armed Forces and of the Ministry of Defence. It can also be seen as the total of it's personnel, assuming they are all agreed as to their aims and acheivements.

I think my statement is quite meaningful.... You are once, again stating your opinion as fact and trying unsuccessfully to deflect from the issue

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Army_during_the_Second_World_War&ved=2ahUKEwjcv46j_armAhVYPcAKHRuoBkAQFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw0Ax7ITyPVTXqQzb66yroWA
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 11:39:05 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2019, 11:26:30 AM
I saw the fir and could have changed it... But why bother..
Personal pride?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 11:42:05 AM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 11:39:05 AM
Personal pride?

As in ego.... No.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 11:47:22 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2019, 11:42:05 AM
As in ego.... No.
Not ego, because you don't have one. The most humble of men. The Case of the Humble Dental Nurse by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 11:49:03 AM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 11:47:22 AM
Not ego, because you don't have one. The most humble of men. The Case of the Humble Dental Nurse by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.

Why do you keep bringing my assistant into this
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 11:52:08 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2019, 11:49:03 AM
Why do you keep bringing my assistant into this
There's no way Conan Doyle was your assistant! Shut the front door!
Do dental nurses even have assistants; particularly such obviously over-qualified ones?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 11:53:55 AM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 11:52:08 AM
There's no way Conan Doyle was your assistant! Shut the front door!
Do dental nurses even have assistants; particularly such obviously over-qualified ones?
Oh I see... You think I'm a, dental nurse... Your deduction based on the evidence is revealing as to your abilities... Or lack if them
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 12:03:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2019, 11:53:55 AM
Oh I see... You think I'm a, dental nurse... Your deduction based on the evidence is revealing as to your abilities... Or lack if them
Indeed. To deduce the correct profession (such as it is) from such scant data is a triumph.
Now swill this noxious, fluorescent liquid around for 10 seconds, then spit. I SAID SPIT!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 12:05:28 PM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 12:03:00 PM
Indeed. To deduce the correct profession (such as it is) from such scant data is a triumph.
Now swill this noxious, fluorescent liquid around for 10 seconds, then spit. I SAID SPIT!

Since knowledge is power carry on
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 12:09:03 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2019, 12:05:28 PM
Since knowledge is power carry on
Thank you [closes eyes, steeples fingers and presses them to lips].......
....you've had left knee trouble.....of a chronic nature.......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 12:33:27 PM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 11:39:05 AM
Personal pride?

That's an interesting question. Why would someone who is perfectly capable of correct spelling and grammar fail to use it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 12:38:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 12:33:27 PM
That's an interesting question. Why would someone who is perfectly capable of correct spelling and grammar fail to use it?

Precisely... See if you can work it out
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 12:57:07 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2019, 12:38:22 PM
Precisely... See if you can work it out
You lost the use of both hands in a threshing machine accident, didn't you?
Terrible, terrible accident, wasn't it?
You're on then mend now though, aren't you, but it's been a long road?
6 years of rehab, am I right?
It's the hands, you see. 'Don't mock the afflicted', my late mother used to say. She also used to say 'if you keep pulling that face, you'll stick like it!'.
As Max Bygraves would say 'You Need Hands', and he was right, you do. Need hands.
That's what the mittens are for, aren't they? For thermal protection. Every other finger is bionic.
I used to know a woman who had false legs, but real feet. Toxic shock, apparently.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 01:17:53 PM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 12:57:07 PM
You lost the use of both hands in a threshing machine accident, didn't you?
Terrible, terrible accident, wasn't it?
You're on then mend now though, aren't you, but it's been a long road?
6 years of rehab, am I right?
It's the hands, you see. 'Don't mock the afflicted', my late mother used to say. She also used to say 'if you keep pulling that face, you'll stick like it!'.
As Max Bygraves would say 'You Need Hands', and he was right, you do. Need hands.
That's what the mittens are for, aren't they? For thermal protection. Every other finger is bionic.
I used to know a woman who had false legs, but real feet. Toxic shock, apparently.

I simply try to type too fast.. And mostly can't be bothered to correct the mistakes
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 01:29:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2019, 01:17:53 PM
I simply try to type too fast.. And mostly can't be bothered to correct the mistakes
Oh.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 05:45:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 08:44:04 AM
You were the one to equate love with positive statements, not me.
You were the one who deflected from my original question, I have no idea why.  You really should be a politician.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 05:48:42 PM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 12:57:07 PM
You lost the use of both hands in a threshing machine accident, didn't you?
Terrible, terrible accident, wasn't it?
You're on then mend now though, aren't you, but it's been a long road?
6 years of rehab, am I right?
It's the hands, you see. 'Don't mock the afflicted', my late mother used to say. She also used to say 'if you keep pulling that face, you'll stick like it!'.
As Max Bygraves would say 'You Need Hands', and he was right, you do. Need hands.
That's what the mittens are for, aren't they? For thermal protection. Every other finger is bionic.
I used to know a woman who had false legs, but real feet. Toxic shock, apparently.
Once upon a time you were quite amusing, sadly that time has passed.
IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 10, 2019, 05:57:03 PM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 01:29:00 PM
Oh.

One of your better posts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 10, 2019, 06:14:53 PM
The last Off Topic Topic was much more interesting than this Off Topic Topic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 06:20:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 08:40:34 AM
I applaud and admire every single person who contributed to the defeat of the Nazis, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, whether British or not.
What do you think of people who think we’d be better off if the Nazis had won?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 06:32:31 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2019, 06:20:54 PM
What do you think of people who think we’d be better off if the Nazis had won?

People can think what they like, I don't care.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 06:35:24 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 10, 2019, 05:57:03 PM
One of your better posts
Nice spelling.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 06:42:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 06:32:31 PM
People can think what they like, I don't care.
You do care, you care so much that you had to make a “let me be absolutely clear” speech earlier.  You know when politicians do that they’re about to spout a load of disingenuous nonsense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 06:48:31 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2019, 06:42:33 PM
You do care, you care so much that you had to make a “let me be absolutely clear” speech earlier.  You know when politicians do that they’re about to spout a load of disingenuous nonsense.
Can't see why you would say that.
Unbelievably, I think you actually believe what you type.
Not that anyone cares.
Trust me, literally nobody.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 06:58:31 PM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 06:48:31 PM
Can't see why you would say that.
Unbelievably, I think you actually believe what you type.
Not that anyone cares.
Trust me, literally nobody.
Really?  You’ve interviewed everyone and asked them have you?  If no one cared what I wrote no one would ever bother replying to my posts.  I suggest you prove your complete lack of interest in mine by not replying to this.  Ta ta.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 07:02:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2019, 06:58:31 PM
Really?  You’ve interviewed everyone and asked them have you?  If no one cared what I wrote no one would ever bother replying to my posts.  I suggest you prove your complete lack of interest in mine by not replying to this.  Ta ta.
Tata
I Like it.
Tonight Matthew VS is the arbiter of amusing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 07:05:24 PM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 07:02:39 PM
Tata
I Like it.
Tonight Matthew VS is the arbiter of amusing.
Oh dear, thanks for caring enough to respond.  Ta ta again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 07:08:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2019, 07:05:24 PM
Oh dear, thanks for caring enough to respond.  Ta ta again.
Terrible thing envy.
Why not consider your posts to make them amusing, like me?
And then type without anger.
Trust me, it works. I'm the funniest 71 year old dyslexic going.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 07:13:19 PM
Quote from: The General on December 10, 2019, 07:08:39 PM
Terrible thing envy.
Why not consider your posts to make them amusing, like me?
And then type without anger.
Trust me, it works. I'm the funniest 71 year old dyslexic going.
I think you’re just lonely.  It seems like you need the attention and thrive on it.  I think you care enough about our sparring posts to keep on replying, which means you need me and want me to respond.  When you stop responding I will take it as a sign that I was wrong, otherwise you will just keep on proving me right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 10, 2019, 07:21:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2019, 07:13:19 PM
I think you’re just lonely.  It seems like you need the attention and thrive on it.  I think you care enough about our sparring posts to keep on replying, which means you need me and want me to respond.  When you stop responding I will take it as a sign that I was wrong, otherwise you will just keep on proving me right.
Correct again. You're good at this.
Only The Lonely is my theme tune.
Colin the Cat is my only companion.
Kevin, not Colin. It's not actually my cat, it's Colin's. Or Kevin's.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 07:25:39 PM
Talking of cats, I’ve just put food down for mine, his favourite Whiskas pouch.  We’d run out this morning and he didn’t touch his substitute dry pellets so I thought he’d tuck into his pouch of wet food with gusto.  Turned his nose right up at it.  As if to say “you let me down this morning so don’t expect me to eat anymore of this muck ever again”.  Cats, eh?  Who’d have ‘em.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 10, 2019, 07:40:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2019, 07:25:39 PM
Talking of cats, I’ve just put food down for mine, his favourite Whiskas pouch.  We’d run out this morning and he didn’t touch his substitute dry pellets so I thought he’d tuck into his pouch of wet food with gusto.  Turned his nose right up at it.  As if to say “you let me down this morning so don’t expect me to eat anymore of this muck ever again”.  Cats, eh?  Who’d have ‘em.

Andrew Lloyd Webber was keen on them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 08:55:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2019, 06:42:33 PM
You do care, you care so much that you had to make a “let me be absolutely clear” speech earlier.  You know when politicians do that they’re about to spout a load of disingenuous nonsense.

Personal attacks on me will always get a reaction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 10:04:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 08:55:55 PM
Personal attacks on me will always get a reaction.
Why, when you don’t care what people think?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 10:57:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2019, 10:04:00 PM
Why, when you don’t care what people think?

I can't congratulate you on your debating skills, but you're really good at goading, deliberately misunderstanding and casting aspersions imo.

I don't care what people think about WW2. Neither do I care what certain people think about me. When their thoughts on me are expressed in words on a public forum they will be strongly challenged and refuted.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 11:12:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 10:57:14 PM
I can't congratulate you on your debating skills, but you're really good at goading, deliberately misunderstanding and casting aspersions imo.

I don't care what people think about WW2. Neither do I care what certain people think about me. When their thoughts on me are expressed in words on a public forum they will be strongly challenged and refuted.
  Those last two sentences completely contradict each other IMO.  That’s not deliberately misunderstanding or goading, it’s simply my opinion.  If you don’t like it, tough.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 10, 2019, 11:19:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 08:18:13 AM
So if the UK didn't have any 'best' universities it would be unworthy of being loved?
This is an example of deliberately misunderstanding a post ^^^. Poor debating too, by employing a complete strawman.  IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 11, 2019, 12:39:51 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on December 09, 2019, 12:04:42 PM
I hope you enjoyed your rant.

The problem is simple.  Guernica has SFA to do with the current state of affairs in Portugal

Are you always so insensitive, or is it just on this topic ?

Have you ever seen the massive original of Guernicia?  A more moving piece of artistry and history, I have never seen before, or since.  It's been many decades since I saw it, but that picture shook me to the roots and gave me an understanding of the depths that man can sink to.



As Brietta says, "a picture is worth more than a thousand words"...  and she is right, far from 'misrepresenting' fascism, Picassos  ' Guernica ' has the epitome of the evils of the fascism which our parents' generation fought a war against.

It is a truly profound painting.  Everyone should try and see it IMO ... and let it put fascism in its rightful place.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 11, 2019, 01:51:18 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 10, 2019, 07:13:19 PM
I think you’re just lonely.  It seems like you need the attention and thrive on it.  I think you care enough about our sparring posts to keep on replying, which means you need me and want me to respond.  When you stop responding I will take it as a sign that I was wrong, otherwise you will just keep on proving me right.

Everyone wants someone to respond, don't they?  Although this doesn't necessarily involve any great need.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 11, 2019, 05:00:47 AM
Quote from: sadie on December 11, 2019, 12:39:51 AM
Are you always so insensitive, or is it just on this topic ?

Have you ever seen the massive original of Guernicia?  A more moving piece of artistry and history, I have never seen before, or since.  It's been many decades since I saw it, but that picture shook me to the roots and gave me an understanding of the depths that man can sink to.



As Brietta says, "a picture is worth more than a thousand words"...  and she is right, far from 'misrepresenting' fascism, Picassos  ' Guernica ' has the epitome of the evils of the fascism which our parents' generation fought a war against.

It is a truly profound painting.  Everyone should try and see it IMO ... and let it put fascism in its rightful place.

So what?

The McCanns should be castigated for wining and dining out each evening in Franco's far right state?

Ooops, but Franco died over 40 years ago.  He's been dug up and reburied since.  All vaguely near Madrid, the capital of Spain.

Perhaps the McCanns should have taken this fascism into account, and taken Madeleine to Center Parcs, rather than the SPAIN she was never in.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 11, 2019, 07:25:38 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 11, 2019, 01:51:18 AM
Everyone wants someone to respond, don't they?  Although this doesn't necessarily involve any great need.
Want, need, something’s at the bottom of it, something not very edifying I’m sure (and I include myself in that).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 11, 2019, 08:21:19 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 11, 2019, 07:25:38 AM
Want, need, something’s at the bottom of it, something not very edifying I’m sure (and I include myself in that).

Me too also.  But I am long used to being ignored.  I have come to the conclusion that I am just plain boring.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 11, 2019, 08:47:28 AM
Did someone say something?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 11, 2019, 08:59:58 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on December 11, 2019, 05:00:47 AM
So what?

The McCanns should be castigated for wining and dining out each evening in Franco's far right state?

Ooops, but Franco died over 40 years ago.  He's been dug up and reburied since.  All vaguely near Madrid, the capital of Spain.

Perhaps the McCanns should have taken this fascism into account, and taken Madeleine to Center Parcs, rather than the SPAIN she was never in.
There’s a lot to be said for fascism in Franco’s Spain.  My parents took me and my baby sister there in 1973, and left us all alone in our apartment for hours while the went to the next town to watch a bullfight.  We weren’t kidnapped once, and even my baby sister (9 months old at the time) survived the experience.  The same cannot be said for the bull.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 11, 2019, 09:01:30 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 11, 2019, 08:47:28 AM
Did someone say something?

No.  Just talking to myself again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 11, 2019, 09:10:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 10, 2019, 08:55:55 PM
Personal attacks on me will always get a reaction.

You've made it clear that you refuse to recognise the actions if the British armed forces being pivotal in securing a free Europe for the benefit of hundreds of millions of people. For liberating the concentration camps.

I find that very odd .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 11, 2019, 09:16:51 AM
Quote from: sadie on December 11, 2019, 12:39:51 AM
Are you always so insensitive, or is it just on this topic ?

Have you ever seen the massive original of Guernicia?  A more moving piece of artistry and history, I have never seen before, or since.  It's been many decades since I saw it, but that picture shook me to the roots and gave me an understanding of the depths that man can sink to.



As Brietta says, "a picture is worth more than a thousand words"...  and she is right, far from 'misrepresenting' fascism, Picassos  ' Guernica ' has the epitome of the evils of the fascism which our parents' generation fought a war against.

It is a truly profound painting.  Everyone should try and see it IMO ... and let it put fascism in its rightful place.

It's still irrelevant to the discussion though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 11, 2019, 09:53:28 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 11, 2019, 09:16:51 AM
It's still irrelevant to the discussion though.
What were we discussing again?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 11, 2019, 09:53:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 11, 2019, 09:16:51 AM
It's still irrelevant to the discussion though.
As Brietta says 'a picture is worth a thousand words'. And it's true. So true, in fact, that the phrase was subsumed in to English parlance decades ago.

I know a little about the Spanish Civil War, but only really from the viewpoint of the Republican army  / Orwell - Homage to Catalonia is a modern classic, pretty bleak, but also pretty miopic. He doesn't seem fully aware of the full circumstances, but that may have been his purpose.
Down and Out in Paris and London is essential Orwell reading too.
Just saying.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 11, 2019, 03:03:51 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on December 11, 2019, 05:00:47 AM
So what?

The McCanns should be castigated for wining and dining out each evening in Franco's far right state?

Ooops, but Franco died over 40 years ago.  He's been dug up and reburied since.  All vaguely near Madrid, the capital of Spain.

Perhaps the McCanns should have taken this fascism into account, and taken Madeleine to Center Parcs, rather than the SPAIN she was never in.

You have absolutely no idea whether or not Madeleine was taken to Spain ... Praia da Luz is very close to the Spanish border ... she could have been well on the way to being transported across it before the Policia Judiciaria had arrived to check out the reports of a missing child.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 11, 2019, 03:38:54 PM
Quote from: The General on December 11, 2019, 09:53:41 AM
As Brietta says 'a picture is worth a thousand words'. And it's true. So true, in fact, that the phrase was subsumed in to English parlance decades ago.

I know a little about the Spanish Civil War, but only really from the viewpoint of the Republican army  / Orwell - Homage to Catalonia is a modern classic, pretty bleak, but also pretty miopic. He doesn't seem fully aware of the full circumstances, but that may have been his purpose.
Down and Out in Paris and London is essential Orwell reading too.
Just saying.
Which is probably why my original post used those squiggly wee things " known as quotation marks around the quotation.

Enough of this nonsense though.


Sound and music is also evocative:  who can forget Ravel's Bolera as Grant ~ Loren ~ Sinatra dragged a huge cannon from one end of Spain to t'other in the film about the Napoleonic wars 'The Pride and the Passion'?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on December 11, 2019, 04:17:30 PM
I can't remember it, because I'm not a geriatric... yet!   But who can forget Torvill & Dean skating to Ravel's Bolero?... without tugging a ginormous cannon behind 'em.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le9OeXaN4jk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le9OeXaN4jk)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 11, 2019, 04:25:45 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 11, 2019, 03:03:51 PM
You have absolutely no idea whether or not Madeleine was taken to Spain ... Praia da Luz is very close to the Spanish border ... she could have been well on the way to being transported across it before the Policia Judiciaria had arrived to check out the reports of a missing child.

You lost the fascism battle a long time ago.

Perhaps MBM is visiting Guernica even as we speak.

Or perhaps not.

 &%%6
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 11, 2019, 04:30:52 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on December 11, 2019, 04:25:45 PM
You lost the fascism battle a long time ago.

Perhaps MBM is visiting Guernica even as we speak.

Or perhaps not.

 &%%6

portugal has  a history of fascism however much you try and deny it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 11, 2019, 04:47:48 PM
Quote from: Myster on December 11, 2019, 04:17:30 PM
I can't remember it, because I'm not a geriatric... yet!   But who can forget Torvill & Dean skating to Ravel's Bolero?... without tugging a ginormous cannon behind 'em.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le9OeXaN4jk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le9OeXaN4jk)

They competed in the 1984 Winter Olympics in Sarajevo as part of the Great Britain team and won Gold.  I think they can be proud of that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 11, 2019, 05:10:34 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on December 11, 2019, 04:25:45 PM
You lost the fascism battle a long time ago.

Perhaps MBM is visiting Guernica even as we speak.

Or perhaps not.

 &%%6

Unfortunately we all appear to have 'lost' the fascism battle if the resurgence of the far right is anything to go by.

Like other well known extremists "they haven't gone away, you know" and in Portugal the old guard weren't swept away with bunches of carnations in 1974, they remained quietly as very much the Establishment maintaining their roles in for example the judiaciary and the police and getting on with the job.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 11, 2019, 05:17:40 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 11, 2019, 05:10:34 PM
Unfortunately we all appear to have 'lost' the fascism battle if the resurgence of the far right is anything to go by.

Like other well known extremists "they haven't gone away, you know" and in Portugal the old guard weren't swept away with bunches of carnations in 1974, they remained quietly as very much the Establishment maintaining their roles in for example the judiaciary and the police and getting on with the job.
Stinking, fascist cesspit, seething with octogenarian despots maintaining positions of power:

According to the 2017 Global Peace Index, Portugal is the world’s 3rd safest country. Only Iceland and New Zealand are considered safer, and neither has the weather, beaches, or low cost of living that Portugal has. To put it in a bit more perspective, the United Kingdom sits at position 41 and the United States at 159. Basically: Portugal is an extremely safe place to visit, and unless you’re coming from either Iceland or New Zealand, it’s safer than your home country.

It’s also considerably safer than most of the other popular holiday and retirement destinations: Spain sits at position 23, Italy at position 38, and France at position 51. Greece and Turkey are even further down the list.

As with any country, there are safe bits and there are unsafe bits. There are some parts of Lisbon that I wouldn’t recommend tourists go late at night, for example, but these aren’t places that tourists ever go to.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 11, 2019, 05:37:12 PM
Quote from: The General on December 11, 2019, 05:17:40 PM
Stinking, fascist cesspit, seething with octogenarian despots maintaining positions of power:

According to the 2017 Global Peace Index, Portugal is the world’s 3rd safest country. Only Iceland and New Zealand are considered safer, and neither has the weather, beaches, or low cost of living that Portugal has. To put it in a bit more perspective, the United Kingdom sits at position 41 and the United States at 159. Basically: Portugal is an extremely safe place to visit, and unless you’re coming from either Iceland or New Zealand, it’s safer than your home country.

It’s also considerably safer than most of the other popular holiday and retirement destinations: Spain sits at position 23, Italy at position 38, and France at position 51. Greece and Turkey are even further down the list.

As with any country, there are safe bits and there are unsafe bits. There are some parts of Lisbon that I wouldn’t recommend tourists go late at night, for example, but these aren’t places that tourists ever go to.

Have another read... It's the third most peaceful country... Not safest... Whatever that means... Not the third safest

safearound.com/danger-rankings

Here as regards safest countries Portugal comes in at 68th
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 11, 2019, 05:59:11 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 11, 2019, 03:03:51 PM
You have absolutely no idea whether or not Madeleine was taken to Spain ... Praia da Luz is very close to the Spanish border ... she could have been well on the way to being transported across it before the Policia Judiciaria had arrived to check out the reports of a missing child.

Madeleine could have been in Spain before the GNR arrived, let alone the PJ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 11, 2019, 06:11:23 PM
Quote from: The General on December 11, 2019, 05:17:40 PM
Stinking, fascist cesspit, seething with octogenarian despots maintaining positions of power:

According to the 2017 Global Peace Index, Portugal is the world’s 3rd safest country. Only Iceland and New Zealand are considered safer, and neither has the weather, beaches, or low cost of living that Portugal has. To put it in a bit more perspective, the United Kingdom sits at position 41 and the United States at 159. Basically: Portugal is an extremely safe place to visit, and unless you’re coming from either Iceland or New Zealand, it’s safer than your home country.

It’s also considerably safer than most of the other popular holiday and retirement destinations: Spain sits at position 23, Italy at position 38, and France at position 51. Greece and Turkey are even further down the list.

As with any country, there are safe bits and there are unsafe bits. There are some parts of Lisbon that I wouldn’t recommend tourists go late at night, for example, but these aren’t places that tourists ever go to.
New Zealand has some bostin beaches, and way more interesting scenery.  And they all speak English.  Shame about the volcanoes though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 11, 2019, 06:14:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 11, 2019, 05:37:12 PM
Have another read... It's the third most peaceful country... Not safest... Whatever that means... Not the third safest

safearound.com/danger-rankings

Here as regards safest countries Portugal comes in at 68th
And the UK comes much higher up the rankings.  Rule Brittania!   Even Equitorial Guinea is safer than Portugal.  Who knew?!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 11, 2019, 06:23:24 PM
Britain also beats Portugal in the list of least corrupt countries. 

https://www.ranker.com/list/the-most-corrupt-countries-in-the-world/info-lists
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 11, 2019, 07:29:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 11, 2019, 05:37:12 PM
Have another read... It's the third most peaceful country... Not safest... Whatever that means... Not the third safest

safearound.com/danger-rankings

Here as regards safest countries Portugal comes in at 68th
One has to then consider, given this information is in the public domain; this 3rd world, 68th safest, despotic, fascist, backwater, who would leave 3 children under the age of 4 alone, unattended, in an unlocked holiday let, whilst they went out for dinner with friends, drinking and eating? Who would do that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 11, 2019, 07:31:39 PM
Quote from: The General on December 11, 2019, 07:29:42 PM
One has to then consider, given this information is in the public domain; this 3rd world, 68th safest, despotic, backwater, who would leave 3 children under the age of 4 alone, unattended, in an unlocked holiday let, whilst they went out for dinner with friends, drinking and eating? Who would do that?

this was debated in full here several years ago...try using the search function to find it...more point in discussing the dogs  imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 11, 2019, 07:34:11 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 11, 2019, 07:31:39 PM
this was debated in full here several years ago...try using the search function to find it...more point in discussing the dogs  imo
Give it up, mittens, we're being censored out of existence. I'm not allowed to abuse even you any more. What's the point if we can't joust?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 11, 2019, 07:56:55 PM
Quote from: The General on December 11, 2019, 07:29:42 PM
One has to then consider, given this information is in the public domain; this 3rd world, 68th safest, despotic, fascist, backwater, who would leave 3 children under the age of 4 alone, unattended, in an unlocked holiday let, whilst they went out for dinner with friends, drinking and eating? Who would do that?
My parents did in Spain, under Franco (though it was for a bullfight not dinner).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 11, 2019, 08:12:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 11, 2019, 07:56:55 PM
My parents did in Spain, under Franco (though it was for a bullfight not dinner).
Gotta get yer priorities right. Ole!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 11, 2019, 08:37:52 PM
Quote from: The General on December 11, 2019, 07:29:42 PM
One has to then consider, given this information is in the public domain; this 3rd world, 68th safest, despotic, fascist, backwater, who would leave 3 children under the age of 4 alone, unattended, in an unlocked holiday let, whilst they went out for dinner with friends, drinking and eating? Who would do that?

It felt safe. Feelings are important when making important decisions. Imagination is also important. The McCanns never imagined that someone might abduct their child. If they had, obviously they wouldn't have left them alone. As to leaving the patio doors unlocked a couple of reasons were given, but in my opinion that decision was a tiny bit selfish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 11, 2019, 08:56:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 11, 2019, 08:37:52 PM
It felt safe. Feelings are important when making important decisions. Imagination is also important. The McCanns never imagined that someone might abduct their child. If they had, obviously they wouldn't have left them alone. As to leaving the patio doors unlocked a couple of reasons were given, but in my opinion that decision was a tiny bit selfish.
That's apparent. No reasonable person would do what they did if an initial 'thought' had to turned to a concern. But all possible scenarios will flit through the mind of all reasonable people, it's what you do with that information and the 'risk' attached to each of the potential scenarios that counts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 14, 2019, 06:59:39 PM
Does anyone know why the person on the left has been associated with the e-fit on the right?

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 14, 2019, 07:29:25 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 14, 2019, 06:59:39 PM
Does anyone know why the person on the left has been associated with the e-fit on the right?
The one on the right looks a bit like Gerry.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 14, 2019, 07:40:14 PM
‘The one on the right looks a bit like Gerry.’

Can you explain what you mean?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 14, 2019, 07:47:06 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 14, 2019, 07:40:14 PM
‘The one on the right looks a bit like Gerry.’

Can you explain what you mean?
Not much more to say. Dude looks like Gerry.
The one on the left looks a bit like my mate Keith. The fat get.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 14, 2019, 08:04:59 PM
Quote from: The General on December 14, 2019, 07:29:25 PM
The one on the right looks a bit like Gerry.
In your opinion. In mine he looks more like Piers Morgan.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 14, 2019, 08:15:41 PM
I don’t know if you have any recollection of your posts. The following has reference:

‘How is posting pictures of young girls acceptable? Bit weird.
Have you asked her permission?’ - General

The pictures I posted belong to someone else and with consent.

Yet, you are referring to an official e-fit as Madeleine’s dad.

How is that acceptable?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 14, 2019, 08:16:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 14, 2019, 08:04:59 PM
In your opinion. In mine he looks more like Piers Morgan.
Of course it's my opinion, you big fruit, I said 'I think'.
But, errrr, yeh, thanks for pointing that out, I suppose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 14, 2019, 08:20:52 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 14, 2019, 08:15:41 PM
I don’t know if you have any recollection of your posts. The following has reference:

‘How is posting pictures of young girls acceptable? Bit weird.
Have you asked her permission?’ - General

The pictures I posted belong to someone else and with consent.

Yet, you are referring to an official e-fit as Madeleine’s dad.

How is that acceptable?
You're what now?
You were posting pictures of little girls on the internet - that is weird. You asked the girl via Facebook if you could re-post her pictures on this forum? I very much doubt it.

I didn't say it was Madeleine's dad, I said 'it looks a bit like him'.
The other guy looks like my mate Keith.

Not seeing your point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 14, 2019, 08:25:56 PM
Quote from: The General on December 14, 2019, 08:20:52 PM
You're what now?
You were posting pictures of little girls on the internet - that is weird. You asked the girl via Facebook if you could re-post her pictures on this forum? I very much doubt it.

I didn't say it was Madeleine's dad, I said 'it looks a bit like him'.
The other guy looks like my mate Keith.

Not seeing your point.

Watch your language please.  This is not a request.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 14, 2019, 08:45:39 PM
To be clear: the girl in question has been identified by Mr Moreno. I have read his theory and made an attempt to share it on the forum. I have never claimed to be in contact with the girl. I was reposting Moreno’s theory. Girls? The pictures Moreno shared are (supposedly) of the same girl.

Please, don’t associate and attribute another person’s view to me.

Semantics? You didn’t say it is Gerry McCann, but by innuendo you are referring to him?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 14, 2019, 08:50:04 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 14, 2019, 08:45:39 PM
To be clear: the girl in question has been identified by Mr Moreno. I have read his theory and made an attempt to share it on the forum. I have never claimed to be in contact with the girl. I was reposting Moreno’s theory. Girls? The pictures Moreno shared are (supposedly) of the same girl.

Please, don’t associate and attribute another person’s view to me.

Semantics? You didn’t say it is Gerry McCann, but by innuendo you are referring to him?

It's not semantics - it's pretty clear - I said it looked like Gerry.
Semantics?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 14, 2019, 09:37:49 PM
Quote from: The General on December 14, 2019, 08:16:36 PM
Of course it's my opinion, you big fruit, I said 'I think'.
But, errrr, yeh, thanks for pointing that out, I suppose.
What?  You didn’t say “I think”.  Are you hallucinating?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 14, 2019, 09:47:33 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 14, 2019, 09:37:49 PM
What?  You didn’t say “I think”.  Are you hallucinating?
Did too.
Not hallucinating tonight, but vaguely recall talking to spirits in a graveyard in Edinburgh circa '92, dressed only in flip flops and a hotel bed sheet, whilst off my grid on acid. Turns out I'd tripped, hit my head on a gravestone and was 'missing' for 30 minutes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 14, 2019, 09:49:44 PM
Quote from: The General on December 14, 2019, 09:47:33 PM
Did too.
Not hallucinating tonight, but vaguely recall talking to spirits in a graveyard in Edinburgh circa '92, dressed only in flip flops and a hotel bed sheet, whilst off my grid on acid. Turns out I'd tripped, hit my head on a gravestone and was 'missing' for 30 minutes.

And never quite found yourself since.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 14, 2019, 09:51:13 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 14, 2019, 09:49:44 PM
And never quite found yourself since.
Head injuries can be very serious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 14, 2019, 09:52:42 PM
Quote from: The General on December 14, 2019, 07:29:25 PM
The one on the right looks a bit like Gerry.
You did not say “I think”, therefore in my opinion it looks like you must have dreamt it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 14, 2019, 09:53:49 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 14, 2019, 09:49:44 PM
And never quite found yourself since.
Imagine how much of an adversary I would have been had I not been rendered retarded.
Rendered Retarded. Sounds like a 90's indie band from Seattle.
Dibs on the name!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 14, 2019, 09:54:50 PM
Quote from: The General on December 14, 2019, 09:47:33 PM
Did too.
Not hallucinating tonight, but vaguely recall talking to spirits in a graveyard in Edinburgh circa '92, dressed only in flip flops and a hotel bed sheet, whilst off my grid on acid. Turns out I'd tripped, hit my head on a gravestone and was 'missing' for 30 minutes.
Once you’ve done a few trips you can’t be relied on to remember owt accurately imo.  You on one tonight?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 14, 2019, 09:56:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 14, 2019, 09:52:42 PM
You did not say “I think”, therefore in my opinion it looks like you must have dreamt it.
What did I say? CBA looking back in case it's been deleted and I'm disappointed.
What are we talking about? John Podesta's* fotofit?

*allegedly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 14, 2019, 09:58:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 14, 2019, 09:54:50 PM
Once you’ve done a few trips you can’t be relied on to remember owt accurately imo.  You on one tonight?
I left all of that behind me. I literally can't remember 1991.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 14, 2019, 10:03:00 PM
Quote from: The General on December 14, 2019, 09:58:25 PM
I left all of that behind me. I literally can't remember 1991.
The damage has clearly been lasting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 14, 2019, 10:04:50 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 14, 2019, 10:03:00 PM
The damage has clearly been lasting.
Indeed. Worth it though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 14, 2019, 10:23:41 PM
Quote from: The General on December 14, 2019, 09:56:38 PM
What did I say? CBA looking back in case it's been deleted and I'm disappointed.
What are we talking about? John Podesta's* fotofit?

*allegedly.
I quoted what you said!  You really have lost the plot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 15, 2019, 10:31:42 AM
Any one got a google home,alexa thingy or such like,I've a google home,play my music through it nice rich sound,to my ears anyway,hows that for off topic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 15, 2019, 10:45:11 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 15, 2019, 10:31:42 AM
Any one got a google home,alexa thingy or such like,I've a google home,play my music through it nice rich sound,to my ears anyway,hows that for off topic.

Gonçalo chewed through the power wire on my wife's.  It's the only time I've heard him go yip.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 15, 2019, 01:57:12 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 15, 2019, 10:31:42 AM
Any one got a google home,alexa thingy or such like,I've a google home,play my music through it nice rich sound,to my ears anyway,hows that for off topic.

Yep, had an Alexa for years.  Hubby likes gizmos.


Very useful cos it answers your questions like what date is it and what is the weather like in  different places ? ... and general knowledge.   Saves time because the answer comes straight back at you; there is no need to google on the computer..  Plays music too IIRC.  We liked it.


We stopped using it several years ago when we learned that what we were saying and other noises could be listened to by interested parties.  We value our privacy.

Only about a month ago, I read that the * Powers That Be * (The Illuminatii?) will have enough detail against each of us all in two years to be able to complettely control us and minupulate us at will.  The Internet knows our buying patterns, Forums give info, etc and probably emails and banking(?) all help to have produced a network involving us all, it was said.

Dunno how correct this is but we try and keep as much of our personal details off the internet as possible ... just in case.   However, if they want to, I bet they know all about us already.   Same with you guys.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 15, 2019, 09:12:24 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 15, 2019, 10:31:42 AM
Any one got a google home,alexa thingy or such like,I've a google home,play my music through it nice rich sound,to my ears anyway,hows that for off topic.

Actually, if you read back to the beginning of this thread you will see exactly why Pegasus started it ... and it certainly wasn't to play around with non sequiturs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on December 16, 2019, 12:36:39 AM
i have a  apple tv 4 i love it  :D
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 16, 2019, 07:25:47 AM
Quote from: carlymichelle on December 16, 2019, 12:36:39 AM
i have a  apple tv 4 i love it  :D
I do hope the General will be along shortly to take the piss out of your poor grammar. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 08:31:22 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 16, 2019, 07:25:47 AM
I do hope the General will be along shortly to take the piss out of your poor grammar.

In my opinion the General only makes fun of those who need taking down a peg or two.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 16, 2019, 09:01:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 08:31:22 AM
In my opinion the General only makes fun of those who need taking down a peg or two.
I’ve never seen him take the piss out of you and you surely could do with some peg reduction IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2019, 09:33:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 08:31:22 AM
In my opinion the General only makes fun of those who need taking down a peg or two.

And do you think he manages that... I think he fails miserably ...i dont take offence...its just a bit of banter
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 16, 2019, 09:42:32 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2019, 09:33:52 AM
And do you think he manages that... I think he fails miserably
You missed the question mark.
And the efficacy of my piss-taking is directly correlated to the level of unwarranted moderation I receive. Your gatekeepers Cerberus and Orthrus see to that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 16, 2019, 09:52:33 AM
Quote from: The General on December 16, 2019, 09:42:32 AM
You missed the question mark.
And the efficacy of my piss-taking is directly correlated to the level of unwarranted moderation I receive. Your gatekeepers Cerberus and Orthrus see to that.
So you take the piss out of fellow members because of your frustration with the way you are moderated?  I see...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2019, 10:17:20 AM
Quote from: The General on December 16, 2019, 09:42:32 AM
You missed the question mark.
And the efficacy of my piss-taking is directly correlated to the level of unwarranted moderation I receive. Your gatekeepers Cerberus and Orthrus see to that.

so what effect do you think your piss taking has ....apart from making you appera to be an utter *******....replace with tomorrows word. Do you imagine it has any effect....id say you are totally deluded. I have never reported one of your posts because they simply dont offend me
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 16, 2019, 10:20:09 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2019, 10:17:20 AM
so what effect do you think your piss taking has ....apart from making you appera to be an utter *******....replace with tomorrows word. Do you imagine it has any effect....id say you are totally deluded. I have never reported one of your posts because they simply dont offend me
@)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 10:24:44 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 16, 2019, 09:52:33 AM
So you take the piss out of fellow members because of your frustration with the way you are moderated?  I see...

In my opinion that's not what the General said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on December 16, 2019, 10:32:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 10:24:44 AM
In my opinion that's not what the General said.

i think the  thing is  g unit   we   skeptics  dont take  it seriously as the  supporters  on here they treat the forum like it is a military  ship in the end  we will all never  agree  but thats fine how  boring would life be if we  agreed with everybody??
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 16, 2019, 10:41:05 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 16, 2019, 10:20:09 AM
@)(++(*
That's quite a tirade for someone who doesn't care.

*Edit: yeh, not you, him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 16, 2019, 10:41:39 AM
Quote from: The General on December 16, 2019, 10:41:05 AM
That's quite a tirade for someone who doesn't care.
No, that’s a laughing emoticon not a tirade.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on December 16, 2019, 10:43:02 AM
Quote from: The General on December 16, 2019, 10:41:05 AM
That's quite a tirade for someone who doesn't care.

*Edit: yeh, not you, him.

  i think some on this  forum are internet trolls   ( not you of course lol)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 16, 2019, 10:46:04 AM
Quote from: carlymichelle on December 16, 2019, 10:43:02 AM
  i think some on this  forum are internet trolls   ( not you of course lol)
Says the poster whose only ever contribution is to pour petrol on the flames.  Laughable!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 16, 2019, 10:54:42 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 16, 2019, 10:46:04 AM
Says the poster whose only ever contribution is to pour petrol on the flames.  Laughable!
We get it. Maybe ease off now you've made your point?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 16, 2019, 10:58:45 AM
I'm gonna tell John of you lot if you don't stop it.  Trust me, I mean it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on December 16, 2019, 11:00:25 AM
Quote from: The General on December 16, 2019, 10:54:42 AM
We get it. Maybe ease off now you've made your point?

i just think some on here are too emotionally involved  theres supposed to be a  rule on this forum   debate the post  and   not attack the poster  no one follows that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 16, 2019, 11:02:52 AM
Quote from: carlymichelle on December 16, 2019, 11:00:25 AM
i just think some on here are too emotionally involved  theres supposed to be a  rule on this forum   debate the post  and   not attack the poster  no one follows that

This means you as well.  See my post above.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 16, 2019, 11:11:56 AM
Quote from: carlymichelle on December 16, 2019, 11:00:25 AM
i just think some on here are too emotionally involved  theres supposed to be a  rule on this forum   debate the post  and   not attack the poster  no one follows that
 
Says the person who posted this baiting post -   

  i think some on this  forum are internet trolls   ( not you of course lol)

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 16, 2019, 11:49:24 AM
Quote from: Lace on December 16, 2019, 11:11:56 AM
 
Says the person who posted this baiting post -   

  i think some on this  forum are internet trolls   ( not you of course lol)

Question for today - Troll or Zealot, which are you ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 11:51:30 AM
Perhaps we should remember whose baiting post started this quarrel?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2019, 12:12:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 11:51:30 AM
Perhaps we should remember whose baiting post started this quarrel?

Yes... The Generals continued baiting of my posts Re spelling
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 01:18:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2019, 12:12:18 PM
Yes... The Generals continued baiting of my posts Re spelling

Nope. The General made no comment, baiting or otherwise.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg565547#msg565547
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 16, 2019, 01:22:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 01:18:00 PM
Nope. The General made no comment, baiting or otherwise.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg565547#msg565547
I'm an easy target because I'm the most educated, erudite and illuminating dude here - everyone wants a shot at the title.
'Everyone thinks they can beat you until they get punched in the face'. Mike Tyson.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2019, 01:52:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 01:18:00 PM
Nope. The General made no comment, baiting or otherwise.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg565547#msg565547

It's the Generals baiting of me in general... That has started this.  You even admitted he does it to take posters down a peg or two... In his, dreams
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2019, 01:54:47 PM
Quote from: The General on December 16, 2019, 01:22:23 PM
I'm an easy target because I'm the most educated, erudite and illuminating dude here - everyone wants a shot at the title.
'Everyone thinks they can beat you until they get punched in the face'. Mike Tyson.

Perhaps you've just taken too many headshots.... And you aren't the hotshot you think you are.. But are more chump than champ
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 16, 2019, 02:04:10 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2019, 01:54:47 PM
Perhaps you've just taken too many headshots.... And you aren't the hotshot you think you are.. But are more chump than champ
........YANK.............'here's the first one, Karen! .........zzzzzzzz........' (frantically reels in the first overtly sensitive egomaniac)
'What is it General?'
'.....it's.......urghh......predictably Karen, it's a Davros..........you can hook them with a cat turd on a piece of string'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 02:11:37 PM
Quote from: The General on December 16, 2019, 01:22:23 PM
I'm an easy target because I'm the most educated, erudite and illuminating dude here - everyone wants a shot at the title.
'Everyone thinks they can beat you until they get punched in the face'. Mike Tyson.

Some certainly seem rather perturbed by you. So much so that they've taken to using you to threaten/goad third parties.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2019, 02:20:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 02:11:37 PM
Some certainly seem rather perturbed by you. So much so that they've taken to using you to threaten/goad third parties.  @)(++(*
It's a discussion forum... It's not real life
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 16, 2019, 02:20:19 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 16, 2019, 11:49:24 AM
Question for today - Troll or Zealot, which are you ?

I'm neither.   Just someone who wants to debate the McCann case occasionally.

Another favourite with Carly is the pro McCann's are too emotionally involved!!  What???   I'd like her to give an example but of course she wouldn't,  she just like to leave posts that wind people up and then go away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 02:29:25 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2019, 02:20:14 PM
It's a discussion forum... It's not real life

The forum is real. Sometimes the conversations are slanging matches rather than discussions imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2019, 02:46:06 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 02:29:25 PM
The forum is real. Sometimes the conversations are slanging matches rather than discussions imo.

You seem to support the General trying to put me in my place... So you are encouraging the slanging match
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 04:07:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 16, 2019, 02:46:06 PM
You seem to support the General trying to put me in my place... So you are encouraging the slanging match

Slanging is an attack on someone using abusive language. Something you are guilty of doing imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2019, 04:27:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 16, 2019, 04:07:40 PM
Slanging is an attack on someone using abusive language. Something you are guilty of doing imo.

Only when I'm attacked with abuse and when posters need taking down a peg or two... Which you obviously approve of.
Might be best to give up this personal attack on me... It will get you  nowhere
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 16, 2019, 04:30:20 PM
Members are advised that future posts criticising each other are going to be deleted.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 17, 2019, 09:02:47 PM
To me, this picture represents the truth re. Madeleine.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 17, 2019, 09:06:14 PM


Ahhhh, yes. She was loved. Although perhaps not as much as Tapas.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 18, 2019, 12:46:01 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 17, 2019, 09:02:47 PM
To me, this picture represents the truth re. Madeleine.

You can solve a case from a photo. How extraordinary!

How many photos have you got of a nearly 4 years old Maddy with her mum?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 18, 2019, 03:27:46 PM
‘You can solve a case from a photo. How extraordinary!
How many photos have you got of a nearly 4 years old Maddy with her mum?’

Your presumptuousness is overbearing. How does sharing a photo which clearly shows the bond between a mother and her child translate to solving a case?
As regards your second statement; surely you realise that back in 2007 people were dependent on others taking photos of them. Long before the ‘selfie’ came into being.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 18, 2019, 04:15:12 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 18, 2019, 03:27:46 PM
‘You can solve a case from a photo. How extraordinary!
How many photos have you got of a nearly 4 years old Maddy with her mum?’

Your presumptuousness is overbearing. How does sharing a photo which clearly shows the bond between a mother and her child translate to solving a case?
As regards your second statement; surely you realise that back in 2007 people were dependent on others taking photos of them. Long before the ‘selfie’ came into being.

I think the first mobile phones capable of taking selfies were marketed in the UK in 2003.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 18, 2019, 05:41:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 18, 2019, 04:15:12 PM
I think the first mobile phones capable of taking selfies were marketed in the UK in 2003.
it didn’t become a widely available feature on phones until much later though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 18, 2019, 07:59:40 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 18, 2019, 03:27:46 PM
‘You can solve a case from a photo. How extraordinary!
How many photos have you got of a nearly 4 years old Maddy with her mum?’

Your presumptuousness is overbearing. How does sharing a photo which clearly shows the bond between a mother and her child translate to solving a case?
As regards your second statement; surely you realise that back in 2007 people were dependent on others taking photos of them. Long before the ‘selfie’ came into being.

Truth  *%87

Smile of a killer: Rose West pictured with Mae as a baby
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/08/31/21/4F92BD0200000578-0-image-m-16_1535747765012.jpg)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6120107/How-survived-growing-House-Horrors-Fred-Rose-Wests-daughter.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 18, 2019, 08:04:59 PM
Here we go again: equating the McCanns with psychopathic serial killers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 18, 2019, 08:06:26 PM
I didn't write that caption. The link is there to see it! What an absurd post by Anthro. Truth lol.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 18, 2019, 08:12:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 18, 2019, 08:04:59 PM
Here we go again: equating the McCanns with psychopathic serial killers.


When was the last time ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 18, 2019, 08:42:58 PM
You clearly do not have the capacity to see the reality and truth in the picture of Kate and Madeleine. It really is simple. You have latched onto the discussion an unrelated case. Absurd? Perhaps you.

Didn’t you have your theory explained on the forum? Please tell what the outcome was.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 18, 2019, 08:44:46 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 18, 2019, 08:12:25 PM

When was the last time ?
I suggest you do a forum search for the names Harold Shipman, Ted Bundy, Rose West etc if you really want to know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 18, 2019, 08:59:23 PM
I happened to be chatting to a social worker yesterday and after hollys post... I thought I would ask what she thought about the McCann case.  I was quite surprised.  She said she thought there, was, a, man hanging around all week who seemed suspicious and may be the abductor... No mention of neglect.  It made me think she deals with some pretty awful parents and cases of real neglect and to her the mccanns simply were not bad parents.. Think about it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 18, 2019, 10:24:52 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 18, 2019, 08:42:58 PM
You clearly do not have the capacity to see the reality and truth in the picture of Kate and Madeleine. It really is simple. You have latched onto the discussion an unrelated case. Absurd? Perhaps you.

Didn’t you have your theory explained on the forum? Please tell what the outcome was.

Smithman carried Madeleine away and was seen by eye witnesses so he checked his watch for his alibi 22:03 (my avatar). The timeline was changed to cover it up. 28 pages on my theory thread.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2019, 08:18:12 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on December 18, 2019, 10:24:52 PM
Smithman carried Madeleine away and was seen by eye witnesses so he checked his watch for his alibi 22:03 (my avatar). The timeline was changed to cover it up. 28 pages on my theory thread.
So they’re all in on it.  Got to love a conspiracy theory!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2019, 08:23:02 AM
When’s the penny going to drop for the police Psthfinder?  They’re off investigsting german paedos if Amaral is to be believed.  How do you explain this, when it’s so obvious to you who dunnit and who was involved? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 19, 2019, 08:28:58 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 19, 2019, 08:23:02 AM
When’s the penny going to drop for the police Psthfinder?  They’re off investigsting german paedos if Amaral is to be believed.  How do you explain this, when it’s so obvious to you who dunnit and who was involved?
Classic diversionary tactic, straight out of the Interpol playbook. Let them settle in, play the long game, throw a few German paedos in to the mix.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2019, 08:36:46 AM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on December 18, 2019, 10:24:52 PM
Smithman carried Madeleine away and was seen by eye witnesses so he checked his watch for his alibi 22:03 (my avatar). The timeline was changed to cover it up. 28 pages on my theory thread.

You have a theory.. Like many.. Based on your understanding/misunderstanding of the evidence,  with no proof to support it.  I have a theory.. My theory is your theory is codswallop.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 19, 2019, 08:36:56 AM
Quote from: The General on December 19, 2019, 08:28:58 AM
Classic diversionary tactic, straight out of the Interpol playbook. Let them settle in, play the long game, throw a few German paedos in to the mix.

How long is this game going to go on for?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2019, 08:37:04 AM
Quote from: The General on December 19, 2019, 08:28:58 AM
Classic diversionary tactic, straight out of the Interpol playbook. Let them settle in, play the long game, throw a few German paedos in to the mix.
How would you describe your riposte?  Perhaps you could explain why my question is not perfectly valid, questioning as it does the illogicality of Pathfinder’s thought processes?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2019, 08:38:38 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 19, 2019, 08:36:56 AM
How long is this game going to go on for?
My understanding of Pathfinder’s theory is that the police are playing the longest game available - ie waiting for the final piece of the jigsaw to fall into their laps.  Apparently they can’t be arsed to go and look for it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2019, 08:59:26 AM

Pathfinder is going to look pretty damn foolish when SY nail that abductor paedo who looks like Maddie's dad.

Shouldn't be much longer now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2019, 09:02:52 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2019, 08:59:26 AM
Pathfinder is going to look pretty damn foolish when SY nail that abductor paedo who looks like Maddie's dad.

Shouldn't be much longer now.
Classic diversionary tactic, straight out of the Interpol playbook. Let them settle in, play the long game, throw a few German paedos in to the mix.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 19, 2019, 12:37:21 PM
Pathfinder, from your latest reply it seems that you have solved the case? The irony of labelling me as having solved the case and absurd. Can you please share what the outcome of your theory was?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 19, 2019, 01:40:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 19, 2019, 08:18:12 AM
So they’re all in on it.  Got to love a conspiracy theory!

How did they all have to be in on it? We are talking minutes here not hours. The sighting was minutes away from the tapas.  Many didn't know what time it when the alarm was raised so a few could use that to their advantage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2019, 05:02:55 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on December 19, 2019, 01:40:49 PM
How did they all have to be in on it? We are talking minutes here not hours. The sighting was minutes away from the tapas.  Many didn't know what time it when the alarm was raised so a few could use that to their advantage.
”the timeline was changed to cover it up”.  You wrote that.  Who wrote the timeline?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 19, 2019, 05:10:22 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 19, 2019, 05:02:55 PM
”the timeline was changed to cover it up”.  You wrote that.  Who wrote the timeline?
Which one?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2019, 05:26:54 PM
Quote from: The General on December 19, 2019, 05:10:22 PM
Which one?
The one that was changed, obviously.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 19, 2019, 07:37:59 PM
My theory thread will cover timelines but here's one example:

Russell said he returned to the table at 9:45 and on the timeline it was 9:55 and Kate left 5 minutes later at 10pm. Matt said Kate left at 9:50 which is 5 minutes after 9:45 corroborating Russell's time. That's a 10 minute discrepancy. The later 10pm time was the same time Smithman was seen. If one was Smithman the timeline was changed to rule them out of the sighting.

(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/timeline040507.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2019, 08:23:19 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on December 19, 2019, 07:37:59 PM
My theory thread will cover timelines but here's one example:

Russell said he returned to the table at 9:45 and on the timeline it was 9:55 and Kate left 5 minutes later at 10pm. Matt said Kate left at 9:50 which is 5 minutes after 9:45 corroborating Russell's time. That's a 10 minute discrepancy. The later 10pm time was the same time Smithman was seen. If one was Smithman the timeline was changed to rule them out of the sighting.

(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/timeline040507.jpg)
So they were all in on it then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on December 19, 2019, 09:37:00 PM
does anyone  find it  funny posts that are off topic are being  deleted   in a   off topic thread?? @)(++(* some might  call it  censorship
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2019, 09:42:11 PM
Quote from: carlymichelle on December 19, 2019, 09:37:00 PM
does anyone  find it  funny posts that are off topic are being  deleted   in a   off topic thread?? @)(++(* some might  call it  censorship
The posts that were deleted were quite offensive to any decent thinking person.  I noticed you liked them.  Says it all really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 19, 2019, 09:46:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 19, 2019, 09:42:11 PM
The posts that were deleted were quite offensive to any decent thinking person.  I noticed you liked them.  Says it all really.


You mean like wot you are?  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on December 19, 2019, 09:50:02 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 19, 2019, 09:46:19 PM

You mean like wot you are?  8(0(*

I'm not too sure which posts have been deleted but some have been offensive in the last few days.
Unless you agree with racist, and homophobic posts?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 19, 2019, 09:52:41 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 19, 2019, 09:46:19 PM

You mean like wot you are?  8(0(*

As per usual, the reporters tried to make the posts as being directed at Madeleine, where as in fact it was a bit of fun poked at the ludicrous claims of the Tapas group and their  unbelievable stupid timelines!

And Gerry and Kate like a bit of fun... we have seen pictures of them doing just that!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 19, 2019, 09:54:10 PM
Quote from: Erngath on December 19, 2019, 09:50:02 PM
I'm not too sure which posts have been deleted but some have been offensive in the last few days.
Unless you agree with racist, and homophobic posts?


Which were they then? I saw no such posts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on December 19, 2019, 10:01:17 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 19, 2019, 09:54:10 PM

Which were they then? I saw no such posts

Did you not?

The word " bum boy" "picanninies " "letter box" were included in the post.
I'm sure the author of said post will soon claim authorship of the  post.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 19, 2019, 10:21:50 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 19, 2019, 09:54:10 PM

Which were they then? I saw no such posts

You have to look for them even when they are not there.   ?>)()<
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2019, 10:25:13 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 19, 2019, 09:46:19 PM

You mean like wot you are?  8(0(*
Exactly.  I don’t find the idea of paedophile abductors comical under any circumstances, do you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 19, 2019, 10:29:28 PM
Well, the parents had a laugh or two about their daughters situation:
Kate- "she will give her tuppence worth"
 There are numerous pictures of them laughing and Kate mentioned in her book about CF... erm um well best not say anything about that!

No one was discussing MBM. it was the parents and their pathetic attempt  IMO to make a  serious claim about jemmied shutters, whooshing curtains and moving doors!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2019, 10:32:47 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on December 19, 2019, 10:29:28 PM
Well, the parents had a laugh or two about their daughters situation:
Kate- "she will give her tuppence worth"
 There are numerous pictures of them laughing and Kate mentioned in her book about CF... erm um well best not say anything about that!

No one was discussing MBM. it was the parents and their pathetic attempt  IMO to make a  serious claim about jemmied shutters, whooshing curtains and moving doors!
The fact that you think the parents had a laugh or two about maddies situation shows just how deluded you are.. Imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on December 19, 2019, 10:33:44 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on December 19, 2019, 10:29:28 PM
Well, the parents had a laugh or two about their daughters situation:
Kate- "she will give her tuppence worth"
 There are numerous pictures of them laughing and Kate mentioned in her book about CF... erm um well best not say anything about that!

No one was discussing MBM. it was the parents and their pathetic attempt  IMO to make a  serious claim about jemmied shutters, whooshing curtains and moving doors!

Someone will like this post.
Some will wonder why you bothered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 19, 2019, 10:35:56 PM
Some will think I care.  (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on December 19, 2019, 10:38:12 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on December 19, 2019, 10:35:56 PM
Some will think I care.  (&^&

That's good to know you don't !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 20, 2019, 10:53:59 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on December 19, 2019, 10:29:28 PM
Well, the parents had a laugh or two about their daughters situation:
Kate- "she will give her tuppence worth"
 There are numerous pictures of them laughing and Kate mentioned in her book about CF... erm um well best not say anything about that!

No one was discussing MBM. it was the parents and their pathetic attempt  IMO to make a  serious claim about jemmied shutters, whooshing curtains and moving doors!

Giving ones tuppence worth -  To share one's opinion, idea, or point of view, regardless of whether or not others want to hear it. Primarily heard in UK, Australia.

Please give a cite where the McCann's laugh about Madeleine's situation.

You are obsessed with the jemmied shutters whooshing curtains and moving doors aren't you,  all of which have been debated about yet you still bring them into your posts as if they mean something.

Did CF have 'paedo' emblazoned on his forehead?   NO.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 20, 2019, 12:15:10 PM
Some people seem to think the McCanns made friends with CF because they knew he was a paedo IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 20, 2019, 01:21:24 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 19, 2019, 08:23:19 PM
So they were all in on it then.

No they don't but these strange timelines reveal a lot  -  9:15 Gerry went to check on Madeleine when in his arguido interview he gave an exact time of 9:04. Think that's called Takin the piss!

10 minute discrepancy yet again. Catching on yet? You will when the truth is out!

(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/timeline040507.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 20, 2019, 01:54:47 PM
Quote from: Erngath on December 19, 2019, 10:01:17 PM
Did you not?

The word " bum boy" "picanninies " "letter box" were included in the post.
I'm sure the author of said post will soon claim authorship of the  post.

Wasn’t that Bojo...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on December 20, 2019, 02:03:50 PM
Quote from: carlymichelle on December 19, 2019, 09:37:00 PM
does anyone  find it  funny posts that are off topic are being  deleted   in a   off topic thread?? @)(++(* some might  call it  censorship

I don't find it funny at all. Valuable resources are constantly deployed to ensure that posts which breach the forum rules are removed. If all posters refrained from posting abusive material we mods wouldn't have to remove them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on December 20, 2019, 02:05:24 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 20, 2019, 12:15:10 PM
Some people seem to think the McCanns made friends with CF because they knew he was a paedo.  IMO.

How could they have been so stupid?  But then they did go on holiday with three toddlers but return with two due to their stupidity!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on December 20, 2019, 02:44:56 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on December 20, 2019, 01:54:47 PM
Wasn’t that Bojo...


I believe he has used one of those offensive descriptions but he is as far as I know not the poster on this forum who posted all of these offensive words.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 20, 2019, 02:47:15 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on December 20, 2019, 01:21:24 PM
No they don't but these strange timelines reveal a lot  -  9:15 Gerry went to check on Madeleine when in his arguido interview he gave an exact time of 9:04. Think that's called Takin the piss!

10 minute discrepancy yet again. Catching on yet? You will when the truth is out!

(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/timeline040507.jpg)

Although Russell wrote the timeline Gerry cleary helped because Russell had no other way of knowing that the bedroom door was open. Russell changed his mind slightly the following day about when Gerry left, but he had an interesting take on when he returned;

He recalls that Matthew Oldfield left the restaurant at shortly after 9pm to check the children. He is no longer sure who went out first, but five minutes later, Gerry McCann and his own partner, Jane, went out, almost at the same time, to check the children. Jane could have come back first because she found Gerry chatting with a person who is also a guest in the same place, named Jez. He thinks that Jane only checked their apartment, being worried about ****. Then Gerry came back at around 9.25/9.30 and they started to eat the first course.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on December 20, 2019, 04:58:31 PM
It seems we have a lot of guests on the forum today, has something unusual occurred?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 20, 2019, 05:15:11 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 20, 2019, 04:58:31 PM
It seems we have a lot of guests on the forum today, has something unusual occurred?

Yep.  Everyone is behaving like dick heads.  None of you do yourselves any favours.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 20, 2019, 05:15:30 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 20, 2019, 04:58:31 PM
It seems we have a lot of guests on the forum today, has something unusual occurred?

Yeah,a Brexit bill got through the Commons. ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on December 20, 2019, 05:54:08 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 20, 2019, 05:15:30 PM
Yeah,a Brexit bill got through the Commons. ?{)(**

Woopie doo dah  @)(++(*

BREXIT here we come...   B-Day 31 January 2020
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 20, 2019, 06:06:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 20, 2019, 02:47:15 PM
Although Russell wrote the timeline Gerry cleary helped because Russell had no other way of knowing that the bedroom door was open. Russell changed his mind slightly the following day about when Gerry left, but he had an interesting take on when he returned;

He recalls that Matthew Oldfield left the restaurant at shortly after 9pm to check the children. He is no longer sure who went out first, but five minutes later, Gerry McCann and his own partner, Jane, went out, almost at the same time, to check the children. Jane could have come back first because she found Gerry chatting with a person who is also a guest in the same place, named Jez. He thinks that Jane only checked their apartment, being worried about ****. Then Gerry came back at around 9.25/9.30 and they started to eat the first course.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN.htm

Russell later said he could not recall when Gerry returned after his check. Matt and Russell later said they left the table at 9.25 to check and that was after they had their starters. When Russell later returned he had his main course.

So Jane actually got up, erm, and went over and did a check, erm, and then came back.  And I don’t remember her saying anything about Gerry talking or, or, or, or any problems in the room or having seen anyone, I think she just, she just did the check and returned.  Erm, and, erm, I presume at some point, although I can’t picture it, you know, Gerry himself coming back.
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN_ROGATORY.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 20, 2019, 06:18:35 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 20, 2019, 04:58:31 PM
It seems we have a lot of guests on the forum today, has something unusual occurred?

Im not at all convinced there are so many guests on this forum...it seems its more like bots and spiders
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 20, 2019, 09:00:36 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 20, 2019, 06:18:35 PM
Im not at all convinced there are so many guests on this forum...it seems its more like bots and spiders

It could well be..this is written in php machine language. Great for creating bots, and mischief. This isn't a secure site, we all know this right?

However, I agree there are visitors who read, as I know people who just read and are not members.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 20, 2019, 09:27:37 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on December 20, 2019, 06:06:36 PM
Russell later said he could not recall when Gerry returned after his check. Matt and Russell later said they left the table at 9.25 to check and that was after they had their starters. When Russell later returned he had his main course.

So Jane actually got up, erm, and went over and did a check, erm, and then came back.  And I don’t remember her saying anything about Gerry talking or, or, or, or any problems in the room or having seen anyone, I think she just, she just did the check and returned.  Erm, and, erm, I presume at some point, although I can’t picture it, you know, Gerry himself coming back.
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN_ROGATORY.htm

His memory was fresh on 4th May, not so fresh a year later. Two of the Tapas staff mentioned a 30 minute absence also;
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS-EMPLOYEES.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 20, 2019, 09:29:37 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on December 20, 2019, 02:05:24 PM
How could they have been so stupid?  But then they did go on holiday with three toddlers but return with two due to their stupidity!
Would you have known CF was a paedo prior to the media revelations? If so, how?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 20, 2019, 09:33:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 20, 2019, 09:27:37 PM
His memory was fresh on 4th May, not so fresh a year later. Two of the Tapas staff mentioned a 30 minute absence also;
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS-EMPLOYEES.htm

i can see one claim of 30 but that he returned before kate left the table.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 20, 2019, 10:29:44 PM
“We can iggy that” - what, like one of the stooges you mean?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 20, 2019, 11:10:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 20, 2019, 09:29:37 PM
Would you have known CF was a paedo prior to the media revelations? If so, how?

I'm never happy about accusations made when the person is not around and able to defend him/herself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 21, 2019, 09:26:15 AM
Quote from: Erngath on December 20, 2019, 02:44:56 PM

I believe he has used one of those offensive descriptions but he is as far as I know not the poster on this forum who posted all of these offensive words.

I made them comments on the Brexit thread.

All the terms I used were previously used by Boris Johnson.

My sincere apologies to any that were offended.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on December 21, 2019, 09:41:34 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 21, 2019, 09:26:15 AM
I made them comments on the Brexit thread.

All the terms I used were previously used by Boris Johnson.

My sincere apologies to any that were offended.

I knew he had used one of those offensive IMO descriptions but didn't realize that he had used all three!
What a wonderful Prime Minister he is !
How lucky are we to have such an inspirational leader in this 21 st century !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 21, 2019, 10:16:15 AM
Does anyone know if the telephone records between Mark Warner reservations in the United Kingdom and the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz have been looked at and analysed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 21, 2019, 10:33:31 AM
Quote from: Erngath on December 21, 2019, 09:41:34 AM
I knew he had used one of those offensive IMO descriptions but didn't realize that he had used all three!
What a wonderful Prime Minister he is !
How lucky are we to have such an inspirational leader in this 21 st century !

In the end there was no alternative imo. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 21, 2019, 10:35:09 AM
Quote from: Anthro on December 21, 2019, 10:16:15 AM
Does anyone know if the telephone records between Mark Warner reservations in the United Kingdom and the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz have been looked at and analysed?

I don't think so. What is it you want to know?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 21, 2019, 10:36:36 AM
Quote from: Anthro on December 21, 2019, 10:16:15 AM
Does anyone know if the telephone records between Mark Warner reservations in the United Kingdom and the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz have been looked at and analysed?

I would like to have a look at several other Phone Records.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 21, 2019, 11:42:37 AM
‘I don’t think so. What is it you want to know?’

A forensic trail.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 21, 2019, 12:25:55 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 21, 2019, 11:42:37 AM
‘I don’t think so. What is it you want to know?’

A forensic trail.

I don't think the first investigation thought to collect that information. I know that Mark Warner collected certain information from it's clients, but not how this was passed on to the people working for Greentrust, which ran the Ocean Club.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 21, 2019, 01:13:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 21, 2019, 12:25:55 PM
I don't think the first investigation thought to collect that information. I know that Mark Warner collected certain information from it's clients, but not how this was passed on to the people working for Greentrust, which ran the Ocean Club.

According to Scotland Yard, the phone records had been "looked at" during the initial Portuguese police investigation but not in detail.

Jim Gamble, the former head of the UK's Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre told the BBC's Today programme he had recommended the "cell dump" was looked at again in his 2010 review of the case.
_________________________________________________________________

Mr Gamble said the EU data retention directive, which compels telephone companies to retain call and internet records for a period of time, was at an "immature stage" in 2007.

But he said it appeared the data "wasn't properly or appropriately interrogated," at the time.

In UK investigations, he would expect the data to have been examined almost immediately, he said, but the "complex nature and geography" had made it more difficult.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24386130


The information was available to the first investigation I just don't think they used it properly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 21, 2019, 01:32:48 PM

Dibujos animados.

Dibujo means drawing, animado means animated, so you get cartoons.

This is an artificial intelligence version.  It maps the face of a drawing, then animates it because it knows how faces work.

Click on the link for an animated Eleanor.

https://elpais.com/elpais/2019/12/18/ciencia/1576667541_021128.html

 (&^&

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 21, 2019, 01:35:33 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on December 21, 2019, 01:32:48 PM
Dibujos animados.

Dibujo means drawing, animado means animated, so you get cartoons.

This is an artificial intelligence version.  It maps the face of a drawing, then animates it because it knows how faces work.

Click on the link for an animated Eleanor.

https://elpais.com/elpais/2019/12/18/ciencia/1576667541_021128.html

 (&^&

Better looking than I first thought.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 21, 2019, 02:10:17 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 21, 2019, 01:13:25 PM
According to Scotland Yard, the phone records had been "looked at" during the initial Portuguese police investigation but not in detail.

Jim Gamble, the former head of the UK's Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre told the BBC's Today programme he had recommended the "cell dump" was looked at again in his 2010 review of the case.
_________________________________________________________________

Mr Gamble said the EU data retention directive, which compels telephone companies to retain call and internet records for a period of time, was at an "immature stage" in 2007.

But he said it appeared the data "wasn't properly or appropriately interrogated," at the time.

In UK investigations, he would expect the data to have been examined almost immediately, he said, but the "complex nature and geography" had made it more difficult.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24386130


The information was available to the first investigation I just don't think they used it properly.

I haven't seen anything relating to phone calls from Mark Warner in London to Greentrust in PdL.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 21, 2019, 05:06:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 21, 2019, 02:10:17 PM
I haven't seen anything relating to phone calls from Mark Warner in London to Greentrust in PdL.

Neither have I but apparently unlike you I haven't been looking.  Anyway why do you think a private company with a vested interest should have anything to do with evidence in a criminal investigation if not for the purpose of handing it directly to the police.

I have given a link which suggests the police had information regarding phone calls early days in the investigation and that it " ...  "wasn't properly or appropriately interrogated," at the time. (Jim Gamble); in my opinion the proof of that lies in the attention given to the phone traffic of the McCanns and their friends proving both points. 
(a)  the information was at hand and available.
(b)  the information was not interrogated as it should have been.
Amaral took his eye off the ball in his eagerness to nail the McCanns by concentrating on them and Murat and by the look of it, while ignoring all else that was going on around him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 21, 2019, 05:37:39 PM
We all know what happened in 2014 after a deep audit of phone data by OG.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 21, 2019, 06:49:54 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 21, 2019, 05:37:39 PM
We all know what happened in 2014 after a deep audit of phone data by OG.

I don't ... nor do I remember them telling anyone else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 21, 2019, 07:51:34 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 21, 2019, 05:06:14 PM
Neither have I but apparently unlike you I haven't been looking.  Anyway why do you think a private company with a vested interest should have anything to do with evidence in a criminal investigation if not for the purpose of handing it directly to the police.

I have given a link which suggests the police had information regarding phone calls early days in the investigation and that it " ...  "wasn't properly or appropriately interrogated," at the time. (Jim Gamble); in my opinion the proof of that lies in the attention given to the phone traffic of the McCanns and their friends proving both points. 
(a)  the information was at hand and available.
(b)  the information was not interrogated as it should have been.
Amaral took his eye off the ball in his eagerness to nail the McCanns by concentrating on them and Murat and by the look of it, while ignoring all else that was going on around him.

I can't see why the particular evidence mentioned would be relevant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 21, 2019, 08:26:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 21, 2019, 07:51:34 PM
I can't see why the particular evidence mentioned would be relevant.

It probably wasn't except for elimination purposes.  The problem would have been that what was recognised by law enforcement as a very useful investigative tool was not utilised as it should have been ... a bit like being unable to see the wood for the trees.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 21, 2019, 08:51:45 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 21, 2019, 08:26:11 PM
It probably wasn't except for elimination purposes.  The problem would have been that what was recognised by law enforcement as a very useful investigative tool was not utilised as it should have been ... a bit like being unable to see the wood for the trees.

Or perhaps some Phone Records that they didn't want looked at.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 21, 2019, 09:08:45 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 21, 2019, 06:49:54 PM
I don't ... nor do I remember them telling anyone else.

Mark Rowley talking about phone data in relation to the four suspects (Arguido's) in 2014

MR: So that phone data is always something we will look at and we wouldn’t have had it available if
the Portuguese had not got hold of it at the time so we need to be careful about criticism. But we had
the data available and we worked with the Portuguese and that was part of the background to do with
phone data and various sightings. There was enough there to say, not to prove the case, but there
was something worth looking at in more detail and that’s what we did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 21, 2019, 09:09:11 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 21, 2019, 08:51:45 PM
Or perhaps some Phone Records that they didn't want looked at.

There is that.
I think the conspiracy theorists might very well have dipped their poison pens into overdrive into the wrong conspiracy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 21, 2019, 09:10:24 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 21, 2019, 09:08:45 PM
Mark Rowley talking about phone data in relation to the four suspects (Arguido's) in 2014

MR: So that phone data is always something we will look at and we wouldn’t have had it available if
the Portuguese had not got hold of it at the time so we need to be careful about criticism. But we had
the data available and we worked with the Portuguese and that was part of the background to do with
phone data and various sightings. There was enough there to say, not to prove the case, but there
was something worth looking at in more detail and that’s what we did.

                 Quite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 21, 2019, 09:11:33 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 21, 2019, 09:10:24 PM
                 Quite.


Yep it proved worthless as it happened,save to drag 4 innocents into the saga.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 21, 2019, 09:12:17 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 21, 2019, 09:09:11 PM
There is that.
I think the conspiracy theorists might very well have dipped their poison pens into overdrive into the wrong conspiracy.


Indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 21, 2019, 09:25:38 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 21, 2019, 08:26:11 PM
It probably wasn't except for elimination purposes.  The problem would have been that what was recognised by law enforcement as a very useful investigative tool was not utilised as it should have been ... a bit like being unable to see the wood for the trees.

Unless someone can explain why phone calls between Mark Warner in London and Greentrust in PdL might be of interest there's no point in suggesting that the information should have been collected imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 23, 2019, 10:48:07 AM
Case knowledge doesn't matter to those who have already decided what happened. This can be seen everywhere, not just on here. So many commentators have shown this lack of knowledge; the authors of books, ex-policemen, newspaper journalists and documentary makers. Most of them are long on opinion and short on facts imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 23, 2019, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 23, 2019, 10:48:07 AM
Case knowledge doesn't matter to those who have already decided what happened. This can be seen everywhere, not just on here. So many commentators have shown this lack of knowledge; the authors of books, ex-policemen, newspaper journalists and documentary makers. Most of them are long on opinion and short on facts imo.

Could you give an example of any case knowledge you have that has any bearing on our understanding of what happened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 23, 2019, 01:44:49 PM
In the newspapers today:

‘Missing Madeleine McCann is alive and living under a new identity with a Germany family, a psychic who works with police has sensationally claimed.

... However, psychic Fia Johansson – who has reportedly worked with US law enforcement agencies on missing person cases – believes the girl is alive and well.

Fia told Daily Star Online: “She’s alive, I can see that she is in Germany. She has no clue about her other family. She was very little, she doesn’t remember anything about the family.”

Madeleine was supposedly kidnapped by a German child trafficker who has since been imprisoned, Fia claims.  Two years after being taken, a woman from the crime gang took pity on her and helped her escape, Fia added.

The psychic initially made this staggering allegation back in October.

A month later, former Portuguese chief Goncalo Amaral claimed the new suspect is a jailed German paedophile who talked about killing Maddie in an internet chat room.

Fia claims that Maddie’s new parents are in their 70s and 80s, living somewhere in the state of Koln with a common German surname and another adopted daughter of a similar age.

Her name has also apparently been changed to Melanie, and she has light blonde hair.

Fia added: “She’s very much inter-connected with music and dance, she has an amazing, beautiful voice.

“She will find her own family by accident. My prediction is that she will find them by 2022 to 2024 by herself, because she’s going to be very famous in singing.

“She’s always trying to help other people, she has a golden heart. The good news is, she doesn’t remember the trauma.”

Fia believes that Madeleine was taken to two countries before ending up in Germany, and didn’t come to any harm.

Fearing repercussions due to the widespread media coverage of the case, one of the gang members apparently panicked and freed her.

Fia claims: “There was lady, I can feel it – around the age of 45 or 47 – who almost pushed Madeline away. I think the reason they couldn’t sell Madeleine right away was the publicity.

“It was too risky, everybody was talking about her, so they pushed Madeleine away.”

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/madeleine-mccann-alive-germany-now-21146667
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 23, 2019, 02:02:26 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 23, 2019, 01:44:49 PM
In the newspapers today:

‘Missing Madeleine McCann is alive and living under a new identity with a Germany family, a psychic who works with police has sensationally claimed.

... However, psychic Fia Johansson – who has reportedly worked with US law enforcement agencies on missing person cases – believes the girl is alive and well.

Fia told Daily Star Online: “She’s alive, I can see that she is in Germany. She has no clue about her other family. She was very little, she doesn’t remember anything about the family.”

Madeleine was supposedly kidnapped by a German child trafficker who has since been imprisoned, Fia claims.  Two years after being taken, a woman from the crime gang took pity on her and helped her escape, Fia added.

The psychic initially made this staggering allegation back in October.

A month later, former Portuguese chief Goncalo Amaral claimed the new suspect is a jailed German paedophile who talked about killing Maddie in an internet chat room.

Fia claims that Maddie’s new parents are in their 70s and 80s, living somewhere in the state of Koln with a common German surname and another adopted daughter of a similar age.

Her name has also apparently been changed to Melanie, and she has light blonde hair.

Fia added: “She’s very much inter-connected with music and dance, she has an amazing, beautiful voice.

“She will find her own family by accident. My prediction is that she will find them by 2022 to 2024 by herself, because she’s going to be very famous in singing.

“She’s always trying to help other people, she has a golden heart. The good news is, she doesn’t remember the trauma.”

Fia believes that Madeleine was taken to two countries before ending up in Germany, and didn’t come to any harm.

Fearing repercussions due to the widespread media coverage of the case, one of the gang members apparently panicked and freed her.

Fia claims: “There was lady, I can feel it – around the age of 45 or 47 – who almost pushed Madeline away. I think the reason they couldn’t sell Madeleine right away was the publicity.

“It was too risky, everybody was talking about her, so they pushed Madeleine away.”

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/madeleine-mccann-alive-germany-now-21146667



Interesting. Another one of those was willing to reveal her grave- free of charge!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 23, 2019, 02:35:41 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on December 23, 2019, 02:02:26 PM


Interesting. Another one of those was willing to reveal her grave- free of charge!

What gets me with these psychics is, they can see all this nonsense like who she's living with & that's she's going to be a famous singer & blah blah blah. But what they can never see is her home address & telephone number.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 23, 2019, 02:46:15 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 23, 2019, 02:35:41 PM
What gets me with these psychics is, they can see all this nonsense like who she's living with & that's she's going to be a famous singer & blah blah blah. But what they can never see is her home address & telephone number.


Aw but to be fair  she did tell us the child had a real German Name  as she lived in Germany. &^^&*
 What are the chances she had a 'french name living in Germany? 

Now all we need is the actual name she has been given... AND where abouts in Germany. Sorted!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on December 23, 2019, 03:24:06 PM
On a German theme, here's a report from just yesterday about a 15yr old boy who was found alive in the hands of a suspected German paedophile 2 years after he was reported missing.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/boy-15-missing-two-years-21150007

A Chicago baby stolen 55 years ago has also reportedly been located via DNA Ancestry.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/paul-fronczak-chicago-baby-kidnapped-in-1964-reportedly-found/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 23, 2019, 05:48:10 PM
Facts such as where the Totmans stayed have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann or understanding what happened to her.  IMO.

How it can be described as “a basic fact” that everyone should know beggars belief. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 23, 2019, 06:24:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 23, 2019, 05:48:10 PM
Facts such as where the Totmans stayed have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann or understanding what happened to her.  IMO.

Facts such as where the Totmans stayed become important when people get it wrong then base statements of 'fact' on their wrong understanding.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 23, 2019, 06:53:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 23, 2019, 06:24:36 PM
Facts such as where the Totmans stayed become important when people get it wrong then base statements of 'fact' on their wrong understanding.
There are no circumstances under which this arcane knowledge can be described as important imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 23, 2019, 06:56:26 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 23, 2019, 06:53:10 PM
There are no circumstances under which this arcane knowledge can be described as important imo.

Nevertheless if discussed the correct facts should be used.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 23, 2019, 07:11:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 23, 2019, 06:56:26 PM
Nevertheless if discussed the correct facts should be used.
Who is claiming otherwise?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 23, 2019, 07:23:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 23, 2019, 06:56:26 PM
Nevertheless if discussed the correct facts should be used.

Yet you have referred veto CMOMM as a good forum as a resource for facts when they post claims that are not facts.. And anyone who questions them is banned.  That's why I don't see your claim as credible
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 24, 2019, 08:33:48 AM
HAPPY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on December 24, 2019, 08:52:57 AM
I do not claim to be an 'expert' on this case evidenced by my profile/stats.  Conversely I would say I'm somewhat of an 'expert' on White House Farm/Jeremy Bamber evidenced by way of my profile/stats. 

Understanding when the S&R dogs were deployed and which block Dr T was staying in are important basic facts which I would expect long-term posters to be offay with. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 24, 2019, 01:53:26 PM
Can all posters avoid deliberate disruption.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 24, 2019, 02:18:00 PM
Merry Christmas to those who value kindness and compassion..

imo...all the worlds evil comes from those that dont
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 24, 2019, 03:50:39 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on December 24, 2019, 01:53:26 PM
Can all posters avoid deliberate disruption.

when you say all posters...I presume you include moderators
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 24, 2019, 06:29:41 PM

Has anyone got a working link to the Norad Santa Tracker?  I can't find one.

Yer, yer, I know.  But I like it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on December 24, 2019, 06:45:11 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 24, 2019, 06:29:41 PM
Has anyone got a working link to the Norad Santa Tracker?  I can't find one.

Yer, yer, I know.  But I like it.
This one works for me, Eleanor. https://www.noradsanta.org/   Takes a while to load.
Merry Christmas to you & all members present & past. Special thoughts for those who have shuffled off this mortal coil since last Christmas.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 24, 2019, 07:44:44 PM
Quote from: misty on December 24, 2019, 06:45:11 PM
This one works for me, Eleanor. https://www.noradsanta.org/   Takes a while to load.
Merry Christmas to you & all members present & past. Special thoughts for those who have shuffled off this mortal coil since last Christmas.

Sadly I can't get it to work.  But never mind and thanks anyway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 24, 2019, 08:11:50 PM

What's your favourite Christmas Film?

Mine is Die Hard.

Anyone else?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 24, 2019, 08:46:03 PM
Who was it who very recently said that Dr Totman wasn't staying in Block 4 for the first week?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 24, 2019, 08:52:12 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 24, 2019, 08:46:03 PM
Who was it who very recently said that Dr Totman wasn't staying in Block 4 for the first week?

Rob saw it somewhere.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on December 24, 2019, 09:01:20 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 24, 2019, 08:52:12 PM
Rob saw it somewhere.

What evidence exists showing Dr T stayed anywhere other than block 4?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 24, 2019, 09:11:35 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 24, 2019, 09:01:20 PM
What evidence exists showing Dr T stayed anywhere other than block 4?

Ask Rob.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on December 24, 2019, 09:21:41 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 24, 2019, 09:11:35 PM
Ask Rob.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11131.msg566494#msg566494

Anyone know anything about the above?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 24, 2019, 09:55:29 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 24, 2019, 09:01:20 PM
What evidence exists showing Dr T stayed anywhere other than block 4?

I asked for the evidence but none was supplied. William Totman was in the same Mini Group as Madeleine and his sister Lucy was in the same group as the McCan twins. G4M was entered next to their names every time they attended.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CRECHE.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 24, 2019, 09:59:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 24, 2019, 09:55:29 PM
I asked for the evidence but none was supplied. William Totman was in the same Mini Group as Madeleine and his sister Lucy was in the same group as the McCan twins. G4M was entered next to their names every time they attended.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CRECHE.htm

It would be if he was using the address.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on December 24, 2019, 10:04:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 24, 2019, 09:55:29 PM
I asked for the evidence but none was supplied. William Totman was in the same Mini Group as Madeleine and his sister Lucy was in the same group as the McCan twins. G4M was entered next to their names every time they attended.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CRECHE.htm

Thanks.  Do you know what block the Weinbergers were staying in? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 24, 2019, 10:09:20 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 24, 2019, 10:04:30 PM
Thanks.  Do you know what block the Weinbergers were staying in?

G4L.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on December 24, 2019, 10:11:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 24, 2019, 10:09:20 PM
G4L.

Thanks.  Where is the info from?  Did the Weinbergers have children with them? 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on December 24, 2019, 10:21:39 PM
Merry Christmas everyone!

Just sampling some new wine I bought earlier from M&S: RABL/Gruner Veltliner which I would recommend along with St Feuillien beer @ 8.5% abv  8((()*/

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 24, 2019, 11:03:31 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 24, 2019, 10:11:10 PM
Thanks.  Where is the info from?  Did the Weinbergers have children with them?

The info is here; scroll down and there are alphabetically arranged sheets printed out from the OC software;

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS_BOOKING.htm

To see details from the MW booking system which lists the family members see here;

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ARRIVALS.htm

The Weingergers had two children also.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 24, 2019, 11:37:56 PM
Merry Christmas everyone.  I have just completed Father Christmas duties (even though my kids are 20 and 17, they still want stockings and presents under the tree that miraculously appear overnight),  I may permit myself a little sherry whilst I survey my work and contemplate the morrow.  Have a great day, let’s hope the armistice holds for 24 hours.  Chin chin!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 25, 2019, 05:43:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 24, 2019, 11:03:31 PM
The info is here; scroll down and there are alphabetically arranged sheets printed out from the OC software;

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS_BOOKING.htm

To see details from the MW booking system which lists the family members see here;

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ARRIVALS.htm

The Weingergers had two children also.

Search for Totman on this page. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P2/02_VOLUME_IIa_Page_336.jpg
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 25, 2019, 05:47:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 24, 2019, 11:03:31 PM
The info is here; scroll down and there are alphabetically arranged sheets printed out from the OC software;

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS_BOOKING.htm

To see details from the MW booking system which lists the family members see here;

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ARRIVALS.htm

The Weingergers had two children also.

Also look at notes on these pages http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ARRIVALS.htm

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P2/02_VOLUME_IIa_Page_338_small.jpg for the Weinbergers
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P2/02_VOLUME_IIa_Page_336_small.jpg for the Totmans.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 10:07:23 AM
Just been listening to a new review of the Suzanne Pilley case.  It has professor John Cassella of Staffordshire University who is quite dismissive if the dog alerts and says they should not have been admitted as evidence.  It also says the SCCRC ruled that the alerts should not have been admitted.  That's quite damning here to posters who still support the value of the alerts

For those who are not aware John Cassella is a colleague of Martin Grime
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 25, 2019, 10:20:25 AM

Happy Christmas, Y'all.

This a Community you know, whether you like it or not.  The Community, I mean.  I can think of something worth defending about all of you if pushed and if any of you were being attacked from outside.

And most of us have been at this for quite some time.

God knows what I would have done with myself for the last twelve years without it, especially the lonesome years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 11:39:14 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 10:07:23 AM
Just been listening to a new review of the Suzanne Pilley case.  It has professor John Cassella of Staffordshire University who is quite dismissive if the dog alerts and says they should not have been admitted as evidence.  It also says the SCRC ruled that the alerts should not have been admitted.  That's quite damning here to posters who still support the value of the alerts

For those who are not aware John Cassella is a colleague of Martin Grime

What would really be damning is if Suzanne turns up alive safe & well.

Who knows, maybe 2020 will be the year her & Jeanette Zapata go public.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 25, 2019, 05:48:43 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 10:07:23 AM
Just been listening to a new review of the Suzanne Pilley case.  It has professor John Cassella of Staffordshire University who is quite dismissive if the dog alerts and says they should not have been admitted as evidence.  It also says the SCRC ruled that the alerts should not have been admitted.  That's quite damning here to posters who still support the value of the alerts

For those who are not aware John Cassella is a colleague of Martin Grime
So what was the source Davel?   Is there any chance of the link to the podcast? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 05:52:13 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 25, 2019, 05:48:43 PM
So what was the source Davel?   Is there any chance of the link to the podcast?

And while he's at it, could he tell us what he thinks happened to Suzanne Pilley, if Gilroy didn't kill her?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 05:55:46 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 05:52:13 PM
And while he's at it, could he tell us what he thinks happened to Suzanne Pilley, if Gilroy didn't kill her?

from what Ive read I think he did kill her
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 05:59:00 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 25, 2019, 05:48:43 PM
So what was the source Davel?   Is there any chance of the link to the podcast?

https://www.audible.co.uk/pd/Body-of-Proof-Audiobook/B07WPCMH3C
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 06:02:23 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 05:55:46 PM
from what Ive read I think he did kill her

No, I think maybe he had an addiction to inhaling air fresheners.

It was coincidence that he stopped texting her after she disappeared & he liked wearing make up on his hands.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 06:09:46 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 06:02:23 PM
No, I think maybe he had an addiction to inhaling air fresheners.

It was coincidence that he stopped texting her after she disappeared & he liked wearing make up on his hands.

As the SCCRC said ...the dog alerts should have been inadmissible ...but there was enough evidence to convict him anyway. Im just making the point to those who celebrated the admissibility of the alerts...even Grimes own colleague...professor Cassella  said they should not have been admitted and raised questions about their accuracy
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 06:13:11 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 06:09:46 PM
As the SRCC said ...the dog alerts should have been inadmissible ...but there was enough evidence to convict him anyway. Im just making the point to those who celebrated the admissibility of the alerts...even Grimes own colleague...professor Cassella  said they should not have been admitted and raised questions about their accuracy

I wonder what Prof Cassella thinks happened to Suzanne then.  Maybe she's still hiding in a broom cupboard at work.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 06:17:27 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 06:13:11 PM
I wonder what Prof Cassella thinks happened to Suzanne then.  Maybe she's still hiding in a broom cupboard at work.

Prof Cassellla is an expert on the dogs...perhaps the defence should have called him. I can undestand why you want to deflect away from his opinion. Almeida said the main evidence against the mcccanns were the dog alerts...makes the PJ look more than a little foolish


Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida said he believed the British child had died in her family's apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz on the day she went missing. He told the court the main evidence for this was the findings of British police sniffer dogs sent to Portugal to examine the flat. The McCanns' lawyer, Isabel Duarte, challenged this claim, arguing that the results from sniffer dogs did not constitute proof and were not allowed as evidence in the case.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jan/12/madeleine-mccann-parents-defamation-book
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 06:23:25 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 06:17:27 PM
Prof Cassellla is an expert on the dogs...perhaps the defence should have called him. I can undestand why you want to deflect away from his opinion. Almeida said the main evidence against the mcccanns were the dog alerts...makes the PJ look more than a little foolish


Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida said he believed the British child had died in her family's apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz on the day she went missing. He told the court the main evidence for this was the findings of British police sniffer dogs sent to Portugal to examine the flat. The McCanns' lawyer, Isabel Duarte, challenged this claim, arguing that the results from sniffer dogs did not constitute proof and were not allowed as evidence in the case.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jan/12/madeleine-mccann-parents-defamation-book

It's obvious Suzanne Pilley is dead, that's the dog alerts corroborated IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 06:24:41 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 06:23:25 PM
It's obvious Suzanne Pilley is dead, that's the dog alerts corroborated IMO

its not Prof Cassellas opinion....and hes the expert.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 06:27:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 06:24:41 PM
its not Prof Cassellas opinion....and hes the expert.

So does he explain what happened to Suzanne at all?

I mean, if the cadaver dog alerts are wrong then she must be alive, right?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 06:29:46 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 06:27:17 PM
So does he explain what happened to Suzanne at all?

I mean, if the cadaver dog alerts are wrong then she must be alive, right?

no....theres enough real evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt shes dead ...the alerts arent part of that evidence

thats not my opinion...its the opinion of the appeal court
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 06:33:20 PM

It's obvious the alerts are right though.

Unless, maybe Gilroy liked cleaning only his car boot & not the rest of his car.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 06:35:50 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 06:33:20 PM
It's obvious the alerts are right though.

Unless, maybe Gilroy liked cleaning only his car boot & not the rest of his car.

not according to the experts...in fact there was blood found in the boot but it wasnt Pilleys or Gilroys...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 06:39:41 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 06:35:50 PM
not according to the experts...in fact there was blood found in the boot but it wasnt Pilleys or Gilroys...


I'm no expert, but I can guarantee Maddie won't be home by next christmas.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 25, 2019, 07:32:20 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 10:07:23 AM
Just been listening to a new review of the Suzanne Pilley case.  It has professor John Cassella of Staffordshire University who is quite dismissive if the dog alerts and says they should not have been admitted as evidence.  It also says the SCRC ruled that the alerts should not have been admitted.  That's quite damning here to posters who still support the value of the alerts

For those who are not aware John Cassella is a colleague of Martin Grime

There was other evidence?

On 7 March 2012, a forensic pathologist, Dr Nathaniel Cary told the jury that David Gilroy had curved scratches on his hands a cut on his forehead, bruises on his chest and other scratches to his hands, wrist and forearms on 6 May 2010. A series of photographs were produced in court. He told the advocate depute that the scratches could have been caused by another person's fingernails, possibly in a struggle, and that this had happened around the time Ms Pilley went missing.

Suzanne Pilley put up a fight but the b........ still got her.

On 8 March 2012, the advocate depute led evidence from a Lothian and Borders Police constable who told the court how they partially traced a car journey David Gilroy made to Lochgilphead on 5 May 2010, using CCTV footage. After analysing the footage police recreated the journey there and back several times. They found that Mr Gilroy had taken 2 hours longer than their average time each way. Furthermore a comparison of fuel consumption suggested that 124 miles of Mr Gilroy's journey were unaccounted for.

Nothing to see here. Move on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 07:38:18 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on December 25, 2019, 07:32:20 PM
There was other evidence?

On 7 March 2012, a forensic pathologist, Dr Nathaniel Cary told the jury that David Gilroy had curved scratches on his hands a cut on his forehead, bruises on his chest and other scratches to his hands, wrist and forearms on 6 May 2010. A series of photographs were produced in court. He told the advocate depute that the scratches could have been caused by another person's fingernails, possibly in a struggle, and that this had happened around the time Ms Pilley went missing.

Suzanne Pilley put up a fight but the b........ still got her.

On 8 March 2012, the advocate depute led evidence from a Lothian and Borders Police constable who told the court how they partially traced a car journey David Gilroy made to Lochgilphead on 5 May 2010, using CCTV footage. After analysing the footage police recreated the journey there and back several times. They found that Mr Gilroy had taken 2 hours longer than their average time each way. Furthermore a comparison of fuel consumption suggested that 124 miles of Mr Gilroy's journey were unaccounted for.

Nothing to see here. Move on.

Ive already said there was other evidence... I'm just commenting on the inadmisibility of the alerts and the view if Prof Cassella.. Martin Grimes colleague
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 08:08:26 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 07:38:18 PM
Ive already said there was other evidence... I'm just commenting on the inadmisibility of the alerts and the view if Prof Cassella.. Martin Grimes colleague

Has he also cast doubt on the conviction of D'Andre Lane?

Maybe 2020 will be the year Bianca Jones abductors are caught & she turns up alive & well.

I wouldn't recommend holding your breath though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 08:28:58 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 08:08:26 PM
Has he also cast doubt on the conviction of D'Andre Lane?

Maybe 2020 will be the year Bianca Jones abductors are caught & she turns up alive & well.

I wouldn't recommend holding your breath though.

He hasn't cast doubt on any conviction...he's, simply cast doubt on the, alerts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 08:39:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 08:28:58 PM
He hasn't cast doubt on any conviction...he's, simply cast doubt on the, alerts

Bit of a coincidence though eh, woman goes missing, car boot smells of air freshener, cadaver dog alerts there.

Perhaps 2020 will be the year Suzanne Pilley turns up alive & well.

I wouldn't hold your breath though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 08:43:50 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 08:39:40 PM
Bit of a coincidence though eh, woman goes missing, car boot smells of air freshener, cadaver dog alerts there.

Perhaps 2020 will be the year Suzanne Pilley turns up alive & well.

I wouldn't hold your breath though.

If they keep taking cadaver dogs to missing person scenes then the dogs have a good chance of getting some right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 25, 2019, 08:48:12 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 07:38:18 PM
Ive already said there was other evidence... I'm just commenting on the inadmisibility of the alerts and the view if Prof Cassella.. Martin Grimes colleague

Along with other evidence it suggests the dog was spot on and that will corroborate the dog alerts. He had 2 hours to hide the body very well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 08:54:19 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on December 25, 2019, 08:48:12 PM
Along with other evidence it suggests the dog was spot on and that will corroborate the dog alerts. He had 2 hours to hide the body very well.

Yes but the expert says....

Psssh...

Remind us how many missing persons have turned up alive following cadaver dog alerts?

It's one I think, maybe two, out of how many?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 09:17:20 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 08:54:19 PM
Yes but the expert says....

Psssh...

Remind us how many missing persons have turned up alive following cadaver dog alerts?

It's one I think, maybe two, out of how many?

Perhaps you can remind me how many times Eddie... The best cadaver dog in the world.... Actually found any evidence... I think it's two... Not bad for seven years work
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 09:19:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 09:17:20 PM
Perhaps you can remind me how many times Eddie... The best cadaver dog in the world.... Actually found any evidence... I think it's two... Not bad for seven years work

He's yet to be proven wrong in the Maddie case.

Any sign of Maddie being alive?

No?

Fancy that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 09:23:11 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 09:19:42 PM
He's yet to be proven wrong in the Maddie case.

Any sign of Maddie being alive?

No?

Fancy that.

Just like the celestial teapot... Has anyone managed to prove it doesn't exist..

If Maddie did turn up... As Shannon Mathews did... The handler just comes up with another story...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 25, 2019, 09:25:26 PM
Please could Davel provide a link to this 'review' he was listening to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 09:29:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 25, 2019, 09:25:26 PM
Please could Davel provide a link to this 'review' he was listening to?

I already have done.
This was all discussed sone time ago.  You seemed to think that the Pilley case showed the alerts as evidence.  Yet this latest investigation confirms that the SCCRC confirmed  the alerts were really inadmissible.... And Grimes colleague..
Prof Casella confirms it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 09:31:22 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 09:23:11 PM
Just like the celestial teapot... Has anyone managed to prove it doesn't exist..

If Maddie did turn up... As Shannon Mathews did... The handler just comes up with another story...

We know the celestial teapot doesn't exist because we have telescopes & satellites & stuff.

Maddie will never be found alive, I'd bet my house on it & I don't usually gamble.

It's glaringly obvious she's dead, even without cadaver dog alerts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 09:33:23 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 09:31:22 PM
We know the celestial teapot doesn't exist because we have telescopes & satellites & stuff.

Maddie will never be found alive, I'd bet my house on it & I don't usually gamble.

It's glaringly obvious she's dead, even without cadaver dog alerts.

I agree she's most likely dead... The alerts tell us nothing
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 09:38:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 09:33:23 PM
I agree she's most likely dead... The alerts tell us nothing

Entirely coincidental, cadaver dog alerts, Smithman seen carrying a motionless child, Maddie still not turning up however many years later.

But don't worry, she's going to be a famous singer soon.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 09:39:40 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 09:38:00 PM
Entirely coincidental, cadaver dog alerts, Smithman seen carrying a motionless child, Maddie still not turning up however many years later.

But don't worry, she's going to be a famous singer soon.
As I said we don't need Eddie swinging cuddlecat around to tell us Maddie is most likely dead
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 25, 2019, 09:49:01 PM


The dogs are very reliable at helping to find evidence... If there's any there... In the Pilley case.. Nothing found..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on December 25, 2019, 10:09:36 PM


There's nothing on the Find Madeleine' site unlike last Crimbo  8(8-))

http://findmadeleine.com/updates/index.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2019, 10:18:16 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 25, 2019, 10:09:36 PM
There's nothing on the Find Madeleine' site unlike last Crimbo  8(8-))

http://findmadeleine.com/updates/index.html

I just like reading the comments on the Sun article.

Very supportive of K & G.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10618432/madeleine-mccann-parents-christmas-message/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 25, 2019, 10:56:36 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 09:29:34 PM
I already have done.
This was all discussed sone time ago.  You seemed to think that the Pilley case showed the alerts as evidence.  Yet this latest investigation confirms that the SCCRC confirmed  the alerts were really inadmissible.... And Grimes colleague..
Prof Casella confirms it

It's not exactly a 'new review' is it? It's a podcast by two journalists which those with knowledge of the case found to be biased.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 26, 2019, 12:02:15 AM
How sad that some people lead such empty and inadequate lives that they feel so compelled on Christmas Day to write bitchy comments about the parent of a missing child on the Sun’s website.   You do have to feel sorry for people like this IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 26, 2019, 03:54:19 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 08:28:58 PM
He hasn't cast doubt on any conviction...he's, simply cast doubt on the, alerts
Same thing in a circumstantial evidence case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 08:37:54 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 25, 2019, 10:56:36 PM
It's not exactly a 'new review' is it? It's a podcast by two journalists which those with knowledge of the case found to be biased.

What is new is the interview with Prof Cassella who is quite critical of the alerts in this, case and says they should not have been admitted as evidence.  It also reports, that an appeal to the, SCCRC judged that the alerts, should not have been admitted as evidence.  That's, quite damning to the, validity of the alerts.
You may remember a previous discussion  where you and others felt that the admission of these, alerts, as, evidence validified them... Seems like you were quite wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 26, 2019, 10:39:27 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 26, 2019, 08:37:54 AM
What is new is the interview with Prof Cassella who is quite critical of the alerts in this, case and says they should not have been admitted as evidence.  It also reports, that an appeal to the, SCCRC judged that the alerts, should not have been admitted as evidence.  That's, quite damning to the, validity of the alerts.
You may remember a previous discussion  where you and others felt that the admission of these, alerts, as, evidence validified them... Seems like you were quite wrong

In the end the choice was the judge's and the conviction stands.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 10:49:27 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 26, 2019, 10:39:27 AM
In the end the choice was the judge's and the conviction stands.

The conviction stands but the admissibility of the alerts doesn't... That's, what's interesting

this is what you posted on the subject..

The dog alerts suggested that she entered the building and died there. That's why it was one of the important components of the circumstantial evidence collected. All the components combined suggested what had happened.

the alerts were not circumstantial evidence....They were eventually ruled as inadmissable....a fact supported by Prof Cassella , a collegue of Grime from Staffs university. Cassella had quite a bit to say about them...none of it supportive. The alerts in the McCann case should therefore be seen in the same light

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 26, 2019, 11:33:01 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 25, 2019, 09:49:01 PM

The dogs are very reliable at helping to find evidence... If there's any there... In the Pilley case.. Nothing found..
But you agree that the mode of death and transportation of the corpse happened broadly as described by the prosecution?
I listened to that podcast. Pretty interesting. He's quite an eloquent and convincing character. Guilty AF, obviously.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 11:38:05 AM
Quote from: The General on December 26, 2019, 11:33:01 AM
But you agree that the mode of death and transportation of the corpse happened broadly as described by the prosecution?
I listened to that podcast. Pretty interesting. He's quite an eloquent and convincing character. Guilty AF, obviously.

The problem is the total lack of forensic evidence....every contact leaves  a trace...but in this case it didnt. There was blood in the boot....so it wasnt thoroughly cleaned....but not hers...or his
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 26, 2019, 11:41:11 AM
Quote from: The General on December 26, 2019, 11:33:01 AM
But you agree that the mode of death and transportation of the corpse happened broadly as described by the prosecution?
I listened to that podcast. Pretty interesting. He's quite an eloquent and convincing character. Guilty AF, obviously.
It makes you wonder how much unconscious cueing of the dogs goes on, when one human assesses another to be as guilty AF even in the absence of any actual evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 26, 2019, 11:42:32 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 26, 2019, 11:38:05 AM
The problem is the total lack of forensic evidence....every contact leaves  a trace...but in this case it didnt. There was blood in the boot....so it wasnt thoroughly cleaned....but not hers...or his
I agree. Maybe he went prepared - roll of visqueen, gaffa tape, gloves and strangled her, alas.
But it leaves these dog alerts a little puzzling. Of all the places to 'alert' is the place where the polus thought it happened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 26, 2019, 11:44:19 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 26, 2019, 11:41:11 AM
It makes you wonder how much unconscious cueing of the dogs goes on, when one human assesses another to be as guilty AF even in the absence of any actual evidence.
The circumstantial evidence is overwhelming. The dogs evidence, admissible or not, may not have made a difference.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 11:46:34 AM
Quote from: The General on December 26, 2019, 11:44:19 AM
The circumstantial evidence is overwhelming. The dogs evidence, admissible or not, may not have made a difference.

The SCRCC also thought he would have been convicted without the dog alerts......the evidence does seem to be overwhelming
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 26, 2019, 11:49:31 AM
Quote from: The General on December 26, 2019, 11:44:19 AM
The circumstantial evidence is overwhelming. The dogs evidence, admissible or not, may not have made a difference.
I agree, that's not the point though.  The point concerns the dog alerts and whether or not they were reliable.   Just because the guy was obviously guilty doesn't necessarily validate the dog alerts. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 26, 2019, 11:51:21 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 26, 2019, 11:46:34 AM
The SCRCC also thought he would have been convicted without the dog alerts......the evidence does seem to be overwhelming
Remember, when you're thinking of killing someone you've been hounding for days, make sure you keep hounding her after she 'goes missing'. Not you, Davros, a would be perp.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 11:52:53 AM
Quote from: The General on December 26, 2019, 11:51:21 AM
Remember, when you're thinking of killing someone you've been hounding for days, make sure you keep hounding her after she 'goes missing'. Not you, Davros, a would be perp.

Yes ill remember should I ever be in a similar situation..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 26, 2019, 12:02:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 26, 2019, 11:49:31 AM
I agree, that's not the point though.  The point concerns the dog alerts and whether or not they were reliable.   Just because the guy was obviously guilty doesn't necessarily validate the dog alerts.
I get it. Because this, that. I know you can't go on record as stating that these alerts corroborate, because that would be you contradicting yourself. But these alerts are more compelling, irrespective of the 'unconscious cue' argument, as we're 'almost sure' (cross thread skills), actually way more than that, she was killed right there and stored there for a time.

Conversely, if you're looking for an example of someone who can hold their nerve and lie in a world class manner and be somewhat convincing, then this guy......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 12:09:55 PM
Quote from: The General on December 26, 2019, 12:02:13 PM
I get it. Because this, that. I know you can't go on record as stating that these alerts corroborate, because that would be you contradicting yourself. But these alerts are more compelling, irrespective of the 'unconscious cue' argument, as we're 'almost sure' (cross thread skills), actually way more than that, she was killed right there and stored there for a time.

Conversely, if you're looking for an example of someone who can hold their nerve and lie in a world class manner and be somewhat convincing, then this guy......

theres no evidence she was killed in the basement.
The Gilroy case was seen as breaking ground by scepetic as regards the admissibility of the alert evidence.
we now know taht isnt the case. Whats also interesting is Prof Cassella...Grimes colleague ....being very unsupportive of the alerts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 26, 2019, 12:16:56 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 26, 2019, 12:09:55 PM
theres no evidence she was killed in the basement.
The Gilroy case was seen as breaking ground by scepetic as regards the admissibility of the alert evidence.
we now know taht isnt the case. Whats also interesting is Prof Cassella...Grimes colleague ....being very unsupportive of the alerts
There's loads of circumstantial evidence that she was. That's evidence. She may have been rendered unconscious in the basement, but the lack of forensic evidence doesn't support that. She may have been bundled in to the boot of the car / a car, but the timings don't support that.
Unless you think he killed her and posted her through a time portal?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 12:18:36 PM
Quote from: The General on December 26, 2019, 12:16:56 PM
There's loads of circumstantial evidence that she was. That's evidence. She may have been rendered unconscious in the basement, but the lack of forensic evidence doesn't support that. She may have been bundled in to the boot of the car / a car, but the timings don't support that.
Unless you think he killed her and posted her through a time portal?

i dont think there is much circumstantial evidence to support that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 26, 2019, 12:19:35 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 26, 2019, 12:18:36 PM
i dont think there is much circumstantial evidence to support that
So, having admitted you think he killed her, where, when and how do you think he managed that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 12:20:58 PM
Quote from: The General on December 26, 2019, 12:19:35 PM
So, having admitted you think he killed her, where, when and how do you think he managed that?
Ive no idea...I dont think theres any evidence she actually entered the building
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 26, 2019, 12:23:24 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 26, 2019, 12:20:58 PM
Ive no idea...I dont think theres any evidence she actually entered the building
You have no idea?
How, given that you think he killed her, did he manage that if she didn't enter the building, bearing in mind the timings are quite specific?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 12:35:01 PM
Quote from: The General on December 26, 2019, 12:23:24 PM
You have no idea?
How, given that you think he killed her, did he manage that if she didn't enter the building, bearing in mind the timings are quite specific?

more info needed....what do his colleagues say about his presence at work that day
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 26, 2019, 12:39:09 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 26, 2019, 12:35:01 PM
more info needed....what do his colleagues say about his presence at work that day
His mate talked to him at 09.03 and said he looked like boiled shite and looked like he'd slept in a hedge. (My words, not his). He'd been 'exerting himself', I believe was the phrase, which I don't take to mean he'd been cracking one out in the bog.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 26, 2019, 12:43:38 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 26, 2019, 10:49:27 AM
The conviction stands but the admissibility of the alerts doesn't... That's, what's interesting

this is what you posted on the subject..

The dog alerts suggested that she entered the building and died there. That's why it was one of the important components of the circumstantial evidence collected. All the components combined suggested what had happened.

the alerts were not circumstantial evidence....They were eventually ruled as inadmissable....a fact supported by Prof Cassella , a collegue of Grime from Staffs university. Cassella had quite a bit to say about them...none of it supportive. The alerts in the McCann case should therefore be seen in the same light

How surveillance society solved a murder with no body
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-17727255

The key evidence came from the dog
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 12:49:46 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on December 26, 2019, 12:43:38 PM
How surveillance society solved a murder with no body
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-17727255

The key evidence came from the dog

Then his appeal may be successful as the alerts should not have been admitted as evidence. The more his conviction relies on the dog alerts the more chance jhe has of a successful appeal
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 26, 2019, 01:08:13 PM
Quote from: The General on December 26, 2019, 12:02:13 PM
I get it. Because this, that. I know you can't go on record as stating that these alerts corroborate, because that would be you contradicting yourself. But these alerts are more compelling, irrespective of the 'unconscious cue' argument, as we're 'almost sure' (cross thread skills), actually way more than that, she was killed right there and stored there for a time.

Conversely, if you're looking for an example of someone who can hold their nerve and lie in a world class manner and be somewhat convincing, then this guy......
No, even if she had been killed right there and stored for a time and the dogs subsequently alerted we still can’t be sure that the dogs weren’t unconsciously  cued or that they actually detected cadaver odour. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 26, 2019, 01:13:16 PM
Robbie Coltrane's Critical Evidence S02 - Ep08 Into Thin Air David Gilroy

23:25 "The cadaver dogs provided critical evidence."

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6pimmf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 01:15:57 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on December 26, 2019, 01:13:16 PM
Robbie Coltrane's Critical Evidence S02 - Ep08 Into Thin Air David Gilroy

23:25 "The cadaver dogs provided critical evidence."

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6pimmf

you quote Coltrane.....I quote Prof Cassella. Do you realise who Cassellla is?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 26, 2019, 01:30:46 PM
LOL at Robbie Coltrane.  Is that Hagrid now a dog expert?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 26, 2019, 01:33:29 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 26, 2019, 01:15:57 PM
you quote Coltrane.....I quote Prof Cassella. Do you realise who Cassellla is?

Gilroy is guilty case closed! It's a very good series.

https://www.crimeandinvestigation.co.uk/shows/robbie-coltranes-critical-evidence

When there’s a murder with no suspect, no leads and perhaps not even a body, that’s when investigators face their toughest test. Evidence must be gathered. Evidence must be analysed. But evidence is worthless if it can’t be pinned to a suspect... Most murder victims knew the person that killed them. That's why homicide, in many cases, is a straightforward crime to solve. Yet 20% of UK homicides are classified as “circumstances unknown”. In this series, Robbie Coltrane reveals eight of the hardest, most complex and baffling murder cases ever to be investigated by British police. The focus of each programme is the trail of evidence: how it was discovered, what it meant and how it became critical to crack the case. With interviews from the lead investigators and forensic specialists, many speaking for the first time, Robbie reveals the astonishing twists and turns of often stranger-than-fiction cases. It is a record of the detectives’ art: using skill and determination to solve seemingly unsolvable cases – because the only difference between success and failure is critical evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 26, 2019, 01:43:12 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on December 26, 2019, 01:33:29 PM
Gilroy is guilty case closed! It's a very good series.

https://www.crimeandinvestigation.co.uk/shows/robbie-coltranes-critical-evidence

When there’s a murder with no suspect, no leads and perhaps not even a body, that’s when investigators face their toughest test. Evidence must be gathered. Evidence must be analysed. But evidence is worthless if it can’t be pinned to a suspect... Most murder victims knew the person that killed them. That's why homicide, in many cases, is a straightforward crime to solve. Yet 20% of UK homicides are classified as “circumstances unknown”. In this series, Robbie Coltrane reveals eight of the hardest, most complex and baffling murder cases ever to be investigated by British police. The focus of each programme is the trail of evidence: how it was discovered, what it meant and how it became critical to crack the case. With interviews from the lead investigators and forensic specialists, many speaking for the first time, Robbie reveals the astonishing twists and turns of often stranger-than-fiction cases. It is a record of the detectives’ art: using skill and determination to solve seemingly unsolvable cases – because the only difference between success and failure is critical evidence.
So do you think Professor Cassella is talking shite then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 26, 2019, 01:52:36 PM
Of course. It's obvious as to what the cadaver dogs were alerting to in this case (Gilroy's garage parking space, car boot). And other evidence corroborates it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 26, 2019, 01:57:53 PM
I see Martin Grime is now an Honourary Research Fellow at the School of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University as well as the School of Law, Policing and Forensics, Staffordshire University.  His knowledge and experience are in demand, it seems.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 26, 2019, 02:02:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 26, 2019, 01:57:53 PM
I see Martin Grime is now an Honourary Research Fellow at the School of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University as well as the School of Law, Policing and Forensics, Staffordshire University.  His knowledge and experience are in demand, it seems.
He has been for some time.  John Cassella is a professor of Forensic Science at Staffs where Grime is an Honorary research fellow.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 02:15:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 26, 2019, 01:57:53 PM
I see Martin Grime is now an Honourary Research Fellow at the School of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University as well as the School of Law, Policing and Forensics, Staffordshire University.  His knowledge and experience are in demand, it seems.

And the professor there. Prof Cassella....who is very critical of the alerts when no forensic evidence is found...he also wrote the introduction to grimes white paper. Do you have  a cite that Grime is in demand.....I dont see it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 26, 2019, 02:33:18 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 26, 2019, 02:15:33 PM
And the professor there. Prof Cassella....who is very critical of the alerts when no forensic evidence is found...he also wrote the introduction to grimes white paper. Do you have  a cite that Grime is in demand.....I dont see it.

Grime might be in demand in America, although we haven't seen much evidence of that lately.

No evidence at all that he is in demand in England.

Martin Grime is a grand stander for his own financial gain.  In My Opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: slartibartfast on December 26, 2019, 02:41:06 PM
A lot of unsubstantiated bad mouthing of Grime going on. Wonder why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 02:50:43 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on December 26, 2019, 02:41:06 PM
A lot of unsubstantiated bad mouthing of Grime going on. Wonder why?

I dont see a lot of bad mouthing against Grime.  What I see is simply pointing out that the alerts should not have been admitted as evidence in the Gilroy case. Then we have Grimes colleague casting doubt on unconfirmed alerts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 26, 2019, 03:34:46 PM
Quote from: slartibartfast on December 26, 2019, 02:41:06 PM
A lot of unsubstantiated bad mouthing of Grime going on. Wonder why?
I wonder why no one is interested in what John Cassella has to say and why Pathfinder thinks he is talking shite.  Any ideas?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 26, 2019, 03:58:28 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 26, 2019, 03:34:46 PM
I wonder why no one is interested in what John Cassella has to say and why Pathfinder thinks he is talking shite.  Any ideas?

All we know is what Davel has said. I for one have no intention of signing up to a long podcast to listen to what is probably a short interview. Especially as it won't make any difference to the Pilley case and has no bearing on the McCann case imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 26, 2019, 04:15:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 26, 2019, 03:58:28 PM
All we know is what Davel has said. I for one have no intention of signing up to a long podcast to listen to what is probably a short interview. Especially as it won't make any difference to the Pilley case and has no bearing on the McCann case imo.
Do you accept that Davel is accurate when he says John Cassella states the dog evidence should have been ruled inadmissible in the Pilley case, or do you think he’s making it up?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 04:17:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 26, 2019, 03:58:28 PM
All we know is what Davel has said. I for one have no intention of signing up to a long podcast to listen to what is probably a short interview. Especially as it won't make any difference to the Pilley case and has no bearing on the McCann case imo.

The General listened to it as well and has not contradicted anything I've said Re Cassella.  Based on the fact that Almeida  said the main evidence in the first investigation was the alerts then it certainly  is relevant
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 04:18:21 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 26, 2019, 04:15:54 PM
Do you accept that Davel is accurate when he says John Cassella states the dog evidence should have been ruled inadmissible in the Pilley case, or do you think he’s making it up?

And confirmed by the SCCRC. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 26, 2019, 05:00:21 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 26, 2019, 04:15:54 PM
Do you accept that Davel is accurate when he says John Cassella states the dog evidence should have been ruled inadmissible in the Pilley case, or do you think he’s making it up?

I don't really care what he said. He was commenting on things outside of his area of expertise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 26, 2019, 05:02:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 26, 2019, 05:00:21 PM
I don't really care what he said. He was commenting on things outside of his area of expertise.

Aren't we all?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 26, 2019, 05:05:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 26, 2019, 05:00:21 PM
I don't really care what he said. He was commenting on things outside of his area of expertise.
Who was - Davel or the professor of Forensic science?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 05:22:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 26, 2019, 05:00:21 PM
I don't really care what he said. He was commenting on things outside of his area of expertise.

are you suggesting Prof Cassella was commneting on something outside his area of expertise.......The SCCRC also said the alerts were not admisssable...are they doing the same


and what is your area of experise to support this statement

http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/2556/1/Simon%20Newbery%20poster.pdf

the dog deployed in the Gilroy case was Buster
2yrs old
handler...least experienced
deploymnets...few


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 26, 2019, 06:38:59 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 26, 2019, 04:15:54 PM
Do you accept that Davel is accurate when he says John Cassella states the dog evidence should have been ruled inadmissible in the Pilley case, or do you think he’s making it up?
I wasn't taking notes or ought, but I can re-visit the part. He might have said something like that.
I'd recommend anyone here give it a listen. It's free on Audible.
West Cork is excellent too. And Evil Has a Name.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 26, 2019, 07:05:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 26, 2019, 05:22:56 PM
are you suggesting Prof Cassella was commneting on something outside his area of expertise.......The SCCRC also said the alerts were not admisssable...are they doing the same


and what is your area of experise to support this statement

http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/2556/1/Simon%20Newbery%20poster.pdf

the dog deployed in the Gilroy case was Buster
2yrs old
handler...least experienced
deploymnets...few
I don't understand all these stupid police forces pressed in to using untested, inexperienced dogs and handlers. It's like they don't know what they're doing, but yet somehow keep securing convictions despite their shortcomings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2019, 07:20:04 PM
Quote from: The General on December 26, 2019, 07:05:06 PM
I don't understand all these stupid police forces pressed in to using untested, inexperienced dogs and handlers. It's like they don't know what they're doing, but yet somehow keep securing convictions despite their shortcomings.

I think you will find the dogs are not often used... When they, are used they can be very useful in finding evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on December 27, 2019, 12:28:02 AM
Most regular posters will know that I don't normally intervene in discussions unless there is an issue. On this occasion there is an issue!

This thread has been provided in order to discuss new events and cases, some of which are of sufficient interest to be later spun off into new threads. This board is not a platform for members to criticise other users or their knowledge about the cases. I remind everyone that it is a breach of the forum rules to single out any member for criticism. Please bear this in mind going forward.TY

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 27, 2019, 09:25:12 AM
Good to see John addressing the insulting post that some posters have appalling knowledge of the, case, and making it clear it's against forum rules and not acceptable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on December 27, 2019, 01:29:25 PM
I will be monitoring these boards closely over the next few days to ensure that our rules are fully complied with.

Admin
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 30, 2019, 05:02:52 PM
Quote from: The General on December 26, 2019, 07:05:06 PM
I don't understand all these stupid police forces pressed in to using untested, inexperienced dogs and handlers. It's like they don't know what they're doing, but yet somehow keep securing convictions despite their shortcomings.

But what you are missing is: the PJ didn't find Madeleine within 20 minutes of being 'abducted'. That makes them really pathetic and useless.

SY probably know who did it but can't say they probably do not have enough evidence. At least that could be believed after all the manpower and millions spent!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on January 01, 2020, 05:17:30 PM
I saw this picture and find it interesting how accurate the age progression method is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on January 01, 2020, 07:59:45 PM
Quote from: Anthro on January 01, 2020, 05:17:30 PM
I saw this picture and find it interesting how accurate the age progression method is.

Magic!   How do you find all the images ?

Well done Anthro
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on January 01, 2020, 08:16:55 PM
Quote from: sadie on January 01, 2020, 07:59:45 PM
Magic!   How do you find all the images ?

Well done Anthro

Hi Sadie, it must have been on another discussion group. I wonder if there will be another age progression done this year?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 01, 2020, 08:37:44 PM
Quote from: Anthro on January 01, 2020, 05:17:30 PM
I saw this picture and find it interesting how accurate the age progression method is.

They used photos of Madeleine during the process, so it's hardly surprising that it looked like her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 01, 2020, 08:46:50 PM
Quote from: Anthro on January 01, 2020, 08:16:55 PM
Hi Sadie, it must have been on another discussion group. I wonder if there will be another age progression done this year?

Quote from: G-Unit on January 01, 2020, 08:37:44 PM
They used photos of Madeleine during the process, so it's hardly surprising that it looked like her.


Done in 2012 wasn't it.

(https://i.imgur.com/CpNvfDG.jpg)


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-17844172/new-photo-of-madeleine-mccann-aged-9
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on January 01, 2020, 08:53:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 01, 2020, 08:37:44 PM
They used photos of Madeleine during the process, so it's hardly surprising that it looked like her.

I realise it looks like her and know they used photos 5 years after she disappeared to compile the age progression at 9 years old. I was merely commenting on how accurate it is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on January 01, 2020, 08:56:09 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 01, 2020, 08:46:50 PM

Done in 2012 wasn't it.

(https://i.imgur.com/CpNvfDG.jpg)


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-17844172/new-photo-of-madeleine-mccann-aged-9

Yes, Barrier.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 01, 2020, 08:58:03 PM
Quote from: Anthro on January 01, 2020, 08:53:02 PM
I realise it looks like her and know they used photos 5 years after she disappeared to compile the age progression at 9 years old. I was merely commenting on how accurate it is.

Thats one thing we don't know,but SY done it so one would hope their software would be up to some sort of standard.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on January 01, 2020, 09:10:51 PM
I was wondering if anyone here has information - is there a familial connection between Ruth McCann (owner of 5A when the McCanns were there) and Pauline McCann (working at the Baby Club at the time)?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on January 01, 2020, 11:52:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 01, 2020, 08:37:44 PM
They used photos of Madeleine during the process, so it's hardly surprising that it looked like her.

Some of the age progression images look nothing like her IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 02, 2020, 10:07:10 AM
Quote from: sadie on January 01, 2020, 11:52:11 PM
Some of the age progression images look nothing like her IMO.

I really can't comment as I don't know which ones you are referring to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 02, 2020, 10:34:26 AM
Quote from: sadie on January 01, 2020, 11:52:11 PM
Some of the age progression images look nothing like her IMO.

She's rapidly approaching what would be her 17th birthday,none of them have any bearing now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 02, 2020, 11:20:09 AM
Quote from: barrier on January 02, 2020, 10:34:26 AM
She's rapidly approaching what would be her 17th birthday,none of them have any bearing now.

17th is an interesting thought.  Presumably one could make a 17th age-progressed image, based on Kate, Gerry and the twins.

 *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 02, 2020, 11:28:33 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 02, 2020, 11:20:09 AM
17th is an interesting thought.  Presumably one could make a 17th age-progressed image, based on Kate, Gerry and the twins.

 *%87

Is she fat of face,thin of face,long hair,short hair,fair hair,dark hair? all possibles,but probables,don't think so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 02, 2020, 11:40:01 AM
Quote from: barrier on January 02, 2020, 11:28:33 AM
Is she fat of face,thin of face,long hair,short hair,fair hair,dark hair? all possibles,but probables,don't think so.

Two of The Age Progression pictures are very Americanised and one of them is very rough.  Not my idea of what Madeleine would look like.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 02, 2020, 12:04:32 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 02, 2020, 11:28:33 AM
Is she fat of face,thin of face,long hair,short hair,fair hair,dark hair? all possibles,but probables,don't think so.

As to hair colour, I would have thought Kate and Amelie would provide the basis for that.

I don't see hair length as important, given the ease with which it can be changed.

She could now be either fat of thin, but again her family provide a basic model.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 02, 2020, 12:45:34 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 02, 2020, 11:20:09 AM
17th is an interesting thought.  Presumably one could make a 17th age-progressed image, based on Kate, Gerry and the twins.

 *%87

I don't think that will happen.  In my opinion as Madeleine's sister ages she will be indistinguishable from age progressed images of Madeleine.  Just think of the familial resemblance, even down to mannerisms and voices, shared by many siblings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 02, 2020, 12:47:42 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 02, 2020, 12:45:34 PM
I don't think that will happen.  In my opinion as Madeleine's sister ages she will be indistinguishable from age progressed images of Madeleine. Just think of the familial resemblance, even down to mannerisms and voices, shared by many siblings.

Do you not think a lot of that would be down to mimicry, due to close contact, rather than inherited traits ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 02, 2020, 12:51:18 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 02, 2020, 12:47:42 PM
Do you not think a lot of that would be down to mimicry, due to close contact, rather than inherited traits ?

No.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 02, 2020, 12:53:38 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 02, 2020, 12:51:18 PM
No.

Would you care to post some evidence in support of your view, or is it merely your opinion ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 02, 2020, 01:04:03 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 02, 2020, 12:53:38 PM
Would you care to post some evidence in support of your view, or is it merely your opinion ?

Quote
I don't think that will happen. In my opinion as Madeleine's sister ages she will be indistinguishable from age progressed images of Madeleine. Just think of the familial resemblance, even down to mannerisms and voices, shared by many siblings.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg567603#msg567603
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 02, 2020, 01:13:36 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 02, 2020, 12:53:38 PM
Would you care to post some evidence in support of your view, or is it merely your opinion ?

Nature or Nurture?  Take your pick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 04, 2020, 10:43:08 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 02, 2020, 10:34:26 AM
She's rapidly approaching what would be her 17th birthday,none of them have any bearing now.

Yes, her hair would have got naturally darker. BECAUSE...


I made the comment about bottle blonde as some were discussing hair colour taken from mum and dad. dad is almost bald to front and mum is no longer blonde because...  censored!

 The claim is legitimate.

Stop being so pathetic in amending posts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 06, 2020, 09:21:00 PM
Interesting to see that the president of Cyprus will overturn a courts decision....what does this say about justice systems in other parts of europe
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 06, 2020, 09:23:16 PM
Quote from: Davel on January 06, 2020, 09:21:00 PM
Interesting to see that the president of Cyprus will overturn a courts decision....what does this say about justice systems in other parts of europe
Certainly the Cypriot justice system seems to be at least as shonky as the Italians and Portuguese.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 06, 2020, 09:38:43 PM
The British  'party animals and free sex on tap' brigade does not help the reputation of ALL UK citizens who go abroad.

It is not just the justice systems it is the behavior of many who think they can get away with anything.

Having said that I do believe the young woman was raped. It may have started out as consensual sex with one person and then- this was seen as a great opportunity for others to have a go. It was filmed. DISGUSTING.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 06, 2020, 10:06:52 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on January 06, 2020, 10:02:14 PM
I guess we'll never know for sure.

I notice she covered her face from the cameras outside court, guilty people do that IMO.
Or maybe she didn’t want to be identified and publicly humilated and abused for the rest of her life?  Crazy idea I know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 06, 2020, 10:17:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 06, 2020, 10:06:52 PM
Or maybe she didn’t want to be identified and publicly humilated and abused for the rest of her life?  Crazy idea I know.

The Manchester rapist was kept very quiet!  I recall reading about many murders of gay men being drowned in the canal- some claiming it was a killer and some saying suicides. I can't seem to find any more info on that.  It would be a horror story if true!

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on January 08, 2020, 08:48:07 PM
This picture is on a facebook page called ‘Madeleine: the truth behind the lie’. Does anyone have more information on the origin of the photo?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 08, 2020, 10:10:38 PM
Quote from: Anthro on January 08, 2020, 08:48:07 PM
This picture is on a facebook page called ‘Madeleine: the truth behind the lie’. Does anyone have more information on the origin of the photo?

The picture seems to be from the works of Michal Chelbin, a renowned female photographer.
https://www.google.com/search?q=michal+chelbin&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBGB857GB857&sxsrf=ACYBGNSPKf_5rjoZKnyhmUwSuffU82u5MQ:1578521156013&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjc5[Name removed]GgfXmAhWxoVwKHfKNB8cQ_AUoAXoECBEQAw&biw=1280&bih=578
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 08, 2020, 10:40:44 PM
Quote from: misty on January 08, 2020, 10:10:38 PM
The picture seems to be from the works of Michal Chelbin, a renowned female photographer.
https://www.google.com/search?q=michal+chelbin&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBGB857GB857&sxsrf=ACYBGNSPKf_5rjoZKnyhmUwSuffU82u5MQ:1578521156013&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjc5[Name removed]GgfXmAhWxoVwKHfKNB8cQ_AUoAXoECBEQAw&biw=1280&bih=578
Taken in 2005.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on January 09, 2020, 06:04:04 AM
Quote from: Anthro on January 08, 2020, 08:48:07 PM
This picture is on a facebook page called ‘Madeleine: the truth behind the lie’. Does anyone have more information on the origin of the photo?
Misty's correct (as always)...


[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on January 09, 2020, 07:30:50 AM
Quote from: Anthro on January 08, 2020, 08:48:07 PM
This picture is on a facebook page called ‘Madeleine: the truth behind the lie’. Does anyone have more information on the origin of the photo?
Why do you need to know?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 09, 2020, 08:02:51 AM
Quote from: The General on January 09, 2020, 07:30:50 AM
Why do you need to know?
Already been done, keep up The General!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on January 09, 2020, 08:13:26 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 09, 2020, 08:02:51 AM
Already been done, keep up The General!
For a renowned photographer it's actually pretty poor quality, that's all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 10, 2020, 10:50:49 AM
Makes for a headline I suppose.

Madeleine McCann search blow as mum Kate sees book royalties dry up

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-search-blow-mum-21249973

Details of the fund can be found here.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/06248215/filing-history
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 10, 2020, 10:55:52 AM
Not surprising really. Anyone who wanted to buy a copy new will have  already done so and for the rest there are plenty of copies around in charity shops.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 10, 2020, 11:54:06 AM
Quote from: barrier on January 10, 2020, 10:50:49 AM
Makes for a headline I suppose.

Madeleine McCann search blow as mum Kate sees book royalties dry up

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-search-blow-mum-21249973

Details of the fund can be found here.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/06248215/filing-history

Any story will do. Accuracy is not a requirement. This one for example from September 2018;

McCanns due to face Amaral in 'European Court' in the next few weeks (wrong)

If they lose the case the pair will be forced to pay Goncalo Amaral £750,000, after he made a bid to sue them for compensation. (wrong)

However it could be completely wiped out if the decision stands to award Amaral £430,000 as well as paying costs on top. (wrong)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6178661/Public-fund-Madeline-McCann-WIPED-upcoming-court-case.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 10, 2020, 12:31:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 10, 2020, 11:54:06 AM
Any story will do. Accuracy is not a requirement. This one for example from September 2018;

McCanns due to face Amaral in 'European Court' in the next few weeks (wrong)

If they lose the case the pair will be forced to pay Goncalo Amaral £750,000, after he made a bid to sue them for compensation. (wrong)

However it could be completely wiped out if the decision stands to award Amaral £430,000 as well as paying costs on top. (wrong)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6178661/Public-fund-Madeline-McCann-WIPED-upcoming-court-case.html

Unless they've paid out of their pocket there's nowt showing for payment of the court cost's which is one requirement of the echr acceptance if I recall.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on January 10, 2020, 08:52:36 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 10, 2020, 10:50:49 AM
Makes for a headline I suppose.

Madeleine McCann search blow as mum Kate sees book royalties dry up

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-search-blow-mum-21249973

Details of the fund can be found here.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/06248215/filing-history
I also take note of my 6-monthly tantieme for a publication. Thankfully, I am not dependent on the income. I feel for the McCanns in finding their daughter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 10, 2020, 10:40:24 PM
Quote from: Anthro on January 10, 2020, 08:52:36 PM
I also take note of my 6-monthly tantieme for a publication. Thankfully, I am not dependent on the income. I feel for the McCanns in finding their daughter.

Well, they're not actually looking for her now, are they?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 10, 2020, 11:19:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 10, 2020, 10:40:24 PM
Well, they're not actually looking for her now, are they?
What do you know about it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 10, 2020, 11:30:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 10, 2020, 11:19:54 PM
What do you know about it?

I know that their searching was done by hiring private detectives, selling wristbands etc. and paying for posters and leaflets. They haven't done any of that for years, hence the stability of the amount in the Fund.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 10, 2020, 11:36:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 10, 2020, 11:30:30 PM
I know that their searching was done by hiring private detectives, selling wristbands etc. and paying for posters and leaflets. They haven't done any of that for years, hence the stability of the amount in the Fund.
An assumption then, on your part.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 11, 2020, 08:05:32 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 10, 2020, 11:36:03 PM
An assumption then, on your part.

If there are no signs of searching it's reasonable to assume it's not happening.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 11, 2020, 08:48:27 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 11, 2020, 08:05:32 AM
If there are no signs of searching it's reasonable to assume it's not happening.

Is anyone searching for Madeleine,searching for what happened is another matter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 11, 2020, 08:48:35 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 11, 2020, 08:05:32 AM
If there are no signs of searching it's reasonable to assume it's not happening.

Another absence of evidence argument
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on January 11, 2020, 09:04:51 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 10, 2020, 11:36:03 PM
An assumption then, on your part.

I doubt the McCanns would be allowed to engage the services of private detectives now MET are on the case. 

KM said in the 10 YR interview with Fiona Bruce that they're reliant on police and someone coming forward with info.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 11, 2020, 09:24:46 AM
Quote from: barrier on January 11, 2020, 08:48:27 AM
Is anyone searching for Madeleine,searching for what happened is another matter.

The only searching that could be done is by following up leads.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 11, 2020, 09:27:11 AM
Quote from: Lace on January 11, 2020, 09:24:46 AM
The only searching that could be done is by following up leads.

That would be none.Rowley nor any one else for that matter speaks of leads,only lines of enquiry.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 11, 2020, 10:12:44 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on January 11, 2020, 09:04:51 AM
I doubt the McCanns would be allowed to engage the services of private detectives now MET are on the case. 

KM said in the 10 YR interview with Fiona Bruce that they're reliant on police and someone coming forward with info.

In my opinion they have been told to do nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on January 11, 2020, 01:11:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 11, 2020, 10:12:44 AM
In my opinion they have been told to do nothing.

Rightfully so IMO. 

Did anything positive come out of anything the MCCanns did in terms of the campaign?

Same as Jeremy Bamber and his mainly loopy women that 'campaign' on his behalf not a single positive thing has ever been achieved.  In fact in JB's case it has only produced negative results.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on January 11, 2020, 01:14:43 PM
Just out of interest are any of the regulars on the MM board watching the ITV series re White House Farm murders/Jeremy Bamber which runs over 6 episodes starting Wed gone? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on January 11, 2020, 01:27:16 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on January 11, 2020, 01:11:19 PM
Rightfully so IMO. 

Did anything positive come out of anything the MCCanns did in terms of the campaign?

Same as Jeremy Bamber and his mainly loopy women that 'campaign' on his behalf not a single positive thing has ever been achieved.  In fact in JB's case it has only produced negative results.
He did get a few freebie cakes out of it though, such as your own "Holly Mess"...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 11, 2020, 01:58:47 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on January 11, 2020, 01:14:43 PM
Just out of interest are any of the regulars on the MM board watching the ITV series re White House Farm murders/Jeremy Bamber which runs over 6 episodes starting Wed gone?

Yes I've commented in the Bamber section.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on January 11, 2020, 02:01:47 PM
Quote from: Myster on January 11, 2020, 01:27:16 PM
He did get a few freebie cakes out of it though, such as your own "Holly Mess"...

Holy Mess!

It really beggars belief a group of people could ever think the 'bake-off' and 'graveside reading' were anything other than acts of appalling taste let alone could in any way assist JB.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on January 11, 2020, 02:04:05 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 11, 2020, 01:58:47 PM
Yes I've commented in the Bamber section.

Thanks.  I'll go read your comments.   8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 11, 2020, 05:50:11 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on January 11, 2020, 01:14:43 PM
Just out of interest are any of the regulars on the MM board watching the ITV series re White House Farm murders/Jeremy Bamber which runs over 6 episodes starting Wed gone?
Yes, I did and have made a comment or two on the Bamber forum, which were ignored.  Maybe it’s cos I’m not part of the “in” crowd.   @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 11, 2020, 05:52:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 11, 2020, 05:50:11 PM
Yes, I did and have made a comment or two on the Bamber forum, which were ignored.  Maybe it’s cos I’m not part of the “in” crowd.   @)(++(*


Recently?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 11, 2020, 05:55:08 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 11, 2020, 05:52:39 PM

Recently?
Ish, why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 11, 2020, 05:57:07 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 11, 2020, 05:55:08 PM
Ish, why?

I thought you indicated you might have after the 1st episode thats all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 11, 2020, 06:18:47 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 11, 2020, 05:57:07 PM
I thought you indicated you might have after the 1st episode thats all.
I did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 11, 2020, 06:31:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 11, 2020, 06:18:47 PM
I did.

On this forum?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 11, 2020, 06:32:32 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 11, 2020, 06:31:48 PM
On this forum?
Yes.  Why do you care?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 11, 2020, 06:43:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 11, 2020, 06:32:32 PM
Yes.  Why do you care?


We'll leave it there,social isn't your forte it seems.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 11, 2020, 06:54:14 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 11, 2020, 06:43:15 PM

We'll leave it there,social isn't your forte it seems.
Social isn’t my forte?  What does that mean?  If you want to know what I posted where check my posting history, but why you should be interested I have no idea.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 11, 2020, 07:03:50 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 11, 2020, 06:43:15 PM

We'll leave it there,social isn't your forte it seems.

I think social is very much VSs forte...but theres still some nasty sniping here so its difficult to be social. I dont include you as youve been relativley pleasant recently...its possible to disagree amicably...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on January 11, 2020, 09:47:17 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on January 11, 2020, 09:04:51 AM
I doubt the McCanns would be allowed to engage the services of private detectives now MET are on the case. 

KM said in the 10 YR interview with Fiona Bruce that they're reliant on police and someone coming forward with info.


Which is fanciful when no one came forward when a large reward was on offer!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 17, 2020, 12:40:07 PM
Remind us again who is running Operation Grange? the MET I recall isn't it, top notch investigators.

Met Police probed for not investigating VIP abuse claims

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51146111

Also their head has been referred.


In December, the now Met Police Commissioner Dame Cressida Dick was referred to the police watchdog over whether she should have done more to correct a public statement in 2014 - by a senior detective - that Beech's allegations were "credible and true".



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on January 28, 2020, 12:42:13 PM
Hope you're all not missing my invaluable input too much?!  I'm back to my spirutal home!

Can I tempt any of the regulars here with a secondment to the Bamber board?  It would be good to see some different views?  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 28, 2020, 02:02:06 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on January 28, 2020, 12:42:13 PM
Hope you're all not missing my invaluable input too much?!  I'm back to my spirutal home!

Can I tempt any of the regulars here with a secondment to the Bamber board?  It would be good to see some different views?  8((()*/

Hi Holly. I've had a couple of looks, but my knowledge of that case is way too sparse. I was interested to see how the early investigators messed up the evidence at the beginning.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 28, 2020, 05:35:43 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on January 28, 2020, 12:42:13 PM
Hope you're all not missing my invaluable input too much?!  I'm back to my spirutal home!

Can I tempt any of the regulars here with a secondment to the Bamber board?  It would be good to see some different views?  8((()*/

I've been doing a bit of reading up on the threads which has been interesting, I've also been following the ITV dramatisation which I think has been well done and of course I remember the case at the time.
I don't think I could be tempted to join the discussion.  I think it is all cut and dried and if I were in charge of the key to Bamber's cell I would throw it away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on January 28, 2020, 06:57:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 28, 2020, 02:02:06 PM
Hi Holly. I've had a couple of looks, but my knowledge of that case is way too sparse. I was interested to see how the early investigators messed up the evidence at the beginning.

Hi G-Unit.   Everyone has to start somewhere and I think you need a new challenge!  The case is worthy of your super sleuthing and forensic analytical skills.  8(>(( ?>)()<.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on January 28, 2020, 07:04:17 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 28, 2020, 05:35:43 PM
I've been doing a bit of reading up on the threads which has been interesting, I've also been following the ITV dramatisation which I think has been well done and of course I remember the case at the time.
I don't think I could be tempted to join the discussion.  I think it is all cut and dried and if I were in charge of the key to Bamber's cell I would throw it away.

Hi Brie.  A DS Jones appears to have suspected JB from the off much the same way GA did with the McCanns.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 28, 2020, 07:26:05 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on January 28, 2020, 07:04:17 PM
Hi Brie.  A DS Jones appears to have suspected JB from the off much the same way GA did with the McCanns.
DS Jones probably starting with musing "cui bono?"
And the police made a pigs ear of the crime scene.  Plus ca change plus c'est la meme chose ... but luckily there was sufficient evidence to convict the child killer Bamber while there was not an iota of anything approaching evidence to support any of Amaral's lunatic theories.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 28, 2020, 08:44:51 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 28, 2020, 07:26:05 PM
DS Jones probably starting with musing "cui bono?"
And the police made a pigs ear of the crime scene.  Plus ca change plus c'est la meme chose ... but luckily there was sufficient evidence to convict the child killer Bamber while there was not an iota of anything approaching evidence to support any of Amaral's lunatic theories.

Still nothing as emerged to prove him wrong though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 28, 2020, 08:46:48 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 28, 2020, 08:44:51 PM
Still nothing as emerged to prove him wrong though.

celestial teapot sceptic rubbish..imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 28, 2020, 08:59:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on January 28, 2020, 08:46:48 PM
celestial teapot sceptic rubbish..imo

Waiting for confirmation he was wrong,I'm patient.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 28, 2020, 09:18:36 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 28, 2020, 08:59:45 PM
Waiting for confirmation he was wrong,I'm patient.

celestial teapot sceptic rubbish..imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 28, 2020, 09:26:40 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 28, 2020, 08:59:45 PM
Waiting for confirmation he was wrong,I'm patient.
You think he might be right that Madeleine was od’ed on Calpol, fell to her death off the sofa and her body transported by the McCanns to her final resting place 23 dYs later?   Wow. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 29, 2020, 01:15:49 AM
"A police dog tracked down a wedding ring thrown out by a man after a row with his wife.

German shepherd Odin, six, found the lost band "in seconds" on a grass verge in Harborne, Birmingham.

Officers had pulled over after spotting the man and a friend "acting suspiciously" in Northfield Road at about 02:00 GMT on Saturday.

Handler PC Carl Woodall said: "It was pitch black. They could have spent all night and still not found it.""

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on January 29, 2020, 01:47:07 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on January 29, 2020, 01:15:49 AM
"A police dog tracked down a wedding ring thrown out by a man after a row with his wife.

German shepherd Odin, six, found the lost band "in seconds" on a grass verge in Harborne, Birmingham.

Officers had pulled over after spotting the man and a friend "acting suspiciously" in Northfield Road at about 02:00 GMT on Saturday.

Handler PC Carl Woodall said: "It was pitch black. They could have spent all night and still not found it.""

I wish I could have used him when I lost my engagement ring about 18 months ago.


Never took it off my finger so it must somehow, somewhere, have dropped off.   


Never found.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 29, 2020, 07:01:37 AM
Quote from: Davel on January 28, 2020, 09:18:36 PM
celestial teapot sceptic rubbish..imo
Th immaterial has become.... immaterial.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 01, 2020, 12:07:36 AM
An update on the case of the Document Devouring Deputy Mayor....7 years on. (The connection to the McCann case is Amaral's wife worked in the industry with Carito at the time)

https://www.portugalresident.com/former-deputy-mayor-who-swallowed-paper-during-police-searches-absolved-i-dont-know-what-was-on-the-paper/
Natasha Donn 31st Jan 2020

Former deputy mayor of Portimão Luís Carito and nine other defendants have been absolved of all the crimes they were accused, with a panel of judges determining that none of the charges could be proven.

Carito became the most notable suspect for having grabbed a paper out of the hands of a PJ police inspector and swallowed it during a house search.

Accused alongside him were businessmen Artur Curado, Luís Marreiros and Carlos Barros and six companies, all facing charges of money laundering, qualified fraud and participation in illegal business deals relating to the controversial ‘Cidade do Cinema’ project which aimed to turn Portimão into something of a European Bollywood.

The plans never moved forward and shortly after the local council fell into financial disarray, becoming one of the most indebted in Portugal.

However, yesterday came the official announcement that Portimão Court was only able to prove that contracts were signed between municipal companies Turis and Urbis and the companies involved in the creation of the so-called ‘Cidade do Cinema’.

In other words, it found no proof that these contracts defrauded the State or aggravated the municipality’s debt.

Initially, the Public Prosecutor’s Office had accused the defendants of taking part in a “fraudulent scheme” that was believed to have cost the State around €4.6 million.

However, last October, the Public Prosecutor’s Office called for the acquittal of the defendants as it had not been proven “that they acted in a concerted manner, harmed Portimão, or obtained personal benefits”.

Carito was even absolved for having grabbed a paper out of a PJ police inspector’s hands and swallowing it, as the Court says that “it was not possible to determine its content and relevance to the case”.

Speaking to reporters after the final verdict on Thursday, Carito said he was delighted with the outcome.

“I can finally look people in the face and say that it was proven that this whole situation was a mistake, or something else,” he told reporters, complaining that his name and the name of the other defendants were dragged through the mud.

“As we expected, this whole process led to nothing,” Carito said, adding that he has a “completely clear conscience”.

His lawyer Sancho Carvalho Nunes also spoke to reporters, saying that Carito’s innocence was proven “during the trial and not beforehand in the media” and claimed that the paper-swallowing was given more attention by newspapers than it was by “public opinion”.

“As was proven here today, not even that was a crime. Today justice was made and it was made during the trial and not in the newspapers,” he added.

Still, after all this time, no credible explanation has been offered as to why Carito swallowed the paper if in fact he did nothing wrong.

“I don’t know what was on it,” he told reporters.

michael.bruxo@algarveresident.com
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on February 02, 2020, 12:18:48 AM
Quote from: sadie on January 29, 2020, 01:47:07 AM
I wish I could have used him when I lost my engagement ring about 18 months ago.


Never took it off my finger so it must somehow, somewhere, have dropped off.   


Never found.

Aw that is a shame Sadie. I do hope it turns up!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 02, 2020, 01:51:46 AM

Didn't Amaral stand for Mayor somewhere or other.  I don't think it went well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 02, 2020, 02:48:18 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on February 02, 2020, 12:18:48 AM
Aw that is a shame Sadie. I do hope it turns up!

Thankyou Mistaken.  I doubt it now tho'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on February 02, 2020, 07:57:44 AM
Quote from: sadie on February 02, 2020, 02:48:18 AM
Thankyou Mistaken.  I doubt it now tho'

Don't give up hope yet Sadie.
Things often turn up eventually.
A wee word with St. Anthony,.patron Saint of lost things might work.:-)
Although it didn't when I lost a stone from my mother's engagement ring.
Here's hoping it still turns up.x
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 02, 2020, 09:33:27 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 02, 2020, 01:51:46 AM
Didn't Amaral stand for Mayor somewhere or other.  I don't think it went well.

I know Gerry McCann was blamed for his failure but I think in reality he had made himself unelectable as a result of his recent criminal conviction for perjury and his political party refused to put his name forward.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 02, 2020, 10:03:52 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 02, 2020, 09:33:27 AM
I know Gerry McCann was blamed for his failure but I think in reality he had made himself unelectable as a result of his recent criminal conviction for perjury and his political party refused to put his name forward.

How could Gerry McCann have influenced this if Amaral was so loved in Portugal?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 02, 2020, 10:32:43 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 02, 2020, 10:03:52 AM
How could Gerry McCann have influenced this if Amaral was so loved in Portugal?
Never underestimate the power of the McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 02, 2020, 10:54:50 AM

Most of the population of Portugal were terrified of The PJ if what I have seen was anything to go by.  Fortunately things seem to be changing.  And sad to say because of Madeleine.  Amaral went one step too far in trying to stitch up The McCanns, especially as he was about to become an Arguido himself.
I will never understand who and why he was put in charge of this investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 02, 2020, 11:15:35 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 02, 2020, 10:54:50 AM
Most of the population of Portugal were terrified of The PJ if what I have seen was anything to go by.  Fortunately things seem to be changing.  And sad to say because of Madeleine.  Amaral went one step too far in trying to stitch up The McCanns, especially as he was about to become an Arguido himself.
I will never understand who and why he was put in charge of this investigation.

Encarnacao and Neves were in charge, overseen by the Public Prosecutor and a judge. I think it's time to understand that 'Amaral being in charge' is a myth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 02, 2020, 11:18:56 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 02, 2020, 11:15:35 AM
Encarnacao and Neves were in charge, overseen by the Public Prosecutor and a judge. I think it's time to understand that 'Amaral being in charge' is a myth.

Yeh but,cause of him there's a nasty abductor(allegedly) out there don't you know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 02, 2020, 11:36:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 02, 2020, 11:15:35 AM
Encarnacao and Neves were in charge, overseen by the Public Prosecutor and a judge. I think it's time to understand that 'Amaral being in charge' is a myth.

More semantics with no real content.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 02, 2020, 12:09:20 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 02, 2020, 11:15:35 AM
Encarnacao and Neves were in charge, overseen by the Public Prosecutor and a judge. I think it's time to understand that 'Amaral being in charge' is a myth.
amaral was the co ordinator and had a lot of inluence......remember he said his views were not just his views but were shared by the the whole investigation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 12:16:20 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 02, 2020, 10:32:43 AM
Never underestimate the power of the McCanns.


Or the power behind them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 02, 2020, 12:34:12 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 12:16:20 PM

Or the power behind them.
Aha, yes (flutters fan in front of face).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 02, 2020, 12:34:12 PM
Aha, yes (flutters fan in front of face).

How come -  are you hot and bothered VS
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 02, 2020, 01:22:44 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 01:02:12 PM
How come -  are you hot and bothered VS
It’s a reference to the conspiratorial gossips in Dangerous Liaisons, probably a bit before your time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 02, 2020, 01:48:14 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 02, 2020, 11:36:48 AM
More semantics with no real content.

The chain of command is well known and you if prefer to ignore the truth you could at least acknowledge that your post is your opinion, not a fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 01:58:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 02, 2020, 01:22:44 PM
It’s a reference to the conspiratorial gossips in Dangerous Liaisons, probably a bit before your time.


Not sure what you mean by that = either age or knowledge.

But either way, you are wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 02, 2020, 02:14:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 02, 2020, 11:15:35 AM
Encarnacao and Neves were in charge, overseen by the Public Prosecutor and a judge. I think it's time to understand that 'Amaral being in charge' is a myth.

Yes ... we all know a big boy dunnit and ran away.  Which is not quite the impression conveyed within the pages of his book on the matter or in his many appearances on TV and print as the apparent 'expert' on Madeleine's case.

Wonder if he knows his away support are portraying him as the office boy ... I think he might find that at variance with his self image and honour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 02, 2020, 02:19:22 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 01:58:49 PM

Not sure what you mean by that = either age or knowledge.

But either way, you are wrong.
I assumed from your posts you were quite young, that is all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 03:09:55 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 02, 2020, 02:14:27 PM
Yes ... we all know a big boy dunnit and ran away.  Which is not quite the impression conveyed within the pages of his book on the matter or in his many appearances on TV and print as the apparent 'expert' on Madeleine's case.

Wonder if he knows his away support are portraying him as the office boy ... I think he might find that at variance with his self image and honour.


Well considering the support he got to fight the mcns in court - should tell you something.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 02, 2020, 03:14:42 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 03:09:55 PM

Well considering the support he got to fight the mcns in court - should tell you something.

which is nothing compared to support the McCanns have received from the Uk public
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 02, 2020, 03:26:08 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 02, 2020, 02:14:27 PM
Yes ... we all know a big boy dunnit and ran away.  Which is not quite the impression conveyed within the pages of his book on the matter or in his many appearances on TV and print as the apparent 'expert' on Madeleine's case.

Wonder if he knows his away support are portraying him as the office boy ... I think he might find that at variance with his self image and honour.

Your hyperbole requires no rebuttal in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 02, 2020, 04:00:38 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 02, 2020, 03:14:42 PM
which is nothing compared to support the McCanns have received from the Uk public

Which just goes to show how gullible the British public are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 04:04:24 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 02, 2020, 03:14:42 PM
which is nothing compared to support the McCanns have received from the Uk public



Think that was in the beginning - not so much now IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 02, 2020, 04:07:13 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 04:04:24 PM


Think that was in the beginning - not so much now IMO

All the UK media are supportive of the McCanns.

They'd be sued if they weren't though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 02, 2020, 04:18:41 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 04:04:24 PM


Think that was in the beginning - not so much now IMO
No far from just in the beginning...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 02, 2020, 04:19:41 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 02, 2020, 04:07:13 PM
All the UK media are supportive of the McCanns.

They'd be sued if they weren't though.

The UK media can't tell lies... The Portuguese can it seems
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 02, 2020, 04:20:29 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 02, 2020, 04:07:13 PM
All the UK media are supportive of the McCanns.

They'd be sued if they weren't though.
What an idiotic statement.  Is there a law against being unsupportive now?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 02, 2020, 04:21:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 02, 2020, 04:19:41 PM
The UK media can't tell lies... The Portuguese can it seems

They can't risk questioning the McCanns version of events in fear of litigation imo

Things might be different when the McCanns are dead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 02, 2020, 04:25:13 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 02, 2020, 04:21:50 PM
They can't risk questioning the McCanns version of events in fear of litigation imo

Things might be different when the McCanns are dead.

They can as long as they don't tell lies... You don't seem to understand it's that simple
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 02, 2020, 04:25:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 02, 2020, 04:20:29 PM
What an idiotic statement.  Is there a law against being unsupportive now?

How might the media go about being unsuportive of the McCanns IYO?

The BBC went so far as claiming Smith had changed his mind, before being pulled up over it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 02, 2020, 04:26:59 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 02, 2020, 04:00:38 PM
Which just goes to show how gullible the British public are.
I think the gullible ones are those that supported amaral
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 02, 2020, 04:28:01 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 02, 2020, 04:26:59 PM
I think the gullible ones are those that supported amaral

I think you are wrong, & my opinion matters more than yours IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 02, 2020, 04:31:24 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 02, 2020, 04:28:01 PM
I think you are wrong, & my opinion matters more than yours IMO.

Seeing as he, was, sacked from the investigation... His own police force didn't rate him
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 02, 2020, 04:33:11 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 02, 2020, 04:31:24 PM
Seeing as he, was, sacked from the investigation... His own police force didn't rate him

That still doesn't prove he was wrong though.

Only time will tell I suppose, SY are going to nail that German paedo who looks like Gerry any day now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 02, 2020, 05:23:49 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 02, 2020, 04:19:41 PM
The UK media can't tell lies... The Portuguese can it seems

The Sun gets away with it imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 02, 2020, 05:27:23 PM

Quote from: Davel on February 02, 2020, 04:19:41 PM
The UK media can't tell lies... The Portuguese can it seems


Ask Elton John and J Archer whether thats true,oh they had a payback from Archer but they had to pay out a £million for Elton John lies.Hillsborough was full of inaccuracies.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 07:36:08 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 02, 2020, 04:18:41 PM
No far from just in the beginning...


Thats IYO - my opinion is your wrong D
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 07:40:01 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 02, 2020, 04:31:24 PM
Seeing as he, was, sacked from the investigation... His own police force didn't rate him


IMO again he was taken off the case for a reason. by the powers that be again IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 02, 2020, 08:11:17 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 07:40:01 PM

IMO again he was taken off the case for a reason. by the powers that be again IMO

his conduct and perhaps because he was arguido and they expected him to be found guilty of perjury in another case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 03, 2020, 01:22:47 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 02, 2020, 07:40:01 PM

IMO again he was taken off the case for a reason. by the powers that be again IMO

Who do you think the Powers that be ae kizzy ?

For what reason do you think they took him off the case ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 03, 2020, 12:47:40 PM
Quote from: sadie on February 03, 2020, 01:22:47 AM
Who do you think the Powers that be ae kizzy ?

For what reason do you think they took him off the case ?

Well, Saidie nice to see you didn't say sacked.


On 2 October 2007 Chief Inspector Gonçalo Amaral, the inquiry's coordinator, was removed from his post and transferred from Portimão to Faro after telling the newspaper Diário de Notícias that the British police had only pursued leads helpful to the McCanns.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 03, 2020, 01:10:00 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 03, 2020, 12:47:40 PM
Well, Saidie nice to see you didn't say sacked.


On 2 October 2007 Chief Inspector Gonçalo Amaral, the inquiry's coordinator, was removed from his post and transferred from Portimão to Faro after telling the newspaper Diário de Notícias that the British police had only pursued leads helpful to the McCanns.

So definitely for breaking the law, on judicial secrecy being one reason
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 03, 2020, 01:20:54 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 03, 2020, 12:47:40 PM
Well, Saidie nice to see you didn't say sacked.


On 2 October 2007 Chief Inspector Gonçalo Amaral, the inquiry's coordinator, was removed from his post and transferred from Portimão to Faro after telling the newspaper Diário de Notícias that the British police had only pursued leads helpful to the McCanns.

Why on earth not?
That is how it was reported in the Portuguese press at the time.
To be in denial or trying to ignore the facts because they don't fit your preferred narrative is something that in my opinion devalues any case sceptics try to build.


Gonçalo Amaral demitido
02.10.2007 às 16h36

O coordenador da PJ de Portimão deixa a investigação do desaparecimento de Madeleine McCann. Em causa estão as declarações ao DN onde critica a polícia inglesa.

A Direcção Nacional da PJ demitiu hoje o coordenador da PJ de Portimão, Gonçalo Amaral, que deixa igualmente de liderar as investigações ao desaparecimento de Madeleine McCann.

Segundo o Expresso apurou, o despacho de cessação da comissão de serviço foi assinado esta terça-feira e deve-se às declarações de Gonçalo Amaral ao DN, onde fazia fortes críticas à polícia inglesa.

Gonçalo Amaral vai regressar à PJ de Faro.

https://expresso.pt/dossies/dossiest_actualidade/dos_madeleine_mccan/goncalo-amaral-demitido=f131397

Gonçalo Amaral fired
02.10.2007 at 16h36
CARLOS RODRIGUES LIMA AND RUI GUSTAVO

The coordinator of the Portimão PJ leaves the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. At issue are the statements to DN where it criticizes the English police.

The National Directorate of the PJ dismissed today the coordinator of the PJ of Portimão, Gonçalo Amaral, who also fails to lead investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

According to Expresso, the service commission termination order was signed this Tuesday and is due to Gonçalo Amaral's statements to DN, where he was strongly critical of the English police.

Gonçalo Amaral will return to the PJ of Faro.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 03, 2020, 04:57:08 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 03, 2020, 01:20:54 PM

Gonçalo Amaral will return to the PJ of Faro.

All that when you could have just left the last line in. Not fired then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on February 03, 2020, 04:58:47 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 02, 2020, 03:14:42 PM
which is nothing compared to support the McCanns have received from the Uk public

Which very quickly stopped once they began to hear the real events!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 03, 2020, 05:23:37 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on February 03, 2020, 04:58:47 PM
Which very quickly stopped once they began to hear the real events!

Rubbish... When do you think it stopped.. The year previously Kate contributed over 80,000 from the sale of her book
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on February 03, 2020, 05:51:09 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 03, 2020, 05:23:37 PM
Rubbish... When do you think it stopped.. The year previously Kate contributed over 80,000 from the sale of her book

It is NOT rubbish at all. They set up a private company to raise money- Simple!   The public became more aware of what was really going on as did the Vatican and other celebrities.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 04, 2020, 12:21:35 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 03, 2020, 01:10:00 PM
So definitely for breaking the law, on judicial secrecy being one reason

Unfortunately half my post was missing - as it wasn't edited must have been my mistake.

GA made a mistake - unprofesional or fustration.

But is there any wonder he was frustrated - with all the interference from the UK


TOTL chapter 6
SNIP
On May 14th, Kate Healy is indignant about the attitude of the liaison officer, who asks her where her daughter is. Neither she nor her husband accepts anyone doubting their word. The officer will be sent packing - and his colleague too - a week after his arrival. That attitude is, to say the least, shocking on the part of parents confronted by such a situation, that, what is more, is in a foreign country. Those two police officers, who distinguished themselves through long experience in the management of situations of kidnap and abduction, had been, all the same, entirely at their disposal; they provided daily logistical and legal support, and afforded them all the help they could have needed.

Curiously, the English do not consider it expedient to disclose the incident and the PJ are not informed. Myself, I only learn of it indirectly. Finally, a solution is found quickly: the two men are replaced by a Portuguese man who speaks fluent English.


SNIP
As time went by, we noticed that a certain number of the police officers sent to Portugal were poorly informed about the progress of the investigation. One of them who - like the majority - was coming to Portugal for the first time, was wearing a green and yellow rubber wrist band, bought for £2, which he played with nervously. The inscription read, "Look for Madeleine." Some of his colleagues told him that he would soon get rid of it. As a matter of fact, he took it off as soon as he got properly into the investigation and he had learned about the evidence placing doubt on the theory of abduction.


According to some on here the mcns made a mistake - that Maddie probably paid for with her life. IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 04, 2020, 12:38:27 PM
Isn't it strange how Amaral tries to make out the British were suspicious of the McCann's,  yet it was his explosive anger at the idea that the Police wanted to follow the line of abduction that got him taken off the case.   Which is it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 04, 2020, 12:42:14 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 04, 2020, 12:38:27 PM
Isn't it strange how Amaral tries to make out the British were suspicious of the McCann's,  yet it was his explosive anger at the idea that the Police wanted to follow the line of abduction that got him taken off the case.   Which is it?
Neither.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 04, 2020, 01:07:54 PM
Quote from: The General on February 04, 2020, 12:42:14 PM
Neither.

Please explain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 04, 2020, 01:28:25 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 04, 2020, 12:38:27 PM
Isn't it strange how Amaral tries to make out the British were suspicious of the McCann's,  yet it was his explosive anger at the idea that the Police wanted to follow the line of abduction that got him taken off the case.   Which is it?

Why do you call it explosive anger - have you a site for that or is that just what you think

Using the word explosive L is OTT in my opinion - unless you can prove otherwise that is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 04, 2020, 01:38:54 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 04, 2020, 01:28:25 PM
Why do you call it explosive anger - have you a site for that or is that just what you think

Using the word explosive L is OTT in my opinion - unless you can prove otherwise that is.

The explosive outburst led to the first intervention by the Portuguese government, in a very public reprimand by the Justice Minister Alberto Costa.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 04, 2020, 01:40:33 PM
https://newsoutlines.blogspot.com/2007/10/madeleine-detective-kicked-off-case.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 04, 2020, 01:47:57 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 04, 2020, 01:40:33 PM
https://newsoutlines.blogspot.com/2007/10/madeleine-detective-kicked-off-case.html
So not sacked at all then.
If Gerald, a cardiac consultant, is moved from Case A to Case B, is he 'sacked' from Case A?
Was Amaral 'sacked' from the case he was on before MM to lead this investigation?

But I get it; the utter desperation to smear, I understand. I'd do the same. I feel you bro.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 04, 2020, 01:51:57 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 04, 2020, 01:38:54 PM
The explosive outburst led to the first intervention by the Portuguese government, in a very public reprimand by the Justice Minister Alberto Costa.

It was Ribeiro who removed him from the case. He was also given to opening his mouth inappropriately.

Portugal's most senior policeman has apologised to his bosses over claims police rushed into making Kate and Gerry McCann suspects in daughter Madeleine's disappearance.

Alipio Ribeiro said he should have been more cautious in discussing the case and told Minister of Justice Alberto Costa he had a "slip of the tongue".
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/top-portugal-cop-alipio-ribeiro-292328
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 04, 2020, 01:55:24 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 04, 2020, 01:38:54 PM
The explosive outburst led to the first intervention by the Portuguese government, in a very public reprimand by the Justice Minister Alberto Costa.

Are they your words/opinion or someone else's L

If someone else - please show your source of info.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 04, 2020, 02:21:55 PM
Quote from: sadie on February 03, 2020, 01:22:47 AM
Who do you think the Powers that be ae kizzy ?

For what reason do you think they took him off the case ?

The part I missed Sadie off my reply.

Political powers IMO
"My removal was a political issue," says Gonçalo Amaral

Gonçalo Amaral, the former Judiciary Police inspector responsible for the case is another of the faces and voices of the documentary. Just like for Moita Flores for Gonçalo Amaral there was also "no evidence that pointed to an abduction. However, there was a need to continue the investigation," he argues when questioned on the two hours documentary, recalling that children's bed sheets looked "as if no one had slept on them".

Hypothesizing that both Maddie and the twin brothers were under Calpol, a medicine that helps them(children) fall asleep, the former inspector reinforces publicly again that they have come to the conclusion that "this would have been an accidental death" and has no doubts that the removal from the case that he was obliged "was a political issue."

With several testimonies including Pinto Monteiro, the then Attorney-General of the Republic, in a statement, the channel underlines that "The Madeleine McCann Mystery" dissects several lines of investigation that have been "known over the past 12 years, but were never conclusive.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 04, 2020, 06:43:03 PM
Quote from: The General on February 04, 2020, 01:47:57 PM
So not sacked at all then.
If Gerald, a cardiac consultant, is moved from Case A to Case B, is he 'sacked' from Case A?
Was Amaral 'sacked' from the case he was on before MM to lead this investigation?

But I get it; the utter desperation to smear, I understand. I'd do the same. I feel you bro.

Did I say sacked?  I said taken off the case. [bro]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 04, 2020, 07:18:43 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 04, 2020, 01:55:24 PM
Are they your words/opinion or someone else's L

If someone else - please show your source of info.
You appear to have missed ... http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg572169#msg572169

Snip
  ... Kate and Gerry have constantly said they are very willing to co-operate fully with the Portuguese authorities.

They will continue to do so regardless of who is in charge of the hunt for Madeleine." The bombshell came after Amaral accused British police of shielding the McCanns.

He claimed they were only pursuing leads that could help clear the couple, and were hampering his investigation into the four-year-old's disappearance from her family's holiday apartment in the the Algarve.

The explosive outburst led to the first intervention by the Portuguese government, in a very public reprimand by the Justice Minister Alberto Costa.

Last night a Portuguese police source described Amaral's remarks as "the straw that broke the camel's back".

He had breached Portuguese law and broken his silence over the Madeleine case, claiming:

"The British police have only been working on what the McCann couple want them to and what suits them most." The McCanns have been warned they face jail if they speak about the case – but Amaral appeared unconcerned by the secrecy laws as he sneered at a line of inquiry being followed by Leicestershire Police.

Amaral said a tip-off sent to Prince Charles's website that Madeleine may have been snatched by a former employee at the Ocean Club complex had "no credibility whatsoever".

He told Portuguese newspaper Diario de Noticias: "The Ocean Club is in Praia da Luz, not in London.

"That means that anything in respect to the complex and the employees – current or ex – has been or is being investigated by the Policia Judiciaria.

"It won't be an email, and an anonymous one at that, which will distract our line of investigation." He even claimed the tipoff was created by the McCanns.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg572169#msg572169

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 05, 2020, 01:37:52 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 04, 2020, 02:21:55 PM
The part I missed Sadie off my reply.

Political powers IMO
"My removal was a political issue," says Gonçalo Amaral

Gonçalo Amaral, the former Judiciary Police inspector responsible for the case is another of the faces and voices of the documentary. Just like for Moita Flores for Gonçalo Amaral there was also "no evidence that pointed to an abduction. However, there was a need to continue the investigation," he argues when questioned on the two hours documentary, recalling that children's bed sheets looked "as if no one had slept on them".

Hypothesizing that both Maddie and the twin brothers were under Calpol, a medicine that helps them(children) fall asleep, the former inspector reinforces publicly again that they have come to the conclusion that "this would have been an accidental death" and has no doubts that the removal from the case that he was obliged "was a political issue."

With several testimonies including Pinto Monteiro, the then Attorney-General of the Republic, in a statement, the channel underlines that "The Madeleine McCann Mystery" dissects several lines of investigation that have been "known over the past 12 years, but were never conclusive.


Thanks for your response Kizzy

But you are just quoting Amarals own excuses as to why he was removed.  Can we have something with some real sources and weight attached instead of Amarals, IMO, fantacies attempting to support himself.


Let's face it, Amarals word doesn't carry much value, does it?   After all he is a convicted purjorer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 07:52:28 AM
Quote from: sadie on February 05, 2020, 01:37:52 AM
Thanks for your response Kizzy

But you are just quoting Amarals own excuses as to why he was removed.  Can we have something with some real sources and weight attached instead of Amarals, IMO, fantacies attempting to support himself.


Let's face it, Amarals word doesn't carry much value, does it?   After all he is a convicted purjorer.

So, let's use this logic and apply it elsewhere. If you are found guilty of perjury, but deny it, you lied, end of, and anything you assert subsequently can't be trusted and is probably also a lie? Is that correct?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 05, 2020, 08:18:40 AM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 07:52:28 AM
So, let's use this logic and apply it elsewhere. If you are found guilty of perjury, but deny it, you lied, end of, and anything you assert subsequently can't be trusted and is probably also a lie? Is that correct?
Such logic has sustained the McCann critic for many years, and neither has ever been found guilty by a court of lying, just one admission in Kate’s book that they told a lie about the reasons for calling off a day trip.  Apparently this “confession” proves that they are liars full stop, and that nothing they have ever said can be deemed truthful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 05, 2020, 09:05:15 AM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 07:52:28 AM
So, let's use this logic and apply it elsewhere. If you are found guilty of perjury, but deny it, you lied, end of, and anything you assert subsequently can't be trusted and is probably also a lie? Is that correct?
Lying in court as, amaral did is a, serious offence... Particularly as he's a police officer.  It shows he's, willing to lie to make his point and hence untrustworthy
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 09:57:31 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 05, 2020, 09:05:15 AM
Lying in court as, amaral did is a, serious offence... Particularly as he's a police officer.  It shows he's, willing to lie to make his point and hence untrustworthy
Thank you. So when Kate and Gerry lied about him being ill.........untrustworthy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 09:59:50 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 05, 2020, 08:18:40 AM
Such logic has sustained the McCann critic for many years, and neither has ever been found guilty by a court of lying, just one admission in Kate’s book that they told a lie about the reasons for calling off a day trip.  Apparently this “confession” proves that they are liars full stop, and that nothing they have ever said can be deemed truthful.
OK, so there's lies and other lies that are OK? And the lies that are OK don't lead to further scrutiny of the truthfulness of subsequent statements? But it depends who's lying? And it depends on whether the person admitted to lying or not?
Pretty convenient.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 05, 2020, 10:01:57 AM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 09:57:31 AM
Thank you. So when Kate and Gerry lied about him being ill.........untrustworthy.

You need to look at things in context
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 10:04:48 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 05, 2020, 10:01:57 AM
You need to look at things in context
OK.
But then your bleating about a police officer having to be unimpeachable is too funny for consumption if a child has just been fed to the pigs. How's that for context?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 05, 2020, 10:06:29 AM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 10:04:48 AM
OK.
But then your bleating about a police officer having to be unimpeachable is too funny for consumption if a child has just been fed to the pigs. How's that for context?

There, absolutely no evidence a child was fed to the pigs... More lies
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 10:12:18 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 05, 2020, 10:06:29 AM
There, absolutely no evidence a child was fed to the pigs... More lies
I can actually hear the intro to Billie Jean as you moonwalk out of this one.....do...do.......do..do.......do..do......do..do.............
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 05, 2020, 10:14:00 AM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 09:59:50 AM
OK, so there's lies and other lies that are OK? And the lies that are OK don't lead to further scrutiny of the truthfulness of subsequent statements? But it depends who's lying? And it depends on whether the person admitted to lying or not?
Pretty convenient.
And you managed to discern all that from what I wrote?  Wow, twisted. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 05, 2020, 10:15:51 AM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 10:04:48 AM
OK.
But then your bleating about a police officer having to be unimpeachable is too funny for consumption if a child has just been fed to the pigs. How's that for context?
Police officers really should be unimpeachable regardless of the nature of the crimes they are investigating, but I realise you think otherwise and that they should bend the rules to suit themselves.   Glad you're not in charge.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 10:24:06 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 05, 2020, 10:14:00 AM
And you managed to discern all that from what I wrote?  Wow, twisted.
Thank you. I get that a lot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 05, 2020, 10:26:00 AM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 10:24:06 AM
Thank you. I get that a lot.
I'm not surprised. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 10:34:52 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 05, 2020, 10:15:51 AM
Police officers really should be unimpeachable regardless of the nature of the crimes they are investigating, but I realise you think otherwise and that they should bend the rules to suit themselves.   Glad you're not in charge.
They should. It's actually part of the Code of Conduct. But they rarely are. I'm an advocate of stress and pressure being applied in certain circumstances, yes. I'm twisted like that. And I've been on the receiving end - and I'm in favour!
By the way, I am in charge.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 10:35:22 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 05, 2020, 10:26:00 AM
I'm not surprised.
Me neither.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 05, 2020, 10:41:06 AM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 10:34:52 AM
They should. It's actually part of the Code of Conduct. But they rarely are. I'm an advocate of stress and pressure being applied in certain circumstances, yes. I'm twisted like that. And I've been on the receiving end - and I'm in favour!
By the way, I am in charge.
Yes dear, time for your meds.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 05, 2020, 10:46:02 AM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 10:34:52 AM
They should. It's actually part of the Code of Conduct. But they rarely are. I'm an advocate of stress and pressure being applied in certain circumstances, yes. I'm twisted like that. And I've been on the receiving end - and I'm in favour!
By the way, I am in charge.

I can't see any justification for beating the he'll out of Cipriano particularly when there's no evidence she's guilty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 05, 2020, 11:36:22 AM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 09:57:31 AM
Thank you. So when Kate and Gerry lied about him being ill.........untrustworthy.

Hardly.  The McCanns did not commit Perjury.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 12:39:13 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 05, 2020, 11:36:22 AM
Hardly.  The McCanns did not commit Perjury.
So all lies are different? Even when the accused does not admit to it? And people who admit it are OK?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 05, 2020, 12:48:20 PM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 12:39:13 PM
So all lies are different? Even when the accused does not admit to it? And people who admit it are OK?

The McCanns did not lie, they merely offered an excuse which Kate later explained.  And well you know it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 05, 2020, 01:06:08 PM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 12:39:13 PM
So all lies are different? Even when the accused does not admit to it? And people who admit it are OK?
Actually yes, all lies are different.  There are big lies, little lies, white lies, fibs, untruths, half-truths. 
Someone who stands in a dock and under oath tells a lie has committed a serious offence.  Someone who says "I can't come out today cos I've got a tummy bug" when actually they have just recovered from a tummy bug and are 90% better and then later admit they made an excuse has not committed a serious offence.  Unless you see them both as equally heinous crimes?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 05, 2020, 01:21:05 PM
When the lie told results in someone being imprisoned for the best part of 20 years when they may well be innocent... Then it's serious
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 05, 2020, 01:28:53 PM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 09:57:31 AM
Thank you. So when Kate and Gerry lied about him being ill.........untrustworthy.

Gerry was ill,  they just bigged it up a bit.   Anyway,  they weren't allowed to mention the investigation two years in prison if they did,  so what were they supposed to do?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 03:14:41 PM
Which is it then? Lying's OK if you admit it? Being found guilty of perjury isn't, but the accused never admitted it? But isn't the Portuguese judicial system irrevocably broken, the government fascists and the economy third world? Or is it suddenly, or even sporadically world class? But one conviction is safe (Snr Gonzo), but another isn't (Leonor). A small lie is OK to sand bag and retrofit, but 'overseeing' the administrative element of pressure on a convicted child killer is barbarism?
You guys, you crack me right up. Not. I find your revisionism, conceit and facetiousness incongruent, but not surprising. And for what? Because a policeman didn't give you the outcome you wanted, so you're willing to compromise your own conscious. When the nasty policeman was giving me a kicking with his mates in a cell, I had the good grace to admit I deserved it for being an arsehole. (The key is to cover your head, roll up in a ball, tuck your elbows in, knees to the chest - they rarely go for the face, which is something). Fair one. My only regret was not running fast enough.

And I'm twisted? (I am twisted, I admit it). At least I'm honest and refuse to be a sycophantic shitbag.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 05, 2020, 03:37:57 PM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 03:14:41 PM
Which is it then? Lying's OK if you admit it? Being found guilty of perjury isn't, but the accused never admitted it? But isn't the Portuguese judicial system irrevocably broken, the government fascists and the economy third world? Or is it suddenly, or even sporadically world class? But one conviction is safe (Snr Gonzo), but another isn't (Leonor). A small lie is OK to sand bag and retrofit, but 'overseeing' the administrative element of pressure on a convicted child killer is barbarism?
You guys, you crack me right up. Not. I find your revisionism, conceit and facetiousness incongruent, but not surprising. And for what? Because a policeman didn't give you the outcome you wanted, so you're willing to compromise your own conscious. When the nasty policeman was giving me a kicking with his mates in a cell, I had the good grace to admit I deserved it for being an arsehole. (The key is to cover your head, roll up in a ball, tuck your elbows in, knees to the chest - they rarely go for the face, which is something). Fair one. My only regret was not running fast enough.

And I'm twisted? (I am twisted, I admit it). At least I'm honest and refuse to be a sycophantic shitbag.
Oh wow I have been totally “owned” by that incoherent rant.  Not. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 05, 2020, 03:45:51 PM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 03:14:41 PM
Which is it then? Lying's OK if you admit it? Being found guilty of perjury isn't, but the accused never admitted it? But isn't the Portuguese judicial system irrevocably broken, the government fascists and the economy third world? Or is it suddenly, or even sporadically world class? But one conviction is safe (Snr Gonzo), but another isn't (Leonor). A small lie is OK to sand bag and retrofit, but 'overseeing' the administrative element of pressure on a convicted child killer is barbarism?
You guys, you crack me right up. Not. I find your revisionism, conceit and facetiousness incongruent, but not surprising. And for what? Because a policeman didn't give you the outcome you wanted, so you're willing to compromise your own conscious. When the nasty policeman was giving me a kicking with his mates in a cell, I had the good grace to admit I deserved it for being an arsehole. (The key is to cover your head, roll up in a ball, tuck your elbows in, knees to the chest - they rarely go for the face, which is something). Fair one. My only regret was not running fast enough.

And I'm twisted? (I am twisted, I admit it). At least I'm honest and refuse to be a sycophantic shitbag.

You can call other posters, any names you want but it reflects badly on you rather than them
As regards Portuguese or any court it's the evidence that's important.  There was overwhelming evidence amaral was guilty of perjury and next to no evidence cipriano was guilty.  Perhaps if you knew more about the cases you might understand
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 05, 2020, 03:48:59 PM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 03:14:41 PM
Which is it then? Lying's OK if you admit it? Being found guilty of perjury isn't, but the accused never admitted it? But isn't the Portuguese judicial system irrevocably broken, the government fascists and the economy third world? Or is it suddenly, or even sporadically world class? But one conviction is safe (Snr Gonzo), but another isn't (Leonor). A small lie is OK to sand bag and retrofit, but 'overseeing' the administrative element of pressure on a convicted child killer is barbarism?
You guys, you crack me right up. Not. I find your revisionism, conceit and facetiousness incongruent, but not surprising. And for what? Because a policeman didn't give you the outcome you wanted, so you're willing to compromise your own conscious. When the nasty policeman was giving me a kicking with his mates in a cell, I had the good grace to admit I deserved it for being an arsehole. (The key is to cover your head, roll up in a ball, tuck your elbows in, knees to the chest - they rarely go for the face, which is something). Fair one. My only regret was not running fast enough.

And I'm twisted? (I am twisted, I admit it). At least I'm honest and refuse to be a sycophantic shitbag.
You might be twisted enough to believe that police brutality is fair enough when you’re guilty but what about when you’re not?  Do you trust the police to be discerning enough to only kick the shit out of thieving b........s like you, and not out of some innocent bystander at a crime scene?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 04:59:45 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 05, 2020, 03:48:59 PM
You might be twisted enough to believe that police brutality is fair enough when you’re guilty but what about when you’re not?  Do you trust the police to be discerning enough to only kick the shit out of thieving b......s like you, and not out of some innocent bystander at a crime scene?
Hang on, I'm no thief! Twisted, check. Arsehole, check. Knobhead on a night out, check. Assaulted a bouncer (started as self-defence) by smashing his head in to the light cluster of a parked car, check.
What was the question?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 05:01:48 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 05, 2020, 03:45:51 PM
You can call other posters, any names you want but it reflects badly on you rather than them

This is your go to!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 05:04:24 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 05, 2020, 03:37:57 PM
Oh wow I have been totally “owned” by that incoherent rant.  Not.
Nobody expects the glove puppet to comprehend, they're just surprised when it speaks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 05, 2020, 05:15:26 PM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 05:04:24 PM
Nobody expects the glove puppet to comprehend, they're just surprised when it speaks.

i think you may have taken too many head shots
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 05, 2020, 05:21:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 05, 2020, 05:15:26 PM
i think you may have taken too many head shots

Snort.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 05, 2020, 05:27:03 PM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 04:59:45 PM
Hang on, I'm no thief! Twisted, check. Arsehole, check. Knobhead on a night out, check. Assaulted a bouncer (started as self-defence) by smashing his head in to the light cluster of a parked car, check.
What was the question?
So, not a thief then just a violent thug, mes apologies. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 05, 2020, 05:32:39 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 05, 2020, 01:21:05 PM
When the lie told results in someone being imprisoned for the best part of 20 years when they may well be innocent... Then it's serious

What I found bizarre was the fact that despite the Portuguese court judging that Leonor Cipriano had indeed been tortured but because she was unable to identify her torturers ~ hardly surprising since she could not see them because they had put a bag over her head ~ she was punished by having time added on to her sentence.

I fail to see why anyone could condone, an at the time serving police officer, being found guilty of perjury in a torture case or what I think is perverting the course of justice and finding it all quite acceptable.
Or why those who were present in the location where torture had occurred were allowed to walk without accounting for themselves.  Either they did it or someone walked in off the street to do it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 05, 2020, 05:46:38 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 05, 2020, 05:32:39 PM
What I found bizarre was the fact that despite the Portuguese court judging that Leonor Cipriano had indeed been tortured but because she was unable to identify her torturers ~ hardly surprising since she could not see them because they had put a bag over her head ~ she was punished by having time added on to her sentence.

I fail to see why anyone could condone, an at the time serving police officer, being found guilty of perjury in a torture case or what I think is perverting the course of justice and finding it all quite acceptable.
Or why those who were present in the location where torture had occurred were allowed to walk without accounting for themselves.  Either they did it or someone walked in off the street to do it.

The powers that be at the time knew who did it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 07:22:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 05, 2020, 05:27:03 PM
So, not a thief then just a violent thug, mes apologies.
None taken.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 05, 2020, 07:24:17 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 05, 2020, 05:32:39 PM
What I found bizarre was the fact that despite the Portuguese court judging that Leonor Cipriano had indeed been tortured but because she was unable to identify her torturers ~ hardly surprising since she could not see them because they had put a bag over her head ~ she was punished by having time added on to her sentence.

I fail to see why anyone could condone, an at the time serving police officer, being found guilty of perjury in a torture case or what I think is perverting the course of justice and finding it all quite acceptable.
Or why those who were present in the location where torture had occurred were allowed to walk without accounting for themselves.  Either they did it or someone walked in off the street to do it.
Sucks to be her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 05, 2020, 09:33:34 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 05, 2020, 05:46:38 PM
The powers that be at the time knew who did it.

In my opinion they might have been powerless to prevent it but they had to know what was going on. And as we know many years down the line another one who had associated himself closely with Madeleine's case was also involved in Joana's case and accused of torturing her mother into making a confession.

Snip
Amaral is not the only accused officer linked to the McCann investigation. Another is the recently retired Chief Inspector Paulo Pereira Cristovao, who has been writing a daily column on the Madeleine inquiry for a Portuguese newspaper that has been reporting sensational stories, leaked by sources close to the police inquiry, some of which have later been proven to be untrue.

Cristovao makes clear in his column that he considers the McCanns are probably responsible for Madeleine's death or disappearance.

In the Cipriano case, Cristovao is alleged to have been one of those involved in the torture, but not

the cover-up. Leonor was unable to pick out her assailants from among the accused officers on an identity parade.

Sources say the prosecutor is now investigating the allegation that police paid outside thugs to beat up Leonor.

Like Amaral, Cristovao denies all wrongdoing.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482039/Madeleine-Police-trial-torturing-mother-missing-girl.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 06, 2020, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 07:52:28 AM
So, let's use this logic and apply it elsewhere. If you are found guilty of perjury, but deny it, you lied, end of, and anything you assert subsequently can't be trusted and is probably also a lie? Is that correct?

I would use the word "possibly" rather than "probably"


But Amarals perjury was such a dreadful lie and had obviously been planned before writing it.   It caused two people who may well be innocent to rot in jail for what would probably have been the best years of their lives.


Unforgivable for anyone to do that to others ... and because of it, it is quite obvious that everything that he states must be carefully analysed in case he is making it up.   He cannot be totally trusted, can he?   Simples.



He has put about many untruths in recent years but seems to have rescinded some of them in 2017.  Have you not noticed the posts about this in the past couple of months, or so?




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 06, 2020, 01:15:59 AM
Quote from: sadie on February 06, 2020, 01:03:11 AM
I would use the word "possibly" rather than "probably"


But Amarals perjury was such a dreadful lie and had obviously been planned before writing it.   It caused two people who may well be innocent to rot in jail for what would probably have been the best years of their lives.


Unforgivable for anyone to do that to others ... and because of it, it is quite obvious that everything that he states must be carefully analysed in case he is making it up.   He cannot be totally trusted, can he?   Simples.



He has put about many untruths in recent years but seems to have rescinded some of them in 2017.  Have you not noticed the posts about this in the past couple of months, or so?


2017 is an interesting year in this case

That year, the number of sceptics, on forum, who toned down their viscious attacks on The Mccanns, or stopped posting was noticed. 

Had the Police accidentally, or deliberately, leaked ? 
Had  some news indicating that the PJ and OG knew who (a collective "Who" ) the perps were, escaped the silence from the Police Forces ? ...... the silence that the rest of us noticed ?   


Was it best policy for sceptics in the know, or ones that had abused The Mccanns, to cover their backs and to quietly slide away ?   Cos that is what I noticed.


Also as we saw on here in a recent post, 2017 was the year that Amaral started backing off.   Why then ?  ...  And his mate Flores, IIRC., didn't he back off a bit?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 06, 2020, 07:19:04 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 05, 2020, 09:33:34 PM

Sources say the prosecutor is now investigating the allegation that police paid outside thugs to beat up Leonor.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482039/Madeleine-Police-trial-torturing-mother-missing-girl.html

Make your mind up. I thought the plod slapped her about? What happened to that?
Sources say blah blah blah.......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 06, 2020, 07:34:22 AM
Quote from: sadie on February 06, 2020, 01:15:59 AM

2017 is an interesting year in this case
That year, the number of sceptics, on forum, who toned down their viscious attacks on The Mccanns, or stopped posting was noticed. 
Had the Police accidentally, or deliberately, leaked ? 
Had  some news indicating that the PJ and OG knew who (a collective "Who" ) the perps were, escaped the silence from the Police Forces ? ...... the silence that the rest of us noticed ?   
Was it best policy for sceptics in the know, or ones that had abused The Mccanns, to cover their backs and to quietly slide away ?   Cos that is what I noticed.
Also as we saw on here in a recent post, 2017 was the year that Amaral started backing off.   Why then ?  ...  And his mate Flores, IIRC., didn't he back off a bit?

Best. Post. Ever.

This is why I'm here, I see that now. Have I just been delivered my personal Damascene conversion? The truth will out. Sustaining longer than the enemy is the key. It's an attritional, intellectual battle now; the battlefield has shifted.
Those who know will fold and those who fold will fall.

Keep the faith, Sadie. Keep strong. May your god go with you.

Shalom.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 06, 2020, 08:18:22 AM
Quote from: The General on February 06, 2020, 07:19:04 AM
Make your mind up. I thought the plod slapped her about? What happened to that?
Sources say blah blah blah.......

the best source is the PJ officers themeselves who claimed cipriano was injured when she threw herself down the stairs. By stating that the idiots placed themeselves at the scene of the injuries. AS it was confirmed that a fall down stairs would not have caused the injuries the PJ incriminated themeselves
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 06, 2020, 08:26:59 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 06, 2020, 08:18:22 AM
the best source is the PJ officers themeselves who claimed cipriano was injured when she threw herself down the stairs. By stating that the idiots placed themeselves at the scene of the injuries. AS it was confirmed that a fall down stairs would not have caused the injuries the PJ incriminated themeselves
I don't know if you're aware, but when you're in custody, the nice policemen, as far as I'm aware, don't permit detainees to have the run of the gaff. In the main they're accompanied everywhere. So if someone decides to end it all by throwing themselves headlong down the stairs, then, inevitably, this will be witnessed by one or more chaperones of the hapless victim.
Quite how that 'incriminates' them, I can't see.

But wait.......are you suggesting.....? But don't have the bottle to say......?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 06, 2020, 10:24:38 AM
Quote from: The General on February 05, 2020, 03:14:41 PM
Which is it then? Lying's OK if you admit it? Being found guilty of perjury isn't, but the accused never admitted it? But isn't the Portuguese judicial system irrevocably broken, the government fascists and the economy third world? Or is it suddenly, or even sporadically world class? But one conviction is safe (Snr Gonzo), but another isn't (Leonor). A small lie is OK to sand bag and retrofit, but 'overseeing' the administrative element of pressure on a convicted child killer is barbarism?
You guys, you crack me right up. Not. I find your revisionism, conceit and facetiousness incongruent, but not surprising. And for what? Because a policeman didn't give you the outcome you wanted, so you're willing to compromise your own conscious. When the nasty policeman was giving me a kicking with his mates in a cell, I had the good grace to admit I deserved it for being an arsehole. (The key is to cover your head, roll up in a ball, tuck your elbows in, knees to the chest - they rarely go for the face, which is something). Fair one. My only regret was not running fast enough.

And I'm twisted? (I am twisted, I admit it). At least I'm honest and refuse to be a sycophantic shitbag.

You can hardly compare the McCann's white lie of bigging up Gerry's stomach upset because they were put in a situation where they  couldn't tell the truth at the time as they were forbidden to reveal anything concerning the Portuguese investigation,  if they did they would have been given a two year prison sentence.  To Amaral who committed perjury.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 06, 2020, 10:41:59 AM
Quote from: Lace on February 06, 2020, 10:24:38 AM
You can hardly compare the McCann's white lie of bigging up Gerry's stomach upset because they were put in a situation where they  couldn't tell the truth at the time as they were forbidden to reveal anything concerning the Portuguese investigation,  if they did they would have been given a two year prison sentence.  To Amaral who committed perjury.
Oh great, that post went under the radar until you quoted it. Watch this space.
I can see both sides though, granted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 06, 2020, 10:56:14 AM
Quote from: The General on February 06, 2020, 10:41:59 AM
Oh great, that post went under the radar until you quoted it. Watch this space.
I can see both sides though, granted.

I suppose you think gerrys lie Re the stomach upset is no worse than... We believe Saddam Hussain has WMDs..
Everyone tells the odd white lie.. It's the consequence of the lie that signifies it's importance
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 06, 2020, 11:01:36 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 06, 2020, 10:56:14 AM
I suppose you think gerrys lie Re the stomach upset is no worse than... We believe Saddam Hussain has WMDs..
Everyone tells the odd white lie.. It's the consequence of the lie that signifies it's importance
I get it. It was an example of minor league hypocrisy. But I understand your point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 06, 2020, 04:15:22 PM
Quote from: sadie on February 06, 2020, 01:15:59 AM

2017 is an interesting year in this case

That year, the number of sceptics, on forum, who toned down their viscious attacks on The Mccanns, or stopped posting was noticed. 

Had the Police accidentally, or deliberately, leaked ? 
Had  some news indicating that the PJ and OG knew who (a collective "Who" ) the perps were, escaped the silence from the Police Forces ? ...... the silence that the rest of us noticed ?   


Was it best policy for sceptics in the know, or ones that had abused The Mccanns, to cover their backs and to quietly slide away ?   Cos that is what I noticed.


Also as we saw on here in a recent post, 2017 was the year that Amaral started backing off.   Why then ?  ...  And his mate Flores, IIRC., didn't he back off a bit?

Two things of note in 2017,Rowley update and Pedro do Carmo telling Brunt,they don't know what happened and have to prepared for different scenario's,this in answer to a question"do you accept the girl was abducted"

Grange as it stands.

https://www.met.police.uk/notices/met/operation-grange/

On 12 May 2011 the Met announced that, at the request of the Home Secretary, it had agreed to bring its particular expertise to the Madeleine McCann case.

The then Commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, considered the request and took the decision that on balance it was the right thing to do. This was subject to funding being made available by the Home Office, as this case is beyond the Met’s jurisdiction.

Investigative review
The Met’s involvement, known as Operation Grange, is led by the Specialist Crime Command unit and involved, in the first instance, an ‘investigative review’.  This was a review of all of the investigations that had been previously conducted into the circumstances of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.

Ongoing investigation
In July 2013 the status of the Met’s enquiries changed to that of an investigation, working with the Portuguese authorities to pursue specific lines of enquiry.

The Portuguese authorities retain the lead and the Met continues to work in support of them.

The Home Office continues to fund Operation Grange.

Contact details for Operation Grange
Ways to contact us:

By phone: 0207 321 9251

By email: Operation.grange@met.police.uk
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 06, 2020, 04:27:45 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 06, 2020, 04:15:22 PM
Two things of note in 2017,Rowley update and Pedro do Carmo telling Brunt,they don't know what happened and have to prepared for different scenario's,this in answer to a question"do you accept the girl was abducted"

Grange as it stands.

https://www.met.police.uk/notices/met/operation-grange/

On 12 May 2011 the Met announced that, at the request of the Home Secretary, it had agreed to bring its particular expertise to the Madeleine McCann case.

The then Commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, considered the request and took the decision that on balance it was the right thing to do. This was subject to funding being made available by the Home Office, as this case is beyond the Met’s jurisdiction.

Investigative review
The Met’s involvement, known as Operation Grange, is led by the Specialist Crime Command unit and involved, in the first instance, an ‘investigative review’.  This was a review of all of the investigations that had been previously conducted into the circumstances of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.

Ongoing investigation
In July 2013 the status of the Met’s enquiries changed to that of an investigation, working with the Portuguese authorities to pursue specific lines of enquiry.

The Portuguese authorities retain the lead and the Met continues to work in support of them.

The Home Office continues to fund Operation Grange.

Contact details for Operation Grange
Ways to contact us:

By phone: 0207 321 9251

By email: Operation.grange@met.police.uk

Of course PdC doesn't know if Maddie was abducted... But he was clear parents not suspects and no evidence against them... Woke and wandered is a possibility
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 06, 2020, 04:30:23 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 06, 2020, 04:27:45 PM
Of course PdC doesn't know if Maddie was abducted... But he was clear parents not suspects and no evidence against them... Woke and wandered is a possibility

Yes, if Maddie opened the window & shutters herself, or a burglar did it then ran away, or the McCanns lied about the open window/shutters.   Take your pick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 06, 2020, 07:04:04 PM
Quote from: sadie on February 06, 2020, 01:15:59 AM

2017 is an interesting year in this case

That year, the number of sceptics, on forum, who toned down their viscious attacks on The Mccanns, or stopped posting was noticed. 

Had the Police accidentally, or deliberately, leaked ? 
Had  some news indicating that the PJ and OG knew who (a collective "Who" ) the perps were, escaped the silence from the Police Forces ? ...... the silence that the rest of us noticed ?   


Was it best policy for sceptics in the know, or ones that had abused The Mccanns, to cover their backs and to quietly slide away ?   Cos that is what I noticed.


Also as we saw on here in a recent post, 2017 was the year that Amaral started backing off.   Why then ?  ...  And his mate Flores, IIRC., didn't he back off a bit?

2017 was indeed interesting. It was the year that 'huge bids' were being made for interviews with the McCanns, but Scotland Yard seemed to put a stop to that idea. Slowly but surely the media stopped showering us with McCann stories thereafter also. Was that down to the police too?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 06, 2020, 08:09:34 PM
I reckon that after a decade of nothing, people just got weary and lost interest.
A few died as no doubt will many more before any result is declared.

Those of us who are left have nothing better to do, otherwise we would be doing it - IMO, of course
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 06, 2020, 09:02:06 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 06, 2020, 08:09:34 PM
I reckon that after a decade of nothing, people just got weary and lost interest.
A few died as no doubt will many more before any result is declared.

Those of us who are left have nothing better to do, otherwise we would be doing it - IMO, of course
True.
No illuminati intervention in '17 then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 07, 2020, 01:12:06 AM
Quote from: The General on February 06, 2020, 07:34:22 AM
Best. Post. Ever.

This is why I'm here, I see that now. Have I just been delivered my personal Damascene conversion? The truth will out. Sustaining longer than the enemy is the key. It's an attritional, intellectual battle now; the battlefield has shifted.
Those who know will fold and those who fold will fall.

Keep the faith, Sadie. Keep strong. May your god go with you.

Shalom.

Just to add to your ire.


The Supreme Court found in Amarals favour on Jan 31, 2017.  He was awarded £500,000. euros 500,000.  Soz my error, now amended


How come he hasn't yet picked up the lolly?
 
Has some news been leaked in 2017 from the Police Forces that shows that the case is solved, and that the decision of the Supreme Court was wrong ?   Because of this, has he decided to back off and also make his public announcement in 2017 that he has changed his mind about the Mccanns involvement ?


Only thoughts ....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 07, 2020, 06:48:35 AM
Quote from: The General on February 06, 2020, 09:02:06 PM
True.
No illuminati intervention in '17 then?
Nah! Professor Langdon sorted them out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 07, 2020, 06:52:28 AM
Quote from: sadie on February 07, 2020, 01:12:06 AM
Just to add to your ire.


The Supreme Court found in Amarals favour on Jan 31, 2017.  He was awarded £500,000.


How come he hasn't yet picked up the lolly?
 
Has some news been leaked in 2017 from the Police Forces that shows that the case is solved, and that the decision of the Supreme Court was wrong ?   Because of this, has he decided to back off and also make his public announcement in 2017 that he has changed his mind about the Mccanns involvement ?


Only thoughts ....
Where in the judgement by the supreme court is that written.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 07, 2020, 07:14:21 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 07, 2020, 06:52:28 AM
Where in the judgement by the supreme court is that written.
are you suggesting he wasn’t awarded 500,000 euros?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 07, 2020, 07:31:20 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 07, 2020, 07:14:21 AM
are you suggesting he wasn’t awarded 500,000 euros?
Does an award get suspended upon appeal?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 07, 2020, 08:02:32 AM
Quote from: The General on February 07, 2020, 07:31:20 AM
Does an award get suspended upon appeal?
Immaterial to my question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 08:25:34 AM
Quote from: sadie on February 07, 2020, 01:12:06 AM
Just to add to your ire.


The Supreme Court found in Amarals favour on Jan 31, 2017.  He was awarded £500,000.


How come he hasn't yet picked up the lolly?
 
Has some news been leaked in 2017 from the Police Forces that shows that the case is solved, and that the decision of the Supreme Court was wrong ?   Because of this, has he decided to back off and also make his public announcement in 2017 that he has changed his mind about the Mccanns involvement ?


Only thoughts ....

Are you sure that you've got your facts right?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 07, 2020, 08:36:15 AM
So just how much money is Gonc expecting to get out of the McCanns? At the time we were led to believe they were to be financially ruined by the Supreme Court judgement , but perhaps not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 07, 2020, 08:47:50 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 07, 2020, 08:02:32 AM
Immaterial to my question.
ooooooooooooooh. Touchy. YEEEOUCH!
Sheesh, I was only asking a question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 09:17:27 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 07, 2020, 08:36:15 AM
So just how much money is Gonc expecting to get out of the McCanns? At the time we were led to believe they were to be financially ruined by the Supreme Court judgement , but perhaps not?

Amaral and his co-defendants should have already received the costs they spent on defending themselves, which is what the Supreme Court ordered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 07, 2020, 11:03:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 09:17:27 AM
Amaral and his co-defendants should have already received the costs they spent on defending themselves, which is what the Supreme Court ordered.

Did Amaral cough up on the award to the McCanns or did he wait until the fat lady finished her aria ???

Were I you I would content myself until such time as she finishes her encore and having taken her bow ... leaves the stage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 07, 2020, 11:11:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 09:17:27 AM
Amaral and his co-defendants should have already received the costs they spent on defending themselves, which is what the Supreme Court ordered.

Then the appeal fund money for his defence will be directed where?  Wasn't there some talk of him and a children's charity?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 11:35:16 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 07, 2020, 11:03:23 AM
Did Amaral cough up on the award to the McCanns or did he wait until the fat lady finished her aria ???

Were I you I would content myself until such time as she finishes her encore and having taken her bow ... leaves the stage.

The case against Amaral and his co-defendants was appealed, which allowed them to delay their payments pending the result of their appeal. The case against Amaral by the McCanns ended on 31st December 2017. The case at the ECHR is between the McCanns and the State of Portugal. One condition of their application being accepted is that any money owing to the State of Portugal has to have been paid.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 07, 2020, 12:30:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 11:35:16 AM
The case against Amaral and his co-defendants was appealed, which allowed them to delay their payments pending the result of their appeal. The case against Amaral by the McCanns ended on 31st December 2017. The case at the ECHR is between the McCanns and the State of Portugal. One condition of their application being accepted is that any money owing to the State of Portugal has to have been paid.

the court fees had to be paid up front by each party before each round of hearings (think about PJGA GFM appeal) so nothing is owed to the Portuguese state. McCanns are responsible for their own lawyers' fees & Amaral his own. It's unclear whether or not McCanns have complied with the Appeal court judgement & reimbursed Amaral for his costs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 02:00:01 PM
Quote from: misty on February 07, 2020, 12:30:19 PM
the court fees had to be paid up front by each party before each round of hearings (think about PJGA GFM appeal) so nothing is owed to the Portuguese state. McCanns are responsible for their own lawyers' fees & Amaral his own. It's unclear whether or not McCanns have complied with the Appeal court judgement & reimbursed Amaral for his costs.

Those being sued may have to pay fees upfront, but if they are found not guilty they can surely claim those fees back? Anything else would be an injustice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 07, 2020, 02:04:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 02:00:01 PM
Those being sued may have to pay fees upfront, but if they are found not guilty they can surely claim those fees back? Anything else would be an injustice.

The court usually makes an order for such costs on a case by case basis.....I think the verdict was an injustice.
aS I understand if thee court felt that the Mccanns clim had some validity they may well not order costs against them
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 02:20:10 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 07, 2020, 02:04:55 PM
The court usually makes an order for such costs on a case by case basis.....I think the verdict was an injustice.
aS I understand if thee court felt that the Mccanns clim had some validity they may well not order costs against them

You can think what you like, but the McCann's appeal to the Supreme Court was dismissed and they were ordered to pay the costs.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 07, 2020, 02:34:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 02:20:10 PM
You can think what you like, but the McCann's appeal to the Supreme Court was dismissed and they were ordered to pay the costs.

Court costs as I understand... Can you provide a cite that they were ordered to pay amarals lawyers fees... Otherwise you are just thinking what you like
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 07, 2020, 02:41:45 PM
He was crowd-funded for his defence, so maybe not an issue
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 02:52:54 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 07, 2020, 02:34:34 PM
Court costs as I understand... Can you provide a cite that they were ordered to pay amarals lawyers fees... Otherwise you are just thinking what you like

Can you provide a cite that lawyers fees are included in court costs? Otherwise your post is immaterial.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 07, 2020, 03:16:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 02:52:54 PM
Can you provide a cite that lawyers fees are included in court costs? Otherwise your post is immaterial.

As you don't seem to understand precisely what you are talking about what's the point.  Whe amaral was awarded costs... Was that court costs or lawyers fees... I don't know for sure and it looks like you don't either
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 07, 2020, 03:25:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 02:00:01 PM
Those being sued may have to pay fees upfront, but if they are found not guilty they can surely claim those fees back? Anything else would be an injustice.

Both sides have to pay the court fees up front. The point is the McCanns do not owe the State of Portugal any money, they only owe Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 03:31:18 PM
Quote from: misty on February 07, 2020, 03:25:35 PM
Both sides have to pay the court fees up front. The point is the McCanns do not owe the State of Portugal any money, they only owe Amaral.

That depends on whether the courts have paid Amaral and his co-defendants up front.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 07, 2020, 03:44:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 03:31:18 PM
That depends on whether the courts have paid Amaral and his co-defendants up front.

Who really cares... Why is it so important to you
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 07, 2020, 04:27:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 03:31:18 PM
That depends on whether the courts have paid Amaral and his co-defendants up front.

What?  Why would The Court do that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 04:31:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 07, 2020, 04:27:31 PM
What?  Why would The Court do that?

As I understand it the court officals calculate what is owed by the losers, having added up all the relevant amounts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 04:34:27 PM
Quote from: sadie on February 07, 2020, 01:12:06 AM
Just to add to your ire.


The Supreme Court found in Amarals favour on Jan 31, 2017.  He was awarded £500,000. euros 500,000.  Soz my error, now amended


How come he hasn't yet picked up the lolly?
 
Has some news been leaked in 2017 from the Police Forces that shows that the case is solved, and that the decision of the Supreme Court was wrong ?   Because of this, has he decided to back off and also make his public announcement in 2017 that he has changed his mind about the Mccanns involvement ?


Only thoughts ....

Amaral wasn't awarded 500,000 in any currency.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 07, 2020, 05:07:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 03:31:18 PM
That depends on whether the courts have paid Amaral and his co-defendants up front.

Pardon? Since when has a Civil Court ever taken that action?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 07, 2020, 06:03:51 PM
Quote from: The General on February 07, 2020, 08:47:50 AM
ooooooooooooooh. Touchy. YEEEOUCH!
Sheesh, I was only asking a question.
What. ridiculous overreaction to my post.  I wasn’t being touchy, just stating a fact. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 07, 2020, 06:36:20 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 07, 2020, 07:14:21 AM
are you suggesting he wasn’t awarded 500,000 euros?

Show in the judgement where this award was made,please.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 07, 2020, 06:47:51 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 07, 2020, 06:36:20 PM
Show in the judgement where this award was made,please.
No, I realise now it wasn’t.  I think the 500k figure came from the amount that the McCanns were awarded and which was cancelled by the Supreme Court.  Nevertheless I do recall the glee with which the judgement was received in some quarter because there was a belief that the McCanns would be financially ruined.  I wonder why anyone believed that?  I forget now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 07, 2020, 07:05:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 07, 2020, 06:47:51 PM
No, I realise now it wasn’t.  I think the 500k figure came from the amount that the McCanns were awarded and which was cancelled by the Supreme Court.  Nevertheless I do recall the glee with which the judgement was received in some quarter because there was a belief that the McCanns would be financially ruined.  I wonder why anyone believed that?  I forget now.


Journalist's if I recall,termed loosely you'll understand.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7281872/madeline-mcann-fund-750k-case/

Other crap outlets are available.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 07, 2020, 07:24:03 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 07, 2020, 07:05:35 PM

Journalist's if I recall,termed loosely you'll understand.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7281872/madeline-mcann-fund-750k-case/

Other crap outlets are available.
from the article

“That could all go if the decision to award Amaral £430,000 is upheld — with the McCanns paying costs on top”.

I’m guessing they (the journos) didn’t have a full grasp of the facts then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 08:14:27 PM
Quote from: misty on February 07, 2020, 05:07:44 PM
Pardon? Since when has a Civil Court ever taken that action?

I think the courts are more involved in Portugal. Only they know which costs can be reclaimed, it's quite complicated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 07, 2020, 10:30:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 08:14:27 PM
I think the courts are more involved in Portugal. Only they know which costs can be reclaimed, it's quite complicated.

Perhaps you can provide the link which shows how the fixed court fees are returned to the successful party from State funds.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 07, 2020, 11:41:57 PM
Quote from: misty on February 07, 2020, 10:30:00 PM
Perhaps you can provide the link which shows how the fixed court fees are returned to the successful party from State funds.

I was speculating. I've no idea how it's arranged. This article seems to suggest the court has details of some kind;

https://www.ladbible.com/news/news-madeleine-mccann-parents-owe-legal-fines-following-libel-court-battle-20190324
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 08, 2020, 08:47:56 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 07, 2020, 06:47:51 PM
No, I realise now it wasn’t.  I think the 500k figure came from the amount that the McCanns were awarded and which was cancelled by the Supreme Court.  Nevertheless I do recall the glee with which the judgement was received in some quarter because there was a belief that the McCanns would be financially ruined.  I wonder why anyone believed that?  I forget now.
I wonder why you thought the award was made in the judgement. Can you remember that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 08, 2020, 09:32:35 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 07, 2020, 07:05:35 PM

Journalist's if I recall,termed loosely you'll understand.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7281872/madeline-mcann-fund-750k-case/

Other crap outlets are available.

Are you arguing that in effect the McCanns owe Amaral nothing at all ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 08, 2020, 10:15:18 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 08, 2020, 09:32:35 AM
Are you arguing that in effect the McCanns owe Amaral nothing at all ?

Amaral or his lawyers,bit of a difference.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 08, 2020, 10:20:59 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 08, 2020, 09:32:35 AM
Are you arguing that in effect the McCanns owe Amaral nothing at all ?

What do you think they owe to Amaral and his co-defendants?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 08, 2020, 10:40:35 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 08, 2020, 10:20:59 AM
What do you think they owe to Amaral and his co-defendants?

We shall have to wait for The ECHR decision. 

I have no idea of who has paid what up front, apart from Court Costs which appear to be mandatory by all parties.  But apparently not frightfully expensive.

Hopefully, The McCanns will not owe any of them anything.
Is it possible to claim this back if you win?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 08, 2020, 10:41:26 AM
A couple of years after the trial finally finished,  it would reflect badly on McCann if they still owed anybody anything.

IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 08, 2020, 10:44:32 AM
Quote from: jassi on February 08, 2020, 10:41:26 AM
A couple of years after the trial finally finished,  it would reflect badly on McCann if they still owed anybody anything.

IMO

It wouldn't if they don't have to pay at the moment.  But no doubt some will make it so.  In their opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 08, 2020, 10:49:55 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 08, 2020, 09:32:35 AM
Are you arguing that in effect the McCanns owe Amaral nothing at all ?

3 - Decision.

Given what has been said, the request of review is denied and the appealed judgement confirmed.

Costs for the appellants.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.0


Nothing about owing monies to Amaral,but the court cost's.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 08, 2020, 06:38:24 PM
Quote from: The General on February 08, 2020, 08:47:56 AM
I wonder why you thought the award was made in the judgement. Can you remember that?
Hello.  Who are you?  Have we met before?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 08, 2020, 08:29:00 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 08, 2020, 10:40:35 AM
We shall have to wait for The ECHR decision. 

I have no idea of who has paid what up front, apart from Court Costs which appear to be mandatory by all parties.  But apparently not frightfully expensive.

Hopefully, The McCanns will not owe any of them anything.
Is it possible to claim this back if you win?

The ECHR has nothing to do with domestic courts. It's not an appeal court and it can't overturn judgements. If the domestic courts have ordered costs to be paid they should be paid before involving the ECHR. Even if the ECHR found in the McCann's favour, it's the State of Portugal who have breached the McCann's human rights, not Amaral and his co-defendants.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 08, 2020, 10:41:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 08, 2020, 06:38:24 PM
Hello.  Who are you?  Have we met before?
As if.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on February 13, 2020, 02:00:12 PM
Just for a little light amusement on your next coffee break, you might like to visit www.shininginluz.wordpress.com, for the Elvis take on cobblers.

There is a connection to the Madeleine McCann case, simply because nearly everything in Luz has a connection to MBM, but it is so obscure that I chose not to mention it.

But if you fancy some light froth on your next break pop in for Southern cobblers.

 &^^&*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 13, 2020, 02:44:33 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 13, 2020, 02:00:12 PM
Just for a little light amusement on your next coffee break, you might like to visit www.shininginluz.wordpress.com, for the Elvis take on cobblers.

There is a connection to the Madeleine McCann case, simply because nearly everything in Luz has a connection to MBM, but it is so obscure that I chose not to mention it.

But if you fancy some light froth on your next break pop in for Southern cobblers.

 &^^&*

I didnt think your blog could get any worse...but you've surprised me......it's not often I'm wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 13, 2020, 02:52:43 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 13, 2020, 02:00:12 PM
Just for a little light amusement on your next coffee break, you might like to visit www.shininginluz.wordpress.com, for the Elvis take on cobblers.

There is a connection to the Madeleine McCann case, simply because nearly everything in Luz has a connection to MBM, but it is so obscure that I chose not to mention it.

But if you fancy some light froth on your next break pop in for Southern cobblers.

 &^^&*



Fascinating SIL - interesting read and well thought out.

I remember also the mcns had the song don't forget about me at the height of the fundraising and publicity.

It seems when they got made arguidos the song got forgot about -  I still think of Maddie when I hear it.


Corned beef potatoes and pepper hash is a fav of mine although there is 2 ways of doing it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 13, 2020, 03:33:12 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 13, 2020, 02:44:33 PM
I didnt think your blog could get any worse...but you've surprised me......it's not often I'm wrong.
You took the time to read it, that's all that matters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 13, 2020, 04:30:46 PM
Last night I had  a little look at one of  R D Hall's videos...imo the man's a fruitcake...if you think ive paid him a compliment he's not on his own ...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 13, 2020, 05:27:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 13, 2020, 04:30:46 PM
Last night I had  a little look at one of  R D Hall's videos...imo the man's  a fruitcake...if you think ive paid him a compliment he's not on his own ...
You click, you lose.
Agreed about Richard D Hall. His Jo Cox videos are next level.
And yes, I clicked and lost.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 13, 2020, 05:32:01 PM
Quote from: The General on February 13, 2020, 05:27:06 PM
You click, you lose.
Agreed about Richard D Hall. His Jo Cox videos are next level.
And yes, I clicked and lost.

If you want to mistakenly think to click is to lose then i''ll have to leave you to your ignorance ...imo

i wont bother explaining why...if you don't know now you never will

my feeling is its important to look  and consider everything....but im an open minded supporter not a narrow minded sceptic...how can we dismiss what Hall says without listening to him
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 13, 2020, 06:11:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 13, 2020, 05:32:01 PM
If you want to mistakenly think to click is to lose then i''ll have to leave you to your ignorance ...imo

i wont bother explaining why...if you don't know now you never will

my feeling is its important to look  and consider everything....but im an open minded supporter not a narrow minded sceptic...how can we dismiss what Hall says without listening to him
Yet you had already formed an opinion of Hall, but you were compelled nonetheless.
Open-minded or weak-willed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 13, 2020, 06:14:48 PM
Quote from: The General on February 13, 2020, 06:11:04 PM
Yet you had already formed an opinion of Hall, but you were compelled nonetheless.
Open-minded or weak-willed?

is it possible to have a discussion based on fact rather than what you think is fact...

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 13, 2020, 06:24:05 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 13, 2020, 06:14:48 PM
is it possible to have a discussion based on fact rather than what you think is fact...
This is more like it; the existential.
But was it a rhetorical, baited question?
Have you already illicited the response you craved? Did you crave a response at all?
Was it a musing typed as an affirmation, a cajolement to lull me in and I draw back the veil; sirens luring the hapless sailor to a rocky end, or was it a genuine offer of polite discourse, the metaphorical olive branch?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 13, 2020, 06:26:37 PM
Quote from: The General on February 13, 2020, 06:24:05 PM
This is more like it; the existential.
But was it a rhetorical, baited question?
Have you already illicited the response you craved? Did you crave a response at all?
Was it a musing typed as an affirmation, a cajolement to lull me in and I draw back the veil; sirens luring the hapless sailor to a rocky end, or was it a genuine offer of polite discourse, the metaphorical olive branch?

is it possible to have a discussion based on fact rather than what you think is fact..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 13, 2020, 06:30:20 PM
the fact is ...Hall is a darling of many sceptics...my view ..based on evidence ...is that he has the ability to understand evidence of a born again yesterday christian....I hope im not being too unkind to christians.

Yet there are posters here who support him
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 13, 2020, 06:40:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 13, 2020, 06:30:20 PM
the fact is ...Hall is a darling of many sceptics...my view ..based on evidence ...is that he has the ability to understand evidence of a born again yesterday christain....I hope im not being too unkind to christians.

Yet there are posters here who support him
Agreed. But indignor quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 13, 2020, 06:45:18 PM
Quote from: The General on February 13, 2020, 06:40:00 PM
Agreed. But indignor quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus

you are going to assume I bothered to try and translate that...im not...i studied latin and suspect its totally bogus
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 13, 2020, 06:45:35 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 13, 2020, 02:52:43 PM


Fascinating SIL - interesting read and well thought out.

I remember also the mcns had the song don't forget about me at the height of the fundraising and publicity.

It seems when they got made arguidos the song got forgot about -  I still think of Maddie when I hear it.


Corned beef potatoes and pepper hash is a fav of mine although there is 2 ways of doing it

It was very kind of you to mention Madeleine in the context of Simple Mind's beautiful tune and lyrics freely given for use in Madeleine's behalf:  promoting Madeleine using music and video certainly seems to have worked if your experience is anything to go by and still exists on the internet even all this time down the line.

The publicity then and later was in the hope that Madeleine would be found as a result.

The fundraising was to enable the continuing search for her.


SIMPLEMINDS
19 MAY, 2007 MADELEINE MCCANN
in All News Share

The disappearance of four-year-old Madeleine McCann while holidaying in Algarve, Portugal has impacted millions of people throughout the continent.

Frankly it is impossible to imagine the extent of the pain and confusion that has descended on the little girl’s parents and her entire family as they wait hopefully on some positive news regarding both Madeleine’s wellbeing and whereabouts.

Our thoughts are with them entirely with every passing hour as the police search continues. Meanwhile it took no time at all for Simple Minds to agree for the usage of our track Don’t You Forget About Me as part of a video campaign to be shown throughout Europe detailing Madeleine’s circumstances and of course requesting information. We hope with the fullest of hearts that all efforts lead only to the safe return of Madeleine.

Simple Minds
https://www.simpleminds.com/2007/05/19/madeleine-mccann/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiuS1DSdjOg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtXiUoPHOSQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEuQn5rWPa0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 13, 2020, 06:51:35 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 13, 2020, 06:45:18 PM
you are going to assume I bothered to try and translate that...im not...i studied latin and suspect its totally bogus
Disappointed. It's pretty well known - even by me and I know only 4 or 5 phrases.
I was lucky enough to have one excellent teacher in the comprehensive system. He taught us what he knew - which was a lot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 13, 2020, 06:55:27 PM
Quote from: The General on February 13, 2020, 06:51:35 PM
Disappointed. It's pretty well known - even by me and I know only 4 or 5 phrases.
I was lucky enough to have one excellent teacher in the comprehensive system. He taught us what he knew - which was a lot.

it cant be pretty well known as Ive never heard of it...it doesnt look to contain a verb and i dont recognise one genuine word....why would a proper noun be at the end of the phrase....looks like you've been caught out
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 13, 2020, 06:56:49 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 13, 2020, 06:55:27 PM
it cant be pretty well known as Ive never heard of it...it doesnt look to contain a verb and i dont recognise one genuine word....why would a proper noun be at the end of the phrase....looks like you've been caught out
Even Homer nods. You're right I may have it back to front.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 13, 2020, 06:57:10 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 13, 2020, 02:00:12 PM
Just for a little light amusement on your next coffee break, you might like to visit www.shininginluz.wordpress.com, for the Elvis take on cobblers.

There is a connection to the Madeleine McCann case, simply because nearly everything in Luz has a connection to MBM, but it is so obscure that I chose not to mention it.

But if you fancy some light froth on your next break pop in for Southern cobblers.

 &^^&*
I got as far as Elvis dying in 1987 and didn’t bother with the rest.  I guess he must have faked his own death and gone to work in the chip shop after all, for the last 10 years of his life.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 13, 2020, 06:57:52 PM
Quote from: The General on February 13, 2020, 06:56:07 PM
You miss the point. I like Davros' posts - I choose to read for that reason.

Come again?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 13, 2020, 06:58:33 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 13, 2020, 06:57:10 PM
I got as far as Elvis dying in 1987 and didn’t bother with the rest.  I guess he must have faked his own death and gone to work in the chip shop after all, for the last 10 years of his life.

probbaly one of R D Halls theories
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 13, 2020, 09:10:37 PM
The General introduced the concept of losing to the discussion.  Apparently if you read SIL’s blog and then comment on it negatively you have lost.  I don’t understand the logic personally but the same rule should imo apply if you then take the time to comment on another’s post negatively.  Don’t you agree?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 13, 2020, 09:23:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 13, 2020, 09:10:37 PM
The General introduced the concept of losing to the discussion.  Apparently if you read SIL’s blog and then comment on it negatively you have lost.  I don’t understand the logic personally but the same rule should imo apply if you then take the time to comment on another’s post negatively.  Don’t you agree?
You entirely missed the point, but then it wasn't aimed at you.
The point was that morbid curiosity occasionally prevails over moral and / or intellectual abstinence; a concept amplified by the modern phenomena of 'clickbait', but not exclusively.
So, to use the vernacular, you 'lose' by succumbing to its multifarious, if not compelling and futile allure (the clckbait, dear boy, not SIL's excellent blog).
And yes, I had to employ a virtual, mental D8 to even consider to deign to respond.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 13, 2020, 09:42:23 PM
Quote from: The General on February 13, 2020, 09:23:38 PM
You entirely missed the point, but then it wasn't aimed at you.
The point was that morbid curiosity occasionally prevails over moral and / or intellectual abstinence; a concept amplified by the modern phenomena of 'clickbait', but not exclusively.
So, to use the vernacular, you 'lose' by succumbing to its multifarious, if not compelling and futile allure (the clckbait, dear boy, not SIL's excellent blog).
And yes, I had to employ a virtual, mental D8 to even consider to deign to respond.
LOL at SIL’s “excellent blog”, and thanks for the pseudo-intellectual explanation, it’s all crystal now... 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 13, 2020, 09:47:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 13, 2020, 09:42:23 PM
LOL at SIL’s “excellent blog”, and thanks for the pseudo-intellectual explanation, it’s all crystal now...
300mm layers.........
That'll be twice you've used that term now.
You're no doubt aware of Tom Wolfe's piece on the matter in 2000, given your penchant for the phrase.
I think he's talking to you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 13, 2020, 10:14:15 PM
Quote from: The General on February 13, 2020, 09:47:39 PM
300mm layers.........
That'll be twice you've used that term now.
You're no doubt aware of Tom Wolfe's piece on the matter in 2000, given your penchant for the phrase.
I think he's talking to you.
I used it twice this evening to describe your verbose grandstanding  proclamations because it describes them perfectly imo.  BTW, I’ve not come across someone quite so pleased with themselves since Alice.  Fascinating. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 13, 2020, 10:30:46 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 13, 2020, 10:14:15 PM
I used it twice this evening to describe your verbose grandstanding  proclamations because it describes them perfectly imo.  BTW, I’ve not come across someone quite so pleased with themselves since Alice.  Fascinating.
I didn't know Alice or read any of his posts, but I'll take the comparison as a back-handed compliment, irrespective of whether it was meant, as clearly he made a monumental impact on this forum. So thank you, I'll gladly take it.
But there's a more powerful emotion at work here. You've gone on record as stating that he was 'nasty' to you. Similarly, I have slighted you, apparently, much to your obvious chagrin and frustration. It would seem that your attempts to be accepted among your perceived peers is an enduring problem; you've never quite hit that mark, have you? Perhaps they weren't your peers after all.
I'm not going to indulge you further; I won't go full Freud (not Clement, obviously, let's not open that particular Pandora's Box) and attempt to psychoanalyse you - there's nothing to analyse. You're a painted marionette, nothing more.
As I said earlier, but was expunged from the record by your guardians, your content is nothing more than overburden one wades through to get to Davros' posts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 13, 2020, 10:53:06 PM
Quote from: The General on February 13, 2020, 10:30:46 PM
I didn't know Alice or read any of his posts, but I'll take the comparison as a back-handed compliment, irrespective of whether it was meant, as clearly he made a monumental impact on this forum. So thank you, I'll gladly take it.
But there's a more powerful emotion at work here. You've gone on record as stating that he was 'nasty' to you. Similarly, I have slighted you, apparently, much to your obvious chagrin and frustration. It would seem that your attempts to be accepted among your perceived peers is an enduring problem; you've never quite hit that mark, have you? Perhaps they weren't your peers after all.
I'm not going to indulge you further; I won't go full Freud (not Clement, obviously, let's not open that particular Pandora's Box) and attempt to psychoanalyse you - there's nothing to analyse. You're a painted marionette, nothing more.
As I said earlier, but was expunged from the record by your guardians, your content is nothing more than overburden one wades through to get to Davros' posts.
Wow, how very cutting, clearly designed to destroy me but not remotely succeeding.  Better luck next time matey boy!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 13, 2020, 11:10:00 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 13, 2020, 10:53:06 PM
Wow, how very cutting, clearly designed to destroy me but not remotely succeeding.  Better luck next time matey boy!
I have no desire to destroy you. That would bestow value.
I mean no malice or ill-will. You are not a challenge that requires defeat. You're just a dude playing a dude disguised as another dude.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 13, 2020, 11:28:41 PM
Quote from: The General on February 13, 2020, 11:10:00 PM
I have no desire to destroy you. That would bestow value.
I mean no malice or ill-will. You are not a challenge that requires defeat. You're just a dude playing a dude disguised as another dude.
And what are you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 13, 2020, 11:52:28 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 13, 2020, 11:28:41 PM
And what are you?
You seem to be baiting me to conjure forth Thomas Carlyle and the 'valetism' of the hero.
It's too late for that, but I see where you're coming from.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2020, 12:06:29 AM
Quote from: The General on February 13, 2020, 11:52:28 PM
You seem to be baiting me to conjure forth Thomas Carlyle and the 'valetism' of the hero.
It's too late for that, but I see where you're coming from.
You know what you are, and you hate yourself for it.  Goodnight.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 14, 2020, 02:45:40 AM
Quote from: The General on February 13, 2020, 04:26:39 PM
I think I get the jist of that sentence.
You've inadvertently paid the compliment; you visited. That's it. Your opinion is moot.

Personally I think that it is nothing to do with compliments. 

With me and Davel and probably most on this side, we believe in looking at what the other side has to say.  We want to see what you have found before we make judgements / decisions about events ... who knows there might even be something interesting and true.

As far as i am concerned and I believe Davel thinks the same, ' To have a broad knowledge ' is the aim, rather than a narrow outlook based largely on myths and bigottry ... don't you agree?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 14, 2020, 03:07:39 AM
Quote from: The General on February 13, 2020, 10:30:46 PM
I didn't know Alice or read any of his posts, but I'll take the comparison as a back-handed compliment, irrespective of whether it was meant, as clearly he made a monumental impact on this forum. So thank you, I'll gladly take it.
But there's a more powerful emotion at work here. You've gone on record as stating that he was 'nasty' to you. Similarly, I have slighted you, apparently, much to your obvious chagrin and frustration. It would seem that your attempts to be accepted among your perceived peers is an enduring problem; you've never quite hit that mark, have you? Perhaps they weren't your peers after all.
I'm not going to indulge you further; I won't go full Freud (not Clement, obviously, let's not open that particular Pandora's Box) and attempt to psychoanalyse you - there's nothing to analyse. You're a painted marionette, nothing more.
As I said earlier, but was expunged from the record by your guardians, your content is nothing more than overburden one wades through to get to Davros' posts.

What a jealous post !  IMO both VS and Davel can run rings around your swanking pretencious posts .. as can many on the supporters side

Ad homs everywhere.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 14, 2020, 03:10:59 AM
Quote from: The General on February 13, 2020, 11:52:28 PM
You seem to be baiting me to conjure forth Thomas Carlyle and the 'valetism' of the hero.
It's too late for that, but I see where you're coming from.

After several viscious posts baiting VS, I think that you got that the wrong way round.

The evidence is in your posts above.   Pretentious nonsence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 14, 2020, 07:18:59 AM
Quote from: sadie on February 14, 2020, 03:10:59 AM
After several viscious posts baiting VS, I think that you got that the wrong way round.

The evidence is in your posts above.   Pretentious nonsence
Theories involving Zionist paedophile rings returning to snatch their waning bloodline?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 14, 2020, 07:21:23 AM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 07:18:59 AM
Theories involving Zionist paedophile rings returning to snatch their waning bloodline?
In the style of some sceptics... Has this theory been proved wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2020, 07:55:57 AM
Happy Valentine’s Day everyone.   Big love to all my fellow worthless enablers xxxxx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 14, 2020, 07:56:14 AM
Quote from: Erngath on February 14, 2020, 07:54:08 AM
I have obviously missed the explanation of the term " enablers" .
Who are "enablers"?
Who are 'sceptics'? Lazy, catch-all labels can be used by all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2020, 07:57:35 AM
Quote from: Erngath on February 14, 2020, 07:54:08 AM
I have obviously missed the explanation of the term " enablers" .
Who are "enablers"?
You are, I am, Misty is.  We enable evil deeds to go unpunished, we are therefore presumably  evil ourselves.  Great innit? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 14, 2020, 08:01:26 AM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 07:56:14 AM
Who are 'sceptics'? Lazy, catch-all labels can be used by all.

sceptics are those who beleive there is  a very high probablity...or possibility.. that the McCanns have lied about important details re this case. It really is that simple.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on February 14, 2020, 08:03:31 AM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 07:56:14 AM
Who are 'sceptics'? Lazy, catch-all labels can be used by all.

The terms " sceptics" and "supporters" are ones which have been accepted by the powers that be, as far as the forum rules dictate.
Obviously the term "sceptic" is self explanatory as "sceptics" are sceptical about Madeleine being abducted.
"Supporters" support the theory that Madeleine was abducted.
What do the "enablers" enable and is this a term used by just you or have I missed it being used by other posters?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 14, 2020, 08:05:40 AM
Quote from: Erngath on February 14, 2020, 08:03:31 AM
The terms " sceptics" and "supporters" are ones which have been accepted by the powers that be, as far as the forum rules dictate.
Obviously the term "sceptic" is self explanatory as "sceptics" are sceptical about Madeleine being abducted.
"Supporters" support the theory that Madeleine was abducted.
What do the "enablers" enable and is this a term used by just you or have I missed it being used by other posters?

Its  a word coined by the General so that he can criticise the use of the word sceptic without being accused of using the word supporter...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 08:11:40 AM

Any further use of the word "Enablers" will be Deleted.  This is not a criticism of all.  We have already done this one and already warned about this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2020, 08:17:53 AM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 07:56:14 AM
Who are 'sceptics'? Lazy, catch-all labels can be used by all.
yeah, like “man”, “woman”, “Belieber”, etc. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 14, 2020, 09:14:29 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 14, 2020, 07:55:57 AM
Happy Valentine’s Day everyone.   Big love to all my fellow worthless enablers xxxxx

Happy Valentine's Day Vertigo  Big love to you too   @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 14, 2020, 09:34:00 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 08:11:40 AM
Any further use of the word "Enablers" will be Deleted.  This is not a criticism of all.  We have already done this one and already warned about this.
Are we deleting sceptic too? Or just enabler?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 14, 2020, 09:46:00 AM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 09:34:00 AM
Are we deleting sceptic too? Or just enabler?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg573943#msg573943

Don't you bother to read posts? ... the above is explanatory and accurate, please take it on board.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 09:51:59 AM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 09:34:00 AM
Are we deleting sceptic too? Or just enabler?

Sceptic and Supporter are titles designated by John.  You know John, The Forum Owner.  I should try that one on with him if you want a discussion on the subject.

Enablers will be Deleted and could attract Large Warning Points.  So if the rest of you could cease to reply to any comment containing the word Enablers then this would be sensible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 09:56:42 AM
Add Beliebers to my comment above.  That will also attract Warning Points.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 14, 2020, 10:26:39 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 13, 2020, 06:30:20 PM
the fact is ...Hall is a darling of many sceptics...my view ..based on evidence ...is that he has the ability to understand evidence of a born again yesterday christian....I hope im not being too unkind to christians.

Yet there are posters here who support him


Interesting you brought up Hall - because how strange the mcns didn't go after him.

Yet he produced many DVDs online and sold privately in the UK.

Stating the mcns involved in Maddie disappearance - and not believing the abduction possible.

The info he put out IMO was a lot more damming than the book TOTL

It was also freely available in the UK - just been looking at these but there are many more.

PART ONE:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZV9Ten-HkY   

PART TWO:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFk1l_8lxq4   

PART THREE:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUPm35D-X3o

PART FOUR:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrMUcwy4dO4   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 10:51:40 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 14, 2020, 10:26:39 AM

Interesting you brought up Hall - because how strange the mcns didn't go after him.

Yet he produced many DVDs online and sold privately in the UK.

Stating the mcns involved in Maddie disappearance - and not believing the abduction possible.

The info he put out IMO was a lot more damming than the book TOTL

It was also freely available in the UK - just been looking at these but there are many more.

PART ONE:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZV9Ten-HkY   

PART TWO:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFk1l_8lxq4   

PART THREE:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUPm35D-X3o

PART FOUR:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrMUcwy4dO4

I would be tempted to Delete this rubbish if it wasn't so ridiculously flawed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 14, 2020, 10:54:49 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 14, 2020, 10:26:39 AM

Interesting you brought up Hall - because how strange the mcns didn't go after him.

Yet he produced many DVDs online and sold privately in the UK.

Stating the mcns involved in Maddie disappearance - and not believing the abduction possible.

The info he put out IMO was a lot more damming than the book TOTL

It was also freely available in the UK - just been looking at these but there are many more.

I can't see this post escaping the censor.
In terms of Hall, you're right. If ever there was low hanging fruit ripe for a law suit, then surely it's him. The content alone was totally unequivocal in its conclusions - way beyond Amaral's bestseller. Couple that with the literally millions of views, it's odd that the argument that everyone stops searching when Amaral published his book, doesn't appear to be a factor with Hall's output.

For balance, however, I suppose as targets go, Amaral would be higher on the list of priorities, given his central role in the case. Hall is nibbling away on the periphery, albeit with a monumental reach.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 14, 2020, 11:00:45 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 14, 2020, 10:26:39 AM

Interesting you brought up Hall - because how strange the mcns didn't go after him.

Yet he produced many DVDs online and sold privately in the UK.

Stating the mcns involved in Maddie disappearance - and not believing the abduction possible.

The info he put out IMO was a lot more damming than the book TOTL

It was also freely available in the UK - just been looking at these but there are many more.

PART ONE:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZV9Ten-HkY   

PART TWO:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFk1l_8lxq4   

PART THREE:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUPm35D-X3o

PART FOUR:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrMUcwy4dO4

In my opinion the number of internet fly by nights seizing the opportunity to make fame and fortune by exploiting the McCann's tragedy preclude any but exemplary action.

Undoubtedly a very comfortable living could be made both for lawyers and litigants but in my opinion the McCann family have far bigger goals such as doing their best for their missing daughter ... doing their best for their twins ... doing their best to live as normal and productive a life as possible both at work and at home.

What you haven't quite grasped yet is that the McCanns have far more important concerns than the irritants of these little people some of whom you feel the need to advertise, who have turned Madeleine into their own personal cash cow.  Madeleine's parents have achieved their aim.  There are at least two major investigations being carried out by Scotland Yard and the Judicial Police into Madeleine's case. 

If you don't think that doesn't indicate "JUSTICE for MADELEINE" I certainly do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 11:01:53 AM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 10:54:49 AM
I can't see this post escaping the censor.
In terms of Hall, you're right. If ever there was low hanging fruit ripe for a law suit, then surely it's him. The content alone was totally unequivocal in its conclusions - way beyond Amaral's bestseller. Couple that with the literally millions of views, it's odd that the argument that everyone stops searching when Amaral published his book, doesn't appear to be a factor with Hall's output.

For balance, however, I suppose as targets go, Amaral would be higher on the list of priorities, given his central role in the case. Hall is nibbling away on the periphery, albeit with a monumental reach.

Have you listened to Hall?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 14, 2020, 11:02:22 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 10:51:40 AM
I would be tempted to Delete this rubbish if it wasn't so ridiculously flawed.

My sentiments exactly, Eleanor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on February 14, 2020, 11:02:52 AM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 10:54:49 AM
I can't see this post escaping the censor.
In terms of Hall, you're right. If ever there was low hanging fruit ripe for a law suit, then surely it's him. The content alone was totally unequivocal in its conclusions - way beyond Amaral's bestseller. Couple that with the literally millions of views, it's odd that the argument that everyone stops searching when Amaral published his book, doesn't appear to be a factor with Hall's output.

For balance, however, I suppose as targets go, Amaral would be higher on the list of priorities, given his central role in the case. Hall is nibbling away on the periphery, albeit with a monumental reach.


I would imagine that most of those who have looked at his theories and I include myself, have also looked at his ghastly theory about the tragic  Manchester Arena bombing and concluded he is a " [ censored word ]".

I didn't realise that a loon of conspiracy theories was a censored word.
A crank who has no care about the victims of a tragedy nor the feelings of their bereaved families.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 14, 2020, 11:13:18 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 14, 2020, 11:02:22 AM
My sentiments exactly, Eleanor.

My point here was - why have the mcns done nothing about him then.

It's not as if they are backward at coming forward to sue people - just look at their record.

The way they go after GA relentlessly - why not RDH
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 14, 2020, 11:16:39 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 11:01:53 AM
Have you listened to Hall?
Whhhoaa there sister, I'm not defending him. I've gone on record stating that he's a total crank (my opinion, I'll happily have a straightener in a pub car park if you're watching Richard).
Some of his 'theories' are horrendous; Jo Cox, Manchester Bombing to name but two.
I'm simply pointing out that his Youtube account alone has generated 17 million views and counting. But you can multiply that by at least tenfold for accounts who re-post and re-link. And that's just Youtube.
So his MM output has been seen 10's of millions of times. That's my point. Irrespective of where the McCann's choose to direct their resources, if it were me I'd have hammered him years ago - he's just sat there with his content still sat on his website. I doubt he's a rich man - he's making a decent living as a Youtuber, why not Carter Ruck his ass?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 14, 2020, 11:27:58 AM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 10:54:49 AM
I can't see this post escaping the censor.
In terms of Hall, you're right. If ever there was low hanging fruit ripe for a law suit, then surely it's him. The content alone was totally unequivocal in its conclusions - way beyond Amaral's bestseller. Couple that with the literally millions of views, it's odd that the argument that everyone stops searching when Amaral published his book, doesn't appear to be a factor with Hall's output.

For balance, however, I suppose as targets go, Amaral would be higher on the list of priorities, given his central role in the case. Hall is nibbling away on the periphery, albeit with a monumental reach.

Perhaps he doesn't have enough money to be sued for almost a million pounds either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 14, 2020, 11:34:10 AM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 11:16:39 AM
Whhhoaa there sister, I'm not defending him. I've gone on record stating that he's a total crank (my opinion, I'll happily have a straightener in a pub car park if you're watching Richard).
Some of his 'theories' are horrendous; Jo Cox, Manchester Bombing to name but two.
I'm simply pointing out that his Youtube account alone has generated 17 million views and counting. But you can multiply that by at least tenfold for accounts who re-post and re-link. And that's just Youtube.
So his MM output has been seen 10's of millions of times. That's my point. Irrespective of where the McCann's choose to direct their resources, if it were me I'd have hammered him years ago - he's just sat there with his content still sat on his website. I doubt he's a rich man - he's making a decent living as a Youtuber, why not Carter Ruck his ass?


Especially when he is harming the so-called search for Maddie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 14, 2020, 11:34:42 AM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 11:16:39 AM
Whhhoaa there sister, I'm not defending him. I've gone on record stating that he's a total crank (my opinion, I'll happily have a straightener in a pub car park if you're watching Richard).
Some of his 'theories' are horrendous; Jo Cox, Manchester Bombing to name but two.
I'm simply pointing out that his Youtube account alone has generated 17 million views and counting. But you can multiply that by at least tenfold for accounts who re-post and re-link. And that's just Youtube.
So his MM output has been seen 10's of millions of times. That's my point. Irrespective of where the McCann's choose to direct their resources, if it were me I'd have hammered him years ago - he's just sat there with his content still sat on his website. I doubt he's a rich man - he's making a decent living as a Youtuber, why not Carter Ruck his ass?

He is merely one of many ridiculous conspiracy theorists ... why bother ... they come and go are celebrated for a while then vanish back into the obscurity from which they came.

I remember when this man first made his appearance he was well promoted as they all are by all the usual suspects ... much as he has been on our forum today ... it means absolutely nothing and is not the force you pretend it to be.

Cristovao wrote a book around the same time and using the same subject Amaral did ... it was a best seller too just as his books on other missing children were ... has it never occurred to you why no-one bothered with him?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 14, 2020, 11:37:51 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 14, 2020, 11:34:10 AM

Especially when he is harming the so-called search for Maddie.

The Policia Judiciaria and Scotland Yard are presently investigating Madeleine's case.  So what possible damage is he doing?

Hardly a household name is he.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 14, 2020, 11:48:40 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 14, 2020, 11:34:42 AM
He is merely one of many ridiculous conspiracy theorists ... why bother ... they come and go are celebrated for a while then vanish back into the obscurity from which they came.

I remember when this man first made his appearance he was well promoted as they all are by all the usual suspects ... much as he has been on our forum today ... it means absolutely nothing and is not the force you pretend it to be.

Cristovao wrote a book around the same time and using the same subject Amaral did ... it was a best seller too just as his books on other missing children were ... has it never occurred to you why no-one bothered with him?
Agreed. But this 'ridiculous conspiracy theorist' has way more reach. Amaral's book pales in to obscurity in comparison.
As I say, 17 million views is pretty significant. It must be exponentially more damaging for the search if he's swaying the opinion of potentially millions globally.
He's a crank, but he's not small fry. He must have been on the radar.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 14, 2020, 11:52:33 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 14, 2020, 11:37:51 AM
The Policia Judiciaria and Scotland Yard are presently investigating Madeleine's case.  So what possible damage is he doing?

Hardly a household name is he.
But what about Richard Hall, not Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 12:00:36 PM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 11:16:39 AM
Whhhoaa there sister, I'm not defending him. I've gone on record stating that he's a total crank (my opinion, I'll happily have a straightener in a pub car park if you're watching Richard).
Some of his 'theories' are horrendous; Jo Cox, Manchester Bombing to name but two.
I'm simply pointing out that his Youtube account alone has generated 17 million views and counting. But you can multiply that by at least tenfold for accounts who re-post and re-link. And that's just Youtube.
So his MM output has been seen 10's of millions of times. That's my point. Irrespective of where the McCann's choose to direct their resources, if it were me I'd have hammered him years ago - he's just sat there with his content still sat on his website. I doubt he's a rich man - he's making a decent living as a Youtuber, why not Carter Ruck his ass?

The McCanns probably couldn't be assed.  Too ridiculous for words.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 14, 2020, 12:08:17 PM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 11:48:40 AM
Agreed. But this 'ridiculous conspiracy theorist' has way more reach. Amaral's book pales in to obscurity in comparison.
As I say, 17 million views is pretty significant. It must be exponentially more damaging for the search if he's swaying the opinion of potentially millions globally.
He's a crank, but he's not small fry. He must have been on the radar.

17 million views does not mean 17 million people....  I would say relatively few have heard of Hall

Where does 17 million come from... Just looked at one made in 2016...when Madeline died... 8.1k views... And that's not 8.1 thousand people
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 14, 2020, 12:17:36 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 14, 2020, 12:08:17 PM
17 million views does not mean 17 million people....  I would say relatively few have heard of Hall

I suspect everyone on the internet who follows this case has seen DVDs and not favorable comment as usual either
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 14, 2020, 12:35:58 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 11:01:53 AM
Have you listened to Hall?

I've tried to.  If I were him I'd become an hypnotist as I almost drop of to sleep whenever I hear his voice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 14, 2020, 12:38:38 PM
Hall is just another of those making money out of a missing child.   Take the evidence twist it around add a bit of drama and conspiracy and you've got the dim hanging onto his every word,  when he realises what they want to hear he makes it up as he goes along.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 14, 2020, 12:40:36 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 14, 2020, 12:17:36 PM
I suspect everyone on the internet who follows this case has seen DVDs and not favorable comment as usual either

I think anyone with any sense would realise what a fruitcake he is... And how his theories are based in his misunderstanding of the evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 14, 2020, 12:47:24 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 10:51:40 AM
I would be tempted to Delete this rubbish if it wasn't so ridiculously flawed.
You'd only delete the truth? besides it freely available to any one with internet access,this little old site pales.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 14, 2020, 01:09:28 PM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 11:48:40 AM
Agreed. But this 'ridiculous conspiracy theorist' has way more reach. Amaral's book pales in to obscurity in comparison.
As I say, 17 million views is pretty significant. It must be exponentially more damaging for the search if he's swaying the opinion of potentially millions globally.
He's a crank, but he's not small fry. He must have been on the radar.

Amaral based his book very much on being the inside man in the know ... somewhat along the lines of the Ace up his sleeve type of nonsense.

In my opinion both are charlatans ... then if people want to buy into that, it's entirely their prerogative to do so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 14, 2020, 01:13:48 PM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 11:52:33 AM
But what about Richard Hall, not Amaral.

You don't appear to be keeping up with the discussion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on February 14, 2020, 01:55:25 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 14, 2020, 01:09:28 PM
Amaral based his book very much on being the inside man in the know ... somewhat along the lines of the Ace up his sleeve type of nonsense.

In my opinion both are charlatans ... then if people want to buy into that, it's entirely their prerogative to do so.

Until the McCann start answering real questions about what they did with Madeleine's pink blanket, the second main luggage bag missing from the crime scene photos etc, then the PJ were right to keep on questioning them but all they got was no comment. They are something else but the case is still open so don't worry  8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 14, 2020, 02:06:28 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 14, 2020, 12:38:38 PM
Hall is just another of those making money out of a missing child.   Take the evidence twist it around add a bit of drama and conspiracy and you've got the dim hanging onto his every word,  when he realises what they want to hear he makes it up as he goes along.


IMO same as the mcns then L
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 14, 2020, 02:08:14 PM
The lack of meaningful debate is quite amusing at times. The case of Richard D Hall demonstrates this lack very well.

It seems his theories can be dismissed because he is a 'crank', a 'conspiracy theorist', a 'fruitcake' and a 'charlatan'.
Another reason is his boring voice.
Not to mention he's only doing what he does to make money!!!

Why not discuss his actual theories, I wonder? In my opinion that would be a debate while all I can see is attempts at character assassination.

There are conspiracy theorists among the McCann supporters, there are people with voices that not everyone finds musical and most of those who have commentated have been paid for doing so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 14, 2020, 02:15:53 PM
Could we cut the personal insults folks otherwise posts will be removed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 02:19:28 PM

If anyone wants to discuss Hall's Theories try CMOMM.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 14, 2020, 02:33:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 14, 2020, 02:08:14 PM
The lack of meaningful debate is quite amusing at times. The case of Richard D Hall demonstrates this lack very well.

It seems his theories can be dismissed because he is a 'crank', a 'conspiracy theorist', a 'fruitcake' and a 'charlatan'.
Another reason is his boring voice.
Not to mention he's only doing what he does to make money!!!

Why not discuss his actual theories, I wonder? In my opinion that would be a debate while all I can see is attempts at character assassination.

There are conspiracy theorists among the McCann supporters, there are people with voices that not everyone finds musical and most of those who have commentated have been paid for doing so.
Halls theory re maddie is that Eddie the cadaver dog signalled the past presence of a corpse in 5a. This is not a fact as he mistakenly claims. i listened to his video phoning SY to inform them of this...he came accross as a real idiot imo. 11 hours of video based on a false premise.

He also states that the Manchester bombing was a hoax...I think that qualifies him for the term fruitcake


would any sceptic like to defend hall basing 11 hours of video on a fallacy
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 14, 2020, 03:26:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 14, 2020, 12:08:17 PM
17 million views does not mean 17 million people....  I would say relatively few have heard of Hall

Where does 17 million come from... Just looked at one made in 2016...when Madeline died... 8.1k views... And that's not 8.1 thousand people
OK, I'll let you in to how video sharing works - so Hall has 17 million 'views' on this Youtube channel. Granted that doesn't mean 17 million people have seen them, let alone watched them.
By far and away his most popular are the McCann videos - maybe a couple of million views on this Youtube channel?
But they're free to share. And they are shared many, many times on thousands of other Youtube channels, existing and now defunct. So Youtube alone is generating millions of potential views, perhaps many millions.
In addition, other video sharing sites exist.
His website also generates 10's of thousands of 'watches' - and 11 million page views according to 'Worth of Web', generating a healthy income stream to boot. I'm not saying it's right, but free speech permits him to peddle whatever he wants within their t's and c's.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 14, 2020, 04:16:05 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 02:19:28 PM
If anyone wants to discuss Hall's Theories try CMOMM.

Are you suggesting it shouldn't be discussed here ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 04:19:17 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 14, 2020, 04:16:05 PM
Are you suggesting it shouldn't be discussed here ?

Far too likely to engender Libel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 14, 2020, 04:28:02 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on February 14, 2020, 01:55:25 PM
Until the McCann start answering real questions about what they did with Madeleine's pink blanket, the second main luggage bag missing from the crime scene photos etc, then the PJ were right to keep on questioning them but all they got was no comment. They are something else but the case is still open so don't worry  8)--))

The pink blanket was given to the handlers of the search dogs to sniff.   Who says the luggage bag is missing?  The McCann's say all their luggage was there when they left Portugal  I believe this is another myth sorry.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 14, 2020, 04:29:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 14, 2020, 02:08:14 PM
The lack of meaningful debate is quite amusing at times. The case of Richard D Hall demonstrates this lack very well.

It seems his theories can be dismissed because he is a 'crank', a 'conspiracy theorist', a 'fruitcake' and a 'charlatan'.
Another reason is his boring voice.
Not to mention he's only doing what he does to make money!!!

Why not discuss his actual theories, I wonder? In my opinion that would be a debate while all I can see is attempts at character assassination.

There are conspiracy theorists among the McCann supporters, there are people with voices that not everyone finds musical and most of those who have commentated have been paid for doing so.

His actual theories?  Like Madeleine died on the Sunday?  I'm not going to debate anything so ridiculous.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 14, 2020, 04:31:55 PM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 03:26:40 PM
OK, I'll let you in to how video sharing works - so Hall has 17 million 'views' on this Youtube channel. Granted that doesn't mean 17 million people have seen them, let alone watched them.
By far and away his most popular are the McCann videos - maybe a couple of million views on this Youtube channel?
But they're free to share. And they are shared many, many times on thousands of other Youtube channels, existing and now defunct. So Youtube alone is generating millions of potential views, perhaps many millions.
In addition, other video sharing sites exist.
His website also generates 10's of thousands of 'watches' - and 11 million page views according to 'Worth of Web', generating a healthy income stream to boot. I'm not saying it's right, but free speech permits him to peddle whatever he wants within their t's and c's.

I think when a video is shared it simply links to the original..

the highest video has 450,000 views...that isnt views its click. so someone might clicg...watch afew minutes ...return and click again . It snot unreasonable to suggest it 20 clicks...or returns to watch a video....including watching portions again ...that would be 20,000 actual views..it may even be less than that....a far cry from 17 million..


ive just noticed ...the phantoms has 45,000 views...that could be as little as 200 people having watched them....plus no advertising on it...another sign it doesnt have a large audience
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 14, 2020, 04:32:09 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 14, 2020, 04:29:29 PM
His actual theories?  Like Madeleine died on the Sunday?  I'm not going to debate anything so ridiculous.

Is that his? I thought others had come up with that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 14, 2020, 04:32:22 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 14, 2020, 04:29:29 PM
His actual theories?  Like Madeleine died on the Sunday?  I'm not going to debate anything so ridiculous.

Indeed, it's ridiculous, & far more likely that she died on Thursday.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 14, 2020, 04:33:24 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 14, 2020, 04:29:29 PM
His actual theories?  Like Madeleine died on the Sunday?  I'm not going to debate anything so ridiculous.
Which day do you think she died on then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 04:34:21 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 14, 2020, 04:31:55 PM
I think when a video is shared it simply links to the original..

the highest video has 450,000 views...that isnt views its click. so someone might clicg...watch afew minutes ...return and click again . It snot unreasonable to suggest it 20 clicks...or returns to watch a video....including watching portions again ...that would be 20,000 actual views..it may even be less than that....a far cry from 17 million

Some persons actually do this on purpose.  Would you ever.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 14, 2020, 04:36:23 PM
I've got a little program that allows me to download once and view at leisure, as often as I like   ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 14, 2020, 04:38:49 PM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 04:33:24 PM
Which day do you think she died on then?

I believe she was abducted on the Thursday.   They believe she died on the Sunday.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 14, 2020, 04:49:21 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 14, 2020, 04:31:55 PM
I think when a video is shared it simply links to the original..

the highest video has 450,000 views...that isnt views its click. so someone might clicg...watch afew minutes ...return and click again . It snot unreasonable to suggest it 20 clicks...or returns to watch a video....including watching portions again ...that would be 20,000 actual views..it may even be less than that....a far cry from 17 million..


ive just noticed ...the phantoms has 45,000 views...that could be as little as 200 people having watched them....plus no advertising on it...another sign it doesnt have a large audience
No. Youtubers rip videos and appropriate them......all the time.
Besides, Youtube installed an algorithm years ago. They don't count a view until 30 seconds. They verify a 'view' because they're monetised - it's in their interests to reduce phantoms - people were writing code and annihilating their own videos with hits remotely generated.
And each return view also needs 30 seconds to count.

So we know with some certainty that at least 17 million 30 second views gross views on this account alone, verified.
Substantial reach. Not that it matters. Hall - website and youtube channel - many million potential views - left alone. Bennett - crazy old man on a bike, posting crazy shit on a niche forum, posting a few letters and generally haranguing a small number of nobody - privately prosecuted.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 14, 2020, 04:55:00 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 04:34:21 PM
Some persons actually do this on purpose.  Would you ever.
It's not possible any more. Otherwise my Funny Cats 5 video would have got more than the $3.26 for the 26,000 views I spent a week creating back in 2014.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 05:00:29 PM

CMOMM have always thought they had Millions of Guests viewing when it was me going back again and again because I could hardly believe what I read the first time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 14, 2020, 05:06:24 PM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 04:55:00 PM
It's not possible any more. Otherwise my Funny Cats 5 video would have got more than the $3.26 for the 26,000 views I spent a week creating back in 2014.

I like funny cat video's.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2020, 06:02:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 14, 2020, 02:08:14 PM
The lack of meaningful debate is quite amusing at times. The case of Richard D Hall demonstrates this lack very well.

It seems his theories can be dismissed because he is a 'crank', a 'conspiracy theorist', a 'fruitcake' and a 'charlatan'.
Another reason is his boring voice.
Not to mention he's only doing what he does to make money!!!

Why not discuss his actual theories, I wonder? In my opinion that would be a debate while all I can see is attempts at character assassination.

There are conspiracy theorists among the McCann supporters, there are people with voices that not everyone finds musical and most of those who have commentated have been paid for doing so.
Lets discuss his theory then.  What is it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 14, 2020, 06:04:01 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2020, 10:51:40 AM
I would be tempted to Delete this rubbish if it wasn't so ridiculously flawed.

Please delete it Eleanor


Because there are people out there who will believe it.  Not everyon has your IQ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 14, 2020, 06:04:55 PM
Quote from: sadie on February 14, 2020, 06:04:01 PM
Please delete it Eleanor


Because there are people out there who will believe it.  Not everyon has your IQ.

Do you imagine there are people who read here are not aware of everything else?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2020, 06:07:48 PM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 04:49:21 PM
No. Youtubers rip videos and appropriate them......all the time.
Besides, Youtube installed an algorithm years ago. They don't count a view until 30 seconds. They verify a 'view' because they're monetised - it's in their interests to reduce phantoms - people were writing code and annihilating their own videos with hits remotely generated.
And each return view also needs 30 seconds to count.

So we know with some certainty that at least 17 million 30 second views gross views on this account alone, verified.
Substantial reach. Not that it matters. Hall - website and youtube channel - many million potential views - left alone. Bennett - crazy old man on a bike, posting crazy shit on a niche forum, posting a few letters and generally haranguing a small number of nobody - privately prosecuted.
Bennett brought his hate to their manor, of course they’re going to take action.  Hall is just some idiot on the internet that no one with more than two braincells is going to take remotely seriously.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 14, 2020, 06:23:21 PM
Quote from: The General on February 14, 2020, 04:49:21 PM
No. Youtubers rip videos and appropriate them......all the time.
Besides, Youtube installed an algorithm years ago. They don't count a view until 30 seconds. They verify a 'view' because they're monetised - it's in their interests to reduce phantoms - people were writing code and annihilating their own videos with hits remotely generated.
And each return view also needs 30 seconds to count.

So we know with some certainty that at least 17 million 30 second views gross views on this account alone, verified.
Substantial reach. Not that it matters. Hall - website and youtube channel - many million potential views - left alone. Bennett - crazy old man on a bike, posting crazy shit on a niche forum, posting a few letters and generally haranguing a small number of nobody - privately prosecuted.

as you say...none of it matters
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on February 14, 2020, 07:31:12 PM
Been busy. Anything new?

Happy New Year everyone!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 14, 2020, 07:36:35 PM
Quote from: Carana on February 14, 2020, 07:31:12 PM
Been busy. Anything new?

Happy New Year everyone!

Well there's still no abduction evidence.

Try coming back in 2021, SY might have found some by then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2020, 07:41:24 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 14, 2020, 07:36:35 PM
Well there's still no abduction evidence.

Try coming back in 2021, SY might have found some by then.
We’re very fortunate that SY have chose you to keep us abreast of their investigations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 14, 2020, 07:45:05 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 14, 2020, 07:36:35 PM
Well there's still no abduction evidence.

Try coming back in 2021, SY might have found some by then.

plenty of evidence to support abduction
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 14, 2020, 07:45:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 14, 2020, 07:41:24 PM
We’re very fortunate that SY have chose you to keep us abreast of their investigations.

Indeed we are .Where would we be without Spamy?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 14, 2020, 07:47:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 14, 2020, 07:45:05 PM
plenty of evidence to support abduction

Yeah loads, that's why SY have solved the ca.....oh, no wait, that's right...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 15, 2020, 10:07:07 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 14, 2020, 07:45:05 PM
plenty of evidence to support abduction

Yes...from the street outside.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 15, 2020, 10:40:32 AM
Quote from: sadie on February 14, 2020, 06:04:01 PM
Please delete it Eleanor


Because there are people out there who will believe it.  Not everyon has your IQ.


Ther are people out there who don't believe Maddie was abducted - who have come to it by there own intelligence

Bit silly to delete it - there is a thread on here with 103 pages.

Re: Richard Hall's film 'When Madeleine Died?'

The point was as you say delete it people will believe it - why didn't the mcns who it is more damaging to than you or me.

Afterall it bears all the hallmarks [and more] for the reason they have gone relentlessly after GA.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 15, 2020, 10:44:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 14, 2020, 02:08:14 PM
The lack of meaningful debate is quite amusing at times. The case of Richard D Hall demonstrates this lack very well.

It seems his theories can be dismissed because he is a 'crank', a 'conspiracy theorist', a 'fruitcake' and a 'charlatan'.
Another reason is his boring voice.
Not to mention he's only doing what he does to make money!!!

Why not discuss his actual theories, I wonder? In my opinion that would be a debate while all I can see is attempts at character assassination.

There are conspiracy theorists among the McCann supporters, there are people with voices that not everyone finds musical and most of those who have commentated have been paid for doing so.

Amusing?.... You suggest the lack of meaningful debate us amusing yet when I offer to debate his theory you run away... Laughable... His whole theory is based on a fallacy... He assumes the alerts are confirmation of the previous presence of a corpse in 5a... Is that the level of his understanding of the evidence in the case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 15, 2020, 10:51:39 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 15, 2020, 10:40:32 AM

Ther are people out there who don't believe Maddie was abducted - who have come to it by there own intelligence

Bit silly to delete it - there is a thread on here with 103 pages.

Re: Richard Hall's film 'When Madeleine Died?'

The point was as you say delete it people will believe it - why didn't the mcns who it is more damaging to than you or me.

Afterall it bears all the hallmarks [and more] for the reason they have gone relentlessly after GA.

Halls clams are evidence that the mccanns do not try to silence anyone who disagrees with them... As is oft claimed.

Perhaps they leave Hall because his his crackpot theories ridicule the sceptic stance
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 15, 2020, 10:53:45 AM

Have I Deleted it?  No.  But I will be watching for Libel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 15, 2020, 11:06:26 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 14, 2020, 07:36:35 PM
Well there's still no abduction evidence.

Try coming back in 2021, SY might have found some by then.

What abduction evidence would you like?  A message from the abductor?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 15, 2020, 11:27:51 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 15, 2020, 10:51:39 AM
Halls clams are evidence that the mccanns do not try to silence anyone who disagrees with them... As is oft claimed.

Perhaps they leave Hall because his his crackpot theories ridicule the sceptic stance


It's you who brought Hall up D - Stating you had watched a DVD.

They have silenced everyone else I can think of with huge settlements - Hall more daming than TB

You would have thought if anyone needed silencing it would be him especially produced freely in the UK.

Probably they thought he wouldn't harm the search for Maddie - or it wasn't worth the cost
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 15, 2020, 11:58:32 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 15, 2020, 11:27:51 AM

It's you who brought Hall up D - Stating you had watched a DVD.

They have silenced everyone else I can think of with huge settlements - Hall more daming than TB

You would have thought if anyone needed silencing it would be him especially produced freely in the UK.

Probably they thought he wouldn't harm the search for Maddie - or it wasn't worth the cost

Not if he's a crackpot... Do you think the Manchester bomb was a hoax
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 16, 2020, 05:39:42 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 15, 2020, 11:27:51 AM

It's you who brought Hall up D - Stating you had watched a DVD.

They have silenced everyone else I can think of with huge settlements - Hall more daming than TB

You would have thought if anyone needed silencing it would be him especially produced freely in the UK.

Probably they thought he wouldn't harm the search for Maddie - or it wasn't worth the cost


There are a lot who believe the theory that Madeleine died on the Sunday,  the McCann's haven't gone after them either.   Probably because there is a live investigation going on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 16, 2020, 06:25:05 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 16, 2020, 05:39:42 PM

There are a lot who believe the theory that Madeleine died on the Sunday,  the McCann's haven't gone after them either.   Probably because there is a live investigation going on.
They 'went after' Tony Bennett. (The spanner, not the singer)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 16, 2020, 06:37:55 PM
Quote from: The General on February 16, 2020, 06:25:05 PM
They 'went after' Tony Bennett. (The spanner, not the singer)

Quite.  And that didn't end too well for Bennett did it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 16, 2020, 07:46:12 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 16, 2020, 06:37:55 PM
Quite.  And that didn't end too well for Bennett did it?
No. Quite rightly. But the point is, they went after him. Small fry who believed Madeleine died on the Sunday, as I recall.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 16, 2020, 07:48:35 PM
Quote from: The General on February 16, 2020, 07:46:12 PM
No. Quite rightly. But the point is, they went after him. Small fry who believed Madeleine died on the Sunday, as I recall.

I think the leaflet drop in their neighbourhood was the step too far.

I would have done the same tbf.............if I could be bothered to drive to Rothley.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on February 16, 2020, 07:57:33 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 16, 2020, 07:48:35 PM
I think the leaflet drop in their neighbourhood was the step too far.

I would have done the same tbf.............if I could be bothered to drive to Rothley.

I think you'll find Rothley has some very interesting things going on.   &^^&*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 16, 2020, 07:59:21 PM
Quote from: The General on February 16, 2020, 07:46:12 PM
No. Quite rightly. But the point is, they went after him. Small fry who believed Madeleine died on the Sunday, as I recall.

is his website down?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 16, 2020, 08:01:17 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 16, 2020, 07:57:33 PM
I think you'll find Rothley has some very interesting things going on.   &^^&*

in your imagination of course
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 16, 2020, 08:01:41 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 16, 2020, 07:59:21 PM
is his website down?
Didn't know he had a website.
I'm one of those people who think the Dark Web is page 2 of Google results.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 16, 2020, 08:03:32 PM
Quote from: The General on February 16, 2020, 08:01:41 PM
Didn't know he had a website.
I'm one of those people who think the Dark Web is page 2 of Google results.

richplanet.net
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 16, 2020, 08:19:59 PM
Quote from: The General on February 16, 2020, 07:46:12 PM
No. Quite rightly. But the point is, they went after him. Small fry who believed Madeleine died on the Sunday, as I recall.
Does he have any assets... Blessed are the poor because they cannot be sued
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 16, 2020, 08:24:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 16, 2020, 08:19:59 PM
Does he have any assets... Blessed are the poor because they cannot be sued
How do I know? Email him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 16, 2020, 08:37:39 PM
Quote from: The General on February 16, 2020, 08:24:42 PM
How do I know? Email him.
It's a rhetorical question
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 16, 2020, 08:46:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 16, 2020, 08:37:39 PM
It's a rhetorical question
So was mine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 16, 2020, 10:18:51 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 16, 2020, 06:37:55 PM
Quite.  And that didn't end too well for Bennett did it?


No - but it has for R D Hall why haven't they gone after him.

Far worse  what he has put out than TB - Hall certainly doesn't believe Maddie wasn't abducted

Never been challenged either by mcns - not as cut and dried as what some think IMO the so-called abduction
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 12:05:33 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 16, 2020, 10:18:51 PM

No - but it has for R D Hall why haven't they gone after him.

Far worse  what he has put out than TB - Hall certainly doesn't believe Maddie wasn't abducted

Never been challenged either by mcns - not as cut and dried as what some think IMO the so-called abduction

You appear to have missed the point that at the moment there is an active investigation under way into Madeleine McCann's disappearance and all due to the hard work and effort put into campaigning for it by her parents.

Action was taken against Bennett at a time when absolutely no-one but her parents were looking for Madeleine and it was assessed that his activities were detrimental to the parental campaign for police action on her behalf.

Snip

Bennett, who was ordered to pay the costs of the litigation, apologised to the court.

He added: "I recognise the distress I have caused on a number of occasions to the claimants. I would like to apologise to them for that distress."

The judge said that Gerry and Kate McCann, who have not attended court, had suffered injury to their reputations and feelings and resorted to legal action not to punish Mr Bennett - but to put a stop to his repeated conduct.

He agreed with lawyers for the McCanns that Bennett had played "cat and mouse" with them by complying with the undertakings some of the time.

"He was testing them with false or disingenuous assurances and demands for explanations to which, as a member of the public with no responsibility for law enforcement, he was not entitled."

Later, Clarence Mitchell, the McCann family spokesman, said: "Kate and Gerry McCann brought these committal proceedings very much as a last resort.

"Concerned for the effect that Mr Bennett's campaign may have on the ongoing search for their daughter and the likelihood of new leads coming forward, the McCanns concluded they had little choice but to seek the Court's intervention.

"Contrary to press reports, Kate and Gerry McCann did not bring the action to punish Mr Bennett or to send him to prison, but simply to get him to stop."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-campaigner-tony-bennett-1723519
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 17, 2020, 08:45:05 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 12:05:33 AM

"Concerned for the effect that Mr Bennett's campaign may have on the ongoing search for their daughter and the likelihood of new leads coming forward, the McCanns concluded they had little choice but to seek the Court's intervention.


As discussed previously and confirmed in your snip (redacted), The McCann's were concerned as to the effect Bennett was having on the search, which we assume is negative, so they wanted him stopped.
So they intervened against an old man with a grudge, an incongruous theory and a pushbike, but seemingly overlooked a concerted, well organised Youtube campaign by a man with 1000's of followers.
The difference I see is that Bennett took it to the front door. But in terms of 'damaging the search', they're on different scales.
Low hanging fruit? Pick your battles?

...and aren't they oppo's? Bennett supplied the ammo, Hall fired them?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 17, 2020, 08:56:05 AM
Quote from: The General on February 17, 2020, 08:45:05 AM
As discussed previously and confirmed in your snip (redacted), The McCann's were concerned as to the effect Bennett was having on the search, which we assume is negative, so they wanted him stopped.
So they intervened against an old man with a grudge, an incongruous theory and a pushbike, but seemingly overlooked a concerted, well organised Youtube campaign by a man with 1000's of followers.
The difference I see is that Bennett took it to the front door. But in terms of 'damaging the search', they're on different scales.
Low hanging fruit? Pick your battles?
From what i can see libel alw changed in 2013 and it was necessary to show probable serious harm to reputation.....thats probably why cmommm can get way with it.....i think bennett was pre 2013

So how much harm has Hall done to the McCanns reputation...very little I would think. Those that read him already suspect the McCanns and the vast majority of the population probably havent heard of him. The number of views may be from those already visiting his site believing in alien abduction having a quick look at them.

He does seem to have gone very quiet now...his websites gone...not sure whats happening there


I think it could be  argued his utterings have caused more damage to his own reputation than that of the McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 17, 2020, 09:18:39 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 12:05:33 AM
You appear to have missed the point that at the moment there is an active investigation under way into Madeleine McCann's disappearance and all due to the hard work and effort put into campaigning for it by her parents.

Action was taken against Bennett at a time when absolutely no-one but her parents were looking for Madeleine and it was assessed that his activities were detrimental to the parental campaign for police action on her behalf.

Snip

Bennett, who was ordered to pay the costs of the litigation, apologised to the court.

He added: "I recognise the distress I have caused on a number of occasions to the claimants. I would like to apologise to them for that distress."

The judge said that Gerry and Kate McCann, who have not attended court, had suffered injury to their reputations and feelings and resorted to legal action not to punish Mr Bennett - but to put a stop to his repeated conduct.

He agreed with lawyers for the McCanns that Bennett had played "cat and mouse" with them by complying with the undertakings some of the time.

"He was testing them with false or disingenuous assurances and demands for explanations to which, as a member of the public with no responsibility for law enforcement, he was not entitled."

Later, Clarence Mitchell, the McCann family spokesman, said: "Kate and Gerry McCann brought these committal proceedings very much as a last resort.

"Concerned for the effect that Mr Bennett's campaign may have on the ongoing search for their daughter and the likelihood of new leads coming forward, the McCanns concluded they had little choice but to seek the Court's intervention.

"Contrary to press reports, Kate and Gerry McCann did not bring the action to punish Mr Bennett or to send him to prison, but simply to get him to stop."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-campaigner-tony-bennett-1723519

No B I am not missing the point you are -  you only assume that is the reason.

The fact is they have not done anything about RDH - It is there to see every day



"Concerned for the effect that Mr Bennett's campaign may have on the ongoing search for their daughter and the likelihood of new leads coming forward, the McCanns concluded they had little choice but to seek the Court's intervention.


Doesnt that also apply to Richard D Hall - seems not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 17, 2020, 09:29:32 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 17, 2020, 09:18:39 AM
No B I am not missing the point you are -  you only assume that is the reason.

The fact is they have not done anything about RDH - It is there to see every day



"Concerned for the effect that Mr Bennett's campaign may have on the ongoing search for their daughter and the likelihood of new leads coming forward, the McCanns concluded they had little choice but to seek the Court's intervention.


Doesnt that also apply to Richard D Hall - seems not.

Halls theories are not in main stream media....very few if the general public have heard of him
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 17, 2020, 09:33:10 AM
Quote from: The General on February 17, 2020, 08:45:05 AM
As discussed previously and confirmed in your snip (redacted), The McCann's were concerned as to the effect Bennett was having on the search, which we assume is negative, so they wanted him stopped.
So they intervened against an old man with a grudge, an incongruous theory and a pushbike, but seemingly overlooked a concerted, well organised Youtube campaign by a man with 1000's of followers.
The difference I see is that Bennett took it to the front door. But in terms of 'damaging the search', they're on different scales.
Low hanging fruit? Pick your battles?

...and aren't they oppo's? Bennett supplied the ammo, Hall fired them?

Bennett has done a lot of that in recent years.  He has actively encouraged others to attack The McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 17, 2020, 09:51:23 AM
Quote from: The General on February 16, 2020, 06:25:05 PM
They 'went after' Tony Bennett. (The spanner, not the singer)

Yes,  they did,  but that was when he was selling his booklet,  50 reasons.   Now with his theory of Madeleine died on the Sunday,  he is laughable and not worth the effort.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 17, 2020, 09:52:07 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 17, 2020, 09:29:32 AM
Halls theories are not in main stream media....very few if the general public have heard of him


I think you may mean the ones who are not interested in the mcns - who probably beileve they brought it on themselves whatever happened.

IMO those who don't believe the abduction or not sure certainly are - you can't prove either way.

but still, RDH is left completely alone - and all over what happened to Maddie forums.


One of the titles of his work is - Re: Richard Hall's film 'When Madeleine Died?'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 17, 2020, 10:02:02 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 17, 2020, 09:52:07 AM

I think you may mean the ones who are not interested in the mcns - who probably beileve they brought it on themselves whatever happened.

IMO those who don't believe the abduction or not sure certainly are - you can't prove either way.

but still, RDH is left completely alone - and all over what happened to Maddie forums.


One of the titles of his work is - Re: Richard Hall's film 'When Madeleine Died?'

I think most people including the mccanns believe Maddie is probably dead... Have you read my explanation of the 2013 change in libel law.. It explains why the mccanns could sue Bennett but not cmomm or hall
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 10:20:50 AM
Quote from: The General on February 17, 2020, 08:45:05 AM
As discussed previously and confirmed in your snip (redacted), The McCann's were concerned as to the effect Bennett was having on the search, which we assume is negative, so they wanted him stopped.
So they intervened against an old man with a grudge, an incongruous theory and a pushbike, but seemingly overlooked a concerted, well organised Youtube campaign by a man with 1000's of followers.
The difference I see is that Bennett took it to the front door. But in terms of 'damaging the search', they're on different scales.
Low hanging fruit? Pick your battles?

...and aren't they oppo's? Bennett supplied the ammo, Hall fired them?

Not really  ...

In my opinion this was "an old man with a grudge" according to you, who had the expertise ~ the knowledge combined with obsession who stole Madeleine's name to confusingly set up the Madeleine Foundation for the express purpose of libelling and harassing Madeleine's parents and asking the public for donations to enable him to do so.

And all at a time when the Portuguese authorities had written Madeleine off and were not looking for her and her parents were desperately highlighting her plight and trying to get an investigation into her case restarted.

And all at a time when the British authorities were being desperately lobbied by Madeleine's parents to start up their own investigation into Madeleine's case and initiate investigations into what happened to her.

There was no official investigation being conducted into the circumstances of Madeleine McCann's disappearance anywhere in the world ... only her parents were looking for her and they knew that wasn't enough.
In their opinion Bennett's libels attacked and impeded their campaign to find Madeleine.

In 2013 Kate and Gerry's ceaseless efforts paid off and a police investigation was begun in Britain, Madeleine's homeland ~ and a police investigation was begun in Portugal, the country where Madeleine disappeared from.

Kate and Gerry were eliminated from the inquiries of both official police investigations ... and both official police investigations which are still ongoing, are investigating Madeleine's abduction.

In my opinion people who are fly by nights who come and go after making their pound of flesh on the conspiracy theory circuit are a total irrelevance at the moment.  Madeleine's case is active and being investigated ... she is being officially looked for and that situation has been taken on board and its significance recognised by the majority of people who might have an interest in her case.

The majority know the earth isn't flat. A minority believe it is.  Basically they exist on the periphery ... a total irrelevance to most and to some who don't even know of their existence or if they do, couldn't care less about them.

So it is with those who have their fifteen minutes of fame then vanish back into the obscurity from which they emerged.

Madeleine's case is being investigated.  Madeleine is being looked for which may well be an irritant for some ... but that is the state of play right now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2020, 10:24:14 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 10:20:50 AM
Not really  ...

In my opinion this was "an old man with a grudge" according to you, who had the expertise ~ the knowledge combined with obsession who stole Madeleine's name to confusingly set up the Madeleine Foundation for the express purpose of libelling and harassing Madeleine's parents and asking the public for donations to enable him to do so.

And all at a time when the Portuguese authorities had written Madeleine off and were not looking for her and her parents were desperately highlighting her plight and trying to get an investigation into her case restarted.

And all at a time when the British authorities were being desperately lobbied by Madeleine's parents to start up their own investigation into Madeleine's case and initiate investigations into what happened to her.

There was no official investigation being conducted into the circumstances of Madeleine McCann's disappearance anywhere in the world ... only her parents were looking for her and they knew that wasn't enough.
In their opinion Bennett's libels attacked and impeded their campaign to find Madeleine.

In 2013 Kate and Gerry's ceaseless efforts paid off and a police investigation was begun in Britain, Madeleine's homeland ~ and a police investigation was begun in Portugal, the country where Madeleine disappeared from.

Kate and Gerry were eliminated from the inquiries of both official police investigations ... and both official police investigations which are still ongoing, are investigating Madeleine's abduction.

In my opinion people who are fly by nights who come and go after making their pound of flesh on the conspiracy theory circuit are a total irrelevance at the moment.  Madeleine's case is active and being investigated ... she is being officially looked for and that situation has been taken on board and its significance recognised by the majority of people who might have an interest in her case.

The majority know the earth isn't flat. A minority believe it is.  Basically they exist on the periphery ... a total irrelevance to most and to some who don't even know of their existence or if they do, couldn't care less about them.

So it is with those who have their fifteen minutes of fame then vanish back into the obscurity from which they emerged.

Madeleine's case is being investigated.  Madeleine is being looked for which may well be an irritant for some ... but that is the state of play right now.

Madeleine is being looked for??

Have you seen any searching going on recently, by that strength in numbers that is 4 ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 10:25:34 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 17, 2020, 09:18:39 AM
No B I am not missing the point you are -  you only assume that is the reason.

The fact is they have not done anything about RDH - It is there to see every day



"Concerned for the effect that Mr Bennett's campaign may have on the ongoing search for their daughter and the likelihood of new leads coming forward, the McCanns concluded they had little choice but to seek the Court's intervention.


Doesnt that also apply to Richard D Hall - seems not.

Why are you so desperate for this nonentity to be sued?  You certainly seem most put out that he hasn't been.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on February 17, 2020, 10:26:05 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 10:20:50 AM
Not really  ...

In my opinion this was "an old man with a grudge" according to you, who had the expertise ~ the knowledge combined with obsession who stole Madeleine's name to confusingly set up the Madeleine Foundation for the express purpose of libelling and harassing Madeleine's parents and asking the public for donations to enable him to do so.

And all at a time when the Portuguese authorities had written Madeleine off and were not looking for her and her parents were desperately highlighting her plight and trying to get an investigation into her case restarted.

And all at a time when the British authorities were being desperately lobbied by Madeleine's parents to start up their own investigation into Madeleine's case and initiate investigations into what happened to her.

There was no official investigation being conducted into the circumstances of Madeleine McCann's disappearance anywhere in the world ... only her parents were looking for her and they knew that wasn't enough.
In their opinion Bennett's libels attacked and impeded their campaign to find Madeleine.

In 2013 Kate and Gerry's ceaseless efforts paid off and a police investigation was begun in Britain, Madeleine's homeland ~ and a police investigation was begun in Portugal, the country where Madeleine disappeared from.

Kate and Gerry were eliminated from the inquiries of both official police investigations ... and both official police investigations which are still ongoing, are investigating Madeleine's abduction.

In my opinion people who are fly by nights who come and go after making their pound of flesh on the conspiracy theory circuit are a total irrelevance at the moment.  Madeleine's case is active and being investigated ... she is being officially looked for and that situation has been taken on board and its significance recognised by the majority of people who might have an interest in her case.

The majority know the earth isn't flat. A minority believe it is.  Basically they exist on the periphery ... a total irrelevance to most and to some who don't even know of their existence or if they do, couldn't care less about them.

So it is with those who have their fifteen minutes of fame then vanish back into the obscurity from which they emerged.

Madeleine's case is being investigated.  Madeleine is being looked for which may well be an irritant for some ... but that is the state of play right now.


Excellent post.
Well said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 17, 2020, 10:28:02 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 17, 2020, 08:56:05 AM
From what i can see libel alw changed in 2013 and it was necessary to show probable serious harm to reputation.....thats probably why cmommm can get way with it.....i think bennett was pre 2013

So how much harm has Hall done to the McCanns reputation...very little I would think. Those that read him already suspect the McCanns and the vast majority of the population probably havent heard of him. The number of views may be from those already visiting his site believing in alien abduction having a quick look at them.

He does seem to have gone very quiet now...his websites gone...not sure whats happening there


I think it could be  argued his utterings have caused more damage to his own reputation than that of the McCanns.
His website's still there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 10:28:46 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 17, 2020, 09:29:32 AM
Halls theories are not in main stream media....very few if the general public have heard of him

Absolutely correct.

I don't think it is generally realised what a terribly small bubble people like us inhabit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 10:40:06 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2020, 10:24:14 AM
Madeleine is being looked for??

Have you seen any searching going on recently, by that strength in numbers that is 4 ?

What a predictable post.
I think you may have posted many such over the years since Madeleine's case opened in 2013.  You really don't know any more about it than I do because this is an active police investigation both here and in Portugal and for all we know elsewhere in the world and the police are giving nothing away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 17, 2020, 10:46:14 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 10:25:34 AM
Why are you so desperate for this nonentity to be sued?  You certainly seem most put out that he hasn't been.


Not at all B - I admire those who are able to put it out there -  and have the bottle to speak out there beliefs.

Who do not believe the mcns - and not afraid to say so

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 17, 2020, 10:50:32 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 17, 2020, 10:46:14 AM

Not at all B - I admire those who are able to put it out there -  and have the bottle to speak out there beliefs.

Who do not believe the mcns - and not afraid to say so

I don't think it takes any bravery... What a, strange idea.
I suppose you think hall is brave for saying the Manchester bombing was a hoax... I just think he's balmy
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2020, 10:52:13 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 10:40:06 AM
What a predictable post.
I think you may have posted many such over the years since Madeleine's case opened in 2013.  You really don't know any more about it than I do because this is an active police investigation both here and in Portugal and for all we know elsewhere in the world and the police are giving nothing away.

Your reply was equally predictable. As is the fact that neither Maddie or any abductor are traceable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 11:03:01 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 17, 2020, 10:46:14 AM

Not at all B - I admire those who are able to put it out there -  and have the bottle to speak out there beliefs.

Who do not believe the mcns - and not afraid to say so

That is entirely your prerogative ... there is nothing I can or would wish to do or say to shake your faith in your heroes and heroines particularly as I too am a firm believer in truth and justice and in the rule of law.

I think the difference between us is that I do not require to be led by anyone else's convictions artfully portrayed, I weigh things up for myself and make my own decisions.
I think it can be summed up by the entirely different posting style adopted by us both.  You confess to admire someone else's thoughts ... my preference is to sift through the internet dross and to make up my own mind.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on February 17, 2020, 11:15:52 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 17, 2020, 10:50:32 AM
I don't think it takes any bravery... What a, strange idea.
I suppose you think hall is brave for saying the Manchester bombing was a hoax... I just think he's balmy

And cruel IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 11:44:00 AM
Quote from: Erngath on February 17, 2020, 11:15:52 AM
And cruel IMO.

And cowardly IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 17, 2020, 11:47:26 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 11:44:00 AM
And cowardly IMO.

Not to mention spiteful IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 17, 2020, 12:22:06 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2020, 10:24:14 AM
Madeleine is being looked for??

Have you seen any searching going on recently, by that strength in numbers that is 4 ?

Do you think that four people are out on the streets in different countries looking for Madeleine?   That is what your post seems to imply.   There is Technology in case you have forgotten,  people can get in touch with others very easily.  Th ere is also the Portuguese Police who are also looking for Madeleine,  these two teams are in close contact
with one another.  Dear me how some seem to think,  people including the McCann's should be searching streets knocking on doors searching for Madeleine makes me despair.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 17, 2020, 12:54:51 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 17, 2020, 12:22:06 PM
Do you think that four people are out on the streets in different countries looking for Madeleine?   That is what your post seems to imply.   There is Technology in case you have forgotten,  people can get in touch with others very easily.  Th ere is also the Portuguese Police who are also looking for Madeleine,  these two teams are in close contact
with one another.  Dear me how some seem to think,  people including the McCann's should be searching streets knocking on doors searching for Madeleine makes me despair.
I think Spamage was referring to the depleted resources available to Operation Grange.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 17, 2020, 01:03:09 PM
Quote from: The General on February 17, 2020, 12:54:51 PM
I think Spamage was referring to the depleted resources available to Operation Grange.

I think four full time officers is quite a lit of manpower in the circumstances... Makes me wonder... Either they sit round all day eating biscuits or there really is some info being investigated
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 17, 2020, 01:06:12 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 17, 2020, 01:03:09 PM
I think four full time officers is quite a lit of manpower in the circumstances... Makes me wonder... Either they sit round all day eating biscuits or there really is some info being investigated
Indeed. I did the maths a few weeks ago. CBA doing it again. But 4 plod, plus a car, plus prelims, no overtime, 35 hour week, no civil support = the most recently allocated budget.
Maybe they are Policemefecating, but they won't do much with those resources.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 17, 2020, 01:10:16 PM
Quote from: The General on February 17, 2020, 01:06:12 PM
Indeed. I did the maths a few weeks ago. CBA doing it again. But 4 plod, plus a car, plus prelims, no overtime, 35 hour week, no civil support = the most recently allocated budget.
Maybe they are Policemefecating, but they won't do much with those resources.

They must be doing something reasonably substantial otherwise why employ 4....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 17, 2020, 01:20:54 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 17, 2020, 01:10:16 PM
They must be doing something reasonably substantial otherwise why employ 4....
I reckon they're bound by SY protocol / HR  / H&S and all that. So if they go somewhere they have to have 2 (not sure if that rule applies popping out to Gregg's). So 3 would be an odd number. 1 will be more senior I imagine, for process, maybe a DS.
I've said it before, but I doubt there was a queue when they were looking for volunteers - no overtime.
Plus if there's 4 they can play doubles in darts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 01:46:04 PM
Just a passing thought ... is it customary to deride and rubbish all active police operations ... or is the bile, vitriol and derision reserved uniquely for any sort of positive pro-active investigation into Madeleine McCann's case.

Why are some individuals so biased against the British police (it seems there is ignorance that Portugal too have devoted personnel and resources) tasked with working a missing person case.

Is their negativity towards taking steps to solve Madeleine's case directed towards all missing persons or is it reserved exclusively for Madeleine McCann.  In my opinion whether it is the former or the latter ... each is equally reprehensible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2020, 01:46:37 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 17, 2020, 01:03:09 PM
I think four full time officers is quite a lit of manpower in the circumstances... Makes me wonder... Either they sit round all day eating biscuits or there really is some info being investigated

We'll find out soon enough. Either that or, we'll all be here in years to come & Maddie still won't be found, nor any abductor.

My money is on the latter.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 17, 2020, 01:52:22 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 01:46:04 PM
Just a passing thought ... is it customary to deride and rubbish all active police operations ... or is the bile, vitriol and derision reserved for uniquely for any sort of positive pro-active investigation into Madeleine McCann's case.

Why are some individuals so biased against the British police (it seems there is ignorance that Portugal too have devoted personnel and resources) tasked with working a missing person case.

Is their negativity towards taking steps to solve Madeleine's case directed towards all missing persons or is it reserved exclusively for Madeleine McCann.  In my opinion whether it is the former or the latter ... each is equally reprehensible.

All police forces have cases they can't solve, and it seems Operation Grange may well be such a case. The difference to other cases being that they volunteered to take it on, they appear to have done so with preconceived ideas and there's never been any sign of success.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2020, 01:56:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 01:46:04 PM
Just a passing thought ... is it customary to deride and rubbish all active police operations ... or is the bile, vitriol and derision reserved uniquely for any sort of positive pro-active investigation into Madeleine McCann's case.

Why are some individuals so biased against the British police (it seems there is ignorance that Portugal too have devoted personnel and resources) tasked with working a missing person case.

Is their negativity towards taking steps to solve Madeleine's case directed towards all missing persons or is it reserved exclusively for Madeleine McCann.  In my opinion whether it is the former or the latter ... each is equally reprehensible.

I believe investigating an abduction that didn't happen is a massive waste of tax payers money.

12 million squid could have filled a lot of pot holes. Much more worth while imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on February 17, 2020, 02:10:19 PM
This is on-topic, if only I could be a***d to find the correct topic.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-51533563

Rikki Neave was 6 years old when he was murdered in Peterborough in Nov 94.  His body was found the day after he disappeared.  He had been strangled.

The Britcops went after his mother Ruth Neave.  She was found not guilty of murder, but she got 7 years for child neglect.  Kate's so-called deal for body occultation carried a maximum term of 2 years, typically suspended.

The link gives an insight into how Britcops conduct a cold case murder review, and how long that takes when they have a body and it is on home turf.

A man has been charged with Rikki's murder.  As he is now 38, 25 years ago he was 13, so presumably proceedings will relate to an offence committed by a minor.

 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 17, 2020, 02:42:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 17, 2020, 01:52:22 PM
All police forces have cases they can't solve, and it seems Operation Grange may well be such a case. The difference to other cases being that they volunteered to take it on, they appear to have done so with preconceived ideas and there's never been any sign of success.

It's a sceptic mantra that SY we're limited to abduction... I think it was just a working hypothesis that could change depending on evidence found...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 17, 2020, 02:51:30 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 01:46:04 PM
Just a passing thought ... is it customary to deride and rubbish all active police operations ... or is the bile, vitriol and derision reserved uniquely for any sort of positive pro-active investigation into Madeleine McCann's case.

Why are some individuals so biased against the British police (it seems there is ignorance that Portugal too have devoted personnel and resources) tasked with working a missing person case.

Is their negativity towards taking steps to solve Madeleine's case directed towards all missing persons or is it reserved exclusively for Madeleine McCann.  In my opinion whether it is the former or the latter ... each is equally reprehensible.
From my perspective, there's no 'bile' or vitriol', that's usually reserved for the PJ by supporters.
But there is derision. Because the investigation thus far, several years and £12 million and counting, has delivered derisory results. Whilst I'm not too concerned about my 78p contribution or whatever it is, the Operation Grange staff - and it initially numbered scores of police - could be put to way better use.
I have a modicum of sympathy for the various heads of Grange, it's a poisoned chalice; a veritable graveyard for senior police chiefs - kicked out to the long grass, then retire creeping out the back door clutching a gold clock and a final salary pension

By the way, your point regarding the Portuguese police expending resources and time is moot; we don't live in Portugal, they can spend their money how they deem fit. Unless you live in Portugal, of course.

Life support must be switched off this time round.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 17, 2020, 02:56:13 PM
Quote from: The General on February 17, 2020, 02:51:30 PM
From my perspective, there's no 'bile' or vitriol', that's usually reserved for the PJ by supporters.
But there is derision. Because the investigation thus far, several years and £12 million and counting, has delivered derisory results. Whilst I'm not too concerned about my 78p contribution or whatever it is, the Operation Grange staff - and it initially numbered scores of police - could be put to way better use.
I have a modicum of sympathy for the various heads of Grange, it's a poisoned chalice; a veritable graveyard for senior police chiefs - kicked out to the long grass, then retire creeping out the back door clutching a gold clock and a final salary pension

By the way, your point regarding the Portuguese police expending resources and time is moot; we don't live in Portugal, they can spend their money how they deem fit. Unless you live in Portugal, of course.

Life support must be switched off this time round.

There's no bile or vitriol from me towards the initial pj investigation... Just derision... The present lot seem more professional.. Id prefer to wait and see what SY come up with before making a judgement
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 02:59:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 17, 2020, 01:52:22 PM
All police forces have cases they can't solve, and it seems Operation Grange may well be such a case. The difference to other cases being that they volunteered to take it on, they appear to have done so with preconceived ideas and there's never been any sign of success.

A criminal offence has been committed and when I last looked it seems the police are committed to investigating all such as long as there is evidence which warrants it.
Madeleine's investigation is still ongoing so obviously there is still work to be carried out on it and evidence to justify doing so.
In my opinion it would at the least be polite to wait for the eventual outcome of Madeleine's investigation and also respectful to the concept of law and order.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 17, 2020, 03:04:32 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 02:59:34 PM
A criminal offence has been committed and when I last looked it seems the police are committed to investigating all such as long as there is evidence which warrants it.
Madeleine's investigation is still ongoing so obviously there is still work to be carried out on it and evidence to justify doing so.
In my opinion it would at the least be polite to wait for the eventual outcome of Madeleine's investigation and also respectful to the concept of law and order.
How long for? Indefinitely? How much money is reasonable? £100 million?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 17, 2020, 03:05:40 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 17, 2020, 02:10:19 PM
This is on-topic, if only I could be a***d to find the correct topic.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-51533563

Rikki Neave was 6 years old when he was murdered in Peterborough in Nov 94.  His body was found the day after he disappeared.  He had been strangled.

The Britcops went after his mother Ruth Neave.  She was found not guilty of murder, but she got 7 years for child neglect.  Kate's so-called deal for body occultation carried a maximum term of 2 years, typically suspended.

The link gives an insight into how Britcops conduct a cold case murder review, and how long that takes when they have a body and it is on home turf.

A man has been charged with Rikki's murder.  As he is now 38, 25 years ago he was 13, so presumably proceedings will relate to an offence committed by a minor.

Saw this.  Blimmin hell.  Why was his mother charged with cruelty and neglect?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 03:17:07 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 17, 2020, 02:10:19 PM
This is on-topic, if only I could be a***d to find the correct topic.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-51533563

Rikki Neave was 6 years old when he was murdered in Peterborough in Nov 94.  His body was found the day after he disappeared.  He had been strangled.

The Britcops went after his mother Ruth Neave.  She was found not guilty of murder, but she got 7 years for child neglect.  Kate's so-called deal for body occultation carried a maximum term of 2 years, typically suspended.

The link gives an insight into how Britcops conduct a cold case murder review, and how long that takes when they have a body and it is on home turf.

A man has been charged with Rikki's murder.  As he is now 38, 25 years ago he was 13, so presumably proceedings will relate to an offence committed by a minor.

And your post concerning an abused child whose name was on the Child Protection Register relates in which way to Madeleine McCann who was a much loved and well cared for child.

Please justify how you reached your need to make such a comparison on what I think is not just scant cause but, rather incredibly, no cause at all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2020, 03:19:01 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 17, 2020, 03:05:40 PM
Saw this.  Blimmin hell.  Why was his mother charged with cruelty and neglect?

I read that she threatened to kill him, wrote idiot on his head & poured washing up liquid down his throat.
Mum of the year.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 03:26:48 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 17, 2020, 03:05:40 PM
Saw this.  Blimmin hell.  Why was his mother charged with cruelty and neglect?

Because she was apparently a monster.  The wee boy was known to Social Services ... but as well as having a rubbish parent he was badly let down by them too.

It is obviously a more convoluted case than just yet another baseball bat useful to beat the McCanns with.  In my opinion the original post shows total disrespect for the life of this poor murdered wee boy.
A very bad show indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 17, 2020, 03:41:43 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 03:26:48 PM
Because she was apparently a monster.  The wee boy was known to Social Services ... but as well as having a rubbish parent he was badly let down by them too.

It is obviously a more convoluted case than just yet another baseball bat useful to beat the McCanns.  In my opinion the original post shows total disrespect for the life of this poor murdered wee boy.
A very bad show indeed.
So let me get this straight; you're alleging that SIL posted this story as a device with which to 'beat the McCann's with' despite it being a news story today, posted in the off-topic thread and the fact that the McCann's are extremely unlikely to read this? Or, as is more likely, you think SIL posted this story on this forum to goad supporters?
Bad show?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 17, 2020, 03:46:34 PM
Quote from: The General on February 17, 2020, 03:41:43 PM
So let me get this straight; you're alleging that SIL posted this story as a device with which to 'beat the McCann's with' despite it being a news story today, posted in the off-topic thread and the fact that the McCann's are extremely unlikely to read this? Or, as is more likely, you think SIL posted this story on this forum to goad supporters?
Bad show?

In what way was the post relevant to this board....whats it got to do with kates offer of a  deal by the PJ
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 17, 2020, 03:49:33 PM
Quote from: The General on February 17, 2020, 03:04:32 PM
How long for? Indefinitely? How much money is reasonable? £100 million?

it would depend on what evidence was available and if it pointed anywhere
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 17, 2020, 03:55:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 17, 2020, 03:46:34 PM
In what way was the post relevant to this board....whats it got to do with kates offer of a  deal by the PJ
Do you think it was posted for Gerry and Kate's eyes, to use as a 'baseball bat'?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 17, 2020, 04:03:07 PM
Quote from: The General on February 17, 2020, 03:55:02 PM
Do you think it was posted for Gerry and Kate's eyes, to use as a 'baseball bat'?

no one said it was for kate and gerry's eyes. There is much posted here to bash the McCanns...sil has been particularly guilty of it...imo because he felt he could help the Mccanns...even went as far as emailing gerry...but his offer was rebuffed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 17, 2020, 05:16:34 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 17, 2020, 04:03:07 PM
no one said it was for kate and gerry's eyes. There is much posted here to bash the McCanns...sil has been particularly guilty of it...imo because he felt he could help the Mccanns...even went as far as emailing gerry...but his offer was rebuffed
So how were they going to get beaten with 'a baseball bat' euphemistically by posting this story?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 17, 2020, 05:31:42 PM
Quote from: The General on February 17, 2020, 05:16:34 PM
So how were they going to get beaten with 'a baseball bat' euphemistically by posting this story?

many stories are posted to bash the mccanns...not literally
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on February 17, 2020, 06:16:15 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 03:26:48 PM
Because she was apparently a monster.  The wee boy was known to Social Services ... but as well as having a rubbish parent he was badly let down by them too.

It is obviously a more convoluted case than just yet another baseball bat useful to beat the McCanns with.  In my opinion the original post shows total disrespect for the life of this poor murdered wee boy.
A very bad show indeed.

If you can't work out how this case relates to OG, then you are dumb, because I made the connection crystal clear when I posted it.

If you are not dumb, then I can only assume you are being bitter.

Better to pipe down in either case.

I am 100% within forum rules, and you know it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 17, 2020, 06:24:50 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 17, 2020, 06:16:15 PM
If you can't work out how this case relates to OG, then you are dumb, because I made the connection crystal clear when I posted it.

If you are not dumb, then I can only assume you are being bitter.

Better to pipe down in either case.

I am 100% within forum rules, and you know it.
How very rude.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 17, 2020, 06:28:42 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 17, 2020, 02:10:19 PM
This is on-topic, if only I could be a***d to find the correct topic.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-51533563

Rikki Neave was 6 years old when he was murdered in Peterborough in Nov 94.  His body was found the day after he disappeared.  He had been strangled.

The Britcops went after his mother Ruth Neave.  She was found not guilty of murder, but she got 7 years for child neglect.  Kate's so-called deal for body occultation carried a maximum term of 2 years, typically suspended.

The link gives an insight into how Britcops conduct a cold case murder review, and how long that takes when they have a body and it is on home turf.

A man has been charged with Rikki's murder.  As he is now 38, 25 years ago he was 13, so presumably proceedings will relate to an offence committed by a minor.
What would be very interesting to know is how many personnel they have had working on this case for the last 6 years and how much money spent.  Now doubt far too much for some people to stomach.  thanks for posting though, it shows that sometimes results take a long time to eventuate, even if nothing appears to be happening, something may well be about to come to fruition.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 06:30:32 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 17, 2020, 06:16:15 PM
If you can't work out how this case relates to OG, then you are dumb, because I made the connection crystal clear when I posted it.

If you are not dumb, then I can only assume you are being bitter.

Better to pipe down in either case.

I am 100% within forum rules, and you know it.

Your insults are nasty and 100% outwith forum rules.  I think the pity of it is that you were at one time a poster who was capable of bringing intelligent information to the forum.
That was quite some time ago and I cannot recall the last time you bothered to do that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 17, 2020, 06:32:14 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 06:30:32 PM
Your insults are nasty and 100% outwith forum rules.  I think the pity of it is that you were at one time a poster who was capable of bringing intelligent information to the forum.
That was quite some time ago and I cannot recall the last time you bothered to do that.
Why does this rude and belittling poster never get warning points though?  He gets away with murrrdah!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on February 17, 2020, 07:00:04 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 17, 2020, 06:30:32 PM
Your insults are nasty and 100% outwith forum rules.  I think the pity of it is that you were at one time a poster who was capable of bringing intelligent information to the forum.
That was quite some time ago and I cannot recall the last time you bothered to do that.

Check my original post.  100% within the forum rules.

Plus it brings some intelligent information to the forum.

So you are wrong on both counts.   &^^&*

PS I do not do sheep impressions.  And I'm not impressed by sheepdog impressions.   *&^^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 17, 2020, 07:06:55 PM
If anyone understood the sheep/sheepdog reference kindly pm me (too dumb to understand).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 17, 2020, 07:26:33 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2020, 01:56:46 PM
I believe investigating an abduction that didn't happen is a massive waste of tax payers money.

12 million squid could have filled a lot of pot holes. Much more worth while imo.


it's a drop in the ocean to find a missing child.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 17, 2020, 07:28:21 PM
Quote from: The General on February 17, 2020, 12:54:51 PM
I think Spamage was referring to the depleted resources available to Operation Grange.

Well it's obvious in the beginning they needed more officers to go through the whole investigation by the PJ.  All the sightings etc.  Now they have narrowed it down.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2020, 07:38:33 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 17, 2020, 07:26:33 PM

it's a drop in the ocean to find a missing child.

What's so bleedin special about Maddie?

Why isn't the same amount being spent on the search for Ben Needham for example?

And what's so special about missing children?

Why isn't the same amount being spent on the search for Suzy Lamplugh, Mary Flanagan, Claudia Lawrence, Lord Lucan or Shergar?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 17, 2020, 07:39:06 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 17, 2020, 07:28:21 PM
Well it's obvious in the beginning they needed more officers to go through the whole investigation by the PJ.  All the sightings etc.  Now they have narrowed it down.
Narrowed it down? They're barely keeping the lights on.
They've downscaled due to budget constraints. They ran out of toner for the fax machine last month, ffs.*



*they probably didn't run out of toner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 17, 2020, 07:51:22 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2020, 07:38:33 PM
What's so bleedin special about Maddie?

Why isn't the same amount being spent on the search for Ben Needham for example?

And what's so special about missing children?

Why isn't the same amount being spent on the search for Suzy Lamplugh, Mary Flanagan, Claudia Lawrence, Lord Lucan or Shergar?

Are there any leads for them to investigate Ben.  I don't think there is.

Suzy Lamplugh and Claudia Lawrence haven't been forgotten,  they investigate if new leads arise.

Don't know Mary Flanagan.  Lord Lucas has just been in the news again,  [brother?  I'm not sure]  of woman murdered has said he knows where he is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 17, 2020, 08:06:33 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 17, 2020, 07:51:22 PM
Are there any leads for them to investigate Ben.  I don't think there is.

Suzy Lamplugh and Claudia Lawrence haven't been forgotten,  they investigate if new leads arise.

Don't know Mary Flanagan.  Lord Lucas has just been in the news again,  [brother?  I'm not sure]  of woman murdered has said he knows where he is.
When the police numbers per head are at their lowest in London for 20 years and the crime rate at its highest in over a decade - maybe, I don't know, priorities?
It's like old runaway train morality test. Depends on how utilitarian you are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 17, 2020, 08:33:08 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2020, 07:38:33 PM
What's so bleedin special about Maddie?

Why isn't the same amount being spent on the search for Ben Needham for example?

And what's so special about missing children?

Why isn't the same amount being spent on the search for Suzy Lamplugh, Mary Flanagan, Claudia Lawrence, Lord Lucan or Shergar?
She’s kept you entertained for 13 years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on February 19, 2020, 02:28:13 PM
Cue another slew of 'this has nothing to do with Madeleine McCann' and 'another stick to beat K&G with'.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-51558600

7 year old Fátima Aldrighett was murdered in Mexico City recently.  Her body was found 4 days after she disappeared.

A woman thought to be between 42 and 45 walked her away from her school, an act which was seen on CCTV.  Fátima had been waiting outside her school to be picked up by her mother, but her mother was running late due to Mexico City traffic jams.

The relevant bits are these, just to get supporters up to speed.

The family has piled in, saying the police response was too slow, and that protocols were not followed.

Feminists have piled in, stating that femicide must stop.  This despite the fact that in this case police are hunting for a female.

Police offered £83,000 for the identification of the female who walked off with Fátima.  To date, AFAIK, there has been no reward offered for the mere identification of Smithman.  It's a measly £20k for a successful prosecution.

 8((()*/     
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 19, 2020, 03:09:29 PM
It’s almost as if you’re using the murders of children to bait McCann supporters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 19, 2020, 03:35:31 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 19, 2020, 02:28:13 PM
Cue another slew of 'this has nothing to do with Madeleine McCann' and 'another stick to beat K&G with'.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-51558600

7 year old Fátima Aldrighett was murdered in Mexico City recently.  Her body was found 4 days after she disappeared.

A woman thought to be between 42 and 45 walked her away from her school, an act which was seen on CCTV.  Fátima had been waiting outside her school to be picked up by her mother, but her mother was running late due to Mexico City traffic jams.

The relevant bits are these, just to get supporters up to speed.

The family has piled in, saying the police response was too slow, and that protocols were not followed.

Feminists have piled in, stating that femicide must stop.  This despite the fact that in this case police are hunting for a female.

Police offered £83,000 for the identification of the female who walked off with Fátima.  To date, AFAIK, there has been no reward offered for the mere identification of Smithman.  It's a measly £20k for a successful prosecution.

 8((()*/   

What a pointless post... It seems to be becoming a habit
To date, afaik... There has been no appeal for smithman in Portugal... Why not
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 19, 2020, 04:19:18 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 19, 2020, 03:09:29 PM
It’s almost as if you’re using the murders of children to bait McCann supporters.

which is a rather stupid and childish thing to do
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 19, 2020, 05:29:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 19, 2020, 03:35:31 PM
What a pointless post... It seems to be becoming a habit
To date, afaik... There has been no appeal for smithman in Portugal... Why not

Perchance OG don't think he's a resident there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 19, 2020, 06:10:15 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 19, 2020, 05:29:45 PM
Perchance OG don't think he's a resident there.

is it up to SY...I thought it was a portuguese investigation...thats what you sceptics normally say
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 19, 2020, 06:30:26 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 19, 2020, 06:10:15 PM
is it up to SY...I thought it was a portuguese investigation...thats what you sceptics normally say

Its the official line.

The Portuguese authorities retain the lead and the Met continues to work in support of them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 19, 2020, 07:06:00 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 19, 2020, 06:30:26 PM
Its the official line.

The Portuguese authorities retain the lead and the Met continues to work in support of them.

I doubt very much SY would be allowed to make a public appeal in portugal for smithman...its not the way the PJ work. Hopefully they are changing but in the past they seem to arrest someone and convince them they are smithman....a good beating soon helps the memory
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 19, 2020, 07:21:58 PM
In other news in my country: Danie Krugel’s device has been officially patented. His original picture of where he ‘located’ Madeleine, includes the home/previous home of Freud. Does anyone know who occupied Casa Colina at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 19, 2020, 07:26:11 PM
I also recall someone noticed car lights going up the hill during the night that Madeleine disappeared?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 19, 2020, 07:34:30 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 19, 2020, 07:26:11 PM
I also recall someone noticed car lights going up the hill during the night that Madeleine disappeared?
Probably attached to a car.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 19, 2020, 08:40:38 PM
Quote from: The General on February 19, 2020, 07:34:30 PM
Probably attached to a car.

And you are trying to say ...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 19, 2020, 08:56:41 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 19, 2020, 08:40:38 PM
And you are trying to say ...
Those car lights going up the hill? Probably on a car.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 19, 2020, 09:32:15 PM
We’ve reached rock bottom at last.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 20, 2020, 07:14:36 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 19, 2020, 09:32:15 PM
We’ve reached rock bottom at last.
So let's keep digging then.
These lights. Headlights? So the car was going up the hill backwards?

Come one you 305 'guests' lurking in the shadows, sign up, join the party. WOO! Yeh!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 20, 2020, 07:17:46 AM
Quote from: The General on February 20, 2020, 07:14:36 AM
So let's keep digging then.
These lights. Headlights? So the car was going up the hill backwards?
Nurse, the screens!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 23, 2020, 11:12:04 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 19, 2020, 07:21:58 PM
In other news in my country: Danie Krugel’s device has been officially patented. His original picture of where he ‘located’ Madeleine, includes the home/previous home of Freud. Does anyone know who occupied Casa Colina at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance?

Freud's wife Jill arrived in Portugal on 3/5/07 & hired a car at Faro airport.
There's a topic dedicated to Freud here http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7352.0 with reference to the hire car starting around page 15.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 24, 2020, 01:59:06 AM
Quote from: The General on February 20, 2020, 07:14:36 AM
So let's keep digging then.
These lights. Headlights? So the car was going up the hill backwards?

Come one you 305 'guests' lurking in the shadows, sign up, join the party. WOO! Yeh!

Haven't you ever seen a vehicles headlights on a dark hillside like that.  I have, especially when near the top when the car would be outined above the horizon.    I doubt there would be any light polution from streetlamps or houses up there, but I haven't checked to be fair. 

When raised, in dark places headlamp beams can look like search lights against the sky and also illuminate the hillside
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 24, 2020, 06:51:23 AM
Quote from: misty on February 23, 2020, 11:12:04 PM
Freud's wife Jill arrived in Portugal on 3/5/07 & hired a car at Faro airport.
There's a topic dedicated to Freud here http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7352.0 with reference to the hire car starting around page 15.

Thank you, Misty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 24, 2020, 07:50:23 AM
Quote from: sadie on February 24, 2020, 01:59:06 AM
Haven't you ever seen a vehicles headlights on a dark hillside like that.  I have, especially when near the top when the car would be outined above the horizon.    I doubt there would be any light polution from streetlamps or houses up there, but I haven't checked to be fair. 

When raised, in dark places headlamp beams can look like search lights against the sky and also illuminate the hillside
Prosaic, but not helpful. These lights, were they coming or going? And what's the significance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 24, 2020, 10:00:19 AM
Quote from: Anthro on February 19, 2020, 07:26:11 PM
I also recall someone noticed car lights going up the hill during the night that Madeleine disappeared?

Do you have a cite for that please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 24, 2020, 12:14:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 24, 2020, 10:00:19 AM
Do you have a cite for that please?

I can back Anthro on the fact that someone saw lights going up that hill that night.  I read it too, but I know not where.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 24, 2020, 12:33:44 PM
Quote from: sadie on February 24, 2020, 12:14:28 PM
I can back Anthro on the fact that someone saw lights going up that hill that night.  I read it too, but I know not where.
That settles it then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 24, 2020, 12:44:54 PM
Quote from: sadie on February 24, 2020, 12:14:28 PM
I can back Anthro on the fact that someone saw lights going up that hill that night.  I read it too, but I know not where.
She said that the previous night she had seen a car going up the Rocha Negra – the black, volcanic cliff that dominates the village.      madeleine      Kate McCann
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 24, 2020, 01:01:24 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 24, 2020, 12:44:54 PM
She said that the previous night she had seen a car going up the Rocha Negra – the black, volcanic cliff that dominates the village.      madeleine      Kate McCann

Who said ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on February 24, 2020, 01:26:07 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 24, 2020, 12:44:54 PM
She said that the previous night she had seen a car going up the Rocha Negra – the black, volcanic cliff that dominates the village.      madeleine      Kate McCann

she talks some shit but Negra is important where she ran to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 24, 2020, 01:36:16 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on February 24, 2020, 01:26:07 PM
she talks some shit but Negra is important where she ran to.
(https://shakedowntitle.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/jogging-1.jpg?w=221&h=221)
We know both Kate and Gerry ran; it is on record.  We know they ran on Rocha Negra; it is on record. Your point is??
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 24, 2020, 01:40:59 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 24, 2020, 01:36:16 PM
(https://shakedowntitle.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/jogging-1.jpg?w=221&h=221)
We know both Kate and Gerry ran; it is on record.  We know they ran on Rocha Negra; it is on record. Your point is??
That run could've had a duel role - keeping fit and search for their daughter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 24, 2020, 06:23:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 24, 2020, 10:00:19 AM
Do you have a cite for that please?
Kate Mccann’s book, chapter 6.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 24, 2020, 06:38:33 PM
Quote from: The General on February 24, 2020, 07:50:23 AM
Prosaic, but not helpful. These lights, were they coming or going? And what's the significance?
To me, the significance is the following: Casa Colina and Freud; Freud befriending the McCann’s, Freud’s actress wife, Jill in Praia da Luz on 3 May 2007, Freud exposed, Epstein, Maxwell etc.
My interest is in Danie Krugel. Gerry phoned him 70 days after Madeleine’s disappearance. He went to Praia da Luz with his ‘device’. This device has since been patented and recognised in the USA and 18 other countries. He had many families find the truth about their relatives’ burial place in SA. There is a recent article in a local newspaper, “Maroela Media” where he vows to go back to Praia da Luz because according to him, Madeleine’s ‘location’ has not changed. His search area includes the stretch where Casa Colina is. I’ll upload the photo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 24, 2020, 06:44:42 PM
Danie Krugel.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 24, 2020, 06:50:19 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 24, 2020, 06:44:42 PM
Danie Krugel.
I'm right behind you with this one - and the photo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 24, 2020, 07:06:04 PM
Quote from: The General on February 24, 2020, 06:50:19 PM
I'm right behind you with this one - and the photo.
Your emphasis is on the jogging towards the Rocha Negra, Kate’s dream?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 24, 2020, 07:11:26 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 24, 2020, 06:38:33 PM
To me, the significance is the following: Casa Colina and Freud; Freud befriending the McCann’s, Freud’s actress wife, Jill in Praia da Luz on 3 May 2007, Freud exposed, Epstein, Maxwell etc.
My interest is in Danie Krugel. Gerry phoned him 70 days after Madeleine’s disappearance. He went to Praia da Luz with his ‘device’. This device has since been patented and recognised in the USA and 18 other countries. He had many families find the truth about their relatives’ burial place in SA. There is a recent article in a local newspaper, “Maroela Media” where he vows to go back to Praia da Luz because according to him, Madeleine’s ‘location’ has not changed. His search area includes the stretch where Casa Colina is. I’ll upload the photo.

I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong but I believe that Kate and Gerry's acceptance of Danie Krugel's offer of help was claimed by Amaral to have been one of the first things to raise PJ suspicions against them.

Which totally failed to take account of the fact that as well as claiming to be able to find dead people, Krugel also claimed to have helped many families to trace missing relatives who were very much alive.
Which is what motivated Kate and Gerry to use him ... if Madeleine was alive ~ they desperately wanted to have her found.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 24, 2020, 07:12:33 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 24, 2020, 07:06:04 PM
Your emphasis is on the jogging towards the Rocha Negra, Kate’s dream?
Yes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 24, 2020, 07:20:00 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 24, 2020, 07:11:26 PM
I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong but I believe that Kate and Gerry's acceptance of Danie Krugel's offer of help was claimed by Amaral to have been one of the first things to raise PJ suspicions against them.

Which totally failed to take account of the fact that as well as claiming to be able to find dead people, Krugel also claimed to have helped many families to trace missing relatives who were very much alive.
Which is what motivated Kate and Gerry to use him ... if Madeleine was alive ~ they desperately wanted to have her found.
Yes, Brietta. Krugel indirectly mobilised the dogs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 24, 2020, 07:35:00 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 24, 2020, 07:20:00 PM
Yes, Brietta. Krugel indirectly mobilised the dogs.
Mark Harrison thought Krugel's machine was dope.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 24, 2020, 10:13:17 PM

https://www.portugalresident.com/judicial-uproar-as-investigation-suggests-system-of-allocating-cases-is-rigged-and-open-to-corruption/


Judicial uproar as investigation suggests system of allocating cases is rigged, and open to corruption
By Natasha Donn -24th February 2020
 
Judges at Lisbon’s Court of Appeal are in an embarrassing spotlight this week as a journalistic investigation suggests the way cases are allocated has been manipulated, so that specific judges get specific cases – and can then deal with them in a specific way. The story came to light against the backdrop of a tabloid, absolved of wrong-doing in a lower court, then ‘condemned’ in the Court of Appeal.

The paper, Correio da Manhã (the country’s best selling tabloid) was then later found ‘not guilty’ once again by the Supreme Court, and the ‘judge’ it had ostensibly wronged was ordered to pay damages.

The judge in question was Rui Rangel, currently banned from presiding over a courtroom following an investigation into corruption within the world of football (Operation Lex click here).

It is now widely inferred that Rangel was aided by the former president of the Court of Appeal Luís Vaz Neves, and at least one other judge (possibly two) as well as a court clerk.

Damning evidence was leaked to TVI24 (television station) via Europol, claims the station, which published a purported text-conversation between Rangel and Vaz Neves, in which the former asked the latter to ‘control the situation’ regarding the allocation of the Correio da Manhã case.

Says Expresso, the judges’ syndicate and Portugal’s Law Society have asked for an ‘urgent review’ and ‘assurances’ on the way cases are distributed to judges at Lisbon’s Court of Appeal.

Judges told the paper: “Citizens cannot have doubts on the impartiality of their courts nor on the integrity of those who work in them”.

===================================================

Rui Rangel, pictured with Goncalo Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 24, 2020, 10:28:32 PM
A lady from an apartment across Rua Dr Gentil Martins, overlooking our little side gate, came over to speak to us. She said that the previous night she had seen a car going up the Rocha Negra – the black, volcanic cliff that dominates the village. There was a track leading to the Rocha Negra but nobody remembered ever having noticed any vehicle that far up in the daytime, let alone at night. This immediately conjured visions of Madeleine being disposed of somewhere on the overhanging cliff. I went to tell one of the police officers who was able to speak a little English. He was quite dismissive. It would have been one of the GNR men checking the area, he said. [madeleine]

What time was the car seen?
If it was on the track it had climbed to the top, leaving the road. Is that what the woman said, rather than 'going up'?
Who was asked about cars in the daytime?
Why did Kate 'immediately' think of Madeleine being disposed of on the cliff?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 24, 2020, 10:35:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 24, 2020, 10:28:32 PM
A lady from an apartment across Rua Dr Gentil Martins, overlooking our little side gate, came over to speak to us. She said that the previous night she had seen a car going up the Rocha Negra – the black, volcanic cliff that dominates the village. There was a track leading to the Rocha Negra but nobody remembered ever having noticed any vehicle that far up in the daytime, let alone at night. This immediately conjured visions of Madeleine being disposed of somewhere on the overhanging cliff. I went to tell one of the police officers who was able to speak a little English. He was quite dismissive. It would have been one of the GNR men checking the area, he said. [madeleine]

What time was the car seen?
If it was on the track it had climbed to the top, leaving the road. Is that what the woman said, rather than 'going up'?
Who was asked about cars in the daytime?
Why did Kate 'immediately' think of Madeleine being disposed of on the cliff?
Why wouldn’t she?  She was convinced her daughter had been abducted. Children that are abducted by strangers often end up dead. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 24, 2020, 10:39:28 PM
Quote from: misty on February 24, 2020, 10:13:17 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/judicial-uproar-as-investigation-suggests-system-of-allocating-cases-is-rigged-and-open-to-corruption/


Judicial uproar as investigation suggests system of allocating cases is rigged, and open to corruption
By Natasha Donn -24th February 2020
 
Judges at Lisbon’s Court of Appeal are in an embarrassing spotlight this week as a journalistic investigation suggests the way cases are allocated has been manipulated, so that specific judges get specific cases – and can then deal with them in a specific way. The story came to light against the backdrop of a tabloid, absolved of wrong-doing in a lower court, then ‘condemned’ in the Court of Appeal.

The paper, Correio da Manhã (the country’s best selling tabloid) was then later found ‘not guilty’ once again by the Supreme Court, and the ‘judge’ it had ostensibly wronged was ordered to pay damages.

The judge in question was Rui Rangel, currently banned from presiding over a courtroom following an investigation into corruption within the world of football (Operation Lex click here).

It is now widely inferred that Rangel was aided by the former president of the Court of Appeal Luís Vaz Neves, and at least one other judge (possibly two) as well as a court clerk.

Damning evidence was leaked to TVI24 (television station) via Europol, claims the station, which published a purported text-conversation between Rangel and Vaz Neves, in which the former asked the latter to ‘control the situation’ regarding the allocation of the Correio da Manhã case.

Says Expresso, the judges’ syndicate and Portugal’s Law Society have asked for an ‘urgent review’ and ‘assurances’ on the way cases are distributed to judges at Lisbon’s Court of Appeal.

Judges told the paper: “Citizens cannot have doubts on the impartiality of their courts nor on the integrity of those who work in them”.

===================================================

Rui Rangel, pictured with Goncalo Amaral.

I have long suspected this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 24, 2020, 10:56:28 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 24, 2020, 10:39:28 PM
I have long suspected this.
There are some rotten apples who have tainted Portuguese judicial & political systems.
A Portuguese case decision in ECHR is due to be published this week. Part of it relates to the Appeal Court overturning a "cleared" verdict in the lower criminal court.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 24, 2020, 11:02:56 PM
Quote from: misty on February 24, 2020, 10:13:17 PM
https://www.portugalresident.com/judicial-uproar-as-investigation-suggests-system-of-allocating-cases-is-rigged-and-open-to-corruption/


Judicial uproar as investigation suggests system of allocating cases is rigged, and open to corruption
By Natasha Donn -24th February 2020
 
Judges at Lisbon’s Court of Appeal are in an embarrassing spotlight this week as a journalistic investigation suggests the way cases are allocated has been manipulated, so that specific judges get specific cases – and can then deal with them in a specific way. The story came to light against the backdrop of a tabloid, absolved of wrong-doing in a lower court, then ‘condemned’ in the Court of Appeal.

The paper, Correio da Manhã (the country’s best selling tabloid) was then later found ‘not guilty’ once again by the Supreme Court, and the ‘judge’ it had ostensibly wronged was ordered to pay damages.

The judge in question was Rui Rangel, currently banned from presiding over a courtroom following an investigation into corruption within the world of football (Operation Lex click here).

It is now widely inferred that Rangel was aided by the former president of the Court of Appeal Luís Vaz Neves, and at least one other judge (possibly two) as well as a court clerk.

Damning evidence was leaked to TVI24 (television station) via Europol, claims the station, which published a purported text-conversation between Rangel and Vaz Neves, in which the former asked the latter to ‘control the situation’ regarding the allocation of the Correio da Manhã case.

Says Expresso, the judges’ syndicate and Portugal’s Law Society have asked for an ‘urgent review’ and ‘assurances’ on the way cases are distributed to judges at Lisbon’s Court of Appeal.

Judges told the paper: “Citizens cannot have doubts on the impartiality of their courts nor on the integrity of those who work in them”.

===================================================

Rui Rangel, pictured with Goncalo Amaral.
Shonky AF.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 24, 2020, 11:03:39 PM
Quote from: misty on February 24, 2020, 10:56:28 PM
There are some rotten apples who have tainted Portuguese judicial & political systems.
A Portuguese case decision in ECHR is due to be published this week. Part of it relates to the Appeal Court overturning a "cleared" verdict in the lower criminal court.

I believe that this all stems from The Glorious Revolution.  Old School Judges overturning original decisions of younger Judges in an attempt to prevent change.
It has been happening for far too long.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 24, 2020, 11:28:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 24, 2020, 11:03:39 PM
I believe that this all stems from The Glorious Revolution.  Old School Judges overturning original decisions of younger Judges in an attempt to prevent change.
It has been happening for far too long.

The irony of the latest ECHR case against the State is that the State charged a man for illegally recording evidence, yet it had already used this same evidence to help convict another person. I don't know if that's the way they used to serve justice pre-Revolution.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 24, 2020, 11:35:54 PM
Quote from: misty on February 24, 2020, 11:28:30 PM
The irony of the latest ECHR case against the State is that the State charged a man for illegally recording evidence, yet it had already used this same evidence to help convict another person. I don't know if that's the way they used to serve justice pre-Revolution.

Whatever suited or suits their agenda.  They seem to support The Police all too readily, regardless of evidence.

Pre Revolution most cases were decided before they even went to court.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 25, 2020, 12:28:49 AM

This is what happened in The Cipriano Case and why Leonor got an extra six months when she couldn't identify the PJ Officers who beat her up.  And what happened to The McCanns.

But try saying something unpleasant about a Judge or a Police Officer or a member of the Ruling Classes and then see what happens.

I undertand Portuguese Justice only too well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 25, 2020, 10:13:29 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 25, 2020, 12:28:49 AM
This is what happened in The Cipriano Case and why Leonor got an extra six months when she couldn't identify the PJ Officers who beat her up.  And what happened to The McCanns.

But try saying something unpleasant about a Judge or a Police Officer or a member of the Ruling Classes and then see what happens.

I undertand Portuguese Justice only too well.
Libel?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 25, 2020, 10:38:06 AM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 10:13:29 AM
Libel?

No it is not ... I am making allowances for the fact that some have difficulty differentiating.

Leonor Cipriano was penalised by having her sentence added to exactly for the reason Eleanor has stated.  I know that is impossible for most right thinking people to take in but it is fact.

There is also the law in Portugal designed to protect those in any sort of public office from being 'defamed' by Joe Public.  Nope I do not have a cite.  Nope I do not know what the law is called.  It is a fact though so anyone with an interest can look it up for themselves, I'm sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 25, 2020, 10:39:27 AM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 10:13:29 AM
Libel?

I don't think so.  It is on record that Leonor Cipriano was given a further six months in prison for failing to identify her attackers.  Despite The Court agreeing that she was beaten up in Police Custody.  And despite having a bag over her head at the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 25, 2020, 10:41:34 AM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 10:13:29 AM
Libel?

As I understand you can only libel individual officers..not the police force. The court ruled she was beaten whilst in custody so there's no doubt she was beaten by the PJ
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 25, 2020, 11:06:39 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 25, 2020, 10:41:34 AM
As I understand you can only libel individual officers..not the police force. The court ruled she was beaten whilst in custody so there's no doubt she was beaten by the PJ

It's nice to know that some conclusions reached by the Portuguese courts are accepted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 25, 2020, 11:17:15 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 25, 2020, 11:06:39 AM
It's nice to know that some conclusions reached by the Portuguese courts are accepted.

Fat lot of good that did her.  The PJ beat her up but it's her fault she didn't know by whom.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 25, 2020, 11:50:52 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 25, 2020, 10:41:34 AM
As I understand you can only libel individual officers..not the police force. The court ruled she was beaten whilst in custody so there's no doubt she was beaten by the PJ
Cite please. That would be a decent read.

Also, point out the bit where it specifically states that, during this period of incarceration, she was:
1. definitely beaten up and that;
2. it was perpetrated by PJ officers.

Please. DAVEL.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 25, 2020, 12:31:49 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 11:50:52 AM
Cite please. That would be a decent read.

Also, point out the bit where it specifically states that, during this period of incarceration, she was:
1. definitely beaten up and that;
2. it was perpetrated by PJ officers.

Please. DAVEL.

http://home.iscte-iul.pt/~apad/ACED_juristas/maddietrab_ficheiros/Acordao%20Leonor%20Cipriano%20contra%20Goncalo%20e%20outros.%2022Maio2009.pdf

You can run the whole document through Google Translate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 25, 2020, 12:33:35 PM
Quote from: misty on February 25, 2020, 12:31:49 PM
http://home.iscte-iul.pt/~apad/ACED_juristas/maddietrab_ficheiros/Acordao%20Leonor%20Cipriano%20contra%20Goncalo%20e%20outros.%2022Maio2009.pdf

You can run the whole document through Google Translate.
Be a darling and run it through for me, my dear old fruit.

Joking. Thanks for that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 25, 2020, 12:47:41 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 11:50:52 AM
Cite please. That would be a decent read.

Also, point out the bit where it specifically states that, during this period of incarceration, she was:
1. definitely beaten up and that;
2. it was perpetrated by PJ officers.

Please. DAVEL.

ill have alook at that PDF...ive read it befoe and will see if I can pull out the salient points....but we have already...

The PJ officers claimed in court that ciprianos injuries were caused when she threw herself down the stairs at the station..fact

What that does is place them at the scene when the injuries happened...fact

Injuries are not consistent with sucha fall....fact according to medical evidence...

Judge rules she was beaten in custody bt cant show which officers did it...fact

So the officers who saw her fall down the stairs either did it or know who did it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 25, 2020, 12:51:37 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 25, 2020, 12:47:41 PM
ill have alook at that PDF...ive read it befoe and will see if I can pull out the salient points....but we have already...

The PJ officers claimed in court that ciprianos injuries were caused when she threw herself down the stairs at the station..fact

What that does is place them at the scene when the injuries happened...fact

Injuries are not consistent with sucha fall....fact according to medical evidence...

Judge rules she was beaten in custody bt cant show which officers did it...fact

So the officers who saw her fall down the stairs either did it or know who did it
Cheers. So was she held in isolation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 25, 2020, 01:44:56 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 12:51:37 PM
Cheers. So was she held in isolation?

The officers said they saw her fall down the stairs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 25, 2020, 01:53:49 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 25, 2020, 01:44:56 PM
The officers said they saw her fall down the stairs
Was she held in general population or isolation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 25, 2020, 01:56:59 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 01:53:49 PM
Was she held in general population or isolation?

Why is that important
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 25, 2020, 02:23:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 25, 2020, 01:56:59 PM
Why is that important
Was there a window of opportunity for inmates to intervene? If it were the case, then it's not inconceivable that the officers alleged the fall down the stairs to cover for their apparent negligence, or for 'looking the other way'. [Insert 'yeh, because they're happy to perjure themselves at every turn, etc, below]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 25, 2020, 02:38:16 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 02:23:27 PM
Was there a window of opportunity for inmates to intervene? If it were the case, then it's not inconceivable that the officers alleged the fall down the stairs to cover for their apparent negligence, or for 'looking the other way'. [Insert 'yeh, because they're happy to perjure themselves at every turn, etc, below]

have you been on that mescaline again
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 25, 2020, 02:40:55 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 02:23:27 PM
Was there a window of opportunity for inmates to intervene? If it were the case, then it's not inconceivable that the officers alleged the fall down the stairs to cover for their apparent negligence, or for 'looking the other way'. [Insert 'yeh, because they're happy to perjure themselves at every turn, etc, below]

Leonor was in Portimao police station and had just left the interview room when the injuries were sustained.
There was no lawyer present. There was no record of Leonor having arrived at the police station with injuries. 2 officers reported to Amaral (he was in the building awaiting information about a freezer) that Leonor had tried to throw herself down the stairs & she'd sustained injuries.  No inmates were present or involved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 25, 2020, 02:46:15 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 25, 2020, 02:38:16 PM
have you been on that mescaline again
Not since 'the event'.
But you see the point? If there's 'opportunity', then anything could have occurred.
If I was a police officer learning of the apparent fate of Joana from the horses mouth, then I would be on a fag break while the other inmates mingled. And I don't smoke. Or take breaks.
Or she could have fell down the stairs.
Or both.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 25, 2020, 03:01:08 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 02:46:15 PM
Not since 'the event'.
But you see the point? If there's 'opportunity', then anything could have occurred.
If I was a police officer learning of the apparent fate of Joana from the horses mouth, then I would be on a fag break while the other inmates mingled. And I don't smoke. Or take breaks.
Or she could have fell down the stairs.
Or both.

Perhaps Cipriano was a trained MMA fighter and decide to take on six PJ...she was getting the better of them do they used reasonable force to disable her...they could never admit this so came up with the stair theory...what do you think
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 25, 2020, 03:09:48 PM
I reckon she punched herself in the face.  Police don't ever doff up those in their custody as The General will be the first to confirm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 25, 2020, 03:13:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 25, 2020, 03:09:48 PM
I reckon she punched herself in the face.  Police don't ever doff up those in their custody as The General will be the first to confirm.
Could be. But usually, if there's stairs available and they've given you a slap about, they'll proceed to throw you down them. For rigour.
Not me personally. I received a delightful breakfast of bacon on toast and a cup of tea the following morning.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 25, 2020, 04:25:13 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 03:13:55 PM
Could be. But usually, if there's stairs available and they've given you a slap about, they'll proceed to throw you down them. For rigour.
Not me personally. I received a delightful breakfast of bacon on toast and a cup of tea the following morning.
And the police never laid a finger on you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 25, 2020, 05:00:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 25, 2020, 04:25:13 PM
And the police never laid a finger on you?
Only the preceding evening. There were no stairs, alas.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 25, 2020, 05:51:41 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 05:00:58 PM
Only the preceding evening. There were no stairs, alas.
Right, so why are you so keen to make out that JC was harmed by other inmates or inflicted the injuries on herself?  Why do you seemingly disregard the possibility of Portuguese police brutality even though that was the judgement of the courts?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 25, 2020, 07:55:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 25, 2020, 05:51:41 PM
Right, so why are you so keen to make out that JC was harmed by other inmates or inflicted the injuries on herself?  Why do you seemingly disregard the possibility of Portuguese police brutality even though that was the judgement of the courts?

Another one accepting the findings of a Portuguese court. That's a refreshing change.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 25, 2020, 08:12:31 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 25, 2020, 05:51:41 PM
Right, so why are you so keen to make out that JC was harmed by other inmates or inflicted the injuries on herself?  Why do you seemingly disregard the possibility of Portuguese police brutality even though that was the judgement of the courts?
Whhhooaa sister / brother. You've jumped again. It's an example. Is it definitive that she was beaten by the police? Was there a window of opportunity, serendipitous or created, whereby enraged inmates could have a pop?
It is equally possible that the PJ could have battered her. Do you see?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 25, 2020, 08:22:38 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 08:12:31 PM
Whhhooaa sister / brother. You've jumped again. It's an example. Is it definitive that she was beaten by the police? Was there a window of opportunity, serendipitous or created, whereby enraged inmates could have a pop?
It is equally possible that the PJ could have battered her. Do you see?

You haven't read that judgement I posted, have you?
Please see my post #7768 with a very brief summary.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 25, 2020, 08:25:42 PM
Quote from: misty on February 25, 2020, 08:22:38 PM
You haven't read that judgement I posted, have you?
Please see my post #7768 with a very brief summary.
Yes.
No.
Of course I did. But hadn't it occurred to you that, if you wanted to give her a good hiding, but didn't want to physically do it yourself, given the, you know, murder of her child and all that, how would you report it as a policeman without implicating inmates?
Come on guys, think laterally.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 25, 2020, 08:58:42 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 08:25:42 PM
Yes.
No.
Of course I did. But hadn't it occurred to you that, if you wanted to give her a good hiding, but didn't want to physically do it yourself, given the, you know, murder of her child and all that, how would you report it as a policeman without implicating inmates?
Come on guys, think laterally.

Lateral thinking involves believing Leonor threw herself down the stairs to bring injuries caused by fellow inmates to the attention of PJ....except she didn't arrive (for the second time that day & without a lawyer) at the police HQ with big black swollen eyes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 25, 2020, 09:00:09 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 08:12:31 PM
Whhhooaa sister / brother. You've jumped again. It's an example. Is it definitive that she was beaten by the police? Was there a window of opportunity, serendipitous or created, whereby enraged inmates could have a pop?
It is equally possible that the PJ could have battered her. Do you see?
is it definitive that Leonor Cipriano was involved in the death of her daughter? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 25, 2020, 09:19:44 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 25, 2020, 09:00:09 PM
is it definitive that Leonor Cipriano was involved in the death of her daughter?
Not sure what bearing it has on this particular conversation, but for me, yes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 25, 2020, 09:27:23 PM
Quote from: misty on February 25, 2020, 08:58:42 PM
Lateral thinking involves believing Leonor threw herself down the stairs to bring injuries caused by fellow inmates to the attention of PJ....except she didn't arrive (for the second time that day & without a lawyer) at the police HQ with big black swollen eyes.
Perhaps you mis-read my post.
PJ take her in. PJ go for lunch. PJ conveniently leave an adjoining door open. PJ come back. PJ find Leonor getting filled in by inmates. PJ state 'she threw herself down the stairs' so inmates don't get the blame and there's no evidence on PJ.
You can happily rearrange the sequence with the PJ filling her in if you like. My point is either are possible given the atmosphere that must have been prevailing when word got round that she is in the building.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 25, 2020, 09:54:44 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 09:19:44 PM
Not sure what bearing it has on this particular conversation, but for me, yes.
So you completely trust one court verdict seemingly unquestioningly but doubt another for what reasons especially?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 25, 2020, 10:17:05 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 09:27:23 PM
Perhaps you mis-read my post.
PJ take her in. PJ go for lunch. PJ conveniently leave an adjoining door open. PJ come back. PJ find Leonor getting filled in by inmates. PJ state 'she threw herself down the stairs' so inmates don't get the blame and there's no evidence on PJ.
You can happily rearrange the sequence with the PJ filling her in if you like. My point is either are possible given the atmosphere that must have been prevailing when word got round that she is in the building.

Shall I set the scene for you?
It was approaching the witching hour one late October night in Faro police station. Goncalo Amaral was sereenly awaiting for news from his officers regarding an appropriately-sized freezer at the Cipriano residence. There were no escapees secretly raiding the vast drinks' cabinets.
Leonor had been brought back to the station 4 hours after having been returned to Odemira prison. Her (alleged) previous confession to PJ officers, admitting to killing Joana by dubious methods, left a lot to be desired. PJ needed to speak with her again "lest Joana still be alive" (somewhere in a pig pen).
Leonor was interrogated by Cristovao*, a PJ Inspector well-versed in child trafficking & various forms of thuggery.
She needed a bathroom break & was accompanied by 2 other PJ officers to the restroom.....

*Cristovao sentenced twice in the last decade for various forms of corruption, kidnapping, armed robbery etc for 4.5 & 7.5 years yet remains a free man.

None of the people who tortured Leonor could be identified due to falsification of reports. Meanwhile, the victim had additional time added to her custodial sentence. I'm don't think that anyone should ever accept the court judgement was a delivery of justice.


*Edited to correct name of police station
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 25, 2020, 11:02:07 PM
Quote from: misty on February 25, 2020, 10:17:05 PM
Shall I set the scene for you?
It was approaching the witching hour one late October night in Portimao police station. Goncalo Amaral was sereenly awaiting for news from his officers regarding an appropriately-sized freezer at the Cipriano residence. There were no escapees secretly raiding the vast drinks' cabinets.
Leonor had been brought back to the station 4 hours after having been returned to Odemira prison. Her (alleged) previous confession to PJ officers, admitting to killing Joana by dubious methods, left a lot to be desired. PJ needed to speak with her again "lest Joana still be alive" (somewhere in a pig pen).
Leonor was interrogated by Cristovao*, a PJ Inspector well-versed in child trafficking & various forms of thuggery.
She needed a bathroom break & was accompanied by 2 other PJ officers to the restroom.....

*Cristovao sentenced twice in the last decade for various forms of corruption, kidnapping, armed robbery etc for 4.5 & 7.5 years yet remains a free man.

None of the people who tortured Leonor could be identified due to falsification of reports. Meanwhile, the victim had additional time added to her custodial sentence. I'm don't think that anyone should ever accept the court judgement was a delivery of justice.

There is nothing alleged about it.  She told police that she had accidentally killed Joana in an attempt to protect her delinquent brother.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 25, 2020, 11:07:51 PM
Quote from: The General on February 25, 2020, 09:27:23 PM
Perhaps you mis-read my post.
PJ take her in. PJ go for lunch. PJ conveniently leave an adjoining door open. PJ come back. PJ find Leonor getting filled in by inmates. PJ state 'she threw herself down the stairs' so inmates don't get the blame and there's no evidence on PJ.
You can happily rearrange the sequence with the PJ filling her in if you like. My point is either are possible given the atmosphere that must have been prevailing when word got round that she is in the building.

I believe the alleged throwing herself down steps incident and the torture incident are unconnected.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 26, 2020, 07:15:39 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 25, 2020, 11:02:07 PM
There is nothing alleged about it.  She told police that she had accidentally killed Joana in an attempt to protect her delinquent brother.

I think she's innocent as it seems do many Portuguese
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 26, 2020, 07:16:50 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 25, 2020, 11:07:51 PM
I believe the alleged throwing herself down steps incident and the torture incident are unconnected.

The stairs are the PJ's explanation for her injuries...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 26, 2020, 07:24:58 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 26, 2020, 07:15:39 AM
I think she's innocent as it seems do many Portuguese
Cite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 26, 2020, 07:53:09 AM
Quote from: The General on February 26, 2020, 07:24:58 AM
Cite.

MST : Let me ask you a question, do you think that in this country many people believes that Leonor Cipriano killed her daughter ?
GA : I think so.
MST : Very few people, Gonçalo Amaral, very few people.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7483.msg348878#msg348878
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 26, 2020, 08:22:24 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 26, 2020, 07:53:09 AM
MST : Let me ask you a question, do you think that in this country many people believes that Leonor Cipriano killed her daughter ?
GA : I think so.
MST : Very few people, Gonçalo Amaral, very few people.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7483.msg348878#msg348878
You're quoting a guy's opinion. That's not an acceptable cite. Might even be poorly translated. Where's the sauce?
I need numbers of these 'many Portuguese'.
Or retract.
Whichever.

Nah, just kidding. I don't care. That quote will do. Thank you. We can all use this as the gold standard of cites from here on in. Members can refer back to your reply and use it as the now eroded standard of an acceptable cite.
Henceforth this new standard will be called: The Many Portuguese Test.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 26, 2020, 08:49:26 AM
Quote from: The General on February 26, 2020, 08:22:24 AM
You're quoting a guy's opinion. That's not an acceptable cite. Might even be poorly translated. Where's the sauce?
I need numbers of these 'many Portuguese'.
Or retract.
Whichever.

Nah, just kidding. I don't care. That quote will do. Thank you. We can all use this as the gold standard of cites from here on in. Members can refer back to your reply and use it as the now eroded standard of an acceptable cite.
Henceforth this new standard will be called: The Many Portuguese Test.
As Davel used the word “seems” I think his cite is perfectly acceptable.  I “seem” to remember that there was an opinion poll carried out in Portugal on this subject many years ago and overwhelmingly people in Portugal felt this case had been a miscarriage of justice.  Now you can pooh-pooh my post.  Give it your best shot, try and make me feel completely worthless too while you’re at it.  Cheers a lot. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 26, 2020, 09:01:57 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 26, 2020, 08:49:26 AM
As Davel used the word “seems” I think his cite is perfectly acceptable.  I “seem” to remember that there was an opinion poll carried out in Portugal on this subject many years ago and overwhelmingly people in Portugal felt this case had been a miscarriage of justice.  Now you can pooh-pooh my post.  Give it your best shot, try and make me feel completely worthless too while you’re at it.  Cheers a lot.
I'm self-moderating, so I will refrain and not take up your offer. 'Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you' - some philosopher dude (I'm not calling anyone a monster - it's analogous and metaphorical)

Let's all have a pleasant day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 26, 2020, 09:21:33 AM
Quote from: The General on February 26, 2020, 09:01:57 AM
I'm self-moderating, so I will refrain and not take up your offer. 'Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you' - some philosopher dude (I'm not calling anyone a monster - it's analogous and metaphorical)

Let's all have a pleasant day.
I like..

Don't wrestle with pigs .. you'll get dirty...but the pigs like it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 26, 2020, 09:22:29 AM
I am what I am...not as others see me..
Just made that up now
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 26, 2020, 09:46:02 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 26, 2020, 08:49:26 AM
As Davel used the word “seems” I think his cite is perfectly acceptable.  I “seem” to remember that there was an opinion poll carried out in Portugal on this subject many years ago and overwhelmingly people in Portugal felt this case had been a miscarriage of justice.  Now you can pooh-pooh my post.  Give it your best shot, try and make me feel completely worthless too while you’re at it.  Cheers a lot.

I seem to remember opinion polls in both Portugal and the UK where the majority of respondents thought the McCanns were guilty. Opinion polls, eh....... 8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 26, 2020, 09:50:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 26, 2020, 09:46:02 AM
I seem to remember opinion polls in both Portugal and the UK where the majority of respondents thought the McCanns were guilty. Opinion polls, eh....... 8(>((

Cite...you seem to have a poor understanding of statistics.
Opinion polls carried out on forums such as CMOMM are not   representative of the general public.

I haven't seen any a valid opinion polls...so provide a cite
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 26, 2020, 09:58:11 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 26, 2020, 09:46:02 AM
I seem to remember opinion polls in both Portugal and the UK where the majority of respondents thought the McCanns were guilty. Opinion polls, eh....... 8(>((
Thanks for your input, I knew I could rely on someone to point out the obvious.   8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 26, 2020, 12:21:09 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 26, 2020, 09:50:48 AM
Cite...you seem to have a poor understanding of statistics.
Opinion polls carried out on forums such as CMOMM are not   representative of the general public.

I haven't seen any a valid opinion polls...so provide a cite

Q2. Do you consider Maddie's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, guilty over their daughter's disappearance?

Portugal Yes: 77.5%
No: 22.3%
Don’t know/No reply: 0.2%

United Kingdom Yes: 44.6%
No: 38.4%
Don’t know/No reply: 17%

Yes: 61%*
McCanns guilty

Q3. Do you think that Maddie was abducted?

Portugal Yes: 25.3%
No: 74.4%
Don’t know/No reply: 0.3%

United Kingdom Yes: 72.9%
No: 11.3%
Don’t know/No reply: 15.8%

Yes: 49%*
She was abducted

Q4. Do you think the child is alive or dead?

Portugal Alive: 12.2%
Dead: 77.0%
Don’t know/No reply: 10.8%

United Kingdom Alive: 36.7%
Dead: 47.1%
Don’t know/No reply: 16.2%

Yes: 24.5%*
She is alive

Q5. In your opinion, even if they were not directly involved in their daughter's death, do you think that Kate and Gerry are responsible for her death, or not?

Portugal Yes: 89.6%
No: 6.6%
Don’t know/No reply: 3.8%

United Kingdom Yes: 54.9%
No: 34.3%
Don’t know/No reply: 10.7%

Yes: 72%*
They are responsible

Q6. In your opinion, is the McCann couple hiding something?

Portugal Yes: 78.3%
No: 9.7%
Don’t know/No reply: 12.2%

United Kingdom Yes: 26.1%
No: 61.6%
Don’t know/No reply: 12.3%

Yes: 52%*
They are hiding

Q7. Do you think that Madeleine's parents should be penalised or not?

Portugal Yes: 70.4%
No: 16.6%
Don’t know/No reply: 13.0%

United Kingdom Yes: 28.6%
No: 65.4%
Don’t know/No reply: 6.0%

Yes: 50%*
Penalised

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/maddie-mccann-case-international-poll-by-focus-03--t24236.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 26, 2020, 12:52:06 PM
Interesting that even back in 2008 a quarter of Portuguese believed Madeleine HAD been abducted.  That's quite a lot, more than I would have thought.  Good for them, clearly not everyone was brainwashed by the media and Gonc's attempts to portray the McCanns as the culprits. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 26, 2020, 12:58:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 26, 2020, 12:21:09 PM
Q2. Do you consider Maddie's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, guilty over their daughter's disappearance?

Portugal Yes: 77.5%
No: 22.3%
Don’t know/No reply: 0.2%

United Kingdom Yes: 44.6%
No: 38.4%
Don’t know/No reply: 17%

Yes: 61%*
McCanns guilty

Q3. Do you think that Maddie was abducted?

Portugal Yes: 25.3%
No: 74.4%
Don’t know/No reply: 0.3%

United Kingdom Yes: 72.9%
No: 11.3%
Don’t know/No reply: 15.8%

Yes: 49%*
She was abducted

Q4. Do you think the child is alive or dead?

Portugal Alive: 12.2%
Dead: 77.0%
Don’t know/No reply: 10.8%

United Kingdom Alive: 36.7%
Dead: 47.1%
Don’t know/No reply: 16.2%

Yes: 24.5%*
She is alive

Q5. In your opinion, even if they were not directly involved in their daughter's death, do you think that Kate and Gerry are responsible for her death, or not?

Portugal Yes: 89.6%
No: 6.6%
Don’t know/No reply: 3.8%

United Kingdom Yes: 54.9%
No: 34.3%
Don’t know/No reply: 10.7%

Yes: 72%*
They are responsible

Q6. In your opinion, is the McCann couple hiding something?

Portugal Yes: 78.3%
No: 9.7%
Don’t know/No reply: 12.2%

United Kingdom Yes: 26.1%
No: 61.6%
Don’t know/No reply: 12.3%

Yes: 52%*
They are hiding

Q7. Do you think that Madeleine's parents should be penalised or not?

Portugal Yes: 70.4%
No: 16.6%
Don’t know/No reply: 13.0%

United Kingdom Yes: 28.6%
No: 65.4%
Don’t know/No reply: 6.0%

Yes: 50%*
Penalised

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/maddie-mccann-case-international-poll-by-focus-03--t24236.html

Guilty of what
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 26, 2020, 01:19:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 26, 2020, 12:58:33 PM
Guilty of what
That was a quick edit. Don't blame ya.
Who cares what guilty. You got your cite. At least now you have seen some opinion polls.

Have a pleasant day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 26, 2020, 01:23:12 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 26, 2020, 12:52:06 PM
Interesting that even back in 2008 a quarter of Portuguese believed Madeleine HAD been abducted.  That's quite a lot, more than I would have thought.  Good for them, clearly not everyone was brainwashed by the media and Gonc's attempts to portray the McCanns as the culprits.
Indeed. 25% is quite a lot, most surprising. It also validates the poll as relatively robust, as you alluded to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 26, 2020, 01:30:36 PM
Quote from: The General on February 26, 2020, 01:19:45 PM
That was a quick edit. Don't blame ya.
Who cares what guilty. You got your cite. At least now you have seen some opinion polls.

Have a pleasant day.

72.9 % of UK pollsters think Maddie was abducted...I think that's about right ..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 26, 2020, 01:56:07 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 26, 2020, 01:30:36 PM
72.9 % of UK pollsters think Maddie was abducted...I think that's about right ..
Probably a good indicator of the concerted press campaign the McCann's launched to find their daughter.
Again, at least it's robust and we're all referencing the figures.
It would appear that perhaps, for a change, Amaral didn't have his finger on the pulse of Portuguese public opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 26, 2020, 02:31:41 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 26, 2020, 01:30:36 PM
72.9 % of UK pollsters think Maddie was abducted...I think that's about right ..

I'm not a fan of opinion polls, but at least this one revealed some details. It was a CATI telephone survey and the questions were posed to people of both sexes aged between 18 and 64 with a landline telephone.

In the UK 612 people responded so in August 2008 approx. 450 people thought Madeleine McCann was abducted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 26, 2020, 02:45:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 26, 2020, 02:31:41 PM
I'm not a fan of opinion polls, but at least this one revealed some details. It was a CATI telephone survey and the questions were posed to people of both sexes aged between 18 and 64 with a landline telephone.

In the UK 612 people responded so in August 2008 approx. 450 people thought Madeleine McCann was abducted.

Thats right..72.9%...thats quite a high figure...only around 10% thought she wasn't...no figure for woke and wandered.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 26, 2020, 03:28:43 PM
Quote from: The General on February 26, 2020, 01:56:07 PM
Probably a good indicator of the concerted press campaign the McCann's launched to find their daughter.
Again, at least it's robust and we're all referencing the figures.
It would appear that perhaps, for a change, Amaral didn't have his finger on the pulse of Portuguese public opinion.
what have the uk public's views got to do with Amaral not having his finger on Portuguese public opinion?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 26, 2020, 03:52:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 26, 2020, 03:28:43 PM
what have the uk public's views got to do with Amaral not having his finger on Portuguese public opinion?
It doesn't. It sounded good in my head. The voices. Dunno, it was hours ago.

Have a pleasant remainder of the day and evening.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 26, 2020, 03:54:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 26, 2020, 02:45:23 PM
Thats right..72.9%...thats quite a high figure...only around 10% thought she wasn't...no figure for woke and wandered.
Maybe because that wasn't one of the questions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 26, 2020, 03:59:20 PM
Quote from: The General on February 26, 2020, 03:52:40 PM
It doesn't. It sounded good in my head. The voices. Dunno, it was hours ago.

Have a pleasant remainder of the day and evening.
You're sarky little epithets are becoming somewhat tiresome now.  I think I preferred the turgid tirades.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 26, 2020, 04:04:05 PM
Quote from: The General on February 26, 2020, 03:54:52 PM
Maybe because that wasn't one of the questions.

That's precisely why there's no figure for it..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 26, 2020, 04:49:33 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 26, 2020, 03:59:20 PM
You're sarky little epithets are becoming somewhat tiresome now.  I think I preferred the turgid tirades.
Please accept my apologies. No offence was intended.
And it's 'your'.

Have a great evening.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 26, 2020, 04:52:58 PM
Quote from: The General on February 26, 2020, 04:49:33 PM
Please accept my apologies. No offence was intended.
And it's 'your'.

Have a great evening.
Thanks, I hope you do too.  In fact I don’t just hope, I am praying for it.  God Bless you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 26, 2020, 05:14:04 PM
Quote from: The General on February 26, 2020, 04:49:33 PM
Please accept my apologies. No offence was intended.
And it's 'your'.

Have a great evening.

We do not ever criticise the grammar of any member's comments, accidental or otherwise.

Please do not do this again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: puglove on February 26, 2020, 05:14:43 PM
Quote from: The General on February 26, 2020, 03:52:40 PM
It doesn't. It sounded good in my head. The voices. Dunno, it was hours ago.

Have a pleasant remainder of the day and evening.

General. Please never leave the battlefield.


 8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 26, 2020, 06:12:23 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 26, 2020, 05:14:04 PM
We do not ever criticise the grammar of any member's comments, accidental or otherwise.

Please do not do this again.
I don’t mind that, I find bad grammar very annoying too, especially when I’ve made the mistake.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 26, 2020, 06:15:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 26, 2020, 06:12:23 PM
I don’t mind that, I find bad grammar very annoying too, especially when I’ve made the mistake.

That you should have been so fortunate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 26, 2020, 06:35:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 26, 2020, 06:12:23 PM
I don’t mind that, I find bad grammar very annoying too, especially when I’ve made the mistake.

How about amusing? Poking fun at the perpetrator?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 26, 2020, 06:52:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 26, 2020, 06:35:53 PM
How about amusing? Poking fun at the perpetrator?

There is no need to elucidate.  This is not going to be a matter for discussion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 28, 2020, 02:41:46 PM
Latest tranche has been asked for apparently.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11047514/madeleine-mccann-cops-cash-12m/


MADDIE HOPE Madeleine McCann cops request more cash for £12m hunt as parents hail ‘iron will determination’ to find her

Today a Home Office spokesperson told The Sun Online: “We have received details of the Metropolitan Police Service’s anticipated spending for Operation Grange in 2020/21.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 02:58:13 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 28, 2020, 02:41:46 PM
Latest tranche has been asked for apparently.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11047514/madeleine-mccann-cops-cash-12m/


MADDIE HOPE Madeleine McCann cops request more cash for £12m hunt as parents hail ‘iron will determination’ to find her

Today a Home Office spokesperson told The Sun Online: “We have received details of the Metropolitan Police Service’s anticipated spending for Operation Grange in 2020/21.

And what can they possibly have done with all this funding, past and present, if not for surveillance of an alive and well MM with her abductor(s)?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 03:05:28 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 02:58:13 PM
And what can they possibly have done with all this funding, past and present, if not for surveillance of an alive and well MM with her abductor(s)?

This gives some idea of the surveillance costs associated with JA:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.met.police.uk/SysSiteAssets/foi-media/metropolitan-police/disclosure_2017/november_2017/counter-terrorism-command---overall-cost-to-the-mps-to-place-julian-assange-under-surveillance&ved=2ahUKEwi85PfrwfTnAhWSZxUIHTrDDCoQFjAMegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw1qJoOMFWaYNkMEc5CFt1Hv
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 28, 2020, 03:07:26 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 02:58:13 PM
And what can they possibly have done with all this funding, past and present, if not for surveillance of an alive and well MM with her abductor(s)?

Rowley in 2017 said we have no definitive evidence if the girl was dead or alive,who do you think they have surveillance of.Recent reports of visits to Luz doesn't support this imo. Mitchell also says this of the visit by detectives recently. in Luz.

Mr Mitchell, speaking exclusively to The Sun Online, said: “It is as much about Scotland Yard ruling people out rather than ruling them in. Interviews are only taking place that are necessary.”


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 28, 2020, 03:11:01 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 02:58:13 PM
And what can they possibly have done with all this funding, past and present, if not for surveillance of an alive and well MM with her abductor(s)?

30+ officers translating and sifting through 40,000 pages from the first investigation,the digs in Luz didn't come cheap.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 28, 2020, 03:16:53 PM

Quote from: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 02:58:13 PM
And what can they possibly have done with all this funding, past and present, if not for surveillance of an alive and well MM with her abductor(s)?

Quote from: barrier on February 28, 2020, 03:11:01 PM
30+ officers translating and sifting through 40,000 pages from the first investigation,the digs in Luz didn't come cheap.

This from 2016.

Up to 81 former officers were on the Met payroll as part of the failed £12.1million hunt for the missing child

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/scotland-yard-used-ex-police-7112764
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 05:07:14 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 28, 2020, 03:07:26 PM
Rowley in 2017 said we have no definitive evidence if the girl was dead or alive,who do you think they have surveillance of.Recent reports of visits to Luz doesn't support this imo. Mitchell also says this of the visit by detectives recently. in Luz.

Mr Mitchell, speaking exclusively to The Sun Online, said: “It is as much about Scotland Yard ruling people out rather than ruling them in. Interviews are only taking place that are necessary.”

But we're now 2020 and if she has been found alive and well and under round the clock surveillance I'm assuming only a select few will be in the know which might not include CM.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 05:09:06 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 28, 2020, 03:11:01 PM
30+ officers translating and sifting through 40,000 pages from the first investigation,the digs in Luz didn't come cheap.

But hopefully all the translating and associated costs were dealt with in year 1 of the investigation ie 2015.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 05:10:55 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 28, 2020, 03:16:53 PM
This from 2016.

Up to 81 former officers were on the Met payroll as part of the failed £12.1million hunt for the missing child

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/scotland-yard-used-ex-police-7112764

But that's 2016 we're 4 years on and the tabloids are unlikely to know what's going on. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 28, 2020, 05:46:36 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 05:10:55 PM
But that's 2016 we're 4 years on and the tabloids are unlikely to know what's going on.

Quite,Rowley 2017:There are odd headlines and odd stories in newspapers on a regular basis and most of those are
nonsense.

But I was on about funding in response to your wondering what the money is being spent on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 06:40:42 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 28, 2020, 05:46:36 PM
Quite,Rowley 2017:There are odd headlines and odd stories in newspapers on a regular basis and most of those are
nonsense.

But I was on about funding in response to your wondering what the money is being spent on.

Well what do you think its being spent on 7 years down the line if not an alive and well MM under round the clock surveillance? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 28, 2020, 07:26:54 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 06:40:42 PM
Well what do you think its being spent on 7 years down the line if not an alive and well MM under round the clock surveillance?

My thoughts exactly. Surely there is good/valid reason for more funding. What if Madeleine’s disappearance is the impetus of exposing something much bigger?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 28, 2020, 07:27:52 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 06:40:42 PM
Well what do you think its being spent on 7 years down the line if not an alive and well MM under round the clock surveillance?
I've done this. Twice. They're on a skeleton crew of 4 of varying rank merely keeping the lights on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 28, 2020, 07:36:54 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 06:40:42 PM
Well what do you think its being spent on 7 years down the line if not an alive and well MM under round the clock surveillance?

So you think interviewing a bar woman is Luz is connected to surveillance,seriously?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 28, 2020, 08:07:38 PM
Quote from: The General on February 28, 2020, 07:27:52 PM
I've done this. Twice. They're on a skeleton crew of 4 of varying rank merely keeping the lights on.
Where I’m from, the UK police force is highly respected.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 28, 2020, 08:11:18 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 28, 2020, 08:07:38 PM
Where I’m from, the UK police force is highly respected.
I mean the cost of the police in relation to the most recent additional funds.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 28, 2020, 08:23:27 PM
Quote from: The General on February 28, 2020, 08:11:18 PM
I mean the cost of the police in relation to the most recent additional funds.
I do get that. If I were a taxpayer in your country, I would be asking many questions. Somehow, I think there might be much more to Madeleine’s disappearance. No conspiracy or ‘overactive imagination’, as I have been labelled.
Not by you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2020, 08:47:44 PM
Quote from: The General on February 28, 2020, 07:27:52 PM
I've done this. Twice. They're on a skeleton crew of 4 of varying rank merely keeping the lights on.
You know nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 28, 2020, 09:16:21 PM
Both our Yorkies were killed by a puff adder on our lawn. Ten days ago. We had much needed rainfall. And, living in a Wildlife Estate, it is inevitable that snakes roam. Just wanted to share. Our hearts are not as before. But we will face the day of tomorrow,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 28, 2020, 09:36:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2020, 08:47:44 PM
You know nothing.
Davel?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: puglove on February 28, 2020, 09:38:42 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 28, 2020, 09:16:21 PM
Both our Yorkies were killed by a puff adder on our lawn. Ten days ago. We had much needed rainfall. And, living in a Wildlife Estate, it is inevitable that snakes roam. Just wanted to share. Our hearts are not as before. But we will face the day of tomorrow,

What a terrible shock for you. I'm so sorry.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 28, 2020, 10:03:06 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 28, 2020, 09:16:21 PM
Both our Yorkies were killed by a puff adder on our lawn. Ten days ago. We had much needed rainfall. And, living in a Wildlife Estate, it is inevitable that snakes roam. Just wanted to share. Our hearts are not as before. But we will face the day of tomorrow,

You will miss them, Anthro.  Feisty wee dogs.
The best I can think of to say is at least you and the family are unscathed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on February 28, 2020, 10:20:22 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 28, 2020, 09:16:21 PM
Both our Yorkies were killed by a puff adder on our lawn. Ten days ago. We had much needed rainfall. And, living in a Wildlife Estate, it is inevitable that snakes roam. Just wanted to share. Our hearts are not as before. But we will face the day of tomorrow,

Sorry to hear this.
Losing a pet is very  upsetting.x
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2020, 10:40:35 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 28, 2020, 09:16:21 PM
Both our Yorkies were killed by a puff adder on our lawn. Ten days ago. We had much needed rainfall. And, living in a Wildlife Estate, it is inevitable that snakes roam. Just wanted to share. Our hearts are not as before. But we will face the day of tomorrow,
How upsetting, So sorry to hear this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2020, 10:41:12 PM
Quote from: The General on February 28, 2020, 09:36:54 PM
Davel?
Yes, I am Davel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 28, 2020, 11:26:45 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 28, 2020, 09:16:21 PM
Both our Yorkies were killed by a puff adder on our lawn. Ten days ago. We had much needed rainfall. And, living in a Wildlife Estate, it is inevitable that snakes roam. Just wanted to share. Our hearts are not as before. But we will face the day of tomorrow,

I just don't know what to say; how terrible for you all...and for the wee doggies.     We grow to love our animals, especially family dogs, in such a deep way ... and what a traumatic thing to happen to you all.  Do hope that you and the children are recovering as well as is possible.


Too many dangers and traumas around there.   
Please please be careful ... have been reading and puff adders can blend into the scenery almost seamlessly ... so many dangers around.    Please leave there and come home to somewhere safer


Thinking of you, Anthro, and sharing your families grief.

(((HUGS)))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 28, 2020, 11:34:59 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 28, 2020, 07:26:54 PM
My thoughts exactly. Surely there is good/valid reason for more funding. What if Madeleine’s disappearance is the impetus of exposing something much bigger?

Exactly what I am thinking. 

I doubt any police force will completely manage it, but TRY and round them ALL up
... and crush the organisations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 28, 2020, 11:43:17 PM
Quote from: sadie on February 28, 2020, 11:34:59 PM
Exactly what I am thinking. 

I doubt any police force will completely manage it, but TRY and round them ALL up
... and crush the organisations.

I think it is obvious that something big is going on.  Scotland Yard wouldn't be making the request for more funding to keep it going if they didn't have good reason for doing so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on February 29, 2020, 07:20:12 AM
Quote from: The General on February 28, 2020, 07:27:52 PM
I've done this. Twice. They're on a skeleton crew of 4 of varying rank merely keeping the lights on.

Can you provide a breakdown of funding per year, thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on February 29, 2020, 07:24:19 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 28, 2020, 07:36:54 PM
So you think interviewing a bar woman is Luz is connected to surveillance,seriously?
Seriously, where have I mentioned a bar woman in Luz being interviewed let alone connected to surveillance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 29, 2020, 08:26:15 AM

Quote from: Holly Goodhead on February 29, 2020, 07:24:19 AM
Seriously, where have I mentioned a bar woman in Luz being interviewed let alone connected to surveillance?
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on February 28, 2020, 06:40:42 PM
Well what do you think its being spent on 7 years down the line if not an alive and well MM under round the clock surveillance?

You mentioned surveillance,I'm asking why would an interview of a bar woman be linked to any surveillance operation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on February 29, 2020, 08:59:30 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 29, 2020, 08:26:15 AM
You mentioned surveillance,I'm asking why would an interview of a bar woman be linked to any surveillance operation?

Where have I said it would?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 29, 2020, 09:02:47 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on February 29, 2020, 07:20:12 AM
Can you provide a breakdown of funding per year, thanks.

Scroll down for figures up to 2017,the last two yrs were broadly inline with 2017.



https://www.met.police.uk/SysSiteAssets/foi-media/metropolitan-police/disclosure_2018/january_2018/information-rights-unit---total-cost-of-operation-grange
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 29, 2020, 09:28:06 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 28, 2020, 11:43:17 PM
I think it is obvious that something big is going on.  Scotland Yard wouldn't be making the request for more funding to keep it going if they didn't have good reason for doing so.

Maybe keeping it going, no matter how minimally, is preferable to calling a halt and admitting defeat.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 29, 2020, 09:42:07 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 29, 2020, 09:28:06 AM
Maybe keeping it going, no matter how minimally, is preferable to calling a halt and admitting defeat.

Pure speculation from you....I think its likely they still have investigative leads that are well worth investigating.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 29, 2020, 10:15:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 29, 2020, 09:28:06 AM
Maybe keeping it going, no matter how minimally, is preferable to calling a halt and admitting defeat.

It'll all come out in the wash,maybe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 29, 2020, 10:23:49 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 29, 2020, 09:42:07 AM
Pure speculation from you....I think its likely they still have investigative leads that are well worth investigating.

Which is pure speculation from you too.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 29, 2020, 10:31:45 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 29, 2020, 09:28:06 AM
Maybe keeping it going, no matter how minimally, is preferable to calling a halt and admitting defeat.

You really don't give the police much credit do you?

It is not a question of "admitting defeat".  It is a question of following the evidence until it runs out and it is patently obvious by the request for continued funding, that stage has not yet been reached as far as Madeleine's case is concerned.

Perhaps if the Portuguese authorities as detailed by Amaral had not to all intents and purposes given up on Madeleine in the aftermath of of her disappearance ... and officially "admitting defeat" a very few months later when they archived her case ... we wouldn't be having this conversation today.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on February 29, 2020, 10:35:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 29, 2020, 10:23:49 AM
Which is pure speculation from you too.  @)(++(*

Do you believe that evidence of the continuing investigation is presented when extra funding is asked for or that money is given to the investigation without any requirement to present evidence of any progress being made?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 29, 2020, 10:41:45 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 29, 2020, 10:23:49 AM
Which is pure speculation from you too.  @)(++(*

It is.   ...but I thought you didn't do speculation and claim to be open minded...but your post is typical sceptic rhetoric..so it tells us something
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 29, 2020, 10:43:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 29, 2020, 10:23:49 AM
Which is pure speculation from you too.  @)(++(*

There is certainly more evidence for it than your puerile notion that the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance has degenerated into some macho face saving exercise of "admitting defeat".

Today's Judicial Police haven't thrown in the towel as yet.

Scotland Yard haven't either despite the constraints placed upon them for justifying each round of funding to the politicians whose budget is financing the search for Madeleine and for Justice.

If the police are still working the case it strongly suggests they have intelligence and evidence which enables them to do so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 29, 2020, 11:02:03 AM
Quote from: puglove on February 28, 2020, 09:38:42 PM
What a terrible shock for you. I'm so sorry.
Thank you.x
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 29, 2020, 11:03:08 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 28, 2020, 10:03:06 PM
You will miss them, Anthro.  Feisty wee dogs.
The best I can think of to say is at least you and the family are unscathed.
Thank you, Brietta.x
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 29, 2020, 11:04:06 AM
Quote from: Erngath on February 28, 2020, 10:20:22 PM
Sorry to hear this.
Losing a pet is very  upsetting.x
Thank you, Erngath.x
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 29, 2020, 11:04:59 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2020, 10:40:35 PM
How upsetting, So sorry to hear this.
Thank you, Vertigo Swirl.x
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 29, 2020, 11:06:44 AM
Quote from: sadie on February 28, 2020, 11:26:45 PM
I just don't know what to say; how terrible for you all...and for the wee doggies.     We grow to love our animals, especially family dogs, in such a deep way ... and what a traumatic thing to happen to you all.  Do hope that you and the children are recovering as well as is possible.


Too many dangers and traumas around there.   
Please please be careful ... have been reading and puff adders can blend into the scenery almost seamlessly ... so many dangers around.    Please leave there and come home to somewhere safer


Thinking of you, Anthro, and sharing your families grief.

(((HUGS)))
Thank you for your words, dear Sadie.xx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on February 29, 2020, 11:31:51 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 29, 2020, 09:02:47 AM
Scroll down for figures up to 2017,the last two yrs were broadly inline with 2017.



https://www.met.police.uk/SysSiteAssets/foi-media/metropolitan-police/disclosure_2018/january_2018/information-rights-unit---total-cost-of-operation-grange

Thanks.  Does anyone know the figs for 2018 and 2019?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 29, 2020, 11:55:51 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on February 29, 2020, 11:31:51 AM
Thanks.  Does anyone know the figs for 2018 and 2019?

This talks of 6 months,so going by that £150,000 x 2 +£300,000 per year.


https://www.met.police.uk/SysSiteAssets/foi-media/metropolitan-police/disclosure_2019/february_2019/information-rights-unit---further-home-office-funding-for-operation-grange


June last year,which covers until this March.

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/local-news/madeleine-mccann-missing-home-office-2945711


Home Office explains why it's given another £300k to Madeleine McCann hunt


An application had been made by the Metropolitan Police Service for a further £300,000 to keep the investigation going until the end of March 2020.

Today the Home Office confirmed the investigation would get "similar" funding to last financial year, when it got £300,000.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 29, 2020, 01:19:10 PM

With that sort of money SY could pay the reduced staff and have a healthy chunk left over to pay people on the ground for surveillance.

That's what I think they are doing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 29, 2020, 03:09:56 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 29, 2020, 08:26:15 AM
You mentioned surveillance,I'm asking why would an interview of a bar woman be linked to any surveillance operation?
Scotland Yard have said that they are not going to give a running commentary on the investigation into Madeleine's case and I don't think anyone has the temerity to ask anything of the Judicial Police.

That someone felt it necessary to go to the tabloids when there is so much at stake makes it I think a high price to pay for fifteen minutes of fame which gives people like me the license to ponder why the police looked under the bed of the girlfriend mentioned and why her non-hypothetical freezer was anecdotally checked out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 03:38:21 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 29, 2020, 10:43:58 AM
There is certainly more evidence for it than your puerile notion that the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance has degenerated into some macho face saving exercise of "admitting defeat".

Today's Judicial Police haven't thrown in the towel as yet.

Scotland Yard haven't either despite the constraints placed upon them for justifying each round of funding to the politicians whose budget is financing the search for Madeleine and for Justice.

If the police are still working the case it strongly suggests they have intelligence and evidence which enables them to do so.



You don't know what's happening  - best wait to see if they do get more funding IMO.

So you don't know whether they have thrown the towel in or not - we have to wait and see.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 29, 2020, 03:41:45 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 03:38:21 PM


You don't know what's happening  - best wait to see if they do get more funding IMO.

So you don't know whether they have thrown the towel in or not - we have to wait and see.

Doesn't that apply to gunits post...and posts by other sceptics ...lol
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 03:57:16 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 29, 2020, 03:41:45 PM
Doesn't that apply to gunits post...and posts by other sceptics ...lol



Not at all - it depends on whether they get more funding quite possibly they won't.

The lol is  - they are getting nowhere 4 people at a desk its a joke.IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 29, 2020, 04:00:47 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 03:57:16 PM


Not at all - it depends on whether they get more funding quite possibly they won't.

The lol is  - they are getting nowhere 4 people at a desk its a joke.IMO

You say they are getting nowhere...how do you know.
All these negative comments are a joke imo.
Shouldn't you take your own advice and wait and see what happens.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 04:06:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 29, 2020, 04:00:47 PM
You say they are getting nowhere...how do you know.
All these negative comments are a joke imo.
Shouldn't you take your own advice and wait and see what happens.



Oh lol - I know as much as you then D nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 29, 2020, 04:30:45 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 04:06:04 PM


Oh lol - I know as much as you then D nothing.
You may know nothing so best just speak for yourself
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 04:38:47 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 29, 2020, 04:30:45 PM
You may know nothing so best just speak for yourself



Oi, don't tell. me what to do - bit arrogant D.

you are no different to me - apart from what we believe happened.

I don't know what happened - and neither do you.

Anything you claim to know -  is only your opinion

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 29, 2020, 04:46:54 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 04:38:47 PM


Oi, don't tell. me what to do - bit arrogant D.

you are no different to me - apart from what we believe happened.

I don't know what happened - and neither do you.

Anything you claim to know -  is only your opinion
You have admitted you know nothing...thats up to you. Theres quite a lot of evidence from which i can draw some conclusions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 04:51:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 29, 2020, 04:46:54 PM
You have admitted you know nothing...thats up to you. Theres quite a lot of evidence from which i can draw some conclusions.



Yes exactly the same as me.

like the conclusion of no evidence of an abduction.

IMO your conclusion - is only speculation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 29, 2020, 04:56:18 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 04:51:50 PM


Yes exactly the same as me.

like the conclusion of no evidence of an abduction.

IMO your conclusion - is only speculation.

there is evidence of abduction...but you have to understand what evidence means
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 05:02:39 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 29, 2020, 04:56:18 PM
there is evidence of abduction...but you have to understand what evidence means



You understand the evidence lol you say it enough times D

So what is it that proves -  Maddie was abducted what is the evidence you understand
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 29, 2020, 05:04:34 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 05:02:39 PM


You understand the evidence lol you say it enough times D

So what is it that proves -  Maddie was abducted what is the evidence you understand

You obvioulsy havent understood what I have said...I havent mentioned proof.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 05:21:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 29, 2020, 05:04:34 PM
You obvioulsy havent understood what I have said...I havent mentioned proof.


probably because you haven't any.

Or there isn't any that Maddie was abducted - is what I meant to say D
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 29, 2020, 06:14:09 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 03:57:16 PM


Not at all - it depends on whether they get more funding quite possibly they won't.

The lol is  - they are getting nowhere 4 people at a desk its a joke.IMO
They’ve done more than sit at a desk if the last report in the Mirror is anything to go by.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 29, 2020, 07:03:56 PM
I think the fact that there are only 4 dedicated persons at Operation Grange working on Madeleine’s case, is irrelevant. I also think that because of all the publicity and public outcry over funding, taxpayers’ money etc, many aspects related to the investigation are covert. It might be that the FBI, Interpol etc. have been involved in recent years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 29, 2020, 07:39:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 29, 2020, 06:14:09 PM
They’ve done more than sit at a desk if the last report in the Mirror is anything to go by.

Looking under beds, inside freezers & scoping out old hippies via Facebook.
High-tec stuff.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 29, 2020, 07:56:03 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 29, 2020, 07:39:49 PM
Looking under beds, inside freezers & scoping out old hippies via Facebook.
High-tec stuff.
I keep forgetting you’re regularly briefed by the Met on what Op Grange are up to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 29, 2020, 08:37:11 PM
I do understand that Krugel’s device is dismissed and rubbished by many. I do not know him personally, but we live in the same city, a couple of km’s apart. When you look at the area that he suggested Madeleine could have been, it includes Casa Colina. Krugel has assisted many in South Africa by pointing out where their deceased are. He also investigated a high-profile case (in the 80’s) i.e the Van Rooyen girls. Six girls were held captive by him and his female companion, Joey, never to be found. He pointed to an area where human bones were found and police investigated. He also identified a site nearby, where police said they are not going to investigate. In Madeleine’s case, Krugel says that the area which he had demarcated was only searched partially by the PJ. Their focus was on the beach, and not beyond.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 29, 2020, 08:46:46 PM
Quote from: Erngath on February 29, 2020, 10:35:41 AM
Do you believe that evidence of the continuing investigation is presented when extra funding is asked for or that money is given to the investigation without any requirement to present evidence of any progress being made?

I think I read somewhere that the money is forthcoming if Op Grange say they need it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 29, 2020, 09:12:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 29, 2020, 08:46:46 PM
I think I read somewhere that the money is forthcoming if Op Grange say they need it.

This so-called Operation Grange investigation is one almighty farce in my book.  Seems nobody has the balls to say enough is enough.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on February 29, 2020, 10:25:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 29, 2020, 08:46:46 PM
I think I read somewhere that the money is forthcoming if Op Grange say they need it.

Where did you read that ?.
Do you believe that Operation Grange only have  to ask for more money and and it will be granted?
No questions asked, no updated report of progress submitted ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 29, 2020, 11:17:56 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 29, 2020, 09:12:46 PM
This so-called Operation Grange investigation is one almighty farce in my book.  Seems nobody has the balls to say enough is enough.
What about the Portuguese investigation - is that a farce too?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 01, 2020, 01:41:31 AM
Quote from: kizzy on February 29, 2020, 03:57:16 PM


Not at all - it depends on whether they get more funding quite possibly they won't.

The lol is  - they are getting nowhere 4 people at a desk its a joke.IMO

Ah, but maybe other investigations have spawned off the Madeleine investigation.  Maybe other SY teams are working on them?   We just don't know, do we?

Could it be that other teams are working on other aspects thrown up by OG's investigations?   I could suggest several possibles, such as

1) an investigation into the other children missing in PT, which tend to follow a pattern, imo

2)  an investigation into smuggling globally

3)  an investigation into the cannabis trade because of the Rif Mountains connections to Malenbeek St John in Brussels to Leh in the Himalayas ... all places where sightings of Madeleine took place



i.  In the Rif Mountains they grow most of the hemp in the world.  Hemp is processed into cannabis, crack, hashish etc.

ii   The processing is done at Molenbeek St John, before sending on via 'safe' routes globally.

iii.  It is then forwarded to places like Leh, other Indian places, and globally elsewhere     Almost all the hashish smoked in India comes in via Leh, way up in the Himalayas.


4)  an investigation into the abuse by Catholic priests  etc etc



Much better to have a seperate team to Operation Grange for any such investigation, imo.  At least a new unknown team would not be being pestered all the time by timewasters, like Bennet seems to be, imo.

All the above is only my thoughts, but it could account for time spent looking

And I know that it might be wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 01, 2020, 07:11:27 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 29, 2020, 09:12:46 PM
This so-called Operation Grange investigation is one almighty farce in my book.  Seems nobody has the balls to say enough is enough.
Next year when Madeleine would be 18 and her ward of court ends,the state will have no responsibility then.That's when it ends imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 01, 2020, 07:47:34 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 29, 2020, 09:12:46 PM
This so-called Operation Grange investigation is one almighty farce in my book.  Seems nobody has the balls to say enough is enough.

I think you've got it back to front...in my book it was the initial investigation that was a farce
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 01, 2020, 08:59:29 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 01, 2020, 07:11:27 AM
Next year when Madeleine would be 18 and her ward of court ends,the state will have no responsibility then.That's when it ends imo.

Certainly there ill be no excuse for this alleged surveillance after that date  -  IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 09:33:19 AM
Quote from: jassi on March 01, 2020, 08:59:29 AM
Certainly there ill be no excuse for this alleged surveillance after that date  -  IMO

This could depend on whether or not Madeleine knows who she is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 01, 2020, 09:49:00 AM
Quote from: sadie on March 01, 2020, 01:41:31 AM
Ah, but maybe other investigations have spawned off the Madeleine investigation.  Maybe other SY teams are working on them?   We just don't know, do we?

Could it be that other teams are working on other aspects thrown up by OG's investigations?   I could suggest several possibles, such as

1) an investigation into the other children missing in PT, which tend to follow a pattern, imo

2)  an investigation into smuggling globally

3)  an investigation into the cannabis trade because of the Rif Mountains connections to Malenbeek St John in Brussels to Leh in the Himalayas ... all places where sightings of Madeleine took place



i.  In the Rif Mountains they grow most of the hemp in the world.  Hemp is processed into cannabis, crack, hashish etc.

ii   The processing is done at Molenbeek St John, before sending on via 'safe' routes globally.

iii.  It is then forwarded to places like Leh, other Indian places, and globally elsewhere     Almost all the hashish smoked in India comes in via Leh, way up in the Himalayas.


4)  an investigation into the abuse by Catholic priests  etc etc



Much better to have a seperate team to Operation Grange for any such investigation, imo.  At least a new unknown team would not be being pestered all the time by timewasters, like Bennet seems to be, imo.

All the above is only my thoughts, but it could account for time spent looking

And I know that it might be wrong.

False assumptions are a sign of a lazy researcher imo.

Hemp is a relative of cannabis, but it can't be made into cannabis because it lacks the THC which makes cannabis psychoactive. The country which grows most of it is China, followed by Canada and the USA. The USA is number one for growing cannabis or marijuana, with Morroco second.

Crack is made from cocaine, which comes from the leaves of a plant called coca.

Hashish is made from the resin of the cannabis plant. This is done by the growers; exporting the harvested plants to Belgium to be dried and to extract the resin would be crazy and noticeable.

Hemp is grown all over, even in Yorkshire, although farmers need a licence to farm it. Strangely, no licence is needed to grow opium poppies in the UK, although they are what heroin comes from.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 01, 2020, 10:02:09 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 01, 2020, 09:49:00 AM
False assumptions are a sign of a lazy researcher imo.

Hemp is a relative of cannabis, but it can't be made into cannabis because it lacks the THC which makes cannabis psychoactive. The country which grows most of it is China, followed by Canada and the USA. The USA is number one for growing cannabis or marijuana, with Morroco second.

Crack is made from cocaine, which comes from the leaves of a plant called coca.

Hashish is made from the resin of the cannabis plant. This is done by the growers; exporting the harvested plants to Belgium to be dried and to extract the resin would be crazy and noticeable.

Hemp is grown all over, even in Yorkshire, although farmers need a licence to farm it. Strangely, no licence is needed to grow opium poppies in the UK, although they are what heroin comes from.

So it's not surprising that opium poppies are now cultivated on about 8,000 acres of arable land in Britain.

its easy to grow cannabis for personal use and theres a lot grown in the UK....some legal. I undersatnd Theresa May's husband is on e of the biggest producers.

growing poppys takes a lot more space so i doubt if its posssible for individuals to grow enough poppies...perhapsyou could spend the rest of your day doing some proper research....i'm off to Wembley
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 01, 2020, 10:17:17 AM
Quote from: Erngath on February 29, 2020, 10:25:28 PM
Where did you read that ?.
Do you believe that Operation Grange only have  to ask for more money and and it will be granted?
No questions asked, no updated report of progress submitted ?

When considering special grants applications, the Home Office does not take a view on whether an investigation should continue, which would be an operational matter for the police.
https://homeofficemedia.blog.gov.uk/2019/06/05/home-office-update-on-funding-for-operation-grange/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 01, 2020, 10:25:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 01, 2020, 10:17:17 AM
When considering special grants applications, the Home Office does not take a view on whether an investigation should continue, which would be an operational matter for the police.
https://homeofficemedia.blog.gov.uk/2019/06/05/home-office-update-on-funding-for-operation-grange/

Also the money does not get approved until later in the year,seems as if OG continues with  a assurance of funding,with out even knowing whats a foot.

All applications for Special Grant funding are considered carefully on their individual merits, however, decisions are made in batches to allow us to better consider the impact on the overall policing budget.
Due to this, the next round of Special Grant funding will not be decided until October, however we have written to Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime in the meantime with assurance that the MPS will receive a similar level of funding for Operation Grange for 2019/20 as it did for the previous year.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 01, 2020, 10:28:55 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 09:33:19 AM
This could depend on whether or not Madeleine knows who she is.

Why would that have any bearing on surveillance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 01, 2020, 10:31:59 AM
Quote from: jassi on March 01, 2020, 08:59:29 AM
Certainly there ill be no excuse for this alleged surveillance after that date  -  IMO

What other police operation is known to announce we're applying for funding,recently the investigation into Stuart Lubbocks murder made the news,no mention of funding,Suzi lamplugh case had two digs last year,no mention of funding,tis a strange one to be sure.

Lets play the surveillance nonsense,those who supposedly hold Madeleine are one supposes not of lower intelligence,these person's are not unaware of the continuance of OG,one whiff of alleged surveillance they'd be off like a shot.Yeah right,we've got your back girl.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 10:52:46 AM
Quote from: jassi on March 01, 2020, 10:28:55 AM
Why would that have any bearing on surveillance?

Who knows where Madeleine might decide to go.  They wouldn't want to lose track of her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 01, 2020, 10:59:37 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 10:52:46 AM
Who knows where Madeleine might decide to go.  They wouldn't want to lose track of her.

Imo all track of her was lost on the night of 3/05/2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 01, 2020, 11:01:53 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 10:52:46 AM
Who knows where Madeleine might decide to go.  They wouldn't want to lose track of her.

You think that is the job of British police once she has reached 18 ?

What about when she is 25 or even 45 ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 11:48:44 AM
Quote from: jassi on March 01, 2020, 11:01:53 AM
You think that is the job of British police once she has reached 18 ?

What about when she is 25 or even 45 ?

Working in conjunction with Portugal, yes.  And it is a British Citizen that we are talking about.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 01, 2020, 11:50:12 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 11:48:44 AM
Working in conjunction with Portugal, yes.  And it is a British Citizen that we are talking about.

Are you seriously suggesting that authorities will be interested indefinitely ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 11:57:45 AM
Quote from: jassi on March 01, 2020, 11:50:12 AM
Are you seriously suggesting that authorities will be interested indefinitely ?

Are you seriously suggesting that there is a need for me to answer that question?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 01, 2020, 12:00:43 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 11:57:45 AM
Are you seriously suggesting that there is a need for me to answer that question?

Of course. Why do you think it a credible thought process ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on March 01, 2020, 12:01:11 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 01, 2020, 10:31:59 AM
What other police operation is known to announce we're applying for funding,recently the investigation into Stuart Lubbocks murder made the news,no mention of funding,Suzi lamplugh case had two digs last year,no mention of funding,tis a strange one to be sure.

Lets play the surveillance nonsense,those who supposedly hold Madeleine are one supposes not of lower intelligence,these person's are not unaware of the continuance of OG,one whiff of alleged surveillance they'd be off like a shot.Yeah right,we've got your back girl.

Those cases you mention necessitated a UK police investigation and as they took place on British soil it's a matter for the authorities.

In the case of MM the case didn't take place on British soil and of course the media and public expect the authorities to account for taxpayer funds.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 12:04:53 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 01, 2020, 12:00:43 PM
Of course. Why do you think it a credible thought process ?

Please don't play Semantics with me.  You aren't very good at it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 01, 2020, 12:08:01 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on March 01, 2020, 12:01:11 PM
Those cases you mention necessitated a UK police investigation and as they took place on British soil it's a matter for the authorities.

In the case of MM the case didn't take place on British soil and of course the media and public expect the authorities to account for taxpayer funds.

Do they,apart from Mr Bennett who ask's of OG? the media are only page filling,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 01, 2020, 12:10:12 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 01, 2020, 10:02:09 AM
So it's not surprising that opium poppies are now cultivated on about 8,000 acres of arable land in Britain.

its easy to grow cannabis for personal use and theres a lot grown in the UK....some legal. I undersatnd Theresa May's husband is on e of the biggest producers.

growing poppys takes a lot more space so i doubt if its posssible for individuals to grow enough poppies...perhapsyou could spend the rest of your day doing some proper research....i'm off to Wembley

Could you provide a cite re Mr May please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on March 01, 2020, 12:15:04 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 29, 2020, 07:03:56 PM
I think the fact that there are only 4 dedicated persons at Operation Grange working on Madeleine’s case, is irrelevant. I also think that because of all the publicity and public outcry over funding, taxpayers’ money etc, many aspects related to the investigation are covert. It might be that the FBI, Interpol etc. have been involved in recent years.

How can it be evidenced for a fact 4 officers are currently dedicated to the case? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 01, 2020, 12:22:53 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on March 01, 2020, 12:15:04 PM
How can it be evidenced for a fact 4 officers are currently dedicated to the case?

Difficult. It was stated by Rowley that there were only 4 back in 2016. It could well be less by now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on March 01, 2020, 12:24:55 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 01, 2020, 12:08:01 PM
Do they,apart from Mr Bennett who ask's of OG? the media are only page filling,

Well Afaik the MM case is unique in terms of Brit police getting involved in a case/investigation/crime that took place outside UK?

Did Brit police get involved in the case of BN when it happened or shortly afterwards? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 01, 2020, 12:26:07 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 01, 2020, 12:22:53 PM
Difficult. It was stated by Rowley that there were only 4 back in 2016. It could well be less by now.

Exactly, funding maybe for only one officer now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 01, 2020, 12:29:35 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on March 01, 2020, 12:15:04 PM
How can it be evidenced for a fact 4 officers are currently dedicated to the case?

Recently on bbc 2,murder 24/7, teams of officers,going over cctv,phone data, witness statements,just what do 4 officers now do? its all been done before,save all of a sudden its announced just a few days before funding rear's its head, SY have been out in Portugal interviewing a barmaid.Join the dots.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on March 01, 2020, 12:31:32 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 01, 2020, 12:26:07 PM
Exactly, funding maybe for only one officer now.

I thought funds requested last/this year amounted to 300k?

A quick look at salaries would suggest 300k would cover 3 DC'S and 1 DS plus some 100k surplus.  This might fit with surveillance, overtime, accomm and travel. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 01, 2020, 12:33:52 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 01, 2020, 12:29:35 PM
Recently on bbc 2,murder 24/7, teams of officers,going over cctv,phone data, witness statements,just what do 4 officers now do? its all been done before,save all of a sudden its announced just a few days before funding rear's its head, SY have been out in Portugal interviewing a barmaid.Join the dots.
Who do you think they should have been interviewing- someone who describes their profession as paedo child abductor? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on March 01, 2020, 12:34:30 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 01, 2020, 12:29:35 PM
Recently on bbc 2,murder 24/7, teams of officers,going over cctv,phone data, witness statements,just what do 4 officers now do? its all been done before,save all of a sudden its announced just a few days before funding rear's its head, SY have been out in Portugal interviewing a barmaid.Join the dots.

But the tabloids reporting some officers in conversation with a barmaid (are we allowed to refer to a such a person as a barmaid?) doesn't make it factually correct.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on March 01, 2020, 12:37:21 PM
I think a select few know what's going on and we'll find out in a little over 12 months time when MM reaches age of majority in both Portugal and UK 18 yoa.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on March 01, 2020, 12:38:00 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on March 01, 2020, 12:34:30 PM
But the tabloids reporting some officers in conversation with a barmaid (are we allowed to refer to a such a person as a barmaid?) doesn't make it factually correct.

SY have attempted to put the blame for Madeline's abduction at the feet of numerous individuals over the years, some of whom were already deceased while others have since died. It doesn't take too much reading between the lines to work out what the true agenda is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on March 01, 2020, 12:41:45 PM
Quote from: Admin on March 01, 2020, 12:38:00 PM
SY have attempted to put the blame for Madeline's abduction at the feet of numerous individuals over the years, some of whom are deceased.  It doesn't take too much reading between the lines to work out what the true agenda is.

Has it or is it just tabloid reporting?

Where has someone in an official capacity from SY said we're seriously looking at this, that or other individual?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on March 01, 2020, 12:50:09 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on March 01, 2020, 12:41:45 PM
Has it or is it just tabloid reporting?

Where has someone in an official capacity from SY said we're seriously looking at this, that or other individual?

In some cases they went to the trouble to interview these men where they were still alive and interview close family members or associates where they were deceased.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 01, 2020, 01:04:49 PM
Quote from: Admin on March 01, 2020, 12:38:00 PM
SY have attempted to put the blame for Madeline's abduction at the feet of numerous individuals over the years, some of whom were already deceased while others have since died. It doesn't take too much reading between the lines to work out what the true agenda is.
Could you please spell out what the true agenda is for those of us too dim to work out what it is thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 01, 2020, 01:50:32 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on March 01, 2020, 12:37:21 PM
I think a select few know what's going on and we'll find out in a little over 12 months time when MM reaches age of majority in both Portugal and UK 18 yoa.

Perhaps we can revisit this next year and see how wide of the mark you are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on March 01, 2020, 02:00:01 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on March 01, 2020, 12:15:04 PM
How can it be evidenced for a fact 4 officers are currently dedicated to the case?
It was stated as such.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 01, 2020, 02:15:34 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 01, 2020, 01:50:32 PM
Perhaps we can revisit this next year and see how wide of the mark you are.
It makes no difference to the respective positions in the debate.  I’ve been revisiting the theory that the McCanns are still the chief suspects and the tick-tock slowly slowly catchee monkey brigade for years and years, and they STILL believe it after all this time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 01, 2020, 02:20:12 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on March 01, 2020, 02:15:34 PM
It makes no difference to the respective positions in the debate.  I’ve been revisiting the theory that the McCanns are still the chief suspects and the tick-tock slowly slowly catchee monkey brigade for years and years, and they STILL believe it after all this time.

Others still believe that a child who disappeared in 2007 is alive, well and recoverable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 01, 2020, 02:26:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 01, 2020, 02:20:12 PM
Others still believe that a child who disappeared in 2007 is alive, well and recoverable.
How very DARE they!!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 01, 2020, 02:26:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on March 01, 2020, 02:15:34 PM
It makes no difference to the respective positions in the debate.  I’ve been revisiting the theory that the McCanns are still the chief suspects and the tick-tock slowly slowly catchee monkey brigade for years and years, and they STILL believe it after all this time.

And so it shall remain for now and for ever. Amen.

It least it will be proved if all this business about OG just waiting until Madeleine is 18 is a load of guff.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 01, 2020, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 29, 2020, 08:37:11 PM
I do understand that Krugel’s device is dismissed and rubbished by many. I do not know him personally, but we live in the same city, a couple of km’s apart. When you look at the area that he suggested Madeleine could have been, it includes Casa Colina. Krugel has assisted many in South Africa by pointing out where their deceased are. He also investigated a high-profile case (in the 80’s) i.e the Van Rooyen girls. Six girls were held captive by him and his female companion, Joey, never to be found. He pointed to an area where human bones were found and police investigated. He also identified a site nearby, where police said they are not going to investigate. In Madeleine’s case, Krugel says that the area which he had demarcated was only searched partially by the PJ. Their focus was on the beach, and not beyond.
I think he is more a profiler rather than reliant on his "machine". 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on March 01, 2020, 02:47:35 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 01, 2020, 02:36:02 PM
I think he is more a profiler rather than reliant on his "machine".
Hi Rob, he used to be in the police force here, turned academic at the local University. His device has now been patented. He has vowed to go back to Praia da Luz to investigate where the PJ didn’t.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 01, 2020, 02:48:49 PM
Quote from: Admin on March 01, 2020, 12:38:00 PM
SY have attempted to put the blame for Madeline's abduction at the feet of numerous individuals over the years, some of whom were already deceased while others have since died. It doesn't take too much reading between the lines to work out what the true agenda is.

I think you mean ...what you think the true agenda is.
Imo the true agenda is to find out what happened to Maddie
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 01, 2020, 02:58:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 01, 2020, 02:20:12 PM
Others still believe that a child who disappeared in 2007 is alive, well and recoverable.

I think most of those people think Maddie might still be ...not is alive..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 03:03:26 PM

So little hope in the lives of some people.  What difference does it make if she isn't?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 01, 2020, 03:11:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 03:03:26 PM
So little hope in the lives of some people.  What difference does it make if she isn't?

Because if Maddie is still alive they will look rather foolish
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 03:24:11 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 01, 2020, 03:11:30 PM
Because if Maddie is still alive they will look rather foolish

I don't think "Foolish" is quite the word for it.  I might look foolish for hoping that Madeleine is alive, but I can well live with that.

Hoping that she is dead is something else entirely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 01, 2020, 03:26:07 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 03:24:11 PM
I don't think "Foolish" is quite the word for it.  I might look foolish for hoping that Madeleine is alive, but I can well live with that.

Hoping that she is dead is something else entirely.

Who's expressed that view, then ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 03:31:52 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 01, 2020, 03:26:07 PM
Who's expressed that view, then ?

So you hope that Madeleine is alive.  Good. I am pleased to hear that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 01, 2020, 03:40:17 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 03:31:52 PM
So you hope that Madeleine is alive.  Good. I am pleased to hear that.

Well I don't do hope as a i consider it futile.
She is either dead or alive and nothing I think or believe will change that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 01, 2020, 03:41:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 01, 2020, 12:10:12 PM
Could you provide a cite re Mr May please?
Philip May's Capital Group profits from British weed-growing op while patients denied access (VIDEO)
13 Jun, 2018 16:37 / Updated 1 year ago
Charges of hypocrisy have been leveled against the Home Office for not granting patients access to medicinal cannabis, while relatives of Tory MPs are profiting from its production and export.
The accusations first surfaced in an article by Dr John Regan, published in April by the website urhealthguide.com, using data provided by cannabis advocacy groups Transform and Cardiff Cannabis Cafe, which accused the government of hypocrisy for its stance on medicinal cannabis.
PM'S HUBBY'S FIRM PROFITS FROM MEDICAL CANNABIS
https://youtu.be/pDKvCG2y7RY
https://www.rt.com/uk/429637-may-husband-capital-cannabis/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 03:45:09 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 01, 2020, 03:40:17 PM
Well I don't do hope as a i consider it futile.
She is either dead or alive and nothing I think or believe will change that.

You don't do hope.  How very sad.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 01, 2020, 03:49:07 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 03:45:09 PM
You don't do hope.  How very sad.

You may think so, I think it pointless.

Consider the following. If Madeleine is dead, then no amount of hope will  change that. If she is alive, then there is no need to hope so.
In either case hope plays no useful  part in her future.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 01, 2020, 04:01:37 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 01, 2020, 03:24:11 PM
I don't think "Foolish" is quite the word for it.  I might look foolish for hoping that Madeleine is alive, but I can well live with that.

Hoping that she is dead is something else entirely.

Q: There is a chance she may still be alive.
M Rowley: We have to keep an open mind, it is a missing person enquiry, we don’t have that definitive
evidence either way.

Thats being practical,neither hope or having no hope changes that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on March 01, 2020, 04:14:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 01, 2020, 02:48:49 PM
I think you mean ...what you think the true agenda is.
Imo the true agenda is to find out what happened to Maddie

I know exactly what I mean. The SY smokescreen is fooling nobody.  I believe this became apparent very early on and that is why the PJ have been less than forthcoming.  Two police forces with opposing agendas, one tasked with finding out the truth while the other attempts to bury it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 01, 2020, 04:21:40 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 29, 2020, 08:37:11 PM
I do understand that Krugel’s device is dismissed and rubbished by many. I do not know him personally, but we live in the same city, a couple of km’s apart. When you look at the area that he suggested Madeleine could have been, it includes Casa Colina. Krugel has assisted many in South Africa by pointing out where their deceased are. He also investigated a high-profile case (in the 80’s) i.e the Van Rooyen girls. Six girls were held captive by him and his female companion, Joey, never to be found. He pointed to an area where human bones were found and police investigated. He also identified a site nearby, where police said they are not going to investigate. In Madeleine’s case, Krugel says that the area which he had demarcated was only searched partially by the PJ. Their focus was on the beach, and not beyond.

Not any thing to do with a guy called Birch is he,who also is from SA and had a ground radar type thing which he used back in 2007 on Murats property
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 01, 2020, 04:26:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 01, 2020, 09:49:00 AM
False assumptions are a sign of a lazy researcher imo.

Hemp is a relative of cannabis, but it can't be made into cannabis because it lacks the THC which makes cannabis psychoactive. The country which grows most of it is China, followed by Canada and the USA. The USA is number one for growing cannabis or marijuana, with Morroco second.

Crack is made from cocaine, which comes from the leaves of a plant called coca.

Hashish is made from the resin of the cannabis plant. This is done by the growers; exporting the harvested plants to Belgium to be dried and to extract the resin would be crazy and noticeable.

Hemp is grown all over, even in Yorkshire, although farmers need a licence to farm it. Strangely, no licence is needed to grow opium poppies in the UK, although they are what heroin comes from.

OH  HOHO!

It was you that corrected me many years ago and told me that Canabis came from Hemp!

With all your knowledge, have you got a very special interest in drugs/narcotics?


Several years ago, when this was discussed before, The Rif Mountains area of Morocco, produced over half the worlds supply of hemp/canabis, whichever.  Zinat, where Madeleine was sighted by Clara Torres, is in the Rif Mountains. 

Madeleine was spotted again walking round the bank in Molenbeek St John in Brussels.  Do you remember the video ?
She was wearing a quality kilt (by the way it swung as she walked) of a certain clan and an arran sweater (expensive attire) and accompanied by a nanny who looked Moroccan.   There are interesting other connections at both places, some of which I cannot share.

And then, she was sighted up in Leh, in the high Himalayas.   Ley is where most of the Hashish that Indians smoke, arrives in the Country.  Again this was information from earlier in the case.  She was sighted by 2 Brits and one N. American, who were all convinced it was her. 

Her parents  were French and Belgian reportedly.  However, with the strong drugs link between The Rif, in Africa and Molenbeek St John in Belgium, it is quite common for inhabitants originating in Africa and living and working in M. St John to have dual nationality.


We just don't know enough about it, do we ?   But there are a load of co-incidences there aren't there ? $65*


Three sightings in three drug related places ... *%6^   HMMM ..... ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on March 01, 2020, 04:31:01 PM
Quote from: Admin on March 01, 2020, 04:14:45 PM
I know exactly what I mean. The SY smokescreen is fooling nobody.  I believe this became apparent very early on and that is why the PJ have been less than forthcoming.  Two police forces with opposing agendas, one tasked with finding out the truth while the other attempts to bury it.


Couldn't agree more - well said.

Although the smoke screen is apparent to most - why is SY doing it at such a cost.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on March 01, 2020, 04:43:11 PM
Quote from: Admin on March 01, 2020, 04:14:45 PM
I know exactly what I mean. The SY smokescreen is fooling nobody.  I believe this became apparent very early on and that is why the PJ have been less than forthcoming.  Two police forces with opposing agendas, one tasked with finding out the truth while the other attempts to bury it.

That brings to mind the Find Madeline website which suggests anyone wishing to assist the search in any way to get in touch but I have yet to hear from anyone who has ever had a reply.  *%87

Maybe they didn't like my questions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on March 01, 2020, 04:50:58 PM
Quote from: kizzy on March 01, 2020, 04:31:01 PM

Couldn't agree more - well said.

Although the smoke screen is apparent to most - why is SY doing it at such a cost.

You do realise the McCanns have friends at the heart of government?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on March 01, 2020, 04:59:29 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on March 01, 2020, 04:50:58 PM
You do realise the McCanns have friends at the heart of government?





Well they had to be wrapped in cotton wool by some one - Do you think that could change now we have Boris.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 01, 2020, 05:03:11 PM
Governments have come and gone over the period, so I think it's more a case of 'Establishment' support, rather than just politicians.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on March 01, 2020, 05:36:34 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 01, 2020, 04:21:40 PM
Not any thing to do with a guy called Birch is he,who also is from SA and had a ground radar type thing which he used back in 2007 on Murats property
Hi Barrier, no Stephen Birch lives in Cape Town and claims to have entered the Murat property and finding something buried underneath a newly constructed driveway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 01, 2020, 05:38:33 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 01, 2020, 03:49:07 PM
You may think so, I think it pointless.

Consider the following. If Madeleine is dead, then no amount of hope will  change that. If she is alive, then there is no need to hope so.
In either case hope plays no useful  part in her future.
It’s interesting that some sceptics profess not to do hope nor ha e much time for empathy as a quality either.  I think this is quite telling and helps to explain why som people are one way and some the other.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on March 01, 2020, 05:44:10 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on March 01, 2020, 04:43:11 PM
That brings to mind the Find Madeline website which suggests anyone wishing to assist the search in any way to get in touch but I have yet to hear from anyone who has ever had a reply.  *%87

Maybe they didn't like my questions.
I had a reply. I have sent a picture and short summary of Jos Brech and how he resembles one of the persons of interest on findmadeleine. It said ‘thank you’ and can I forward some more information on this person. Also saying ‘ it was sent to Operation Grange as priority’.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 01, 2020, 06:11:25 PM
Quote from: Anthro on March 01, 2020, 05:36:34 PM
Hi Barrier, no Stephen Birch lives in Cape Town and claims to have entered the Murat property and finding something buried underneath a newly constructed driveway.

Thanks,just wondered if there was a connection.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 01, 2020, 06:13:11 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on March 01, 2020, 04:43:11 PM
That brings to mind the Find Madeline website which suggests anyone wishing to assist the search in any way to get in touch but I have yet to hear from anyone who has ever had a reply.  *%87

Maybe they didn't like my questions.

Strangely enough,on murder 24/7 some one got in touch with crime stoppers,this led to an arrest,maybe the police really is the  way to go.

Over three episodes.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000frh7/murder-247-series-1-episode-1
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 01, 2020, 06:40:31 PM
Quote from: Anthro on March 01, 2020, 02:47:35 PM
Hi Rob, he used to be in the police force here, turned academic at the local University. His device has now been patented. He has vowed to go back to Praia da Luz to investigate where the PJ didn’t.
I struggle to believe that.   What he claims is rather unscientific.  He might have applied for a patent.  Can you share any data on it that you have, please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 01, 2020, 06:46:32 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 01, 2020, 04:21:40 PM
Not anything to do with a guy called Birch is he, who also is from SA and had a ground radar type thing which he used back in 2007 on Murats property
Ground radar is a well-known method.  The resulting images are not that easy to determine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 01, 2020, 06:50:20 PM
I'm sure we all feel better for a free and frank exchange of views on here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 02, 2020, 09:46:04 PM
Quote from: sadie on March 01, 2020, 04:26:40 PM
snip/

OH  HOHO!

It was you that corrected me many years ago and told me that Canabis came from Hemp!

With all your knowledge, have you got a very special interest in drugs/narcotics?


Not true; I have always said the same, cannabis does not 'come from' hemp. They are two different plants. I have no special interest in drugs and I have no idea why you should think I might have. I find it offensive that you continually make accusations about me.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8490.msg325741#msg325741
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on March 02, 2020, 09:58:53 PM
The very offensive comment made earlier today has been removed together with those posts which referenced it.  Some members have asked what represents an offensive comment but I feel certain they already know. There are ways to make ones views and opinions known without resorting to offensive language.

The comment should have been removed on sight so moderators please take heed!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 03, 2020, 07:16:30 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 01, 2020, 06:46:32 PM
Ground radar is a well-known method.  The resulting images are not that easy to determine.
Indeed. The fact that Birch found 'disturbed ground' under a newly laid drive is not unexpected.
In fact if it didn't, then you'd be looking to get the builders back to do it properly.
But again, fair play to him, you have to admire tenacity of that nature, jumping over walls with all the kit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on March 03, 2020, 09:13:57 AM
Quote from: John on March 02, 2020, 09:58:53 PM
The very offensive comment made earlier today has been removed together with those posts which referenced it.  Some members have asked what represents an offensive comment but I feel certain they already know. There are ways to make ones views and opinions known without resorting to offensive language.

The comment should have been removed on sight so moderators please take heed!

The buck stops with anyone making such a very offensive comment.
The moderators have an unenviable task and cannot possibly screen every comment
Instead of commenting on the offensive post , I should have reported it .
There is obviously a reluctance to report a post which one deems to be offensive in one's own  opinion but when a post is, as you say very offensive, then perhaps it should be immediately reported and thus be brought to the attention of the moderators who in my opinion have a very difficult task.

Very off topic but very topical......  Is everyone in the same state of panic over this coronavirus as the media seem to be?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 03, 2020, 09:43:11 AM
Quote from: Erngath on March 03, 2020, 09:13:57 AM
The buck stops with anyone making such a very offensive comment.
The moderators have an unenviable task and cannot possibly screen every comment
Instead of commenting on the offensive post , I should have reported it .
There is obviously a reluctance to report a post which one deems to be offensive in one's own  opinion but when a post is, as you say very offensive, then perhaps it should be immediately reported and thus be brought to the attention of the moderators who in my opinion have a very difficult task.

Very off topic but very topical......  Is everyone in the same state of panic over this coronavirus as the media seem to be?
I think it is just another bad type of flu and they are giving us a warning about a possible pandemic which they may not have had the capacity to do with earlier ones of which there are very few but virulent when they do occur. 

It will be interesting to see if quarantining measures being taken actually work although I think confining people on the cruise ship off Japan might well have turned it into a breeding ground.
Haven't read the news today yet so I don't know if our single confirmed case in Scotland has multiplied as yet ... I think the measures taken are what should be done in any case of illness - remember "coughs and sneezes spread diseases"?

But I don't think there is any real cause for panic other than taking normal precautions against winter bugs for example flu jabs are already freely available if one is vulnerable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 03, 2020, 09:53:35 AM
Quote from: Brietta on March 03, 2020, 09:43:11 AM
I think it is just another bad type of flu and they are giving us a warning about a possible pandemic which they may not have had the capacity to do with earlier ones of which there are very few but virulent when they do occur. 

It will be interesting to see if quarantining measures being taken actually work although I think confining people on the cruise ship off Japan might well have turned it into a breeding ground.
Haven't read the news today yet so I don't know if our single confirmed case in Scotland has multiplied as yet ... I think the measures taken are what should be done in any case of illness - remember "coughs and sneezes spread diseases"?

But I don't think there is any real cause for panic other than taking normal precautions against winter bugs for example flu jabs are already freely available if one is vulnerable.

if the figures are correct the mortality rate is a lot higher and it particularly affects those over 60. It seems it attacks the lungs a lot more aggressively than normal flu. I don't see how it can be contained but i think the idea will be to slow the  spread so the NHS can cope.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 03, 2020, 10:02:26 AM
Quote from: Davel on March 03, 2020, 09:53:35 AM
if the figures are correct the mortality rate is a lot higher and it particularly affects those over 60. It seems it attacks the lungs a lot more aggressively than normal flu. I don't see how it can be contained but i think the idea will be to slow the  spread so the NHS can cope.

I think the worrying thing is that some people who have had a confirmed bout and recovered have taken it again.  I don't understand what that means?

Is there no natural immunity and will they be able to develop a vaccine if there isn't?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 03, 2020, 10:09:37 AM
Quote from: Brietta on March 03, 2020, 10:02:26 AM
I think the worrying thing is that some people who have had a confirmed bout and recovered have taken it again.  I don't understand what that means?

Is there no natural immunity and will they be able to develop a vaccine if there isn't?

it seems odd taht there are claims taht people have become re infected ...of course that may not be true. A vaccine sia least ayear away it seems.....no natural immunity. At the moment the figures may not be accurate but it seems to spread 2 to 3 times quicker than normal flu and the death rate is far higher......but mainly in the  elderly. it seems no child under 9 has died
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on March 03, 2020, 10:33:39 AM
Quote from: Davel on March 03, 2020, 10:09:37 AM
it seems odd taht there are claims taht people have become re infected ...of course that may not be true. A vaccine sia least ayear away it seems.....no natural immunity. At the moment the figures may not be accurate but it seems to spread 2 to 3 times quicker than normal flu and the death rate is far higher......but mainly in the  elderly. it seems no child under 9 has died

You are not allaying my fears Davel!
Once I see the headline news, I turn the television news over to a  non news Channel..
The final straw was Jacob Reece Moggs advising us to wash our hands and sing the National Anthem. Lol.
Prresumably the time it takes to sing the National Anthem is the required time necessary to wash one's hands properly..
I fluctuate between being very concerned to believing the media are causing unnecessary worry.
I had hoped that like the Romans the virus would find us Scots too scary and our weather too inclement to bother us.
On a serious note, it must be very concerning for all medical workers and those with serious underlying health problems.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 03, 2020, 10:36:57 AM
The ability to be reinfected is concerning, in that it would mean that one can never be free of the risk.
I suppose it depends on how reliable the 'Test' is. There's bound to be a degree of false positives so some of the recurrence claims may not be correct.
I guess the position will become clearer as time goes on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on March 03, 2020, 10:48:26 AM
One ray of hope,  I read that they think this virus will be seasonal and so when the temperatures rise it will die off.   Unfortunately that will also mean it will come back next Winter,   hopefully there will be a vaccination by then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 03, 2020, 11:02:22 AM
from Guardian

"Overall probably around one percent of the people who get the virus may end up dying as a result, the press conference is told by Britain’s Chief Medical Officer, Professor Chris Whitty."

The question you have to ask yourself is ' Do you feel lucky'?  Well do you punk?  (Dirty Harry)

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 03, 2020, 11:11:25 AM
Quote from: Lace on March 03, 2020, 10:48:26 AM
One ray of hope,  I read that they think this virus will be seasonal and so when the temperatures rise it will die off.   Unfortunately that will also mean it will come back next Winter,   hopefully there will be a vaccination by then.
Another ray of hope is that the mortality rate is way higher among the elderly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 03, 2020, 11:19:30 AM
Quote from: The General on March 03, 2020, 11:11:25 AM
Another ray of hope is that the mortality rate is way higher among the elderly.

Well that's certainly something to look forward to
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 03, 2020, 11:24:05 AM
Quote from: jassi on March 03, 2020, 11:19:30 AM
Well that's certainly something to look forward to
Indeed.
On a serious note, the old British stiff upper lip will be quickly discarded when shut downs begin. It will be like end of days. And when they start shutting Gregg's, well..............
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 03, 2020, 11:58:00 AM
I'll tell you one thing, if I catch it I ain't going anywhere near my local hospital - the last place anyone ill would want to be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 03, 2020, 12:01:49 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 03, 2020, 11:02:22 AM
from Guardian

"Overall probably around one percent of the people who get the virus may end up dying as a result, the press conference is told by Britain’s Chief Medical Officer, Professor Chris Whitty."

The question you have to ask yourself is ' Do you feel lucky'?  Well do you punk?  (Dirty Harry)

the mortality rate for general is 0.1%.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 03, 2020, 12:03:41 PM
Quote from: The General on March 03, 2020, 11:24:05 AM
Indeed.
On a serious note, the old British stiff upper lip will be quickly discarded when shut downs begin. It will be like end of days. And when they start shutting Gregg's, well..............

ive got plent of Greggs in the freezer from Iceland...they are very good...£1.90 for 4 sausage rolls
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 03, 2020, 12:07:54 PM
Quote from: The General on March 03, 2020, 11:24:05 AM
Indeed.
On a serious note, the old British stiff upper lip will be quickly discarded when shut downs begin. It will be like end of days. And when they start shutting Gregg's, well..............

As an elderly person I wouldn't miss Greggs at all; I've never been in there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 03, 2020, 12:14:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 03, 2020, 12:03:41 PM
ive got plent of Greggs in the freezer from Iceland...they are very good...£1.90 for 4 sausage rolls
I've stocked up on Steak Bakes too. Can't be too careful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 03, 2020, 12:21:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 03, 2020, 12:07:54 PM
As an elderly person I wouldn't miss Greggs at all; I've never been in there.
You should G, it's the working (or unemployed, or retired, or school aged, or student, or less abled, or in a coma) man's (or woman, or inter-gender, or non-gender specific) gastronomy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 03, 2020, 12:22:06 PM
Quote from: The General on March 03, 2020, 12:14:17 PM
I've stocked up on Steak Bakes too. Can't be too careful.

Time you learned to cook? Mind you, lots of people would be in trouble these days if they had to cook their own meals from scratch.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 03, 2020, 12:28:16 PM
Quote from: The General on March 03, 2020, 12:14:17 PM
I've stocked up on Steak Bakes too. Can't be too careful.

yes got steak bakes too. Ive been copying them and doing quite well....but now ive found them at iceland its hardly worth it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 03, 2020, 12:29:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 03, 2020, 12:22:06 PM
Time you learned to cook? Mind you, lots of people would be in trouble these days if they had to cook their own meals from scratch.

lots of people?.......I find my youngsters love to cook.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 03, 2020, 12:36:45 PM
Quote from: The General on March 03, 2020, 12:21:08 PM
You should G, it's the working (or unemployed, or retired, or school aged, or student, or less abled, or in a coma) man's (or woman, or inter-gender, or non-gender specific) gastronomy.

Well it's not mine. I prefer my own cooking.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on March 03, 2020, 12:39:10 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 03, 2020, 12:29:48 PM
lots of people?.......I find my youngsters love to cook.


Judging by your posts D - your wife doesn't.


Seems all mums go to iceland.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 03, 2020, 12:42:03 PM
Quote from: kizzy on March 03, 2020, 12:39:10 PM

Judging by your posts D - your wife doesn't.


Seems all mums go to iceland.

My wife is an incredible cook...as am I .  that doesnt mean we sometimes buy ready made food. You are a poor judge.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 03, 2020, 12:48:12 PM
A glimmer of hope for all you wrinklies: https://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/2020/03/02/nota/7764477/se-recupera-paciente-98-anos-afectada-coronavirus-china (https://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/2020/03/02/nota/7764477/se-recupera-paciente-98-anos-afectada-coronavirus-china)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 03, 2020, 12:49:35 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 03, 2020, 12:42:03 PM
My wife is an incredible cook...as am I .  that doesnt mean we sometimes buy ready made food. You are a poor judge.
My wife is such a bad cook, in my house we pray after the meal (R. Dangerfield)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 03, 2020, 12:51:06 PM
Quote from: The General on March 03, 2020, 12:48:12 PM
A glimmer of hope for all you wrinklies: https://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/2020/03/02/nota/7764477/se-recupera-paciente-98-anos-afectada-coronavirus-china (https://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/2020/03/02/nota/7764477/se-recupera-paciente-98-anos-afectada-coronavirus-china)

from memory the flu pandemic in the 20's didnt kill anyone over 70
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on March 03, 2020, 12:55:51 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 03, 2020, 12:42:03 PM
My wife is an incredible cook...as am I .  that doesnt mean we sometimes buy ready made food. You are a poor judge.




no, it's just with your comment of copying greggs steak bake - I would have thought you can't beat your own.

I mean lol - why bother when you can find them in Iceland - most have there own steak pie/bake speciality
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 03, 2020, 01:00:01 PM
Quote from: kizzy on March 03, 2020, 12:55:51 PM



no, it's just with your comment of copying greggs steak bake - I would have thought you can't beat your own.

I mean lol - why bother when you can find them in Iceland - most have there own steak pie/bake speciality

greggs are excellent at them...and sausage rolls...I cant beat them. i dont eat them often.
Ive just perfected salt and pepper chiken wings and spare ribs....its quite a fashionable spice. salt and pepper chips are now popular too. i make my own seasoning mix and its brilliant.

I cant remember the last time I was impressed with a meal at a restaurant
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on March 03, 2020, 01:13:55 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 03, 2020, 01:00:01 PM
greggs are excellent at them...and sausage rolls...I cant beat them. i dont eat them often.
Ive just perfected salt and pepper chiken wings and spare ribs....its quite a fashionable spice. salt and pepper chips are now popular too. i make my own seasoning mix and its brilliant.

I cant remember the last time I was impressed with a meal at a restaurant




Its I always worry about ingredients I like to know whats in them - nothing wrong though if you enjoy them.


I always enjoyed an indian restaurant - till I found out they use halal meat.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on March 03, 2020, 01:17:58 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 03, 2020, 11:58:00 AM
I'll tell you one thing, if I catch it I ain't going anywhere near my local hospital - the last place anyone ill would want to be.

You might have to it attacks the lungs and you may need a ventilator.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on March 03, 2020, 01:20:15 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 03, 2020, 12:07:54 PM
As an elderly person I wouldn't miss Greggs at all; I've never been in there.

Their vegetable pasties are nice.  Don't eat any of the meat ones I'm fussy when it comes to meat.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 03, 2020, 01:23:31 PM
Quote from: Lace on March 03, 2020, 01:17:58 PM
You might have to it attacks the lungs and you may need a ventilator.

I think I'd still take my chances at home.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 03, 2020, 01:23:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 03, 2020, 12:51:06 PM
from memory the flu pandemic in the 20's didnt kill anyone over 70
From memory? How old are you, 100?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 03, 2020, 01:26:24 PM
Quote from: The General on March 03, 2020, 01:23:42 PM
From memory? How old are you, 100?

I think we talked about during a lecture on epidemiology....about 45 yrs ago..

the pandemic was 1918-19
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 03, 2020, 01:26:30 PM
Quote from: The General on March 03, 2020, 01:23:42 PM
From memory? How old are you, 100?

And some. How do you think he's accrued all this knowledge not available to the rest of us?  ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 03, 2020, 01:27:54 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 03, 2020, 01:26:30 PM
And some. How do you think he's accrued all this knowledge not available to the rest of us?  ?{)(**

I'll take that as a compliment
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 03, 2020, 02:18:21 PM

Greggs outlined basic plans if coronavirus affects them.

Here on the Algarve, my family has started on contingency plans, due to the number of at-risk people we currently have in the house.  That's 3 x age, 1 x diabetes, 1 x significant respiratory problems.

And I'm monitoring the situation in Portugal, which has just had its first two cases, both being treated in Porto hospital.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 03, 2020, 06:02:25 PM
My mother who is 82 this weekend and who we were going to stay with to help her celebrate is afraid we will bring the disease with us and doesn’t want us to come now.  :-(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on March 03, 2020, 06:16:45 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on March 03, 2020, 06:02:25 PM
My mother who is 82 this weekend and who we were going to stay with to help her celebrate is afraid we will bring the disease with us and doesn’t want us to come now.  :-(

That would be a great pity but such is the media hype, then it is understandable that she is concerned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 03, 2020, 06:42:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on March 03, 2020, 06:02:25 PM
My mother who is 82 this weekend and who we were going to stay with to help her celebrate is afraid we will bring the disease with us and doesn’t want us to come now.  :-(

If you are clean of any flu symptoms, it would be a good time to visit, before the s##t gets worse.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 03, 2020, 06:46:37 PM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 03, 2020, 06:42:43 PM
If you are clean of any flu symptoms, it would be a good time to visit, before the s##t gets worse.
You can be a carrier without showing any signs of having the virus and she is adamant that we don’t travel via big stations like St Panc, and risk being coughed on by a carrier.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 03, 2020, 06:52:45 PM
According to news now,the NHS is at defcom 4.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1250419/coronavirus-uk-nhs-emergency-level-4-coronavirus-latest-news-covid-19-symptoms-cases
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 03, 2020, 07:04:11 PM
WTF is Defcom 4 - some imported Americanism?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 03, 2020, 08:10:44 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 03, 2020, 07:04:11 PM
WTF is Defcom 4 - some imported Americanism?
I got a warning for writing WTF once.  I doubt you will....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on March 03, 2020, 11:13:34 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 03, 2020, 01:26:30 PM
And some. How do you think he's accrued all this knowledge not available to the rest of us?  ?{)(**

Good ole Google no less. lol

I have to cancel two trips.  the rest will do me good  unless...

We should have shut down before now. It really wasn't a great idea going to bring home those exposed to it, It is much worse than the flu affects the lungs and then onto all major organs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 04, 2020, 12:33:43 AM
Quote from: The General on March 03, 2020, 11:11:25 AM
Another ray of hope is that the mortality rate is way higher among the elderly.

Hey, that's not hope for lots of us !!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on March 04, 2020, 09:51:28 PM
Quote from: sadie on March 04, 2020, 12:33:43 AM
Hey, that's not hope for lots of us !!

Sadie your white blood cells are potent against any wee virus.

The stats show: more people died of cancers, and many other illnesses. lets keep it real.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 05, 2020, 01:13:15 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on March 04, 2020, 09:51:28 PM
Sadie your white blood cells are potent against any wee virus.

The stats show: more people died of cancers, and many other illnesses. lets keep it real.

Not to worry Mistaken, but kind of you to try and reassure me.  Thank you.

I've had 82 years, and the last 4 1/2 have been a bit busy with major illnesses, accidents and major proceedures but I have decided that I am not going to fight if Coronovirus comes visiting me. ~ The odds are too great against me.~  I have got three of the four criteria where each one individually makes it easier for the virus to kill you.   


And it is likely that the virus is already here in my home town.

Party of 44 local youngsters with 6 teachers, from our old school, in our town, just back from a ski trip in the Dolomites, N. Italy.   Do hope none of them have the virus.

Also hubby doesn't seem inclined to give up his seat at the footie matches.  Just think of the germs falling down on him from the teirs above

And then, our daughter is a high risk dentist.  She always wears a mask and rubber gloves, bless her, when she visits us and is mothering us all the time re the virus especially.


So the odds are quite high.

Cheers  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on March 05, 2020, 12:58:05 PM
It has just been confirmed that South Africa has its first case of the  Covid-19 virus. The person had travelled with a group of 10 people to Italy and developed symptons on 1 March. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 05, 2020, 02:19:36 PM
Quote from: Anthro on March 05, 2020, 12:58:05 PM
It has just been confirmed that South Africa has its first case of the  Covid-19 virus. The person had travelled with a group of 10 people to Italy and developed symptons on 1 March.
Seems to be the same method across Europe too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on March 05, 2020, 10:31:47 PM
Quote from: The General on March 05, 2020, 02:19:36 PM
Seems to be the same method across Europe too.

We are not hearing any news from China... the shut down of large areas is brutal on the last correspondence I received.  There was protests at the beginning...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on March 15, 2020, 02:01:52 AM
I know we have many mature members contributing to the forum and I just wanted say look after yourselves and stay well until this horrible virus subsides.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 15, 2020, 02:18:23 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on March 15, 2020, 02:01:52 AM
I know we have many mature members contributing to the forum and I just wanted say look after yourselves and stay well until this horrible virus subsides.

Thankyou, Faith.

Unless they can find a working vacination I wonder how they will stop its rampage.  I dread that it might keep flaring up as it hits a new set of people.   We are now in voluntary isolation with food and medical stocks (soon) to see us thru a long wait.

I never thought that I would say this .... but after three days on our own, thank God for TV.   (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 15, 2020, 10:01:01 AM
Quote from: sadie on March 15, 2020, 02:18:23 AM
Thankyou, Faith.

Unless they can find a working vacination I wonder how they will stop its rampage.  I dread that it might keep flaring up as it hits a new set of people.   We are now in voluntary isolation with food and medical stocks (soon) to see us thru a long wait.

I never thought that I would say this .... but after three days on our own, thank God for TV.   (&^&
God bless you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on March 15, 2020, 11:33:14 AM
Quote from: sadie on March 15, 2020, 02:18:23 AM
Thankyou, Faith.

Unless they can find a working vacination I wonder how they will stop its rampage.  I dread that it might keep flaring up as it hits a new set of people.   We are now in voluntary isolation with food and medical stocks (soon) to see us thru a long wait.

I never thought that I would say this .... but after three days on our own, thank God for TV.   (&^&

Good idea Sadie.    Look after yourselves  xxxx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 15, 2020, 11:45:16 AM
I can't go to supermarkets any more due to walking and carrying problems. I normally have a week's food in as I shop online and in case of illness I have some 'emergency' food in too. I have added more to my emergency store because online shopping has increased so slots are difficult to find. I can now manage for two weeks if I can't get a delivery slot and will keep that topped up as slots become available. I feel for those who don't have the finances to stockpile, especially those who have to use foodbanks which are also suffering shortages. I have dug out my small camping stove also in case of power cuts. I must have a cup of tea!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on March 15, 2020, 12:46:17 PM
Quote from: Anthro on March 05, 2020, 12:58:05 PM
It has just been confirmed that South Africa has its first case of the  Covid-19 virus. The person had travelled with a group of 10 people to Italy and developed symptons on 1 March.
Here, we have 51 confirmed cases. Major sports and cultural events have been cancelled and at least 3 schools have now closed. Wits University in Johannesburg has also just announced a student has tested positive for Covid-19. It has also come to light that personnel at OR Tambo International have not used the scanning devices during the first 5 days of been issued.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 15, 2020, 02:11:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 15, 2020, 11:45:16 AM
I can't go to supermarkets any more due to walking and carrying problems. I normally have a week's food in as I shop online and in case of illness I have some 'emergency' food in too. I have added more to my emergency store because online shopping has increased so slots are difficult to find. I can now manage for two weeks if I can't get a delivery slot and will keep that topped up as slots become available. I feel for those who don't have the finances to stockpile, especially those who have to use foodbanks which are also suffering shortages. I have dug out my small camping stove also in case of power cuts. I must have a cup of tea!

My 'essentials' are Buxton sparkling water and Rose's Lime juice cordial and I must admit to having laid in a stockpile of those.

What really defies logic are the toilet rolls!!!!  First sign of panic and the first thing we Brits think of seems to be buying them up.  Must be something in the National psyche.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 15, 2020, 06:51:22 PM

In some instances there are now controls over how-many-customers-can-enter-at-any-time e.g. one supermarket and one chemist are definitely doing this.  You queue outside of these if you want to get in.  I've got no idea if this is national practice or not.

Baptista in Luz is still open to all, but quieter than normal.   8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 15, 2020, 07:55:14 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 15, 2020, 02:11:59 PM
My 'essentials' are Buxton sparkling water and Rose's Lime juice cordial and I must admit to having laid in a stockpile of those.

What really defies logic are the toilet rolls!!!!  First sign of panic and the first thing we Brits think of seems to be buying them up.  Must be something in the National psyche.

I'm baffled by the toilet rolls too. My mother's weakness was sugar; I think it was the war that did that, but she always had a pile of it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 15, 2020, 10:15:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 15, 2020, 07:55:14 PM
I'm baffled by the toilet rolls too. My mother's weakness was sugar; I think it was the war that did that, but she always had a pile of it.

An answer is a bidet


But IMO, good quality loo roll is a better answer, unless you relish the chore of washing the bidet each time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 15, 2020, 10:22:16 PM

Buy Kitchen Rolls and cut them in half.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 15, 2020, 11:01:15 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 15, 2020, 10:22:16 PM
Buy Kitchen Rolls and cut them in half.

My daughter told me they're all gone too. It's going to be newspaper squares and string like the olden days at this rate.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 15, 2020, 11:32:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 15, 2020, 11:01:15 PM
My daughter told me they're all gone too. It's going to be newspaper squares and string like the olden days at this rate.  @)(++(*

I read somewhere that asian families have a kind of spray container that they fill with warm soapy water that they get used to using. 


A bit tricky until practiced well, I would think




Then there is one of these toilet squatty stools which would help with a lesser clean up job, I would think

https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_nkw=toilet%20squat%20stool


BTW, I can understand the squares of newspaper, but what do you do with the string ?   The mind boggles  @)(++(*


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 15, 2020, 11:57:50 PM
Quote from: sadie on March 15, 2020, 11:32:22 PM
I read somewhere that asian families have a kind of spray container that they fill with warm soapy water that they get used to using. 


A bit tricky until practiced well, I would think




Then there is one of these toilet squatty stools which would help with a lesser clean up job, I would think

https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_nkw=toilet%20squat%20stool


BTW, I can understand the squares of newspaper, but what do you do with the string ?   The mind boggles  @)(++(*

This isn't newspaper, but it shows what the string was for.

https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-emergency-toilet-paper-on-a-string-at-beamish-museum-118154728.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 16, 2020, 12:14:04 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 15, 2020, 07:55:14 PM
I'm baffled by the toilet rolls too. My mother's weakness was sugar; I think it was the war that did that, but she always had a pile of it.

I thought the toilet rolls would be a cheap substitute for paper tissues if you have to "catch it, bin it, kill it".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 16, 2020, 12:16:21 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 15, 2020, 10:22:16 PM
Buy Kitchen Rolls and cut them in half.

Our water companies have requested people don't flush kitchen roll down the toilet as it bungs up the pipes & sewers. It doesn't degrade as quickly & easily as toilet roll.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 16, 2020, 12:35:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 15, 2020, 11:57:50 PM
This isn't newspaper, but it shows what the string was for.

https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-emergency-toilet-paper-on-a-string-at-beamish-museum-118154728.html

Thanks Gunit


About 57years ago, we made our first trip abroad and staying at Lloret de Mar had a day trip to San Sebastion.  There I needed the loo.   Saw some wooden huts with 3/4 doors, in the park, which turned out to be drop down loos.  There was a dangerous looking big rusty nail sticking out of the wooden wall


Was sitting there doing what one does and sudddenly two rough pieces of torn stiff brown paper appeared over the door, clutched in a gnarled hand  and wham, they were slapped on the nail


Travel is wonderful, one finds out about foreign peoples that way and their lifestyles... and so much more.  We were early to Spain and flights / ferrys abroad and soon adventured farther afield.   All finished now but happy memories.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 16, 2020, 01:46:46 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 15, 2020, 06:51:22 PM
In some instances there are now controls over how-many-customers-can-enter-at-any-time e.g. one supermarket and one chemist are definitely doing this.  You queue outside of these if you want to get in.  I've got no idea if this is national practice or not.

Baptista in Luz is still open to all, but quieter than normal.   8((()*/
Should make it easier to control shoplifting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 16, 2020, 08:27:12 AM
Quote from: misty on March 16, 2020, 12:16:21 AM
Our water companies have requested people don't flush kitchen roll down the toilet as it bungs up the pipes & sewers. It doesn't degrade as quickly & easily as toilet roll.

Strange really because when I was a child there was no soft toilet roll, there was something named Izal toilet paper. It was hard and shiny and tough enough to write on but it didn't block the sewers for some reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on March 16, 2020, 08:27:52 AM
Quote from: sadie on March 16, 2020, 12:35:24 AM
Thanks Gunit


About 57years ago, we made our first trip abroad and staying at Lloret de Mar had a day trip to San Sebastion.  There I needed the loo.   Saw some wooden huts with 3/4 doors, in the park, which turned out to be drop down loos.  There was a dangerous looking big rusty nail sticking out of the wooden wall


Was sitting there doing what one does and sudddenly two rough pieces of torn stiff brown paper appeared over the door, clutched in a gnarled hand  and wham, they were slapped on the nail


Travel is wonderful, one finds out about foreign peoples that way and their lifestyles... and so much more.  We were early to Spain and flights / ferrys abroad and soon adventured farther afield.   All finished now but happy memories.


  @)(++(*    When in Thailand,  we were in a taxi taking us to another part of the area and we stopped at a garage,  needing the loo we got out and went to the toilets.   A hole with wood either side which you stood on,  there was a bucket of water to throw down the hole!!   Very difficult wearing shorts!! had to take them off with pants and try to stop them getting wet from the floor whilst doing so!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 16, 2020, 08:33:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 16, 2020, 08:27:12 AM
Strange really because when I was a child there was no soft toilet roll, there was something named Izal toilet paper. It was hard and shiny and tough enough to write on but it didn't block the sewers for some reason.

Due to the pain factor of using Izal, it meant there was a major incentive to use as little of it as humanly possible.

 &^^&*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: puglove on March 16, 2020, 08:36:57 AM
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on March 16, 2020, 08:33:52 AM
Due to the pain factor of using Izal, it meant there was a major incentive to use as little of it as humanly possible.

 &^^&*

And Bronco.    %56&


We all need the Buckingham Easywipe!     8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 16, 2020, 09:16:34 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 16, 2020, 08:27:12 AM
Strange really because when I was a child there was no soft toilet roll, there was something named Izal toilet paper. It was hard and shiny and tough enough to write on but it didn't block the sewers for some reason.


Sheer luxury!
When I was young, it was squares of newspaper hanging on a nail in the outside privy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 16, 2020, 09:23:56 AM
Quote from: jassi on March 16, 2020, 09:16:34 AM

Sheer luxury!
When I was young, it was squares of newspaper hanging on a nail in the outside privy.

Dock leaves if a need arose..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 16, 2020, 09:54:19 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 16, 2020, 09:23:56 AM
Dock leaves if a need arose..

I told my daughter as a last resort to go and pick dock leaves.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 16, 2020, 09:55:06 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 16, 2020, 09:23:56 AM
Dock leaves if a need arose..
What did you do on a frosty morning?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 16, 2020, 09:57:54 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on March 16, 2020, 09:55:06 AM
What did you do on a frosty morning?
Went round  the Mulberry bush.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on March 16, 2020, 09:06:09 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 16, 2020, 09:57:54 AM
Went round  the Mulberry bush.

Hahahaah good one!

Interesting about the dock leaves we use them wild camping!

In China away from the touristy palces they also use a hole in the ground , you have to squat. and use water.

It may be useful to have a spray bottle with soapy water kept near the radiator (cold water will cause  a shock lol)to squirt on to your... OR after your first flush to remove the waste you dunk your botty into the pan and flush again!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 16, 2020, 09:13:09 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on March 16, 2020, 09:06:09 PM
Hahahaah good one!

Interesting about the dock leaves we use them wild camping!

In China away from the touristy palces they also use a hole in the ground , you have to squat. and use water.

It may be useful to have a spray bottle with soapy water kept near the radiator (cold water will cause  a shock lol)to squirt on to your... OR after your first flush to remove the waste you dunk your botty into the pan and flush again!

I believe the Romans used sponges - or loofas for the really tough
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on March 16, 2020, 09:24:21 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 16, 2020, 09:13:09 PM
I believe the Romans used sponges - or loofas for the really tough
yeah them Romans always bathing and washing... When you look at the Roman soldiers what they did for a living having a loofa on your botty is nothing!! They were real men- real hard. heehee
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on March 17, 2020, 06:54:52 AM
Panic purchasing hit South Africa yesterday. Particularly tissue paper, sanitizer and household cleaning products. I witnessed a woman at a chain store, buying 40 packets of cigarettes. Staff had to source it from different sections within the store, i.e. kiosk, liquor shop and storage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 17, 2020, 07:32:18 AM
I spent 15 days silently secreted in a hedgerow, moving only to urinate in to a bottle and defecate in to cling film.
Whilst I admit a couple of squares of toilet paper would have been useful, maintaining personal hygiene levels were secondary to the potential of being discovered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 17, 2020, 07:57:03 AM
Quote from: The General on March 17, 2020, 07:32:18 AM
I spent 15 days silently secreted in a hedgerow, moving only to urinate in to a bottle and defecate in to cling film.
Whilst I admit a couple of squares of toilet paper would have been useful, maintaining personal hygiene levels were secondary to the potential of being discovered.

That will teach you to pay your TV license on time in future
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 17, 2020, 08:25:53 AM
Quote from: Davel on March 17, 2020, 07:57:03 AM
That will teach you to pay your TV license on time in future
They are very tenacious. It was a battle of wills in the end, day 16 their resolve broke.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 17, 2020, 08:53:36 AM
Quote from: The General on March 17, 2020, 08:25:53 AM
They are very tenacious. It was a battle of wills in the end, day 16 their resolve broke.

I prefer direct debit
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on March 17, 2020, 04:56:09 PM
Quote from: Anthro on March 17, 2020, 06:54:52 AM
Panic purchasing hit South Africa yesterday. Particularly tissue paper, sanitizer and household cleaning products. I witnessed a woman at a chain store, buying 40 packets of cigarettes. Staff had to source it from different sections within the store, i.e. kiosk, liquor shop and storage.


 (&^&

At the picture!


General did those hedgerows benefit from your deposits as in did they become 'organically grown'?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 17, 2020, 05:27:11 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on March 17, 2020, 04:56:09 PM

 (&^&

At the picture!


General did those hedgerows benefit from your deposits as in did they become 'organically grown'?
You know the drill, gotta take those deposits with you - DNA and all that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 18, 2020, 12:53:49 AM
Quote from: Anthro on March 17, 2020, 06:54:52 AM
Panic purchasing hit South Africa yesterday. Particularly tissue paper, sanitizer and household cleaning products. I witnessed a woman at a chain store, buying 40 packets of cigarettes. Staff had to source it from different sections within the store, i.e. kiosk, liquor shop and storage.

Boy, that is a bit public ... and might be a bit cold over here too


But as a last resort, who knows?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 18, 2020, 01:35:25 AM
Quote from: sadie on March 18, 2020, 12:53:49 AM
Boy, that is a bit public ... and might be a bit cold over here too


But as a last resort, who knows?
What as a last resort?  Smoking or Drinking?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 19, 2020, 07:09:13 PM
Sniffer dogs have their noses put out of joint by computer
Highly trained sniffer dogs could be put out of work by “electronic noses”
Highly trained sniffer dogs could be put out of work by “electronic noses”
ALAMY
Share




Save

Sniffer dogs may soon need to look for new jobs because researchers have designed a computer chip that can “smell” dangerous chemicals.

Such technology may soon enable “electronic noses” and robots to sniff out weapons, explosives, drugs and even diseases.

Researchers at the computing giant Intel and Cornell University used a “neuromorphic” chip, called Loihi, which tries to make computers think and process information like biological brains.

The team looked at the way humans and mammals smell something, and tried to replicate the electrical signals that enable us to identify and process different scents.

When a person takes a whiff of something, for example, an orange, the fruit’s molecules interact with receptors in the nose that send signals to part of the brain called the olfactory bulb. There electrical pulses within an interconnected group of neurons translate what the particular smell is.


The researchers, who worked with olfactory neurophysiologists who study the brains of animals as they smell, designed an electrical circuit that is based on the neural circuits that activate in our brains when we process a smell, and carved that on to the silicon chip. They also designed an algorithm that can effectively identify different smells, replicating the behaviour of the electric signals that pulse through the olfactory bulb in the brain.

 
PODCAST
Stories of our times
In the fourth episode of our new daily news podcast, David Aaronovitch talks to the editor-in-chief of the Lancet Dr Richard Horton about the global response to the crisis. Listen for free on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Acast or wherever you get your podcasts
Listen now
When they trained the algorithm on the chip using ten noxious smells, it learnt each of the scents, including methane, ammonia, acetone, and was able to distinguish between them.

The Loihi chip was not only capable of learning and identifying different scents, but could pinpoint them even in the presence of strong background smells.

This is different from smoke and carbon monoxide detectors at home, which use sensors to detect harmful molecules but cannot distinguish between different odours.

Such a tool could be a boon for equipping robots at airports to help with identifying dangerous substances.

The Loihi chip also learnt each odour with just a few samples. Researchers say that is especially impressive because other deep learning techniques can require 3,000 times more training samples to reach the same level of accuracy.

Other tech giants are doing similar research. A group of researchers at Google created a machine-learning algorithm in October last year that can distinguish different types of scents by looking at their molecular structure. The tool created by a group at Google Brain, the search engine company’s AI research team, can describe scents in terms such as “buttery”, “tropical”, “earthy” and “pungent” simply by analysing the atoms and chemical bonds in a molecule.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 19, 2020, 10:33:40 PM
Newsflash: Arkwright's Lancashire textile mills, driven by the Pennine streams, an inexhaustible supply of labour, an industrial revolution and slavery driven cotton supply creates immeasurable wealth.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 23, 2020, 01:08:34 PM
I don't think there'll be a noticeable difference;

Madeleine McCann hunt to be axed as coronavirus puts detectives 'back on the beat'
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/coronavirus-axes-madeleine-mccann-hunt-21724768
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 23, 2020, 01:49:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 23, 2020, 01:08:34 PM
I don't think there'll be a noticeable difference;

Madeleine McCann hunt to be axed as coronavirus puts detectives 'back on the beat'
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/coronavirus-axes-madeleine-mccann-hunt-21724768

Are you quoting the star to support your argument...laughable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on March 23, 2020, 06:59:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 23, 2020, 01:49:48 PM
Are you quoting the star to support your argument...laughable

Well, I doubt they will be allowed to go 'searching' anywhere if lock down is implemented globally. The general feeling is this has been milked.I am of the opinion No one really cares about the parents feelings anymore since they have carried on with their lives,apart from a handful of people on some forums.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 30, 2020, 07:38:08 AM
Awww...

Girl, 4, found asleep with her dog after two days in forest
Evelyn Sides got lost running in woodland
Evelyn Sides got lost running in woodland
Two days and two nights after she strayed alone into the woods of Alabama a four-year-old girl has been found alive and well, sleeping in a pine-wooded valley with her dog at her side.

Evelyn Sides, who goes by the name Vadie, was at the home of a family friend she calls “Nanny” deep in the countryside about 50 miles northeast of Montgomery.

They were out for a short walk at 2.40pm in the afternoon when Vadie and the dog strayed out of sight into the woodland.

Nanny, who is said to be in her seventies and who also looks after Vadie’s infant sister, looked for the girl in the woods and then raised the alarm. Sheriff’s deputies arrived to search for her on foot, on horseback and on four-wheeled motorbikes. As darkness fell a police helicopter flew overhead, scanning the woods for signs of life with an infrared camera.

The following day dog teams came from all over Alabama to comb through the trees, while police divers arrived to search the streams and waterways. Firefighters joined the hunt too, told to look for a girl who might be in the company of a hound dog.


A second night passed with no sign of Vadie, who has red hair and was wearing a blue print dress with green flower patterns, and hopes began to fade with every passing hour.

On the third day of the search 400 volunteers assembled by a church to lend a hand.

Jay Jones, sheriff of Lee county, said that they were deployed at 2.35pm that afternoon in a grid formation to scour woodland where some signs of life had been found the previous day. Less than an hour later, the searchers heard a dog bark and saw a little girl sit up from a spot where she had been resting.

Colonel Edward Casey, of the Alabama national guard, said that he had imagined that she would be distraught. Instead she exclaimed, “Oh! I can’t wait to tell my mommy about my two nights out here,” he told The New York Times.

Vadie recounted some of her adventures to her mother from a hospital bed. “Nanny decided let’s go take a walk,” she said in a video her mother, Amanda, posted on Facebook. Vadie said she had started to run “too fast” and “got lost and then I started calling for Nanny”.

She had passed a house, she said. Also, “I slided down a waterfall that was so slippery. It went just, ‘schooo!’”

“Did you have Lu with you?” her mother inquired, referring to the dog.

“Lu just ran off,” she said. “She was fast but I found her again.” She was able to find the dog “because I could smell”, she said.

“I slept by a road the first night and the second night I slept where they found me.”

She was found less than a mile from where she had gone missing. Sheriff Jones told the Alabama news site AL.com that her movements may have caused her to be missed by searchers hunting a relatively small patch of woodland. He said that he had fretted about snakes and thought the dog might have kept her safe.

“You don’t have anything else that happened in these very long two nights and three days?” her mother asked, in the video.

“Um, no,” her daughter replied, and then pointed at the camera, asking to take a look at the footage that they had recorded.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on March 30, 2020, 01:37:23 PM
This was posted on facebook.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 30, 2020, 01:46:03 PM
Quote from: Anthro on March 30, 2020, 01:37:23 PM
This was posted on facebook.
Uncanny. Sends shivers down one's spine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 30, 2020, 01:53:58 PM
Quote from: The General on March 30, 2020, 01:46:03 PM
Uncanny. Sends shivers down one's spine.

Tois assis, pert être.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 30, 2020, 01:57:02 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 30, 2020, 01:53:58 PM
Tois assis, pert être.
Mange tout, Rodney, mange tout.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 30, 2020, 02:10:04 PM
Quote from: The General on March 30, 2020, 01:57:02 PM
Mange tout, Rodney, mange tout.

I never eat Peas.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 30, 2020, 03:47:34 PM
Quote from: Anthro on March 30, 2020, 01:37:23 PM
This was posted on facebook.


That was in the star online with the most salient point being.



A Met Police spokeswoman said "we are not giving a running commentary on the investigation"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on March 30, 2020, 10:00:27 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 30, 2020, 03:47:34 PM

That was in the star online with the most salient point being.



A Met Police spokeswoman said "we are not giving a running commentary on the investigation"
I am aware of the Met’s stance. And sharing, whatever the source.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on April 07, 2020, 02:50:43 PM
In other news: anyone remembers Stephen Birch (‘Maddie under Murat driveway’)? He has been arrested in Cape Town for spreading fake news re. Covid-19. He appears in a video telling people not to trust the swabs that have been issued to SA by the UK.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 07, 2020, 02:58:27 PM
Please let us know if he is subsequently charged, or whether it's all quietly dropped.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 07, 2020, 03:17:20 PM
Quote from: Anthro on April 07, 2020, 02:50:43 PM
In other news: anyone remembers Stephen Birch (‘Maddie under Murat driveway’)? He has been arrested in Cape Town for spreading fake news re. Covid-19. He appears in a video telling people not to trust the swabs that have been issued to SA by the UK.

Really?  That's good news.  He got carried away with his own self importance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on April 07, 2020, 04:48:34 PM
This is the link:

https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/man-who-posted-fake-contaminated-covid-19-test-kits-video-arrested-20200407
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on April 07, 2020, 04:54:23 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 07, 2020, 02:58:27 PM
Please let us know if he is subsequently charged, or whether it's all quietly dropped.

“Birch was released on a warning and is expected to return to court on 14 July.”(EWN.co.za)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 07, 2020, 09:57:07 PM
From another report on the same story -

https://www.thesouthafrican.com/news/offbeat/who-is-stephen-birch-fake-news-cape-town-testing-kits/

"The fake news peddler is most infamously known for getting involved with the Madeleine McCann disappearance. Five years after the British tot went missing, Stephen Birch claimed to have carried out a ground scan which unearthed human bones near the location where she went missing.

Birch, who admitted to being “obsessed” with the case, spent hundreds of thousands of rand on his own investigations. However, his extraordinary suggestion was debunked by a forensics team."

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

I don't recall any mention of a forensics team examining the Murat driveway again after August 2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 07, 2020, 10:05:57 PM
Quote from: misty on April 07, 2020, 09:57:07 PM
From another report on the same story -

https://www.thesouthafrican.com/news/offbeat/who-is-stephen-birch-fake-news-cape-town-testing-kits/

"The fake news peddler is most infamously known for getting involved with the Madeleine McCann disappearance. Five years after the British tot went missing, Stephen Birch claimed to have carried out a ground scan which unearthed human bones near the location where she went missing.

Birch, who admitted to being “obsessed” with the case, spent hundreds of thousands of rand on his own investigations. However, his extraordinary suggestion was debunked by a forensics team."

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

I don't recall any mention of a forensics team examining the Murat driveway again after August 2007.

Me neither.
If such a thing was carried out I think the only way it could have been carried out covertly would have been if the Judicial Police were involved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 07, 2020, 10:17:24 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 07, 2020, 10:05:57 PM
Me neither.
If such a thing was carried out I think the only way it could have been carried out covertly would have been if the Judicial Police were involved.

Birch tried to negotiate a live TV excavation with CdM around 2015 or 2016 iirc. I forget the exact sum of money involved but if a body was found under the driveway, CdM would pay that amount; if a body wasn't found, Birch would have to pay Murat the sum. Needless to say, the dig didn't happen & Murat tried to sue Birch for trespass afterwards. I don't know the outcome of that Portuguese court case. This all suggests that the site had never been forensically examined again after Eddie was deployed there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 10, 2020, 01:39:40 AM
https://www.portugalresident.com/whistleblower-released-from-jail-in-exchange-for-secrets/

Whistleblower released from jail in exchange for ‘secrets’
By Natasha Donn -9th April 2020
 
Whistleblower Rui Pinto – the young Portuguese computer ‘genius’ who exposed scandals that have become known as Football Leaks and Luanda Leaks – is finally out of jail after more than a year on remand. But he is nowhere near a ‘free man’.

His release has been dependent on his agreement to collaborate with Portuguese justice.

This has always been a ‘sticking point’ in this case. While authorities from other European countries had been actively working with Pinto to probe illegalities – particularly in the world of international football – investigators here have always been seen as seeking to implicate him further for crimes of ‘illegal access’ (computer hacking) and alleged extortion (click here).

Says Correio da Manhã this morning, the decision finally to release him in order to work with PJ police is “extraordinary”.

31-year-old Pinto has apparently agreed to unlock 10 encrypted discs, seized when he was arrested in Hungary last year.

At issue are emails and other documents that allegedly compromise the footballing world further as well as expose “webs of influence in other areas, like politics and the Bank”.

Jornal das Notícias refers to a “gigantic quantity of mails on several high-profile cases”.

Due to having been obtained illegally, the information ‘cannot be used as direct evidence’ but it could be useful for inquiries that are already underway.

Pinto has stored a lot of information about ‘circuits’ for avoiding tax and money-laundering through offshores, says the paper, suggesting the information that becomes available could lead to the opening of “dozens of new inquiries in an authentic tsunami against personalities and institutions that Pinto spied on”.

How this new collaboration will work to Pinto’s benefit when it comes to his trial is not made clear – but the paper stresses that he will be protected round-the-clock throughout this period of ‘house arrest’, essentially from ‘football fans’ who are described as ‘furious’ over leaks that exposed a culture corruption within the sport.

One of the many restrictions to Pinto’s new form of detention is that he will not be able to use the internet.

The young man is being kept in premises of the PJ police in Lisbon “but could at any moment change location for reasons of safety”, says JN.

His lawyers – who have condemned his imprisonment for so long – are described as delighted by their clients release, confident that “other steps will be taken to return their client to total liberty” in due course.

============================================================

A dead man walking....

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 10, 2020, 07:37:32 AM
Quote from: misty on April 10, 2020, 01:39:40 AM
https://www.portugalresident.com/whistleblower-released-from-jail-in-exchange-for-secrets/

Whistleblower released from jail in exchange for ‘secrets’
By Natasha Donn -9th April 2020
 
Whistleblower Rui Pinto – the young Portuguese computer ‘genius’ who exposed scandals that have become known as Football Leaks and Luanda Leaks – is finally out of jail after more than a year on remand. But he is nowhere near a ‘free man’.

His release has been dependent on his agreement to collaborate with Portuguese justice.

This has always been a ‘sticking point’ in this case. While authorities from other European countries had been actively working with Pinto to probe illegalities – particularly in the world of international football – investigators here have always been seen as seeking to implicate him further for crimes of ‘illegal access’ (computer hacking) and alleged extortion (click here).

Says Correio da Manhã this morning, the decision finally to release him in order to work with PJ police is “extraordinary”.

31-year-old Pinto has apparently agreed to unlock 10 encrypted discs, seized when he was arrested in Hungary last year.

At issue are emails and other documents that allegedly compromise the footballing world further as well as expose “webs of influence in other areas, like politics and the Bank”.

Jornal das Notícias refers to a “gigantic quantity of mails on several high-profile cases”.

Due to having been obtained illegally, the information ‘cannot be used as direct evidence’ but it could be useful for inquiries that are already underway.

Pinto has stored a lot of information about ‘circuits’ for avoiding tax and money-laundering through offshores, says the paper, suggesting the information that becomes available could lead to the opening of “dozens of new inquiries in an authentic tsunami against personalities and institutions that Pinto spied on”.

How this new collaboration will work to Pinto’s benefit when it comes to his trial is not made clear – but the paper stresses that he will be protected round-the-clock throughout this period of ‘house arrest’, essentially from ‘football fans’ who are described as ‘furious’ over leaks that exposed a culture corruption within the sport.

One of the many restrictions to Pinto’s new form of detention is that he will not be able to use the internet.

The young man is being kept in premises of the PJ police in Lisbon “but could at any moment change location for reasons of safety”, says JN.

His lawyers – who have condemned his imprisonment for so long – are described as delighted by their clients release, confident that “other steps will be taken to return their client to total liberty” in due course.

============================================================

A dead man walking....

Oh Dear.  Wasn't Cristovao involved in this?  His name crops up all too often.  Was he not involved in both The Cipriano Affair and The McCann Affair?  Not to forget Armed Robbery.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 10, 2020, 01:41:43 PM
God speed fella's.

https://www.bto.org/our-science/projects/cuckoo-tracking-project

PJ crossing the Sahara!
10 Apr 2020
A series of updates from PJ's tag early this morning show that he has embarked on his desert crossing. Over the last few days he has left Ivory Coast and flown over the southwestern corner of Mali and into Mauritania. The latest update which arrived at 06:22 this morning showed that he has flown 1,825 km (1,134 miles) from Ivory Coast and is now in or over north western Mauritania. PJ was tagged in 2016 and in the three previous spring migrations he has crossed the desert further east, mostly over Mali. In previous years, he has made his desert crossing between 6 and 13 April, so he is right on schedule. The mean arrival data of Cuckoo in the UK is around 20th April and some have already been reported here. We will now keep our fingers crossed that when we receive the next update, PJ will have safely completed his desert crossing. Stay tuned!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 09, 2020, 10:53:58 AM
McCann scammer died of a acute subdural haemorrhage.

Private detective, 56, who conned Madeleine McCann's parents out of £300,000 claiming he could find her died in fall before his body was found covered in blood, coroner rules



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8302891/Private-detective-56-conned-Madeleine-McCanns-parents-300-000-died-fall.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 09, 2020, 11:30:25 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 09, 2020, 10:53:58 AM
McCann scammer died of a acute subdural haemorrhage.

Private detective, 56, who conned Madeleine McCann's parents out of £300,000 claiming he could find her died in fall before his body was found covered in blood, coroner rules



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8302891/Private-detective-56-conned-Madeleine-McCanns-parents-300-000-died-fall.html

That could be related to his excessive drinking, but it doesn't explain why he was covered in blood. It's internal, not external bleeding.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 09, 2020, 11:59:43 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2020, 11:30:25 AM
That could be related to his excessive drinking, but it doesn't explain why he was covered in blood. It's internal, not external bleeding.
FIL died of the same,I didn't see it but the wife said it was not nice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 09, 2020, 12:05:16 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 09, 2020, 10:53:58 AM
McCann scammer died of a acute subdural haemorrhage.

Private detective, 56, who conned Madeleine McCann's parents out of £300,000 claiming he could find her died in fall before his body was found covered in blood, coroner rules



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8302891/Private-detective-56-conned-Madeleine-McCanns-parents-300-000-died-fall.html

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-private-detective-who-21998207
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 09, 2020, 12:45:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2020, 11:30:25 AM
That could be related to his excessive drinking, but it doesn't explain why he was covered in blood. It's internal, not external bleeding.
He fell didn’t he?  Some people think Madeleine fell off a sofa which resulted in blood spatter up the wall, so why would you not think a fall could produce bleeding?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 09, 2020, 06:56:09 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 09, 2020, 11:59:43 AM
FIL died of the same,I didn't see it but the wife said it was not nice.

Sorry, who? I know that excessive drinking can thin the blood and make bleeding heavier than normal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 09, 2020, 07:26:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2020, 06:56:09 PM
Sorry, who? I know that excessive drinking can thin the blood and make bleeding heavier than normal.

its easily worked out...father in law
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 09, 2020, 08:24:59 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 09, 2020, 07:26:31 PM
its easily worked out...father in law

Thanks Davel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2020, 06:16:47 PM
Son stolen 32 years ago meets his parents
Police reunited Mao Yin with his parents, having used a picture of him as a child to generate an image of how he would look today
Police reunited Mao Yin with his parents, having used a picture of him as a child to generate an image of how he would look today
AFP/GETTY IMAGES
A Chinese man stolen from his parents 32 years ago as a toddler has been tearfully reunited with them, after police used a photograph of him as a child and facial recognition technology to track him down.

Mao Yin was two years old when he was snatched in the central city of Xi’an in 1988 and sold for £690 in today’s money to a childless couple in Sichuan province 600 miles away.


Mr Mao was abducted when he was two
Police created an image of Mr Mao based on the childhood photo and scanned the national database to find close facial matches. Mr Mao, 34, had no idea that he had been taken and sold as a child. He was abducted when his father was distracted while fetching a drink of water for his son on the way home from nursery.

His mother, Li Jingzhi, said that she quit her job to try to find him, sending more than 100,000 flyers and appearing on TV. Then late last month, the search narrowed after police in Xi’an received a tip-off. They tracked down Mr Mao and a DNA test confirmed his identity.

At the reunion organised by the police, Mr Mao ran into his mother’s arms. “I don’t want him to leave me any more. I won’t let him leave me any more,” she said.


Mr Mao, who runs a home decoration business in Sichuan, said he intended to move to Xi’an to live with his birth parents.

Police have not said what has happened to the parents who brought him up, other than that an inquiry is continuing. Child abduction became widespread in China from the 1980s, when a one-child rule was enforced.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on May 24, 2020, 08:53:32 AM
Thinking of, and wishing Rob(bitybob) a speedy and full recovery from the Covid-19 virus.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 24, 2020, 11:05:35 AM
Quote from: Anthro on May 24, 2020, 08:53:32 AM
Thinking of, and wishing Rob(bitybob) a speedy and full recovery from the Covid-19 virus.

Sorry to hear that,  hope Rob is better soon,  thinking of you Rob.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 24, 2020, 11:19:53 AM
Robs on the Bamber part of the Justice forum.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=6.0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 13, 2020, 10:52:24 AM
The following makes OG pale into insignificance in terms of duration and £'s spent:

https://www.channel4.com/press/news/murder-carpark-explores-1987-murder-daniel-morgan-most-investigated-unsolved-murder
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 13, 2020, 01:16:03 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on June 13, 2020, 10:52:24 AM
The following makes OG pale into insignificance in terms of duration and £'s spent:

https://www.channel4.com/press/news/murder-carpark-explores-1987-murder-daniel-morgan-most-investigated-unsolved-murder

basically in their own backyard, why does any one think they'll crack the Mccann case which is not even in their jurisdiction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2020, 01:28:23 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 13, 2020, 01:16:03 PM
basically in their own backyard, why does any one think they'll crack the Mccann case which is not even in their jurisdiction.
Why do you apparently think they shouldn't bother.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2020, 02:21:00 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2020, 01:28:23 PM
Why do you apparently think they shouldn't bother.

I think the question is whether they're fit for purpose, because if not there's not much point in them bothering imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2020, 03:17:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2020, 02:21:00 PM
I think the question is whether they're fit for purpose, because if not there's not much point in them bothering imo.
Are you suggesting the Met is not fit for purpose?  Perhaps you and Holly could volunteer to replace Cressida Dick on a job share basis and whip them into shape. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 13, 2020, 03:55:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2020, 03:17:38 PM
Are you suggesting the Met is not fit for purpose?  Perhaps you and Holly could volunteer to replace Cressida Dick on a job share basis and whip them into shape.

One of your more sensible posts  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2020, 04:04:32 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on June 13, 2020, 03:55:16 PM
One of your more sensible posts  8((()*/
But sadly not one of yours.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2020, 09:48:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2020, 03:17:38 PM
Are you suggesting the Met is not fit for purpose?  Perhaps you and Holly could volunteer to replace Cressida Dick on a job share basis and whip them into shape.

I think I said that was the question. I didn't speculate about the answer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2020, 10:21:20 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2020, 09:48:40 PM
I think I said that was the question. I didn't speculate about the answer.
Do you accept that some crimes are simply unsolvable no matter how many resources and cash you throw at them or do you think every case should be solved once £x has been spent?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2020, 08:05:45 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2020, 10:21:20 PM
Do you accept that some crimes are simply unsolvable no matter how many resources and cash you throw at them or do you think every case should be solved once £x has been spent?

I do, and I think the McCann case is one of them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2020, 08:15:06 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2020, 08:05:45 AM
I do, and I think the McCann case is one of them.
Then it’s not always a question of police investigative competency.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2020, 09:42:04 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 14, 2020, 08:15:06 AM
Then it’s not always a question of police investigative competency.

Well, according to some it was incompetence which caused the first investigation to fail. I think there were a variety of reasons.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2020, 09:49:45 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2020, 09:42:04 AM
Well, according to some it was incompetence which caused the first investigation to fail. I think there were a variety of reasons.
They hardly put their backs into it did they?  How long before they gave up searching for Madeleine?  A week wasn’t it?  And case shelved within a year.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2020, 09:52:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2020, 09:42:04 AM
Well, according to some it was incompetence which caused the first investigation to fail. I think there were a variety of reasons.

You cannot argue that amaral misunderstood the value of the alerts and the dna.  Amaral is on record using the alerts to prove Maddie died in 5a... that is total rubbish


Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida said he believed the British child had died in her family's apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz on the day she went missing. He told the court the main evidence for this was the findings of British police sniffer dogs sent to Portugal to examine the flat. The McCanns' lawyer, Isabel Duarte, challenged this claim, arguing that the results from sniffer dogs did not constitute proof and were not allowed as evidence in the case.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 14, 2020, 10:45:35 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2020, 10:21:20 PM
Do you accept that some crimes are simply unsolvable no matter how many resources and cash you throw at them or do you think every case should be solved once £x has been spent?

I struggle to see why this case hasn't been solved providing all the data was captured by way of telephones (landline and mobile), electronic card payments, accommodation bookings, hire cars, flights, passport, cctv, sat images etc.

Criminal cases are hampered by the fact those involved in investigating and more come from a very homogenous group of people.  All the research shows problem solving produces better outcomes when the players are from a heterogeneous group.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2020, 10:49:08 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on June 14, 2020, 10:45:35 AM
I struggle to see why this case hasn't been solved providing all the data was captured by way of telephones (landline and mobile), electronic card payments, accommodation bookings, hire cars, flights, passport, cctv, sat images etc.

Criminal cases are hampered by the fact those involved in investigating and more come from a very homogenous group of people.  All the research shows problem solving produces better outcomes when the players are from a heterogeneous group.

i think you need to understand thats your opinion...and pretty well codswallop ...imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2020, 11:05:58 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on June 14, 2020, 10:45:35 AM
I struggle to see why this case hasn't been solved providing all the data was captured by way of telephones (landline and mobile), electronic card payments, accommodation bookings, hire cars, flights, passport, cctv, sat images etc.

Criminal cases are hampered by the fact those involved in investigating and more come from a very homogenous group of people.  All the research shows problem solving produces better outcomes when the players are from a heterogeneous group.
Criminal investigations are often hampered by poor reaction times by the police, by letting perpetrators get away in the "Golden Hour" (not an actual hour btw), by failing to conduct rigorous data gathering in the first hours and days of the crime being perpetrated, by not properly investigating information volunteered by witnesses, by dismissing things as "not relevant" without proper investigation, by failing to gather any and all cctv in the locale etc etc.  Who is to blame for all these failings? Not The Met and not the German police.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on June 14, 2020, 11:18:10 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 14, 2020, 09:52:23 AM
You cannot argue that amaral misunderstood the value of the alerts and the dna.  Amaral is on record using the alerts to prove Maddie died in 5a... that is total rubbish


Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida said he believed the British child had died in her family's apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz on the day she went missing. He told the court the main evidence for this was the findings of British police sniffer dogs sent to Portugal to examine the flat. The McCanns' lawyer, Isabel Duarte, challenged this claim, arguing that the results from sniffer dogs did not constitute proof and were not allowed as evidence in the case.

I wouldn't say total rubbish... maybe there was a translation issue... or maybe he acted too quickly without a full understanding - but the fact remains that the report on swab 3a states:

An incomplete DNA result was obtained from cellular material on the swab 3a. The swab contained very little information and showed low level indications of DNA from more than one person. However, all of the confirmed DNA components within this result match the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Madeline McCann. LCN DNA profiling is highly sensitive it is not possible to attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid".... and later regarding one of the swabs from the car containing 15 (out of 19) DNA markers that MM has: .... "Is there DNA from Madeline on the swab? - It would be very simple to say "yes" simply because of the number of components within the result that are also in her reference sample?"

So although he's over egging the pudding - any officer would at this stage be highly suspicious. Interestingly here's how a book by the author R. Cooley writes about the discussion between the two forces:

"The significance of the DNA is hotly debated to this day. There are very few true experts, so most of the opinions are swarf. However, a UK expert said something interesting in the presence of the Portuguese when the findings were being downplayed… "At our insistence, Stuart contacts the FSS [ the English forensic laboratory ] and asks them if they think the Portuguese are idiots. We hear him saying: “With a lot less than that, we would have already arrested someone in England.”"


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2020, 12:24:34 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on June 14, 2020, 11:18:10 AM
I wouldn't say total rubbish... maybe there was a translation issue... or maybe he acted too quickly without a full understanding - but the fact remains that the report on swab 3a states:

An incomplete DNA result was obtained from cellular material on the swab 3a. The swab contained very little information and showed low level indications of DNA from more than one person. However, all of the confirmed DNA components within this result match the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Madeline McCann. LCN DNA profiling is highly sensitive it is not possible to attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid".... and later regarding one of the swabs from the car containing 15 (out of 19) DNA markers that MM has: .... "Is there DNA from Madeline on the swab? - It would be very simple to say "yes" simply because of the number of components within the result that are also in her reference sample?"

So although he's over egging the pudding - any officer would at this stage be highly suspicious. Interestingly here's how a book by the author R. Cooley writes about the discussion between the two forces:

"The significance of the DNA is hotly debated to this day. There are very few true experts, so most of the opinions are swarf. However, a UK expert said something interesting in the presence of the Portuguese when the findings were being downplayed… "At our insistence, Stuart contacts the FSS [ the English forensic laboratory ] and asks them if they think the Portuguese are idiots. We hear him saying: “With a lot less than that, we would have already arrested someone in England.”"

More codswallop imo.. As I understand  that statement comes from amarals book and he is a convicted liar
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 14, 2020, 01:02:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 14, 2020, 11:05:58 AM
Criminal investigations are often hampered by poor reaction times by the police, by letting perpetrators get away in the "Golden Hour" (not an actual hour btw), by failing to conduct rigorous data gathering in the first hours and days of the crime being perpetrated, by not properly investigating information volunteered by witnesses, by dismissing things as "not relevant" without proper investigation, by failing to gather any and all cctv in the locale etc etc.  Who is to blame for all these failings? Not The Met and not the German police.

But according to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe by 2011 a vast amount of case related material had been accumulated:

https://youtu.be/n9vJm03dlI8

Where did all this material come from if not PJ? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2020, 01:16:50 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on June 14, 2020, 01:02:52 PM
But according to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe by 2011 a vast amount of case related material had been accumulated:

https://youtu.be/n9vJm03dlI8

Where did all this material come from if not PJ?
I didn't say they didn't accumulate a vast amount of case related material, it's what they did(n't) do with it that counts. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 14, 2020, 01:17:34 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on June 14, 2020, 01:02:52 PM
But according to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe by 2011 a vast amount of case related material had been accumulated:

https://youtu.be/n9vJm03dlI8

Where did all this material come from if not PJ?

Did PJ capture all phone and electronic payment data?  I don't think this in in files?  Maybe DP rules protect? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 14, 2020, 01:35:10 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on June 14, 2020, 01:02:52 PM
But according to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe by 2011 a vast amount of case related material had been accumulated:

https://youtu.be/n9vJm03dlI8

Where did all this material come from if not PJ?

Some of it came from the files Ricardo Paiva had decided 'were not relevant' some of it came from the complete PJ files (nothing at all to do with the ones posted on the internet) some of it came from police work and some of it came from the McCann Private Investigator's files.  I think most of that is documented, but I'll have missed sources such as the Official Madeleine site.

The PJ stopped working on Madeleine's case in 2008.  The McCann investigators worked Madeleine's case from before then and up until Scotland Yard took over.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2020, 01:36:15 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on June 14, 2020, 01:02:52 PM
But according to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe by 2011 a vast amount of case related material had been accumulated:

https://youtu.be/n9vJm03dlI8

Where did all this material come from if not PJ?

He mentioned having it translated, so most of it came from the PJ. OG also collected material from the PI's involved in the case by the parents. LP also had material not shown as being given to the PJ, like the questionnaires sent to 500-odd British people who were in PdL at the time of the disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 14, 2020, 01:43:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 14, 2020, 01:16:50 PM
I didn't say they didn't accumulate a vast amount of case related material, it's what they did(n't) do with it that counts.

That is the point.  A lot of information was there thanks to Rebello's team putting it onto computer but a lot of it had never been looked at properly.  I think going through that alone took a lot of time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 29, 2020, 01:36:49 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8470297/Child-snatcher-caught-carrying-two-year-old-girl-German-park.html?ito=push-notification&ci=20649&si=7866482

Open carrying of 2 year old by abductor though streets in broad daylight...child offered no visible resistance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on June 29, 2020, 03:48:54 PM
Quote from: misty on June 29, 2020, 01:36:49 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8470297/Child-snatcher-caught-carrying-two-year-old-girl-German-park.html?ito=push-notification&ci=20649&si=7866482

Open carrying of 2 year old by abductor though streets in broad daylight...child offered no visible resistance.
Just goes to show how quick and easy it can happen. The attached video is from December 2019. It happened in the province of KwaZulu-Natal (South Africa), which borders Swaziland and Mozambique.
https://youtu.be/gRIHoPhFB6M
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 01, 2020, 10:28:55 AM
Quote from: Anthro on June 29, 2020, 03:48:54 PM
Just goes to show how quick and easy it can happen. The attached video is from December 2019. It happened in the province of KwaZulu-Natal (South Africa), which borders Swaziland and Mozambique.
https://youtu.be/gRIHoPhFB6M
I call this the Spontaneous Human Combustion fallacy; an extraordinarily rare event used as an example at how simplistically such manifestly rare events can occur.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 02, 2020, 12:57:26 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8482787/Met-police-stage-dramatic-dawn-raid-smash-crime-gangs-secret-phone-network.html?ito=push-notification&ci=21082&si=7866482

Well done Met. Police & all other forces involved. This operation shows how vital the digital trail can be in tracing serious crime.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on July 02, 2020, 03:09:25 PM
In other news: Ghislaine Maxwell has been arrested by the FBI.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on July 02, 2020, 04:02:37 PM
Quote from: Anthro on July 02, 2020, 03:09:25 PM
In other news: Ghislaine Maxwell has been arrested by the FBI.

No messing around there with charging her.

Why you can trust Sky News
British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell has been charged with playing a role in the "sexual exploitation and abuse" of multiple underage girls by Jeffrey Epstein, according to a court filing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on July 02, 2020, 05:10:51 PM
But Ghislaine Maxwell is a perfectly respectable protector of the world's oceans from plastic pollution!...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pUzcRORDIg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pUzcRORDIg)

Or is she?...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8483581/Ghislaine-Maxwell-ARRESTED.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8483581/Ghislaine-Maxwell-ARRESTED.html)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GifgqzFfXKg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GifgqzFfXKg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 02, 2020, 05:17:10 PM

I would like to see them try and get away with this one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 02, 2020, 05:21:12 PM
Quote from: kizzy on July 02, 2020, 04:02:37 PM
No messing around there with charging her.

Why you can trust Sky News
British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell has been charged with playing a role in the "sexual exploitation and abuse" of multiple underage girls by Jeffrey Epstein, according to a court filing.

I wonder what she might have to say about Prince Andrew ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 02, 2020, 05:30:33 PM
Quote from: kizzy on July 02, 2020, 04:02:37 PM
No messing around there with charging her.

Why you can trust Sky News
British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell has been charged with playing a role in the "sexual exploitation and abuse" of multiple underage girls by Jeffrey Epstein, according to a court filing.
A good example of someone who has been suspected of wrongdoing for years, who has only now been arrested and charged.  How come it took so long?  How do you know she’s not been set up? La la la la la.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on July 02, 2020, 07:47:16 PM
Quote from: The General on July 01, 2020, 10:28:55 AM
I call this the Spontaneous Human Combustion fallacy; an extraordinarily rare event used as an example at how simplistically such manifestly rare events can occur.
Rare? Simplistic? Fallacy?
‘A child goes missing every five hours in South Africa, according to figures released by the South African Police Service Missing Persons Bureau for 2013. Missing Children South Africa’s statistic indicates that 77% of children are found. Sadly, this still leaves us with at least 23% of the children being either never found, trafficked or found deceased. Children are also the most vulnerable victims of gender-based violence. The reality is shocking and undeniable and we can no longer be innocent bystanders to this fact. It can happen to your child’.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 02, 2020, 08:48:55 PM
Quote from: Anthro on July 02, 2020, 07:47:16 PM
Rare? Simplistic? Fallacy?
‘A child goes missing every five hours in South Africa, according to figures released by the South African Police Service Missing Persons Bureau for 2013. Missing Children South Africa’s statistic indicates that 77% of children are found. Sadly, this still leaves us with at least 23% of the children being either never found, trafficked or found deceased. Children are also the most vulnerable victims of gender-based violence. The reality is shocking and undeniable and we can no longer be innocent bystanders to this fact. It can happen to your child’.
That's terrible. What about the world? What about Wales? What about Monaco?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on July 02, 2020, 09:05:21 PM
Quote from: The General on July 02, 2020, 08:48:55 PM
That's terrible. What about the world? What about Wales? What about Monaco?
I do not know. Please tell. Your reference to first-world entities obviously differs from developing and underdeveloped countries. South Africa is one. So is Portugal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 02, 2020, 10:24:48 PM
Quote from: misty on July 02, 2020, 12:57:26 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8482787/Met-police-stage-dramatic-dawn-raid-smash-crime-gangs-secret-phone-network.html?ito=push-notification&ci=21082&si=7866482

Well done Met. Police & all other forces involved. This operation shows how vital the digital trail can be in tracing serious crime.
Fantastic achievement - hundreds of serious criminals arrested and dozens of millions of pounds and goods seized.   8@??)(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 02, 2020, 10:33:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 02, 2020, 10:24:48 PM
Fantastic achievement - hundreds of serious criminals arrested and dozens of millions of pounds and goods seized.   8@??)(

I wonder what usual critics  will have to say about this amazing piece of police work by the Met
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 02, 2020, 10:38:03 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on July 02, 2020, 10:36:10 PM
I'll go.........Far more worth while than looking for abductors that don't exist.

I'd disagree...looks like they've found him ....another success story for the Met
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 02, 2020, 10:44:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 02, 2020, 10:38:03 PM
I'd disagree...looks like they've found him ....another success story for the Met

Concrete evidence, no conviction.

That's what you call success is it? Crikey, & I thought the PJ were bad.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on July 02, 2020, 10:46:32 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 02, 2020, 10:38:03 PM
I'd disagree...looks like they've found him ....another success story for the Met

What do you mean "they've found him"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 02, 2020, 10:57:03 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on July 02, 2020, 10:46:32 PM
What do you mean "they've found him"?

What do you think
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on July 02, 2020, 11:06:48 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 02, 2020, 10:57:03 PM
What do you think

You make it sound like the Met have brought him to book - they can't even agree that this is a murder investigation. Mind you they do still have digital data on the samples found in the apartment and hire car so one step ahead of the Germans, perhaps?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 03, 2020, 07:20:46 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 02, 2020, 10:38:03 PM
I'd disagree...looks like they've found him ....another success story for the Met
Yes, to a degree, but it was a Europol bust, headed up by the Dutch.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 03, 2020, 07:45:43 AM
Quote from: The General on July 03, 2020, 07:20:46 AM
Yes, to a degree, but it was a Europol bust, headed up by the Dutch.

predictable unwillingness to accept a succes by the Met...it does your credibility no favours
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 03, 2020, 08:48:15 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 03, 2020, 07:45:43 AM
predictable unwillingness to accept a succes by the Met...it does your credibility no favours
What? How dare you, I'm pointing out the fact that it was a collaboration, with the success being due in no small part to all parties, including the Met Police.
My credibility transcends this mere dust mote of a forum and your narrow outlook.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 03, 2020, 08:54:47 AM

Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. The World English Bible translates the passage as: You hypocrite!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 03, 2020, 09:06:30 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 03, 2020, 08:54:47 AM
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. The World English Bible translates the passage as: You hypocrite!
You Googled the word 'mote' and now I'm a hypocrite?
OK then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 03, 2020, 09:12:18 AM
Quote from: The General on July 03, 2020, 09:06:30 AM
You Googled the word 'mote' and now I'm a hypocrite?
OK then.

I didn't say that.  I'm just quoting The Bible.  It's a very old and well known phrase.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 03, 2020, 09:27:35 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 03, 2020, 09:12:18 AM
I didn't say that.  I'm just quoting The Bible.  It's a very old and well known phrase.
I'm familiar with the passage and the Greek etymology of the word. Even this cynical atheist can derive meaning from the bible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 03, 2020, 09:32:26 AM
Quote from: The General on July 03, 2020, 09:27:35 AM
I'm familiar with the passage and the Greek etymology of the word. Even this cynical atheist can derive meaning from the bible.

Exactly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on July 08, 2020, 08:32:32 AM
Quote from: misty on July 02, 2020, 12:57:26 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8482787/Met-police-stage-dramatic-dawn-raid-smash-crime-gangs-secret-phone-network.html?ito=push-notification&ci=21082&si=7866482

Well done Met. Police & all other forces involved. This operation shows how vital the digital trail can be in tracing serious crime.

Indeed. According to Sky, it was originally the French who decrypted the messages and passed on info to Europol.

The platform was used by criminals, recently decoded by French police and shared via Europol.
https://news.sky.com/story/dutch-police-find-torture-chamber-after-tips-from-unencrypted-messages-12023412

What cooperation will there be with Europol post-Brexit? And what's in place as a substitute for EAWs?

https://icct.nl/publication/post-brexit-eu-insecurity/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 08, 2020, 08:39:50 AM
Quote from: Carana on July 08, 2020, 08:32:32 AM
Indeed. According to Sky, it was originally the French who decrypted the messages and passed on info to Europol.

The platform was used by criminals, recently decoded by French police and shared via Europol.
https://news.sky.com/story/dutch-police-find-torture-chamber-after-tips-from-unencrypted-messages-12023412

What cooperation will there be with Europol post-Brexit? And what's in place as a substitute for EAWs?

https://icct.nl/publication/post-brexit-eu-insecurity/

As things stand, none.
Europol isn't prepared to share its data bases with a non-EU country and UK, (under Mrs May) was determined to withdraw from the EAW .

Things might alter before we're finished, of course.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on July 08, 2020, 08:58:51 AM
Quote from: jassi on July 08, 2020, 08:39:50 AM
As things stand, none.
Europol isn't prepared to share its data bases with a non-EU country and UK, (under Mrs May) was determined to withdraw from the EAW .

Things might alter before we're finished, of course.

Possibly. Not sure how with under 4 months left to go to renegotiate 759 bilateral agreements (FT) or even 157...

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8370/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 08, 2020, 09:03:12 AM
Quote from: Carana on July 08, 2020, 08:58:51 AM
Possibly. Not sure how with under 4 months left to go to renegotiate 759 bilateral agreements (FT) or even 157...

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8370/

I'm sure criminals are watching developments with interest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 08, 2020, 09:09:02 AM
Quote from: Carana on July 08, 2020, 08:58:51 AM
Possibly. Not sure how with under 4 months left to go to renegotiate 759 bilateral agreements (FT) or even 157...

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8370/

we cant stay in the EU because of threats from interpol....im sure both sides will want to find a solution...how does it work with Norway
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 08, 2020, 09:18:20 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 08, 2020, 09:09:02 AM
we cant stay in the EU because of threats from interpol....im sure both sides will want to find a solution...how does it work with Norway

How did it work before the EU,extradition treaties!, mind Biggs found a way around that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on July 08, 2020, 09:33:59 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 08, 2020, 09:09:02 AM
we cant stay in the EU because of threats from interpol....im sure both sides will want to find a solution...how does it work with Norway

AFAIK, the UK will still participate in Interpol, but it's slower than Europol.

I expect as well that both sides would like to find a solution, but for reasons best known to themselves, the UK government didn't request an extension (deadline 30 June), which would have given more breathing space in the midst of a pandemic. And perhaps less "heavy breathing" on the part of countries (or even criminals) who can't wait to see the UK isolated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on July 08, 2020, 09:56:07 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 08, 2020, 09:03:12 AM
I'm sure criminals are watching developments with interest.


So am I. Not exactly what was written on varying sides of the tin...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on July 08, 2020, 10:02:18 AM
Quote from: barrier on July 08, 2020, 09:18:20 AM
How did it work before the EU,extradition treaties!, mind Biggs found a way around that.

Is that a serious question?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 08, 2020, 10:05:27 AM
Quote from: barrier on July 08, 2020, 09:18:20 AM
How did it work before the EU,extradition treaties!, mind Biggs found a way around that.

France never signed up for this, preferring to keep to the original arrangement, so there must have been one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on July 08, 2020, 06:59:55 PM
I apologise if information from another blog is not allowed. The source is Textusa:
‘Carole Tranmer says in her rogatory interview, in the PJ Files, "'And, humm... then I believe I saw him wearing a blue-grey T-shirt, it was not dark blue, more of a pallid colour and it was, humm... a type of blue with short sleeves, humm... but I did not see anything below, I did not see the trousers or shoes or anything else, only the top part and he would have, I would say'humm, when looking from above, he was not short, I would say he was about a 1'78, about medium height. He was not thing nor was he muscular. So he was of average stature. I would say he was European but not Portuguese. He was not dark and, he was not short, but I would say that he looked Scandinavian if you will, because he was very light and could have been British or Scandinavian. Even though I was looking upwards, he had big eyes, there is nothing else. He did not have tattoos, nothing like this, humm'a person of common appearance, it was his furtiveness that called my attention, humm, no, I can't'".
Who was Tranmer referring to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 08, 2020, 07:18:57 PM
Quote from: Anthro on July 08, 2020, 06:59:55 PM
I apologise if information from another blog is not allowed. The source is Textusa:
‘Carole Tranmer says in her rogatory interview, in the PJ Files, "'And, humm... then I believe I saw him wearing a blue-grey T-shirt, it was not dark blue, more of a pallid colour and it was, humm... a type of blue with short sleeves, humm... but I did not see anything below, I did not see the trousers or shoes or anything else, only the top part and he would have, I would say'humm, when looking from above, he was not short, I would say he was about a 1'78, about medium height. He was not thing nor was he muscular. So he was of average stature. I would say he was European but not Portuguese. He was not dark and, he was not short, but I would say that he looked Scandinavian if you will, because he was very light and could have been British or Scandinavian. Even though I was looking upwards, he had big eyes, there is nothing else. He did not have tattoos, nothing like this, humm'a person of common appearance, it was his furtiveness that called my attention, humm, no, I can't'".
Who was Tranmer referring to?
Ah.  Holly’s prime suspect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on July 08, 2020, 07:55:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 08, 2020, 07:18:57 PM
Ah.  Holly’s prime suspect.
I actually don’t know. Holly, apparently, is not prepared to share her theory in full, here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 08, 2020, 08:00:22 PM
Quote from: Anthro on July 08, 2020, 07:55:42 PM
I actually don’t know. Holly, apparently, is not prepared to share her theory in full, here.

according to Holly maddie was taken to a better life by Carole T and her husband....as they ahd found out she was being neglected from her aunt..Pamela F
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 08, 2020, 08:07:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 08, 2020, 08:00:22 PM
according to Holly maddie was taken to a better life by Carole T and her husband....as they ahd found out she was being neglected from her aunt..Pamela F

At least Holly's heart is in the right place.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 08, 2020, 08:08:41 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 08, 2020, 08:07:04 PM
At least Holly's heart is in the right place.

I totally agree

I really would prefer if Holly was right
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on July 08, 2020, 08:24:15 PM
I can only speak for myself. Madeleine being subjected to a person such as Brückner, I am praying that it is not the case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 08, 2020, 08:29:46 PM

Bruckner could have sold Madeleine.  If it was him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 08, 2020, 08:32:50 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 08, 2020, 08:29:46 PM
Bruckner could have sold Madeleine.  If it was him.

Equally Brueckner couldn't have sold Madeleine if it wasn't him
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 08, 2020, 08:36:54 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 08, 2020, 08:32:50 PM
Equally Brueckner couldn't have sold Madeleine if it wasn't him

Somebody else could have sold Madeleine to someone who wanted her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 08, 2020, 08:38:38 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 08, 2020, 08:29:46 PM
Bruckner could have sold Madeleine.  If it was him.

that is a possibility
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 08, 2020, 08:41:52 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 08, 2020, 08:36:54 PM
Somebody else could have sold Madeleine to someone who wanted her.

Of course,  no doubt there were  any number of paedophiles  who would have been interested
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 08, 2020, 08:42:10 PM
So there you are you see.  There is still hope.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 08, 2020, 08:43:32 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 08, 2020, 08:41:52 PM
Of course,  no doubt there were  any number of paedophiles  who would have been interested

Oh Dear?  Never mind.  I don't suppose you can help it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 08, 2020, 08:44:14 PM
I really don’t think the German police would have been so forceful in their statements about her being dead without very good reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 08, 2020, 08:48:31 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 08, 2020, 08:44:14 PM
I really don’t think the German police would have been so forceful in their statements about her being dead without very good reason.

They wouldnt
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 08, 2020, 08:52:12 PM

I'll go on hoping if nobody minds.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 08, 2020, 08:52:36 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 08, 2020, 08:29:46 PM
Bruckner could have sold Madeleine.  If it was him.

I think the Winnebago indicates that he came into money from somewhere.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 08, 2020, 08:54:45 PM
Allegedly he said he stole it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 08, 2020, 08:57:49 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 08, 2020, 08:54:45 PM
Allegedly he said he stole it

Yeah ... such a small insignificant vehicle would never have attracted any interest or been quite noticeable if reported as stolen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 08, 2020, 08:58:55 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 08, 2020, 08:57:49 PM
Yeah ... such a small insignificant vehicle would never have attracted any interest or been quite noticeable if reported as stolen.

No,No he stole the money, not the vehicle - allegedly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 08, 2020, 08:59:57 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 08, 2020, 08:54:45 PM
Allegedly he said he stole it

cite please
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 08, 2020, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 08, 2020, 08:59:57 PM
cite please

Not necessary as I didn't state it as a fact, but no doubt if you google you'll find a media report
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 08, 2020, 09:02:58 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 08, 2020, 08:52:36 PM
I think the Winnebago indicates that he came into money from somewhere.

Yes, it does.  I thought that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 08, 2020, 09:04:07 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 08, 2020, 09:01:07 PM
Not necessary as I didn't state it as a fact, but no doubt if you google you'll find a media report

who alleged he stole it...as you claim..its up to you to provide a cite

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 08, 2020, 09:04:58 PM
Quote from: Anthro on July 08, 2020, 06:59:55 PM
I apologise if information from another blog is not allowed. The source is Textusa:
‘Carole Tranmer says in her rogatory interview, in the PJ Files, "'And, humm... then I believe I saw him wearing a blue-grey T-shirt, it was not dark blue, more of a pallid colour and it was, humm... a type of blue with short sleeves, humm... but I did not see anything below, I did not see the trousers or shoes or anything else, only the top part and he would have, I would say'humm, when looking from above, he was not short, I would say he was about a 1'78, about medium height. He was not thing nor was he muscular. So he was of average stature. I would say he was European but not Portuguese. He was not dark and, he was not short, but I would say that he looked Scandinavian if you will, because he was very light and could have been British or Scandinavian. Even though I was looking upwards, he had big eyes, there is nothing else. He did not have tattoos, nothing like this, humm'a person of common appearance, it was his furtiveness that called my attention, humm, no, I can't'".
Who was Tranmer referring to?
Could that be CB?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on July 09, 2020, 07:34:00 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 08, 2020, 09:04:58 PM
Could that be CB?
I think it is possible, Rob.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 09, 2020, 09:12:36 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 08, 2020, 09:04:58 PM
Could that be CB?

Why would he be leaving the Oldfield's garden?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 09, 2020, 09:15:20 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 08, 2020, 09:04:58 PM
Could that be CB?

it sounds very much like him
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 09, 2020, 09:18:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 09, 2020, 09:12:36 AM
Why would he be leaving the Oldfield's garden?
Why would any strange bloke be leaving the Oldfields garden?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 09, 2020, 10:06:57 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 09, 2020, 09:18:32 AM
Why would any strange bloke be leaving the Oldfields garden?

I'm of the opinion that it was Matthew Oldfield leaving his own garden on his way (probably) to the beach.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 09, 2020, 10:42:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 09, 2020, 10:06:57 AM
I'm of the opinion that it was Matthew Oldfield leaving his own garden on his way (probably) to the beach.
Furtively?  I thought MO was the tallest of the bunch...?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 09, 2020, 12:42:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 09, 2020, 09:12:36 AM
Why would he be leaving the Oldfield's garden?
Maybe looking for a way to get into McCann's apartment.  There was only a low fence to jump across.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 09, 2020, 12:44:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 09, 2020, 10:06:57 AM
I'm of the opinion that it was Matthew Oldfield leaving his own garden on his way (probably) to the beach.
They had been at the beach that afternoon hadn't they.  Sailing and all that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 09, 2020, 12:58:31 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 09, 2020, 12:44:28 PM
They had been at the beach that afternoon hadn't they.  Sailing and all that.

Yes, but the witness wasn't absolutely certain whether it was morning or afternoon when she saw the man and couldn't give a definite time.

According to Rachael the women and children didn't leave for the beach until four, half four. The men went down before that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on July 09, 2020, 01:44:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 09, 2020, 10:42:44 AM
Furtively?  I thought MO was the tallest of the bunch...?

Russell was the tallest 6'6
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 09, 2020, 04:10:21 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on July 09, 2020, 01:44:49 PM
Russell was the tallest 6'6
And how tall was MO?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on July 09, 2020, 06:39:08 PM
As a guess about 6'2

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Media/Pix/pictures/2008/10/16/tapas460.jpg?width=445&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=73164af13bdad0c88222eb2a9298298e)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on July 09, 2020, 07:06:14 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on July 09, 2020, 06:39:08 PM
As a guess about 6'2

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Media/Pix/pictures/2008/10/16/tapas460.jpg?width=445&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=73164af13bdad0c88222eb2a9298298e)
Oldfield does not have light complexion. Tranmer described the man she saw as being furtive, as if he wanted to not attract attention. I think in that, lies an important detail.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 09, 2020, 07:08:11 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on July 09, 2020, 06:39:08 PM
As a guess about 6'2

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Media/Pix/pictures/2008/10/16/tapas460.jpg?width=445&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=73164af13bdad0c88222eb2a9298298e)
Deffo not medium height then!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 10, 2020, 12:50:07 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 08, 2020, 08:52:36 PM
I think the Winnebago indicates that he came into money from somewhere.

But does he own the Winnibago / Allegro

If so why didn't he live in it?.  It was easily big enough and would have saved him a lot of money if he didn't have a cottage as well.?

I am inclined to think that maybe he was provided with it to transport children / narcotics at the will of the Trafficking master... but I don't know !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on July 10, 2020, 09:32:24 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 08, 2020, 08:52:36 PM
I think the Winnebago indicates that he came into money from somewhere.

Why is a Winnebago absent from MET and BKA websites? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 10, 2020, 09:47:21 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on July 10, 2020, 09:32:24 AM
Why is a Winnebago absent from MET and BKA websites?


Possibly because it wasn't bought until 2010

https://nypost.com/2020/06/17/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-bruckner-kept-child-porn-in-rv-film/

Brueckner, 43, reportedly bought the red and white Allegro Bay RV in early 2010 — three years after moving back to his native Germany from Portugal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on July 10, 2020, 09:55:13 AM
Quote from: jassi on July 10, 2020, 09:47:21 AM

Possibly because it wasn't bought until 2010

https://nypost.com/2020/06/17/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-bruckner-kept-child-porn-in-rv-film/

Brueckner, 43, reportedly bought the red and white Allegro Bay RV in early 2010 — three years after moving back to his native Germany from Portugal.

Thanks.  Not sure I see any connection with MM's disappearance if he purchased in 2010?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 10, 2020, 10:00:21 AM
Nope, nor do I, though it may be relevant to the Germans, who seem interested in far more than Madeleine's disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 15, 2020, 08:53:46 AM
Its been suggested that Portugal is a paedo paradise in some quarters,Germany it seem is not immune from it.

Caveat google translate.

https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article211612601/Kindesmissbrauch-Netz-der-Paedokriminellen-zieht-sich-durch-ganz-Deutschland.html
The network of pedophile criminals runs through all of Germany


A criminal scene with thousands of perpetrators: The latest abuse scandals in Germany have caused bewilderment. Increased international investigations now reveal the huge dimension of organized child abuse.
4th

EThey are snapshots of different crimes, but, in summary, they reveal the huge dimension of the problem of child abuse: one of the ten most wanted pediatricians worldwide has now been arrested in Paris. According to the Bordeaux public prosecutor, the 40-year-old Frenchman is said to have provided photos and videos of abuse images to thousands of users on the Internet. The arrest was carried out in cooperation with the EU police agency Europol.

In the past two weeks, the Rostock public prosecutor and police have executed 18 search warrants on suspicion of acquiring, owning and distributing child abuse images. The accused are between 16 and 76 years old. According to the public prosecutor, these are separate cases. The data on 385 secured data carriers and evidence covers more than 26 terabytes, storage space for millions of photos and hundreds of videos. It may be that other suspects are identified during the evaluation. The Rostock investigators already carried out a total of 47 raids on the subject of child abuse this year.

ALSO READ
Parents should send clear signals when a child talks about abuse and be sure to seek support for themselves
ABUSE
How to protect your child from sexual assault
Since autumn 2019, the Cologne police have been providing regular information, in phases weekly, about the largest crime complex of the investigative commission "Berg", which has been the nation's largest so far. So far, 60 suspects have been targeted by investigators in NRW alone. 56 reports were forwarded to investigative authorities in the remaining 15 federal states.

The intensified investigations reveal how far-reaching the networks are in child sexual abuse - most recently with a number of the “Cybercrime Central and Contact Point” at the Cologne Public Prosecutor's Office, which investigates the clues from the “Berg” crime complex and now a task force to combat child abuse has founded: Accordingly, there are now around 30,000 traces at “Berg”, although it is not clear whether the number of suspects is the same. In a seized internet chat, around 1800 participants were found who have to fear at least one charge for possessing or distributing recordings of naked and raped children - if they can all be identified using their pseudonyms.

ALSO READ
"It is difficult to accept all of this, including all the disgust. But I am grateful for my life"
CHILD ABUSE
"You don't think that grandma wants something bad"
The Federal Government's Commissioner for Abuse, Johannes-Wilhelm Rörig, calls for more federal and state involvement in the fight against sexual abuse of children and adolescents. Rörig advocated a cross-departmental master plan of the federal states against sexual violence. "The political will to combat sexual violence against children has so far been too weak," complained Rörig to the Funke media group.

In Rörig's view , the now planned tightening of punishment, which federal states such as North Rhine-Westphalia had requested early and which, after the first hesitation, now also supports Federal Justice Minister Christine Lambrecht (SPD), is not sufficient to prevent abuse. He advocates improved information and prevention work, better investigative options and closer cooperation between youth welfare offices and family courts.

The CSU wants to go further than the Federal Minister of Justice and ensure that convictions for child abuse remain in the offender's extended certificate of good conduct for life and are no longer deleted after ten years. "If you commit the weakest in our society, you must never deal with children again professionally or on a voluntary basis," said the head of the CSU state group in the Bundestag, Alexander Dobrindt. North Rhine-Westphalia, Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria and the Saarland have jointly launched an initiative to eliminate the deletion deadlines through the Federal Council.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 15, 2020, 11:49:08 AM
Quote from: barrier on July 15, 2020, 08:53:46 AM
Its been suggested that Portugal is a paedo paradise in some quarters,Germany it seem is not immune from it.

Caveat google translate.

https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article211612601/Kindesmissbrauch-Netz-der-Paedokriminellen-zieht-sich-durch-ganz-Deutschland.html
The network of pedophile criminals runs through all of Germany


A criminal scene with thousands of perpetrators: The latest abuse scandals in Germany have caused bewilderment. Increased international investigations now reveal the huge dimension of organized child abuse.
4th

EThey are snapshots of different crimes, but, in summary, they reveal the huge dimension of the problem of child abuse: one of the ten most wanted pediatricians worldwide has now been arrested in Paris. According to the Bordeaux public prosecutor, the 40-year-old Frenchman is said to have provided photos and videos of abuse images to thousands of users on the Internet. The arrest was carried out in cooperation with the EU police agency Europol.

In the past two weeks, the Rostock public prosecutor and police have executed 18 search warrants on suspicion of acquiring, owning and distributing child abuse images. The accused are between 16 and 76 years old. According to the public prosecutor, these are separate cases. The data on 385 secured data carriers and evidence covers more than 26 terabytes, storage space for millions of photos and hundreds of videos. It may be that other suspects are identified during the evaluation. The Rostock investigators already carried out a total of 47 raids on the subject of child abuse this year.

ALSO READ
Parents should send clear signals when a child talks about abuse and be sure to seek support for themselves
ABUSE
How to protect your child from sexual assault
Since autumn 2019, the Cologne police have been providing regular information, in phases weekly, about the largest crime complex of the investigative commission "Berg", which has been the nation's largest so far. So far, 60 suspects have been targeted by investigators in NRW alone. 56 reports were forwarded to investigative authorities in the remaining 15 federal states.

The intensified investigations reveal how far-reaching the networks are in child sexual abuse - most recently with a number of the “Cybercrime Central and Contact Point” at the Cologne Public Prosecutor's Office, which investigates the clues from the “Berg” crime complex and now a task force to combat child abuse has founded: Accordingly, there are now around 30,000 traces at “Berg”, although it is not clear whether the number of suspects is the same. In a seized internet chat, around 1800 participants were found who have to fear at least one charge for possessing or distributing recordings of naked and raped children - if they can all be identified using their pseudonyms.

ALSO READ
"It is difficult to accept all of this, including all the disgust. But I am grateful for my life"
CHILD ABUSE
"You don't think that grandma wants something bad"
The Federal Government's Commissioner for Abuse, Johannes-Wilhelm Rörig, calls for more federal and state involvement in the fight against sexual abuse of children and adolescents. Rörig advocated a cross-departmental master plan of the federal states against sexual violence. "The political will to combat sexual violence against children has so far been too weak," complained Rörig to the Funke media group.

In Rörig's view , the now planned tightening of punishment, which federal states such as North Rhine-Westphalia had requested early and which, after the first hesitation, now also supports Federal Justice Minister Christine Lambrecht (SPD), is not sufficient to prevent abuse. He advocates improved information and prevention work, better investigative options and closer cooperation between youth welfare offices and family courts.

The CSU wants to go further than the Federal Minister of Justice and ensure that convictions for child abuse remain in the offender's extended certificate of good conduct for life and are no longer deleted after ten years. "If you commit the weakest in our society, you must never deal with children again professionally or on a voluntary basis," said the head of the CSU state group in the Bundestag, Alexander Dobrindt. North Rhine-Westphalia, Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria and the Saarland have jointly launched an initiative to eliminate the deletion deadlines through the Federal Council.


Paedophiles are everywhere.  Though most countries keep note of who is convicted of abuse against children,  how come the Portuguese didn't?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 15, 2020, 11:52:50 AM
Quote from: Lace on July 15, 2020, 11:49:08 AM
Paedophiles are everywhere.  Though most countries keep note of who is convicted of abuse against children,  how come the Portuguese didn't?
Are you really going there? Most countries in mainland Europe refused to ge on board with a European Database in 2008 because of 'ooooohhhh, Human Rights', Germany led the way in fact. So let's not even go down that road.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 15, 2020, 11:55:43 AM
Quote from: Lace on July 15, 2020, 11:49:08 AM
Paedophiles are everywhere.  Though most countries keep note of who is convicted of abuse against children,  how come the Portuguese didn't?


 A work in progress for several years, I imagine.

Does  any country keep such records of those who haven't sexually offended in the country of residence ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 15, 2020, 12:00:33 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 15, 2020, 11:55:43 AM

 A work in progress for several years, I imagine.

Does  any country keep such records of those who haven't sexually offended in the country of residence ?
It's a rather weak argument and somewhat misguided when we, the UK, couldn't even get two police forces to talk to eachother about EMPLOYING A SCHOOL CARETAKER ON THE SEX OFFENDERS REGISTER WHO KILLED TWO LITTLE GIRLS.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 15, 2020, 12:16:12 PM
Quote from: The General on July 15, 2020, 12:00:33 PM
It's a rather weak argument and somewhat misguided when we, the UK, couldn't even get two police forces to talk to eachother about EMPLOYING A SCHOOL CARETAKER ON THE SEX OFFENDERS REGISTER WHO KILLED TWO LITTLE GIRLS.


Ten years on, the Police National Database (PND), set up on the basis of recommendations following the killings and designed to ensure convicts and suspects cannot hide across county borders, is set to hit one million searches.


I'm confused,  Portuguese Police say they didn't know CB was a sex offender,  only that he was a thief.   Yet Amaral says Police knocked on CB's door after Madelene went missing but he was out.   So why did Police knock on his door?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 15, 2020, 12:39:44 PM
Quote from: The General on July 15, 2020, 12:00:33 PM
It's a rather weak argument and somewhat misguided when we, the UK, couldn't even get two police forces to talk to eachother about EMPLOYING A SCHOOL CARETAKER ON THE SEX OFFENDERS REGISTER WHO KILLED TWO LITTLE GIRLS.

He hadn't been extradited from one country to another for sexual offences.  Nor was he a convicted paedophile  Although he was on file for burglary.       http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3313501.stm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 15, 2020, 11:38:37 PM
Quote from: Lace on July 15, 2020, 12:16:12 PM

Ten years on, the Police National Database (PND), set up on the basis of recommendations following the killings and designed to ensure convicts and suspects cannot hide across county borders, is set to hit one million searches.


I'm confused,  Portuguese Police say they didn't know CB was a sex offender,  only that he was a thief.   Yet Amaral says Police knocked on CB's door after Madelene went missing but he was out.   So why did Police knock on his door?

My guess would be they knocked on many peoples doors!

Although, it was made known that gypsies and  burglars were the main targets,it  made sense to chat with them as well. Not only to implicate or eliminate but to see if they saw anything suspicious if they were 'working' that area that time of night. Makes sense to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 16, 2020, 12:03:41 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on July 15, 2020, 11:38:37 PM
My guess would be they knocked on many peoples doors!

Although, it was made known that gypsies and  burglars were the main targets,it  made sense to chat with them as well. Not only to implicate or eliminate but to see if they saw anything suspicious if they were 'working' that area that time of night. Makes sense to me.

They didn't knock on Pamela Fenn's door and she lived in the apartment above them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 16, 2020, 12:14:39 PM
Quote from: Lace on July 16, 2020, 12:03:41 PM
They didn't knock on Pamela Fenn's door and she lived in the apartment above them.
They didn't knock on Mr and Mrs Moyes' door, who lived above Mrs Fenn.

They didn't bother too much with apartment 5J either ... and didn't arrange immediate access despite two dog teams following a scent to the door and showing showing great interest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 16, 2020, 01:12:37 PM
Quote from: Lace on July 16, 2020, 12:03:41 PM
They didn't knock on Pamela Fenn's door and she lived in the apartment above them.
Prove it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 16, 2020, 01:14:14 PM
Quote from: Lace on July 16, 2020, 12:03:41 PM
They didn't knock on Pamela Fenn's door and she lived in the apartment above them.

Must have at some stage, she made a statement did she not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 16, 2020, 01:25:34 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 16, 2020, 01:14:14 PM
Must have at some stage, she made a statement did she not.
This is another lazy trope; a mere crutch to lean on in the absence of knowledge and utterly without foundation. Apparently anyone Portuguese connected to the case are idiots.
To suggest they didn't knock on upstairs is palpable tripe - I'm not proving a negative - show me the officer's notebooks, or a log.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 16, 2020, 02:01:05 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 16, 2020, 01:14:14 PM
Must have at some stage, she made a statement did she not.

In August.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 16, 2020, 02:05:49 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 16, 2020, 01:14:14 PM
Must have at some stage, she made a statement did she not.

Mrs Fenn's home was not visited when the police were going door to door in Luz.  Maybe she wasn't in when they called and they didn't bother to call back.

Mrs Fenn wasn't interviewed until the 20th August.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 16, 2020, 02:08:40 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 16, 2020, 02:05:49 PM
Mrs Fenn's home was not visited when the police were going door to door in Luz.  Maybe she wasn't in when they called and they didn't bother to call back.

Mrs Fenn wasn't interviewed until the 20th August.

Did she say that? A source would be helpful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 16, 2020, 02:23:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 16, 2020, 02:08:40 PM
Did she say that? A source would be helpful.

Try the Search Facility.  It'll be on here somewhere.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 16, 2020, 02:25:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 16, 2020, 02:08:40 PM
Did she say that? A source would be helpful.

Did she mention a home visit in her only statement in the files?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 16, 2020, 02:30:53 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 16, 2020, 02:25:40 PM
Did she mention a home visit in her only statement in the files?

Shouldn't you be telling me rather than asking me? I thought the same forum customs applied to all members.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 16, 2020, 02:39:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 16, 2020, 02:30:53 PM
Shouldn't you be telling me rather than asking me? I thought the same forum customs applied to all members.

No.  This demand for Cites is getting ridiculous when most of this ancient history has already been discussed on this Forum.

Let's have some common sense instead of deliberate attempts to wind people up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 16, 2020, 05:39:34 PM
Quote from: The General on July 16, 2020, 01:12:37 PM
Prove it.

Mrs Fenn was not interviewed by the Portuguese Police she was interviewed by the British Police months after Madeleine went missing  -

Incredibly Mrs Fenn, who lives in the apartment directly above the flat the McCanns were staying in, was never interviewed by Portuguese police, it was claimed yesterday.

www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id331.htm

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 16, 2020, 05:46:12 PM
Quote from: The General on July 16, 2020, 01:25:34 PM
This is another lazy trope; a mere crutch to lean on in the absence of knowledge and utterly without foundation. Apparently anyone Portuguese connected to the case are idiots.
To suggest they didn't knock on upstairs is palpable tripe - I'm not proving a negative - show me the officer's notebooks, or a log.

Yes,  shocking isn't it,  didn't interview anyone living just above the McCann's,  shoddy Police work if you ask me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 16, 2020, 05:57:16 PM
Quote from: Lace on July 16, 2020, 05:46:12 PM
Yes,  shocking isn't it,  didn't interview anyone living just above the McCann's,  shoddy Police work if you ask me.
Be shocked if you like, kid, it's simply not true; another lame myth conjured out of the butcher's bin of half-baked supporter phlegm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 16, 2020, 05:59:15 PM
Quote from: The General on July 16, 2020, 05:57:16 PM
Be shocked if you like, kid, it's simply not true; another lame myth conjured out of the butcher's bin of half-baked supporter phlegm.


 Please yourself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 16, 2020, 06:05:31 PM
Quote from: Lace on July 16, 2020, 05:59:15 PM

 Please yourself.
I will. They chased down thousands of bits of data, most of which are on public record and some of which were contrived by the mischievous. To even consider formulating a sentence suggesting they didn't knock on upstairs, then having the audacity to actually proceed to post that jive on a public forum, is unadulterated, bilious flotsam and does everyone of that mind an irredeemable disservice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 16, 2020, 06:14:21 PM
Quote from: The General on July 16, 2020, 06:05:31 PM
I will. They chased down thousands of bits of data, most of which are on public record and some of which were contrived by the mischievous. To even consider formulating a sentence suggesting they didn't knock on upstairs, then having the audacity to actually proceed to post that jive on a public forum, is unadulterated, bilious flotsam and does everyone of that mind an irredeemable disservice.

As I said,  please yourself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 16, 2020, 06:23:59 PM
Quote from: The General on July 16, 2020, 06:05:31 PM
I will. They chased down thousands of bits of data, most of which are on public record and some of which were contrived by the mischievous. To even consider formulating a sentence suggesting they didn't knock on upstairs, then having the audacity to actually proceed to post that jive on a public forum, is unadulterated, bilious flotsam and does everyone of that mind an irredeemable disservice.

Look at the date of her statement,  August.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 16, 2020, 06:26:06 PM
Quote from: Lace on July 16, 2020, 06:23:59 PM
Look at the date of her statement,  August.

That's the official statement. It doesn't mean that police didn't speak to her earlier
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 16, 2020, 06:30:11 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 16, 2020, 06:26:06 PM
That's the official statement. It doesn't mean that police didn't speak to her earlier
Can you prove they did?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 16, 2020, 06:32:55 PM
Quote from: The General on July 16, 2020, 06:30:55 PM
They spoke to the brother in law of the cousin of the Lucky Lucky man down at the beach, ffs.
How do you know?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 16, 2020, 06:34:34 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 16, 2020, 06:30:11 PM
Can you prove they did?

No. I posed it as a possibility
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 16, 2020, 06:39:11 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 16, 2020, 06:34:34 PM
No. I posed it as a possibility
Then there is no evidence they did.  They certainly didn’t consider the need to take a statement off the nearest human being to Madeleine when she was taken apart from her siblings and whoever took her until months had passed.  Very professional of them for sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 16, 2020, 06:42:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 16, 2020, 06:39:11 PM
Then there is no evidence they did.  They certainly didn’t consider the need to take a statement off the nearest human being to Madeleine when she was taken apart from her siblings and whoever took her until months had passed.  Very professional of them for sure.
Prove they didn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 16, 2020, 06:43:34 PM
Quote from: The General on July 16, 2020, 06:42:08 PM
Prove they didn't.

This is not posible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 16, 2020, 06:44:19 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 16, 2020, 06:43:34 PM
This is not posible.
Ditto.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 16, 2020, 06:49:45 PM
Quote from: The General on July 16, 2020, 06:42:08 PM
Prove they didn't.
If they did, they didn’t think her important enough to take a statement from for months.  Do you find that an example of diligent policework?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 16, 2020, 06:52:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 16, 2020, 06:49:45 PM
If they did, they didn’t think her important enough to take a statement from for months.  Do you find that an example of diligent policework?
Prove it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 16, 2020, 06:54:44 PM
Quote from: The General on July 16, 2020, 06:52:52 PM
Prove it.

Will you stop this now please.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 16, 2020, 07:52:35 PM
Quote from: The General on July 16, 2020, 06:52:52 PM
Prove it.
Where is the statement?  Accidentally end up in the bin did it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 16, 2020, 08:05:33 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 16, 2020, 07:52:35 PM
Where is the statement?  Accidentally end up in the bin did it?
I'm not allowed to post on this topic I'm afraid.
This message will self-destruct in 1 minute.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 16, 2020, 09:32:02 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 16, 2020, 07:52:35 PM
Where is the statement?  Accidentally end up in the bin did it?

Where are the statements of all the people whose doors the police knocked on? Answer; they didn't make any.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 16, 2020, 10:15:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 16, 2020, 09:32:02 PM
Where are the statements of all the people whose doors the police knocked on? Answer; they didn't make any.
Of course they didn’t, but these were not people who were literally feet away from the scene of the crime as it happened. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 17, 2020, 09:20:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 16, 2020, 09:32:02 PM
Where are the statements of all the people whose doors the police knocked on? Answer; they didn't make any.
Snip
Through Murat we answered a few questions and gave our details, which the policeman wrote down on the back of a bit of paper. No notebook. Then he pointed to the photocopied picture of Madeleine on the table. "Is this your daughter?" he asked. "Er, no," we said. "That's the girl you are meant to be searching for." My heart sank for the McCanns.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on July 17, 2020, 09:35:21 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 17, 2020, 09:20:41 AM
Snip
Through Murat we answered a few questions and gave our details, which the policeman wrote down on the back of a bit of paper. No notebook. Then he pointed to the photocopied picture of Madeleine on the table. "Is this your daughter?" he asked. "Er, no," we said. "That's the girl you are meant to be searching for." My heart sank for the McCanns.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann

same article

One morning, I saw Gerry and his wife Kate on their balcony, chatting to their friends on the path below. Privately I was glad we didn't get their apartment. It was on a corner by the road and people could see in. They were exposed.

Yet they still left there children ...no sense of responsibility it was so exposed...your heart sinks for Maddie
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 17, 2020, 09:50:11 AM
Quote from: kizzy on July 17, 2020, 09:35:21 AM
same article

One morning, I saw Gerry and his wife Kate on their balcony, chatting to their friends on the path below. Privately I was glad we didn't get their apartment. It was on a corner by the road and people could see in. They were exposed.

Yet they still left there children ...no sense of responsibility it was so exposed...your heart sinks for Maddie

I agree they made an awful mistake...my heart sinks for the McCanns too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 17, 2020, 10:13:16 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 17, 2020, 09:50:11 AM
I agree they made an awful mistake...my heart sinks for the McCanns too.

I cannot go down this road.  It was not done with intent and has been done by many of us.  And it does not constitute Neglect.

Abduction by whoever was not something that would have entered the minds of anyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 10:16:11 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 17, 2020, 09:20:41 AM
Snip
Through Murat we answered a few questions and gave our details, which the policeman wrote down on the back of a bit of paper. No notebook. Then he pointed to the photocopied picture of Madeleine on the table. "Is this your daughter?" he asked. "Er, no," we said. "That's the girl you are meant to be searching for." My heart sank for the McCanns.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann

That's not a statement.  Amaral asked LP to interview Wilkins as soon as he was aware that he had been involved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 10:22:47 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 17, 2020, 10:13:16 AM
I cannot go down this road.  It was not done with intent and has been done by many of us.  And it does not constitute Neglect.

Abduction by whoever was not something that would have entered the minds of anyone.

A danger of abduction isn't the reason why most people don't leave their children home alone, and it isn't the reason why they are advised not to do it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 10:23:15 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 17, 2020, 09:50:11 AM
I agree they made an awful mistake...my heart sinks for the McCanns too.

It's the Mccanns remaining children I feel sorry for. Having to live with the McCanns. Maddy got lucky.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 17, 2020, 10:33:16 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 10:22:47 AM
A danger of abduction isn't the reason why most people don't leave their children home alone, and it isn't the reason why they are advised not to do it.

Half an hour is hardly leaving your children home alone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 11:47:59 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 17, 2020, 10:33:16 AM
Half an hour is hardly leaving your children home alone.

That may be your opinion but it isn't the opinion of the NSPCC;

Infants and young children aged 0-3 years old should never be left alone – even for 15 minutes while you pop down the road.
https://www.nspcc.org.uk/keeping-children-safe/in-the-home/home-alone/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 17, 2020, 11:49:51 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 11:47:59 AM
That may be your opinion but it isn't the opinion of the NSPCC;

Infants and young children aged 0-3 years old should never be left alone – even for 15 minutes while you pop down the road.
https://www.nspcc.org.uk/keeping-children-safe/in-the-home/home-alone/

The Opinion of The NSPCC is just an Opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 12:14:26 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 17, 2020, 11:49:51 AM
The Opinion of The NSPCC is just an Opinion.

As experts theirs is an informed opinion, based on evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 17, 2020, 12:17:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 12:14:26 PM
As experts theirs is an informed opinion, based on evidence.

Do you always trust experts ...I prefer to be a little more open minded
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 17, 2020, 12:25:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 12:14:26 PM
As experts theirs is an informed opinion, based on evidence.

I do have to say that The NSPCC didn't do much for me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 12:30:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 17, 2020, 12:17:08 PM
Do you always trust experts ...I prefer to be a little more open minded

I think you agree with the NSPCC's advice on the subject under discussion, however?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 17, 2020, 12:34:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 12:30:02 PM
I think you agree with the NSPCC's advice on the subject under discussion, however?

Not entirely so you think wrong...and  my greatest fear in leaving children as the McCanns did would be abduction
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 01:12:18 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 17, 2020, 12:34:53 PM
Not entirely so you think wrong...and  my greatest fear in leaving children as the McCanns did would be abduction

Did you develop that fear after their experience?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 17, 2020, 01:56:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 01:12:18 PM
Did you develop that fear after their experience?

no
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 02:20:21 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 17, 2020, 01:56:51 PM
no

In my opinion a fear of small children being abducted if left home alone is unrealistic. Most people imo are well aware that home accidents are far more likely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 17, 2020, 02:23:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 02:20:21 PM
In my opinion a fear of small children being abducted if left home alone is unrealistic. Most people imo are well aware that home accidents are far more likely.

Thats not what happened here according to SY and the Germans
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 03:01:23 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 17, 2020, 02:23:23 PM
Thats not what happened here according to SY and the Germans

Why police officers subscribe to the idea that this 'incredibly rare' event took place I can't imagine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 17, 2020, 03:04:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 03:01:23 PM
Why police officers subscribe to the idea that this 'incredibly rare' event took place I can't imagine.

its quite simple...evidence. What we now have is two police forces investigating abduction so the idea of an SY conspiracy to protect the McCanns looks more than a bit silly
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 17, 2020, 03:22:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 10:16:11 AM
That's not a statement.  Amaral asked LP to interview Wilkins as soon as he was aware that he had been involved.

Did I say it was a statement???

Although it was straight from the pen of Bridget O'Donnel and as a first hand account is better in so many ways than many of the statements which pass for such in the files.

At least there is confirmation that Bridget O'Donnell - who was staying in block four -  was actually visited by the police.

But the fact that the officer wrote on a scrap of paper speaks volumes ... although not as much as the fact that he was apparently sent out without being briefed about the missing child they were supposed to be looking for.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 17, 2020, 03:26:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 10:22:47 AM
A danger of abduction isn't the reason why most people don't leave their children home alone, and it isn't the reason why they are advised not to do it.

But Madeleine was abducted ... was anyone advised that there was an intruder abroad who made a habit of assaulting children in their beds whether their parents were at home or not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 04:05:29 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 17, 2020, 03:26:27 PM
But Madeleine was abducted ... was anyone advised that there was an intruder abroad who made a habit of assaulting children in their beds whether their parents were at home or not?

Well her parents said Madeleine was abducted and Operation Grange were told to investigate it. The PJ said they didn't know what happened and the Germans think she was murdered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 17, 2020, 04:17:15 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 04:05:29 PM
Well her parents said Madeleine was abducted and Operation Grange were told to investigate it. The PJ said they didn't know what happened and the Germans think she was murdered.

The Germans think she was abducted....try not to deny reality
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 17, 2020, 05:12:17 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 10:23:15 AM
It's the Mccanns remaining children I feel sorry for. Having to live with the McCanns. Maddy got lucky.
I know we shouldn't feed the troll, but really - this post is beneath contempt.  Basically Spam is telling us Madeleine is lucky to be dead than having to live with her parents, and that her siblings are living a hellish life and would (presumably) be better off dead too.  And "sceptics" wonder why some people find them so repellent. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 17, 2020, 05:15:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 03:01:23 PM
Why police officers subscribe to the idea that this 'incredibly rare' event took place I can't imagine.
Why can't you imagine it?  Why is abduction from an unlocked apartment in which the adults were absence virtually impossible as far as you're concerned?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 17, 2020, 05:16:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 04:05:29 PM
Well her parents said Madeleine was abducted and Operation Grange were told to investigate it. The PJ said they didn't know what happened and the Germans think she was murdered.
Murdered but not abducted first?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 05:36:24 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 17, 2020, 04:17:15 PM
The Germans think she was abducted....try not to deny reality

Think?

So they have no evidence of it then, just like SY.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 05:38:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 17, 2020, 05:12:17 PM
I know we shouldn't feed the troll, but really - this post is beneath contempt.  Basically Spam is telling us Madeleine is lucky to be dead than having to live with her parents, and that her siblings are living a hellish life and would (presumably) be better off dead too.  And "sceptics" wonder why some people find them so repellent.

I thought the argument currently doing the rounds was that some nice paedo had sold her to a loving family?

Maybe this family take her on holidays & don't go home without her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 17, 2020, 06:36:16 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 05:38:42 PM
I thought the argument currently doing the rounds was that some nice paedo had sold her to a loving family?

Maybe this family take her on holidays & don't go home without her.

You certainly bring a certain ~ Je ne sais quoi ~ to almost every post you make.  Keep it up ... it really is portraying sceptic beliefs in proper context.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 17, 2020, 06:38:28 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 17, 2020, 06:36:16 PM
You certainly bring a certain ~ Je ne sais quoi ~ to almost every post you make.  Keep it up ... it really is portraying sceptic beliefs in proper context.

Yep.  Not worth paying any attention.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 06:44:43 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 17, 2020, 06:36:16 PM
You certainly bring a certain ~ Je ne sais quoi ~ to almost every post you make.  Keep it up ... it really is portraying sceptic beliefs in proper context.

Since when do I stand as representative of all sceptics belief?

I don't recall any election.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 07:19:34 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 06:44:43 PM
Since when do I stand as representative of all sceptics belief?

I don't recall any election.

You've been chosen. I choose Sadie as your opposite number.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on July 17, 2020, 07:21:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 07:19:34 PM
You've been chosen. I choose Sadie as your opposite number.
Please explain re. Sadie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 17, 2020, 07:32:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 07:19:34 PM
You've been chosen. I choose Sadie as your opposite number.

Uncalled for.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 17, 2020, 07:32:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 07:19:34 PM
You've been chosen. I choose Sadie as your opposite number.

Surely it has to be someone who is an Amaral-[ censored word ]  to be truly representative.  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 07:40:17 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 17, 2020, 07:32:29 PM
Uncalled for.

So was the previous comment imo. There's no such thing as a set of 'sceptic beliefs' afaik.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 17, 2020, 07:45:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 07:40:17 PM
So was the previous comment imo. There's no such thing as a set of 'sceptic beliefs' afaik.

Spammy doesn't have any beliefs and is just here to Spam for fun.  While Sadie actually cares about this Forum and Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 17, 2020, 07:55:42 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 17, 2020, 07:45:53 PM
Spammy doesn't have any beliefs and is just here to Spam for fun.  While Sadie actually cares about this Forum and Madeleine.

I agree the post was goading towards Sadie
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 17, 2020, 08:31:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 07:19:34 PM
You've been chosen. I choose Sadie as your opposite number.
at least Sadie is not disgustingly offensive. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 08:41:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 17, 2020, 08:31:29 PM
at least Sadie is not disgustingly offensive.

I chose Sadie as portraying supporter beliefs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 08:43:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 17, 2020, 08:31:29 PM
at least Sadie is not disgustingly offensive.

It's not my fault if people choose to be offended.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 17, 2020, 08:45:32 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 08:43:38 PM
It's not my fault if people choose to be offended.
Any decent person would be offended by your post. Because they are decent they would have no choice in the matter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 08:49:02 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 17, 2020, 08:45:32 PM
Any decent person would be offended by your post. Because they are decent they would have no choice in the matter.

Nonsense. Being offended by something that's not specifically aimed at you is entirely a matter of choice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 17, 2020, 09:01:48 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 08:49:02 PM
Nonsense. Being offended by something that's not specifically aimed at you is entirely a matter of choice.
Absolute tripe. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 09:05:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 17, 2020, 09:01:48 PM
Absolute tripe.

Great come back. That showed me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 17, 2020, 09:31:08 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 09:05:57 PM
Great come back. That showed me.
It sure did, no futher explanation necessary.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 17, 2020, 09:41:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 07:19:34 PM
You've been chosen. I choose Sadie as your opposite number.
Don't you think you may be breaking forum protocol with a post such as this?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 10:42:16 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 17, 2020, 09:41:22 PM
Don't you think you may be breaking forum protocol with a post such as this?

Are you reserving the right to decide someone portrays 'sceptic beliefs' in every post but denying others the right to  do the same in respect of 'supporter beliefs'?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 17, 2020, 10:48:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 10:42:16 PM
Are you reserving the right to decide someone portrays 'sceptic beliefs' in every post but denying others the right to  do the same in respect of 'supporter beliefs'?

you decided to make it personal by naming sadie,....cant you see that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 17, 2020, 10:52:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 08:41:42 PM
I chose Sadie as portraying supporter beliefs.
Why?  Why not me?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 11:16:28 PM

I disagree with ....

They probably covered up the death of their child

for starters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 17, 2020, 11:18:25 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 11:16:28 PM
I disagree with ....

They probably covered up the death of their child

for starters.
Yes, well you *know* they did, so you’re just splitting hairs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 11:22:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 17, 2020, 11:18:25 PM
Yes, well you *know* they did, so you’re just splitting hairs.

Yes, that's right. There's no probably about it IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 17, 2020, 11:50:00 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on July 17, 2020, 11:22:57 PM
Yes, that's right. There's no probably about it IMO
You have the unquestioing faith of the true believer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 18, 2020, 03:31:19 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 17, 2020, 08:41:42 PM
I chose Sadie as portraying supporter beliefs.

Hey, I would like that BUT I don't think that you are right.

For instance, a lot of supporters cannot accept my thoughts on what likely happened to Madeleine …. and it doesn't surprise me really, because it does sound far fetched … and unfortunately I am in the position of being unable to verify what I say … because it is in the hands of SY.

Also this Christian Bruckner affair.  I am out of kilter with quite a number of supporters here because I feel there is something "wrong" about the supposed case against him … and I feel that Bruckner, evil man that he is, has been "set up" to take the blame for Madeleines abduction by the master abductors and traffickers.   He may, or may not, have ben involved but, in my opinion, he was commissioned rather than the originator of the abduction idea

I think that there is a massively wealthy "elite gang" out there making a fortune out of slavery and trafficking … and probably out of drug production and trafficking. 

It has been going on for centuries; a brotherhood of them.  All IMO only, BUT I was able to pass a very long document over to SY showing links.



2017 was the year that things re Christian Bruckner (and Amaral) and others, started happening.   Apart from things I have mentioned previously, I wonder why that was the year that the Pope and RC Church broke away from the Knights of Malta/ St John/ Hospitaliers?   For centuries they had been huge buddies.

The Grand Master of the Knights of Malta, Fra Matthew Festling, was treated as a "Prince" of the Roman Catholic Church.  Some reports said that he was closer to the Pope and also higher than the Cardinals.  Why did The Church suddenly break from him and the Knights ?   What precipitated it ?  *%6^



Reading the internet now doesn't give the same picture as in the early days [2017].   Some cleansing has taken place.


Yep, things started happening in 2017, but I can't be sure why

And these are only my thoughts that could be totally wrrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on July 18, 2020, 12:30:08 PM
Quote from: sadie on July 18, 2020, 03:31:19 AM
Hey, I would like that BUT I don't think that you are right.

For instance, a lot of supporters cannot accept my thoughts on what likely happened to Madeleine …. and it doesn't surprise me really, because it does sound far fetched … and unfortunately I am in the position of being unable to verify what I say … because it is in the hands of SY.

Also this Christian Bruckner affair.  I am out of kilter with quite a number of supporters here because I feel there is something "wrong" about the supposed case against him … and I feel that Bruckner, evil man that he is, has been "set up" to take the blame for Madeleines abduction by the master abductors and traffickers.   He may, or may not, have ben involved but, in my opinion, he was commissioned rather than the originator of the abduction idea

I think that there is a massively wealthy "elite gang" out there making a fortune out of slavery and trafficking … and probably out of drug production and trafficking. 

It has been going on for centuries; a brotherhood of them.  All IMO only, BUT I was able to pass a very long document over to SY showing links.



2017 was the year that things re Christian Bruckner (and Amaral) and others, started happening.   Apart from things I have mentioned previously, I wonder why that was the year that the Pope and RC Church broke away from the Knights of Malta/ St John/ Hospitaliers?   For centuries they had been huge buddies.

The Grand Master of the Knights of Malta, Fra Matthew Festling, was treated as a "Prince" of the Roman Catholic Church.  Some reports said that he was closer to the Pope and also higher than the Cardinals.  Why did The Church suddenly break from him and the Knights ?   What precipitated it ?  *%6^



Reading the internet now doesn't give the same picture as in the early days [2017].   Some cleansing has taken place.


Yep, things started happening in 2017, but I can't be sure why

And these are only my thoughts that could be totally wrrong

Good post Sadie, I can agree with you for once on Brueckner at least.  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 18, 2020, 12:40:14 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on July 18, 2020, 12:30:08 PM
Good post Sadie, I can agree with you for once on Brueckner at least.  8((()*/

I do so hope your post was tongue in cheeek.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on July 18, 2020, 01:12:22 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 18, 2020, 12:40:14 PM
I do so hope your post was tongue in cheeek.

I might not agree with Sadie on her abduction theory involving international child smuggling gangs but she has a point about Brueckner. It was all too convenient imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 18, 2020, 01:18:12 PM
Quote from: sadie on July 18, 2020, 03:31:19 AM
Hey, I would like that BUT I don't think that you are right.

For instance, a lot of supporters cannot accept my thoughts on what likely happened to Madeleine …. and it doesn't surprise me really, because it does sound far fetched … and unfortunately I am in the position of being unable to verify what I say … because it is in the hands of SY.

Also this Christian Bruckner affair.  I am out of kilter with quite a number of supporters here because I feel there is something "wrong" about the supposed case against him … and I feel that Bruckner, evil man that he is, has been "set up" to take the blame for Madeleines abduction by the master abductors and traffickers.   He may, or may not, have ben involved but, in my opinion, he was commissioned rather than the originator of the abduction idea

I think that there is a massively wealthy "elite gang" out there making a fortune out of slavery and trafficking … and probably out of drug production and trafficking. 

It has been going on for centuries; a brotherhood of them.  All IMO only, BUT I was able to pass a very long document over to SY showing links.



2017 was the year that things re Christian Bruckner (and Amaral) and others, started happening.   Apart from things I have mentioned previously, I wonder why that was the year that the Pope and RC Church broke away from the Knights of Malta/ St John/ Hospitaliers?   For centuries they had been huge buddies.

The Grand Master of the Knights of Malta, Fra Matthew Festling, was treated as a "Prince" of the Roman Catholic Church.  Some reports said that he was closer to the Pope and also higher than the Cardinals.  Why did The Church suddenly break from him and the Knights ?   What precipitated it ?  *%6^



Reading the internet now doesn't give the same picture as in the early days [2017].   Some cleansing has taken place.


Yep, things started happening in 2017, but I can't be sure why

And these are only my thoughts that could be totally wrrong

I think you are totally wrong with bloodlines  etc...and totally wrong about CB being set up. His case will be decided on the evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 18, 2020, 05:00:22 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on July 18, 2020, 01:12:22 PM
I might not agree with Sadie on her abduction theory involving international child smuggling gangs but she has a point about Brueckner. It was all too convenient imo.
Why would the Germans be looking for convenience wrt solving the MM case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 18, 2020, 05:05:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 18, 2020, 05:00:22 PM
Why would the Germans be looking for convenience wrt solving the MM case?

It doesn't make sense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on July 18, 2020, 05:22:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 18, 2020, 05:00:22 PM
Why would the Germans be looking for convenience wrt solving the MM case?

IMO the Germans thought they had this case solved, alas none of the forensics came back positive.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 18, 2020, 05:25:35 PM
Quote from: John on July 18, 2020, 05:22:42 PM
IMO the Germans thought they had this case solved, alas none of the forensics came back positive.
Cases are not solved on forensics alone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 18, 2020, 05:30:43 PM
Quote from: John on July 18, 2020, 05:22:42 PM
IMO the Germans thought they had this case solved, alas none of the forensics came back positive.



They must have known this for some time - they've been investigating for years, so they won't have just received  results last week.

The reason for bringing all this into the open at the beginning of June was to counter Brueckner's parole attempt.

IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 18, 2020, 05:35:25 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 18, 2020, 05:30:43 PM



They must have known this for some time - they've been investigating for years, so they won't have just received  results last week.

The reason for bringing all this into the open at the beginning of June was to counter Brueckner's parole attempt.

IMO
Is there a legal basis for denying a person parole because they are a suspect in another case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 18, 2020, 05:36:59 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 18, 2020, 05:35:25 PM
Is there a legal basis for denying a person parole because they are a suspect in another case?

Parole isn't absolute.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 18, 2020, 05:39:37 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 18, 2020, 05:36:59 PM
Parole isn't absolute.
I don’t know what that means.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 18, 2020, 05:41:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 18, 2020, 05:39:37 PM
I don’t know what that means.

The State doesn't have to grant Parole.  I don't think they need a reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 18, 2020, 05:42:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 18, 2020, 05:35:25 PM
Is there a legal basis for denying a person parole because they are a suspect in another case?

As I understand, a parole decision is a balanced judgement and anything that reflects on the appellant, for good or bad, is likely to influence that decision.

Again IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on July 18, 2020, 05:54:06 PM
Priti!... Keep your eyes peeled on the Dover Strait, we've got enough of our own depraved kiddy-fiddlers to contend with...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8536327/BBC-presenter-turned-evangelical-preacher-44-admits-40-sex-offences-against-children.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8536327/BBC-presenter-turned-evangelical-preacher-44-admits-40-sex-offences-against-children.html)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 18, 2020, 11:47:50 PM
Quote from: Myster on July 18, 2020, 05:54:06 PM
Priti!... Keep your eyes peeled on the Dover Strait, we've got enough of our own depraved kiddy-fiddlers to contend with...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8536327/BBC-presenter-turned-evangelical-preacher-44-admits-40-sex-offences-against-children.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8536327/BBC-presenter-turned-evangelical-preacher-44-admits-40-sex-offences-against-children.html)

Priti wouldn’t know the difference between the Dover Strait and a Dover soul.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 06:42:18 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 18, 2020, 11:47:50 PM
Priti wouldn’t know the difference between the Dover Strait and a Dover soul.

Do you...what's a Dover Soul
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on July 19, 2020, 06:55:21 AM
A Brit although I'm sure she meant a flatfish... https://crosswordheaven.com/clues/dover-soul (https://crosswordheaven.com/clues/dover-soul)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 19, 2020, 08:17:53 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 06:42:18 AM
Do you...what's a Dover Soul
LOL - when taking the piss out of someone else for being stupid, it really is advisable not to look quite so dumb yourself!   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 19, 2020, 09:31:24 AM
Quote from: Myster on July 19, 2020, 06:55:21 AM
A Brit although I'm sure she meant a flatfish... https://crosswordheaven.com/clues/dover-soul (https://crosswordheaven.com/clues/dover-soul)
Flat fish is a sole.  Not soul.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 09:33:30 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 19, 2020, 09:31:24 AM
Flat fish is a sole.  Not soul.

I think most of us know what a Dover Sole is
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 19, 2020, 09:47:17 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 09:33:30 AM
I think most of us know what a Dover Sole is
My parents are Dover Souls and they are certainly not flat fish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 10:45:46 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 06:42:18 AM
Do you...what's a Dover Soul

Can you spell hypocrite?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 11:06:17 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 10:45:46 AM
Can you spell hypocrite?
Looks like I've touched a nerve...which is something I generally try and avoid...I'm more Hippocrates than hypocrite
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 19, 2020, 11:16:44 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 11:06:17 AM
Looks like I've touched a nerve...which is something I generally try and avoid...I'm more Hippocrates than hypocrite
You mean something like this?  (https://www.biography.com/.image/ar_1:1%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cg_face%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_300/MTQwOTE0OTAyNzE2OTE3MTEy/hippocrates--gettyimages-164084419_1600jpg.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 11:19:06 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 19, 2020, 11:16:44 AM
You mean something like this?  (https://www.biography.com/.image/ar_1:1%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cg_face%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_300/MTQwOTE0OTAyNzE2OTE3MTEy/hippocrates--gettyimages-164084419_1600jpg.jpg)

No ...he's dead...I'm very much alive
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 19, 2020, 11:21:23 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 11:19:06 AM
No ...he's dead...I'm very much alive
But is there some resemblance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 11:23:49 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 19, 2020, 11:21:23 AM
But is there some resemblance?

Does it matter to you...or anyone else
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 19, 2020, 11:25:19 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 11:23:49 AM
Does it matter to you...or anyone else
Just confirming your assertion, "I'm more Hippocrates than hypocrite".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 11:28:22 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 19, 2020, 11:25:19 AM
Just confirming your assertion, "I'm more Hippocrates than hypocrite".

It's a play on words...with some truth in it...but not to be taken too seriously
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 11:29:32 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 11:06:17 AM
Looks like I've touched a nerve...which is something I generally try and avoid...I'm more Hippocrates than hypocrite


Touched a nerve...you have a nerve. Your posts are often barely legible due to bad grammar and spelling...but it is forum etiquette not to point it out....so we don’t.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 11:31:18 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 19, 2020, 11:16:44 AM
You mean something like this?  (https://www.biography.com/.image/ar_1:1%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cg_face%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_300/MTQwOTE0OTAyNzE2OTE3MTEy/hippocrates--gettyimages-164084419_1600jpg.jpg)

No.  Davel is much better looking than that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 11:33:08 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 11:29:32 AM


Touched a nerve...you have a nerve. Your posts are often barely legible due to bad grammar and spelling...but it is forum etiquette not to point it out....so we don’t.

Don't go down that route.  Everyone makes mistakes.  Even clever old me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 11:33:43 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 11:31:18 AM
No.  Davel is much better looking than that.

But less of a gentleman it would appear.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 11:37:48 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 11:33:08 AM
Don't go down that route.  Everyone makes mistakes.  Even clever old me.

Absolutely true Eleanor which is why your lack of comment on Davel’s original post over my spelling of sole and the consequent pile on is especially puzzling.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 11:44:03 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 11:37:48 AM
Absolutely true Eleanor which is why your lack of comment on Davel’s original post over my spelling of sole and the consequent pile on is especially puzzling.

Because I didn't know how to spell Dover Soul.  A very overrated Fish if you ask me.  I never buy them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 19, 2020, 11:44:27 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 11:31:18 AM
No.  Davel is much better looking than that.
I'll take your word for that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 11:46:05 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 11:33:43 AM
But less of a gentleman it would appear.

Not to me.  Even Davel thinks I am biased sometimes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 19, 2020, 11:46:31 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 11:31:18 AM
No.  Davel is much better looking than that.

Is there a Specsavers in France?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 11:52:14 AM
Quote from: barrier on July 19, 2020, 11:46:31 AM
Is there a Specsavers in France?

Chacun a son gout.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 11:57:19 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 11:44:03 AM
Because I didn't know how to spell Dover Soul.  A very overrated Fish if you ask me.  I never buy them.

Nicely swerved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 19, 2020, 11:57:31 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 11:52:14 AM
Chacun a son gout.

"Mange tout" as Del boy would say,(Yes I know its a pea.)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on July 19, 2020, 11:59:40 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 11:44:03 AM
Because I didn't know how to spell Dover Soul.  A very overrated Fish if you ask me.  I never buy them.
Also a pain in the a*** to fillet with little meat left after skinning... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1ePKvwKFXk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1ePKvwKFXk)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 12:03:15 PM
Quote from: Myster on July 19, 2020, 11:59:40 AM
Also a pain in the a*** to fillet with little meat left after skinning... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1ePKvwKFXk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1ePKvwKFXk)

But Lemon Soul are really good.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 19, 2020, 12:05:06 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 12:03:15 PM
But Lemon Soul are really good.

Maybe for the soul, but not for the Sole.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on July 19, 2020, 12:14:16 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 12:03:15 PM
But Lemon Soul are really good.
Looks fleshier and more appetising when filleted too... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yv8lE3Fb9Ck (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yv8lE3Fb9Ck)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 12:17:47 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 19, 2020, 12:05:06 PM
Maybe for the soul, but not for the Sole.

A bit like Free Speach.  This one is going to stick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 12:22:00 PM
Quote from: Myster on July 19, 2020, 12:14:16 PM
Looks fleshier and more appetising when filleted too... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yv8lE3Fb9Ck (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yv8lE3Fb9Ck)

And taste way better.  But a trifle expensive.  I get it from The Food Bank sometimes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 12:25:31 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 19, 2020, 12:05:06 PM
Maybe for the soul, but not for the Sole.

The sole fish gets it's UK name from the Latin for sandal; solea. In Greek, German, Spanish and Dutch  it gets it's name from the tongue.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on July 19, 2020, 12:36:16 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 12:22:00 PM
And taste way better.  But a trifle expensive.  I get it from The Food Bank sometimes.
The only fish dished out at Food Banks here, which luckily I've never had to visit, are probably packets of 10 Lidl Fish Fingers... if you're lucky.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 12:51:30 PM
Quote from: Myster on July 19, 2020, 12:36:16 PM
The only fish dished out at Food Banks here, which luckily I've never had to visit, are probably packets of 10 Lidl Fish Fingers... if you're lucky.

A lot of the food dished out here is of the expensive kind as it goes into Sell By Date and is then donated by Supermarkets.
The French Peasants are careful shoppers generally.

I simply don't understand why Food Banks suggest some sort of shame.  I am never made to feel so.  Although I am the only English person.  Other English people who might qualify seem to be more concerned by their Fiddles being exposed.

Make what you may of that.

For me this all to do with my disgraceful Basic British State Pension.  Why should I be ashamed of that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 12:56:14 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 12:51:30 PM
A lot of the food dished out here is of the expensive kind as it goes into Sell By Date and is then donated by Supermarkets.
The French Peasants are careful shoppers generally.

I simply don't understand why Food Banks suggest some sort of shame.  I am never made to feel so.  Although I am the only English person.  Other English people who might qualify seem to be more concerned by their Fiddles being exposed.

Make what you may of that.

The only shame to be apportioned is to governments who make food banks necessary.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 19, 2020, 01:19:37 PM
I know you got Sole
If you didn’t you wouldn’t be in here....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 01:19:43 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 12:56:14 PM
The only shame to be apportioned is to governments who make food banks necessary.

I don't think that I can blame any British Government in particular.  There are means in Britain to claim extras, although why Pensioners should be forced to do so is a mystery to me.  I worked for most of my adult life to support my children.

But never mind.  I would so much rather be here than there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 01:24:47 PM
Quote from: Myster on July 19, 2020, 12:36:16 PM
The only fish dished out at Food Banks here, which luckily I've never had to visit, are probably packets of 10 Lidl Fish Fingers... if you're lucky.

Or tinned fish. I don't think they offer frozen food.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 19, 2020, 01:27:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 01:24:47 PM
Or tinned fish. I don't think they offer frozen food.

Nor fresh, it all has to be canned, bottled or dried.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 01:31:32 PM
The French food banks seem superior. This is a typical 3 day parcel in the UK;

A typical food parcel includes:

Cereal
Soup
Pasta
Rice
Tinned tomatoes/ pasta sauce
Lentils, beans and pulses
Tinned meat
Tinned vegetables
Tea/coffee
Tinned fruit
Biscuits
UHT milk
Fruit juice

It may also include;

Toiletries – deodorant, toilet paper, shower gel, shaving gel, shampoo, soap, toothbrushes, tooth paste, hand wipes
Household items – laundry liquid detergent, laundry powder, washing up liquid
Feminine products – sanitary towels and tampons
Baby supplies – nappies, baby wipes and baby food.
https://www.trusselltrust.org/get-help/emergency-food/food-parcel/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 01:41:07 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 01:24:47 PM
Or tinned fish. I don't think they offer frozen food.

They do here.  Lots of it.  Which is why you have to have a Freezer Bag.

Sheesh, I am beginning to wonder what on earth Food Banks are about in Britain.  No wonder that everyone is ashamed to admit that they depend on this.

Here, The Food Bank Organisations buy Pork Chops by the bucket load.  Oh, and lots of bottom end of Cows Legs which make a very good stew.

Some of this is funded by The EU, which until recently will have been available in Britain.  Or have they failed to mention this?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 01:42:56 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 19, 2020, 01:27:22 PM
Nor fresh, it all has to be canned, bottled or dried.

Wrong.  Unless Britain is having you on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 01:44:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 01:31:32 PM
The French food banks seem superior. This is a typical 3 day parcel in the UK;

A typical food parcel includes:

Cereal
Soup
Pasta
Rice
Tinned tomatoes/ pasta sauce
Lentils, beans and pulses
Tinned meat
Tinned vegetables
Tea/coffee
Tinned fruit
Biscuits
UHT milk
Fruit juice

It may also include;

Toiletries – deodorant, toilet paper, shower gel, shaving gel, shampoo, soap, toothbrushes, tooth paste, hand wipes
Household items – laundry liquid detergent, laundry powder, washing up liquid
Feminine products – sanitary towels and tampons
Baby supplies – nappies, baby wipes and baby food.
https://www.trusselltrust.org/get-help/emergency-food/food-parcel/

This also part of what I get.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 19, 2020, 01:46:23 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 01:42:56 PM
Wrong.  Unless Britain is having you on.

That's what they tell us.

UK food banks appear to have no facilities beyond a few shelves - no freezers or fridges, so everything donated has to have long storage dates.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 19, 2020, 01:51:35 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 01:41:07 PM
They do here.  Lots of it.  Which is why you have to have a Freezer Bag.

Sheesh, I am beginning to wonder what on earth Food Banks are about in Britain.  No wonder that everyone is ashamed to admit that they depend on this.

Here, The Food Bank Organisations buy Pork Chops by the bucket load.  Oh, and lots of bottom end of Cows Legs which make a very good stew.

Some of this is funded by The EU, which until recently will have been available in Britain.  Or have they failed to mention this?

There are some very funny attitudes in Britain, particularly among the Daily Mail & Express readership.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 02:47:59 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 19, 2020, 01:46:23 PM
That's what they tell us.

UK food banks appear to have no facilities beyond a few shelves - no freezers or fridges, so everything donated has to have long storage dates.

In this little place where I attend they have six very big Freezers in the back room.  We are also reminded that some of the money is donated by The EU, to which Britain must have been entitled.

Are you saying that Britain isn't doing a proper job for the needy?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 02:55:48 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 19, 2020, 01:51:35 PM
There are some very funny attitudes in Britain, particularly among the Daily Mail & Express readership.

So is it Newspapers who bring shame on Food Bank Recipients?

There could be a lot of Food going to waste out there when some people actually need it.

The Local Supermarkets around here donate it to The Local Food Bank instead of dumping it in some bin.

I am getting really cross about this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 19, 2020, 02:58:03 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 02:47:59 PM
In this little place where I attend they have six very big Freezers in the back room.  We are also reminded that some of the money is donated by The EU, to which Britain must have been entitled.

Are you saying that Britain isn't doing a proper job for the needy?
Yes. It seems to work unrelated to Government ans is dependent on donations from individuals with good intentions, but often little imagination.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 02:58:21 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 02:47:59 PM
In this little place where I attend they have six very big Freezers in the back room.  We are also reminded that some of the money is donated by The EU, to which Britain must have been entitled.

Are you saying that Britain isn't doing a proper job for the needy?

2500 children admitted to hospital due to malnutrition in 2020....I’d say not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 19, 2020, 03:05:06 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 02:55:48 PM
So is it Newspapers who bring shame on Food Bank Recipients?

There could be a lot of Food going to waste out there when some people actually need it.

The Local Supermarkets around here donate it to The Local Food Bank instead of dumping it in some bin.

I am getting really cross about this.

Not directly, more to do with the right-wing attitudes of the readership.

There is a very strong attitude of - 'if I can't have something then I don't see why others should' in England, which applies to things like benefits and the like.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 03:06:34 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 02:58:21 PM
2500 children admitted to hospital due to malnutrition in 2020....I’d say not.

What was the cause of malnutrition...too much McDonalds?. Is it poverty or is it poor parenting
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 03:19:52 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 19, 2020, 03:05:06 PM
Not directly, more to do with the right-wing attitudes of the readership.

There is a very strong attitude of - 'if I can't have something then I don't see why others should' in England, which applies to things like benefits and the like.

That is a cop out.  I have to prove my lack of income.  I don't just get access to The Food Bank for the asking.  And I have to reapply every six months with proof.

This is never going to be a problem for me.  My Basic British State Pension is never going to get any better.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 03:48:41 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 03:06:34 PM
What was the cause of malnutrition...too much McDonalds?. Is it poverty or is it poor parenting

I expect you and your wife could meet your food, clothing, household bills, entertainment, travel and other expenses from £116.80 plus £21.05 for the eldest child and £13.95 for any others. My state pension (just for me) is more than the benefit paid to a couple on benefits.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 19, 2020, 03:52:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 03:48:41 PM
I expect you and your wife could meet your food, clothing, household bills, entertainment, travel and other expenses from £116.80 plus £21.05 for the eldest child and £13.95 for any others. My state pension (just for me) is more than the benefit paid to a couple on benefits.
How much do you think a couple with two children should be paid to live on benefits out of interest? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 03:56:05 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 03:19:52 PM
That is a cop out.  I have to prove my lack of income.  I don't just get access to The Food Bank for the asking.  And I have to reapply every six months with proof.

This is never going to be a problem for me.  My Basic British State Pension is never going to get any better.

In England there is no entitlement to food from the food banks. Those on £74.35 per week are supposed to manage. If they have a crisis they can be given a voucher for 3 day's worth of food (if they can persuade someone to give them one), but that's not available regularly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 04:02:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 19, 2020, 03:52:45 PM
How much do you think a couple with two children should be paid to live on benefits out of interest?

A couple on State Pension are deemed to need £265.20 income. If they have less than that they get Pension Credits to top it up. I can't understand why a couple on benefits are deemed to need £116.80.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 04:06:33 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 03:06:34 PM
What was the cause of malnutrition...too much McCdonalds?. Is it poverty or is it poor parenting

It has to be Poor Parenting.  No one in Britain needs to be starving or malnourished.  The whole idea is ridiculous.

No proper food?  Why not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 04:10:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 03:56:05 PM
In England there is no entitlement to food from the food banks. Those on £74.35 per week are supposed to manage. If they have a crisis they can be given a voucher for 3 day's worth of food (if they can persuade someone to give them one), but that's not available regularly.

Goodness me, that is a disgrace.  Thank God I live in France.  Where everyone has always been kind to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 04:23:52 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 04:06:33 PM
It has to be Poor Parenting.  No one in Britain needs to be starving or malnourished.  The whole idea is ridiculous.

No proper food?  Why not?

Do the sums, Eleanor. There is a cultural element too, however; in my opinion far too many families have no idea how to shop and cook these days. I was surprised some of them got through lockdown without their takeaways. We have a national obsession with cooking, but budgeting and cookery is no longer taught in schools.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 04:30:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 04:23:52 PM
Do the sums, Eleanor. There is a cultural element too, however; in my opinion far too many families have no idea how to shop and cook these days. I was surprised some of them got through lockdown without their takeaways. We have a national obsession with cooking, but budgeting and cookery is no longer taught in schools.

This is an excuse, is it?  This is not the fault of The Government.

What Cultural Element?  No one ever taught me how to cook because I am useless?  And no one ever taught me how to feed my children?

How do you think the rest of us managed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 19, 2020, 04:40:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 04:02:17 PM
A couple on State Pension are deemed to need £265.20 income. If they have less than that they get Pension Credits to top it up. I can't understand why a couple on benefits are deemed to need £116.80.
Perhaps to encourage them not to retire at the age of 25? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 19, 2020, 04:43:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 04:23:52 PM
Do the sums, Eleanor. There is a cultural element too, however; in my opinion far too many families have no idea how to shop and cook these days. I was surprised some of them got through lockdown without their takeaways. We have a national obsession with cooking, but budgeting and cookery is no longer taught in schools.
Well I totally agree with this.   You could eat quite healthily for a tenner a week per person if you had to, knew how to cook the basics, shopped around and weren't lazy. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 04:53:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 19, 2020, 04:43:59 PM
Well I totally agree with this.   You could eat quite healthily for a tenner a week per person if you had to, knew how to cook the basics, shopped around and weren't lazy.

Gosh, as much as that.  I managed on less.  And my children were never Malnourished.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 04:56:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 04:23:52 PM
Do the sums, Eleanor. There is a cultural element too, however; in my opinion far too many families have no idea how to shop and cook these days. I was surprised some of them got through lockdown without their takeaways. We have a national obsession with cooking, but budgeting and cookery is no longer taught in schools.

cookery is still taught in schools
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 05:02:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 04:56:41 PM
cookery is still taught in schools

Is it?  I don't know.  But there are more than enough programmes about it.  How to Cook a Carrot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 19, 2020, 05:26:37 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 05:02:42 PM
Is it?  I don't know.  But there are more than enough programmes about it.  How to Cook a Carrot.

I prefer mine roasted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 19, 2020, 05:30:25 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 04:56:41 PM
cookery is still taught in schools
Hmm.   Rather half-heartedly I would say.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 05:40:22 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 19, 2020, 05:26:37 PM
I prefer mine roasted.

Gosh.  I never thought about that.  Personally, I never eat Carrots.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 19, 2020, 05:45:29 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 05:40:22 PM
Gosh.  I never thought about that. Personally, I never eat Carrots.

Thats why you can come up with gems like Davel is better looking than Hippocrates.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 05:50:56 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 04:06:33 PM
It has to be Poor Parenting.  No one in Britain needs to be starving or malnourished.  The whole idea is ridiculous.

No proper food?  Why not?

That is the narrative pushed by the rightwing press.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 05:57:09 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 04:30:33 PM
This is an excuse, is it?  This is not the fault of The Government.

What Cultural Element?  No one ever taught me how to cook because I am useless?  And no one ever taught me how to feed my children?

How do you think the rest of us managed?

Unless parents have suddenly become terrible in the last few years the rise in child admissions to hospital due to malnutrition must lie elsewhere. I’m not sure why everyone can’t see that the squeeze on benefits and the proliferation of zero hours contracts are the main cause.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 06:05:44 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 05:57:09 PM
Unless parents have suddenly become terrible in the last few years the rise in child admissions to hospital due to malnutrition must lie elsewhere. I’m not sure why everyone can’t see that the squeeze on benefits and the proliferation of zero hours contracts are the main cause.
Do you totally discount the roll out of mobile phone technology as a primary cause
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 06:07:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 06:05:44 PM
Do you totally discount the roll out of mobile phone technology as a primary cause

In what way has mobile phone technology impacted on the rise in malnutrition amongst children ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 06:09:04 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 19, 2020, 05:45:29 PM
Thats why you can come up with gems like Davel is better looking than Hippocrates.

I have to tell you that there is absolutely nothing wrong with my eyesight.  My brain is getting a bit dodgy, but only due to constant repetition of absolute rubbish.

Carrots?  Who needs them?  I would rather eat Asparagus.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 06:10:52 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 05:50:56 PM
That is the narrative pushed by the rightwing press.

Is it Right Wing or Left Wing?  I have rather lost track.  Either would use this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 07:15:57 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 06:07:45 PM
In what way has mobile phone technology impacted on the rise in malnutrition amongst children ?


I dont think it has...but you seem to be deciding what does based on no evidence so I just wondered how far your baseless accusations go.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 07:28:10 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 05:57:09 PM
Unless parents have suddenly become terrible in the last few years the rise in child admissions to hospital due to malnutrition must lie elsewhere. I’m not sure why everyone can’t see that the squeeze on benefits and the proliferation of zero hours contracts are the main cause.

2500 is quite a small number.......chldren are under 18s...how  many of those who are admitted do you think are due to eating disorders....which may well be on the increase
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 07:30:05 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 07:15:57 PM

I dont think it has...but you seem to be deciding what does based on no evidence so I just wondered how far your baseless accusations go.

https://www.endhungeruk.org/2019/02/07/uk-food-poverty-now-public-health-emergency/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 07:36:05 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 07:28:10 PM
2500 is quite a small number.......chldren are under 18s...how  many of those who are admitted do you think are due to eating disorders....which may well be on the increase

2500 is a disgrace in the fifth richest country in the world.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 07:37:48 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 07:30:05 PM
https://www.endhungeruk.org/2019/02/07/uk-food-poverty-now-public-health-emergency/


what proportion of thos ebeing admitted to hospital come from poor backgrounds..its raer in the Uk

Malnutrition caused by a poor diet is rare in the UK, but it can happen if a child is neglected, living in poverty or being abused.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 07:38:48 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 07:36:05 PM
2500 is a disgrace in the fifth richest country in the world.

how many of the 2500 are not subject to poverty but to anorexia
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 07:44:51 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 05:50:56 PM
That is the narrative pushed by the rightwing press.

and pretty well everything you say and post is the narrative of the left
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 07:53:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 07:44:51 PM
and pretty well everything you say and post is the narrative of the left

I’m not embarrassed to admit I’m left wing....immensely proud of it actually, as are most left-wingers. You can’t, strangely, say that of those who veer to the right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 19, 2020, 07:57:56 PM
The worst thing about the far left is their firm belief that they are the most virtuous among us.  And yet more crimes against humanity have been carried out by those on the far left than on the far right, and thatis a fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 07:59:10 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 07:53:04 PM
I’m not embarrassed to admit I’m left wing....immensely proud of it actually, as are most left-wingers. You can’t, strangely, say that of those who veer to the right.

I represent and follow the middle way.... its the only way...and I'm very happy with it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 08:03:18 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 07:59:10 PM
I represent and follow the middle way.... its the only way...and I'm very happy with it

Then that’s lovely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 08:05:36 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 08:03:18 PM
Then that’s lovely.

It's wonderful...thanks
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 19, 2020, 08:26:03 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 19, 2020, 05:40:22 PM
Gosh.  I never thought about that.  Personally, I never eat Carrots.

I love roast veg
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 19, 2020, 08:29:55 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 07:37:48 PM

what proportion of thos ebeing admitted to hospital come from poor backgrounds..its raer in the Uk

Malnutrition caused by a poor diet is rare in the UK, but it can happen if a child is neglected, living in poverty or being abused.

I can't bear the thought of anyone being hungry,  especially children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 08:42:45 PM
Quote from: Lace on July 19, 2020, 08:29:55 PM
I can't bear the thought of anyone being hungry,  especially children.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/welfare/2019/12/channel-4-s-shocking-dispatches-child-poverty-reality-check-election-needs

Then we have something in common Lace.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on July 19, 2020, 08:50:01 PM
Very sad
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 19, 2020, 09:19:18 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on July 19, 2020, 08:42:45 PM
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/welfare/2019/12/channel-4-s-shocking-dispatches-child-poverty-reality-check-election-needs

Then we have something in common Lace.
..
What do you think is the bigger problem for UK children...hunger or obesity
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 19, 2020, 10:08:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 19, 2020, 03:48:41 PM
I expect you and your wife could meet your food, clothing, household bills, entertainment, travel and other expenses from £116.80 plus £21.05 for the eldest child and £13.95 for any others. My state pension (just for me) is more than the benefit paid to a couple on benefits.

What about rent,council tax? dental and optician free as well? children get free school meals.

Malnutrition= bad parenting. Factoring in children of woke people are turning vegan and starving themselves being admitted for Anorexia Nervosa.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 19, 2020, 10:24:55 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 19, 2020, 09:19:18 PM
..
What do you think is the bigger problem for UK children...hunger or obesity


Know the facts  regardless of your political persuasion.

I would add to that argument that school children are monitored by school teachers and nurses and the social work are contacted on suspect of any form of abuse. Starving your children is a form of abuse. Parents are offered triple P parenting support and  if children are at serious risk they are removed from the home. Therefore, any child being admitted to hospital is via the community social work team which include NHS staff for assessment and diagnosis.  If a child  is very ill then that has been due to the parents/s not contacting services for assistance and being held back from attending school. to go under the radar.

So 100% parents fault. Unless the child is diagnosed  with Anorexia Nervosa. And that is a very specific mental health issue.

https://www.triplep.net/glo-en/find-out-about-triple-p/triple-p-in-a-nutshell/



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 24, 2020, 01:12:23 PM
Something or nothing...
According to their Linkedin profiles, both RM & MWM have relocated to Exeter within the last few months. My cynical side is whispering something about a dislike of Portuguese justice & jails.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 24, 2020, 01:35:54 PM
Quote from: misty on July 24, 2020, 01:12:23 PM
Something or nothing...
According to their Linkedin profiles, both RM & MWM have relocated to Exeter within the last few months. My cynical side is whispering something about a dislike of Portuguese justice & jails.

Is July 2019 "within the last few months"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on July 24, 2020, 01:42:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 24, 2020, 01:35:54 PM
Is July 2019 "within the last few months"?

The page didn't have Exeter as his location a few months ago.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 29, 2020, 09:52:42 PM
why do some posters...hide their online status... do they think we don't know they are lurking. perhaps those who hide could answer...who are they hiding from
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 29, 2020, 11:43:38 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 29, 2020, 09:52:42 PM
why do some posters...hide their online status... do they think we don't know they are lurking. perhaps those who hide could answer...who are they hiding from

I am not sure that I know what you mean.  Do you mean Hidden Members?  Perhaps they are paranoid.  But then who cares?

No one has come gunning for me despite knowing exactly who I am and where to find me.  Courtesy of Mr. Bennett.

Lann Georges,  56310 Melrand,  Maureen Eleanor Eccles Lang.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 29, 2020, 11:58:47 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 29, 2020, 11:43:38 PM
I am not sure that I know what you mean.  Do you mean Hidden Members?  Perhaps they are paranoid.  But then who cares?

No one has come gunning for me despite knowing exactly who I am and where to find me.  Courtesy of Mr. Bennett.

Lann Georges,  56310 Melrand,  Maureen Eleanor Eccles Lang.
Do they write addresses the other way around in France?   The town first and Name last?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 30, 2020, 12:28:47 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 29, 2020, 11:58:47 PM
Do they write addresses the other way around in France?   The town first and Name last?

No.  I was just making a point however it comes.  It will find me if anyone so chooses.

You can have anonymous.  I have never been so.  I put my money where my mouth is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on July 30, 2020, 01:18:09 AM
Quote from: Davel on July 29, 2020, 09:52:42 PM
why do some posters...hide their online status... do they think we don't know they are lurking. perhaps those who hide could answer...who are they hiding from

We have numerous people who follow the forum daily and who are well known public figures. I suppose it gives them a sense of security.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 30, 2020, 02:33:35 AM
Quote from: John on July 30, 2020, 01:18:09 AM
We have numerous people who follow the forum daily and who are well known public figures. I suppose it gives them a sense of security.

Actually, this not what it is all about.  They are just lurking with their Forum Names and hoping that no one noticed.

Or they are just Members who never comment.  Does anyone care?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 30, 2020, 03:28:24 AM
Quote from: John on July 30, 2020, 01:18:09 AM
We have numerous people who follow the forum daily and who are well known public figures. I suppose it gives them a sense of security.

Why?  They don't have to Register to read The Forum.  Blimmin Hell, who are these people?

Thanks a bunch.  Too afraid to say on whose side they are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 30, 2020, 07:16:58 AM
Quote from: John on July 30, 2020, 01:18:09 AM
We have numerous people who follow the forum daily and who are well known public figures. I suppose it gives them a sense of security.
LOL.   I think Davel means forum members who have their online status set to “hidden” as I have.  I did it years ago for a laugh and now I can’t remember how to undo it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 30, 2020, 12:24:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 30, 2020, 07:16:58 AM
LOL.   I think Davel means forum members who have their online status set to “hidden” as I have.  I did it years ago for a laugh and now I can’t remember how to undo it.

I did mine some time ago because it was suggested.  I remember how to undo it but when I tried it didn't work, but I've got used to it now and experience shows me it enables the avoidance of a lot of unnecessary flak.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on July 30, 2020, 12:44:05 PM
Quote from: Brietta on July 30, 2020, 12:24:35 PM
I did mine some time ago because it was suggested.  I remember how to undo it but when I tried it didn't work, but I've got used to it now and experience shows me it enables the avoidance of a lot of unnecessary flak.
It has it's advantages as no one is aware which moderator is "on".   I have not tried it, but I'm tempted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 30, 2020, 12:47:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 30, 2020, 07:16:58 AM
LOL.   I think Davel means forum members who have their online status set to “hidden” as I have.  I did it years ago for a laugh and now I can’t remember how to undo it.
That's right...I noticed one mod was hidden but it's quite easy to check if that mod is online as the status shows on the profile...perhaps they don't realise that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 30, 2020, 12:47:43 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 30, 2020, 12:44:05 PM
It has it's advantages as no one is aware which moderator is "on".   I have not tried it, but I'm tempted.

Its easy to work out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 30, 2020, 01:18:48 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 30, 2020, 12:47:43 PM
Its easy to work out.

Very easy....that's why I'm asking why posters do it... particularly mods
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 30, 2020, 02:38:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 30, 2020, 07:16:58 AM
LOL.   I think Davel means forum members who have their online status set to “hidden” as I have.  I did it years ago for a laugh and now I can’t remember how to undo it.

I don't know if I am allowed to do this.  And wouldn't know how anyway.  Put your money where your mouth is, as they say in France.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 30, 2020, 02:40:57 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on July 30, 2020, 12:44:05 PM
It has it's advantages as no one is aware which moderator is "on".   I have not tried it, but I'm tempted.

You are all killing me, as in, What a Laugh.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 30, 2020, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 30, 2020, 12:47:25 PM
That's right...I noticed one mod was hidden but it's quite easy to check if that mod is online as the status shows on the profile...perhaps they don't realise that

Obviously.  So what is the point?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 30, 2020, 04:03:26 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 30, 2020, 02:38:13 PM
I don't know if I am allowed to do this.  And wouldn't know how anyway.  Put your money where your mouth is, as they say in France.

The V sign was the riposte to that at Agincourt. (allegedly)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 30, 2020, 04:28:06 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 30, 2020, 04:03:26 PM
The V sign was the riposte to that at Agincourt. (allegedly)

Agincourt?  When was that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on July 30, 2020, 04:46:53 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 30, 2020, 04:28:06 PM
Agincourt?  When was that?
Don't you remember it, El?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 30, 2020, 05:15:49 PM
Quote from: The General on July 30, 2020, 04:46:53 PM
Don't you remember it, El?

Who?  Me?  I am only eighty one years old, you know.  And still a bit more bright than you.  Oh, and probably a lot better looking.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 30, 2020, 05:48:24 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 30, 2020, 05:15:49 PM
Who?  Me?  I am only eighty one years old, you know.  And still a bit more bright than you.  Oh, and probably a lot better looking.

Are you a trumpet player,cause you sure know how to blow one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 30, 2020, 06:02:55 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 30, 2020, 05:48:24 PM
Are you a trumpet player,cause you sure know how to blow one.

Not a chance.  Nothing Yorkshire about me, sad to say.  I am a Mouthy Cow.  You can take the Londoner out of London but you can't ever take the Londoner out of me,  much as I might have preferred otherwise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 30, 2020, 09:49:49 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 30, 2020, 06:02:55 PM
Not a chance.  Nothing Yorkshire about me, sad to say.  I am a Mouthy Cow.  You can take the Londoner out of London but you can't ever take the Londoner out of me,  much as I might have preferred otherwise.

5 hidden including rob and spam...it seems,,robs appeared now
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 30, 2020, 10:09:26 PM
Quote from: Davel on July 30, 2020, 09:49:49 PM
5 hidden including rob and spam...it seems,,robs appeared now

I don't hide my profile?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mrswah on July 31, 2020, 11:44:27 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 30, 2020, 06:02:55 PM
Not a chance.  Nothing Yorkshire about me, sad to say.  I am a Mouthy Cow.  You can take the Londoner out of London but you can't ever take the Londoner out of me,  much as I might have preferred otherwise.

Can't get the Londoner out of me either, although I left years ago.

My daughters were both born "Essex girls".   They are appalled !!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 02, 2020, 02:28:43 PM
Quote from: mrswah on July 31, 2020, 11:44:27 AM
Can't get the Londoner out of me either, although I left years ago.

My daughters were both born "Essex girls".   They are appalled !!!

Ha ha.  Try me when push comes to shove.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on August 06, 2020, 07:21:58 PM
Nearly 3 million views in 5 days

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 07, 2020, 01:13:53 AM
Why are we not allowed to comment on the thread about the media lies on Christian Bruckner ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 07, 2020, 02:38:13 AM
Quote from: sadie on August 07, 2020, 01:13:53 AM
Why are we not allowed to comment on the thread about the media lies on Christian Bruckner ?
The forum doesn't want to be involved with a case for libel. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 07, 2020, 08:00:04 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on August 07, 2020, 02:38:13 AM
The forum doesn't want to be involved with a case for libel.
I wonder if there are many instances of rapists successfully sueing the world’s media whilst serving a jail sentence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 07, 2020, 08:13:56 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 07, 2020, 08:00:04 AM
I wonder if there are many instances of rapists successfully sueing the world’s media whilst serving a jail sentence.

Its strange...I havent seen any false stateemnts as regards CB here but plenty of libel directed towards the McCanns
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 07, 2020, 08:53:14 AM
What I find slightly disturbing is that there are people on this forum who actually hope that this man profits at the expense of the media who have imo done us the service of alerting us to the type of vile man he is.  Bonkers and strange imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 07, 2020, 09:29:29 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 07, 2020, 08:53:14 AM
What I find slightly disturbing is that there are people on this forum who actually hope that this man profits at the expense of the media who have imo done us the service of alerting us to the type of vile man he is.  Bonkers and strange imo.

I can't see how he has any case as long as the reporting is accurate
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 07, 2020, 10:59:57 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 07, 2020, 09:29:29 AM
I can't see how he has any case as long as the reporting is accurate

Which is the same position the parents were in when the false stories were published about them. Most turned out to be inaccurate. In Brueckner’s case we will just have to wait and see.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 07, 2020, 11:23:00 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 07, 2020, 10:59:57 AM
Which is the same position the parents were in when the false stories were published about them. Most turned out to be inaccurate. In Brueckner’s case we will just have to wait and see.

All the reporting I've seen is accurate...have you seen something that might not be accurate...I doubt it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 07, 2020, 11:38:36 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 07, 2020, 11:23:00 AM
All the reporting I've seen is accurate...have you seen something that might not be accurate...I doubt it

Mobile phone records proved Brueckner was in Praia da Luz on the night she disappeared.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-had-secret-22435881

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 07, 2020, 02:21:35 PM
Ex-Labour MP Eric Joyce gets suspended jail sentence over child abuse image

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/07/ex-labour-mp-eric-joyce-gets-suspended-jail-sentence-over-child-abuse-image
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 07, 2020, 02:27:12 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 07, 2020, 02:21:35 PM
Ex-Labour MP Eric Joyce gets suspended jail sentence over child abuse image

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/07/ex-labour-mp-eric-joyce-gets-suspended-jail-sentence-over-child-abuse-image

Former Conservative MP found guilty of sexual assault https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-politics-elphicke/former-conservative-mp-found-guilty-of-sexual-assault-idUKKCN24V2BF

And this means what exactly in relation to Madeleine McCann's case and the prime suspect Brueckner ???
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 07, 2020, 02:38:04 PM
Nothing, which is why it is in wandering.
However it's  relevance relates to earlier discussions about leniency of sentences.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 07, 2020, 05:07:37 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 07, 2020, 02:38:04 PM
Nothing, which is why it is in wandering.
However it's  relevance relates to earlier discussions about leniency of sentences.

More noteworthy is the Conservative MP who is under investigation for sexual assault. Why does he still have the whip ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 07, 2020, 05:41:57 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 07, 2020, 02:27:12 PM
Former Conservative MP found guilty of sexual assault https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-politics-elphicke/former-conservative-mp-found-guilty-of-sexual-assault-idUKKCN24V2BF

And this means what exactly in relation to Madeleine McCann's case and the prime suspect Brueckner ???

Kelly Mary Fauvrelle.

Remember when you shared that story which had precisely nothing to do with Maddie?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 07, 2020, 07:33:08 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 07, 2020, 05:07:37 PM
More noteworthy is the Conservative MP who is under investigation for sexual assault. Why does he still have the whip ?

There is some uncertainty about this- the lady in question was in a relationship with the Tory MP, She didn't report to the police. The claims are about when she was in  a 'toxic' type relationship with him. It certainly does need looked into!

However, it isn't quite on the same tablet as accessing  babies in porn...suspended sentence? WTF! Not even on the sex register. I wonder who he knows and shares his 'hobby' with.

 But I would guess the hanging brigade are out in force demanding all sorts for the Tory MP before it has been properly investigated!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 07, 2020, 07:34:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 07, 2020, 08:53:14 AM
What I find slightly disturbing is that there are people on this forum who actually hope that this man profits at the expense of the media who have imo done us the service of alerting us to the type of vile man he is.  Bonkers and strange imo.

Would you care to name them, I can't see them... Thank you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 07, 2020, 07:56:57 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 07, 2020, 07:34:11 PM
Would you care to name them, I can't see them... Thank you.
Holly for one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 07, 2020, 08:05:34 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 07, 2020, 07:56:57 PM
Holly for one.

OMG really? where is the post. I am shocked.

I know she likes justice and all but to want that monster to get compo  ewwwwww

just the one name- maybe you should amend you post for accuracy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 07, 2020, 08:11:16 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 07, 2020, 08:05:34 PM
OMG really? where is the post. I am shocked.

I know she likes justice and all but to want that monster to get compo  ewwwwww

just the one name- maybe you should amend you post for accuracy.

Try reading back a bit on the main Threads.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 07, 2020, 08:13:29 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 07, 2020, 08:05:34 PM
OMG really? where is the post. I am shocked.

I know she likes justice and all but to want that monster to get compo  ewwwwww

just the one name- maybe you should amend you post for accuracy.
Wonderfulspam was another.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 07, 2020, 08:23:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 07, 2020, 08:13:29 PM
Wonderfulspam was another.

lol spammer is a given for  troll posts.

But thanks anyway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 07, 2020, 08:32:35 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 07, 2020, 08:23:48 PM
lol spammer is a given for  troll posts.

But thanks anyway.
Then there was this from Faithlily to Davel

“Then you are okay with Brueckner receiving huge wads of cash for the unsubstantiated allegations made about him in the press. Glad to hear it.”

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 07, 2020, 08:33:27 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 07, 2020, 07:33:08 PM
There is some uncertainty about this- the lady in question was in a relationship with the Tory MP, She didn't report to the police. The claims are about when she was in  a 'toxic' type relationship with him. It certainly does need looked into!

However, it isn't quite on the same tablet as accessing  babies in porn...suspended sentence? WTF! Not even on the sex register. I wonder who he knows and shares his 'hobby' with.

 But I would guess the hanging brigade are out in force demanding all sorts for the Tory MP before it has been properly investigated!

The lady in question did report the incident to the police as Mark Spencer wasn’t doing anything. Why do you think there is a police investigation going on ?

You don’t need to ‘know’ anyone to get a suspended sentence for a child abuse conviction....remember Nigel Nessling ?

The investigation should of course run its course but in any other industry if a employee in a senior position had been accused of sexual assault he or she would be suspended to the investigation was completed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 07, 2020, 08:36:40 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 07, 2020, 08:05:34 PM
OMG really? where is the post. I am shocked.

I know she likes justice and all but to want that monster to get compo  ewwwwww

just the one name- maybe you should amend you post for accuracy.

No one wants Brueckner to get any money but several of us think it’s a possibility if he isn’t charged in connection with Madeleine’s disappearance he will sue the newspapers who suggested he was...much like the parents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 07, 2020, 08:44:02 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 07, 2020, 08:36:40 PM
No one wants Brueckner to get any money but several of us think it’s a possibility if he isn’t charged in connection with Madeleine’s disappearance he will sue the newspapers who suggested he was...much like the parents.

How much did Michael Barrymore get..I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 07, 2020, 08:48:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 07, 2020, 08:44:02 PM
How much did Michael Barrymore get..I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land

We shall wait and see.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 07, 2020, 08:51:40 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 07, 2020, 08:48:42 PM
We shall wait and see.

I think that's the most sensible post you've ever made
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 07, 2020, 09:02:49 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 07, 2020, 08:51:40 PM
I think that's the most sensible post you've ever made

I think I’ll grow old waiting for yours.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 07, 2020, 09:06:11 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 07, 2020, 09:02:49 PM
I think I’ll grow old waiting for yours.
I doubt you will ever see sense...however old you get
I have absolute proof of that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 07, 2020, 09:59:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 07, 2020, 09:06:11 PM
I doubt you will ever see sense...however old you get
I have absolute proof of that

In your posts...absolutely.

Or is that ‘faulty logic ‘  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 07, 2020, 10:03:51 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 07, 2020, 09:59:42 PM
In your posts...absolutely.

Or is that ‘faulty logic ‘  @)(++(*

I have absolute proof that you have  a very poor interpretation of evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 08, 2020, 12:07:51 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 07, 2020, 10:03:51 PM
I have absolute proof that you have  a very poor interpretation of evidence
Prove that or expect more moderation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 11, 2020, 05:16:16 PM
Feel free to heap scorn and derision on the Met.  No doubt they were focused on completely the wrong suspects and kept the case open for as long as they could to keep officers in employment and to save face, not to mention wasting millions of pounds on one case, when there are loads of other murdered children whose cases never got nearly as much money spent on them blah blah blah

Stephen Lawrence: Met police close murder investigation after 27 years
In 2012 Gary Dobson and David Norris were jailed for life after being found guilty of being part of the gang of white youths who fatally stabbed Stephen, 18, in an unprovoked attack as he waited at a bus stop in April 1993.

She said: “This was an appalling racist murder and I am sad that we have been unable to secure further convictions for Stephen, his family and friends.

“The investigation has now moved to an ‘inactive’ phase, but I have given Stephen’s family the assurance that we will continue to deal with any new information that comes to light.

“The investigation into Stephen’s murder will also be periodically reviewed for any further investigative opportunities which may arise, for example with advances in technology.”

She added: “ “We were able to secure two convictions following a determined investigation in 2012 but it is well known that other suspects were also involved in the events which unfolded that night and it is deeply frustrating that we have been unable to bring them to justice.”

In 2018, on the 25th anniversary of the murder, the Met said that the investigation was unlikely to proceed without new information. At that time Stephen’s mother, Baroness Lawrence, suggested that police should close the murder inquiry if there was no hope. His father Neville Lawrence said he hoped the family could get “total justice” and would never give up.

Sponsored

The force has been trying to bring the remaining suspects to justice since a new phase in the inquiry began in 2014. It involved more than 240 new witness statements and a mass screening of over 360 women to identify a female DNA profile from a bag strap discarded at the scene of the murder.

A public appeal for information in September 2016 to identify the woman, along with two other potential male witnesses, generated more than 40 lines of inquiry. Ultimately however officers were unable to trace the trio.

The case will now be managed by officers within the Special Casework Team, Central Specialist Crime, and any new information will be fully reviewed.

The original investigation into Stephen’s death was hampered by incompetence, racism and claims of police corruption surrounding Norris's father Clifford and his links to the criminal underworld.

In April 1994 the Crown Prosecution Service said there was insufficient evidence to bring a prosecution, and in September that year Mr Lawrence's parents unsuccessfully attempted their own private prosecution against Dobson, Knight and Neil Acourt.

Five years later the Macpherson report, produced after a public inquiry into the case, found the Metropolitan Police guilty of institutional racism and made a series of recommendations on changes to policing and wider public policy.

Today there are still ongoing inquiries linked to the case, including an investigation by the National Crime Agency and the Independent Office for Police Conduct into alleged corruption.

That case will also inform part of the public inquiry into undercover policing that is due to start next year, after it was revealed in 2013 that a police mole infiltrated a campaign group supporting the Lawrence family's fight for justice.

Dame Cressida paid tribute to Mr Lawrence's parents for their tireless campaign for justice for their son, with the family waiting nearly 20 years before two of his killers were finally jailed.

Dame Cressida said: “As a result of ceaseless campaigning for justice by Stephen’s parents, profound changes have happened in policing, the law and wider society.

“I pay tribute to them for their courage and achievements.

“And today my thoughts are with them and all Stephen’s loved ones.”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 11, 2020, 05:23:14 PM

"Feel free to heap scorn and derision on the Met."

OK I will, ta very much.

What a blatant waste of police time & resources.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 11, 2020, 06:02:50 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 11, 2020, 05:23:14 PM
"Feel free to heap scorn and derision on the Met."

OK I will, ta very much.

What a blatant waste of police time & resources.
Thanks.  Next!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 12, 2020, 10:38:44 AM
(https://scontent.flhr2-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/117350673_4332920926729850_4241257874537682778_o.jpg?_nc_cat=1&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=Nl5Y6dmdWqcAX8QYvpf&_nc_ht=scontent.flhr2-2.fna&oh=5dca3b45c3a6d6f5971c46efd9f258ce&oe=5F58C859)
NFU Scotland
1 d ·
URGENT UPDATE FOR THOSE WHO HAVE RECEIVED UNSOLICITED PACKETS OF SEED IN THE POST
Significant numbers of Scottish households have been receiving unsolicited packets of seeds in the post from China/Singapore as part of a likely scam.
Following contact with Scottish Government, it urges those receiving seeds to take the following actions.
• If the packet of seeds has not been opened, please leave it sealed.
• DO NOT PLANT OR COMPOST THESE SEEDS.
It is possible that these seeds could be a harmful invasive species or harbour a disease both of which if released could pose a threat to agriculture and the environment.
• Do not handle the seeds
These seeds may have been treated with a chemical pesticide. Please wash your hands if you have handled them without gloves.
Science and Advice for Scottish Agriculture (SASA) is collecting these unsolicited packets of seeds for analysis.  It is asking for your co-operation to send these seeds to SASA.
Email your details and a postal address to info@sasa.gov.scot 
You will be sent a pre-paid self-addressed envelope and zip-lock bag.  When you receive the envelope and zip-lock bag please insert the packet of seeds into the zip-lock bag and seal. Then place the zip-lock bag and contents into the envelope and post it back to SASA.
If you receive further unsolicited packages, please report them again using info@sasa.gov.scot
NFU Scotland - Argyll & the Islands Region
NFU Scotland - Ayrshire Region
NFU Scotland - Forth & Clyde Region
NFU Scotland East Central
NFU Scotland - Dumfries and Galloway region
NFUS North East Region
NFU Scotland - Lothians & Borders Region
Scottish Natural Heritage
Rural Matters
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 12, 2020, 11:09:32 AM

Oh Dear, that's a new one.  Fortunately I only ever plant my own grown seeds.  Although this usually involves everything I grow, which means that I am getting nowhere fast.  There is hardly ever anything left to actually eat.

But I do like growing things.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 12, 2020, 11:35:32 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 12, 2020, 11:09:32 AM
Oh Dear, that's a new one.  Fortunately I only ever plant my own grown seeds.  Although this usually involves everything I grow, which means that I am getting nowhere fast.  There is hardly ever anything left to actually eat.

But I do like growing things.

It looks as if the NFU are less than happy about it; I would certainly take their advice if I received some.  Although I don't think it is some sort of 'attack' the source and the reason for posting has to be found and I am sure someone will be doing that.

I'm not much of a gardener and certainly no Johnny Appleseed ... the creepy crawlies do it for me ... but I've got the start of a hedge consisting of various shrubs coming along from scratch very nicely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 12, 2020, 12:19:02 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 12, 2020, 11:35:32 AM
It looks as if the NFU are less than happy about it; I would certainly take their advice if I received some.  Although I don't think it is some sort of 'attack' the source and the reason for posting has to be found and I am sure someone will be doing that.

I'm not much of a gardener and certainly no Johnny Appleseed ... the creepy crawlies do it for me ... but I've got the start of a hedge consisting of various shrubs coming along from scratch very nicely.

Never plant Laurel.  It makes a very good hedge very quickly, but it is monstrous.

As for the rest of them, keep them in check and cut them twice a year.  There isn't very much that I don't know about Hedges.

As for Creepy Crawlies, of which I am not fond, I had to learn to deal with those when I fetched up here alone some many years ago.  No good hollering for help because there wasn't anyone.  But if you really look at them some of them are quite beautiful.

I never kill anything by the way.  These things are far too important.

I have lived in peace with three Wasps Nest now and never been stung.  And my goodness, they are so interesting.

Whoops, sorry about that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on August 12, 2020, 12:26:04 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 12, 2020, 11:35:32 AM
It looks as if the NFU are less than happy about it; I would certainly take their advice if I received some.  Although I don't think it is some sort of 'attack' the source and the reason for posting has to be found and I am sure someone will be doing that.

I'm not much of a gardener and certainly no Johnny Appleseed ... the creepy crawlies do it for me ... but I've got the start of a hedge consisting of various shrubs coming along from scratch very nicely.
Not the NFU... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=029JSiSFcn4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=029JSiSFcn4)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 12, 2020, 12:39:44 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 12, 2020, 12:19:02 PM
Never plant Laurel.  It makes a very good hedge very quickly, but it is monstrous.

As for the rest of them, keep them in check and cut them twice a year.  There isn't very much that I don't know about Hedges.

As for Creepy Crawlies, of which I am not fond, I had to learn to deal with those when I fetched up here alone some many years ago.  No good hollering for help because there wasn't anyone.  But if you really look at them some of them are quite beautiful.

I never kill anything by the way.  These things are far too important.

I have lived in peace with three Wasps Nest now and never been stung.  And my goodness, they are so interesting.

Whoops, sorry about that.

No weed killer (children-dogs-cats made that impossible) and no killing for me either although I have toyed with the idea of leaving out some containers with beer in them to drown the slugs ... on the premise they would at least die happy.  I've not done it though ~ just try to plant things they are said not to like, unfortunately nobody told my slugs that, they just munch away regardless.
Fortunately I've never had a dog that showed the slightest interest in eating or even going near one
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 12, 2020, 12:45:16 PM
Quote from: Myster on August 12, 2020, 12:26:04 PM
Not the NFU... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=029JSiSFcn4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=029JSiSFcn4)
Love it!  Particularly his face when he says " ... someone in China has your name and address!"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 12, 2020, 01:01:56 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 12, 2020, 12:39:44 PM
No weed killer (children-dogs-cats made that impossible) and no killing for me either although I have toyed with the idea of leaving out some containers with beer in them to drown the slugs ... on the premise they would at least die happy.  I've not done it though ~ just try to plant things they are said not to like, unfortunately nobody told my slugs that, they just munch away regardless.
Fortunately I've never had a dog that showed the slightest interest in eating or even going near one

Rotten Little Swine loves insects.  He wants to make friends.  He is insane.  But I love him,  I think.

Slugs don't like Broad Beans ever and aren't keen on Tomatoes once they get knee high, so put them on a garden table out of reach, along with Runner Beans.

There are always more ways than one to skin a cat.  Such basic knowledge I now have, none of which is even remotely agricultural.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on August 12, 2020, 02:55:04 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 12, 2020, 12:39:44 PM
No weed killer (children-dogs-cats made that impossible) and no killing for me either although I have toyed with the idea of leaving out some containers with beer in them to drown the slugs ... on the premise they would at least die happy.  I've not done it though ~ just try to plant things they are said not to like, unfortunately nobody told my slugs that, they just munch away regardless.
Fortunately I've never had a dog that showed the slightest interest in eating or even going near one

A hedgehog will fix the slug problem. Just put out water for it while it's hot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on August 12, 2020, 03:42:51 PM
First catch your hedgehog, but make sure the water has cooled off a bit beforehand.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 12, 2020, 04:07:11 PM
Quote from: Carana on August 12, 2020, 02:55:04 PM
A hedgehog will fix the slug problem. Just put out water for it while it's hot.

But first you have to get them, presuming that you don't want The Dog to bring them into the house.  Hedgehog Fleas are seriously not funny.

Rotten Little Swine loves all things.  He wants to be Mates with everything.  Meanwhile I deal with Slugs and Snails by chucking them over the wall, along with the occasional Hedgehog.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 12, 2020, 04:14:42 PM
Quote from: Myster on August 12, 2020, 03:42:51 PM
First catch your hedgehog, but make sure the water has cooled off a bit beforehand.

Hedgehogs manage to get into my entirely Dog Proof garden.  The dog is stupid you see.  God knows how some random Hedgehog gets in.

O'Connor, the Rotten Little Swine, is still digging for Badgers.  And we certainly haven't got any of those.  You tell him.  He isn't listening to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 12, 2020, 06:10:56 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 12, 2020, 12:19:02 PM
Never plant Laurel.  It makes a very good hedge very quickly, but it is monstrous.

As for the rest of them, keep them in check and cut them twice a year.  There isn't very much that I don't know about Hedges.

As for Creepy Crawlies, of which I am not fond, I had to learn to deal with those when I fetched up here alone some many years ago.  No good hollering for help because there wasn't anyone.  But if you really look at them some of them are quite beautiful.

I never kill anything by the way.  These things are far too important.

I have lived in peace with three Wasps Nest now and never been stung.  And my goodness, they are so interesting.

Whoops, sorry about that.

Ever laid or cast one?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 12, 2020, 06:36:17 PM
Quote from: barrier on August 12, 2020, 06:10:56 PM
Ever laid or cast one?

What?  A Hedge?  Certainly not.  I don't like Hedges.  Why would anyone want a Hedge?  I like to see what is going on out there.  I don't care if they can see what is going on in here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 12, 2020, 06:43:35 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 12, 2020, 06:36:17 PM
What?  A Hedge?  Certainly not.  I don't like Hedges.  Why would anyone want a Hedge?  I like to see what is going on out there.  I don't care if they can see what is going on in here.

Wild life haven's if properly managed, sadly modern methods don't think of that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 12, 2020, 07:06:31 PM
Quote from: barrier on August 12, 2020, 06:43:35 PM
Wild life haven's if properly managed, sadly modern methods don't think of that.

Really.  But we can't all manage our gardens to whatever is your standard.

I have got this rotten little shite who thinks I've got Badgers.  You tell him that I haven't.

You tell me what you are taking about.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 19, 2020, 07:58:46 PM
Just saw this..

Grieving mother tells court how her heart 'snapped' when she heard her daughter had been killed in Manchester bombing as court prepares to sentence ISIS-backing terrorist over atrocity that killed 22

yet R D Hall...beloved of CMOMM and sceptics in general ...says the bombing was a hoax...what an appalling excuse for  a human being.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 19, 2020, 11:26:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 19, 2020, 07:58:46 PM
Just saw this..

Grieving mother tells court how her heart 'snapped' when she heard her daughter had been killed in Manchester bombing as court prepares to sentence ISIS-backing terrorist over atrocity that killed 22

yet R D Hall...beloved of CMOMM and sceptics in general ...says the bombing was a hoax...what an appalling excuse for  a human being.

Then why do you give him the publicity he so obviously enjoys ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 20, 2020, 06:29:01 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 19, 2020, 11:26:52 PM
Then why do you give him the publicity he so obviously enjoys ?

Don't.you think he should be named and shamed for his appalling video of the Manchester bombing.
Some of his theories are quite cruel and grotesque.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 20, 2020, 11:14:44 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 20, 2020, 06:29:01 PM
Don't.you think he should be named and shamed for his appalling video of the Manchester bombing.
Some of his theories are quite cruel and grotesque.

I think it’s more important that the video is publicised as little as possible. Hall obviously thrives on the notoriety his videos bring and you and your compadres couldn’t help more in that endeavour if you were Satchi and Satchi. What does naming and shaming achieve other giving you a chance to display your imagined moral superiority?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 20, 2020, 11:29:14 PM
I think some people want to brush RD Hall under the carpet for bringing the sceptic cause into disrepute.  Mind you, just look at the loudest, most prominent  McCann sceptic commentators - all mad, bad or dangerous to know.  I wonder why that is...?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 21, 2020, 12:44:48 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 20, 2020, 11:29:14 PM
I think some people want to brush RD Hall under the carpet for bringing the sceptic cause into disrepute.  Mind you, just look at the loudest, most prominent  McCann sceptic commentators - all mad, bad or dangerous to know.  I wonder why that is...?

Based on the rantings in every comment section they can aim their keyboards at which remain largely the same now as they have been since 2007, I think your description of the most prominent aptly covers the meanest of them too.

I think the likes of Hall is a dish to be relished in private and a bit much to be consumed in public ... but a man has to make a living somehow.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 21, 2020, 01:04:56 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 21, 2020, 12:44:48 AM
Based on the rantings in every comment section they can aim their keyboards at which remain largely the same now as they have been since 2007, I think your description of the most prominent aptly covers the meanest of them too.

I think the likes of Hall is a dish to be relished in private and a bit much to be consumed in public ... but a man has to make a living somehow.

What you do in private is your business Brietta.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 21, 2020, 07:10:41 AM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 20, 2020, 11:14:44 PM
I think it’s more important that the video is publicised as little as possible. Hall obviously thrives on the notoriety his videos bring and you and your compadres couldn’t help more in that endeavour if you were Satchi and Satchi. What does naming and shaming achieve other giving you a chance to display your imagined moral superiority?

I can see  why you and other sceptics would prefer no light to be shone on his videos. It must be  difficult for you to see his theories about Madeleine's abduction sit alongside his equally insane and frankly disgraceful theories about the Manchester bombing.
I do understand.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 21, 2020, 07:11:46 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 20, 2020, 11:29:14 PM
I think some people want to brush RD Hall under the carpet for bringing the sceptic cause into disrepute.  Mind you, just look at the loudest, most prominent  McCann sceptic commentators - all mad, bad or dangerous to know.  I wonder why that is...?

Indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on August 21, 2020, 11:39:51 AM
Quote from: Erngath on August 21, 2020, 07:10:41 AM
I can see  why you and other sceptics would prefer no light to be shone on his videos. It must be  difficult for you to see his theories about Madeleine's abduction sit alongside his equally insane and frankly disgraceful theories about the Manchester bombing.
I do understand.

The veiled assertion is that, because RD Hall is a vehement sceptic in regard to the MM case, then if you even partially side with that opinion, by association you are somehow tacitly aligned in all other areas of his 'investigation'.
The lazy, crass, misguided generalisation renders all other discussion worthless.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 21, 2020, 11:42:44 AM
Quote from: The General on August 21, 2020, 11:39:51 AM
The veiled assertion is that, because RD Hall is a vehement sceptic in regard to the MM case, then if you even partially side with that opinion, by association you are somehow tacitly aligned in all other areas of his 'investigation'.
The lazy, crass, misguided generalisation renders all other discussion worthless.
Not all conspiracy theorists like RD Hall are McCann sceptics and not all McCann sceptics are conspiracy theorists but on a Venn diagram I reckon the majority would lie in the intersection.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 21, 2020, 12:00:30 PM
Quote from: The General on August 21, 2020, 11:39:51 AM
The veiled assertion is that, because RD Hall is a vehement sceptic in regard to the MM case, then if you even partially side with that opinion, by association you are somehow tacitly aligned in all other areas of his 'investigation'.
The lazy, crass, misguided generalisation renders all other discussion worthless.

Personally, I nearly lost the will to live listening to RD Hall.  Anyone who managed to wade through that lot deserves a medal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on August 21, 2020, 12:04:28 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 21, 2020, 12:00:30 PM
Personally, I nearly lost the will to live listening to RD Hall.  Anyone who managed to wade through that lot deserves a medal.
I personally can't cope with the man or any of his 'investigations'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: puglove on August 21, 2020, 12:40:06 PM
Quote from: The General on August 21, 2020, 12:04:28 PM
I personally can't cope with the man or any of his 'investigations'.

I can't cope with his mullet.    %56&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 21, 2020, 12:42:58 PM
Quote from: The General on August 21, 2020, 11:39:51 AM
The veiled assertion is that, because RD Hall is a vehement sceptic in regard to the MM case, then if you even partially side with that opinion, by association you are somehow tacitly aligned in all other areas of his 'investigation'.
The lazy, crass, misguided generalisation renders all other discussion worthless.

I assume you find the language used by Faithfully in her response to my post as equally "lazy, crass and misguided.
I, unlike Faithlilly  did not resort to personal attack.

In my opinion if you partially side with any one of his  crank theories then you do actually by association align yourself to all that he promulgates.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on August 21, 2020, 12:58:24 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 21, 2020, 12:42:58 PM
I assume you find the language used by Faithfully in her response to my post as equally "lazy, crass and misguided.
I, unlike Faithlilly  did not resort to personal attack.

In my opinion if you partially side with any one of his  crank theories then you do actually by association align yourself to all that he promulgates.
Then that type of skewed logic can't be reconciled.
I bid you good day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on August 21, 2020, 01:07:54 PM
Quote from: puglove on August 21, 2020, 12:40:06 PM
I can't cope with his mullet.    %56&
...or his accent. Or his face.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 21, 2020, 01:13:09 PM
Quote from: The General on August 21, 2020, 01:07:54 PM
...or his accent. Or his face.

What Accent?  It's a dirge.  The man isn't even literate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 21, 2020, 01:15:08 PM
Quote from: The General on August 21, 2020, 12:58:24 PM
Then that type of skewed logic can't be reconciled.
I bid you good day.

He promulgates crank conspiracy theories!
If someone chooses to believe that only  one of his theories is plausible, then that shows a distinct lack of logic!
Good day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on August 21, 2020, 01:25:49 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 21, 2020, 01:15:08 PM
He promulgates crank conspiracy theories!
If someone chooses to believe that only  one of his theories is plausible, then that shows a distinct lack of logic!
Good day.
Good day. That's not what I said, I referred to being of a 'sceptical ilk', not appreciating any of his content in any way.

But I will bid you a further good day. Good day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 21, 2020, 05:11:45 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 21, 2020, 07:10:41 AM
I can see  why you and your sceptic ilk would prefer no light to be shone on his videos. It must be  difficult for you to see his theories about Madeleine's abduction sit alongside his equally insane and frankly disgraceful theories about the Manchester bombing.
I do understand.

It appears you don’t understand and I’m a little confused on your position too. Do you want these awful videos to be seen ? Where do the victims figure in this....or indeed their families ? Do you really want this video...which I haven’t seen....doing the rounds just to prove what a vile human being Hall is and how unfair he’s been to the McCanns ? Seems a rather immature reaction to me .

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 21, 2020, 05:20:02 PM

Okay.  No Videos.  Definitely not.

Good.  I am glad for this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 21, 2020, 07:04:42 PM
Quote from: Faithlilly on August 21, 2020, 05:11:45 PM
It appears you don’t understand and I’m a little confused on your position too. Do you want these awful videos to be seen ? Where do the victims figure in this....or indeed their families ? Do you really want this video...which I haven’t seen....doing the rounds just to prove what a vile human being Hall is and how unfair he’s been to the McCanns ? Seems a rather immature reaction to me .

Is it at all possible for you to make a post without an insult.
You don't seem the slightest concerned that this man is making money accusing the parents of the children killed in the Manchester bombing of being complicit in a huge conspiracy and fraud.

His.videos are well publicised on social media.

Do you really thing he should earn money from his tours and talks and videos. You seem content to allow him to continue with his dreadful accusations.
I do wonder why.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 21, 2020, 07:09:59 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 21, 2020, 05:20:02 PM
Okay.  No Videos.  Definitely not.

Good.  I am glad for this.
Unfortunately they exist.
And have received many views.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on August 21, 2020, 07:14:55 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 21, 2020, 07:04:42 PM
Is it at all possible for you to make a post without an insult.
You don't seem the slightest concerned that this man is making money accusing the parents of the children killed in the Manchester bombing of being complicit in a huge conspiracy and fraud.

His.videos are well publicised on social media.

Do you really thing he should earn money from his tours and talks and videos. You seem content to allow him to continue with his dreadful accusations.
I do wonder why.
Could be because there's absolutely nothing we can do about it.
Just ignore the tool. He'll get his one day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on August 21, 2020, 07:20:56 PM
Quote from: The General on August 21, 2020, 07:14:55 PM
Could be because there's absolutely nothing we can do about it.
Just ignore the tool. He'll get his one day.


Thank you
I will and I do hope he does.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 21, 2020, 07:27:29 PM
Quote from: The General on August 21, 2020, 01:25:49 PM
Good day. That's not what I said, I referred to being of a 'sceptical ilk', not appreciating any of his content in any way.

But I will bid you a further good day. Good day.

Do you always have to be so smart?  You could be quite useful otherwise.  My own opinions notwithstanding.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 21, 2020, 08:36:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 21, 2020, 07:27:29 PM
Do you always have to be so smart?  You could be quite useful otherwise.  My own opinions notwithstanding.

I agree with you on this occasion...theres only room for one smart arse on the forum and the positions taken
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 21, 2020, 08:42:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 21, 2020, 08:36:45 PM
I agree with you on this occasion...theres only room for one smart arse on the forum and the positions taken

Is it you or me?  Probably you.  I amn't quite that smart.

But never underestimate silly old me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 21, 2020, 08:44:51 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 21, 2020, 08:42:17 PM
Is it you or me?  Probably you.  I amn't quite that smart.

But never underestimate silly old me.

I don't underestimate you
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 21, 2020, 09:09:55 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 21, 2020, 08:44:51 PM
I don't underestimate you

Oh Gosh.  Tis such a sad fact of life that silly old women like me are so often ignored.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 21, 2020, 11:02:15 PM
Quote from: Erngath on August 21, 2020, 07:04:42 PM
Is it at all possible for you to make a post without an insult.
You don't seem the slightest concerned that this man is making money accusing the parents of the children killed in the Manchester bombing of being complicit in a huge conspiracy and fraud.

His.videos are well publicised on social media.

Do you really thing he should earn money from his tours and talks and videos. You seem content to allow him to continue with his dreadful accusations.
I do wonder why.

Please point me to the part of my post where I say that I don’t care that Hall is making money from the video he appears to have made about the Manchester bombing ? If you can’t then please withdraw your accusation.

Likewise please point me to the part of my post where I said that I was content that Hall continue with his ‘dreadful accusations’ ? If you can’t then please withdraw your accusation.

I’m not sure how I can make my position clearer but I’ll try one final time. Hall is a crackpot who thrives on the notoriety his ridiculous videos bestow on him. Supporters help him achieve this notoriety by mentioning him and posting links to his videos on their sites. Can I suggest if you want to stop him monetising his absurd theories you a) report him to every platform he posts on and b) stop mentioning his name and posting links to his videos. Your outrage is his oxygen...cut it off at its source.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 21, 2020, 11:05:58 PM
She said outraged, mentioning  his name no less than three times ^^^
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 21, 2020, 11:33:07 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 21, 2020, 11:05:58 PM
She said outraged, mentioning  his name no less than three times ^^^

Ooo Err.  Bloody hell.  I don't think I can cope with this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 25, 2020, 06:26:17 PM
Mr Grime and his dogs.

Mr. Grime was hired by the FBI to come to America and help them establish a cadaver dog program.  Mr. Grime brought his two dogs, Morse the cadaver dog, and Keela the blood detection dog, to the Castillo home seventeen days after her body was located. Morse alerted to the basement bathroom where Mrs. Castillo was found, and also to the foot of her bed in the master bedroom.

The cadaver dog testimony was presented at trial so the jury could consider whether the victim had been killed in her bedroom and then moved to the bathroom. The defendant continuously alleged throughout the course of the trial that Mrs. Castillo committed suicide. The cadaver dog evidence helped the Commonwealth show that this defense was not possible.

https://www.loudoun.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=5011&fbclid=IwAR3dAxj6gN6IlJMU-kMJXN2MU3rhFahfzVddY7xrg9o3k6gX2GLvWKKulq4
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on August 25, 2020, 07:00:17 PM
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/madeline-mccann-holiday-human-trafficking-16892523
It’s the first time I’ve noticed this. It is from 2019.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 26, 2020, 08:43:58 AM
going back to hiding online status...whats it all about.. robs on line but it seems hes hiding
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on August 26, 2020, 09:21:19 AM
Quote from: Davel on August 26, 2020, 08:43:58 AM
going back to hiding online status...whats it all about.. robs on line but it seems hes hiding
There are other boards to view as well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 26, 2020, 02:16:05 PM
I am finding it interesting to look around to see what the Portuguese press are saying regarding Brueckner and other aspects of Madeleine's case.

More and more I am seeing that the Portuguese press refer to the lifting of arguido status to be commensurate with clearing the person involved.


As follows ...
The Judiciary Police (PJ) reopened the investigation in 2013, after the case was dismissed by the PGR in 2008, clearing the three defendants, Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, and another Briton, Robert Murat.

A Polícia Judiciária (PJ) reabriu a investigação em 2013, depois de o caso ter sido arquivado pela PGR em 2008, ilibando os três arguidos, os pais de Madeleine, Kate e Gerry McCann, e um outro britânico, Robert Murat.

https://tvi24.iol.pt/sociedade/christian-brueckner/maddie-suspeito-alemao-alvo-de-cinco-pedidos-de-cooperacao-judiciaria-internacional
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 26, 2020, 02:50:37 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 26, 2020, 02:16:05 PM
I am finding it interesting to look around to see what the Portuguese press are saying regarding Brueckner and other aspects of Madeleine's case.

More and more I am seeing that the Portuguese press refer to the lifting of arguido status to be commensurate with clearing the person involved.


As follows ...
The Judiciary Police (PJ) reopened the investigation in 2013, after the case was dismissed by the PGR in 2008, clearing the three defendants, Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, and another Briton, Robert Murat.

A Polícia Judiciária (PJ) reabriu a investigação em 2013, depois de o caso ter sido arquivado pela PGR em 2008, ilibando os três arguidos, os pais de Madeleine, Kate e Gerry McCann, e um outro britânico, Robert Murat.

https://tvi24.iol.pt/sociedade/christian-brueckner/maddie-suspeito-alemao-alvo-de-cinco-pedidos-de-cooperacao-judiciaria-internacional
Obviously the PT media have been bought off by the McCanns too, tsk.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 27, 2020, 12:09:30 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 26, 2020, 02:16:05 PM
I am finding it interesting to look around to see what the Portuguese press are saying regarding Brueckner and other aspects of Madeleine's case.

More and more I am seeing that the Portuguese press refer to the lifting of arguido status to be commensurate with clearing the person involved.


As follows ...
The Judiciary Police (PJ) reopened the investigation in 2013, after the case was dismissed by the PGR in 2008,clearing the three defendants, Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, and another Briton, Robert Murat.

A Polícia Judiciária (PJ) reabriu a investigação em 2013, depois de o caso ter sido arquivado pela PGR em 2008, ilibando os três arguidos, os pais de Madeleine, Kate e Gerry McCann, e um outro britânico, Robert Murat.

https://tvi24.iol.pt/sociedade/christian-brueckner/maddie-suspeito-alemao-alvo-de-cinco-pedidos-de-cooperacao-judiciaria-internacional

Well spotted Brie.

We 'bumped' into Robert Murat and he smiled and waved, which was nice.  We were in the car several miles from PdL in a very exclusive and quiet little cul-de-sac, which had something of real interest to me there.  I wonder what brought him there?  It was about 23ish miles by road or roughly 13 miles as the crow flies from Praia de Luz.   I thought it a great co-incidence that we should see him there

Seems that he has been cleared along with The Mccanns, so that is good news for them all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 04, 2020, 02:20:12 AM
Mum of missing Scots airman Corrie McKeague 'trying to keep sensible head' after bones found stuffed in bin bags in river
Nicola Urquhart said she is trying to stay sensible after police informed her of the discovery but haven't been able to identify the bones so far.
BySam Russell
09:53, 3 SEP 2020
The mother of missing airman Corrie McKeague has said that police have been unable to reassure her that bones found in bin bags in a Suffolk river are not her son's.

Nicola Urquhart said she was "trying to keep a sensible head on" after the discovery of human remains in the River Stour in Sudbury on August 27.

Mr McKeague, of Dunfermline, Fife, was 23 when he vanished on a night out in Bury St Edmunds, around 16 miles north of Sudbury, on September 24 2016.

Suffolk Police said that a post-mortem examination of the bones found in Sudbury was completed on Sunday but "was not able to establish any form of identification or cause of death".

The force said further tests are now taking place, adding that this will be a "lengthy process".

Ms Urquhart told the East Anglian Daily Times: "Most times when remains or bodies have been found, the police down in Suffolk have been able to put my mind at rest that it's not Corrie very quickly.

"After speaking to me, they'll be able to tell me that they already think they know who the person is or, for whatever reason, they know it's not Corrie.

"Unfortunately, on this occasion, they've not been able to do that.

"So I think the hard thing is that, whether this is Corrie or not, this is somebody's son or daughter - and it's whether anybody will ever find out because they might not be able to identify who this person is."

She added: "It's just about trying to keep a sensible head on, and not letting your head start making things up and thinking a million thoughts.

"It is really difficult just to wait until you get an answer because there's as much chance of this not being Corrie as it being Corrie but it's going to be someone's son or daughter.

"It's just awful."

The investigation into Mr McKeague's disappearance was passed to cold case detectives in 2018.

Suffolk Police said the "most likely scenario" is that Mr McKeague went into a bin which was emptied into a lorry and ended up in the waste process.

No trace of him has been found.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/mum-missing-scots-airman-corrie-22621768?utm_source=daily_record_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=EM_DailyRecord_Nletter_News_Home_largeteaser_Image_Story1&utm_campaign=daily_newsletter
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on September 04, 2020, 12:45:02 PM
Zahid Younis: Murderer who hid bodies of two women in freezer jailed for life

Zahid Younis has been convicted of the murders of Henriett Szucs and Mihrican Mustafa, whose bodies were found in Canning Town.

A "manipulative" predator who killed two women and hid their bodies in a freezer has been given a life sentence with a minimum term of 38 years.

Zahid Younis had subjected both victims to "very significant violence" in the days before he killed them.

The body of one of the women, Henriett Szucs, was hidden in the small, padlocked chest freezer for almost three years before it was found by police in the 36-year-old killer's flat in east London in April 2019.

Ms Szucs, 34, a Hungarian national, was last seen in August 2016 and is believed to have gone to live with Younis at his home in Canning Town.

The second victim, mother-of-three Mihrican Mustafa, 38, had not been seen since May 2018.

more here https://news.sky.com/story/zahad-younis-man-found-guilty-of-murdering-two-women-whose-bodies-were-found-in-freezer-in-east-london-flat-12060820
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 04, 2020, 05:43:55 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on September 04, 2020, 12:45:02 PM
Zahid Younis: Murderer who hid bodies of two women in freezer jailed for life

Zahid Younis has been convicted of the murders of Henriett Szucs and Mihrican Mustafa, whose bodies were found in Canning Town.

A "manipulative" predator who killed two women and hid their bodies in a freezer has been given a life sentence with a minimum term of 38 years.

Zahid Younis had subjected both victims to "very significant violence" in the days before he killed them.

The body of one of the women, Henriett Szucs, was hidden in the small, padlocked chest freezer for almost three years before it was found by police in the 36-year-old killer's flat in east London in April 2019.

Ms Szucs, 34, a Hungarian national, was last seen in August 2016 and is believed to have gone to live with Younis at his home in Canning Town.

The second victim, mother-of-three Mihrican Mustafa, 38, had not been seen since May 2018.

more here https://news.sky.com/story/zahad-younis-man-found-guilty-of-murdering-two-women-whose-bodies-were-found-in-freezer-in-east-london-flat-12060820


Catalogue of errors it seems including the much vaunted MET.

The Met's missing person inquiry into Ms Mustafa - which started in 2018 - did not examine vital phone evidence, which would have shown contact with Younis around the time she vanished. It is now the subject of an internal Scotland Yard inquiry after her family made a series of complaints.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-53950083
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2020, 05:53:01 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 04, 2020, 05:43:55 PM

Catalogue of errors it seems including the much vaunted MET.

The Met's missing person inquiry into Ms Mustafa - which started in 2018 - did not examine vital phone evidence, which would have shown contact with Younis around the time she vanished. It is now the subject of an internal Scotland Yard inquiry after her family made a series of complaints.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-53950083
At least justice has been done for those two poor women.  I suppose their case proves the McCanns  hid Madeleine’s body in a freezer too. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 06, 2020, 11:36:17 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 04, 2020, 05:43:55 PM

Catalogue of errors it seems including the much vaunted MET.

The Met's missing person inquiry into Ms Mustafa - which started in 2018 - did not examine vital phone evidence, which would have shown contact with Younis around the time she vanished. It is now the subject of an internal Scotland Yard inquiry after her family made a series of complaints.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-53950083
Probably not investigated thoroughly because they were both brown, women and serial victims. A simple check was all that was required, albeit too late. Terrible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 07, 2020, 10:22:24 PM
Quote from: The General on September 06, 2020, 11:36:17 AM
Probably not investigated thoroughly because they were both brown, women and serial victims. A simple check was all that was required, albeit too late. Terrible.

To be fair they were busy looking for Maddie...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 20, 2020, 08:22:25 PM
Ive received  a warning for smart arsed replies...I think I should receive a medal. Obviously someones lost the argument big time...if he thought they were smart arsed...I havent started yet
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 20, 2020, 10:27:59 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 20, 2020, 08:22:25 PM
Ive received  a warning for smart arsed replies...I think I should receive a medal. Obviously someones lost the argument big time...if he thought they were smart arsed...I havent started yet

Is this of interest to anyone except you? There are threads where this type of post can be made, and I don't think this is one of them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 24, 2020, 09:40:20 PM
If I may, today is Heritage Day in my country, hence a public holiday. With 11 official languages, we celebrate. It is also called national ‘braai’/barbecue day. The Ndlovu Choir and their version of the ‘Jerusalema’ will suffice.
https://youtu.be/IlGlmAGskGc
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 24, 2020, 09:50:30 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 24, 2020, 09:40:20 PM
If I may, today is Heritage Day in my country, hence a public holiday. With 11 official languages, we celebrate. It is also called national ‘braai’/barbecue day. The Ndlovu Choir and their version of the ‘Jerusalema’ will suffice.
https://youtu.be/IlGlmAGskGc


Happy Heritage day Anthro!  That is a lovely song is that choir a national one? I wil you tube them... ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 24, 2020, 09:57:16 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on September 24, 2020, 09:50:30 PM

Happy Heritage day Anthro!  That is a lovely song is that choir a national one? I wil you tube them... ?{)(**
Hi MTI, they are from up north, close to the Zimbabwean border. They were also on America’s Got Talent. They truly are bringing so much positivity to a our deeply divided country.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 24, 2020, 10:05:52 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on September 24, 2020, 09:50:30 PM

Happy Heritage day Anthro!  That is a lovely song is that choir a national one? I will you tube them... ?{)(**

This moved me. I loved it when I saw it on friends facebook.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtPcmkO2llY

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on September 25, 2020, 06:35:03 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 24, 2020, 09:40:20 PM
If I may, today is Heritage Day in my country, hence a public holiday. With 11 official languages, we celebrate. It is also called national ‘braai’/barbecue day. The Ndlovu Choir and their version of the ‘Jerusalema’ will suffice.
https://youtu.be/IlGlmAGskGc
Wishing you  a great day! x

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AGtd2-jv0U

I'm also looking for a different choir that I found fabulous as well.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 25, 2020, 07:01:01 PM
Quote from: Carana on September 25, 2020, 06:35:03 PM
Wishing you  a great day! x

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AGtd2-jv0U

I'm also looking for a different choir that I found fabulous as well.

Hi Carana, this is the original version.xx
https://youtu.be/fCZVL_8D048
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 25, 2020, 08:25:49 PM
Cute kids in this one!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp7aVYPa6QM
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on September 26, 2020, 12:19:53 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 25, 2020, 07:01:01 PM
Hi Carana, this is the original version.xx
https://youtu.be/fCZVL_8D048

I'm mesmerised by this. They're brilliant!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=[Name removed]V36ub5ybI

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 26, 2020, 02:55:02 PM
Quote from: Carana on September 26, 2020, 12:19:53 PM
I'm mesmerised by this. They're brilliant!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=[Name removed]V36ub5ybI
Last one, I promise Carana. One of my favourite songs by Toto, ‘Africa’.
https://youtu.be/LWYqap0r3vo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 26, 2020, 07:41:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 25, 2020, 08:25:49 PM
Cute kids in this one!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp7aVYPa6QM
The ones at the end of the recording?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 26, 2020, 07:48:34 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 26, 2020, 07:41:49 PM
The ones at the end of the recording?

None of these for me.  I just so like that Africa thingy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 26, 2020, 08:02:47 PM
Quote from: Carana on September 26, 2020, 12:19:53 PM
I'm mesmerised by this. They're brilliant!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=[Name removed]V36ub5ybI

Brilliant but they could lose fluteman
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 26, 2020, 08:16:57 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 26, 2020, 07:41:49 PM
The ones at the end of the recording?

Yes, joining in with the dance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 26, 2020, 08:28:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 26, 2020, 08:02:47 PM
Brilliant but they could lose fluteman
Please no, Davel. The fluteman is Wouter Kellerman who took the Ndlovu Youth Choir next level. Ralf Schmitt is the conductor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 26, 2020, 08:41:03 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 26, 2020, 08:28:46 PM
Please no, Davel. The fluteman is Wouter Kellerman who took the Ndlovu Youth Choir next level. Ralf Schmitt is the conductor.

https://www.peoplemagazine.co.za/celebrity-news/ralf-schmitt-opens-viral-south-african-cover-shape/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 26, 2020, 08:42:59 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 26, 2020, 08:28:46 PM
Please no, Davel. The fluteman is Wouter Kellerman who took the Ndlovu Youth Choir next level. Ralf Schmitt is the conductor.

He just seems totally out of place. I'm just commentating as someone who hasnt seen them before. I would prefer not to see their wonderful culture diluted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 26, 2020, 08:44:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 26, 2020, 08:41:03 PM
https://www.peoplemagazine.co.za/celebrity-news/ralf-schmitt-opens-viral-south-african-cover-shape/

by all means help them...but he seems to me to be totally out of place. I feel  he adds nothing to the performance   and actually detracts from it...like Andrew Lloyd  Webber insisting on playing the Phantom
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 26, 2020, 09:36:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 26, 2020, 08:16:57 PM
Yes, joining in with the dance.
Thank you. For one moment, I thought you were inferring to monks and nuns performing the ‘Jerusalema’ as sinister i.e toddler children joining the fun.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on September 26, 2020, 09:39:29 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 26, 2020, 08:02:47 PM
Brilliant but they could lose fluteman

I think he fits in really well. Enjoying it, adding to the kids' music, without stealing the show for himself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 26, 2020, 09:44:15 PM
Quote from: Carana on September 26, 2020, 09:39:29 PM
I think he fits in really well. Enjoying it, adding to the kids' music, without stealing the show for himself.

as you are aware I dont agree.. I think he detracts from the performance...the kids don't need him
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 27, 2020, 09:06:45 AM
https://www.theportugalnews.com/news/britons-involved-in-algarve-wide-drug-bust/55878
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on September 27, 2020, 09:55:42 AM
Unless my memory is failing me, it used to be the PJ in charge of drug-busting. It was supposedly even Amaral's "forte".

Interesting...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 27, 2020, 10:12:25 AM
Quote from: Anthro on September 27, 2020, 09:06:45 AM
https://www.theportugalnews.com/news/britons-involved-in-algarve-wide-drug-bust/55878

At least CB can't take the wrap for it,he's inside lest we forget.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 27, 2020, 01:07:17 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 27, 2020, 10:12:25 AM
At least CB can't take the wrap for it,he's inside lest we forget.

The police have been investigating this particular case for at least two years so goodness knows what may be turned up on what appears to be geographically Brueckner's stamping ground.

Perhaps another known criminal with information to trade for a more lenient sentence.  Only this time not in Greece but in the Algarve.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 27, 2020, 01:09:55 PM
Quote from: Carana on September 27, 2020, 09:55:42 AM
Unless my memory is failing me, it used to be the PJ in charge of drug-busting. It was supposedly even Amaral's "forte".

Interesting...

I wonder if Brueckner was a police informant.  Amaral didn't make it clear exactly why he had been ruled out of the investigation in 2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 27, 2020, 02:38:05 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 27, 2020, 01:07:17 PM
The police have been investigating this particular case for at least two years so goodness knows what may be turned up on what appears to be geographically Brueckner's stamping ground.

Perhaps another known criminal with information to trade for a more lenient sentence.  Only this time not in Greece but in the Algarve.

Oh please not another one. Is there one witness against Brueckner who hasn’t got a rap sheet as long as your arm ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 27, 2020, 03:01:07 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 27, 2020, 02:38:05 PM
Oh please not another one. Is there one witness against Brueckner who hasn’t got a rap sheet as long as your arm ?

his girlfriendfor one
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 27, 2020, 04:31:51 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 27, 2020, 03:01:07 PM
his girlfriendfor one

The one that’s supposed to be complicit in his burglaries ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on September 27, 2020, 04:55:41 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 26, 2020, 08:42:59 PM
He just seems totally out of place. I'm just commentating as someone who hasnt seen them before. I would prefer not to see their wonderful culture diluted

I see it differently. More as an opportunity to participate in - and contribute to - a culture of peace and mutual appreciation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 27, 2020, 05:03:09 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 27, 2020, 03:01:07 PM
his girlfriendfor one

Which girlfriend .....Surely not this one.



Nicole Fehlinger was named by a Portuguese couple who linked her to Brueckner for the first time in a bombshell interview.

They claimed she acted as his accomplice to raid properties in the Algarve with chilling similarity to the break-in at the McCanns' holiday home in 2007.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8534831/Madeleine-McCann-suspect-Christian-Brueckners-girlfriend-finally-unmasked.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 27, 2020, 05:20:58 PM
Quote from: Carana on September 27, 2020, 04:55:41 PM
I see it differently. More as an opportunity to participate in - and contribute to - a culture of peace and mutual appreciation.

I thought he looked totally out of place
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 05, 2020, 06:44:08 PM
Sonia poulton had Colin sutton on her podcast ...live on saturday. I skimmed through the interview. She never once mentioned the McCann case to him...how odd is that...perhaps she didnt like what he might say
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on October 06, 2020, 12:14:53 AM
WARNING RE FORUM DISRUPTION:

It has been brought to my attention that some members are engaged in an activity which can only be viewed as a malicious disruption of the forum. This will not be allowed to continue!

Let me be very clear. If this conduct does not cease immediately I will delete the accounts of the offenders.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 12, 2020, 10:40:34 AM
Seems very calm at the moment. Could it be that a poster who pontificates on forum rules is not posting in support of another poster who has been censured for breaking them...who knows
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 12, 2020, 05:30:09 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 12, 2020, 10:40:34 AM
Seems very calm at the moment. Could it be that a poster who pontificates on forum rules is not posting in support of another poster who has been censured for breaking them...who knows
All you need is love ( JC is Love).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 12, 2020, 05:34:20 PM
Thought that was the Beatles
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 16, 2020, 12:58:35 PM
The competent Germans,a conviction with out a body which later turned up.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/oct/20/rudolf-rupp-farmer-family-trial


Retrial opens in case of 'fed-to-dogs' farmer whose body was found intact
 This article is more than 9 years old
Prosecutors stand by conviction of Rudolf Rupp's wife, children and a family friend despite presenting false claims at first trial.

He was hacked to death with an axe by his wife, children and a family friend, his torso later fed to the family's three pet dogs and his head boiled in an urn and buried in a heap of manure.

At least that is the version of events German prosecutors presented to a court in 2005 at the trial of Rudolf Rupp's wife and children, who were convicted over the killing of the family's tyrannical patriarch.

But the case was rolled out again following the discovery by workmen in March 2009 of a Mercedes that had tumbled down an embankment and into the river Danube. Forensic scientists soon discovered that the car was Rupp's and the rotting but intact body found inside was his.

Today a court in Landshut opened the retrial of Hermine Rupp, 55, her children, Manuela and Andrea, and Manuela's boyfriend, identified only as Matthias E, all of whom originally received prison sentences variously for manslaughter and accomplice to manslaughter.

At the heart of the case is the question: how did the prosecutors get their story so wrong? And is it true, as at least one of Rupp's offspring has claimed, that they were threatened with torture if they did not agree to own up to the crime?

The state prosecutor Ralph Reiter faced the somewhat embarrassing task of having to read out the details of the initial and now discredited trial. Rupp was said to have come home one night in 2001 having consumed eight half-litre glasses of beer, to be met in the entrance way by Matthias E who knocked him unconscious with a hammer.

His body was said to have been hacked up and fed to the family's dobermans, a bullterrier and a sheep dog in the farmyard, after which his Mercedes was taken to a scrapyard and destroyed.

No traces of Rupp's blood or bone fragments were ever found in the house or cellar. Nevertheless, prosecutors say they remain convinced that the family and Matthias E were responsible for the farmer's death.

"They were all in on it. They promised themselves they would have a trouble-free life without their father," Reiter told the court.

Lawyers for the defendants say they are pushing for pardons and extensive compensation. Klaus Wittmann, a lawyer for Hermine Rupp, told the court she had given in to pressure on her to confess, blaming "the circumstances of the interrogation, the strain of weeks in custody ... Whatever details didn't fit were accordingly bent into shape."



This led to the acquittal of all  defendants.
 
The convicted were acquitted at the retrial,so that make in modern times no conviction's in Germany with out a body.

http://www.albanylawreview.org/Articles/Vol77_3/77.3.1139%20Grunewald.pdf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 16, 2020, 02:06:40 PM
Quote from: barrier on October 16, 2020, 12:58:35 PM
The competent Germans,a conviction with out a body which later turned up.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/oct/20/rudolf-rupp-farmer-family-trial


Retrial opens in case of 'fed-to-dogs' farmer whose body was found intact
 This article is more than 9 years old
Prosecutors stand by conviction of Rudolf Rupp's wife, children and a family friend despite presenting false claims at first trial.

He was hacked to death with an axe by his wife, children and a family friend, his torso later fed to the family's three pet dogs and his head boiled in an urn and buried in a heap of manure.

At least that is the version of events German prosecutors presented to a court in 2005 at the trial of Rudolf Rupp's wife and children, who were convicted over the killing of the family's tyrannical patriarch.

But the case was rolled out again following the discovery by workmen in March 2009 of a Mercedes that had tumbled down an embankment and into the river Danube. Forensic scientists soon discovered that the car was Rupp's and the rotting but intact body found inside was his.

Today a court in Landshut opened the retrial of Hermine Rupp, 55, her children, Manuela and Andrea, and Manuela's boyfriend, identified only as Matthias E, all of whom originally received prison sentences variously for manslaughter and accomplice to manslaughter.

At the heart of the case is the question: how did the prosecutors get their story so wrong? And is it true, as at least one of Rupp's offspring has claimed, that they were threatened with torture if they did not agree to own up to the crime?

The state prosecutor Ralph Reiter faced the somewhat embarrassing task of having to read out the details of the initial and now discredited trial. Rupp was said to have come home one night in 2001 having consumed eight half-litre glasses of beer, to be met in the entrance way by Matthias E who knocked him unconscious with a hammer.

His body was said to have been hacked up and fed to the family's dobermans, a bullterrier and a sheep dog in the farmyard, after which his Mercedes was taken to a scrapyard and destroyed.

No traces of Rupp's blood or bone fragments were ever found in the house or cellar. Nevertheless, prosecutors say they remain convinced that the family and Matthias E were responsible for the farmer's death.

"They were all in on it. They promised themselves they would have a trouble-free life without their father," Reiter told the court.

Lawyers for the defendants say they are pushing for pardons and extensive compensation. Klaus Wittmann, a lawyer for Hermine Rupp, told the court she had given in to pressure on her to confess, blaming "the circumstances of the interrogation, the strain of weeks in custody ... Whatever details didn't fit were accordingly bent into shape."



This led to the acquittal of all  defendants.
 
The convicted were acquitted at the retrial,so that make in modern times no conviction's in Germany with out a body.

http://www.albanylawreview.org/Articles/Vol77_3/77.3.1139%20Grunewald.pdf
Sounds like they were inspired by the PJ and the Cipriano case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 17, 2020, 09:59:46 PM
I am just sharing. We have found peace after our two Yorkies were killed by a puff adder. Our new much loved ‘babas’ are Luigi and Livia.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on October 17, 2020, 10:02:48 PM
Quote from: Anthro on October 17, 2020, 09:59:46 PM
I am just sharing. We have found peace after our two Yorkies were killed by a puff adder. Our new much loved ‘babas’ are Luigi and Livia.

Lovely wee dogs.
Many years ahead of love and joy with them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 17, 2020, 11:04:12 PM
Quote from: Erngath on October 17, 2020, 10:02:48 PM
Lovely wee dogs.
Many years ahead of love and joy with them.
Thank you, Erngath. Unlimited love with these two.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on October 17, 2020, 11:51:59 PM
Quote from: Anthro on October 17, 2020, 09:59:46 PM
I am just sharing. We have found peace after our two Yorkies were killed by a puff adder. Our new much loved ‘babas’ are Luigi and Livia.

What sweeties they are.   They will bring years of joy to your lives.  Lucky you.

I would love to have a dog or dogs again, but at our stage of life, it wouldn't be fair.  Still we share our daughters cat quite a lot of the time and, now old and mainly sleeping, she is a soothing presence to have and we love her.   You can't beat a dog though.   Better still, two dogs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 18, 2020, 12:39:50 AM
Quote from: Anthro on October 17, 2020, 09:59:46 PM
I am just sharing. We have found peace after our two Yorkies were killed by a puff adder. Our new much loved ‘babas’ are Luigi and Livia.

They are adorable Anthro and I’m sure will help heal the pain caused by your loss.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 18, 2020, 01:00:56 AM

Anyone want a Dachshund?  You need to be insane.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on October 18, 2020, 02:58:26 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 18, 2020, 01:00:56 AM
Anyone want a Dachshund?  You need to be insane.

Does it get involved in hurdling and sports like the one on TV adverts.   Cos I love that dachshund.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 18, 2020, 03:02:29 AM
Quote from: sadie on October 18, 2020, 02:58:26 AM
Does it get involved in hurdling and sports like the one on TV adverts.   Cos I love that dachshund.

This one is definitely a Steeple Chaser.  When he's not trying to dig his way to visit Rob.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 18, 2020, 09:43:08 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 18, 2020, 12:39:50 AM
They are adorable Anthro and I’m sure will help heal the pain caused by your loss.
Thank you, Faithlilly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 18, 2020, 09:48:18 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 18, 2020, 03:02:29 AM
This one is definitely a Steeple Chaser.  When he's not trying to dig his way to visit Rob.

But you love him 💘 because he's adorable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 18, 2020, 10:24:17 AM
Quote from: Brietta on October 18, 2020, 09:48:18 AM
But you love him 💘 because he's adorable.

What?  The fact that the joyful little swine is still in one piece after two years instead of on the barbecue is testimony to my miraculous endurance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 18, 2020, 02:52:55 PM

I can't live without a dog.  It is no life to me at all.  They have come and gone in various shapes and sizes and all had something going for them.  And all lived long.

I am still hoping for another Hamlet, but I suspect that you only get one of those.

This Rotten Little Swine is the most joyful dog that I have so far owned.  But I think that this is a Dachshund thing.  He is a joy unto himself.  He loves his life and everybody in it.

But you don't half have to be a dog lover before you take on one of these.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 19, 2020, 09:40:17 PM
For attention: John
I believe the Forum’s website has been compromised. While typing a comment in the past 30 minutes, my keyboard kept erasing my words, replacing it with other symbols. To me, this suggests that someone else is logged-in on my profile and altering my messages.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on October 19, 2020, 09:42:58 PM
Quote from: Anthro on October 19, 2020, 09:40:17 PM
For attention: John
I believe the Forum’s website has been compromised. While typing a comment in the past 30 minutes, my keyboard kept erasing my words, replacing it with other symbols. To me, this suggests that someone else is logged-in on my profile and altering my messages.

Two people cannot log on at the same time. Sounds like your computer might be compromised. Suggest you do a full integrity check on it to find and expunge any viruses.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 19, 2020, 10:02:04 PM
Quote from: John on October 19, 2020, 09:42:58 PM
Two people cannot log on at the same time. Sounds like your computer might be compromised. Suggest you do a full integrity check on it to find and expunge any viruses.
Thanks, John.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on October 19, 2020, 11:47:34 PM
Quote from: Anthro on October 19, 2020, 09:40:17 PM
For attention: John
I believe the Forum’s website has been compromised. While typing a comment in the past 30 minutes, my keyboard kept erasing my words, replacing it with other symbols. To me, this suggests that someone else is logged-in on my profile and altering my messages.

Apart from the ones mentioned earlier, I have all sorts of other problems some days.

The one I hate the most is when the screen starts rolling around like a drunkard might experience. 

That's awful, but so is the vanishing post syndrome.  It is no joke to have spent a couple of hours gathering info to find that suddenly the post has vanished and that you are at an obscure page on the forum that you have never seen before.

There are other things as well, like not accepting my password when I am trying to log in …. and so on

Cant see mine ever getting sorted now, but I hope that yours does Anthro.   8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 20, 2020, 06:23:37 AM
Hard to argue against imo

Mum of missing Ben Needham urges police to keep searching like in Madeleine McCann case
EXCLUSIVE: Kerry Needham says she feels like her son Ben has been forgotten because South Yorkshire Police have not requested any cash to pursue his disappearance case since 2016


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mum-missing-ben-needham-urges-22866919?utm_source=linkCopy&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 20, 2020, 07:26:00 AM
Quote from: barrier on October 20, 2020, 06:23:37 AM
Hard to argue against imo

Mum of missing Ben Needham urges police to keep searching like in Madeleine McCann case
EXCLUSIVE: Kerry Needham says she feels like her son Ben has been forgotten because South Yorkshire Police have not requested any cash to pursue his disappearance case since 2016


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mum-missing-ben-needham-urges-22866919?utm_source=linkCopy&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar
Despite her on-going agony Kerry is still generous enough to be kind and supportive about the McCanns, if only everyone could be as supportive and understanding as her.  Clearly she does not consider the McCanns to be involved in any sort of cover up and is in a better position than most to detect phoniness or behaviour that doesn’t ring true, imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 20, 2020, 08:24:45 AM
Quote from: barrier on October 20, 2020, 06:23:37 AM
Hard to argue against imo

Mum of missing Ben Needham urges police to keep searching like in Madeleine McCann case
EXCLUSIVE: Kerry Needham says she feels like her son Ben has been forgotten because South Yorkshire Police have not requested any cash to pursue his disappearance case since 2016


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mum-missing-ben-needham-urges-22866919?utm_source=linkCopy&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar

"My child is buried somewhere and without finances we’ll never find him. That’s unfair and heartbreaking.”

I have to agree.

If the focus is now on Bruckner as we are lead to believe why are OG still being funded ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 20, 2020, 08:52:57 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 20, 2020, 07:26:00 AM
Despite her on-going agony Kerry is still generous enough to be kind and supportive about the McCanns, if only everyone could be as supportive and understanding as her.  Clearly she does not consider the McCanns to be involved in any sort of cover up and is in a better position than most to detect phoniness or behaviour that doesn’t ring true, imo.

I read this the other day and wondered when it would appear as yet another complaint against Madeleine and the McCanns.

From memory ~ if it is suspected that Ben's remains have been moved more than once and there are possible areas to which the previous searches did not have access I agree something needs to be done and they should be searched.

Perhaps the energy directed against the McCanns in the form of petitions against everything McCann to the Government website and campaigns to Parliament yet again against everything McCann could be redirected positively for Ben.

In the interim one solution to finance such a search might be that those who have experience of setting up funding schemes such as the ones they have organised on behalf of Goncalo Amaral could do it again as the last one raised a lot of money in the shortest space of time.
Perhaps anything left in that fund could be transferred back from Portugal to set the ball rolling.

I would be happy to contribute and I am sure many others would welcome the opportunity to put their money where their mouth is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 20, 2020, 09:45:53 AM
People are funny fish aren't they?  The same people who complain about £12 million of tax payers money spent on Madeleine would presumably be ecstatic if £12 m were promised to find Ben.  Or would they start grumbling about that as well, and find some other missing child case to compare with to contrast the unfairness of it all?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 20, 2020, 09:52:39 AM
Quote from: Brietta on October 20, 2020, 08:52:57 AM
I read this the other day and wondered when it would appear as yet another complaint against Madeleine and the McCanns.

From memory ~ if it is suspected that Ben's remains have been moved more than once and there are possible areas to which the previous searches did not have access I agree something needs to be done and they should be searched.

Perhaps the energy directed against the McCanns in the form of petitions against everything McCann to the Government website and campaigns to Parliament yet again against everything McCann could be redirected positively for Ben.

In the interim one solution to finance such a search might be that those who have experience of setting up funding schemes such as the ones they have organised on behalf of Goncalo Amaral could do it again as the last one raised a lot of money in the shortest space of time.
Perhaps anything left in that fund could be transferred back from Portugal to set the ball rolling.

I would be happy to contribute and I am sure many others would welcome the opportunity to put their money where their mouth is.

Then off you go Brietta. It’s not that hard to set up a crowdfunding page and what a lovely gesture it would be to be helping Kerry at last to find closure. I’m sure you’d be able to drum up donations among that silent majority who support Madeleine’s parents and as a bonus would prove once and for all that you are not all mouth and no trousers and that your concern for missing children really does extend beyond protecting their parent’s reputation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 20, 2020, 10:29:54 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 20, 2020, 09:52:39 AM
Then off you go Brietta. It’s not that hard to set up a crowdfunding page and what a lovely gesture it would be to be helping Kerry at last to find closure. I’m sure you’d be able to drum up donations among that silent majority who support Madeleine’s parents and as a bonus would prove once and for all that you are not all mouth and no trousers and that your concern for missing children really does extend beyond protecting their parent’s reputation.
I'll stump up for such a worthy cause (£48). Is there a link?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 10:42:29 AM
On CMOMM...which gunit sees as a useful source of info...the consensus seems to be that Ben died in an accident on his uncles motorbike and the family covered it up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on October 20, 2020, 10:59:30 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 10:42:29 AM
On CMOMM...which gunit sees as a useful source of info...the consensus seems to be that Ben died in an accident on his uncles motorbike and the family covered it up.


Very little compassion shown on that forum for Kerry.
More be careful what you wish for in her desire to have the investigation into Ben's disappearance furthered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 20, 2020, 11:03:14 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 10:42:29 AM
On CMOMM...which gunit sees as a useful source of info...the consensus seems to be that Ben died in an accident on his uncles motorbike and the family covered it up.
How was a toddler able to drive his uncle's motorbike?
....and what's a CMOM?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 11:13:57 AM
Quote from: The General on October 20, 2020, 11:03:14 AM
How was a toddler able to drive his uncle's motorbike?
....and what's a CMOM?

You need to ask the fellow sceptics on CMOMM.....I can assure you the general belief is that it's an accidental death covered up by the family. They were suspects and have never been cleared or proven innocent..just like the McCanns
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 20, 2020, 11:16:44 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 10:42:29 AM
On CMOMM...which gunit sees as a useful source of info...the consensus seems to be that Ben died in an accident on his uncles motorbike and the family covered it up.

Under normal circumstances I would have laughed at that idea knowing a bit about the amount of self sacrifice the family have had in conducting searches for Ben.
I think it is safe to say his disappearance has taken over all of their lives.

I know that Kerry was publicly given a dressing down for laughing with her daughter but I really did not think anyone was idiotic enough to go along with that theory.
If memory serves me well the local police looked into it at the time and came to the conclusion that was not the reason for Ben's disappearance.

Absolutely incredible!

So no chance of a crowdfunding thingy from CMOMM then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 20, 2020, 11:24:19 AM
Quote from: Erngath on October 20, 2020, 10:59:30 AM

Very little compassion shown on that forum for Kerry.
More be careful what you wish for in her desire to have the investigation into Ben's disappearance furthered.

I really do not know what goes on in that forum for the simple reason it sickens me to my stomach and I seldom go there.

Therefore I hadn't the a clue this was going on.

Whatever happened to good old British notions of fair play and benefit of the doubt?  Did they ever exists? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 11:42:38 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 10:42:29 AM
On CMOMM...which gunit sees as a useful source of info...the consensus seems to be that Ben died in an accident on his uncles motorbike and the family covered it up.

If you google 'Madeleine McCann forums' the Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann is always on the first page, along with their Facebook page. That's because it's the foremost forum on the subject. As such, it's worth reading what they have to say, so yes, a useful source of info imo. Even those here who disagree with what the people there say are reading what they say nevertheless. Some even post there.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 11:59:40 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 11:42:38 AM
If you google 'Madeleine McCann forums' the Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann is always on the first page, along with their Facebook page. That's because it's the foremost forum on the subject. As such, it's worth reading what they have to say, so yes, a useful source of info imo. Even those here who disagree with what the people there say are reading what they say nevertheless. Some even post there.
It's worth reading for a good laugh...how they can suggest the Needhams  covered up an accident is beyond me but perhaps you think it's a reasonable thing to say. I find much of what is on there is complete junk
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Snowgirl on October 20, 2020, 12:17:16 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 11:59:40 AM
It's worth reading for a good laugh...how they can suggest the Needhams  covered up an accident is beyond me but perhaps you think it's a reasonable thing to say. I find much of what is on there is complete junk
Isn’t it with an open mind that we ought to approach things.
The members of CMMM  are all there because they’re interested in an alternative version of the story you believe and who’s to prove that story is incorrect ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 12:22:03 PM
Quote from: Snowgirl on October 20, 2020, 12:17:16 PM
Isn’t it with an open mind that we ought to approach things.
The members of CMMM  are all there because they’re interested in an alternative version of the story you believe and who’s to prove that story is incorrect ?
It's not a matter of me proving them wrong it's a matter of them proving themselves right...
Do you support the idea the Needhams covered up an accident.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 12:34:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 12:22:03 PM
It's not a matter of me proving them wrong it's a matter of them proving themselves right...
Do you support the idea the Needhams covered up an accident.

In my opinion you have no intention of accepting any other opinions except your own, so proving anything to you is impossible. In your opinion you understand evidence better than anyone, even Supreme Court judges.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 12:49:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 12:34:40 PM
In my opinion you have no intention of accepting any other opinions except your own, so proving anything to you is impossible. In your opinion you understand evidence better than anyone, even Supreme Court judges.

It is not up to you to tell me how i might or might not act. You show  acomplete lack of understanding of my reasoning.

Why should I accept others opinions..... I accept what the evidence supports. CMOMM gives alot of weight to the dog alerts...I don't accept that because the experts dont support it.

You are wrong about the SC judges too...they ruled mainly on law....not evidence.......and figures you quoted showed they had  a particularly poor record when challenged at the ECHR.

You think you know better than the whole worlds scientists who say smoking causes cancer...but you think you know better.

Ive always said taht sceptics are sceptics because they dont understand the evidence...I think that is clear to anyone with an open mind

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Snowgirl on October 20, 2020, 01:08:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 12:22:03 PM
It's not a matter of me proving them wrong it's a matter of them proving themselves right...
Do you support the idea the Needhams covered up an accident.
Whatever I said you wouldn’t accept  it unless it happened to echo your own opinions  davel .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 01:09:58 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 12:49:27 PM
It is not up to you to tell me how i might or might not act. You show  acomplete lack of understanding of my reasoning.

Why should I accept others opinions..... I accept what the evidence supports. CMOMM gives alot of weight to the dog alerts...I don't accept that because the experts dont support it.

You are wrong about the SC judges too...they ruled mainly on law....not evidence.......and figures you quoted showed they had  a particularly poor record when challenged at the ECHR.

You think you know better than the whole worlds scientists who say smoking causes cancer...but you think you know better.

Ive always said taht sceptics are sceptics because they dont understand the evidence...I think that is clear to anyone with an open mind

I have the same right as you have to form my own opinions and to express them. You have never hesitated to tell us how much cleverer you think you are than everyone else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 01:12:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 01:09:58 PM
I have the same right as you have to form my own opinions and to express them. You have never hesitated to tell us how much cleverer you think you are than everyone else.

You have every right to form and express your opinions but you seem to object to me  expressing mine...thats hypocrisy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 20, 2020, 01:13:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 01:09:58 PM
I have the same right as you have to form my own opinions and to express them. You have never hesitated to tell us how much cleverer you think you are than everyone else.

For me that reeks of insecurity.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 01:18:07 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 20, 2020, 01:13:38 PM
For me that reeks of insecurity.

Then I dont think you are  avery good judge. Is this the Ad Hom hour led by gunit the mod and yourself. I dont mind in the slightest....I have an answer for everything
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 01:22:34 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 01:12:16 PM
You have every right to form and express your opinions but you seem to object to me  expressing mine...thats hypocrisy.

As long as you make clear it's an opinion and not a fact, and you refrain from abusing other members you can express your opinions freely with no objections from me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 01:24:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 01:22:34 PM
As long as you make clear it's an opinion and not a fact, and you refrain from abusing other members you can express your opinions freely with no objections from me.

I don't need your permission to do that..I'm entitled to it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 01:30:52 PM
Quote from: Snowgirl on October 20, 2020, 01:08:02 PM
Whatever I said you wouldn’t accept  it unless it happened to echo your own opinions  davel .

I accept anything supported by sufficient evidence...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 20, 2020, 01:32:51 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 01:30:52 PM
I accept anything supported by sufficient evidence...
This from the man who compares the abilities of cadaver dogs to those of Mystic Meg.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 20, 2020, 01:33:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 11:42:38 AM
If you google 'Madeleine McCann forums' the Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann is always on the first page, along with their Facebook page. That's because it's the foremost forum on the subject. As such, it's worth reading what they have to say, so yes, a useful source of info imo. Even those here who disagree with what the people there say are reading what they say nevertheless. Some even post there.

Not if they are McCann Supporters they don't.  It's not allowed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 01:39:20 PM
Quote from: The General on October 20, 2020, 01:32:51 PM
This from the man who compares the abilities of cadaver dogs to those of Mystic Meg.

You dont seem to understand what I said...or perhaps you are just being facetious. In reality I have a far better understanding of the alerts than any sceptic...IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 20, 2020, 01:40:11 PM
I've just accessed CMoMM for the first time in a year.  It's still very boring and totally illogical.  A bunch of nutters no less.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 20, 2020, 01:41:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 11:42:38 AM
If you google 'Madeleine McCann forums' the Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann is always on the first page, along with their Facebook page. That's because it's the foremost forum on the subject. As such, it's worth reading what they have to say, so yes, a useful source of info imo. Even those here who disagree with what the people there say are reading what they say nevertheless. Some even post there.
This is really no great recommendation.  Google anything - moon landings, holocaust, Sandy Hook, 9/11 and put "forum" after the subject and the top of the first page will bring you to the most popular of the bonkers conspiracy websites pertaining to each.  You think these are useful tools?  Only if you want to marvel at the way the conspiracy theorist's mind works.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 20, 2020, 01:50:29 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 01:39:20 PM
You dont seem to understand what I said...or perhaps you are just being facetious. In reality I have a far better understanding of the alerts than any sceptic...IMO
You can't even define 'sceptic', never mind grasp the basics of the alerts. That's not an opinion, that's a fact.
I've proven beyond doubt with Cassella's most recent work that cadaver dogs are a useful tool when searching for vestiges of cadaverine. He endorses their use and includes the results in his theses.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 02:01:57 PM
Quote from: The General on October 20, 2020, 01:50:29 PM
You can't even define 'sceptic', never mind grasp the basics of the alerts. That's not an opinion, that's a fact.
I've proven beyond doubt with Cassella's most recent work that cadaver dogs are a useful tool when searching for vestiges of cadaverine. He endorses their use and includes the results in his theses.

They are a very useful tool in searching for cadaverine...the fact you don't realise I support that shows how little you understand my views on the dogs.

The Germans it seems used cadaver dogs in the allotment search...
Yet are prepared to ignore Eddies alerts...I totally understand the logic of that...I doubt you do
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 20, 2020, 02:16:15 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 02:01:57 PM
They are a very useful tool in searching for cadaverine...the fact you don't realise I support that shows how little you understand my views on the dogs.

The Germans it seems used cadaver dogs in the allotment search...
Yet are prepared to ignore Eddies alerts...I totally understand the logic of that...I doubt you do
You have just provided your opinion of the machinations of the German police and passed it off as some quasi-fact, then attempted to reason that you understand the logic of this 'fact' that you just contrived, whilst simultaneously suggesting that my grasp of your 'logic' is limited.
You got the last bit right, granted, it's difficult to understand the manufactured logic of a man groping around in the dark searching for recognition of his intellect.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 20, 2020, 02:33:59 PM
^^^When you can't argue the point, hurl insults at all and sundry, that's bound to win a few likes from the fan club, if nothing else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 02:38:54 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 01:30:52 PM
I accept anything supported by sufficient evidence...

Until Wolters says he has evidence, then you are prepared to just believe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 02:49:36 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 20, 2020, 01:33:51 PM
Not if they are McCann Supporters they don't.  It's not allowed.

Well I know at least one who's sneaked in there, ignoring your rules.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 20, 2020, 02:51:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 02:38:54 PM
Until Wolters says he has evidence, then you are prepared to just believe.
If the German prosecutor says he has evidence then that is evidence that he has evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 02:57:07 PM
Quote from: The General on October 20, 2020, 02:16:15 PM
You have just provided your opinion of the machinations of the German police and passed it off as some quasi-fact, then attempted to reason that you understand the logic of this 'fact' that you just contrived, whilst simultaneously suggesting that my grasp of your 'logic' is limited.
You got the last bit right, granted, it's difficult to understand the manufactured logic of a man groping around in the dark searching for recognition of his intellect.


Total nonsense...from start to finish
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 02:59:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 20, 2020, 02:51:33 PM
If the German prosecutor says he has evidence then that is evidence that he has evidence.

It's evidence that he thinks he has evidence. Not sufficient to charge his suspect though, as he has also admitted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 03:01:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 02:38:54 PM
Until Wolters says he has evidence, then you are prepared to just believe.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume HCW has evidence if he says he has.... particularly what he has said and the circumstances in which he has said them.
You on the other hand disbelieve on the basis it doesn't fit your agenda...we will soon see who is right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 03:08:25 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 03:01:50 PM
I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume HCW has evidence if he says he has.... particularly what he has said and the circumstances in which he has said them.
You on the other hand disbelieve on the basis it doesn't fit your agenda...we will soon see who is right.

In other words you are prepared to believe what Wolters says. I neither believe or disbelieve him, and until he gets enough to charge his suspect it's immaterial.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 03:22:01 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 03:08:25 PM
In other words you are prepared to believe what Wolters says. I neither believe or disbelieve him, and until he gets enough to charge his suspect it's immaterial.
I haven't used the word believe..you have
I think based on the fact HCW has said he had evidence.   ..in a country with such strict privacy laws...it's reasonable to assume he has evidence .
You ...we will soon know
I don't blindly believe him...that would be ridiculous
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 03:28:53 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 03:22:01 PM
I haven't used the word believe..you have
I think based on the fact HCW has said he had evidence.   ..in a country with such strict privacy laws...it's reasonable to assume he has evidence .
You ...we will soon know
I don't blindly believe him...that would be ridiculous

You used assume, which means suppose to be the case, without proof.
https://languages.oup.com/google-dictionary-en/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 20, 2020, 03:31:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 02:49:36 PM
Well I know at least one who's sneaked in there, ignoring your rules.

Sneaked In?  How very peculiar.  But it does rather prove my point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 03:35:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 03:28:53 PM
You used assume, which means suppose to be the case, without proof.
https://languages.oup.com/google-dictionary-en/

What do you mean by proof...balance of probabilities...beyond reasonable doubt .. absolute..
I think on the balance of probabilities...which is a level of proof....he has evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 20, 2020, 03:36:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 03:08:25 PM
In other words you are prepared to believe what Wolters says. I neither believe or disbelieve him, and until he gets enough to charge his suspect it's immaterial.
The most telling aspect of HCW's decision to 'out' CB is that he would not have been afforded the opportunity if he wasn't already in custody. So if we're dealing with 'facts', then HCW came in to possession of his 'evidence' much later. This can only reasonably be the jailhouse snitch, which I'm sure all prosecutors would avoid using if at all possible.
However this particular snitch provided something compelling, but not quite enough. I've said it before, there's very limited scope as to what this is.
So they then do what every decent prosecutor does, he doesn't just drop his snitch, he pumps him dry and at a certain tipping point this snitch will say just about anything if he thinks he's being believed.
This snitch provides more names of 'accomplices' and 'acquaintances', in the hope of time off, or favourable terms (despite it being illegal in Germany), who are subsequently, equally pumped for information until their eyes bleed - hence the searches.
If HCW had enough on CB now, after this protracted fishing expedition, he would have used it. There's nothing come to fruition, no irons in the CB fire and the secret caches of filth have run dry.

We're at an impasse. I bet HCW is popular with the people on the 12th Floor - his appendage is well and truly on the block.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 20, 2020, 03:41:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 02:59:55 PM
It's evidence that he thinks he has evidence. Not sufficient to charge his suspect though, as he has also admitted.
No one has claimed he has enough evidence to charge his suspect, but I have no reason to believe that the prosecutor is a liar, do you? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Snowgirl on October 20, 2020, 03:46:37 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 20, 2020, 03:41:59 PM
No one has claimed he has enough evidence to charge his suspect, but I have no reason to believe that the prosecutor is a liar, do you?
Didn’t he say he had sent something to the McCanns but they denied it ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 20, 2020, 03:55:07 PM
Quote from: Snowgirl on October 20, 2020, 03:46:37 PM
Didn’t he say he had sent something to the McCanns but they denied it ?
Well we all know the McCanns are liars so what are you trying to say, that for once in their evil rotten lives they're telling the truth?*  Or maybe, just maybe HCW sent a letter that simply hadn't reached the McCanns at the time of the news report.  Nooooo, far too far fetched, I agree.

*Satire, mods, satire.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 04:01:23 PM
Quote from: The General on October 20, 2020, 03:36:18 PM
The most telling aspect of HCW's decision to 'out' CB is that he would not have been afforded the opportunity if he wasn't already in custody. So if we're dealing with 'facts', then HCW came in to possession of his 'evidence' much later. This can only reasonably be the jailhouse snitch, which I'm sure all prosecutors would avoid using if at all possible.
However this particular snitch provided something compelling, but not quite enough. I've said it before, there's very limited scope as to what this is.
So they then do what every decent prosecutor does, he doesn't just drop his snitch, he pumps him dry and at a certain tipping point this snitch will say just about anything if he thinks he's being believed.
This snitch provides more names of 'accomplices' and 'acquaintances', in the hope of time off, or favourable terms (despite it being illegal in Germany), who are subsequently, equally pumped for information until their eyes bleed - hence the searches.
If HCW had enough on CB now, after this protracted fishing expedition, he would have used it. There's nothing come to fruition, no irons in the CB fire and the secret caches of filth have run dry.

We're at an impasse. I bet HCW is popular with the people on the 12th Floor - his appendage is well and truly on the block.



Based on everything HCW has said the snitch is not the evidence he is holding back....based on the fact that the snitch and his commnets are in the public domain. I think its possible the evidence is on the memory sticks on the basis that HCW would not answer questions about them. I think all your observations are way off the amrk
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 04:02:00 PM
Quote from: Snowgirl on October 20, 2020, 03:46:37 PM
Didn’t he say he had sent something to the McCanns but they denied it ?

that misunderstanding has been explained
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 04:03:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 20, 2020, 03:55:07 PM
Well we all know the McCanns are liars so what are you trying to say, that for once in their evil rotten lives they're telling the truth?*  Or maybe, just maybe HCW sent a letter that simply hadn't reached the McCanns at the time of the news report.  Nooooo, far too far fetched, I agree.

*Satire, mods, satire.

It seems HCW sent the letter via SY who didnt forward it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 04:16:16 PM
Quote from: The General on October 20, 2020, 01:50:29 PM
You can't even define 'sceptic', never mind grasp the basics of the alerts. That's not an opinion, that's a fact.
I've proven beyond doubt with Cassella's most recent work that cadaver dogs are a useful tool when searching for vestiges of cadaverine. He endorses their use and includes the results in his theses.

its an opinion and clearly an opinion which shows you dont know the difference between an opinion and fact.

you have proved nothing....everyone accepts that the dogs are a  very useful tool when searching for vestiges of cadaverine from body parts. Cassella is on recpord as being quite scathing about uncorroborated alerts being regarded  as evidence. Looks like you need to do  a little more reading
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 20, 2020, 04:19:22 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 04:01:23 PM


Based on everything HCW has said the snitch is not the evidence he is holding back....based on the fact that the snitch and his commnets are in the public domain. I think its possible the evidence is on the memory sticks on the basis that HCW would not answer questions about them. I think all your observations are way off the amrk
There's a surprise, Emperor.
You clearly missed the salient point: the snitch provided the memory card location. It's the only way. They didn't exhume themselves, the snitch knew exactly where to look. That was his ticket outta Dodge, or so he thought.
But they weren't quite the Golden Ticket they all thought they would be - compelling, but really, a conviction of more child porn charges were not going to cut it when he's already in Sing Sing for a decent stretch.
And does anyone really think that HCW or others didn't already have CB in or around Luz? This is the former Stasi, they had that information, they just can't join all the dots for a case, mainly because the snitch is a liar. He threw them a bone and then when they came back for me he fed them any old carp that he could come up with.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 04:21:28 PM
Quote from: The General on October 20, 2020, 04:19:22 PM
There's a surprise, Emperor.
You clearly missed the salient point: the snitch provided the memory card location. It's the only way. They didn't exhume themselves, the snitch knew exactly where to look. That was his ticket outta Dodge, or so he thought.
But they weren't quite the Golden Ticket they all thought they would be - compelling, but really, a conviction of more child porn charges were not going to cut it when he's already in Sing Sing for a decent stretch.
And does anyone really think that HCW or others didn't already have CB in or around Luz? This is the former Stasi, they had that information, they just can't join all the dots for a case, mainly because the snitch is a liar. He threw them a bone and then when they came back for me he fed them any old carp that he could come up with.

If you call me emperor... I will call you idiot....deal or no deal..idiot
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 20, 2020, 04:22:05 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 04:16:16 PM
its an opinion and clearly an opinion which shows you dont know the difference between an opinion and fact.

you have proved nothing....everyone accepts that the dogs are a  very useful tool when searching for vestiges of cadaverine from body parts. Cassella is on recpord as being quite scathing about uncorroborated alerts being regarded  as evidence. Looks like you need to do  a little more reading
No it doesn't. It looks like you need to. He was very complimentary and even cited their use as being bang on the money. His recent input in to cadaverine soil transference attests to how the dogs were used successfully.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 20, 2020, 04:22:26 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 04:21:28 PM
If you call me emperor... I will call you idiot....deal or no deal..idiot
Deal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 20, 2020, 04:25:48 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 04:03:23 PM
It seems HCW sent the letter via SY who didnt forward it.
What a lovely gesture, withholding potentially vital evidence in the search for their missing daughter. Maybe to save them from more heartache and just hope they never expose themselves to any media report ever again.
Unless SY know only too well that CB didn't do jack.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 04:27:04 PM
Quote from: The General on October 20, 2020, 04:22:05 PM
No it doesn't. It looks like you need to. He was very complimentary and even cited their use as being bang on the money. His recent input in to cadaverine soil transference attests to how the dogs were used successfully.


no one doubts the dogs ability to detect cadaverine...if it present. Cassella was dismisive about uncoroborrated alerts  ..... fact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 20, 2020, 04:32:55 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 04:27:04 PM

no one doubts the dogs ability to detect cadaverine...if it present. Cassella was dismisive about uncoroborrated alerts  ..... fact
He's not dismissive, he's stating fact. But it transpires that the incredibly unreliable dogs are actually pretty sharp and corroborated or not, a cadaver dog alerting is a very good indicator of vestiges or presence of cadaverine / cadaver. He's watched them first hand and, on the most recent occasion, the body was actually discovered several feet under overburden. There's plenty of other occasions where there is no body, but the vestiges remain - he also knows that's the truth.

[am I allowed to extend 'Emperor' to 'Empmeister'?]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 04:36:50 PM
Quote from: The General on October 20, 2020, 04:32:55 PM
He's not dismissive, he's stating fact. But it transpires that the incredibly unreliable dogs are actually pretty sharp and corroborated or not, a cadaver dog alerting is a very good indicator of vestiges or presence of cadaverine / cadaver. He's watched them first hand and, on the most recent occasion, the body was actually discovered several feet under overburden. There's plenty of other occasions where there is no body, but the vestiges remain - he also knows that's the truth.

[am I allowed to extend 'Emperor' to 'Empmeister'?]

How many bodies did Eddie find in five years prior to Luz...as I said...no one disagrees with their ability to detect cadaver odour...it's what happens if there is none present which needs to be answerred..,and dogs being repeatedly called back when there's none present
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 20, 2020, 04:44:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 04:36:50 PM
How many bodies did Eddie find in five years prior to Luz...as I said...no one disagrees with their ability to detect cadaver odour...it's what happens if there is none present which needs to be answerred..,and dogs being repeatedly called back when there's none present
So we have proof of concept and proof of reliability.
Your beef is with Martin Grime's technique.
He can't invent cadaverine and I'm highly dubious as to the concept of a man dedicating his life to training the infernal hounds, only to compromise his life's work and vocation on camera (with the eyes of the world on him) to somehow spur his dogs to alert. What for, financial gain, as you have alluded to in the past? Really? He was already preeminent in the field; he was, and still is, the go-to man.
It's weak, man, really weak.
His only mistake was in not cross-checking and getting another cadaver dog in - but then he'd never been impeached in such a manner up to that time.

Edit: and there's a really good reason why Eddie didn't alert a great deal in 5 years; it's the relative paucity of murder victims. Which is why he's so sought after in the good ole US&A.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 04:55:29 PM
Quote from: The General on October 20, 2020, 04:44:27 PM
So we have proof of concept and proof of reliability.
Your beef is with Martin Grime's technique.
He can't invent cadaverine and I'm highly dubious as to the concept of a man dedicating his life to training the infernal hounds, only to compromise his life's work and vocation on camera (with the eyes of the world on him) to somehow spur his dogs to alert. What for, financial gain, as you have alluded to in the past? Really? He was already preeminent in the field; he was, and still is, the go-to man.
It's weak, man, really weak.
His only mistake was in not cross-checking and getting another cadaver dog in - but then he'd never been impeached in such a manner up to that time.

Edit: and there's a really good reason why Eddie didn't alert a great deal in 5 years; it's the relative paucity of murder victims. Which is why he's so sought after in the good ole US&A.

The dogs activity in Luz played a part in Grime getting a 90k contract in Jersey...he used the video to convince Harper of his skills.

I won't bother answering any more points..it's s waste if time. If HCW has proof of Maddie's death at the hands of an abductor then that really questions the alerts. I'm sure a suitable explanation will be forthcoming

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 20, 2020, 05:03:38 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 04:55:29 PM
The dogs activity in Luz played a part in Grime getting a 90k contract in Jersey...he used the video to convince Harper of his skills.

I won't bother answering any more points..it's s waste if time. If HCW has proof of Maddie's death at the hands of an abductor then that really questions the alerts. I'm sure a suitable explanation will be forthcoming
Is that it? 90k feeds his dogs for 6 months and keeps the lights on. He can only be in one place at a time. He hasn't got a puppy farm churning out little Keelas and Eddies. He's not minted, he looks like any normal jobbing contractor.
Who doesn't use their CV  / testimonials to procure work? If you're a spark with a few lads and a van, of course you're going to take photos of your cable containment and neat terminations on cabinets.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 05:11:07 PM
If HCW has evidence of Maddie's death at the hands of an abductor then the alerts are discredited..
Just have to wait and see..

That's when my psychic analogy comes in...as people try and come up with an explanation to explain them
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 07:15:22 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 04:01:23 PM


Based on everything HCW has said the snitch is not the evidence he is holding back....based on the fact that the snitch and his commnets are in the public domain. I think its possible the evidence is on the memory sticks on the basis that HCW would not answer questions about them. I think all your observations are way off the amrk

If there was a planted informer in jail we don't know who he was or what he said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 07:22:08 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 20, 2020, 03:31:57 PM
Sneaked In?  How very peculiar.  But it does rather prove my point.

What was your point? That no supporters are members of CMOMM? You are wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on October 20, 2020, 07:25:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 07:22:08 PM
What was your point? That no supporters are members of CMOMM? You are wrong.

They must be as quiet as church mice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 07:30:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 07:22:08 PM
What was your point? That no supporters are members of CMOMM? You are wrong.
Cite
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 20, 2020, 07:32:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 07:15:22 PM
If there was a planted informer in jail we don't know who he was or what he said.
what evidence do you have of a planted informer.....do you believe thereis one
we dont know what HCW's material/concrete evidence is...It would be more sensible to wait than dismiss it out of hand.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 20, 2020, 08:22:25 PM
Quote from: Erngath on October 20, 2020, 07:25:18 PM
They must be as quiet as church mice.

And ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 20, 2020, 08:58:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 20, 2020, 07:22:08 PM
What was your point? That no supporters are members of CMOMM? You are wrong.

Shining in Luz who could hardly be described as a 'supporter' in my opinion was given his marching orders from there but it should be easy enough for you to make your point without blowing anyone's cover.

A couple of C&Ps of pro McCann posts should do the trick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 20, 2020, 09:08:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 20, 2020, 08:58:21 PM
Shining in Luz who could hardly be described as a 'supporter' in my opinion was given his marching orders from there but it should be easy enough for you to make your point without blowing anyone's cover.

A couple of C&Ps of pro McCann posts should do the trick.
Blimey if he didn’t last what hope for a genuine supporter? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 20, 2020, 09:24:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 20, 2020, 09:08:46 PM
Blimey if he didn’t last what hope for a genuine supporter?

I was kicked out many, many moons ago and I hardly said a word about anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 20, 2020, 09:31:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 20, 2020, 09:24:08 PM
I was kicked out many, many moons ago and I hardly said a word about anything.
Same here, and I was so grovellingly polite you would never have recognized me!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 20, 2020, 09:54:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 20, 2020, 09:24:08 PM
I was kicked out many, many moons ago and I hardly said a word about anything.

Is ..... is going ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on October 20, 2020, 09:58:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 20, 2020, 09:31:45 PM
Same here, and I was so grovellingly polite you would never have recognized me!

Nope.
Never ventured there.
Read occasionally but never joined!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 20, 2020, 10:04:42 PM

I discovered it as a newbie to Madeleine's case but very soon recognised it as a slick but very sick forum.  You couldn't have paid me to join them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 20, 2020, 10:27:30 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 20, 2020, 10:04:42 PM
I discovered it as a newbie to Madeleine's case but very soon recognised it as a slick but very sick forum.  You couldn't have paid me to join them.

Some of us thought that everyone was up for discussion in those days.

This is why this Forum is a bit precious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on October 20, 2020, 10:37:38 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 20, 2020, 08:22:25 PM
And ?

They are frightened to give an opinion, seems.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on October 20, 2020, 10:41:52 PM
Quote from: Erngath on October 20, 2020, 09:58:42 PM
Nope.
Never ventured there.
Read occasionally but never joined!!

I was frightened to join   8**8:/:   Oh, my !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on October 20, 2020, 10:46:26 PM
Quote from: sadie on October 20, 2020, 10:41:52 PM
I was frightened to join   8**8:/:   Oh, my !

Same here........there are so many "researchers" I would be worried about being "researched". Lol.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 20, 2020, 10:53:18 PM
Quote from: Erngath on October 20, 2020, 10:46:26 PM
Same here........there are so many "researchers" I would be worried about being "researched". Lol.

I was.  Being one of the few whose email address is my name Tony Bennett outed me.  Fortunately it didn't bother me.  Silly old fool.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 20, 2020, 11:06:58 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 20, 2020, 10:53:18 PM
I was.  Being one of the few whose email address is my name Tony Bennett outed me.  Fortunately it didn't bother me.  Silly old fool.

Thankfully you weren’t as mentally fragile like Brenda Leyland. I’m afraid that in both camps we often see the worst of human nature.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 21, 2020, 12:52:54 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 20, 2020, 11:06:58 PM
Thankfully you weren’t as mentally fragile like Brenda Leyland. I’m afraid that in both camps we often see the worst of human nature.

Please note the paragraphs I have bolded for your attention.  I found them quite apt.


The case of Brenda Leyland and the McCanns is a thoroughly modern tale of internet lawlessness
You can’t accuse a TV reporter of ‘hounding’ someone who is guilty of trolling
Grace Dent
Tuesday 07 October 2014

The circumstances around the death of Brenda Leyland, whose body was found in a Leicester hotel room this weekend, are all at once sad, complex, divisive and thoroughly modern.

Ms. Leyland, I cannot help but feel, is yet another victim of what I’ve termed “the internet wild west era” in which we’re living. The rules of civility are yet to be established. We’re naught but electronic guinea pigs. One man’s “troll” is another man’s prophet of truth. One woman’s systematic campaign of abuse is another woman’s brave battle to be heard.

Ms Leyland was doorstepped last week by Martin Brunt from Sky News over her alleged obsessive and relentless Twtter campaign to expose what she felt was “the truth” about Madeleine McCann’s parents Gerry and Kate.

A Twitter account by the handle @sweepyface had tweeted over 4,300 times supporting its firm - albeit incorrect - view that the McCanns are implicated nefariously in their daughter’s disappearance. The account’s contempt and anger for the McCanns was multi-faceted, inexhaustible, and at times breathtakingly unpleasant.

Mr Brunt took pains in his report to say that @sweepyface was not the worst offender. This I believe, as over many years I’ve noticed the anti-McCann conspiracy theory lobby to be some of the most furious, combative and unsettling message-propellers one might come across.

The McCann conspiracy theory is the perfect tinderbox for internet trolls. It involves a child’s disappearance, a possible paedophile bogeyman, a £2m fund with accusations of misuse, plus handily placed daft foreigners open to accusations of fecklessness and corruption. But more than this the McCann case appeals to firmly entrenched class war tensions that these evil middle class folk are able to pull strings or use their money or power to cover something up. I cannot remember blame and spite directed at Jamie Bulger’s mother or Sarah Payne’s grandparents alleging that it was flaws in their attention which had led to utter woe. In these cases, empathy and compassion were abundant.

Yet there is something about doctors eating patatas bravas within metres of sleeping children which drove Twitter accounts like @sweepyface to a bleak place. The @sweepyface account begged for attention endlessly - from like-minded people, from detractors, from journalists and from TV people. Matthew Wright received many tweets, Martin Brunt also – and with this in mind Brunt approached Ms Leyland to allot her just this - attention.

But, as I say, we’re in the wild west. While @sweepyface was desperate for exposure, Ms Leyland did not welcome it at all. While @sweepyface may have been in her element flinging around accusations, gossip and provoking ill-will, the real life Ms. Leyland met Mr Brunt’s request for a comment with a firm No and an attempt to disappear into her car.

Mr. Brunt is now being accused by some sections of “hounding” Ms. Leyland to her death. This seems extreme. Reporters have been doorstepping people and requesting answers on British television for the past 50 years. Are we now saying that in this new internet age, any person who draws attention to themselves vehemently but anonymously online is out of bounds for reporters?

Are we saying that we must accept that internet users working anonymously to spread misery are most probably mentally delicate and fuelled on their own shortcomings, so let’s leave be? Should a person's privacy be respected even if their modus operandi is disrespecting privacy? The only certainty this incident has underlined is we have no strong idea how to tackle harmful internet unpleasantness, aside from “ignore”.

There should be more help, support, understanding and escape routes offered to people living angrily behind keyboards. Their numbers are growing. In our ever web-dependent, fresh-air lacking, screen-chained world, we’re all more powerful, more superhuman behind our laptops in bed at midnight than we ever could be in real life.

And being an internet idiot, even just momentarily, is in all our sights. When we’re safely miles away from our target, we feel righteous, war-like, invincible and remorseless over our ability to wound. Ms. Leyland’s meeting with Mr Brunt was a reminder that when human beings propel anger electronically, the last thing they want is to be greeted with is a human face.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/case-brenda-leyland-and-mccanns-thoroughly-modern-tale-internet-lawlessness-9778262.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 21, 2020, 10:30:34 AM
Quote from: Erngath on October 20, 2020, 09:58:42 PM
Nope.
Never ventured there.
Read occasionally but never joined!!

Well, you obviously venture there to take time to read it  - even if only occasionally.

Shows you have some interest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 21, 2020, 10:32:05 AM
Quote from: Brietta on October 20, 2020, 10:04:42 PM
I discovered it as a newbie to Madeleine's case but very soon recognised it as a slick but very sick forum.  You couldn't have paid me to join them.


What is sick B is that you think posters are beneath contempt because their opinion is different from yours.

Officially at this moment in time, no one knows what happened to Maddie yet you condemn peoples beliefs.

Simply because they are different to yours, which IMO could also be described as sick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2020, 10:33:31 AM
Quote from: kizzy on October 21, 2020, 10:30:34 AM
Well, you obviously venture there to take time to read it  - even if only occasionally.

Shows you have some interest.

Just because someone looks at a site doesnt give it any credibility. Its interesting to see what the crackpots latest ideas are
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 21, 2020, 10:34:24 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 20, 2020, 04:55:29 PM
The dogs activity in Luz played a part in Grime getting a 90k contract in Jersey...he used the video to convince Harper of his skills.

I won't bother answering any more points..it's s waste if time. If HCW has proof of Maddie's death at the hands of an abductor then that really questions the alerts. I'm sure a suitable explanation will be forthcoming


The dogs activity in Luz played a part in Grime getting a 90k contract in Jersey...he used the video to convince Harper of his skills.

O.M.G. doesn't that tell you something D he must have had complete faith in the credibility of his videos

Otherwise, what would he have done if Maddie had been found where would his skills have been then.

Seems he was totally confident in his dogs IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2020, 10:36:01 AM
Quote from: kizzy on October 21, 2020, 10:32:05 AM

What is sick B is that you think posters are beneath contempt because their opinion is different from yours.

Officially at this moment in time, no one knows what happened to Maddie yet you condemn peoples beliefs.

Simply because they are different to yours, which IMO could also be described as sick.

Its  a matter of looking at where the evidence points. the fact that CB is the prime suspect of an abduction is significant. You remind me of thos ewho calim corona virus is  ahoax...totally midguided
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 21, 2020, 10:37:35 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 21, 2020, 10:33:31 AM
Just because someone looks at a site doesnt give it any credibility. Its interesting to see what the crackpots latest ideas are

Its interesting to see what the crackpots latest ideas are

Well, I reckon they could think the same if they occasionally look on here lol.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2020, 10:39:15 AM
Quote from: kizzy on October 21, 2020, 10:34:24 AM

The dogs activity in Luz played a part in Grime getting a 90k contract in Jersey...he used the video to convince Harper of his skills.

O.M.G. doesn't that tell you something D he must have had complete faith in the credibility of his videos

Otherwise, what would he have done if Maddie had been found where would his skills have been then.

Seems he was totally confident in his dogs IMO.

Grime has a financial interest in his search dogs ...Grime has made it clear the alerts have no evidential vlue...do you think hes lying.

Grime has not claimed the alerts ahve any connection to Maddie so if abduction is proven...as it may well be..grime has plenty of reasons why his alerts were not to MM
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2020, 10:40:58 AM
Quote from: kizzy on October 21, 2020, 10:37:35 AM
Its interesting to see what the crackpots latest ideas are

Well, I reckon they could think the same if they occasionally look on here lol.

They probbaly would. Crackpot conspiracy theorists think normal poeple are misguided...and thats exactly what posters on CMOMM are
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 21, 2020, 10:43:20 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 21, 2020, 10:39:15 AM
Grime has a financial interest in his search dogs ...Grime has made it clear the alerts have no evidential vlue...do you think hes lying.

Grime has not claimed the alerts ahve any connection to Maddie so if abduction is proven...as it may well be..grime has plenty of reasons why his alerts were not to MM

Yet he used the video as you claimed to show his skills.

IMO he must have had faith in them as what would his skills have been then if maddie had been found alive and well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 10:51:43 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 21, 2020, 10:33:31 AM
Just because someone looks at a site doesnt give it any credibility. Its interesting to see what the crackpots latest ideas are

Does joining the forum give it credibility, do you think?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Snowgirl on October 21, 2020, 10:52:21 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 21, 2020, 10:36:01 AM
Its  a matter of looking at where the evidence points. the fact that CB is the prime suspect of an abduction is significant. You remind me of thos ewho calim corona virus is  ahoax...totally midguided
  Has there been an official announcement  that CB is the chief suspect ? Where is this  evidence that points to him ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 21, 2020, 11:00:17 AM
Quote from: kizzy on October 21, 2020, 10:32:05 AM

What is sick B is that you think posters are beneath contempt because their opinion is different from yours.

Officially at this moment in time, no one knows what happened to Maddie yet you condemn peoples beliefs.

Simply because they are different to yours, which IMO could also be described as sick.

What an impertinent post.

I will thank you for not presuming to tell me what I think in future and concentrate on the content of my posts and not your amateur attempts at psychoanalysing me or any other member come to that.  Thankyou
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 21, 2020, 11:05:39 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 21, 2020, 10:33:31 AM
Just because someone looks at a site doesnt give it any credibility. Its interesting to see what the crackpots latest ideas are

That is a fact.  Observation is neither condoning or accepting. 

I just find myself unable to deal with such levels of unadulterated stupidity and malice en masse.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 21, 2020, 11:11:22 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 10:51:43 AM
Does joining the forum give it credibility, do you think?

Did you manage to find a couple of posts from a supporter to C&P to substantiate your claim or are you still looking?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 21, 2020, 11:13:15 AM
Quote from: Brietta on October 21, 2020, 11:00:17 AM
What an impertinent post.

I will thank you for not presuming to tell me what I think in future and concentrate on the content of my posts and not your amateur attempts at psychoanalysing me or any other member come to that.  Thankyou


IMO it's you that called another forum sick ., that just happens to be anti mcc that's all.

psychoanalyze you, not at all I think your posts try and do a poor job at doing that B

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 11:20:56 AM
Quote from: Brietta on October 21, 2020, 12:52:54 AM
Please note the paragraphs I have bolded for your attention.  I found them quite apt.


The case of Brenda Leyland and the McCanns is a thoroughly modern tale of internet lawlessness
You can’t accuse a TV reporter of ‘hounding’ someone who is guilty of trolling
Grace Dent
Tuesday 07 October 2014

The circumstances around the death of Brenda Leyland, whose body was found in a Leicester hotel room this weekend, are all at once sad, complex, divisive and thoroughly modern.

Ms. Leyland, I cannot help but feel, is yet another victim of what I’ve termed “the internet wild west era” in which we’re living. The rules of civility are yet to be established. We’re naught but electronic guinea pigs. One man’s “troll” is another man’s prophet of truth. One woman’s systematic campaign of abuse is another woman’s brave battle to be heard.

Ms Leyland was doorstepped last week by Martin Brunt from Sky News over her alleged obsessive and relentless Twtter campaign to expose what she felt was “the truth” about Madeleine McCann’s parents Gerry and Kate.

A Twitter account by the handle @sweepyface had tweeted over 4,300 times supporting its firm - albeit incorrect - view that the McCanns are implicated nefariously in their daughter’s disappearance. The account’s contempt and anger for the McCanns was multi-faceted, inexhaustible, and at times breathtakingly unpleasant.

Mr Brunt took pains in his report to say that @sweepyface was not the worst offender. This I believe, as over many years I’ve noticed the anti-McCann conspiracy theory lobby to be some of the most furious, combative and unsettling message-propellers one might come across.

The McCann conspiracy theory is the perfect tinderbox for internet trolls. It involves a child’s disappearance, a possible paedophile bogeyman, a £2m fund with accusations of misuse, plus handily placed daft foreigners open to accusations of fecklessness and corruption. But more than this the McCann case appeals to firmly entrenched class war tensions that these evil middle class folk are able to pull strings or use their money or power to cover something up. I cannot remember blame and spite directed at Jamie Bulger’s mother or Sarah Payne’s grandparents alleging that it was flaws in their attention which had led to utter woe. In these cases, empathy and compassion were abundant.

Yet there is something about doctors eating patatas bravas within metres of sleeping children which drove Twitter accounts like @sweepyface to a bleak place. The @sweepyface account begged for attention endlessly - from like-minded people, from detractors, from journalists and from TV people. Matthew Wright received many tweets, Martin Brunt also – and with this in mind Brunt approached Ms Leyland to allot her just this - attention.

But, as I say, we’re in the wild west. While @sweepyface was desperate for exposure, Ms Leyland did not welcome it at all. While @sweepyface may have been in her element flinging around accusations, gossip and provoking ill-will, the real life Ms. Leyland met Mr Brunt’s request for a comment with a firm No and an attempt to disappear into her car.

Mr. Brunt is now being accused by some sections of “hounding” Ms. Leyland to her death. This seems extreme. Reporters have been doorstepping people and requesting answers on British television for the past 50 years. Are we now saying that in this new internet age, any person who draws attention to themselves vehemently but anonymously online is out of bounds for reporters?

Are we saying that we must accept that internet users working anonymously to spread misery are most probably mentally delicate and fuelled on their own shortcomings, so let’s leave be? Should a person's privacy be respected even if their modus operandi is disrespecting privacy? The only certainty this incident has underlined is we have no strong idea how to tackle harmful internet unpleasantness, aside from “ignore”.

There should be more help, support, understanding and escape routes offered to people living angrily behind keyboards. Their numbers are growing. In our ever web-dependent, fresh-air lacking, screen-chained world, we’re all more powerful, more superhuman behind our laptops in bed at midnight than we ever could be in real life.

And being an internet idiot, even just momentarily, is in all our sights. When we’re safely miles away from our target, we feel righteous, war-like, invincible and remorseless over our ability to wound. Ms. Leyland’s meeting with Mr Brunt was a reminder that when human beings propel anger electronically, the last thing they want is to be greeted with is a human face.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/case-brenda-leyland-and-mccanns-thoroughly-modern-tale-internet-lawlessness-9778262.html

An opinion piece by Grace Dent proves.......?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 11:23:17 AM
I wonder why supporters are so interested in and critical of other forums? I've noticed that those posting on stopthemyths often comment on CMOMM and on this forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 11:33:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 11:23:17 AM
I wonder why supporters are so interested in and critical of other forums? I've noticed that those posting on stopthemyths often comment on CMOMM and on this forum.

Very odd.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 21, 2020, 11:39:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 11:23:17 AM
I wonder why supporters are so interested in and critical of other forums? I've noticed that those posting on stopthemyths often comment on CMOMM and on this forum.
Bump
Did you manage to find a couple of posts from a supporter to C&P to substantiate your claim or are you still looking?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg623077#msg623077


Perhaps because they are not allowed to post their alleged criticisms either on CMOMM or on this forum.  I noted a few weeks ago that Shining in Luz red carded a poster he didn't agree with and who was getting the better of him into the bargain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 11:40:39 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 11:33:10 AM
Very odd.

I know. I don't give a thought to how they run their sad little forum, but they watch this one and have the cheek to pass judgement, among other things, on moderation here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 12:04:07 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 21, 2020, 11:39:55 AM
Bump
Did you manage to find a couple of posts from a supporter to C&P to substantiate your claim or are you still looking?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg623077#msg623077


Perhaps because they are not allowed to post their alleged criticisms either on CMOMM or on this forum.  I noted a few weeks ago that Shining in Luz red carded a poster he didn't agree with and who was getting the better of him into the bargain.

I think the person I'm referring to should stand up and be counted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 21, 2020, 12:05:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 11:40:39 AM
I know. I don't give a thought to how they run their sad little forum, but they watch this one and have the cheek to pass judgement, among other things, on moderation here.

Must be devotion to the cause.
Between research and forum participation I wonder how much time they spend on things mCann
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2020, 12:38:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 11:40:39 AM
I know. I don't give a thought to how they run their sad little forum, but they watch this one and have the cheek to pass judgement, among other things, on moderation here.

You have  a very short memory. Do you not remember the forum stephen started where you and  most sceptics on this forum were members. There were continual attacks on posters and mods here....stephen and at least a  couple of others even sank so low as to racially abuse my wife...who is not even a member of any forum . I think it really would have got out of hand if not for the unfortunate sudden death of stephens own wife.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2020, 12:40:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 10:51:43 AM
Does joining the forum give it credibility, do you think?

Not if its to expose the hypocrisy on the forum...and the lies being told
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 21, 2020, 12:41:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 11:23:17 AM
I wonder why supporters are so interested in and critical of other forums? I've noticed that those posting on stopthemyths often comment on CMOMM and on this forum.
Fancy you sullying yourself with Stop The Myths!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 21, 2020, 12:43:05 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 21, 2020, 12:05:05 PM
Must be devotion to the cause.
Between research and forum participation I wonder how much time they spend on things mCann
Very little judging by the very few posts there are on that site.  They must have all moved on and got a life, unlike us saddoes. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 21, 2020, 12:44:12 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 21, 2020, 12:38:27 PM
You have  a very short memory. Do you not remember the forum stephen started where you  most sceptics on this forum were members. there were continual attacks on posters and mods here....stephen and at least a  couple of others even sank so low as to racially abuse my wife...who is not even a member of any forum . I think it really would have got out of hand if not for the unfortunate sudden death of stephens own wife.
Haha, good point.  A nice bit of sceptic hypocrisy exposed today, well done!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Snowgirl on October 21, 2020, 12:46:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 21, 2020, 12:40:40 PM
Not if its to expose the hypocrisy on the forum...and the lies being told

I’ve recognised  someone doing exactly that in a forum I belong to .
One thing difficult to do even under another name is hiding the style .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2020, 12:49:33 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 11:33:10 AM
Very odd.

were you not a memeber of stephens forum...criticising posters here
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 21, 2020, 12:50:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 12:04:07 PM
I think the person I'm referring to should stand up and be counted.

In other words you are unable to verify your claim that you know "at least one who's sneaked in there".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2020, 12:52:13 PM
Quote from: Snowgirl on October 21, 2020, 12:46:06 PM

I’ve recognised  someone doing exactly that in a forum I belong to .
One thing difficult to do even under another name is hiding the style .

If the poster is exposing hypocrisy and lies....is it me on a fb group by any chance. if it is ive made no attempt to post under a different name from here
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 21, 2020, 01:00:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 12:04:07 PM
I think the person I'm referring to should stand up and be counted.
So there is ONE McCann supporter on a forum of thousands of sceptics?  Is that what you are claiming? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 01:07:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 11:40:39 AM
I know. I don't give a thought to how they run their sad little forum, but they watch this one and have the cheek to pass judgement, among other things, on moderation here.

It appears to be the same six or seven people posting on all the different forums. How they find time to be so diligent heaven alone knows.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 01:08:21 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 21, 2020, 12:05:05 PM
Must be devotion to the cause.
Between research and forum participation I wonder how much time they spend on things mCann

Indeed, such dedication to the cause.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 01:56:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 21, 2020, 01:00:42 PM
So there is ONE McCann supporter on a forum of thousands of sceptics?  Is that what you are claiming?

That isn't what I claimed, no.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2020, 02:05:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 01:56:49 PM
That isn't what I claimed, no.

Still no cite as requested
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on October 21, 2020, 02:30:46 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 21, 2020, 10:30:34 AM
Well, you obviously venture there to take time to read it  - even if only occasionally.

Shows you have some interest.

I must admit I read there occasionally,   curious to see the latest.   I find it appalling  and I don't know how a lot of the libellous comments have been allowed to stay.  The comments about the make up photo especially,  quite a sickening read. The way DP is spoken about too.  Anyone who has the guts to say something that comes across as questioning the death on the Sunday is immediately knocked down,  'look at all the research'  they shout.   Yes look at the research,  the nannies must be lying or bribed.   There was no Madeleine,  she must have been mistaken for another blonde girl.  Absolutely ridiculous.   So,  forgive me if I can't help having a look to see the latest lunatic assumption it's human nature.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 02:42:43 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 21, 2020, 02:05:04 PM
Still no cite as requested

Do you think I'm mistaken?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Snowgirl on October 21, 2020, 02:43:19 PM
Quote from: Lace on October 21, 2020, 02:30:46 PM
I must admit I read there occasionally,   curious to see the latest.   I find it appalling  and I don't know how a lot of the libellous comments have been allowed to stay.  The comments about the make up photo especially,  quite a sickening read. The way DP is spoken about too.  Anyone who has the guts to say something that comes across as questioning the death on the Sunday is immediately knocked down,  'look at all the research'  they shout.   Yes look at the research,  the nannies must be lying or bribed.   There was no Madeleine,  she must have been mistaken for another blonde girl.  Absolutely ridiculous.   So,  forgive me if I can't help having a look to see the latest lunatic assumption it's human nature.
You can’t say  it’s ridiculous . It’s just your opinion it’s ridiculous .
 A lot of research has gone into their opinions   that Madeleine died and not on the 3rd  of May .
If you read things with an open mind together with reasons for other opinions  ,then read how  they have formed those conclusions that’s much fairer than dismissing them simply because you think they’re lunatic assumptions.
I look in there myself btw which is why I feel I can comment on the site .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 02:47:18 PM
Quote from: Lace on October 21, 2020, 02:30:46 PM
I must admit I read there occasionally,   curious to see the latest.   I find it appalling  and I don't know how a lot of the libellous comments have been allowed to stay.  The comments about the make up photo especially,  quite a sickening read. The way DP is spoken about too.  Anyone who has the guts to say something that comes across as questioning the death on the Sunday is immediately knocked down,  'look at all the research'  they shout.   Yes look at the research,  the nannies must be lying or bribed.   There was no Madeleine,  she must have been mistaken for another blonde girl.  Absolutely ridiculous.   So,  forgive me if I can't help having a look to see the latest lunatic assumption it's human nature.

I find the theory that Madeleine died on Sunday absolute nonsense and every bit as ridiculous as Madeleine being abducted for her bloodline.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 21, 2020, 02:49:04 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 02:47:18 PM
I find the theory that Madeleine died on Sunday absolute nonsense and every bit as ridiculous as Madeleine being abducted for her bloodline.
Wait, what? They believe what now? Why? How?
So many questions.......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 21, 2020, 02:50:20 PM
Quote from: Snowgirl on October 21, 2020, 02:43:19 PM
You can’t say  it’s ridiculous . It’s just your opinion it’s ridiculous .
 A lot of research has gone into their opinions   that Madeleine died and not on the 3rd  of May .
If you read things with an open mind together with reasons for other opinions  ,then read how  they have formed those conclusions that’s much fairer than dismissing them simply because you think they’re lunatic assumptions.
I look in there myself btw which is why I feel I can comment on the site .


Ridicule appears to be a standard supporter ploy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Snowgirl on October 21, 2020, 03:04:05 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 02:47:18 PM
I find the theory that Madeleine died on Sunday absolute nonsense and every bit as ridiculous as Madeleine being abducted for her bloodline.
I think  the first part of your post is more than a theory. A great deal of research
investigation has gone into it .
As for your second point I agree .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 21, 2020, 03:07:11 PM
Quote from: Lace on October 21, 2020, 02:30:46 PM
I must admit I read there occasionally,   curious to see the latest.   I find it appalling  and I don't know how a lot of the libellous comments have been allowed to stay.  The comments about the make up photo especially,  quite a sickening read. The way DP is spoken about too.  Anyone who has the guts to say something that comes across as questioning the death on the Sunday is immediately knocked down,  'look at all the research'  they shout.   Yes look at the research,  the nannies must be lying or bribed.   There was no Madeleine,  she must have been mistaken for another blonde girl.  Absolutely ridiculous.   So,  forgive me if I can't help having a look to see the latest lunatic assumption it's human nature.


I find it appalling  and I don't know how a lot of the libellous comments have been allowed to stay.

If I found a forum appalling I wouldn't go on it again. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 21, 2020, 03:16:10 PM
Quote from: Snowgirl on October 21, 2020, 03:04:05 PM
I think  the first part of your post is more than a theory. A great deal of research
investigation has gone into it .
As for your second point I agree .

One of the dangers of research is twisting things to suit your  argument while rejecting anything that doesn't fit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Snowgirl on October 21, 2020, 03:33:23 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 21, 2020, 03:16:10 PM
One of the dangers of research is twisting things to suit your  argument while rejecting anything that doesn't fit.
Not if you're a fair minded person . Research isn't about finding things to suit your own  argument . You might very well not have one ? .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 21, 2020, 03:35:13 PM
Quote from: Snowgirl on October 21, 2020, 02:43:19 PM
You can’t say  it’s ridiculous . It’s just your opinion it’s ridiculous .
 A lot of research has gone into their opinions   that Madeleine died and not on the 3rd  of May .
If you read things with an open mind together with reasons for other opinions  ,then read how  they have formed those conclusions that’s much fairer than dismissing them simply because you think they’re lunatic assumptions.
I look in there myself btw which is why I feel I can comment on the site .

I've read their research and it's total junk...another post above on there talks about s bunch of Freemasons making coronavirus...a bunch of lunatics
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 03:45:14 PM
Quote from: Snowgirl on October 21, 2020, 03:04:05 PM
I think  the first part of your post is more than a theory. A great deal of research
investigation has gone into it .
As for your second point I agree .

Then I’m afraid that we’re going to have to disagree on your first sentence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 21, 2020, 03:48:08 PM
Quote from: Snowgirl on October 21, 2020, 03:33:23 PM
Not if you're a fair minded person . Research isn't about finding things to suit your own  argument . You might very well not have one ? .

I'm afraid I find that a touch naive.
My experience is that people undertake research into the 'Madeleine Mystery' to further their own argument or discredit someone else's.

Interpretation of such research is very much the name of the game  - IMO
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on October 21, 2020, 03:51:25 PM
Quote from: Snowgirl on October 21, 2020, 02:43:19 PM
You can’t say  it’s ridiculous . It’s just your opinion it’s ridiculous .
 A lot of research has gone into their opinions   that Madeleine died and not on the 3rd  of May .
If you read things with an open mind together with reasons for other opinions  ,then read how  they have formed those conclusions that’s much fairer than dismissing them simply because you think they’re lunatic assumptions.
I look in there myself btw which is why I feel I can comment on the site .

I can say it's ridiculous and it is.   To say the Nanny would have mistaken another blonde haired child for Madeleine is ridiculous.   They didn't have many children in their class to mistake a child for someone else.   The Nanny spoke of the McCann's coming to collect Madeleine too is she mistaken?  Lying?   Madeleine was seen through the week.     A photo of Madeleine came to light through the Nexflix documentary a father pointed her out in the group,  how many other parents would have Madeleine in their photo's?   Just because the McCann's didn't show many photo's of Madeleine's stay there doesn't mean other parents don't have her in their photo's with their child/children.  Many of the Nannies said they saw her,  she would stand out as she had twin siblings.  Plus the whole group would have had to lie for the McCann's all through the week pretending that Madeleine was going to the creche.  It's laughable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 21, 2020, 04:00:21 PM
Quote from: Lace on October 21, 2020, 03:51:25 PM
I can say it's ridiculous and it is.   To say the Nanny would have mistaken another blonde haired child for Madeleine is ridiculous.   They didn't have many children in their class to mistake a child for someone else.   The Nanny spoke of the McCann's coming to collect Madeleine too is she mistaken?  Lying?   Madeleine was seen through the week.     A photo of Madeleine came to light through the Nexflix documentary a father pointed her out in the group,  how many other parents would have Madeleine in their photo's?   Just because the McCann's didn't show many photo's of Madeleine's stay there doesn't mean other parents don't have her in their photo's with their child/children.  Many of the Nannies said they saw her,  she would stand out as she had twin siblings.  Plus the whole group would have had to lie for the McCann's all through the week pretending that Madeleine was going to the creche.  It's laughable.

So laugh away - it's not as if it makes any difference .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 21, 2020, 04:17:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 01:56:49 PM
That isn't what I claimed, no.
What are you claiming then? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 21, 2020, 04:18:20 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 21, 2020, 03:16:10 PM
One of the dangers of research is twisting things to suit your  argument while rejecting anything that doesn't fit.
8@??)(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 21, 2020, 04:20:02 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 21, 2020, 04:00:21 PM
So laugh away - it's not as if it makes any difference .
No one needs your permission to laugh at the nonsense on other forums, and nothing makes any difference to anything, so we may as well all top ourselves now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 21, 2020, 04:24:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 21, 2020, 04:20:02 PM
No one needs your permission to laugh at the nonsense on other forums, and nothing makes any difference to anything, so we may as well all top ourselves now.


After you   ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 21, 2020, 04:26:43 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 21, 2020, 04:24:43 PM

After you   ?{)(**
Age before beauty.  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 04:54:45 PM
Quote from: Lace on October 21, 2020, 03:51:25 PM
I can say it's ridiculous and it is.   To say the Nanny would have mistaken another blonde haired child for Madeleine is ridiculous.   They didn't have many children in their class to mistake a child for someone else.   The Nanny spoke of the McCann's coming to collect Madeleine too is she mistaken?  Lying?   Madeleine was seen through the week.     A photo of Madeleine came to light through the Nexflix documentary a father pointed her out in the group,  how many other parents would have Madeleine in their photo's?   Just because the McCann's didn't show many photo's of Madeleine's stay there doesn't mean other parents don't have her in their photo's with their child/children.  Many of the Nannies said they saw her,  she would stand out as she had twin siblings.  Plus the whole group would have had to lie for the McCann's all through the week pretending that Madeleine was going to the creche.  It's laughable.

More laughable than Madeleine being abducted for her bloodline ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on October 21, 2020, 05:12:17 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 04:54:45 PM
More laughable than Madeleine being abducted for her bloodline ?

At least that theory has Madeleine on holiday for the week.   How can anyone believe that parents could pretend to have a child holidaying with them all week when she wasn't?

Do you know in Thailand a chid with blonde hair and blue eyes are said to be angels from god?   In some Countries they still believe in the walking dead,  so they dig up the corpse and decapitate the body?   You don't know what drives some so I wouldn't totally dismiss the bloodline theory.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 05:15:33 PM
Quote from: Lace on October 21, 2020, 05:12:17 PM
At least that theory has Madeleine on holiday for the week.   How can anyone believe that parents could pretend to have a child holidaying with them all week when she wasn't?

Do you know in Thailand a chid with blonde hair and blue eyes are said to be angels from god?   In some Countries they still believe in the walking dead,  so they dig up the corpse and decapitate the body?   You don't know what drives some so I wouldn't totally dismiss the bloodline theory.

Fair enough Lace. We’ll let the forum decide on your logic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 21, 2020, 07:14:58 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 04:54:45 PM
More laughable than Madeleine being abducted for her bloodline ?
I find your statement intriguing. Why is it worth your while to discredit and belittle Sadie and her well-positioned research?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 21, 2020, 07:16:56 PM
Quote from: Anthro on October 21, 2020, 07:14:58 PM
I find your statement intriguing. Why is it worth your while to discredit and belittle Sadie and her well-positioned research?

Who decided that, or is that just you opinion ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 21, 2020, 07:26:25 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 21, 2020, 07:16:56 PM
Who decided that, or is that just you opinion ?
This has been said. ‘More laughable than Madeleine being abducted for her bloodline’. So, not my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 21, 2020, 07:28:27 PM
Quote from: Anthro on October 21, 2020, 07:26:25 PM
This has been said. ‘More laughable than Madeleine being abducted for her bloodline’. So, not my opinion.

Ah but you said "  well-positioned research? "

What's what I'm querying
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 07:30:08 PM
Quote from: Anthro on October 21, 2020, 07:14:58 PM
I find your statement intriguing. Why is it worth your while to discredit and belittle Sadie and her well-positioned research?

I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy of painting one conspiracy theory as ridiculous while failing to condemn another equally ridiculous conspiracy theory.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 21, 2020, 07:31:48 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 21, 2020, 07:28:27 PM
Ah but you said "  well-positioned research? "

What's what I'm querying
Yes. I was referring to Sadie’s longitudinal research. You responded to a post of mine, not directed at you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 21, 2020, 07:35:01 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 07:30:08 PM
I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy of painting one conspiracy theory as ridiculous while failing to condemn another equally ridiculous conspiracy theory.
To me, your innuendo is personal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 07:36:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 21, 2020, 04:17:12 PM
What are you claiming then?

That a McCann supporter is a member here and on CMOMM.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 21, 2020, 07:52:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 07:36:53 PM
That a McCann supporter is a member here and on CMOMM.
What is the relevance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 08:09:56 PM
Quote from: Anthro on October 21, 2020, 07:35:01 PM
To me, your innuendo is personal.

Then you are wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 21, 2020, 08:28:56 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 08:09:56 PM
Then you are wrong.
In that case, please provide information because you have lost me on this one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 21, 2020, 08:33:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 21, 2020, 07:36:53 PM
That a McCann supporter is a member here and on CMOMM.
Fascinating.  So are they one of one, or one of several / many?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 08:33:34 PM
Quote from: Anthro on October 21, 2020, 08:28:56 PM
In that case, please provide information because you have lost me on this one.

Read back the information is all there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on October 22, 2020, 08:39:48 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 21, 2020, 05:15:33 PM
Fair enough Lace. We’ll let the forum decide on your logic.

Am I supposed to care?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on October 22, 2020, 08:40:50 AM
I would be interested to hear faithlillies theory.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 22, 2020, 11:47:16 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 21, 2020, 12:43:05 PM
Very little judging by the very few posts there are on that site.  They must have all moved on and got a life, unlike us saddoes.

They must have all moved on and got a life, unlike us saddoes.

Oh LOL very true though Vs.

What I don't understand thou [no not Chinese writing]

Is why you feel the need to constantly defend the mccs when it seems they have all the protection they need.

Also getting on with there lives, when it is Maddie who had neither.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 22, 2020, 11:50:33 AM
Quote from: Lace on October 22, 2020, 08:39:48 AM
Am I supposed to care?

Nope.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 22, 2020, 11:55:36 AM
Quote from: kizzy on October 22, 2020, 11:47:16 AM
They must have all moved on and got a life, unlike us saddoes.

Oh LOL very true though Vs.

What I don't understand thou [no not Chinese writing]

Is why you feel the need to constantly defend the mccs when it seems they have all the protection they need.

Also getting on with there lives, when it is Maddie who had neither.

Gerry has established a successful career in academia and is certainly getting on with his life.
Not so sure about Kate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 22, 2020, 05:31:49 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 22, 2020, 11:47:16 AM
They must have all moved on and got a life, unlike us saddoes.

Oh LOL very true though Vs.

What I don't understand thou [no not Chinese writing]

Is why you feel the need to constantly defend the mccs when it seems they have all the protection they need.

Also getting on with there lives, when it is Maddie who had neither.
Ask yourself why you feel the need to constantly attack the McCanns when it seems they already have more than enough detractors and then maybe you will see the answer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on October 22, 2020, 10:24:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 22, 2020, 05:31:49 PM
Ask yourself why you feel the need to constantly attack the McCanns when it seems they already have more than enough detractors and then maybe you will see the answer.

Possibly not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 23, 2020, 08:43:24 AM
Quote from: Erngath on October 22, 2020, 10:24:57 PM
Possibly not.
It appears to be impossible to make progress on this case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 23, 2020, 08:44:59 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on October 23, 2020, 08:43:24 AM
It appears to be impossible to make progress on this case.
It will be that way until the main protagonists (and pick your protagonist) tell the truth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 23, 2020, 10:56:37 AM
Quote from: The General on October 23, 2020, 08:44:59 AM
It will be that way until the main protagonists (and pick your protagonist) tell the truth.
I'd have to think about what you mean by "the main protagonists"? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 23, 2020, 11:09:37 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on October 23, 2020, 10:56:37 AM
I'd have to think about what you mean by "the main protagonists"?
Well at least on person knows the truth. That person is either lying continually, in a vegetative state or dead.
Let's hope it's the former.
But I don't think it's CB.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 23, 2020, 11:28:23 AM
Quote from: The General on October 23, 2020, 11:09:37 AM
Well at least on person knows the truth. That person is either lying continually, in a vegetative state or dead.
Let's hope it's the former.
But I don't think it's CB.

Why don't you think it's CB
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 23, 2020, 11:56:21 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 23, 2020, 11:28:23 AM
Why don't you think it's CB
A number of reasons, but, despite him being a decent fit profile wise, they would have proved the link by now.
His total lack of attempting to evade justice is either irredeemably idiotic or an audacious act of Machiavellian brinkmanship, the like of which criminal investigation has hitherto not encountered.
The reliance on the jailhouse snitches, then the apparent under-handed tactic of a plant inside the nick, smacks of desperation. Pumping snitches for information gets you only so far, then they start going all Stephen King on yo ass.
Couple that with the searches that clearly drew a blank (or they would have moved by now) and the total lack of movement since June despite a massive publicity campaign, then it's all but over bar the shouting.

....oh and, in my opinion, MM wasn't abducted.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 23, 2020, 12:12:36 PM
Quote from: The General on October 23, 2020, 11:56:21 AM
A number of reasons, but, despite him being a decent fit profile wise, they would have proved the link by now.
His total lack of attempting to evade justice is either irredeemably idiotic or an audacious act of Machiavellian brinkmanship, the like of which criminal investigation has hitherto not encountered.
The reliance on the jailhouse snitches, then the apparent under-handed tactic of a plant inside the nick, smacks of desperation. Pumping snitches for information gets you only so far, then they start going all Stephen King on yo ass.
Couple that with the searches that clearly drew a blank (or they would have moved by now) and the total lack of movement since June despite a massive publicity campaign, then it's all but over bar the shouting.

....oh and, in my opinion, MM wasn't abducted.


I think you have it away at the end..I think the main reason sceptics dismiss CB is because they are hooked on abduction.
We need to wait and see what Wolters has...I can't see him saying what he has without evidence to back it up.,..I think he has proof Maddie was abducted...

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 23, 2020, 12:22:32 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 23, 2020, 12:12:36 PM
I think you have it away at the end..I think the main reason sceptics dismiss CB is because they are hooked on abduction.
We need to wait and see what Wolters has...I can't see him saying what he has without evidence to back it up.,..I think he has proof Maddie was abducted...
Hey, if he has, great. But he's doing a remarkable job of showing the world he's got very little.
I have a theory that fits HCW's assertions that doesn't involve abduction, and also fits with CB's movements / lack of evasion. He might be a player, he might not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 23, 2020, 12:25:32 PM
Quote from: The General on October 23, 2020, 12:22:32 PM
Hey, if he has, great. But he's doing a remarkable job of showing the world he's got very little.
I have a theory that fits HCW's assertions that doesn't involve abduction, and also fits with CB's movements / lack of evasion. He might be a player, he might not.

I think you perception of HCW is severely influenced by your disbelief in abduction. I think abduction is odds on
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 23, 2020, 12:33:13 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 23, 2020, 12:25:32 PM
I think you perception of HCW is severely influenced by your disbelief in abduction. I think abduction is odds on
I believe you are wrong in your assertion.
I've used the data HCW has provided to try to fit it in to all possibilities.
If he would have said he had evidence of an abduction and left it there, I'd be intrigued.
Unfortunately, once he name-dropped CB it slowly transpired that it didn't fit together, as I described above.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 23, 2020, 12:38:13 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 23, 2020, 12:25:32 PM
I think you perception of HCW is severely influenced by your disbelief in abduction. I think abduction is odds on

Abduction is a theory suggested and promoted by Madeleine's parents. It may have happened, but there's no definitive evidence that it did. One of the reasons people have doubts, imo, is the refusal by her parents to consider any other possibility.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 23, 2020, 12:57:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 23, 2020, 12:38:13 PM
Abduction is a theory suggested and promoted by Madeleine's parents. It may have happened, but there's no definitive evidence that it did. One of the reasons people have doubts, imo, is the refusal by her parents to consider any other possibility.

You seem to think that the only reason abduction is being investigated is because of the parents wishes...which is ridiculous imo.
Looking at all the evidence I would say abduction is by far the most likely and it seems both SY and the Germans agree...I think HCW may well have proof of abduction...we will see
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 23, 2020, 01:37:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 23, 2020, 12:38:13 PM
Abduction is a theory suggested and promoted by Madeleine's parents. It may have happened, but there's no definitive evidence that it did. One of the reasons people have doubts, imo, is the refusal by her parents to consider any other possibility.
What a ludicrous suggestion IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 23, 2020, 09:09:29 PM
https://omny.fm/shows/maddie/theyve-taken-her
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 23, 2020, 09:48:46 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 23, 2020, 09:09:29 PM
https://omny.fm/shows/maddie/theyve-taken-her

Ive alraedy commneted on it...Wolters has said his strong evidence is neither the phone pings or  a witness statement....so sceptics can stop imagining it is
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 24, 2020, 01:39:41 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 23, 2020, 09:48:46 PM
Ive alraedy commneted on it...Wolters has said his strong evidence is neither the phone pings or  a witness statement....so sceptics can stop imagining it is
I'm looking forward to the day you say something new!   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 24, 2020, 08:47:15 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on October 24, 2020, 01:39:41 AM
I'm looking forward to the day you say something new!
That is new Rob...don't you realise that.....and quite significant

I've said the strong evidence is not the phone or witness statements...some posters have said I was wrong...now Wolters has confirmed I am right

It's the rest of the forum that is stuck in the past...the Smith sighting....48 questions and Amarals theory
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 24, 2020, 09:29:47 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 24, 2020, 08:47:15 AM
That is new Rob...don't you realise that.....and quite significant

I've said the strong evidence is not the phone or witness statements...some posters have said I was wrong...now Wolters has confirmed I am right

It's the rest of the forum that is stuck in the past...the Smith sighting....48 questions and Amarals theory

At least GA spoke from the police files.

What HCW has is just words words words....nothing else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 24, 2020, 09:37:52 AM
Quote from: kizzy on October 24, 2020, 09:29:47 AM
At least GA spoke from the police files.

What HCW has is just words words words....nothing else.
HCW is speaking from the BKA files.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 24, 2020, 09:43:20 AM
Quote from: Anthro on October 24, 2020, 09:37:52 AM
HCW is speaking from the BKA files.

How would we know? They haven't been released to the public, any more than the OG ones have.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 24, 2020, 09:44:46 AM
Quote from: kizzy on October 24, 2020, 09:29:47 AM
At least GA spoke from the police files.

What HCW has is just words words words....nothing else.

GA spoke from files that didnt understand the evidence...you dont seem to understand that. HCW is speaking for the german police....who I would think do understand the evidence. They convicted CB for rape where the PJ failed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 24, 2020, 12:56:55 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 24, 2020, 09:43:20 AM
How would we know? They haven't been released to the public, any more than the OG ones have.
Mr Wolters is the prosecutor, therefore he would not necessarily know all the evidence and detail the BKA has, in my opinion. It would be interesting if there’s an interview with the lead investigator of the BKA.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 01:00:36 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 24, 2020, 09:44:46 AM
GA spoke from files that didnt understand the evidence...you dont seem to understand that. HCW is speaking for the german police....who I would think do understand the evidence. They convicted CB for rape where the PJ failed

A professional prosecutor, rather than a glory hunter, wouldn’t be talking to Portuguese television programmes and obscure podcasts about the case. He is an embarrassment to the German judicial system.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 24, 2020, 01:12:04 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 01:00:36 PM
A professional prosecutor, rather than a glory hunter, wouldn’t be talking to Portuguese television programmes and obscure podcasts about the case. He is an embarrassment to the German judicial system.

The fact that you are impressed by Amaral shows your opinion on police isn't worth a lot...imo

Perhaps if he covered up a beating by his men to extract s confession from CB you would be more impressed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 24, 2020, 04:22:05 PM
Quote from: Anthro on October 24, 2020, 12:56:55 PM
Mr Wolters is the prosecutor, therefore he would not necessarily know all the evidence and detail the BKA has, in my opinion. It would be interesting if there’s an interview with the lead investigator of the BKA.

I agree, Anthro.

In my opinion the Germans appear to be very hierarchical and Wolters is their spokesperson so it just won't happen; as my personal preference is for investigators to play their cards very close to their chest I'm at ease with it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 24, 2020, 04:29:10 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 01:00:36 PM
A professional prosecutor, rather than a glory hunter, wouldn’t be talking to Portuguese television programmes and obscure podcasts about the case. He is an embarrassment to the German judicial system.

Any opinion ~ embarrassing or otherwise ~ on civilians dropping false information with as much publicity as possible into an active police investigation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 05:25:18 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 24, 2020, 01:12:04 PM
The fact that you are impressed by Amaral shows your opinion on police isn't worth a lot...imo

Perhaps if he covered up a beating by his men to extract s confession from CB you would be more impressed

I’m not at all impressed by Amaral. I think he made some rudimentary mistakes in the case...such as making the parents suspects at the beginning when he could see that there was holes in their story, letting the group collaborate on their statements and letting Gerry sit behind Kate when she gave her first statement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 05:28:02 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 24, 2020, 04:29:10 PM
Any opinion ~ embarrassing or otherwise ~ on civilians dropping false information with as much publicity as possible into an active police investigation?

I don’t think it should happen but in this case it made little or no difference to the lack of evidence Wolter now has.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 24, 2020, 05:30:32 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 05:28:02 PM
I don’t think it should happen but in this case it made little or no difference to the lack of evidence Wolter now has.

From what we know Wolters has very strong evidence of abduction and murder
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 24, 2020, 05:36:15 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 05:25:18 PM
I’m not at all impressed by Amaral. I think he made some rudimentary mistakes in the case...such as making the parents suspects at the beginning when he could see that there was holes in their story, letting the group collaborate on their statements and letting Gerry sit behind Kate when she gave her first statement.
thats nothing comapred tp his total ignorance when it came to understanding the alerts and the forensic evince....it seems non of the PJ did at the time despte it being explained to them.

Almeida has  a conviction for torture...amaral for perjury....imo they were out of their depth when they couldnt manufacture evidence...or perhaps they tried to
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 05:38:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 24, 2020, 05:30:32 PM
From what we know Wolters has very strong evidence of abduction and murder

From the interview he just gave to MS even the phone and location evidence they allegedly have against him isn’t even solid. He’s a laughing stock. It was obvious that MS was thinking ‘is that all you’ve got ‘.

Amaral et al were rubbish....let’s take that as read and move on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 24, 2020, 05:49:46 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 05:38:50 PM
From the interview he just gave to MS even the phone and location evidence they allegedly have against him isn’t even solid. He’s a laughing stock. It was obvious that MS was thinking ‘is that all you’ve got ‘.

Amaral et al were rubbish....let’s take that as read and move on.

I think you are in denial. He says clearly he has strong evidence of death and murder. Hes being truthful about all the evidence so why do you think on this one point he isnt. MS clearly hasnt got  a clue as hes an admirer of poulton and brown.

You think hes  a laughing stock...you are trying to claim it as fact when it isnt...its just your opinion...It shows how insecure you are with your beleifs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 24, 2020, 07:09:18 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 05:25:18 PM
I’m not at all impressed by Amaral. I think he made some rudimentary mistakes in the case...such as making the parents suspects at the beginning when he could see that there was holes in their story, letting the group collaborate on their statements and letting Gerry sit behind Kate when she gave her first statement.

As damning as some might think ~ I believe the collaboration on the group statement was encouraged by the Portuguese police who were present; and I don't think Kate had eyes in the back of her head to catch any prompts from her husband when she was at the point of collapse and worry about her eldest child.
You obviously do since you have bothered to make mention.

Being in total ignorance of what happens in a family setting when a child goes missing from home and not in a foreign country I don't actually know if it is normal practice to separate grieving parents when taking statements.

In this instance I think the Judicial Police acted with some humanity in allowing a mother on the point of collapse to have the invisible support of having her husband with her in the same room.

Amaral didn't require to "make the parents suspects" as far as I am concerned ~ all he had to do was to eliminate them from the enquiry as per usual practice to allow the search and investigation to be widened.
It appears that in cases involving missing little girls both he and Christovao used a their own MO,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 24, 2020, 07:17:10 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 05:28:02 PM
I don’t think it should happen but in this case it made little or no difference to the lack of evidence Wolter now has.

I disagree.

I believe the release of Brueckner's name into the public domain to have been a retrograde step which any investigation into a serious investigation must have found to be less than convenient.

Quite frankly ~ it is my opinion that you have absolutely no idea what impact it may have made in gathering evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 07:39:52 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 24, 2020, 07:09:18 PM
As damning as some might think ~ I believe the collaboration on the group statement was encouraged by the Portuguese police who were present; and I don't think Kate had eyes in the back of her head to catch any prompts from her husband when she was at the point of collapse and worry about her eldest child.
You obviously do since you have bothered to make mention.

Being in total ignorance of what happens in a family setting when a child goes missing from home and not in a foreign country I don't actually know if it is normal practice to separate grieving parents when taking statements.

In this instance I think the Judicial Police acted with some humanity in allowing a mother on the point of collapse to have the invisible support of having her husband with her in the same room.

Amaral didn't require to "make the parents suspects" as far as I am concerned ~ all he had to do was to eliminate them from the enquiry as per usual practice to allow the search and investigation to be widened.
It appears that in cases involving missing little girls both he and Christovao used a their own MO,

I believe Gerry had his hand on Kate’s shoulder so no need for eyes in the back of her head.

From Madeleine.
“ Every now and then Gerry would put a hand on my shoulder or give me a reassuring squeeze”

Clear the parents or make them suspects...either way it wasn’t done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 07:44:56 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 24, 2020, 07:17:10 PM
I disagree.

I believe the release of Brueckner's name into the public domain to have been a retrograde step which any investigation into a serious investigation must have found to be less than convenient.

Quite frankly ~ it is my opinion that you have absolutely no idea what impact it may have made in gathering evidence.

Why was it a retrograde step ? Would evidence did it stop being discovered?

And quite frankly it’s my opinion neither do you. Either way Wolter started the ball rolling in regard to Brueckner’s identification, closely followed by the media. It had absolutely nothing to do with Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 24, 2020, 08:13:59 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 07:44:56 PM
Why was it a retrograde step ? Would evidence did it stop being discovered?

And quite frankly it’s my opinion neither do you. Either way Wolter started the ball rolling in regard to Brueckner’s identification, closely followed by the media. It had absolutely nothing to do with Amaral.

Wolters never named CB..fact. he let others do that including Amaral and FF

I'm sure HCW understands German law
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 24, 2020, 08:23:15 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 24, 2020, 08:13:59 PM
Wolters never named CB..fact. he let others do that including Amaral and FF

I'm sure HCW understands German law
Well, let's hope he does.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 24, 2020, 08:31:50 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on October 24, 2020, 08:23:15 PM
Well, let's hope he does.

I think he understands that he doesn't have enough evidence to get a warrant to arrest Brueckner. I wonder if he tried and was refused by a judge?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 24, 2020, 08:34:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 24, 2020, 08:31:50 PM
I think he understands that he doesn't have enough evidence to get a warrant to arrest Brueckner. I wonder if he tried and was refused by a judge?

Speculation lol..why should he. He has all the time in the world
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 24, 2020, 09:12:11 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 24, 2020, 08:34:25 PM
Speculation lol..why should he. He has all the time in the world
Louis Armstrong sang that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 24, 2020, 09:13:21 PM
Quote from: barrier on October 24, 2020, 09:12:11 PM
Louis Armstrong sang that.

Wonderful song
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 24, 2020, 09:26:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 24, 2020, 08:34:25 PM
Speculation lol..why should he. He has all the time in the world

Does he? In the rape case Wolters said;

23:15
"In this case there is an arrest warrant for him so he will stay in prison until the verdict is legally binding"

So the conviction for rape isn't finalised it seems.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 09:31:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 24, 2020, 08:13:59 PM
Wolters never named CB..fact. he let others do that including Amaral and FF

I'm sure HCW understands German law

I didn’t say Wolter named Brueckner, I said he started the ball rolling and the media did the rest. Brueckner’s name was out there before Amaral used it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 24, 2020, 11:07:38 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 24, 2020, 09:13:21 PM
Wonderful song
https://youtu.be/SgVWFdDnSXQ
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 24, 2020, 11:13:31 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 09:31:06 PM
I didn’t say Wolter named Brueckner, I said he started the ball rolling and the media did the rest. Brueckner’s name was out there before Amaral used it.

Amaral released information in the Australian podcast which led directly to Brueckner's identification.  Deny it all you like but that is the fact of the matter
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 11:50:07 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 24, 2020, 11:13:31 PM
Amaral released information in the Australian podcast which led directly to Brueckner's identification.  Deny it all you like but that is the fact of the matter

Repeating it doesn’t make it any truer.

There was 15 months between Amaral speaking about a German scapegoat and Brueckner being named. Brueckner’s name wasn’t mentioned until after Wolter’s appeal for information, 15 months after MS’s podcast and after the media had used the information released by Wolter to find out his name.

I’m really not sure why you’re flogging this dead horse but I do wish you’d stop...you are convincing no one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on October 24, 2020, 11:54:50 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 11:50:07 PM
Repeating it doesn’t make it any truer.

There was 15 months between Amaral speaking about a German scapegoat and Brueckner being named. Brueckner’s name wasn’t mentioned until after Wolter’s appeal for information, 15 months after MS’s podcast and after the media had used the information released by Wolter to find out his name.

I’m really not sure why you’re flogging this dead horse but I do wish you’d stop...you are convincing no one.
!


In your own opinion of course.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 25, 2020, 12:03:34 AM
Quote from: Erngath on October 24, 2020, 11:54:50 PM
!


In your own opinion of course.

No, my post is based on facts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 25, 2020, 12:18:02 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 24, 2020, 11:50:07 PM
Repeating it doesn’t make it any truer.

There was 15 months between Amaral speaking about a German scapegoat and Brueckner being named. Brueckner’s name wasn’t mentioned until after Wolter’s appeal for information, 15 months after MS’s podcast and after the media had used the information released by Wolter to find out his name.

I’m really not sure why you’re flogging this dead horse but I do wish you’d stop...you are convincing no one.

Long before we heard Brueckner's name or knew the German police suspected him in Madeleine's disappearance Amaral was scuttling from Podcast to TV Studio to make sure he got his message across.

It is a fact he did so the only puzzlement is WHY he did so.

Snip
By GERARD COUZENS FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 14:46, 30 November 2019

The ex-cop sparked speculation Hamburg-born child strangler Ney was the prime suspect after telling an Australian podcast earlier this year investigators were focusing on a German paedophile in prison.

He failed to identify Ney by name at the time, describing the suspect only as someone who had been ruled out of the investigation into the missing British youngster in 2008 but later jailed in his home country.

Now Amaral, the original lead investigator in the case, has fuelled new speculation about his identity by telling a Spanish TV programme: 'A paedophile who is German and serving life for killing children has been spoken about.
'What I know is that the suspect is not him, it's another man. He's also in prison in Germany. He's also a paedophile.
'Years later, many years later, it appears that in an Internet chatroom there is a conversation between that person and another person where they talk about Madeleine.'

He responded: 'It can't be him' when he was shown a photo of Ney before adding in a false and vile jibe at Madeleine McCann's father: 'I'll say something else, the kidnapper is similar, very similar, to Gerry McCann' before pointing at the photo he had been shown of Martin Ney and adding: 'That man is not similar to Gerry McCann.'
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/11/30/14/21649446-7741505-image-a-50_1575123173656.jpg)
Martin Ney's name emerged after Mr Amaral told an Australian podcast: 'They are preparing the end of the investigation, with a German paedophile who is in prison right now.

'I don't know how they will start it, but that will be the big ending, if it ends.'

He did not identify the mystery German at the time, although Correio da Manha went on to claim Ney was not the suspect. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7741505/Ex-Portuguese-police-chief-claims-leading-Madeleine-McCann-suspect-mystery-German-paedophile.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 25, 2020, 12:29:54 AM
Quote from: Brietta on October 25, 2020, 12:18:02 AM
Long before we heard Brueckner's name or knew the German police suspected him in Madeleine's disappearance Amaral was scuttling from Podcast to TV Studio to make sure he got his message across.

It is a fact he did so the only puzzlement is WHY he did so.

Snip
By GERARD COUZENS FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 14:46, 30 November 2019

The ex-cop sparked speculation Hamburg-born child strangler Ney was the prime suspect after telling an Australian podcast earlier this year investigators were focusing on a German paedophile in prison.

He failed to identify Ney by name at the time, describing the suspect only as someone who had been ruled out of the investigation into the missing British youngster in 2008 but later jailed in his home country.

Now Amaral, the original lead investigator in the case, has fuelled new speculation about his identity by telling a Spanish TV programme: 'A paedophile who is German and serving life for killing children has been spoken about.
'What I know is that the suspect is not him, it's another man. He's also in prison in Germany. He's also a paedophile.
'Years later, many years later, it appears that in an Internet chatroom there is a conversation between that person and another person where they talk about Madeleine.'

He responded: 'It can't be him' when he was shown a photo of Ney before adding in a false and vile jibe at Madeleine McCann's father: 'I'll say something else, the kidnapper is similar, very similar, to Gerry McCann' before pointing at the photo he had been shown of Martin Ney and adding: 'That man is not similar to Gerry McCann.'
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/11/30/14/21649446-7741505-image-a-50_1575123173656.jpg)
Martin Ney's name emerged after Mr Amaral told an Australian podcast: 'They are preparing the end of the investigation, with a German paedophile who is in prison right now.

'I don't know how they will start it, but that will be the big ending, if it ends.'

He did not identify the mystery German at the time, although Correio da Manha went on to claim Ney was not the suspect. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7741505/Ex-Portuguese-police-chief-claims-leading-Madeleine-McCann-suspect-mystery-German-paedophile.html

Yes I read that earlier.

November 2019 and it took the world’s media another 7 months to name Bruckner....and coincidentally after Wolter had provided them with ample information to identify him.

Wolter gave the media all they needed to identify Bruckner. It had nothing to do with Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 25, 2020, 12:54:36 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 25, 2020, 12:29:54 AM
Yes I read that earlier.

November 2019 and it took the world’s media another 7 months to name Bruckner....and coincidentally after Wolter had provided them with ample information to identify him.

Wolter gave the media all they needed to identify Bruckner. It had nothing to do with Amaral.

The evidence is there.  Why doesn't it surprise me you are in denial.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 25, 2020, 01:07:32 AM
Quote from: Brietta on October 25, 2020, 12:54:36 AM
The evidence is there.  Why doesn't it surprise me you are in denial.

The evidence isn’t there and I’m afraid you are wrong.

It was 15 months after Amaral’s interview that Bruckner was identified by the media, and only after Wolter had given them many more clues to his identity.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 25, 2020, 07:30:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 24, 2020, 09:26:00 PM
Does he? In the rape case Wolters said;

23:15
"In this case there is an arrest warrant for him so he will stay in prison until the verdict is legally binding"

So the conviction for rape isn't finalised it seems.
This interview was on 4th July....in August there was a ruling upholding the conviction so it seems you are wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 25, 2020, 07:38:13 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 25, 2020, 07:30:52 AM
This interview was on 4th July....in August there was a ruling upholding the conviction so it seems you are wrong

Do you mean the ruling from the ECJ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 25, 2020, 07:41:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 25, 2020, 07:38:13 AM
Do you mean the ruling from the ECJ?

You should be aware that s lot has happened since July 4...it seems his bid was rejected at the end of September
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 25, 2020, 07:57:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 25, 2020, 07:38:13 AM
Do you mean the ruling from the ECJ?

Bring yourself up to speed
https://www.brusselstimes.com/news/eu-affairs/132610/european-court-rejects-appeal-from-madeleine-mccann-suspect/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 25, 2020, 08:45:19 AM
Quote from: Anthro on October 24, 2020, 11:07:38 PM
https://youtu.be/SgVWFdDnSXQ
The real wild child (Iggy pop) does a passable version.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 25, 2020, 09:22:41 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 25, 2020, 07:57:55 AM
Bring yourself up to speed
https://www.brusselstimes.com/news/eu-affairs/132610/european-court-rejects-appeal-from-madeleine-mccann-suspect/

That was a decision on whether they had to right to arrest Brueckner for one crime and try him for another. It wasn't to do with whether the verdict of the trial was legally binding.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 25, 2020, 09:31:25 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 25, 2020, 09:22:41 AM
That was a decision on whether they had to right to arrest Brueckner for one crime and try him for another. It wasn't to do with whether the verdict of the trial was legally binding.

On what basis was his lawyer challenging the verdict.....on the right to try him for the crime. The judgemnet therefore makes the verdict legally binding

have you read the article..it says..

Brückner will now have to serve out his seven-year sentence in Germany. In the meantime, police in the UK and Portugal will continue to investigate his possible involvement in Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 25, 2020, 10:14:26 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 25, 2020, 09:22:41 AM
That was a decision on whether they had to right to arrest Brueckner for one crime and try him for another. It wasn't to do with whether the verdict of the trial was legally binding.
So he's also appealing the rape sentence is he?  Do you have a cite?  Presumably if true he has found new evidence that exonerates him?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 25, 2020, 10:18:46 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 25, 2020, 10:14:26 AM
So he's also appealing the rape sentence is he?  Do you have a cite?  Presumably if true he has found new evidence that exonerates him?

Maybe. Perhaps it will turn out to be one of these miscarriages of justice that people get excited about.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 25, 2020, 10:28:01 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 25, 2020, 09:31:25 AM
On what basis was his lawyer challenging the verdict.....on the right to try him for the crime. The judgemnet therefore makes the verdict legally binding

have you read the article..it says..

Brückner will now have to serve out his seven-year sentence in Germany. In the meantime, police in the UK and Portugal will continue to investigate his possible involvement in Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.

I have reason to believe that the sentence for rape has been appealed against;

"he was sentenced to seven years in prison by the Braunschweig Regional Court for raping a 72-year-old girl in the Algarve in 2005. This penalty is currently being examined by the Federal Court of Justice and is not final."
https://www.fnp.de/deutschland/maddie-mccann-anwalt-christian-b-kritik-medien-vermisst-tot-verdacht-zr-13810982.html

The Federal Court of Justice is Germany's Supreme Court.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 25, 2020, 12:06:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 25, 2020, 10:28:01 AM
I have reason to believe that the sentence for rape has been appealed against;

"he was sentenced to seven years in prison by the Braunschweig Regional Court for raping a 72-year-old girl in the Algarve in 2005. This penalty is currently being examined by the Federal Court of Justice and is not final."
https://www.fnp.de/deutschland/maddie-mccann-anwalt-christian-b-kritik-medien-vermisst-tot-verdacht-zr-13810982.html

The Federal Court of Justice is Germany's Supreme Court.

Jesus H,  did he rape this 72 year old woman or not?  And since Portugal were doing nothing about it, who do you think should have done?

But it has rather put to bed that Portugal has primacy on crimes committed in Portugal.  They obviously don't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 25, 2020, 12:19:29 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 25, 2020, 12:06:25 PM
Jesus H, did he rape this 72 year old woman or not?  And since Portugal were doing nothing about it, who do you think should have done?

But it has rather put to bed that Portugal has primacy on crimes committed in Portugal.  They obviously don't.
Who knows ?

I'm sure having 'possession' of the suspect  and his/her nationality must affect a country's decision to prosecute
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 25, 2020, 12:25:21 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 25, 2020, 12:06:25 PM
Jesus H,  did he rape this 72 year old woman or not?  And since Portugal were doing nothing about it, who do you think should have done?

But it has rather put to bed that Portugal has primacy on crimes committed in Portugal.  They obviously don't.

I don't know what evidence was used to convict CB of rape, so I have no opinion on whether it was a sound conviction or not.

I'm not sure why Portugal didn't prosecute CB. Maybe they didn't have the evidence which his friends provided for the German trial, or it was insufficient in their opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 25, 2020, 12:28:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 25, 2020, 10:28:01 AM
I have reason to believe that the sentence for rape has been appealed against;

"he was sentenced to seven years in prison by the Braunschweig Regional Court for raping a 72-year-old girl in the Algarve in 2005. This penalty is currently being examined by the Federal Court of Justice and is not final."
https://www.fnp.de/deutschland/maddie-mccann-anwalt-christian-b-kritik-medien-vermisst-tot-verdacht-zr-13810982.html

The Federal Court of Justice is Germany's Supreme Court.

do you have  acite for that...or at least apointer where the info is in the link you have sent
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 25, 2020, 12:46:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 25, 2020, 10:28:01 AM
I have reason to believe that the sentence for rape has been appealed against;

"he was sentenced to seven years in prison by the Braunschweig Regional Court for raping a 72-year-old girl in the Algarve in 2005. This penalty is currently being examined by the Federal Court of Justice and is not final."
https://www.fnp.de/deutschland/maddie-mccann-anwalt-christian-b-kritik-medien-vermisst-tot-verdacht-zr-13810982.html

The Federal Court of Justice is Germany's Supreme Court.

whats the date on that statement...as I recall the German court referred to the ECJ fir advice who ruled in dec the trial was legal...looks like im right,.. the article you quoted is from june
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 25, 2020, 12:53:26 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 25, 2020, 12:19:29 PM
Who knows ?

I'm sure having 'possession' of the suspect  and his/her nationality must affect a country's decision to prosecute

So Britain can prosecute a British Subject living in Britain for a crime committed abroad.  Thank God we got that one sorted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 25, 2020, 12:54:24 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 25, 2020, 12:53:26 PM
So Britain can prosecute a British Subject living in Britain for a crime committed abroad.  Thank God we got that one sorted.

Not necessarily - it depends on the crime, apparently.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 25, 2020, 12:56:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 25, 2020, 12:25:21 PM
I don't know what evidence was used to convict CB of rape, so I have no opinion on whether it was a sound conviction or not.

I'm not sure why Portugal didn't prosecute CB. Maybe they didn't have the evidence which his friends provided for the German trial, or it was insufficient in their opinion.

So now the evidence of his friends does matter.  Sorry, I thought his friends were stitching him up for lighter sentences.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 25, 2020, 12:58:34 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 25, 2020, 12:54:24 PM
Not necessarily - it depends on the crime, apparently.

So which Crimes does this apply to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 25, 2020, 01:02:53 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 25, 2020, 12:58:34 PM
So which Crimes does this apply to?

Murder/manslaughter.

https://www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/insights/blogs/criminal-law-blog/widening-the-net-investigating-and-prosecuting-offences-overseas

The general principle is that acts committed abroad are not punishable under the English criminal law. Parliament may give an offence extra-territorial application but must do so expressly. ... A person of any nationality commits / attempts to commit such an offence in any country covered by the convention
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 25, 2020, 01:07:04 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 25, 2020, 01:02:53 PM
Murder/manslaughter.

https://www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/insights/blogs/criminal-law-blog/widening-the-net-investigating-and-prosecuting-offences-overseas

The general principle is that acts committed abroad are not punishable under the English criminal law. Parliament may give an offence extra-territorial application but must do so expressly. ... A person of any nationality commits / attempts to commit such an offence in any country covered by the convention

That doesn't rule out the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 25, 2020, 01:07:21 PM
Its been posted often enough.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/24-25/100/section/9

9Murder or manslaughter abroad.
Where any murder or manslaughter shall be committed on land out of the United Kingdom, whether within the Queen’s dominions or without, and whether the person killed were a subject of Her Majesty or not, every offence committed by any subject of Her Majesty in respect of any such case, whether the same shall amount to the offence of murder or of manslaughter, . . . F1, may be dealt with, inquired of, tried, determined, and punished . . . F1 in England or Ireland . . . F1: Provided, that nothing herein contained shall prevent any person from being tried in any place out of England or Ireland for any murder or manslaughter committed out of England or Ireland, in the same manner as such person might have been tried before the passing of this Act.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 25, 2020, 06:54:46 PM
An interesting fact I learned today.  If you fall 50 ft off a building (that’s 5 storeys), your survival chances are 50%.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 25, 2020, 06:57:49 PM
Fascinating - how was survival defined ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 25, 2020, 06:58:29 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 25, 2020, 06:54:46 PM
An interesting fact I learned today.  If you fall 50 ft off a building (that’s 5 storeys), your survival chances are 50%.

Yet maddoe died rolling of the sofa according to detective dim
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 25, 2020, 07:03:08 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 25, 2020, 06:57:49 PM
Fascinating - how was survival defined ?
As not dying.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on October 30, 2020, 09:14:40 PM
https://youtu.be/4xJ4q-V2Glc
Just sharing a wonderful release today. Karen Zoid (Afrikaans artist), AB de Villiers, our national cricket captain, and Ralf with the Ndlovu youth choir.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 30, 2020, 09:38:34 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 25, 2020, 12:53:26 PM
So Britain can prosecute a British Subject living in Britain for a crime committed abroad.  Thank God we got that one sorted.


Yes, many have. most notorious was 70's pop star Garry Glitter (ew) who sexually abused children in Thailand or was it Vietnam?   Sex tourists they are called.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 30, 2020, 09:40:54 PM
Germany sem to have quite a high bar re evidence for prosecution. What I think many have not realised is that if the Germans don't charge CB..then SY could.....trial by jury
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on October 30, 2020, 09:46:36 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 30, 2020, 09:40:54 PM
Germany sem to have quite a high bar re evidence for prosecution. What I think many have not realised is that if the Germans don't charge CB..then SY could.....trial by jury
I have my doubts about that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 30, 2020, 09:48:20 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 30, 2020, 09:40:54 PM
Germany sem to have quite a high bar re evidence for prosecution. What I think many have not realised is that if the Germans don't charge CB..then SY could.....trial by jury

SY can't he has committed no crime in the UK Neither is he a UK citizen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 30, 2020, 09:50:05 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on October 30, 2020, 09:48:20 PM
SY can't he has committed no crime in the UK Neither is he a UK citizen.

You obviously don't understand the law...he absolutely could be tried in the UK
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on October 30, 2020, 09:54:48 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 30, 2020, 09:50:05 PM
You obviously don't understand the law...he absolutely could be tried in the UK


Yawn.  No he really, really can't. He committed NO CRIME ON UK SOIL.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 30, 2020, 09:56:03 PM
Quote from: Anthro on October 30, 2020, 09:14:40 PM
https://youtu.be/4xJ4q-V2Glc
Just sharing a wonderful release today. Karen Zoid (Afrikaans artist), AB de Villiers, our national cricket captain, and Ralf with the Ndlovu youth choir.

Brilliant!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 30, 2020, 10:01:18 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on October 30, 2020, 09:54:48 PM

Yawn.  No he really, really can't. He committed NO CRIME ON UK SOIL.

I'll post the cite tomorrow
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 31, 2020, 12:55:37 PM
Bobby Ball,[Name removed] Williams, now Connery, rip.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 01, 2020, 07:21:08 AM
Quote from: barrier on October 31, 2020, 12:55:37 PM
Bobby Ball,[Name removed] Williams, now Connery, rip.
Sean Connery arrives at the Pearly Gates and St. Peter asks him who he is.

Sean Connery says "My name is Bond, James Bond".

What is the punch line to that joke?  What is St. Peter's reply?

"I admire your luck"

Here's one.

St Peter:  "We've already had a James Bond up here already, so what's your number"
Sean Connery replies: "007".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 09, 2020, 05:48:32 AM
Good News for Trump.

He won his golf games two days in a row.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2020, 08:11:22 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 09, 2020, 05:48:32 AM
Good News for Trump.

He won his golf games two days in a row.

I bet he did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2020, 08:26:42 AM
I wouldn’t have wanted to be in the shoes of anyone with the temerity to beat Trump on the golf course this weekend.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2020, 09:48:30 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2020, 08:26:42 AM
I wouldn’t have wanted to be in the shoes of anyone with the temerity to beat Trump on the golf course this weekend.

 @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 09, 2020, 10:11:07 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2020, 08:26:42 AM
I wouldn’t have wanted to be in the shoes of anyone with the temerity to beat Trump on the golf course this weekend.
Has anyone seen Barak Obama in the last few days?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 09, 2020, 09:33:37 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 09, 2020, 10:11:07 AM
Has anyone seen Barak Obama in the last few days?

No, but he is allegedly being tipped to be UK embassy something or other... All noses to the trough...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 09, 2020, 10:21:31 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 09, 2020, 09:33:37 PM
No, but he is allegedly being tipped to be UK embassy something or other... All noses to the trough...
What seeking asylum in case Trump makes a comeback?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on November 10, 2020, 05:55:38 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 30, 2020, 10:01:18 PM
I'll post the cite tomorrow
Cite please
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 10, 2020, 06:19:18 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 30, 2020, 09:50:05 PM
You obviously don't understand the law...he absolutely could be tried in the UK
Davel is right.  There are circumstances where UK will prosecute for crimes committed overseas.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on November 10, 2020, 06:34:29 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 10, 2020, 06:19:18 PM
Davel is right.  There are circumstances where UK will prosecute for crimes committed overseas.
I am well aware that the UK can prosecute for crimes committed overseas but lets see if they can as Davel asserts prosecute Christian Breuckner for crimes committed overseas. They can't even extradite him
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 10, 2020, 06:37:11 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on November 10, 2020, 06:34:29 PM
I am well aware that the UK can prosecute for crimes committed overseas but lets see if they can as Davel asserts prosecute Christian Breuckner for crimes committed overseas. They can't even extradite him

If they extradite him he is physically present in the Uk and they can therefore prosecute
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on November 10, 2020, 06:43:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 10, 2020, 06:37:11 PM
If they extradite him he is physically present in the Uk and they can therefore prosecute
They can't lawfully extradite him. Since 31/01/2020 we left the EU. The German constitution gives the express right to a German citizen that they cannot be extradited to a non EU country
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 10, 2020, 06:45:17 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on November 10, 2020, 06:43:06 PM
They can't lawfully extradite him. Since 31/01/2020 we left the EU. The German constitution gives the express right to a German citizen that they cannot be extradited to a non EU country

Bold statement - Cite requested for "The German constitution gives the express right to a German citizen that they cannot be extradited to a non EU country".  Please.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on November 10, 2020, 06:48:07 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 10, 2020, 06:45:17 PM
Bold statement - Cite requested for "The German constitution gives the express right to a German citizen that they cannot be extradited to a non EU country".  Please.
Extradition to a non-EU country is inadmissible for own nationals. This is regulated in the German Constitution, cf. Article 16.2 sentence 1 of the German Constitution. The German state will then take over the prosecution itself.

https://criminal-law-germany.lawyer/extradition-in-criminal-law/#:~:text=Under%20certain%20conditions%2C%20the%20Federal,foreign%20citizens%20to%20other%20countries.&text=Extradition%20to%20a%20non%2DEU,1%20of%20the%20German%20Constitution.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 10, 2020, 07:10:49 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 10, 2020, 06:19:18 PM
Davel is right.  There are circumstances where UK will prosecute for crimes committed overseas.

Only UK citizens if they are the victim and the prep is British.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 10, 2020, 07:11:42 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on November 10, 2020, 06:43:06 PM
They can't lawfully extradite him. Since 31/01/2020 we left the EU. The German constitution gives the express right to a German citizen that they cannot be extradited to a non EU country

100% correct!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 10, 2020, 07:21:31 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 10, 2020, 07:10:49 PM
Only UK citizens if they are the victim and the prep is British.

that is wrong...its whether the perp is physically present in the UK...nationality unimportant.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 10, 2020, 07:27:36 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 10, 2020, 07:11:42 PM
100% correct!
The question was could CB be prosecuted in the UK......the answer is ..yes. I'm not saying probable but possible.

If ever he was released from prison and travelled to another country he may well be able to be extradited..

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 10, 2020, 07:49:04 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on October 30, 2020, 09:54:48 PM

Yawn.  No he really, really can't. He committed NO CRIME ON UK SOIL.

Just to put my claim into context...the Uk can prosecute for crimes not committed on UK soil
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 10, 2020, 08:03:33 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 10, 2020, 07:21:31 PM
that is wrong...its whether the perp is physically present in the UK...nationality unimportant.

 if MBM was abducted by a non British citizen in an other country. UK can't bring charges.

If MBM was abducted here by someone living in this country they would be charged.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 10, 2020, 08:06:03 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 10, 2020, 08:03:33 PM
if MBM was abducted by a non British citizen in an other country. UK can't bring charges.

If MBM was abducted here by someone living in this country they would be charged.

the accused only has to be present in the country..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 10, 2020, 09:04:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 10, 2020, 08:06:03 PM
the accused only has to be present in the country..


Yes, but CB isn't , is he. So he can't be  charged and tried here. End of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 10, 2020, 09:12:12 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 10, 2020, 09:04:04 PM

Yes, but CB isn't , is he. So he can't be  charged and tried here. End of.

Glad you agree with me now...he could be extradited
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 11, 2020, 06:52:25 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 10, 2020, 09:12:12 PM
Glad you agree with me now...he could be extradited
And that would be grounds for another appeal if that happened IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 11, 2020, 09:19:42 AM

America doesn't seem to have a problem with extraditing British Citizens.  Unfortunately The Americans aren't so keen on a reciprocal arrangement.

France never extradites anyone, if they can possibly avoid it.  But then France didn't join this one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 11, 2020, 09:59:11 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 11, 2020, 09:19:42 AM
America doesn't seem to have a problem with extraditing British Citizens.  Unfortunately The Americans aren't so keen on a reciprocal arrangement.

France never extradites anyone, if they can possibly avoid it.  But then France didn't join this one.
Would that because USA states have the death penalty?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 11, 2020, 10:40:33 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 11, 2020, 09:59:11 AM
Would that because USA states have the death penalty?

What?  France you mean?  France didn't join because they were quite happy with what they already had.

Meanwhile, I am still at a loss to fathom who can extradite who and for what in The EU.  Although France might comply when it comes to Rape and Murder.

No one can be extradited from France when whatever it is isn't a crime in France, no matter what their Nationality.  Which is where some crimes of sexual abuse comes in.  The age limits in France are different.

The last man, boy actually, who was guillotined was in about 1966 and from what I read on the subject was almost certainly Innocent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 11, 2020, 10:57:05 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 10, 2020, 09:12:12 PM
Glad you agree with me now...he could be extradited

Austria, Germany and Slovenia have recently confirmed their earlier statements that they would refuse UK extradition requests for their nationals once the UK ceases to be a member of the European Union ('EU'), and have already officially informed the European Commission.

Following the UK’s departure from the EU on 31 January 2020, the three countries stated that they would also decline UK extradition requests for their nationals during the 11 months transition period, even though the UK still remains governed by the European Arrest Warrant (‘EAW’).
https://www.gherson.com/blog/3-european-countries-will-not-extradite-to-uk
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 11, 2020, 11:05:57 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 11, 2020, 10:57:05 AM
Austria, Germany and Slovenia have recently confirmed their earlier statements that they would refuse UK extradition requests for their nationals once the UK ceases to be a member of the European Union ('EU'), and have already officially informed the European Commission.

Following the UK’s departure from the EU on 31 January 2020, the three countries stated that they would also decline UK extradition requests for their nationals during the 11 months transition period, even though the UK still remains governed by the European Arrest Warrant (‘EAW’).
https://www.gherson.com/blog/3-european-countries-will-not-extradite-to-uk

The European Arrest Warrant always was a mess of potage.  So why did so many of these European Countries agree to it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 11, 2020, 11:07:16 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 11, 2020, 10:57:05 AM
Austria, Germany and Slovenia have recently confirmed their earlier statements that they would refuse UK extradition requests for their nationals once the UK ceases to be a member of the European Union ('EU'), and have already officially informed the European Commission.

Following the UK’s departure from the EU on 31 January 2020, the three countries stated that they would also decline UK extradition requests for their nationals during the 11 months transition period, even though the UK still remains governed by the European Arrest Warrant (‘EAW’).
https://www.gherson.com/blog/3-european-countries-will-not-extradite-to-uk

We are talking hypothetically...if he travelled outside Germany it's possible he could be extradited.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 11, 2020, 01:18:25 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 11, 2020, 11:07:16 AM
We are talking hypothetically...if he traveled outside Germany it's possible he could be extradited.

I'm talking factually.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 11, 2020, 01:24:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 11, 2020, 01:18:25 PM
I'm talking factually.

I understand the facts and factually he would be prosecuted in Germany
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 11, 2020, 01:36:23 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 11, 2020, 11:05:57 AM
The European Arrest Warrant always was a mess of potage.  So why did so many of these European Countries agree to it?

I don't know, but it won't exist in the UK after we leave the EU.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 11, 2020, 01:55:11 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 11, 2020, 11:05:57 AM
The European Arrest Warrant always was a mess of potage.  So why did so many of these European Countries agree to it?

Presumably because it improved the extradition process. EU countires will continue to have its benefits.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 11, 2020, 02:01:58 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 11, 2020, 01:55:11 PM
Presumably because it improved the extradition process. EU countires will continue to have its benefits.

Not from France it won't
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 11, 2020, 02:10:25 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 11, 2020, 02:01:58 PM
Not from France it won't

From Wiki - The European Arrest Warrant (EAW) is an arrest warrant valid throughout all member states of the European Union (EU). Once issued, it requires another member state to arrest and transfer a criminal suspect or sentenced person to the issuing state so that the person can be put on trial or complete a detention period.

Are you saying that France does not participate ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 11, 2020, 02:12:27 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 11, 2020, 02:10:25 PM
From Wiki - The European Arrest Warrant (EAW) is an arrest warrant valid throughout all member states of the European Union (EU). Once issued, it requires another member state to arrest and transfer a criminal suspect or sentenced person to the issuing state so that the person can be put on trial or complete a detention period.

Are you saying that France does not participate ?

No.  Only that France refused to sign while sticking to it's own long established rules.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 12, 2020, 03:18:49 PM
Are all nurses angels?   Dr Shipman was a great doctor!  can looks be deceiving...


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8941335/Childrens-nurse-30-charged-murdering-eight-babies-trying-murder-10-more.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 12, 2020, 06:35:15 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 12, 2020, 03:18:49 PM
Are all nurses angels?   Dr Shipman was a great doctor!  can looks be deceiving...


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8941335/Childrens-nurse-30-charged-murdering-eight-babies-trying-murder-10-more.html

I think there is only one poster here who beleives we dont have the right to question so called experts....and its gunit
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 12, 2020, 06:51:54 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 12, 2020, 03:18:49 PM
Are all nurses angels?   Dr Shipman was a great doctor!  can looks be deceiving...


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8941335/Childrens-nurse-30-charged-murdering-eight-babies-trying-murder-10-more.html
From what I understand this is the third time this woman has been arrested before finally being charged.  It’s taken three years to get to this point.  It would behove  those gloaters and goaders well who sneer at the German prosecutor’s efforts re: securing charges against CB to consider this before ramping up their snide rhetoric.  Sometimes it takes years to build a watertight case against a suspect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 12, 2020, 07:17:09 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 12, 2020, 06:51:54 PM
From what I understand this is the third time this woman has been arrested before finally being charged.  It’s taken three years to get to this point.  It would behove  those gloaters and goaders well who sneer at the German prosecutor’s efforts re: securing charges against CB to consider this before ramping up their snide rhetoric.  Sometimes it takes years to build a watertight case against a suspect.

"It would behove  those gloaters and goaders well who sneer at the German prosecutor’s efforts " 

who are these people you speak of?    You have spend a good part of your life on this very forum bleeting on about the McCanns being 'innocent' untill charged and there is not enough evidence to do charge them with anything.
make YOUR MIND UP.

As far as I can see reading the posts- the supporters believe CB dun it with not enough evidence to charge him therefore- he can't be found guilty can he?



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 12, 2020, 07:24:48 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 12, 2020, 07:17:09 PM
"It would behove  those gloaters and goaders well who sneer at the German prosecutor’s efforts " 

who are these people you speak of?    You have spend a good part of your life on this very forum bleeting on about the McCanns being 'innocent' untill charged and there is not enough evidence to do charge them with anything.
make YOUR MIND UP.

As far as I can see reading the posts- the supporters believe CB dun it with not enough evidence to charge him therefore- he can't be found guilty can he?
Sorry but your post doesn’t make much sense.  What have I got to make my mind up about?  And as far as the gloaters and goaders are concerned, well Faithlilly made a post gloating that CB was never going to be charged just a few minutes ago.  Happy to provide plenty more examples if you need them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 12, 2020, 07:37:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 12, 2020, 07:24:48 PM
Sorry but your post doesn’t make much sense.  What have I got to make my mind up about?  And as far as the gloaters and goaders are concerned, well Faithlilly made a post gloating that CB was never going to be charged just a few minutes ago.  Happy to provide plenty more examples if you need them.

"gloaters and goaders" is an opinion and that should be made apparent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 12, 2020, 07:51:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 12, 2020, 07:24:48 PM
Sorry but your post doesn’t make much sense.  What have I got to make my mind up about?  And as far as the gloaters and goaders are concerned, well Faithlilly made a post gloating that CB was never going to be charged just a few minutes ago.  Happy to provide plenty more examples if you need them.

dismissing my posts, pretending you do not understand it, is an old troll and  goad trick. Your hypocrisy is so transparent.

You are happy to accept that CB is guilty without evidence being present. you are happy to spend many hours over the years to say the McCANNS  are not guilty of their daughters disappearance and are being punished by nasty jealous trolls etc even though no crime has been officially claimed with evidence!

You then turn on the same people who say CB may not have committed abduction and murder due to no evidence.

Yes, No,  I don't know, I am absolutly positive, I am unsure.  We can see right through all your posts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 12, 2020, 08:16:06 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 12, 2020, 07:51:06 PM
dismissing my posts, pretending you do not understand it, is an old troll and  goad trick. Your hypocrisy is so transparent.

You are happy to accept that CB is guilty without evidence being present. you are happy to spend many hours over the years to say the McCANNS  are not guilty of their daughters disappearance and are being punished by nasty jealous trolls etc even though no crime has been officially claimed with evidence!

You then turn on the same people who say CB may not have committed abduction and murder due to no evidence.

Yes, No,  I don't know, I am absolutly positive, I am unsure.  We can see right through all your posts.
A personal attack, how delightful and how wrong on every count. oh, and liked by the moderator to boot, tsk tsk.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 12, 2020, 08:18:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 12, 2020, 07:37:08 PM
"gloaters and goaders" is an opinion and that should be made apparent.
Of course it’s an opinion, as anyone wilth any sense can see. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 12, 2020, 08:21:18 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 12, 2020, 07:51:06 PM
dismissing my posts, pretending you do not understand it, is an old troll and  goad trick. Your hypocrisy is so transparent.

You are happy to accept that CB is guilty without evidence being present. you are happy to spend many hours over the years to say the McCANNS  are not guilty of their daughters disappearance and are being punished by nasty jealous trolls etc even though no crime has been officially claimed with evidence!

You then turn on the same people who say CB may not have committed abduction and murder due to no evidence.

Yes, No,  I don't know, I am absolutly positive, I am unsure.  We can see right through all your posts.

Just so its clear for you...I havent seen any poster here claim CB is guilty....but hes the prime suspect now and there may or may not be enough evidence to charge him...we dont know...that includes you
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 12, 2020, 08:23:33 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 12, 2020, 07:24:48 PM
Sorry but your post doesn’t make much sense.  What have I got to make my mind up about?  And as far as the gloaters and goaders are concerned, well Faithlilly made a post gloating that CB was never going to be charged just a few minutes ago.  Happy to provide plenty more examples if you need them.


"gloaters and goaders are concerned, well Faithlilly made a post gloating that CB was never going to be charged"

insulting Faith tsk tks you should know better than to personally attack a fellow poster.  ^*&&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 12, 2020, 08:24:47 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 12, 2020, 08:21:18 PM
Just so its clear for you...I havent seen any poster here claim CB is guilty....but hes the prime suspect now and there may or may not be enough evidence to charge him...we dont know...that includes you
Yes, I would challenge Miss Taken to supply a cite of me claiming CB is guilty, but of course she won’t because there isn’t one.  It’s hilarious though that the moderator gave her abusive unsubstantiated post the thumbs up, the moderator who claims to disapprove of abusive posts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 12, 2020, 08:25:39 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 12, 2020, 08:23:33 PM

"gloaters and goaders are concerned, well Faithlilly made a post gloating that CB was never going to be charged"

insulting Faith tsk tks you should know better than to personally attack a fellow poster.  ^*&&
She doesn’t mind, it says so in her avatar, so no harm done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 12, 2020, 08:29:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 12, 2020, 08:25:39 PM
She doesn’t mind, it says so in her avatar, so no harm done.

I am offended on her behalf... so that has some count  8)--)). My post was not abusive it stated a few facts. just sit still for a few hours the bruising will ease. Best known cure for bruised ego.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 12, 2020, 08:35:59 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on November 12, 2020, 08:29:53 PM
I am offended on her behalf... so that has some count  8)--)). My post was not abusive it stated a few facts. just sit still for a few hours the bruising will ease. Best known cure for bruised ego.
Good goad, good goad, got anymore...? ^*&&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mrswah on November 12, 2020, 11:57:43 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 12, 2020, 08:21:18 PM
Just so its clear for you...I havent seen any poster here claim CB is guilty....but hes the prime suspect now and there may or may not be enough evidence to charge him...we dont know...that includes you


We certainly can't say he's guilty. My own feeling is that the German police do have some kind of  evidence against him: I see no reason for them to lie. However, they obviously don't have enough to charge him, or they would have done so by now.  He doesn't have a good record, but , at the moment, we can't say he abducted Madeleine, or was connected with her disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mrswah on November 12, 2020, 11:59:40 PM
Please could posters try to treat each other politely on this thread. It really isn't difficult to do!!

Thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 13, 2020, 01:42:02 AM
Quote from: mrswah on November 12, 2020, 11:57:43 PM

We certainly can't say he's guilty. My own feeling is that the German police do have some kind of  evidence against him: I see no reason for them to lie. However, they obviously don't have enough to charge him, or they would have done so by now.  He doesn't have a good record, but , at the moment, we can't say he abducted Madeleine, or was connected with her disappearance.

I have been saying this for a long time.

I do think that he is likely to be involved in some way because of
1)  Things that we are told he has said 
2)  Other things that have been said by (ex) friends.
3)  His sexually depraved appetite
4)  His climbing and breaking in abilities
5)  His record
6)  Videos and photos   
[ But I ask myself, "where the videos and photos planted"? ….. because The traffickers want a Patsy?.   And They want Madeleine believed dead at the hand of CB and then they can carry on unhindered in their immensely money making trafficking business, allied, I expect to blackmail and extortion]

BUT, WE JUST DON'T KNOW, so I agree with mrswah.   


As far as I am concerned at the moment, despite all the seeming pointers, CB might or might not be involved in the abduction of Madeleine.   Or he might be a patsy for The Traffickers
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 13, 2020, 05:42:33 AM
Quote from: sadie on November 13, 2020, 01:42:02 AM
I have been saying this for a long time.

I do think that he is likely to be involved in some way because of
1)  Things that we are told he has said 
2)  Other things that have been said by (ex) friends.
3)  His sexually depraved appetite
4)  His climbing and breaking in abilities
5)  His record
6)  Videos and photos   
[ But I ask myself, "where the videos and photos planted"? ….. because The traffickers want a Patsy?.   And They want Madeleine believed dead at the hand of CB and then they can carry on unhindered in their immensely money making trafficking business, allied, I expect to blackmail and extortion]

BUT, WE JUST DON'T KNOW, so I agree with mrswah.   


As far as I am concerned at the moment, despite all the seeming pointers, CB might or might not be involved in the abduction of Madeleine.   Or he might be a patsy for The Traffickers
I don't think so.  Whilst he was jailed, Brueckner asked his friend(s) to remove these items (videos specifically, and maybe computer HDDs, cameras, etc.) from one of his PdL lairs and then make it look like someone had broken into the property.  Why would he do that if the material wasn't incriminating?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 13, 2020, 05:55:52 AM
Quote from: Myster on November 13, 2020, 05:42:33 AM
I don't think so.  Whilst he was jailed, Brueckner asked his friend(s) to remove these items (videos specifically, and maybe computer HDDs, cameras, etc.) from one of his PdL lairs and then make it look like someone had broken into the property.  Why would he do that if the material wasn't incriminating?
This supposedly incriminating evidence is where, it's all bollex, dupers delight.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 13, 2020, 06:23:15 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 12, 2020, 07:37:08 PM
"gloaters and goaders" is an opinion and that should be made apparent.
Doesn't quite flow like "handbags and gladrags".(Stereophonics)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2020, 07:26:06 AM
Quote from: barrier on November 13, 2020, 06:23:15 AM
Doesn't quite flow like "handbags and gladrags".(Stereophonics)
I think it flows perfectly well actually, much better thsn “handbags and gladrags” which is a bit of a mouthful truth be told.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: mrswah on November 13, 2020, 11:26:56 AM
Quote from: Myster on November 13, 2020, 05:42:33 AM
I don't think so.  Whilst he was jailed, Brueckner asked his friend(s) to remove these items (videos specifically, and maybe computer HDDs, cameras, etc.) from one of his PdL lairs and then make it look like someone had broken into the property.  Why would he do that if the material wasn't incriminating?


I'm sure he has/had plenty to hide, and I can well believe he has committed some nasty crimes, -------we just don't know whether he had anything to do with the disappearance of Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2020, 11:31:55 AM
Quote from: mrswah on November 13, 2020, 11:26:56 AM

I'm sure he has/had plenty to hide, and I can well believe he has committed some nasty crimes, -------we just don't know whether he had anything to do with the disappearance of Madeleine.

Wolters seems to think he does and he's seen the evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 13, 2020, 11:57:38 AM
Quote from: Myster on November 13, 2020, 05:42:33 AM
I don't think so.  Whilst he was jailed, Brueckner asked his friend(s) to remove these items (videos specifically, and maybe computer HDDs, cameras, etc.) from one of his PdL lairs and then make it look like someone had broken into the property.  Why would he do that if the material wasn't incriminating?

It would be interesting to know the source of this sort of story
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 13, 2020, 01:46:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2020, 11:31:55 AM
Wolters seems to think he does and he's seen the evidence

I’ll bet you think Trump won the election too because he said so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 13, 2020, 01:49:48 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2020, 11:31:55 AM
Wolters seems to think he does and he's seen the evidence
Wolters is a cop, and you're taking his word for it.  Not a good look.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 13, 2020, 01:51:26 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 13, 2020, 01:46:46 PM
I’ll bet you think Trump won the election too because he said so.
He can still get the presidency on the path he is taking.   

I took it that this guy knows what he is talking about.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZWRhLW7Y8w
"What if a US presidential candidate refuses to concede after an election? | Van Jones"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 13, 2020, 01:55:36 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 13, 2020, 11:57:38 AM
It would be interesting to know the source of this sort of story

I read somewhere that they took advantage of him being in jail to nick his stuff. Rumours, eh?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 13, 2020, 02:02:21 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 13, 2020, 01:51:26 PM
He can still get the presidency on the path he is taking.   

I took it that this guy knows what he is talking about.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZWRhLW7Y8w
"What if a US presidential candidate refuses to concede after an election? | Van Jones"

No he can’t, he doesn’t not have the electoral college votes and no litigation will change that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2020, 02:13:25 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 13, 2020, 01:46:46 PM
I’ll bet you think Trump won the election too because he said so.

Don't be stupid...but then again..carry on
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2020, 02:15:39 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 13, 2020, 01:49:48 PM
Wolters is a cop, and you're taking his word for it.  Not a good look.

Not a good look to you..in your opinion. It isn't as simple as that but I can't be bothered to explain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2020, 02:22:57 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 13, 2020, 01:49:48 PM
Wolters is a cop, and you're taking his word for it.  Not a good look.

Have you listened to what Simon Foy said about Wolters statements...it sums up my views.
I'm getting a lot of goading but I'm not bothered...I trust my judgement implicitly.
Very strong evidence .or even proof of Maddie's murder...but not enough to prove CBs involvement.

Also investigating a group of online paedophiles....and that's why they are waiting before making anything public..

All my opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 13, 2020, 02:24:53 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 13, 2020, 02:02:21 PM
No he can’t, he doesn’t not have the electoral college votes and no litigation will change that.
As I said I took this guy at face value.    Beyond me otherwise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 13, 2020, 02:26:26 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2020, 02:15:39 PM
Not a good look to you..in your opinion. It isn't as simple as that but I can't be bothered to explain.
Fair enough.  We've probably heard it all before anyhow.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 13, 2020, 03:24:19 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2020, 02:22:57 PM
Have you listened to what Simon Foy said about Wolters statements...it sums up my views.
I'm getting a lot of goading but I'm not bothered...I trust my judgement implicitly.
Very strong evidence .or even proof of Maddie's murder...but not enough to prove CBs involvement.

Also investigating a group of online paedophiles....and that's why they are waiting before making anything public..

All my opinion

There’s no evidence that the Germans are investigating a group of online paedophiles....it would appear more lurid imaginings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2020, 03:27:49 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 13, 2020, 03:24:19 PM
There’s no evidence that the Germans are investigating a group of online paedophiles....it would appear more lurid imaginings.

They have been watching CB in online chat rooms .. perhaps on the dark web...that suggests they have been watching others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 13, 2020, 04:51:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2020, 03:27:49 PM
They have been watching CB in online chat rooms .. perhaps on the dark web...that suggests they have been watching others.

Do you have a cite ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 13, 2020, 04:52:56 PM
Must be some time ago as he's been locked up for years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2020, 05:10:50 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 13, 2020, 04:52:56 PM
Must be some time ago as he's been locked up for years.
Has he?  How many?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2020, 05:15:22 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 13, 2020, 04:51:45 PM
Do you have a cite ?

60 mins  australian documentary
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 13, 2020, 05:16:56 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 13, 2020, 05:10:50 PM
Has he?  How many?

Not sure but certainly since 2019. Why not look it up if you want to know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2020, 05:18:23 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 13, 2020, 03:24:19 PM
There’s no evidence that the Germans are investigating a group of online paedophiles....it would appear more lurid imaginings.

Theres no evidence maddie had an accident in the apartment...hasnt stopped 13 years of speculation...a book...documentary...tv shows...countless interviews..newspaper articles...fb/forum posts...Youre  a bit selective in what you consider to be imaginings
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on November 13, 2020, 05:29:37 PM
Big lad probably ended up in the waste system with no likelihood of finding him,what chance a small child.



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8946443/RAF-airman-23-vanished-night-2016-died-dustbin-lorry.html

Missing RAF airman Corrie McKeague, 23, who vanished after night out in 2016 'died in the back of dustbin lorry after climbing into Greggs industrial bin while drunk' inquest hears
Corrie McKeague, 23, disappeared in Bury St Edmund's, Suffolk, after a night out with friends in 2016 
Police spent 137 days on a £2million search operation of two waste sites but never found his body 
It is feared that he may have sheltered in a rubbish bin which was then dumped in the early hours
His mother, Nicola Urquhart, has long campaigned for a formal inquest which was opened this afternoon
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2020, 05:33:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2020, 05:18:23 PM
Theres no evidence maddie had an accident in the apartment...hasnt stopped 13 years of speculation...a book...documentary...tv shows...countless interviews..newspaper articles...fb/forum posts...Youre  a bit selective in what you consider to be imaginings
yep.  Faithlilly imagines Gerry dumped Madeleine’s body in a bin after she fell off the balcony.  And the evidence for these two imaginings is precisely...non existent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2020, 05:35:09 PM
Quote from: barrier on November 13, 2020, 05:29:37 PM
Big lad probably ended up in the waste system with no likelihood of finding him,what chance a small child.



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8946443/RAF-airman-23-vanished-night-2016-died-dustbin-lorry.html

Missing RAF airman Corrie McKeague, 23, who vanished after night out in 2016 'died in the back of dustbin lorry after climbing into Greggs industrial bin while drunk' inquest hears
Corrie McKeague, 23, disappeared in Bury St Edmund's, Suffolk, after a night out with friends in 2016 
Police spent 137 days on a £2million search operation of two waste sites but never found his body 
It is feared that he may have sheltered in a rubbish bin which was then dumped in the early hours
His mother, Nicola Urquhart, has long campaigned for a formal inquest which was opened this afternoon
you must be livid the police spent £2 million in 137 days  on looking for him though.  Makes the McCann case look like value for money.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 13, 2020, 06:33:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2020, 05:15:22 PM
60 mins  australian documentary

You are incorrect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 13, 2020, 06:38:10 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 13, 2020, 05:35:09 PM
you must be livid the police spent £2 million in 137 days  on looking for him though.  Makes the McCann case look like value for money.

Not if the outcome is zilch.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2020, 06:42:06 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 13, 2020, 06:33:42 PM
You are incorrect.

no you are...just checked ..its at two minutes into the programme. Why are you trying to disrupt and post misinformation...whats your point
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2020, 07:28:39 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 13, 2020, 05:16:56 PM
Not sure but certainly since 2019. Why not look it up if you want to know.
Hardly years then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 13, 2020, 07:34:50 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 13, 2020, 07:28:39 PM
Hardly years then.

Years means more than one year. He had served earlier terms .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2020, 08:04:20 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 13, 2020, 07:34:50 PM
Years means more than one year. He had served earlier terms .
LOL, yes 2019 was years ago I’m sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2020, 08:17:03 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 13, 2020, 06:33:42 PM
You are incorrect.
But I'm not...so whats your excuse. Are you just ignorant as to what whats going on...or are you just trying to deflect the thread.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 13, 2020, 08:22:24 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 13, 2020, 08:09:49 PM
Feel free to get worked up over trivial issues. 'tis of no consequence.

There's a lot of that going on around here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 13, 2020, 08:53:16 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2020, 08:17:03 PM
But I'm not...so whats your excuse. Are you just ignorant as to what whats going on...or are you just trying to deflect the thread.
Don't get too personal. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2020, 09:01:02 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 13, 2020, 08:53:16 PM
Don't get too personal.
Faith has been very personal.
I've provided a cite...two minutes into the doc.

She's says I'm wrong..I'm not..
Perhaps she can answer herself

She's been online..she's chose not to
Al my posts are based on facts.. faiths isnt
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 13, 2020, 09:11:37 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 13, 2020, 08:53:16 PM
Don't get too personal.
Perhaps faith could respond herself...or perhaps she can't
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 13, 2020, 09:48:21 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2020, 09:11:37 PM
Perhaps faith could respond herself...or perhaps she can't
If your replies aren't so personal I'll be able to focus on Faithlilly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 14, 2020, 02:06:10 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2020, 03:27:49 PM
They have been watching CB in online chat rooms .. perhaps on the dark web...that suggests they have been watching others.

Good thinking, Davel.

Likely you are right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 14, 2020, 05:39:48 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 13, 2020, 05:15:22 PM
60 mins  australian documentary
On YouTube there are two "60 Minutes Australia documentaries" on the McCann case that have 2020 dates.

So if there is a dispute as to whether the cite was "2 minutes in" or not depends on which one you are viewing. 
A cite should be supported by a URL so there is no argument.

The point being clarified "They have been watching CB in online chat rooms .. perhaps on the dark web...that suggests they have been watching others."

Which documentary talks about this?

Well it seems to be this one https://youtu.be/Pvqu9Wd388c?t=120

They both start differently, but the other has the same scenes about 15 seconds later.  https://youtu.be/IXsXXxRek2Q?t=135
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 14, 2020, 07:52:49 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 14, 2020, 05:39:48 AM
On YouTube there are two "60 Minutes Australia documentaries" on the McCann case that have 2020 dates.

So if there is a dispute as to whether the cite was "2 minutes in" or not depends on which one you are viewing. 
A cite should be supported by a URL so there is no argument.

The point being clarified "They have been watching CB in online chat rooms .. perhaps on the dark web...that suggests they have been watching others."

Which documentary talks about this?

Well it seems to be this one https://youtu.be/Pvqu9Wd388c?t=120

They both start differently, but the other has the same scenes about 15 seconds later.  https://youtu.be/IXsXXxRek2Q?t=135

The fact is I'm right and faiths wrong.. I think it's likely the police will want to trace the others in the conversation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 14, 2020, 10:26:52 AM
Quote from: Davel on November 14, 2020, 07:52:49 AM
The fact is I'm right and faiths wrong.. I think it's likely the police will want to trace the others in the conversation
They could try I suppose.  What will that prove?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 14, 2020, 11:37:58 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on November 14, 2020, 10:26:52 AM
They could try I suppose.  What will that prove?

Did you see all the arrests in Australia last week..what I'm saying is they may be investigating others too.....but not necessarily in relation to this crime
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 14, 2020, 03:01:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on November 14, 2020, 07:52:49 AM
The fact is I'm right and faiths wrong.. I think it's likely the police will want to trace the others in the conversation

I’d have another look at all the media mentions of a chat room if I was you. The word ‘alleged’ comes before almost every mention ie no hard evidence. The story, such as it is, seems to have come from another of Brueckner’s criminal friends, one that appears to be okay with discussing child abuse with Brueckner. Be honest, how credible do you think his testimony is ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 16, 2020, 08:32:13 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 14, 2020, 03:01:17 PM
I’d have another look at all the media mentions of a chat room if I was you. The word ‘alleged’ comes before almost every mention ie no hard evidence. The story, such as it is, seems to have come from another of Brueckner’s criminal friends, one that appears to be okay with discussing child abuse with Brueckner. Be honest, how credible do you think his testimony is ?

His true words lol
Hogwash, to be ignored.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on November 18, 2020, 10:49:48 AM
Congratulations to Heriberto on his appointment as Professor at the Camilo Jose Cela University👏
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 05, 2020, 04:43:32 PM
This is how an investigation should be done, silently and not declaring to the world a suspect until he is charged.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9021005/Suspect-66-appears-court-one-Britains-longest-unsolved-double-killings.html

Suspect, 66, appears in court over one of Britain's longest-unsolved double killings when two women were attacked 33 years ago in the 'Bedsit Murders'
David Fuller appeared at magistrates' court charged with two counts of murder
It relates to 1987 deaths of Wendy Knell and Caroline Pierce in Tunbridge Wells
Both women were sexually assaulted, beaten and strangled just months apart
Deaths became known as Bedsit murders and a huge investigation was launched
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 05, 2020, 05:24:18 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 05, 2020, 04:43:32 PM
This is how an investigation should be done, silently and not declaring to the world a suspect until he is charged.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9021005/Suspect-66-appears-court-one-Britains-longest-unsolved-double-killings.html

Suspect, 66, appears in court over one of Britain's longest-unsolved double killings when two women were attacked 33 years ago in the 'Bedsit Murders'
David Fuller appeared at magistrates' court charged with two counts of murder
It relates to 1987 deaths of Wendy Knell and Caroline Pierce in Tunbridge Wells
Both women were sexually assaulted, beaten and strangled just months apart
Deaths became known as Bedsit murders and a huge investigation was launched
Amazing that the boyfriend didn’t do it considering virtually all murders are commited by people known to be the victim and by the last person who claims they saw them
 “After spending the evening at her boyfriend's house, he dropped her home at 11pm and kissed her goodbye on the doorstep”.  I guess if this had happened in the modern eraher boyfriend would have been hung out to dry by people who find it hard to get their heads round the fact that it isn’t always the nearest and dearest what dunnit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 05, 2020, 05:36:20 PM
Fortunately for him DNA profiling had been invented by then and as police had a full profile of culprit, he would have been excluded.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 05, 2020, 05:49:21 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 05, 2020, 05:36:20 PM
Fortunately for him DNA profiling had been invented by then and as police had a full profile of culprit, he would have been excluded.
DNA? Pah!  Probably got there on a cat or something.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 05, 2020, 08:03:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 05, 2020, 05:49:21 PM
DNA? Pah!  Probably got there on a cat or something.
It could have been transferred on the back of a snail considering how slow the case has been.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 06, 2020, 10:14:52 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 05, 2020, 05:24:18 PM
Amazing that the boyfriend didn’t do it considering virtually all murders are commited by people known to be the victim and by the last person who claims they saw them
 “After spending the evening at her boyfriend's house, he dropped her home at 11pm and kissed her goodbye on the doorstep”.  I guess if this had happened in the modern eraher boyfriend would have been hung out to dry by people who find it hard to get their heads round the fact that it isn’t always the nearest and dearest what dunnit.

I wonder who these people are? I know that the statistic on child murders suggest that it's most likely someone close to them who is the culprit, but where is the evidence suggesting that murders are committed by the last person who claims they saw them?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 06, 2020, 10:20:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 06, 2020, 10:14:52 AM
I wonder who these people are? I know that the statistic on child murders suggest that it's most likely someone close to them who is the culprit, but where is the evidence suggesting that murders are committed by the last person who claims they saw them?
Statistics??  Who needs them??  I am talking about the court of public opinion, the court you see enactd on internet forums and the comments pages of the Sun where this factoid is regularly trotted out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 06, 2020, 10:32:50 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 06, 2020, 10:20:38 AM
Statistics??  Who needs them??  I am talking about the court of public opinion, the court you see enactd on internet forums and the comments pages of the Sun where this factoid is regularly trotted out.

So you are saying that people who comment on murders on forums or in newspapers say that the crime was committed "by people known to be the victim and by the last person who claims they saw them"?  I find that difficult to believe, sorry.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 06, 2020, 10:39:53 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 05, 2020, 05:24:18 PM
Amazing that the boyfriend didn’t do it considering virtually all murders are commited by people known to be the victim and by the last person who claims they saw them
 “After spending the evening at her boyfriend's house, he dropped her home at 11pm and kissed her goodbye on the doorstep”.  I guess if this had happened in the modern eraher boyfriend would have been hung out to dry by people who find it hard to get their heads round the fact that it isn’t always the nearest and dearest what dunnit.


Why not wait until the trial before passing judgement, for all you know the suspect may have been known to the victims, only a few yrs older at the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 06, 2020, 10:48:06 AM
As I've said before.. When children are harmed it's usually by someone close to them. That's because usually children are under the supervision of someone close.

It's only when they are not with a family member that th ey are vulnerable to strangers... Like being left in a holiday apartment
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 06, 2020, 11:42:42 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 06, 2020, 10:48:06 AM
As I've said before.. When children are harmed it's usually by someone close to them. That's because usually children are under the supervision of someone close.

It's only when they are not with a family member that th ey are vulnerable to strangers... Like being left in a holiday apartment

Poor Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 06, 2020, 01:07:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 06, 2020, 10:32:50 AM
So you are saying that people who comment on murders on forums or in newspapers say that the crime was committed "by people known to be the victim and by the last person who claims they saw them"?  I find that difficult to believe, sorry.
It happened in the Lindy Chamberlain case, it happened in the Ramsay case, it happened in the McCann case, it happened in the Joanna Yeates case, it's happening right now in the case of the woman who has gone missing in the Pyrenees.  I'm utterly amazed you are unaware of this phenomenon.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 06, 2020, 01:08:50 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 06, 2020, 10:39:53 AM

Why not wait until the trial before passing judgement, for all you know the suspect may have been known to the victims, only a few yrs older at the time.
Two completely unlinked women, both unlikely to be sharing the same murderous boyfriend, eh?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 07, 2020, 12:33:48 PM
Not off topic as such but just reading a piece from Do Carmo in 2017 through the medium of google translate where he says there is no deadline because they don't  know what crime was committed, this ties in with the missing person's stance by OG, so by that the limitations does not kick in until the crime is known.


https://www.dn.pt/sociedade/pedro-do-carmo-o-unico-caso-da-pj-em-que-nao-ha-respostas-6652723.html

We don't have a set deadline because we don't know what happened. If we were sure that we were facing a certain crime, we would have a deadline to respect it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 12:47:45 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 07, 2020, 12:33:48 PM
Not off topic as such but just reading a piece from Do Carmo in 2017 through the medium of google translate where he says there is no deadline because they don't  know what crime was committed, this ties in with the missing person's stance by OG, so by that the limitations does not kick in until the crime is known.


https://www.dn.pt/sociedade/pedro-do-carmo-o-unico-caso-da-pj-em-que-nao-ha-respostas-6652723.html

We don't have a set deadline because we don't know what happened. If we were sure that we were facing a certain crime, we would have a deadline to respect it.

It will be interesting if it’s true that the Portuguese still have the parents, or someone else, in the frame and the Germans insist on prosecuting Brueckner. Two perpetrators for the one crime?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 12:50:00 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 07, 2020, 12:33:48 PM
Not off topic as such but just reading a piece from Do Carmo in 2017 through the medium of google translate where he says there is no deadline because they don't  know what crime was committed, this ties in with the missing person's stance by OG, so by that the limitations does not kick in until the crime is known.


https://www.dn.pt/sociedade/pedro-do-carmo-o-unico-caso-da-pj-em-que-nao-ha-respostas-6652723.html

We don't have a set deadline because we don't know what happened. If we were sure that we were facing a certain crime, we would have a deadline to respect it.

That was three years ago
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 12:50:54 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 12:50:00 PM
That was three years ago

Wolter made the claim a few short months ago...or are you now cherrypicking his quotes too?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 07, 2020, 12:51:35 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 12:50:00 PM
That was three years ago

If you bother to read I said 2017 in my post. Still relevant today, its not been determined what crime was committed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 12:53:18 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 12:50:54 PM
Wolter made the claim a few short months ago...or are you now cherrypicking his quotes too?

Wolters never said that at all... It seems you are cherry picking parts of quotes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 12:54:02 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 07, 2020, 12:51:35 PM
If you bother to read I said 2017 in my post. Still relevant today, its not been determined what crime was committed.

Wolters says it has been.. Things have moved since 2017
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 07, 2020, 12:54:50 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 12:47:45 PM
It will be interesting if it’s true that the Portuguese still have the parents, or someone else, in the frame and the Germans insist on prosecuting Brueckner. Two perpetrators for the one crime?

Yes Martin Brunt put a question to him asking did he accept the girl was abducted to which his reply was, we don't know what happened and have to be prepared for different scenarios, OG are still clearly on board with Dame Dick recently declaring it's still  a missing persons case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 07, 2020, 12:55:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 12:54:02 PM
Wolters says it has been.. Things have moved since 2017


Dame Cressida says its not, things have moved on in a few days.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 12:58:24 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 07, 2020, 12:55:45 PM

Dame Cressida says its not, things have moved on in a few days.

Semantics and denial of reality imo.
The point is that If I'm right we will know shortly....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 07, 2020, 01:00:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 12:58:24 PM
Semantics and denial of reality imo.
The point is that If I'm right we will know shortly....

Ah! much like you claimed the ECHR thing would be done this year.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 01:01:28 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 07, 2020, 01:00:02 PM
Ah! much like you claimed the ECHR thing would be done this year.

I never claimed it would be done this year at all...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 01:29:05 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 12:53:18 PM
Wolters never said that at all... It seems you are cherry picking parts of quotes.

You are incorrect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 01:31:36 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 01:29:05 PM
You are incorrect.

No... Wolters isn't unsure what crime was committed.. It's murder unfortunately
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 07, 2020, 01:34:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 01:31:36 PM
No... Wolters isn't unsure what crime was committed.. It's murder unfortunately
Concrete evidence of murder, but can't bring charges. Probably unique.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 01:36:11 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 01:31:36 PM
No... Wolters isn't unsure what crime was committed.. It's murder unfortunately

Wolter said that the Portuguese still had the parents in the frame.

If we’re playing suspect top trump the Portuguese will trump the German’s every time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 01:40:49 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 01:36:11 PM
Wolter said that the Portuguese still had the parents in the frame.

If we’re playing suspect top trump the Portuguese will trump the German’s every time.
If you want to believe the parents are still in the frame it's up to you
I'll go with Wolters and we will soon see who is right
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 01:48:32 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 01:40:49 PM
If you want to believe the parents are still in the frame it's up to you
I'll go with Wolters and we will soon see who is right

It’s not what I believe, it’s what Wolter said and if that is the case the Wolter’s suspect will always play second fiddle.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 01:53:02 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 01:48:32 PM
It’s not what I believe, it’s what Wolter said and if that is the case the Wolter’s suspect will always play second fiddle.
There may well elements in the PJ who are so stupid and inept they still think  the parents are involved and should be seen as an embarrassment to Portugal.
I think you will also find out just how wrong you are  in the coming weeks too... The case will be decided by the evidence.. HCW is holding all the cards
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 07, 2020, 02:07:37 PM

The McCanns aren't Convicted Paedophiles and Rapists.  Brueckner will have one hell of a problem getting around that one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 02:30:50 PM
Sorry to take the off-topic thread off-topic but I keep getting a message on my laptop which states 'session timed out' when I attempt to post and something similar when I attempt to logout.  Help please!?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 02:35:35 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 02:30:50 PM
Sorry to take the off-topic thread off-topic but I keep getting a message on my laptop which states 'session timed out' when I attempt to post and something similar when I attempt to logout.  Help please!?

I've had something similar on my phone and can't post... Have to restart phone
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 07, 2020, 02:38:07 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 02:30:50 PM
Sorry to take the off-topic thread off-topic but I keep getting a message on my laptop which states 'session timed out' when I attempt to post and something similar when I attempt to logout.  Help please!?


Sorry can't help, not come across that on here before.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 07, 2020, 02:39:13 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 07, 2020, 02:07:37 PM
The McCanns aren't Convicted Paedophiles and Rapists.  Brueckner will have one hell of a problem getting around that one.

Why? how does that define guilt in the McCann case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 07, 2020, 02:41:59 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 02:30:50 PM
Sorry to take the off-topic thread off-topic but I keep getting a message on my laptop which states 'session timed out' when I attempt to post and something similar when I attempt to logout.  Help please!?

It's happening to several of us.  Try informing Admin.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 07, 2020, 02:44:46 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 02:30:50 PM
Sorry to take the off-topic thread off-topic but I keep getting a message on my laptop which states 'session timed out' when I attempt to post and something similar when I attempt to logout.  Help please!?

Do you have two JF pages on the go and have signed into both?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 07, 2020, 02:47:09 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 01:53:02 PM
There may well elements in the PJ who are so stupid and inept they still think  the parents are involved and should be seen as an embarrassment to Portugal.
I think you will also find out just how wrong in the coming weeks too... The case will be decided by the evidence.. HCW is holding all the cards

HCW says he's got cards. What they are and if they show what he claims remains to be seen. If he has definitive evidence that Madeleine McCann is dead I think he should share it with Operation Grange and her parents, however.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 02:50:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 07, 2020, 02:47:09 PM
HCW says he's got cards. What they are and if they show what he claims remains to be seen. If he has definitive evidence that Madeleine McCann is dead I think he should share it with Operation Grange and her parents, however.
He's explained why he hasnt
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 03:20:07 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 01:53:02 PM
There may well elements in the PJ who are so stupid and inept they still think  the parents are involved and should be seen as an embarrassment to Portugal.
I think you will also find out just how wrong you are  in the coming weeks too... The case will be decided by the evidence.. HCW is holding all the cards

Doesn’t matter how stupid the PJ are, if they have a suspect(s) then Wolter’s suspect is history.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 03:20:52 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 07, 2020, 02:07:37 PM
The McCanns aren't Convicted Paedophiles and Rapists.  Brueckner will have one hell of a problem getting around that one.

Nope but Brueckner doesn’t have to get around anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 03:33:46 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 03:20:07 PM
Doesn’t matter how stupid the PJ are, if they have a suspect(s) then Wolter’s suspect is history.

No it doesn't... It depends on evidence... I'm surprised you don't understand that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 03:49:35 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 03:33:46 PM
No it doesn't... It depends on evidence... I'm surprised you don't understand that

No it doesn’t. If Portugal has their own suspect(s) it’s game over for Wolter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 03:55:57 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 03:49:35 PM
No it doesn’t. If Portugal has their own suspect(s) it’s game over for Wolter.

That really is absolute nonsense... Combined with the fact that I don't see Portugal having a suspect
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 07, 2020, 04:08:10 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 03:55:57 PM
That really is absolute nonsense... Combined with the fact that I don't see Portugal having a suspect
Because there's two of them?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 04:27:01 PM
Quote from: The General on December 07, 2020, 04:08:10 PM
Because there's two of them?

I find it odd that posters think the parents are suspects in the Portuguese investigation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 07, 2020, 04:29:15 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 04:27:01 PM
I find it odd that posters think the parents are suspects in the Portuguese investigation

I think it is silly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on December 07, 2020, 04:30:36 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 04:27:01 PM
I find it odd that posters think the parents are suspects in the Portuguese investigation
I think it's foolish to rule anyone out at such an early stage.
Except Murat. He seems like a decent chap and has a solid alibi.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 04:33:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 04:27:01 PM
I find it odd that posters think the parents are suspects in the Portuguese investigation

Wolter said so....don’t you believe him?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 07, 2020, 04:37:33 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 02:50:12 PM
He's explained why he hasnt

I know from personal experience that the police in the UK do everything they can to inform the relatives themselves about a death, whether accidental or deliberate. They would never confirm it to the press until the relatives knew. Wolters has not, it seems, had the courtesy to do the same. If he has definitive evidence of Madeleine's death he is showing no regard for the feelings of her parents whatsoever. It leads me to conclude that early reports were correct, and it was an assumption.

4th June 2020
Hans Christian Wolters, from the Braunschweig Public Prosecutor's Office in Germany, said in an update on Thursday: "We are assuming that the girl is dead.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52916137
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 05:09:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 07, 2020, 04:37:33 PM
I know from personal experience that the police in the UK do everything they can to inform the relatives themselves about a death, whether accidental or deliberate. They would never confirm it to the press until the relatives knew. Wolters has not, it seems, had the courtesy to do the same. If he has definitive evidence of Madeleine's death he is showing no regard for the feelings of her parents whatsoever. It leads me to conclude that early reports were correct, and it was an assumption.

4th June 2020
Hans Christian Wolters, from the Braunschweig Public Prosecutor's Office in Germany, said in an update on Thursday: "We are assuming that the girl is dead.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52916137

From what hes said hes going to do them the courtesy of solving the disappearance of their daughter and doing them the courtesy of prosecuting the person responsible. He says he hopes they understand that by releasing the information it might help the perpertrator walk free.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 07, 2020, 05:13:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 05:09:21 PM
From what hes said hes going to do them the courtesy of solving the disappearance of their daughter and doing them the courtesy of prosecuting the person responsible. He says he hopes they understand that by releasing the information it might help the perpertrator walk free.

Would have thought this was obvious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 07, 2020, 05:17:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 05:09:21 PM
From what hes said hes going to do them the courtesy of solving the disappearance of their daughter and doing them the courtesy of prosecuting the person responsible. He says he hopes they understand that by releasing the information it might help the perpertrator walk free.

Yet he said he sent them a letter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 07, 2020, 05:35:31 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 01:36:11 PM
Wolter said that the Portuguese still had the parents in the frame.

If we’re playing suspect top trump the Portuguese will trump the German’s every time.
@)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 07, 2020, 05:36:50 PM
Quote from: The General on December 07, 2020, 04:30:36 PM
I think it's foolish to rule anyone out at such an early stage.
Except Murat. He seems like a decent chap and has a solid alibi.
Yep, Mummy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 05:38:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 07, 2020, 05:35:31 PM
@)(++(*

Do you think its  a joke..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 07, 2020, 05:39:10 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 05:38:25 PM
Do you think its  a joke..
Surely it must be?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 07, 2020, 06:28:55 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 05:09:21 PM
From what hes said hes going to do them the courtesy of solving the disappearance of their daughter and doing them the courtesy of prosecuting the person responsible. He says he hopes they understand that by releasing the information it might help the perpertrator walk free.

He hopes they understand? I think he should know whether they understand as he would if he had behaved honourably and spoken to them instead of every media outlet he could find!

I think he is working in accordance with Germany's disappearance law (Verschollenheitsgesetz):
General disappearance: 10 years from the last sign of life (5 years for persons older than 80 years)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_death#Germany

Assuming death was permissable by 2017 according to German law.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 06:52:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 07, 2020, 06:28:55 PM
He hopes they understand? I think he should know whether they understand as he would if he had behaved honourably and spoken to them instead of every media outlet he could find!

I think he is working in accordance with Germany's disappearance law (Verschollenheitsgesetz):
General disappearance: 10 years from the last sign of life (5 years for persons older than 80 years)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_death#Germany

Assuming death was permissable by 2017 according to German law.

I find your logic absurd...you seeem to be offended for the McCanns...criticies HCW....but have never said aword about amaral writing a book...laughable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 07, 2020, 07:27:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 06:52:43 PM
I find your logic absurd...you seeem to be offended for the McCanns...criticies HCW....but have never said aword about amaral writing a book...laughable

I'm questioning the behaviour of a prosecutor who has happily spoken to media people about an investigation without any sign of respect for the family of the victim. Not because the family's name happens to be McCann but because a man in his position should behave with more decency to any such family imo.

Amaral did none of that and neither did any of his colleagues.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 07:39:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 07, 2020, 07:27:52 PM
I'm questioning the behaviour of a prosecutor who has happily spoken to media people about an investigation without any sign of respect for the family of the victim. Not because the family's name happens to be McCann but because a man in his position should behave with more decency to any such family imo.

Amaral did none of that and neither did any of his colleagues.

Amaral was a disgrace imo and many others....I simply cant take your posts seriously...amaral according to SF was leaking lies to the press
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 07, 2020, 07:41:54 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 07:39:04 PM
Amaral was a disgrace imo and many others....I simply cant take your posts seriously...amaral according to SF was leaking lies to the press
Does SF have some influence over you Davel?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 07:44:07 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 07, 2020, 07:41:54 PM
Does SF have some influence over you Davel?

Funny three years ago Davel wouldn’t have believed a word Sandra said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 07:44:20 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 07, 2020, 07:41:54 PM
Does SF have some influence over you Davel?

why do you nake such a ridiculous comment?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 07:45:17 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 07:44:07 PM
Funny three years ago Davel wouldn’t have believed a word Sandra said.

Ive always beleived her...she cant help if she was being fed lies as we now know
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 07:57:57 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 07:45:17 PM
Ive always beleived her...she cant help if she was being fed lies as we now know

You believed ( i before e except after c) her when she reported stories pointing to the parent’s guilt?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 08:00:50 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 07, 2020, 07:57:57 PM
You believed ( i before e except after c) her when she reported stories pointing to the parent’s guilt?

She was telling what she had ben told...She had been fed the information..I beleived in her honesty not what she was being fed.

It's quite a monumental volta face from her
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 07, 2020, 08:02:15 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 07, 2020, 07:27:52 PM
I'm questioning the behaviour of a prosecutor who has happily spoken to media people about an investigation without any sign of respect for the family of the victim. Not because the family's name happens to be McCann but because a man in his position should behave with more decency to any such family imo.

Amaral did none of that and neither did any of his colleagues.
Is this the McCann’s sentiment?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 07, 2020, 08:03:14 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 07:44:20 PM
why do you nake such a ridiculous comment?
I've noticed something change over the years. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 08:04:34 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 07, 2020, 08:03:14 PM
I've noticed something change over the years.

Sorry Rob but I have little respect for your opinions and observations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 07, 2020, 08:06:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 08:04:34 PM
Sorry, Rob but I have little respect for your opinions and observations.
Is it rude to say "Likewise"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 08:09:27 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 07, 2020, 08:06:46 PM
Is it rude to say "Likewise"?

Abnsolutely not...but when CB is questioned...charged  tried and the evidence is revealed ....you might like others need to reappraise
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 07, 2020, 08:13:10 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 08:09:27 PM
Abnsolutely not...but when CB is questioned...charged  tried and the evidence is revealed ....you might like others need to reappraise

What was it said, I'll take a cold drink in hell before that happens,   there is a place in hell reserved for me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 08:15:37 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 07, 2020, 08:13:10 PM
What was it said, I'll take a cold drink in hell before that happens,   there is a place in hell reserved for me.

it could be judgement days of asort soon...where some will have to admit their mistakes
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 07, 2020, 08:35:45 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 07, 2020, 08:02:15 PM
Is this the McCann’s sentiment?

I'm not privy to their thoughts, I'm expressing my own and in my opinion Wolters behaved badly. Publicising his belief that a child is dead without thinking of the effect on her parents is cold and unfeeling. Especially when he seems to lack definitive evidence.

13/06/2020
In an exclusive interview, Mr Wolters confirmed that there is no forensic ­evidence to show Maddie is dead.

And despite previously saying he believes suspect Christian Bruckner killed her quickly, he said: “It was only personal opinion and speculation.”

A friend of the McCanns slammed him last night, saying: “You shouldn’t say it if you don’t know for a fact...

Mr Wolters, a state prosecutor in Braunschweig, said: “Because there is no forensic evidence there may be a little bit of hope.

“We don’t want to kill the hope and because there is no forensic evidence it may be possible. I am surprised the fact we say or I say Madeleine is dead is so important for the British people. In Germany it’s more normal we investigate a murder in such a case, so it’s not so important. It’s more normal.”...

Asked about saying Madeleine was killed quickly, he said: “That was private opinion and speculation... without facts. I said ‘I believe’ because in cases where children were kidnapped, they made a sexual crime then killed.’”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-could-still-alive-22187901
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 08:39:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 02:35:35 PM
I've had something similar on my phone and can't post... Have to restart phone

For future ref I cleared all my browsing history, cookies etc and all seems ok now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 08:41:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 07, 2020, 08:35:45 PM
I'm not privy to their thoughts, I'm expressing my own and in my opinion Wolters behaved badly. Publicising his belief that a child is dead without thinking of the effect on her parents is cold and unfeeling. Especially when he seems to lack definitive evidence.

13/06/2020
In an exclusive interview, Mr Wolters confirmed that there is no forensic ­evidence to show Maddie is dead.

And despite previously saying he believes suspect Christian Bruckner killed her quickly, he said: “It was only personal opinion and speculation.”

A friend of the McCanns slammed him last night, saying: “You shouldn’t say it if you don’t know for a fact...

Mr Wolters, a state prosecutor in Braunschweig, said: “Because there is no forensic evidence there may be a little bit of hope.

“We don’t want to kill the hope and because there is no forensic evidence it may be possible. I am surprised the fact we say or I say Madeleine is dead is so important for the British people. In Germany it’s more normal we investigate a murder in such a case, so it’s not so important. It’s more normal.”...

Asked about saying Madeleine was killed quickly, he said: “That was private opinion and speculation... without facts. I said ‘I believe’ because in cases where children were kidnapped, they made a sexual crime then killed.’”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-could-still-alive-22187901

 I'm impressed with Wolters...I think he is the best hope for.. Justice for Maddie....and thats the most important thing
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 08:43:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 07, 2020, 08:35:45 PM
I'm not privy to their thoughts, I'm expressing my own and in my opinion Wolters behaved badly. Publicising his belief that a child is dead without thinking of the effect on her parents is cold and unfeeling. Especially when he seems to lack definitive evidence.

13/06/2020
In an exclusive interview, Mr Wolters confirmed that there is no forensic ­evidence to show Maddie is dead.

And despite previously saying he believes suspect Christian Bruckner killed her quickly, he said: “It was only personal opinion and speculation.”

A friend of the McCanns slammed him last night, saying: “You shouldn’t say it if you don’t know for a fact...

Mr Wolters, a state prosecutor in Braunschweig, said: “Because there is no forensic evidence there may be a little bit of hope.

“We don’t want to kill the hope and because there is no forensic evidence it may be possible. I am surprised the fact we say or I say Madeleine is dead is so important for the British people. In Germany it’s more normal we investigate a murder in such a case, so it’s not so important. It’s more normal.”...

Asked about saying Madeleine was killed quickly, he said: “That was private opinion and speculation... without facts. I said ‘I believe’ because in cases where children were kidnapped, they made a sexual crime then killed.’”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-could-still-alive-22187901

I agree G-Unit and I doubt he has children of his own.  To my mind he came over as grandstanding. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 08:45:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 08:41:22 PM
I'm impressed with Wolters...I think he is the best hope for.. Justice for Maddie....and thats the most important thing

What exactly do you find impressive about him?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 08:47:27 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 08:43:45 PM
I agree G-Unit and I doubt he has children of his own.  To my mind he came over as grandstanding.

What I see is posters who have always denied  a stranger abduction now trying to discredit HCW. Might be more sensible to wait and see what his evidence is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 08:49:49 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 08:45:52 PM
What exactly do you find impressive about him?
not much point in my saying because you wont agree,. Based on what he has said... everything he has said is consistent. I have seen nothing to suggest he does not have concrete evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 08:56:28 PM
What i have seen is posters who for several years have claimed to be openminded to be totally closed minded to the possibility that HCW has the evidence he claims. That to me shows their claims of openmindedness was totally false.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 08:59:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 08:49:49 PM
not much point in my saying because you wont agree,. Based on what he has said... everything he has said is consistent. I have seen nothing to suggest he does not have concrete evidence

Ive seen nothing to suggest he does have concrete evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 09:02:31 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 08:56:28 PM
What i have seen is posters who for several years have claimed to be openminded to be totally closed minded to the possibility that HCW has the evidence he claims. That to me shows their claims of openmindedness was totally false.

How can anyone be open minded about someone who says they have concrete evidence of something and yet hasn't divulged what the evidence is?  Why the need to tell the public he has concrete evidence?  How has the telling assisted the case? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 09:03:37 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 08:59:02 PM
Ive seen nothing to suggest he does have concrete evidence.

he says he has..why would you not even see that as a possibility...because your mind is closed ...imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 07, 2020, 09:03:45 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 08:59:02 PM
Ive seen nothing to suggest he does have concrete evidence.
What would you expect to see exactly given that he has stated he is not yet prepared to reveal it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 07, 2020, 09:04:49 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 09:02:31 PM
How can anyone be open minded about someone who says they have concrete evidence of something and yet hasn't divulged what the evidence is?  Why the need to tell the public he has concrete evidence?  How has the telling assisted the case?

that has all been explained...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 09:26:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 07, 2020, 09:03:45 PM
What would you expect to see exactly given that he has stated he is not yet prepared to reveal it?

Why the need to tell?  How has it assisted the case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 07, 2020, 10:23:34 PM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 09:26:49 PM
Why the need to tell?  How has it assisted the case?
Answering a question with a question.  Not cool.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 08, 2020, 06:24:40 AM
Quote from: Holly Goodhead on December 07, 2020, 09:02:31 PM
How can anyone be open minded about someone who says they have concrete evidence of something and yet hasn't divulged what the evidence is?  Why the need to tell the public he has concrete evidence?  How has the telling assisted the case?
Isn’t this the correct way in which to conduct an active police investigation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 06:36:44 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 07, 2020, 09:03:37 PM
he says he has..why would you not even see that as a possibility...because your mind is closed ...imo

Wolters contradicts himself. He claims to have concrete evidence that Madeleine McCann is dead, and he also admits that he's assuming she's dead. I think you should open your mind to the inconsistencies in his pronouncements.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 07:26:09 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 06:36:44 AM
Wolters contradicts himself. He claims to have concrete evidence that Madeleine McCann is dead, and he also admits that he's assuming she's dead. I think you should open your mind to the inconsistencies in his pronouncements.
Those two statements are not contradictory.  For example Dog believers in this case hold exactly the same two beliefs.  Think about it. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 07:53:29 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 08, 2020, 07:26:09 AM
Those two statements are not contradictory.  For example Dog believers in this case hold exactly the same two beliefs.  Think about it.

No. He either has concrete evidence of death or he doesn't and it's an assumption or a belief.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 07:59:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 07:53:29 AM
No. He either has concrete evidence of death or he doesn't and it's an assumption or a belief.
I don’t think you understand the difference between evidence and proof.  Take this photo in isolation.  Imagine you’ve never seen it before, and only know that it was taken of a missing man, some time during the 60s in Vietnam.  It’s concrete evidence of death though it shows him alive.  It doesn’t prove he is dead.
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/187110559491049081/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2020, 08:10:19 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 06:36:44 AM
Wolters contradicts himself. He claims to have concrete evidence that Madeleine McCann is dead, and he also admits that he's assuming she's dead. I think you should open your mind to the inconsistencies in his pronouncements.

There is concrete evidence Rui Pedro is dead but no proof. It is assumed he died.

That's real life... Not an opinion..... which proves you wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on December 08, 2020, 08:17:38 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 07, 2020, 08:06:46 PM
Is it rude to say "Likewise"?

davel used to go on for years about how there was no evidence that maddie had been harmed now he says she is most likley dead??
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 08, 2020, 08:21:26 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 08, 2020, 08:10:19 AM
There is concrete evidence Rui Pedro is dead but no proof. It is assumed he died.

That's real life... Not an opinion..... which proves you wrong
Is this who you are talking about?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rui_Pedro_Teixeira_Mendon%C3%A7a#:~:text=Mendon%C3%A7a%20was%2011%20years%20old,declared%20legally%20dead%20in%202019.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2020, 09:09:06 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 08, 2020, 08:21:26 AM
Is this who you are talking about?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rui_Pedro_Teixeira_Mendon%C3%A7a#:~:text=Mendon%C3%A7a%20was%2011%20years%20old,declared%20legally%20dead%20in%202019.

The information is in the article. Abducted in Portugal... Images found of abuse... Presumed dead
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 09:12:21 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 08, 2020, 08:10:19 AM
There is concrete evidence Rui Pedro is dead but no proof. It is assumed he died.

That's real life... Not an opinion..... which proves you wrong

There is concrete evidence that he was in the hands of members of the Wonderland Club and was abused by them. That isn't concrete evidence that he died.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2020, 09:15:50 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 09:12:21 AM
There is concrete evidence that he was in the hands of members of the Wonderland Club and was abused by them. That isn't concrete evidence that he died.
Thats right.. It's assumed he's dead based on the imaged
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 09:25:19 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 09:12:21 AM
There is concrete evidence that he was in the hands of members of the Wonderland Club and was abused by them. That isn't concrete evidence that he died.
Give us an example of something you would consider to be concrete evidence of death.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 08, 2020, 09:49:59 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 08, 2020, 09:25:19 AM
Give us an example of something you would consider to be concrete evidence of death.
His head on a plate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2020, 09:51:46 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 08, 2020, 09:49:59 AM
His head on a plate.

Not very nice
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 09:52:24 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 08, 2020, 09:49:59 AM
His head on a plate.
No Rob, that would be proof.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 08, 2020, 10:01:55 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 08, 2020, 09:52:24 AM
No Rob, that would be proof.
I've often wondered what is the difference between evidence and proof.  Proof is sufficient evidence that there is only one outcome to consider.  Multiple pieces of evidence lead to proof.
So a head on a plate is more than enough evidence hence proof. 

A finger in an envelop may be evidence of torture but not proof of death.  Any vital organ would be proof, provided it was DNA tested and a match.   E.g. a heart in jar preserved in formalin (evidence).  It could be a pig heart (if human then that's evidence), get it DNA tested (evidence) and if a match - combined evidence becomes proof.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 10:22:42 AM
It's ironic that the same people who lambast HCW for claiming he has evidence of Madeleine's death don't have any problem whatsoever with Amaral claiming the same. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 11:16:55 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 08, 2020, 10:22:42 AM
It's ironic that the same people who lambast HCW for claiming he has evidence of Madeleine's death don't have any problem whatsoever with Amaral claiming the same.

The difference being that the PJ took the next step and questioned their suspects after making them arguidos in accordance with Portuguese law. No unconfirmed accusations were made in the media before that happened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 08, 2020, 11:21:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 11:16:55 AM
The difference being that the PJ took the next step and questioned their suspects after making them arguidos in accordance with Portuguese law. No unconfirmed accusations were made in the media before that happened.

Portuguese Law at the time, which changed eight days later.

And what a waste of time that was.  Arguidos are not obliged to answer questions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 11:30:37 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 11:16:55 AM
The difference being that the PJ took the next step and questioned their suspects after making them arguidos in accordance with Portuguese law. No unconfirmed accusations were made in the media before that happened.
You obviously have a very short memory.  In any case it's completely irrelevant.  You accept evidence of death from the Portuguese apparently unconditionally.  Pourquoi?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 05:07:33 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 08, 2020, 11:30:37 AM
You obviously have a very short memory.  In any case it's completely irrelevant.  You accept evidence of death from the Portuguese apparently unconditionally.  Pourquoi?

My memory's fine. Do you have a cite for the PJ claiming they had suspects and concrete evidence that they killed the child before any action was taken against them?

I was able to examine the evidence the PJ gathered and reach my own conclusions. I certainly didn't take their word for anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 05:13:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 05:07:33 PM
My memory's fine. Do you have a cite for the PJ claiming they had suspects and concrete evidence that they killed the child before any action was taken against them?

I was able to examine the evidence the PJ gathered and reach my own conclusions. I certainly didn't take their word for anything.
The papers were full of leaks from the PJ in the Summer of 2007 that made it clear the McCanns were their suspects, the results of the dog alerts etc.  Regardless of that did the PJ have concrete evidence of Madeleine’s death at any point in your view?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 05:22:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 08, 2020, 05:13:25 PM
The papers were full of leaks from the PJ in the Summer of 2007 that made it clear the McCanns were their suspects, the results of the dog alerts etc.  Regardless of that did the PJ have concrete evidence of Madeleine’s death at any point in your view?

Alleged leaks are one thing, identified spokespersons another.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 05:23:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 05:22:25 PM
Alleged leaks are one thing, identified spokespersons another.
Makes no difference but allows you to avoid the question I asked you which I sahll ask again: in your opinion did the PJ have concrete evidence of Madeleine’s death?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 06:08:28 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 08, 2020, 05:23:45 PM
Makes no difference but allows you to avoid the question I asked you which I sahll ask again: in your opinion did the PJ have concrete evidence of Madeleine’s death?

There is a huge difference between alleged leaks and public claims by a member of the authorities. I don't think the PJ ever claimed to have concrete evidence of Madeleine's death, whatever 'concrete' means.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2020, 06:13:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 06:08:28 PM
There is a huge difference between alleged leaks and public claims by a member of the authorities. I don't think the PJ ever claimed to have concrete evidence of Madeleine's death, whatever 'concrete' means.

That's because they never had it... HcW may well have such evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 08, 2020, 06:19:15 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 06:08:28 PM
There is a huge difference between alleged leaks and public claims by a member of the authorities. I don't think the PJ ever claimed to have concrete evidence of Madeleine's death, whatever 'concrete' means.

Didn't Amaral state it as a fact?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 07:21:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 06:08:28 PM
There is a huge difference between alleged leaks and public claims by a member of the authorities. I don't think the PJ ever claimed to have concrete evidence of Madeleine's death, whatever 'concrete' means.
Concrete means solid, hard to refute, not easily dismissed.  Amaral certainly believes he has concrete evidence of Madeleine’s death.  He was once part of the PJ, indeed we’re always being told his book was only repeating the views of the investigation.  So, once more I ask: in your opinion did the PJ have concrete evidence of Madeleine’s death in your view?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 07:41:58 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 08, 2020, 06:13:24 PM
That's because they never had it... HcW may well have such evidence

There's no room for 'may', he has to have it, or he will be guilty of lying.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 07:43:26 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 08, 2020, 06:19:15 PM
Didn't Amaral state it as a fact?

In public, when he was a serving police officer? Not to my knowledge.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2020, 07:48:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 07:41:58 PM
There's no room for 'may', he has to have it, or he will be guilty of lying.

I dont see him lying so he must have it...thats that sorted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 07:54:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 08, 2020, 07:48:19 PM
I dont see him lying so he must have it...thats that sorted

I hope your belief in him is rewarded. I'll wait and see what he's got; if it's ever revealed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2020, 07:56:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 07:54:45 PM
I hope your belief in him is rewarded. I'll wait and see what he's got; if it's ever revealed.

I dont believe he would lie..I find it strange you think he would
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 07:58:50 PM
Why on earth would he lie?  Makes no sense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 08, 2020, 08:05:11 PM
It is strange how those that thought Madeleine had died way back in 2007 were pilloried and accused of being trolls, harming the search for the girl etc, now we have a German prosecutor telling us he believes she is dead and has the evidence that would have the brit public agree with it, and is  some one to be feted. Go figure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2020, 08:07:37 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 08, 2020, 08:05:11 PM
It is strange how those that thought Madeleine had died way back in 2007 were pilloried and accused of being trolls, harming the search for the girl etc, now we have a German prosecutor telling us he believes she is dead and has the evidence that would have the brit public agree with it, and is  some one to be feted. Go figure.
13 years have passed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 08:10:29 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 08, 2020, 08:05:11 PM
It is strange how those that thought Madeleine had died way back in 2007 were pilloried and accused of being trolls, harming the search for the girl etc, now we have a German prosecutor telling us he believes she is dead and has the evidence that would have the brit public agree with it, and is  some one to be feted. Go figure.
Equally it is strange that those who were convinced Madeleine died in 2007 simply won’t countenance the idea that an investigation has uncovered concrete evidence to support their belief.  Go figure indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 08:48:35 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 08, 2020, 07:56:30 PM
I dont believe he would lie..I find it strange you think he would

Nevertheless you were cautious enough to say he 'may' have the evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 08:49:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 08:48:35 PM
Nevertheless you were cautious enough to say he 'may' have the evidence.
no he didn’t.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 08, 2020, 08:52:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 08:48:35 PM
Nevertheless you were cautious enough to say he 'may' have the evidence.

“ HcW may well have such evidence” Davel

Nothing ‘concrete’ there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 08:53:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 08, 2020, 08:10:29 PM
Equally it is strange that those who were convinced Madeleine died in 2007 simply won’t countenance the idea that an investigation has uncovered concrete evidence to support their belief.  Go figure indeed.

There are people who are quick to believe anything which supports their own opinions. There are others who prefer to examine the evidence underlying claims before accepting statements being made. For me, that applies to any statements whether they agree or disagree with my own opinions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2020, 08:59:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 08:53:49 PM
There are people who are quick to believe anything which supports their own opinions. There are others who prefer to examine the evidence underlying claims before accepting statements being made. For me, that applies to any statements whether they agree or disagree with my own opinions.

Like your belief  in the twice translated statements ..you haven't  even heard the evidence from HCW but you have dismissed  it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 09:11:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 08:53:49 PM
There are people who are quick to believe anything which supports their own opinions. There are others who prefer to examine the evidence underlying claims before accepting statements being made. For me, that applies to any statements whether they agree or disagree with my own opinions.
Yes dear, we know you think you’re rather superior in the critical thinking department  to the rest of us riff-raff but I think that’s simply rude, arrogant and inaccurate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 09:36:26 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 08, 2020, 08:59:22 PM
Like your belief  in the twice translated statements ..you haven't  even heard the evidence from HCW but you have dismissed  it

I haven't dismissed it at all. I've criticised the claims for varying from 'concrete' to 'assumption', but I can't dismiss something if I don't know what it is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 08, 2020, 09:42:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 09:36:26 PM
I haven't dismissed it at all. I've criticised the claims for varying from 'concrete' to 'assumption', but I can't dismiss something if I don't know what it is.

Concrete evidence is not proof... We will see relatively soon. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 10:03:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 09:36:26 PM
I haven't dismissed it at all. I've criticised the claims for varying from 'concrete' to 'assumption', but I can't dismiss something if I don't know what it is.
Do you accept that it is entirely possible that HCW has concrete evidence that Madeleine was murdered and that CB was involved?  And that his repeated insistence that this is so without any attempt by his superiors to shut him up or dismiss him from the investigation is evidence that he is not just making this up for self-aggrandisement or attention?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 10:52:24 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 08, 2020, 10:03:09 PM
Do you accept that it is entirely possible that HCW has concrete evidence that Madeleine was murdered and that CB was involved?  And that his repeated insistence that this is so without any attempt by his superiors to shut him up or dismiss him from the investigation is evidence that he is not just making this up for self-aggrandisement or attention?

Anything's possible. He claims to be able to say things in Germany that wouldn't be acceptable in the UK or Portugal, and maybe that's true.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 08, 2020, 11:00:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 10:52:24 PM
Anything's possible. He claims to be able to say things in Germany that wouldn't be acceptable in the UK or Portugal, and maybe that's true.
Admittedly I don’t have you superior intellect or critical thinking abilities but I am unable to come up with any logical reason for Wolters to be lying to the general public about the evidence he claims he has, therefore until it’s revealed that he is simply a self-aggrandising narcissist lying little plonker I will continue to give him the benefit of the doubt. I suppose this makes me a sheeple with borderline dementia as far as some on this forum are concerned but there’s little I can do about that, it’s my age and gender you see, not to mention the fact that I worship the McCanns and fully approve of child neglect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 11:38:12 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 08, 2020, 11:00:31 PM
Admittedly I don’t have you superior intellect or critical thinking abilities but I am unable to come up with any logical reason for Wolters to be lying to the general public about the evidence he claims he has, therefore until it’s revealed that he is simply a self-aggrandising narcissist lying little plonker I will continue to give him the benefit of the doubt. I suppose this makes me a sheeple with borderline dementia as far as some on this forum are concerned but there’s little I can do about that, it’s my age and gender you see, not to mention the fact that I worship the McCanns and fully approve of child neglect.

Are you OK? You seem to be getting wound up, but not by anything I've said. In fact most of them were dreamed up and posted by you imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 12, 2020, 08:43:56 PM
Wishing everyone a happy and safe festive season.💫 We are off to the coast for the annual six-week summer break.🐬
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on December 12, 2020, 08:54:02 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 12, 2020, 08:43:56 PM
Wishing everyone a happy and safe festive season.💫 We are off to the coast for the annual six-week summer break.🐬

And the same to you and your family.
A safe and blessed Christmas .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 12, 2020, 09:00:25 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 12, 2020, 08:43:56 PM
Wishing everyone a happy and safe festive season.💫 We are off to the coast for the annual six-week summer break.🐬

It's freezing and peeing down here, so thanks a bunch.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 12, 2020, 09:12:38 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 12, 2020, 09:00:25 PM
It's freezing and peeing down here, so thanks a bunch.
I wish I could bring you here, Eleanor. Our summer season is beautiful. We are however, experiencing a second Covid outbreak. No hard lockdown though, because our economy is too vulnerable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 12, 2020, 09:23:34 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 12, 2020, 09:12:38 PM
I wish I could bring you here, Eleanor. Our summer season is beautiful. We are however, experiencing a second Covid outbreak. No hard lockdown though, because our economy is too vulnerable.

Everything is Lockdown here.  But I have no idea about The Economy.

Have a lovely Christmas.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 12, 2020, 10:36:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 08, 2020, 11:38:12 PM
Are you OK? You seem to be getting wound up, but not by anything I've said. In fact most of them were dreamed up and posted by you imo.
Only just seen this patronising little goad.  I’m fine thanks, not remotely wound up, just having a little tongue-in-cheek riff on some sceptic themes, you of course wouldn’t recognise any of them, but others I’m sure know what I’m on about. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 12, 2020, 11:09:06 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 12, 2020, 08:43:56 PM
Wishing everyone a happy and safe festive season.💫 We are off to the coast for the annual six-week summer break.🐬

Thanks Anthro.   Have a lovely holiday and a super Christmas.  South Africa sounds wonderful from all I have read.

We shall miss you.  Take care.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 13, 2020, 12:40:18 AM
Quote from: Anthro on December 12, 2020, 08:43:56 PM
Wishing everyone a happy and safe festive season.💫 We are off to the coast for the annual six-week summer break.🐬

Have a great time, Anthro.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 13, 2020, 10:14:43 PM
Well worth a watch of a unique and beautiful area of the UK;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000qf0c/the-misadventures-of-romesh-ranganathan-christmas-the-hebrides
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 13, 2020, 10:27:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 13, 2020, 10:14:43 PM
Well worth a watch of a unique and beautiful area of the UK;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000qf0c/the-misadventures-of-romesh-ranganathan-christmas-the-hebrides
Only works in the UK.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 13, 2020, 11:10:42 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 13, 2020, 10:27:19 PM
Only works in the UK.

That's a shame. Google 'Outer Hebrides'. I lived there for two years and it's beautiful and very remote, and, as the guy says, nothing like the rest of Scotland or the UK. Different culture and language altogether.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 19, 2020, 03:52:52 PM
Just a reminder there are others missing with out it seems the amount of investigation others have.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9069469/Claudia-Lawrences-mother-reveals-fells-forgotten-police.html


'I have been forgotten by the police’: Agony for Claudia Lawrence’s mother as she faces 11th Christmas without her missing daughter
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2020, 04:13:35 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 19, 2020, 03:52:52 PM
Just a reminder there are others missing with out it seems the amount of investigation others have.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9069469/Claudia-Lawrences-mother-reveals-fells-forgotten-police.html


'I have been forgotten by the police’: Agony for Claudia Lawrence’s mother as she faces 11th Christmas without her missing daughter

Perhaps there just aren't any more leads.  It seems some posters object to an on-going investigation and object to no investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 19, 2020, 04:16:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 19, 2020, 04:13:35 PM
Perhaps there just aren't any more leads. It seems some posters object to an on-going investigation and object to no investigation.

Who are those "some posters" then ? I merely showed that at least one other mother and dare say also K Needham will be of the same mind they seem to have been forgotten.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2020, 04:18:34 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 19, 2020, 04:13:35 PM
Perhaps there just aren't any more leads.  It seems some posters object to an on-going investigation and object to no investigation.

They have an unmatched dna profile from a fag butt in her car.

They should start testing everyone in the UK for a match.

That might only cost a few hundred million at a guess.

Maybe they should be doing that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 19, 2020, 04:20:42 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2020, 04:18:34 PM
They have an unmatched dna profile from a fag butt in her car.

They should start testing everyone in the UK for a match.

That might only cost a few hundred million at a guess.

Maybe they should be doing that.


If they want to vaccinate everyone then a simple DNA test shouldn't be out of the question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2020, 04:23:40 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 19, 2020, 04:16:17 PM
Who are those "some posters" then ? I merely showed that at least one other mother and dare say also K Needham will be of the same mind they seem to have been forgotten.

You posted...



Just a reminder there are others missing with out it seems the amount of investigation others have
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 19, 2020, 04:25:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on December 19, 2020, 04:23:40 PM
You posted...



Just a reminder there are others missing with out it seems the amount of investigation others have

Is that an objection ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2020, 04:26:06 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 19, 2020, 04:20:42 PM

If they want to vaccinate everyone then a simple DNA test shouldn't be out of the question.

Yep, then put us all on a DNA database, start tracing historic cases & there could be thousands of crimes solved and offenders brought to justice.

Sounds quite simple really.

Costly, but worth it surely?



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 19, 2020, 04:31:32 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2020, 04:26:06 PM
Yep, then put us all on a DNA database, start tracing historic cases & there could be thousands of crimes solved and offenders brought to justice.

Sounds quite simple really.

Costly, but worth it surely?

Virus cost's seem unlimited, tag it onto that. All over 16 are issued with a NI number so we're all on a record of some type anyway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2020, 04:39:42 PM

I think hospitals should be obtaining DNA samples of all children at birth & adding them to the database indefinitely for use in future cases. New-born babies should be implanted with a GPS tracker & have 3 numbers tattooed on their heads.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 04:50:09 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2020, 04:39:42 PM
I think hospitals should be obtaining DNA samples of all children at birth & adding them to the database indefinitely for use in future cases. New-born babies should be implanted with a GPS tracker & have 3 numbers tattooed on their heads.

Do you think that their Race and Religion should be recorded as well?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2020, 04:52:30 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 19, 2020, 04:31:32 PM
Virus cost's seem unlimited, tag it onto that. All over 16 are issued with a NI number so we're all on a record of some type anyway.

There's a new variant of Covid now.

I see a new tier 4 has just been introduced & the furlough scheme has been extended until April.

So yes, there is an endless money pot so no excuses, & we can all expect to be in and out of lockdown until Summer & probably beyond, plus, if you own a small business, bankrupt in 2021.

Happy new year!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2020, 04:53:41 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 04:50:09 PM
Do you think that their Race and Religion should be recorded as well?

Race yes, but religion I'm not sure as it is interchangeable, a bit like gender is nowadays, much to my confusion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 19, 2020, 05:04:32 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2020, 04:39:42 PM
I think hospitals should be obtaining DNA samples of all children at birth & adding them to the database indefinitely for use in future cases. New-born babies should be implanted with a GPS tracker & have 3 numbers tattooed on their heads.

Blood samples from all new-borns in UK have been collected since early 60's, maybe even earlier, though not for DNA purposes.
It would only takes a change in the law and a few million pounds to create a DNA database from them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 05:06:04 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2020, 04:53:41 PM
Race yes, but religion I'm not sure as it is interchangeable, a bit like gender is nowadays, much to my confusion.

One wonders what Gender you might be.  Probably indeterminate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 19, 2020, 05:08:31 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 05:06:04 PM
One wonders what Gender you might be.  Probably indeterminate.

They're bloody good fisher's, nets you every time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 05:14:33 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 19, 2020, 05:08:31 PM
They're bloody good fisher's, nets you every time.

What has Fishing got to do with Spammy?  Spammy is having fun at the moment because of the attention.  And I felt a bit sorry for him/her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2020, 05:27:10 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2020, 04:26:06 PM
Yep, then put us all on a DNA database, start tracing historic cases & there could be thousands of crimes solved and offenders brought to justice.

Sounds quite simple really.

Costly, but worth it surely?
Just start taking dna samples at birth and injecting everyone with a tracking device and monitoring everyone’s whereabouts at every time, sorted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2020, 05:28:32 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2020, 04:39:42 PM
I think hospitals should be obtaining DNA samples of all children at birth & adding them to the database indefinitely for use in future cases. New-born babies should be implanted with a GPS tracker & have 3 numbers tattooed on their heads.
Ah I see you already suggested it.  Yes, let’s embrace 1984 entirely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2020, 05:29:32 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2020, 04:52:30 PM
There's a new variant of Covid now.

I see a new tier 4 has just been introduced & the furlough scheme has been extended until April.

So yes, there is an endless money pot so no excuses, & we can all expect to be in and out of lockdown until Summer & probably beyond, plus, if you own a small business, bankrupt in 2021.

Happy new year!
I have a small business and I’m unlikely to go bankrupt in 2021.  Thanks Rishi!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 19, 2020, 05:30:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 04:50:09 PM
Do you think that their Race and Religion should be recorded as well?
Photographed and fingerprinted at the same time to save money in the long run. OK, the vaccination rate may suffer a bit, but who cares.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 19, 2020, 05:32:35 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 19, 2020, 05:04:32 PM
Blood samples from all new-borns in UK have been collected since early 60's, maybe even earlier, though not for DNA purposes.
It would only takes a change in the law and a few million pounds to create a DNA database from them.
It would come into an effective zone in about 20 -30 years time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 19, 2020, 05:33:16 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 05:06:04 PM
One wonders what Gender you might be.  Probably indeterminate.
That is below the belt!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 19, 2020, 05:35:20 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 19, 2020, 05:29:32 PM
I have a small business and I’m unlikely to go bankrupt in 2021.  Thanks Rishi!
Are you in funeral services, or into making coffins?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 19, 2020, 05:38:26 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 19, 2020, 05:32:35 PM
It would come into an effective zone in about 20 -30 years time.
You could test the samples retrospectively.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 05:39:50 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 19, 2020, 05:29:32 PM
I have a small business and I’m unlikely to go bankrupt in 2021.  Thanks Rishi!

I am very pleased to hear that.  I have worried a bit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 05:41:31 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 19, 2020, 05:30:30 PM
Photographed and fingerprinted at the same time to save money in the long run. OK, the vaccination rate may suffer a bit, but who cares.

I care.  How do you think The Nazis got away with so much horror?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 19, 2020, 05:42:59 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 19, 2020, 04:39:42 PM
I think hospitals should be obtaining DNA samples of all children at birth & adding them to the database indefinitely for use in future cases. New-born babies should be implanted with a GPS tracker & have 3 numbers tattooed on their heads.

UGH !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 05:43:44 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 19, 2020, 05:33:16 PM
That is below the belt!

You think?  I thought Indeterminate Gender was the way to go.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 05:44:34 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 19, 2020, 05:35:20 PM
Are you in funeral services, or into making coffins?

That's a bit below the belt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2020, 05:50:15 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 05:41:31 PM
I care.  How do you think The Nazis got away with so much horror?
Why do you think Spammy is such a fan of the idea?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 05:54:44 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 19, 2020, 05:50:15 PM
Why do you think Spammy is such a fan of the idea?

Spammy isn't.  Spammy isn't a fan of anything.  Just trying to wind everyone up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 19, 2020, 06:36:00 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 05:54:44 PM
Spammy isn't.  Spammy isn't a fan of anything.  Just trying to wind everyone up.

Works with you everytime.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2020, 06:37:18 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 05:54:44 PM
Spammy isn't.  Spammy isn't a fan of anything.  Just trying to wind everyone up.
bless him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2020, 06:38:25 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 19, 2020, 06:36:00 PM
Works with you everytime.

You may have noticed I rarely comment on any of his posts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 06:38:50 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 19, 2020, 06:36:00 PM
Works with you everytime.

I know what you are doing and why.  But it isn't important, at least not to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 19, 2020, 08:27:56 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 19, 2020, 05:35:20 PM
Are you in funeral services, or into making coffins?
No, you’re thinking of Slartibartibum Slartibartfast
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 19, 2020, 08:52:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 19, 2020, 08:27:56 PM
No, you’re thinking of Slartibartibum
That might explain why he isn't here that often - run off his feet making and sell coffins.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 20, 2020, 09:23:52 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 19, 2020, 06:38:50 PM
I know what you are doing and why.  But it isn't important, at least not to me.

Good, that's that cleared up. May all your troubles be big ones.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 20, 2020, 09:30:02 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 20, 2020, 09:23:52 AM
Good, that's that cleared up. May all your troubles be big ones.
Nasty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 20, 2020, 09:39:14 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 20, 2020, 09:30:02 AM
Nasty.

Rock on tommy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 20, 2020, 10:32:29 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 20, 2020, 09:39:14 AM
Rock on tommy.
May the Bluebird of Happiness shit on your shoes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 23, 2020, 12:45:28 PM
HAPPY CHRISTMAS TO YOU ALL
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 23, 2020, 12:48:53 PM
Quote from: Lace on December 23, 2020, 12:45:28 PM
HAPPY CHRISTMAS TO YOU ALL

And to you Lace. Wishing you health and happiness in equal proportions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 23, 2020, 01:31:01 PM
Quote from: Lace on December 23, 2020, 12:45:28 PM
HAPPY CHRISTMAS TO YOU ALL
Merry Christmas Lace, have a good one x
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on December 23, 2020, 05:31:18 PM
Have a peaceful & healthy Christmas, everyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 23, 2020, 05:58:14 PM
May you all be blessed. Although most of our beaches are closed until 4 January, we are most fortunate to have this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 23, 2020, 08:17:42 PM
Bah Humbug.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 23, 2020, 09:13:00 PM
Merry Christmas to you all.  I'm not that big on Christmas myself, but I know it seems important to go with the flow or else someone will feel as if they are missing out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 23, 2020, 10:44:06 PM
Merry Christmas everyone.  Have as good a time as possible with present restrictions
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on December 24, 2020, 06:32:03 AM
Yes, a Merry Christmas and a Covid-free New Year to one and all.

Hope you get some decent presents, unlike me last year - a glow-in-the-dark loo roll, a 1960's dried-up Parker ballpoint which a relative had discovered at the back of a drawer, and a box of chocolate-covered Brazil Nuts with a 2015 use-by date.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 24, 2020, 08:36:46 AM

I am waiting until Christmas Day.  I will be here, ever faithful while everyone around me recovers from a Christmas Eve Hangover.  It's what they do in Brittany.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 24, 2020, 10:09:41 AM
(https://dm0qx8t0i9gc9.cloudfront.net/watermarks/image/rDtN98Qoishumwih/happy-christmas-day-wallpaper_zJPntmFu_SB_PM.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 24, 2020, 10:16:31 AM

I shall be watching Norad tonight.  I always do.  It will be starting shortly, although not sure where.  Somewhere near Rob.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 24, 2020, 11:13:26 AM

Santa is off on his travels.  Somewhere over Russia, although I'm not sure how that works globally.

Rudolph The Red Nosed Reindeer is once again leading the pack.  He must be getting on a bit now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 24, 2020, 01:52:18 PM

Ah Ha.  Santa is heading for Alice Springs.  It must be Christmas in Australia.  Happy Christmas, Rob.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 24, 2020, 06:00:46 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 24, 2020, 01:52:18 PM
Ah Ha.  Santa is heading for Alice Springs.  It must be Christmas in Australia.  Happy Christmas, Rob.
Thanks to you Eleanor. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 24, 2020, 06:19:55 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 24, 2020, 06:00:46 PM
Thanks to you Eleanor.

It is Christmas Morning for you.  Isn't that lovely.  Me too a bit later.  All around The World.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 24, 2020, 06:34:32 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 24, 2020, 06:19:55 PM
It is Christmas Morning for you.  Isn't that lovely.  Me too a bit later.  All around The World.
I got up and my cat wasn't beside me.  I called for her outside, and she came back in and now is asleep on the cushion I rest my arm on. The thought of losing her is my biggest fear.  How will I cope?

We talk to each other, she has a sort of sign language, and I use the same language to talk back to her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 24, 2020, 07:15:37 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 24, 2020, 06:34:32 PM
I got up and my cat wasn't beside me.  I called for her outside, and she came back in and now is asleep on the cushion I rest my arm on. The thought of losing her is my biggest fear.  How will I cope?

We talk to each other, she has a sort of sign language, and I use the same language to talk back to her.

Really?  I tell the Rotten Little Shit to pee outside but he completely ignores me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: puglove on December 24, 2020, 07:33:37 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on December 24, 2020, 06:34:32 PM
I got up and my cat wasn't beside me.  I called for her outside, and she came back in and now is asleep on the cushion I rest my arm on. The thought of losing her is my biggest fear.  How will I cope?

We talk to each other, she has a sort of sign language, and I use the same language to talk back to her.

I love all of my animals, but one is especially dear to me. He's an old lad now, and a pug (so not the healthiest of dogs) and I dread the thought of life without him, when he's gone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 24, 2020, 07:53:22 PM
Quote from: puglove on December 24, 2020, 07:33:37 PM
I love all of my animals, but one is especially dear to me. He's an old lad now, and a pug (so not the healthiest of dogs) and I dread the thought of life without him, when he's gone.

It’s awful losing a beloved pet especially if you have had to have them PTS but that’s the tragedy, we will almost always be left mourning them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 24, 2020, 08:17:34 PM
I've shared most of my life with cats and found that the solution to loss is to have several of different ages so that I'm never without at least one. Given my age, I'm not sure I will share my home with any new ones
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 24, 2020, 08:23:22 PM
I bought my son 4 goldfish and one developed some sort of fungal infection. Flushing it down the toilet was not an option as it was in my day. We had a small tank which we used as an isolation tank and nursed it back to health over two months.
With cats dogs.. everything comes at a price..the love and affection they give you has to be paid for when you lose them. It's attachment and a source of suffering
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: puglove on December 24, 2020, 08:23:31 PM
Quote from: Myster on December 24, 2020, 06:32:03 AM
Yes, a Merry Christmas and a Covid-free New Year to one and all.

Hope you get some decent presents, unlike me last year - a glow-in-the-dark loo roll, a 1960's dried-up Parker ballpoint which a relative had discovered at the back of a drawer, and a box of chocolate-covered Brazil Nuts with a 2015 use-by date.

I got a Ladycare fannymagnet because I'm such a moany old boiler.

 8(8-))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 24, 2020, 08:27:17 PM
I've got a new phone..it's really quite good. It's not actually new it's my son's old one . I bought him the latest IPhone and I've got his old one
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 24, 2020, 08:28:23 PM
My Christmas has been ruined since my next door neighbour announced they’re getting a puppy.  Great, just what I needed in my life.  Another yappy dog within 100 metres of my house bringing the total to 5.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 24, 2020, 08:37:57 PM
You have my sympathy. My late mother in law lived next door to a pack of yappy dogs who ruined her later  life.
Fortunately I live in  a dog-free area at present.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 24, 2020, 08:42:28 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 24, 2020, 08:37:57 PM
You have my sympathy. My late mother in law lived next door to a pack of yappy dogs who ruined her later  life.
Fortunately I live in  a dog-free area at present.

It's inconsiderate people who are the problem who care only about themselves and not others
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 24, 2020, 08:44:42 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 24, 2020, 08:37:57 PM
You have my sympathy. My late mother in law lived next door to a pack of yappy dogs who ruined her later  life.
Fortunately I live in  a dog-free area at present.
My dream is to live a mile from the nearest other house in any direction.  Neighbours and their DIY and their screaming children and their dogs are the bane of my life. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on December 24, 2020, 08:51:13 PM
Wishing everyone a happy Christmas .
Very frosty here ...maybe a White Christmas?

So much is already so different to our traditional family celebration both tonight and tomorrow that a White Christmas would be lovely.
A peaceful and happy Christmas to all.xx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 24, 2020, 08:53:57 PM
Quote from: Erngath on December 24, 2020, 08:51:13 PM
Wishing everyone a happy Christmas .
Very frosty here ...maybe a White Christmas?

So much is already so different to our traditional family celebration both tonight and tomorrow that a White Christmas would be lovely.
A peaceful and happy Christmas to all.xx

As you live in Scotland, you may get your wish.
Living south of the border, all I can expect is excessive rain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 24, 2020, 09:00:01 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 24, 2020, 08:44:42 PM
My dream is to live a mile from the nearest other house in any direction.  Neighbours and their DIY and their screaming children and their dogs are the bane of my life.

I lived in the country in a farmhouse with no near neighbours. The wildlife were pretty vocal, especially the foxes. It sometimes sounded like murder was being committed in the garden.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 24, 2020, 10:23:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 24, 2020, 09:00:01 PM
I lived in the country in a farmhouse with no near neighbours. The wildlife were pretty vocal, especially the foxes. It sometimes sounded like murder was being committed in the garden.
I don’t mind that, nor owls hooting, that’s nature which is preferable to human nature which is often selfish and inconsiderate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 24, 2020, 10:26:33 PM
Quote from: Erngath on December 24, 2020, 08:51:13 PM
Wishing everyone a happy Christmas .
Very frosty here ...maybe a White Christmas?

So much is already so different to our traditional family celebration both tonight and tomorrow that a White Christmas would be lovely.
A peaceful and happy Christmas to all.xx
Merry Christmas Erngarth.  We celebrated earlier on the street by ringing bells at 6pm and then singing carols with everyone standing in front of their houses.  It was rather nice.  Jolly chilly though!  The mulled wine afterwards warmed us up :-)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Erngath on December 24, 2020, 11:10:22 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 24, 2020, 10:26:33 PM
Merry Christmas Erngarth.  We celebrated earlier on the street by ringing bells at 6pm and then singing carols with everyone standing in front of their houses.  It was rather nice.  Jolly chilly though!  The mulled wine afterwards warmed us up :-)

That  is a lovely way to spend Christmas Eve, apart from the mulled wine.

I've tried it several times but not to my liking.

Merry Christmas 🎄 to and your family.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 25, 2020, 09:09:11 AM
Quote from: Davel on December 24, 2020, 08:27:17 PM
I've got a new phone..it's really quite good. It's not actually new it's my son's old one . I bought him the latest IPhone and I've got his old one

My grandson does that for his Dad.  He might give me one some day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 25, 2020, 09:12:52 AM

Happy Christmas everyone.

Santa is over The Pacific and heading for Hawaii.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 03:22:43 PM
No heartfelt words from the parents thanking supporters for their continuing support this year ? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 27, 2020, 03:59:35 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 03:22:43 PM
No heartfelt words from the parents thanking supporters for their continuing support this year ?
It was sent by PM direct to all genuine supporters, you must be gutted not to have seen what it said.  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 04:16:24 PM
Compare and contrast

From Ben Needham’s page.

Merry Christmas Ben 💙
We all love and miss you beyond words 💔. We will NEVER GIVE UP the search....
All at #teamben would like to wish you all a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Thankyou all for your continued support. 💕
The latest raffle will be drawn live tonight once again by Ben's sister Leighanna.
Keep safe Everyone 💙💙
#HelpFindBen 💙 #BenNeedham

From Madeleine’s page.....absolute silence.

Poor Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 27, 2020, 04:26:10 PM
How does one determine a genuine supporter - is it one who has donated to the cause ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 27, 2020, 04:30:03 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 04:16:24 PM
Compare and contrast

From Ben Needham’s page.

Merry Christmas Ben 💙
We all love and miss you beyond words 💔. We will NEVER GIVE UP the search....
All at #teamben would like to wish you all a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Thankyou all for your continued support. 💕
The latest raffle will be drawn live tonight once again by Ben's sister Leighanna.
Keep safe Everyone 💙💙
#HelpFindBen 💙 #BenNeedham

From Madeleine’s page.....absolute silence.

Poor Madeleine.
Poor you, you mean.  Christmas ruined by a lack of message from Gerry and Kate for you to pore over and pick apart, still there’s always the (late) filing of the accounts to for you to look forward to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 27, 2020, 04:32:23 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 27, 2020, 04:26:10 PM
How does one determine a genuine supporter - is it one who has donated to the cause ?
It’s the ones who haven’t been sussed out as trolls and [ censored word ]s, who haven’t pretended to be supporters and then gone on to stab the McCanns and their FB webmaster in the back elsewhere on the net.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 27, 2020, 04:36:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 27, 2020, 04:32:23 PM
It’s the ones who haven’t been sussed out as trolls and [ censored word ], who haven’t pretended to be supporters and then gone on to stab the McCanns and their FB webmaster in the back elsewhere on the net.

As most posters are anonymous, often using several user names,  who would know ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 27, 2020, 04:56:56 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 27, 2020, 04:36:15 PM
As most posters are anonymous, often using several user names,  who would know ?
You’d be surprised how easily people give themselves away.... in any case there are other ways of sorting the wheat from the chaff, the genuinely supporters from thentrolls and it doesn’t involve money, just a modicum of intelligence. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 27, 2020, 05:24:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 27, 2020, 04:32:23 PM
It’s the ones who haven’t been sussed out as trolls and [ censored word ], who haven’t pretended to be supporters and then gone on to stab the McCanns and their FB webmaster in the back elsewhere on the net.

At least anti's & trolls are doing something for their cause by being nasty about the McCanns & disrupting their Facebook page.

What are supporters doing to help their cause of bringing Maddie home?

Why aren't supporters out there organising search parties & banging on front doors?

I've lived in the same house since before Maddie's disappearance & not once in the past 13 years have the McCanns or any of their supporters popped round & asked if I've seen Maddie.

This flies in the face of the claim that they would leave no stone unturned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 27, 2020, 05:26:36 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 27, 2020, 05:24:52 PM
At least anti's & trolls are doing something for their cause by being nasty about the McCanns & disrupting their Facebook page.

What are supporters doing to help their cause of bringing Maddie home?

Why aren't supporters out there organising search parties & banging on front doors?

I've lived in the same house since before Maddie's disappearance & not once in the past 13 years have the McCanns or any of their supporters popped round & asked if I've seen Maddie.

This flies in the face of the claim that they would leave no stone unturned.

Do try not to be too silly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 27, 2020, 05:27:10 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 27, 2020, 05:24:52 PM
At least anti's & trolls are doing something for their cause by being nasty about the McCanns & disrupting their Facebook page.

What are supporters doing to help their cause of bringing Maddie home?

Why aren't supporters out there organising search parties & banging on front doors?

I've lived in the same house since before Maddie's disappearance & not once in the past 13 years have the McCanns or any of their supporters popped round & asked if I've seen Maddie.

This flies in the face of the claim that they would leave no stone unturned.

They've probably marked you on Google Maps as a place to avoid.  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 27, 2020, 05:28:49 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 27, 2020, 05:24:52 PM
At least anti's & trolls are doing something for their cause by being nasty about the McCanns & disrupting their Facebook page.

What are supporters doing to help their cause of bringing Maddie home?

Why aren't supporters out there organising search parties & banging on front doors?

I've lived in the same house since before Maddie's disappearance & not once in the past 13 years have the McCanns or any of their supporters popped round & asked if I've seen Maddie.

This flies in the face of the claim that they would leave no stone unturned.
How you any idea how thoroughly stupid you sound in this post?   I presume not otherwise you wouldn’t have written it, or perhaps you have no self-respect.  Hard to tell really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 27, 2020, 06:21:50 PM
I'm not even the slightest bit dismayed at the unashamed nastiness which has been exhibited here as it has become de rigour for some;  but I must admit to being concerned for the individuals who see fit to make light of a child who has been missing for over thirteen years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 06:49:34 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 27, 2020, 04:36:15 PM
As most posters are anonymous, often using several user names,  who would know ?

No one unless you have a rather chatty webmistress.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 06:52:28 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 27, 2020, 06:21:50 PM
I'm not even the slightest bit dismayed at the unashamed nastiness which has been exhibited here as it has become de rigour for some;  but I must admit to being concerned for the individuals who see fit to make light of a child who has been missing for over thirteen years.

No one makes light of what has happened to this poor child. To conflate their feeling for Madeleine with disdain for her parents is simply wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 27, 2020, 07:21:45 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 06:49:34 PM
No one unless you have a rather chatty webmistress.
The poor webmistress who was groomed by PM and then had her private conversations shared by a “helpful” sceptic online for all to see you mean?  Now who would do a sneaky thing like that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 07:42:30 PM
I believe Blacksmith was threatened with legal action if he didn’t withdraw details of the webmistress’s answer to a perfectly reasonable question. If the answer was straightforward doesn’t that seem like overkill?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 27, 2020, 08:32:39 PM
That’s right, it was the Blacksmith’s Apprentice who did the sneaky work.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 08:36:56 PM
Perhaps answering a straightforward question honestly isn’t quite the level ‘transparency’ that was promised.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 27, 2020, 09:03:55 PM
People who attempt through devious means to try and humiliate or shame the person who looks after a Facebook page devoted to the campaign to find a missing child really are beneath contempt IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 09:14:00 PM
Engaging the threat of lawyers does not suggest an honestly given answer...no matter who asked the question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 27, 2020, 09:23:36 PM
Innocent people who harrassed and traduced to the point of needing to take legal action to get it to stop have my utmost sympathy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 09:31:05 PM
Again a straightforward question elicited a rather less straightforward answer.

It does make you wonder how the poster trying to shape the narrative can possibly know what the correspondence involved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 27, 2020, 09:37:01 PM
Interesting that Faithlilly who makes a point of ignoring my posts is now addressing them albeit in a pass ag way.  Must have touched a nerve though I can’t think how...

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 09:48:01 PM
When you ask a question and the answer is knowingly dishonest, who is to blame for that dishonesty?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 27, 2020, 09:57:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 27, 2020, 09:37:01 PM
Interesting that Faithlilly who makes a point of ignoring my posts is now addressing them albeit in a pass ag way.  Must have touched a nerve though I can’t think how...

I've sure worked it out based solely on that short exchange. 👀
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 10:08:01 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 27, 2020, 09:57:23 PM
I've sure worked it out based solely on that short exchange. 👀

Not at all....I just think that the truth matters. I’m sure you do too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 27, 2020, 10:14:17 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 09:48:01 PM
When you ask a question and the answer is knowingly dishonest, who is to blame for that dishonesty?
Was it you Faithlilly, PMing the Official Madeleine FB webmistress and then divulging the contents of your correspondence online?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 27, 2020, 11:02:12 PM
And suddenly for some strange reason I was put back on ignore.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 27, 2020, 11:13:29 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 27, 2020, 11:02:12 PM
And suddenly for some strange reason I was put back on ignore.

I didn't know about that insidious little episode.  Words fail me now that I do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 11:24:07 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 27, 2020, 11:13:29 PM
I didn't know about that insidious little episode.  Words fail me now that I do.

Insidious absolutely.

What person after answering a perfectly innocent question threatens legal action if the answer to that question is revealed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 27, 2020, 11:56:15 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 27, 2020, 11:24:07 PM
Insidious absolutely.

What person after answering a perfectly innocent question threatens legal action if the answer to that question is revealed?
A person who has been exploited and trolled by another for their own amusement?  I notice you chose to ignore my earlier question - it serms to me you have something to hide too...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 12:35:21 AM
Blacksmith was threatened with legal action if he didn’t delete information given freely by the OFM webmistress. I think we’ll let the reader decide who had something to hide.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 28, 2020, 07:09:08 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 12:35:21 AM
Blacksmith was threatened with legal action if he didn’t delete information given freely by the OFM webmistress. I think we’ll let the reader decide who had something to hide.
Did the OFM give you permission to share information divulged to you by PM to be published on a nasty little sceptic  blog?   Your continued refusal to answer my questions is both evasive and dishonest imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 28, 2020, 07:15:17 AM
Great news (albeit a bit too late) for sceptics going forward:

Britons overseas have no right to our help, says Foreign Office

“British citizens arrested overseas through no fault of their own have no right to the government’s assistance or protection, even if they are tortured or held as diplomatic leverage against their country, the Foreign Office has said.

That stark assessment was delivered in a letter to lawyers for Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, who asked the department to lay out the government’s view of its obligations towards her.”

From today’s Times.  If only this had been brought in 13 years ago the McCanns might be rotting in a Portuguese jail. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 28, 2020, 08:00:46 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 28, 2020, 07:15:17 AM
Great news (albeit a bit too late) for sceptics going forward:

Britons overseas have no right to our help, says Foreign Office

“British citizens arrested overseas through no fault of their own have no right to the government’s assistance or protection, even if they are tortured or held as diplomatic leverage against their country, the Foreign Office has said.

That stark assessment was delivered in a letter to lawyers for Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, who asked the department to lay out the government’s view of its obligations towards her.”

From today’s Times.  If only this had been brought in 13 years ago the McCanns might be rotting in a Portuguese jail.

I sometimes shudder at the thought of what could have happened to Kate McCann.  Tis no wonder to me why The British Ambassador turned up so quickly.  The British Government hadn't forgotten what happened to a British Subject some years before.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 28, 2020, 09:31:32 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 28, 2020, 07:15:17 AM
Great news (albeit a bit too late) for sceptics going forward:

Britons overseas have no right to our help, says Foreign Office

“British citizens arrested overseas through no fault of their own have no right to the government’s assistance or protection, even if they are tortured or held as diplomatic leverage against their country, the Foreign Office has said.

That stark assessment was delivered in a letter to lawyers for Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, who asked the department to lay out the government’s view of its obligations towards her.”

From today’s Times.  If only this had been brought in 13 years ago the McCanns might be rotting in a Portuguese jail.

From today's Times...can you imagine how much this statement would have been ridiculed if made by a supporter.
In reality there is an element of truth in it

Wasn't a Welsh woman held on remand for shouting at a policeman


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4781566/amp/British-woman-forced-spend-months-Portuguese-prison.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 28, 2020, 09:52:19 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 27, 2020, 11:13:29 PM
I didn't know about that insidious little episode.  Words fail me now that I do.

I've no idea what is being discussed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 28, 2020, 09:59:04 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 28, 2020, 09:52:19 AM
I've no idea what is being discussed.

Nor me. I suspect only a select few do  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 28, 2020, 10:20:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 28, 2020, 09:52:19 AM
I've no idea what is being discussed.

I found my inspiration from Faith which gave me all the answers necessary to make an informed assessment.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 10:34:15 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 28, 2020, 10:20:41 AM
I found my inspiration from Faith which gave me all the answers necessary to make an informed assessment.

You have none of the information necessary to make an informed assessment and unfortunately to reveal it may leave the forum open to the same threat of legal action that Blacksmith faced so I think we should leave it there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 28, 2020, 11:18:50 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 10:34:15 AM
You have none of the information necessary to make an informed assessment and unfortunately to reveal it may leave the forum open to the same threat of legal action that Blacksmith faced so I think we should leave it there.
LOL.  I'm not surprised you're eager to change the subject, sorry (not sorry) for putting you on the spot and all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 28, 2020, 11:43:51 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 28, 2020, 11:18:50 AM
LOL.  I'm not surprised you're eager to change the subject, sorry (not sorry) for putting you on the spot and all.

Just another brushstroke added to the portrait in the attic.  An illuminating one though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 11:45:30 AM
Maybe those desperate to carry on this subject will tell members what they think the conversation was about and I can confirm or deny it and we can move on?



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 28, 2020, 11:55:39 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 11:45:30 AM
Maybe those desperate to carry on this subject will tell members what they think the conversation was about and I can confirm or deny it and we can move on?

I don't care what it was about.

All that matters is that you a upset a supporter & probably made her cry & I think that's something to be proud of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 28, 2020, 12:01:31 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 11:45:30 AM
Maybe those desperate to carry on this subject will tell members what they think the conversation was about and I can confirm or deny it and we can move on?
I've already asked you to confirm or deny whether it was you who struck up a private message conversation with the OFM webmistress and then divulged the contents of the private message to an infamous McCann sceptic blogger who then proceeded to use the private converstion in one of his posts to try and make something out of nothing, in his own inimitable way?  So far you have refused to do so, perhaps now you will come clean....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 28, 2020, 12:14:36 PM
Moral of this little storm in a teacup would seem to be  never divulge information that you wouldn't want to be in the public domain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 28, 2020, 12:14:53 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 28, 2020, 11:55:39 AM
I don't care what it was about.

All that matters is that you a upset a supporter & probably made her cry & I think that's something to be proud of.
Sadist.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 28, 2020, 12:16:06 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 28, 2020, 12:14:36 PM
Moral of this little storm in a teacup would seem to be  never divulge information that you wouldn't want to be in the public domain.
And never trust anyone sucking up to you by PM (particularly a sceptic) to be honorable and keep the conversation private. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 28, 2020, 12:22:09 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 28, 2020, 12:14:36 PM
Moral of this little storm in a teacup would seem to be  never divulge information that you wouldn't want to be in the public domain.

I think she's got it! By George she's got it!  Welcome to the ranks of 'the select few'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on December 28, 2020, 12:23:06 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 28, 2020, 11:55:39 AM
I don't care what it was about.

All that matters is that you a upset a supporter & probably made her cry & I think that's something to be proud of.

So you think is was OK to upset Brenda Leyland too
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 12:24:00 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 28, 2020, 12:14:36 PM
Moral of this little storm in a teacup would seem to be  never divulge information that you wouldn't want to be in the public domain.

Absolutely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 28, 2020, 12:29:50 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 28, 2020, 12:22:09 PM
I think she's got it! By George she's got it!  Welcome to the ranks of 'the select few'.

Not me, I've no idea what it's all about, other than it seems pretty trivial.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 28, 2020, 12:37:45 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 12:24:00 PM
Absolutely.
And if you ARE going to troll people and betray their confidence it's also best not to do so using your real name.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 01:18:59 PM
It seems someone has rather landed themselves in it. If the member knows the name of the person who supplied the information to Blacksmith a) the webmistress has revealed private information to a second party....so rather hypocritical to accuse anyone else of the same thing. b) the member is rather closer to the McCann machinery than previously revealed.

All very interesting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 28, 2020, 02:13:22 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 01:18:59 PM
It seems someone has rather landed themselves in it. If the member knows the name of the person who supplied the information to Blacksmith a) the webmistress has revealed private information to a second party....so rather hypocritical to accuse anyone else of the same thing. b) the member is rather closer to the McCann machinery than previously revealed.

All very interesting.
Not really - some people were simply very careless in the early days of their trolling and had accounts under their real names.  The webmistress has revealed nothing, the troll did that all by herself.  Silly girl!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 02:23:05 PM
The webmistress has revealed details that could only have been known to herself and her correspondent. That’s simply logic.

It does explain however how even the mention of the webmistress’s name brings on apoplexy in a certain member.

Oops !!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 28, 2020, 02:36:39 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 02:23:05 PM
The webmistress has revealed details that could only have been known to herself and her correspondent. That’s simply logic.

It does explain however how even the mention of the webmistress’s name brings on apoplexy in a certain member.

Oops !!!
Some people just haven't got a clue how easily their repetitive and sanctimonious online crowing used to give them away.  And if people want to add 2 and 2 to get 500, it's absolutely no skin off my nose.  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 28, 2020, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: jassi on December 28, 2020, 12:29:50 PM
Not me, I've no idea what it's all about, other than it seems pretty trivial.

Your posts always give me the impression that is par for the course as far as you are concerned.

Why was BS influenced by the threat of libel?

Does the telecommunications act cover fora PMs.

Or was what he posted actually just a pack of lies which could be proven by the webmaster/mistress to be exactly that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 02:53:15 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 28, 2020, 02:40:45 PM
Your posts always give me the impression that is par for the course as far as you are concerned.

Why was BS influenced by the threat of libel?

Does the telecommunications act cover fora PMs.

Or was what he posted actually just a pack of lies which could be proven by the webmaster/mistress to be exactly that?

Libel? Did I say libel? No....don’t think I did. I said legal action.

If anything has to be proven the original correspondence is still available...and, for clarification, it was not via PM.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 03:04:30 PM
“If you do not tell the truth about yourself you cannot tell it about other people.”
― Virginia Woolf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 28, 2020, 03:41:24 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 28, 2020, 03:04:30 PM
“If you do not tell the truth about yourself you cannot tell it about other people.”
― Virginia Woolf
So tell the truth about yourself and own up to your actions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 28, 2020, 03:43:51 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 28, 2020, 02:40:45 PM
Your posts always give me the impression that is par for the course as far as you are concerned.

Why was BS influenced by the threat of libel?

Does the telecommunications act cover fora PMs.

Or was what he posted actually just a pack of lies which could be proven by the webmaster/mistress to be exactly that?

Probably because I don't devote my life to the cause McCann.

I just dip in and out as the mood takes me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 28, 2020, 04:58:27 PM

I am appalled by the vein of these comments.  My PMs are Private.  What on earth do you all think you are trying to do?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 28, 2020, 05:21:51 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 28, 2020, 04:58:27 PM
I am appalled by the vein of these comments.  My PMs are Private.  What on earth do you all think you are trying to do?

When you communicate with someone, be it in person, by phone or in writing there's always a risk that they'll repeat what you tell them. There's no such thing as a private pm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 28, 2020, 05:37:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 28, 2020, 05:21:51 PM
When you communicate with someone, be it in person, by phone or in writing there's always a risk that they'll repeat what you tell them. There's no such thing as a private pm.
The clue’s in the name.  Private message.  Of course if you communicate with someone by private message there is always the possibility that they will ignore etiquette and plaster your private messages all over the internet but that tends to reveal more about the leaker than the leaked, imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 28, 2020, 06:12:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 28, 2020, 05:21:51 PM
When you communicate with someone, be it in person, by phone or in writing there's always a risk that they'll repeat what you tell them. There's no such thing as a private pm.

Then I feel seriously sorry for you.  I had not realised how badly damaged some of you are.

Alice died two years ago coming up the 9th of January and none of you knew about he and me or what a joy he was to me.

I am briefly disgusted with the lot of you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 28, 2020, 06:14:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 28, 2020, 05:37:52 PM
The clue’s in the name.  Private message.  Of course if you communicate with someone by private message there is always the possibility that they will ignore etiquette and plaster your private messages all over the internet but that tends to reveal more about the leaker than the leaked, imo.

No one has ever done this to me.  Or I to them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 28, 2020, 07:05:46 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 28, 2020, 06:14:11 PM
No one has ever done this to me.  Or I to them.
Likewise, some people however are proud of their mischief-making.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 28, 2020, 07:39:57 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 28, 2020, 06:12:14 PM
Then I feel seriously sorry for you.  I had not realised how badly damaged some of you are.

Alice died two years ago coming up the 9th of January and none of you knew about he and me or what a joy he was to me.

I am briefly disgusted with the lot of you.

There's no need to feel sorry for anyone who is careful what they say to strangers; it's just common sense. Do you think you were the only one who spoke privately to Alice?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 28, 2020, 07:57:09 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 28, 2020, 06:12:14 PM
Then I feel seriously sorry for you.  I had not realised how badly damaged some of you are.

Alice died two years ago coming up the 9th of January and none of you knew about he and me or what a joy he was to me.

I am briefly disgusted with the lot of you.

Alice was very funny, I miss their humour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 28, 2020, 10:32:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 28, 2020, 07:39:57 PM
There's no need to feel sorry for anyone who is careful what they say to strangers; it's just common sense. Do you think you were the only one who spoke privately to Alice?

What on earth makes you think that I would think I was the only one who spoke to Alice privately?

Frankly, you sound a bit miffed.  Alice didn't just belong to Sceptics you know.  Obviously.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 28, 2020, 10:59:19 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 28, 2020, 07:57:09 PM
Alice was very funny, I miss their humour.

Well he is a professional comic, in't he ?  And, yes he was part of both a duo and a group, I believe.   Am not sure if he is stand alone now.   Not my kinda humour though.

I like Eleanors humour far better.  Her one liners take some beating.  Wonder if he has professionally pinched any of them?


PS.  I think he still lives
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 28, 2020, 11:01:10 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 28, 2020, 10:32:33 PM
What on earth makes you think that I would think I was the only one who spoke to Alice privately?

Frankly, you sound a bit miffed.  Alice didn't just belong to Sceptics you know.  Obviously.

I just wondered why you felt the need to mention it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 31, 2020, 04:55:43 PM
Nothing to see here
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 31, 2020, 05:11:59 PM


I hope that Christian Brueckner regains his freedom.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 31, 2020, 05:20:28 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 31, 2020, 05:11:59 PM

I hope that Christian Brueckner regains his freedom.
That was too predictable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 31, 2020, 05:36:38 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 31, 2020, 05:11:59 PM

I hope that Christian Brueckner regains his freedom.

Bereft of sensible good wishes.  How sad.   


I feel so sorry for you Spammy.  And hope that 2021 is a better year for you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 01, 2021, 06:10:14 PM
Lovely...and it only took a little persuasion.

Goodbye 2020

What a year! One we don’t want to remember but will find it hard to forget.

There’s no doubt that 2020 has been tough for most people, and often distressing, with so much loss, worry and isolation. Despite losing a parent each, we are aware we have been more fortunate than many, with our family unit at home and jobs to go to. Understandably, the investigation to find Madeleine has been forced to slow down as a result of the pandemic. It hasn’t stopped however and the hope, energy and determination to find her and uncover the truth remain steadfast.

We are very grateful for the continued support, especially throughout this ‘rubbish’ year and for all the Christmas wishes too. Thank you.

Our thoughts and prayers are with everyone who has suffered this year. Let’s hope 2021 is a brighter, more positive one.

With our best wishes for exactly that.

Kate & Gerry
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 01, 2021, 06:13:33 PM
LOL.  Faithlilly obviously believes she shamed the McCanns into making their New Year’s message.  I mean how deluded can one person be?  Still, she’ll never know what they wrote in their private Christmas message to their supporters, and very interesting it was too...  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 03, 2021, 09:50:38 AM
HAPPY NEW YEAR ALL !!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 03, 2021, 09:53:44 AM
I've been trying to find the details about a villa which had camera's set up in it, found when searching for Madeleine in Portugal.   I didn't dream it.  I also remember a witness saying she saw people arriving at a villa they didn't look [to her] the type of people who would have owned it.   Can't remember where I read it..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 03, 2021, 10:04:54 AM
Quote from: Lace on January 03, 2021, 09:53:44 AM
I've been trying to find the details about a villa which had camera's set up in it, found when searching for Madeleine in Portugal.   I didn't dream it.  I also remember a witness saying she saw people arriving at a villa they didn't look [to her] the type of people who would have owned it.   Can't remember where I read it..

Was that Robert Murat's Mother?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 03, 2021, 10:07:24 AM
I wonder what villa owners should look like ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 03, 2021, 10:38:05 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 03, 2021, 10:04:54 AM
Was that Robert Murat's Mother?

Don't think so
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 03, 2021, 10:38:59 AM
Quote from: jassi on January 03, 2021, 10:07:24 AM
I wonder what villa owners should look like ?


The person said there were really old cars,  that's why I'm interested.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 03, 2021, 10:44:31 AM
Quote from: jassi on January 03, 2021, 10:07:24 AM
I wonder what villa owners should look like ?
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/who-is-nassef-sawiris-villa-17082772
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 03, 2021, 11:48:56 AM
Quote from: Lace on January 03, 2021, 09:53:44 AM
I've been trying to find the details about a villa which had camera's set up in it, found when searching for Madeleine in Portugal.   I didn't dream it.  I also remember a witness saying she saw people arriving at a villa they didn't look [to her] the type of people who would have owned it.   Can't remember where I read it..

Is this it?

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/103035/Madeleine-The-missed-clues-at-1m-villa
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 03, 2021, 12:05:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 03, 2021, 11:48:56 AM
Is this it?

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/103035/Madeleine-The-missed-clues-at-1m-villa

Yes!!   Thanks G-Unit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 03, 2021, 01:46:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 03, 2021, 11:48:56 AM
Is this it?

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/103035/Madeleine-The-missed-clues-at-1m-villa

It’d forgotten how silly the stories were in the early days.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 03, 2021, 02:28:22 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on January 03, 2021, 01:46:08 PM
It’d forgotten how silly the stories were in the early days.

And how many people claimed to have told their stories to the police. Then the police files were put on the internet and translated...........
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 03, 2021, 02:47:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 03, 2021, 02:28:22 PM
And how many people claimed to have told their stories to the police. Then the police files were put on the internet and translated...........
Is that a poor reflection on the people who say they went to the police, or the police themselves do you think? When were the translated files put on the net?  Before this news report surely...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 03, 2021, 03:18:55 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on January 03, 2021, 01:46:08 PM
It’d forgotten how silly the stories were in the early days.

Oh is that a silly story?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 03, 2021, 03:54:51 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 03, 2021, 03:18:55 PM
Oh is that a silly story?

Absolutely. People making value judgements and passing them off as ‘concerns’.

Imagine if the police hadn’t had to waste time following up these tales....Madeleine’s whereabouts may actually have been discovered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 03, 2021, 03:57:27 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on January 03, 2021, 03:54:51 PM
Absolutely. People making value judgements and passing them off as ‘concerns’.

Imagine if the police hadn’t had to waste time following up these tales....Madeleine’s whereabouts may actually have been discovered.
As G-Unit pointed out there is no evidence whatsoever of the police following up any concerns by these people.  I guess the general public should just keep their concerns to themsleves, including Dr Gaspar for example.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 03, 2021, 04:09:52 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on January 03, 2021, 03:54:51 PM
Absolutely. People making value judgements and passing them off as ‘concerns’.

Imagine if the police hadn’t had to waste time following up these tales....Madeleine’s whereabouts may actually have been discovered.

Many crimes, are solved by information from the public that otherwise would not be solved.. Particularly those involving strangers
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 03, 2021, 05:22:36 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 03, 2021, 03:18:55 PM
Oh is that a silly story?

If it is the Villa Caso Ao Pescareza  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1391.msg39988#msg39988 the location is interesting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 03, 2021, 05:38:19 PM
So it was Jenny Murat

Jenny Murat (71) revealed she had unearthed a new line of inquiry when she and a friend reported a gang of suspicious strangers to police - days before she knew her son was in the frame for the shocking crime.

But Jenny claimed the lead - centred on a house less than two miles from where Madeleine was grabbed - was IGNORED for weeks by detectives.

And she accused them of not acting on it urgently because Murat was their only suspect and she is his only alibi.

Sister-in-law Sally Eveleigh, 56, told The People, that as a huge manhunt was launched for the kidnapper, Jenny remembered seeing three strangers - a couple in their 30s and a woman in her 50s - at a large isolated house nearby.

She had spotted the building - called Casa Ao Pescareza - while walking her dog along a coastal path.

Sally said: "Jenny was intrigued because they looked like gipsies or travellers and were driving a clapped-out old red car with a British number plate. They looked out of place in this grand house with its big drive and swimming pool.
"But they also seemed to have a string of visitors - men in smart suits driving plush new cars like Mercedes.

"On one occasion the older woman told Jenny they always came to Luz in summer and were staying four months.

"She spoke perfect English but Jenny thought she had a French or possibly Middle-Eastern accent.

"Then two days after Maddie vanished Jenny was walking down that way again and noticed the house was shut up and deserted.

"There was no sign of the trio after that - even though they had said they would be there all summer."

Jenny jotted her recollections on a piece of paper which was passed to police.

She also gave them the name of a pal who had shared her suspicions about the "odd" tenants.

The People, which has seen Jenny's notes, has learnt cops did not contact the friend for two months.

Sally said: "People will probably say that Jenny is clutching at straws.

"But she reported it to police a couple of days after Madeleine vanished and more than a week before anyone knew Robert would be questioned."
 
——————-
If it’s not in the police files then I guess Murat’s mother and her sister in law made it all up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 03, 2021, 06:06:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 03, 2021, 05:38:19 PM
So it was Jenny Murat

Jenny Murat (71) revealed she had unearthed a new line of inquiry when she and a friend reported a gang of suspicious strangers to police - days before she knew her son was in the frame for the shocking crime.

But Jenny claimed the lead - centred on a house less than two miles from where Madeleine was grabbed - was IGNORED for weeks by detectives.

And she accused them of not acting on it urgently because Murat was their only suspect and she is his only alibi.

Sister-in-law Sally Eveleigh, 56, told The People, that as a huge manhunt was launched for the kidnapper, Jenny remembered seeing three strangers - a couple in their 30s and a woman in her 50s - at a large isolated house nearby.

She had spotted the building - called Casa Ao Pescareza - while walking her dog along a coastal path.

Sally said: "Jenny was intrigued because they looked like gipsies or travellers and were driving a clapped-out old red car with a British number plate. They looked out of place in this grand house with its big drive and swimming pool.
"But they also seemed to have a string of visitors - men in smart suits driving plush new cars like Mercedes.

"On one occasion the older woman told Jenny they always came to Luz in summer and were staying four months.

"She spoke perfect English but Jenny thought she had a French or possibly Middle-Eastern accent.

"Then two days after Maddie vanished Jenny was walking down that way again and noticed the house was shut up and deserted.

"There was no sign of the trio after that - even though they had said they would be there all summer."

Jenny jotted her recollections on a piece of paper which was passed to police.

She also gave them the name of a pal who had shared her suspicions about the "odd" tenants.

The People, which has seen Jenny's notes, has learnt cops did not contact the friend for two months.

Sally said: "People will probably say that Jenny is clutching at straws.

"But she reported it to police a couple of days after Madeleine vanished and more than a week before anyone knew Robert would be questioned."
 
——————-
If it’s not in the police files then I guess Murat’s mother and her sister in law made it all up.

Thanks for that, VS.  I thought it was Jenny Murat.  There isn't much wrong with my memory.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 03, 2021, 06:10:08 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 03, 2021, 06:06:39 PM
Thanks for that, VS.  I thought it was Jenny Murat.  There isn't much wrong with my memory.
I wonder if Faithlilly and G-Unit still consider it to be a silly and /or fake story now that they know it involved Jenny Murat.  I mean if they think she made this up, where does that leave the alibi she gave for her son’s whereabouts that night?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 03, 2021, 06:22:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 03, 2021, 06:10:08 PM
I wonder if Faithlilly and G-Unit still consider it to be a silly and /or fake story now that they know it involved Jenny Murat.  I mean if they think she made this up, where does that leave the alibi she gave for her son’s whereabouts that night?

But Jenny Murat didn't make it up and had another witness to support her.  It is just another example of PJ Incompetence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 03, 2021, 06:41:33 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 03, 2021, 06:22:27 PM
But Jenny Murat didn't make it up and had another witness to support her.  It is just another example of PJ Incompetence.

I think the PJ never had the experience  or the manpower to investigate properly.  In the UK as I understand.. Every lead would be followed  up
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 03, 2021, 06:50:29 PM
Quote from: Davel on January 03, 2021, 06:41:33 PM
I think the PJ never had the experience  or the manpower to investigate properly.  In the UK as I understand.. Every lead would be followed  up

No, The PJ didn't.  But that is beside the point.  The PJ did a massive amount of damage in their ignorance.  Totally ignoring Judicial Secrecy while demanding it of everyone else with threats of Imprisonment.  Madeleine never stood a chance under the watch of The PJ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 03, 2021, 06:55:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on January 03, 2021, 06:41:33 PM
I think the PJ never had the experience  or the manpower to investigate properly.  In the UK as I understand.. Every lead would be followed  up
And yet according to a PJ apologist on this forum
“Imagine if the police hadn’t had to waste time following up these tales....Madeleine’s whereabouts may actually have been discovered”

to which I say

Imagine if the PJ HAD followed up on such a report, Madeleine’s whereabouts may actually have been discovered..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 03, 2021, 07:04:03 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 03, 2021, 06:55:50 PM
And yet according to a PJ apologist on this forum
“Imagine if the police hadn’t had to waste time following up these tales....Madeleine’s whereabouts may actually have been discovered”

to which I say

Imagine if the PJ HAD followed up on such a report, Madeleine’s whereabouts may actually have been discovered..

And some.  This wasn't the only failure.  And you can't find something if you don't look for it.

Meanwhile, The PJ led by Amaral were too busy trying to stitch up The McCanns.

There are times when I don't want to be reminded of how awful it all was.

Heaven alone helped The McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 03, 2021, 09:22:10 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 03, 2021, 06:10:08 PM
I wonder if Faithlilly and G-Unit still consider it to be a silly and /or fake story now that they know it involved Jenny Murat.  I mean if they think she made this up, where does that leave the alibi she gave for her son’s whereabouts that night?

Jenny Murat gave out two stories to the press that she doesn't seem to have shared with the police; this one and the lady in purple one. This one first surfaced in The People on 29th July 2007. [https://www.thefreelibrary.com/MURAT+MOTHER%27S+FURY%3B+EXCLUSIVE%3A+Shocked+Jenny+says+Maddie+suspect+was...-a0166903584]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 03, 2021, 10:16:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 03, 2021, 09:22:10 PM
Jenny Murat gave out two stories to the press that she doesn't seem to have shared with the police; this one and the lady in purple one. This one first surfaced in The People on 29th July 2007. [https://www.thefreelibrary.com/MURAT+MOTHER%27S+FURY%3B+EXCLUSIVE%3A+Shocked+Jenny+says+Maddie+suspect+was...-a0166903584]

What makes you think she didn't share them with the police
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 03, 2021, 10:22:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 03, 2021, 09:22:10 PM
Jenny Murat gave out two stories to the press that she doesn't seem to have shared with the police; this one and the lady in purple one. This one first surfaced in The People on 29th July 2007. [https://www.thefreelibrary.com/MURAT+MOTHER%27S+FURY%3B+EXCLUSIVE%3A+Shocked+Jenny+says+Maddie+suspect+was...-a0166903584]
She says she went to the police.  Are you calling her a liar?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 03, 2021, 10:36:43 PM
Quote from: Davel on January 03, 2021, 10:16:59 PM
What makes you think she didn't share them with the police

Reports made to the PJ can be found here;

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/

There is one statement from Jenny Murat and nothing else.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 03, 2021, 10:39:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 03, 2021, 10:36:43 PM
Reports made to the PJ can be found here;

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/

There is one statement from Jenny Murat and nothing else.
And?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 03, 2021, 11:05:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 03, 2021, 10:39:22 PM
And?

There is no evidence that Jenny Murat or anyone else spoke to the police about Casa Ao Pescareza.
.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 03, 2021, 11:14:25 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 03, 2021, 06:22:27 PM
But Jenny Murat didn't make it up and had another witness to support her.  It is just another example of PJ Incompetence.

Did anyone say that Jenny Murat made the sighting up? I said the witness made a value judgement ie the people they saw didn’t conform to their preconceived idea of the situation. I’m sure Murat’s mother was totally sincere in her recollection.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 03, 2021, 11:24:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 03, 2021, 11:05:15 PM
There is no evidence that Jenny Murat or anyone else spoke to the police about Casa Ao Pescareza.
.

What really makes me chuckle about this whole thread is that the only way we know how many leads the PJ failed to follow up, did not take seriously etc, etc, etc is because the files were made public. We have no idea how often this happens in other parts of the world, and least of all the U.K. because we are not given access to that sort of information. Therefore to somehow suggest that the British police would have followed up every nonsense ‘feeling that something is not right’ brought to them by a well meaning member of the public is simply absurd.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 03, 2021, 11:31:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 03, 2021, 11:05:15 PM
There is no evidence that Jenny Murat or anyone else spoke to the police about Casa Ao Pescareza.
.
Yes there is.  Jenny and her sister-in-law both said that she did.  Why do you not accept their word?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 03, 2021, 11:35:52 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on January 03, 2021, 11:24:28 PM
What really makes me chuckle about this whole thread is that the only way we know how many leads the PJ failed to follow up, did not take seriously etc, etc, etc is because the files were made public. We have no idea how often this happens in other parts of the world, and least of all the U.K. because we are not given access to that sort of information. Therefore to somehow suggest that the British police would have followed up every nonsense ‘feeling that something is not right’ brought to them by a well meaning member of the public is simply absurd.
What is absurd is to wait two months before deciding to follow up a possible lead that was given in the first few days after a young child goes missing.  It’s absurd and negligent imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 04, 2021, 12:37:08 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on January 03, 2021, 03:54:51 PM
Absolutely. People making value judgements and passing them off as ‘concerns’.

Imagine if the police hadn’t had to waste time following up these tales....Madeleine’s whereabouts may actually have been discovered.

Ok,  so the Police shouldn't be concerned that there could have been a Paedophile ring then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 04, 2021, 12:48:30 PM
Supposing police received, say 20, different reports from concerned individuals, which should they investigate given that it all takes time & manpower ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on January 04, 2021, 12:53:21 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 04, 2021, 12:48:30 PM
Supposing police received, say 20, different reports from concerned individuals, which should they investigate given that it all takes time & manpower ?


I would have thought this report would have had priority as a child had disappeared in the same area.  Why were there video camera's set up?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 04, 2021, 01:01:06 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 04, 2021, 12:48:30 PM
Supposing police received, say 20, different reports from concerned individuals, which should they investigate given that it all takes time & manpower ?

My interpretation of your question is that you appear to suggest that all should be investigated.

That's nice.

In my opinion any will suffice if the incident to which you refer is the same one.

If there are twenty different reports I think using a triage type system might be beneficial.  Like you ~ I think they should hit on them all at one time or another.

This does not appear to be the experience of witnesses who gave statements to the Policia Judiciaria and heard no more about it.
For example Mrs M and Dr T.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 04, 2021, 01:35:07 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 04, 2021, 12:48:30 PM
Supposing police received, say 20, different reports from concerned individuals, which should they investigate given that it all takes time & manpower ?
They should investigate ALL reports of strange or suspicious activity in the immediate vicinity and immediate aftermath of the incident, that's what police investigations should do, not file witness reports in a pile of post-it notes and get round to following them up half-heartedly two months later.  Or do you disagree?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 04, 2021, 01:43:24 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 04, 2021, 01:01:06 PM
My interpretation of your question is that you appear to suggest that all should be investigated.

That's nice.

In my opinion any will suffice if the incident to which you refer is the same one.

If there are twenty different reports I think using a triage type system might be beneficial.  Like you ~ I think they should hit on them all at one time or another.

This does not appear to be the experience of witnesses who gave statements to the Policia Judiciaria and heard no more about it.
For example Mrs M and Dr T.

All down to evaluation of priority, isn't it.
 Unless we have the police report, we cannot evaluate priority
IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 04, 2021, 02:50:57 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 04, 2021, 12:53:21 PM

I would have thought this report would have had priority as a child had disappeared in the same area.  Why were there video camera's set up?

The story about video cameras seems to have come from Paul Luckman, who heard it from 'a searcher' who 'somehow got inside'. It's a luxury villa and it seems to me very unlikely that anyone would be able to get inside it, even if it was unoccupied.

https://www.luzholidays.com/property/casa-ao-pescareza/

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 04, 2021, 03:25:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 04, 2021, 02:50:57 PM
The story about video cameras seems to have come from Paul Luckman, who heard it from 'a searcher' who 'somehow got inside'. It's a luxury villa and it seems to me very unlikely that anyone would be able to get inside it, even if it was unoccupied.

https://www.luzholidays.com/property/casa-ao-pescareza/

Brueckner seems to have managed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 04, 2021, 05:33:27 PM
Quote from: Lace on January 04, 2021, 12:37:08 PM
Ok,  so the Police shouldn't be concerned that there could have been a Paedophile ring then?

What was there to suggest that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 04, 2021, 05:43:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 04, 2021, 02:50:57 PM
The story about video cameras seems to have come from Paul Luckman, who heard it from 'a searcher' who 'somehow got inside'. It's a luxury villa and it seems to me very unlikely that anyone would be able to get inside it, even if it was unoccupied.

https://www.luzholidays.com/property/casa-ao-pescareza/

According to Luckman ~ his companion was accompanied by a dog.  Police would have had right of entry to inspect the described photographs of children pinned to the wall'

Was Luckman's companion a police officer? or was s/he just another dog walker like Mrs M and her retired police friend?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 04, 2021, 06:44:01 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 04, 2021, 05:43:09 PM
According to Luckman ~ his companion was accompanied by a dog.  Police would have had right of entry to inspect the described photographs of children pinned to the wall'

Was Luckman's companion a police officer? or was s/he just another dog walker like Mrs M and her retired police friend?

Police would have needed a warrant or the owner's permission to enter a property.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 04, 2021, 07:40:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 04, 2021, 06:44:01 PM
Police would have needed a warrant or the owner's permission to enter a property.

Bearing in mind the internet files are not complete and we have seen pictures of them clambering into properties via windows ~ how do you know the police didn't request warrants?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 04, 2021, 09:27:40 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 04, 2021, 07:40:55 PM
Bearing in mind the internet files are not complete and we have seen pictures of them clambering into properties via windows ~ how do you know the police didn't request warrants?

Certain things were kept out of the files, but not applications for search warrants.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on January 08, 2021, 02:53:43 PM
Britain’s finest !

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-officers-racist-hampshire-sacked-b1784351.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 08, 2021, 03:19:10 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on January 08, 2021, 02:53:43 PM
Britain’s finest !

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-officers-racist-hampshire-sacked-b1784351.html

Awful.  This sort of mindset is impossible to change individually.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 16, 2021, 07:57:42 PM
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_YOUNG.htm

In this witness statement, reference was made to a Peter K, who was employed as a cook at Tapas Bar but not at work on the day Madeleine disappeared. No statement seems to have been taken from Peter K by PJ.
This last section of Young's statement is curious because, for some reason, he was either asked for or volunteered a brief physical description of Peter K. I'm not aware of any other Tapas Bar staff being asked questions about Peter K, so what was the significance at the time?

*snipped*
"Regarding his work area, he only remembers that the Kitchen Chef from the Tapas, a German individual named Peter, left his employment about a week before the disappearance. He adds that this person's behaviour was that of a perfectly normal person. He further adds that this person's build is as follows: thin, Caucasian, height of about 1,77m with full, light brown/grey hair."


The interpreter was RM & the witness (JSY) lived in Almadena.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 16, 2021, 08:12:34 PM
Quote from: misty on January 16, 2021, 07:57:42 PM
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_YOUNG.htm

In this witness statement, reference was made to a Peter K, who was employed as a cook at Tapas Bar but not at work on the day Madeleine disappeared. No statement seems to have been taken from Peter K by PJ.
This last section of Young's statement is curious because, for some reason, he was either asked for or volunteered a brief physical description of Peter K. I'm not aware of any other Tapas Bar staff being asked questions about Peter K, so what was the significance at the time?

*snipped*
"Regarding his work area, he only remembers that the Kitchen Chef from the Tapas, a German individual named Peter, left his employment about a week before the disappearance. He adds that this person's behaviour was that of a perfectly normal person. He further adds that this person's build is as follows: thin, Caucasian, height of about 1,77m with full, light brown/grey hair."


The interpreter was RM & the witness (JSY) lived in Almadena.
How did you work out it was Peter K as the file just says "Peter"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 16, 2021, 08:12:54 PM
Somebody reads textusa.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 16, 2021, 08:19:50 PM
Could "Peter K" be Christian Brueckner?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 16, 2021, 08:22:22 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 16, 2021, 08:19:50 PM
Could "Peter K" be Christian Brueckner?

Didn't he have a similar looking pal that he sometimes hung around with ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 16, 2021, 08:29:58 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 16, 2021, 08:19:50 PM
Could "Peter K" be Christian Brueckner?

No, it's the guy on the OC staff list.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P4/04_VOLUME_IVa_Page_851.jpg
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 16, 2021, 08:30:37 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 16, 2021, 08:12:54 PM
Somebody reads textusa.

It's actually the reverse.  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 16, 2021, 08:42:02 PM
Quote from: misty on January 16, 2021, 08:29:58 PM
No, it's the guy on the OC staff list.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P4/04_VOLUME_IVa_Page_851.jpg
Peter Kreuzer that could be the name he gave.    Don't they false identities in Portugal.  Handwritten passports etc.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 16, 2021, 08:44:12 PM
Quote from: misty on January 16, 2021, 08:30:37 PM
It's actually the reverse.  8(0(*
8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 16, 2021, 08:50:15 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 16, 2021, 08:42:02 PM
Peter Kreuzer that could be the name he gave.    Don't they false identities in Portugal.  Handwritten passports etc.

I don't know, Rob. The apparent failure of PJ to take a statement from someone who worked in the Tapas Bar that week is not helpful. I just found Young's comments about PK in his own witness statement rather odd.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on January 16, 2021, 08:59:22 PM
Quote from: misty on January 16, 2021, 07:57:42 PM
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_YOUNG.htm

In this witness statement, reference was made to a Peter K, who was employed as a cook at Tapas Bar but not at work on the day Madeleine disappeared. No statement seems to have been taken from Peter K by PJ.
This last section of Young's statement is curious because, for some reason, he was either asked for or volunteered a brief physical description of Peter K. I'm not aware of any other Tapas Bar staff being asked questions about Peter K, so what was the significance at the time?

*snipped*
"Regarding his work area, he only remembers that the Kitchen Chef from the Tapas, a German individual named Peter, left his employment about a week before the disappearance. He adds that this person's behaviour was that of a perfectly normal person. He further adds that this person's build is as follows: thin, Caucasian, height of about 1,77m with full, light brown/grey hair."


The interpreter was RM & the witness (JSY) lived in Almadena.
Hi Misty, here is another reference to Kreuzer. I can’t decipher what is written in brackets though.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 16, 2021, 09:02:52 PM
Quote from: Anthro on January 16, 2021, 08:59:22 PM
Hi Misty, here is another reference to Kreuzer. I can’t decipher what is written in brackets though.

It roughly translates to " he was off sick between 2-10 May for psychiatric reasons".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 16, 2021, 09:44:27 PM
Quote from: misty on January 16, 2021, 09:02:52 PM
It roughly translates to " he was off sick between 2-10 May for psychiatric reasons".

The first guy's statement says he left the previous week, didn't it?

a German individual named Peter, left his employment about a week before the disappearance.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_YOUNG.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 16, 2021, 10:52:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 16, 2021, 09:44:27 PM
The first guy's statement says he left the previous week, didn't it?

a German individual named Peter, left his employment about a week before the disappearance.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_YOUNG.htm

Possibly JSY was not working on Monday or Tuesday?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 16, 2021, 11:36:31 PM
Quote from: misty on January 16, 2021, 10:52:31 PM
Possibly JSY was not working on Monday or Tuesday?

He worked at the Millenium anyway. I wondered if Peter K was in fact a chef. The Tapas had a chef who had been there since the beginning of the season, according to his statement. I can't imagine they would need two, with the numbers they served.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MIGUE_COEIHO.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 17, 2021, 01:41:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 16, 2021, 11:36:31 PM
He worked at the Millenium anyway. I wondered if Peter K was in fact a chef. The Tapas had a chef who had been there since the beginning of the season, according to his statement. I can't imagine they would need two, with the numbers they served.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MIGUE_COEIHO.htm

Check out the number of OC staff listed as working in the restaurant areas. I doubt MC worked on his own.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 17, 2021, 11:56:06 AM
Quote from: misty on January 17, 2021, 01:41:32 AM
Check out the number of OC staff listed as working in the restaurant areas. I doubt MC worked on his own.

Well, he clearly wasn't alone in the kitchen. A chef needs support staff to carry out prep, keep on top of the washing up and clean the area at the end of service. What wasn't needed was another chef in such a small restaurant.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 17, 2021, 12:21:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2021, 11:56:06 AM
Well, he clearly wasn't alone in the kitchen. A chef needs support staff to carry out prep, keep on top of the washing up and clean the area at the end of service. What wasn't needed was another chef in such a small restaurant.
Chefs can't work all day every day. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 17, 2021, 04:42:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2021, 11:56:06 AM
Well, he clearly wasn't alone in the kitchen. A chef needs support staff to carry out prep, keep on top of the washing up and clean the area at the end of service. What wasn't needed was another chef in such a small restaurant.
We haven't had an explanation of what the booking sheet was about.  It is possible there were separate booking sheets for the different travel companies.  We tend to think they weren't that busy just based on the booking sheet, but all those names on there were Mark Warner customers yet the resort had Thomas Cook customers as well. I have a feeling there was a lot more going on than just what appears on the booking sheets we have access to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 17, 2021, 10:45:42 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 17, 2021, 04:42:21 PM
We haven't had an explanation of what the booking sheet was about.  It is possible there were separate booking sheets for the different travel companies.  We tend to think they weren't that busy just based on the booking sheet, but all those names on there were Mark Warner customers yet the resort had Thomas Cook customers as well. I have a feeling there was a lot more going on than just what appears on the booking sheets we have access to.

You may be right, but my impression is that the Tapas complex was for Mark Warner guests, as were the creches and the tennis courts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 18, 2021, 01:45:09 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 17, 2021, 10:45:42 PM
You may be right, but my impression is that the Tapas complex was for Mark Warner guests, as were the creches and the tennis courts.
Could you run a business like that?  There definitely seemed a lot of staff for the number of customers that we see.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 18, 2021, 08:28:09 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 18, 2021, 01:45:09 AM
Could you run a business like that?  There definitely seemed a lot of staff for the number of customers that we see.

They weren't all there at once.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 22, 2021, 09:24:01 AM
Could one of the mods online approve my new thread
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on January 22, 2021, 10:41:29 AM
Quote from: Davel on January 22, 2021, 09:24:01 AM
Could one of the mods online approve my new thread
Of course they can, I'll see to it now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 24, 2021, 05:51:14 PM
There are a lot of similarities with CB, is CB a smokescreen or have the BKA been sold a pup, although Ney had a leaning to boys. Just been watching something on prime of true crimes being reinvestigated where a suspect confessed to friends like CB, turns out it was rubbish the guy was just boasting to be the big man, is CB doing the same in the pub with alcohol loosening the tongue.


https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=https://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/meurtre-du-petit-jonathan-le-tueur-des-colonies-de-vacances-entendu-21-01-2021-8420554.php&prev=search&pto=aue

But this man in whose computer thousands of child pornography images were captured categorically denies any responsibility for Jonathan's death.

Martin Ney confessed at the end of 2017 to a fellow inmate having committed the kidnapping and murder of Jonathan, giving very precise details.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 24, 2021, 05:57:25 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 24, 2021, 05:51:14 PM
There are a lot of similarities with CB, is CB a smokescreen or have the BKA been sold a pup, although Ney had a leaning to boys. Just been watching something on prime of true crimes being reinvestigated where a suspect confessed to friends like CB, turns out it was rubbish the guy was just boasting to be the big man, is CB doing the same in the pub with alcohol loosening the tongue.


https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=https://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/meurtre-du-petit-jonathan-le-tueur-des-colonies-de-vacances-entendu-21-01-2021-8420554.php&prev=search&pto=aue

But this man in whose computer thousands of child pornography images were captured categorically denies any responsibility for Jonathan's death.

Martin Ney confessed at the end of 2017 to a fellow inmate having committed the kidnapping and murder of Jonathan, giving very precise details.

It seems that both have apparently confessed crime to fellow inmates.
Why would they do that?
They must know that fellow criminals are untrustworthy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 24, 2021, 06:17:36 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 24, 2021, 05:57:25 PM
It seems that both have apparently confessed crime to fellow inmates.
Why would they do that?
They must know that fellow criminals are untrustworthy.
Because as we’ve been told repeatedly these people are borderline imbeciles.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 24, 2021, 06:19:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 24, 2021, 06:17:36 PM
Because as we’ve been told repeatedly these people are borderline imbeciles.
That must be libel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 24, 2021, 06:23:11 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 24, 2021, 06:19:57 PM
That must be libel.
I look forward to being sued.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 24, 2021, 06:26:47 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 24, 2021, 06:23:11 PM
I look forward to being sued.
There is something closer to home - the forum rules.

"* Posters are asked to keep to thread topics where possible
* Libellous or defamatory material will be removed on sight
* Abuse will not be tolerated. Break the rules expect a ban
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 24, 2021, 06:29:29 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 24, 2021, 06:26:47 PM
There is something closer to home - the forum rules.

"* Posters are asked to keep to thread topics where possible
* Libellous or defamatory material will be removed on sight
* Abuse will not be tolerated. Break the rules expect a ban
The General has frequently referred to Brückner as a borderline imbecile, his posts were not removed so...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 24, 2021, 06:34:26 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 24, 2021, 06:29:29 PM
The General has frequently referred to Brückner as a borderline imbecile, his posts were not removed so...
Is that your excuse?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 24, 2021, 07:27:58 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 24, 2021, 06:34:26 PM
Is that your excuse?
Look, if I have broken the rules by calling Brückner an imbecile then do what you need to do.  Personally I don’t think he is an imbecile, I think he’s cunning, shrewd and very dangerous.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 24, 2021, 07:40:20 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 24, 2021, 07:27:58 PM
Look, if I have broken the rules by calling Brückner an imbecile then do what you need to do.  Personally I don’t think he is an imbecile, I think he’s cunning, shrewd and very dangerous.
I don't know how to handle it either.  Saying "cunning, shrewd and very dangerous" is OK is it?  At least this time it is clearly an informed opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 24, 2021, 07:49:12 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 24, 2021, 07:40:20 PM
I don't know how to handle it either.  Saying "cunning, shrewd and very dangerous" is OK is it?  At least this time it is clearly an informed opinion.

But it seems its ok to call Wolters  a liar and  a plonker...I doubt he cares what some ignorant people  think of him
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 24, 2021, 07:56:03 PM
Quote from: Davel on January 24, 2021, 07:49:12 PM
But it seems its ok to call Wolters  a liar and  a plonker...I doubt he cares what some ignorant people  think of him
You are wandering off topic again D.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 24, 2021, 07:57:32 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on January 24, 2021, 07:56:03 PM
You are wandering off topic again D.

good job thats the title of the thread then isnt it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 05, 2021, 09:41:18 AM
Im not intending to post much but at this point its pertinent to point out why. It seems John has issued an edict to cull even more posts and apply the rules more strictly. That would be fine if the rules were made clear and everyone understood them. Its clear thats not the case with Rob showing he isnt clear what libel is and I dont think anyone else here is either...so how can that rule be enforced.

There was a time when a lot more was allowed. Then the forum had lots of posters with lots of debates. As posters have been more closely moderated the forum has shrunk with the result its only a handful taking part and I think it will get worse.

About a year ago I wondered what would happen if I really tried to avoid confrontation and I asked John to have a word with ceratin mods to ask them to stop targeting me. It worked well generally but occasionally things slipped...not on my behalf.

last week I was given 50 points...totaly unfairly imo. I absolutely never called Sadie a liar...Sadie's claim was untrue. ...but perhaps tahts was what was reported to Admin. Now it seems mods have been told to crack down even more.

I think the forum is being suffocated. I wont post anything of consequence now until something of interest happens
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 05, 2021, 09:54:40 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 05, 2021, 09:41:18 AM
Im not intending to post much but at this point its pertinent to point out why. It seems John has issued an edict to cull even more posts and apply the rules more strictly. That would be fine if the rules were made clear and everyone understood them. Its clear thats not the case with Rob showing he isnt clear what libel is and I dont think anyone else here is either...so how can that rule be enforced.

There was a time when a lot more was allowed. Then the forum had lots of posters with lots of debates. As posters have been more closely moderated the forum has shrunk with the result its only a handful taking part and I think it will get worse.

About a year ago I wondered what would happen if I really tried to avoid confrontation and I asked John to have a word with ceratin mods to ask them to stop targeting me. It worked well generally but occasionally things slipped...not on my behalf.

last week I was given 50 points...totallyy unfairly imo. Now it seems mods have been told to crack down even more.

I think the forum is being suffocated. I wont post anything of consequence now until something of interest happens
Good post.  It's very clear that the Mods can't agree amongst themselves what constitutes a libel as the last few days show.  loads of posts were removed about the subject of Tasmin Sillence's father but the original libellous post which kicked off the whole "debate" which describes him as "a hustler out to make a buck" was still on the forum the last time I looked which was last night.  Having already drawn it to G-Unit and John's attention you would have thought such obvious libel would be instantly identified as such and removed.  Personally I would prefer it if we could say whatever we wanted but all the while the rules are only being applied on an ad hoc basis (usually partisan Mods turning a blind eye when their allies make a rule-breaking post) it makes the forum a frustrating place to post sometimes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 05, 2021, 10:10:26 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 05, 2021, 09:54:40 AM
Good post.  It's very clear that the Mods can't agree amongst themselves what constitutes a libel as the last few days show.  loads of posts were removed about the subject of Tasmin Sillence's father but the original libellous post which kicked off the whole "debate" which describes him as "a hustler out to make a buck" was still on the forum the last time I looked which was last night.  Having already drawn it to G-Unit and John's attention you would have thought such obvious libel would be instantly identified as such and removed.  Personally I would prefer it if we could say whatever we wanted but all the while the rules are only being applied on an ad hoc basis (usually partisan Mods turning a blind eye when their allies make a rule-breaking post) it makes the forum a frustrating place to post sometimes.

I have no record of being contacted by anyone in connection with this issue.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 05, 2021, 10:12:37 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 05, 2021, 10:10:26 AM
I have no record of being contacted by anyone in connection with this issue.
I asked you about it twice on the thread itself -  you will of course claim you never read my comments addressed to you, despite the fact that you were online at the time and commented on the same thread shortly after my comment addressed to yourself. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 05, 2021, 10:21:03 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 05, 2021, 10:12:37 AM
I asked you about it twice on the thread itself -  you will of course claim you never read my comments addressed to you, despite the fact that you were online at the time and commented on the same thread shortly after my comment addressed to yourself.
You are showing gross disrespect for your moderators if you continue on that line.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 05, 2021, 10:31:34 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 05, 2021, 10:21:03 AM
You are showing gross disrespect for your moderators if you continue on that line.

You could always have VS banned... If you did... Now I'm gone that would be the end of the forum I think it's about time moderators started having some respect for posters
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 05, 2021, 10:37:13 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 05, 2021, 10:31:34 AM
You could always have VS banned... If you did... Now I'm gone that would be the end of the forum I think it's about time moderators started having some respect for posters
I thought we were until we were told by John we are not being tough enough.  Just following orders.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 05, 2021, 10:42:24 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 05, 2021, 10:37:13 AM
I thought we were until we were told by John we are not being tough enough.  Just following orders.

I think it's a mistake by John.. I think your actions and lack of respect for posters will finish the forum off
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 05, 2021, 10:43:38 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 05, 2021, 10:21:03 AM
You are showing gross disrespect for your moderators if you continue on that line.
What are you going to do about it?  I have already messaged John about G-Unit's failure to moderate that thread properly. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 05, 2021, 10:45:41 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 05, 2021, 10:42:24 AM
I think it's a mistake by John.. I think your actions and lack of respect for posters will finish the forum off
I have invited hundreds of people to join the forum but the main issue is that their browser warns people that the site is not secure.   No one joins - that to me is the main problem.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 05, 2021, 10:47:09 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 05, 2021, 10:40:06 AM

If you're going to leave then stop flouncing around & just leave already.

The forum will still be here for you to re-join when you've finished sulking.

Goading post... Which John has instructed mods to crack down on. Will the mods remove it or like it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 05, 2021, 10:52:37 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 05, 2021, 10:47:09 AM
Goading post... Which John has instructed mods to crack down on. Will the mods remove it or like it
I thought he was giving good advice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 05, 2021, 10:53:44 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 05, 2021, 10:52:37 AM
I thought he was giving good advice.

I dont
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 05, 2021, 10:54:50 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 05, 2021, 10:43:38 AM
What are you going to do about it?  I have already messaged John about G-Unit's failure to moderate that thread properly.
Let us know what you get back.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 05, 2021, 10:59:00 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 05, 2021, 10:12:37 AM
I asked you about it twice on the thread itself -  you will of course claim you never read my comments addressed to you, despite the fact that you were online at the time and commented on the same thread shortly after my comment addressed to yourself.

You appear to be labouring under the misapprehension that moderators should take advice from you. I think you should accept the fact that you yourself didn't escape unscathed from John's response. Perhaps you should examine your own behaviour before trying to advise others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 05, 2021, 11:02:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 05, 2021, 10:59:00 AM
You appear to be labouring under the misapprehension that moderators should take advice from you. I think you should accept the fact that you yourself didn't escape unscathed from John's response. Perhaps you should examine your own behaviour before trying to advise others.
I didn't offer you advice, I asked you if you thought the post in question was acceptable and that if you deemed it to be so that i would let the matter rest.  You chose to ignore my post.
 I don't know what you mean about not escaping unscathed from John's response? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 05, 2021, 11:15:20 AM
The subject of moderation is now closed. Any more posts on the subject will be deleted. There is a designated area of the forum where the issue can be raised if members feel the need.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 06, 2021, 05:16:08 PM
I’m surprised no one has mentioned “The Investigation “ which finished screening on BBC2 last night.  About the murder of journalist Kim Wall on a submarine.  There was a whole episode dedicated to the cadaver dog searches, which certainly showed their efforts in a positive light though it took a long time for their alerts to be vindicated.  What was equally interesting was the fact that despite having a body, despite an admission from the murderer that he dismembered the body, despite the fact that he was a sexual deviant who watched videos of female decapitation shortly before he carried out the same crime, despite an absolute mountain of circumstantial evidence against him, the Public Prosecutor still did not have enough to charge him with murder, and was even doubtful about a manslaughter charge as cause of death could not be established.  Also the police felt compelled to go public appealing for associates of the suspect to come forward with info on him.  It was eventually a hitherto overlooked piece of forensic evidence that allowed the Danish authorities to successfully prosecute.  It was a fantastic series. IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 06, 2021, 08:43:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 06, 2021, 05:16:08 PM
I’m surprised no one has mentioned “The Investigation “ which finished screening on BBC2 last night.  About the murder of journalist Kim Wall on a submarine.  There was a whole episode dedicated to the cadaver dog searches, which certainly showed their efforts in a positive light though it took a long time for their alerts to be vindicated.  What was equally interesting was the fact that despite having a body, despite an admission from the murderer that he dismembered the body, despite the fact that he was a sexual deviant who watched videos of female decapitation shortly before he carried out the same crime, despite an absolute mountain of circumstantial evidence against him, the Public Prosecutor still did not have enough to charge him with murder, and was even doubtful about a manslaughter charge as cause of death could not be established.  Also the police felt compelled to go public appealing for associates of the suspect to come forward with info on him.  It was eventually a hitherto overlooked piece of forensic evidence that allowed the Danish authorities to successfully prosecute.  It was a fantastic series. IMO.


The humans had to determine what carried the scent, current's or wind, dog alerts were corroborated once they found the currents played the bigger part.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 06, 2021, 09:11:45 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 06, 2021, 05:16:08 PM
I’m surprised no one has mentioned “The Investigation “ which finished screening on BBC2 last night.  About the murder of journalist Kim Wall on a submarine.  There was a whole episode dedicated to the cadaver dog searches, which certainly showed their efforts in a positive light though it took a long time for their alerts to be vindicated.  What was equally interesting was the fact that despite having a body, despite an admission from the murderer that he dismembered the body, despite the fact that he was a sexual deviant who watched videos of female decapitation shortly before he carried out the same crime, despite an absolute mountain of circumstantial evidence against him, the Public Prosecutor still did not have enough to charge him with murder, and was even doubtful about a manslaughter charge as cause of death could not be established.  Also the police felt compelled to go public appealing for associates of the suspect to come forward with info on him.  It was eventually a hitherto overlooked piece of forensic evidence that allowed the Danish authorities to successfully prosecute.  It was a fantastic series. IMO.

It was the manner in which Kim's fate was decreed which struck home for me.

On the day that she contacted him to arrange an interview he had tried on three separate occasions to entice three different women to take the trip with him.

The burden of proof the police worked under was unbelievable and although I was familiar with the case and knew the outcome I could hardly believe it when they were shown to come up trumps.

If they hadn't, who knows what other depth of depravity that beast would have come up with.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 11, 2021, 12:41:10 PM
Another documentary coming up;

Three-part Discovery Plus original documentary series “Prime Suspect: The Madeleine McCann Case,” examines the new German suspect Christian B for the first time, and his link to one of the world’s most well-known unsolved cases – Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.
https://variety.com/2021/biz/global/madeleine-mccann-case-news-supsect-discovery-original-1234905756/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 11, 2021, 02:14:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 11, 2021, 12:41:10 PM
Another documentary coming up;

Three-part Discovery Plus original documentary series “Prime Suspect: The Madeleine McCann Case,” examines the new German suspect Christian B for the first time, and his link to one of the world’s most well-known unsolved cases – Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.
https://variety.com/2021/biz/global/madeleine-mccann-case-news-supsect-discovery-original-1234905756/
three parts??  They must have a lot to tell, probably won't be what any of his apologists will want to hear though...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 11, 2021, 02:39:21 PM


Seems like GA could be involved in it.

Produced by Danish Heartland TV and directed by Jesper H. Grand, the collection options the participation of buddies of the suspect, an ex-girlfriend and different key individuals in the case, together with the suspect’s protection counsel, the German prosecutor and the former Portuguese investigator.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 11, 2021, 02:56:53 PM
I'm afraid I have no confidence in any of these documentaries. They all employ 'rent a mouths' to expound on their pet theories and twist and omit information to fit whatever agenda the producers are following.

Their  underlying purpose is revenue and ratings not portraying events truthfully.

And yet you get people who should  know better treating them as gospel and citing various parts to support their argument.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 11, 2021, 03:01:15 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 11, 2021, 02:56:53 PM
I'm afraid I have no confidence in any of these documentaries. They all employ 'rent a mouths' to expound on their pet theories and twist and omit information to fit whatever agenda the producers are following.

Their  underlying purpose is revenue and ratings not portraying events truthfully.

And yet you get people who should  know better treating them as gospel and citing various parts to support their argument.
Well if Amaral's on it then you could be right about them employing "Rent A Mouths".  I doubt that will put anyone off watching it, apart from your good self of course. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 13, 2021, 11:31:45 AM
Interesting story of abduction -
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/13/police-stop-plane-on-heathrow-tarmac-to-arrest-child-abduction-suspect

Wonder if it will turn out to be the child's father. Being released on bail suggests that he is not seen as much of  a risk.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 13, 2021, 11:36:58 AM
Quote from: jassi on February 13, 2021, 11:31:45 AM
Interesting story of abduction -
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/13/police-stop-plane-on-heathrow-tarmac-to-arrest-child-abduction-suspect

Wonder if it will turn out to be the child's father. Being released on bail suggests that he is not seen as much of  a risk.
As does
“A 32-year-old man, who is known to the girl, has been arrested on suspicion of child abduction”.  A not uncommon story, sadly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 13, 2021, 02:55:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 13, 2021, 11:36:58 AM
As does
“A 32-year-old man, who is known to the girl, has been arrested on suspicion of child abduction”.  A not uncommon story, sadly.

Unlike stranger abduction from holiday resort.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 13, 2021, 03:36:00 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 13, 2021, 02:55:40 PM
Unlike stranger abduction from holiday resort.
a thankfully rare occurrence indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 13, 2021, 03:38:26 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 13, 2021, 02:55:40 PM
Unlike stranger abduction from holiday resort.

These are figures from the US;

On average, fewer than 350 people under the age of 21 have been abducted by strangers in the United States per year since 2010, the FBI says. From 2010 through 2017, the most recent data available, the number has ranged from a low of 303 in 2016 to a high of 384 in 2011 with no clear directional trend...

The NCMEC says that abductions by strangers are the rarest type of cases of missing children. Strangers are most likely to attempt to abduct a child as they head to or from school, the center said.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-wisconsin-missinggirl-data-idUSKCN1P52BJ

To place the figures in context, the 350 abductions above were a infinitesimal number of the 74 million under 18's in the USA
https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-03.pdf

The risk of child being abducted by a stranger is so rare in the USA as to be almost zero.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 13, 2021, 03:42:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 13, 2021, 03:38:26 PM
These are figures from the US;

On average, fewer than 350 people under the age of 21 have been abducted by strangers in the United States per year since 2010, the FBI says. From 2010 through 2017, the most recent data available, the number has ranged from a low of 303 in 2016 to a high of 384 in 2011 with no clear directional trend...

The NCMEC says that abductions by strangers are the rarest type of cases of missing children. Strangers are most likely to attempt to abduct a child as they head to or from school, the center said.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-wisconsin-missinggirl-data-idUSKCN1P52BJ

To place the figures in context, the 350 abductions above were a infinitesimal number of the 74 million under 18's in the USA
https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-03.pdf

The risk of child being abducted by a stranger is so rare in the USA as to be almost zero.
350 stranger abductions of children is nearly one per day.  What point are you trying to make?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 13, 2021, 05:54:03 PM
A paper Perlin was involved in.

TrueAllele validation paper chosen as a 2020 Noteworthy Article by the Journal of Forensic Sciences

The authors of the noteworthy article are Dr. David Bauer, Dr. Nasir Butt, Jennifer Bracamontes, and Dr. Mark Perlin.

https://www.cybgen.com/information/newsroom/2021/jan/TrueAllele-validation-paper-chosen-as-a-2020-Noteworthy-Article-by-the-Journal-of-Forensic-Sciences.shtml
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 13, 2021, 06:13:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 13, 2021, 03:38:26 PM
These are figures from the US;

On average, fewer than 350 people under the age of 21 have been abducted by strangers in the United States per year since 2010, the FBI says. From 2010 through 2017, the most recent data available, the number has ranged from a low of 303 in 2016 to a high of 384 in 2011 with no clear directional trend...

The NCMEC says that abductions by strangers are the rarest type of cases of missing children. Strangers are most likely to attempt to abduct a child as they head to or from school, the center said.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-wisconsin-missinggirl-data-idUSKCN1P52BJ

To place the figures in context, the 350 abductions above were a infinitesimal number of the 74 million under 18's in the USA
https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-03.pdf

The risk of child being abducted by a stranger is so rare in the USA as to be almost zero.

As rare as a burglar who also happems to be  a  paedophile no doubt
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 13, 2021, 06:16:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 13, 2021, 06:13:05 PM
As rare as a burglar who also happems to be  a  paedophile no doubt

How many burglaries has CB been convicted of ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 13, 2021, 06:34:49 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 13, 2021, 06:16:42 PM
How many burglaries has CB been convicted of ?

I've no idea ... probably something along the lines of the number of convictions the arguidos of 2013 had ... what was that again?
Or was he just so good at breaking into residences he wasn't actually caught?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 13, 2021, 07:38:48 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 13, 2021, 06:16:42 PM
How many burglaries has CB been convicted of ?
His friends claim many. Passports, cameras, Rolex watches.
No convictions though. Petty theft. In my country, you don’t bother to get a case number from police for this sort of crime.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 13, 2021, 08:34:00 PM
Quote from: Anthro on February 13, 2021, 07:38:48 PM
His friends claim many. Passports, cameras, Rolex watches.
No convictions though. Petty theft. In my country, you don’t bother to get a case number from police for this sort of crime.

Are you able to claim on your insurance without a crime number? I had to get a crime number from a very uninterested police officer when my wheelie bin was stolen. The council wouldn't give me another one unless I did that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 13, 2021, 11:07:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 13, 2021, 08:34:00 PM
Are you able to claim on your insurance without a crime number? I had to get a crime number from a very uninterested police officer when my wheelie bin was stolen. The council wouldn't give me another one unless I did that.
You reported your wheelie bin stolen to the police?!   Mine goes missing three or four times a year and I just call up the council to get a new one, no police involved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 14, 2021, 12:53:40 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 13, 2021, 11:07:03 PM
You reported your wheelie bin stolen to the police?!   Mine goes missing three or four times a year and I just call up the council to get a new one, no police involved.
Are there police in your area?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on February 14, 2021, 08:09:39 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 13, 2021, 08:34:00 PM
Are you able to claim on your insurance without a crime number? I had to get a crime number from a very uninterested police officer when my wheelie bin was stolen. The council wouldn't give me another one unless I did that.
No, I can’t claim from my insurance without a case number. We usually only claim for an item/damage exceeding R50 000 (+/- £2500).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2021, 08:15:23 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 14, 2021, 12:53:40 AM
Are there police in your area?
Yes but I wouldn’t dream of wasting their time on such a trivial matter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 14, 2021, 09:46:17 AM
Quote from: Anthro on February 13, 2021, 07:38:48 PM
His friends claim many. Passports, cameras, Rolex watches.
No convictions though. Petty theft. In my country, you don’t bother to get a case number from police for this sort of crime.

Much as I thought, those friends again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 14, 2021, 10:48:10 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 13, 2021, 11:07:03 PM
You reported your wheelie bin stolen to the police?!   Mine goes missing three or four times a year and I just call up the council to get a new one, no police involved.

My council gave me two choices - get a crime number and get a new bin free or don't get a crime number and pay them the cost of the new bin.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2021, 10:58:16 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 14, 2021, 10:48:10 AM
My council gave me two choices - get a crime number and get a new bin free or don't get a crime number and pay them the cost of the new bin.
must be a Tory council.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 14, 2021, 11:00:24 AM
Who! wants a second hand rubbish bin ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2021, 11:01:29 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 14, 2021, 11:00:24 AM
Who! wants a second hand rubbish bin ?
How much?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 14, 2021, 11:02:07 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 14, 2021, 11:01:29 AM
How much?

Motorised ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 11:03:59 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 14, 2021, 10:58:16 AM
must be a Tory council.

Now that is Libel, especially if it's a Labour Council.  How dare you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 11:04:45 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 14, 2021, 11:00:24 AM
Who! wants a second hand rubbish bin ?

Someone who had theirs nicked.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 14, 2021, 11:05:55 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 11:03:59 AM
Now that is Libel, especially if it's a Labour Council.  How dare you.
They must have stolen the election!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2021, 11:15:09 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 11:03:59 AM
Now that is Libel, especially if it's a Labour Council.  How dare you.
So sue me Boris Bin Snatcher.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2021, 11:15:47 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 14, 2021, 11:02:07 AM
Motorised ?
Only if it’s Dusty!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 14, 2021, 11:25:52 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 14, 2021, 11:15:47 AM
Only if it’s Dusty!


I'll get swmbo to empty the vacuum in it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 14, 2021, 11:27:08 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 14, 2021, 11:00:24 AM
Who! wants a second hand rubbish bin ?

Mine was brand new, never been used. New bins were being delivered to every household at the time. I rang up because collections were due to start and I didn't have the right bin. They said they'd delivered one, I said it wasn't there and they said it must have been stolen and I must report it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 11:33:00 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 14, 2021, 11:15:09 AM
So sue me Boris Bin Snatcher.

I'll set Macron on yous.  Get outa that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 14, 2021, 11:35:16 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 14, 2021, 11:27:08 AM
Mine was brand new, never been used. New bins were being delivered to every household at the time. I rang up because collections were due to start and I didn't have the right bin. They said they'd delivered one, I said it wasn't there and they said it must have been stolen and I must report it.

So no evidence it was stolen
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2021, 11:35:21 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 11:33:00 AM
I'll set Macron on yous.  Get outa that.
That little pipsqueak wouldn’t reach my knees (and I’m certainly not old enough for him to show any interest in anyway). 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2021, 11:36:09 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 14, 2021, 11:35:16 AM
So no evidence it was stolen
LOL.  Yeah, maybe she just didn’t like the colour and chucked the bin in the nearest bin and staged an abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 14, 2021, 11:43:23 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 14, 2021, 11:35:16 AM
So no evidence it was stolen

None at all, but I was forced to report it or pay up for one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 11:59:04 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 14, 2021, 11:35:21 AM
That little pipsqueak wouldn’t reach my knees (and I’m certainly not old enough for him to show any interest in anyway).

Are you suggesting that I am?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2021, 12:15:24 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 11:59:04 AM
Are you suggesting that I am?
To be fair you’re probably more his type.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 12:28:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 14, 2021, 12:15:24 PM
To be fair you’re probably more his type.

Age you mean.  Well, don't you?  Sadly, he's too old for me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2021, 12:46:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 12:28:43 PM
Age you mean.  Well, don't you?  Sadly, he's too old for me.
@)(++(*. He’s too short for me.  And too French.  Sozaloz.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 12:51:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 14, 2021, 12:46:30 PM
@)(++(*. He’s too short for me.  And too French.  Sozaloz.

Anything is better than Marine le Penn.  Do you fancy her?  For President I mean?  And not that other funny stuff.  Unless you fancy that of course;

Is this comment Libellous?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2021, 12:58:48 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 12:51:27 PM
Anything is better than Marine le Penn.  Do you fancy her?  For President I mean?  And not that other funny stuff.  Unless you fancy that of course;

Is this comment Libellous?
On my lord.  Are you asking me if I’m lesbitiously inclined?  How very dare you!! Certainly not for Marine Le Pen, nor Madame Macron that’s for certain.  I fancy Eric Cantona though.  For president, and the other thing. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 01:08:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 14, 2021, 12:58:48 PM
On my lord.  Are you asking me if I’m lesbitiously inclined?  How very dare you!! Certainly not for Marine Le Pen, nor Madame Macron that’s for certain.  I fancy Eric Cantona though.  For president, and the other thing.

You mean you're not Woke?  I shall have to report you to The Woke Police.  See how you like that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2021, 01:12:29 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 01:08:06 PM
You mean you're not Woke?  I shall have to report you to The Woke Police.  See how you like that.
I’m certainly not woke, I’m half asleep most of the time, and spend my more lucid moments championing child neglecters and body occulteers.  Hardly woke innit.  I think you can be unwoke and a lesbian though, look at Julie Burchill (if you can bear to, mindd you she IS an ex lezzer).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 01:51:33 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 14, 2021, 01:12:29 PM
I’m certainly not woke, I’m half asleep most of the time, and spend my more lucid moments championing child neglecters and body occulteers.  Hardly woke innit.  I think you can be unwoke and a lesbian though, look at Julie Burchill (if you can bear to, mindd you she IS an ex lezzer).

All of The Woke will be Ex Woke in a minute, so don't worry about it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 14, 2021, 05:37:47 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 12:51:27 PM
Anything is better than Marine le Penn.  Do you fancy her?  For President I mean?  And not that other funny stuff.  Unless you fancy that of course;

Is this comment Libellous?


 (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 14, 2021, 06:42:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 14, 2021, 11:36:09 AM
LOL.  Yeah, maybe she just didn’t like the colour and chucked the bin in the nearest bin and staged an abduction.
Libel ! 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 14, 2021, 06:43:49 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 14, 2021, 11:59:04 AM
Are you suggesting that I am?
Sue her for damages.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 14, 2021, 07:11:03 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 14, 2021, 06:42:53 PM
Libel !
It was a theory not a fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 14, 2021, 07:31:00 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 14, 2021, 07:11:03 PM
It was a theory not a fact.
Was it?    When I presented my theory I made sure it was labelled a "theory", using words like "theoretical" repeatedly just someone thought I was libelling them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 14, 2021, 07:40:26 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 14, 2021, 06:42:53 PM
Libel !

"Maybe" identifies it as a possibility, hence opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 15, 2021, 07:26:36 AM
Spare a thought today for Peter Lawrence who died last Thursday without ever knowing what happened to his beloved daughter Claudia.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: puglove on February 15, 2021, 07:55:08 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 15, 2021, 07:26:36 AM
Spare a thought today for Peter Lawrence who died last Thursday without ever knowing what happened to his beloved daughter Claudia.

Gosh, I hadn't read about this. He seemed such a sweet, gentle man.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 15, 2021, 09:12:48 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 15, 2021, 07:26:36 AM
Spare a thought today for Peter Lawrence who died last Thursday without ever knowing what happened to his beloved daughter Claudia.


Very sad.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 15, 2021, 06:20:24 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 15, 2021, 07:26:36 AM
Spare a thought today for Peter Lawrence who died last Thursday without ever knowing what happened to his beloved daughter Claudia.

A grown woman disappears with out trace, what hope a small child after 14 yrs, nigh on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 15, 2021, 06:26:49 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 15, 2021, 06:20:24 PM
A grown woman disappears with out trace, what hope a small child after 14 yrs, nigh on.
It’s not unheard of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 15, 2021, 06:31:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 15, 2021, 06:26:49 PM
It’s not unheard of.

Agreed, in the Lawrence case numerous arrest's under suspicion of murder but no charges.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 15, 2021, 06:50:49 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 15, 2021, 06:31:54 PM
Agreed, in the Lawrence case numerous arrest's under suspicion of murder but no charges.
Some cases can never be solved, not without a massive stroke of luck, a tip off or a confession.  This is obviously one of those.  Her poor father, going to his grave never getting the answers he so  doggedly sought.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 20, 2021, 06:08:53 PM
For anyone who feels the need.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpg_VJ0XckQ&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 20, 2021, 07:55:32 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 20, 2021, 06:08:53 PM
For anyone who feels the need.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpg_VJ0XckQ&feature=youtu.be
Damn, I’m washing my hair this evening, then I have some drying paint to watch.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 08:07:12 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 20, 2021, 07:55:32 PM
Damn, I’m washing my hair this evening, then I have some drying paint to watch.

I can hardly wait.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 20, 2021, 08:45:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 20, 2021, 07:55:32 PM
Damn, I’m washing my hair this evening, then I have some drying paint to watch.
Multitask then.  Do all three together.  It is live now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 08:53:26 PM

It is absolute rubbish.  Approximately 90 people listening.  Probably the entire membership of CMoMM, presuming they have that many members.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 09:07:22 PM

There is a conversation going on the right hand side which is a bit distracting and Dave Mojo is getting a hard time because he doesn't agree with them.  They are threatening to block him.  Very democratic.

All a bit of a hoot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 20, 2021, 09:08:13 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 08:53:26 PM
It is absolute rubbish.  Approximately 90 people listening.  Probably the entire membership of CMoMM, presuming they have that many members.
That is a lot.

Dave Mojo?  is that Davel?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 09:14:13 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 20, 2021, 09:08:13 PM
That is a lot.

Dave Mojo?  is that Davel?

Don't know.  He seems to have disappeared.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 09:35:22 PM

God, this just gets worse.  So unprofessional.  Definitely CMoMM.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 09:57:07 PM

Right, that's it.  I can't cope with any more of this.  Pat Brown is laughing herself silly most of the time and Hideho is definitely in charge.

All the same old same old CMoMM Myths.  And Brueckner definitely didn't dun it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 10:11:52 PM

And that's it from me, Folks, on the front line of the most uninteresting discussion I have ever heard.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 20, 2021, 10:12:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 09:57:07 PM
Right, that's it.  I can't cope with any more of this.  Pat Brown is laughing herself silly most of the time and Hideho is definitely in charge.

All the same old same old CMoMM Myths.  And Brueckner definitely didn't dun it.

Well done for sticking with it as long as you did....you’re made of sterner stuff than me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 10:24:53 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 20, 2021, 10:12:30 PM
Well done for sticking with it as long as you did....you’re made of sterner stuff than me.

Thank you.  I even surprised myself.

I kept on hoping for something riveting.  I should have known better of course.

I just had another quick look and it is still dragging on.  Nearly two hours now of Pat Brown talking about herself when not being interrupted by HideHo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 20, 2021, 10:53:17 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 10:11:52 PM
And that's it from me, Folks, on the front line of the most uninteresting discussion I have ever heard.

Is it on a loop or are they still prattling on?  I don't know how long I lasted ... certainly not long ... but they had just started pontificating about the twins in unlearned answer to an unlearned question when I switched it off.

Who the hell do these sick people think they are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 11:03:29 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 20, 2021, 10:53:17 PM
Is it on a loop or are they still prattling on?  I don't know how long I lasted ... certainly not long ... but they had just started pontificating about the twins in unlearned answer to an unlearned question when I switched it off.

Who the hell do these sick people think they are.

Still going on, but it might be on a loop now.  The most interesting bit was them threatening to Block people for disagreeing.  Poor old Dave Mojo didn't last long.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 20, 2021, 11:17:01 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 20, 2021, 10:53:17 PM
Is it on a loop or are they still prattling on?  I don't know how long I lasted ... certainly not long ... but they had just started pontificating about the twins in unlearned answer to an unlearned question when I switched it off.

Who the hell do these sick people think they are.

What makes you think they're sick?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 20, 2021, 11:21:38 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 20, 2021, 10:53:17 PM
Is it on a loop or are they still prattling on?  I don't know how long I lasted ... certainly not long ... but they had just started pontificating about the twins in unlearned answer to an unlearned question when I switched it off.

Who the hell do these sick people think they are.

I suppose they assume they have the same right to talk about private matters as those who discuss Amaral’s finances or marriage breakdown.

It’s really none of either’s business.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 11:28:30 PM

Oh well, there goes my fifteen minutes of fame.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 21, 2021, 12:41:57 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 11:28:30 PM
Oh well, there goes my fifteen minutes of fame.
You still have your smile.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 01:11:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 20, 2021, 11:17:01 PM
What makes you think they're sick?

What makes you ask?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 01:15:52 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 20, 2021, 11:03:29 PM
Still going on, but it might be on a loop now.  The most interesting bit was them threatening to Block people for disagreeing.  Poor old Dave Mojo didn't last long.

That's the problem with freedom of speachspeech ~ all well and good if the party line is being followed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 21, 2021, 06:43:54 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 21, 2021, 12:41:57 AM
You still have your smile.

Oh Yes, and O'Connor.  I'm going o get that framed and hang on my kitchen wall.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 09:50:43 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 01:15:52 AM
That's the problem with freedom of speachspeech ~ all well and good if the party line is being followed

I’m afraid that happens on both sides.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 21, 2021, 09:54:54 AM
It sounds as if  people were forced to watch this program - so they could have a good moan about it  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 10:03:24 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 01:11:59 AM
What makes you ask?

I asked because the word can have many different meanings and I wanted your definition. Taking the word out of your sentence we are left with "Who the hell do these people think they are." Which suggests to me that you think they are taking it upon themselves to do or say something which they have no right to do.

Describing them as "sick" suggests you think they are in less than perfect health. Do you think they are ill in body or mind perhaps?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 10:08:57 AM
Quote from: jassi on February 21, 2021, 09:54:54 AM
It sounds as if that people were forced to watch this program - so they could have a good moan about it  @)(++(*

It was recommended to us.  It would have been hypocritical to join a conversation about it without at least making the effort to watch it.
Does it not dismay you even slightly that the twins became subjects for scrutiny.  It certainly does me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 10:10:34 AM
Quote from: jassi on February 21, 2021, 09:54:54 AM
It sounds as if  people were forced to watch this program - so they could have a good moan about it  @)(++(*
I didn’t watch it, was it good?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 10:13:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 10:03:24 AM
I asked because the word can have many different meanings and I wanted your definition. Taking the word out of your sentence we are left with "Who the hell do these people think they are." Which suggests to me that you think they are taking it upon themselves to do or say something which they have no right to do.

Describing them as "sick" suggests you think they are in less than perfect health. Do you think they are ill in body or mind perhaps?
I’m surprised you couldn’t work that one out for yourself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 10:22:48 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 10:13:24 AM
I’m surprised you couldn’t work that one out for yourself.

I was just trying to work out exactly what was meant by the use of that word. It sounded a lot like a slur to me, but perhaps I misunderstood.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 10:25:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 10:22:48 AM
I was just trying to work out exactly what was meant by the use of that word. It sounded a lot like a slur to me, but perhaps I misunderstood.
Oh right, you were hoping Brietta would self incriminate herself. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 10:26:51 AM
Personally I think it takes a sick mind to come up with the idea that Gerry transported his dead daughter back to England in his hand luggage as if he were a bush meat smuggler, but that’s just me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 10:30:11 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 10:03:24 AM
I asked because the word can have many different meanings and I wanted your definition. Taking the word out of your sentence we are left with "Who the hell do these people think they are." Which suggests to me that you think they are taking it upon themselves to do or say something which they have no right to do.

Describing them as "sick" suggests you think they are in less than perfect health. Do you think they are ill in body or mind perhaps?

Had I the time or the inclination to define "sick" for you I might give some thought to helping you out but I have neither.

Anyway ~ apart from my syntax ~ what did you think of the performance it seems few were able to suffer for very long?



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 21, 2021, 10:47:31 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 10:26:51 AM
Personally I think it takes a sick mind to come up with the idea that Gerry transported his dead daughter back to England in his hand luggage as if he were a bush meat smuggler, but that’s just me.
Is that a slur on bush meat smugglers?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 10:50:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 10:22:48 AM
I was just trying to work out exactly what was meant by the use of that word. It sounded a lot like a slur to me, but perhaps I misunderstood.

Is it really possible to slur two individuals who are spending hours slurring the parents of a missing child while ensuring that her siblings are drawn into their mix of slurs.

Did either of these women achieve anything other than massaging their egos ~ encouraging the prejudices of their target audience ~ or exploiting a missing child to enhance their bank balances.

What I watched was disagreeable and sick making abuse of children.  Did you watch any or all it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 10:57:03 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 10:08:57 AM
It was recommended to us.  It would have been hypocritical to join a conversation about it without at least making the effort to watch it.
Does it not dismay you even slightly that the twins became subjects for scrutiny.  It certainly does me.

It wasn’t recommended, simply posted to let members know that it existed.

I didn’t watch it myself as, knowing the protagonists, I knew exactly what the content would be. I’m sure others did too but still watched. Isn’t that the very definition of masochism?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 11:00:05 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 21, 2021, 10:47:31 AM
Is that a slur on bush meat smugglers?

I don't know if that particular slur was repeated last night by these two cheer leaders for every slur in the book aimed at the McCanns but that accusation as detailed by VS ranks I believe as one of the sickest slurs it is possible to use.

All encouraged by Amaral who used the slur in an interview very recently.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 21, 2021, 11:03:04 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 10:57:03 AM
It wasn’t recommended, simply posted to let members know that it existed.

I didn’t watch it myself as, knowing the protagonists, I knew exactly what the content would be. I’m sure others did too but still watched. Isn’t that the very definition of masochism?

Devotion to the cause. Would one expect anything less from zealots ?  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 11:03:59 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 11:00:05 AM
I don't know if that particular slur was repeated last night by these two cheer leaders for every slur in the book aimed at the McCanns but that accusation as detailed by VS ranks I believe as one of the sickest slurs it is possible to use.

All encouraged by Amaral who used the slur in an interview very recently.

I must have missed that interview. You obviously follow Amaral’s utterings much, much more closely than me. Do you have a cite?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 11:06:48 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 11:03:59 AM
I must have missed that interview. You obviously follow Amaral’s utterings much, much more closely than me. Do you have a cite?

As I recall it was one of Pat Brown's theories
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 11:10:35 AM
Quote from: jassi on February 21, 2021, 11:03:04 AM
Devotion to the cause. Would one expect anything less from zealots ?  8(0(*
That’s definitely a slur.  Mods!!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 11:15:12 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 10:26:51 AM
Personally I think it takes a sick mind to come up with the idea that Gerry transported his dead daughter back to England in his hand luggage as if he were a bush meat smuggler, but that’s just me.

You seem to be leaning towards the sick in mind definition. I just read up about bushmeat smuggling; I had no idea! The smugglers seem to get a lot of it through too, it's not just small amounts for personal use.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 11:15:56 AM
Quote from: jassi on February 21, 2021, 11:03:04 AM
Devotion to the cause. Would one expect anything less from zealots ?  8(0(*

There is money to be made on YouTube.  I think it takes a particular zeal to disingenuously post links promoting such.

Probably just part of the learning curve to disregard such information in the future.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 21, 2021, 11:21:07 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 11:15:56 AM
There is money to be made on YouTube.  I think it takes a particular zeal to disingenuously post links promoting such.

Probably just part of the learning curve to disregard such information in the future.
Do you have any idea of the levels of support that would be required to make anything on YouTube? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 11:21:33 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 11:15:12 AM
You seem to be leaning towards the sick in mind definition. I just read up about bushmeat smuggling; I had no idea! The smugglers seem to get a lot of it through too, it's not just small amounts for personal use.
Any reports of them smuggling dead children through customs in their hand luggage?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 11:35:04 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 10:50:59 AM
Is it really possible to slur two individuals who are spending hours slurring the parents of a missing child while ensuring that her siblings are drawn into their mix of slurs.

Did either of these women achieve anything other than massaging their egos ~ encouraging the prejudices of their target audience ~ or exploiting a missing child to enhance their bank balances.

What I watched was disagreeable and sick making abuse of children.  Did you watch any or all it?

I do indeed think it's possible to insult and attempt to damage the reputation of others by calling them 'sick', yes. As far as I know there's no evidence that those people are suffering from any illnesses of mind or body.

I also see no evidence of them "massaging their egos ~ encouraging the prejudices of their target audience ~ or exploiting a missing child to enhance their bank balances."

In my opinion it's all your opinion, which could and should have been made clear.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 11:39:57 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 11:06:48 AM
As I recall it was one of Pat Brown's theories

It was but I’ve never heard Amaral claim it. Perhaps Brietta wil furnish us with a cite?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 11:41:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 11:35:04 AM
I do indeed think it's possible to insult and attempt to damage the reputation of others by calling them 'sick', yes. As far as I know there's no evidence that those people are suffering from any illnesses of mind or body.

I also see no evidence of them "massaging their egos ~ encouraging the prejudices of their target audience ~ or exploiting a missing child to enhance their bank balances."

In my opinion it's all your opinion, which could and should have been made clear.
Obviously it was Brietta's opinion, no need for her to say so IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 11:49:22 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 11:15:56 AM
There is money to be made on YouTube.  I think it takes a particular zeal to disingenuously post links promoting such.

Probably just part of the learning curve to disregard such information in the future.

Zeal? Takes not zeal to post a link. Disingenuously? I explained exactly why I posted the link. Promotion? I don’t think even you believe that.

And yes best to disregard a link to something that you know will not be to your taste...I did, pity you chose not to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 11:49:38 AM
Sick does not always refer to a person who is suffering from an illness as I'm sure G-Unit is only too well aware.  Here are some other definitions:


2: spiritually or morally unsound or corrupt

4a: mentally or emotionally unsound or disordered : MORBID
sick thoughts
b: highly distasteful : MACABRE, SADISTIC
sick jokes
a sick crime
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 11:50:55 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 10:50:59 AM
Is it really possible to slur two individuals who are spending hours slurring the parents of a missing child while ensuring that her siblings are drawn into their mix of slurs.

Did either of these women achieve anything other than massaging their egos ~ encouraging the prejudices of their target audience ~ or exploiting a missing child to enhance their bank balances.

What I watched was disagreeable and sick making abuse of children.  Did you watch any or all it?

Two wrongs don't make a right Brietta.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 11:51:46 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 11:49:38 AM
Sick does not always refer to a person who is suffering from an illness as I'm sure G-Unit is only too well aware.  Here are some other definitions:


2: spiritually or morally unsound or corrupt

4a: mentally or emotionally unsound or disordered : MORBID
sick thoughts
b: highly distasteful : MACABRE, SADISTIC
sick jokes
a sick crime

...or just sad?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 11:58:05 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 11:51:46 AM
...or just sad?
Sure, if you prefer sad to sick, I'm fine with that too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 21, 2021, 12:16:25 PM
I just had a quick look.   Pat Brown said that it is possible it was Gerry that the Smith's saw as people can walk through the streets with a dead child because they panic.   Well lets think about that for a minute.  Did the Smith man look or act as if he was panicking?   If Gerry had found Madeleine dead I don't believe for one moment that he would have just taken her body and ran with it.   First of all it would have been a huge shock to find her,  he no doubt would have been crying desperately trying to help  her,   he would have called Kate he would have called his friends.   But,  if he hadn't and then after trying to save her he picked her up and hid her,  how would he be so calm and collected when he met Jeremy?   Jeremy said he spoke normally to him.   Then off he went to laugh and joke and eat his dinner.   No,  sorry no way IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 12:19:25 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 21, 2021, 12:16:25 PM
I just had a quick look.   Pat Brown said that it is possible it was Gerry that the Smith's saw as people can ran through the streets with a dead child because they panic.   Well lets think about that for a minute.   Was the Smith man running?  did he look panicked?    If Gerry had found Madeleine dead I don't believe for one moment that he would have just taken her body and run with it.   First of all it would have been a huge shock to find her,  he no doubt would have been crying desperately trying to help  her,   he would have called Kate he would have called his friends.   But,  if he hadn't and then after trying to save her he picked her up and hid her,  how would he be so calm and collected when he met Jeremy?   Jeremy said he spoke normally to him.   Then off he went to laugh and joke and eat his dinner.   No,  sorry no way IMO
someone in a panic with a dead body he's desperately trying to hide who has just been spotted by half a dozen people then goes on to find a hiding place (in the dark, in a town he was not that familiar with, with no vehicle and no tools) so brilliant no one ever found the body after 13 plus years..  It's a miracle.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 12:39:01 PM
Imo neither of them are particularly bright... And that goes for those who support and follow their line of thought.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 12:43:38 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 11:50:55 AM
Two wrongs don't make a right Brietta.
If these two individuals feel they have the right to promote their opinion how can they object to others giving their opinion of themselves
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 12:45:21 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 12:43:38 PM
If these two individuals feel they have the right to promote their opinion how can they object to others giving their opinion of themselves
Yep.  They put their heads above the parapet, they can expect to have them shot off.  Metaphorically speaking of course...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 12:46:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 12:39:01 PM
Imo neither of them are particularly bright... And that goes for those who support and follow their line of thought.
I don't follow Pat Brown's career closely at all but I'm curious to know what successes she's had recently in her crime solving endeavours.  Anyone know?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 12:47:31 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 21, 2021, 12:16:25 PM
I just had a quick look.   Pat Brown said that it is possible it was Gerry that the Smith's saw as people can walk through the streets with a dead child because they panic.   Well lets think about that for a minute.  Did the Smith man look or act as if he was panicking?   If Gerry had found Madeleine dead I don't believe for one moment that he would have just taken her body and ran with it.   First of all it would have been a huge shock to find her,  he no doubt would have been crying desperately trying to help  her,   he would have called Kate he would have called his friends.   But,  if he hadn't and then after trying to save her he picked her up and hid her,  how would he be so calm and collected when he met Jeremy?   Jeremy said he spoke normally to him.   Then off he went to laugh and joke and eat his dinner.   No,  sorry no way IMO

You begin by suggesting that carrying a body through the streets occured immediately after discovering it. Then you go on to suggest finding a body, hiding it, telling no-one and then chatting unconcernedly with an acquaintance. Can you think of any other possibilities?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 12:48:44 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 12:46:42 PM
I don't follow Pat Brown's career closely at all but I'm curious to know what successes she's had recently in her crime solving endeavours.  Anyone know?

In fact what success has she ever had
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 12:51:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 12:47:31 PM
You begin by suggesting that carrying a body through the streets occured immediately after discovering it. Then you go on to suggest finding a body, hiding it, telling no-one and then chatting unconcernedly with an acquaintance. Can you think of any other possibilities?
I can - stranger abduction.  That does away with the need to create a completely improbable and illogical narrative of parental involvement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 12:53:20 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 12:43:38 PM
If these two individuals feel they have the right to promote their opinion how can they object to others giving their opinion of themselves

That reminds me of the McCann v Amaral case. They clearly didn't like his opinion and he made no personal remarks about them imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 12:55:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 12:53:20 PM
That reminds me of the McCann v Amaral case. They clearly didn't like his opinion and he made no personal remarks about them imo.
He accused them of criminal acts. Can you not see that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 21, 2021, 12:55:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 12:39:01 PM
Imo neither of them are particularly bright... And that goes for those who support and follow their line of thought.

Well, that is just your opinion D a poster.

Whereas Pat Brown is a .sucsesfull (criminal profiler).

poster and those who follow your line of thought vs criminal profiler Pat Brown.

No contest really IMO who is the brightest.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 12:57:18 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 21, 2021, 12:55:46 PM
Well, that is just your opinion D a poster.

Whereas Pat Brown is a .sucsesfull (criminal profiler).

poster and those who follow your line of thought vs criminal profiler Pat Brown.

No contest really IMO who is the brightest.
Oh dear.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 21, 2021, 12:58:05 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 12:55:10 PM
He accused them of criminal acts. Can you not see that

He accused them of criminal acts

Can you not see - he has not been proved wrong it seems.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 12:59:10 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 21, 2021, 12:58:05 PM
He accused them of criminal acts

Can you not see - he has not been proved wrong it seems.
So are you saying it's ok to accuse anyone of criminal acts as long as you're never proven wrong?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 21, 2021, 12:59:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 12:57:18 PM
Oh dear.  @)(++(*

I know the feeling vs my reaction when I see posts about Wolt
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 01:01:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 12:45:21 PM
Yep.  They put their heads above the parapet, they can expect to have them shot off.  Metaphorically speaking of course...

Did that go for Brenda too?  *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 01:02:25 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 01:01:55 PM
Did that go for Brenda too?  *%87
Yup.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 21, 2021, 01:04:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 12:59:10 PM
So are you saying it's ok to accuse anyone of criminal acts as long as you're never proven wrong?

well we are not talking about anyone are we it's about GA who won the right to against the mccs

So seems it was ok for him to continue with what he believed happened. I M O
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 01:06:05 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 21, 2021, 01:04:16 PM
well we are not talking about anyone are we it's about GA who won the right to against the mccs

So seems it was ok for him to continue with what he believed happened. I M O
So you support the idea in principle then?  That's cool, you should have no issue with Wolters claiming Bruckner did it if he's never proven wrong then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 01:08:13 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 21, 2021, 12:55:46 PM
Well, that is just your opinion D a poster.

Whereas Pat Brown is a .sucsesfull (criminal profiler).

poster and those who follow your line of thought vs criminal profiler Pat Brown.

No contest really IMO who is the brightest.

I havent seen any evidence of her success... You seem to accept it blindly. Let's see how bright and successful all these people look at the conclusion the case. They are going to look very foolish imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 01:09:39 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 01:01:55 PM
Did that go for Brenda too?  *%87

Unfortunately yes. I do blame those for encouraging Brenda to a certain extent for what happened to her
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 21, 2021, 01:10:28 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 12:46:42 PM
I don't follow Pat Brown's career closely at all but I'm curious to know what successes she's had recently in her crime solving endeavours.  Anyone know?

She said herself that The FBI that she apparently trained didn't pay much if any attention to her.  Oh the ingratitude.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 01:11:13 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 21, 2021, 01:04:16 PM
well we are not talking about anyone are we it's about GA who won the right to against the mccs

So seems it was ok for him to continue with what he believed happened. I M O

You may have noticed he no longer repeats his claims.. Probably worried about the ECHR
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 21, 2021, 01:12:59 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 21, 2021, 12:55:46 PM
Well, that is just your opinion D a poster.

Whereas Pat Brown is a .sucsesfull (criminal profiler).

poster and those who follow your line of thought vs criminal profiler Pat Brown.

No contest really IMO who is the brightest.

What exactly has Pat Brown successfully Profiled?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 21, 2021, 01:14:16 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 01:01:55 PM
Did that go for Brenda too?  *%87

This is a disgraceful Comment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on February 21, 2021, 01:18:51 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 21, 2021, 01:12:59 PM
What exactly has Pat Brown successfully Profiled?
Home-grown reviews speak for themselves...

https://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/1531881335/ref=acr_dp_hist_1?ie=UTF8&filterByStar=one_star&reviewerType=all_reviews#reviews-filter-bar (https://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/1531881335/ref=acr_dp_hist_1?ie=UTF8&filterByStar=one_star&reviewerType=all_reviews#reviews-filter-bar)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 01:23:07 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 21, 2021, 01:14:16 PM
This is a disgraceful Comment.

The answer was equally reprehensible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 01:25:06 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 01:23:07 PM
The answer was equally reprehensible.
()678% still reading me then?  Good news! 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 01:26:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 01:02:25 PM
Yup.

I take it you don't believe in free speech unless it is your own?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 01:27:04 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 21, 2021, 01:14:16 PM
This is a disgraceful Comment.

Why?   It was a genuine observation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 01:28:42 PM
Quote from: Myster on February 21, 2021, 01:18:51 PM
Home-grown reviews speak for themselves...

https://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/1531881335/ref=acr_dp_hist_1?ie=UTF8&filterByStar=one_star&reviewerType=all_reviews#reviews-filter-bar (https://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/1531881335/ref=acr_dp_hist_1?ie=UTF8&filterByStar=one_star&reviewerType=all_reviews#reviews-filter-bar)

Very true  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 01:29:38 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 01:26:13 PM
I take it you don't believe in free speech unless it is your own?
How do you figure that out then?  Do tell.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 21, 2021, 01:44:13 PM
Quote from: Myster on February 21, 2021, 01:18:51 PM
Home-grown reviews speak for themselves...

https://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/1531881335/ref=acr_dp_hist_1?ie=UTF8&filterByStar=one_star&reviewerType=all_reviews#reviews-filter-bar (https://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/1531881335/ref=acr_dp_hist_1?ie=UTF8&filterByStar=one_star&reviewerType=all_reviews#reviews-filter-bar)

Precisely.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 01:47:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 01:29:38 PM
How do you figure that out then?  Do tell.

You agreed with the post suggesting that people who stick their heads above the parapet should be shot at.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 01:49:25 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 01:47:17 PM
You agreed with the post suggesting that people who stick their heads above the parapet should be shot at.
There's no such thing as total free speech.. It has limits... As we are constantly reminded
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 01:49:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 12:55:10 PM
He accused them of criminal acts. Can you not see that

He documented the progress of the investigation up to September 2007, which suspected them of criminal acts and made them arguidos. The investigators suspected them primarily of occultation of a body and simulation of a kidnapping, and Amaral agreed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 01:51:59 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 01:47:17 PM
You agreed with the post suggesting that people who stick their heads above the parapet should be shot at.
Yes, what's the problem?  Did you think I meant literally?  Perhaps I need to explain.  If you pipe up with controversial or hateful views, expect those hateful or controversial views to be critiqued in the strongest terms by way of reply.   That's just freedom of speech in action. 

What IS reprehensible is dragging Brenda into a discussion that was nothing to do with her - stop weaponising her name to try and score points in a discussion online, it's not nice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 21, 2021, 01:53:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 01:49:40 PM
He documented the progress of the investigation up to September 2007, which suspected them of criminal acts and made them arguidos. The investigators suspected them primarily of occultation of a body and simulation of a kidnapping, and Amaral agreed.

Who else wrote a book?  Oh Yes, Amaral's convicted criminal oppo Cristavao
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 01:53:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 01:49:40 PM
He documented the progress of the investigation up to September 2007, which suspected them of criminal acts and made them arguidos. The investigators suspected them primarily of occultation of a body and simulation of a kidnapping, and Amaral agreed.

I think you need to read his book and watch the video. The investigation suspected them... Amaral said he could prove it... Can you really not see the difference. He also said things that were not in the files
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 02:01:51 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 01:53:32 PM
I think you need to read his book and watch the video. The investigation suspected them... Amaral said he could prove it... Can you really not see the difference. He also said things that were not in the files

He expressed his own opinions, as did the McCanns. Both claimed that the evidence supported their theories. Both said things that were not in the released files.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 02:06:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 02:01:51 PM
He expressed his own opinions, as did the McCanns. Both claimed that the evidence supported their theories. Both said things that were not in the released files.
Only Amaral pointed the finger at named individuals who have never been charged with any crime.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on February 21, 2021, 02:08:03 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 01:08:13 PM
I havent seen any evidence of her success... You seem to accept it blindly. Let's see how bright and successful all these people look at the conclusion the case. They are going to look very foolish imo

Taking about blindly are you not doing the same with wolt who just rehashes all he says from the first time he made the appeal in June, yet has still hasn't produced any evidence. apart from words.

If there ever is a conclusion.

IYO they could look foolish -  IMO so could Wolt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 02:29:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 02:06:09 PM
Only Amaral pointed the finger at named individuals who have never been charged with any crime.

Those named individuals could hardly name the 'they' who they claimed had taken Madeleine. Their whole theory relied upon that person or persons being strangers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 02:41:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 02:29:48 PM
Those named individuals could hardly name the 'they' who they claimed had taken Madeleine. Their whole theory relied upon that person or persons being strangers.
She said, missing the point spectacularly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 04:10:28 PM
Quote from: kizzy on February 21, 2021, 02:08:03 PM
Taking about blindly are you not doing the same with wolt who just rehashes all he says from the first time he made the appeal in June, yet has still hasn't produced any evidence. apart from words.

If there ever is a conclusion.

IYO they could look foolish -  IMO so could Wolt.

He's looking foolish already. He thought that if he made a sensational reveal them everyone would come crawling out of the woodwork and incriminate Bruckner. It didn't happen?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 04:14:52 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 04:10:28 PM
He's looking foolish already. He thought that if he made a sensational reveal them everyone would come crawling out of the woodwork and incriminate Bruckner. It didn't happen?

He's got the evidence... You just can't accept it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 04:21:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 04:14:52 PM
He's got the evidence... You just can't accept it

He, or anyone else including SY, the McCanns, the PJ, haven’t seen it.

If you believe something you can’t see, that’s simply blind faith.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 04:32:30 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 04:21:00 PM
He, or anyone else including SY, the McCanns, the PJ, haven’t seen it.

If you believe something you can’t see, that’s simply blind faith.
No its a matter of looking at the whole picture.. I think it's more blind faith by those saying he has nothing
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 04:51:20 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 04:32:30 PM
No its a matter of looking at the whole picture.. I think it's more blind faith by those saying he has nothing

But you can’t see the whole picture so at this point it’s blind faith that he has what he says he has.

Any comment SY’s denial that they failed to pass on any letters from the BKA with proof of Madeleine’s death to the parents?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 04:55:14 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 04:51:20 PM
But you can’t see the whole picture so at this point it’s blind faith that he has what he says he has.

Any comment SY’s denial that they failed to pass on any letters from the BKA with proof of Madeleine’s death to the parents?

There has never been any mention of proof of Madeleine’s death apart from Amaral... You need to have another think
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 05:04:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 04:55:14 PM
There has never been any mention of proof of Madeleine’s death apart from Amaral... You need to have another think

Semantics but do you think Madeleine’s parents will care whether Wolter has claimed he has evidence or proof that she is dead?

Any SY’s denial...do you believe them?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 05:08:05 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 05:04:42 PM
Semantics but do you think Madeleine’s parents will care whether Wolter has claimed he has evidence or proof that she is dead?

Any SY’s denial...do you believe them?

Im sure the parents do care... You would have to provide a precise cite as to what SY said if you want my opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 05:09:55 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 05:08:05 PM
Im sure the parents do care... You would have to provide a precise cite as to what SY said if you want my opinion

I posted it last night but to save you searching.

Not what SY say.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8440359/Scotland-Yard-deny-theyve-failed-hand-letters-Madeleine-McCanns-parents.html

‘Amid the war of words between British and German police, a spokesman for the Met said this afternoon: 'The Met received one letter from the Bundeskriminalamt (BKA) on June 12, which was passed to the family.

'The letter did not state that there was evidence or proof that Madeleine is dead - the Met continue to investigate Madeleine’s disappearance as a missing person investigation. No letter has been received by the Met from the German prosecutor'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 05:10:47 PM
From the McCanns 3rd June..

the search for Madeleine.

All we have ever wanted is to find her, uncover the truth and bring those responsible to justice. We will never give up hope of finding Madeleine alive but whatever the outcome may be, we need to know as we need to find peace.

Seems to me they accept she may not be alive
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 05:12:34 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 05:09:55 PM
I posted it last night but to save you searching.

Not what SY say.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8440359/Scotland-Yard-deny-theyve-failed-hand-letters-Madeleine-McCanns-parents.html

‘Amid the war of words between British and German police, a spokesman for the Met said this afternoon: 'The Met received one letter from the Bundeskriminalamt (BKA) on June 12, which was passed to the family.

'The letter did not state that there was evidence or proof that Madeleine is dead - the Met continue to investigate Madeleine’s disappearance as a missing person investigation. No letter has been received by the Met from the German prosecutor'.

The McCanns confirm receiving this letter
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 05:16:26 PM
I would love to know how those who believe the McCanns are covering up their disposal of Madeleine’s body rationalise the McCanns apparent  reluctance to accept that the Germans might have evidence she is dead and that she was killed by Christian Brückner.  How DO they get their little heads around that one?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 05:22:09 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 05:12:34 PM
The McCanns confirm receiving this letter

No they don’t.


'The parents have been told the German police have evidence that she is dead but we have not told them the details.'

However, Kate and Gerry hit back with a furious rebuke, in which they said: 'The widely reported news that we have a received a letter from the German authorities that states there is evidence or proof that Madeleine is dead is FALSE.'

They also don’t appear to care whether Wolter has evidence or proof.

So Wolter gave a press conference in which he stated that he had evidence that their daughter was dead yet failed to tell her parents first. Not only that but lied about it afterwards.

What kind of man is he?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 05:27:29 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 12:43:38 PM
If these two individuals feel they have the right to promote their opinion how can they object to others giving their opinion of themselves

I think that is a profound post.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 05:31:00 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 05:22:09 PM
No they don’t.


'The parents have been told the German police have evidence that she is dead but we have not told them the details.'

However, Kate and Gerry hit back with a furious rebuke, in which they said: 'The widely reported news that we have a received a letter from the German authorities that states there is evidence or proof that Madeleine is dead is FALSE.'

They also don’t appear to care whether Wolter has evidence or proof.

So Wolter gave a press conference in which he stated that he had evidence that their daughter was dead yet failed to tell her parents first. Not only that but lied about it afterwards.

What kind of man is he?

The parents confirmed receiving a letter.. Its on their website... But the letter didn't mention the evidence. I don't see Wolters has lied

The Met received one letter from the BKA on 12 June, which was passed to the family. The letter did not state that there was evidence or proof that Madeleine is dead
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 05:38:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 01:09:39 PM
Unfortunately yes. I do blame those for encouraging Brenda to a certain extent for what happened to her

I agree.  The conclusions reached at her inquest left no doubt that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 05:57:05 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 05:31:00 PM
The parents confirmed receiving a letter.. Its on their website... But the letter didn't mention the evidence. I don't see Wolters has lied

The Met received one letter from the BKA on 12 June, which was passed to the family. The letter did not state that there was evidence or proof that Madeleine is dead

https://news.sky.com/story/madeleine-mccann-prosecutors-letter-to-parents-says-there-is-concrete-evidence-she-is-dead-12007630

‘ A German prosecutor has written to the parents of Madeleine McCann telling them he has "concrete evidence" she is dead.

Hans Christian Wolters said in a letter to Kate and Gerry McCann that he has no doubt their daughter is dead, but he refused to tell them why.’
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 06:00:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 02:01:51 PM
He expressed his own opinions, as did the McCanns. Both claimed that the evidence supported their theories. Both said things that were not in the released files.

Amaral had a theory.  His theory was disproved when the data he relied on to formulate it was dismissed when subjected to proper scrutiny.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 06:01:43 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 05:57:05 PM
https://news.sky.com/story/madeleine-mccann-prosecutors-letter-to-parents-says-there-is-concrete-evidence-she-is-dead-12007630

‘ A German prosecutor has written to the parents of Madeleine McCann telling them he has "concrete evidence" she is dead.

Hans Christian Wolters said in a letter to Kate and Gerry McCann that he has no doubt their daughter is dead, but he refused to tell them why.’

How do you know how accurate that quote by Sky is. The media is not to be trusted to be accurate. I prefer to go by what Wolters has said live.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 06:05:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 06:01:43 PM
How do you know how accurate that quote by Sky is. The media is not to be trusted to be accurate. I prefer to go by what Wolters has said live.

Madeleine’s parents seem to believe he said it or what were they reacting to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 21, 2021, 06:09:08 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 06:05:42 PM
Madeleine’s parents seem to believe he said it or what were they reacting to?
You are relying on press reports.. Believe if you want... Believe Wolters is a liar. Its not really of any importance
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 06:23:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 21, 2021, 06:09:08 PM
You are relying on press reports.. Believe if you want... Believe Wolters is a liar. Its not really of any importance

Yes it is because it throws everything else he says into doubt.

Goodness knows what SY and the parents think of him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 06:29:13 PM
Is there anyone the sceptics don’t think have been dishonest in this case?  They believe the McCanns are liars.  They believe Operation Grange have deliberately overlooked evidence against the parents.  They believe the Germans are lying about having evidence against Brückner.  The only person in all of this who they do trust is a convicted perjurer. You couldn’t make it up!,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 07:48:50 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 06:00:12 PM
Amaral had a theory.  His theory was disproved when the data he relied on to formulate it was dismissed when subjected to proper scrutiny.

The McCanns' theory, on the other hand, was relentlessly promoted by them and ultimately by the media and by Operation Grange. In my opinion it is still a theory and seems to have been accepted as the truth simply through constant repitition.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 07:57:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 07:48:50 PM
The McCanns' theory, on the other hand, was relentlessly promoted by them and ultimately by the media and by Operation Grange. In my opinion it is still a theory and seems to have been accepted as the truth simply through constant repitition.
No, it’s been accepted as the truth because it’s the only plausible and logical theory available, that’s why.  IMo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 08:34:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 07:48:50 PM
The McCanns' theory, on the other hand, was relentlessly promoted by them and ultimately by the media and by Operation Grange. In my opinion it is still a theory and seems to have been accepted as the truth simply through constant repitition.
 

I think it is about time you caught up with what is going on in the real world where international police force investigators following the evidence are investigating abduction and have been for the years since 2013.

That is the fact of the matter.  My opinion is that you are in denial.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 09:17:20 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 21, 2021, 08:34:40 PM
 

I think it is about time you caught up with what is going on in the real world where international police force investigators following the evidence are investigating abduction and have been for the years since 2013.

That is the fact of the matter.  My opinion is that you are in denial.

Those are your opinions, which you are entitled to hold. My opinion differ however.

Operation Grange was set up specifically to investigate an abduction, so that's hardly a surprise. What they lack, in my opinion, is evidence that an abduction actually occured.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 09:21:20 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 09:17:20 PM
Those are your opinions, which you are entitled to hold. My opinion differ however.

Operation Grange was set up specifically to investigate an abduction, so that's hardly a surprise. What they lack, in my opinion, is evidence that an abduction actually occured.
you seem to think that is as a result of a successful propaganda campaign by the McCanns.  How did they get to wield so much power over the police do you think?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 21, 2021, 09:34:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 09:21:20 PM
you seem to think that is as a result of a successful propaganda campaign by the McCanns.  How did they get to wield so much power over the police do you think?

Ml5.  Gonc told you that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 09:43:56 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 09:21:20 PM
you seem to think that is as a result of a successful propaganda campaign by the McCanns.  How did they get to wield so much power over the police do you think?

I don't think that the McCanns had any power over the police.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 09:51:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 09:43:56 PM
I don't think that the McCanns had any power over the police.
How  do you account for the fact that they are not suspects then and that Operation Grange is pursuing abduction as their only line of enquiry?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 21, 2021, 10:03:46 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 09:51:11 PM
How  do you account for the fact that they are not suspects then and that Operation Grange is pursuing abduction as their only line of enquiry?

Or was it Ml6?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 11:16:12 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 09:51:11 PM
How  do you account for the fact that they are not suspects then and that Operation Grange is pursuing abduction as their only line of enquiry?

I assume that Colin Sutton told the truth when he said he was told by a senior officer that those chosen to work on Operation Grange would be told what they could look at and what they could not. The fact that he shared this information means that he believed that the officers of the Metropolitan Police could be given such instructions and would obey them.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 21, 2021, 11:18:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 11:16:12 PM
I assume that Colin Sutton told the truth when he said he was told by a senior officer that those chosen to work on Operation Grange would be told what they could look at and what they could not. The fact that he shared this information means that he believed that the officers of the Metropolitan Police could be given such instructions and would obey them.

We never did find out who said that to him, did we?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 21, 2021, 11:26:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 11:16:12 PM
I assume that Colin Sutton told the truth when he said he was told by a senior officer that those chosen to work on Operation Grange would be told what they could look at and what they could not. The fact that he shared this information means that he believed that the officers of the Metropolitan Police could be given such instructions and would obey them.
You have not answered my question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 11:33:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 11:16:12 PM
I assume that Colin Sutton told the truth when he said he was told by a senior officer that those chosen to work on Operation Grange would be told what they could look at and what they could not. The fact that he shared this information means that he believed that the officers of the Metropolitan Police could be given such instructions and would obey them.

We also have the remit of Operation Grange which Brietta displays with such pride.

The Archiving Report could not decide what happened  on the 3rd of May, after a year long investigation. That being the case how could Operation Grange’s starting point be abduction if, up to that point, an abduction hadn’t been proved to have happened?

And 10 years and multiple suspects later they are still looking in the wrong place. IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 11:34:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 11:26:19 PM
You have not answered my question.

Operation Grange are complying with their remit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 11:54:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 11:34:43 PM
Operation Grange are complying with their remit.

They certainly seem rather resistant to jumping on to the German jalopy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 11:55:23 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 21, 2021, 11:33:55 PM
We also have the remit of Operation Grange which Brietta displays with such pride.

The Archiving Report could not decide what happened  on the 3rd of May, after a year long investigation. That being the case how could Operation Grange’s starting point be abduction if, up to that point, an abduction hadn’t been proved to have happened?

And 10 years and multiple suspects later they are still looking in the wrong place. IMO

Don't you realise by now that the SY investigation is a diversion. IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 12:04:25 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 11:55:23 PM
Don't you realise by now that the SY investigation is a diversion. IMO.

What is it trying to divert us from?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:11:56 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 12:04:25 AM
What is it trying to divert us from?

Amaral's version of events.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 12:16:23 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:11:56 AM
Amaral's version of events.

Well that worked well, didn’t it !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:24:35 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 12:16:23 AM
Well that worked well, didn’t it !

He hasn't been proven wrong yet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 12:32:25 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:24:35 AM
He hasn't been proven wrong yet.

Indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 02:48:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 11:16:12 PM
I assume that Colin Sutton told the truth when he said he was told by a senior officer that those chosen to work on Operation Grange would be told what they could look at and what they could not. The fact that he shared this information means that he believed that the officers of the Metropolitan Police could be given such instructions and would obey them.
I assume Colin Sutton spoke the truth in reference to Madeleine's disappearance ~

Lack of information released to public from Portuguese police

“There was no publicising the case from the local police, which is unheard of back home.

“The public assistance in a case like Madeleine’s would have been huge because of the emotive subject - a missing three-year-old girl. It defies belief that they did not publish e-fits once they had them.

“Their lack of PR explains why the McCanns were so pro-active on that front. They were trying to fill the vacuum.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 02:58:13 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 11:16:12 PM
I assume that Colin Sutton told the truth when he said he was told by a senior officer that those chosen to work on Operation Grange would be told what they could look at and what they could not. The fact that he shared this information means that he believed that the officers of the Metropolitan Police could be given such instructions and would obey them.

I assume Colin Sutton was speaking the truth when he says ~

House-to-house inquiries were haphazard and in some cases did not happen at all

“House-to-house, or in this case apartment-to-apartment, inquiries should have happened straight away. It is a simple case of knocking on doors and asking the occupants if they saw anything.

“If you’re on holiday and see a three-year-old girl wandering outside in her pyjamas, the natural thing is to bring her inside and figure out where she is from.

“For all the police knew, Madeleine could have been inside one of those apartments. But it takes lots of resources to do that. Because it was a holiday complex, it was the equivalent of knocking on as many doors as an entire housing estate in the UK.

“That takes the kind of manpower that would not have been immediately available to the Portuguese police.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590


For example ~ "For all the police knew, Madeleine could have been inside one of those apartments." ~ did anyone ever find out who left the food to rot in the fridge at apartment 5J where two GNR dog teams showed great interest some days after Madeleine's disappearance, as noted by their handlers?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 22, 2021, 05:58:56 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 21, 2021, 09:51:11 PM
How  do you account for the fact that they are not suspects then and that Operation Grange is pursuing abduction as their only line of enquiry?
With that you may have touched on the very reason after nigh on 14 yrs ,circa £12 million ,it's still unresolved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 07:09:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 11:34:43 PM
Operation Grange are complying with their remit.
Who decided the remit and why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 07:10:59 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 11:55:23 PM
Don't you realise by now that the SY investigation is a diversion. IMO.
Ooh, now this really does sound like some of you believe in a top level conspiracy!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 07:13:20 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 22, 2021, 05:58:56 AM
With that you may have touched on the very reason after nigh on 14 yrs ,circa £12 million ,it's still unresolved.
Sometimes cases if abduction cannot be solved or take a long time to be solved.  Do you really think it would all have been done and dusted years ago if they’d gone after the McCanns instead?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 22, 2021, 08:36:58 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:24:35 AM
He hasn't been proven wrong yet.

Do you and others understand what a pathetic reply that is... A celestial teapot argument. A sure sign you've lost the argument. Remember Sadies theory that Maddies disappearance relates to her bloodline connection to Jesus hasn't been proved wrong either. All my opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 22, 2021, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 22, 2021, 05:58:56 AM
With that you may have touched on the very reason after nigh on 14 yrs ,circa £12 million ,it's still unresolved.

I think it is solved
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 22, 2021, 08:41:09 AM
SY's theory that Maddie was abducted has not been proven wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 22, 2021, 08:46:30 AM
Quote from: Davel on February 22, 2021, 08:37:48 AM
I think it is solved
In the end of the court trial then we might be able to say whether it was solved or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 22, 2021, 08:50:52 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 22, 2021, 08:46:30 AM
In the end of the court trial then we might be able to say whether it was solved or not.
You have your opinion I have mine. To me everything points to the Germans having enough evidence to solve the case. Enough evidence to say Maddie was abducted and murdered but not quite enough at the moment to definitely prove who did it.. But enough evidence to suggest who did
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 22, 2021, 09:08:41 AM
The remit by SY was arrived at because that's where all the evidence pointed.. IMO.. Simple
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 22, 2021, 09:10:56 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 21, 2021, 12:47:31 PM
You begin by suggesting that carrying a body through the streets occured immediately after discovering it. Then you go on to suggest finding a body, hiding it, telling no-one and then chatting unconcernedly with an acquaintance. Can you think of any other possibilities?

No there are no other possibilities.   I don't want to discuss any idea that Madeleine 'died' before the 3rd of May.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 09:12:25 AM
If Operation Grange had stumbled upon a key piece of evidence that pointed incontrovertibly to the McCanns do sceptics here believe they would have buried it?  If so, why?  Surely solving this case would be their top priority, not protecting the McCanns, unless anyone can give a very good reason why the latter would be more important than the former?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 09:21:43 AM

Some persons will never believe that The McCanns are innocent no matter what evidence or even proof is produced.

So I don't expect this Forum to be going anywhere any time soon.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 09:49:13 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 09:21:43 AM
Some persons will never believe that The McCanns are innocent no matter what evidence or even proof is produced.

So I don't expect this Forum to be going anywhere any time soon.
What is also clear is that despite their protestations to the contrary some persons do believe that the McCanns are being protected by the Establishment.  This is a popular conspiracy theory trope but heaven forfend you call anyone here a conspiracy theorist!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 10:05:53 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 09:49:13 AM
What is also clear is that despite their protestations to the contrary some persons do believe that the McCanns are being protected by the Establishment.  This is a popular conspiracy theory trope but heaven forfend you call anyone here a conspiracy theorist!

It's the zeal with which these persons pursue it that fascinates me.  I don't much care either way as I have only ever been interested in Innocent Until Proven Guilty.  And why they think I have some emotional involvement is also puzzling.  But how could I ever blame The McCanns for something I did myself?  That would be hypocrisy.

So far I have seen nothing that actually proves that anyone in particular stole Madeleine or that The McCanns harmed their daughter in any way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 22, 2021, 10:42:11 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 10:05:53 AM
It's the zeal with which these persons pursue it that fascinates me.  I don't much care either way as I have only ever been interested in Innocent Until Proven Guilty.  And why they think I have some emotional involvement is also puzzling.  But how could I ever blame The McCanns for something I did myself?  That would be hypocrisy.

So far I have seen nothing that actually proves that anyone in particular stole Madeleine or that The McCanns harmed their daughter in any way.

13 years on, all we  still have are suspicions
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 10:48:43 AM
Quote from: jassi on February 22, 2021, 10:42:11 AM
13 years on, all we  still have are suspicions

In your opinion perhaps ~ in my opinion there is evidence of an active and complex police investigation which is well underway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 10:49:11 AM
Quote from: jassi on February 22, 2021, 10:42:11 AM
13 years on, all we  still have are suspicions

Yes, I know.  This is another mystery to me.  I don't do Suspicions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 10:51:58 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 10:48:43 AM
In your opinion perhaps ~ in my opinion there is evidence of an active and complex police investigation which is well underway.

So complex that SY haven’t even been shown why the BKA think Madeleine is dead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 22, 2021, 11:10:53 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 10:48:43 AM
In your opinion perhaps ~ in my opinion there is evidence of an active and complex police investigation which is well underway.

Still only suspicions, though - however certain they may or may not be.
Not enough to arrest to take to court - as yet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 22, 2021, 11:18:42 AM
Quote from: jassi on February 22, 2021, 11:10:53 AM
Still only suspicions, though - however certain they may or may not be.
Not enough to arrest to take to court - as yet.

I think a lot more than suspicions. But not enough to take to court and be certain of a conviction
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 11:30:23 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 07:09:12 AM
Who decided the remit and why?

I don't know but it seems a high ranking officer knew something about it before it was actually set up; he knew there were going to be restrictions on it's scope.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 11:32:33 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 11:30:23 AM
I don't know but it seems a high ranking officer knew something about it before it was actually set up; he knew there were going to be restrictions on it's scope.
So you do believe that there is some sort of conspiracy at a high level to protect the McCanns?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 11:33:55 AM
Quote from: Lace on February 22, 2021, 09:10:56 AM
No there are no other possibilities.   I don't want to discuss any idea that Madeleine 'died' before the 3rd of May.

How about between 5.30pm and 8.30pm?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 11:38:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 11:33:55 AM
How about between 5.30pm and 8.30pm?
Yes, let's talk about that.  It obviously excludes an accident with both parents not present so we'd have to come up with a jolly good motive for a cover up. Do carry on....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 11:46:10 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 09:12:25 AM
If Operation Grange had stumbled upon a key piece of evidence that pointed incontrovertibly to the McCanns do sceptics here believe they would have buried it?  If so, why?  Surely solving this case would be their top priority, not protecting the McCanns, unless anyone can give a very good reason why the latter would be more important than the former?

Which bit of being told what they could look at and what they could not didn't you understand? My impression of Grange's focus was that they searched the evidence looking for leads which might lead to an abductor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 11:53:15 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 11:46:10 AM
Which bit of being told what they could look at and what they could not didn't you understand? My impression of Grange's focus was that they searched the evidence looking for leads which might lead to an abductor.

I don't think I believe this.  At least not in the context in which you have presented it.  In My Opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 11:58:22 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 11:38:59 AM
Yes, let's talk about that.  It obviously excludes an accident with both parents not present so we'd have to come up with a jolly good motive for a cover up. Do carry on....

If something happened and was covered up there was a motive regardless of the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 22, 2021, 11:59:58 AM
Editted:

Angelos post about my theory and Jesus has been wiped.  Some of you will have seen it.   I wonder why it has now gone.

Please remember that I referred to historical figures such as John the Baptist and Robert de Brus as well.  Now Robert de Brus had his Historical seat is in Brussels at Molenbeek St John.   Some on here, who are sleuths by nature, might find that interesting.   With most it will fly right over their heads  ?>)()<

Or they will prefer not to know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 12:00:22 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 11:53:15 AM
I don't think I believe this.  At least not in the context in which you have presented it.  In My Opinion.

How do you explain OG remit then? Shouldn’t it read disappearance rather than abduction?

With the remit and Colin Sutton’s claim I’m afraid there is no other explanation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 12:01:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 11:46:10 AM
Which bit of being told what they could look at and what they could not didn't you understand? My impression of Grange's focus was that they searched the evidence looking for leads which might lead to an abductor.
What a rude post.  I am perfectly able understand everything you have written thank you.
You seem to be saying that even if Operation Grange HAD stumbled across evidence that pointed strongly at the parents they would avert their gaze from it.  In other words that they would be complicit in the cover up.  Is this a correct interpretation of your view?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 22, 2021, 12:02:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 11:46:10 AM
Which bit of being told what they could look at and what they could not didn't you understand? My impression of Grange's focus was that they searched the evidence looking for leads which might lead to an abductor.

I thought it was a Portuguese investigation... What have they been doing
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 22, 2021, 12:04:03 PM
Quote from: sadie on February 22, 2021, 11:59:58 AM
Please remember that I referred to historical figures such as John the Baptist and Robert de Brus as well.  Now Robert de Brus had his Historical seat is in Brussels at Molenbeek St John.   Some on here, who are sleuths by nature, might find that interesting.   With most it will fly right over their heads  ?>)()<

Or they will prefer not to know.

I'm pointing out that you haven't been proven wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 22, 2021, 12:07:14 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 22, 2021, 12:04:03 PM
I'm pointing out that you haven't been proven wrong

Sorry, Davel.  I wasn't referring to your post, but to Angelos about Jesus.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 12:12:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 11:58:22 AM
If something happened and was covered up there was a motive regardless of the time.
I'm asking what would be a motive for a cover up if one or both parents were there.  Covering up an accident can be ruled out can it not?  Unless you can explain why an accident which happens in the presence of a parent would result in them deciding it was necessary to cover it up.  What sort of an accident would it be that resulted in near instantaneous death that would reflect so badly on the parent(s) present that hiding the accident from the authorities would be preferable?   And then we have to consider how two parents could conspire to hatch a cover up plot and then go out to dinner seemingly both completely relaxed and untroubled, leaving their dead child in an unlocked apartment, quite happy for their friends to go and check on her and her siblings in their beds.  Unless you think Madeleine wasn't left in her bed but stuffed behind the sofa instead?  Which might look a bit strange to anyone checking on the kids well-being, unless of course the friends had been briefed that Madeleine was actually dead so don't be too alarmed that she's not in bed but behind the sofa? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 22, 2021, 12:13:30 PM
Quote from: sadie on February 22, 2021, 12:07:14 PM
Sorry, Davel.  I wasn't referring to your post, but to Angelos about Jesus.
No problem Sadie
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 22, 2021, 12:15:25 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 12:00:22 PM
How do you explain OG remit then? Shouldn’t it read disappearance rather than abduction?

With the remit and Colin Sutton’s claim I’m afraid there is no other explanation.

The other explanation was that its a Portuguese investigation and they decide who and who cannot be questioned in Portugal. The officer didn't mention the McCanns to Sutton
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:27:52 PM
Quote from: sadie on February 22, 2021, 11:59:58 AM
Editted:

Angelos post about my theory and Jesus has been wiped.  Some of you will have seen it.   I wonder why it has now gone.

Please remember that I referred to historical figures such as John the Baptist and Robert de Brus as well.  Now Robert de Brus had his Historical seat is in Brussels at Molenbeek St John.   Some on here, who are sleuths by nature, might find that interesting.   With most it will fly right over their heads  ?>)()<

Or they will prefer not to know.

Interesting history Sadie but not very relevant imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:29:31 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 12:01:58 PM
What a rude post.  I am perfectly able understand everything you have written thank you.
You seem to be saying that even if Operation Grange HAD stumbled across evidence that pointed strongly at the parents they would avert their gaze from it.  In other words that they would be complicit in the cover up.  Is this a correct interpretation of your view?

Haven't they already cast a convenient blind eye to criminality?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:31:14 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 22, 2021, 12:13:30 PM
No problem Sadie

That's nice  8**8:/:
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 22, 2021, 12:31:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 11:33:55 AM
How about between 5.30pm and 8.30pm?

What is supposed to have happened?   If Madeleine had an accident Kate was there to help her,  there would be no need for a cover up.  Dave saw the children when he looked in on Kate,  I see no reason why he would lie.   Are you suggesting either Gerry or Kate did something to Madeleine?   So then what?   Hid her somewhere?   They still wouldn't have been able to behave normally,  going to dinner [the first there] eating and laughing with friends.  It was their daughter for whom they loved and cherished for almost four years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 22, 2021, 12:32:59 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 22, 2021, 12:31:24 PM
What is supposed to have happened?   If Madeleine had an accident Kate was there to help her,  there would be no need for a cover up.  Dave saw the children when he looked in on Kate,  I see no reason why he would lie.   Are you suggesting either Gerry or Kate did something to Madeleine?   So then what?   Hid her somewhere?   They still wouldn't have been able to behave normally,  going to dinner [the first there] eating and laughing with friends.  It was their daughter for whom they loved and cherished for almost four years.

Would any answer to this  not be considered libel on here ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 22, 2021, 12:33:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 12:12:34 PM
I'm asking what would be a motive for a cover up if one or both parents were there.  Covering up an accident can be ruled out can it not?  Unless you can explain why an accident which happens in the presence of a parent would result in them deciding it was necessary to cover it up.  What sort of an accident would it be that resulted in near instantaneous death that would reflect so badly on the parent(s) present that hiding the accident from the authorities would be preferable?   And then we have to consider how two parents could conspire to hatch a cover up plot and then go out to dinner seemingly both completely relaxed and untroubled, leaving their dead child in an unlocked apartment, quite happy for their friends to go and check on her and her siblings in their beds.  Unless you think Madeleine wasn't left in her bed but stuffed behind the sofa instead?  Which might look a bit strange to anyone checking on the kids well-being, unless of course the friends had been briefed that Madeleine was actually dead so don't be too alarmed that she's not in bed but behind the sofa?

























Well said VS.   8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 22, 2021, 12:34:42 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 22, 2021, 12:32:59 PM
Would any answer to this  not be considered libel on here ?


I don't know,  I can't keep up with what's libel or not.   How can you debate if you can't answer how you want to?  Unless you put IMO I suppose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:35:15 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 22, 2021, 12:31:24 PM
What is supposed to have happened?   If Madeleine had an accident Kate was there to help her,  there would be no need for a cover up.  Dave saw the children when he looked in on Kate,  I see no reason why he would lie.   Are you suggesting either Gerry or Kate did something to Madeleine?   So then what?   Hid her somewhere?   They still wouldn't have been able to behave normally,  going to dinner [the first there] eating and laughing with friends.  It was their daughter for whom they loved and cherished for almost four years.

It's all very odd, there is an eyewitness who supposedly saw Gerry carrying a child in his arms at 10pm and then we have the tapas group who say he was sat at the dining table with them at that time. One explanation for this is that there was a doppelganger in town.

Question is, did the child think the doppelganger was her father so wasn't afraid and didn't cry out?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 22, 2021, 12:38:54 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:35:15 PM
It's all very odd, there is an eyewitness who supposedly saw Gerry carrying a child in his arms at 10pm and then we have the tapas group who say he was sat at the dining table with them at that time. The only explanation for this is that there was a doppelganger in town.


Smith didn't say he saw Gerry.   Gerry was sat at the table at 10'clock   Kate came running in and said 'Madeleine's gone Gerry'.    So unless she was talking to a cardboard cut out of Gerry he was there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:40:11 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 22, 2021, 12:38:54 PM

Smith didn't say he saw Gerry.   Gerry was sat at the table at 10'clock   Kate came running in and said 'Madeleine's gone Gerry'.    So unless she was talking to a cardboard cut out of Gerry he was there.

Well yes he did and so much so he went to the police about it. And even days later he was sure enough for him and the missus to make statements about it.

Do you think he is a fool or what?

ETA. The cardboard cutout must have been carrying the child then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 12:44:25 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:40:11 PM
Well yes he did and so much so he went to the police about it. And even days later he was sure enough for him and the missus to make statements about it.

Do you think he is a fool or what?

ETA. The cardboard cutout must have been carrying the child then.
He only decided it was Gerry months later (and then only 60-80%).  I think he was simply mistaken, not a fool.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 22, 2021, 12:44:53 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:27:52 PM
Interesting history Sadie but not very relevant imo.

Ah, but you are not a slueth, Angelo.   And you haven't found any connections to Templars with trafficking like I have .  And Bruces strong connections to the Templars.; they adored and supported him and he gave them land in Scotland.

And then, of course, Molenbeek St John, being the land of Robert de Brus (Bruce).   This is where all the hemp grown in The Rif Mountains is procesessed into Cannabis etc and redistributed around the world


I bet that several slueths on here can see connections even if you cannot.


P.S.  Why did you take your post down about sadie and Jesus ?   And wrong foot me?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:47:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 12:44:25 PM
He only decided it was Gerry months later (and then only 60-80%).  I think he was simply mistaken, not a fool.

It was the picture of Gerry carrying one of the children down the aircraft steps which persuaded him of who it was they had encountered the night Maddie disappeared. He must have been darn sure to phone the police about such a serious matter.

(https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/Picture234.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:53:35 PM
Quote from: sadie on February 22, 2021, 12:44:53 PM
Ah, but you are not a slueth, Angelo.   And you haven't found any connections to Templars with trafficking like I have .  And Bruces strong connections to the Templars.; they adored and supported him and he gave them land in Scotland.

And then, of course, Molenbeek St John, being the land of Robert de Brus (Bruce).   This is where all the hemp grown in The Rif Mountains is procesessed into Cannabis etc and redistributed around the world


I bet that several slueths on here can see connections even if you cannot.


P.S.  Why did you take your post down about sadie and Jesus ?   And wrong foot me?

I believe we have done the Morocco connection to death Sadie. You even thought the two little Berber girls were Maddie and Joana so I think your sleuthing days are gone.  With respect Sadie, that is poor judgement imo.

ETA. I have been away for weeks so when did I ever mention you and Jesus?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 22, 2021, 12:55:23 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:40:11 PM
Well yes he did and so much so he went to the police about it. And even days later he was sure enough for him and the missus to make statements about it.

Do you think he is a fool or what?

ETA. The cardboard cutout must have been carrying the child then.


No I don't think he is a fool.   I think he was very worried as Amaral was pointing to the McCanns as the suspects.   He saw Gerry walking down the steps with Sean asleep in his arms and he remembered that is how he saw the man carrying the child he said he was 60/80% sure.   Even though  millions of people carry their children down the steps from a plane exactly the same way, Amaral jumped on this and said Smith had portrayed Gerry as the person he saw.   Gerry was at the Tapas Bar.   Thankfully other Police forces have obviously not taken this information seriously.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:56:46 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 22, 2021, 12:55:23 PM

No I don't think he is a fool.   I think he was very worried as Amaral was pointing to the McCanns as the suspects.   He saw Gerry walking down the steps with Sean asleep in his arms and he remembered that is how he saw the man carrying the child he said he was 60/80% sure.   Even though  millions of people carry their children down the steps from a plane exactly the same way, Amaral jumped on this and said Smith had portrayed Gerry as the person he saw.   Gerry was at the Tapas Bar.   Thankfully other Police forces have obviously not taken this information seriously.

Don't blame Gonc for what happened, he had left by then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 01:05:48 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 22, 2021, 12:15:25 PM
The other explanation was that its a Portuguese investigation and they decide who and who cannot be questioned in Portugal. The officer didn't mention the McCanns to Sutton

With the remit and Sutton’s claim it doesn’t take much working out though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 22, 2021, 12:38:54 PM

Smith didn't say he saw Gerry.   Gerry was sat at the table at 10'clock   Kate came running in and said 'Madeleine's gone Gerry'.    So unless she was talking to a cardboard cut out of Gerry he was there.

I was watching a programme last night where five witnesses said a young man was the perpetrator of a shooting. The young man was imprisoned. Strange thing was the young man didn’t do it.

Moral of the tale....when you have several witnesses who say the same thing it’s hard to prove that they are wrong. Sometimes, however, they are.

That’s what the AG faced.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 01:25:19 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 22, 2021, 11:10:53 AM
Still only suspicions, though - however certain they may or may not be.
Not enough to arrest to take to court - as yet.

I think you are wrong on all points.  I think they have evidence and I don't think they are in any rush about charging him or making making an arrest for the simple reason they don't have to.

I'm not quite sure how many European Arrest Warrants have been served against his name ~ I think it may be five ~ so there may be quite a long haul ahead for the Germans when the evidence required to substantiate all of these requests is taken into consideration.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 01:37:13 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 11:30:23 AM
I don't know but it seems a high ranking officer knew something about it before it was actually set up; he knew there were going to be restrictions on it's scope.

I am incredulous that it is assumed Scotland Yard embarked on investigating Madeleine's case without checking out the evidence.  In my opinion that is the stuff of fantasy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 01:38:37 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 01:25:19 PM
I think you are wrong on all points.  I think they have evidence and I don't think they are in any rush about charging him or making making an arrest for the simple reason they don't have to.

I'm not quite sure how many European Arrest Warrants have been served against his name ~ I think it may be five ~ so there may be quite a long haul ahead for the Germans when the evidence required to substantiate all of these requests is taken into consideration.

We know that Brueckner is locked up for the next five years at least, so if there are any repeated offences in the offing then he could stay locked up for a very long time indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 01:41:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 11:58:22 AM
If something happened and was covered up there was a motive regardless of the time.

You really do sail very close to the wind with your constant slurs against the McCanns.  My opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 01:47:24 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 01:41:30 PM
You really do sail very close to the wind with your constant slurs against the McCanns.  My opinion

Mine too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 01:48:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 22, 2021, 12:15:25 PM
The other explanation was that its a Portuguese investigation and they decide who and who cannot be questioned in Portugal. The officer didn't mention the McCanns to Sutton

I believe that at the time in question there was quite a bit of friction regarding letters of request.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 01:52:18 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:47:57 PM
It was the picture of Gerry carrying one of the children down the aircraft steps which persuaded him of who it was they had encountered the night Maddie disappeared. He must have been darn sure to phone the police about such a serious matter.

(https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/Picture234.jpg)
No, he wasnt "darn sure", he was "60-80% sure" which is the same as "20-40% unsure".  And it was months after the event too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 01:53:47 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:29:31 PM
Haven't they already cast a convenient blind eye to criminality?

I think Bennett might have tried that one already.  Did it hold water then?  anymore than it holds water now. 

Or have I got the wrong end of the stick and you are referring to Amaral's criminality?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 01:54:10 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 01:10:53 PM
I was watching a programme last night where five witnesses said a young man was the perpetrator of a shooting. The young man was imprisoned. Strange thing was the young man didn’t do it.

Moral of the tale....when you have several witnesses who say the same thing it’s hard to prove that they are wrong. Sometimes, however, they are.

That’s what the AG faced.
So if only two people say "it was Gerry" does that mean they are less likely to be wrong?  The irony of your post is quite astounding btw.  As if seven friends of Gerry would all be mistaken about his whereabouts at the time the alarm was raised.  Were they all completely pissed as farts?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 01:54:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 12:01:58 PM
What a rude post.  I am perfectly able understand everything you have written thank you.
You seem to be saying that even if Operation Grange HAD stumbled across evidence that pointed strongly at the parents they would avert their gaze from it.  In other words that they would be complicit in the cover up.  Is this a correct interpretation of your view?

I think it would depend entirely on those higher up the chain of command which evidence was deemed useful and worth pursuing. Those people would probably be DCI's or above; the same rank as Colin Sutton, Andy Redwood and Nicola Wall. If, as Sutton has claimed, Op Grange was restricted in scope, a DCI would know and keep the investigation on the track laid down for it. They wouldn't, in my opinion, go off at a tangent without the knowledge of and permission from their superiors.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 01:58:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 01:54:39 PM
I think it would depend entirely on those higher up the chain of command which evidence was deemed useful and worth pursuing. Those people would probably be DCI's or above; the same rank as Colin Sutton, Andy Redwood and Nicola Wall. If, as Sutton has claimed, Op Grange was restricted in scope, a DCI would know and keep the investigation on the track laid down for it. They wouldn't, in my opinion, go off at a tangent without the knowledge of and permission from their superiors.
I didn't realise the police were trained to turn a blind eye to compelling evidence that pointed in a different direction to that which they have been told to pursue by their superiors.  How astounding and how corrupt. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 02:01:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 01:58:17 PM
I didn't realise the police were trained to turn a blind eye to compelling evidence that pointed in a different direction to that which they have been told to pursue by their superiors.  How astounding and how corrupt.

It couldn't and wouldn't happen, certainly not in this case.  The whole idea is ridiculous.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 02:06:27 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 01:37:13 PM
I am incredulous that it is assumed Scotland Yard embarked on investigating Madeleine's case without checking out the evidence.  In my opinion that is the stuff of fantasy.

According to their remit they embarked on investigating Madeleine's abduction. According to Colin Sutton, who doesn't strike me as a fantasist;

I do though think that a point worthy of reinforcing is that a proper, conclusive and reasoned elimination or implication of Kate and Gerry McCann would have been in everyone's interest, most of all theirs.  That would have been my first objective had I been leading Operation Grange and so that is the biggest issue I have with how that investigation proceeded.  To eliminate or implicate those closest to the child in this type of case is not only the documented best investigative practice but is common sense.  Had Grange done this then everything would be a lot clearer. I have no idea why this was not done but I am satisfied on what has been said by the Met and what is available that it was not.
http://colinsutton.blogspot.com/2017/05/madeleine-mccann-and-operation-grange_9.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 02:07:15 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:40:11 PM
Well yes he did and so much so he went to the police about it. And even days later he was sure enough for him and the missus to make statements about it.

Do you think he is a fool or what?

ETA. The cardboard cutout must have been carrying the child then.

I don't think Mr Smith is a fool.  Nor do I think Mr McCluskey is a fool either.  But I do believe that both were mistaken when they added to the statements they gave to the police, bearing in mind the saturation news coverage given to images of Madeleine's parents carrying the twins.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 02:09:56 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 01:58:17 PM
I didn't realise the police were trained to turn a blind eye to compelling evidence that pointed in a different direction to that which they have been told to pursue by their superiors.  How astounding and how corrupt.

I never said the police were trained to do any such thing, and you have no evidence that they 'stumbled' upon anything which they subsequently ignored. You are raising a strawman argument imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 22, 2021, 02:17:51 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 01:54:10 PM
So if only two people say "it was Gerry" does that mean they are less likely to be wrong?  The irony of your post is quite astounding btw.  As if seven friends of Gerry would all be mistaken about his whereabouts at the time the alarm was raised.  Were they all completely pissed as farts?

What time was the alarm raised exactly?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 02:31:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 02:09:56 PM
I never said the police were trained to do any such thing, and you have no evidence that they 'stumbled' upon anything which they subsequently ignored. You are raising a strawman argument imo.
I didn't say there that the Met had found evidence against the McCanns.  I am not raising a strawman argument.  I posed a "what if" scenario and you replied that the police would ignore any such evidence against the McCanns because of their orders under the remit.  This would point to a dereliction of duty and corruption in my book, not to mention a cover up at a higher level, but it seems that you have a very low opinion of the Met so I am not surprised by your response. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 02:33:00 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 22, 2021, 02:17:51 PM
What time was the alarm raised exactly?
Irrelevant to the point Faithlilly was making, in which she claimed it was credible for all the Tapas group to be mistaken about Gerry's whereabouts at the point Kate raised the alarm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 22, 2021, 02:43:26 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 02:33:00 PM
Irrelevant to the point Faithlilly was making, in which she claimed it was credible for all the Tapas group to be mistaken about Gerry's whereabouts at the point Kate raised the alarm.

Totally relevant to the point I'm making.

They couldn't all be precise about the time.

Matt said Kate left the table at 9.50, Gerry said 10:03.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 02:52:19 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 22, 2021, 02:17:51 PM
What time was the alarm raised exactly?

That is a question which was never actually satisfactorily answered imo. For that I do blame the PJ. There were statements suggesting it was raised earlier than the Tapas group said it was, and those people should have been reinterviewed imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 02:59:26 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 22, 2021, 02:43:26 PM
Totally relevant to the point I'm making.

They couldn't all be precise about the time.

Matt said Kate left the table at 9.50, Gerry said 10:03.
Y-A-W-N
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 03:01:01 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 02:52:19 PM
That is a question which was never actually satisfactorily answered imo. For that I do blame the PJ. There were statements suggesting it was raised earlier than the Tapas group said it was, and those people should have been reinterviewed imo.
As I recall you're quite convinced the only person who got the time right was the Tapas chef.  Didn't he say around 9.20pm?   Coz of course he would be best placed to know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 22, 2021, 03:10:12 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:56:46 PM
Don't blame Gonc for what happened, he had left by then.


Amaral put it in his book. -

This image, brings back with a jolt, that of the man they encountered in the streets of Vila da Luz, on the evening of Madeleine's disappearance. It's as if the scene is repeating itself ....Mr Smith thinking he's hallucinating, sees the same report on other channels, ITV and Sky News. From that moment, he is sure: the man they came across that night was Gerald McCann. Of that there is very little doubt. Upset by the implications of this discovery, he alerts the police and waits to be called back by those in charge of the investigation.


"He is sure the man they came across that night was Gerald McCann'.     In reality Mr Smith said he was 60/80% sure by the way he held his child.   It's could be laughable if it wasn't so tragic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 22, 2021, 03:11:36 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 22, 2021, 02:43:26 PM
Totally relevant to the point I'm making.

They couldn't all be precise about the time.

Matt said Kate left the table at 9.50, Gerry said 10:03.


So, even if it was 9.50. Gerry was at the table.   Even if it was 10.03 Gerry was at the table.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 22, 2021, 03:14:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 02:59:26 PM
Y-A-W-N

Yawn all you like but it takes me less than 13 minutes a week to put the bins out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 22, 2021, 03:19:47 PM
Gerry was at the Tapas Bar.  Taken from Dianne Websters statement -

 Reply    ”One of them would stay, or stayed in the apartment while the other one gobbled down their meal and then, so I think Russell, Russell must have gone back and let Jane come and eat her meal because by that time err we’d, we’d ordered our main courses and err Russell had ordered steak and of course he wasn’t at the table when it was ready and he said oh you know (inaudible) to go back, he’ll be back later, once Jane finishes hers err just keep his steak warm err so Jane sort of gobbled down her, her meal and went, went back so that Russell could come and have his dinner and, and this must have been getting on for, I don’t know, maybe ten to ten or something like that. Again I wasn’t looking at the time but just thinking to what happened is that err Russell came back to table and err they’d actually cooked him a fresh steak and he was just starting to tuck into it when err Kate had obviously gone back to check on the children, came running in you know, as far as I can recollect she said you know she’s gone, Gerry, Madeleine’s gone, screaming you know.”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 03:19:51 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 22, 2021, 03:14:48 PM
Yawn all you like but it takes me less than 13 minutes a week to put the bins out.
Interesting, is that including your walk through Ramsgate with a dead child in your arms?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 22, 2021, 03:20:57 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 22, 2021, 03:10:12 PM

Amaral put it in his book. -

This image, brings back with a jolt, that of the man they encountered in the streets of Vila da Luz, on the evening of Madeleine's disappearance. It's as if the scene is repeating itself ....Mr Smith thinking he's hallucinating, sees the same report on other channels, ITV and Sky News. From that moment, he is sure: the man they came across that night was Gerald McCann. Of that there is very little doubt. Upset by the implications of this discovery, he alerts the police and waits to be called back by those in charge of the investigation.


"He is sure the man they came across that night was Gerald McCann'.     In reality Mr Smith said he was 60/80% sure by the way he held his child.   It's could be laughable if it wasn't so tragic.

Another fallacy for the ECHR
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 03:31:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 03:01:01 PM
As I recall you're quite convinced the only person who got the time right was the Tapas chef.  Didn't he say around 9.20pm?   Coz of course he would be best placed to know.

I don't know who got the time right, but a lot of people gave times which didn't fit with the alarm being raised at 10pm or later.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 03:32:12 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 01:47:24 PM
Mine too.

Bit of a pile on here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 03:36:07 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 22, 2021, 03:19:47 PM
Gerry was at the Tapas Bar.  Taken from Dianne Websters statement -

 Reply    ”One of them would stay, or stayed in the apartment while the other one gobbled down their meal and then, so I think Russell, Russell must have gone back and let Jane come and eat her meal because by that time err we’d, we’d ordered our main courses and err Russell had ordered steak and of course he wasn’t at the table when it was ready and he said oh you know (inaudible) to go back, he’ll be back later, once Jane finishes hers err just keep his steak warm err so Jane sort of gobbled down her, her meal and went, went back so that Russell could come and have his dinner and, and this must have been getting on for, I don’t know, maybe ten to ten or something like that. Again I wasn’t looking at the time but just thinking to what happened is that err Russell came back to table and err they’d actually cooked him a fresh steak and he was just starting to tuck into it when err Kate had obviously gone back to check on the children, came running in you know, as far as I can recollect she said you know she’s gone, Gerry, Madeleine’s gone, screaming you know.”

It’s common knowledge that Gerry was at the tapas bar at the alert. It’s what happened in the minutes before that is in doubt.

Of course DW said in her first statement that she didn’t think Gerry was at the table when she arrived.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 03:42:39 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 22, 2021, 03:11:36 PM

So, even if it was 9.50. Gerry was at the table.   Even if it was 10.03 Gerry was at the table.

While it's perfectly possible that Gerry was at the table when the alarm was raised, there's reason to wonder about the actual time it happened. According to waiter Ricardo Alexandre da Luz Oliveira the table was empty at 9.45pm.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RICARDO-A-D-L-OLIVEIRA.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 03:43:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 03:31:43 PM
I don't know who got the time right, but a lot of people gave times which didn't fit with the alarm being raised at 10pm or later.
Such incompetence in the PJ then, claiming in the final report that the alarm was raised around 10pm.  What WERE they basing that ridiculous assumption on I wonder?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 03:45:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 03:42:39 PM
While it's perfectly possible that Gerry was at the table when the alarm was raised, there's reason to wonder about the actual time it happened. According to waiter Ricardo Alexandre da Luz Oliveira the table was empty at 9.45pm.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RICARDO-A-D-L-OLIVEIRA.htm
He also says this - so which is true then?
When asked, he says that on 3rd May he only remembers that one guest from the table left for about 10 minutes, given that when he was about to serve the respective plate he was told to hold the food back for a few minutes, and that it was about 15 minutes before the guest returned, at about 21.45.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 04:18:52 PM
I’ve always found this statement rather interesting.

SVETLANA
-------  STARIKOVA VITORINO (Russian citizen, with the telephone No "96635 ####) - kitchen assistant:
- Said that, yesterday, one individual, purportedly the father of the missing, left the dinner table where a group of friends (in number 8 or 9), for about 30 minutes. After having returned, a woman whom she believed to be his wife, also left the table, there having passed a few moments, all the guests left the table in question, except one elderly lady, who told her [Svetlana's] colleagues that that child had disappeared.
- During the time that she was working yesterday (between 14:30 and 23:00) she did not see any individual with blonde "rastas

And this from Diane Webster.

‘ That, at that time, the whole group were at the restaurant. The witness did not recall, but thinks that perhaps Gerald and MATT had not been in the restaurant ( when she arrived) along with the other members of the group. ’

‘ Prompted to state for the record the movements that occurred that night, during the above dinner, the witness reiterated that she could not say specifically who had left nor when they had done so.’


Was Gerry doing the first check?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 04:21:51 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 03:32:12 PM
Bit of a pile on here.

Are you Slurring me?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 04:54:20 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 04:21:51 PM
Are you Slurring me?

Just an observation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 22, 2021, 06:41:34 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 01:58:17 PM
I didn't realise the police were trained to turn a blind eye to compelling evidence that pointed in a different direction to that which they have been told to pursue by their superiors.  How astounding and how corrupt.

It seemed to happen alright in the Stephen Lawrence case with  institutional racism.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 22, 2021, 06:45:05 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 22, 2021, 12:35:15 PM
It's all very odd, there is an eyewitness who supposedly saw Gerry carrying a child in his arms at 10pm and then we have the tapas group who say he was sat at the dining table with them at that time. One explanation for this is that there was a doppelganger in town.

Question is, did the child think the doppelganger was her father so wasn't afraid and didn't cry out?

This man who is the key to it all imo, he was seen carrying a child fitting a description close to that of Madeleine ( Redwood said so) the only child missing that night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 06:46:33 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 22, 2021, 06:41:34 PM
It seemed to happen alright in the Stephen Lawrence case with  institutional racism.
And how do we know about it?  Oh yes, that’s right.  The Establishment conducted a thorough review and published a report about it exposing the police failings.  Racism was established as the root cause of those failings, what do you think they’d uncover as the root cause of failings in tOperation Grange?  A top level conspiracy involving the PM  to protect two doctors from Rothley?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 07:13:33 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 22, 2021, 06:45:05 PM
This man who is the key to it all imo, he was seen carrying a child fitting a description close to that of Madeleine ( Redwood said so) the only child missing that night.

I agree..it’s far too much of a coincidence..but of course he looked nothing like Brueckner.

Neither of course did Tannerman. Supporters have been deathly quiet regarding him recently.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 07:18:10 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 07:13:33 PM
I agree..it’s far too much of a coincidence..but of course he looked nothing like Brueckner.

Neither of course did Tannerman. Supporters have been deathly quiet regarding him recently.
Talking of coincidence - 4 children have gone missing close to Brückner’s known whereabouts at the time of their disappearances, across two different countries.  What are the odds, eh? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 22, 2021, 07:23:04 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 07:18:10 PM
Talking of coincidence - 4 children have gone missing close to Brückner’s known whereabouts at the time of their disappearances, across two different countries.  What are the odds, eh?

Its not been established where CB was on the night of 3/05/2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 07:29:06 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 22, 2021, 07:23:04 PM
Its not been established where CB was on the night of 3/05/2007.
there is evidence he was in PdL that night, there is no evidence he was anywhere else that night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 22, 2021, 07:31:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 07:29:06 PM
there is evidence he was in PdL that night, there is no evidence he was anywhere else that night.

There is irrefutable evidence the McCanns were in PDL that night, & that they had complete access to both 5a & Maddie.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 08:02:18 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 22, 2021, 07:31:35 PM
There is irrefutable evidence the McCanns were in PDL that night, & that they had complete access to both 5a & Maddie.
But they were investigated and no evidence was found against them hence why they were de-arguido’ed, allowedto keep their remaining children and get on with their lives, enjoying the support of prime ministers, home secretaries and the Metropolitan police along the way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 22, 2021, 09:06:51 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 07:29:06 PM
there is evidence he was in PdL that night, there is no evidence he was anywhere else that night.

Who confirmed this snippet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 09:20:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 08:02:18 PM
But they were investigated and no evidence was found against them hence why they were de-arguido’ed, allowedto keep their remaining children and get on with their lives, enjoying the support of prime ministers, home secretaries and the Metropolitan police along the way.

They were investigated by the (in your opinion) inadequate PJ. Do you have faith in their findings on this matter despite showing little faith in them otherwise imo?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 09:24:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 09:20:11 PM
They were investigated by the (in your opinion) inadequate PJ. Do you have faith in their findings on this matter despite showing little faith in them otherwise imo?

The PJ didn't find any evidence against The McCanns.  Or do you think they missed that as well?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 09:32:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 09:20:11 PM
They were investigated by the (in your opinion) inadequate PJ. Do you have faith in their findings on this matter despite showing little faith in them otherwise imo?

That’s the thing. If the PJ were as incompetent as some suggest it could be why the parents weren’t charged. It works both ways.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 09:42:53 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 09:32:53 PM
That’s the thing. If the PJ were as incompetent as some suggest it could be why the parents weren’t charged. It works both ways.

Now there's a thought.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 10:11:08 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 09:32:53 PM
That’s the thing. If the PJ were as incompetent as some suggest it could be why the parents weren’t charged. It works both ways.

Exactly. The fact that the PJ were unable to find enough evidence to charge the McCanns could have been due to their famous incompetence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 10:18:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 10:11:08 PM
Exactly. The fact that the PJ were unable to find enough evidence to charge the McCanns could have been due to their famous incompetence.

I often wonder what would have happened if Gerry hadn’t been allowed to sit with Kate in her first interview with his hand on her shoulder or if the PJ had questioned her on the 10th?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 10:20:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 10:11:08 PM
Exactly. The fact that the PJ were unable to find enough evidence to charge the McCanns could have been due to their famous incompetence.

Do you think Gonc might go along with that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 10:20:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 10:11:08 PM
Exactly. The fact that the PJ were unable to find enough evidence to charge the McCanns could have been due to their famous incompetence.
Do you believe that then, that the PJ were so incompetent they were unable to find the crucial evidence needed to charge thr McCanns?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 10:22:26 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 10:20:59 PM
Do you believe that then, that the PJ were so incompetent they were unable to find the crucial evidence needed to charge thr McCanns?

Sounds like a subject for discussion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 10:29:52 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 10:22:26 PM
Sounds like a subject for discussion.
Sounds good to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 10:39:56 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 10:20:59 PM
Do you believe that then, that the PJ were so incompetent they were unable to find the crucial evidence needed to charge thr McCanns?

My point is that those who have accused them of being incompetent seem reluctant to consider that possibility.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 10:42:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 10:39:56 PM
My point is that those who have accused them of being incompetent seem reluctant to consider that possibility.
I’m perfectly open to that possibility - let’s discuss it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 10:44:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2021, 10:39:56 PM
My point is that those who have accused them of being incompetent seem reluctant to consider that possibility.

I'm not, obviously.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 11:01:13 PM

There was that one and only CCTV Camera that got wiped before The PJ got there.  That was a bit incompetent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 11:04:02 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 11:01:13 PM
There was that one and only CCTV Camera that got wiped before The PJ got there.  That was a bit incompetent.

Imagine the implications of that mistake. Didn’t Amaral say that that was one of his biggest regrets?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 11:05:06 PM
Where did the PJ physically check that night, if anywhere?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 11:09:22 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 11:04:02 PM
Imagine the implications of that mistake. Didn’t Amaral say that that was one of his biggest regrets?

Yes, you're right, he did.  But wasn't the camera pointing the wrong way?   Did he mention any other mistakes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 22, 2021, 11:10:51 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 11:01:13 PM
There was that one and only CCTV Camera that got wiped before The PJ got there.  That was a bit incompetent.

Had it not been wiped it is possible that it would have provided evidence regarding the time the Smith family returned to their accommodation on the night of the third.

Paul Luckman says Amaral thinks it would have captured the child carrier who passed them en route.

What a shame no-one thought to check it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 11:14:18 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 11:09:22 PM
Yes, you're right, he did.  But wasn't the camera pointing the wrong way?   Did he mention any other mistakes.

I think mentioning that the British police were being led by the parents may have been one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 11:24:08 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 11:14:18 PM
I think mentioning that the British police were being led by the parents may have been one.

Was that the reason for why he got removed from the case?  I never did work out quite what he did to warrant that.  But I bet he wished he hadn't said it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 11:25:59 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 11:24:08 PM
Was that the reason for why he got removed from the case?  I never did work out quite what he did to warrant that.  But I bet he wished he hadn't said it.

He said the wrong thing to the wrong reporter. I think he thought that it was off the record..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 11:36:02 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 11:25:59 PM
He said the wrong thing to the wrong reporter. I think he thought that it was off the record..

That wasn't very bright, was it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 11:46:50 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 11:36:02 PM
That wasn't very bright, was it.

I’m sure it was driven by frustration.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 22, 2021, 11:49:30 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 11:46:50 PM
I’m sure it was driven by frustration.

You are almost certainly right about that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2021, 11:52:22 PM
I think Amaral simply handed the PJ a convenient excuse to sack him off the case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 23, 2021, 12:09:48 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2021, 11:52:22 PM
I think Amaral simply handed the PJ a convenient excuse to sack him off the case.

I doubt it very much given the humiliation that followed. IMO he was right to criticise the English police given their refusal to provide the information the Portuguese wanted concerning the McCanns.  IMFO, the English police behaved abominably in refusing the Portuguese requests. Who were they protecting and why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 23, 2021, 02:51:41 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 23, 2021, 12:09:48 AM
I doubt it very much given the humiliation that followed. IMO he was right to criticise the English police given their refusal to provide the information the Portuguese wanted concerning the McCanns.  IMFO, the English police behaved abominably in refusing the Portuguese requests. Who were they protecting and why?

Hmm ... and there was me thinking that Amaral's narrative when it suits him, was that the English police were hand in glove with the Portuguese ... except when he put a tail on their senior officers in what seems to me to be a display of paranoia, to keep an eye on them. (TOTL)

Actually I think the incident which caused his sacking from the case was an intemperate outburst to a journalist caused when he was sent a copy of an email in evidence in which an informant suggested a motive of revenge for Madeleine's kidnap by a sacked employee of the Ocean club when he had already decided on his arguidos.
Snip
He told Portuguese newspaper Diario de Noticias: "The Ocean Club is in Praia da Luz, not in London.

"That means that anything in respect to the complex and the employees – current or ex – has been or is being investigated by the Policia Judiciaria.

"It won't be an email, and an anonymous one at that, which will distract our line of investigation." He even claimed the tipoff was created by the McCanns.


Do you think there was a bit of tit for tat in operation when the Portuguese refused Scotland Yard permission to take forensic samples (fingerprints & DNA) from their arguidos in 2014? 
Were they being protected too? 

Or was it  was simply that it would have been illegal to hand over the information the Portuguese were asking for just as it was deemed illegal for Portuguese to hand over the information SY wanted to access.

Why do you think it is that everything associated with Amaral has a conspiracy theory tacked onto it somewhere?


Ingleses pedem ADN de arguidos a todo o custo no caso Maddie
Britons ask for DNA from defendants at all costs in Maddie case

02 Julho 2014 às 00:28
A Polícia britânica chegou a pedir à Polícia Judiciária para proceder à recolha de impressões digitais e o perfil de ADN dos quatro suspeitos agora constituídos arguidos.
The British Police even asked the Judicial Police to carry out the fingerprints and DNA profile of the four suspects now constituted defendants
O pedido consta de uma carta rogatória de julho do ano passado, mas foi contestada pela PJ, por se tratar de uma ilegalidade.
The request is contained in a letter rogatory of July last year, but was challenged by the JUDICIARY, because it is illegal.
https://www.jn.pt/nacional/dossiers/o-caso-maddie-mccann/ingleses-pedem-adn-de-arguidos-a-todo-o-custo-no-caso-maddie-4003235.html?id=4003235
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 23, 2021, 07:17:51 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 23, 2021, 12:09:48 AM
I doubt it very much given the humiliation that followed. IMO he was right to criticise the English police given their refusal to provide the information the Portuguese wanted concerning the McCanns.  IMFO, the English police behaved abominably in refusing the Portuguese requests. Who were they protecting and why?
What humiliation are you referring to?  I think the English police recognised a stitch up when they saw it frankly.  Good for them for not being complicit in such abominable behaviour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 23, 2021, 09:37:00 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 22, 2021, 04:18:52 PM
I’ve always found this statement rather interesting.

SVETLANA
-------  STARIKOVA VITORINO (Russian citizen, with the telephone No "96635 ####) - kitchen assistant:
- Said that, yesterday, one individual, purportedly the father of the missing, left the dinner table where a group of friends (in number 8 or 9), for about 30 minutes. After having returned, a woman whom she believed to be his wife, also left the table, there having passed a few moments, all the guests left the table in question, except one elderly lady, who told her [Svetlana's] colleagues that that child had disappeared.
- During the time that she was working yesterday (between 14:30 and 23:00) she did not see any individual with blonde "rastas

And this from Diane Webster.

‘ That, at that time, the whole group were at the restaurant. The witness did not recall, but thinks that perhaps Gerald and MATT had not been in the restaurant ( when she arrived) along with the other members of the group. ’

‘ Prompted to state for the record the movements that occurred that night, during the above dinner, the witness reiterated that she could not say specifically who had left nor when they had done so.’


Was Gerry doing the first check?

Rachel Oldfields statement -

----- By 21.05, GERALD went see his children, and about 10 minutes later JANE left before GM had returned. A few minutes after Jane left GERALD arrived and said he had been talking to "Jez" about tennis, [she] not recalling if he said anything about the children. During this time she affirmed that no one else left the table. Two or three minutes after the arrival of Gerald, Jane arrived, [she] again not recalling whether [Jane] made any comment about her children.


I'm not discussing it anymore,  it is obvious that Gerry was at the table when Kate returned,  there was no way Gerry would have ran off and hidden Madeleine and returned to speak to Jeremy and eat his dinner laughing with his friends
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 09:43:32 AM
Quote from: Lace on February 23, 2021, 09:37:00 AM
Rachel Oldfields statement -

----- By 21.05, GERALD went see his children, and about 10 minutes later JANE left before GM had returned. A few minutes after Jane left GERALD arrived and said he had been talking to "Jez" about tennis, [she] not recalling if he said anything about the children. During this time she affirmed that no one else left the table. Two or three minutes after the arrival of Gerald, Jane arrived, [she] again not recalling whether [Jane] made any comment about her children.


I'm not discussing it anymore,  it is obvious that Gerry was at the table when Kate returned, there was no way Gerry would have ran off and hidden Madeleine and returned to speak to Jeremy and eat his dinner laughing with his friends

Why?

What was preventing it & renders it a complete & utter physical impossibility?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 23, 2021, 09:49:01 AM
Quote from: Lace on February 23, 2021, 09:37:00 AM
Rachel Oldfields statement -

----- By 21.05, GERALD went see his children, and about 10 minutes later JANE left before GM had returned. A few minutes after Jane left GERALD arrived and said he had been talking to "Jez" about tennis, [she] not recalling if he said anything about the children. During this time she affirmed that no one else left the table. Two or three minutes after the arrival of Gerald, Jane arrived, [she] again not recalling whether [Jane] made any comment about her children.


I'm not discussing it anymore,  it is obvious that Gerry was at the table when Kate returned,  there was no way Gerry would have ran off and hidden Madeleine and returned to speak to Jeremy and eat his dinner laughing with his friends

I agree, there is no way he could have done that but IMO he could have done his 9 o’clock check slightly earlier than Rachel remembers, met Jez at 9 for their conversation and did a second check at 9.30 when he found Madeleine missing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 23, 2021, 09:54:49 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 23, 2021, 09:49:01 AM
I agree, there is no way he could have done that but IMO he could have done his 9 o’clock check slightly earlier than Rachel remembers, met Jez at 9 for their conversation and did a second check at 9.30 when he found Madeleine missing.
Who has Gerry doing a second check at 9.30pm in their statements?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 23, 2021, 10:00:28 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 09:43:32 AM
Why?

What was preventing it & renders it a complete & utter physical impossibility?

Reading your posts I have gathered you don't have a tendency for emotional feelings.    So it is useless to explain how a father would feel if he found his daughter dead.   IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 23, 2021, 10:02:53 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 23, 2021, 09:49:01 AM
I agree, there is no way he could have done that but IMO he could have done his 9 o’clock check slightly earlier than Rachel remembers, met Jez at 9 for their conversation and did a second check at 9.30 when he found Madeleine missing.

Yes lets move the goal posts a ridiculous distance away. no he wasn't talking to Jeremy at nine,  he left the table just after nine to do his check on the children.  As Jeremy said in his statement,  he saw Gerry and believed he had just checked his children.  End of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 10:08:58 AM
Quote from: Lace on February 23, 2021, 10:00:28 AM
Reading your posts I have gathered you don't have a tendency for emotional feelings.    So it is useless to explain how a father would feel if he found his daughter dead.   IMO

Well I don't believe he found her dead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 23, 2021, 10:09:12 AM
Quote from: Lace on February 23, 2021, 10:00:28 AM
Reading your posts I have gathered you don't have a tendency for emotional feelings.    So it is useless to explain how a father would feel if he found his daughter dead.   IMO

Reading WS’s post I think he enjoys winding rather easily wound up people up. His posts say nothing about his ability as a father.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 10:14:19 AM

The thing that gets me about Gerry's 9pm check is how he stopped & admired Maddie & how beautiful she was etc etc.

He doesn't, however, mention any similar feelings about his other offspring, who lay just a matter of inches away from him.

One can only assume he just didn't like them as much.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 10:15:14 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 23, 2021, 10:14:44 AM
He's not a father.  The end.

You only have my word for it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 23, 2021, 10:15:39 AM
Quote from: Lace on February 23, 2021, 10:02:53 AM
Yes lets move the goal posts a ridiculous distance away. no he wasn't talking to Jeremy at nine,  he left the table just after nine to do his check on the children.  As Jeremy said in his statement,  he saw Gerry and believed he had just checked his children.  End of.

And he had just checked on his children...at 9pm. Wilkins said in his statement that his chat with Gerry could have been anytime between 8.45 and 9.15 and Diane Webster, by far the most transparent witness of the group IMO, does not remember Gerry being there when she arrived. Taking these witnesses into account it is entirely possible that Gerry did a check at 9.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 10:35:32 AM
Quote from: Lace on February 23, 2021, 09:37:00 AM
Rachel Oldfields statement -

----- By 21.05, GERALD went see his children, and about 10 minutes later JANE left before GM had returned. A few minutes after Jane left GERALD arrived and said he had been talking to "Jez" about tennis, [she] not recalling if he said anything about the children. During this time she affirmed that no one else left the table. Two or three minutes after the arrival of Gerald, Jane arrived, [she] again not recalling whether [Jane] made any comment about her children.


I'm not discussing it anymore,  it is obvious that Gerry was at the table when Kate returned,  there was no way Gerry would have ran off and hidden Madeleine and returned to speak to Jeremy and eat his dinner laughing with his friends

I assume you don't know Gerry McCann? How can you therefore claim to know what he was or wasn't capable of? In my opinion you can't, you're just guessing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 23, 2021, 10:36:51 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 10:35:32 AM
I assume you don't know Gerry McCann? How can you therefore claim to know what he was or wasn't capable of? In my opinion you can't, you're just guessing.

Logistics.  Nothing to do with knowing Gerry.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 23, 2021, 10:41:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 10:35:32 AM
I assume you don't know Gerry McCann? How can you therefore claim to know what he was or wasn't capable of? In my opinion you can't, you're just guessing.
An informed guess, based on what we know of Gerry, what his nearest and dearest have said about him, on the observations of the FLOs subsequently, on what is known of human behaviour and natural reactions to extreme stress and grief, etc.  Is there any evidence to support the view that Gerry was the kind of person who could deal with the sudden death of his own child in such a relaxed way?  If so perhaps you could provide it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 10:43:43 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 23, 2021, 10:36:51 AM
Logistics.  Nothing to do with knowing Gerry.

Logistics...

'the detailed organization and implementation of a complex operation'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 10:47:09 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 23, 2021, 10:41:58 AM
An informed guess, based on what we know of Gerry, what his nearest and dearest have said about him, on the observations of the FLOs subsequently, on what is known of human behaviour and natural reactions to extreme stress and grief, etc.  Is there any evidence to support the view that Gerry was the kind of person who could deal with the sudden death of his own child in such a relaxed way?  If so perhaps you could provide it.

As a doctor he is trained to deal with stress, grief & death.

If he wasn't capable of dealing with those instances he wouldn't be a very good doctor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 10:51:48 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 10:14:19 AM
The thing that gets me about Gerry's 9pm check is how he stopped & admired Maddie & how beautiful she was etc etc.

He doesn't, however, mention any similar feelings about his other offspring, who lay just a matter of inches away from him.

One can only assume he just didn't like them as much.

As I recall, it took time for the 'proud father' story to emerge, and if I remember correctly the twins were added in at some stage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 10:54:25 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 23, 2021, 10:36:51 AM
Logistics.  Nothing to do with knowing Gerry.

Some people claim to know how others would react. Just guessing imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 23, 2021, 10:55:41 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 10:47:09 AM
As a doctor he is trained to deal with stress, grief & death.

If he wasn't capable of dealing with those instances he wouldn't be a very good doctor.

What a mean spirited post and sooooooooooooooooooooooo totally unnecessary at this remove.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 23, 2021, 10:57:32 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 23, 2021, 10:15:39 AM
And he had just checked on his children...at 9pm. Wilkins said in his statement that his chat with Gerry could have been anytime between 8.45 and 9.15 and Diane Webster, by far the most transparent witness of the group IMO, does not remember Gerry being there when she arrived. Taking these witnesses into account it is entirely possible that Gerry did a check at 9.

From Jeremy Wilkins statement -

I do not remember having seen anyone else at this time besides Gerry. After leaving each other, Gerry walked downward in the direction of the Tapas Bar and I began to walk in the other direction, up the pathway. I turned left at the crossing and passed the apartment. I did not meet anyone else during my walk and once in my apartment, I did not venture out again.


'Gerry walked towards the Tapas Bar'.  Ties in exactly to what Gerry says himself after speaking to Jeremy he went back to the Tapas Bar.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 23, 2021, 10:58:47 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 10:47:09 AM
As a doctor he is trained to deal with stress, grief & death.

If he wasn't capable of dealing with those instances he wouldn't be a very good doctor.
Is he trained to deal with stress, grief and death of his own children?  Is he trained to cover up their deaths and to dispose of their bodies in the dark without vehicle or tools, in an unfamiliar environment without anyone ever finding them? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 23, 2021, 11:00:34 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 10:51:48 AM
As I recall, it took time for the 'proud father' story to emerge, and if I remember correctly the twins were added in at some stage.
Are you suggesting that Gerry does not have the usual emotional, father connections to his children and that these were manufactured for the press?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 23, 2021, 11:01:25 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 10:47:09 AM
As a doctor he is trained to deal with stress, grief & death.

If he wasn't capable of dealing with those instances he wouldn't be a very good doctor.


Yes he is trained to deal with stress grief and death.   How not to show emotion when dealing with the bereaved,  though many Drs have been know to break down in tears.   They are trained to deal with this but not for their own family,  Drs are not usually allowed to operate on one of their own family as emotion gets in the way.   It is very different dealing with strangers than dealing with their own family.   Madeleine was Gerry's daughter very different indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 11:01:45 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 10:51:48 AM
As I recall, it took time for the 'proud father' story to emerge, and if I remember correctly the twins were added in at some stage.

Such a sad part to the story, that just moments after contemplating how much he cherished his precious daughter, before pissing off out & leaving her to fend for herself again, some nasty paedophile (not quite sure how he knew this) comes in through the *window, *locked/unlocked front door, *patio doors, or was already *hiding in the apartment (*delete as applicable) & he never see's her again.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 23, 2021, 11:03:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 10:35:32 AM
I assume you don't know Gerry McCann? How can you therefore claim to know what he was or wasn't capable of? In my opinion you can't, you're just guessing.


Gerry was a loving father,   you don't need to guess do you?   How would any loving father deal with finding their child dead?   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 23, 2021, 11:04:46 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 11:01:45 AM
Such a sad part to the story, that just moments after contemplating how much he cherished his precious daughter, before pissing off out & leaving her to fend for herself again, some nasty paedophile (not quite sure how he knew this) comes in through the *window, *locked/unlocked front door, *patio doors, or was already *hiding in the apartment (*delete as applicable) & he never see's her again.

[Content Removed]


Well you would think that way,  as I said you have no compassion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on February 23, 2021, 11:06:47 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 10:51:48 AM
As I recall, it took time for the 'proud father' story to emerge, and if I remember correctly the twins were added in at some stage.

So Gerry wasn't a proud father?   What are you trying to say?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 23, 2021, 11:09:25 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 11:01:45 AM
Such a sad part to the story, that just moments after contemplating how much he cherished his precious daughter, before pissing off out & leaving her to fend for herself again, some nasty paedophile (not quite sure how he knew this) comes in through the *window, *locked/unlocked front door, *patio doors, or was already *hiding in the apartment (*delete as applicable) & he never see's her again.

[Content Removed]
This sounds a bit slur-ry to me.  You really are very upset about Gerry aren't you?  Poor thing, was the nasty man beastly to you too? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 23, 2021, 11:10:29 AM
Quote from: Lace on February 23, 2021, 11:06:47 AM
So Gerry wasn't a proud father?   What are you trying to say?

He may have been, but I think he very much over-egged the pudding when he came out with that statement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 11:38:47 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 23, 2021, 11:09:25 AM
This sounds a bit slur-ry to me.  You really are very upset about Gerry aren't you?  Poor thing, was the nasty man beastly to you too?

I'm just stating the facts as I see them.

I haven't seen any evidence the McCann's personal, social or professional lives have been damaged irreparably by their daughters disappearance. Quite the opposite in fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 23, 2021, 12:00:50 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 23, 2021, 10:57:32 AM
From Jeremy Wilkins statement -

I do not remember having seen anyone else at this time besides Gerry. After leaving each other, Gerry walked downward in the direction of the Tapas Bar and I began to walk in the other direction, up the pathway. I turned left at the crossing and passed the apartment. I did not meet anyone else during my walk and once in my apartment, I did not venture out again.


'Gerry walked towards the Tapas Bar'.  Ties in exactly to what Gerry says himself after speaking to Jeremy he went back to the Tapas Bar.

And?

How does that rule out that Gerry did a check at 9pm?

‘Q. Relative to the time I met Gerry McCann on the Thursday night of May 3, 2007;
As stated in my original deposition, I believe that I left the apartment around 20h30. I calculate that I met Gerry on the road between 20h45 and 21h15. I am aware of the importance of this hour and am also aware that the media announced our meeting time as 21h05. Even if this were correct, I have no idea from where such information originated. It is not possible to give you a more exact time. ‘
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 23, 2021, 12:17:35 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 11:38:47 AM
I'm just stating the facts as I see them.

I haven't seen any evidence the McCann's personal, social or professional lives have been damaged irreparably by their daughters disappearance. Quite the opposite in fact.
The subject is obviously very close to your heart as you seem to get quite worked up about it. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 12:22:29 PM
Quote from: Lace on February 23, 2021, 11:03:24 AM

Gerry was a loving father,   you don't need to guess do you?   How would any loving father deal with finding their child dead?

I've no reason to believe Gerry McCann wasn't a loving father, but there are many different ways of loving and fathering. That means no-one except him can know how he might react to a situation. I've seen no evidence that he found his child dead, either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 23, 2021, 01:33:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 12:22:29 PM
I've no reason to believe Gerry McCann wasn't a loving father, but there are many different ways of loving and fathering. That means no-one except him can know how he might react to a situation. I've seen no evidence that he found his child dead, either.
If he didn't find his child dead why did he dispose of her body then?  Or do you think there's no evidence of that either?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 05:33:33 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 23, 2021, 01:33:21 PM
If he didn't find his child dead why did he dispose of her body then?  Or do you think there's no evidence of that either?

Why is there an assumption that she was found?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 23, 2021, 06:19:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 05:33:33 PM
Why is there an assumption that she was found?
What are you suggesting?  That Gerry watched her as she died?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 07:54:04 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 23, 2021, 06:19:35 PM
What are you suggesting?  That Gerry watched her as she died?

Just questioning your assumption that if she died she was alone when it happened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 23, 2021, 08:58:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 07:54:04 PM
Just questioning your assumption that if she died she was alone when it happened.
Sadly I don’t think she was alone when she died but I certainly do. not believe Gerry was there when it happened, you however appear to think it’s a possibility.  So you’re not ruling out manslaughter or murder by her parent(s) either I take it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 09:26:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 23, 2021, 08:58:35 PM
Sadly I don’t think she was alone when she died but I certainly do. not believe Gerry was there when it happened, you however appear to think it’s a possibility.  So you’re not ruling out manslaughter or murder by her parent(s) either I take it?

You think children don't have accidents when their parents are present?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 23, 2021, 09:30:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 09:26:35 PM
You think children don't have accidents when their parents are present?
Of course, but generally I find parents don’t pretend nothing has happened, go out to dinner and dispose of the evidence between the main course and dessert.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 11:30:33 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 23, 2021, 09:30:03 PM
Of course, but generally I find parents don’t pretend nothing has happened, go out to dinner and dispose of the evidence between the main course and dessert.

Not usually, no, but on occasion such things do happen and it's not unknown for parents to claim an abduction took place.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 23, 2021, 11:36:06 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 23, 2021, 11:30:33 PM
Not usually, no, but on occasion such things do happen and it's not unknown for parents to claim an abduction took place.
Do you have some examples?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 24, 2021, 10:58:56 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 23, 2021, 11:36:06 PM
Do you have some examples?
I take it that's a "no" then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on February 24, 2021, 01:23:32 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 23, 2021, 11:38:47 AM
I'm just stating the facts as I see them.

I haven't seen any evidence the McCann's personal, social or professional lives have been damaged irreparably by their daughters disappearance. Quite the opposite in fact.

They might have been shit parents WS but have some empathy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 25, 2021, 12:41:10 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 on February 24, 2021, 01:23:32 PM
They might have been shit parents WS but have some empathy.

You couldn't wait to get that ad hom nasty attack in, could you, Angelo?

And then wrapping it up as empathy, Jeez !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 13, 2021, 08:23:56 AM
Despite a three month extension to their filing date, the Madeleine's Fund accounts are late being filed.
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/06248215
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 08:43:17 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 13, 2021, 08:23:56 AM
Despite a three month extension to their filing date, the Madeleine's Fund accounts are late being filed.
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/06248215

Who'd a thought it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 13, 2021, 09:33:04 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 08:43:17 AM
Who'd a thought it?

Who cares!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 10:08:15 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 13, 2021, 09:33:04 AM
Who cares!

Well, there are a few you know
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 13, 2021, 10:25:32 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 13, 2021, 09:33:04 AM
Who cares!

Clearly not you. Is that because it suggests that the directors of the Fund are not efficient? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 10:40:50 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 13, 2021, 10:25:32 AM
Clearly not you. Is that because it suggests that the directors of the Fund are not efficient?

Almost certainly The McCann's Accountants know what they are doing.  Or had that not occurred to you?

And how many times has this cropped up?  Every blimmin year as far as I remember.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 13, 2021, 10:43:12 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 10:08:15 AM
Well, there are a few you know

I've stopped even bothering with such as those a long time ago I find their ethos reprehensible and tiresome in the extreme.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 13, 2021, 10:50:56 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 10:40:50 AM
Almost certainly The McCann's Accountants know what they are doing.  Or had that not occurred to you?

And how many times has this cropped up?  Every blimmin year as far as I remember.

Of course.The figures are only published once a year
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 13, 2021, 10:51:51 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 13, 2021, 10:25:32 AM
Clearly not you. Is that because it suggests that the directors of the Fund are not efficient?

There is just so much going on in the world at the moment which has been life changing for many folk why on earth would I wish to get bogged down in irrelevant trivia which is none of my business anyway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 13, 2021, 11:18:20 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 13, 2021, 10:51:51 AM
There is just so much going on in the world at the moment which has been life changing for many folk why on earth would I wish to get bogged down in irrelevant trivia which is none of my business anyway.

That applies to everyone who posts on here, but that's never been a barrier.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 11:23:31 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 13, 2021, 10:50:56 AM
Of course.The figures are only published once a year

Why would they be otherwise?  Straightforward Accounting.  Nothing more is required from The Accountants who audit The Accounts.

And there is always End of Year Accounts which are not required before April of any year.  I haven't yet even received a demand to to submit my Accounts.

Some of you are abysmally ignorant of how Accounting actually works.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 11:27:51 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 13, 2021, 11:18:20 AM
That applies to everyone who posts on here, but that's never been a barrier.

Certainly not for some.  But if anyone seriously believes that The McCanns are up to shenanigans with The Fund then they are deluded.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 13, 2021, 11:34:48 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 11:23:31 AM
Why would they be otherwise?  Straightforward Accounting.  Nothing more is required from The Accountants who audit The Accounts.

And there is always End of Year Accounts which are not required before April of any year.  I haven't yet even received a demand to to submit my Accounts.

Some of you are abysmally ignorant of how Accounting actually works.

Are you comparing self-employed accounts to company accounts? You do realise there are different deadlines, I'm sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 11:39:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 13, 2021, 11:34:48 AM
Are you comparing self-employed accounts to company accounts? You do realise there are different deadlines, I'm sure.

So tell me the date by which Company Accounts should be submitted.  And The Penalties if they aren't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 13, 2021, 11:52:28 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 13, 2021, 10:51:51 AM
There is just so much going on in the world at the moment which has been life changing for many folk why on earth would I wish to get bogged down in irrelevant trivia which is none of my business anyway.

You have shown interest in Amaral's finances in the past, which are not publicly accessible and are therefore less of your business than the Fund's accounts.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 13, 2021, 12:08:29 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 11:39:36 AM
So tell me the date by which Company Accounts should be submitted.  And The Penalties if they aren't.

Nine months after the company's financial year ends. In 2021 that has been extended to twelve months due to Brexit. Penalties are on a sliding scale, beginning with £150 for one month late and rising to £ 1,500 for six months late.

At the same time as the accounts are submitted to Companies House, any corporation tax due must be paid or penalties are charged by HMRC.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 12:13:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 13, 2021, 12:08:29 PM
Nine months after the company's financial year ends. In 2021 that has been extended to twelve months due to Brexit. Penalties are on a sliding scale, beginning with £150 for one month late and rising to £ 1,500 for six months late.

At the same time as the accounts are submitted to Companies House, any corporation tax due must be paid or penalties are charged by HMRC.

Has this ever happened to The McCanns. or more to the point, their Accountants?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 13, 2021, 12:31:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 13, 2021, 11:52:28 AM
You have shown interest in Amaral's finances in the past, which are not publicly accessible and are therefore less of your business than the Fund's accounts.

I have no interest in the money collected by public conscription to benefit Amaral but only in the hypocrisy of those sad individuals who while admitting to the secrecy surrounding donations to Amaral sit like vultures awaiting the annual publication of the transparent Madeleine Fund for their intense scrutiny.

The contrast between the Amaral Fund and Madeleine's fund from concept to vilification or lack of could hardly be more marked.

By the way ... we are informed exactly what will happen to the surplus from Madeleine's Fund when her disappearance is resolved.  A similar undertaken was promised for the surplus from Amaral's Fund which now he has won his case must be due ... which charity or charities benefitted?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 01:03:22 PM

This is almost unbelievable, again.  Every year without fail, but with nothing ever to be found that contravenes anything.  But you never know.  Maybe next year.

If I were The McCanns I would take the money, earned from Kate's Book and then bog off to New Zealand, which The McCanns are quite within their rights to do.

And then these persons can all have a lovely time trying to track them down as they are obviously bored out of their tiny minds.

Meanwhile, Breuckner will get banged up yet again for child sexual abuse which will be no odds to any of them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 13, 2021, 01:11:11 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 13, 2021, 12:31:12 PM
I have no interest in the money collected by public conscription to benefit Amaral but only in the hypocrisy of those sad individuals who while admitting to the secrecy surrounding donations to Amaral sit like vultures awaiting the annual publication of the transparent Madeleine Fund for their intense scrutiny.

The contrast between the Amaral Fund and Madeleine's fund from concept to vilification or lack of could hardly be more marked.

By the way ... we are informed exactly what will happen to the surplus from Madeleine's Fund when her disappearance is resolved.  A similar undertaken was promised for the surplus from Amaral's Fund which now he has won his case must be due ... which charity or charities benefitted?

Madeleine's Fund's transparency goes only as far as the minimum they are obliged to reveal. I wasn't referring to Amaral's Fund, by the way, but to your general interest in and disapproval of his financial affairs.

"In my opinion a senior police officer obviously living beyond his means resulting in substantial debt is very much a cause for concern whatever jurisdiction he happens to be from."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8465.msg640112#msg640112
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2021, 01:58:13 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 13, 2021, 08:23:56 AM
Despite a three month extension to their filing date, the Madeleine's Fund accounts are late being filed.
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/06248215
You've stolen Faithlilly's thunder - it's usually her who brings us these yearly sad tidings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 13, 2021, 03:04:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 13, 2021, 01:11:11 PM
Madeleine's Fund's transparency goes only as far as the minimum they are obliged to reveal. I wasn't referring to Amaral's Fund, by the way, but to your general interest in and disapproval of his financial affairs.

"In my opinion a senior police officer obviously living beyond his means resulting in substantial debt is very much a cause for concern whatever jurisdiction he happens to be from."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8465.msg640112#msg640112

And that's a fact twice over.

Madeleine's Fund meets all the protocols necessary and it is inappropriate for a senior police to be mired in debt 👏
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 15, 2021, 10:22:19 AM
Madeleine's Fund has now filed it's accounts at Companies House. The Fund has not been wiped out by having to pay huge amounts to Amaral as yet, although it's assets have been reduced by £ 70944.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 15, 2021, 11:45:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 15, 2021, 10:22:19 AM
Madeleine's Fund has now filed it's accounts at Companies House. The Fund has not been wiped out by having to pay huge amounts to Amaral as yet, although it's assets have been reduced by £ 70944.

That's a sizable amount. Any details of what it was spent on ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 15, 2021, 12:09:32 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 15, 2021, 11:45:58 AM
That's a sizable amount. Any details of what it was spent on ?

A new ffrock for Kate perhaps.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 15, 2021, 12:12:10 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 15, 2021, 12:09:32 PM
A new ffrock for Kate perhaps.
 

Ah expenses. Could be
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 15, 2021, 12:29:27 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 13, 2021, 03:04:41 PM
And that's a fact twice over.

Madeleine's Fund meets all the protocols necessary and it is inappropriate for a senior police to be mired in debt 👏

Why?

Many people are in debt.

The British Government is mired in debt, personally I find that more inappropriate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 15, 2021, 12:35:16 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 15, 2021, 11:45:58 AM
That's a sizable amount. Any details of what it was spent on ?

Not really. They report a deficit of £ 55385 from the Income and Expenditure account, aka Profit and Loss account. That just means they've spent more than they've earned. 

Of interest so far is an amount of £ 5193 in search fees. That term usually applies to searches connected to property purchases afaik, but it seems rather a lot if so.

A payment of £ 4229.00 to the McCann couple is also interesting. It says it's to reimburse legal costs in relation to ongoing libel action in Portugal. That's a little confusing, as that case was concluded in 2017.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on April 20, 2021, 08:56:39 AM
Hello everyone.  I am able to post again after not being able to for a while,  every time I tried to post I got the message that my time had expired when posting,  to log out and in again to resolve the problem.  I am unable to log out when it happens,  or post or send private messages.   Just wondered if this has happened to anyone else on this forum.  It has nothing to do with my computer as it is a brand new MacBook Pro.  This has happened three times now.  I don't know how long I will be able to post this time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 20, 2021, 09:05:49 AM
Quote from: Lace on April 20, 2021, 08:56:39 AM
Hello everyone.  I am able to post again after not being able to for a while,  every time I tried to post I got the message that my time had expired when posting,  to log out and in again to resolve the problem.  I am unable to log out when it happens,  or post or send private messages.   Just wondered if this has happened to anyone else on this forum.  It has nothing to do with my computer as it is a brand new MacBook Pro.  This has happened three times now.  I don't know how long I will be able to post this time.

Yes, it happens to me sometimes and I'm on a nearly new MacBook Air.  I shut down everything and then start again but this doesn't always work.

I am currently having to Log In every time I leave my computer for longer than half an hour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 20, 2021, 09:21:36 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 20, 2021, 09:05:49 AM
Yes, it happens to me sometimes and I'm on a nearly new MacBook Air.  I shut down everything and then start again but this doesn't always work.

I am currently having to Log In every time I leave my computer for longer than half an hour.

I'm no expert but I'm wondering if this is the problem;
https://smallbusiness.chron.com/server-connection-timeout-mean-71381.html

Under "related" it says "pinging a server in a Mac". Maybe this would help?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 20, 2021, 09:49:51 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 20, 2021, 09:21:36 AM
I'm no expert but I'm wondering if this is the problem;
https://smallbusiness.chron.com/server-connection-timeout-mean-71381.html

Under "related" it says "pinging a server in a Mac". Maybe this would help?

This didn't happen to me for years and years and I have always been on a Mac.  And I know that Sadie isn't on a Mac but has the same thing.

Having to keep on Logging In is a Forum problem.  I don't have this trouble anywhere else.

But thanks for trying.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 20, 2021, 10:22:40 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 20, 2021, 09:49:51 AM
This didn't happen to me for years and years and I have always been on a Mac.  And I know that Sadie isn't on a Mac but has the same thing.

Having to keep on Logging In is a Forum problem.  I don't have this trouble anywhere else.

But thanks for trying.

I suppose I was thinking the problem was between your server and the forum's server, but as I said I'm no expert.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 20, 2021, 10:42:58 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 20, 2021, 09:49:51 AM
This didn't happen to me for years and years and I have always been on a Mac.  And I know that Sadie isn't on a Mac but has the same thing.

Having to keep on Logging In is a Forum problem.  I don't have this trouble anywhere else.

But thanks for trying.

I've had the same problem on my android phone... So it's not a mac problem
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 20, 2021, 10:44:17 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 20, 2021, 10:22:40 AM
I suppose I was thinking the problem was between your server and the forum's server, but as I said I'm no expert.

It is all to easy to think it's Apple when obviously it isn't.  And besides, it happens to others.  But it's okay.  I manage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 20, 2021, 10:45:37 AM
I've had trouble logging on too - I put in my (correct) details and it says "not recognised" - I thought I'd been banned for a while but I persevered and after 4 or 5 attempts I got on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 20, 2021, 10:59:14 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on April 20, 2021, 10:45:37 AM
I've had trouble logging on too - I put in my (correct) details and it says "not recognised" - I thought I'd been banned for a while but I persevered and after 4 or 5 attempts I got on.

I think that some hoped that I had bogged off when it got really difficult.  As if.

And of course, you can't complain because you can't get in.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 20, 2021, 11:19:25 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 20, 2021, 10:59:14 AM
I think that some hoped that I had bogged off when it got really difficult.  As if.

And of course, you can't complain because you can't get in.

I can't answer for others, but I didn't really notice your absence. We all come and go.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 20, 2021, 11:22:30 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 20, 2021, 11:19:25 AM
I can't answer for others, but I didn't really notice your absence. We all come and go.

That is even funnier.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 20, 2021, 11:27:38 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 20, 2021, 10:42:58 AM
I've had the same problem on my android phone... So it's not a mac problem

I never said it was, but the link I provided points out that Mac's have the ability to check connection speeds.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on April 20, 2021, 12:02:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 20, 2021, 09:21:36 AM
I'm no expert but I'm wondering if this is the problem;
https://smallbusiness.chron.com/server-connection-timeout-mean-71381.html

Under "related" it says "pinging a server in a Mac". Maybe this would help?

I don't think so G-Unit,  as I have logged in go to send a message [short one]. and the same thing happens.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 20, 2021, 12:26:49 PM
Quote from: Lace on April 20, 2021, 12:02:50 PM
I don't think so G-Unit,  as I have logged in go to send a message [short one]. and the same thing happens.

Well as I said, I'm no expert, but if it is the forum I wonder why it isn't affecting everyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 20, 2021, 12:38:29 PM
could it be web browser or a combination of browser &  OS ?

I'm using Chrome & Windows 7 - no problem - to date.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 20, 2021, 06:22:27 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 20, 2021, 12:38:29 PM
could it be web browser or a combination of browser &  OS ?

I'm using Chrome & Windows 7 - no problem - to date.

Windows 10, chrome, the problem I have is being let back in. (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on April 20, 2021, 07:21:56 PM
Just to advise that there are no connectivity issues with the forum so if anyone is experiencing difficulties the problem relates to your own device and it's settings.

If your device or PC is not set to remember passwords and deletes them each time you close down then you will have to log in every time you access the site.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on April 21, 2021, 09:53:23 AM
Quote from: John on April 20, 2021, 07:21:56 PM
Just to advise that there are no connectivity issues with the forum so if anyone is experiencing difficulties the problem relates to your own device and it's settings.

If your device or PC is not set to remember passwords and deletes them each time you close down then you will have to log in every time you access the site.

When this problem happens to me I am able to log in John.   Then when I try to post a message comes up saying my time has run out when posting,  try logging out and in again.   I don't know how my time has run out as I haven't been long writing my posts.   Then I am unable to log out!!!   I can't send private messages either.   Then suddenly I am able to post again.   If it was something to do with my computer I wouldn't be able to come back on as normal would I?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2021, 10:00:05 AM
Quote from: Lace on April 21, 2021, 09:53:23 AM
When this problem happens to me I am able to log in John.   Then when I try to post a message comes up saying my time has run out when posting,  try logging out and in again.   I don't know how my time has run out as I haven't been long writing my posts.   Then I am unable to log out!!!   I can't send private messages either.   Then suddenly I am able to post again.   If it was something to do with my computer I wouldn't be able to come back on as normal would I?

Far be it for me to gainsay John.  But these problems are intermittent.  So why is that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 21, 2021, 10:00:33 AM
Quote from: Lace on April 21, 2021, 09:53:23 AM
When this problem happens to me I am able to log in John.   Then when I try to post a message comes up saying my time has run out when posting,  try logging out and in again.   I don't know how my time has run out as I haven't been long writing my posts.   Then I am unable to log out!!!   I can't send private messages either.   Then suddenly I am able to post again.   If it was something to do with my computer I wouldn't be able to come back on as normal would I?

I haven't an answer, but when it occurs, have you tried hitting the back button and then trying to re-post your message ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2021, 10:13:14 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 21, 2021, 10:00:33 AM
I haven't an answer, but when it occurs, have you tried hitting the back button and then trying to re-post your message ?

Yes I have.  It doesn't work.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on April 22, 2021, 11:29:01 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 21, 2021, 10:13:14 AM
Yes I have.  It doesn't work.

What's the problem: getting logged out or losing a post?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 22, 2021, 11:44:49 AM
Quote from: Carana on April 22, 2021, 11:29:01 AM
What's the problem: getting logged out or losing a post?

Both are annoying, but losing a well consider Comment is worse.  I sometimes Copy those these days.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 23, 2021, 06:31:53 PM
Although German police insist they have evidence Madeleine is dead the couple believe she could still be alive.


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-still-believe-23965529
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 23, 2021, 06:58:15 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 23, 2021, 06:31:53 PM
Although German police insist they have evidence Madeleine is dead the couple believe she could still be alive.


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-still-believe-23965529

Why is so wrong with that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 24, 2021, 01:22:59 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 23, 2021, 06:58:15 PM
Why is so wrong with that?

I think there is something seriously wrong with it.  The Germans have evidence.  They have no proof.  At the moment as far as Scotland Yard is concerned Madeleine's is a missing person's case.  So why deride the parents of a missing child the right to have hopes for her bearing in mind they have already achieved the impossible of keeping the search for her an officially active one for all these years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 24, 2021, 08:50:44 AM
How very apt the "bleeding hearts" are flowering in the garden.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 24, 2021, 10:46:56 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 24, 2021, 01:22:59 AM
I think there is something seriously wrong with it.  The Germans have evidence.  They have no proof.  At the moment as far as Scotland Yard is concerned Madeleine's is a missing person's case.  So why deride the parents of a missing child the right to have hopes for her bearing in mind they have already achieved the impossible of keeping the search for her an officially active one for all these years.

Despite the McCanns pleas, it is said that the UK authorities had absolutely no intention of getting involved until Rebekah Brooks/The Sun persuaded appealed to the Prime Minister.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 24, 2021, 10:55:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 24, 2021, 10:46:56 AM
Despite the McCanns pleas, it is said that the UK authorities had absolutely no intention of getting involved until Rebekah Brooks/The Sun persuaded appealed to the Prime Minister.
It is said by whom, and do you have a cite?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 24, 2021, 11:02:04 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 24, 2021, 10:46:56 AM
Despite the McCanns pleas, it is said that the UK authorities had absolutely no intention of getting involved until Rebekah Brooks/The Sun persuaded appealed to the Prime Minister.

It is said the earth is flat and a mere 6000 years old... Lol
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 24, 2021, 11:32:54 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 24, 2021, 08:50:44 AM
How very apt the "bleeding hearts" are flowering in the garden.
(https://th.bing.com/th/id/R0f61d1e51c0a9c1c800d498573582b85?rik=2cCDmxKIaJDwuw&riu=http%3a%2f%2f3.bp.blogspot.com%2f-h4qMEPADdsI%2fUXbnlt6L4yI%2fAAAAAAAACiw%2fxhhFQNRTJyQ%2fs1600%2f7102795205_cc51918fb0_z.jpg&ehk=Df%2fJyTxG%2f5sYWGE4PmuosdLxWg7nvVDKmq3XJmdP8tE%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw)
And aren't they just a beauty to behold for those with vision and hope!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 24, 2021, 02:05:06 PM
Never mind all the cant, quite nice to look at Full stop.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 24, 2021, 08:23:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 24, 2021, 10:46:56 AM
Despite the McCanns pleas, it is said that the UK authorities had absolutely no intention of getting involved until Rebekah Brooks/The Sun persuaded appealed to the Prime Minister.
For the second time of asking: it is said by whom, and please provide the cite thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 24, 2021, 08:38:08 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 24, 2021, 11:02:04 AM
It is said the earth is flat and a mere 6000 years old... Lol

Is that relevant? The McCanns petitioned three Home Secretary's; Jacqui Smith, Alan Johnson and Theresa May to no avail. So in November 2010 they;

"started a petition to lobby the two governments to conduct an independent review. We are at a loss to understand why such a commonly used procedure isn’t an obvious option and why our request for such a review has gone unanswered. " [madeleine page 384]

Rebekah Brooks became involved and persuaded the Government to act, according to her. Others suggested she threatened rather than persuaded.

"QC Robert Jay claimed Mrs Brooks threatened to put Home Secretary Theresa May on the front page of The Sun every day until she ordered a new inquiry into the missing child."
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/rebekah-brooks-accused-of-bullying-government-over-mccanns-7737611.html

It seems that the McCanns pleas alone were not enough.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 24, 2021, 08:56:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 24, 2021, 08:38:08 PM
Is that relevant? The McCanns petitioned three Home Secretary's; Jacqui Smith, Alan Johnson and Theresa May to no avail. So in November 2010 they;

"started a petition to lobby the two governments to conduct an independent review. We are at a loss to understand why such a commonly used procedure isn’t an obvious option and why our request for such a review has gone unanswered. " [madeleine page 384]

Rebekah Brooks became involved and persuaded the Government to act, according to her. Others suggested she threatened rather than persuaded.

"QC Robert Jay claimed Mrs Brooks threatened to put Home Secretary Theresa May on the front page of The Sun every day until she ordered a new inquiry into the missing child."
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/rebekah-brooks-accused-of-bullying-government-over-mccanns-7737611.html

It seems that the McCanns pleas alone were not enough.

Who really cares . I think it's patently clear the McCanns pushed to keep the investigation going... In fact it was their appeal on German TV that led to CB being the prime suspect
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 24, 2021, 09:39:35 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 24, 2021, 08:56:25 PM
Who really cares . I think it's patently clear the McCanns pushed to keep the investigation going... In fact it was their appeal on German TV that led to CB being the prime suspect

Some one thought they were going to make a buck or two, it'll peter out, getting on toward 11 months the concrete is going soft not harder.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 24, 2021, 09:41:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 24, 2021, 11:02:04 AM
It is said the earth is flat and a mere 6000 years old... Lol


There's a lot of faith based on the imaginary, so who knows.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 24, 2021, 10:15:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 24, 2021, 08:38:08 PM
Is that relevant? The McCanns petitioned three Home Secretary's; Jacqui Smith, Alan Johnson and Theresa May to no avail. So in November 2010 they;

"started a petition to lobby the two governments to conduct an independent review. We are at a loss to understand why such a commonly used procedure isn’t an obvious option and why our request for such a review has gone unanswered. " [madeleine page 384]

Rebekah Brooks became involved and persuaded the Government to act, according to her. Others suggested she threatened rather than persuaded.

"QC Robert Jay claimed Mrs Brooks threatened to put Home Secretary Theresa May on the front page of The Sun every day until she ordered a new inquiry into the missing child."
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/rebekah-brooks-accused-of-bullying-government-over-mccanns-7737611.html

It seems that the McCanns pleas alone were not enough.
Thank you, so now you might like to give some thought as to why the McCanns were so desperate for a case review that they petitioned three home secretaries to re-open an investigation into the crimes you seem to think they themselves may have committed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 24, 2021, 10:41:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 24, 2021, 08:38:08 PM
Is that relevant? The McCanns petitioned three Home Secretary's; Jacqui Smith, Alan Johnson and Theresa May to no avail. So in November 2010 they;

"started a petition to lobby the two governments to conduct an independent review. We are at a loss to understand why such a commonly used procedure isn’t an obvious option and why our request for such a review has gone unanswered. " [madeleine page 384]

Rebekah Brooks became involved and persuaded the Government to act, according to her. Others suggested she threatened rather than persuaded.

"QC Robert Jay claimed Mrs Brooks threatened to put Home Secretary Theresa May on the front page of The Sun every day until she ordered a new inquiry into the missing child."
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/rebekah-brooks-accused-of-bullying-government-over-mccanns-7737611.html

It seems that the McCanns pleas alone were not enough.

You never really get it quite right do you.

Snip
Former Home Secretary Alan Johnson commissioned a scoping exercise by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (Ceop) centre to look at the feasibility of carrying out a review of the case.

This was completed in March 2010
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13378289

As we know Johnson was unable to take things any further as a result the 2010 general election, Thursday 6 May 2010.

Kate and Gerry wrote an open letter which was published in May 2011 asking David Cameron to launch an independent review of all information relating to Madeleine's disappearance.


Snip
Mr Cameron's spokeswoman said: "The prime minister met Kate and Gerry McCann while he was leader of the opposition, and he has followed their plight very closely.

"He and the home secretary want to make sure the government does all it can to help them".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13370591

The McCanns never gave up on Madeleine nor did they ever give up on lobbying for her case to be properly investigated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 24, 2021, 10:52:21 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 24, 2021, 08:56:25 PM
Who really cares . I think it's patently clear the McCanns pushed to keep the investigation going... In fact it was their appeal on German TV that led to CB being the prime suspect

The content of the open letter was prescient on that ...

Snip
They wrote that "the benefits of pooling together different bits of evidence can be enormous".

"One call might be all that is needed to lead to Madeleine and her abductor," they said.

"To this end we are seeking a joint independent, transparent and comprehensive review of all information held in relation to Madeleine's disappearance.

"Thus far there has been no formal review of the material held by the police authorities."

They added: "It is fundamental for any major incident that a case review is undertaken to identify all the avenues that could be explored that might lead to new information coming into the inquiry."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13370591

And that one call came as a result of their appearance on German Television ten years after Madeleine's disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 24, 2021, 11:11:12 PM
One would have to admit that the parents’ determination to have the circumstances surrounding the crimes they have supposedly committed themselves is really quite unprecedented.  How on earth do sceptics explain this to themselves?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 07:38:29 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on April 24, 2021, 10:15:50 PM
Thank you, so now you might like to give some thought as to why the McCanns were so desperate for a case review that they petitioned three home secretaries to re-open an investigation into the crimes you seem to think they themselves may have committed.

Case reviews often examine how an investigation was handled in order to identify mistakes made by investigators. As Kate McCann refers to 'deficiencies in the investigation' I assume she wanted those deficiencies officially highlighted. That never happened, of course, as no findings were ever publicised.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 07:45:38 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 24, 2021, 10:41:48 PM
You never really get it quite right do you.

Snip
Former Home Secretary Alan Johnson commissioned a scoping exercise by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (Ceop) centre to look at the feasibility of carrying out a review of the case.

This was completed in March 2010
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13378289

As we know Johnson was unable to take things any further as a result the 2010 general election, Thursday 6 May 2010.

Kate and Gerry wrote an open letter which was published in May 2011 asking David Cameron to launch an independent review of all information relating to Madeleine's disappearance.


Snip
Mr Cameron's spokeswoman said: "The prime minister met Kate and Gerry McCann while he was leader of the opposition, and he has followed their plight very closely.

"He and the home secretary want to make sure the government does all it can to help them".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13370591

The McCanns never gave up on Madeleine nor did they ever give up on lobbying for her case to be properly investigated.

You always insist that the McCanns lobbyed for an investigation, but imo that wasn't what they wanted the authorities to do, they wanted a review. They are not the same thing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2021, 07:54:33 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 07:45:38 AM
You always insist that the McCanns lobbyed for an investigation, but imo that wasn't what they wanted the authorities to do, they wanted a review. They are not the same thing.

Are you seriously suggesting the McCanns did not want the investigation re-opened.. I find your post delusional
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 25, 2021, 09:11:54 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 07:38:29 AM
Case reviews often examine how an investigation was handled in order to identify mistakes made by investigators. As Kate McCann refers to 'deficiencies in the investigation' I assume she wanted those deficiencies officially highlighted. That never happened, of course, as no findings were ever publicised.

There was a review of the performance of the British police, mainly Leicester & CEOP in the early days, before they withdrew their services, though I forget what they called it. Quite damning as I recall.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 25, 2021, 09:41:49 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 25, 2021, 09:11:54 AM
There was a review of the performance of the British police, mainly Leicester & CEOP in the early days, before they withdrew their services, though I forget what they called it. Quite damning as I recall.

Operation Task.

https://library.college.police.uk/docs/npia/Strategic-debrief-operation-task-2009.pdf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 09:59:36 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 25, 2021, 07:54:33 AM
Are you seriously suggesting the McCanns did not want the investigation re-opened.. I find your post delusional

I'm repeating what they actually petitioned for;

Please write to the Home Secretary and Prime Minister, urging the British and Portuguese authorities to commission a joint, independent and comprehensive review of Madeleine’s case.
[madeleine page 386]

I see no mention of reopening the investigation, but maybe you can provide a cite for them asking for that? Perhaps it isn't my posts which are delusional?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2021, 10:06:31 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 09:59:36 AM
I'm repeating what they actually petitioned for;

Please write to the Home Secretary and Prime Minister, urging the British and Portuguese authorities to commission a joint, independent and comprehensive review of Madeleine’s case.
[madeleine page 386]

I see no mention of reopening the investigation, but maybe you can provide a cite for them asking for that? Perhaps it isn't my posts which are delusional?

Do you understand that they could not petition to have the investigation re-opened without finding new evidence... It seems a review by SY acheived the aim of the re-opening
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 10:26:04 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 25, 2021, 10:06:31 AM
Do you understand that they could not petition to have the investigation re-opened without finding new evidence... It seems a review by SY acheived the aim of the re-opening

So we're agreed that they did not ask for the investigation to be reopened. Wether or not that's what they wanted is speculation therefore.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2021, 10:32:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 10:26:04 AM
So we're agreed that they did not ask for the investigation to be reopened. Wether or not that's what they wanted is speculation therefore.
I think to deny their purpose was to get SY to reinvestigate is absurd.  I seem to remember you wrte mistaken in your belief that they could had the case re-opened in the early stages just by asking.  You were shown to be wrong then and I'm sure you are wrong again
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 12:27:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 25, 2021, 10:32:00 AM
I think to deny their purpose was to get SY to reinvestigate is absurd.  I seem to remember you wrte mistaken in your belief that they could had the case re-opened in the early stages just by asking.  You were shown to be wrong then and I'm sure you are wrong again

Absurd, imo, is claiming to know what others thought when the only evidence available is what they actually said.

As to your other point;

"The McCanns' spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, said the couple's lawyers would be making an immediate application for full access to the police files so they could follow up any new leads.

They have 20 days to appeal the decision to drop the case, although this is unlikely to happen. After that period limited access will be made available to other interested parties."

(Madeleine McCann: Kate and Gerry McCann officially cleared of 'arguido' status, 22 July 2008
Madeleine McCann: Kate and Gerry McCann officially cleared of 'arguido' status Telegraph
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id134.htm)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2021, 12:59:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 12:27:50 PM
Absurd, imo, is claiming to know what others thought when the only evidence available is what they actually said.

As to your other point;

"The McCanns' spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, said the couple's lawyers would be making an immediate application for full access to the police files so they could follow up any new leads.

They have 20 days to appeal the decision to drop the case, although this is unlikely to happen. After that period limited access will be made available to other interested parties."

(Madeleine McCann: Kate and Gerry McCann officially cleared of 'arguido' status, 22 July 2008
Madeleine McCann: Kate and Gerry McCann officially cleared of 'arguido' status Telegraph
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id134.htm)

We went through the 20 days.... And it was shown to be wrong... Don't you remember
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 01:24:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 25, 2021, 12:59:05 PM
We went through the 20 days.... And it was shown to be wrong... Don't you remember

I remember you being convinced that you were right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2021, 01:29:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 01:24:42 PM
I remember you being convinced that you were right.

I was.... Do you have a cite for the source who said they had 20 days.... The Telegraph doesn't give one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 25, 2021, 01:59:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 07:45:38 AM
You always insist that the McCanns lobbyed for an investigation, but imo that wasn't what they wanted the authorities to do, they wanted a review. They are not the same thing.

Of course I insist on the truth of the matter.  Why do you think they ended their open letter to the PM by stating thus
They added: "It is fundamental for any major incident that a case review is undertaken to identify all the avenues that could be explored that might lead to new information coming into the inquiry."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13370591

The McCanns obviously had been told or had worked it out that nothing would happen to progress further investigation of Madeleine's case until it had been reviewed.

They were looking to the present and to the future very much not as you continually insist on the past.

The new information duly arrived but not until Madeleine's case was reviewed and opened by Scotland Yard and re-opened by the Judicial Police: so your opinion is markedly off kilter on all accounts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 25, 2021, 03:53:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 07:38:29 AM
Case reviews often examine how an investigation was handled in order to identify mistakes made by investigators. As Kate McCann refers to 'deficiencies in the investigation' I assume she wanted those deficiencies officially highlighted. That never happened, of course, as no findings were ever publicised.
Why would she want those highlighted when (as a supposedly guilty person) she would have been far wiser to let sleeping dogs lie and not run the risk of opening a can of worms she may rather not want opened?  After all, she wasn’t in charge of conducting the review was she?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 25, 2021, 03:54:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 07:45:38 AM
You always insist that the McCanns lobbyed for an investigation, but imo that wasn't what they wanted the authorities to do, they wanted a review. They are not the same thing.
OK, explain precisely what a review does and how it would have benefited two people guilty of the crime being reviewed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 04:18:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 25, 2021, 01:59:14 PM
Of course I insist on the truth of the matter.  Why do you think they ended their open letter to the PM by stating thus
They added: "It is fundamental for any major incident that a case review is undertaken to identify all the avenues that could be explored that might lead to new information coming into the inquiry."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13370591

The McCanns obviously had been told or had worked it out that nothing would happen to progress further investigation of Madeleine's case until it had been reviewed.

They were looking to the present and to the future very much not as you continually insist on the past.

The new information duly arrived but not until Madeleine's case was reviewed and opened by Scotland Yard and re-opened by the Judicial Police: so your opinion is markedly off kilter on all accounts.

There was only one inquiry in place when that was written; the one being paid for by the Fund. Imo that was being referred to, rather than something in the future.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 25, 2021, 04:35:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 04:18:36 PM
There was only one inquiry in place when that was written; the one being paid for by the Fund. Imo that was being referred to, rather than something in the future.
Why would they be talking about their own inquiry when the were appealing to the Government to start one?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 07:33:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on April 25, 2021, 04:35:33 PM
Why would they be talking about their own inquiry when the were appealing to the Government to start one?

They were appealing for;

"a joint independent, transparent and comprehensive review of all information held in relation to Madeleine's disappearance."

and looking at Brietta's source, there's a heading;

Private detectives
They added: "It is fundamental for any major incident that a case review is undertaken to identify all the avenues that could be explored that might lead to new information coming into the inquiry."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13370591

Clearly the BBC thought they were referring to the inquiry being conducted by their Private detectives, as do I.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 25, 2021, 10:15:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 07:33:38 PM
They were appealing for;

"a joint independent, transparent and comprehensive review of all information held in relation to Madeleine's disappearance."

and looking at Brietta's source, there's a heading;

Private detectives
They added: "It is fundamental for any major incident that a case review is undertaken to identify all the avenues that could be explored that might lead to new information coming into the inquiry."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13370591

Clearly the BBC thought they were referring to the inquiry being conducted by their Private detectives, as do I.
I really have lost track of what point you are actually trying to make, all I know is you have studiously avoided giving any logical explanation for why anyone guilty of a serious crime would lobby not one, not two, but THREE home secretaries to have the evidence of their crimes reviewed by the British police.  I’m sure you have one of course and that you just can’t be bothered to explain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 25, 2021, 10:19:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 07:33:38 PM
They were appealing for;

"a joint independent, transparent and comprehensive review of all information held in relation to Madeleine's disappearance."

and looking at Brietta's source, there's a heading;

Private detectives
They added: "It is fundamental for any major incident that a case review is undertaken to identify all the avenues that could be explored that might lead to new information coming into the inquiry."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13370591

Clearly the BBC thought they were referring to the inquiry being conducted by their Private detectives, as do I.
PS: you really need to read that paragraph under the heading properly and in context of the whole article.  I think you have completely got hold of the wrong end of the stick.

The letter in its entirety which makes absolutely no mention of the McCanns own private investigation

'Dear Prime Minister,

As a devoted father and family man, you know the importance of children. Our beloved eldest child, Madeleine, was abducted from Praia da Luz, Portugal, four years ago. Since then, we have devoted all our energies to ensuring her safe return.

Today we are asking you - and the British and Portuguese governments - to help find Madeleine and bring her back to her loving family.

We live in hope that Madeleine will be found alive and returned to us. One call might be all that is needed to lead to Madeleine and her abductor.

To this end, we are seeking a joint INDEPENDENT, TRANSPARENT and COMPREHENSIVE review of ALL information held in relation to Madeleine's disappearance. Thus far, there has been NO formal review of the material held by the police authorities - which is routine practice in most major unsolved crimes.

It is not right that a young vulnerable British citizen has essentially been given up on. This remains an unsolved case of a missing child. Children are our most precious gift.

Please don't give up on Madeleine.

Kate & Gerry McCann'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 25, 2021, 10:50:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 07:33:38 PM
They were appealing for;

"a joint independent, transparent and comprehensive review of all information held in relation to Madeleine's disappearance."

and looking at Brietta's source, there's a heading;

Private detectives
They added: "It is fundamental for any major incident that a case review is undertaken to identify all the avenues that could be explored that might lead to new information coming into the inquiry."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13370591

Clearly the BBC thought they were referring to the inquiry being conducted by their Private detectives, as do I.

What a bizarre post particularly when one would have expected your intimate knowledge of the case to have informed you of the wide spectrum of the sources used by Scotland Yard.

In my opinion the denial of even the most obvious documented facts as reflected in your posts is quite extraordinary.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 25, 2021, 10:57:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on April 25, 2021, 10:19:16 PM
PS: you really need to read that paragraph under the heading properly and in context of the whole article.  I think you have completely got hold of the wrong end of the stick.

The letter in its entirety which makes absolutely no mention of the McCanns own private investigation

'Dear Prime Minister,

As a devoted father and family man, you know the importance of children. Our beloved eldest child, Madeleine, was abducted from Praia da Luz, Portugal, four years ago. Since then, we have devoted all our energies to ensuring her safe return.

Today we are asking you - and the British and Portuguese governments - to help find Madeleine and bring her back to her loving family.

We live in hope that Madeleine will be found alive and returned to us. One call might be all that is needed to lead to Madeleine and her abductor.

To this end, we are seeking a joint INDEPENDENT, TRANSPARENT and COMPREHENSIVE review of ALL information held in relation to Madeleine's disappearance. Thus far, there has been NO formal review of the material held by the police authorities - which is routine practice in most major unsolved crimes.

It is not right that a young vulnerable British citizen has essentially been given up on. This remains an unsolved case of a missing child. Children are our most precious gift.

Please don't give up on Madeleine.

Kate & Gerry McCann'

Having to cherry pick to push an agenda is really rather sad. Not to mention revealing a bit of desperation. My opinion🙂
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 06:29:29 AM
The fact remains that the McCanns didn't ask for an investigation to be arranged, they asked for a review.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 26, 2021, 07:07:34 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 06:29:29 AM
The fact remains that the McCanns didn't ask for an investigation to be arranged, they asked for a review.
And the fact remains you can proffer no good valid reason why alledged criminals would want an exhaustive review of all the evidence allegedly held against them.  In the letter to David Cameron they state clearly their reasons for wanting such a review (to help find Madeleine and bring her back to her loving family, don’t give up on Madeleine) - now perhaps you can suggest a more malevolent reason.  Bet you will struggle to or completely ignore this request.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 08:50:27 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on April 26, 2021, 07:07:34 AM
And the fact remains you can proffer no good valid reason why alledged criminals would want an exhaustive review of all the evidence allegedly held against them.  In the letter to David Cameron they state clearly their reasons for wanting such a review (to help find Madeleine and bring her back to her loving family, don’t give up on Madeleine) - now perhaps you can suggest a more malevolent reason.  Bet you will struggle to or completely ignore this request.

According to Kate McCann, their investigation was hampered by a lack of information;

"The Portuguese authorities possess a great deal of material that was not included in the police file released into the public domain. The British police, too, hold information we do not have." [madeleine page 384]

They wanted access to that information, and seemed to think that a review would enable them to get it.

"Our own search, however, has significant limitations. Crucially, we do not have access to all of the information that has come in to the inquiry...The more data we can acquire, the more complete the picture will be and the stronger our chances of finding our daughter."

Why they thought a review would share information with them I don't know. Kate even suggested further action;

"If a review is declined, or indeed if no decision is ever made, we will be left with no alternative but to seek disclosure of all information possessed by the authorities relating to Madeleine’s disappearance."

I'm surprised that they would consider trying to get the authorities to disclose information. They had attempted that before with LP, and had failed. Neither the PJ, LP or the courts were going to ignore privacy and data protection laws just  because the McCanns were the parents of Madeleine.

However, it seems that they wanted information to help with their own investigation.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 26, 2021, 09:29:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 08:50:27 AM
According to Kate McCann, their investigation was hampered by a lack of information;

"The Portuguese authorities possess a great deal of material that was not included in the police file released into the public domain. The British police, too, hold information we do not have." [madeleine page 384]

They wanted access to that information, and seemed to think that a review would enable them to get it.

"Our own search, however, has significant limitations. Crucially, we do not have access to all of the information that has come in to the inquiry...The more data we can acquire, the more complete the picture will be and the stronger our chances of finding our daughter."

Why they thought a review would share information with them I don't know. Kate even suggested further action;

"If a review is declined, or indeed if no decision is ever made, we will be left with no alternative but to seek disclosure of all information possessed by the authorities relating to Madeleine’s disappearance."

I'm surprised that they would consider trying to get the authorities to disclose information. They had attempted that before with LP, and had failed. Neither the PJ, LP or the courts were going to ignore privacy and data protection laws just  because the McCanns were the parents of Madeleine.

However, it seems that they wanted information to help with their own investigation.
They begged three home secretaries for an "INDEPENDENT, TRANSPARENT and COMPREHENSIVE review of ALL information" held by the police and you think this was in the expectation that the police would review it, ignore the evidence that you think puts them in the frame, and just hand it all over to the McCanns for them to use - for what reason exactly?  Can't you see how barmy that sounds if they already know Madeleine is dead?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 26, 2021, 09:42:51 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 06:29:29 AM
The fact remains that the McCanns didn't ask for an investigation to be arranged, they asked for a review.
Wat do you think comes first?(https://aquinastars.org/wp-content/uploads/hatchlings.jpeg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 26, 2021, 09:51:04 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on April 26, 2021, 09:29:01 AM
They begged three home secretaries for an "INDEPENDENT, TRANSPARENT and COMPREHENSIVE review of ALL information" held by the police and you think this was in the expectation that the police would review it, ignore the evidence that you think puts them in the frame, and just hand it all over to the McCanns for them to use - for what reason exactly?  Can't you see how barmy that sounds if they already know Madeleine is dead?
At this stage of the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance that some continue to retain their prejudices astounds me more than just a little 🙄
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 10:09:07 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 26, 2021, 09:51:04 AM
At this stage of the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance that some continue to retain their prejudices astounds me more than just a little 🙄

You seem to believe that the investigation has progressed beyond the stage reached by the PJ. I see no progression.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 26, 2021, 10:19:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 25, 2021, 07:33:38 PM
They were appealing for;

"a joint independent, transparent and comprehensive review of all information held in relation to Madeleine's disappearance."

and looking at Brietta's source, there's a heading;

Private detectives
They added: "It is fundamental for any major incident that a case review is undertaken to identify all the avenues that could be explored that might lead to new information coming into the inquiry."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13370591

Clearly the BBC thought they were referring to the inquiry being conducted by their Private detectives, as do I.

I think they wanted SY to investigate... They couldn't ask for the case to be reopened as there HAD to be a review first.
You disagree.  You are speculating and merely giving your opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 10:32:06 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 26, 2021, 10:19:44 AM
I think they wanted SY to investigate... They couldn't ask for the case to be reopened as there HAD to be a review first.
You disagree.  You are speculating and merely giving your opinion

Why would they want an investigation by UK police who were unable to investigate in the country where the child disappeared?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 26, 2021, 10:40:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 10:32:06 AM
Why would they want an investigation by UK police who were unable to investigate in the country where the child disappeared?
Why wouldn't they want it?  Were they to simply hope that one day the PJ might decide to get off their fat arses and conduct a review / reinvestigation?  What exactly do you think parents in such a situation should do, pray tell?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 26, 2021, 10:47:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 10:32:06 AM
Why would they want an investigation by UK police who were unable to investigate in the country where the child disappeared?

Ridiculous post
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 11:08:34 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on April 26, 2021, 10:40:59 AM
Why wouldn't they want it?  Were they to simply hope that one day the PJ might decide to get off their fat arses and conduct a review / reinvestigation?  What exactly do you think parents in such a situation should do, pray tell?

All I know is that they never requested an investigation by a UK police force.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 26, 2021, 11:38:56 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 11:08:34 AM
All I know is that they never requested an investigation by a UK police force.
You seem content to view this particular issue with your blinkers firmly in place.  Your choice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 12:00:24 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on April 26, 2021, 11:38:56 AM
You seem content to view this particular issue with your blinkers firmly in place.  Your choice.

I find and report the available facts. Those who are blinkered by their own preferences try to deny or manipulate those facts to fit their narrative. The facts are still the facts, and one of them is that the McCanns didn't ask for a UK investigation, they asked for a review.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 26, 2021, 12:41:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 12:00:24 PM
I find and report the available facts. Those who are blinkered by their own preferences try to deny or manipulate those facts to fit their narrative. The facts are still the facts, and one of them is that the McCanns didn't ask for a UK investigation, they asked for a review.
Well I certainly haven't denied that they asked for a review.  In fact earlier I asked:
"Thank you, so now you might like to give some thought as to why the McCanns were so desperate for a case review that they petitioned three home secretaries to re-open an investigation into the crimes you seem to think they themselves may have committed".
Where your blinkers are firmly in place is that you cannot see how utterly absurd it would be for any criminal to ask the British police to conduct a full and comprehensive review into all the evidence of the crimes they have allegedly committed.  It's a ludicrous illogical fantasy which you are fully prepared to go along with it seems.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 26, 2021, 01:45:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 10:09:07 AM
You seem to believe that the investigation has progressed beyond the stage reached by the PJ. I see no progression.
I think your posts tend to indicate that ~ "There are none so blind as those who will not see."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 01:51:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on April 26, 2021, 12:41:42 PM
Well I certainly haven't denied that they asked for a review.  In fact earlier I asked:
"Thank you, so now you might like to give some thought as to why the McCanns were so desperate for a case review that they petitioned three home secretaries to re-open an investigation into the crimes you seem to think they themselves may have committed".
Where your blinkers are firmly in place is that you cannot see how utterly absurd it would be for any criminal to ask the British police to conduct a full and comprehensive review into all the evidence of the crimes they have allegedly committed.  It's a ludicrous illogical fantasy which you are fully prepared to go along with it seems.

According to Kate McCann a review would allow her and her husband access to information which they had so far been unable to examine. She was wrong, but that is what she said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 26, 2021, 02:00:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 01:51:36 PM
According to Kate McCann a review would allow her and her husband access to information which they had so far been unable to examine. She was wrong, but that is what she said.
It still doesn't make a jot of sense (why anyone would demand that the police review all the evidence of their alleged crimes even if they were labouring under the misapprehension that the police would then share their findings with them), and as someone who is supposedly intelligent you must surely recognise that?  That's a question by the way. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 26, 2021, 02:43:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 26, 2021, 01:51:36 PM
According to Kate McCann a review would allow her and her husband access to information which they had so far been unable to examine. She was wrong, but that is what she said.

Never understood why they would have expected access to police information in the first place.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 26, 2021, 02:57:32 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 26, 2021, 02:43:44 PM
Never understood why they would have expected access to police information in the first place.
That's because you haven't really given it any serious thought.  Your child is missing.  No one is looking for her.  You suspect the police first charged with investigating her disappearance didn't do a very efficient and thorough job.  You have meanwhile employed private detectives to investigate.  Their job would be enhanced by having access to the original police files because it would give them access to statements of witnesses and reports that were done at the time, which would allow them to follow any leads previously ignored by incompetent / lazy police.  Given that the PJ allowed the majority of the files to be accessible to any old Tom, Dick or Pedro why is it so incomprehensible that the McCanns might also like access to the full files too? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Nicholas on April 28, 2021, 06:03:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 20, 2019, 10:15:57 PM
I’ve just watched the first two parts of the Docu-drama “When They See Us” about the Central Park Five, a truly appalling case of miscarriage of justice.  It has reinforced to me why you should always answer no comment to police questions, but if the police start roughing you up and torturing you, then it’s easy for them to get you to say anything they want you to say, regardless of the fact that there is literally no evidence against you.  This is a brilliant series, and should be watched by anyone with an interest in miscarriages of justice and prejudiced, corrupt and brutal police tactics in their pursuit of a conviction.

The truth about the Central Park 5 http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9318.msg649493#msg649493
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Nicholas on April 28, 2021, 07:15:41 PM
‘Is The Wrongful Conviction Movement Unstoppable?’ Ft. Devon Tracey aka "Atheism is Unstoppable"

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=laujRg3W5C4&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 06, 2021, 08:39:38 AM
Its a circle which will need to be squared at some stage in the McCann case.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-57002010


Emma Faulds: Police dog indicated body scent during car search

Later in the footage, the dog appears to repeatedly bark at the boot area of the Jaguar.

PC Gunderson said to him it was "clear" Max was giving "an indication".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 10:24:40 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 06, 2021, 08:39:38 AM
Its a circle which will need to be squared at some stage in the McCann case.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-57002010


Emma Faulds: Police dog indicated body scent during car search

Later in the footage, the dog appears to repeatedly bark at the boot area of the Jaguar.

PC Gunderson said to him it was "clear" Max was giving "an indication".

But,but, but….. it has been repeated many times on these esteemed pages that dog alerts are NOT evidence. In fact on the very thread concerning this issue on this forum one poster postulated that the only reason previous dog alert evidence had been heard in court before was because the judges had erred in allowing them. Wait until the press get hold of this, another judge so untrained in the matters of law that he allows cadaver dog evidence to be heard in court. Surely there will be a mistrial
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 10:28:59 AM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 10:24:40 AM
But,but, but….. it has been repeated many times on these esteemed pages that dog alerts are NOT evidence. In fact on the very thread concerning this issue on this forum one poster postulated that the only reason previous dog alert evidence had been heard in court before was because the judges had erred in allowing them. Wait until the press get hold of this, another judge so untrained in the matters of law that he allows cadaver dog evidence to be heard in court. Surely there will be a mistrial

Dog Alerts have to be backed up by other Evidence.  They never stand alone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 06, 2021, 10:37:23 AM
Will be interesting to see the outcome.


'Positive indication'
Later in the footage, the dog appears to repeatedly bark at the boot area of the Jaguar.

PC Gunderson said to him it was "clear" Max was giving "an indication".

Mr Kearney asked: "Do you have any doubt of it being a positive indication from your dog in what he is trained to find?"

PC Gunderson: "I have no doubt whatsoever."

Mr Willox denies the accusations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 06, 2021, 10:38:22 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 10:28:59 AM
Dog Alerts have to be backed up by other Evidence.  They never stand alone.

Wolters has evidence we are repeatedly told.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 10:41:33 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 10:28:59 AM
Dog Alerts have to be backed up by other Evidence.  They never stand alone.

Even if they have to be backed up with other circumstantial evidence not concerning the alert themselves they are still evidence.
Not to wish to derail the thread I will repost my post in the Dog Evidence thread.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 10:49:07 AM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 10:41:33 AM
Even if they have to be backed up with other circumstantial evidence not concerning the alert themselves they are still evidence.
Not to wish to derail the thread I will repost my post in the Dog Evidence thread.

Thank you for not starting another Dog Thread.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 06, 2021, 10:53:21 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 10:49:07 AM
Thank you for not starting another Dog Thread.

You make sense sometimes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 11:00:27 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 06, 2021, 10:53:21 AM
You make sense sometimes.

And thank you to you too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 11:35:58 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 06, 2021, 08:39:38 AM
Its a circle which will need to be squared at some stage in the McCann case.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-57002010


Emma Faulds: Police dog indicated body scent during car search

Later in the footage, the dog appears to repeatedly bark at the boot area of the Jaguar.

PC Gunderson said to him it was "clear" Max was giving "an indication".

The dog barked at the boot area of Emma's BMW.
In Luz the dog barked at the side pocket of the drivers door.  Spot the difference.

In Luz it was PROVED that the dog barked at blood? on the key fob which WAS NOT Madeleine's.  Had you forgotten that ... or just ignoring it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 11:47:02 AM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 10:24:40 AM
But,but, but….. it has been repeated many times on these esteemed pages that dog alerts are NOT evidence. In fact on the very thread concerning this issue on this forum one poster postulated that the only reason previous dog alert evidence had been heard in court before was because the judges had erred in allowing them. Wait until the press get hold of this, another judge so untrained in the matters of law that he allows cadaver dog evidence to be heard in court. Surely there will be a mistrial

You are breenging off in entirely the wrong direction here so boring when the issue was actually resolved way back in 2007.

For information - dog alerts are indications and evidence and do not in themselves constitute proof.  This circumstantial evidence ties in with the evidence that the accused was in Emma's car where his DNA was located forensically on the adjustment handle under the drivers seat.

'MATCHED' DNA found in Emma Faulds’ car matches profile of ‘murder’ accused Ross Willox
Grant McCabe
4 May 2021
Forensic scientist Joanne Cochrane today told how she took a 'taping' from a seat lever of the BMW.

The witness said this then matched the DNA profile of Ross Willox, 41, who denies murdering Emma at his home in Fairfield Park, Monkton, Ayrshire, on April 28, 2019 by means unknown.

Prosecutor Paul Kearney asked: "Could you detect any DNA from Emma Faulds in that taping?"
She said "further traces" were described as "unsuitable for interpretation".
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/scottish-news/7061338/dna-found-emma-faulds-car-murder-accused-ross-willox/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 12:01:59 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 06, 2021, 10:37:23 AM
Will be interesting to see the outcome.


'Positive indication'
Later in the footage, the dog appears to repeatedly bark at the boot area of the Jaguar.

PC Gunderson said to him it was "clear" Max was giving "an indication".

Mr Kearney asked: "Do you have any doubt of it being a positive indication from your dog in what he is trained to find?"

PC Gunderson: "I have no doubt whatsoever."

Mr Willox denies the accusations.

As soon as I read that in my morning paper I absolutely knew that "the dogs don't lie" brigade would have a field day with it and I have not been disappointed.

Emma's body was transported and dumped in a forest some distance away from her home.  The accused was seen driving her car by a witness.  The accused's DNA was found in the vehicle at the driver's seat where it had no right to be.  It is highly likely that the dog's indications signal that Emma's remains were transported to the deposition site in her vehicle.

The prosecution is building a case here to present to the jury, which was NEVER the situation in Luz.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 12:17:42 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 11:47:02 AM
You are breenging off in entirely the wrong direction here so boring when the issue was actually resolved way back in 2007.

For information - dog alerts are indications and evidence and do not in themselves constitute proof.  This circumstantial evidence ties in with the evidence that the accused was in Emma's car where his DNA was located forensically on the adjustment handle under the drivers seat.

'MATCHED' DNA found in Emma Faulds’ car matches profile of ‘murder’ accused Ross Willox
Grant McCabe
4 May 2021
Forensic scientist Joanne Cochrane today told how she took a 'taping' from a seat lever of the BMW.

The witness said this then matched the DNA profile of Ross Willox, 41, who denies murdering Emma at his home in Fairfield Park, Monkton, Ayrshire, on April 28, 2019 by means unknown.

Prosecutor Paul Kearney asked: "Could you detect any DNA from Emma Faulds in that taping?"
She said "further traces" were described as "unsuitable for interpretation".
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/scottish-news/7061338/dna-found-emma-faulds-car-murder-accused-ross-willox/

"For information - dog alerts are indications and evidence and do not in themselves constitute proof."


I am glad you have finally accepted that dog alerts are evidence. I think you may be the first of the so called “supporters” to publicly acknowledge this empirical fact. I have never claimed dog alerts constitute proof.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 06, 2021, 12:36:12 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 12:17:42 PM
"For information - dog alerts are indications and evidence and do not in themselves constitute proof."


I am glad you have finally accepted that dog alerts are evidence. I think you may be the first of the so called “supporters” to publicly acknowledge this empirical fact. I have never claimed dog alerts constitute proof.
According to Grime and Harrison they have no evidential reliability.
I was, reading the BDO report from Jersey.  It said after the piece of cranium was confirmed as human it was presented to Eddie who gave, a, positive alert to cadaver odour... Coconuts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 06, 2021, 12:37:21 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 11:35:58 AM
The dog barked at the boot area of Emma's BMW.
In Luz the dog barked at the side pocket of the drivers door.  Spot the difference.

In Luz it was PROVED that the dog barked at blood? on the key fob which WAS NOT Madeleine's.  Had you forgotten that ... or just ignoring it.

Eddie did alert to the key fob, as did Keela. It wasn't possible to PROVE that they both alerted to blood. As Eddie was known to alert to cadaver scent he could have been alerting to that, just as he did in the main bedroom of apartment 5A.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 01:24:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 06, 2021, 12:36:12 PM
According to Grime and Harrison they have no evidential reliability.
I was, reading the BDO report from Jersey.  It said after the piece of cranium was confirmed as human it was presented to Eddie who gave, a, positive alert to cadaver odour... Coconuts

I think you may have mentioned the bit about Grime and Harrison before and it seems their unqualified opinion was wrong as there is a trial going ahead right now in the UK where a dog alert has been heard in open court. That's the fact.
I thought it was common knowledge that the shell was presented to Eddie and he alerted, but the only way to say if the alert was incorrect is in controlled lab conditions. Coconut shell is quite porous and I would suggest that odours would have been absorbed by such an item. Or maybe Eddie was wrong and he believed he detected the scent for which he was trained, which wasn’t there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 06, 2021, 01:36:28 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 12:17:42 PM
"For information - dog alerts are indications and evidence and do not in themselves constitute proof."


I am glad you have finally accepted that dog alerts are evidence. I think you may be the first of the so called “supporters” to publicly acknowledge this empirical fact. I have never claimed dog alerts constitute proof.
So, is it  your opinion that the dog alerts in PdL suggest that Madeleine's corpse was in the hire car?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 06, 2021, 01:37:03 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 01:24:17 PM
I think you may have mentioned the bit about Grime and Harrison before and it seems their unqualified opinion was wrong as there is a trial going ahead right now in the UK where a dog alert has been heard in open court. That's the fact.
I thought it was common knowledge that the shell was presented to Eddie and he alerted, but the only way to say if the alert was incorrect is in controlled lab conditions. Coconut shell is quite porous and I would suggest that odours would have been absorbed by such an item. Or maybe Eddie was wrong and he believed he detected the scent for which he was trained, which wasn’t there.

The fact is Grime was told it was human and Eddie alerted..
It wasn't human at all.  So then all the excuses start.

I'll have a look at the current trial... In this case it seems the hsndlet is supporting the alert... Grime and Harrison didnt
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 01:38:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 06, 2021, 12:37:21 PM
Eddie did alert to the key fob, as did Keela. It wasn't possible to PROVE that they both alerted to blood. As Eddie was known to alert to cadaver scent he could have been alerting to that, just as he did in the main bedroom of apartment 5A.

We are reliably informed that Keela alerted ONLY to blood.  Therefore the deduction is simple.  The fact that the trace came back from the lab having tested positive for one of the very alive drivers of the car again the deduction is simple.

That apparently was Keela's purpose.  She eliminated 'the scent of death' if she also alerted where Eddie did - bearing the very important distinction that before he became the only 'enhanced 'dog in the world Eddie was a VRD an would react to blood.

None so blind though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 06, 2021, 01:38:58 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 01:24:17 PM
I think you may have mentioned the bit about Grime and Harrison before and it seems their unqualified opinion was wrong as there is a trial going ahead right now in the UK where a dog alert has been heard in open court. That's the fact.
I thought it was common knowledge that the shell was presented to Eddie and he alerted, but the only way to say if the alert was incorrect is in controlled lab conditions. Coconut shell is quite porous and I would suggest that odours would have been absorbed by such an item. Or maybe Eddie was wrong and he believed he detected the scent for which he was trained, which wasn’t there.

I think it's highly possible that the Getmsns have proof Maffie did not die in the apartment... If that's the case how can the alerts be explained
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 01:40:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 06, 2021, 01:36:28 PM
So, is it  your opinion that the dog alerts in PdL suggest that Madeleine's corpse was in the hire car?

Why ask me, I am neither a trained dog handler or on a jury where such evidence is presented. It would depend on how the evidence was presented during trial.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 06, 2021, 01:41:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 01:38:04 PM
We are reliably informed that Keela alerted ONLY to blood.  Therefore the deduction is simple.  The fact that the trace came back from the lab having tested positive for one of the very alive drivers of the car again the deduction is simple.

That apparently was Keela's purpose.  She eliminated 'the scent of death' if she also alerted where Eddie did - bearing the very important distinction that before he became the only 'enhanced 'dog in the world Eddie was a VRD an would react to blood.

None so blind though.

Keela only alerted to blood dried in situ... Eddie alerted to blood where there was, an attempt at a clean up... So an alert by Eddie and not by Keela could still be blood.... According  to Grime
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 01:42:27 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 01:24:17 PM
I think you may have mentioned the bit about Grime and Harrison before and it seems their unqualified opinion was wrong as there is a trial going ahead right now in the UK where a dog alert has been heard in open court. That's the fact.
I thought it was common knowledge that the shell was presented to Eddie and he alerted, but the only way to say if the alert was incorrect is in controlled lab conditions. Coconut shell is quite porous and I would suggest that odours would have been absorbed by such an item. Or maybe Eddie was wrong and he believed he detected the scent for which he was trained, which wasn’t there.

Perhaps you are not familiar with the visit to Jersey.
Please check out the video of Eddie alerting to every nook and cranny of Haute de la Garenne to inform your opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 01:45:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 06, 2021, 01:38:58 PM
I think it's highly possible that the Getmsns have proof Maffie did not die in the apartment... If that's the case how can the alerts be explained

If the Germans do have strong proof that Maddie didn’t die in the apartment then that would trump the weaker evidence of the dog alert and so other avenues would need to be explored, pre-contamination, handler error or broken dog.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 01:47:51 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 06, 2021, 01:37:03 PM
The fact is Grime was told it was human and Eddie alerted..
It wasn't human at all.  So then all the excuses start.

I'll have a look at the current trial... In this case it seems the hsndlet is supporting the alert... Grime and Harrison didnt

You say you are a scientist, but can you say with 100% accuracy that Eddie gave a false alert in Jersey?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 01:50:47 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 01:42:27 PM
Perhaps you are not familiar with the visit to Jersey.
Please check out the video of Eddie alerting to every nook and cranny of Haute de la Garenne to inform your opinion.

I am familiar with Hautte de la Garenne. Was it a good idea to run a cadaver dog through such an old building where I am sure many people have died of natural causes. I would say no. The thinking was flawed. But it doesn’t prove that Eddie was wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 06, 2021, 02:15:12 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 01:50:47 PM
I am familiar with Hautte de la Garenne. Was it a good idea to run a cadaver dog through such an old building where I am sure many people have died of natural causes. I would say no. The thinking was flawed. But it doesn’t prove that Eddie was wrong.

Its impossible to prove Eddie wrong....hes watertight...The Teflon Dog..

Im reasonably sure MM did not die in the apartment but Grime will be able to com eup with  areason for Eddie alerting
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 06, 2021, 02:17:54 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 01:47:51 PM
You say you are a scientist, but can you say with 100% accuracy that Eddie gave a false alert in Jersey?

I think its alraedy been said that the coconut could have fallen on someones head and killed them....so I cant say 100% Eddie was wrong. Just as we cant say theres not a Yellow celestial teapot in such an orbit that its invisible from earth
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 06, 2021, 02:19:07 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 01:40:17 PM
Why ask me, I am neither a trained dog handler or on a jury where such evidence is presented. It would depend on how the evidence was presented during trial.

its  ashame the PJ didnt realise that...they took it as fact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 02:20:22 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 01:50:47 PM
I am familiar with Hautte de la Garenne. Was it a good idea to run a cadaver dog through such an old building where I am sure many people have died of natural causes. I would say no. The thinking was flawed. But it doesn’t prove that Eddie was wrong.

Then you will know there was no evidence found that anyone had died there.  The dog did alert to an area where it was established that cremated remains were found ~ as well as evidence of sexual activity.

This cadaver dog thing just isn't the exact science it has been claimed to be though, is it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 02:24:44 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 06, 2021, 02:17:54 PM
I think its alraedy been said that the coconut could have fallen on someones head and killed them....so I cant say 100% Eddie was wrong. Just as we cant say theres not a Yellow celestial teapot in such an orbit that its invisible from earth

Not really the sort of answer I would expect from a learned man of science. Do you believe in the possibilty of a Yellow celestial teapot or even the only way the coconut could make a dog alert is if it fell on someone's head?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 02:28:04 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 01:40:17 PM
Why ask me, I am neither a trained dog handler or on a jury where such evidence is presented. It would depend on how the evidence was presented during trial.

I think you may have hit the nail on the head there.  The Judicial Police were less than impressed with Eddie's performance of alerting only after numerous passes where he had failed to do so.

In my opinion there was not the slightest possibility of Eddie's alerts being put before a jury for the simple reason there was absolutely no evidence to support them.  And when there was such as the key fob - it was easily explained by forensics.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 02:29:53 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 06, 2021, 02:15:12 PM
Its impossible to prove Eddie wrong....hes watertight...The Teflon Dog..

Im reasonably sure MM did not die in the apartment but Grime will be able to com eup with  areason for Eddie alerting

Well it is now as he is long gone. The only way to test the validity of any dog alert is in controlled conditions. I believe a Grimes dog(Morse) was tested before the Lane cane and scored 95%to 100% accuracy in controlled conditions.
From People v Lane November 2013

“Grime submitted Morse and Keela's training reports into evidence. Over the course of 49 tests, Morse gave no false negative or false positive responses to tests in controlled environments. He gave one “unexplained” response, which was a single bark in a “blank” room. Morse scored 100 percent in tests on December 2 and December 6, 2011. Morse was tested on variety of dates between January 21, 2011, and February 13, 2013. Morse scored 100 percent in all but one test, on which he scored 95 to 100 percent. Morse did not give false positive responses to animal remains during his tests.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 02:34:19 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 02:29:53 PM
Well it is now as he is long gone. The only way to test the validity of any dog alert is in controlled conditions. I believe a Grimes dog(Morse) was tested before the Lane cane and scored 95%to 100% accuracy in controlled conditions.
From People v Lane November 2013

“Grime submitted Morse and Keela's training reports into evidence. Over the course of 49 tests, Morse gave no false negative or false positive responses to tests in controlled environments. He gave one “unexplained” response, which was a single bark in a “blank” room. Morse scored 100 percent in tests on December 2 and December 6, 2011. Morse was tested on variety of dates between January 21, 2011, and February 13, 2013. Morse scored 100 percent in all but one test, on which he scored 95 to 100 percent. Morse did not give false positive responses to animal remains during his tests.

Have you ever seen records of Eddie's training reports short of what Martin Grime has said?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 02:37:20 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 02:34:19 PM
Have you ever seen records of Eddie's training reports short of what Martin Grime has said?

No but I trust Martin Grime to be a competent trainer of such dogs. Why wouldn't I? I am sure he knows more about it then me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 06, 2021, 02:37:34 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 02:29:53 PM
Well it is now as he is long gone. The only way to test the validity of any dog alert is in controlled conditions. I believe a Grimes dog(Morse) was tested before the Lane cane and scored 95%to 100% accuracy in controlled conditions.
From People v Lane November 2013

“Grime submitted Morse and Keela's training reports into evidence. Over the course of 49 tests, Morse gave no false negative or false positive responses to tests in controlled environments. He gave one “unexplained” response, which was a single bark in a “blank” room. Morse scored 100 percent in tests on December 2 and December 6, 2011. Morse was tested on variety of dates between January 21, 2011, and February 13, 2013. Morse scored 100 percent in all but one test, on which he scored 95 to 100 percent. Morse did not give false positive responses to animal remains during his tests.

Without details of the tests its impossible to judge how reliable they are.

Does anyone know what Eddie alerted to in PDL....


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 06, 2021, 02:39:16 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 02:37:20 PM
No but I trust Martin Grime to be a competent trainer of such dogs. Why wouldn't I? I am sure he knows more about it then me.

Grimes a dog handler... Not sure of his knowledge of scientific testing.  I've deen no evidence the dogs have been properly tested
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 02:44:05 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 06, 2021, 02:39:16 PM
Grimes a dog handler... Not sure of his knowledge of scientific testing.  I've deen no evidence the dogs have been properly tested

Grimes is a dog handler/trainer. I am not sure of his knowledge of scientific testing either, or his understanding of law as it pertains to the admissibility of evidence but you keep quoting him on the latter subject.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 06, 2021, 02:50:30 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 02:44:05 PM
Grimes is a dog handler/trainer. I am not sure of his knowledge of scientific testing either, or his understanding of law as it pertains to the admissibility of evidence but you keep quoting him on the latter subject.

I'm quoting what he said... Can you not see the difference.
I'm not quoting him on the admissibilty of evifrnce but on his opinion of the alerts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 02:53:12 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 06, 2021, 02:50:30 PM
I'm quoting what he said... Can you not see the difference.
I'm not quoting him on the admissibilty of evifrnce but on his opinion of the alerts

So we finally agree Grimes statements are only his opinion on whether the alerts are evidence, not the actual fact that they are. Hurrah!! a breakthrough at last.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 06, 2021, 02:58:27 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 02:53:12 PM
So we finally agree Grimes statements are only his opinion on whether the alerts are evidence, not the actual fact that they are. Hurrah!! a breakthrough at last.

How could those alerts be presented as evidence when. Grime says they have no evidential value
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 06, 2021, 02:59:21 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 01:40:17 PM
Why ask me, I am neither a trained dog handler or on a jury where such evidence is presented. It would depend on how the evidence was presented during trial.
Why ask you?  Because you seem keen for people to accept that dog alerts are evidence. I'm just wondering what you see them as evidence of in this case.  I thought this was a discussion forum for exchange of opinions amongst other things,but if you don't want to say what you think then fair enough.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:03:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 06, 2021, 02:58:27 PM
How could those alerts be presented as evidence when. Grime says they have no evidential value

Grime hasn't passed the bar, is not an expert on law and in your words is a dog handler, not a scientist, a judge or even a lawyer. A dog handler who has given evidence in trials also.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 06, 2021, 03:06:40 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:03:50 PM
Grime hasn't passed the bar, is not an expert on law and in your words is a dog handler, not a scientist, a judge or even a lawyer. A dog handler who has given evidence in trials also.
So who is the expert who decides whether or not dog alerts have evidential value and on what basis do they arrive at that decision?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 03:12:08 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 02:37:20 PM
No but I trust Martin Grime to be a competent trainer of such dogs. Why wouldn't I? I am sure he knows more about it then me.

Unfortunately Eddie was taught too many tricks, so in the end no one including Martin Grime knew exactly what Eddie was alerting to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:12:18 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 06, 2021, 03:06:40 PM
So who is the expert who decides whether or not dog alerts have evidential value and on what basis do they arrive at that decision?

The judicial process of law making. There are guidelines that have been published in various countries. IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:15:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 06, 2021, 02:59:21 PM
Why ask you?  Because you seem keen for people to accept that dog alerts are evidence. I'm just wondering what you see them as evidence of in this case.  I thought this was a discussion forum for exchange of opinions amongst other things,but if you don't want to say what you think then fair enough.

I am keen for people to stop spreading falsehoods, what's the point in spreading these untruths can we just accept the fact that dog alerts have been used as evidence in court cases in the UK and overseas. I told you many months ago what my take on the alerts is, cut and paste from reply 37 - Dog Alerts - Evidence or Not?

“The dogs alerts are evidence that the dogs alerted in the flat where a missing child was last seen.
Nothing more than that.”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 03:15:48 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 02:53:12 PM
So we finally agree Grimes statements are only his opinion on whether the alerts are evidence, not the actual fact that they are. Hurrah!! a breakthrough at last.

Martin Grime is an expert dog handler who as a police officer would I believe, fulfil all the necessary requirements of his job.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 06, 2021, 03:15:54 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:12:18 PM
The judicial process of law making. There are guidelines that have been published in various countries.
Can you supply the guidelines for Scotland please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 03:16:52 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:12:18 PM
The judicial process of law making. There are guidelines that have been published in various countries.

A Cite would be appropriate for this Statement.  Thank you in advance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 06, 2021, 03:16:58 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:15:39 PM
I am keen for people to stop spreading falsehoods, what's the point in spreading these untruths can we just accept the fact that dog alerts have been used as evidence in court cases in the UK and overseas. I told you many months ago what my take on the alerts is, cut and paste from reply 37 - Dog Alerts - Evidence or Not?

“The dogs alerts are evidence that the dogs alerted in the flat where a missing child was last seen.
Nothing more than that.”
Well no, they're a bit more than that in the case of the hire car aren't they, as the child was never in the hire car was she?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 06, 2021, 03:17:32 PM
So basically the dog alerts are evidence that the dogs alerted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:17:39 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 03:12:08 PM
Unfortunately Eddie was taught too many tricks, so in the end no one including Martin Grime knew exactly what Eddie was alerting to.

Thats your opinion, mine is Grime knew his dogs very well.
PS. why did you edit my post to Davel?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:18:21 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 06, 2021, 03:15:54 PM
Can you supply the guidelines for Scotland please?

No.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:18:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 06, 2021, 03:17:32 PM
So basically the dog alerts are evidence that the dogs alerted.

Yes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:19:51 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 06, 2021, 03:16:58 PM
Well no, they're a bit more than that in the case of the hire car aren't they, as the child was never in the hire car was she?

We don't know that do we?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:20:53 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 03:16:52 PM
A Cite would be appropriate for this Statement.  Thank you in advance.

Which statement do you want a cite for there are 2 in the post?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 03:22:19 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:20:53 PM
Which statement do you want a cite for there are 2 in the post?

Both would be good.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:31:39 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 03:22:19 PM
Both would be good.  Thank you.

You want a cite for the statement that the judicial process makes the laws and  follow guidelines?
I will add a IMO to the post or you can delete it. Who do you think is responsible for law making?
When I refer to the Judiciary I am referring to the whole system of law. It is separate from the Executive and legislature.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 03:37:35 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:31:39 PM
You want a cite for the statement that the judicial process makes the laws and  follow guidelines?
I will add a IMO to the post or you can delete it. Who do you think is responsible for law making?
When I refer to the Judiciary I am referring to the whole system of law. It is separate from the Executive and legislature.

An "In My Opinion" will do almost as well.  But a Cite of The Guidelines would be better.  We are all happy to learn something or another.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:41:37 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 03:37:35 PM
An "In My Opinion" will do almost as well.  But a Cite of The Guidelines would be better.  We are all happy to learn something or another.

To be clear I have never seen any guidelines from Scotland but it is my opinion that guidelines regarding admission of evidence and any other things pertinent to existing law are applied when considering amendments to law or new laws to be passed. IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 03:46:05 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:41:37 PM
To be clear I have never seen any guidelines from Scotland but it is my opinion that guidelines regarding admission of evidence and any other things pertinent to existing law are applied when considering amendments to law or new laws to be passed. IMO

Thank You.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:57:01 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 03:15:48 PM
Martin Grime is an expert dog handler who as a police officer would I believe, fulfil all the necessary requirements of his job.

As a dog handler he was one reputedly one of the best. As an expert on legal matters, not so much.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 06, 2021, 04:05:06 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:19:51 PM
We don't know that do we?
No we don't, but the dog alerted and that's evidence that the dog alerted so what can we deduce from that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 06, 2021, 04:10:27 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 03:41:37 PM
To be clear I have never seen any guidelines from Scotland but it is my opinion that guidelines regarding admission of evidence and any other things pertinent to existing law are applied when considering amendments to law or new laws to be passed. IMO
That's all well and good but surely as part of the judicial process in deciding whether or not dog alerts should be admissable these have to be subjected to scientific testing or at least expert opinion as judges and legal bods are not usually well versed in canine olfactory science or the art of search dog handling, so do they not have to seek advice from erm...people like Martin Grime?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 04:13:51 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 06, 2021, 04:05:06 PM
No we don't, but the dog alerted and that's evidence that the dog alerted so what can we deduce from that?

I always feel that your questions are trying to catch me out. Maybe its just me.
If it came to a trial its how the evidence is presented to the jury, or maybe it would not be introduced by the prosecution at all. That's generally how it works.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 04:21:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 06, 2021, 04:10:27 PM
That's all well and good but surely as part of the judicial process in deciding whether or not dog alerts should be admissable these have to be subjected to scientific testing or at least expert opinion as judges and legal bods are not usually well versed in canine olfactory science or the art of search dog handling, so do they not have to seek advice from erm...people like Martin Grime?

As you are probably aware English and Scottish law are different. In Scottish law the dog handlers are called as competent and expert witness’s to an event that happened during the investigation, there is not so much of an onus on the scientific part of the evidence as there is in England hence all of the UK cases are in Scotland. That's not to say it is expressly inadmissible as evidence in the way say a polygraph test is, but its a much bigger hurdle in England than Scotland.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 06, 2021, 04:23:15 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 04:13:51 PM
I always feel that your questions are trying to catch me out. Maybe its just me.
If it came to a trial its how the evidence is presented to the jury, or maybe it would not be introduced by the prosecution at all. That's generally how it works.

In the McCsnn case I can only see it presented as having no evidential value or reliability
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 04:26:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 06, 2021, 04:23:15 PM
In the McCsnn case I can only see it presented as having no evidential value or reliability

The worth of the alerts would only be how they were presented and received by a jury. But they will never be heard as evidence by the prosecution in court IMO. Possibly by the defence in a case but not prosecution.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 04:35:36 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 04:13:51 PM
I always feel that your questions are trying to catch me out. Maybe its just me.
If it came to a trial its how the evidence is presented to the jury, or maybe it would not be introduced by the prosecution at all. That's generally how it works.

In both the Scottish cases to which you refer it was introduced by the prosecution.  Similarly there is at least one other case where cadaver dog evidence was also led by the prosecution.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 04:39:26 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 04:35:36 PM
In both the Scottish cases to which you refer it was introduced by the prosecution.  Similarly there is at least one other case where cadaver dog evidence was also led by the prosecution.

I was referring specifically to the McCann case. I imagine its pretty rare for the defence to introduce cadaver dog evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 04:41:07 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 04:26:50 PM
The worth of the alerts would only be how they were presented and received by a jury. But they will never be heard as evidence by the prosecution in court IMO. Possibly by the defence in a case but not prosecution.

They would only be introduced if they had evidential value ... there was no evidential value assigned to the dog alerts in Luz.  That is agreed by all concerned with the exception of Amaral who also believes that Calpol kills children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 04:44:58 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 04:39:26 PM
I was referring specifically to the McCann case. I imagine its pretty rare for the defence to introduce cadaver dog evidence.

I believe the Portuguese investigators of the time were unfamiliar with the concept.  Which may be why so many elementary mistakes and misunderstandings initially occurred.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 06, 2021, 04:52:12 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 04:39:26 PM
I was referring specifically to the McCann case. I imagine its pretty rare for the defence to introduce cadaver dog evidence.

Yes, I would think it pretty much a prosecution thing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 06, 2021, 05:08:36 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 06, 2021, 04:13:51 PM
I always feel that your questions are trying to catch me out. Maybe its just me.
If it came to a trial its how the evidence is presented to the jury, or maybe it would not be introduced by the prosecution at all. That's generally how it works.
Correct me if I’m wrong but you seem to be saying the dog alerts can mean whatever the legal tem introducing them to the jury want them to mean. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 05:20:46 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 06, 2021, 05:08:36 PM
Correct me if I’m wrong but you seem to be saying the dog alerts can mean whatever the legal tem introducing them to the jury want them to mean.

That's what I thought.

Oh for the days when Dogs were just a tool.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 06, 2021, 05:24:50 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 05:20:46 PM
That's what I thought.

Oh for the days when Dogs were just a tool.

Is that not how a prosecution works - they put forward their interpretation of evidence and it is up to the judge to decide if it is legally acceptable ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 06, 2021, 05:39:01 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 06, 2021, 02:37:34 PM
Without details of the tests its impossible to judge how reliable they are.

Does anyone know what Eddie alerted to in PDL....

Wolters may have the answer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 05:41:04 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 06, 2021, 05:24:50 PM
Is that not how a prosecution works - they put forward their interpretation of evidence and it is up to the judge to decide if it is legally acceptable ?

I have no idea.  But a Trial often helps, or not, as the case may be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 06, 2021, 05:43:43 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 06, 2021, 05:24:50 PM
Is that not how a prosecution works - they put forward their interpretation of evidence and it is up to the judge to decide if it is legally acceptable ?
Only up to a point.  I mean, the suspect’s finger print on a gun means it’s very likely he handled it, a victim’s DNA on a suspect unquestionably links the two individual’s together, what does a cadaver dog’s bark tell us evidentially?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 05:45:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 06, 2021, 05:43:43 PM
Only up to a point.  I mean, the suspect’s finger print on a gun means it’s very likely he handled it, a victim’s DNA on a suspect unquestionably links the two individual’s together, what does a cadaver dog’s bark tell us evidentially?

Not a lot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 06, 2021, 05:55:50 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 06, 2021, 05:43:43 PM
Only up to a point.  I mean, the suspect’s finger print on a gun means it’s very likely he handled it, a victim’s DNA on a suspect unquestionably links the two individual’s together, what does a cadaver dog’s bark tell us evidentially?

Depends how much DNA... If it's LCN DNAit doesn't necessarily make a link
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 06, 2021, 06:47:29 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 05:45:13 PM
Not a lot.

That's the purpose of a trial. Prosecution puts forward it's evidence to make a case, defence does it's best to refute it and and ultimately a decision is made.

It doesn't matter what outsiders think of the evidence, only those invbolved in the trial process.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 06, 2021, 06:50:34 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 06, 2021, 06:47:29 PM
That's the purpose of a trial. Prosecution puts forward it's evidence to make a case, defence does it's best to refute it and and ultimately a decision is made.

It doesn't matter what outsiders think of the evidence, only those invbolved in the trial process.

All a matter of opinion ultimately.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 09:58:41 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 06, 2021, 12:01:59 PM
As soon as I read that in my morning paper I absolutely knew that "the dogs don't lie" brigade would have a field day with it and I have not been disappointed.

Emma's body was transported and dumped in a forest some distance away from her home.  The accused was seen driving her car by a witness.  The accused's DNA was found in the vehicle at the driver's seat where it had no right to be.  It is highly likely that the dog's indications signal that Emma's remains were transported to the deposition site in her vehicle.

The prosecution is building a case here to present to the jury, which was NEVER the situation in Luz.

, which was NEVER the situation in Luz.


Over egging my comment a bit there B - I don't know what you think gives you the right to claim you know what happened in LUZ.

You don't know what happened - your constant caricature of posts seems to me the best form of defence is attack

You must remember first and foremost you are just a poster with an opinion ...like anyone else is.

IMO should stop ridiculing any post that does not fit in with your agenda,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 07, 2021, 10:07:44 AM
Quote from: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 09:58:41 AM

, which was NEVER the situation in Luz.


Over egging my comment a bit there B - I don't know what you think gives you the right to claim you know what happened in LUZ.

You don't know what happened - your constant caricature of posts seems to me the best form of defence is attack

You must remember first and foremost you are just a poster with an opinion ...like anyone else is.

IMO should stop ridiculing any post that does not fit in with your agenda,

I have a fair idea what happened in Luz fourteen years ago but I do know what did not happen and that is agreed with the police investigators of three different countries whose concentration is now firmly fixed on the prime suspect Brueckner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 07, 2021, 10:30:15 AM
Quote from: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 09:58:41 AM

, which was NEVER the situation in Luz.


Over egging my comment a bit there B - I don't know what you think gives you the right to claim you know what happened in LUZ.

You don't know what happened - your constant caricature of posts seems to me the best form of defence is attack

You must remember first and foremost you are just a poster with an opinion ...like anyone else is.

IMO should stop ridiculing any post that does not fit in with your agenda,

What is clear is that the Scottish police and courts are prepared to allow dog handlers to give evidence in criminal trials.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 07, 2021, 11:18:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 07, 2021, 10:30:15 AM
What is clear is that the Scottish police and courts are prepared to allow dog handlers to give evidence in criminal trials.

The day on which someone is convicted on the bark of a dog will be a very sad day.  And probably grounds for appeal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 07, 2021, 11:20:42 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 07, 2021, 10:30:15 AM
What is clear is that the Scottish police and courts are prepared to allow dog handlers to give evidence in criminal trials.

Perhaps I should make a FOI to see if the SCRCC did day ss is claimed that the dog evidence should not have been admitted.  The problem in Luz is that both Harrison snd Grime said the alerts had no evidential value or reliability
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 11:36:12 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 07, 2021, 10:07:44 AM
I have a fair idea what happened in Luz fourteen years ago but I do know what did not happen and that is agreed with the police investigators of three different countries whose concentration is now firmly fixed on the prime suspect Brueckner.

I have a fair idea of what happened too.

As for the police forces working together ...are they really.

When it seems they have different ideas wether Maddie is still alive or not.

You would think also if the germans were as credible as you seem to think
.

The mccs would be on board with them.... with an appeal for info ...at least.

Still not as cut and dried as you like to make out B IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 07, 2021, 11:44:39 AM
Quote from: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 11:36:12 AM
I have a fair idea of what happened too.

As for the police forces working together ...are they really.

When it seems they have different ideas wether Maddie is still alive or not.

You would think also if the germans were as credible as you seem to think
.

The mccs would be on board with them.... with an appeal for info ...at least.

Still not as cut and dried as you like to make out B IMO.

The police forces as I see it are in agreement and the McCanns totally understand the situation. The McCanns latest medsage confirms they accept Maddie may well be dead
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 07, 2021, 12:36:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 07, 2021, 10:30:15 AM
What is clear is that the Scottish police and courts are prepared to allow dog handlers to give evidence in criminal trials.

They always have but usually as a result of a body or parts of a body having been found.  Advances in forensic science have made the intelligence underlying dog searches admissible for consideration by the courts in particular circumstances but it most definitely not as 'stand alone' evidence.

For example in Emma's case there is
It will be interesting to see how the judge sums it up when instructing the jury before they retire to consider their verdict.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 07, 2021, 12:56:55 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 11:36:12 AM
I have a fair idea of what happened too.

As for the police forces working together ...are they really.

When it seems they have different ideas wether Maddie is still alive or not.

You would think also if the germans were as credible as you seem to think
.

The mccs would be on board with them.... with an appeal for info ...at least.

Still not as cut and dried as you like to make out B IMO.

No-one knows what the investigators are presently doing except that they are concentrating on finding out what happened to Madeleine which is as it should be on both counts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 07, 2021, 01:35:35 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 07, 2021, 12:36:10 PM
They always have but usually as a result of a body or parts of a body having been found.  Advances in forensic science have made the intelligence underlying dog searches admissible for consideration by the courts in particular circumstances but it most definitely not as 'stand alone' evidence.

For example in Emma's case there is
  • no doubt that the accused was seen driving her vehicle after the police had determined when she was last known to have been seen alive, using evidence such as the distressed barking of her dog which was alone in the house
  • testimony has been heard in court that the accused's DNA was located on the seat adjustment lever located under Emma's car seat
    ( i ) it can be assumed that the accused was the last person to adjust the position of the seat since his was the only DNA recovered
    (ii ) differences in driver height would have required such an adjustment to be made for driving out and return
    (iii) confirmed by the witness who saw him driving Emma's vehicle at a time determined by the police that she was missing
  • in my opinion the fact that the dog alerted to the car boot means nothing on its own without the other evidence supporting the fact of Emma's likely death at the time the accused was seen driving her vehicle

It will be interesting to see how the judge sums it up when instructing the jury before they retire to consider their verdict.

You seem to be denying something which hasn't been claimed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 03:18:12 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 07, 2021, 11:44:39 AM
The police forces as I see it are in agreement and the McCanns totally understand the situation. The McCanns latest medsage confirms they accept Maddie may well be dead

McCanns totally understand the situation.

Is that your opinion ...or do you know that to be a fact.

It seems to me they know the germans are appealing for info ....yet don't seem to get involved.

Considering they want every stone unturned the mccs seem to be very quiet on the appealing for info or to even look as if they are backing the germans up.

IMO there silence seems to be they have no faith in the german investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 07, 2021, 03:48:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 07, 2021, 01:35:35 PM
You seem to be denying something which hasn't been claimed.

I think you've got that entirely wrong ... unless you've never heard that "dog's don't lie" 😁
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 07, 2021, 04:01:05 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 03:18:12 PM
McCanns totally understand the situation.

Is that your opinion ...or do you know that to be a fact.

It seems to me they know the germans are appealing for info ....yet don't seem to get involved.

Considering they want every stone unturned the mccs seem to be very quiet on the appealing for info or to even look as if they are backing the germans up.

IMO there silence seems to be they have no faith in the german investigation.

The fact that the McCanns have never opened their mouths to criticise how the Germans are running their live investigation into Madeleine's case rather dictates the opposite of what you suggest.

That you feel the necessity to post such nonsense about a couple who must be in bits until they find out the results of the process is I find extraordinary in the extreme.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 07, 2021, 04:39:25 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 03:18:12 PM
McCanns totally understand the situation.

Is that your opinion ...or do you know that to be a fact.

It seems to me they know the germans are appealing for info ....yet don't seem to get involved.

Considering they want every stone unturned the mccs seem to be very quiet on the appealing for info or to even look as if they are backing the germans up.

IMO there silence seems to be they have no faith in the german invest
igation.

Did you know it was the McCanns appearing on German TV making an appeal working with the German police that resulted in CB becoming the prime suspect in the case ...perhaps you didnt
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 07, 2021, 05:44:08 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 03:18:12 PM
McCanns totally understand the situation.

Is that your opinion ...or do you know that to be a fact.

It seems to me they know the germans are appealing for info ....yet don't seem to get involved.

Considering they want every stone unturned the mccs seem to be very quiet on the appealing for info or to even look as if they are backing the germans up.

IMO there silence seems to be they have no faith in the german investigation.
OK, have a little think about that.  Two parents who you think were involved in their own child’s disappearance not wanting to support the German investigation into the theory that Madeleine was abducted by a paedophile, nor having any faith in it.  Explain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 07, 2021, 05:56:58 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 07, 2021, 03:48:47 PM
I think you've got that entirely wrong ... unless you've never heard that "dog's don't lie" 😁

What that has to do with your reference to 'stand alone' evidemce I can't imagine. No-one has suggested they should be, have been or will be used as 'stand alone' evidence. They have been used, quite rightly, as part of a body of evidence, and imo will continue to be so used in the future. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 05:58:44 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 07, 2021, 04:01:05 PM
The fact that the McCanns have never opened their mouths to criticise how the Germans are running their live investigation into Madeleine's case rather dictates the opposite of what you suggest.

That you feel the necessity to post such nonsense about a couple who must be in bits until they find out the results of the process is I find extraordinary in the extreme.

Why extraordinary to the extreme.... when you know full well I don't believe the abduction story

Your loyalty imo could also be misplaced it seems with the Germans seems they are more of a hindrance than a help.



Even though Christian B is a suspect in the McCann case, prosecutors have said they do not have enough evidence to hold him on that case alone.

Scotland Yard confirmed in December it has no plans to end its missing person investigation into Madeleine's disappearance, despite the belief of German prosecutors that she was murdered.

The McCanns issued a statement in June strongly denying reports they have received a letter from German authorities stating that Madeleine is dead.

The couple said the "unsubstantiated stories" had "caused unnecessary anxiety to friends and family and once again disrupted our lives".

https://news.sky.com/story/madeleine-mccanns-parents-hang-on-to-hope-of-seeing-her-again-in-poignant-message-ahead-of-18th-birthday-12296463

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 06:00:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 07, 2021, 04:39:25 PM
Did you know it was the McCanns appearing on German TV making an appeal working with the German police that resulted in CB becoming the prime suspect in the case ...perhaps you didnt


Well the mccs have not made anymore TV appearances... working with the germans have they. D
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 06:02:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 07, 2021, 05:44:08 PM
OK, have a little think about that.  Two parents who you think were involved in their own child’s disappearance not wanting to support the German investigation into the theory that Madeleine was abducted by a paedophile, nor having any faith in it.  Explain.


I don't believe that CB abducted Maddie.....

I don't see how you could know wether the mccs are supporting the germans or not..IMO they don't seem to be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 07, 2021, 06:33:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 07, 2021, 05:56:58 PM
What that has to do with your reference to 'stand alone' evidemce I can't imagine. No-one has suggested they should be, have been or will be used as 'stand alone' evidence. They have been used, quite rightly, as part of a body of evidence, and imo will continue to be so used in the future.

The stand alone 'evidence' of the dogs certainly convinced Amaral ... or do you think he only found it expedient to use it to make the McCanns arguidos while the work was in progress to engineer a confession.

Paiva certainly did his ridiculous best with the dog video ... didn't work quite as planned though did it 😁
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 07, 2021, 06:36:46 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 06:02:53 PM

I don't believe that CB abducted Maddie.....

I don't see how you could know wether the mccs are supporting the germans or not..IMO they don't seem to be.
you’ve missed the point (unsurprisingly).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 07, 2021, 06:51:48 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 05:58:44 PM
Why extraordinary to the extreme.... when you know full well I don't believe the abduction story

Your loyalty imo could also be misplaced it seems with the Germans seems they are more of a hindrance than a help.



Even though Christian B is a suspect in the McCann case, prosecutors have said they do not have enough evidence to hold him on that case alone.

Scotland Yard confirmed in December it has no plans to end its missing person investigation into Madeleine's disappearance, despite the belief of German prosecutors that she was murdered.

The McCanns issued a statement in June strongly denying reports they have received a letter from German authorities stating that Madeleine is dead.

The couple said the "unsubstantiated stories" had "caused unnecessary anxiety to friends and family and once again disrupted our lives".

https://news.sky.com/story/madeleine-mccanns-parents-hang-on-to-hope-of-seeing-her-again-in-poignant-message-ahead-of-18th-birthday-12296463

I rely on an awareness of current events and logic - "loyalty" does not enter the equation.  Quite a nonsense statement and a bit shchoolplaygroundy mud slinging in your post. Really no need to keep on saying you don't think Madeleine was abducted, that's not a problem particularly as you evidence no great understanding of events then and certainly nothing of events now.
The fact remains that the people who do think Madeleine was abducted are in charge now and they are doing something about it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 07:13:10 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 07, 2021, 06:51:48 PM
I rely on an awareness of current events and logic - "loyalty" does not enter the equation.  Quite a nonsense statement and a bit shchoolplaygroundy mud slinging in your post. Really no need to keep on saying you don't think Madeleine was abducted, that's not a problem particularly as you evidence no great understanding of events then and certainly nothing of events now.
The fact remains that the people who do think Madeleine was abducted are in charge now and they are doing something about it.


There is no need to keep going on about the mccs and how you think they are coping bla bla bla.

I care more because of there actions ...how Maddie coped especially when as you think she was taken by a peodo.

Mud slinging haha... You should look at your posts to me good job its water off a ducks back.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 07:14:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 07, 2021, 06:36:46 PM
you’ve missed the point (unsurprisingly).

Don't worry about it VS ....I don't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 07, 2021, 07:17:47 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 07:14:06 PM
Don't worry about it VS ....I don't.
you don’t what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 07, 2021, 07:34:10 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 07, 2021, 06:00:04 PM

Well the mccs have not made anymore TV appearances... working with the germans have they. D

The one they did has yeilded fantastic results.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 07, 2021, 07:35:57 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 07, 2021, 07:34:10 PM
The one they did has yeilded fantastic results.

Produced a soundbite, is that fantastic?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 07, 2021, 07:38:09 PM

666.  The Devil Strikes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 07, 2021, 07:52:13 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 07, 2021, 06:33:10 PM
The stand alone 'evidence' of the dogs certainly convinced Amaral ... or do you think he only found it expedient to use it to make the McCanns arguidos while the work was in progress to engineer a confession.

Paiva certainly did his ridiculous best with the dog video ... didn't work quite as planned though did it 😁

You are funny. Surely you know that arguido status is a protective measure which allows suspects the right to remain silent and refuse to answer questions which might incriminate them? Kate McCann took full advantage of this protection, you may recall.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 07, 2021, 07:57:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit link=topic=7060.msg650732#msg650732 dates=1620413533
You are funny. Surely you know that arguido status is a protective measure which allows suspects the right to remain silent and refuse to answer questions which might incriminate them? Kate McCann took full advantage of this protection, you may recall.
It also put pressure on them both... You may recall.
Amaral was convinced based on his inability to understand  the evidence that the McCanns were guilty.  I think most will agree that he thought the pressure would cause Kate to confess
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 08, 2021, 08:48:11 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 07, 2021, 07:34:10 PM
The one they did has yeilded fantastic results.


Well , why haven't they done another one.

After all the germans are struggling for info...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 08, 2021, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: kizzy on May 08, 2021, 08:48:11 AM

Well , why haven't they done another one.

After all the germans are struggling for info...
I'm sure the BKK know a lot better than you.  They've just tskrn down a massive international paedo organisation from the dark web.. Several arrests... Great work
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2021, 09:28:42 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 08, 2021, 09:20:04 AM
I'm sure the BKK know a lot better than you.  They've just tskrn down a massive international paedo organisation from the dark web.. Several arrests... Great work

Well they haven't caught me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 08, 2021, 10:52:47 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2021, 09:28:42 AM
Well they haven't caught me.
They are coming to take you away Ha Ha.   https://youtu.be/3Fn36l_z3WY
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 08, 2021, 11:41:29 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 08, 2021, 09:20:04 AM
I'm sure the BKK know a lot better than you.  They've just tskrn down a massive international paedo organisation from the dark web.. Several arrests... Great work

Whatever, but seems they have a long way to go.

As I said earlier don't think the mcs are too impressed by them.



The McCanns issued a statement in June strongly denying reports they have received a letter from German authorities stating that Madeleine is dead.

The couple said the "unsubstantiated stories" had "caused unnecessary anxiety to friends and family and once again disrupted our lives".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 08, 2021, 12:01:30 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 08, 2021, 11:41:29 AM
Whatever, but seems they have a long way to go.

As I said earlier don't think the mcs are too impressed by them.



The McCanns issued a statement in June strongly denying reports they have received a letter from German authorities stating that Madeleine is dead.

The couple said the "unsubstantiated stories" had "caused unnecessary anxiety to friends and family and once again disrupted our lives".
Is this another newspaper report....do you trust them now.. I don't really see how anyone could not be impressed with the Germans. They have solved maddies fate from what I can see
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2021, 12:07:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 08, 2021, 12:01:30 PM
Is this another newspaper report....do you trust them now.. I don't really see how anyone could not be impressed with the Germans. They have solved maddies fate from what I can see

What?

Because they said they have?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 08, 2021, 12:11:35 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 08, 2021, 11:41:29 AM
Whatever, but seems they have a long way to go.

As I said earlier don't think the mcs are too impressed by them.



The McCanns issued a statement in June strongly denying reports they have received a letter from German authorities stating that Madeleine is dead.

The couple said the "unsubstantiated stories" had "caused unnecessary anxiety to friends and family and once again disrupted our lives".

You know perfectly well that Madeleine McCann's parents 'sent 2 letters by German police Brits failed to pass on'
German prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters has said two letters have been posted to the McCanns via Scotland Yard -
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-sent-2-22217573 A breakdown in communication in a very complex situation which you are milking for all it is worth.  Why on earth you are bothering defeats me ~ ah well, just as long as it keeps you happy no harm done 😊
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 08, 2021, 12:25:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 08, 2021, 12:01:30 PM
Is this another newspaper report....do you trust them now.. I don't really see how anyone could not be impressed with the Germans. They have solved maddies fate from what I can see
I think the problem some people are having with the Germans is that they are doing an excellent job in tackling and solving many of the cases the Policia Judiciaria haven't been able to.  Hence the vitriol directed at them.  It is precisely because they are good at what they do.
Unfortunately these cases the Germans are mopping up appear to be Portuguese failures in cases mainly affecting women and children. Although I am still holding out hope for Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 08, 2021, 03:32:44 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2021, 09:28:42 AM
Well they haven't caught me.

No one is even remotely interested in you.  You aren't even good at whatever.

Come back later and try again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 08, 2021, 03:36:52 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2021, 12:07:00 PM
What?

Because they said they have?

Do go away.  You are becoming frightfully boring now.  You couldn't abduct a sausage from a barbecue when no one was watching.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 08, 2021, 04:39:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2021, 12:11:35 PM
You know perfectly well that Madeleine McCann's parents 'sent 2 letters by German police Brits failed to pass on'
German prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters has said two letters have been posted to the McCanns via Scotland Yard -
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-sent-2-22217573 A breakdown in communication in a very complex situation which you are milking for all it is worth.  Why on earth you are bothering defeats me ~ ah well, just as long as it keeps you happy no harm done 😊

Why are you bothering B ...it obviously keeps you happy answering my posts.

Not milking anything.... if you dont like my replies/opinions... put me on ignore.

Dont know who you think you are ridiculing posts...but as you say if it makes u happy I wont spoil ur fun.

Seems not being empathetic towards the mccs is a problem ...but yours not mine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 08, 2021, 05:05:44 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 08, 2021, 04:39:46 PM
Why are you bothering B ...it obviously keeps you happy answering my posts.

Not milking anything.... if you dont like my replies/opinions... put me on ignore.

Dont know who you think you are ridiculing posts...but as you say if it makes u happy I wont spoil ur fun.

Seems not being empathetic towards the mccs is a problem ...but yours not mine.

Putting other Posters On Ignore is the most ridiculous suggestion that Have ever heard.  But not something that is open for a Moderator.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 08, 2021, 05:16:10 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 08, 2021, 05:05:44 PM
Putting other Posters On Ignore is the most ridiculous suggestion that Have ever heard.  But not something that is open for a Moderator.

On the contrary, it's an excellent way of avoiding the irritating and downright ridiculous.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 08, 2021, 05:20:00 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 08, 2021, 05:16:10 PM
On the contrary, it's an excellent way of avoiding the irritating and downright ridiculous.
()678%
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 08, 2021, 05:27:45 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 08, 2021, 05:16:10 PM
On the contrary, it's an excellent way of avoiding the irritating and downright ridiculous.

If I ever get to the point wherein I can't handle the ridiculous ravings of some of you then I might give it a thought.

But not you personally, I hasten to add.  I think you are a laugh a minute.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 08, 2021, 05:33:34 PM
I do what I can to counter-balance all those who take themselves far too seriously.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 08, 2021, 06:27:29 PM
Quote from: jassi on May 08, 2021, 05:33:34 PM
I do what I can to counter-balance all those who take themselves far too seriously.

Funny really, isn't it.  I have never seen you as an adversary.  Questioning sometimes but not really horrid.

Perhaps you might have to try harder.  Or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 08, 2021, 06:44:20 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 08, 2021, 06:27:29 PM
Funny really, isn't it.  I have never seen you as an adversary.  Questioning sometimes but not really horrid.

Perhaps you might have to try harder.  Or not.
Please don’t encourage her to be any more horrid, thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 08, 2021, 07:44:07 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 08, 2021, 06:44:20 PM
Please don’t encourage her to be any more horrid, thanks.

Oh do come on.  Jassi isn't really horrid.  Well, not a lot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 08, 2021, 08:39:40 PM
Some will cling to a forlorn hope this could be true of Madeleine.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9555829/Police-investigating-kidnapped-woman-viral-TikTok-abducted-aged-four.html

Homeless woman, 22, tells interviewer in Mexico she was kidnapped 18 years ago - sparking hope she could be four-year-old child who was abducted in Washington in 2003
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 08, 2021, 08:46:53 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 08, 2021, 08:39:40 PM
Some will cling to a forlorn hope this could be true of Madeleine.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9555829/Police-investigating-kidnapped-woman-viral-TikTok-abducted-aged-four.html

Homeless woman, 22, tells interviewer in Mexico she was kidnapped 18 years ago - sparking hope she could be four-year-old child who was abducted in Washington in 2003


There are times when I really don't know what to say.  That you should have such little hope.

And No, I don't mean about Madeleine being alive.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 08, 2021, 08:48:24 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 08, 2021, 08:46:53 PM

There are times when I really don't know what to say.  That you should have such little hope.

And No, I don't mean about Madeleine being alive.

You say it best when you say nothing at all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 08, 2021, 08:55:48 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 08, 2021, 08:48:24 PM
You say it best when you say nothing at all.

Et vous aussi.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 08, 2021, 09:03:47 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 08, 2021, 04:39:46 PM
Why are you bothering B ...it obviously keeps you happy answering my posts.

Not milking anything.... if you dont like my replies/opinions... put me on ignore.

Dont know who you think you are ridiculing posts...but as you say if it makes u happy I wont spoil ur fun.

Seems not being empathetic towards the mccs is a problem ...but yours not mine.

You seem to have forgotten someone.  Where does Madeleine figure in your empathy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 08, 2021, 09:05:52 PM
Empathy? What's empathy?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 08, 2021, 09:53:32 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 08, 2021, 07:44:07 PM
Oh do come on.  Jassi isn't really horrid.  Well, not a lot.
I beg to differ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 08, 2021, 09:55:01 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 08, 2021, 08:39:40 PM
Some will cling to a forlorn hope this could be true of Madeleine.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9555829/Police-investigating-kidnapped-woman-viral-TikTok-abducted-aged-four.html

Homeless woman, 22, tells interviewer in Mexico she was kidnapped 18 years ago - sparking hope she could be four-year-old child who was abducted in Washington in 2003
And reports like this will of course be somewhat unsettling to those who believe fervently that Madeleine’s dad chucked her in a bin.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2021, 10:04:21 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 08, 2021, 09:55:01 PM
And reports like this will of course be somewhat unsettling to those who believe fervently that Madeleine’s dad chucked her in a bin.

Not in the slightest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 08, 2021, 10:24:06 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 08, 2021, 10:04:21 PM
Not in the slightest.
I obviously didn’t mean you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 09, 2021, 09:52:51 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 08, 2021, 09:03:47 PM
You seem to have forgotten someone.  Where does Madeleine figure in your empathy.

You seem to have forgotten someone.


Don't  be childish or sarcastic in your posts B ....reverse psychology it seems.

Concern about what happened to Maddie is mentioned a lot more in my posts Than yours.

Seems your concern is more about the mcs who left their three year old to her fate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 09, 2021, 10:12:07 AM
Quote from: kizzy on May 09, 2021, 09:52:51 AM

You seem to have forgotten someone.


Don't  be childish or sarcastic in your posts B ....reverse psychology it seems.

Concern about what happened to Maddie is mentioned a lot more in my posts Than yours.

Seems your concern is more about the mcs who left their three year old to her fate.

Was it ever thus, Madeleine who?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 09, 2021, 10:15:46 AM
Quote from: kizzy on May 09, 2021, 09:52:51 AM

You seem to have forgotten someone.


Don't  be childish or sarcastic in your posts B ....reverse psychology it seems.

Concern about what happened to Maddie is mentioned a lot more in my posts Than yours.

Seems your concern is more about the mcs who left their three year old to her fate.

It never ceases to amaze me that so many people who claim to care about Madeleine  flatly refuse to accept the possibility that her parents were involved in her disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 09, 2021, 10:26:04 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 08, 2021, 09:55:01 PM
And reports like this will of course be somewhat unsettling to those who believe fervently that Madeleine’s dad chucked her in a bin.


Or that CB did such a thing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 09, 2021, 10:57:31 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 09, 2021, 10:26:04 AM

Or that CB did such a thing.
I would be absolutely delighted if this came to pass.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 09, 2021, 10:58:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2021, 10:15:46 AM
It never ceases to amaze me that so many people who claim to care about Madeleine  flatly refuse to accept the possibility that her parents were involved in her disappearance.
In the same way that you claim abduction by a stranger was virtually impossible you mean? Presumably then you don’t care about Madeleine either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 09, 2021, 10:59:39 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 09, 2021, 10:57:31 AM
I would be absolutely delighted if this came to pass.

You're going to be bitterly disappointed then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 09, 2021, 11:02:39 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 09, 2021, 10:59:39 AM
You're going to be bitterly disappointed then.
Do you actually believe that I think it’s in any way likely?  Clearly you have never read any if my posts in which I make it quite clear that I believe Madeleine died a long time ago, probably on the 3rd May 2007 or shortly thereafter.  So, I will not be “bitterly disappointed “, but that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t be absolutely delighted to be proven wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 09, 2021, 11:09:39 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2021, 10:15:46 AM
It never ceases to amaze me that so many people who claim to care about Madeleine  flatly refuse to accept the possibility that her parents were involved in her disappearance.

It never ceases to amaze me how much you get wrong. Im not sure there is one poster here who refuses to accept the possibility. I for one have regularly given my view of what happeneed...and I have never put parental involvement at zero.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 09, 2021, 11:16:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2021, 10:15:46 AM
It never ceases to amaze me that so many people who claim to care about Madeleine  flatly refuse to accept the possibility that her parents were involved in her disappearance.



I did at the beginning,  but did my own research and after reading all the evidence and statements,  came to my own conclusion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 09, 2021, 12:04:08 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 09, 2021, 11:09:39 AM
It never ceases to amaze me how much you get wrong. Im not sure there is one poster here who refuses to accept the possibility. I for one have regularly given my view of what happeneed...and I have never put parental involvement at zero.

What you have done though is rely on the evidence of Madeleine's parents and their friends to support your belief that she was abducted. If it's possible that they were involved it's probable that their evidence can't be relied upon imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 09, 2021, 12:09:07 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2021, 12:04:08 PM
What you have done though is rely on the evidence of Madeleine's parents and their friends to support your belief that she was abducted. If it's possible that they were involved it's probable that their evidence can't be relied upon imo.

You are wrong.. I don't simply rely on the evidence of Madelienes parents. You sem to be claiming its probable their evidence cannot be relied upon which is absolute rubbish
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 09, 2021, 12:15:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 09, 2021, 11:02:39 AM
Do you actually believe that I think it’s in any way likely?  Clearly you have never read any if my posts in which I make it quite clear that I believe Madeleine died a long time ago, probably on the 3rd May 2007 or shortly thereafter.  So, I will not be “bitterly disappointed “, but that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t be absolutely delighted to be proven wrong.

I was commenting more on CB  not being the culprit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 09, 2021, 12:50:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 09, 2021, 12:09:07 PM
You are wrong.. I don't simply rely on the evidence of Madelienes parents. You sem to be claiming its probable their evidence cannot be relied upon which is absolute rubbish

I have seen your attempts at presenting evidence of abduction and have seen nothing which doesn't rely on the testimony of her parents.

What I said was that if they were involved that would make their testimony unreliable imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 09, 2021, 01:00:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2021, 12:50:04 PM
I have seen your attempts at presenting evidence of abduction and have seen nothing which doesn't rely on the testimony of her parents.

What I said was that if they were involved that would make their testimony unreliable imo.

I've put forward evidence which does not rely on the parents testimony but I remember you saying you don't read all the posts.
Obviously  if they erre involved it would make their evidence unreliable... The police seem to think they are not which means they would see their evidence and reliable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 09, 2021, 02:04:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 09, 2021, 01:00:31 PM
I've put forward evidence which does not rely on the parents testimony but I remember you saying you don't read all the posts.
Obviously  if they erre involved it would make their evidence unreliable... The police seem to think they are not which means they would see their evidence and reliable

You have relied heavily on the McCanns testimony, on your belief that they have been eliminated (no evidence of that) and on the fact that OG are not investigating them (because of their remit).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 09, 2021, 02:52:25 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 09, 2021, 12:15:43 PM
I was commenting more on CB  not being the culprit.
I’m not invested in CB being the culprit either. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 11, 2021, 12:25:00 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 09, 2021, 02:52:25 PM
I’m not invested in CB being the culprit either.

Nor is anyone else around here.  But The Sceptics have to think that we are, which is why they keep on about it.
 
We have all been saying that we don't know, but there you go.  They hear what they want to hear because they can't deal with their own hypocrisy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2021, 09:03:17 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2021, 02:04:52 PM
You have relied heavily on the McCanns testimony, on your belief that they have been eliminated (no evidence of that) and on the fact that OG are not investigating them (because of their remit).

More opinion as fact but it's of no importance.  Neither the Germsns or the PJ are investigating the McCanns.... But you cling to your discredited beliefs... Imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 09:12:06 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2021, 02:04:52 PM
You have relied heavily on the McCanns testimony, on your belief that they have been eliminated (no evidence of that) and on the fact that OG are not investigating them (because of their remit).
There is plenty of evidence that the McCanns are not suspects.  How can they both not be suspects but not eliminated?  Who (of any consequence) has not eliminated them and please provide your evidence of this “non eliminated “ status you believe they hold.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 09:30:46 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 09:12:06 AM
There is plenty of evidence that the McCanns are not suspects.  How can they both not be suspects but not eliminated?  Who (of any consequence) has not eliminated them and please provide your evidence of this “non eliminated “ status you believe they hold.

So you believe that because the McCanns aren't suspects they must have been eliminated? In my opinion there is no evidence of elimination.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 11, 2021, 09:36:26 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 11, 2021, 12:25:00 AM
Nor is anyone else around here.  But The Sceptics have to think that we are, which is why they keep on about it.
 
We have all been saying that we don't know, but there you go.  They hear what they want to hear because they can't deal with their own hypocrisy.

There are several supporters who seem certain that the Germans are on the right track and the Germans are only publicising one suspect - CB -as being in the frame, so make of it what you will.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 09:40:47 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 09:30:46 AM
So you believe that because the McCanns aren't suspects they must have been eliminated? In my opinion there is no evidence of elimination.
What does "being eliminated" mean?  Eliminated from what?  Please explain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 11:06:09 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 09:40:47 AM
What does "being eliminated" mean?  Eliminated from what?  Please explain.

Major incident investigations in the UK use a TIE strategy; trace/interview/eliminate. Those eliminated/not eliminated are marked in HOLMES2 by a code. The possibilities are;

1. Forensic elimination, eg, DNA, footwear impressions, fingerprints
2. Description (suspect parameters)
3. Independent witness (alibi)
4. Associate or relative (alibi)
5. Spouse or common law relationship (alibi)
6. Not eliminated.

Imo the only possibilities for the elimination of the McCanns are 4 & 5, which are not the most reliable. As the time of the crime isn't known, it's difficult to see how they could be recorded as eliminated.
https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/investigations/working-with-suspects/#elimination-criteria

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 11:11:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 11:06:09 AM
Major incident investigations in the UK use a TIE strategy; trace/interview/eliminate. Those eliminated/not eliminated are marked in HOLMES2 by a code. The possibilities are;

1. Forensic elimination, eg, DNA, footwear impressions, fingerprints
2. Description (suspect parameters)
3. Independent witness (alibi)
4. Associate or relative (alibi)
5. Spouse or common law relationship (alibi)
6. Not eliminated.

Imo the only possibilities for the elimination of the McCanns are 4 & 5, which are not the most reliable. As the time of the crime isn't known, it's difficult to see how they could be recorded as eliminated.
https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/investigations/working-with-suspects/#elimination-criteria
Are you suggesting then that Operation Grange has not eliminated the McCanns but has been instructed by the High Ups to ignore it? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 11:14:46 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 11:06:09 AM
Major incident investigations in the UK use a TIE strategy; trace/interview/eliminate. Those eliminated/not eliminated are marked in HOLMES2 by a code. The possibilities are;

1. Forensic elimination, eg, DNA, footwear impressions, fingerprints
2. Description (suspect parameters)
3. Independent witness (alibi)
4. Associate or relative (alibi)
5. Spouse or common law relationship (alibi)
6. Not eliminated.

Imo the only possibilities for the elimination of the McCanns are 4 & 5, which are not the most reliable. As the time of the crime isn't known, it's difficult to see how they could be recorded as eliminated.
https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/investigations/working-with-suspects/#elimination-criteria
By your logic then as the crime is "not known" (according to you, though Operation Grange are clearly treating it as a stranger abduction) that no one in the whole of PdL that night (and possibly beyond)  has been eliminated by the UK police, is that your contention?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 11:17:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 11:06:09 AM
Major incident investigations in the UK use a TIE strategy; trace/interview/eliminate. Those eliminated/not eliminated are marked in HOLMES2 by a code. The possibilities are;

1. Forensic elimination, eg, DNA, footwear impressions, fingerprints
2. Description (suspect parameters)
3. Independent witness (alibi)
4. Associate or relative (alibi)
5. Spouse or common law relationship (alibi)
6. Not eliminated.

Imo the only possibilities for the elimination of the McCanns are 4 & 5, which are not the most reliable. As the time of the crime isn't known, it's difficult to see how they could be recorded as eliminated.
https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/investigations/working-with-suspects/#elimination-criteria
Also, by your logic does that mean that no one is eliminated until another suspect is charged, tried and found guilty,  or are they still even then not really eliminated?  After all they could still have been involved somehow so best not eliminate them, eh?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 11:20:43 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 11:06:09 AM
Major incident investigations in the UK use a TIE strategy; trace/interview/eliminate. Those eliminated/not eliminated are marked in HOLMES2 by a code. The possibilities are;

1. Forensic elimination, eg, DNA, footwear impressions, fingerprints
2. Description (suspect parameters)
3. Independent witness (alibi)
4. Associate or relative (alibi)
5. Spouse or common law relationship (alibi)
6. Not eliminated.

Imo the only possibilities for the elimination of the McCanns are 4 & 5, which are not the most reliable. As the time of the crime isn't known, it's difficult to see how they could be recorded as eliminated.
https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/investigations/working-with-suspects/#elimination-criteria
Has Robert Murat been eliminated?  If so why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2021, 11:45:27 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 11:06:09 AM
Major incident investigations in the UK use a TIE strategy; trace/interview/eliminate. Those eliminated/not eliminated are marked in HOLMES2 by a code. The possibilities are;

1. Forensic elimination, eg, DNA, footwear impressions, fingerprints
2. Description (suspect parameters)
3. Independent witness (alibi)
4. Associate or relative (alibi)
5. Spouse or common law relationship (alibi)
6. Not eliminated.

Imo the only possibilities for the elimination of the McCanns are 4 & 5, which are not the most reliable. As the time of the crime isn't known, it's difficult to see how they could be recorded as eliminated.
https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/investigations/working-with-suspects/#elimination-criteria

I think it's all a bit silly... You still haven't said exactly what you mean by eliminated.  As the crime is unknown you could therefore argue that no one has been eliminated.  I would day the McCanns along with others have been eliminated on the present evidence but obviously if more evidence arises that could change.


The McCanns can't really be totally ruled out unless the crime is solved... Even then it could be said it's a miscarriage  of justice and the mccanns are guilty



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 11, 2021, 11:56:22 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 09, 2021, 02:04:52 PM
You have relied heavily on the McCanns testimony, on your belief that they have been eliminated (no evidence of that) and on the fact that OG are not investigating them (because of their remit).

The main focus of the investigation in Madeleine's case moved to Brueckner ten years after Madeleine's disappearance as a result of information stemming from her parents' appeal on German television for information.

No-one with any locus or with any authority in or knowledge regarding Madeleine's case has viewed her parents with suspicion for a very - very - long time and are on record as saying so. (Google it!).

I think your constant reiteration of the sceptic shibboleth (whichever one fits your bill) becomes more threadbare with overuse as time progresses and serves only to reinforce their irrelevance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 11:59:13 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2021, 11:45:27 AM
I think it's all a bit silly... You still haven't said exactly what you mean by eliminated.  As the crime is unknown you could therefore argue that no one has been eliminated.  I would day the McCanns along with others have been eliminated on the present evidence but obviously if more evidence arises that could change.

The McCanns can't really be totally ruled out unless the crime is solved... Even then it could be said it's a miscarriage  of justice and the mccanns are guilty

The crime has been determined, according to Redwood, Rowley, Wolters etc etc.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 12:43:29 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 11:59:13 AM
The crime has been determined, according to Redwood, Rowley, Wolters etc etc.
Yes, sometimes clever cops are able to deduce what crime has been committed by looking at the available evidence, even if they can't be 100% certain.  Being clever cops they have arrived at the conclusion that it's the only logical, plausible explanation and we know that they have eliminated, ruled out, and cleared the McCanns of being involved (galling as this realisation may be, and despite the fact that some people simply cannot and will not accept it).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 12:44:45 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2021, 11:45:27 AM
I think it's all a bit silly... You still haven't said exactly what you mean by eliminated.  As the crime is unknown you could therefore argue that no one has been eliminated.  I would day the McCanns along with others have been eliminated on the present evidence but obviously if more evidence arises that could change.


The McCanns can't really be totally ruled out unless the crime is solved... Even then it could be said it's a miscarriage  of justice and the mccanns are guilty

I was replying to someone who thought eliminating someone was related to actively suspecting them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 12:56:18 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 12:43:29 PM
Yes, sometimes clever cops are able to deduce what crime has been committed by looking at the available evidence, even if they can't be 100% certain.  Being clever cops they have arrived at the conclusion that it's the only logical, plausible explanation and we know that they have eliminated, ruled out, and cleared the McCanns of being involved (galling as this realisation may be, and despite the fact that some people simply cannot and will not accept it).

Alternatively, as with Operation Grange, policemen investigate what they are told to investigate by their remit.

Someone's remit is the area of activity which they are expected to deal with, or which they have authority to deal with.
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/remit

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 12:57:44 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 12:43:29 PM
Yes, sometimes clever cops are able to deduce what crime has been committed by looking at the available evidence, even if they can't be 100% certain.  Being clever cops they have arrived at the conclusion that it's the only logical, plausible explanation and we know that they have eliminated, ruled out, and cleared the McCanns of being involved (galling as this realisation may be, and despite the fact that some people simply cannot and will not accept it).

Well they still haven't shown a shred of abduction evidence, other than a sighting of Gerry, so it's not unreasonable to believe the parents dunnit, imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 01:34:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 12:56:18 PM
Alternatively, as with Operation Grange, policemen investigate what they are told to investigate by their remit.

Someone's remit is the area of activity which they are expected to deal with, or which they have authority to deal with.
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/remit
Have you any examples of serving or ex-police who were told that they couldn’t follow the evidence in a criminal investigation they were part of because their remit forbade it?   Has Murat been eliminated?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 01:35:45 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 12:57:44 PM
Well they still haven't shown a shred of abduction evidence, other than a sighting of Gerry, so it's not unreasonable to believe the parents dunnit, imo.
An alleged sighting of Gerry, there have also been alleged sightings of Madeleine McCann all over the world, some by people who were 100% certain it was her.  Are they all evidence then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 01:42:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 01:35:45 PM
An alleged sighting of Gerry, there have also been alleged sightings of Madeleine McCann all over the world, some by people who were 100% certain it was her.  Are they all evidence then?

Yes, they are evidence of wishful thinking.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2021, 01:49:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 12:56:18 PM
Alternatively, as with Operation Grange, policemen investigate what they are told to investigate by their remit.

Someone's remit is the area of activity which they are expected to deal with, or which they have authority to deal with.
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/remit

So you don't think that when investigating an abduction one possible result is that an abduction didn't happen
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 01:58:14 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 01:42:23 PM
Yes, they are evidence of wishful thinking.
So not necessarily evidence that the person identified was the person actually seen.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 02:01:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 12:44:45 PM
I was replying to someone who thought eliminating someone was related to actively suspecting them.
If you don't eliminate them it's because you still suspect they may be involved.  The act of elimination is the act of removing them from any suspicion of involvement.  If there is lingering suspicion that they are involved, then of course they are not eliminated and remain suspects.  So please explain how you can not be a suspect whilst also not eliminated from suspected involvement?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 02:10:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 01:58:14 PM
So not necessarily evidence that the person identified was the person actually seen.  Thank you.

I think what should happen is that when it's proven Brueckner abducted Maddie, whisking her off past the Smith family & towards a swift demise, all the other people who ever reported sightings of Maddie from all around the world should be arrested & sentenced to summary execution for wasting police time & crimes against common sense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 02:11:20 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 02:10:15 PM
I think what should happen is that when it's proven Brueckner abducted Maddie, whisking her off past the Smith family & towards a swift demise, all the other people who ever reported sightings of Maddie from all around the world should be arrested & sentenced to summary execution for wasting police time & crimes against common sense.
That's a p*sspoorpost imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 02:11:41 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2021, 01:49:51 PM
So you don't think that when investigating an abduction one possible result is that an abduction didn't happen

No I don't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 02:12:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 02:11:41 PM
No I don't.
So you are firmly convinced that Operation Grange is a corrupt entity then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 02:12:56 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 02:11:20 PM
That's a p*sspoorpost imo.

Well I think it's only right that people who lied to the police should be held accountable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 02:17:44 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 02:12:56 PM
Well I think it's only right that people who lied to the police should be held accountable.
You think everyone who ever thought they saw someone in a missing person appeal is a liar that deserves to be executed?  That's mature of you. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2021, 02:23:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 02:11:41 PM
No I don't.
I do.. Shannon Matthews
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 02:24:45 PM
do you think if The Sun ran a headline that said "Murat Not Eliminated From Maddie Probe" that that would be an accurate headline, one that he would not be able to sue the paper for libel? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 02:26:07 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 02:17:44 PM
You think everyone who ever thought they saw someone in a missing person appeal is a liar that deserves to be executed?  That's mature of you.

I think it would be a good way of deterring erroneous sightings in future missing persons cases, thus allowing the police to get on with their jobs rather than being distracted by stupid members of public.

It's certainly an idea I'll be adding to my manifesto, along with my income tax related missing persons search budgets, banning homosexuality & bringing back smoking in pubs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 02:42:16 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 02:26:07 PM
I think it would be a good way of deterring erroneous sightings in future missing persons cases, thus allowing the police to get on with their jobs rather than being distracted by stupid members of public.

It's certainly an idea I'll be adding to my manifesto, along with my income tax related missing persons search budgets, banning homosexuality & bringing back smoking in pubs.
I will be introducing punitive fines for all internet WUMS and trolls in my manifesto, with a minimum £10,000 penalty for posts like yours. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 02:47:57 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2021, 02:23:17 PM
I do.. Shannon Matthews
Yes but Shannon's parents weren't very important doctors, freemasons and secret agents with links to Porton Down, say no more...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 03:11:31 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 02:47:57 PM
Yes but Shannon's parents weren't very important doctors, freemasons and secret agents with links to Porton Down, say no more...

Well I believe Shannon's parents murdered her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 03:17:11 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 03:11:31 PM
Well I believe Shannon's parents murdered her.
Bored Spam?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 04:00:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 03:17:11 PM
Bored Spam?

Yes, I'm stuck at home all day waiting for a delivery, my new book I want to read hasn't arrived in the post yet, there's still no sign of any abduction evidence in the Maddie case & American police don't seem to be shooting any black people at the moment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 04:42:43 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2021, 04:00:48 PM
Yes, I'm stuck at home all day waiting for a delivery, my new book I want to read hasn't arrived in the post yet, there's still no sign of any abduction evidence in the Maddie case & American police don't seem to be shooting any black people at the moment.
Why don’t you go and get a job then, take your mind off your woes?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 05:47:32 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 02:12:38 PM
So you are firmly convinced that Operation Grange is a corrupt entity then?

No, I have never said it was corrupt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 06:20:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 05:47:32 PM
No, I have never said it was corrupt.
If it came across evidence which pointed to another crime other than abduction but which it refused to investigate because it was not part of the remit that would be a sign of a corrupt investigation. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 06:56:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 06:20:37 PM
If it came across evidence which pointed to another crime other than abduction but which it refused to investigate because it was not part of the remit that would be a sign of a corrupt investigation.

So who exactly do you think would come across such evidence?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2021, 07:15:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 06:56:58 PM
So who exactly do you think would come across such evidence?

What evidence do you think couold possibly exist....think about it. What could any investigation do to find any evidence that might exist adaginst the McCanns
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 07:20:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 06:56:58 PM
So who exactly do you think would come across such evidence?
Erm.. members of the  investigative team, who else?!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 07:24:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2021, 07:15:56 PM
What evidence do you think couold possibly exist....think about it. What could any investigation do to find any evidence that might exist adaginst the McCanns
Well, a colleague of Gerry could contact Operation Grange and tell them that when they were down the pub and when Gerry was very drunk that he blurted out he knew what had happened to Madeleine for example.  According to G-Unit Operation Grange would have to ignore this information and carry on investigating an abduction as Parental involvement is not part of the remit.  Willfully ignoring evidence is evidence of a corrupt investigation is it not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 11, 2021, 07:35:07 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 07:24:02 PM
Well, a colleague of Gerry could contact Operation Grange and tell them that when they were down the pub and when Gerry was very drunk that he blurted out he knew what had happened to Madeleine for example.  According to G-Unit Operation Grange would have to ignore this information and carry on investigating an abduction as Parental involvement is not part of the remit.  Willfully ignoring evidence is evidence of a corrupt investigation is it not?

perverting the course of justice...in fact is SY as an organisation guilty of perverting the course of justice
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 07:51:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 11, 2021, 07:35:07 PM
perverting the course of justice...in fact is SY as an organisation guilty of perverting the course of justice
Many sceptics appear to believe so IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 08:46:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 07:20:58 PM
Erm.. members of the  investigative team, who else?!

They pass it up the chain of command and it's either acted on or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 08:55:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 08:46:38 PM
They pass it up the chain of command and it's either acted on or not.
And your point is?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 10:41:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 08:55:19 PM
And your point is?

The direction which an organisation follows is decided by those at the top.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2021, 11:04:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 11, 2021, 10:41:42 PM
The direction which an organisation follows is decided by those at the top.
And who is at the top of Operation Grange?  Are they the ones you believe are corrupt and intent on perverting the course of justice?  And you think those lower down the rank, having been handed evidence that goes contrary to the abduction theory pass it upwards and blindly accept orders to ignore it do you?  Making them complicit in the corruption?   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 12, 2021, 07:19:05 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 11, 2021, 11:04:18 PM
And who is at the top of Operation Grange?  Are they the ones you believe are corrupt and intent on perverting the course of justice?  And you think those lower down the rank, having been handed evidence that goes contrary to the abduction theory pass it upwards and blindly accept orders to ignore it do you?  Making them complicit in the corruption?

It's not corrupt to keep an investigation on the track laid down by it's remit. You're obsessed with the idea of corruption!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 07:33:07 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 12, 2021, 07:19:05 AM
It's not corrupt to keep an investigation on the track laid down by it's remit. You're obsessed with the idea of corruption!
So what do you call it when police deliberately ignore evidence that points towards one set of suspects? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 08:11:45 AM
From the Wikipedia page on police corruption:

Case of Marc Dutroux[edit]
In 2004, the high-profile case of Belgian serial killer and child molester Marc Dutroux resulted in outrage in the community amidst allegations of police corruption and incompetence. Dutroux was meant to be under police surveillance the night he kidnapped two of his victims, but the police had programmed the camera to operate only during the day. The police failed to locate two living victims being held captive during a search of Dutroux's home in 1995. A locksmith who was accompanying the police during the search said he heard children's cries, but was dismissed by the police. The police claimed that they did not view seized videotapes of Dutroux constructing his "dungeon" as at the time they had no VCR. Dutroux claimed he was part of a sex ring that involved high-ranking members of Belgian police and government. The widespread anger over the continued failings of the police and Dutroux's sex-ring allegations, as well as residing judge Jean-Marc Connerott's dismissal, led to the "White March" in 1996, demanding reforms to Belgian police and judicial systems. Connerotte testified that the investigation was deliberately hampered by officials. Dutroux also escaped from police custody in 1998 before being apprehended. A parliamentary commission into the Dutroux case in 1998 found that the defendant benefited from police corruption and incompetence. Although police were cleared of direct compliance in Dutroux's crimes, the report cited major gross negligence throughout Belgium's police system, and an overhaul was called for. The case severely damaged the Belgian community's trust in their police and law enforcement systems.[34

So once again I ask:  do sceptics think that Operation Grange is corrupt, and has been set up specifically to deflect from the crimes of the McCanns by focusing solely on stranger abduction and have they set out to pervert the course of justice by deliberately  ignoring any evidence that pointed back at the parents?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 12, 2021, 11:03:49 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 07:33:07 AM
So what do you call it when police deliberately ignore evidence that points towards one set of suspects?

Firstly I have no evidence telling me that anyone involved in Operation Grange had such evidence and ignored it. Secondly, I can imagine a scenario where officers believe that certain people have been eliminated from an investigation. According to A C Rowley he believed that was true;

"firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese"
http://findmadeleine.com/pdf/ac-rowley-transcript.pdf

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 11:15:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 12, 2021, 11:03:49 AM
Firstly I have no evidence telling me that anyone involved in Operation Grange had such evidence and ignored it. Secondly, I can imagine a scenario where officers believe that certain people have been eliminated from an investigation. According to A C Rowley he believed that was true;

"firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese"
http://findmadeleine.com/pdf/ac-rowley-transcript.pdf
You have claimed that Operation Grange would only investigate Madeleine's disappearance an an abduction.  This means that as far as you're concerned they have ignored all the evidence you think exists against the McCanns and would continue to ignore any new evidence against them should it surface because of the "remit".  Do you think the police investigators are brain dead automatons only carrying out orders from above who would simply turn a blind eye to new information pointing to McCann involvement?
 And these ones giving the orders - what possible reason could they have for (as far as you seem concerned) insisting that the remit only look at abduction to the exclusion of all other possibilities?  Surely you can see that what you seem to believe is Operation Grange is protecting the McCanns and is wilfully intent on ignoring anything that points to other scenarios than abduction.  What would we call this sort of police behaviour?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 11:19:04 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 12, 2021, 11:03:49 AM
Firstly I have no evidence telling me that anyone involved in Operation Grange had such evidence and ignored it. Secondly, I can imagine a scenario where officers believe that certain people have been eliminated from an investigation. According to A C Rowley he believed that was true;

"firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese"
http://findmadeleine.com/pdf/ac-rowley-transcript.pdf
You show your bias by not posting the full quote where he, says, we have had, a, look at all that and are happy... Etc.. Which suggests they've looked at, all the evidence and decided the mccanns are not involved
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 11:48:43 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 11:19:04 AM
You show your bias by not posting the full quote where he, says, we have had, a, look at all that and are happy... Etc.. Which suggests they've looked at, all the evidence and decided the mccanns are not involved

Which does suggest that the only investigation of parental involvement by Operation Grange was to look over the evidence provided in the PJ files and decide to not open that avenue of enquiry. Which is strange of itself as the PJ files seem to suggest some suspicion of the parents but no concrete evidence to further the Portuguese investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 11:52:24 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 11:19:04 AM
You show your bias by not posting the full quote where he, says, we have had, a, look at all that and are happy... Etc.. Which suggests they've looked at, all the evidence and decided the mccanns are not involved
The relevant bits of Rowley's interview missed out by G-Unit

"We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was
all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of
investigation. The McCanns are parents of a missing girl, we are trying to get to the bottom of. In
terms of Andy using the word abduction, she was not old enough to set off and start her own life.
However she left that apartment, she has been abducted. It is not a 20-year-old who has gone
missing and who has made a decision to start a new life, this is a young girl who is missing and at the
heart of this has been an abduction"

"So when we started, we started five or so years into this and there is already a lot of ground
been covered, we don’t cover the same ground, what we do is pull all the material we had at the start,
all the Portuguese material, private detective material, with all the work that had been done, what that
evidence supports, what rules these lines of enquiry out, what keeps them open and you progress
forward. It would be no different if there were a cold case in London, a missing person from 1990, we
would go back to square one look at all the material and if the material was convincing it ruled out that
line of enquiry we would look somewhere else. So you reflect on the original material, you challenge
it, don’t take it at face value. You don’t restart an investigation pretending it doesn’t exist and do all
the same enquiries again that is not constructive"

"It’s a brand new investigation, you are going in with an open mind. You are not ignoring the
evidence in front of you. That would be a bizarre conclusion. You would look at that material, what
does it prove, what it doesn’t. What hypothesis does it open what does it close down and you work
your way through the case"


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 12:16:44 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 11:48:43 AM
Which does suggest that the only investigation of parental involvement by Operation Grange was to look over the evidence provided in the PJ files and decide to not open that avenue of enquiry. Which is strange of itself as the PJ files seem to suggest some suspicion of the parents but no concrete evidence to further the Portuguese investigation.

Not at all....Almeida who wrote the interim report said the main evidence against the McCanns was the alerts.
The mccanns also gave new ststements due to what they felt were mistakes in the initial ones .

So no real reason for suspicion just the pj didn't understand  the evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 12:44:35 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 12:16:44 PM
Not at all....Almeida who wrote the interim report said the main evidence against the McCanns was the alerts.
The mccanns also gave new ststements due to what they felt were mistakes in the initial ones .

So no real reason for suspicion just the pj didn't understand  the evidence
If the impression you get from reading all the PJ files is that the conclusion is there is no room for suspicion on parental involvement in those files then at least one of us has a serious comprehension problem. Whether they understood the evidence( I believe they may have a better understanding than you think) or not, the gist of the PJ files is that some suspicion is placed on parental involvement, that can’t be denied. Or can it?

Almeida reportedly said that over 2 years later in the libel case to emphasise that the PJ investigators had suspicions that parental involvement was likely. So it kind of proves my point really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 12:49:55 PM
So we have another taker for idea of Operation Grange deliberately turning a blind eye to "all" the evidence against the McCanns.  Can anyone posit a reason for this deliberate decision to protect the McCanns from further investigation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 12:51:59 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 12:44:35 PM
If the impression you get from reading all the PJ files is that the conclusion is there is no room for suspicion on parental involvement in those files then at least one of us has a serious comprehension problem. Whether they understood the evidence( I believe they may have a better understanding than you think) or not, the gist of the PJ files is that some suspicion is placed on parental involvement, that can’t be denied. Or can it?

Almeida reportedly said that over 2 years later in the libel case to emphasise that the PJ investigators had suspicions that parental involvement was likely. So it kind of proves my point really.

It proves my point too. The PJ we're relying on the alerts ss evidence... When they had been told they had no evidentisl value or reliability.. They thought 17 markerd was strong evidence of a match it wasn't.. They thought the inconsistencies in the statements were significant.. The way they took the statements invited mistakes.

Parents would always be suspects... But the evidence the PJ thought proved something  didn't.  You only have to read the proven facts in the libel trial to see they didn't understand... I think I have a far better understaing thst Amaral and his crew
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 12:52:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 12:49:55 PM
So we have another taker for idea of Operation Grange deliberately turning a blind eye to "all" the evidence against the McCanns.  Can anyone posit a reason for this deliberate decision to protect the McCanns from further investigation?

Who? name names.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 12:57:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 12:51:59 PM
It proves my point too. The PJ we're relying on the alerts ss evidence... When they had been told they had no evidentisl value or reliability.. They thought 17 markerd was strong evidence of a match it wasn't.. They thought the inconsistencies in the statements were significant.. The way they took the statements invited mistakes.

Parents would always be suspects... But the evidence the PJ thought proved something  didn't.  You only have to read the proven facts in the libel trial to see they didn't understand... I think I have a far better understaing thst Amaral and his crew

The PJ didn't think the evidence proved anything. That's why they shelved the case, But what you seem to be denying is that the PJ concluded there was suspicion regarding the parents. I don't want to start again with dog alerts being evidence, you already agreed that they were on the other thread.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 01:12:23 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 12:57:52 PM
The PJ didn't think the evidence proved anything. That's why they shelved the case, But what you seem to be denying is that the PJ concluded there was suspicion regarding the parents. I don't want to start again with dog alerts being evidence, you already agreed that they were on the other thread.

Amsral is on record as saying it did.. When the case was shelved the McCanns were no longer suspect's.
The alerts are not evidence... P d Carmo said the Mcs we're not suspects and there's no evidence against them
Imo.. SY simply had more sense and understanding and have the dame view as myself
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 12, 2021, 01:15:25 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 11:19:04 AM
You show your bias by not posting the full quote where he, says, we have had, a, look at all that and are happy... Etc.. Which suggests they've looked at, all the evidence and decided the mccanns are not involved

According to Commander Simon Foy, the first person to take charge of Operation Grange;

Foy: " it was perfectly clear to us, that the McCanns themselves had nothing, at all, to do with the actual disappearance of the child"
Interviewer: "why?"
Foy: Because, it was, it was just obvious, from, you know; that everything stacked up that they were, they were where they were when the child went missing"
Panorama 3rd May 2017 36:26 / 58:52
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6lrye9

What Foy didn't say was that the time when the child went missing wasn't definitely identified, it was assumed. He also didn't say that the only evidence of her parent's whereabouts was the evidence provided by themselves and their friends.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 01:25:40 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 01:12:23 PM
Amsral is on record as saying it did.. When the case was shelved the McCanns were no longer suspect's.
The alerts are not evidence... P d Carmo said the Mcs we're not suspects and there's no evidence against them
Imo.. SY simply had more sense and understanding and have the dame view as myself

Amaral is not the PJ files.
Maybe so, not but that's not my point.
Alerts can be evidence, we both know that.
PD Carmo is not the PJ files.
Maybe they do, maybe Scotland Yard are the best of the best but they don’t seem to have got very far and I will be looking forward to reading the files when they are released. Do you think they will be as transparent as the PJ when they shelve the case.

My point is, from the interview with Mark Rowley, and I cut and paste here

MR: “Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of investigation.”

That suggests that all that SY did was look at the PJ files and decide not to start or reopen the investigation into parental involvement. Is that enough?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 01:27:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 12, 2021, 01:15:25 PM
According to Commander Simon Foy, the first person to take charge of Operation Grange;

Foy: " it was perfectly clear to us, that the McCanns themselves had nothing, at all, to do with the actual disappearance of the child"
Interviewer: "why?"
Foy: Because, it was, it was just obvious, from, you know; that everything stacked up that they were, they were where they were when the child went missing"
Panorama 3rd May 2017 36:26 / 58:52
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6lrye9

What Foy didn't say was that the time when the child went missing wasn't definitely identified, it was assumed. He also didn't say that the only evidence of her parent's whereabouts was the evidence provided by themselves and their friends.
Why isn’t the evidence of their friends good enough?  What about the Tapas staff too? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 12, 2021, 01:32:24 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 01:25:40 PM
Amaral is not the PJ files.
Maybe so, not but that's not my point.
Alerts can be evidence, we both know that.
PD Carmo is not the PJ files.
Maybe they do, maybe Scotland Yard are the best of the best but they don’t seem to have got very far and I will be looking forward to reading the files when they are released. Do you think they will be as transparent as the PJ when they shelve the case.

My point is, from the interview with Mark Rowley, and I cut and paste here

MR: “Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of investigation.”

That suggests that all that SY did was look at the PJ files and decide not to start or reopen the investigation into parental involvement. Is that enough?

Not a chance, & I imagine Portugal will be pressured not to release the files or at least heavily redact them when the PJ inevitably shelve the case again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 12, 2021, 01:36:09 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 01:27:43 PM
Why isn’t the evidence of their friends good enough?  What about the Tapas staff too?

The evidence of friends will never be as valuable as the evidence of uninterested parties. The Tapas staff were unable to offer any alibis for anyone, although they confirmed that the group were there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 01:36:59 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 01:25:40 PM
Amaral is not the PJ files.
Maybe so, not but that's not my point.
Alerts can be evidence, we both know that.
PD Carmo is not the PJ files.
Maybe they do, maybe Scotland Yard are the best of the best but they don’t seem to have got very far and I will be looking forward to reading the files when they are released. Do you think they will be as transparent as the PJ when they shelve the case.

My point is, from the interview with Mark Rowley, and I cut and paste here

MR: “Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of investigation.”

That suggests that all that SY did was look at the PJ files and decide not to start or reopen the investigation into parental involvement. Is that enough?
More selective quoting from you, it seems to becoming a habit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 01:37:04 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 12, 2021, 01:32:24 PM
Not a chance, & I imagine Portugal will be pressured not to release the files or at least heavily redact them when the PJ inevitably shelve the case again.

Yeah, I don't think SY will be quite as happy for their work to be scrutinised in the way the PJ were prepared to do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 01:38:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 01:36:59 PM
More selective quoting from you, it seems to becoming a habit.

Did you want me to copy and paste the whole interview?
Its 6 pages long.
I thought I would just paste the bit I was referring to, saves a bit of time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 01:43:32 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 01:38:53 PM
Did you want me to copy and paste the whole interview?
Its 6 pages long.
I thought I would just paste the bit I was referring to, saves a bit of time.
We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was
all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of
investigation. The McCanns are parents of a missing girl, we are trying to get to the bottom of. In
terms of Andy using the word abduction, she was not old enough to set off and start her own life.
However she left that apartment, she has been abducted. It is not a 20-year-old who has gone
missing and who has made a decision to start a new life, this is a young girl who is missing and at the
heart of this has been an abduction"

"So when we started, we started five or so years into this and there is already a lot of ground
been covered, we don’t cover the same ground, what we do is pull all the material we had at the start,
all the Portuguese material, private detective material, with all the work that had been done, what that
evidence supports, what rules these lines of enquiry out, what keeps them open and you progress
forward. It would be no different if there were a cold case in London, a missing person from 1990, we
would go back to square one look at all the material and if the material was convincing it ruled out that
line of enquiry we would look somewhere else. So you reflect on the original material, you challenge
it, don’t take it at face value. You don’t restart an investigation pretending it doesn’t exist and do all
the same enquiries again that is not constructive"

"It’s a brand new investigation, you are going in with an open mind. You are not ignoring the
evidence in front of you. That would be a bizarre conclusion. You would look at that material, what
does it prove, what it doesn’t. What hypothesis does it open what does it close down and you work
your way through the case"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 01:45:41 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 01:37:04 PM
Yeah, I don't think SY will be quite as happy for their work to be scrutinised in the way the PJ were prepared to do.
Is it usual for UK police forces to release files on any investigation  to the general public, shelved or otherwise?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 01:49:33 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 01:25:40 PM
Amaral is not the PJ files.
Maybe so, not but that's not my point.
Alerts can be evidence, we both know that.
PD Carmo is not the PJ files.
Maybe they do, maybe Scotland Yard are the best of the best but they don’t seem to have got very far and I will be looking forward to reading the files when they are released. Do you think they will be as transparent as the PJ when they shelve the case.

My point is, from the interview with Mark Rowley, and I cut and paste here

MR: “Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of investigation.”

That suggests that all that SY did was look at the PJ files and decide not to start or reopen the investigation into parental involvement. Is that enough?
I would say that if you look at the statements... All the evidence..including the new statements give to the PJ which ate not in the file thetee is nothing to incriminate the parents... The alerts are not evidence of their involvement.
What else could SY do... They couldn't use PJ tactics of beating a confeddion out of them... So in your opinion what should SY have done
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 12, 2021, 01:52:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 01:45:41 PM
Is it usual for UK police forces to release files on any investigation  to the general public, shelved or otherwise?

It should be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 01:53:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 01:43:32 PM
We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was
all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of
investigation. The McCanns are parents of a missing girl, we are trying to get to the bottom of. In
terms of Andy using the word abduction, she was not old enough to set off and start her own life.
However she left that apartment, she has been abducted. It is not a 20-year-old who has gone
missing and who has made a decision to start a new life, this is a young girl who is missing and at the
heart of this has been an abduction"

"So when we started, we started five or so years into this and there is already a lot of ground
been covered, we don’t cover the same ground, what we do is pull all the material we had at the start,
all the Portuguese material, private detective material, with all the work that had been done, what that
evidence supports, what rules these lines of enquiry out, what keeps them open and you progress
forward. It would be no different if there were a cold case in London, a missing person from 1990, we
would go back to square one look at all the material and if the material was convincing it ruled out that
line of enquiry we would look somewhere else. So you reflect on the original material, you challenge
it, don’t take it at face value. You don’t restart an investigation pretending it doesn’t exist and do all
the same enquiries again that is not constructive"

"It’s a brand new investigation, you are going in with an open mind. You are not ignoring the
evidence in front of you. That would be a bizarre conclusion. You would look at that material, what
does it prove, what it doesn’t. What hypothesis does it open what does it close down and you work
your way through the case"

Do the following paragraphs change the context of the first paragraph, I don’t think they do.
If they do, how do they? Do they change the context to mean, we looked at the evidence from the PJ but decided to investigate the parents as a matter of course irrespective of what the previous evidence may suggest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 02:11:17 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 01:53:30 PM
Do the following paragraphs change the context of the first paragraph, I don’t think they do.
If they do, how do they? Do they change the context to mean, we looked at the evidence from the PJ but decided to investigate the parents as a matter of course irrespective of what the previous evidence may suggest.
The second two paragraphs explain the process they went through (collating and reviewing ALL the evidence looking at it afresh and not pre-judgin it) and, having done so they came to the only logical, plausible hypothesis - this was an abduction, and therefore the logical conclusion from that is the parents were not involved and did not need reinvestigating themselves, as suggested in the opening paragraph.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 02:12:45 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 12, 2021, 01:52:48 PM
It should be.
That’s another issue all together.  Making out that SY won’t release the full files in this case is suggesting that they have something to hide, which is false, it’s simply a case that files are never usually released.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 02:14:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 01:49:33 PM
I would say that if you look at the statements... All the evidence..including the new statements give to the PJ which ate not in the file thetee is nothing to incriminate the parents... The alerts are not evidence of their involvement.
What else could SY do... They couldn't use PJ tactics of beating a confeddion out of them... So in your opinion what should SY have done

If we take Mark Rowley for his word, he explicitly states they read the previous evidence and chose to not open any investigation into the parents involvement. If as you say the evidence was so unreliable, throw it away and start again to include abduction and any other avenues that may exist. Do a proper investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 02:16:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 02:11:17 PM
The second two paragraphs explain the process they went through (collating and reviewing ALL the evidence looking at it afresh and not pre-judgin it) and, having done so they came to the only logical, plausible hypothesis - this was an abduction, and therefore the logical conclusion from that is the parents were not involved and did not need reinvestigating themselves, as suggested in the opening paragraph.

Exactly, so they didn't re open any investigation into the parents after reading all the previous evidence. That's what I am saying.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 02:19:57 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 02:16:14 PM
Exactly, so they didn't re open any investigation into the parents after reading all the previous evidence. That's what I am saying.
Who has said they did?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 02:24:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 02:19:57 PM
Who has said they did?

OK, maybe no one has said that SY had independently investigated parental involvement.
So at least we all agree that after looking at the previous evidence in this case SY did not open any investigation into parental involvement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 02:26:09 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 02:24:17 PM
OK, maybe no one has said that SY had independently investigated parental involvement.
So at least we all agree that after looking at the previous evidence in this case SY did not open any investigation into parental involvement.
AFAIK noone here has ever suggested that they did, however what HAS been suggested is that the Met deliberately ignored any evidence against the parents because the Remit forbade it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 12, 2021, 02:27:21 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 02:16:14 PM
Exactly, so they didn't re open any investigation into the parents after reading all the previous evidence. That's what I am saying.

I wonder if there might have been a reason why the police "didn't re open any investigation into the parents after reading all the previous evidence".

Might it have been because there was no evidence justifying further investigation of the parents but there was evidence which justified investigating the many other avenues ignored by the Portuguese.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 02:33:32 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 02:26:09 PM
AFAIK noone here has ever suggested that they did, however what HAS been suggested is that the Met deliberately ignored any evidence against the parents because the Remit forbade it.
OK happy days, it's nice to get a consensus on this site, it seems to happen rarely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 02:35:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 12, 2021, 02:27:21 PM
I wonder if there might have been a reason why the police "didn't re open any investigation into the parents after reading all the previous evidence".

Might it have been because there was no evidence justifying further investigation of the parents but there was evidence which justified investigating the many other avenues ignored by the Portuguese.

Throw it all out and start again. From the ground up. Start with no exclusions. Why not? Its surely the correct way to do it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 02:45:59 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 02:33:32 PM
OK happy days, it's nice to get a consensus on this site, it seems to happen rarely.
Do you think there’s consensus for the Met deliberately ignoring all the so-called evidence against the McCanns because the remit forbade them to look at parental involvement?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 02:50:56 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 02:45:59 PM
Do you think there’s consensus for the Met deliberately ignoring all the so-called evidence against the McCanns because the remit forbade them to look at parental involvement?

No, no consensus there I am afraid. But, little steps, we have achieved a consensus concerning whether SY investigated parental involvement after reading the evidence, it seems they didn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 12, 2021, 02:52:28 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 02:35:36 PM
Throw it all out and start again. From the ground up. Start with no exclusions. Why not? Its surely the correct way to do it.

Sounds a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Didn't you bother to read the link provided by VS http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg651516#msg651516 because if you have I'm afraid you've failed to understand the process outlined for
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:01:04 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 12, 2021, 02:52:28 PM
Sounds a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Didn't you bother to read the link provided by VS http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg651516#msg651516 because if you have I'm afraid you've failed to understand the process outlined for
  • reviewing a cold case
  • opening a case

So don't throw it all out, investigate the dog alerts, investigate the timelines, question the people closest involved just don't focus on a single scenario based on evidence you didn't even gather yourself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:10:14 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:01:04 PM
So don't throw it all out, investigate the dog alerts, investigate the timelines, question the people closest involved just don't focus on a single scenario based on evidence you didn't even gather yourself.
How would you have advised Operation Grange to investigate the dog alerts out of interest?  They did investigate the timeline, forensically was the word they used for it.  The people involved were all repeatedly questioned at the time, what questions did they not answer that might have helped OG to gain further understanding of what happened?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:11:35 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 02:50:56 PM
No, no consensus there I am afraid. But, little steps, we have achieved a consensus concerning whether SY investigated parental involvement after reading the evidence, it seems they didn't.
They didn’t investigate Robert Murat either afaik, oversight iyo?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:12:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:11:35 PM
They didn’t investigate Robert Murat either afaik, oversight iyo?

Definitely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:15:34 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:10:14 PM
How would you have advised Operation Grange to investigate the dog alerts out of interest?  They did investigate the timeline, forensically was the word they used for it.  The people involved were all repeatedly questioned at the time, what questions did they not answer that might have helped OG to gain further understanding of what happened?

Interview Grime, Harrison. Re-interview the people involved, maybe something new comes up. Just don't focus on one scenario based on evidence they didn't even gather.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:18:48 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:12:49 PM
Definitely.
Seriously, on what basis do you think there was any reason to reinvestigate him?  Do you actually think there’s the remotest likelihood he was involved?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:20:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:18:48 PM
Seriously, on what basis do you think there was any reason to reinvestigate him?  Do you actually think there’s the remotest likelihood he was involved?

I have no idea if he was involved, if it was an abduction what rules him out? Maybe he has information on other aspects. Keep an open mind.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:23:23 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:15:34 PM
Interview Grime, Harrison. Re-interview the people involved, maybe something new comes up. Just don't focus on one scenario based on evidence they didn't even gather.
How about focusing on abduction being the most plausible, logical scenario as the starting point of the new investigation and then seeing where the evidence takes you from there, bearing in mind that new evidence may be gathered that supports other scenarios which may also need checking out?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:27:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:23:23 PM
How about focusing on abduction being the most plausible, logical scenario as the starting point of the new investigation and then seeing where the evidence takes you from there, bearing in mind that new evidence may be gathered that supports other scenarios which may also need checking out?

That what SY has being doing for the last however many years, and where has it got them?
I don't mind them investigating abduction, but not to the exclusion of any other scenario. Why limit the investigation? Even Davel hasn't totally ruled out parent involvement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:28:49 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:27:30 PM
That what SY has being doing for the last however many years, and where has it got them?
I don't mind them investigating abduction, but not to the exclusion of any other scenario. Why limit the investigation?
Who told you they have excluded any other scenario?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:30:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:28:49 PM
Who told you they have excluded any other scenario?

I thought we agreed on that earlier? Is the consensus broken?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:33:29 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:30:08 PM
I thought we agreed on that earlier? Is the consensus broken?
No, the consensus (between you and me) was that Operation Grange did not reinvestigate the parents at the beginning .  That does not mean that should evidence come to light that points that way that the police would exclude it as being not worthy of further investigation does it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:36:46 PM
In any case by focusing on abduction, that would not preclude the possibility that Murat was involved and had the investigation taken them down that route he may well have been reinvestigated.  As far as I know he was not, though was he not reinterviewed as a witness at one point by OG?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 03:36:56 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:01:04 PM
So don't throw it all out, investigate the dog alerts, investigate the timelines, question the people closest involved just don't focus on a single scenario based on evidence you didn't even gather yourself.

What do you mean by investigate the dog alerts.. Investigate what

All those involved have given statements... They may well have interviewed the mccanns and tapas again.
They didn't just focus  on a single scenario... They looked at all the evidence and decided abduction was by far the most likely
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:37:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:36:46 PM
In any case by focusing on abduction, that would not preclude the possibility that Murat was involved and had the investigation taken them down that route he may well have been reinvestigated.  As far as I know he was not, though was he not reinterviewed as a witness at one point by OG?
yes he was

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/10/madeleine-mccann-robert-murat-re-interviewed
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:40:20 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:37:55 PM
yes he was

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/10/madeleine-mccann-robert-murat-re-interviewed

Are you now arguing with yourself. I agreed that he should have been interviewed. Glad to hear he was.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:44:12 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 03:36:56 PM
What do you mean by investigate the dog alerts.. Investigate what

All those involved have given statements... They may well have interviewed the mccanns and tapas again.
They didn't just focus  on a single scenario... They looked at all the evidence and decided abduction was by far the most likely

Question Grime and Harrison, I already said.
The point I am making is that SY decided not to investigate the scenario of parental involvement after reviewing the seemingly unreliable evidence of the PJ and the hardly impartial evidence of detectives paid by the McCann's.
If you are happy with that situation, good for you, personally I am not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:50:45 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:40:20 PM
Are you now arguing with yourself. I agreed that he should have been interviewed. Glad to hear he was.
No, not arguing with myself, merely confirming what I wrote in my previous post.  He was not being reinvestigated as a suspect, but interviewed as a witness.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:53:04 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:44:12 PM
Question Grime and Harrison, I already said.
The point I am making is that SY decided not to investigate the scenario of parental involvement after reviewing the seemingly unreliable evidence of the PJ and the hardly impartial evidence of detectives paid by the McCann's.
If you are happy with that situation, good for you, personally I am not.
this is the same evidence you think contains evidence pointing to parental involvement- so is it reliable or unreliable in your view? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:54:14 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:44:12 PM
Question Grime and Harrison, I already said.
The point I am making is that SY decided not to investigate the scenario of parental involvement after reviewing the seemingly unreliable evidence of the PJ and the hardly impartial evidence of detectives paid by the McCann's.
If you are happy with that situation, good for you, personally I am not.
What questions who you have had them ask Grime and Harrison out of interest?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 04:16:08 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:44:12 PM
Question Grime and Harrison, I already said.
The point I am making is that SY decided not to investigate the scenario of parental involvement after reviewing the seemingly unreliable evidence of the PJ and the hardly impartial evidence of detectives paid by the McCann's.
If you are happy with that situation, good for you, personally I am not.

What questions would you ask Harrison and Grime.  I seem to recall somewhere Harrison saying they briefed the PJ and confirmed the alerts were not evidential.

They have both given very full statements on the alerts... I really think you are giving the alerts more credibility than they deserve
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 04:20:07 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 03:44:12 PM
Question Grime and Harrison, I already said.
The point I am making is that SY decided not to investigate the scenario of parental involvement after reviewing the seemingly unreliable evidence of the PJ and the hardly impartial evidence of detectives paid by the McCann's.
If you are happy with that situation, good for you, personally I am not.
SY had the  McCanns statements... Plus the new ones they made when they realised the originals had mistakes... They had all the other statements and as I understand  felt the accounts stacked up.  Again I think you only question that because you give too much credibility to the dogs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 05:08:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 03:53:04 PM
this is the same evidence you think contains evidence pointing to parental involvement- so is it reliable or unreliable in your view?

I think they are reliable, that's why I put them as seemingly unreliable as some people seem to think they aren't IMO. Each to their own.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 05:09:29 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 04:16:08 PM
What questions would you ask Harrison and Grime.  I seem to recall somewhere Harrison saying they briefed the PJ and confirmed the alerts were not evidential.

They have both given very full statements on the alerts... I really think you are giving the alerts more credibility than they deserve

Well I would start with asking their opinions of the alerts, in the same way as when uncorroborated dog alerts are brought up in court and the handler gives his expert opinion on them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 05:16:46 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 05:08:35 PM
I think they are reliable, that's why I put them as seemingly unreliable as some people seem to think they aren't IMO. Each to their own.
If it’s reliable then no need for the Met to go over the same ground again is there?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 05:18:14 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 05:09:29 PM
Well I would start with asking their opinions of the alerts, in the same way as when uncorroborated dog alerts are brought up in court and the handler gives his expert opinion on them.
They already gave their opinions of the alerts didn’t they?  Well Grime did.  What’s he going to say that would make any difference to the direction of the investigation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 05:19:02 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 05:09:29 PM
Well I would start with asking their opinions of the alerts, in the same way as when uncorroborated dog alerts are brought up in court and the handler gives his expert opinion on them.

Theyve given their experts opinion on them
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 05:34:26 PM
Its OK, I get it. You both are perfectly happy that Operation Grange looked at the past evidence and decided there was no need to re-open any investigation of parental involvement. I say, what's the harm in covering everything rather than ruling something out based on someone else's evidence. There can be a difference of opinion, I accept yours even if I don’t agree with it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 05:41:38 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 05:34:26 PM
Its OK, I get it. You both are perfectly happy that Operation Grange looked at the past evidence and decided there was no need to re-open any investigation of parental involvement. I say, what's the harm in covering everything rather than ruling something out based on someone else's evidence. There can be a difference of opinion, I accept yours even if I don’t agree with it.

They looked at all the evidence...you suggested they question Grime and Harrison...you cant accept that the testimony by both Grime and harrison has decreed the alerts valueless.

What more could they do to investigate the parents involvement...you cant seem to give  a decent answer
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 05:53:31 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 05:41:38 PM
They looked at all the evidence...you suggested they question Grime and Harrison...you cant accept that the testimony by both Grime and harrison has decreed the alerts valueless.

What more could they do to investigate the parents involvement...you cant seem to give  a decent answer

I can't accept it cause it ain't true.  What more could they do? not close the idea of parental involvement after looking at somebodies else's evidence. Look for themselves. Keep an open mind. Take a fresh look at what the PJ files suggested happened. Investigate, is that not their job?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 06:05:07 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 05:53:31 PM

I can't accept it cause it ain't true.  What more could they do? not close the idea of parental involvement after looking at somebodies else's evidence. Look for themselves. Keep an open mind. Take a fresh look at what the PJ files suggested happened. Investigate, is that not their job?

Yes it is true.. If it wasn't... I would agree with you.. But it is..
I don't see any real evidence in the files which incriminates the parents
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:11:24 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 06:05:07 PM
Yes it is true.. If it wasn't... I would agree with you.. But it is..
I don't see any real evidence in the files which incriminates the parents

So if its true that both Grime and Harrison have testified on the alerts, and those testimonies have made the alerts worthless, can I see where you got that from?
If there isn't any evidence in the files maybe SY should look for some because as you said last week you believe its a possibility that the parents were involved. Every reasonable possibility should be investigated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 06:19:48 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:11:24 PM
So its true that both Grime and Harrison have testified on the alerts, and those testimonies have made the alerts worthless, can I see where you got that from?
If there isn't any evidence in the files maybe SY should look for some because as you said last week you believe its a possibility that the parents were involved. Every reasonable possibility should be investigated.

You are well aware of the statements made by Grime and Harrison that form part of the files..There is an incredibly tiny chance the parents could have been involved but I'm confident Wolters has near enough proof they are not ..
Richard Dawkins says he can't prove god doesn't exist and therefore he has to accept there's a possibility... That's how I view parental involvement
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:27:49 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 06:19:48 PM
You are well aware of the statements made by Grime and Harrison that form part of the files..There is an incredibly tiny chance the parents could have been involved but I'm confident Wolters has near enough proof they are not ..
Richard Dawkins says he can't prove god doesn't exist and therefore he has to accept there's a possibility... That's how I view parental involvement

 I am well aware of the statements but nowhere does it say that either of them express the opinion that the alerts are valueless. Regardless of whether Dawkings is agnostic or atheist, if you believe there is even the tiniest chance that the parents were involved, shouldn't that be investigated, they have been working on it for 9 years now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 06:29:48 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 05:34:26 PM
Its OK, I get it. You both are perfectly happy that Operation Grange looked at the past evidence and decided there was no need to re-open any investigation of parental involvement. I say, what's the harm in covering everything rather than ruling something out based on someone else's evidence. There can be a difference of opinion, I accept yours even if I don’t agree with it.
The original files contained hundreds of thousands of pages of evidence.  Are you suggesting that Operation Grange should have started from scratch, ignored “someone else’s evidence” and gathered their own hundreds of thousands of pages of evidence?  Re-interview hundreds of witnesses?  Revisit hundreds of houses? Redeploy dogs in Apat 5 A and the hire car?  Send in forensics?    Or just do a bit of this and if so which bits to re-do and which bits of the original investigation to rely on?   Or how about they take a fresh look at all the evidence gathered, use HOLMES to make some sense of it, unearth dozens of previously unfollowed up leads and missed investigative opportunities?  Would that not rather make better use of time and resources?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 06:34:34 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:27:49 PM
I am well aware of the statements but nowhere does it say that either of them express the opinion that the alerts are valueless. Regardless of whether Dawkings is agnostic or atheist, if you believe there is even the tiniest chance that the parents were involved, shouldn't that be investigated, they have been working on it for 9 years now.
Afaiac SY have looked at the evidence and decided the parents are not involved.  You can't accept  it because you give thr alerts credibilty they do not deserve ..imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 06:36:27 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:27:49 PM
I am well aware of the statements but nowhere does it say that either of them express the opinion that the alerts are valueless. Regardless of whether Dawkings is agnostic or atheist, if you believe there is even the tiniest chance that the parents were involved, shouldn't that be investigated, they have been working on it for 9 years now.


After the conclusion of the searches, a meeting in the Portimao offices of the PJ took place in the cabinet of Goncalo AMARAL and those present included Guilermino ENCARNACO, an official representative from the Leicestershire police, Martin GRIME and myself. During the meeting were exhibited videos with the details of search activities including the sniffer dogs lead by Martin GRIME. GRIME commented on the actions of the dogs and added that no confirmed evidence or information could be taken from the alerts by the dogs but needed to be confirmed with physical evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:37:47 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 12, 2021, 06:29:48 PM
The original files contained hundreds of thousands of pages of evidence.  Are you suggesting that Operation Grange should have started from scratch, ignored “someone else’s evidence” and gathered their own hundreds of thousands of pages of evidence?  Re-interview hundreds of witnesses?  Revisit hundreds of houses? Redeploy dogs in Apat 5 A and the hire car?  Send in forensics?    Or just do a bit of this and if so which bits to re-do and which bits of the original investigation to rely on?   Or how about they take a fresh look at all the evidence gathered, use HOLMES to make some sense of it, unearth dozens of previously unfollowed up leads and missed investigative opportunities?  Would that not rather make better use of time and resources?

I don't believe there is anything in the PJ files that exonerates the parents, do you? SY have said they have gone through the PJ evidence and that has all been dealt with by the PJ and no need to re open any investigation of the parents. That's fine for you I understand, but wouldn't it be good if they did investigate and then come out and say the parents are innocent and we have all this wealth of evidence to prove it, why wouldn't you want that? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 06:38:50 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:27:49 PM
I am well aware of the statements but nowhere does it say that either of them express the opinion that the alerts are valueless. Regardless of whether Dawkings is agnostic or atheist, if you believe there is even the tiniest chance that the parents were involved, shouldn't that be investigated, they have been working on it for 9 years now.

So what more could SY do... What investigation could they carry out
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:41:48 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 06:34:34 PM
Afaiac SY have looked at the evidence and decided the parents are not involved.  You can't accept  it because you give thr alerts credibilty they do not deserve ..imo

No That's exactly what I do accept. But I still believe they have a duty to investigate all scenarios. I don't understand yours and VS disagreement that parental involvement shouldn't be investigated, it may exonerate them, wouldn't that be good.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:44:10 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 06:36:27 PM

After the conclusion of the searches, a meeting in the Portimao offices of the PJ took place in the cabinet of Goncalo AMARAL and those present included Guilermino ENCARNACO, an official representative from the Leicestershire police, Martin GRIME and myself. During the meeting were exhibited videos with the details of search activities including the sniffer dogs lead by Martin GRIME. GRIME commented on the actions of the dogs and added that no confirmed evidence or information could be taken from the alerts by the dogs but needed to be confirmed with physical evidence.

 I am not going round in circles with you. You know Grime has said uncorroborated alerts can be used as evidence in his 2018 white paper you posted it yourself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:48:05 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 06:38:50 PM
So what more could SY do... What investigation could they carry out

I didn't think I would have to spell it out but here goes.
They have run their investigation from the point of view that the act was an abduction, take a step back and investigate if the act was parental involvement and gather information using that premise as a framework. Thats generally how it works.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 06:49:19 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:44:10 PM
I am not going round in circles with you. You know Grime has said uncorroborated alerts can be used as evidence in his 2018 white paper you posted it yourself.

Thr fact that he has now changed his mind gives him even less credibility imo. I haven't heard Harrison's virws but I know Prof Cassella... Grimes academic lead... Disagrees with him.  Was Grime flown to the US because of his skill or because of what he was now prepared to say.  To say that alerts can be confirmed by anectdotal evidence is preposterous imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 06:49:48 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:37:47 PM
I don't believe there is anything in the PJ files that exonerates the parents, do you? SY have said they have gone through the PJ evidence and that has all been dealt with by the PJ and no need to re open any investigation of the parents. That's fine for you I understand, but wouldn't it be good if they did investigate and then come out and say the parents are innocent and we have all this wealth of evidence to prove it, why wouldn't you want that?
There is no amount of investigating the parent that could have proved their innocence, don’t you get that?  They could have spent the last 10 years focusing solely on the parents and where do you think that would have got them?  If their hypothesis based on the known facts is abduction (and clearly it is thr only logical and plausible theory IMO, and in theirs) why would they waste all that time trying to prove the unproveable, ie the McCanns innocence?   What do you think they could uncover that would prove innocence?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 06:52:58 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:48:05 PM
I didn't think I would have to spell it out but here goes.
They have run their investigation from the point of view that the act was an abduction, take a step back and investigate if the act was parental involvement and gather information using that premise as a framework. Thats generally how it works.

What information do you think they could possibly gather... On the evidence they had.... They consider the parents innocent.  It really hinges on the alerts...and they have no evidential reliability  or value... You seem to think they do... And you are quite wrong imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:53:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 06:49:19 PM
Thr fact that he has now changed his mind gives him even less credibility imo. I haven't heard Harrison's virws but I know Prof Cassella... Grimes academic lead... Disagrees with him.  Was Grime flown to the US because of his skill or because of what he was now prepared to say.  To say that alerts can be confirmed by anectdotal evidence is preposterous imo.
I already answered that on the appropriate thread.
"Grime has changed his opinion and uncorroborated dog alerts can be heard in court. You say this raises questions about his credibility. I say he is smart enough to see himself giving evidence of uncorroborated dog alerts and realises that his opinion in Luz was wrong. He would be an abject fool if he didn’t change his opinion after appearing several times himself, wouldn’t he?"  If you want to talk dogs take it to the correct thread.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 06:58:27 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:53:28 PM
I already answered that on the appropriate thread.
"Grime has changed his opinion and uncorroborated dog alerts can be heard in court. You say this raises questions about his credibility. I say he is smart enough to see himself giving evidence of uncorroborated dog alerts and realises that his opinion in Luz was wrong. He would be an abject fool if he didn’t change his opinion after appearing several times himself, wouldn’t he?"  If you want to talk dogs take it to the correct thread.
You think Grime is now right having got it wrong in Luz.... Prof Cassella does not agree.. Alerts never admitted in England and only once or twice in Scotland... I think DY have got it just right
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:58:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 06:52:58 PM
What information do you think they could possibly gather... On the evidence they had.... They consider the parents innocent.  It really hinges on the alerts...and they have no evidential reliability  or value... You seem to think they do... And you are quite wrong imo

Double team time. If you believe that after reading the PJ files there is evidence that would exonerate the parents ie make them not even worthy for investigations than there is nothing I can say to either of you. Its pointless to argue, you hold your opinion and I will hold mine. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 06:59:59 PM
The only way people get exonerated is of the evidence used to convict them is dodgy and a court decides to overturn the conviction, or if someone else confesses to the crime or enough solid evidence is found to convict another person.  Therfore the only way the McCanns could ever be completely exonerated is if one of the above scenarios came to pass.  They cannot be exonerated by being further investigated themselves IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2021, 07:01:19 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:58:50 PM
Double team time. If you believe that after reading the PJ files there is evidence that would exonerate the parents ie make them not even worthy for investigations than there is nothing I can say to either of you. Its pointless to argue, you hold your opinion and I will hold mine.
I’m saying quite the reverse, but hey ho.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 12, 2021, 07:01:32 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 12, 2021, 06:58:50 PM
Double team time. If you believe that after reading the PJ files there is evidence that would exonerate the parents ie make them not even worthy for investigations than there is nothing I can say to either of you. Its pointless to argue, you hold your opinion and I will hold mine.
I've not said there is evidence that exonerates them.. They don't need that... I don't see evidence that incriminates them.. And it seems SY agree
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 12, 2021, 07:06:34 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 12, 2021, 07:01:32 PM
I've not said there is evidence that exonerates them.. They don't need that... I don't see evidence that incrimminates them.. And it seems SY agree

There's nothing that incriminates CB either from SY's point of view, allegedly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 14, 2021, 06:53:47 PM
Words from Dick, video as well. 33 minutes in, nothing new that she can tell anyone.

https://youtu.be/dr7JCCiAJiM



Met police chief Dame Cressida Dick says force will keep looking for missing girl Madeleine McCann 'until there is nothing left to do' 14 years after she disappeared

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9578461/Met-police-chief-Dame-Cressida-Dick-says-Madeline-McCann-probe-continue.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on May 14, 2021, 07:33:00 PM
Just sharing. Friday evenings are our happy place, playing 80’s music and having a ‘braai’.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on May 14, 2021, 07:35:10 PM
https://youtu.be/62eTq8ErUOQ
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on May 14, 2021, 08:23:01 PM
I find it rude to be sent PMs from people who have blocked me.   Carli - "I read some of those comments and wondered how anyone found out that you had a disability."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: carlymichelle on May 14, 2021, 08:46:48 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on May 14, 2021, 08:23:01 PM
I find it rude to be sent PMs from people who have blocked me.   Carli - "I read some of those comments and wondered how anyone found out that you had a disability."

sorry rob i didnt know you were blocked i may have done it on my ipad  accidently    i dont know how to   unblock you    i have made no secret on this forum and elsewhere that i have  disabilities  from birth and some   in the mcann community have used it against me it doesnt bother me    thats their opinion

edit i ublocked you sorry about that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 14, 2021, 08:58:41 PM
Quote from: carlymichelle on May 14, 2021, 08:46:48 PM
sorry rob i didnt know you were blocked i may have done it on my ipad  accidently    i dont know how to   unblock you    i have made no secret on this forum and elsewhere that i have  disabilities  from birth and some   in the mcann community have used it against me it doesnt bother me    thats their opinion

edit i ublocked you sorry about that

So why do you repeatedly keep on about it?  No one is all that interested.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 14, 2021, 09:22:14 PM
Quote from: Anthro on May 14, 2021, 07:35:10 PM
https://youtu.be/62eTq8ErUOQ

Loved this in the 1980's. Loved the original too;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU6XckAxRrw
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on May 15, 2021, 09:47:39 PM
Similar to pandemic fatigue, I think the forum has reached its discussion fatigue. My opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 15, 2021, 10:13:35 PM
Quote from: Anthro on May 15, 2021, 09:47:39 PM
Similar to pandemic fatigue, I think the forum has reached its discussion fatigue. My opinion.

Along with every other fatigue you can think of.  Basically frightfully boring.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 15, 2021, 10:47:06 PM
Quote from: Anthro on May 15, 2021, 09:47:39 PM
Similar to pandemic fatigue, I think the forum has reached its discussion fatigue. My opinion.

It cannot be denied that the forum has been dumbed down.  A great pity but there are those who have always been inimical to the ethos John has tried to instil here. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 16, 2021, 05:54:28 PM
Quote from: Anthro on May 14, 2021, 07:35:10 PM
https://youtu.be/62eTq8ErUOQ

LOL
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CcyLGh4Whw&list=PLK0gkEiTaKo2JOV9Cm4XxvdGrRVtLIBfI&index=6
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on May 16, 2021, 08:06:46 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 16, 2021, 05:54:28 PM
LOL
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CcyLGh4Whw&list=PLK0gkEiTaKo2JOV9Cm4XxvdGrRVtLIBfI&index=6
😍
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 18, 2021, 05:40:20 PM
In Gloucester where they are searching for the remains of one of Fred West’s victims

“A TV production company discovered two voids in the café basement, which measures ten metres by seven metres, while making a documentary on the disappearance of Mary and her links to Fred West.

They drilled holes into one of them so a cadaver dog could be used to test for evidence of a body and it “gave a minor indication of something in the hole”, Turner said.”

What is a “minor indication “ from a cadaver dog and why would it be minor if a body was buried there?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 18, 2021, 06:32:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 18, 2021, 05:40:20 PM
In Gloucester where they are searching for the remains of one of Fred West’s victims

“A TV production company discovered two voids in the café basement, which measures ten metres by seven metres, while making a documentary on the disappearance of Mary and her links to Fred West.

They drilled holes into one of them so a cadaver dog could be used to test for evidence of a body and it “gave a minor indication of something in the hole”, Turner said.”

What is a “minor indication “ from a cadaver dog and why would it be minor if a body was buried there?


Where's that from ?, the Mail take on it.

DCI Turner said one of the holes had been found by a cadaver dog under the basement toilet at The Clean Plate Café in Gloucester, which officers have been searching for nearly a week after an ITV documentary crew tipped them off that a body could be buried there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 18, 2021, 06:35:40 PM
The sun claimed that bones had been found in the search, but police denied it.

But Gloucestershire Police has denied claims in The Sun last night that they have found evidence of bones in an area of the basement, where Fred West may have carried out work as a builder

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9591335/Fred-West-detectives-hunting-body-15-year-old-Mary-Bastholm-six-voids.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 18, 2021, 06:40:56 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 18, 2021, 06:32:13 PM

Where's that from ?, the Mail take on it.

DCI Turner said one of the holes had been found by a cadaver dog under the basement toilet at The Clean Plate Café in Gloucester, which officers have been searching for nearly a week after an ITV documentary crew tipped them off that a body could be buried there.
My source is today’s Times.  Turner is the DCI ( the man quoted re the minor alert).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 18, 2021, 07:02:25 PM
Thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 18, 2021, 07:19:14 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 18, 2021, 07:02:25 PM
Thanks.
you’re welcome.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2021, 07:55:17 PM
Ive been asked to let posters know that Sadie is having problems posting. She is getting that timed out message...Ive had it on my mobile but not on my PC. Has anyone else had problems
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 26, 2021, 08:02:05 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 26, 2021, 07:55:17 PM
Ive been asked to let posters know that Sadie is having problems posting. She is getting that timed out message...Ive had it on my mobile but not on my PC. Has anyone else had problems
I've had none so far - can anyone help or suggest anything Sadie could try?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on May 26, 2021, 08:56:16 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 26, 2021, 07:55:17 PM
Ive been asked to let posters know that Sadie is having problems posting. She is getting that timed out message...Ive had it on my mobile but not on my PC. Has anyone else had problems
I also had that issue on my iPad and phone. It seems to be sorted now.🤷🏻‍♀️
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on May 26, 2021, 08:59:12 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 26, 2021, 08:02:05 PM
I've had none so far - can anyone help or suggest anything Sadie could try?
In my case, it seems I’ve fallen behind with updates on my Apple devices. I am not sure what Sadie uses, but that could be the problem.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 27, 2021, 08:05:18 AM
I've had it too. Clear the cookies, cache, etc and try manually inputting password.
If that fails set fire to it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 27, 2021, 12:57:29 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 18, 2021, 05:40:20 PM
In Gloucester where they are searching for the remains of one of Fred West’s victims

“A TV production company discovered two voids in the café basement, which measures ten metres by seven metres, while making a documentary on the disappearance of Mary and her links to Fred West.

They drilled holes into one of them so a cadaver dog could be used to test for evidence of a body and it “gave a minor indication of something in the hole”, Turner said.”

What is a “minor indication “ from a cadaver dog and why would it be minor if a body was buried there?
Despite the “minor indication “ by the cadaver dog in Gloucester no human remains have been found according to the Times newspaper today.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 27, 2021, 01:11:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 27, 2021, 12:57:29 PM
Despite the “minor indication “ by the cadaver dog in Gloucester no human remains have been found according to the Times newspaper today.
Clever dog. If he killed someone down there, and there's an effin good chance that he did, that's exactly what I'd expect. WOOF!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 27, 2021, 01:28:50 PM
Quote from: The General on May 27, 2021, 01:11:36 PM
Clever dog. If he killed someone down there, and there's an effin good chance that he did, that's exactly what I'd expect. WOOF!
So he killed her down there but decided not to bury her under the concrete floor he was laying.  How odd.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 27, 2021, 01:39:34 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 27, 2021, 01:28:50 PM
So he killed her down there but decided not to bury her under the concrete floor he was laying.  How odd.
Cite for 'concrete floor' being layed.
Cite for 'concrete floor' being layed by Fred West.
No tabloid tittle tattle permitted ('a source close to someone who has seen some concrete, etc')
There's a good doggy.......have a biscuit. WOOF!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 27, 2021, 02:07:43 PM
Quote from: The General on May 27, 2021, 01:39:34 PM
Cite for 'concrete floor' being layed.
Cite for 'concrete floor' being layed by Fred West.
No tabloid tittle tattle permitted ('a source close to someone who has seen some concrete, etc')
There's a good doggy.......have a biscuit. WOOF!
This  doggy doesn’t obey orders being barked at her and is more likely to respond to such bossiness with a bite to the ‘nads.

Perhaps you could explain why the cadaver dog alerted to the hole dug by the police into the concrete floor of the basement if Fred had actually just murdered her and then removed the body?  Did he murder her then leave her there to decompose for a bit before removing her in your view?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 27, 2021, 03:23:45 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 27, 2021, 02:07:43 PM
This  doggy doesn’t obey orders being barked at her and is more likely to respond to such bossiness with a bite to the ‘nads.

Perhaps you could explain why the cadaver dog alerted to the hole dug by the police into the concrete floor of the basement if Fred had actually just murdered her and then removed the body?  Did he murder her then leave her there to decompose for a bit before removing her in your view?
You answered your own question with a plausible postulation.
Although I doubt that the propagation of decomposition was his primary reason for leaving 'her' there; more likely secreted her there, then moved the body when decomposition was noticeable by odour (or for some other reason).

And I was referring to the actual dog getting the biscuit, not you, although it can be arranged.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 27, 2021, 04:47:16 PM
Police have confirmed no blue material was found in the cellar and what the production team saw was likely to have been part of a pipe.

It said it was "appropriate and proportionate" to investigate and forensic archaeologists and anthropologists had been focusing on six voids beneath a toilet floor.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-57266871
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 27, 2021, 05:16:42 PM
Quote from: The General on May 27, 2021, 03:23:45 PM
You answered your own question with a plausible postulation.
Although I doubt that the propagation of decomposition was his primary reason for leaving 'her' there; more likely secreted her there, then moved the body when decomposition was noticeable by odour (or for some other reason).

And I was referring to the actual dog getting the biscuit, not you, although it can be arranged.
Given that he didn't actually own the cafe and that presumably it was accessible by others who may perhaps have been looking for the missing girl, do you suppose he would have just left her hidden behind the sacks of potatoes until another time to go and collect her when it was more convenient? I think this is highly unlikely tbh.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 27, 2021, 06:18:44 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 27, 2021, 12:57:29 PM
Despite the “minor indication “ by the cadaver dog in Gloucester no human remains have been found according to the Times newspaper today.

Was it a police dog ?

These chaps were on it.


Hero police dogs who found body of Emma Faulds in remote woodland pictured after killer found guilty
The two specially trained dogs proved vital in the search for the 39-year-old’s body after her remains were dumped in the Galloway Forest area by evil Ross Willox in 2019.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/hero-police-dogs-who-found-24181938?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 27, 2021, 06:37:50 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 27, 2021, 06:18:44 PM
Was it a police dog ?

These chaps were on it.


Hero police dogs who found body of Emma Faulds in remote woodland pictured after killer found guilty
The two specially trained dogs proved vital in the search for the 39-year-old’s body after her remains were dumped in the Galloway Forest area by evil Ross Willox in 2019.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/hero-police-dogs-who-found-24181938?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar
If it wasn’t a police dog whose dog do you think the police brought in?  One of Lady Gaga’s maybe?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 27, 2021, 06:43:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 27, 2021, 06:37:50 PM
If it wasn’t a police dog whose dog do you think the police brought in?  One of Lady Gaga’s maybe?

Well clothing turned out to be poly pipe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 27, 2021, 07:01:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 27, 2021, 06:37:50 PM
If it wasn’t a police dog whose dog do you think the police brought in?  One of Lady Gaga’s maybe?

Who knows.

Detective Chief Inspector John Turner, who is leading the investigation for Gloucestershire Police, said a TV production company had identified a void within the floor underneath the toilet in the basement of the cafe.

"They drilled a hole within the void and with the use of a cadaver dog indicated there may be something of interest within the cavity," he said.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14989982/fred-west-police-excavate-six-anomalies-cafe-killer/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 27, 2021, 07:12:21 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 27, 2021, 07:01:54 PM
Who knows.

Detective Chief Inspector John Turner, who is leading the investigation for Gloucestershire Police, said a TV production company had identified a void within the floor underneath the toilet in the basement of the cafe.

"They drilled a hole within the void and with the use of a cadaver dog indicated there may be something of interest within the cavity," he said.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14989982/fred-west-police-excavate-six-anomalies-cafe-killer/
Oh right.  It was one of those fake showbiz cadaver dogs that hire themselves out for £5k a day plus expenses.  Say no more.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 28, 2021, 09:54:12 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 27, 2021, 07:12:21 PM
Oh right.  It was one of those fake showbiz cadaver dogs that hire themselves out for £5k a day plus expenses.  Say no more.
Jazzpaws.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 29, 2021, 09:37:31 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 27, 2021, 07:12:21 PM
Oh right.  It was one of those fake showbiz cadaver dogs that hire themselves out for £5k a day plus expenses.  Say no more.

Always the negative norm, no acknowledgement of Cadavers dogs finding Emma Faulds remains.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 29, 2021, 11:21:06 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2021, 09:37:31 AM
Always the negative norm, no acknowledgement of Cadavers dogs finding Emma Faulds remains.

It's illogical to accept that cadaver dogs can find bodies, but to deny that they can also demonstrate where a missing body was before removal imo. In both cases the scent is the same.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 29, 2021, 12:27:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 29, 2021, 11:21:06 AM
It's illogical to accept that cadaver dogs can find bodies, but to deny that they can also demonstrate where a missing body was before removal imo. In both cases the scent is the same.

No one is denying that... You don't seem to understand. The problem is does Eddie alert when there is no cadaver odour... In Jersey Grime thought the coconut shell was human skull.
It was removed and Eddie alerted to it again. That suggests Eddie will alert when no cadaver has been present.
Then there's blood from a living person. Eddie will alert to this in a trace so small Keela cannot detect it. That's why Grime can only say suggests cadaver odour and can't confirm it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 29, 2021, 01:04:51 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 29, 2021, 12:27:27 PM
No one is denying that... You don't seem to understand. The problem is does Eddie alert when there is no cadaver odour... In Jersey Grime thought the coconut shell was human skull.
It was removed and Eddie alerted to it again. That suggests Eddie will alert when no cadaver has been present.
Then there's blood from a living person. Eddie will alert to this in a trace so small Keela cannot detect it. That's why Grime can only say suggests cadaver odour and can't confirm it.

You don't seem to understand.

Why constantly in your posts do you think no one understands anything but you.

Seems to me its used as a get out clause or to cause confusion. imo

IMO it would have been better if the dogs didn't find anything at all....like in the other apartments they searched.

Seems the only thing they reacted to was the mccs - clohing car apartment etc, no one else.

Evidence ot not  how odd I believe it to be the best dogs ...only alerted to the mccs belonings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 29, 2021, 01:50:32 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 29, 2021, 01:04:51 PM
You don't seem to understand.

Why constantly in your posts do you think no one understands anything but you.

Seems to me its used as a get out clause or to cause confusion. imo

IMO it would have been better if the dogs didn't find anything at all....like in the other apartments they searched.

Seems the only thing they reacted to was the mccs - clohing car apartment etc, no one else.

Evidence ot not  how odd I believe it to be the best dogs ...only alerted to the mccs belonings.

Not odd at all if you understand.

.Eddie showed no interest in the car but was called back three times. According to the PJ the same thing happened in the apartment.

The dogs were not called back to any other car.... And spent much shorter time in the other apartment.
Why do you think SY and the Germans are ignoring the alerts...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 29, 2021, 01:52:24 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2021, 09:37:31 AM
Always the negative norm, no acknowledgement of Cadavers dogs finding Emma Faulds remains.
How many false positives in the latter example?  Any ideas?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 29, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 29, 2021, 11:21:06 AM
It's illogical to accept that cadaver dogs can find bodies, but to deny that they can also demonstrate where a missing body was before removal imo. In both cases the scent is the same.

Can you tell us who has claimed cadaver dogs can't detect remnant scent...where have you got that ridiculous idea... Or are you just mistaken
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 29, 2021, 02:08:38 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 29, 2021, 01:04:51 PM
You don't seem to understand.

Why constantly in your posts do you think no one understands anything but you.

Seems to me its used as a get out clause or to cause confusion. imo

IMO it would have been better if the dogs didn't find anything at all....like in the other apartments they searched.

Seems the only thing they reacted to was the mccs - clohing car apartment etc, no one else.

Evidence ot not  how odd I believe it to be the best dogs ...only alerted to the mccs belonings.

Absolutely remarkable that not a drop of blood was shed anywhere in Luz with the exception of the McCann apartment.

Wonder why that might have been.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 29, 2021, 02:26:10 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 29, 2021, 02:08:38 PM
Absolutely remarkable that not a drop of blood was shed anywhere in Luz with the exception of the McCann apartment.

Wonder why that might have been.

Well what I wonder is - why would Martin grime put his whole career on the line.

What would M.G. achieve from giving false alerts on purpose as you seem to believe.

Maddie could have been found safe and well  - Dogs don't lie I don't beileve M.G. did either.

He had no reason whatsoever to give false alerts nothing to gain by doing so - yet everything to loose.

Now I wonder why on earth would he do that B.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 29, 2021, 02:33:27 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 29, 2021, 02:26:10 PM
Well what I wonder is - why would Martin grime put his whole career on the line.

What would M.G. achieve from giving false alerts on purpose as you seem to believe.

Maddie could have been found safe and well  - Dogs don't lie I don't beileve M.G. did either.

He had no reason whatsoever to give false alerts nothing to gain by doing so - yet everything to loose.

Now I wonder why on earth would he do that B.

He hasn't put his whole career on the line... Same as Jersey..
There's always a get out clause... Old furniture etc.

Do you think if its proved Maddie did not die in the apartment... Which I think is very likely... Grimes career will be ruined

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 29, 2021, 02:57:35 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 29, 2021, 02:08:38 PM
Absolutely remarkable that not a drop of blood was shed anywhere in Luz with the exception of the McCann apartment.

Wonder why that might have been.

I can't see why the dogs weren't made to search every single  property in Luz.
Clearly a fit up only to use them in the holiday apartments.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 29, 2021, 03:32:01 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 29, 2021, 02:33:27 PM
He hasn't put his whole career on the line... Same as Jersey..
There's always a get out clause... Old furniture etc.

Do you think if its proved Maddie did not die in the apartment... Which I think is very likely... Grimes career will be ruined

Well, uncorroborated  guess work D.

I posted what happened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 29, 2021, 03:34:30 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 29, 2021, 03:32:01 PM
Well, uncorroborated  guess work D.

I posted what happened.

I posted what happened too.. Its in the files.. But you are right about uncorroborated
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 29, 2021, 03:42:39 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 29, 2021, 03:34:30 PM
I posted what happened too.. Its in the files.. But you are right about uncorroborated

I know its in the files.

I posted what happened too

But wrong the below what you posted isn't - just you guessing again.

Do you think if its proved Maddie did not die in the apartment... Which I think is very likely... Grimes career will be ruined

Manipulation they call it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 29, 2021, 03:47:07 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 29, 2021, 12:27:27 PM
No one is denying that... You don't seem to understand. The problem is does Eddie alert when there is no cadaver odour... In Jersey Grime thought the coconut shell was human skull.
It was removed and Eddie alerted to it again. That suggests Eddie will alert when no cadaver has been present.
Then there's blood from a living person. Eddie will alert to this in a trace so small Keela cannot detect it. That's why Grime can only say suggests cadaver odour and can't confirm it.

You may not being denying it outright, but you and others have written a lot of posts suggesting that Eddie wasn't alerting to cadaver odour in PdL.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 29, 2021, 03:49:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 29, 2021, 03:47:07 PM
You may not being denying it outright, but you and others have written a lot of posts suggesting that Eddie wasn't alerting to cadaver odour in PdL.

I certainly have.. And you certainly seem not to understand.
Just because Eddie can detect cadaver odour does not mean everytime he alerts cadaver odour is present... As the coconut proves

The FACT is Eddie MAY have been alerting to cadaver odour.. That's what Grime said
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 29, 2021, 03:52:18 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 29, 2021, 03:42:39 PM
I know its in the files.

I posted what happened too

But wrong the below what you posted isn't - just you guessing again.

Do you think if its proved Maddie did not die in the apartment... Which I think is very likely... Grimes career will be ruined

Manipulation they call it

I'm referring to my previous post..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 29, 2021, 04:18:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 29, 2021, 03:47:07 PM
You may not being denying it outright, but you and others have written a lot of posts suggesting that Eddie wasn't alerting to cadaver odour in PdL.
What was he alerting to? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 29, 2021, 04:37:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 29, 2021, 03:47:07 PM
You may not being denying it outright, but you and others have written a lot of posts suggesting that Eddie wasn't alerting to cadaver odour in PdL.

We will never know what Eddie the rather excitable little spaniel was alerting to in Luz but just a short time later we know that the still excitable little spaniel was most certainly not alerting to cadaver odour in Haute de la Garenne.

Semen ~ yes.  Baby teeth ~ yes.  Corpse ~ NO.  Proven because despite allegations made by a seriously disturbed female I believe, of numerous deaths - absolutely no-one was missing.

Don't you think the desperation is becoming palpable among sceptics here and elsewhere that Eddie has had to be resurrected as a comfort blanket.
Didn't work first time round - and it certainly won't this time, just ask Sandra Felgueiras about that one 😁
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 29, 2021, 08:24:45 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 29, 2021, 02:08:38 PM
Absolutely remarkable that not a drop of blood was shed anywhere in Luz with the exception of the McCann apartment.

Wonder why that might have been.

Its absolutely remarkable that dogs alerted to the only apartment a child was reported missing from.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 29, 2021, 08:29:26 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2021, 08:24:45 PM
Its absolutely remarkable that dogs alerted to the only apartment a child was reported missing from.

Some of us know exactly why....and why the present investigation is ignoring them
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 29, 2021, 08:32:12 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 29, 2021, 08:29:26 PM
Some of us know exactly why....and why the present investigation is ignoring them

Ergo, why its not been resolved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 29, 2021, 08:54:11 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2021, 08:24:45 PM
Its absolutely remarkable that dogs alerted to the only apartment a child was reported missing from.

It really is.  I wonder what that was all about.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 29, 2021, 09:00:09 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2021, 08:32:12 PM
Ergo, why its not been resolved.

But it has
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 29, 2021, 09:21:57 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 29, 2021, 09:00:09 PM
But it has

Where and when ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 29, 2021, 09:38:55 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2021, 09:21:57 PM
Where and when ?

Oh well ... if you wish to plead ignorance of what goes on in the world about you that's down to you.  But why you seem keen to advertise it is perplexing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 30, 2021, 06:57:20 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 29, 2021, 09:38:55 PM
Oh well ... if you wish to plead ignorance of what goes on in the world about you that's down to you.  But why you seem keen to advertise it is perplexing.
When the argument is lost, the abuse begins.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2021, 08:14:20 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2021, 08:24:45 PM
Its absolutely remarkable that dogs alerted to the only apartment a child was reported missing from.

I find it even more remarkable that such evidence has been resolutely ignored by Operation Grange.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2021, 08:31:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2021, 08:14:20 AM
I find it even more remarkable that such evidence has been resolutely ignored by Operation Grange.

Thats because it isn't in itself evidence and after 14 years you still don't understand.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 08:33:46 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2021, 08:14:20 AM
I find it even more remarkable that such evidence has been resolutely ignored by Operation Grange.
What did the dogs alert to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2021, 09:57:31 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 30, 2021, 08:31:48 AM
Thats because it isn't in itself evidence and after 14 years you still don't understand.

I think there are people who have spent 14 years trying to convince themselves and everyone else that alerts by police dogs aren't evidence. Convictions have been achieved using such evidence, so their claims are obviously wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2021, 10:12:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2021, 09:57:31 AM
I think there are people who have spent 14 years trying to convince themselves and everyone else that alerts by police dogs aren't evidence. Convictions have been achieved using such evidence, so their claims are obviously wrong.

You need to listen to the.experts rather than deciding you know better.
Every dog is different.. Eddie reacts to blood, coconuts and god knows what else.
As for these particular alerts the experts have told us they have no evidential value or reliability and no inference can be drawn from them...
Can you see how they could be used in evidence after that less than glowing opinion from the two experts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 10:28:57 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2021, 09:57:31 AM
I think there are people who have spent 14 years trying to convince themselves and everyone else that alerts by police dogs aren't evidence. Convictions have been achieved using such evidence, so their claims are obviously wrong.
So what did the dogs actually alert to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 11:03:22 AM
Quote from: Davel on May 30, 2021, 10:12:44 AM
You need to listen to the.experts rather than deciding you know better.
Every dog is different.. Eddie reacts to blood, coconuts and god knows what else.
As for these particular alerts the experts have told us they have no evidential value or reliability and no inference can be drawn from them...
Can you see how they could be used in evidence after that less than glowing opinion from the two experts

Which two experts? Do you mean M. Grime who said in 2008 that alerts could be supported by anecdotal witness accounts. 
M. Harrison whose only utterances on the subject was

“Additionally I consider no inference can be drawn as to whether a human cadaver has previously been in any location without other supporting physical evidence.”

So he could testify in court that although he could draw no inference(conclusion) that a body had been there, in his expert opinion a body may have laid there.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 11:07:26 AM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 11:03:22 AM
Which two experts? Do you mean M. Grime who said in 2008 that alerts could be supported by anecdotal witness accounts. 
M. Harrison whose only utterances on the subject was

“Additionally I consider no inference can be drawn as to whether a human cadaver has previously been in any location without other supporting physical evidence.”

So he could testify in court that although he could draw no inference(conclusion) that a body had been there, in his expert opinion a body may have laid there.
If the dog had not alerted would that mean that an expert could draw the conclusion that a body had never laid there? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 11:20:25 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2021, 11:07:26 AM
If the dog had not alerted would that mean that an expert could draw the conclusion that a body had never laid there?

You can’t expect me to know the thinking of a hypothetical expert witness, who’s opinion on dog alerts is his alone.
Maybe one would and one wouldn't. Anyone can conclude anything they want even when faced with massive evidence to the contrary, see this subject, dog alerts are not evidence to be heard in court, yet I could give you a dozen cases from the US and Scotland right now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 11:32:33 AM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 11:20:25 AM
You can’t expect me to know the thinking of a hypothetical expert witness, who’s opinion on dog alerts is his alone.
Maybe one would and one wouldn't. Anyone can conclude anything they want even when faced with massive evidence to the contrary, see this subject, dog alerts are not evidence to be heard in court, yet I could give you a dozen cases from the US and Scotland right now.
In other words - draw any conclusion you like about the alerts or lack of them in order to suit your case. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 11:37:21 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2021, 11:32:33 AM
In other words - draw any conclusion you like about the alerts or lack of them in order to suit your case.

I think that's how it works with just about any piece of evidence, introduce it to support your case, whether you are prosecuting a case or defending a case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 11:48:17 AM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 11:37:21 AM
I think that's how it works with just about any piece of evidence, introduce it to support your case, whether you are prosecuting a case or defending a case.
I disagree - some evidence is irrefutably tangible evidence of a link between an individual and another individual, place or object.  A phone call or a piece of CCTV footage, a fingerprint on a bullet casing, a pubic hair from a stranger in a rape victim's bed etc.  A dog's bark is what exactly? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 11:50:02 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2021, 11:48:17 AM
I disagree - some evidence is irrefutably tangible evidence of a link between an individual and another individual, place or object.  A phone call or a piece of CCTV footage, a fingerprint on a bullet casing, a pubic hair from a stranger in a rape victim's bed etc. A dog's bark is what exactly?

Evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2021, 11:59:52 AM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 11:50:02 AM
Evidence.

Could you explain how in this case the alerts could be introduced when the two experts involved with the dogs have said they have no evidential value or reliability
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 12:09:12 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 11:50:02 AM
Evidence.
Very weak evidence that may or may not signify the possible presence of a body (unnamed) at some point in time (unknown).  Big wow.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 12:12:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 30, 2021, 11:59:52 AM
Could you explain how in this case the alerts could be introduced when the two experts involved with the dogs have said they have no evidential value or reliability

That would be for Grime to explain when questioned by defence counsel. He has already testified a few times in the US, was he questioned on his words during those trials? I don't know but you would think defence counsels would look into Grimes past testimonies to see if something would help their client.
But my point is not whether Grime or Harrison would make good expert witness or not but the fact that they could testify, ergo, dog alerts are evidence. Something you still deny to this day despite the evident evidence that exists. That I don't understand.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2021, 12:27:49 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 12:12:02 PM
That would be for Grime to explain when questioned by defence counsel. He has already testified a few times in the US, was he questioned on his words during those trials? I don't know but you would think defence counsels would look into Grimes past testimonies to see if something would help their client.
But my point is not whether Grime or Harrison would make good expert witness or not but the fact that they could testify, ergo, dog alerts are evidence. Something you still deny to this day despite the evident evidence that exists. That I don't understand.

I dont really have time today..the only time its been admirtted in the UK is in thje pillay case where as I understand both the SCCRC and Prof John cassella said it should not have been admitted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 12:36:43 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 30, 2021, 12:27:49 PM
I dont really have time today..the only time its been admirtted in the UK is in thje pillay case where as I understand both the SCCRC and Prof John cassella said it should not have been admitted

Rubbish!
Cairney & Jones trial
Gilroy Trial
Willox Trial.
I listened to the Pillay podcast, if you base your beliefs on that absolute biased piece of journalism then I don't know what to say.
You have never seen the SCCRC report, and Cassella never actually said it, the reporters quoted him as saying it, he was quite forthcoming with his own voice on a multitude of other evidential instances but when it came to that bit the journalists quoted him. But it doesn't matter what Cassella and the SCCRC believe, they don't make the law.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2021, 12:41:52 PM
Has anyone watched Exhbit A on Netflix on the US Bianca case? Irrespective of other aspects of the case, some of which I didn't notice being mentioned, Grime is interviewed ~ 27.40 ish.

Grime:

"There's a lot of people who [turn around?) and say no one should be convicted on the say-so of a dog. I think everyone agrees to that. But it doesn't matter what I say, I can turn around and say my dog responded there.

'What's your dog trained to respond to?'

'Human decomposition'.

Yeah?

I will always believe my dog's right, otherwise there's no point in me doing this job. I will always say I think my dog's right, unless he was absolutely wrong, yeah, but that's unlikely, but I can't go into court and say there was a dead body, that's up to somebody else to say.

And if the court decides that I may be of some use to the court in a case and they say, 'Mr Grime, we want you to come to court and explain to us what you did', etc., I will do that. Everyone has their job to do. But, to turn around and say, dogs are always right or dogs are always wrong, we don't know. But we move on.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 12:48:38 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2021, 12:41:52 PM
Has anyone watched Exhbit A on Netflix on the US Bianca case? Irrespective of other aspects of the case, some of which I didn't notice being mentioned, Grime is interviewed ~ 27.40 ish.

Grime:

"There's a lot of people who [turn around?) and say no one should be convicted on the say-so of a dog. I think everyone agrees to that. But it doesn't matter what I say, I can turn around and say my dog responded there.

'What's your dog trained to respond to?'

'Human decomposition'.

Yeah?

I will always believe my dog's right, otherwise there's no point in me doing this job. I will always say I think my dog's right, unless he was absolutely wrong, yeah, but that's unlikely, but I can't go into court and say there was a dead body, that's up to somebody else to say.

And if the court decides that I may be of some use to the court in a case and they say, 'Mr Grime, we want you to come to court and explain to us what you did', etc., I will do that. Everyone has their job to do. But, to turn around and say, dogs are always right or dogs are always wrong, we don't know. But we move on.



I have seen it, and to me what it shows is the jury are the only people who decide the worth of the alerts, there was very little other evidence in the case but still a guilty verdict was reached. But can anyone say the dogs are always 100% correct, no, no one can say that. But no one can say they cannot be used as evidence in law courts around the world, oh wait......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2021, 12:57:09 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 12:12:02 PM
That would be for Grime to explain when questioned by defence counsel. He has already testified a few times in the US, was he questioned on his words during those trials? I don't know but you would think defence counsels would look into Grimes past testimonies to see if something would help their client.
But my point is not whether Grime or Harrison would make good expert witness or not but the fact that they could testify, ergo, dog alerts are evidence. Something you still deny to this day despite the evident evidence that exists. That I don't understand.

The voice of reason imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2021, 01:10:07 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 12:36:43 PM
Rubbish!
Cairney & Jones trial
Gilroy Trial
Willox Trial.
I listened to the Pillay podcast, if you base your beliefs on that absolute biased piece of journalism then I don't know what to say.
You have never seen the SCCRC report, and Cassella never actually said it, the reporters quoted him as saying it, he was quite forthcoming with his own voice on a multitude of other evidential instances but when it came to that bit the journalists quoted him. But it doesn't matter what Cassella and the SCCRC believe, they don't make the law.

Rubbish...the FACT of the matter is that both SY and BKK are prepared to totally ignore the alerts...the ony police force who took them seriously......unlike SY and BKK ..they have no knowledge or expeience of cadaver dogs

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 30, 2021, 01:10:20 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2021, 11:07:26 AM
If the dog had not alerted would that mean that an expert could draw the conclusion that a body had never laid there?

If the dog had not alerted



But the dogs did alert.

Also said previously ...not anywhere else but mccs apartment and belongings.

Their apartment - and it was their child who was missing.

M.G. had no reason whatsoever not to do his job and the dogs to the absolute best of his ability.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2021, 01:10:55 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 12:48:38 PM
I have seen it, and to me what it shows is the jury are the only people who decide the worth of the alerts, there was very little other evidence in the case but still a guilty verdict was reached. But can anyone say the dogs are always 100% correct, no, no one can say that. But no one can say they cannot be used as evidence in law courts around the world, oh wait......

"Around the world" might be slightly over-egging the argument. ;)

I don't have a problem with a dog handler being brought in as an expert witness (the per diem puts butter on the table, after all), provided that there is a robust defense asking appropriate questions. And it may also depend on the extent of questioning allowed (adversarial or not).





Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:15:50 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2021, 01:10:55 PM
"Around the world" might be slightly over-egging the argument. ;)

I don't have a problem with a dog handler being brought in as an expert witness (the per diem puts butter on the table, after all), provided that there is a robust defense asking appropriate questions. And it may also depend on the extent of questioning allowed (adversarial or not).

Absolutely, 100% agree.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:19:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 30, 2021, 01:10:07 PM
Rubbish...the FACT of the matter is that both SY and BKK are prepared to totally ignore the alerts...the ony police force who took them seriously......unlike SY and BKK ..they have no knowledge or expeience of cadaver dogs

That is a different argument, not pertaining to whether dog alerts are evidence or not. I don't have an inside track on any of the investigations so don't know what evidence they are evaluating, but I suggest they shouldn't ignore any evidence. Not good practice I would say.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2021, 01:21:30 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:15:50 PM
Absolutely, 100% agree.

I wasn't expecting you to agree with me. lol

If you were a defense lawyer, what would you want to check? Or, as a barrister, what questions would you ask?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:28:49 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2021, 01:21:30 PM
I wasn't expecting you to agree with me. lol

If you were a defense lawyer, what would you want to check? Or, as a barrister, what questions wou.ld you ask?

Everything you said made perfect sense, and is factual, dog handlers testify as expert witness' thats a fact.

A good example of courtroom interaction is the Margaret Fleming case which is on BBC player. It shows both the prosecution and defence questioning of the dog handler, I think that's pretty much how it would go in most cases.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2021, 01:29:42 PM
OTOH, I find it a waste of money to admit evidence, whatever the nature, when either its nature or the expert in question doesn't have a proven record of accuracy.

Otherwise, people could be convicted on the basis of clairvoyants... who then "move on".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:32:32 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2021, 01:29:42 PM
OTOH, I find it a waste of money to admit evidence, whatever the nature, when either it's nature or the expert in question doesn't have a proven record of accuracy.

Otherwise, people could be convicted on the basis of clairvoyants... who then "move on".

I agree, a line has to be drawn on what evidence is admissible and I would definitely include clairvoyants on that list.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 01:33:24 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 30, 2021, 01:10:20 PM

If the dog had not alerted



But the dogs did alert.

Also said previously ...not anywhere else but mccs apartment and belongings.

Their apartment - and it was their child who was missing.

M.G. had no reason whatsoever not to do his job and the dogs to the absolute best of his ability.
What did the dogs alert to then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 01:35:43 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:19:06 PM
That is a different argument, not pertaining to whether dog alerts are evidence or not. I don't have an inside track on any of the investigations so don't know what evidence they are evaluating, but I suggest they shouldn't ignore any evidence. Not good practice I would say.
OK, so the police shouldn't ignore the dog alerts.  How should they investigate them further then?  What would you do if you were in charge of the investigation wrt to the dog alerts?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:40:01 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2021, 01:35:43 PM
OK, so the police shouldn't ignore the dog alerts.  How should they investigate them further then?  What would you do if you were in charge of the investigation wrt to the dog alerts?

I will leave all that to the investigating forces. All I am saying is that an investigation should not ignore any evidence. It should be assessed to see how it fits into the current line of investigation. Do you believe any evidence should be ignored then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2021, 01:41:26 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:28:49 PM
Everything you said made perfect sense, and is factual, dog handlers testify as expert witness' thats a fact.

A good example of courtroom interaction is the Margaret Fleming case which is on BBC player. It shows both the prosecution and defence questioning of the dog handler, I think that's pretty much how it would go in most cases.

I'll have a look to see if it's on YT.

"I think that's pretty much how it would go in most cases." - In which jurisdictions? I don't know how familiar you may be with the Cipriano case (which didn't involve dogs), but my jaw dropped to my feet on that one, both in terms of the investigation (or lack thereof) and in the court case.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2021, 01:43:15 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:40:01 PM
I will leave all that to the investigating forces. All I am saying is that an investigation should not ignore any evidence. It should be assessed to see how it fits into the current line of investigation. Do you believe any evidence should be ignored then?

By "evidence", do you mean investigative intelligence or courtroom evidence by expert witnesses?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:46:13 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2021, 01:41:26 PM
I'll have a look to see if it's on YT.

"I think that's pretty much how it would go in most cases." - In which jurisdictions? I don't know how familiar you may be with the Cipriano case (which didn't involve dogs), but my jaw dropped to my feet on that one, both in terms of the investigation (or lack thereof) and in the court case.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7wADZlR3vs
Dog testimony at 43:50

I can't comment on the Cipriano case as I know only the basics
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:46:59 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2021, 01:43:15 PM
By "evidence", do you mean investigative intelligence or courtroom evidence by expert witnesses?

In this instance investigative intelligence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2021, 01:53:09 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:40:01 PM
I will leave all that to the investigating forces. All I am saying is that an investigation should not ignore any evidence. It should be assessed to see how it fits into the current line of investigation. Do you believe any evidence should be ignored then?

IMO, in abstract terms, probably not, but in reality, I can think of numerous factors as to whether certain types of "evidence" or certain "expert witnesses" should be allowed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:57:38 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2021, 01:53:09 PM
IMO, in abstract terms, probably not, but in reality, I can think of numerous factors as to whether certain types of "evidence" or certain "expert witnesses" should be allowed.

 I agree, that what the framework of the law permits. Some evidence is deemed admissible and some not.
What we must surely agree on is that currently in certain countries, USA, Canada, UK forensically uncorroborated VRD dog alerts are allowed to be used as evidence in a court of law.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2021, 02:07:31 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:57:38 PM
I agree, that what the framework of the law permits. Some evidence is deemed admissible and some not.
What we must surely agree on is that currently in certain countries, USA, Canada, UK forensically uncorroborated VRD dog alerts are allowed to be used as evidence in a court of law.

I haven't followed as to whether uncorroborated VRD alerts are admitted as current practice or not, nor where. IIRC, some countries don't even allow lie detector tests (or have stopped them).

I'm interested in what you would seek to find out as a defense lawyer / questions to ask as a barrister.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 02:11:54 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:40:01 PM
I will leave all that to the investigating forces. All I am saying is that an investigation should not ignore any evidence. It should be assessed to see how it fits into the current line of investigation. Do you believe any evidence should be ignored then?
No and I don’t believe anyone has ignored the dog evidence, quite the reverse in fact, I believe they were given far too much credence in the initial investigation to the exclusion of pretty much everything else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 02:14:16 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2021, 02:07:31 PM
I haven't followed as to whether uncorroborated VRD alerts are admitted as current practice or not, nor where. IIRC, some countries don't even allow lie detector tests (or have stopped them).

I'm interested in what you would seek to find out as a defense lawyer / questions to ask as a barrister.

The case you referenced today from Exhibit A was evidence of a dog alert that was forensically uncorroborated as was the Margaret Fleming from Scotland that I gave you the link for earlier.
As I said pretty much the same as the defence lawyer in the Margaret Fleming case, question the training of the dogs, question the lack of forensic evidence.. What about you what would you ask?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 02:16:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2021, 02:11:54 PM
No and I don’t believe anyone has ignored the dog evidence, quite the reverse in fact, I believe they were given far too much credence in the initial investigation to the exclusion of pretty much everything else.

Well I didn't bring it up, take it up with Davel, he said SY and BKK are prepared to totally ignore the alerts.
Not good practice imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2021, 02:19:03 PM
Just a thought:

If a dog and his handler had led to fiinding a body in the alert location... is there any reason why the handler would be needed in court?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 02:19:14 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 02:16:52 PM
Well I didn't bring it up, take it up with Davel, he said SY and BKK are prepared to totally ignore the alerts.
Not good practice imo.
At what point in the investigation do you think it might be acceptable to discard the dog alerts as evidence, if ever?  For example, if CB confessed to taking Madeleine would it be ok then to ignore them or not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 02:22:00 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2021, 02:19:03 PM
Just a thought:

If a dog and his handler had led to fiinding a body in the alert location... is there any reason why the handler would be needed in court?

I believe the handlers still testify in that situation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 02:24:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2021, 02:19:14 PM
At what point in the investigation do you think it might be acceptable to discard the dog alerts as evidence, if ever?  For example, if CB confessed to taking Madeleine would it be ok then to ignore them or not?

At the point where it has been proved that the alerts can't be relied upon as satisfactory evidence, ie other stronger evidence counters it. We are not at that point yet imo, it may come but just not yet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2021, 02:28:59 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 02:22:00 PM
I believe the handlers still testify in that situation.

Why?

A dog alerts. A body is found. DNA identifies the body. What's the point of a dog handler testifying (whose dogs' reactions were intelligence leading to the finding)?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 02:33:24 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2021, 02:28:59 PM
Why?

A dog alerts. A body is found. DNA identifies the body. What's the point of a dog handler testifying (whose dogs' reactions were intelligence leading to the finding)?

In the same way that a police office who say, found the murder weapon at the scene will testify, They are testifying to an event during the investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 30, 2021, 02:52:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2021, 01:33:24 PM
What did the dogs alert to then?

Maybe the dogs are the reason wolt thinks Maddie is dead. in ma op
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2021, 02:54:51 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 02:33:24 PM
In the same way that a police office who say, found the murder weapon at the scene will testify, They are testifying to an event during the investigation.

Ok. but that seems different.

Perhaps a different example could be: someone is on trial for a kidnap and murder in situ. An officer testifies at what might have been a whiff of gunsmoke in the vicinity (3 months after the fact). No weapon was found, let alone one identified by forensic evidence as being the weapon potentially in question, yet no trace of the victim.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2021, 02:56:30 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 30, 2021, 02:52:14 PM
Maybe the dogs are the reason wolt thinks Maddie is dead. in ma op

I somewhat doubt that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2021, 03:04:00 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:46:13 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7wADZlR3vs
Dog testimony at 43:50

I can't comment on the Cipriano case as I know only the basics

Ah. Many thanks, will watch.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 04:01:25 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 02:24:06 PM
At the point where it has been proved that the alerts can't be relied upon as satisfactory evidence, ie other stronger evidence counters it. We are not at that point yet, it may come but just not yet.
Can I ask how you know this for a fact?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 04:02:46 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 30, 2021, 02:52:14 PM
Maybe the dogs are the reason wolt thinks Maddie is dead. in ma op
Wolt (as you matily refer to him) seems pretty sure Madeleine died at the hands of CB - so how would the dog alerts feature in such a scenario?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 04:03:55 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 02:33:24 PM
In the same way that a police office who say, found the murder weapon at the scene will testify, They are testifying to an event during the investigation.
A murder weapon is something tangible, which can be matched to wounds, blood etc.  What can a dog's bark be matched to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 30, 2021, 04:12:20 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2021, 02:56:30 PM
I somewhat doubt that.

Why, you don't know every thing C. You can doubt it but you don't know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 30, 2021, 04:12:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2021, 09:57:31 AM
I think there are people who have spent 14 years trying to convince themselves and everyone else that alerts by police dogs aren't evidence. Convictions have been achieved using such evidence, so their claims are obviously wrong.

Not on their own they don't ... unless you have an instance you would care to share.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 30, 2021, 04:29:03 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2021, 04:02:46 PM
Wolt (as you matily refer to him) seems pretty sure Madeleine died at the hands of CB - so how would the dog alerts feature in such a scenario?


Oi, I can matily refer to him any way I want its not up to you.

Its when I came him wally it - would be fair to comment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 30, 2021, 04:54:41 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2021, 12:41:52 PM
Has anyone watched Exhbit A on Netflix on the US Bianca case? Irrespective of other aspects of the case, some of which I didn't notice being mentioned, Grime is interviewed ~ 27.40 ish.

Grime:

"There's a lot of people who [turn around?) and say no one should be convicted on the say-so of a dog. I think everyone agrees to that. But it doesn't matter what I say, I can turn around and say my dog responded there.

'What's your dog trained to respond to?'

'Human decomposition'.

Yeah?

I will always believe my dog's right, otherwise there's no point in me doing this job. I will always say I think my dog's right, unless he was absolutely wrong, yeah, but that's unlikely, but I can't go into court and say there was a dead body, that's up to somebody else to say.

And if the court decides that I may be of some use to the court in a case and they say, 'Mr Grime, we want you to come to court and explain to us what you did', etc., I will do that. Everyone has their job to do. But, to turn around and say, dogs are always right or dogs are always wrong, we don't know. But we move on.



That is interesting.

All that a dog handler can confirm is that the trained working dog has reacted in a certain way.  No assurance can be given either to who or to what


Margaret Fleming trial: Police search dog 'found decomposing scents'
Published14 May 2019

PC Galloway, 42, said his black labrador Ollie found two possible decomposing scents in the garden close to the River Clyde.

This was in two cup-sized holes dug 18ins (46cm) apart and 24ins (61cm) deep.

PC Galloway said: "The dog's reaction was quite clear as his behaviour changed and he became more focused.

"He tilted his head back and started to bark.

"He is only trained to identify pig and human flesh."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-48275280


We are now being fed misinformation a cadaver dog 'solved' Margaret's case.  It did not.  No trace whatsoever of Margaret was ever found.
It was police work that provided the evidence to enable a sound conviction.

We are being fed the misinformation that Suzanne Pilley's murder was 'solved' by cadaver dogs.  No trace whatsoever of Suzanne was ever found.
It was police work that provided the evidence to enable a sound conviction.

We are being misinformed that cadaver dogs 'solved' the murder of Emma Faulds.  Emma's body was found by trained dogs once intensive police work had pin-pointed the most likely deposition site.
Yet again it was police work which provided the evidence which enabled a sound conviction.

Dogs are another tool in the box ~ they indicate where evidence might be found but quite often nothing is found as in Margaret's or Suzanne's cases and they found Emma when the groundwork was done to tell them where to look.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 05:11:00 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 30, 2021, 04:54:41 PM
That is interesting.

All that a dog handler can confirm is that the trained working dog has reacted in a certain way.  No assurance can be given either to who or to what


Margaret Fleming trial: Police search dog 'found decomposing scents'
Published14 May 2019

PC Galloway, 42, said his black labrador Ollie found two possible decomposing scents in the garden close to the River Clyde.

This was in two cup-sized holes dug 18ins (46cm) apart and 24ins (61cm) deep.

PC Galloway said: "The dog's reaction was quite clear as his behaviour changed and he became more focused.

"He tilted his head back and started to bark.

"He is only trained to identify pig and human flesh."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-48275280


We are now being fed misinformation a cadaver dog 'solved' Margaret's case.  It did not.  No trace whatsoever of Margaret was ever found.
It was police work that provided the evidence to enable a sound conviction.

We are being fed the misinformation that Suzanne Pilley's murder was 'solved' by cadaver dogs.  No trace whatsoever of Suzanne was ever found.
It was police work that provided the evidence to enable a sound conviction.

We are being misinformed that cadaver dogs 'solved' the murder of Emma Faulds.  Emma's body was found by trained dogs once intensive police work had pin-pointed the most likely deposition site.
Yet again it was police work which provided the evidence which enabled a sound conviction.

Dogs are another tool in the box ~ they indicate where evidence might be found but quite often nothing is found as in Margaret's or Suzanne's cases and they found Emma when the groundwork was done to tell them where to look.

Who has claimed that a cadaver dog solved any of these cases you list?
Name the poster who is spreading misinformation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 05:13:25 PM
Quote from: kizzy on May 30, 2021, 04:29:03 PM

Oi, I can matily refer to him any way I want its not up to you.

Its when I came him wally it - would be fair to comment.
I didn’t say you couldn’t refer to him matily but I do regret providing you with a handy deflection excuse for ignoring my point entirely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 05:13:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2021, 04:01:25 PM
Can I ask how you know this for a fact?

As I am sure you don't believe I am part of the BKA investigation or indeed Operation Grange, I would have thought it would be a reasonable assumption that it was just my opinion. Fret not, I will amend my post to avoid any doubt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 05:15:55 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 05:13:52 PM
As I am sure you don't believe I am part of the BKA investigation or indeed Operation Grange, I would have thought it would be a reasonable assumption that it was just my opinion. Fret not, I will amend my post to avoid any doubt.
Them’s the rules mate, G-Unit is a stickler for them and you wouldn’t want to get on her bad side.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 05:19:03 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2021, 04:03:55 PM
A murder weapon is something tangible, which can be matched to wounds, blood etc.  What can a dog's bark be matched to?

If you read the history behind the post it was a conversation between myself and Carana regarding the similarity of evidence between a murder weapon and a cadaver that was located by a VRD. So both cases of tangible evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 05:19:47 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 30, 2021, 05:15:55 PM
Them’s the rules mate, G-Unit is a stickler for them and you wouldn’t want to get on her bad side.

Well rest assured its done. All is well with the universe again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2021, 06:15:50 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 05:19:47 PM
Well rest assured its done. All is well with the universe again.
Good, make sure it doesn’t happen again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2021, 06:46:15 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 30, 2021, 04:12:41 PM
Not on their own they don't ... unless you have an instance you would care to share.

I don't think I said anything about 'on their own'. Imo it would be rare to convict on one piece of evidence only; unless you know of such a case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 30, 2021, 06:52:47 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 01:46:59 PM
In this instance investigative intelligence.

What is investigative intelligence worth if it doesn't lead anywhere?

OK. Let's change scenario. Someone was burgled. The victim remembered seeing someone with a grey hoodie. A witness saw an identifiable person with a grey hoodie around the vicinity at the time.

Then what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 30, 2021, 09:29:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2021, 06:46:15 PM
I don't think I said anything about 'on their own'. Imo it would be rare to convict on one piece of evidence only; unless you know of such a case?

Memo:
I think there are people who have spent 14 years trying to convince themselves and everyone else that alerts by police dogs aren't evidence. Convictions have been achieved using such evidence, so their claims are obviously wrong.    Gu

You think there are people who cannot differentiate between an indication and evidence.
I think of which you are a prime example.

You think "convictions have been achieved using such evidence"
I think you are way off the mark there ... unless you can provide an accredited example which substantiates your claim, which is of course impossible for the simple reason you've got it wrong 😁
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 10:48:10 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 30, 2021, 09:29:42 PM
Memo:
I think there are people who have spent 14 years trying to convince themselves and everyone else that alerts by police dogs aren't evidence. Convictions have been achieved using such evidence, so their claims are obviously wrong.    Gu

You think there are people who cannot differentiate between an indication and evidence.
I think of which you are a prime example.

You think "convictions have been achieved using such evidence"
I think you are way off the mark there ... unless you can provide an accredited example which substantiates your claim, which is of course impossible for the simple reason you've got it wrong 😁

I think I finally have worked out your reluctance to accept that a forensically uncorroborated  cadaver dog alert can be used as evidence in a UK court.
You have seen with your own eyes PC Ryan Galloway giving such evidence in a murder case in 2019 so I always struggled to understand how you could say it was not evidence.
But I now believe you think we are suggesting that the convictions were achieved almost only because of the dog alert evidence. I am certainly not suggesting that and I don’t believe G-Unit is.
In all 3 cases you refer to, all the evidence was circumstantial, the dog alerts were a part of these circumstantial cases certainly not defining evidence just a strand of the whole part of the case. The only people who know the worth of the dog alert evidence are the 15 jurors who weighed up the evidence in these cases, maybe they were dismissed as insignificant and maybe they weren’t. But the fact is they were heard as evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 11:03:15 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2021, 06:52:47 PM
What is investigative intelligence worth if it doesn't lead anywhere?

OK. Let's change scenario. Someone was burgled. The victim remembered seeing someone with a grey hoodie. A witness saw an identifiable person with a grey hoodie around the vicinity at the time.

Then what?

In your scenario, I would expect the investigation to interview the identifiable person and see if he had any exculpatory evidence that would exclude him for their enquiries. If he had they could, if he hadn’t he would stay on file as a person of interest. But in reality, I think they would probably just issue a crime number for insurance purposes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 30, 2021, 11:41:11 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 10:48:10 PM
I think I finally have worked out your reluctance to accept that a forensically uncorroborated  cadaver dog alert can be used as evidence in a UK court.
You have seen with your own eyes PC Ryan Galloway giving such evidence in a murder case in 2019 so I always struggled to understand how you could say it was not evidence.
But I now believe you think we are suggesting that the convictions were achieved almost only because of the dog alert evidence. I am certainly not suggesting that and I don’t believe G-Unit is.
In all 3 cases you refer to, all the evidence was circumstantial, the dog alerts were a part of these circumstantial cases certainly not defining evidence just a strand of the whole part of the case. The only people who know the worth of the dog alert evidence are the 15 jurors who weighed up the evidence in these cases, maybe they were dismissed as insignificant and maybe they weren’t. But the fact is they were heard as evidence.

Fine for you to speak for yourself.  But has Gu lost the ability that you feel the need to explain her words and reasoning for her.  Fine by me.

There is a bit of abysmal lack of understanding of what constitutes circumstantial evidence in your post although granted that there is an element of one piece of evidence slotting into and corroborating another in every investigation and prosecution.
Take Emma Fauld's murder ~
(https://wpcluster.dctdigital.com/sundaypost/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2021/05/101602373-e1622314398483.jpg)
Murderer Ross Willox’s hiking boot which linked him to the crime scene
Professor Lorna Dawson, who heads up the team of forensic experts at the James Hutton Institute in Aberdeen explained how microscopic traces of soil recovered from Willox’s boots were seized by police.

Prior to the forensics breakthrough police had been scouring a different part of the 500-square-mile forest landscape. They knew Willox, the last person to have seen Emma alive and the prime suspect, had previously worked on wind farms in the area. And, 24 hours after the Aberdeen team delivered its analysis, the search team found Emma’s body.

The samples from his boot linked Willox to the crime scene and were instrumental in his conviction on Tuesday after a six-week trial.
https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/emma-faulds-murder-soil-forensic/

Not to mention his fingerprint found on the seat adjustment lever of Emma's car which he had used to transport her body to what he had intended to be her final resting place.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 11:45:42 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 30, 2021, 11:41:11 PM
Fine for you to speak for yourself.  But has Gu lost the ability that you feel the need to explain her words and reasoning for her.  Fine by me.

There is a bit of abysmal lack of understanding of what constitutes circumstantial evidence in your post although granted that there is an element of one piece of evidence slotting into and corroborating another in every investigation and prosecution.
Take Emma Fauld's murder ~
(https://wpcluster.dctdigital.com/sundaypost/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2021/05/101602373-e1622314398483.jpg)
Murderer Ross Willox’s hiking boot which linked him to the crime scene
Professor Lorna Dawson, who heads up the team of forensic experts at the James Hutton Institute in Aberdeen explained how microscopic traces of soil recovered from Willox’s boots were seized by police.

Prior to the forensics breakthrough police had been scouring a different part of the 500-square-mile forest landscape. They knew Willox, the last person to have seen Emma alive and the prime suspect, had previously worked on wind farms in the area. And, 24 hours after the Aberdeen team delivered its analysis, the search team found Emma’s body.

The samples from his boot linked Willox to the crime scene and were instrumental in his conviction on Tuesday after a six-week trial.
https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/emma-faulds-murder-soil-forensic/

Not to mention his fingerprint found on the seat adjustment lever of Emma's car which he had used to transport her body to what he had intended to be her final resting place.

Please explain what you mean about my lack of understanding of what constitutes circumstantial evidence.
G-Unit I am sure can speak for herself, I was at a loose end for an hour so thought I would reply to your post
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 11:58:32 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 30, 2021, 11:41:11 PM
Fine for you to speak for yourself.  But has Gu lost the ability that you feel the need to explain her words and reasoning for her.  Fine by me.

There is a bit of abysmal lack of understanding of what constitutes circumstantial evidence in your post although granted that there is an element of one piece of evidence slotting into and corroborating another in every investigation and prosecution.
Take Emma Fauld's murder ~
(https://wpcluster.dctdigital.com/sundaypost/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2021/05/101602373-e1622314398483.jpg)
Murderer Ross Willox’s hiking boot which linked him to the crime scene
Professor Lorna Dawson, who heads up the team of forensic experts at the James Hutton Institute in Aberdeen explained how microscopic traces of soil recovered from Willox’s boots were seized by police.

Prior to the forensics breakthrough police had been scouring a different part of the 500-square-mile forest landscape. They knew Willox, the last person to have seen Emma alive and the prime suspect, had previously worked on wind farms in the area. And, 24 hours after the Aberdeen team delivered its analysis, the search team found Emma’s body.

The samples from his boot linked Willox to the crime scene and were instrumental in his conviction on Tuesday after a six-week trial.
https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/emma-faulds-murder-soil-forensic/

Not to mention his fingerprint found on the seat adjustment lever of Emma's car which he had used to transport her body to what he had intended to be her final resting place.

Oh I see you think the fact the soil was on his boot from the body scene is not circumstantial, some would say yes some no.  It says his boots had possibly been there at some point in time, not that he killed her. Also he was her friend, he could argue that why would his fingerprints not be in her car? It seems pretty circumstantial to me but that wasn't really my point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2021, 02:00:51 AM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 30, 2021, 11:58:32 PM
Oh I see you think the fact the soil was on his boot from the body scene is not circumstantial, some would say yes some no.  It says his boots had possibly been there at some point in time, not that he killed her. Also he was her friend, he could argue that why would his fingerprints not be in her car? It seems pretty circumstantial to me but that wasn't really my point.

As police teams methodically searched the area, Dawson’s team were using science to narrow the hunt.

She said: “We used gas chromatography (the process whereby the various elements of a compound are separated into their distinct parts for individual analysis) in the evidential phase of the operation and showed the peat on the soles of the Timberland boots also had the same organic profile as was found at the scene.

“Our botanist identified the individual recovered mosses. From this we knew that the person who wore the boots had likely stood in the area where Emma was found. There was also an organic peat stain on the boots which showed they had been partially submerged in peaty water.

“Puddles containing peaty water were located in the hollows between the clumps of moss and rushes at the scene. Trees had been planted around 2016 in that general area and may not have been felled for another 40 to 60 years, which might have left Emma hidden in the undergrowth.

“She was covered with clumps of mosses and the rushes which had been pulled from the ground a few metres away from her body in an attempt to conceal her.

“Soil can be distinctive in a range of chemical, physical and biological characteristics, including the soil organic profile, soil elemental composition and soil mineralogy. Depending on the type of soil, different methods are used in forensic case work. In this case, because of the organic nature of the soil, organic plant wax marker analysis was used. In addition, the distinctive plant community added another link to the scene.”

Without the police and forensic experts’ efforts Emma’s body may never have been found and her family would not have known if she was alive or dead. Dawson added: “What the police search did was to return Emma to her family and give them that at least. It would be hugely painful for them to be left without that knowledge.”
https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/emma-faulds-murder-soil-forensic/

For information
That is an example of direct forensic evidence as is the murderer's DNA found under the driver's seat of Emma's car.
Both examples of direct evidence which helped to nail a killer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2021, 08:02:14 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2021, 02:00:51 AM
As police teams methodically searched the area, Dawson’s team were using science to narrow the hunt.

She said: “We used gas chromatography (the process whereby the various elements of a compound are separated into their distinct parts for individual analysis) in the evidential phase of the operation and showed the peat on the soles of the Timberland boots also had the same organic profile as was found at the scene.

“Our botanist identified the individual recovered mosses. From this we knew that the person who wore the boots had likely stood in the area where Emma was found. There was also an organic peat stain on the boots which showed they had been partially submerged in peaty water.

“Puddles containing peaty water were located in the hollows between the clumps of moss and rushes at the scene. Trees had been planted around 2016 in that general area and may not have been felled for another 40 to 60 years, which might have left Emma hidden in the undergrowth.

“She was covered with clumps of mosses and the rushes which had been pulled from the ground a few metres away from her body in an attempt to conceal her.

“Soil can be distinctive in a range of chemical, physical and biological characteristics, including the soil organic profile, soil elemental composition and soil mineralogy. Depending on the type of soil, different methods are used in forensic case work. In this case, because of the organic nature of the soil, organic plant wax marker analysis was used. In addition, the distinctive plant community added another link to the scene.”

Without the police and forensic experts’ efforts Emma’s body may never have been found and her family would not have known if she was alive or dead. Dawson added: “What the police search did was to return Emma to her family and give them that at least. It would be hugely painful for them to be left without that knowledge.”
https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/emma-faulds-murder-soil-forensic/

For information
That is an example of direct forensic evidence as is the murderer's DNA found under the driver's seat of Emma's car.
Both examples of direct evidence which helped to nail a killer.

It was certainly helpful to be able to connect the suspect's boots to the scene, but it was the cadaver dog which led them to the scene, after searching for many days and covering 200 miles.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-56821768

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2021, 08:04:22 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2021, 08:02:14 AM
It was certainly helpful to be able to connect the suspect's boots to the scene, but it was the cadaver dog which led them to the scene, after searching for many days and covering 200 miles.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-56821768
I wonder how many false positives there were (if any) before the body was located.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2021, 08:21:21 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2021, 08:04:22 AM
I wonder how many false positives there were (if any) before the body was located.

As you don't know the answer why bother wondering? It couldn't be to try to cast doubt on the dog's abilities, could it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 31, 2021, 09:19:23 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2021, 02:00:51 AM

For information
That is an example of direct forensic evidence as is the murderer's DNA found under the driver's seat of Emma's car.
Both examples of direct evidence which helped to nail a killer.

That reminds me of a missing-child / murder case in France in 2017.
 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43065000

Police cadaver dogs eventually found her remains down a snow-covered ravine, but after the suspect had finally confessed as to where to find the body... which he did once he had been confronted with evidence of an uncontaminated DNA sample in the depths of the boot of his car. There was a lot of circumstantial evidence against him, but nothing that couldn't be explained away until the police found that particular DNA sample.

AFAIK, the trial concerning the little girl hasn't been held yet, but he's recently been convicted for "voluntary homicide" of the young army chap (20 years, with 2/3 of the sentence behind bars).

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2021, 09:20:27 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2021, 08:21:21 AM
As you don't know the answer why bother wondering? It couldn't be to try to cast doubt on the dog's abilities, could it?
As you are forever “wondering “ about things yourself that no one here knows the answer to I think that’s a bit rich.  It’s a very valid question which does not throw doubt on the dog’s ability to find a body, more a question about how many attempts it may have taken.  Should we not ask such questions?  I recall a televised police dog search for a body in which the dog positively alerted to a dead chick, which seemed to his handler to be perfectly acceptable and he even rewarded the dog for finding it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2021, 09:28:29 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2021, 08:02:14 AM
It was certainly helpful to be able to connect the suspect's boots to the scene, but it was the cadaver dog which led them to the scene, after searching for many days and covering 200 miles.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-56821768
(https://th.bing.com/th/id/R42bfef62eab99d8486d551d770c0dea2?rik=1aE2cmkdLwPECg&riu=http%3a%2f%2fblog.tailsuntold.com%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2014%2f08%2flaughing-dog.jpg&ehk=REk411f8FQPewJkMIraOdjpnOFEW3a1GHUkQQu4axYc%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw)
You really don't bother to read links do you ~ Victim Recovery Dogs do carry out valuable work.  However I doubt if they are capable of carrying out a soil analysis enabling them to pin point a precise search area in a 500-square-mile forest - unless of course you know different  😁
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2021, 09:38:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2021, 08:21:21 AM
As you don't know the answer why bother wondering? It couldn't be to try to cast doubt on the dog's abilities, could it?
An example of you asking a whole load of questions you don't know the answer to, so why bother?  It couldn't be to cast Gerry in a suspicious light could it?
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9636.90
"The video footage is very interesting with or without sound. Why are the twins so interested in what is happening to their left? Why aren't the two girls looking in that direction? Why isn't Gerry McCann smiling and relaxed like Fiona and Dianne?"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 31, 2021, 09:54:57 AM
Whether or not certain jurisdictions allow uncorroborated dog alerts, I'm not sure what the point is of allowing it (or other types of "intelligence" in a trial. What about cases in which the defense is court-appointed and only had a couple of hours to rummage through the files prior to the trial? If there is no counter evidence / argument, the jury could be swayed towards accepting "expert testimony" at face value.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 31, 2021, 10:14:59 AM
is anyone up for pretending to be a defense counsel countering uncorroborated dog alerts?

What background information would be helpful?
What questions would you ask?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2021, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2021, 09:28:29 AM
(https://th.bing.com/th/id/R42bfef62eab99d8486d551d770c0dea2?rik=1aE2cmkdLwPECg&riu=http%3a%2f%2fblog.tailsuntold.com%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2014%2f08%2flaughing-dog.jpg&ehk=REk411f8FQPewJkMIraOdjpnOFEW3a1GHUkQQu4axYc%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw)
You really don't bother to read links do you ~ Victim Recovery Dogs do carry out valuable work.  However I doubt if they are capable of carrying out a soil analysis enabling them to pin point a precise search area in a 500-square-mile forest - unless of course you know different  😁

Was just one search area pinpointed, or was it more a case of various possible areas of interest?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 12:01:38 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2021, 02:00:51 AM
As police teams methodically searched the area, Dawson’s team were using science to narrow the hunt.

She said: “We used gas chromatography (the process whereby the various elements of a compound are separated into their distinct parts for individual analysis) in the evidential phase of the operation and showed the peat on the soles of the Timberland boots also had the same organic profile as was found at the scene.

“Our botanist identified the individual recovered mosses. From this we knew that the person who wore the boots had likely stood in the area where Emma was found. There was also an organic peat stain on the boots which showed they had been partially submerged in peaty water.

“Puddles containing peaty water were located in the hollows between the clumps of moss and rushes at the scene. Trees had been planted around 2016 in that general area and may not have been felled for another 40 to 60 years, which might have left Emma hidden in the undergrowth.

“She was covered with clumps of mosses and the rushes which had been pulled from the ground a few metres away from her body in an attempt to conceal her.

“Soil can be distinctive in a range of chemical, physical and biological characteristics, including the soil organic profile, soil elemental composition and soil mineralogy. Depending on the type of soil, different methods are used in forensic case work. In this case, because of the organic nature of the soil, organic plant wax marker analysis was used. In addition, the distinctive plant community added another link to the scene.”

Without the police and forensic experts’ efforts Emma’s body may never have been found and her family would not have known if she was alive or dead. Dawson added: “What the police search did was to return Emma to her family and give them that at least. It would be hugely painful for them to be left without that knowledge.”
https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/emma-faulds-murder-soil-forensic/

For information
That is an example of direct forensic evidence as is the murderer's DNA found under the driver's seat of Emma's car.
Both examples of direct evidence which helped to nail a killer.

I think you may not totally understand the meaning of direct evidence and circumstantial evidence.
Direct evidence is evidence that proves a fact with no inference needed to apply to the evidence
The most common form of direct evidence is an eyewitness account of the actual crime taking place
Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on inference to prove a fact.
Forensic evidence can still be circumstantial, such as a fingerprint in a car.

“Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact—such as a fingerprint at the scene of a crime.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_evidence

With that being said, the other 2 cases you mention, Pillay and Fleming, was there any direct evidence or even forensic evidence in those cases?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2021, 12:20:35 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 12:01:38 PM
I think you may not totally understand the meaning of direct evidence and circumstantial evidence.
Direct evidence is evidence that proves a fact with no inference needed to apply to the evidence
The most common form of direct evidence is an eyewitness account of the actual crime taking place
Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on inference to prove a fact.
Forensic evidence can still be circumstantial, such as a fingerprint in a car.

“Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact—such as a fingerprint at the scene of a crime.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_evidence

With that being said, the other 2 cases you mention, Pillay and Fleming, was there any direct evidence or even forensic evidence in those cases?

I know what constitutes circumstantial evidence, thank you, and in Emma's case the direct scientific evidence was proven when the dogs were taken to the place indicated and found Emma's body.
This gave her family a measure of closure although the cause of death was unable to be established.

In both Margaret's and Suzanne's cases only inference could be made from the dogs' reaction ~ no evidence ~ and definitely no proof.
In other words - nothing.

I must say the deification of dogs has never been as prevalent since Anubis's time 😊
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 12:30:24 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2021, 12:20:35 PM
I know what constitutes circumstantial evidence, thank you, and in Emma's case the direct scientific evidence was proven when the dogs were taken to the place indicated and found Emma's body.
This gave her family a measure of closure although the cause of death was unable to be established.

In both Margaret's and Suzanne's cases only inference could be made from the dogs' reaction ~ no evidence ~ and definitely no proof.
In other words - nothing.

I must say the deification of dogs has never been as prevalent since Anubis's time 😊

Exactly, inference could be drawn from this circumstantial evidence which is what a jury has to do in all cases. Pretty much the same with any other piece of circumstantial evidence, fingerprints, soil samples, an expert witness.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2021, 12:52:10 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 12:30:24 PM
Exactly, inference could be drawn from this circumstantial evidence which is what a jury has to do in all cases. Pretty much the same with any other piece of circumstantial evidence, fingerprints, soil samples, an expert witness.

you dont see the fact that Grime and harrison said in this case the alerts have no evidential reliability or value have any consequence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2021, 12:59:16 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2021, 12:20:35 PM
I know what constitutes circumstantial evidence, thank you, and in Emma's case the direct scientific evidence was proven when the dogs were taken to the place indicated and found Emma's body.
This gave her family a measure of closure although the cause of death was unable to be established.

In both Margaret's and Suzanne's cases only inference could be made from the dogs' reaction ~ no evidence ~ and definitely no proof.
In other words - nothing.

I must say the deification of dogs has never been as prevalent since Anubis's time 😊

I ask again, was just one place indicated or several? Imo there would be more than one area of bog and peat in the area and advising the searchers to look in those areas would have helped, but the dog (s) still had to locate the body. The dog alerts to the boot of the Jaguar and the discovery that the suspect drove that car to Glentrool Forest led to the search area too. It seems to me that different types of evidence helped to reconstruct the suspect's actions and to decide where best to search for the body.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on May 31, 2021, 01:16:55 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 30, 2021, 06:52:47 PM
What is investigative intelligence worth if it doesn't lead anywhere?

OK. Let's change scenario. Someone was burgled. The victim remembered seeing someone with a grey hoodie. A witness saw an identifiable person with a grey hoodie around the vicinity at the time.

Then what?

What is investigative intelligence worth if it doesn't lead anywhere?

What do you mean like this as the germans believing  C.B. Is the abductor.


It was earlier claimed there is “concrete evidence” against Brueckner, who was in Praia da Luz, in the Algarve, at the time Madeleine vanished.

"We are missing important information. We want no stone unturned. Whether there will be an indictment in the end, I cannot foresee at the moment.”


German Madeleine McCann police still haven't spoken to parents year after naming suspect

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/german-madeleine-mccann-police-still
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 01:27:23 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2021, 12:52:10 PM
you dont see the fact that Grime and harrison said in this case the alerts have no evidential reliability or value have any consequence

It didn't seem to hamper Grime giving evidence in cases in the US subsequently and he has stated at least twice that alerts can be supported by witness accounts without any forensics. Only he can explain what he meant by those statements as they are clearly false, as the evidence has been heard in court many times.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2021, 01:36:34 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 01:27:23 PM
It didn't seem to hamper Grime giving evidence in cases in the US subsequently and he has stated at least twice that alerts can be supported by witness accounts without any forensics. Only he can explain what he meant by those statements as they are clearly false, as the evidence has been heard in court many times.

So he's changed his mind.. I wonder why... That makes his opinions suspect. I wonder how much he was paid to give his witness statement in the US. It cannot be denied that Grime has a financial interest in the value of the alerts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2021, 01:36:34 PM
So he's changed his mind.. I wonder why... That makes his opinions suspect. I wonder how much he was paid to give his witness statement in the US. It cannot be denied that Grime has a financial interest in the value of the alerts

He hasn't really changed his mind as he said about the anecdotal witness thing in his personal profile letter from 2007. Maybe he was told to temper the expectations of the Portuguese concerning the alerts. Its all speculation what he meant, the fact is dog alerts are heard as evidence.
You are slightly impugning the morals and reputation of Mr Grime by suggesting he regards pecuniary gain higher than the truth, as presented before a court of law.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2021, 02:13:41 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
He hasn't really changed his mind as he said about the anecdotal witness thing in his personal profile letter from 2007. Maybe he was told to temper the expectations of the Portuguese concerning the alerts. Its all speculation what he meant, the fact is dog alerts are heard as evidence.
You are slightly impugning the morals and reputation of Mr Grime by suggesting he regards pecuniary gain higher than the truth, as presented before a court of law.

I'm stating a fact... Grime has a financial interest in the value of the alerts. I think it's true to say their use in court is contraversial
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2021, 03:01:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2021, 12:59:16 PM
I ask again, was just one place indicated or several? Imo there would be more than one area of bog and peat in the area and advising the searchers to look in those areas would have helped, but the dog (s) still had to locate the body. The dog alerts to the boot of the Jaguar and the discovery that the suspect drove that car to Glentrool Forest led to the search area too. It seems to me that different types of evidence helped to reconstruct the suspect's actions and to decide where best to search for the body.

It seems to me that you quite simply fail to understand the information available which details the manner in which an impossible search area was narrowed down.

Much as you fail to understand the process involved in the management of victim recovery dogs and gathering evidence.

VS made an interesting observation which you chose to ignore but I too wonder how often these dogs gave false alerts in what was obviously peaty soil before the human element and forensics indicated probable territory for the deposition of remains which enabled Emma to be returned to her family for burial.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 03:07:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2021, 02:13:41 PM
I'm stating a fact... Grime has a financial interest in the value of the alerts. I think it's true to say their use in court is contraversial

Its good to see that you are finally coming round to the fact that alerts can and have been used in court, I will meet you halfway and say it is correct , some people view the use of these alerts as controversial, but with a rider that a lot of these people are the relatives and friends of someone convicted after such evidence is heard, ie. Gilroy, Lane et al.

By the way what did you mean with this post

“Then there's blood from a living person. Eddie will alert to this in a trace so small Keela cannot detect it"

Not sure that is correct, show me your workings
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2021, 03:08:30 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 03:07:27 PM
Its good to see that you are finally coming round to the fact that alerts can and have been used in court, I will meet you halfway and say it is correct , some people view the use of these alerts as controversial, but with a rider that a lot of these people are the relatives and friends of someone convicted after such evidence is heard, ie. Gilroy, Lane et al.

By the way what did you mean with this post

“Then there's blood from a living person. Eddie will alert to this in a trace so small Keela cannot detect it"

Not sure that is correct, show me your workings

But you know all about the dogs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 03:17:38 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2021, 03:08:30 PM
But you know all about the dogs

I am sure I don't know all about the dogs, I am by no means an expert. I am always up for education, so give me a schooling.
I suspect it is something to do with your idea that Eddie alerts to diluted blood whereas Keela doesn't, which is arrant nonsense in which you have misinterpreted Grime's testimony on Eddie and Keela.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2021, 03:56:49 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 03:17:38 PM
I am sure I don't know all about the dogs, I am by no means an expert. I am always up for education, so give me a schooling.
I suspect it is something to do with your idea that Eddie alerts to diluted blood whereas Keela doesn't, which is arrant nonsense in which you have misinterpreted Grime's testimony on Eddie and Keela.

so how do you intepret what Grime said....

In order for the dog to locate the source the blood must have 'dried' in situ. Any

'wetting' once dried will not affect the dog's abilities.

Blood that is subjected to dilution by precipitation or other substantial water source

prior to drying will soak into the ground or other absorbent material. This may dilute

the scent to an unacceptable leve1 for accurate location.

It is possible however that the EVRD will locate the scent source as it would for 'dead body' scent. Forensic testing may not produce evidence but any alert may provide
intelligence to support other factors in the investigation of a crime.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 04:59:54 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2021, 03:56:49 PM
so how do you intepret what Grime said....

In order for the dog to locate the source the blood must have 'dried' in situ. Any

'wetting' once dried will not affect the dog's abilities.

Blood that is subjected to dilution by precipitation or other substantial water source

prior to drying will soak into the ground or other absorbent material. This may dilute

the scent to an unacceptable leve1 for accurate location.

It is possible however that the EVRD will locate the scent source as it would for 'dead body' scent. Forensic testing may not produce evidence but any alert may provide
intelligence to support other factors in the investigation of a crime.

If you read the actual document from Martin Grime, this has all the correct punctuation and is formatted in a way that is easier to read. The bit about the EVRD is on a separate paragraph that indicates its not expressly linked to the paragraph above. If he wanted to convey the fact that the EVRD dog would alert to diluted blood but the CSI wouldn’t he would surely have carried on the existing paragraph with a comma and then something like “,however the EVRD dog will alert to diluted blood…."
When he refers to the scent source he is referring to the fact Eddie was trained on both blood and cadaver odour so will alert to both.
He is asked the question in the rogatory interview
“The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver”
The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'. They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.
He explicitly states that they give an alert for dried blood, not blood that hasn’t dried in situ and been diluted before drying.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2021, 05:23:29 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 04:59:54 PM
If you read the actual document from Martin Grime, this has all the correct punctuation and is formatted in a way that is easier to read. The bit about the EVRD is on a separate paragraph that indicates its not expressly linked to the paragraph above. If he wanted to convey the fact that the EVRD dog would alert to diluted blood but the CSI wouldn’t he would surely have carried on the existing paragraph with a comma and then something like “,however the EVRD dog will alert to diluted blood…."
When he refers to the scent source he is referring to the fact Eddie was trained on both blood and cadaver odour so will alert to both.
He is asked the question in the rogatory interview
“The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver”
The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'. They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.
He explicitly states that they give an alert for dried blood, not blood that hasn’t dried in situ and been diluted before drying.
will they give an alert for dried blood from a living human that was once in situ but is no longer?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 05:24:37 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2021, 05:23:29 PM
will they give an alert for dried blood from a living human that was once in situ but is no longer?

As its dried blood I would guess so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2021, 05:43:25 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 04:59:54 PM
If you read the actual document from Martin Grime, this has all the correct punctuation and is formatted in a way that is easier to read. The bit about the EVRD is on a separate paragraph that indicates its not expressly linked to the paragraph above. If he wanted to convey the fact that the EVRD dog would alert to diluted blood but the CSI wouldn’t he would surely have carried on the existing paragraph with a comma and then something like “,however the EVRD dog will alert to diluted blood…."
When he refers to the scent source he is referring to the fact Eddie was trained on both blood and cadaver odour so will alert to both.
He is asked the question in the rogatory interview
“The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver”
The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'. They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.
He explicitly states that they give an alert for dried blood, not blood that hasn’t dried in situ and been diluted before drying.

I think you need to read it again
Keela only alerts to blood dried in situ
Eddie may detect blood that has been diluted whilst Keela won't..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2021, 05:43:44 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 05:24:37 PM
As its dried blood I would guess so.
That being the case don’t you find it odd that none of the other apartments had ever had any human blood in them?  From a cut, or a nosebleed?  Nothing?  In fact I would say that if a dog really did alert to traces of dried blood that was no longer there, then they’d be more likely to alert in a house than not, IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 05:45:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2021, 05:43:25 PM
I think you need to read it again
Keela only alerts to blood dried in situ
Eddie may detect blood that has been diluted whilst Keela won't..

Explain the rogatory answer then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 05:48:46 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2021, 05:43:44 PM
That being the case don’t you find it odd that none of the other apartments had ever had any human blood in them?  From a cut, or a nosebleed?  Nothing?  In fact I would say that if a dog really did alert to traces of dried blood that was no longer there, then they’d be more likely to alert in a house than not, IMO.

Was it not the standard procedure to send Eddie in and only if he alerted would they send in Keela.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2021, 05:53:27 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 05:48:46 PM
Was it not the standard procedure to send Eddie in and only if he alerted would they send in Keela.
Are you now saying Eddie wouldn’t alert to dried human blood that was no longer in situ then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 06:00:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2021, 05:53:27 PM
Are you now saying Eddie wouldn’t alert to dried human blood that was no longer in situ then?

You do know I was not Eddies trainer or that I have ever trained a cadaver or CSI dog.
Martin Grime testified that Eddie alerts to dried blood so you either believe him or you don't.
It seems you don't.
I could speculate that Keela was more proficient at detecting blood as this was her only function but I don't know that to be a true fact. You really need to find a qualified dog trainer and ask them these questions if you really want to know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2021, 06:05:22 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 05:48:46 PM
Was it not the standard procedure to send Eddie in and only if he alerted would they send in Keela.

Both dogs alert to blood dried in situ... Only Eddie alerts to blood that has been diluted. So if Maddie had a nosebleed and it was cleaned up its quite possible that Eddie would alert and Keela wouldnt
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 06:07:19 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2021, 06:05:22 PM
Both dogs alert to blood dried in situ... Only Eddie alerts to blood that has been diluted. So if Maddie had a nosebleed and it was cleaned up its quite possible that Eddie would alert and Keela wouldnt

Explain the rogatory answer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2021, 06:07:56 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 04:59:54 PM
If you read the actual document from Martin Grime, this has all the correct punctuation and is formatted in a way that is easier to read. The bit about the EVRD is on a separate paragraph that indicates its not expressly linked to the paragraph above. If he wanted to convey the fact that the EVRD dog would alert to diluted blood but the CSI wouldn’t he would surely have carried on the existing paragraph with a comma and then something like “,however the EVRD dog will alert to diluted blood…."
When he refers to the scent source he is referring to the fact Eddie was trained on both blood and cadaver odour so will alert to both.
He is asked the question in the rogatory interview
“The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver”
The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'. They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.
He explicitly states that they give an alert for dried blood, not blood that hasn’t dried in situ and been diluted before drying.

Here Grime contradicts himself again... He mentions teeth as a source of an alert. In Jersey quite a few deciduous teeth were alerted too... Allegedly. However in his white paper Grime expressly says the cadaver dog is unlikely to alert to teeth
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2021, 06:09:50 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 06:07:19 PM
Explain the rogatory answer.

The post you just quoted explains it..
Both dogs alert to blood dried in situ
Eddie may alert when the blood has been diluted by a clean up... Keela wont
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2021, 06:10:32 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 06:00:14 PM
You do know I was not Eddies trainer or that I have ever trained a cadaver or CSI dog.
Martin Grime testified that Eddie alerts to dried blood so you either believe him or you don't.
It seems you don't.
I could speculate that Keela was more proficient at detecting blood as this was her only function but I don't know that to be a true fact. You really need to find a qualified dog trainer and ask them these questions if you really want to know.
Ooh, prickly!  I asked my initial question because you seemed to know what you were talking about, sorry for misunderstanding. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 06:12:16 PM
Quote from: Davel on May 31, 2021, 06:07:56 PM
Here Grime contradicts himself again... He mentions teeth as a source of an alert. In Jersey quite a few deciduous teeth were alerted too... Allegedly. However in his white paper Grime expressly says the cadaver dog is unlikely to alert to teeth

Does it even make sense though, they would have 2 dogs and it is possible that they were trained in such a way that a bark only from the cadaver dog could mean he was alerting to diluted blood that the blood dog wouldn't alert to. Do you have so little faith in the intellect and ability of British police forces that that scenario is even possible.
It beggars belief.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 06:14:32 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2021, 06:10:32 PM
Ooh, prickly!  I asked my initial question because you seemed to know what you were talking about, sorry for misunderstanding.
Not prickly at all. I have never said I knew anything about training cadaver dogs. Most of my posts have been about the admissibility of such evidence. Keep up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on May 31, 2021, 06:19:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2021, 05:23:29 PM
will they give an alert for dried blood from a living human that was once in situ but is no longer?

That doesn't appear to have ever been clarified. Somewhere in those documents, he stated that Keela would only react to the physical presence of blood, but he said no such thing about Eddie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2021, 06:59:42 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 06:14:32 PM
Not prickly at all. I have never said I new anything about training cadaver dogs. Most of my posts have been about the admissibility of such evidence. Keep up.
It’s “knew” not “new” btw, and if you didn’t know you should have said so in answer to the original question imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2021, 07:08:37 PM
Quote from: Carana on May 31, 2021, 06:19:15 PM
That doesn't appear to have ever been clarified. Somewhere in those documents, he stated that Keela would only react to the physical presence of blood, but he said no such thing about Eddie.
It’s possible he doesn’t really know himself I guess...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 09:06:01 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2021, 06:59:42 PM
It’s “knew” not “new” btw, and if you didn’t know you should have said so in answer to the original question imo.

Did that make you feel a little bit more superior correcting my spelling? Do you think I don’t know how to spell knew? Petty, oh so so petty.
PS. I corrected it just in case its an OCD thing with you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2021, 10:00:51 PM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 09:06:01 PM
Did that make you feel a little bit more superior correcting my spelling? Do you think I don’t know how to spell knew? Petty, oh so so petty.
PS. I corrected it just in case its an OCD thing with you.
I just didn’t like being instructed by you (patronisingly) to “keep up”, that was all.  Oh and it’s “pretty” not “petty”, so, so pretty, but I’m sure you new that  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2021, 08:21:11 AM
Quote from: Icanhandlethetruth on May 31, 2021, 06:12:16 PM
Does it even make sense though, they would have 2 dogs and it is possible that they were trained in such a way that a bark only from the cadaver dog could mean he was alerting to diluted blood that the blood dog wouldn't alert to. Do you have so little faith in the intellect and ability of British police forces that that scenario is even possible.
It beggars belief.

It does beggar belief... But that is precisely what Grime has said... He's also said the cadaver dog alerts to teeth.. Then contradicts himself in his white paper
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2021, 08:52:01 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2021, 08:21:11 AM
It does beggar belief... But that is precisely what Grime has said... He's also said the cadaver dog alerts to teeth.. Then contradicts himself in his white paper
WRT to remnant scent dog alerts the phrase “making it up as he goes along” springs to mind...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2021, 09:25:54 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 01, 2021, 08:52:01 AM
WRT to remnant scent dog alerts the phrase “making it up as he goes along” springs to mind...
I actually think Grime and Harrison invented remnant scent. As a form of intelligence so yes... Making it up on the hoof
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2021, 10:40:16 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2021, 09:25:54 AM
I actually think Grime and Harrison invented remnant scent. As a form of intelligence so yes... Making it up on the hoof

Did they ever use the words 'remnant scent', or has someone else invented the term?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2021, 11:06:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2021, 10:40:16 AM
Did they ever use the words 'remnant scent', or has someone else invented the term?
What is the cadaver dog alerting to when no body is present?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 01, 2021, 11:23:33 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 01, 2021, 11:06:52 AM
What is the cadaver dog alerting to when no body is present?

Could be anything that it is trained to alert to and not necessarily the remnant scent from a body which didn't even need to have actually been there due to scent transfer.

All we know and have seen for ourselves in the various videos provided is that the cadaver dogs did alert to something. Unfortunately however, this is a long way from stating with any certainty that a cadaver was present in 5a.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2021, 11:44:54 AM
Quote from: John on June 01, 2021, 11:23:33 AM
Could be anything that it is trained to alert to and not necessarily the remnant scent from a body which didn't even need to have actually been there due to scent transfer.

All we know and have seen for ourselves in the various videos provided is that the cadaver dogs did alert to something. Unfortunately however, this is a long way from stating with any certainty that a cadaver was present in 5a.
Quite.  It's all very vague isn't it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2021, 12:00:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2021, 10:40:16 AM
Did they ever use the words 'remnant scent', or has someone else invented the term?
Whats wrong with the term.. Or is your post just being pedantic
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2021, 12:28:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 01, 2021, 11:06:52 AM
What is the cadaver dog alerting to when no body is present?

Is that meant to distract me? Just answer my question; when did Harrison or Grime mention 'remnant scent'?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2021, 12:32:10 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 01, 2021, 12:00:28 PM
Whats wrong with the term.. Or is your post just being pedantic

There's nothing wrong with it. You accused Grime and Harrison of inventing it, so they must have used it. Where and when did they use the phrase?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2021, 12:38:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2021, 12:28:23 PM
Is that meant to distract me? Just answer my question; when did Harrison or Grime mention 'remnant scent'?

Is that an important question for you
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 01, 2021, 12:48:01 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 01, 2021, 11:44:54 AM
Quite.  It's all very vague isn't it?

The cadaver dogs episode told us very little imo. If anything it damaged the entire science surrounding the use of properly trained cadaver dogs.

If a dog is trained using cadavers it will find cadavers or the remnant scent associated with them.  If they are trained using materials other than cadavers then expect indeterminate results. The latter applying in Praia da Luz.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2021, 01:04:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2021, 12:32:10 PM
There's nothing wrong with it. You accused Grime and Harrison of inventing it, so they must have used it. Where and when did they use the phrase?
No I suggested Grime and Harrison may well have developed the use of remnant scent as intelligence... I never said they invented the term. Is it that you do not understand what the term means... John's using it at the moment too
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2021, 01:16:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2021, 12:28:23 PM
Is that meant to distract me? Just answer my question; when did Harrison or Grime mention 'remnant scent'?
Did I ever say that they did? No. I would have thought my question was the most important one there possibly was to ask on the subject.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 01, 2021, 01:54:49 PM
Is there anyone who doesn't understand what the term 'remnant scent' means in relation to cadaver dogs?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 07, 2021, 10:20:24 AM
Quote from: John on June 01, 2021, 01:54:49 PM
Is there anyone who doesn't understand what the term 'remnant scent' means in relation to cadaver dogs?

Quite a few I would say.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 09, 2021, 06:32:53 PM
The clairvoyant who was recently in the news, was spouting rubbish back in 2014. Its in German but google translate bring's this.


“I have no ears,” he explains. “I don't need glass balls. I only listen to my inner voice. ”The gift of“ being a little tool of God ”kept his finger hovering over the place 40 kilometers west of the resort. "I can narrow the position down to 30 by 50 meters," says Michael Schneider. " Maddie McCann was kidnapped and then killed relatively quickly," he suspects.

The clairvoyant immediately alerted the investigators. He even traveled to Portugal. What did he find there? "The place where I suspect Maddie's body is at the end of a street, right on a cliff." It would be the perfect hiding place ..

https://www.wunderweib.de/maddie-mccann-wurde-das-grab-des-maedchens-entdeckt-1004.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 10, 2021, 07:39:24 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on May 31, 2021, 07:08:37 PM
It’s possible he doesn’t really know himself I guess...

Except that the possibility that Eddie reacted to remnant scent of blood from a living person (bearing in mind that the last - holiday-maker - occupants of 5A only left one week prior to the arrival of the dogs. And, at the time of the release of the files, at least, had never been questioned. Neither were any cleaning staff questioned about what they did or didn't do prior to the flat being locked up again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 08:43:27 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 10, 2021, 07:39:24 AM
Except that the possibility that Eddie reacted to remnant scent of blood from a living person (bearing in mind that the last - holiday-maker - occupants of 5A only left one week prior to the arrival of the dogs. And, at the time of the release of the files, at least, had never been questioned. Neither were any cleaning staff questioned about what they did or didn't do prior to the flat being locked up again.

Eddie wasn't alerting to blood in the main bedroom because Keela didn't alert in there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2021, 09:12:28 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 08:43:27 AM
Eddie wasn't alerting to blood in the main bedroom because Keela didn't alert in there.
You are quite wrong... Its surprising how many posters dont understand the alerts

Eddie may well alert to blood that Keela doesnt detect... Its in Grimes profile
.. Im surprised you are not aware of this
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 10:10:20 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2021, 09:12:28 AM
You are quite wrong... Its surprising how many posters dont understand the alerts

Eddie may well alert to blood that Keela doesnt detect... Its in Grimes profile
.. Im surprised you are not aware of this

It's possible, but only in very specific circunstances. The blood would have to have been substantially diluted (before it dried) to a level at which Keela couldn't detect it. The extremely diluted blood would also need to soak into an absorbent material such as soil. In those circumstances Eddie might detect it.

I find it unlikely that those circumstances occured in the main bedroom of 5A.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2021, 10:19:35 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 10:10:20 AM
It's possible, but only in very specific circunstances. The blood would have to have been substantially diluted (before it dried) to a level at which Keela couldn't detect it. The extremely diluted blood would also need to soak into an absorbent material such as soil. In those circumstances Eddie might detect it.

I find it unlikely that those circumstances occured in the main bedroom of 5A.

So when you said Eddie wadnt alerting to blood.. Stating it as a fact... You were wrong
Eddie also alerts to coconuts... Im not sure keela does.. So it could hsve been a small remnant of coconut
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 11:17:10 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2021, 10:19:35 AM
So when you said Eddie wadnt alerting to blood.. Stating it as a fact... You were wrong
Eddie also alerts to coconuts... Im not sure keela does.. So it could hsve been a small remnant of coconut

Some people are prepared to believe in extremely unlikely scenarios rather than accepting the most probable explanations. Eddie was never shown to alert to coconuts imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 11:37:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 11:17:10 AM
Some people are prepared to believe in extremely unlikely scenarios rather than accepting the most probable explanations. Eddie was never shown to alert to coconuts imo.

'Human bone' at centre of Jersey children's home inquiry is actually a piece of wood or coconut shell
By DAVID ROSE
Last updated at 23:26 18 May 2008

The "remains of a child" discovered by police investigating allegations of abuse at a former children's home on Jersey is really a small piece of wood or broken coconut shell, The Mail on Sunday has learned.

The discovery of the fragment in February prompted police to open an inquiry into a possible murder at the Haut de la Garenne home; and this week detectives are set to announce further evidence which they believe shows that another two dead children were buried in the cellar.

But Jersey police were told almost six weeks ago that tests by Britain's top carbon-dating laboratory showed that the original evidence – supposedly a fragment of a child's skull – was not bone.

The island's controversial deputy police chief, Lenny Harper, who is heading the investigation, has consistently failed to mention the vital results in public statements since the tests were completed.

Interviewed in the home last Tuesday, he repeated: "It is a fragment of a human body...we don't know how, when or where that person died."

Last night Mr Harper admitted that his team had received emails reporting the test results on April 8, including a message that stated: "This one ain't bone."

But he insisted that had "never seen" a letter setting out the findings in more detail, which was addressed to him personally and dated May 1, until it was emailed to him yesterday.

Mr Harper also conceded that "clothing and other items" which he previously said had been found at the home – fuelling speculation that a child's grave had been unearthed – amounted to a piece of a button and a leather toggle.

However, he said he remained confident that the fragment was bone, based on the opinion of his forensic anthropologist, Julie Roberts, even though she had not been able to carry out detailed tests.

"As far as I am concerned, it was diagnosed as bone, and bone it remains," he said.

Scientists from the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit spent weeks investigating the fragment with the world's most sophisticated equipment, whereas Ms Roberts had to reach her conclusion in a hurry – between the fragment's discovery at 9.30am on February 24 and Mr Harper's Press conference that afternoon.
____________________________________________________________________________________

His murder inquiry began when Eddie, an "enhanced victim recovery dog", began barking in the cellar of Haut de la Garenne – the sign, according to its handler, that he had detected the scent of human remains.

By coincidence, the dog, from South Yorkshire Police, is the same animal that supposedly picked up "the scent of death" in the apartment where Madeleine McCann was last seen in Praia de Luz in Portugal.

According to Mr Harper, Eddie smelled the decades-old skull fragment through "several inches" of concrete, which police then smashed through. Eddie had the same reaction at another six locations at Haut de la Garenne but nothing was ever found.

"I don't believe a dog can pick up such a scent through a layer of concrete," said Mike Swindells, a former Lancashire officer who wrote the standard sniffer dog training manual.

"It's really very unlikely."

In his early media briefings, Mr Harper did not make clear that the first "human remains" consisted only of a single fragment the size of a 50p piece. Doubts were cast over the evidence when it first arrived at the Oxford lab early in March.

The first step in dating remains is to treat the bone with chemicals that separate its soft collagen protein from the harder mineral content. Only the collagen can be dated reliably.

However, the pre-treatment did not produce any collagen. The conclusion was unavoidable: the fragment was not bone.

At the time, a police Press statement admitted scientists had been unable to date the fragment because its collagen content was low. But Mr Harper said this was because it had been found in a "lime-rich environment", to which Ms Coupland added:

"The experts who tested it said that was why the collagen had degraded."

In fact, the Oxford scientists and Dr Jacobi say the opposite is true. "If it had been kept in a temperate, lime-rich environment and was actually bone, it would have been well preserved," Dr Jacobi said.

"It would very clearly be bone, which this is not.

"The Oxford scientist who did the pre-treatment has tested thousands of pieces of bone and she felt instinctively from the outset that this was not bone. She was right."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-567013/Human-bone-centre-Jersey-childrens-home-inquiry-actually-piece-wood-coconut-shell.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 12:07:38 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 11:37:32 AM
'Human bone' at centre of Jersey children's home inquiry is actually a piece of wood or coconut shell
By DAVID ROSE
Last updated at 23:26 18 May 2008

The "remains of a child" discovered by police investigating allegations of abuse at a former children's home on Jersey is really a small piece of wood or broken coconut shell, The Mail on Sunday has learned.

The discovery of the fragment in February prompted police to open an inquiry into a possible murder at the Haut de la Garenne home; and this week detectives are set to announce further evidence which they believe shows that another two dead children were buried in the cellar.

But Jersey police were told almost six weeks ago that tests by Britain's top carbon-dating laboratory showed that the original evidence – supposedly a fragment of a child's skull – was not bone.

The island's controversial deputy police chief, Lenny Harper, who is heading the investigation, has consistently failed to mention the vital results in public statements since the tests were completed.

Interviewed in the home last Tuesday, he repeated: "It is a fragment of a human body...we don't know how, when or where that person died."

Last night Mr Harper admitted that his team had received emails reporting the test results on April 8, including a message that stated: "This one ain't bone."

But he insisted that had "never seen" a letter setting out the findings in more detail, which was addressed to him personally and dated May 1, until it was emailed to him yesterday.

Mr Harper also conceded that "clothing and other items" which he previously said had been found at the home – fuelling speculation that a child's grave had been unearthed – amounted to a piece of a button and a leather toggle.

However, he said he remained confident that the fragment was bone, based on the opinion of his forensic anthropologist, Julie Roberts, even though she had not been able to carry out detailed tests.

"As far as I am concerned, it was diagnosed as bone, and bone it remains," he said.

Scientists from the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit spent weeks investigating the fragment with the world's most sophisticated equipment, whereas Ms Roberts had to reach her conclusion in a hurry – between the fragment's discovery at 9.30am on February 24 and Mr Harper's Press conference that afternoon.
____________________________________________________________________________________

His murder inquiry began when Eddie, an "enhanced victim recovery dog", began barking in the cellar of Haut de la Garenne – the sign, according to its handler, that he had detected the scent of human remains.

By coincidence, the dog, from South Yorkshire Police, is the same animal that supposedly picked up "the scent of death" in the apartment where Madeleine McCann was last seen in Praia de Luz in Portugal.

According to Mr Harper, Eddie smelled the decades-old skull fragment through "several inches" of concrete, which police then smashed through. Eddie had the same reaction at another six locations at Haut de la Garenne but nothing was ever found.

"I don't believe a dog can pick up such a scent through a layer of concrete," said Mike Swindells, a former Lancashire officer who wrote the standard sniffer dog training manual.

"It's really very unlikely."

In his early media briefings, Mr Harper did not make clear that the first "human remains" consisted only of a single fragment the size of a 50p piece. Doubts were cast over the evidence when it first arrived at the Oxford lab early in March.

The first step in dating remains is to treat the bone with chemicals that separate its soft collagen protein from the harder mineral content. Only the collagen can be dated reliably.

However, the pre-treatment did not produce any collagen. The conclusion was unavoidable: the fragment was not bone.

At the time, a police Press statement admitted scientists had been unable to date the fragment because its collagen content was low. But Mr Harper said this was because it had been found in a "lime-rich environment", to which Ms Coupland added:

"The experts who tested it said that was why the collagen had degraded."

In fact, the Oxford scientists and Dr Jacobi say the opposite is true. "If it had been kept in a temperate, lime-rich environment and was actually bone, it would have been well preserved," Dr Jacobi said.

"It would very clearly be bone, which this is not.

"The Oxford scientist who did the pre-treatment has tested thousands of pieces of bone and she felt instinctively from the outset that this was not bone. She was right."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-567013/Human-bone-centre-Jersey-childrens-home-inquiry-actually-piece-wood-coconut-shell.html

And for this Martin Grime was paid 96 Thousand Pounds.  A good one if you can get it.

No wonder Martin Grime doesn't want to talk about it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 12:26:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 11:37:32 AM
'Human bone' at centre of Jersey children's home inquiry is actually a piece of wood or coconut shell
By DAVID ROSE
Last updated at 23:26 18 May 2008

The "remains of a child" discovered by police investigating allegations of abuse at a former children's home on Jersey is really a small piece of wood or broken coconut shell, The Mail on Sunday has learned.

The discovery of the fragment in February prompted police to open an inquiry into a possible murder at the Haut de la Garenne home; and this week detectives are set to announce further evidence which they believe shows that another two dead children were buried in the cellar.

But Jersey police were told almost six weeks ago that tests by Britain's top carbon-dating laboratory showed that the original evidence – supposedly a fragment of a child's skull – was not bone.

The island's controversial deputy police chief, Lenny Harper, who is heading the investigation, has consistently failed to mention the vital results in public statements since the tests were completed.

Interviewed in the home last Tuesday, he repeated: "It is a fragment of a human body...we don't know how, when or where that person died."

Last night Mr Harper admitted that his team had received emails reporting the test results on April 8, including a message that stated: "This one ain't bone."

But he insisted that had "never seen" a letter setting out the findings in more detail, which was addressed to him personally and dated May 1, until it was emailed to him yesterday.

Mr Harper also conceded that "clothing and other items" which he previously said had been found at the home – fuelling speculation that a child's grave had been unearthed – amounted to a piece of a button and a leather toggle.

However, he said he remained confident that the fragment was bone, based on the opinion of his forensic anthropologist, Julie Roberts, even though she had not been able to carry out detailed tests.

"As far as I am concerned, it was diagnosed as bone, and bone it remains," he said.

Scientists from the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit spent weeks investigating the fragment with the world's most sophisticated equipment, whereas Ms Roberts had to reach her conclusion in a hurry – between the fragment's discovery at 9.30am on February 24 and Mr Harper's Press conference that afternoon.
____________________________________________________________________________________

His murder inquiry began when Eddie, an "enhanced victim recovery dog", began barking in the cellar of Haut de la Garenne – the sign, according to its handler, that he had detected the scent of human remains.

By coincidence, the dog, from South Yorkshire Police, is the same animal that supposedly picked up "the scent of death" in the apartment where Madeleine McCann was last seen in Praia de Luz in Portugal.

According to Mr Harper, Eddie smelled the decades-old skull fragment through "several inches" of concrete, which police then smashed through. Eddie had the same reaction at another six locations at Haut de la Garenne but nothing was ever found.

"I don't believe a dog can pick up such a scent through a layer of concrete," said Mike Swindells, a former Lancashire officer who wrote the standard sniffer dog training manual.

"It's really very unlikely."

In his early media briefings, Mr Harper did not make clear that the first "human remains" consisted only of a single fragment the size of a 50p piece. Doubts were cast over the evidence when it first arrived at the Oxford lab early in March.

The first step in dating remains is to treat the bone with chemicals that separate its soft collagen protein from the harder mineral content. Only the collagen can be dated reliably.

However, the pre-treatment did not produce any collagen. The conclusion was unavoidable: the fragment was not bone.

At the time, a police Press statement admitted scientists had been unable to date the fragment because its collagen content was low. But Mr Harper said this was because it had been found in a "lime-rich environment", to which Ms Coupland added:

"The experts who tested it said that was why the collagen had degraded."

In fact, the Oxford scientists and Dr Jacobi say the opposite is true. "If it had been kept in a temperate, lime-rich environment and was actually bone, it would have been well preserved," Dr Jacobi said.

"It would very clearly be bone, which this is not.

"The Oxford scientist who did the pre-treatment has tested thousands of pieces of bone and she felt instinctively from the outset that this was not bone. She was right."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-567013/Human-bone-centre-Jersey-childrens-home-inquiry-actually-piece-wood-coconut-shell.html

So Eddie alerted in a cellar. The police dug there and found something which a forensic anthropologist thought might be bone. I can see no evidence that the fragment was what triggered Eddie's alert, I see only assumptions by others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 12:45:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 12:26:46 PM
So Eddie alerted in a cellar. The police dug there and found something which a forensic anthropologist thought might be bone. I can see no evidence that the fragment was what triggered Eddie's alert, I see only assumptions by others.

So that was it that triggered this apparent Alert, since nothing else was found and no children had gone missing?

Not that I expect a reply.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 10, 2021, 12:47:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 12:26:46 PM
So Eddie alerted in a cellar. The police dug there and found something which a forensic anthropologist thought might be bone. I can see no evidence that the fragment was what triggered Eddie's alert, I see only assumptions by others.

That's very true, scent cannot be seen by the naked eye.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 12:52:40 PM
Quote from: John on June 10, 2021, 12:47:32 PM
That's very true, scent cannot be seen by the naked eye.

That's a good excuse as no one knows if there is one.  Mayhap there wasn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2021, 01:03:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 12:26:46 PM
So Eddie alerted in a cellar. The police dug there and found something which a forensic anthropologist thought might be bone. I can see no evidence that the fragment was what triggered Eddie's alert, I see only assumptions by others.

You are wrong again.. No assumptions
Grime took the coconut to another location and tested it again. Once again Eddie gave a positive alert

Eddie alerted to a coconut... Fact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 10, 2021, 01:08:55 PM
I think it's also worth noting that one Grime's dogs, presumably Keela, also alerted to a bath located under the floor area at Haut de la Garenne. A presumptive forensic test indicated the presence of blood but, after further tests were carried out, no blood was found.

https://jersey.police.uk/news-appeals/2008/november/press-conference-notes-from-operation-rectangle-update/
*snipped*
The Bath and blood stains:

This bath in the under floor voids has no water supply and has not been used as a bath since the 1920's when a brick pillar was constructed within it. During the search a specialist search dog reacted to the bath and a presumptive test indicated positive for blood in a minute area of the bath.  Following detailed forensic microscopic examination no blood has been found.  There is nothing suspicious about the bath and no indication this bath has been used in the commission of any offences.
_______________________________________________________

Due to the age of the bath, it's not unreasonable to assume it was made of cast iron. Luminol reacts to rust. Rust is Iron Oxide and one form of Iron Oxide can be found in blood. Would such an alert by Keela be classed as a false positive for blood or an alert within her training parameters?

*snipped*
"Luminol can also react with substances like bleach, rust, fizzy drink and coffee, causing it to produce false positives."

Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19722-blood-camera-to-spot-invisible-stains-at-crime-scenes/#ixzz6xNz1uKWV

It's worth pointing out that LGC Forensic costs invoiced to SOJ police were £453,000.
https://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/R%20Operation%20Rectangle%20review%20of%20the%20efficient%20and%20effective%20use%20of%20resources%20201005%20BDO%20Alto.pdf   (page 43 of document)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 10, 2021, 01:12:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 11:17:10 AM
Some people are prepared to believe in extremely unlikely scenarios rather than accepting the most probable explanations. Eddie was never shown to alert to coconuts imo.
What is the most probable explanation in your opinion and upon what do you base your belief?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 01:13:56 PM
Quote from: misty on June 10, 2021, 01:08:55 PM
I think it's also worth noting that one Grime's dogs, presumably Keela, also alerted to a bath located under the floor area at Haut de la Garenne. A presumptive forensic test indicated the presence of blood but, after further tests were carried out, no blood was found.

https://jersey.police.uk/news-appeals/2008/november/press-conference-notes-from-operation-rectangle-update/
*snipped*
The Bath and blood stains:

This bath in the under floor voids has no water supply and has not been used as a bath since the 1920's when a brick pillar was constructed within it. During the search a specialist search dog reacted to the bath and a presumptive test indicated positive for blood in a minute area of the bath.  Following detailed forensic microscopic examination no blood has been found.  There is nothing suspicious about the bath and no indication this bath has been used in the commission of any offences.
_______________________________________________________

Due to the age of the bath, it's not unreasonable to assume it was made of cast iron. Luminol reacts to rust. Rust is Iron Oxide and one form of Iron Oxide can be found in blood. Would such an alert by Keela be classed as a false positive for blood or an alert within her training parameters?

*snipped*
"Luminol can also react with substances like bleach, rust, fizzy drink and coffee, causing it to produce false positives."

Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19722-blood-camera-to-spot-invisible-stains-at-crime-scenes/#ixzz6xNz1uKWV

It's worth pointing out that LGC Forensic costs invoiced to SOJ police were £453,000.
https://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/R%20Operation%20Rectangle%20review%20of%20the%20efficient%20and%20effective%20use%20of%20resources%20201005%20BDO%20Alto.pdf   (page 43 of document)

I fear that you are wasting your time, Misty.  This is way too logical.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 01:15:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 12:26:46 PM
So Eddie alerted in a cellar. The police dug there and found something which a forensic anthropologist thought might be bone. I can see no evidence that the fragment was what triggered Eddie's alert, I see only assumptions by others.

You totally miss the point.

Eddie alerted a minimum of six times at Haute de la Garenne which was being searched specifically for bodies - not 'remnant scent' but physical remains.
And we have watched him doing some of it  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2874.msg99065#msg99065

In the event he alerted to NOTHING.  Much as he alerted to NOTHING in Praia da Luz.

But his actions in both places had catastrophic results not least of which resulted in both officers in charge of each case falling into disrepute.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 01:31:45 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 01:15:33 PM
You totally miss the point.

Eddie alerted a minimum of six times at Haute de la Garenne which was being searched specifically for bodies - not 'remnant scent' but physical remains.
And we have watched him doing some of it  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2874.msg99065#msg99065

In the event he alerted to NOTHING.  Much as he alerted to NOTHING in Praia da Luz.

But his actions in both places had catastrophic results not least of which resulted in both officers in charge of each case falling into disrepute.

Eddie's job was to alert when he smelled the odours he was trained to find. Some human beings THINK he alerted to NOTHING, but they can't KNOW if that's true or not.

Amaral wasn't in charge of the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance, Neves and Encarnacao were.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 01:36:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 01:31:45 PM
Eddie's job was to alert when he smelled the odours he was trained to find. Some human beings THINK he alerted to NOTHING, but they can't KNOW if that's true or not.

Amaral wasn't in charge of the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance, Neves and Encarnacao were.

I wonder why those two never wrote books.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 10, 2021, 01:40:31 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 01:15:33 PM
You totally miss the point.

Eddie alerted a minimum of six times at Haute de la Garenne which was being searched specifically for bodies - not 'remnant scent' but physical remains.
And we have watched him doing some of it  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2874.msg99065#msg99065

In the event he alerted to NOTHING.  Much as he alerted to NOTHING in Praia da Luz.

But his actions in both places had catastrophic results not least of which resulted in both officers in charge of each case falling into disrepute.

I think Eddie's alert spectrum was far too wide to be of much use.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 01:45:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 01:31:45 PM
Eddie's job was to alert when he smelled the odours he was trained to find. Some human beings THINK he alerted to NOTHING, but they can't KNOW if that's true or not.

Amaral wasn't in charge of the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance, Neves and Encarnacao were.

We have had this conversation before.


As I said ... "the existence of a cadaver is not a requirement for a cadaver dog to alert.  In Haute de la Garennne for example the Victim Recovery Dog alerted to a tissue used to clean up after a sexual encounter.  Keela the CSI dog also alerted. But there was no cadaver; the dogs had alerted to semen and blood."

It was concluded that the dogs alerted to tissues after sexual activity which usually occurs while participants are alive and well.

Haut de la Garenne
 
OPERATION RECTANGLE SUMMARY REPORT JULY 22 2008

V/T 9 Re-enforced concrete machine gun post and protective trench, personnel shelter attached. Earth and debris removed by hand and plant machinery to allow access.
The forensic strategy was implemented with the following results.

EVRD – positive indication.
SOCO visual – positive.
Blood dog - positive indication.
Visual – positive.
UV – negative (items removed prior to screening).
Quasar - negative.

Positive indications confirmed as being recently deposited tissues used to clean up after sex by unknown persons. Offences not suspected at this stage. Retained as exhibit should there be future reports of offences. There will be no forensic submission at this stage.
----------------------------------
VT / 9 Trench and gun emplacement containing small personnel shelter. Forensic examination revealed recently deposited tissues that appeared to have been used to ‘clean up following sexual intercourse’. It would appear that the shelter had been used as a venue for courting couples. This alert is within the trained parameters of the dog’s repertoire and is a satisfactory explanation of the alert.
https://catalogue.jerseyheritage.org/collection/Details/archive/110390044

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11381.msg618468#msg618468
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 01:57:05 PM
Quote from: John on June 10, 2021, 01:40:31 PM
I think Eddie's alert spectrum was far too wide to be of much use.

This much was obvious a very log time ago.  Although hardly his fault.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 02:05:30 PM
Quote from: John on June 10, 2021, 01:40:31 PM
I think Eddie's alert spectrum was far too wide to be of much use.

He did alert appropriately when there was nothing there but fortunately it was explained exactly why before it could become yet another huge mystery.

For example he alerted at a tree where cremation ashes had been scattered.

What he alerted to as witnessed on the Jersey video clip is a mystery just as are his alerts in Luz are which is why it is so ridiculous that such a cult has been built around them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2021, 02:16:13 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 01:31:45 PM
Eddie's job was to alert when he smelled the odours he was trained to find. Some human beings THINK he alerted to NOTHING, but they can't KNOW if that's true or not.

Amaral wasn't in charge of the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance, Neves and Encarnacao were.

No one knows what Eddie alerted to.. That st is a fact and its about time you accepted that.
Grime THINKS Eddie may have alerted to cadaver... Thats all there is .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 02:32:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2021, 02:16:13 PM
No one knows what Eddie alerted to.. That st is a fact and its about time you accepted that.
Grime THINKS Eddie may have alerted to cadaver... Thats all there is .

I think the most likely answer is that Eddie alerted to what he was trained to alert to, but I don't know that for sure. The fanciful ones are those who think they do know, and suggest he alerted to either nothing or a wide variety of substances of which the most ridiculous imo was garden fertilizer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2021, 02:37:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 02:32:06 PM
I think the most likely answer is that Eddie alerted to what he was trained to alert to, but I don't know that for sure. The fanciful ones are those who think they do know, and suggest he alerted to either nothing or a wide variety of substances of which the most ridiculous imo was garden fertilizer.
If it transpires that MM did not die in the apartment... And its proved.. I wonder what excuse Grime will come up with.. Any ideas
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 02:40:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 02:32:06 PM
I think the most likely answer is that Eddie alerted to what he was trained to alert to, but I don't know that for sure. The fanciful ones are those who think they do know, and suggest he alerted to either nothing or a wide variety of substances of which the most ridiculous imo was garden fertilizer.

What exactly was Eddie trained to alert to before he was trained to alert to something else?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 02:41:59 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2021, 02:37:45 PM
If it transpires that MM did not die in the apartment... And its proved.. I wonder what excuse Grime will come up with.. Any ideas

No Comment?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2021, 02:52:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 02:32:06 PM
I think the most likely answer is that Eddie alerted to what he was trained to alert to, but I don't know that for sure. The fanciful ones are those who think they do know, and suggest he alerted to either nothing or a wide variety of substances of which the most ridiculous imo was garden fertilizer.

Logically the alerts make no dense unledd MM died before the McCanns left for the tapas bar... So no neglect.. Why would they want to cover up a death before they left. It just gets more and more ridiculous
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 10, 2021, 03:23:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 02:40:27 PM
What exactly was Eddie trained to alert to before he was trained to alert to something else?

More interesting, IMO, is what he would not alert to.

- So far, roadkill. What was that? What's the list?

-  How many people could he have encountered who would have eaten decomposing piglets?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 03:35:02 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 10, 2021, 03:23:45 PM
More interesting, IMO, is what he would not alert to.

- So far, roadkill. What was that? What's the list?

-  How many people could he have encountered who would have eaten decomposing piglets?

There doesn't appear to be a lot that Eddie wouldn't alert to after Grime had done with him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 10, 2021, 03:52:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 02:32:06 PM
I think the most likely answer is that Eddie alerted to what he was trained to alert to, but I don't know that for sure. The fanciful ones are those who think they do know, and suggest he alerted to either nothing or a wide variety of substances of which the most ridiculous imo was garden fertilizer.

Many common garden fertilisers contain peat/peat moss. Peat can confuse cadaver dogs.
https://www.murderscience.com/articles/2018/1/29/cadaver-dogs-
*snipped*
"All of this assumes the scent that the dog is interested in is the correct one. While there can be other smells that could mislead cadaver dogs, like the methane released from disturbed peat-rich soil 6 , the main concern for police and handlers is the scent of animal remains. Some handlers train their dogs using pig remains due to the difficulty and hazards of getting human remains."

IIRC Grime worked on a case in USA around 2014 with Stockham/FBI which involved searching a bog after a missing girl's clothes were found there. I can't remember the name of the mp nor if the body was also found.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 05:33:32 PM
Quote from: misty on June 10, 2021, 03:52:45 PM
Many common garden fertilisers contain peat/peat moss. Peat can confuse cadaver dogs.
https://www.murderscience.com/articles/2018/1/29/cadaver-dogs-
*snipped*
"All of this assumes the scent that the dog is interested in is the correct one. While there can be other smells that could mislead cadaver dogs, like the methane released from disturbed peat-rich soil 6 , the main concern for police and handlers is the scent of animal remains. Some handlers train their dogs using pig remains due to the difficulty and hazards of getting human remains."

IIRC Grime worked on a case in USA around 2014 with Stockham/FBI which involved searching a bog after a missing girl's clothes were found there. I can't remember the name of the mp nor if the body was also found.

Firstly I don't know if the smell of methane affects a cadaver dog; how was that assertained? Secondly, Apartment 5A wasn't a peat bog, nor did it contain fertilizer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 05:45:06 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 05:33:32 PM
Firstly I don't know if the smell of methane affects a cadaver dog; how was that assertained? Secondly, Apartment 5A wasn't a peat bog, nor did it contain fertilizer.

You are the one who ridiculed the notion of garden fertiliser.

Misty is the one who corrected you on that 😁
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 10, 2021, 05:46:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 05:33:32 PM
Firstly I don't know if the smell of methane affects a cadaver dog; how was that assertained? Secondly, Apartment 5A wasn't a peat bog, nor did it contain fertilizer.
IMO it was more likely to contain fertilizer (brought in on shoes that had been walking on an area recently treated) than a dead body.  No one is saying Eddie alerted to fertilzer anyway but the fact is there is a long list of possible explanations for the alerts and only one of them (and the least likely imo) is the one time presence of a dead body on May 3rd.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 05:48:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 05:45:06 PM
You are the one who ridiculed the notion of garden fertiliser.

Misty is the one who corrected you on that 😁

Didn't Eddie sort of alert to the flower bed outside 5a?  But Grime never followed up on it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 06:14:14 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 05:48:36 PM
Didn't Eddie sort of alert to the flower bed outside 5a?  But Grime never followed up on it?

I believe he did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 10, 2021, 06:18:06 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 05:48:36 PM
Didn't Eddie sort of alert to the flower bed outside 5a?  But Grime never followed up on it?

Yes he did, sort of, and no, there doesn't appear to have been any follow up.

Geez, I can't believe that after 14 years, the doggies who've been resting their cotton sock paws on clouds for quite some time are still a topic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2021, 06:20:51 PM
My understanding is.. Based on Grimed introduction to his white paper is that VRD dogs were used to find bodies and body parts. Ss they didnt do this very often Grime and Harruson came up with remnant scent to aid in intelligence for homicide.. Missing person on cases.. And its all snowballed from there..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 06:23:29 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 10, 2021, 05:46:50 PM
IMO it was more likely to contain fertilizer (brought in on shoes that had been walking on an area recently treated) than a dead body.  No one is saying Eddie alerted to fertilzer anyway but the fact is there is a long list of possible explanations for the alerts and only one of them (and the least likely imo) is the one time presence of a dead body on May 3rd.

The apartment was not a sterile environment.

The Judicial Police had given permission for it to be put back into service as a holiday residence between the McCanns leaving it and the dogs arriving to inspect it.

I forget how many families made use of it during that time.  A minimum of three and possibly five.  I do not think any of these families were asked to give an interview about their time there.

There would have been a deep clean between each different set of occupants.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 08:22:16 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 05:45:06 PM
You are the one who ridiculed the notion of garden fertiliser.

Misty is the one who corrected you on that 😁

Does peat-based garden fertilizer emit methane? Does the smell of methane confuse cadaver dogs?
Until those questions are answered it can't be claimed that Eddie alerted to garden fertilizer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 08:30:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 08:22:16 PM
Does peat-based garden fertilizer emit methane? Does the smell of methane confuse cadaver dogs?
Until those questions are answered it can't be claimed that Eddie alerted to garden fertilizer.

Nobody knows what caused Eddie to bark in Luz - just as no-one knows what caused Eddie to bark in Jersey.  But whatever - Eddie's barks mean nothing in either case so I don't think anyone is particularly interested.
With a rump of exceptions.

Trying to make something out of nothing has been turned into an art form as far as Eddie's fan club is concerned and how silly that has been and is when witnessing the direction the investigation has taken from 2013 onwards.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 08:32:10 PM

Some fertilisers contain blood.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2021, 08:47:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 08:22:16 PM
Does peat-based garden fertilizer emit methane? Does the smell of methane confuse cadaver dogs?
Until those questions are answered it can't be claimed that Eddie alerted to garden fertilizer.

The FACT is... No one knows what Eddie alerted to.. But we know he alerted to a coconut in Jersey..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 10, 2021, 09:01:48 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 10, 2021, 08:32:10 PM
Some fertilisers contain blood.
and bone, and in Portugal it could well be pig based.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 06:27:31 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 10, 2021, 08:47:05 PM
The FACT is... No one knows what Eddie alerted to.. But we know he alerted to a coconut in Jersey..

You like to think he alerted to a piece of coconut, but the fact is that he alerted to an area and in that area a piece of what may have been coconut was found. That doesn't mean that's what he alerted to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 11, 2021, 06:42:19 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 06:27:31 AM
You like to think he alerted to a piece of coconut, but the fact is that he alerted to an area and in that area a piece of what may have been coconut was found. That doesn't mean that's what he alerted to.

No its you who likes to think that snd you are wrong sgain..


 
ƒ As has now been widely reported, on the morning of 23 February
2008 LGC were excavating the area when they uncovered a
fragment of material measuring 6.3cm x 4.4cm that was believed
at that time to be human bone. The LGC scientist described it as ‘a
fragment of juvenile rather than an adult cranium’ and it was
referred to as JAR/6. A short time later Mr Grime’s dog was
presented with the item and gave a positive indication for human
remains.


From the BDO report which you have seen but obviously not read and understood. Eddie alerted specifically to the piece of coconut annd gave an alert for human remains. Please stop promoting untruths

So Grime thought the fragment was human remains and the dog alerted to it..... LOL
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2021, 07:15:49 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 06:27:31 AM
You like to think he alerted to a piece of coconut, but the fact is that he alerted to an area and in that area a piece of what may have been coconut was found. That doesn't mean that's what he alerted to.
You are in denial and will clearly defend the dogs to the death, despite the evidence that they clearly alert to a wide range of substances - strange from someone who is supposedly such a stickler for accepting nothing (except if it comes from a dog? ), believing no one (dogs exempt?) confirming everything (no need to if it’s a dog?)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 08:00:00 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 10, 2021, 09:01:48 PM
and bone, and in Portugal it could well be pig based.

According to Google it is usually Swine based;  And probably uneviscerated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 09:47:08 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 11, 2021, 06:42:19 AM
No its you who likes to think that snd you are wrong sgain..


 
ƒ As has now been widely reported, on the morning of 23 February
2008 LGC were excavating the area when they uncovered a
fragment of material measuring 6.3cm x 4.4cm that was believed
at that time to be human bone. The LGC scientist described it as ‘a
fragment of juvenile rather than an adult cranium’ and it was
referred to as JAR/6. A short time later Mr Grime’s dog was
presented with the item and gave a positive indication for human
remains.


From the BDO report which you have seen but obviously not read and understood. Eddie alerted specifically to the piece of coconut annd gave an alert for human remains. Please stop promoting untruths

So Grime thought the fragment was human remains and the dog alerted to it..... LOL

Your cite quotes "as has been widely reported" as it's source. By that I assume it is referring to reports in the media or online as they acknowledge.

In Harper's press conference in Ferbruary 2008 he said;

"We would not put the dog onto any of the items found.

The archaeologist and anthropologist will go through what we find bit by bit"
https://jersey.police.uk/news-appeals/2008/february/media-briefing-notes-from-haut-de-la-garenne-(20)/

Reading the Operation Rectangle Summary Report written in 2008, much less weight is given to the discovery of the fragment than was given to it by the media;

Anecdotal witness evidence was suggestive of juvenile human bones being recovered from the area of the north-western stairwell during recent building renovations in 2003. Human remains deposited within the ground in that area would contaminate the ground, and any porous material within it. The dog's reactions were therefore consistent with this scenario.

The area was therefore subjected to intrusive archaeological excavation. A fragment of what the forensic anthropologist describes as being possibly human/juvenile skull was recovered from within a Victorian context of the excavation. The fragment was shipped to the U.K. for confirmation of substance, species, carbon dating and DNA testihg. The laboratory conducting the analysis reported confused and conflicting findings therefore no conclusion is available at this time. Other burnt bone fragments were also recovered from the context within this area.

The dating of the context is Victorian, outside the time spectrum of a homicide enquiry at this time. Therefore further testing will be the subject of a forensic submission review later in the enquiry.
Page 11 Digital copy of Exhibit LH20: Operation Rectangle Summary Report by States of Jersey Police.
https://catalogue.jerseyheritage.org/collection/Details/archive/110390044
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2021, 09:54:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 09:47:08 AM
Your cite quotes "as has been widely reported" as it's source. By that I assume it is referring to reports in the media or online as they acknowledge.

In Harper's press conference in Ferbruary 2008 he said;

"We would not put the dog onto any of the items found.

The archaeologist and anthropologist will go through what we find bit by bit"
https://jersey.police.uk/news-appeals/2008/february/media-briefing-notes-from-haut-de-la-garenne-(20)/

Reading the Operation Rectangle Summary Report written in 2008, much less weight is given to the discovery of the fragment than was given to it by the media;

Anecdotal witness evidence was suggestive of juvenile human bones being recovered from the area of the north-western stairwell during recent building renovations in 2003. Human remains deposited within the ground in that area would contaminate the ground, and any porous material within it. The dog's reactions were therefore consistent with this scenario.

The area was therefore subjected to intrusive archaeological excavation. A fragment of what the forensic anthropologist describes as being possibly human/juvenile skull was recovered from within a Victorian context of the excavation. The fragment was shipped to the U.K. for confirmation of substance, species, carbon dating and DNA testihg. The laboratory conducting the analysis reported confused and conflicting findings therefore no conclusion is available at this time. Other burnt bone fragments were also recovered from the context within this area.

The dating of the context is Victorian, outside the time spectrum of a homicide enquiry at this time. Therefore further testing will be the subject of a forensic submission review later in the enquiry.
Page 11 Digital copy of Exhibit LH20: Operation Rectangle Summary Report by States of Jersey Police.
https://catalogue.jerseyheritage.org/collection/Details/archive/110390044
Given the dog's amazing and accurate ability to tell a bone from a coconut, why ever would the forensic team NOT give the final word (bark) to Eddie The Wonderdog?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 10:15:19 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 11, 2021, 09:54:24 AM
Given the dog's amazing and accurate ability to tell a bone from a coconut, why ever would the forensic team NOT give the final word (bark) to Eddie The Wonderdog?

The dog's role was to indicate areas where evidence might be found. I would think that anything found within that area would carry the scent to which the dog alerted, so there was nothing to be gained by asking him to screen those items individually.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 10:36:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 10:15:19 AM
The dog's role was to indicate areas where evidence might be found. I would think that anything found within that area would carry the scent to which the dog alerted, so there was nothing to be gained by asking him to screen those items individually.

What?  What was Eddie there for?

No evidence of human remains was found in that area and no children were found to be missing.  96,000 Pounds later for the use of Eddie, to the cost of The Tax Payer, the whole Investigation fell apart.

My only regret is that a nice little dog who only wanted to please was grandstanded by Martin Grime who tried to teach Eddie too many tricks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 11:43:54 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 10:36:14 AM
What?  What was Eddie there for?

No evidence of human remains was found in that area and no children were found to be missing.  96,000 Pounds later for the use of Eddie, to the cost of The Tax Payer, the whole Investigation fell apart.

My only regret is that a nice little dog who only wanted to please was grandstanded by Martin Grime who tried to teach Eddie too many tricks.

Eddie was there to indicate areas of interest, which is what he did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2021, 12:10:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 11:43:54 AM
Eddie was there to indicate areas of interest, which is what he did.
It would seem that despite the fact that only the remains of a coconut were found (RIP) some people remain convinced that a body had once lain beneath the concrete but was removed before the diggers got to work.  Fascinating!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 12:13:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 11:43:54 AM
Eddie was there to indicate areas of interest, which is what he did.

And found nothing.  Gosh.  Same old same old.  96,000 Pounds to The Tax Payer.  Mercy Beaucoup.

Did you miss the point that nothing was found and that no children were ever found to have been missing?  Or do you think that this was a cover up and that someone left these bodies lying around for long enough to leave cadaver odour and then moved them to somewhere else?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 11, 2021, 12:47:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 11:43:54 AM
Eddie was there to indicate areas of interest, which is what he did.

Why did that necessitate Grime staying in one of the most expensive hotels on the island and upgrade to a deluxe ocean vview room
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 01:11:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 11, 2021, 12:47:56 PM
Why did that necessitate Grimr staying in one of the most expensive hotels on the island and upgrade to a feluce ocean vview room

Because Lenny Harper wanted to believe what Grime said for the benefit of his own career.  They were all at it.

Lenny Harper then used a Retired Constable, Police Dog Handler, to bolster his own imaginings.  When Martin Grime was doing exactly the same thing.

Thank God Martin Grime bogged off to America.  He will never appear in an English Court.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2021, 01:32:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 11, 2021, 12:47:56 PM
Why did that necessitate Grimr staying in one of the most expensive hotels on the island and upgrade to a feluce ocean vview room
Eddie had expensive tastes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 01:39:23 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 01:11:04 PM
Because Lenny Harper wanted to believe what Grime said for the benefit of his own career.  They were all at it.

Lenny Harper then used a Retired Constable, Police Dog Handler, to bolster his own imaginings.  When Martin Grime was doing exactly the same thing.

Thank God Martin Grime bogged off to America.  He will never appear in an English Court.

Actually the total direct cost of the dog deployment was £108,075 - and the cadaver dog licence had expired seven months prior to arrival in Jersey. https://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/R%20Operation%20Rectangle%20review%20of%20the%20efficient%20and%20effective%20use%20of%20resources%20201005%20BDO%20Alto.pdf
Therefore Eddie did not meet the official criteria to make any sort of alert in Praia da Luz whether false or not as it could be argued he was deemed as "not competent" for operational duty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 01:45:57 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 01:39:23 PM
Actually the total direct cost of the dog deployment was £108,075 - and the cadaver dog licence had expired seven months prior to arrival in Jersey. https://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/R%20Operation%20Rectangle%20review%20of%20the%20efficient%20and%20effective%20use%20of%20resources%20201005%20BDO%20Alto.pdf
Therefore Eddie did not meet the official criteria to make any sort of alert in Praia da Luz whether false or not as it could be argued he was deemed as "not competent" for operational duty.

And since Eddie wasn't Martin Grime's dog in the first place one has to wonder what Martin Grime thought he was doing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 02:27:20 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 01:11:04 PM
Because Lenny Harper wanted to believe what Grime said for the benefit of his own career.  They were all at it.

Lenny Harper then used a Retired Constable, Police Dog Handler, to bolster his own imaginings.  When Martin Grime was doing exactly the same thing.

Thank God Martin Grime bogged off to America.  He will never appear in an English Court.

Harper called in the NPIA and followed their recommendations;

"The advice and assistance of the NPIA in the deployment of UK specialists was secured...On 19/2/08 the "Haul de Ia Garenne" site was visited by a reconnaissance party including States of Jersey Police SIO and Forensic Services Manager, NPIA homicide search advisors, FCSC canine advisor and LGC Forensics staff representing forensic archaeology and anthropology.
https://catalogue.jerseyheritage.org/wp-content/plugins/adlib-interface/adlib-download.php?p=110390044&f=0&d=archive&suppress_download
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 02:37:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 02:27:20 PM
Harper called in the NPIA and followed their recommendations;

"The advice and assistance of the NPIA in the deployment of UK specialists was secured...On 19/2/08 the "Haul de Ia Garenne" site was visited by a reconnaissance party including States of Jersey Police SIO and Forensic Services Manager, NPIA homicide search advisors, FCSC canine advisor and LGC Forensics staff representing forensic archaeology and anthropology.
https://catalogue.jerseyheritage.org/wp-content/plugins/adlib-interface/adlib-download.php?p=110390044&f=0&d=archive&suppress_download

That is a witness statement by Lenny Harper the disgraced officer in charge of the debacle.

Witness Name: Leonard Harper
Statement No: First
Exhibits: LH1 - LH48
Dated: 02 November 2014

Why are you quoting that as fact and ignoring the findings of OPERATION RECTANGLE.

The question is rhetorical just to save you more grief 😑
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 02:38:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 02:27:20 PM
Harper called in the NPIA and followed their recommendations;

"The advice and assistance of the NPIA in the deployment of UK specialists was secured...On 19/2/08 the "Haul de Ia Garenne" site was visited by a reconnaissance party including States of Jersey Police SIO and Forensic Services Manager, NPIA homicide search advisors, FCSC canine advisor and LGC Forensics staff representing forensic archaeology and anthropology.
https://catalogue.jerseyheritage.org/wp-content/plugins/adlib-interface/adlib-download.php?p=110390044&f=0&d=archive&suppress_download

Since they couldn't even spell the name of The Site correctly then one has to wonder where they thought they were.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 02:39:52 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 02:37:10 PM
That is a witness statement by Lenny Harper the disgraced officer in charge of the debacle.

Witness Name: Leonard Harper
Statement No: First
Exhibits: LH1 - LH48
Dated: 02 November 2014

Why are you quoting that as fact and ignoring the findings of OPERATION RECTANGLE.

The question is rhetorical just to save you more grief 😑

Oh Dear.  Even worse than I thought.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 11, 2021, 02:49:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2021, 05:33:32 PM
Firstly I don't know if the smell of methane affects a cadaver dog; how was that assertained? Secondly, Apartment 5A wasn't a peat bog, nor did it contain fertilizer.

Yes, methane can confuse dogs.

https://www.murderscience.com/articles/2018/1/29/cadaver-dogs-

https://www.academia.edu/602545/Suspect_burial_excavation_procedure_A_cautionary_tale

No, I agree that 5A wasn't a peat bog, lol. However, IF organic fertilizer had been used in the garden, it could equally have confused Eddie - even in the flat (by contamination via footwear, or even by remnant scent wafting in.

At the same time, that's not the sole potentially irrelevant explanation, and I've lost count of how often these have been discussed ad nauseum.

I have never discounted the possibility that she may indeed have died in the flat as there's no absolute proof of the contrary. On the other hand, IMO, the investigation into potential other explanations as to the dogs' alerts never got further than vaguely asking around if anyone had heard of anyone else dying there.

If ever other potentially plausible and rational alternative explanation had been thoroughly explored and discounted, then I'd have changed my view.

Reality seems to be that Eddie did his best, but could hardly have given a nuanced interpretation to Dad. And Dad had just embarked (or was about to embark) on a solo career.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 11, 2021, 02:56:05 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 10, 2021, 06:23:29 PM
The apartment was not a sterile environment.

The Judicial Police had given permission for it to be put back into service as a holiday residence between the McCanns leaving it and the dogs arriving to inspect it.

I forget how many families made use of it during that time.  A minimum of three and possibly five.  I do not think any of these families were asked to give an interview about their time there.

There would have been a deep clean between each different set of occupants.

Not sure what you mean by a "deep clean", Bri. This was way before recent Corona virus parents had even winked at each other across a bar in a virus disco. ;)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 03:14:14 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 11, 2021, 02:56:05 PM
Not sure what you mean by a "deep clean", Bri. This was way before recent Corona virus parents had even winked at each other across a bar in a virus disco. ;)

Hi Carana ~ what I mean by 'deep clean' is stripping the room down with changes of sheets and towels etc between guests departing and arriving - rather than just swinging in to give the apartment a quick once over for guests there over a few days.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 11, 2021, 03:34:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 10:15:19 AM
The dog's role was to indicate areas where evidence might be found. I would think that anything found within that area would carry the scent to which the dog alerted, so there was nothing to be gained by asking him to screen those items individually.

"Might" being the operative word.

None was found.

Which didn't stop a certain ex-head-honcho PJ officer from making a mint out of his short-lived "investigation".

Whether he really did leave of his own volition or was booted with x-months's salary to find another job, he could have written a very different account of his time on the case, and it would still have been a bestseller.

If he had written a book that described the difficulties he'd faced (lack of computers, difficulties in back-up staff... generally gripes against slow procedures, the system in generall, I'd have found it more useful).

However, my objection is that's not what his book was about. And the book was fairly benign compared to the "docufiction", his column in whichever rag, plus innnumerable interviews, and whatever else he had planned. Ho

However, that's not what he did. He tried to convince everyone that she had indeed died in that flat and the parents (and others) had all been criminally involved, based on the flimsiest of "evidence".

In the meantime - and however remote the idea may be now (in 2021) that she could still be alive 14 years later - 1-2 years after her disappearance, or even later, there was nothing tangible to assert the contrary. The effect, for many, could (and probably was) that there was no longer any point in being vigilant concerning a child who might have been held captive).

He was effectively scuppering chances of her being found alive. What honest copper (and a dad, to boot), could be so heartless?





Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 04:22:30 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 11, 2021, 03:34:11 PM
"Might" being the operative word.

None was found.

Which didn't stop a certain ex-head-honcho PJ officer from making a mint out of his short-lived "investigation".

Whether he really did leave of his own volition or was booted with x-months's salary to find another job, he could have written a very different account of his time on the case, and it would still have been a bestseller.

If he had written a book that described the difficulties he'd faced (lack of computers, difficulties in back-up staff... generally gripes against slow procedures, the system in generall, I'd have found it more useful).

However, my objection is that's not what his book was about. And the book was fairly benign compared to the "docufiction", his column in whichever rag, plus innnumerable interviews, and whatever else he had planned. Ho

However, that's not what he did. He tried to convince everyone that she had indeed died in that flat and the parents (and others) had all been criminally involved, based on the flimsiest of "evidence".

In the meantime - and however remote the idea may be now (in 2021) that she could still be alive 14 years later - 1-2 years after her disappearance, or even later, there was nothing tangible to assert the contrary. The effect, for many, could (and probably was) that there was no longer any point in being vigilant concerning a child who might have been held captive).

He was effectively scuppering chances of her being found alive. What honest copper (and a dad, to boot), could be so heartless?

There was no proof of Madeleine's death let alone what might have happened to her.  Trying to pin down a suspect against whom there was no evidence before ascertaining what had happened showed a limited vision.

It seems as far as Amaral was concerned the case stood or fell on finding a culprit - anyone would do - and he just did not understand the diligences required to search for a missing child.

The fact that no body was found in the vicinity within a few hours of Madeleine's disappearance surely should have been an indication that there was still some hope for her return.
Instead with the hasty focus on Murat against whom he was unable to find evidence being transferred to Madeleine's parents also against whom there was no evidence he effectively gave up on Madeleine as a result.

For the life of me I cannot understand the vendetta he has carried out against the McCanns over fourteen years - it has all been so unnecessary and talk about kicking people when they are down and at their lowest ebb.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 04:55:54 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 04:22:30 PM
There was no proof of Madeleine's death let alone what might have happened to her.  Trying to pin down a suspect against whom there was no evidence before ascertaining what had happened showed a limited vision.

It seems as far as Amaral was concerned the case stood or fell on finding a culprit - anyone would do - and he just did not understand the diligences required to search for a missing child.

The fact that no body was found in the vicinity within a few hours of Madeleine's disappearance surely should have been an indication that there was still some hope for her return.
Instead with the hasty focus on Murat against whom he was unable to find evidence being transferred to Madeleine's parents also against whom there was no evidence he effectively gave up on Madeleine as a result.

For the life of me I cannot understand the vendetta he has carried out against the McCanns over fourteen years - it has all been so unnecessary and talk about kicking people when they are down and at their lowest ebb.

In My Opinion Amaral only fixated on Murat because he knew that The McCanns could not have disposed of a body without help from a local with a car.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 05:06:53 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 04:55:54 PM
In My Opinion Amaral only fixated on Murat because he knew that The McCanns could not have disposed of a body without help from a local with a car.

There certainly was a movement amongst the Amaral leaning fora posters to try to  make an association with Murat along those lines.
Obviously because in their heart of hearts they knew there had to be a local element.  They were not to know that a rapist - burglar - and paedophile had according to Amaral been checked out by the Judicial police.  Perhaps if they had it would have put a different perspective on things.  Or - sadly - perhaps it would not 😢

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 05:13:40 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 05:06:53 PM
There certainly was a movement amongst the Amaral leaning fora posters to try to  make an association with Murat along those lines.
Obviously because in their heart of hearts they knew there had to be a local element.  They were not to know that a rapist - burglar - and paedophile had according to Amaral been checked out by the Judicial police.  Perhaps if they had it would have put a different perspective on things.  Or - sadly - perhaps it would not 😢

Probably not.  Amaral almost certainly didn't want outside interference to debunk his "Theory" for all the world to see.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 05:20:01 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 02:38:16 PM
Since they couldn't even spell the name of The Site correctly then one has to wonder where they thought they were.

????
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 05:27:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 05:20:01 PM
????

Didn't you read it ~ "Haul de Ia Garenne"  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg654221#msg654221
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 05:28:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 05:20:01 PM
????

Read your comment 10434.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 05:30:09 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 05:28:52 PM
Read your comment 10434.

      Beat you to it 😀
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 05:55:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 05:30:09 PM
      Beat you to it 😀

Thank you.

I sometimes wonder if G Unit is doing a deliberate hatchet job on herself these days.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2021, 06:46:34 PM
What scientific studies have been done on dogs ability to detect remnant scent theough a layer of concrete, ie: sniff out the temporary resting place of a corpse years that lay in situ years earlier that is subsequently removed and the resting placed covered in concrete?  Anyone know?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 06:53:04 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 11, 2021, 06:46:34 PM
What scientific studies have been done on dogs ability to detect remnant scent theough a layer of concrete, ie: sniff out the temporary resting place of a corpse years that lay in situ years earlier that is subsequently removed and the resting placed covered in concrete?  Anyone know?

Sounds like a lot of hard work to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 11, 2021, 07:00:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 11, 2021, 06:46:34 PM
What scientific studies have been done on dogs ability to detect remnant scent theough a layer of concrete, ie: sniff out the temporary resting place of a corpse years that lay in situ years earlier that is subsequently removed and the resting placed covered in concrete?  Anyone know?

Is that question related to the Kristin Smart case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2021, 07:03:41 PM
Quote from: misty on June 11, 2021, 07:00:48 PM
Is that question related to the Kristin Smart case?
No the Haut La Garenne case, as some people seem convinced Eddie alerted to cadaver scent not a coconut shell.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 08:18:21 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 11, 2021, 06:46:34 PM
What scientific studies have been done on dogs ability to detect remnant scent theough a layer of concrete, ie: sniff out the temporary resting place of a corpse years that lay in situ years earlier that is subsequently removed and the resting placed covered in concrete?  Anyone know?

What concrete?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 08:22:52 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 05:27:19 PM
Didn't you read it ~ "Haul de Ia Garenne"  http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg654221#msg654221

It's spelled correctly in the original. It seems to be something that can happen when copying and pasting from a pdf. document.
https://superuser.com/questions/137824/pdf-has-garbled-text-when-copy-pasting
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2021, 08:25:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 08:18:21 PM
What concrete?

“His murder inquiry began when Eddie, an "enhanced victim recovery dog", began barking in the cellar of Haut de la Garenne – the sign, according to its handler, that he had detected the scent of human remains.

By coincidence, the dog, from South Yorkshire Police, is the same animal that supposedly picked up "the scent of death" in the apartment where Madeleine McCann was last seen in Praia de Luz in Portugal.

According to Mr Harper, Eddie smelled the decades-old skull fragment through "several inches" of concrete, which police then smashed through. Eddie had the same reaction at another six locations at Haut de la Garenne but nothing was ever found.

"I don't believe a dog can pick up such a scent through a layer of concrete," said Mike Swindells, a former Lancashire officer who wrote the standard sniffer dog training manual.

"It's really very unlikely."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2021, 08:48:13 PM
https://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/R%20Operation%20Rectangle%20review%20of%20the%20efficient%20and%20effective%20use%20of%20resources%20201005%20BDO%20Alto.pdf pg 45 and 46 if you prefer
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 08:48:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 08:22:52 PM
It's spelled correctly in the original. It seems to be something that can happen when copying and pasting from a pdf. document.
https://superuser.com/questions/137824/pdf-has-garbled-text-when-copy-pasting

Might I request you indulge me with the relevant page number in the link you provided.
https://catalogue.jerseyheritage.org/wp-content/plugins/adlib-interface/adlib-download.php?p=110390044&f=0&d=archive&suppress_download
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 10:04:54 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 08:48:31 PM
Might I request you indulge me with the relevant page number in the link you provided.
https://catalogue.jerseyheritage.org/wp-content/plugins/adlib-interface/adlib-download.php?p=110390044&f=0&d=archive&suppress_download

Page 4
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 10:16:28 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 11, 2021, 06:46:34 PM
What scientific studies have been done on dogs ability to detect remnant scent theough a layer of concrete, ie: sniff out the temporary resting place of a corpse years that lay in situ years earlier that is subsequently removed and the resting placed covered in concrete?  Anyone know?

The dog alerted to a stairwell. I don't know who said he detected through a layer of concrete;

CANINE SEARCH

The reactions of the dog are explained as scent travelling through  ‘chimneys’ such as conduit, electric cable ducting, which transects from the north west stairwell along the western corridor in a southerly direction.
http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2012/04/summary-of-evidence.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 10:21:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 11, 2021, 08:48:13 PM
https://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/R%20Operation%20Rectangle%20review%20of%20the%20efficient%20and%20effective%20use%20of%20resources%20201005%20BDO%20Alto.pdf pg 45 and 46 if you prefer

This document was focused on examining and assessing the costs of the enquiry, details of which were made available to those involved. When commenting on details of the investigation their information seems to have been gathered from media reports rather than police records.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 10:34:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 10:04:54 PM
Page 4

Thank you.

Where exactly.

STATES OF JERSEY POLICE
• The human blood search dog was deployed in a detailed close supervision search role
within crime scenes to locate human blood deposits that may be explained at a later
date as being accidental or suspicious.
The system of deployment was recorded in the Standard Operating Procedures and policy
documents. The policies and procedures were applied consistently throughout the search to
conclusion.
The following search scenarios were considered and adopted where deemed appropriate.

Feature based searching. (Deposition)
Although feature based search is adopted in most cases of homicide in this particular case
there are no obvious features that are evident in the present day that were evident at the
operational material time. However, present day features such as trees and obvious ground
disturbance would be included within the scenario based search strategy.
Offender profile based search. (Deposition)
There are no known offenders in this case in relation to homicide. However the abuse of
child/juvenile' residents was reportedly committed by staff and residents.

Offender profile based search (Evidential- abuse) 1
Although there are a number of suspected offenders in the case all policed searches would be
included within scenario based searches.

Speculative search.
Speculative searching was not included. All searches conducted were subject to discussion
and policy decision in relation to scenario, based upon anecdotal witness evidence.

Scenario Based Searching
Prior to any searches being undertaken scenarios to be considered included:
the search for the sub surface, non dismembered, skeletal remains of children within the
building and grounds of Haut de la Garenne.

Intelligence of a child having been chased through the building and leaping through a
window. 

Intelligence of forced illegal abortion.

Intelligence of Still borne child 

The search for and recovery of any evidence that would directly corroborate witness .
testimony of abuse, or support witness testimony of abuse, or any suggestive intelligence of
same.

Witness accounts of systematic abuse, both violent and sexual, include anecdotal evidence of
events in the cellar areas hidden from view under the ground floor of the building.

The search for and recovery of any evidence that would directly corroborate witness
testimony of abuse, support witness testimony of abuse, or any suggestive intelligence of
PO BOX 789 JERSEY JE4 BZD TELEPHONE 01534 612612 FAX 01534 612613
WEBSITE www.pollce.gov.je
CHIEF OFFICER: GRAHAM POWER QPM MA (Oxon) DEPUTY CHIEF OFFICER: LEONARD HARPER MSc BA (Hans)
page 4 of 24
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2021, 10:35:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 10:16:28 PM
The dog alerted to a stairwell. I don't know who said he detected through a layer of concrete;

CANINE SEARCH

The reactions of the dog are explained as scent travelling through  ‘chimneys’ such as conduit, electric cable ducting, which transects from the north west stairwell along the western corridor in a southerly direction.
http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2012/04/summary-of-evidence.html
Did you ignore my previous post?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2021, 10:36:15 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2021, 10:21:25 PM
This document was focused on examining and assessing the costs of the enquiry, details of which were made available to those involved. When commenting on details of the investigation their information seems to have been gathered from media reports rather than police records.
@)(++(*
Supply the police records then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 08:10:33 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 11, 2021, 10:34:04 PM
Thank you.

Where exactly.

STATES OF JERSEY POLICE
• The human blood search dog was deployed in a detailed close supervision search role
within crime scenes to locate human blood deposits that may be explained at a later
date as being accidental or suspicious.
The system of deployment was recorded in the Standard Operating Procedures and policy
documents. The policies and procedures were applied consistently throughout the search to
conclusion.
The following search scenarios were considered and adopted where deemed appropriate.

Feature based searching. (Deposition)
Although feature based search is adopted in most cases of homicide in this particular case
there are no obvious features that are evident in the present day that were evident at the
operational material time. However, present day features such as trees and obvious ground
disturbance would be included within the scenario based search strategy.
Offender profile based search. (Deposition)
There are no known offenders in this case in relation to homicide. However the abuse of
child/juvenile' residents was reportedly committed by staff and residents.

Offender profile based search (Evidential- abuse) 1
Although there are a number of suspected offenders in the case all policed searches would be
included within scenario based searches.

Speculative search.
Speculative searching was not included. All searches conducted were subject to discussion
and policy decision in relation to scenario, based upon anecdotal witness evidence.

Scenario Based Searching
Prior to any searches being undertaken scenarios to be considered included:
the search for the sub surface, non dismembered, skeletal remains of children within the
building and grounds of Haut de la Garenne.

Intelligence of a child having been chased through the building and leaping through a
window. 

Intelligence of forced illegal abortion.

Intelligence of Still borne child 

The search for and recovery of any evidence that would directly corroborate witness .
testimony of abuse, or support witness testimony of abuse, or any suggestive intelligence of
same.

Witness accounts of systematic abuse, both violent and sexual, include anecdotal evidence of
events in the cellar areas hidden from view under the ground floor of the building.

The search for and recovery of any evidence that would directly corroborate witness
testimony of abuse, support witness testimony of abuse, or any suggestive intelligence of
PO BOX 789 JERSEY JE4 BZD TELEPHONE 01534 612612 FAX 01534 612613
WEBSITE www.pollce.gov.je
CHIEF OFFICER: GRAHAM POWER QPM MA (Oxon) DEPUTY CHIEF OFFICER: LEONARD HARPER MSc BA (Hans)
page 4 of 24

Flippin' pdf. At the top it says page 4, but at the bottom of the page it says page 3.

STATES OF JERSEY POLICE
These staged renovations have been identified from archive plarming so as to prioritise areas
of search and identifY precise locations of relevant to this enquiry.
TASKING, STRATEGY AND DEPLOYMENT
On 5/2/08 a briefing was held at LGC Forensics Oxford Chaired by the SIO Deputy Chief
Officer Lenny Harper, States of Jersey Police. In addition to the briefing a document was
distributed which had been prepared by Karl Harrison, lead scientist LGC. This document
was a desk based study of the "Haut de Ia Garenne" site.
The Forensic Canine Search Consultancy produced a canine deployment brief encompassing
the entire site to maximise assurity. The canine assets would be deployed both in a wide area
screening and detailed search capacity.
On 19/2/08 the "Haul de Ia Garenne" site was visited by a reconnaissance party including
States of Jersey Police SIO and Forensic Services Manager, NPIA homicide search advisors,
FCSC canine advisor and LGC Forensics staff representing forensic archaeology and
anthropology.
https://catalogue.jerseyheritage.org/wp-content/plugins/adlib-interface/adlib-download.php?p=110390044&f=0&d=archive&suppress_download

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 12, 2021, 08:59:01 AM

So we can't trust pdfs for Cites.  And it's someone else's fault.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 09:31:28 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 12, 2021, 08:59:01 AM
So we can't trust pdfs for Cites.  And it's someone else's fault.

Pardon? There's nothing wrong with using pdf. files for cites, but copying and pasting the info can be problematic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 12, 2021, 09:48:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 09:31:28 AM
Pardon? There's nothing wrong with using pdf. files for cites, but copying and pasting the info can be problematic.

How do you work that one out if there is a problem with Copy and Paste?

And never say 'Pardon', always say 'What', my granny used to say.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 12, 2021, 10:05:20 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 11, 2021, 03:34:11 PM
"Might" being the operative word.

None was found.

Which didn't stop a certain ex-head-honcho PJ officer from making a mint out of his short-lived "investigation".

Whether he really did leave of his own volition or was booted with x-months's salary to find another job, he could have written a very different account of his time on the case, and it would still have been a bestseller.

If he had written a book that described the difficulties he'd faced (lack of computers, difficulties in back-up staff... generally gripes against slow procedures, the system in generall, I'd have found it more useful).

However, my objection is that's not what his book was about. And the book was fairly benign compared to the "docufiction", his column in whichever rag, plus innnumerable interviews, and whatever else he had planned. Ho

However, that's not what he did. He tried to convince everyone that she had indeed died in that flat and the parents (and others) had all been criminally involved, based on the flimsiest of "evidence".

In the meantime - and however remote the idea may be now (in 2021) that she could still be alive 14 years later - 1-2 years after her disappearance, or even later, there was nothing tangible to assert the contrary. The effect, for many, could (and probably was) that there was no longer any point in being vigilant concerning a child who might have been held captive).

He was effectively scuppering chances of her being found alive. What honest copper (and a dad, to boot), could be so heartless?

He was effectively scuppering chances of her being found alive. What honest copper (and a dad, to boot), could be so heartless?

This could also show imo - he had first hand information of what happened that night he was on the case an could probably know things we don't.

This is why I believe he knows the mccs are involved - and has risked everything to stick to his belief

Because he is basically a cop and father with knowledge of the case....

G.A was there.. involved ....none of us was ..he is working from knowledge ...ours is just opinions what we think happened.


It amazes me the work posters go to ...too discredit the dogs an Grime ...why...what does it prove

why so obsessed to discredit the dogs if you think there alerts were of no use anyway.

It does not alter the fact that the dogs only alerted to the mccs and the mccs belongings in different areas.

Not one single alert it seems.... to any of the others in there group.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 10:08:54 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 12, 2021, 09:48:58 AM
How do you work that one out if there is a problem with Copy and Paste?

And never say 'Pardon', always say 'What', my granny used to say.

The problem is obvious when "Haut de la Garenne" copied pastes as  “Haul de la Garenne”. Google tells me this sort of thing happens to others too, but I don't really understand the explanations supplied. (not that I need to, it's enough to know it's not me or the Jersey Police)
https://www.reddit.com/r/Adobe/comments/j9j7af/cannot_copypaste_text_from_pdf_some_characters/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 12, 2021, 10:12:06 AM
For anyone old enough to remember the Jersey saga...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1086018/How-police-chief-Lenny-Harper-lost-plot-Jersey-childrens-home-murders.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 12, 2021, 10:12:43 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 10:08:54 AM
The problem is obvious when "Haut de la Garenne" copied pastes as  “Haul de la Garenne”. Google tells me this sort of thing happens to others too, but I don't really understand the explanations supplied. (not that I need to, it's enough to know it's not me or the Jersey Police)
https://www.reddit.com/r/Adobe/comments/j9j7af/cannot_copypaste_text_from_pdf_some_characters/

And that nothing was found, of course.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 12, 2021, 10:27:53 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 12, 2021, 10:12:06 AM
For anyone old enough to remember the Jersey saga...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1086018/How-police-chief-Lenny-Harper-lost-plot-Jersey-childrens-home-murders.html

Gosh.  That's a good find.  I actually do remember this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 10:43:53 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 12, 2021, 10:12:06 AM
For anyone old enough to remember the Jersey saga...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1086018/How-police-chief-Lenny-Harper-lost-plot-Jersey-childrens-home-murders.html

As I understand it the press release said ""Jersey Police found what is believed to be partial remains of a child's body at former children's home on the island on Saturday morning"

The media then waxed lyrical, as they are wont to do.

The Daily Telegraph mentioned "the discovery of a body at the home at the weekend."
The Times said "After the discovery of the skull..."
The Mirror reported that: "Police investigating allegations of child abuse said on Monday their search of a former children's home in the Channel Islands where a body was found at the weekend..."
The Guardian led with: "The body of a child is found at the home after a sniffer dog detects remains through several inches of concrete..."
https://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2010/05/haut-de-la-garenne-retrospective-review.html?m=0

So journalistic licence turned 'partial remains' into a skull or even a body, just as Eddie alerting to a scent emerging through various channels became Eddie smelling said imaginary skull or body through several inches of concrete.

Perhaps the press should have examined their own role in this as well as that of the SIO?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 12, 2021, 11:15:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 10:43:53 AM
As I understand it the press release said ""Jersey Police found what is believed to be partial remains of a child's body at former children's home on the island on Saturday morning"

The media then waxed lyrical, as they are wont to do.

The Daily Telegraph mentioned "the discovery of a body at the home at the weekend."
The Times said "After the discovery of the skull..."
The Mirror reported that: "Police investigating allegations of child abuse said on Monday their search of a former children's home in the Channel Islands where a body was found at the weekend..."
The Guardian led with: "The body of a child is found at the home after a sniffer dog detects remains through several inches of concrete..."
https://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2010/05/haut-de-la-garenne-retrospective-review.html?m=0

So journalistic licence turned 'partial remains' into a skull or even a body, just as Eddie alerting to a scent emerging through various channels became Eddie smelling said imaginary skull or body through several inches of concrete.

Perhaps the press should have examined their own role in this as well as that of the SIO?

Absolutely. But who was feeding the media?

Have you read "Flat Earth News" by Nick Davies? His investigative work led to the Leveson inquiry.

Al Jazeera's documentary "McCanns versus the Media" is also worth watching, IMO.

Part 1:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epZEpwVXgyw

Part 2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbTimBzkcRM

Part 3:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEaDIhYABIg

Part 4:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPKn44DN9EM




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 12, 2021, 11:23:10 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 11, 2021, 04:55:54 PM
In My Opinion Amaral only fixated on Murat because he knew that The McCanns could not have disposed of a body without help from a local with a car.

Way back, a PJ rumour was that the connection was... Exeter. The O'Briens had recently moved there, and Murat's sister lived there. And therefore, bingo. I'm not sure that they realised that Exeter is somewhat bigger than Portimão.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 11:30:51 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 12, 2021, 11:15:23 AM
Absolutely. But who was feeding the media?

Have you read "Flat Earth News" by Nick Davies? His investigative work led to the Leveson inquiry.

Al Jazeera's documentary "McCanns versus the Media" is also worth watching, IMO.

Part 1:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epZEpwVXgyw

Part 2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbTimBzkcRM

Part 3:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEaDIhYABIg

Part 4:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPKn44DN9EM

Journalists really should understand that those who leak are doing it for reasons of their own, and may be exaggerating or even lying. Repeating what they say is irresponsible and unprofessional imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 12, 2021, 11:33:20 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 12, 2021, 10:12:43 AM
And that nothing was found, of course.

Nothing relevant to the investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 12, 2021, 11:38:17 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 11:30:51 AM
Journalists really should understand that those who leak are doing it for reasons of their own, and may be exaggerating or even lying. Repeating what they say is irresponsible and unprofessional imo.

I agree. I expect the Ciprianos do as well.

Zooming into recent world events, a major bleach-producing company had to issue a statement that their products were not intended to be ingested.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 12, 2021, 12:10:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 11:30:51 AM
Journalists really should understand that those who leak are doing it for reasons of their own, and may be exaggerating or even lying. Repeating what they say is irresponsible and unprofessional imo.

Keep that hat on, and try reading the coverage of the Cipriano case in that light.

All somewhere in this sub-forum:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=71.0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 12, 2021, 12:30:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 08:10:33 AM
Flippin' pdf. At the top it says page 4, but at the bottom of the page it says page 3.

STATES OF JERSEY POLICE
These staged renovations have been identified from archive plarming so as to prioritise areas
of search and identifY precise locations of relevant to this enquiry.
TASKING, STRATEGY AND DEPLOYMENT
On 5/2/08 a briefing was held at LGC Forensics Oxford Chaired by the SIO Deputy Chief
Officer Lenny Harper, States of Jersey Police. In addition to the briefing a document was
distributed which had been prepared by Karl Harrison, lead scientist LGC. This document
was a desk based study of the "Haut de Ia Garenne" site.
The Forensic Canine Search Consultancy produced a canine deployment brief encompassing
the entire site to maximise assurity. The canine assets would be deployed both in a wide area
screening and detailed search capacity.
On 19/2/08 the "Haul de Ia Garenne" site was visited by a reconnaissance party including
States of Jersey Police SIO and Forensic Services Manager, NPIA homicide search advisors,
FCSC canine advisor and LGC Forensics staff representing forensic archaeology and
anthropology.
https://catalogue.jerseyheritage.org/wp-content/plugins/adlib-interface/adlib-download.php?p=110390044&f=0&d=archive&suppress_download

Mine doesn't.
The bottom of page three says - Page three of twenty four.  Page four is the same and is as I have cut and pasted with no page number on the top but with Page four of twenty four at the bottom.


I think the problem as far as I am concerned is that you have added opinion to the quotation by saying "The advice and assistance of the NPIA in the deployment of UK specialists was secured... On 19/2/08 the "Haul de Ia Garenne" site was visited


Which is actually a bit of a laugh when one reads OPERATION RECTANGLE.  Advice and assistance was sought but whether or not it was taken is another matter.  But it most certainly was not a factor in the deployment of the dogs when none of the procedures in force at the time were either sought or implemented.

Snip

“It is not entirely clear how Mr Grime came to be involved in Operation Rectangle.  What is clear is that Mr Grime was the only specialist in this field who was approached and perhaps even considered by SOJP.  LGC, in response to a request for advice on this topic from SOJP in January2008, did in fact suggest and pass on the contact details of the Surrey Police Dog Unit but this was not followed up and no other UK police force was approached.  This seems slightly odd, especially given the stance of the ACPO Police Dog Working Group on this issue.”
Page 37
CFID landscape report (gov.je)

https://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/R%20Operation%20Rectangle%20review%20of%20the%20efficient%20and%20effective%20use%20of%20resources%20201005%20BDO%20Alto.pdf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 12, 2021, 01:50:11 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 12, 2021, 10:27:53 AM
Gosh.  That's a good find.  I actually do remember this.

The saddest part, for me, is that once the media switched off after the "skull" turned out be a coconut, it was almost as if nothing had ever happened there. The child abuse was real.

A bit of background reading:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/03/haut-de-la-garenne-house-of-horror-investigation-brought-jersey-abuse-to-light
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 12, 2021, 02:39:29 PM
Police 'regret' appointing Lenny Harper
NewsPublished: May 20, 2016

THE States police 'regret' appointing Lenny Harper as the senior investigating officer of the historical abuse inquiry in 2007, a lawyer for the force told the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry on Thursday.
Police 'regret' appointing Lenny Harper

And in a second highly critical submission to the panel later in the day, a legal representative for the Law Officers' Department said Mr Harper had an 'astonishing attitude' to dealing with the media, which negatively impacted on the force.

Advocate Jeremy Garrood, on behalf of the police, said that during the operation, named Operation Rectangle, Mr Harper had been 'ill advised' to tell the media that the 'potential remains of a child' has been found at the Haute de la Garenne care home - following tests it was revealed that the fragments were not human remains.

Oliver Glasgow, QC, representing the Law Officers' Department, said that Mr Harper misled the media and his actions were a 'disservice' to the victims of child abuse.
https://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2016/05/20/police-regret-appointing-lenny-harper/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 12, 2021, 03:01:59 PM
Quote from: kizzy on June 12, 2021, 10:05:20 AM

He was effectively scuppering chances of her being found alive. What honest copper (and a dad, to boot), could be so heartless?

This could also show imo - he had first hand information of what happened that night he was on the case an could probably know things we don't.

This is why I believe he knows the mccs are involved - and has risked everything to stick to his belief

Because he is basically a cop and father with knowledge of the case....

G.A was there.. involved ....none of us was ..he is working from knowledge ...ours is just opinions what we think happened.


It amazes me the work posters go to ...too discredit the dogs an Grime ...why...what does it prove

why so obsessed to discredit the dogs if you think there alerts were of no use anyway.

It does not alter the fact that the dogs only alerted to the mccs and the mccs belongings in different areas.

Not one single alert it seems.... to any of the others in there group.

I have no problem with using dogs (or even rats) as assets. When dogs alert, there could be an item or an area worth investigating further. Alerts - on their own - mean little else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 12, 2021, 03:55:08 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 12, 2021, 03:01:59 PM
I have no problem with using dogs (or even rats) as assets. When dogs alert, there could be an item or an area worth investigating further. Alerts - on their own - mean little else.

Or even vultures ...are good at finding bodies.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 12, 2021, 04:07:41 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 12, 2021, 01:50:11 PM
The saddest part, for me, is that once the media switched off after the "skull" turned out be a coconut, it was almost as if nothing had ever happened there. The child abuse was real.

A bit of background reading:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/03/haut-de-la-garenne-house-of-horror-investigation-brought-jersey-abuse-to-light

All a bit too up close and personal for me.

I am beginning to suspect that my sister and I finished up in the only really lovely Children's Home that existed at the time.  However, we did get ideas above our station, which didn't go down too well when we were inevitably sent back home.  But we did both survive that and go on to continue to believe in our selves.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 05:15:32 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 12, 2021, 12:30:59 PM
Mine doesn't.
The bottom of page three says - Page three of twenty four.  Page four is the same and is as I have cut and pasted with no page number on the top but with Page four of twenty four at the bottom.


I think the problem as far as I am concerned is that you have added opinion to the quotation by saying "The advice and assistance of the NPIA in the deployment of UK specialists was secured... On 19/2/08 the "Haul de Ia Garenne" site was visited


Which is actually a bit of a laugh when one reads OPERATION RECTANGLE.  Advice and assistance was sought but whether or not it was taken is another matter.  But it most certainly was not a factor in the deployment of the dogs when none of the procedures in force at the time were either sought or implemented.

Snip

“It is not entirely clear how Mr Grime came to be involved in Operation Rectangle.  What is clear is that Mr Grime was the only specialist in this field who was approached and perhaps even considered by SOJP.  LGC, in response to a request for advice on this topic from SOJP in January2008, did in fact suggest and pass on the contact details of the Surrey Police Dog Unit but this was not followed up and no other UK police force was approached.  This seems slightly odd, especially given the stance of the ACPO Police Dog Working Group on this issue.”
Page 37
CFID landscape report (gov.je)

https://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/R%20Operation%20Rectangle%20review%20of%20the%20efficient%20and%20effective%20use%20of%20resources%20201005%20BDO%20Alto.pdf

The reason for Grime's involvement may not have been clear to those who were tasked with examining the costs of the investigation because they may not have had access to all the information.

I don't know either, but he had worked with the National Police Search Advisers before, and was registered as a subject matter expert with NCPE pre his retirement. It may well be that Grime was recommended to Harper due to his expertise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 12, 2021, 05:23:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 05:15:32 PM
The reason for Grime's involvement may not have been clear to those who were tasked with examining the costs of the investigation because they may not have had access to all the information.

I don't know either, but he had worked with the National Police Search Advisers before, and was registered as a subject matter expert with NCPE pre his retirement. It may well be that Grime was recommended to Harper due to his expertise.

Didn't Grime take the Dog Video Searches from Praia de Luz with him to show Lenny Harper?  I wonder who would have suggested that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 12, 2021, 06:09:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 05:15:32 PM
The reason for Grime's involvement may not have been clear to those who were tasked with examining the costs of the investigation because they may not have had access to all the information.

I don't know either, but he had worked with the National Police Search Advisers before, and was registered as a subject matter expert with NCPE pre his retirement. It may well be that Grime was recommended to Harper due to his expertise.

I really think it is about time you took the rose coloured spectacles off and informed yourself exactly what it is you are talking about by reading OPERATION RECTANGLE which is the official report into the fiasco at Haute de la Garenne.

Of course these guys knew exactly what went on even if in retrospect, to suggest otherwise is nonsense.

Martin Grime will always be an expert.  But he took a dog to Praia da Luz and to Jersey whose licence had run out making the dog team incompetent in both those areas.
Perhaps that may not have mattered in Luz but in Jersey it was an entirely different matter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 06:23:53 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 12, 2021, 05:23:57 PM
Didn't Grime take the Dog Video Searches from Praia de Luz with him to show Lenny Harper?  I wonder who would have suggested that.

I've no idea. I only decided to look at Haut de la Garenne because I was fed up of being told that Eddie alerted to coconut. It now seems to me that statement isn't necessarily true.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 12, 2021, 06:26:15 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 05:15:32 PM
The reason for Grime's involvement may not have been clear to those who were tasked with examining the costs of the investigation because they may not have had access to all the information.

I don't know either, but he had worked with the National Police Search Advisers before, and was registered as a subject matter expert with NCPE pre his retirement. It may well be that Grime was recommended to Harper due to his expertise.

I read in one of the reports that whilst in Jersey Grime offered his services to two other investigations on the island but was turned down. Perhaps he heard about the Jersey case and like other businesses.... Pushed his forward to get the lucrative contract
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 12, 2021, 06:34:17 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 12, 2021, 05:23:57 PM
Didn't Grime take the Dog Video Searches from Praia de Luz with him to show Lenny Harper?  I wonder who would have suggested that.

I believe he did and I believe that he found them very convincing.

So many people had so much faith and reputation invested in what they believed were these dogs unique abilities that they just could not see the very obvious flaws.

The dogs just could not find what wasn't there to be found in the first instance.
Not forgetting that in Luz some alerts were proven forensically - none of which had anything to do with the McCanns (Kate's fingerprints and Gerry's cellular material excepted) - just as other 'hits' in Jersey were valid ones too (the semen found at the outpost and the cremation scatterings).
But just as in Luz nothing of relevance to further the case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 12, 2021, 06:38:53 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 12, 2021, 06:26:15 PM
I read in one of the reports that whilst in Jersey Grime offered his services to two other investigations on the island but was turned down. Perhaps he heard about the Jersey case and like other businesses.... Pushed his forward to get the lucrative contract

I agree and why not - he was a private individual running his own company.  I think if Lenny Harper had followed the advice and offers of help from mainland police forces as he should the situation would not have arisen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 12, 2021, 06:41:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 06:23:53 PM
I've no idea. I only decided to look at Haut de la Garenne because I was fed up of being told that Eddie alerted to coconut. It now seems to me that statement isn't necessarily true.

Maybe I was wrong to recommend reading OPERATION RECTANGLE to you.  Whatever the evidence it seems you know better.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 12, 2021, 06:48:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 06:23:53 PM
I've no idea. I only decided to look at Haut de la Garenne because I was fed up of being told that Eddie alerted to coconut. It now seems to me that statement isn't necessarily true.

According to the BDO report eddie did alert to a coconut....and as I recall from posts on this forum Grime did use the video of Luz to promote his business

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10842.msg540602#msg540602
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 12, 2021, 07:53:21 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 12, 2021, 06:48:33 PM
According to the BDO report eddie did alert to a coconut....and as I recall from posts on this forum Grime did use the video of Luz to promote his business

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10842.msg540602#msg540602

You are correct in saying that the catalyst was the video from Praia da Luz, Davel.

Snip
As the emails to Coupland demonstrate, at first Harper displayed a healthy scepticism. So what made him change his mind? According to a senior detective who worked on Harper's team, one factor was sniffer dog Eddie's handler, Martin Grime.

'Grime made a presentation, showing him [Harper] a video of the dog finding the "scent of death" in Kate and Gerry McCann's car,' the detective said.

'They were still formal suspects and the case had got worldwide publicity. It seemed to get Lenny very excited. I think Grime kind of bewitched him.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1217863/Bungled-Jersey-child-abuse-probe-branded-20million-shambles.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 10:52:29 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 12, 2021, 06:48:33 PM
According to the BDO report eddie did alert to a coconut....and as I recall from posts on this forum Grime did use the video of Luz to promote his business

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10842.msg540602#msg540602

According to a company of Chartered Accountants..............

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 12, 2021, 10:55:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 10:52:29 PM
According to a company of Chartered Accountants..............
Do you have access to the police and forensic reports confirming this was not a coconut fragment but a child’s remains?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 13, 2021, 12:25:05 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2021, 10:52:29 PM
According to a company of Chartered Accountants..............

Perhaps it would help you to read corroborating details from the State of Jersey police themselves.

https://jersey.police.uk/news-appeals/2008/november/press-conference-notes-from-operation-rectangle-update/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2021, 12:48:19 AM
Quote from: misty on June 13, 2021, 12:25:05 AM
Perhaps it would help you to read corroborating details from the State of Jersey police themselves.

https://jersey.police.uk/news-appeals/2008/november/press-conference-notes-from-operation-rectangle-update/

Thanks, Misty.  I don't think I have seen that "straight from the horse's mouth" press release before although I have read it from the press who reported on it.

I think it is definitive.


Snip
With regard to the particular evidence which has been highlighted in the media, the States of Jersey Police are clear that these do not support suggestions that there have been murders at Haut de la Garenne.  In particular;

A Piece of Child's Skull

 An anthropologist made an initial identification as this item being a piece of child's skull.
 At 10:45 am the SIO made a decision to release information to the press about the find.
 At 2pm the same day a press conference disclosed this item as the finding of the potential remains of a child.
 This item was lying within earth that is now identified as being Victorian era.
 On the 31st March 2008 Dr Higham from the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit stated he believed the item was not bone.
 The original anthropologist reviewed her initial identification and on 14th April 2008 had stated she no longer identified it as part of a skull.
 Dr Higham and Dr Jacobi (of the British Museum faunal specialist) concluded that the sample was not in fact bone, but was almost certainly wood.  They went further stating it was more like a part of a seed casing like a small piece of coconut.
 The conclusions are therefore that the sample is a) Not bone and b) Not human.
 The States of Jersey Police satisfied that having liaised with the anthropologist and Dr Higham and other experts, that this item is not human and was found in a Victorian context.

https://jersey.police.uk/news-appeals/2008/november/press-conference-notes-from-operation-rectangle-update/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 01:59:24 AM
Quote from: misty on June 13, 2021, 12:25:05 AM
Perhaps it would help you to read corroborating details from the State of Jersey police themselves.

https://jersey.police.uk/news-appeals/2008/november/press-conference-notes-from-operation-rectangle-update/

Which does not say that Eddie alerted to a piece of coconut. He did alert to the area where the item was found, but I've seen nothing to support BDO's claim that he specifically alerted to the item. Even if he did, that doesn't mean it was human in origin. It could just mean it had absorbed scent present nearby.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2021, 02:11:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 01:59:24 AM
Which does not say that Eddie alerted to a piece of coconut. He did alert to the area where the item was found, but I've seen nothing to support BDO's claim that he specifically alerted to the item. Even if he did, that doesn't mean it was human in origin. It could just mean it had absorbed scent present nearby.

On another thread you said "I think people believe what they want to believe."

I think you may have hit the nail on the head with that one 😁
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 13, 2021, 02:31:27 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 01:59:24 AM
Which does not say that Eddie alerted to a piece of coconut. He did alert to the area where the item was found, but I've seen nothing to support BDO's claim that he specifically alerted to the item. Even if he did, that doesn't mean it was human in origin. It could just mean it had absorbed scent present nearby.

So what happened to all of these Human Remains from whence this Cadaver Odour came?  Did someone dig them up?  All of them?  That would have been a job and a half.  But not a sign of anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 13, 2021, 02:41:23 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2021, 02:11:58 AM
On another thread you said "I think people believe what they want to believe."

I think you may have hit the nail on the head with that one 😁

There is something weird going on in the heads of some people.  The mere mention of Cadaver Dogs in this case produces bodies lying around all over the place, none of which have ever been found.  Not a single bone.  What a fantastic clean up job must have been done.  I can only wonder what some people think was done with all of these bodies once they had been removed from their original hiding place.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2021, 03:02:30 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 13, 2021, 02:41:23 AM
There is something weird going on in the heads of some people.  The mere mention of Cadaver Dogs in this case produces bodies lying around all over the place, none of which have ever been found.  Not a single bone.  What a fantastic clean up job must have been done.  I can only wonder what some people think was done with all of these bodies once they had been removed from their original hiding place.

If the FSS report wasn't enough to clarify the situation for some, the shenanigans over Haute de la Garenne should have been enough to settle it.
I for one failed to realise the extent of the visceral hatred directed at Kate and Gerry McCann as epitomised in the never ending dog debate.  What 'dog debate' is that, one might say given that it was all done and dusted in 2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 13, 2021, 03:16:31 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2021, 03:02:30 AM
If the FSS report wasn't enough to clarify the situation for some, the shenanigans over Haute de la Garenne should have been enough to settle it.
I for one failed to realise the extent of the visceral hatred directed at Kate and Gerry McCann as epitomised in the never ending dog debate.  What 'dog debate' is that, one might say given that it was all done and dusted in 2007.

Martin Grime has a lot to answer for.  Although I don't think he did this with malice.  Just self aggrandisement and the pursuit of money.

The same can't be said for those who think that what they will of things he didn't say.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2021, 07:17:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 01:59:24 AM
Which does not say that Eddie alerted to a piece of coconut. He did alert to the area where the item was found, but I've seen nothing to support BDO's claim that he specifically alerted to the item. Even if he did, that doesn't mean it was human in origin. It could just mean it had absorbed scent present nearby.
Is it completely and utterly out of the question that (gulp!) Eddie got it (I tremble to use the word) WRONG??  As others have pointed out, this item was buried, covered up, they had to dig it out, so where were all the remains that had once been buried with the coconut?  zDid the police overlook those to focus solely on the husk?   Did they not think to take soil samples at any point in their excavations?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 11:05:10 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2021, 07:17:12 AM
Is it completely and utterly out of the question that (gulp!) Eddie got it (I tremble to use the word) WRONG??  As others have pointed out, this item was buried, covered up, they had to dig it out, so where were all the remains that had once been buried with the coconut?  zDid the police overlook those to focus solely on the husk?   Did they not think to take soil samples at any point in their excavations?

I don't know why Eddie alerted I just know that he did and I'm not convinced, after examining the evidence, that it was to a piece of coconut. That 'fact' seems to have been propagated by the media imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2021, 11:30:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 11:05:10 AM
I don't know why Eddie alerted I just know that he did and I'm not convinced, after examining the evidence, that it was to a piece of coconut. That 'fact' seems to have been propagated by the media imo.
Not by the police then who mention it in their report, or perhaps you think they based their investigation on the tabloids as well?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2021, 11:56:51 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 11:05:10 AM
I don't know why Eddie alerted I just know that he did and I'm not convinced, after examining the evidence, that it was to a piece of coconut. That 'fact' seems to have been propagated by the media imo.

So what do you THINK he alerted  to
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2021, 12:01:08 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 13, 2021, 11:56:51 AM
So what do you THINK he alerted  to
Don't expect a straight answer...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 13, 2021, 12:13:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2021, 12:01:08 PM
Don't expect a straight answer...

It's all okay.  G Unit is destroying her own arguments.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2021, 12:15:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 11:05:10 AM
I don't know why Eddie alerted I just know that he did and I'm not convinced, after examining the evidence, that it was to a piece of coconut. That 'fact' seems to have been propagated by the media imo.

You do realise what you think is of no imortance. Whats important is neither of the two forces who have cadaver dogs are convinced eddie alerted to MMs cadaver
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 01:00:29 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2021, 11:30:36 AM
Not by the police then who mention it in their report, or perhaps you think they based their investigation on the tabloids as well?

Is there a police report which states Eddie alerted specifically to the fragment? Do you have a link?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2021, 01:03:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 01:00:29 PM
Is there a police report which states Eddie alerted specifically to the fragment? Do you have a link?
Did you not read Misty's link from the Jersey Police website?

https://jersey.police.uk/news-appeals/2008/november/press-conference-notes-from-operation-rectangle-update/

On the 31st March 2008 Dr Higham from the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit stated he believed the item was not bone.
 The original anthropologist reviewed her initial identification and on 14th April 2008 had stated she no longer identified it as part of a skull.
 Dr Higham and Dr Jacobi (of the British Museum faunal specialist) concluded that the sample was not in fact bone, but was almost certainly wood. They went further stating it was more like a part of a seed casing like a small piece of coconut.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2021, 01:54:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 11:05:10 AM
I don't know why Eddie alerted I just know that he did and I'm not convinced, after examining the evidence, that it was to a piece of coconut. That 'fact' seems to have been propagated by the media imo.
Incidentally, did YOU examine the evidence personally to enable you to contradict the experts Dr Higham and Dr Jacobi that did previously who concluded it was almost certainly part of a nut casing?  Perhaps you could provie us with details of  your scientific analysis on the item.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 01:58:44 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2021, 01:03:31 PM
Did you not read Misty's link from the Jersey Police website?

https://jersey.police.uk/news-appeals/2008/november/press-conference-notes-from-operation-rectangle-update/

On the 31st March 2008 Dr Higham from the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit stated he believed the item was not bone.
 The original anthropologist reviewed her initial identification and on 14th April 2008 had stated she no longer identified it as part of a skull.
 Dr Higham and Dr Jacobi (of the British Museum faunal specialist) concluded that the sample was not in fact bone, but was almost certainly wood. They went further stating it was more like a part of a seed casing like a small piece of coconut.

It doesn't say that Eddie alerted to the sample, evidence of which is what I've been looking for.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2021, 02:06:56 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 13, 2021, 03:16:31 AM
Martin Grime has a lot to answer for.  Although I don't think he did this with malice.  Just self aggrandisement and the pursuit of money.

The same can't be said for those who think that what they will of things he didn't say.

I definitely don't think malice was intended.  He was embarking on a new career and he wanted it to be successful.  Unfortunately the repercussions have been resounding but I think even if he himself were to speak up against what has happened there are those who would not accept it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2021, 02:09:34 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 13, 2021, 12:13:17 PM
It's all okay.  G Unit is destroying her own arguments.

It is actually quite sad to behold 😥
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 13, 2021, 02:15:39 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2021, 02:09:34 PM
It is actually quite sad to behold 😥

Think it is a laugh a minute, but then I am not feeling very charitable at the moment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2021, 02:23:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 01:58:44 PM
It doesn't say that Eddie alerted to the sample, evidence of which is what I've been looking for.
Why would the police have bothered to get it forensically examined if the cadaver dog had not alerted to it?  Given that Eddie was supposedly the last word in what was and wasn't a human body part surely the first thing they would have done with the sample is shove under his miraculous nose and if he didn't alert they could have saved themselves an awful lot of fuss and bother, or do you think the police never thought of that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2021, 02:24:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 01:58:44 PM
It doesn't say that Eddie alerted to the sample, evidence of which is what I've been looking for.
Snip
Not a great deal of these Cadaver dogs work has been reported in the State Media, other than to discredit them, so we asked Mr. Harper to document for us just exactly what is happening in the video below, what does a Cadaver dog do? How significant to the investigation the dog was? What, if anything did he (the dog) find?The results, it has to be said were astounding. Mr. Harper agreed to our request and once again we thank him for his commitment to the truth and justice.

For viewers information "JAR/6" is the fragment of child's skull.

00.00.0 Getting ready. I was reluctant to let the dog inside as I did not feel that it would do much good. In truth, I was a little sceptical – I had not felt a favourable impression from the handler (Martin Grimes) at our initial meeting and I was dubious, although my opinion of his qualities and integrity was to markedly change as events unfolded. I began to realise as I worked closely with him over a period of months that what I originally took as arrogance was simply supreme confidence in the ability of his dogs in the face of jealous, empire protecting rivals who were not as professionally capable. Throughout the investigation, we subjected Martin and his dogs to many ‘verifying’ tests, from burying swabs in sand (which he always found no matter how large an area), to minute blood stains. The dogs never failed.
______________________________________________________________

00.02.25 Eddie is now at the doors leading to the stairwell where both JAR/6 and the “builders’ bones” were found. Note that he is reacting strongly. To corroborate Eddie’s reaction we used the most up to date geological equipment supplied to us by the British Army and the Metropolitan Police (more services obtained through the use of contacts and a hospitality budget!) for which we paid nothing. These surveys confirmed inconsistencies in the sub floor levels.

00.02.39 Eddie is telling us that there is something we need to investigate on the other side of the door and he wants through to indicate this to us.

00.02.58 Eddie is now reacting very strongly and indicating to us that the scent of dead human flesh is in this location. This is where we were to find JAR/6, which the establishment continue to say was only coconut, but cannot explain how Eddie reacted as he did, nor indeed, how the lab at Oxford found Collagen.

Collagen is not found in coconut or wood, it is only present in mammals, which would seem to destroy the claims of the Jersey establishment, aided and abetted by the Jersey Evening Post and Channel Television, that JAR/6 is coconut or wood. Again, it is worthy of recall, that the builders who found the bones at this location thought they were human, and that one of them actually identified a bone as that of a child’s pelvic bone from the internet. Additionally, the police officer who was called to the scene was also dubious of the bones’ origins, as was the female pathologist who attended. She “did not like” the situation and referred the matter to her boss who said the bones where not consistent with being human. However, an Anthropologist later stated that he was incorrect and the measurements he quoted were entirely consistent with the bones being children’s’ pelvic bones as identified by one of the builders. The Anthropologist further stated that the Pathologist was not qualified to make the statement that he had.

00.04.06 Now Eddie has just left the wall adjoining the stair area where he reacted earlier. The drains in the building run from those stairs, under the adjoining wall, and down the room where we are now standing. As the dog is trained to detect the scent of dead human flesh, he is now following the strong scent emanating from the other side of the wall and being carried in the drains under the floor of this room and down the room towards the corridor seen earlier in the video.

https://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/t19319-what-eddie-found-at-haut-de-la-garenne-in-jersey
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 04:12:40 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2021, 02:24:26 PM
Snip
Not a great deal of these Cadaver dogs work has been reported in the State Media, other than to discredit them, so we asked Mr. Harper to document for us just exactly what is happening in the video below, what does a Cadaver dog do? How significant to the investigation the dog was? What, if anything did he (the dog) find?The results, it has to be said were astounding. Mr. Harper agreed to our request and once again we thank him for his commitment to the truth and justice.

For viewers information "JAR/6" is the fragment of child's skull.

00.00.0 Getting ready. I was reluctant to let the dog inside as I did not feel that it would do much good. In truth, I was a little sceptical – I had not felt a favourable impression from the handler (Martin Grimes) at our initial meeting and I was dubious, although my opinion of his qualities and integrity was to markedly change as events unfolded. I began to realise as I worked closely with him over a period of months that what I originally took as arrogance was simply supreme confidence in the ability of his dogs in the face of jealous, empire protecting rivals who were not as professionally capable. Throughout the investigation, we subjected Martin and his dogs to many ‘verifying’ tests, from burying swabs in sand (which he always found no matter how large an area), to minute blood stains. The dogs never failed.
______________________________________________________________

00.02.25 Eddie is now at the doors leading to the stairwell where both JAR/6 and the “builders’ bones” were found. Note that he is reacting strongly. To corroborate Eddie’s reaction we used the most up to date geological equipment supplied to us by the British Army and the Metropolitan Police (more services obtained through the use of contacts and a hospitality budget!) for which we paid nothing. These surveys confirmed inconsistencies in the sub floor levels.

00.02.39 Eddie is telling us that there is something we need to investigate on the other side of the door and he wants through to indicate this to us.

00.02.58 Eddie is now reacting very strongly and indicating to us that the scent of dead human flesh is in this location. This is where we were to find JAR/6, which the establishment continue to say was only coconut, but cannot explain how Eddie reacted as he did, nor indeed, how the lab at Oxford found Collagen.

Collagen is not found in coconut or wood, it is only present in mammals, which would seem to destroy the claims of the Jersey establishment, aided and abetted by the Jersey Evening Post and Channel Television, that JAR/6 is coconut or wood. Again, it is worthy of recall, that the builders who found the bones at this location thought they were human, and that one of them actually identified a bone as that of a child’s pelvic bone from the internet. Additionally, the police officer who was called to the scene was also dubious of the bones’ origins, as was the female pathologist who attended. She “did not like” the situation and referred the matter to her boss who said the bones where not consistent with being human. However, an Anthropologist later stated that he was incorrect and the measurements he quoted were entirely consistent with the bones being children’s’ pelvic bones as identified by one of the builders. The Anthropologist further stated that the Pathologist was not qualified to make the statement that he had.

00.04.06 Now Eddie has just left the wall adjoining the stair area where he reacted earlier. The drains in the building run from those stairs, under the adjoining wall, and down the room where we are now standing. As the dog is trained to detect the scent of dead human flesh, he is now following the strong scent emanating from the other side of the wall and being carried in the drains under the floor of this room and down the room towards the corridor seen earlier in the video.

https://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/t19319-what-eddie-found-at-haut-de-la-garenne-in-jersey

Yes, Eddie alerted in the area where JAR/6 was found. Was he alerting to JAR/6 itself? That question isn't answered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2021, 04:45:15 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 04:12:40 PM
Yes, Eddie alerted in the area where JAR/6 was found. Was he alerting to JAR/6 itself? That question isn't answered.
So describe the scenario as you see it please.  Body or bodies buried in cellar under the flooring.  Then at some point for unknown reasons dug up again,  taken away from the Haute de La Garenne site to be disposed of off site and cellar floor relaid.  This is one explanation that is needed in order to make Eddie correct, is it the one you're going with or is there another you can think of?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 04:51:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2021, 04:45:15 PM
So describe the scenario as you see it please.  Body or bodies buried in cellar under the flooring.  Then at some point for unknown reasons dug up again,  taken away from the Haute de La Garenne site to be disposed of off site and cellar floor relaid.  This is one explanation that is needed in order to make Eddie correct, is it the one you're going with or is there another you can think of?

Due to being told repeatedly that Eddie alerted to coconut, my only interest is if there is evidence proving that statement is factual. So far, there isn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2021, 04:58:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 04:51:58 PM
Due to being told repeatedly that Eddie alerted to coconut, my only interest is if there is evidence proving that statement is factual. So far, there isn't.
Do you accept the possibility that Eddie alerted to a coconut, or is it completely out of the question in your opinion?  All the evidence there is suggests Eddie alerted falsely as no evidence was collected anywhere he alerted that pointed to the presence of a cadaver, or of one having previously been in situ.  Is it your belief that Eddie was nevertheless correct and it was just all the dumb policemen and scientists who got it wrong?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2021, 05:06:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 04:51:58 PM
Due to being told repeatedly that Eddie alerted to coconut, my only interest is if there is evidence proving that statement is factual. So far, there isn't.

Thete is evidence... Its in the BDO report.. But once again you confuse evidence and proof
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2021, 05:07:54 PM
There is evidence that man walked on the moon but where is the proof?  I want proof, not media reports thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 13, 2021, 06:38:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 04:51:58 PM
Due to being told repeatedly that Eddie alerted to coconut, my only interest is if there is evidence proving that statement is factual. So far, there isn't.
I really do not know why I am bothering to indulge you since you quite obviously are not going to budge from your viewpoint.
What is extraordinary is your belief that a dog which was barking at fresh air in Luz - wasn't barking at a coco nut shell in Haute de la Garenne in Jersey.

Lenny was really convinced though wasn't he ~ the builders certainly knew their stuff 😁


Snip
00.00.45 The first indication that the dog (Eddie) is finding something amiss. His behaviour has changed, and is remarked on by the handler.

He is initially reacting further down from where we were to eventually find the initial fragment, (which ILM and others still incorrectly claim to be definitively identified as coconut) and in the flow of the drainage from the area where it was found.

To clarify, Eddie is trained to trace the scent of dead human flesh.

He will react where this scent is found, not necessarily where it was originally located.
His strongest reaction will normally be where that scent is strongest, which will usually be where the dead flesh has lain longest, but he will sense it in areas where the scent has been carried, for instance, by drains.

00.01.08 Eddie is starting to react strongly now. Although still some yards from the finding of JAR/6, he smells something which has been carried down in the drainage from the original source.

We were later to find that the drain ran down from where we found JAR/6 and where the bones were found by the builders, who suspected that they were also the bones of juveniles. One of them identified a child’s pelvic bone from the internet. These bones were found with children’s’ shoes which were to be later the source of interesting conflicts between the evidence of the pathologists and the staff at the Jersey Museum.

00.01.50 The doors and wall where Eddie is reacting so strongly now lead into the room where the top wall adjoins the stair area where JAR/6 (the infamous initial fragment) was found.

Note the change in the dog’s behaviour, and the strong indication from him that there is something to be investigated here.

It is important to note at this point, that the dog is only telling us that the scent of human death is here. He is not telling us that there has been a murder; he is not telling us that this is the spot where a body has been buried. He is only telling us that the scent of human death is at this spot.

He is saying, “There is something here for you to investigate.”

It is worthy of note, that this is also next to the location where builders found the bones which they thought were human juveniles, and where they were told that if they found bones to let “bygones be bygones.”

00.02.25 Eddie is now at the doors leading to the stairwell where both JAR/6 and the “builders’ bones” were found.

Note that he is reacting strongly.

To corroborate Eddie’s reaction we used the most up to date geological equipment supplied to us by the British Army and the Metropolitan Police (more services obtained through the use of contacts and a hospitality budget!) for which we paid nothing. These surveys confirmed inconsistencies in the sub floor levels.

00.02.39 Eddie is telling us that there is something we need to investigate on the other side of the door and he wants through to indicate this to us.

00.02.58 Eddie is now reacting very strongly and indicating to us that the scent of dead human flesh is in this location. This is where we were to find JAR/6, which the establishment continue to say was only coconut, but cannot explain how Eddie reacted as he did, nor indeed, how the lab at Oxford found Collagen.

Collagen is not found in coconut or wood, it is only present in mammals, which would seem to destroy the claims of the Jersey establishment, aided and abetted by the Jersey Evening Post and Channel Television, that JAR/6 is coconut or wood. Again, it is worthy of recall, that the builders who found the bones at this location thought they were human, and that one of them actually identified a bone as that of a child’s pelvic bone from the internet. Additionally, the police officer who was called to the scene was also dubious of the bones’ origins, as was the female pathologist who attended. She “did not like” the situation and referred the matter to her boss who said the bones where not consistent with being human.

However, an Anthropologist later stated that he was incorrect and the measurements he quoted were entirely consistent with the bones being children’s’ pelvic bones ??as identified by one of the builders??. The Anthropologist further stated that the Pathologist was not qualified to make the statement that he had.

00.04.06 Now Eddie has just left the wall adjoining the stair area where he reacted earlier. The drains in the building run from those stairs, under the adjoining wall, and down the room where we are now standing. As the dog is trained to detect the scent of dead human flesh, he is now following the strong scent emanating from the other side of the wall and being carried in the drains under the floor of this room and down the room towards the corridor seen earlier in the video.

00.04.15 Note the dog’s return to the wall. This was almost the exact spot where JAR/6 was found. It is a few inches from where the builders found the bones which they thought were human and which they were told about, “Let bygones be bygones.” If this dog was a waste of money, then how did he lead us to this exact spot? How did he later, in the ‘live’ presence of Wendy Kinnard (the then Home Affairs Minister) and Graham Power (the then Chief Police Officer), lead us to the bones in the cellars which an Anthropologist in the United Kingdom said were “fleshed and fresh” when burnt and buried?

It cannot be a co-incidence that this dog, trained to detect the scent of dead human flesh, reacted so strongly in an area where we were to find a fragment of substance initially identified by a professional, accomplished, Anthropologist, as a part of a child’s skull, and right beside the spot where builders found bones and children’s shoes which they thought were human bones. No amount of spin by Le Marquand and others can contradict this, and no amount of misinformation from Warcup and Gradwell can conceal this truth.

00.04.41 Eddie still on stairs, right above the location where JAR/6 was found.
He comes down again to the exact spot.

00.05.20 Eddie still reacting strongly at the spot where JAR/6 was found.

This is the live video, filmed on a mobile phone as it happened. The film was made by the Homicide Search Advisor of the National Policing Improvement Agency, on his mobile phone. He was to later say that the way we had carried out the search of HDLG was a “shining example” and should be documented as an example of good practice. Where has this recommendation been lost in the mists?
The reactions of the dog speak for themselves. Eddie is not telling us that murder was committed at HDLG. He is telling us that somewhere in the floor-space of the premises; the scent of human death has been present.

He is telling us that there is something there for us to investigate.

His findings have been corroborated by the finding of the bones and teeth, by the results of the surveys carried out by the most sophisticated of electronic geological equipment, and by the evidence of builders and former residents and victims of abuse in HDLG. This video totally contradicts the spin of Frank Walker, Andrew Lewis and Diane Simon of the Jersey Evening Post, all of whom were taken on a tour of the building and given a demonstration of the ability and capability of Eddie and his companion "Keela" the blood detection dog. All of them were aware of the true situation relating to the dog and the finds. All of them, for their own reasons, chose to ignore the truth and to peddle the myths of those seeking to discredit the victims of the horrific abuse within HDLG. They are now, in my opinion, exposed as craven cowards and not fit to lick those victims’ boots. As for Martin Grimes and the dogs that they have tried to discredit, they are now working full time for one of the best Law Enforcement Agencies in the world in the USA.(END)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2021, 07:06:48 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2021, 06:38:52 PM
I really do not know why I am bothering to indulge you since you quite obviously are not going to budge from your viewpoint.
What is extraordinary is your belief that a dog which was barking at fresh air in Luz - wasn't barking at a coco nut shell in Haute de la Garenne in Jersey.

Lenny was really convinced though wasn't he ~ the builders certainly knew their stuff 😁


Snip
00.00.45 The first indication that the dog (Eddie) is finding something amiss. His behaviour has changed, and is remarked on by the handler.

He is initially reacting further down from where we were to eventually find the initial fragment, (which ILM and others still incorrectly claim to be definitively identified as coconut) and in the flow of the drainage from the area where it was found.

To clarify, Eddie is trained to trace the scent of dead human flesh.

He will react where this scent is found, not necessarily where it was originally located.
His strongest reaction will normally be where that scent is strongest, which will usually be where the dead flesh has lain longest, but he will sense it in areas where the scent has been carried, for instance, by drains.

00.01.08 Eddie is starting to react strongly now. Although still some yards from the finding of JAR/6, he smells something which has been carried down in the drainage from the original source.

We were later to find that the drain ran down from where we found JAR/6 and where the bones were found by the builders, who suspected that they were also the bones of juveniles. One of them identified a child’s pelvic bone from the internet. These bones were found with children’s’ shoes which were to be later the source of interesting conflicts between the evidence of the pathologists and the staff at the Jersey Museum.

00.01.50 The doors and wall where Eddie is reacting so strongly now lead into the room where the top wall adjoins the stair area where JAR/6 (the infamous initial fragment) was found.

Note the change in the dog’s behaviour, and the strong indication from him that there is something to be investigated here.

It is important to note at this point, that the dog is only telling us that the scent of human death is here. He is not telling us that there has been a murder; he is not telling us that this is the spot where a body has been buried. He is only telling us that the scent of human death is at this spot.

He is saying, “There is something here for you to investigate.”

It is worthy of note, that this is also next to the location where builders found the bones which they thought were human juveniles, and where they were told that if they found bones to let “bygones be bygones.”

00.02.25 Eddie is now at the doors leading to the stairwell where both JAR/6 and the “builders’ bones” were found.

Note that he is reacting strongly.

To corroborate Eddie’s reaction we used the most up to date geological equipment supplied to us by the British Army and the Metropolitan Police (more services obtained through the use of contacts and a hospitality budget!) for which we paid nothing. These surveys confirmed inconsistencies in the sub floor levels.

00.02.39 Eddie is telling us that there is something we need to investigate on the other side of the door and he wants through to indicate this to us.

00.02.58 Eddie is now reacting very strongly and indicating to us that the scent of dead human flesh is in this location. This is where we were to find JAR/6, which the establishment continue to say was only coconut, but cannot explain how Eddie reacted as he did, nor indeed, how the lab at Oxford found Collagen.

Collagen is not found in coconut or wood, it is only present in mammals, which would seem to destroy the claims of the Jersey establishment, aided and abetted by the Jersey Evening Post and Channel Television, that JAR/6 is coconut or wood. Again, it is worthy of recall, that the builders who found the bones at this location thought they were human, and that one of them actually identified a bone as that of a child’s pelvic bone from the internet. Additionally, the police officer who was called to the scene was also dubious of the bones’ origins, as was the female pathologist who attended. She “did not like” the situation and referred the matter to her boss who said the bones where not consistent with being human.

However, an Anthropologist later stated that he was incorrect and the measurements he quoted were entirely consistent with the bones being children’s’ pelvic bones ??as identified by one of the builders??. The Anthropologist further stated that the Pathologist was not qualified to make the statement that he had.

00.04.06 Now Eddie has just left the wall adjoining the stair area where he reacted earlier. The drains in the building run from those stairs, under the adjoining wall, and down the room where we are now standing. As the dog is trained to detect the scent of dead human flesh, he is now following the strong scent emanating from the other side of the wall and being carried in the drains under the floor of this room and down the room towards the corridor seen earlier in the video.

00.04.15 Note the dog’s return to the wall. This was almost the exact spot where JAR/6 was found. It is a few inches from where the builders found the bones which they thought were human and which they were told about, “Let bygones be bygones.” If this dog was a waste of money, then how did he lead us to this exact spot? How did he later, in the ‘live’ presence of Wendy Kinnard (the then Home Affairs Minister) and Graham Power (the then Chief Police Officer), lead us to the bones in the cellars which an Anthropologist in the United Kingdom said were “fleshed and fresh” when burnt and buried?

It cannot be a co-incidence that this dog, trained to detect the scent of dead human flesh, reacted so strongly in an area where we were to find a fragment of substance initially identified by a professional, accomplished, Anthropologist, as a part of a child’s skull, and right beside the spot where builders found bones and children’s shoes which they thought were human bones. No amount of spin by Le Marquand and others can contradict this, and no amount of misinformation from Warcup and Gradwell can conceal this truth.

00.04.41 Eddie still on stairs, right above the location where JAR/6 was found.
He comes down again to the exact spot.

00.05.20 Eddie still reacting strongly at the spot where JAR/6 was found.

This is the live video, filmed on a mobile phone as it happened. The film was made by the Homicide Search Advisor of the National Policing Improvement Agency, on his mobile phone. He was to later say that the way we had carried out the search of HDLG was a “shining example” and should be documented as an example of good practice. Where has this recommendation been lost in the mists?
The reactions of the dog speak for themselves. Eddie is not telling us that murder was committed at HDLG. He is telling us that somewhere in the floor-space of the premises; the scent of human death has been present.

He is telling us that there is something there for us to investigate.

His findings have been corroborated by the finding of the bones and teeth, by the results of the surveys carried out by the most sophisticated of electronic geological equipment, and by the evidence of builders and former residents and victims of abuse in HDLG. This video totally contradicts the spin of Frank Walker, Andrew Lewis and Diane Simon of the Jersey Evening Post, all of whom were taken on a tour of the building and given a demonstration of the ability and capability of Eddie and his companion "Keela" the blood detection dog. All of them were aware of the true situation relating to the dog and the finds. All of them, for their own reasons, chose to ignore the truth and to peddle the myths of those seeking to discredit the victims of the horrific abuse within HDLG. They are now, in my opinion, exposed as craven cowards and not fit to lick those victims’ boots. As for Martin Grimes and the dogs that they have tried to discredit, they are now working full time for one of the best Law Enforcement Agencies in the world in the USA.(END)


According to Grime in his white paper Eddie wpnt teact to teeth... Another Grime contradiction
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 08:43:15 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 13, 2021, 06:38:52 PM

snipped/

I really do not know why I am bothering to indulge you since you quite obviously are not going to budge from your viewpoint.
What is extraordinary is your belief that a dog which was barking at fresh air in Luz - wasn't barking at a coco nut shell in Haute de la Garenne in Jersey.

I don't know what Eddie alerted to at Haut de la Garenne, but a lot of people believe it was to a piece of coconut. Why? Because it was found in the area where he alerted. That does not prove it was the coconut which triggered Eddie's alert response.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 13, 2021, 09:03:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 08:43:15 PM
I don't know what Eddie alerted to at Haut de la Garenne, but a lot of people believe it was to a piece of coconut. Why? Because it was found in the area where he alerted. That does not prove it was the coconut which triggered Eddie's alert response.

So what else do you think it was?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2021, 09:03:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 08:43:15 PM
I don't know what Eddie alerted to at Haut de la Garenne, but a lot of people believe it was to a piece of coconut. Why? Because it was found in the area where he alerted. That does not prove it was the coconut which triggered Eddie's alert response.

According to the BDO report Eddie alerted a second time to the coconut shell...do you think they made that up...thats pretty strong evidence. Grime did the same with the key fob in luz. I think the alerts in Luz and jersey were total red herrings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2021, 09:05:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 08:43:15 PM
I don't know what Eddie alerted to at Haut de la Garenne, but a lot of people believe it was to a piece of coconut. Why? Because it was found in the area where he alerted. That does not prove it was the coconut which triggered Eddie's alert response.
So you don’t accept the report that Eddie alerted to the coconut shell again separately?  Do you think that was just malicious press reporting to do Eddie and his handler  down?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 13, 2021, 09:06:41 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 13, 2021, 09:03:58 PM
According to the BDO report Eddie alerted a second time to the coconut shell...do you think they made that up...thats pretty strong evidence. Grime did the same with the key fob in luz. I think the alerts in Luz and jersey were total red herrings.

What a total waste of time this all is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2021, 09:16:56 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2021, 09:05:03 PM
So you don’t accept the report that Eddie alerted to the coconut shell again separately?  Do you think that was just malicious press reporting to do Eddie and his handler  down?

Ive never seen the second alert reported in the press.. Only in the BDO report
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2021, 09:38:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 13, 2021, 09:16:56 PM
Ive never seen the second alert reported in the press.. Only in the BDO report
Oh, according to G-Unit that was written based on tabloid reports, perhaps she is mistaken?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2021, 09:39:04 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 13, 2021, 09:38:28 PM
Oh, according to G-Unit that was written based on tabloid reports, perhaps she is mistaken?


She is..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 13, 2021, 10:29:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 13, 2021, 09:39:04 PM

She is..

Do you not see that all things become irrelevant by the hand of these people themselves.  They all destroy their own arguments.

I don't know what I am doing anymore beyond deleting your average obscenity.  Which has to be bad before I step in.   But some still try.

I cannot compliment you too largely and you wouldn't want me to anyway.  The very least I have learned is that you are brave man.

Me?  I'm just a wimp.  And I try too hard.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2021, 12:12:08 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 13, 2021, 09:39:04 PM

She is..

IYO. BDO quoted their sources in respect of some of the things they looked at. For example;

"An LGC scientist records in a statement to the MIR......" (page 45)

From the same page;

"As has now been widely reported, on the morning of 23 February 2008 LGC were excavating the area when they uncovered a fragment of material measuring 6.3cm x 4.4cm that was believed at that time to be human bone. The LGC scientist described it as ‘a fragment of juvenile rather than an adult cranium’ and it was referred to as JAR/6. A short time later Mr Grime’s dog was presented with the item and gave a positive indication for human
remains."

Widely reported? Not the bolded bit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 14, 2021, 12:38:51 AM

Jesus Christ.  I despair.  How can you be so unkind?  Unless you think that The McCanns killed their daughter.

This is now getting a bit too much for me since there is no evidence to suggest that they did.

Fourteen years of nothing  and still you spew your bile.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 14, 2021, 12:41:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2021, 12:12:08 AM
IYO. BDO quoted their sources in respect of some of the things they looked at. For example;

"An LGC scientist records in a statement to the MIR......" (page 45)

From the same page;

"As has now been widely reported, on the morning of 23 February 2008 LGC were excavating the area when they uncovered a fragment of material measuring 6.3cm x 4.4cm that was believed at that time to be human bone. The LGC scientist described it as ‘a fragment of juvenile rather than an adult cranium’ and it was referred to as JAR/6. A short time later Mr Grime’s dog was presented with the item and gave a positive indication for human
remains."

Widely reported? Not the bolded bit.

What was Eddie's job?

Oh I remember ~ it was running around daft and barking his head off when he smelled something he was trained to smell and he did that in spades in Luz just as he did in Haute de la Garenne.

Once Eddie had done that the humans moved in and did their thing - but nobody did nothing till Eddie had barked.

Very much a chicken and egg thing with Eddie doing his thing first despite your denial of his skills.  It really is becoming quite ridiculous now 🤡
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 14, 2021, 12:43:04 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 14, 2021, 12:38:51 AM
Jesus Christ.  I despair.  How can you be so unkind?  Unless you think that The McCanns killed their daughter.

This is now getting a bit too much for me since there is no evidence to suggest that they did.

Fourteen years of nothing  and still you spew your bile.

I think it is a wind up Eleanor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 14, 2021, 01:17:59 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 14, 2021, 12:43:04 AM
I think it is a wind up Eleanor.

If only it were that simple.  There is something going on here that serves to discredit this Forum.

But ultimately it is not my problem.  And sadly I no longer care all that much.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 14, 2021, 01:42:19 AM

The McCanns are never going to be indicted for the death of their daughter.  Not ever.

I might just about live for long enough to see Amaral put to shame.

Although I can't say that I care about Brueckner.  He will never again walk the face of the earth unfettered.

So all things will come to good somehow or another.

I will be sorry if The McCanns never find out what happened to their daughter.  But at least we will be able to go on hoping.

Hope is what it is all about.  If you have no hope then you have nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2021, 05:55:43 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 14, 2021, 01:42:19 AM
The McCanns are never going to be indicted for the death of their daughter.  Not ever.

I might just about live for long enough to see Amaral put to shame.

Although I can't say that I care about Brueckner. He will never again walk the face of the earth unfettered.

So all things will come to good somehow or another.

I will be sorry if The McCanns never find out what happened to their daughter.  But at least we will be able to go on hoping.

Hope is what it is all about.  If you have no hope then you have nothing.

Don't be so ridiculous.

He'll be out of jail within 15 years & there'll be nothing preventing him moving freely to India or Cambodia & marrying a 9 year old.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 14, 2021, 06:58:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 08:43:15 PM
I don't know what Eddie alerted to at Haut de la Garenne, but a lot of people believe it was to a piece of coconut. Why? Because it was found in the area where he alerted. That does not prove it was the coconut which triggered Eddie's alert response.

The fact remains that the "skull" fragment was still a coconut shell.

I don't exclude the possibility that the fragment had picked up a scent (or part of one) within his somewhat vague "training parameters". What's a fragment of coconut shell doing in a stairwell? If it had been part of a meal, for example, could it fallen out of a bag of rubbish containing meat-based leftovers? A dead rat somewhere in the vicinity? A kid who'd had a wee-wee accident in the stairwell? All kinds of possibilities in which Eddie's alert wouldn't have necessarily been wrong (depending on which VOCs he'd pick up on), simply irrelevant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2021, 06:59:11 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2021, 12:12:08 AM
IYO. BDO quoted their sources in respect of some of the things they looked at. For example;

"An LGC scientist records in a statement to the MIR......" (page 45)

From the same page;

"As has now been widely reported, on the morning of 23 February 2008 LGC were excavating the area when they uncovered a fragment of material measuring 6.3cm x 4.4cm that was believed at that time to be human bone. The LGC scientist described it as ‘a fragment of juvenile rather than an adult cranium’ and it was referred to as JAR/6. A short time later Mr Grime’s dog was presented with the item and gave a positive indication for human
remains."

Widely reported? Not the bolded bit.

Widely reported clearly referd to the finding of the child skull... For which you wil find plenty of instances.
You wont find one instance of Eddie's second alert being reported  becsuse it wasnt. Thats why I say you are mistaken
I think this is an instance of you believing what you want to believe
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2021, 07:11:47 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2021, 12:12:08 AM
IYO. BDO quoted their sources in respect of some of the things they looked at. For example;

"An LGC scientist records in a statement to the MIR......" (page 45)

From the same page;

"As has now been widely reported, on the morning of 23 February 2008 LGC were excavating the area when they uncovered a fragment of material measuring 6.3cm x 4.4cm that was believed at that time to be human bone. The LGC scientist described it as ‘a fragment of juvenile rather than an adult cranium’ and it was referred to as JAR/6. A short time later Mr Grime’s dog was presented with the item and gave a positive indication for human
remains."

Widely reported? Not the bolded bit.
So if it wasn’t widely reported then how did they know about the second alert?  Given that they cite Martin Grime as a direct source for their report it couldn’t have been him could it?  Or do you think they just decided to make that bit up for a laugh?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2021, 07:15:04 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2021, 05:55:43 AM
Don't be so ridiculous.

He'll be out of jail within 15 years & there'll be nothing preventing him moving freely to India or Cambodia & marrying a 9 year old.
Like Gary Glitter you mean?  Where is that old git these days, remind me...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2021, 09:05:12 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 14, 2021, 07:15:04 AM
Like Gary Glitter you mean?  Where is that old git these days, remind me...

Not sure, but when them child prostitutes took his money they knew exactly what it was for & were therefore giving their consent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2021, 09:07:56 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2021, 09:05:12 AM
Not sure, but when them child prostitutes took his money they knew exactly what it was for & were therefore giving their consent.
It seems your spell in Troll Rehab didn't work, ah well.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity/jim-davidson-says-paedo-gary-24301044
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2021, 09:41:08 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 14, 2021, 09:07:56 AM
It seems your spell in Troll Rehab didn't work, ah well.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity/jim-davidson-says-paedo-gary-24301044

On the contrary.

I've seen the light, I am now veering towards becoming an extremist woke liberal.

I have found that I agree with Black Lives Matter for example, in that the police & prisons should be abolished. This would reduce all crime by 100%.

Another reason I support BLM is that they rid cities of black owned businesses every time a policeman kills a black person.

And don't get me started on LGBTQ rights.  All love is love according to the doctrine, so logic dictates that shouldn't exclude the beautiful holy matrimony that's present between adults & children in Muslim countries, to do so would be Islamophobic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2021, 10:29:23 AM
Note to self: "Don't Feed The Spam".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2021, 02:13:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2021, 08:43:15 PM
I don't know what Eddie alerted to at Haut de la Garenne, but a lot of people believe it was to a piece of coconut. Why? Because it was found in the area where he alerted. That does not prove it was the coconut which triggered Eddie's alert response.

Indeed, I agree G. There were probably weeds and flowers nearby will someone claim THAT is what Eddie alerted to?  so a coconut shell is  also present in that area. Evidence that is what Eddie sniffed out doesn't seem to exist. Ooops Make it up as yeah go alone seems to be order of the day.

The sniffer dog sniffed the area and alerted that parts or whole dead human remains were at some time present in this area.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2021, 02:14:25 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2021, 09:41:08 AM
On the contrary.

I've seen the light, I am now veering towards becoming an extremist woke liberal.

I have found that I agree with Black Lives Matter for example, in that the police & prisons should be abolished. This would reduce all crime by 100%.

Another reason I support BLM is that they rid cities of black owned businesses every time a policeman kills a black person.


Giggles!

And don't get me started on LGBTQ rights.  All love is love according to the doctrine, so logic dictates that shouldn't exclude the beautiful holy matrimony that's present between adults & children in Muslim countries, to do so would be Islamophobic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2021, 02:16:16 PM
Quote from: Carana on June 14, 2021, 06:58:52 AM
The fact remains that the "skull" fragment was still a coconut shell.

I don't exclude the possibility that the fragment had picked up a scent (or part of one) within his somewhat vague "training parameters". What's a fragment of coconut shell doing in a stairwell? If it had been part of a meal, for example, could it fallen out of a bag of rubbish containing meat-based leftovers? A dead rat somewhere in the vicinity? A kid who'd had a wee-wee accident in the stairwell? All kinds of possibilities in which Eddie's alert wouldn't have necessarily been wrong (depending on which VOCs he'd pick up on), simply irrelevant.

The coconut was a coconut- who claimed it was a skull? Not the dog.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2021, 02:41:08 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2021, 02:13:28 PM
Indeed, I agree G. There were probably weeds and flowers nearby will someone claim THAT is what Eddie alerted to?  so a coconut shell is  also present in that area. Evidence that is what Eddie sniffed out doesn't seem to exist. Ooops Make it up as yeah go alone seems to be order of the day.

The sniffer dog sniffed the area and alerted that parts or whole dead human remains were at some time present in this area.
There were no weeds or flowers nearby as this was in a building, under the cellar floor, where (according to Dog apologists) a body had once been buried, then dug up, then disposed of off-site, then the floor relaid and then the dog alerted and a coconut impregnated in cadaver odour was recovered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2021, 02:47:04 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 14, 2021, 02:41:08 PM
There were no weeds or flowers nearby as this was in a building, under the cellar floor, where (according to Dog apologists) a body had once been buried, then dug up, then disposed of off-site, then the floor relaid and then the dog alerted and a coconut impregnated in cadaver odour was recovered.

Weeds and flowers can grown inside derelict buildings as does Fungus/ mushrooms. The point I was making was a skull was found where they had a dig, that in itself is NOT evidence that is what the dog alerted to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2021, 03:16:27 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2021, 02:47:04 PM
Weeds and flowers can grown inside derelict buildings as does Fungus/ mushrooms. The point I was making was a skull was found where they had a dig, that in itself is NOT evidence that is what the dog alerted to.

There was no skull found
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2021, 03:28:36 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 14, 2021, 03:16:27 PM
There was no skull found

Yeah Davel. I know that.  What we don't know is: who claimed the coconut was a skull? AND more so, who deducted that the Dog sniffed out a coconut. The dog sniffed the area and found a scent he recognised as being odor of death. End of dog job. There happened to be  a coconut in that vicinity.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2021, 04:25:02 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2021, 03:28:36 PM
Yeah Davel. I know that.  What we don't know is: who claimed the coconut was a skull? AND more so, who deducted that the Dog sniffed out a coconut. The dog sniffed the area and found a scent he recognised as being odor of death. End of dog job. There happened to be  a coconut in that vicinity.

The anthropologist identifief it as a skull.

The coconut was removed to a different location where the dog alerted specifically to the coconut
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2021, 04:34:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 14, 2021, 04:25:02 PM
The anthropologist identifief it as a skull.

The coconut was removed to a different location where the dog alerted specifically to the coconut


I just can't stop laughing...

The anthropologist?  OMG.


OK I ask again WHO said the dog identified the coconut. The dog identified via smell of cadaver? was there cadaver scent emanating from the coconut perhaps?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2021, 04:53:54 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2021, 04:34:46 PM

I just can't stop laughing...

The anthropologist?  OMG.


OK I ask again WHO said the dog identified the coconut. The dog identified via smell of cadaver? was there cadaver scent emanating from the coconut perhaps?

You obviously dont understand.. According to sn official report Grime took the coconut to another location... The same as he did with the car keys in Luz.. Grime confirmed tje dog alerted to what grime believed to be pary of a childs skull and Grime confirmed the dog alerted to it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2021, 05:25:29 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2021, 04:34:46 PM

I just can't stop laughing...

The anthropologist?  OMG.


OK I ask again WHO said the dog identified the coconut. The dog identified via smell of cadaver? was there cadaver scent emanating from the coconut perhaps?
Why would cadaver odour be emanating from a coconut?  Maybe a teeny tiny person had sailed to Jersey inside a coconut that washed up at Haut De La Garenne where they were murdered by a giant paedo and then buried in their coconut vessel beneath the cellar floor..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2021, 06:54:07 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 14, 2021, 04:25:02 PM
The anthropologist identifief it as a skull.

The coconut was removed to a different location where the dog alerted specifically to the coconut

According to a comment by BDO, a firm of chartered accountants. They didn't say where they got that information from, and it doesn't seem to appear anywhere else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 14, 2021, 06:57:09 PM
I thought there was some doubt over the chain of custody of this skull/coconut in its various journeys.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2021, 07:00:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2021, 06:54:07 PM
According to a comment by BDO, a firm of chartered accountants. They didn't say where they got that information from, and it doesn't seem to appear anywhere else.

The BDO report was drawn up with the help of a senior police officer. The authors of the report obviously had access to information not available to others. the practice of removing the item to a different location and checking for a second alert appears to be part of Grimes MO. I am quoting an official report...you can choose not to believe it but I see no reason to question it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2021, 07:04:20 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 14, 2021, 06:57:09 PM
I thought there was some doubt over the chain of custody of this skull/coconut in its various journeys.

I'm quoting an official report you are quoting gossip propagated by sceptics.  It  seems sceptics and some posters here  are more impressed by gossip than official reports
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 14, 2021, 07:10:11 PM
Reports may not always be true, you know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2021, 07:12:12 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 14, 2021, 07:10:11 PM
Reports may not be true, you know.

This report has been around for several years and gunit has never questioned its reliability re the facts it contains....now suddeny its unreliable...laughable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 14, 2021, 07:14:21 PM
I didn't say it was unreliable. I don't have enough information to make an assessment - any more than you do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2021, 07:19:43 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 14, 2021, 07:14:21 PM
I didn't say it was unreliable. I don't have enough information to make an assessment - any more than you do.


I do...you probably havent even read it...looks like gunit hasnt either as she was unaware of this particular criticism of Grime...then we have the statement..

The Report states that the findings are “the joint findings of Mr Kellett and BDO”.

which gunit...and almost certainly you ...are not aware of. It is not just  a review by accountants...it has police input too...and the findings are joint findings....BDO and a ex Senior police officer.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 14, 2021, 07:22:24 PM
So that automatically makes it  true? - how naive
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2021, 07:35:16 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 14, 2021, 07:22:24 PM
So that automatically makes it  true? - how naive

What a sloppy comment.. Ive never said its true... You need to be more precise when reading information... Another reason which I think makes me a better judge of the report.
Gunit said theres no evidence its true... You obviously missed that... Shes wrong... Of course theres evidence its true
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2021, 08:01:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2021, 06:54:07 PM
According to a comment by BDO, a firm of chartered accountants. They didn't say where they got that information from, and it doesn't seem to appear anywhere else.
They do say that they had direct contact with Martin Grime when compiling their report, so...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2021, 08:04:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2021, 06:54:07 PM
According to a comment by BDO, a firm of chartered accountants. They didn't say where they got that information from, and it doesn't seem to appear anywhere else.
Can you give me one good reason why they would have included this detail if it were untrue?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2021, 08:49:56 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 14, 2021, 08:04:34 PM
Can you give me one good reason why they would have included this detail if it were untrue?

You tell me. As they don't say where they got the info there's no way to check if it's true or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2021, 08:50:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2021, 08:49:56 PM
You tell me. As they don't say where they got the info there's no way to check if it's true or not.
No, you’re the one suggesting it shouldn’t be believed so you tell me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2021, 08:55:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2021, 08:49:56 PM
You tell me. As they don't say where they got the info there's no way to check if it's true or not.

The fact thst it is stated in an official document is evidencer it is true... Can you supply any evidence it isnt true
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 15, 2021, 03:25:40 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 14, 2021, 04:25:02 PM
The anthropologist identifief it as a skull.

The coconut was removed to a different location where the dog alerted specifically to the coconut
So if that happened what does that suggest?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2021, 07:20:18 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 15, 2021, 03:25:40 AM
So if that happened what does that suggest?
It suggests don’t believe everything a dog tells you, sometimes they make stuff up just for a laugh but then who doesn’t do that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2021, 07:25:02 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 15, 2021, 03:25:40 AM
So if that happened what does that suggest?
It would suggest that we can add coconuts to the list of things eddie would alert to. I would be intetested to know what Grimes explanation would be
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 08:16:07 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 15, 2021, 07:25:02 AM
It would suggest that we can add coconuts to thr list of things eddie would alert to. I would be intetested to know what Grimes expplanation would be

It's a logical fallacy to assume that Eddie would alert to the scent of coconut, just as it would be to assume he would alert to the scent of clothing (Mccann case) or shovels and spirit levels (Amanda Edwards case).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2021, 08:20:33 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 08:16:07 AM
It's a logical fallacy to assume that Eddie would alert to the scent of coconut, just as it would be to assume he would alert to the scent of clothing (Mccann case) or shovels and spirit levels (Amanda Edwards case).

Its not a logical fallacy at all... In fact it seems to have happened
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 08:44:39 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 15, 2021, 08:20:33 AM
Its not a logical fallacy at all... In fact it seems to have happened

It also happened that Eddie alerted to clothing and a shovel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2021, 08:57:58 AM
Is now a good time to bring up the sex tissue again?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 09:33:28 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 15, 2021, 08:57:58 AM
Is now a good time to bring up the sex tissue again?

To which both dogs alerted? That suggests that blood was present.

"EVRD – positive indication.

SOCO visual – positive.

Blood dog - positive indication.

Visual – positive

UV – negative (items removed prior to screening).

Quasar - negative

Positive indications confirmed as being recently deposited tissues used to clean up after sex by unknown persons."
IDENTIFIED DEFENSIVE POSITIONS http://voiceforprotest.blogspot.com/2010/03/operation-rectangle-summary-report.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2021, 09:40:02 AM
did anyone bother checking if there was actually any blood on the tissue or did they just assume it?  Was Keela used to screen the coconut btw? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2021, 10:11:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 09:33:28 AM
To which both dogs alerted? That suggests that blood was present.

"EVRD – positive indication.

SOCO visual – positive.

Blood dog - positive indication.

Visual – positive

UV – negative (items removed prior to screening).

Quasar - negative

Positive indications confirmed as being recently deposited tissues used to clean up after sex by unknown persons."
IDENTIFIED DEFENSIVE POSITIONS http://voiceforprotest.blogspot.com/2010/03/operation-rectangle-summary-report.html

What about cuddle cat.. To which Eddie didnt alert... And then didnt seem to alert again... But Grime felt he did.. But no one bothered to analyse
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 15, 2021, 10:18:34 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 15, 2021, 07:20:18 AM
It suggests don’t believe everything a dog tells you, sometimes they make stuff up just for a laugh but then who doesn’t do that?
What the dog deliberately plays a prank on you!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 15, 2021, 10:22:23 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 15, 2021, 07:25:02 AM
It would suggest that we can add coconuts to the list of things eddie would alert to. I would be intetested to know what Grimes explanation would be
When Eddie alerted in the wardrobe he wasn't alerting to wardrobe wood.   The cocoa-nut material would have absorbed fluids that had surrounded it for years, so it was a reflection of the material that surrounded it IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 15, 2021, 10:29:40 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 09:33:28 AM
To which both dogs alerted? That suggests that blood was present.

"EVRD – positive indication.

SOCO visual – positive.

Blood dog - positive indication.

Visual – positive

UV – negative (items removed prior to screening).

Quasar - negative

Positive indications confirmed as being recently deposited tissues used to clean up after sex by unknown persons."
IDENTIFIED DEFENSIVE POSITIONS http://voiceforprotest.blogspot.com/2010/03/operation-rectangle-summary-report.html


No it doesn't.

If blood had been present no referral would have been made to "tissue used for cleaning up after sex" it would have referred to "bloody tissue used to clean up after nose bleed".

But what is certain is that the cadaver dog alerted to what he was trained to alert to and there were no human remains there or ever had been where he alerted.

You know - something along the lines of some of the alerts he made in Praia da Luz - the only difference being these alerts in Haute de la Garenne appear to have been documented by a SOCO 😁
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 15, 2021, 10:35:41 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 15, 2021, 10:22:23 AM
When Eddie alerted in the wardrobe he wasn't alerting to wardrobe wood.   The cocoa-nut material would have absorbed fluids that had surrounded it for years, so it was a reflection of the material that surrounded it IMO.

Point is though, the dog wasn't alerting to the alleged recent human remains the investigation was looking for.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on June 15, 2021, 11:01:45 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 15, 2021, 10:35:41 AM
Point is though, the dog wasn't alerting to the alleged recent human remains the investigation was looking for.

Which may just be why the dogs are considered as an asset for intelligence purposes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 15, 2021, 11:07:08 AM
Quote from: Carana on June 15, 2021, 11:01:45 AM
Which may just be why the dogs are considered as an asset for intelligence purposes.

It is also a perfect illustration of the harm that can be done when the intelligence is misunderstood or misused as was the situation in both these investigations as a direct result of the dog alerts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 12:05:17 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 15, 2021, 10:22:23 AM
When Eddie alerted in the wardrobe he wasn't alerting to wardrobe wood.   The cocoa-nut material would have absorbed fluids that had surrounded it for years, so it was a reflection of the material that surrounded it IMO.

I agree, rob. I don't think such statements as this on this thread can be justified because they are too simplistic imo.

"But we know he alerted to a coconut in Jersey..."
"Eddie alerted to a coconut... Fact"
"Eddie also alerts to coconuts."

Eddie has, as we know, also alerted to clothing and a shovel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2021, 12:42:16 PM
Some people seem intent on insisting that dog alerts are always correct, that dogs simply are unable to give false alerts, that when they alert to (for example) a coconut shell it means that the coconut definitely came into contact with a cadaver.  "Dogs must never be questioned or doubted" is a strange belief to hold alongside "accept nothing, believe no one, confirm everything" IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2021, 01:15:07 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 12:05:17 PM
I agree, rob. I don't think such statements as this on this thread can be justified because they are too simplistic imo.

"But we know he alerted to a coconut in Jersey..."
"Eddie alerted to a coconut... Fact"
"Eddie also alerts to coconuts."

Eddie has, as we know, also alerted to clothing and a shovel.

So both you and Rob have stated your opinion... Im sure you will understand i have little inteterest or belief in either opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2021, 01:27:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 12:05:17 PM
I agree, rob. I don't think such statements as this on this thread can be justified because they are too simplistic imo.

"But we know he alerted to a coconut in Jersey..."
"Eddie alerted to a coconut... Fact"
"Eddie also alerts to coconuts."

Eddie has, as we know, also alerted to clothing and a shovel.
There was a study posted here that shows dogs can be unconsciously cued by their handler.. It is therefore possible that Grime thought the coconut was a piece of skull and unconsciously cued the dog
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 01:58:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 15, 2021, 12:42:16 PM
Some people seem intent on insisting that dog alerts are always correct, that dogs simply are unable to give false alerts, that when they alert to (for example) a coconut shell it means that the coconut definitely came into contact with a cadaver.  "Dogs must never be questioned or doubted" is a strange belief to hold alongside "accept nothing, believe no one, confirm everything" IMO.

Pointing out that a cadaver dog is highly unlikely to alert to the scent of coconut isn't the same as insisting that dog alerts are always correct.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2021, 02:02:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 01:58:06 PM
Pointing out that a cadaver dog is highly unlikely to alert to the scent of coconut isn't the same as insisting that dog alerts are always correct.

It certainly appears this one did. Perhaps teh dogs really are intelligent and overheard the anthropologist using words such as human remains. Im not suggesting the dog lied because we all know dogs dont lie
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2021, 02:10:50 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 15, 2021, 10:18:34 AM
What the dog deliberately plays a prank on you!

thats my line of thought...could the dog be playing a prank
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 02:24:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 15, 2021, 02:02:32 PM
It certainly appears this one did. Perhaps teh dogs really are intelligent and overheard the anthropologist using words such as human remains. Im not suggesting the dog lied because we all know dogs dont lie

Only in as much as he 'appears' to have alerted to clothing, shovels and spirit levels.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2021, 02:25:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 01:58:06 PM
Pointing out that a cadaver dog is highly unlikely to alert to the scent of coconut isn't the same as insisting that dog alerts are always correct.
It's clear to me from your posts that in your opinion every alert Eddie ever made that wasn't corroborated by Keela was to cadaver odour, now tell me I am mistaken. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 03:02:06 PM
It's clear to me that this discussion is never going to reach a conclusion. On the one hand are those who believe it's a fact that Eddie the VRD alerted to the scent of a coconut. On the other are those who believe that it can't be accepted as a fact for various reasons. I think it's time to stop now as opinions won't be changed on either side.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2021, 03:07:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 02:24:04 PM
Only in as much as he 'appears' to have alerted to clothing, shovels and spirit levels.  @)(++(*

To me its all conkers as opposed to coconuts. If there had been a cadaver in 5a...and it was hsndled by others.. Then that scent would have contaminated the whole apartment... Door handle.. Chairs... Everything that was touched... So I dont believe there was ever a cadaver in 5a. Just ss I dont believe amarals claims that eddie helped find a body under a slab of concrete in Jersey... All conkers
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 15, 2021, 03:29:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 03:02:06 PM
It's clear to me that this discussion is never going to reach a conclusion. On the one hand are those who believe it's a fact that Eddie the VRD alerted to the scent of a coconut. On the other are those who believe that it can't be accepted as a fact for various reasons. I think it's time to stop now as opinions won't be changed on either side.

The discussion has reached a conclusion following the official inquiry carried out by the States of Jersey.
https://www.gov.je/Government/Pages/StatesReports.aspx?ReportID=421 
The fact it is unacceptable to you does not negate either the report or its conclusions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2021, 03:38:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 03:02:06 PM
It's clear to me that this discussion is never going to reach a conclusion. On the one hand are those who believe it's a fact that Eddie the VRD alerted to the scent of a coconut. On the other are those who believe that it can't be accepted as a fact for various reasons. I think it's time to stop now as opinions won't be changed on either side.
Who has said he alerted to the scent of a coconut specifically?  Maybe he just alerted to nothing much in particular because he was bored and wanted to give internet bores something to ponder for years and years and years after the event.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2021, 03:44:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 03:02:06 PM
It's clear to me that this discussion is never going to reach a conclusion. On the one hand are those who believe it's a fact that Eddie the VRD alerted to the scent of a coconut. On the other are those who believe that it can't be accepted as a fact for various reasons. I think it's time to stop now as opinions won't be changed on either side.
Alternatively - on the one hand there are those who believe it's a fact that Eddie the VRD alerted to the scent of a cadaver.  On the other are those who believe that it can't be accepted as a fact for various reasons. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 15, 2021, 06:47:06 PM
Institutional corruption, institutionally racist , the Mighty MET.


Daniel Morgan: Met Police accused of 'institutional corruption' over 1987 unsolved axe murder of private detective

https://news.sky.com/story/daniel-morgan-met-police-accused-of-institutional-corruption-in-1987-unsolved-axe-murder-of-private-detective-12332406
Dick apologise which will make it better for the Morgan family.

Dame Cressida Dick said it is a "matter of great regret that no one has been brought to justice and that our mistakes have compounded the pain suffered by Daniel's family".

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/met-police-chief-apologises-for-failings-in-murdered-private-detective-investigation/ar-AAL4mBn

Can she stay ?


Met chief censured for hampering corruption inquiry into investigation of 1987 death of private detective


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/15/daniel-morgan-met-chief-censured-for-hampering-corruption-inquiry
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 15, 2021, 08:08:10 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 15, 2021, 06:47:06 PM
Institutional corruption, institutionally racist , the Mighty MET.


Daniel Morgan: Met Police accused of 'institutional corruption' over 1987 unsolved axe murder of private detective

https://news.sky.com/story/daniel-morgan-met-police-accused-of-institutional-corruption-in-1987-unsolved-axe-murder-of-private-detective-12332406
Dick apologise which will make it better for the Morgan family.

Dame Cressida Dick said it is a "matter of great regret that no one has been brought to justice and that our mistakes have compounded the pain suffered by Daniel's family".

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/met-police-chief-apologises-for-failings-in-murdered-private-detective-investigation/ar-AAL4mBn

Can she stay ?


Met chief censured for hampering corruption inquiry into investigation of 1987 death of private detective


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/15/daniel-morgan-met-chief-censured-for-hampering-corruption-inquiry

Actually - it would be well worth opening a special thread for corruption of all British police forces and the MET - there certainly seems to be enough interest and activity to keep it going for as long as it takes 😁
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 15, 2021, 08:58:58 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 15, 2021, 08:08:10 PM
Actually - it would be well worth opening a special thread for corruption of all British police forces and the MET - there certainly seems to be enough interest and activity to keep it going for as long as it takes 😁

 Without fear or favour, you gonna guarantee it ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 09:15:02 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 15, 2021, 06:47:06 PM
Institutional corruption, institutionally racist , the Mighty MET.


Daniel Morgan: Met Police accused of 'institutional corruption' over 1987 unsolved axe murder of private detective

https://news.sky.com/story/daniel-morgan-met-police-accused-of-institutional-corruption-in-1987-unsolved-axe-murder-of-private-detective-12332406
Dick apologise which will make it better for the Morgan family.

Dame Cressida Dick said it is a "matter of great regret that no one has been brought to justice and that our mistakes have compounded the pain suffered by Daniel's family".

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/met-police-chief-apologises-for-failings-in-murdered-private-detective-investigation/ar-AAL4mBn

Can she stay ?


Met chief censured for hampering corruption inquiry into investigation of 1987 death of private detective


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/15/daniel-morgan-met-chief-censured-for-hampering-corruption-inquiry

All organisations tend to take steps to protect their reputations, but when the organisation is a police force reputation protection must never be allowed to appear to be a cover up. It's a difficult path to tread.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 15, 2021, 09:31:52 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 15, 2021, 08:58:58 PM
Without fear or favour, you gonna guarantee it ?
What on earth are you on about ~ set up a thread or don't ~ it's all one to me 😁
(https://th.bing.com/th/id/Rb5075a1f27b7775791fe34dbefe20606?rik=qGJfmFAG6jLMzA&riu=http%3a%2f%2fclipartbarn.com%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2017%2f02%2fQuestion-face-free-emoticon-question-mark-clipart-graphic-clipartidy.jpg&ehk=rZ%2fRSl1PfUMgm7WFA1ee%2bpHE93MsKcQCC5dN67Qb8CU%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2021, 08:02:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2021, 03:02:06 PM
It's clear to me that this discussion is never going to reach a conclusion. On the one hand are those who believe it's a fact that Eddie the VRD alerted to the scent of a coconut. On the other are those who believe that it can't be accepted as a fact for various reasons. I think it's time to stop now as opinions won't be changed on either side.
So what did Eddie alert to.. His supporters seem to want to claim now that the soil was contaminated with cadaver odour. So where did the contamination come from... Had a body been buried then removed as there were no remains found.... Or was it just a false alert, far more likely imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 16, 2021, 08:04:14 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 16, 2021, 08:02:10 AM
So what did Eddie alert to.. His supporters seem to want to claim now that the soil was contaminated with cadaver odour. So where did the contamination come from... Had a body been buried then removed as there were no remains found.... Or was it just a false alert, far more likely imo
I predict you won’t get a straight answer to this question, it’s already been asked several times before.  Eddie simply can’t be wrong, end of debate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2021, 08:11:58 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 16, 2021, 08:04:14 AM
I predict you won’t get a straight answer to this question, it’s already been asked several times before.  Eddie simply can’t be wrong, end of debate.

I think its Eddie cant be proved to be wrong.. I think hes wrong  quite a lot
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 16, 2021, 10:20:06 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 16, 2021, 08:04:14 AM
I predict you won’t get a straight answer to this question, it’s already been asked several times before.  Eddie simply can’t be wrong, end of debate.

I doubt any 'answers' will be forthcoming.  Even the most avid of deniers cannot refute the evidence that (a) Eddie alerted to coconut and (b) Eddie alerted to tissue used for a post coital clean up and (c) if there was an alert to any residual human cadaver scent it was as a result of legitimately scattered remains from a cremation.

Worth noting that had it not been known about the scattering of ashes taking place at that location ~ Eddie's alert would have been added to the legend that is Praia da Luz.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2021, 10:49:18 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 16, 2021, 10:20:06 AM
I doubt any 'answers' will be forthcoming.  Even the most avid of deniers cannot refute the evidence that (a) Eddie alerted to coconut and (b) Eddie alerted to tissue used for a post coital clean up and (c) if there was an alert to any residual human cadaver scent it was as a result of legitimately scattered remains from a cremation.

Worth noting that had it not been known about the scattering of ashes taking place at that location ~ Eddie's alert would have been added to the legend that is Praia da Luz.

I can see no point, as I already said, in continuing this discussion. I've achieved what I set out to do, which was to discover what evidence existed to support such claims as are still being made. i.e. "the evidence that (a) Eddie alerted to coconut". As some people are unable to understand that cadaver dogs don't alert to the scent of coconuts, there's no point in continuing to try to enlighten them imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 16, 2021, 10:56:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2021, 10:49:18 AM
I can see no point, as I already said, in continuing this discussion. I've achieved what I set out to do, which was to discover what evidence existed to support such claims as are still being made. i.e. "the evidence that (a) Eddie alerted to coconut". As some people are unable to understand that cadaver dogs don't alert to the scent of coconuts, there's no point in continuing to try to enlighten them imo.
@)(++(* Patronizing, much?  Do you understand that dogs can falsely alert?  What do you think it is that they are alerting to when it's a false alert? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2021, 11:13:34 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2021, 10:49:18 AM
I can see no point, as I already said, in continuing this discussion. I've achieved what I set out to do, which was to discover what evidence existed to support such claims as are still being made. i.e. "the evidence that (a) Eddie alerted to coconut". As some people are unable to understand that cadaver dogs don't alert to the scent of coconuts, there's no point in continuing to try to enlighten them imo.

No one has said the dog alerted to the scent of a coconut.. I think unconcious cueing may have played a part. If you are trying to enlighten me you really are wasting  your time... Im sure you dont have the knowledge.
First you say you dont wish to continue the discussion then you continue to post... Perhaps I can enlighten you
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2021, 12:23:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 16, 2021, 11:13:34 AM
No one has said the dog alerted to the scent of a coconut.. I think unconcious cueing may have played a part. If you are trying to enlighten me you really are wasting  your time... Im sure you dont have the knowledge.
First you say you dont wish to continue the discussion then you continue to post... Perhaps I can enlighten you

I know I'm wasting my time, that's why I stopped. You lot want to carry on, though, don't you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 16, 2021, 12:35:18 PM
Quote from: Davel on June 16, 2021, 08:11:58 AM
I think its Eddie cant be proved to be wrong.. I think hes wrong  quite a lot

I'm pretty sure he's dead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 16, 2021, 12:46:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2021, 12:23:28 PM
I know I'm wasting my time, that's why I stopped. You lot want to carry on, though, don't you?
It's a discussion that's never going to go away so why pretend you've said all you're going to say on the matter?  You know that dogs can and do falsely alert but for some reason you can't bring yourself to admit that Eddie could have got it wrong in HdlG, indeed there's overwhelming evidence that he did but you refuse to see it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2021, 12:55:11 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 16, 2021, 12:35:18 PM
I'm pretty sure he's dead.

I sometimes wonder who will be still alive when this case finally grinds to a halt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 16, 2021, 12:55:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2021, 12:55:11 PM
I sometimes wonder who will be still alive when this case finally grinds to a halt.
Such optimism.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 16, 2021, 01:04:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2021, 10:49:18 AM
I can see no point, as I already said, in continuing this discussion. I've achieved what I set out to do, which was to discover what evidence existed to support such claims as are still being made. i.e. "the evidence that (a) Eddie alerted to coconut". As some people are unable to understand that cadaver dogs don't alert to the scent of coconuts, there's no point in continuing to try to enlighten them imo.

It was a coconut shell and always was a coconut shell from the time it found itself lying in what became through time a Victorian layer.
Eddie alerted to the general area where on excavation the coconut shell was found.  It looked suspiciously like a fragment of a child's skull which the anthropologist thought it could be.
But Lenny Harper was in a hurry to release the information to the world in an arranged press conference so the fragment was not scientifically tested.  Eddie was called for and alerted as per his training - therefore the hundred odd year old nut casing was certified as being from a child's skull.
Which even if it had been was outwith the parameters of the investigation.  It wasn't human though but it was enough to set the ball rolling.

As some people are unable to understand that no-one knows what cadaver dogs alert to without forensic or other information (the scattering of ashes in Haute de la Garenne for example) is introduced into the equation whether the scent of coconuts emanating from concrete layers or the scent in the corner of a bedroom, there's no point in continuing to try to enlighten them, but it is fun to watch them squirm 😁

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 16, 2021, 01:13:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 16, 2021, 12:46:25 PM
It's a discussion that's never going to go away so why pretend you've said all you're going to say on the matter?  You know that dogs can and do falsely alert but for some reason you can't bring yourself to admit that Eddie could have got it wrong in HdlG, indeed there's overwhelming evidence that he did but you refuse to see it.

Even the Judicial Police recognised the anomalies when they questioned Eddie's technique of bypassing objects and only alerting to them later.

You are right, the dogs won't go away.  They are necessary to 'justify' the bile which has been spewed over the McCanns for so many years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2021, 01:22:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2021, 12:23:28 PM
I know I'm wasting my time, that's why I stopped. You lot want to carry on, though, don't you?

Youre welcome to stop but I think you have no right to tell others what they should and shouldn’t post about... Or do you think you do have that right.
You talk about enlightening posters... I dont think you are in a position to do that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2021, 08:31:36 AM
A proper test of the dogs would be to take two dogs and two handlers to a crime scene. They did this in the the Gilroy case and only one dog alerted.. The other didnt. Why didnt they accept the negative alert.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 17, 2021, 09:41:21 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 17, 2021, 08:31:36 AM
A proper test of the dogs would be to take two dogs and two handlers to a crime scene. They did this in the the Gilroy case and only one dog alerted.. The other didnt. Why didnt they accept the negative alert.

Please provide a cite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2021, 10:07:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2021, 09:41:21 AM
Please provide a cite.

Are you not aware of this
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 17, 2021, 10:21:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2021, 12:55:11 PM
I sometimes wonder who will be still alive when this case finally grinds to a halt.

Only the toughest of us and those who are in the right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 17, 2021, 10:23:10 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 17, 2021, 10:07:36 AM
Are you not aware of this

Obviously not. Please elucidate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 17, 2021, 10:26:05 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 17, 2021, 10:21:01 AM
Only the toughest of us and those who are in the right.

The connection escapes me, sorry.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 17, 2021, 10:27:50 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2021, 10:26:05 AM
The connection escapes me, sorry.

It's called The Law.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 17, 2021, 10:39:08 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2021, 09:41:21 AM
Please provide a cite.

[10] A cadaver dog, which is trained to react to the presence of dead bodies, reacted to areas in the basement garage and to a recessed area in the basement near the door leading from the basement to the garage. The dog also reacted to the boot of the car, but no forensic links to the deceased were established.
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=fbc08aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

In what I believe to be standard practice in the use of cadaver dogs - two dogs and two handlers from South Yorkshire Police worked independently of each other.

Only one dog team was referred to in court.  I draw my own conclusions from that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2021, 10:52:03 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2021, 10:23:10 AM
Obviously not. Please elucidate.

I will see what I can find. Its just that you thought you could enlighten us re the dogs and yiu are not aware of this
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 17, 2021, 10:56:03 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2021, 10:26:05 AM
The connection escapes me, sorry.

Life expectancy increases if you are an old boot & believe in fairy-tale abductions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 17, 2021, 11:09:20 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 17, 2021, 10:56:03 AM
Life expectancy increases if you are an old boot & believe in fairy-tale abductions.

Nothing Fairy Tale about me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 17, 2021, 02:25:18 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 17, 2021, 10:39:08 AM

[10] A cadaver dog, which is trained to react to the presence of dead bodies, reacted to areas in the basement garage and to a recessed area in the basement near the door leading from the basement to the garage. The dog also reacted to the boot of the car, but no forensic links to the deceased were established.
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=fbc08aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

In what I believe to be standard practice in the use of cadaver dogs - two dogs and two handlers from South Yorkshire Police worked independently of each other.

Only one dog team was referred to in court.  I draw my own conclusions from that.

You may believe it's standard practice, but can you supply evidence to support your belief?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 17, 2021, 06:18:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2021, 12:55:11 PM
I sometimes wonder who will be still alive when this case finally grinds to a halt.

Quote from: Eleanor on June 17, 2021, 10:21:01 AM
Only the toughest of us and those who are in the right.

Dare say the churchyards are full of people who thought much the same
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 17, 2021, 06:29:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 17, 2021, 10:23:10 AM
Obviously not. Please elucidate.
It would appear to have been covered in a podcast called “Body Of Proof” about the case, as suggested by this blog post

https://www.reddit.com/r/UnresolvedMysteries/comments/fkr0j2/body_of_proof_suzanne_pilley/


No forensic evidence has been found - no fibres, blood etc in the office or his car. A cadaver dog alerted in both locations, but only 1 of two dogs, and there was no corresponding forensic evidence to back this up. This info went to trail (sic) and shouldn't have.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on June 17, 2021, 07:34:54 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 17, 2021, 10:21:01 AM
Only the toughest of us and those who are in the right.
Fighting my way through CoV-2 at the moment, I agree with you Eleanor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2021, 07:38:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 17, 2021, 06:29:21 PM
It would appear to have been covered in a podcast called “Body Of Proof” about the case, as suggested by this blog post

https://www.reddit.com/r/UnresolvedMysteries/comments/fkr0j2/body_of_proof_suzanne_pilley/


No forensic evidence has been found - no fibres, blood etc in the office or his car. A cadaver dog alerted in both locations, but only 1 of two dogs, and there was no corresponding forensic evidence to back this up. This info went to trail (sic) and shouldn't have.

Im fairly sure that's where I heard that statement. Added to that the numerous reports of two dogs at the crime scene but thetes only ever mention of one dog alerting.
It also says in the podcast that Prof Cassella said the alerts should not have been admissible.... That the SCRCC said the dame thing but did not feel it would have affected the verdict.
The defence did not call any witness to challenge the testimonny of the dog handler or reliability of the alerts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 17, 2021, 07:43:13 PM
Quote from: Anthro on June 17, 2021, 07:34:54 PM
Fighting my way through CoV-2 at the moment, I agree with you Eleanor.

Too many persons trying too hard to shut us up.  And failing miserably.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2021, 08:03:23 AM
Did anyone else find the Greek husbands story suspicious when he said his wife was murdered by burglars
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 18, 2021, 08:06:45 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 18, 2021, 08:03:23 AM
Did anyone else find the Greek husbands story suspicious when he said his wife was murdered by burglars
yes, me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 18, 2021, 08:10:55 AM
Yep, it's called having a copper's nose (like Sgt. Stan Jones) and smelling something fishy from the start.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9698321/Greek-husband-CONFESSES-murdering-British-wife-Caroline-Crouch-sources-say.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9698321/Greek-husband-CONFESSES-murdering-British-wife-Caroline-Crouch-sources-say.html)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 18, 2021, 08:27:24 AM
Quote from: Davel on June 18, 2021, 08:03:23 AM
Did anyone else find the Greek husbands story suspicious when he said his wife was murdered by burglars

I wondered but passed it off as being too suspicious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 18, 2021, 09:20:28 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 18, 2021, 08:06:45 AM
yes, me.

Well I think he's innocent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 18, 2021, 09:29:06 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 18, 2021, 09:20:28 AM
Well I think he's innocent.
Grow up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 18, 2021, 09:33:41 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 18, 2021, 09:29:06 AM
Grow up.

I think Spammy means that he doesn't trust Confessions.  And he could be right about that.  Hence why Leonor Cipriano went down for sixteen years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 18, 2021, 10:53:20 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 18, 2021, 09:33:41 AM
I think Spammy means that he doesn't trust Confessions.  And he could be right about that.  Hence why Leonor Cipriano went down for sixteen years.
You think?  I think he just enjoys trolling my posts which is quite sad really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 18, 2021, 10:59:48 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 18, 2021, 10:53:20 AM
You think?  I think he just enjoys trolling my posts which is quite sad really.

Just trying to be kind.  Finding it hard.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Robittybob1 on June 19, 2021, 02:01:03 AM
Quote from: Anthro on June 17, 2021, 07:34:54 PM
Fighting my way through CoV-2 at the moment, I agree with you Eleanor.
Sadie and I send our love.  Hoping you get well ASAP.  Best wishes. Sending love and hugs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on June 19, 2021, 02:27:14 PM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on June 19, 2021, 02:01:03 AM
Sadie and I send our love.  Hoping you get well ASAP.  Best wishes. Sending love and hugs.
❤️❤️
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 13, 2021, 06:38:01 PM
Tragedy can strike so quickly;

Girl, 3, died after ‘choking on rubber end of jacket zip’ in Asda
James Hockaday
Thursday 12 Aug 2021 12:24 pm

A three-year-old girl died after choking on part of her own jacket’s zip inside an Asda supermarket, a source has said.

Onlookers dialled 999 at around 8.48pm on Tuesday night at the branch in Aintree, Liverpool, after the alarm was raised.

Ambulances were on the scene in nine minutes, and the girl was rushed 10 miles away to Alder Hey Children’s Hospital, where she was pronounced dead shortly after.

Now, a source close to the incident has told Metro.co.uk the girl choked on the rubber end of her own jacket’s zip, rather than on an item from the store.

As the death is being treated as non-suspicious, Merseyside Police said they cannot provide further details on her death.

Yesterday Metro.co.uk accurately reported a statement issued by the force claiming ambulances arrived at 9.50pm, almost one hour after emergency services were called.

This statement was incorrect, and police have since clarified that North West Ambulance Service informed them at 9.50pm that they had earlier attended the scene.

Hundreds of tributes have since poured in on social media for the girl, who is yet to be named.

Christine Simpson wrote: ‘Awww that’s terrible so tragic poor little lamb, her parents will be devastated, this is so easily done. RIP little angel and my thoughts are with her family.’

Alex Page commented: ‘This is an awful tragedy for the little girl’s family and anyone else involved. RIP little angel.’

Jean Jackson added: ‘Devastating can’t imagine having to see this happening to a small child God love her and family.’

Barbara Turner-Bone said: ‘Can’t imagine what her parents are going through. Heartbreaking. Thinking of the family. Rip Little angel.’

In a statement, Merseyside Police said: ‘At around 9.50pm, the ambulance service informed Merseyside Police that they had earlier attended reports of a three year-old girl choking inside Asda on Ormskirk Road.

‘The child was taken to hospital but sadly pronounced dead a short time later. The family are being supported by officers at this sad time.

‘The incident is not currently being treated as suspicious and enquiries are ongoing. A file is in the process of being prepared for the coroner.’

An Asda spokesperson told Metro.co.uk: ‘We are shocked and saddened by this incident and send our deepest condolences to the little girl’s family.

‘We are grateful to colleagues who provided immediate assistance in store and will do whatever we can to support them.’
https://metro.co.uk/2021/08/12/girl-3-died-after-choking-on-rubber-end-of-jacket-zip-in-asda-15080408/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 13, 2021, 06:55:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 13, 2021, 06:38:01 PM
Tragedy can strike so quickly;

Girl, 3, died after ‘choking on rubber end of jacket zip’ in Asda
James Hockaday
Thursday 12 Aug 2021 12:24 pm

A three-year-old girl died after choking on part of her own jacket’s zip inside an Asda supermarket, a source has said.

Onlookers dialled 999 at around 8.48pm on Tuesday night at the branch in Aintree, Liverpool, after the alarm was raised.

Ambulances were on the scene in nine minutes, and the girl was rushed 10 miles away to Alder Hey Children’s Hospital, where she was pronounced dead shortly after.

Now, a source close to the incident has told Metro.co.uk the girl choked on the rubber end of her own jacket’s zip, rather than on an item from the store.

As the death is being treated as non-suspicious, Merseyside Police said they cannot provide further details on her death.

Yesterday Metro.co.uk accurately reported a statement issued by the force claiming ambulances arrived at 9.50pm, almost one hour after emergency services were called.

This statement was incorrect, and police have since clarified that North West Ambulance Service informed them at 9.50pm that they had earlier attended the scene.

Hundreds of tributes have since poured in on social media for the girl, who is yet to be named.

Christine Simpson wrote: ‘Awww that’s terrible so tragic poor little lamb, her parents will be devastated, this is so easily done. RIP little angel and my thoughts are with her family.’

Alex Page commented: ‘This is an awful tragedy for the little girl’s family and anyone else involved. RIP little angel.’

Jean Jackson added: ‘Devastating can’t imagine having to see this happening to a small child God love her and family.’

Barbara Turner-Bone said: ‘Can’t imagine what her parents are going through. Heartbreaking. Thinking of the family. Rip Little angel.’

In a statement, Merseyside Police said: ‘At around 9.50pm, the ambulance service informed Merseyside Police that they had earlier attended reports of a three year-old girl choking inside Asda on Ormskirk Road.

‘The child was taken to hospital but sadly pronounced dead a short time later. The family are being supported by officers at this sad time.

‘The incident is not currently being treated as suspicious and enquiries are ongoing. A file is in the process of being prepared for the coroner.’

An Asda spokesperson told Metro.co.uk: ‘We are shocked and saddened by this incident and send our deepest condolences to the little girl’s family.

‘We are grateful to colleagues who provided immediate assistance in store and will do whatever we can to support them.’
https://metro.co.uk/2021/08/12/girl-3-died-after-choking-on-rubber-end-of-jacket-zip-in-asda-15080408/

This is supposed to mean what exactly?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 13, 2021, 07:00:44 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 13, 2021, 06:55:09 PM
This is supposed to mean what exactly?
Obviously that Madeleine woke up, got up and choked to death on something she put in her mouth.  When her parent found her they immediately decided to put her in the bin, case closed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 13, 2021, 07:18:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 13, 2021, 06:38:01 PM
Tragedy can strike so quickly;

Girl, 3, died after ‘choking on rubber end of jacket zip’ in Asda
James Hockaday
Thursday 12 Aug 2021 12:24 pm

A three-year-old girl died after choking on part of her own jacket’s zip inside an Asda supermarket, a source has said.

Onlookers dialled 999 at around 8.48pm on Tuesday night at the branch in Aintree, Liverpool, after the alarm was raised.

Ambulances were on the scene in nine minutes, and the girl was rushed 10 miles away to Alder Hey Children’s Hospital, where she was pronounced dead shortly after.

Now, a source close to the incident has told Metro.co.uk the girl choked on the rubber end of her own jacket’s zip, rather than on an item from the store.

As the death is being treated as non-suspicious, Merseyside Police said they cannot provide further details on her death.

Yesterday Metro.co.uk accurately reported a statement issued by the force claiming ambulances arrived at 9.50pm, almost one hour after emergency services were called.

This statement was incorrect, and police have since clarified that North West Ambulance Service informed them at 9.50pm that they had earlier attended the scene.

Hundreds of tributes have since poured in on social media for the girl, who is yet to be named.

Christine Simpson wrote: ‘Awww that’s terrible so tragic poor little lamb, her parents will be devastated, this is so easily done. RIP little angel and my thoughts are with her family.’

Alex Page commented: ‘This is an awful tragedy for the little girl’s family and anyone else involved. RIP little angel.’

Jean Jackson added: ‘Devastating can’t imagine having to see this happening to a small child God love her and family.’

Barbara Turner-Bone said: ‘Can’t imagine what her parents are going through. Heartbreaking. Thinking of the family. Rip Little angel.’

In a statement, Merseyside Police said: ‘At around 9.50pm, the ambulance service informed Merseyside Police that they had earlier attended reports of a three year-old girl choking inside Asda on Ormskirk Road.

‘The child was taken to hospital but sadly pronounced dead a short time later. The family are being supported by officers at this sad time.

‘The incident is not currently being treated as suspicious and enquiries are ongoing. A file is in the process of being prepared for the coroner.’

An Asda spokesperson told Metro.co.uk: ‘We are shocked and saddened by this incident and send our deepest condolences to the little girl’s family.

‘We are grateful to colleagues who provided immediate assistance in store and will do whatever we can to support them.’
https://metro.co.uk/2021/08/12/girl-3-died-after-choking-on-rubber-end-of-jacket-zip-in-asda-15080408/

Probably no chance of that happening in this case.. An unpleasant death where the poor victim would thrash around
Definitely would have woken thee twins and they would have been very distressed if they had watched Maddie choke to death
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 13, 2021, 07:28:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 13, 2021, 07:18:35 PM
Probably no chance of that happening in this case.. An unpleasant death where the poor victim would thrash around
Definitely would have woken thee twins and they would have been very distressed if they had watched Maddie choke to death

I'm not saying it did. I'm sure there are other scenarios where urgent medical attention is vital.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 13, 2021, 08:02:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 13, 2021, 07:28:00 PM
I'm not saying it did. I'm sure there are other scenarios where urgent medical attention is vital.

Like what
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 02:42:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 13, 2021, 08:02:18 PM
Like what

Head injury and/or unconsciousness leading to compromise or loss of airway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 15, 2021, 03:40:34 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 02:42:46 PM
Head injury and/or unconsciousness leading to compromise or loss of airway.

Swallowing medicines.

"For a baby or young child – err on the side of caution. Children can deteriorate quickly."
https://firstaidforlife.org.uk/999when-to-call-for-an-ambulance-and-when-not-to/

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 15, 2021, 05:57:06 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 02:42:46 PM
Head injury and/or unconsciousness leading to compromise or loss of airway.

Can you give me one example of this happening  and resulting in a death. Every death from a domestic head injury Ive heard of involves death later in hospital
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2021, 06:18:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 15, 2021, 03:40:34 PM
Swallowing medicines.

"For a baby or young child – err on the side of caution. Children can deteriorate quickly."
https://firstaidforlife.org.uk/999when-to-call-for-an-ambulance-and-when-not-to/
What medicine do you think Madeleine could have swallowed that was in the apartment that would have killed her in 30 minutes or so?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 07:30:22 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 15, 2021, 05:57:06 PM
Can you give me one example of this happening  and resulting in a death. Every death from a domestic head injury Ive heard of involves death later in hospital

Suppose you have a situation when a child does not have adult supervision, they fall and become unconscious. In some cases the child (or adult) has either a compromised airway or an airway without patency. Blood oxygen saturation levels drop scarily quickly in children. Very quickly cyanosis. is evident. Simple head tilt chin lift manoeuvres will often resolve the situation (depending on the exact cause - airway obstruction or apnoea). If there's no adult supervision to perform basic life support and the child remains hypoxic then death would occur in around five minutes.

You're correct that most brain injuries that cause apnoea are witnessed in hospital because it takes time for the trauma to cause apnoea (depending on the nature of the injury). But if a victims airway is compromised or totally obstructed then unless they receive immediate life support then they will arrest and die very quickly (particularly children). Someone posted the example of the young lass in Asda who asphyxiated on a coat zip toggle.

Falls are the most common cause of domestic trauma. I see about three a week where the patient needs intubating in A&E because of lack of airway patency due to head trauma (and it's not a big city hospital).

Here's a medical website on the most common cause of upper airway obstruction:

https://blog.sscor.com/what-are-the-most-common-causes-of-upper-airway-obstruction (https://blog.sscor.com/what-are-the-most-common-causes-of-upper-airway-obstruction)

Airway obstructions are common and may even be underreported. The prevalence and type of airway obstruction varies with age. Children younger than 4, for example, are more vulnerable to choking-related upper airway obstructions, and adults commonly experience airway obstruction caused by complications from smoking. First responders will inevitably encounter a wide variety of airway obstructions and must be prepared to promptly respond to each with appropriate medical care. Here are the most common causes of upper airway obstruction.

Tongue-Related Airway Obstruction

A relaxed tongue is the most common cause of upper airway obstruction in patients who are unconscious or who have suffered spinal cord or other neurological injuries. The tongue may relax into the airway, causing an obstruction. In some cases, other injuries complicate this phenomenon. For example, a patient who is unconscious following a blow to the head may also have suffered upper airway trauma, causing both the tongue and the trauma to block the airway.

Foreign Body/Choking

The most common cause of airway obstruction in children is a foreign body lodged in the airway. Choking can fully or completely obstruct the airway. Small toys, round foods such as berries and grapes, rocks, pebbles, and other enticing objects are common culprits. Eighty-eight percent of airway obstruction deaths occur in children younger than 4, highlighting the need for vigilance about children’s access to small objects and breakable toys.

Trauma

Traumatic injuries can directly obstruct the airway, such as when a gunshot or knife wound collapses portions of the airway. Trauma can also cause continuous bleeding or vomiting that obstructs the airway, making airway management difficult and increasing the risk of aspiration pneumonia. In the latter scenario, continuous suction via the SALAD technique can clear the airway and lower mortality risk.

Traumatic brain and spinal cord injuries may also lead to upper airway obstruction. If a patient cannot clear their own airway, they may require suctioning. In some cases, brain and spinal cord injuries inhibit the brain’s ability to control breathing, coughing, and other important respiratory functions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 07:31:41 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 15, 2021, 05:57:06 PM
Can you give me one example of this happening  and resulting in a death. Every death from a domestic head injury Ive heard of involves death later in hospital

What if your upper airway is totally obstructed and no-one is there to take you to hospital?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 15, 2021, 07:57:10 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 07:31:41 PM
What if your upper airway is totally obstructed and no-one is there to take you to hospital?

Ive asked you many times......Ive asked the whole forum many times....can you give me an example ofa child dying in such a way after a fall in a house.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 08:07:25 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 15, 2021, 07:57:10 PM
Ive asked you many times......Ive asked the whole forum many times....can you give me an example ofa child dying in such a way after a fall in a house.

Do you accept that falling is the most common cause of domestic accident?

Do you accept that falling sometimes causes unconsciousness?

Do you accept that the airway is often compromised in an unconscious patient?

Do you accept that the first thing to assess in an unconscious patient is their airway?

There are thousands of injuries which involve children falling from furniture.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2021, 08:17:10 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 08:07:25 PM
Do you accept that falling is the most common cause of domestic accident?

Do you accept that falling sometimes causes unconsciousness?

Do you accept that the airway is often compromised in an unconscious patient?

Do you accept that the first thing to assess in an unconscious patient is their airway?

There are thousands of injuries which involve children falling from furniture.
and despite there being thousands of examples, not one fall causing instant or near instant death?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 08:32:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2021, 08:17:10 PM
and despite there being thousands of examples, not one fall causing instant or near instant death?

Says who?

Here’s some UK statistics on falls in the home including deaths:

https://www.middlesbrough.gov.uk/sites/default/files/first%20foremost%20falls%20factsheet.pdf


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 08:37:45 PM
Falls in the home and garden accounted for nearly half of all home injuries.
Each year an estimated 390,800 children under 15 are taken to hospital with injuries resulting from a fall at home.
Almost sixty per cent of children who went to hospital after falling at home were under five years old.
56 per cent of under fives injured after falling at home were boys
Deaths and severe injuries are often associated with a fall from a high window or balcony or down stairs. Falls can also result in serious injury if the surface the child hits is hard - such as concrete or paving stones.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2021, 08:38:15 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 08:32:40 PM
Says who?

Here’s some UK statistics on falls in the home including deaths:

https://www.middlesbrough.gov.uk/sites/default/files/first%20foremost%20falls%20factsheet.pdf
We’ve been through all of this before.  You still haven’t been able to link to any example of a child falling from any furniture or the height of the Apartment 5 balcony which resulted in instant or near instant death.  The only news story you could find was a baby who fell between a bed and a wall who suffocated, and even then the child didn’t die immediately.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 08:50:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2021, 08:38:15 PM
We’ve been through all of this before.  You still haven’t been able to link to any example of a child falling from any furniture or the height of the Apartment 5 balcony which resulted in instant or near instant death.  The only news story you could find was a baby who fell between a bed and a wall who suffocated, and even then the child didn’t die immediately.

Just read the post above. It talks about deaths from falls onto hard surfaces.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 08:56:13 PM
I work in critical care. I have done for over 30 years. I can assure you that children falling off furniture or window sills is not uncommon.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2021, 09:02:42 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 08:56:13 PM
I work in critical care. I have done for over 30 years. I can assure you that children falling off furniture or window sills is not uncommon.
No one has claimed otherwise, the salient issue is instant or near instant death, still no examples despite hundreds of thousands of children falling in domestic settings in the last 14 years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 15, 2021, 09:13:34 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 08:56:13 PM
I work in critical care. I have done for over 30 years. I can assure you that children falling off furniture or window sills is not uncommon.

We know falling is not uncommon... But dying in a domestic fall quickly it seems is unheard of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 15, 2021, 09:54:47 PM
Unintentional injuries are one of the main causes of premature death and illness for children in England. Every year in England, 60 children under the age of five die from injuries in and around the home, which is one in twelve of all deaths of children aged one to four.
https://publichealthmatters.blog.gov.uk/2017/02/28/preventing-accidents-in-children-under-five/

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 09:56:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 15, 2021, 09:13:34 PM
We know falling is not uncommon... But dying in a domestic fall quickly it seems is unheard of.

Except that's just not true....

https://www.middlesbrough.gov.uk/sites/default/files/first%20foremost%20falls%20factsheet.pdf (https://www.middlesbrough.gov.uk/sites/default/files/first%20foremost%20falls%20factsheet.pdf)

From that fact sheet:
Deaths and severe injuries are often associated with a fall from a high window or balcony or down stairs. Falls can also result in serious injury if the surface the child hits is hard - such as concrete or paving stones.

Post mortem results are to be found in a patient's confidential medical records. The report is part of the medical record of the deceased. You have to complete a formal document requesting access to the Medical Record to comply with the law on patient confidentiality. Consent has to be given usually by the next of kin. So you're not going to find what you're asking for just by using Google!

But honestly all you need to do is read the facts from the link. It's there for all to see that child deaths do occur following falls in the home and the fact sheet even gives as an example a child hitting a hard surface. In my opinion the risk is increased considerably when there is no adult supervision of children under five (who are in a higher risk group even with adult supervision). I've said it before - I don't loath the McCann's. If Madeleine had a fatal fall or if she was abducted, whilst she was unsupervised then they will have suffered the most terrible pain and anguish and they will have to live with the mistake they made every single day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2021, 10:09:18 PM
And yet still no actual examples (despite the supposed plethora of instant or near instant deaths in the home)of young children from falls.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2021, 10:12:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 15, 2021, 09:54:47 PM
Unintentional injuries are one of the main causes of premature death and illness for children in England. Every year in England, 60 children under the age of five die from injuries in and around the home, which is one in twelve of all deaths of children aged one to four.
https://publichealthmatters.blog.gov.uk/2017/02/28/preventing-accidents-in-children-under-five/
About as prevalent as children under 16 being abducted by strangers then.  Do you have any examples of children dying within 30 minutes of a fall in the home?  As only 60 children umder 5 die from domestic injuries not all of which will be as a result of falls, these will be extremely rare and therefore very newsworthy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 15, 2021, 10:38:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2021, 10:12:30 PM
About as prevalent as children under 16 being abducted by strangers then.  Do you have any examples of children dying within 30 minutes of a fall in the home?  As only 60 children umder 5 die from domestic injuries not all of which will be as a result of falls, these will be extremely rare and therefore very newsworthy.

Accidental deaths aren't newsworthy. There may be local news reports, but the national press rarely pick them up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 10:50:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 15, 2021, 10:38:58 PM
Accidental deaths aren't newsworthy. There may be local news reports, but the national press rarely pick them up.

The figures for fatal falls in children under five can be found via your link.... It's the PHE link.... Falls tops the list of accidental home injury in the under fives.... fatal falls are thankfully quite rare but certainly not unheard of.

And yes you're correct. The actual post mortem details of the accidental deaths in homes are in confidential medical records and not generally available to the public in news reports.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2021, 11:11:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 15, 2021, 10:38:58 PM
Accidental deaths aren't newsworthy. There may be local news reports, but the national press rarely pick them up.
Yes they are, if they are as rare as stranger abduction.  Aren’t parents ever prosecuted for neglect in such cases?Google “toddler dies in accident “, hundreds of hits but not newsworthy you say?  Yet none match any plausible scenario of accidental death in this case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2021, 11:29:20 PM
So Madeleine has this freak accident, plummeting to almost sudden death aftet the parents went to dinner.  Who discovers her dead and at what time?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 15, 2021, 11:38:18 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 15, 2021, 10:50:42 PM
The figures for fatal falls in children under five can be found via your link.... It's the PHE link.... Falls tops the list of accidental home injury in the under fives.... fatal falls are thankfully quite rare but certainly not unheard of.

And yes you're correct. The actual post mortem details of the accidental deaths in homes are in confidential medical records and not generally available to the public in news reports.

The Asda incident was very public so was picked up. Had it happened in the family's home it probably wouldn't have been reported imo; not by the national media anyway. Many elderly people die during or after falls in their homes and they're rarely reported in the newspapers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 15, 2021, 11:43:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 15, 2021, 11:38:18 PM
The Asda incident was very public so was picked up. Had it happened in the family's home it probably wouldn't have been reported imo; not by the national media anyway. Many elderly people die during or after falls in their homes and they're rarely reported in the newspapers.
Old people are expected to die, young children’s deaths are far more noteworthy as can be evidenced by the hundreds of reports of childhood death by accident available to read online.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 01:54:01 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2021, 11:43:17 PM
Old people are expected to die, young children’s deaths are far more noteworthy as can be evidenced by the hundreds of reports of childhood death by accident available to read online.

And some of those are under 5's suffering fatal falls. Public Health England have the figures. The link to their data is in G-Unit's link. It's rare but happens. There are about 3 cases a year in the UK (fatal falls in the home in the under 5 age group).

Falls are the most common accident in the home.... and a fall even from 4-5 feet can cause unconsciousness if your head hits a hard surface... and the first thing to assess in an unconscious person is their airway. It's thankfully rare but you can't claim it doesn't happen. I'm actually stunned that people aren't aware of the risks of leaving toddlers unsupervised at home... but I'll admit to getting a bias view working in a hospital and seeing unconscious children lose their airway.

I'll tell you what I consider is  nigh on impossible and that's to carry a 3 year old out of the 5A bedroom window!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 02:20:00 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2021, 11:29:20 PM
So Madeleine has this freak accident, plummeting to almost sudden death aftet the parents went to dinner.  Who discovers her dead and at what time?

I'll throw in a totally hypothetical scenario.... Matt Oldfield finds her missing at 9:30pm, he also checks the master bedroom but can't see her and then returns to either report all is quiet.... or maybe he tells Gerry he didn't see Madeleine. Gerry is then absent for half an hour as per the two employee witness statements.

It's Rachael who alludes to this, imo, when asked "for completeness" what did Matt tell you he saw.... she replies: "he could see that the twins were in their cots and there was no sound, erm so he just assumed everything was alright, he didnt put his head round the door to see if Madeleine was in her bed, but he said he did wonder where she slept, erm poked his head, well you know kind of looked into Gerry and Kates room, just saw there was a double bed there, so you know, assumed they were all in together or, I mean I think he knew that they were all in together, erm but he didnt actually look to see whether Madeleine was there or not'. "

"He did wonder where she slept" might imo imply he wondered where she slept because he can't see her in the children's room... and then logically as Racael states he checks the other bedroom.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 07:14:37 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 01:54:01 AM
And some of those are under 5's suffering fatal falls. Public Health England have the figures. The link to their data is in G-Unit's link. It's rare but happens. There are about 3 cases a year in the UK (fatal falls in the home in the under 5 age group).

Falls are the most common accident in the home.... and a fall even from 4-5 feet can cause unconsciousness if your head hits a hard surface... and the first thing to assess in an unconscious person is their airway. It's thankfully rare but you can't claim it doesn't happen. I'm actually stunned that people aren't aware of the risks of leaving toddlers unsupervised at home... but I'll admit to getting a bias view working in a hospital and seeing unconscious children lose their airway.

I'll tell you what I consider is  nigh on impossible and that's to carry a 3 year old out of the 5A bedroom window!
3 fatal falls in the home in the under 5 age group per year is stunningly rare.  Of those 3 deaths were they all instantaneous or did the children die in hospital hours later?  These cases would make the newspapers no question, but still no links to any of the cases (and by my reckoning there should be 42 of these deaths since Madeleine disappeared).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 07:15:47 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 02:20:00 AM
I'll throw in a totally hypothetical scenario.... Matt Oldfield finds her missing at 9:30pm, he also checks the master bedroom but can't see her and then returns to either report all is quiet.... or maybe he tells Gerry he didn't see Madeleine. Gerry is then absent for half an hour as per the two employee witness statements.

It's Rachael who alludes to this, imo, when asked "for completeness" what did Matt tell you he saw.... she replies: "he could see that the twins were in their cots and there was no sound, erm so he just assumed everything was alright, he didnt put his head round the door to see if Madeleine was in her bed, but he said he did wonder where she slept, erm poked his head, well you know kind of looked into Gerry and Kates room, just saw there was a double bed there, so you know, assumed they were all in together or, I mean I think he knew that they were all in together, erm but he didnt actually look to see whether Madeleine was there or not'. "

"He did wonder where she slept" might imo imply he wondered where she slept because he can't see her in the children's room... and then logically as Racael states he checks the other bedroom.
So basically in your scenario the entire group is involved in a cover up or just Matthew?  Why on earth in the latter scenario would you not tell the parents that the child you had gone to check on was missing? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on August 16, 2021, 07:41:53 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 01:54:01 AM

I'll tell you what I consider is  nigh on impossible and that's to carry a 3 year old out of the 5A bedroom window!
Yeah... but you probably don't have Chris Bonington Brueckner's expertise...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8746635/Madeleine-McCann-suspect-capable-taking-child-partner-crime-says.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8746635/Madeleine-McCann-suspect-capable-taking-child-partner-crime-says.html)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 08:02:19 AM

There were three different ways in and out of that appartment.  No one needs to prove exactly how it was done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 08:10:52 AM
Quote from: Myster on August 16, 2021, 07:41:53 AM
Yeah... but you probably don't have Chris Bonington Brueckner's expertise...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8746635/Madeleine-McCann-suspect-capable-taking-child-partner-crime-says.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8746635/Madeleine-McCann-suspect-capable-taking-child-partner-crime-says.html)
I wonder how the abductor managed to kidnap a 20 month old baby out of a first floor room with a sash window?  Madeleine may have been twice the weight and size but is that the only factor that makes it impossible according to some…?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 08:54:31 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 07:15:47 AM
So basically in your scenario the entire group is involved in a cover up or just Matthew?  Why on earth in the latter scenario would you not tell the parents that the child you had gone to check on was missing?

Maybe he did? Stephen Carpenter, who left the Tapas complex between 9.15 and 9.30pm;

My wife mentioned on the following day that she vaguely remembered someone calling "Madeleine, Madeleine", this was after we had crossed the road from the MW reception and before entering our apartment.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN-CARPENTER.htm

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 09:25:18 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 08:54:31 AM
Maybe he did? Stephen Carpenter, who left the Tapas complex between 9.15 and 9.30pm;

My wife mentioned on the following day that she vaguely remembered someone calling "Madeleine, Madeleine", this was after we had crossed the road from the MW reception and before entering our apartment.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN-CARPENTER.htm
Can you give a plausible, logical explanation for why a man sent to check on someone else's child would, on finding her missing from her bed, go looking for her and then on failing to find her, not mention it to the child's parents on his return to the table?  Or - why (if he did tell the parents and therefore everyone else at the table) they all decided to lie about this?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 09:39:11 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 09:25:18 AM
Can you give a plausible, logical explanation for why a man sent to check on someone else's child would, on finding her missing from her bed, go looking for her and then on failing to find her, not mention it to the child's parents on his return to the table?  Or - why (if he did tell the parents and therefore everyone else at the table) they all decided to lie about this?

Scrapping Rotten Old Barrels.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 09:49:52 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 09:39:11 AM
Scrapping Rotten Old Barrels.
I'm expecting the sound of deafening silence in reply to my question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 09:59:22 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 09:49:52 AM
I'm expecting the sound of deafening silence in reply to my question.

There isn't one.  Other than what I said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 16, 2021, 10:10:37 AM
Quote from: Myster on August 16, 2021, 07:41:53 AM
Yeah... but you probably don't have Chris Bonington Brueckner's expertise...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8746635/Madeleine-McCann-suspect-capable-taking-child-partner-crime-says.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8746635/Madeleine-McCann-suspect-capable-taking-child-partner-crime-says.html)

Chris Bonington is one of my heroes, along with Mallory, Hillary, Messner & three times Everest attempter, Brian Blessed.

I have read far too many books on the mighty mountain, seen countless docus & have been totally obsessed with the thing since I was about 12.

It's incredible I know but I do have interests other than supporting Christian Brueckner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 10:17:40 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 16, 2021, 10:10:37 AM
Chris Bonington is one of my heroes, along with Mallory, Hillary, Messner & three times Everest attempter, Brian Blessed.

I have read far too many books on the mighty mountain, seen countless docus & have been totally obsessed with the thing since I was about 12.

It's incredible I know but I do have interests other than supporting Christian Brueckner.
Have you ever considered climbing it yourself?  If it's finances putting you off we could start a Crowdfunder.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 10:22:31 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 09:25:18 AM
Can you give a plausible, logical explanation for why a man sent to check on someone else's child would, on finding her missing from her bed, go looking for her and then on failing to find her, not mention it to the child's parents on his return to the table?  Or - why (if he did tell the parents and therefore everyone else at the table) they all decided to lie about this?

You are assuming that speaking to one of Madeleine's parents would involve everyone at the table hearing the conversation. There were individual conversations taking place however;

4078    ”Can you remember what conversation was going on in the time before Kate discovered Madeleine missing?”

 Reply    ”Well again now, because err you know when you’ve got a group of nine people you’re not all talking…”

 

 4078    ”No.”

 Reply    ”In the middle of the table, you know, I would be, I was probably talking to Russell when he came back you know and talking about the fact he’d got a new steak, he didn’t get a warmed up one.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANE-WEBSTER-2.htm

So Matthew could have asked one of the parents where Madeleine slept without being heard by everyone. The answer would have reassured him if he hadn't checked that bed. If he had, then that parent may have decided to check for themselves; especially her mother, who had told her friends earlier that the patio doors were left open so Madeleine could get out.

So the disappearance could have been discovered at 9.30pm - 9.40pm, even if the alarm wasn't raised until 10pm.

This hypothesis is IMO. 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 10:25:32 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 09:39:11 AM
Scrapping Rotten Old Barrels.

Best thing to do with them imo, no point in scraping them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 10:30:28 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 10:25:32 AM
Best thing to do with them imo, no point in scraping them.

Oh Gosh.  Well Done.  Open Season now, is it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 10:39:21 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 07:15:47 AM
So basically in your scenario the entire group is involved in a cover up or just Matthew?  Why on earth in the latter scenario would you not tell the parents that the child you had gone to check on was missing?

I think you would obviously. Such a scenario is perhaps supported by the two employee statements who talks about Gerry being absent for half an hour. It doesn’t necessarily mean anyone else in the groups knows hypothetically speaking and imo. To continue with this hypothetical scenario Gerry could come back and say everything is fine (Matt’s only not sure if she’s there). Kate finds the scene she found. It doesn’t fit the final version of the T9 timeline but discrepancies are normal as to checks and exact times and then all those translations!!! It’s not what I think happened but IMO it’s far more plausible than someone climbing out of the window with Madeleine which is nigh on impossible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 10:41:06 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 10:22:31 AM
You are assuming that speaking to one of Madeleine's parents would involve everyone at the table hearing the conversation. There were individual conversations taking place however;

4078    ”Can you remember what conversation was going on in the time before Kate discovered Madeleine missing?”

 Reply    ”Well again now, because err you know when you’ve got a group of nine people you’re not all talking…”

 

 4078    ”No.”

 Reply    ”In the middle of the table, you know, I would be, I was probably talking to Russell when he came back you know and talking about the fact he’d got a new steak, he didn’t get a warmed up one.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANE-WEBSTER-2.htm

So Matthew could have asked one of the parents where Madeleine slept without being heard by everyone. The answer would have reassured him if he hadn't checked that bed. If he had, then that parent may have decided to check for themselves; especially her mother, who had told her friends earlier that the patio doors were left open so Madeleine could get out.

So the disappearance could have been discovered at 9.30pm - 9.40pm, even if the alarm wasn't raised until 10pm.

This hypothesis is IMO.
Right, so let's think about this theoretical scenario logically.
Matt discovers Madeleine missing from her bed.  Tries to find her but fails.  Comes back to the table and whispers in Gerry's ear "your daughter's disappeared".  Then what?  Neither McCann gets up to check on the disappearing child until 10pm?  And Matt is happy to cover for them?  Why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 10:58:38 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 10:39:21 AM
I think you would obviously. Such a scenario is perhaps supported by the two employee statements who talks about Gerry being absent for half an hour. It doesn’t necessarily mean anyone else in the groups knows hypothetically speaking and imo. To continue with this hypothetical scenario Gerry could come back and say everything is fine (Matt’s only not sure if she’s there). Kate finds the scene she found. It doesn’t fit the final version of the T9 timeline but discrepancies are normal as to checks and exact times and then all those translations!!! It’s not what I think happened but IMO it’s far more plausible than someone climbing out of the window with Madeleine which is nigh on impossible.

How do you feel about passing Madeleine through the window?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 16, 2021, 11:07:23 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 10:17:40 AM
Have you ever considered climbing it yourself?  If it's finances putting you off we could start a Crowdfunder.

Hmmm, Guinness book here I come.

Technology has come a long way, Internet at base camp, I could even be trolling from camp 4.

The first Wum to climb Mount Everest.

I can picture myself on the summit, holding up a flag saying 'Free Martin Brueckner'.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 11:11:54 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 10:58:38 AM
How do you feel about passing Madeleine through the window?

That’s definitely a possibility.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 11:12:25 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 16, 2021, 11:07:23 AM
Hmmm, Guinness book here I come.

Technology has come a long way, Internet at base camp, I could even be trolling from camp 4.

The first Wum to climb Mount Everest.

I can picture myself on the summit, holding up a flag saying 'Free Martin Brueckner'.
Well, you've got my full support (or at least a fiver's worth of it).  Good luck!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 11:18:39 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 10:41:06 AM
Right, so let's think about this theoretical scenario logically.
Matt discovers Madeleine missing from her bed.  Tries to find her but fails.  Comes back to the table and whispers in Gerry's ear "your daughter's disappeared".  Then what?  Neither McCann gets up to check on the disappearing child until 10pm?  And Matt is happy to cover for them?  Why?

Gerry goes for half an hour, hypothetically speaking. Matt doesn’t need to lie (apart from this scenario doesn’t fit the T9 timeline) . All Matt did was return to the bar to tell Gerry that he couldn’t see Madeleine. Why would he tell Rachael he checked the master bedroom? Why did he say he wasn’t sure where Madeleine slept?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 11:21:52 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 11:18:39 AM
Gerry goes for half an hour, hypothetically speaking. Matt doesn’t need to lie (apart from these scenario doesn’t fit the T9 timeline) . All Matt did was return to the bar to tell Gerry that he couldn’t see Madeleine. Why would he tell Rachael he checked the master bedroom? Why did he say he wasn’t sure where Madeleine slept?
OK - so you've got Gerry leaving the table for half an hour after Matt returns, a check that none of the rest of the table remember to mention in their statements?  And as soon as he returns Kate does her check? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 11:44:50 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 10:41:06 AM
Right, so let's think about this theoretical scenario logically.
Matt discovers Madeleine missing from her bed.  Tries to find her but fails.  Comes back to the table and whispers in Gerry's ear "your daughter's disappeared".  Then what?  Neither McCann gets up to check on the disappearing child until 10pm?  And Matt is happy to cover for them?  Why?

I have already hypothesised that a parent could have gone to check for themselves. No need to go mob handed, because Matt could have missed seeing Madeleine, she could be there. The parent checks thoroughly and she isn't in the apartment. Maybe she's left through the patio doors left unlocked for that very purpose? Hence the calls of 'Madeleine' heard by Mrs Carpenter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 11:47:59 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 11:21:52 AM
OK - so you've got Gerry leaving the table for half an hour after Matt returns, a check that none of the rest of the table remember to mention in their statements?  And as soon as he returns Kate does her check?


Wasn’t there definitely talk of “Gerry’s been a long time…. Maybe he’s watching football’ . They’ve just got the times of the checks muddled. That’s hardly surprising even the two versions in the sticker book are different!!

I don’t believe this is what happened. But there were the employee statements, the Smith sighting and the timeline discrepancies that should have been focused on with a line of very direct questioning to clear the ground from under the feet. Instead you got interference from different Police departments in the Uk and Portugal and there was even political pressure applied to make the investigation focus on abduction…. What you’ve got left with is a big mess and the Police happy to trawl through pardophiiles until they have enough circumstantial evidence to satisfy the public that it’s case closed even without it ever going to trial. IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 16, 2021, 11:52:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 11:44:50 AM
I have already hypothesised that a parent could have gone to check for themselves. No need to go mob handed, because Matt could have missed seeing Madeleine, she could be there. The parent checks thoroughly and she isn't in the apartment. Maybe she's left through the patio doors left unlocked for that very purpose? Hence the calls of 'Madeleine' heard by Mrs Carpenter.

Was Mrs Carpenter ever interviewed like her husband?
Did she ever say whether it was a male or female voice that she heard?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 12:08:07 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 11:44:50 AM
I have already hypothesised that a parent could have gone to check for themselves. No need to go mob handed, because Matt could have missed seeing Madeleine, she could be there. The parent checks thoroughly and she isn't in the apartment. Maybe she's left through the patio doors left unlocked for that very purpose? Hence the calls of 'Madeleine' heard by Mrs Carpenter.
I don't follow.  I did not suggest that anyone went mob-handed but from your previous post you suggested it would be possible for Matt Oldfield to come back to the table and discreetly mention to a parent that Madeleine was missing - I am asking you what happened next?  Because as far as the Tapas recollection is concerned neither McCann parent got up to do a check on his return.  So - two questions.  1) Why not if he has just told one of them that the child is missing?  2) Why is he covering for them? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 12:09:16 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 11:47:59 AM

Wasn’t there definitely talk of “Gerry’s been a long time…. Maybe he’s watching football’ . They’ve just got the times of the checks muddled. That’s hardly surprising even the two versions in the sticker book are different!!

I don’t believe this is what happened. But there were the employee statements, the Smith sighting and the timeline discrepancies that should have been focused on with a line of very direct questioning to clear the ground from under the feet. Instead you got interference from different Police departments in the Uk and Portugal and there was even political pressure applied to make the investigation focus on abduction…. What you’ve got left with is a big mess and the Police happy to trawl through pardophiiles until they have enough circumstantial evidence to satisfy the public that it’s case closed even without it ever going to trial. IMO.
So you've introduced a scenario you don't think happened, what DO you think happened?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 12:11:07 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 11:47:59 AM

Wasn’t there definitely talk of “Gerry’s been a long time…. Maybe he’s watching football’ . They’ve just got the times of the checks muddled. That’s hardly surprising even the two versions in the sticker book are different!!

I don’t believe this is what happened. But there were the employee statements, the Smith sighting and the timeline discrepancies that should have been focused on with a line of very direct questioning to clear the ground from under the feet. Instead you got interference from different Police departments in the Uk and Portugal and there was even political pressure applied to make the investigation focus on abduction…. What you’ve got left with is a big mess and the Police happy to trawl through pardophiiles until they have enough circumstantial evidence to satisfy the public that it’s case closed even without it ever going to trial. IMO.
PS: Why are the Portuguese police so weak and easily distracted and pushed about? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 12:22:57 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 16, 2021, 11:52:41 AM
Was Mrs Carpenter ever interviewed like her husband?
Did she ever say whether it was a male or female voice that she heard?

She was, and according to DI Gary Watts he sent her rogatory interview with others to UKCA on 23rd May 2008. It didn't reach the PJ files for some reason.

From 2nd Letter of Request, received by UKCA 4th February 2008.

1. Page 18 Interview Steve CARPENTER, he was interviewed on 21st April 2008, the interview was recorded on DVD, please see enclosed 1 copy of the transcript, 1 copy of the DVD, 1 copy of his statement and a copy of the Detective's
statement evidencing the interview.

2. Page 18 Interview Carolyn Elizabeth CARPENTER, she was interviewed on 21st April 2008, the interview was recorded on DVD, please see enclosed 1 copy of the transcript, 1 copy of the DVD, 1 copy of her statement and a copy of the
Detective's statement evidencing the interview.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FRANCES_KENNAH.htm#4400
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 12:39:09 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 12:08:07 PM
I don't follow.  I did not suggest that anyone went mob-handed but from your previous post you suggested it would be possible for Matt Oldfield to come back to the table and discreetly mention to a parent that Madeleine was missing - I am asking you what happened next?  Because as far as the Tapas recollection is concerned neither McCann parent got up to do a check on his return.  So - two questions.  1) Why not if he has just told one of them that the child is missing?  2) Why is he covering for them?

Matthew didn't know that the child was missing. All he knew was that he hadn't seen her, and he wondered where she slept. If he said nothing who was calling "Madeleine"? Or was Mrs Carpenter hearing things? Or did her husband misremember what time he left the Tapas complex?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 01:20:45 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 12:09:16 PM
So you've introduced a scenario you don't think happened, what DO you think happened?

I strongly suspect that Madeleine died in the apartment. The rest is speculation because based on the witness testimony it’s difficult to make any explanation fit. Exactly the same applies for the abduction theory as well IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 01:22:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 12:39:09 PM
Matthew didn't know that the child was missing. All he knew was that he hadn't seen her, and he wondered where she slept. If he said nothing who was calling "Madeleine"? Or was Mrs Carpenter hearing things? Or did her husband misremember what time he left the Tapas complex?
You're moving the goalposts of the discussion.  We had Billy suggesting Matt had found Madeleine missing and come back to the table to let the Mccanns know.  My questions were based on that premise, not the premise you have now introduced which is a blatantly daft one ie: that he didn't know the child was missing but couldn't see her, wondered where she slept, and called out her name loud enough for others to hear.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 01:24:01 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 01:20:45 PM
I strongly suspect that Madeleine died in the apartment. The rest is speculation because based on the witness testimony it’s difficult to make any explanation fit. Exactly the same applies for the abduction theory as well IMO.
Exactly - no plausible or logical theory of parental abduction exists, unlike with abduction which is much, much simpler to explain IMO (though you seem to refuse to accept any of the plausible and logical scenarios describing it).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 02:12:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 01:22:34 PM
You're moving the goalposts of the discussion.  We had Billy suggesting Matt had found Madeleine missing and come back to the table to let the Mccanns know.  My questions were based on that premise, not the premise you have now introduced which is a blatantly daft one ie: that he didn't know the child was missing but couldn't see her, wondered where she slept, and called out her name loud enough for others to hear.

I never said he called Madeleine's name, but Mrs Carpenter said someone did and it was before 10pm. If we take Mrs Carpenter seriously then someone was looking for Madeleine before the McCanns friends did so after 10pm. I can think of no reason why anyone except one of the group would be doing that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 02:32:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 02:12:35 PM
I never said he called Madeleine's name, but Mrs Carpenter said someone did and it was before 10pm. If we take Mrs Carpenter seriously then someone was looking for Madeleine before the McCanns friends did so after 10pm. I can think of no reason why anyone except one of the group would be doing that.
Which member of the group are you referring to then?  I think you are deliberately being obtuse to make this discussion impossible to follow.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 02:35:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2021, 11:29:20 PM
So Madeleine has this freak accident, plummeting to almost sudden death aftet the parents went to dinner.  Who discovers her dead and at what time?
Let's return to this question shall we?  Lets those who believe Madeleine had a fatal fall after the McCanns went to dinner try and make sense of what happened next.  I guarantee they won't be able to do so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 02:39:53 PM

This Thread has now descended into the realms of fantasy..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 03:08:10 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 02:39:53 PM
This Thread has now descended into the realms of fantasy..

Based on the statement of Mrs Carpenter, unless she was fantacizing.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 16, 2021, 03:13:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 03:08:10 PM
Based on the statement of Mrs Carpenter, unless she was fantacizing.

What did Mrs Carpenter actually say in her statement?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 03:14:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 03:08:10 PM
Based on the statement of Mrs Carpenter, unless she was fantacizing.

Please feel free to carry on.  I really don't mind.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 16, 2021, 03:23:38 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 16, 2021, 03:13:10 PM
What did Mrs Carpenter actually say in her statement?

According to an earlier post, it's not in the public domain. Only the of Mr Carpenter is available.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 03:54:12 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 03:14:25 PM
Please feel free to carry on.  I really don't mind.
Except she won’t because it’s enough just to smear by innuendo, and far too difficult to lay cards on the table and spit out exactly what she’s on about.  Yes, I know, forum rules don’t permit it, another hugely convenient excuse to allowing the smearing by innuendo to continue.  IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 03:56:30 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 16, 2021, 03:23:38 PM
According to an earlier post, it's not in the public domain. Only the of Mr Carpenter is available.

So relegated to fantasy.  But never mind.  We have to talk about something in these lean days.  So long as it implicates The McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 03:57:45 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 03:54:12 PM
Except she won’t because it’s enough just to smear by innuendo, and far too difficult to lay cards on the table and spit out exactly what she’s on about.  Yes, I know, forum rules don’t permit it, another hugely convenient excuse to allowing the smearing by innuendo to continue.  IMO.

Snap.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 04:18:18 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 01:24:01 PM
Exactly - no plausible or logical theory of parental abduction exists, unlike with abduction which is much, much simpler to explain IMO (though you seem to refuse to accept any of the plausible and logical scenarios describing it).

Read what Jim Gamble said about the case. I know you probably have already. But in the majority of missing children cases there is family involvement. You have to start there. I know that carrying a child out of the window is nigh on impossible then you have to ask why is it open? Changing entry method of checks has been described as a “red flag” by a retired criminal investigator. The two Tapas employee testimony that state Gerry was away for half an hour needed to be rigorously checked. The Smithman sighting is significant. I’ve read some reports that the PJ had accounted for Totman so why was a 9:15 abduction pursued for so long? Because the ground wasn’t cleared from under their feet we are now left with a mess!! The biggest irony is the PJ failure was actually pursuing an abductor before they had cleared the ground.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 04:22:37 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 04:18:18 PM
Read what Jim Gamble said about the case. I know you probably have already. But in the majority of missing children cases there is family involvement. You have to start there. I know that carrying a child out of the window is nigh on impossible then you have to ask why is it open? Changing entry method of checks has been described as a “red flag” by a retired criminal investigator. The two Tapas employee testimony that state Gerry was away for half an hour needed to be rigorously checked. The Smithman sighting is significant. I’ve read some reports that the PJ had accounted for Totman so why was a 9:15 abduction pursued for so long? Because the ground wasn’t cleared from under their feet we are now left with a mess!! The biggest irony is the PJ failure was actually pursuing an abductor before they had cleared the ground.

Who said that Gerry was away for half an hour?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 16, 2021, 04:34:57 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 16, 2021, 03:23:38 PM
According to an earlier post, it's not in the public domain. Only the of Mr Carpenter is available.

Yes I did know that.  Which is why I was wondering why "Based on the statement of Mrs Carpenter, unless she was fantasizing." was said.

Of course we do know that the files Levy posted on the internet are not the whole story.  I think a bit of cherry picking took place.

My assumption is that we haven't seen Mrs Carpenter's statement not because she was fantasizing but because she wasn't and her statement didn't back up her husband's.  Simple as.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 16, 2021, 04:40:43 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 04:18:18 PM
Read what Jim Gamble said about the case. I know you probably have already. But in the majority of missing children cases there is family involvement. You have to start there. I know that carrying a child out of the window is nigh on impossible then you have to ask why is it open? Changing entry method of checks has been described as a “red flag” by a retired criminal investigator. The two Tapas employee testimony that state Gerry was away for half an hour needed to be rigorously checked. The Smithman sighting is significant. I’ve read some reports that the PJ had accounted for Totman so why was a 9:15 abduction pursued for so long? Because the ground wasn’t cleared from under their feet we are now left with a mess!! The biggest irony is the PJ failure was actually pursuing an abductor before they had cleared the ground.

You are going to have to come up with a couple of cites here.  Starting with the PJ accounting for Totman.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 16, 2021, 04:46:45 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 04:18:18 PM
Read what Jim Gamble said about the case. I know you probably have already. But in the majority of missing children cases there is family involvement. You have to start there. I know that carrying a child out of the window is nigh on impossible then you have to ask why is it open? Changing entry method of checks has been described as a “red flag” by a retired criminal investigator. The two Tapas employee testimony that state Gerry was away for half an hour needed to be rigorously checked. The Smithman sighting is significant. I’ve read some reports that the PJ had accounted for Totman so why was a 9:15 abduction pursued for so long? Because the ground wasn’t cleared from under their feet we are now left with a mess!! The biggest irony is the PJ failure was actually pursuing an abductor before they had cleared the ground.

I think its quite possible that Wolters has photo/video of Maddie in the hands of a paedophile..thats why I think what you are posting is totally irrelevant
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 04:47:37 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 04:18:18 PM
Read what Jim Gamble said about the case. I know you probably have already. But in the majority of missing children cases there is family involvement. You have to start there. I know that carrying a child out of the window is nigh on impossible then you have to ask why is it open? Changing entry method of checks has been described as a “red flag” by a retired criminal investigator. The two Tapas employee testimony that state Gerry was away for half an hour needed to be rigorously checked. The Smithman sighting is significant. I’ve read some reports that the PJ had accounted for Totman so why was a 9:15 abduction pursued for so long? Because the ground wasn’t cleared from under their feet we are now left with a mess!! The biggest irony is the PJ failure was actually pursuing an abductor before they had cleared the ground.
I’ve read what Jim Gamble has said about the case.  I’m surprised you set any store by his opinion as he is quite clear that in his the parents had nothing to do with it.  How do you account for this, if you consider him worth reading?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 04:53:10 PM

Who said that Gerry was gone for half an hour?

We need to know this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 16, 2021, 04:55:47 PM
Do we?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 04:58:18 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 16, 2021, 04:55:47 PM
Do we?

In that case we can discard this statement as exaggeration, or possibly even fibs?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 16, 2021, 05:12:16 PM
All the timing is vague, deliberately so iMO, All we know is that Gerry was away for longer than was expected by other party members.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 05:14:45 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 16, 2021, 05:12:16 PM
All the timing is vague, deliberately so iMO, All we know is that Gerry was away for longer than was expected by other party members.

He was talking to Jez.  According to Jez.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 06:11:11 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 16, 2021, 04:46:45 PM
I think its quite possible that Wolters has photo/video of Maddie in the hands of a paedophile..thats why I think what you are posting is totally irrelevant

If they have that evidence then why have they been pedalling him as the “prime suspect” for months but no charges?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 06:28:55 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 06:11:11 PM
If they have that evidence then why have they been pedalling him as the “prime suspect” for months but no charges?
Because the case they are building against him is not yet watertight presumably.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 16, 2021, 06:32:31 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 06:11:11 PM
If they have that evidence then why have they been pedalling him as the “prime suspect” for months but no charges?

What happened to the cite I requested?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 16, 2021, 06:47:45 PM
 *%^^&
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 06:11:11 PM
If they have that evidence then why have they been pedalling him as the “prime suspect” for months but no charges?

Ive posted the reason before.. If he is in the video his features may be pixellated. I dont think the Germans would announce evidence of maddies death if they did not have it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 08:56:31 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 16, 2021, 04:40:43 PM
You are going to have to come up with a couple of cites here.  Starting with the PJ accounting for Totman.

His wife said so……
He was quizzed by the Guarda Nacional Republicana soon after Madeleine, three, vanished.

[Name removed]_TEM_07052018_tannerman.jpg
(Image: PA)
His wife Rachel told The Sun: "My husband had told the local police it could be him but we didn’t hear anything for years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 09:23:18 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 04:47:37 PM
I’ve read what Jim Gamble has said about the case.  I’m surprised you set any store by his opinion as he is quite clear that in his the parents had nothing to do with it.  How do you account for this, if you consider him worth reading?

Because like him I’m open minded. He accepts that relationships change, there are scientific advances and new evidence might be found to prove him wrong (or rather right to consider parental involvement as the place to start)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 09:25:18 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 04:53:10 PM
Who said that Gerry was gone for half an hour?

We need to know this.

They were MW employees. I named them in the timeline revisited thread.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 09:33:07 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 09:23:18 PM
Because like him I’m open minded. He accepts that relationships change, there are scientific advances and new evidence might be found to prove him wrong (or rather right to consider parental involvement as the place to start)
I’ve never seen him say that he thinks scientific advances might prove him wrong, do you have a cite?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 10:08:18 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 04:53:10 PM
Who said that Gerry was gone for half an hour?

We need to know this.

SVETLANA
-------  STARIKOVA VITORINO (Russian citizen, with the telephone No "96635 ####) - kitchen assistant:
- Said that, yesterday, one individual, purportedly the father of the missing, left the dinner table where a group of friends (in number 8 or 9), for about 30 minutes. After having returned, a woman whom she believed to be his wife, also left the table, there having passed a few moments, all the guests left the table in question, except one elderly lady, who told her [Svetlana's] colleagues that that child had disappeared.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS-EMPLOYEES.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 10:17:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 16, 2021, 10:08:18 PM
SVETLANA
-------  STARIKOVA VITORINO (Russian citizen, with the telephone No "96635 ####) - kitchen assistant:
- Said that, yesterday, one individual, purportedly the father of the missing, left the dinner table where a group of friends (in number 8 or 9), for about 30 minutes. After having returned, a woman whom she believed to be his wife, also left the table, there having passed a few moments, all the guests left the table in question, except one elderly lady, who told her [Svetlana's] colleagues that that child had disappeared.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS-EMPLOYEES.htm

So when exactly did Gerry leave the table for about 30 minutes?

And who was the other witness?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 16, 2021, 10:19:48 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 09:23:18 PM
Because like him I’m open minded. He accepts that relationships change, there are scientific advances and new evidence might be found to prove him wrong (or rather right to consider parental involvement as the place to start)

Do you seriously think posters such as myself are not open minded... You could not be more wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 10:24:02 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 10:17:47 PM
So when exactly did Gerry leave the table for about 30 minutes?

And who was the other witness?
Ever tried nailing jelly to a wall?  Easier than getting an opinion about what happened from G-Unit.  IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 10:55:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 09:33:07 PM
I’ve never seen him say that he thinks scientific advances might prove him wrong, do you have a cite?

Jim Gamble:

"I  genuinely believe that either a prompt to someone’s conscience or the advances in modern technology will take us to a point in my lifetime where we find out what happened to Madeleine.

    I absolutely believe that. If this involves an abductor, someone will have seen something.

    Someone will have suspected something and for personal loyalty perhaps, a relationship, or whatever else – the fact that they’ve been unsure, they’ll have kept that to themselves.

    But as time goes on, relationships change and people who’ve done things have life changing experiences that make them feel the need to tell. I think that can happen.

    But I also think there are advances in technology could also lead us down a different path and that might be what breaks the case."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 10:57:24 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 10:24:02 PM
Ever tried nailing jelly to a wall?  Easier than getting an opinion about what happened from G-Unit.  IMO.

The other witness was Batista
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 11:00:54 PM
Quote from: Davel on August 16, 2021, 10:19:48 PM
Do you seriously think posters such as myself are not open minded... You could not be more wrong

I've already told you that I believe your posts are rational and considered  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 11:01:43 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 10:57:24 PM
The other witness was Baptiste.

Who is Baptiste and what did he say?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 11:10:19 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 10:55:54 PM
Jim Gamble:

"I  genuinely believe that either a prompt to someone’s conscience or the advances in modern technology will take us to a point in my lifetime where we find out what happened to Madeleine.

    I absolutely believe that. If this involves an abductor, someone will have seen something.

    Someone will have suspected something and for personal loyalty perhaps, a relationship, or whatever else – the fact that they’ve been unsure, they’ll have kept that to themselves.

    But as time goes on, relationships change and people who’ve done things have life changing experiences that make them feel the need to tell. I think that can happen.

    But I also think there are advances in technology could also lead us down a different path and that might be what breaks the case."
No hint there that he thinks he may be proven wrong by technological advances.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 16, 2021, 11:10:50 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 10:57:24 PM
The other witness was Baptiste.
That wasn’t the question I was referring to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 16, 2021, 11:32:42 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 09:23:18 PM
Because like him I’m open minded. He accepts that relationships change, there are scientific advances and new evidence might be found to prove him wrong (or rather right to consider parental involvement as the place to start)

Do you think the DNA testing is like an Indy Referendum - keep repeating the process until you get the answer you want? What do you think Perlin could achieve which Eurofins cannot?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 11:52:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 11:10:50 PM
That wasn’t the question I was referring to.

Sorry it was Eleanor who asked for that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 16, 2021, 11:55:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 11:10:19 PM
No hint there that he thinks he may be proven wrong by technological advances.

You have to read or listen to more of the interview for the full context.... I'll try and find it for you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 17, 2021, 12:15:25 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 16, 2021, 11:01:43 PM
Who is Baptiste and what did he say?

Sorry one source I had misspelled the name. It's Batista

JOAQUIM JOSE MOREIRA BATISTA (residing at Rua Ilha Terceira, no. 15, Lagos, Telephone No 91 277 ####) - table employee [waiter].
- Of the group of 8/9 British citizens who dined at the restaurant last night, as usual, of which the parents of missing were part (he didn't know them) he noticed that two individuals left the table, of the male gender.
- The first to leave was about 40/45 years old (tall, skinny, white complexion, with large [a full head of] hair of color gray) and the period of his absence was about 15 minutes, being that they had to [re-]heat his food, which had cooled;
- The second to leave (about 40/45 years of age, having the physical characteristics of the first, but having less bulky hair) did so for about 30 minutes, and that shortly after he returned, all left the table, except for an elderly person, who told him that a child had disappeared, the daughter of a member of the group, due to which he thought that the second person to leave could have been the father of the child;

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 17, 2021, 01:03:53 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 16, 2021, 11:10:19 PM
No hint there that he thinks he may be proven wrong by technological advances.

Listen between 25:20 and 27:42

https://omny.fm/shows/maddie/red-flags (https://omny.fm/shows/maddie/red-flags)

It may be two different interviews I'm quoting.... but here he uses the same words an earlier poster quoted:

"So of course the first people you suspect are the parents, because they are there, they are in proximity, it is their child.
"Did I believe at the beginning that the parents could possibly have done it? Yes. As time went on, did I see evidence that supported that hypothesis? No, I did not."

The poster missed that he went on to say:

"Now that's not to say that something couldn't turn up in the future where I think: 'Oh flip, you know I was right in the beginning and I'm wrong now'. But I've seen nothing, been briefed on nothing and heard nothing that would make me think that Gerry and Kate McCann [had] something to do with their daughter's disappearance."

We know from the other interview what evidence he expects might turn up in the future:

"I  genuinely believe that either a prompt to someone’s conscience or the advances in modern technology will take us to a point in my lifetime where we find out what happened to Madeleine."

The point I was making is that he is open minded.... he knows something might turn up in the future to prove "oh flip" he is wrong now.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 17, 2021, 01:42:27 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 17, 2021, 12:15:25 AM
Sorry one source I had misspelled the name. It's Batista

JOAQUIM JOSE MOREIRA BATISTA (residing at Rua Ilha Terceira, no. 15, Lagos, Telephone No 91 277 ####) - table employee [waiter].
- Of the group of 8/9 British citizens who dined at the restaurant last night, as usual, of which the parents of missing were part (he didn't know them) he noticed that two individuals left the table, of the male gender.
- The first to leave was about 40/45 years old (tall, skinny, white complexion, with large [a full head of] hair of color gray) and the period of his absence was about 15 minutes, being that they had to [re-]heat his food, which had cooled;
- The second to leave (about 40/45 years of age, having the physical characteristics of the first, but having less bulky hair) did so for about 30 minutes, and that shortly after he returned, all left the table, except for an elderly person, who told him that a child had disappeared, the daughter of a member of the group, due to which he thought that the second person to leave could have been the father of the child;

It is very difficult trying to decipher what goes on from one witness statement to another.  Even times don't fit in quite as they should.  According to Joaquim he was in the kitchen when the alarm was raised.

Snip
These absences would last for about 15 minutes. He cannot say with what regularity these absences occurred.

The witness remembers these occurrences well as would often have to take a plate of food requested by one of them back, due to the guest's absence, when he would find that the guest was not at the table when he came to serve the food.

When questioned, the witness says that he remembers on Thursday 3rd May, on the day of the disappearance, that the parents went to dine at the restaurant with the usual people. He cannot be precise, but the witness says that the group arrived between 20.00 and 21.00. He remembers there being about 9 people in total. He states that he received the food orders from the group.

Later, between 22.00 and 22.30, when the witness was in the kitchen, he was informed by a colleague that in the meantime a client had entered the restaurant shouting and that afterwards the whole English had left in a panic. The witness' colleague told him that this individual had said that a child had disappeared. A few minutes later the witness noticed great agitation, with many people everywhere searching for the child.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOAQUIM-J-M-BAPTISTA.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 17, 2021, 01:58:16 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 17, 2021, 01:42:27 AM
It is very difficult trying to decipher what goes on from one witness statement to another.  Even times don't fit in quite as they should.  According to Joaquim he was in the kitchen when the alarm was raised.

Snip
These absences would last for about 15 minutes. He cannot say with what regularity these absences occurred.

The witness remembers these occurrences well as would often have to take a plate of food requested by one of them back, due to the guest's absence, when he would find that the guest was not at the table when he came to serve the food.

When questioned, the witness says that he remembers on Thursday 3rd May, on the day of the disappearance, that the parents went to dine at the restaurant with the usual people. He cannot be precise, but the witness says that the group arrived between 20.00 and 21.00. He remembers there being about 9 people in total. He states that he received the food orders from the group.

Later, between 22.00 and 22.30, when the witness was in the kitchen, he was informed by a colleague that in the meantime a client had entered the restaurant shouting and that afterwards the whole English had left in a panic. The witness' colleague told him that this individual had said that a child had disappeared. A few minutes later the witness noticed great agitation, with many people everywhere searching for the child.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOAQUIM-J-M-BAPTISTA.htm

Yes of course... but in their statement the day before maybe their memory of things was a little more precise imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 17, 2021, 02:39:36 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 17, 2021, 01:58:16 AM
Yes of course... but in their statement the day before maybe their memory of things was a little more precise imo.
To what end do you think.  Brueckner is the prime suspect at the moment and I think if you looked hard enough amongst witness statements from 2007 there might be some indications pertaining to that.

I think sceptics are very transparent in their aims and I don't think they are the slightest bit interested in what might have happened to Madeleine unless it fits with their agenda.  I really feel quite sad about it - that and poor groundhogs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 17, 2021, 07:27:22 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 17, 2021, 01:03:53 AM
Listen between 25:20 and 27:42

https://omny.fm/shows/maddie/red-flags (https://omny.fm/shows/maddie/red-flags)

It may be two different interviews I'm quoting.... but here he uses the same words an earlier poster quoted:

"So of course the first people you suspect are the parents, because they are there, they are in proximity, it is their child.
"Did I believe at the beginning that the parents could possibly have done it? Yes. As time went on, did I see evidence that supported that hypothesis? No, I did not."

The poster missed that he went on to say:

"Now that's not to say that something couldn't turn up in the future where I think: 'Oh flip, you know I was right in the beginning and I'm wrong now'. But I've seen nothing, been briefed on nothing and heard nothing that would make me think that Gerry and Kate McCann [had] something to do with their daughter's disappearance."

We know from the other interview what evidence he expects might turn up in the future:

"I  genuinely believe that either a prompt to someone’s conscience or the advances in modern technology will take us to a point in my lifetime where we find out what happened to Madeleine."

The point I was making is that he is open minded.... he knows something might turn up in the future to prove "oh flip" he is wrong now.
I think anyone with a modicum of intelligence knows that but right now, with all the evidence that is available to him, having probably more access and insight than any of us here, he is firmly of the opinion that Madeleine was abducted by a paedophile and that her parents had nothing to do with it.  I’m glad you’re able to credit people with this opinion as worth listening to and not to sneer at them as if they are deluded sheeple (or something more sinister) like so many sceptics do - it’s refreshing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 08:17:43 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 17, 2021, 12:15:25 AM
Sorry one source I had misspelled the name. It's Batista

JOAQUIM JOSE MOREIRA BATISTA (residing at Rua Ilha Terceira, no. 15, Lagos, Telephone No 91 277 ####) - table employee [waiter].
- Of the group of 8/9 British citizens who dined at the restaurant last night, as usual, of which the parents of missing were part (he didn't know them) he noticed that two individuals left the table, of the male gender.
- The first to leave was about 40/45 years old (tall, skinny, white complexion, with large [a full head of] hair of color gray) and the period of his absence was about 15 minutes, being that they had to [re-]heat his food, which had cooled;
- The second to leave (about 40/45 years of age, having the physical characteristics of the first, but having less bulky hair) did so for about 30 minutes, and that shortly after he returned, all left the table, except for an elderly person, who told him that a child had disappeared, the daughter of a member of the group, due to which he thought that the second person to leave could have been the father of the child;

That doesn't make a lot of sense does it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 17, 2021, 08:48:43 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 08:17:43 AM
That doesn't make a lot of sense does it.

I think that reading between the lines the focus of the investigation had changed.  I think it is indicated by the type type of question asked by the content of the answers.  Bearing in mind there is never any transcript of the questions asked ~ the exception being Kate's forty eight questions.

Just as the repeated answers in police statements saying they hadn't seen Murat indicates they might have been asked if they had.  Statements regarding the "timeline" had obviously been asked of staff and customers.  I think the answers from two members of staff both of whom seemed to have kitchen duties incorporated in whatever else they were doing are a bit disjointed.
The internet is awash with such statements that cannot possibly make much sense because there is no context but are used to "prove" all sorts.
It is a waste of time and just doesn't work particularly when comparison is made between different statements made by the same witness on different occasions are thrown into the mix.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 08:59:48 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 17, 2021, 08:48:43 AM
I think that reading between the lines the focus of the investigation had changed.  I think it is indicated by the type type of question asked by the content of the answers.  Bearing in mind there is never any transcript of the questions asked ~ the exception being Kate's forty eight questions.

Just as the repeated answers in police statements saying they hadn't seen Murat indicates they might have been asked if they had.  Statements regarding the "timeline" had obviously been asked of staff and customers.  I think the answers from two members of staff both of whom seemed to have kitchen duties incorporated in whatever else they were doing are a bit disjointed.
The internet is awash with such statements that cannot possibly make much sense because there is no context but are used to "prove" all sorts.
It is a waste of time and just doesn't work particularly when comparison is made between different statements made by the same witness on different occasions are thrown into the mix.

I am putting all of this disjointed nonsense down to lack of things to talk about.  But the nonsense is very easy to spot so I don't suppose that anyone is taking it seriously.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 17, 2021, 09:03:23 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 17, 2021, 08:48:43 AM
I think that reading between the lines the focus of the investigation had changed.  I think it is indicated by the type type of question asked by the content of the answers.  Bearing in mind there is never any transcript of the questions asked ~ the exception being Kate's forty eight questions.

Just as the repeated answers in police statements saying they hadn't seen Murat indicates they might have been asked if they had.  Statements regarding the "timeline" had obviously been asked of staff and customers.  I think the answers from two members of staff both of whom seemed to have kitchen duties incorporated in whatever else they were doing are a bit disjointed.
The internet is awash with such statements that cannot possibly make much sense because there is no context but are used to "prove" all sorts.
It is a waste of time and just doesn't work particularly when comparison is made between different statements made by the same witness on different occasions are thrown into the mix.
[/b]

Which can also be said about the statements of the T9, despite people trying to deny/explain those differences away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 17, 2021, 09:09:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 17, 2021, 09:03:23 AM
[/b]

Which can also be said about the statements of the T9, despite people trying to deny/explain those differences away.
There is a very simple explanation for all witness statement variation over time but it seems some people just refuse to accept it and prefer  to assign suspicious motives to it (but only when it’s the Tapas group statements).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 09:14:47 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 17, 2021, 09:09:14 AM
There is a very simple explanation for all witness statement variation over time but it seems some people just refuse to accept it and prefer  to assign suspicious motives to it (but only when it’s the Tapas group statements).

60 to 80% certain is now 100% certain despite what's been said since.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 17, 2021, 09:48:50 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 17, 2021, 09:09:14 AM
There is a very simple explanation for all witness statement variation over time but it seems some people just refuse to accept it and prefer  to assign suspicious motives to it (but only when it’s the Tapas group statements).

I have seen their statements presented as absolute truth, when their variations show that they are not. I highlight those variations to highlight that point, not to assign suspicious motives. That is an accusation levelled at me by others who believe that's my aim.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 09:55:06 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 17, 2021, 09:48:50 AM
I have seen their statements presented as absolute truth, when their variations show that they are not. I highlight those variations to highlight that point, not to assign suspicious motives. That is an accusation levelled at me by others who believe that's my aim.

So what do you hope to achieve?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 17, 2021, 10:05:31 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 17, 2021, 09:48:50 AM
I have seen their statements presented as absolute truth, when their variations show that they are not. I highlight those variations to highlight that point, not to assign suspicious motives. That is an accusation levelled at me by others who believe that's my aim.
Who has presented their statements as "absolute truth"?  That is a nonsensical accusation and I don't think you will able to back it up. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 10:16:12 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 17, 2021, 10:05:31 AM
Who has presented their statements as "absolute truth"?  That is a nonsensical accusation and I don't think you will able to back it up.

I don't think that anyone did.  But that's a minor detail.

Anything to undermine The McCanns.  Although Why is a mystery to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 17, 2021, 10:31:30 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 17, 2021, 09:48:50 AM
I have seen their statements presented as absolute truth, when their variations show that they are not. I highlight those variations to highlight that point, not to assign suspicious motives. That is an accusation levelled at me by others who believe that's my aim.

Goodness me - I don't think I've ever read that.  I have seen such things as parts of statements being verified by weighing up the evidence much as Pegasus did when assessing Kate's experience with the curtains and the actual science of the VENTURI effect.

I think most intelligent people know that in a room full of witnesses to an event, each witness will see things differently which is reflected in how they report it.
We've seen experiments and studies to that effect - or presumably most of us have.

I have seen it said and I have often repeated it - that the problem with the tapas statements would have been had they all been word perfect and their timings matched all to the nth degree.
Now THAT really would have been suspicious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 10:40:22 AM

Why are No Sceptics prepared to say for why they are doing this when nothing will come from it?

They won't prove that The McCanns are guilty, so what is the point?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 17, 2021, 11:08:36 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 10:40:22 AM
Why are No Sceptics prepared to say for why they are doing this when nothing will come from it?

They won't prove that The McCanns are guilty, so what is the point?
Everyone needs a hobby.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 17, 2021, 11:10:07 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 10:40:22 AM
Why are No Sceptics prepared to say for why they are doing this when nothing will come from it?

They won't prove that The McCanns are guilty, so what is the point?


You might as well ask what is the point of anything on this forum? It certainly isn't going to change anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 11:15:36 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 17, 2021, 11:08:36 AM
Everyone needs a hobby.

You are right of course.  So why am I doing this?

I suppose it is in some vain attempt to support Innocent Until Proven Guilty.  I have been shocked rigid by the repeated attempts to deny this fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 11:21:59 AM
Quote from: jassi on August 17, 2021, 11:10:07 AM

You might as well ask what is the point of anything on this forum? It certainly isn't going to change anything.

This is true.

Me?  I was a bit lonely in days of yore, living on my own at the time.  But I was involved from the start and quite devastated by this mindless desire to blame The McCanns when it was obvious that it simply wasn't possible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 17, 2021, 12:05:52 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 11:21:59 AM
This is true.

Me?  I was a bit lonely in days of yore, living on my own at the time.  But I was involved from the start and quite devastated by this mindless desire to blame The McCanns when it was obvious that it simply wasn't possible.

I, on the other hand, was astonished by the insistence of some that no part of the McCann group's statements should be examined and/or questioned. Not only that, but anyone doing so was assumed to be seeking to blame, libel or harm one, two or all of them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 12:11:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 17, 2021, 12:05:52 PM
I, on the other hand, was astonished by the insistence of some that no part of the McCann group's statements should be examined and/or questioned. Not only that, but anyone doing so was assumed to be seeking to blame, libel or harm one, two or all of them.

Has it done any good, examining The Statements?

It has only told me that you are on a hiding to nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 17, 2021, 12:23:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 17, 2021, 12:05:52 PM
I, on the other hand, was astonished by the insistence of some that no part of the McCann group's statements should be examined and/or questioned. Not only that, but anyone doing so was assumed to be seeking to blame, libel or harm one, two or all of them.
Again, more unsubstantiated hyperbole
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 17, 2021, 12:39:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 17, 2021, 12:05:52 PM
I, on the other hand, was astonished by the insistence of some that no part of the McCann group's statements should be examined and/or questioned. Not only that, but anyone doing so was assumed to be seeking to blame, libel or harm one, two or all of them.

I think the problem you may be having is that when you are posting here you are required to bear British libel laws in mind.
Perhaps that is why you feel confined by the restraints observance of which causes your complaint.  I can see no reasoning other than that by your post.

Nothing really to get another chip on your shoulder about.  We all have to observe the law even if some sceptics manage to abrogate common decency in the process.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 18, 2021, 02:00:10 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 11:15:36 AM
You are right of course.  So why am I doing this?

I suppose it is in some vain attempt to support Innocent Until Proven Guilty.  I have been shocked rigid by the repeated attempts to deny this fact.

I'll be interested to read your posts on CB's current "innocence" of killing Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 06:34:48 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 17, 2021, 12:39:55 PM
I think the problem you may be having is that when you are posting here you are required to bear British libel laws in mind.
Perhaps that is why you feel confined by the restraints observance of which causes your complaint.  I can see no reasoning other than that by your post.

Nothing really to get another chip on your shoulder about.  We all have to observe the law even if some sceptics manage to abrogate common decency in the process.

No, that's not it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 07:56:17 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 18, 2021, 02:00:10 AM
I'll be interested to read your posts on CB's current "innocence" of killing Madeleine.

Check my previous posts.  I have already said several times that Brueckner is entitled to The Presumption of Innocence, as is everyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 18, 2021, 10:35:03 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 06:34:48 AM
No, that's not it.

At least you acknowledge there is a problem.  That's always a start 😁
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 18, 2021, 10:45:20 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 18, 2021, 02:00:10 AM
I'll be interested to read your posts on CB's current "innocence" of killing Madeleine.

The main individuals in the sceptic world denied the presumption of innocence are Kate and Gerry McCann.  Brueckner's rights will be defended I presume by very expensive lawyers and the law of the land.

I have seen nowhere that Brueckner has had to take recourse to the ECHR to defend his entitlement to that human right but I know the McCanns have had to.

Why sceptics cannot see the hypocrisy of their super sensibility in defence of Brueckner's rights and their attitude in trying to trample McCann rights into the dust remains a mystery.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 11:02:24 AM

Double Standards yet again.  The McCanns don't appear to have The Presumption of Innocence for some.

But Breuckner will get that from me and always did have it.  Until and if he is found guilty.

Billy Whiz is just trying to score points without any knowledge of what I have been saying from the start.

It's always a good idea to check your facts before you attempt to malign someone like me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 18, 2021, 11:11:27 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 11:02:24 AM
Double Standards yet again.  The McCanns don't appear to have The Presumption of Innocence for some.

But Breuckner will get that from me and always did have it.  Until and if he is found guilty.

Billy Whiz is just trying to score points without any knowledge of what I have been saying from the start.

It's always a good idea to check your facts before you attempt to malign someone like me.
I can vouch for the fact that you have always spoken up for Bruckner's right to the presumption of innocence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 11:17:48 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 18, 2021, 11:11:27 AM
I can vouch for the fact that you have always spoken up for Bruckner's right to the presumption of innocence.

Thanks, VS.  I can't do anything else.  I have fought too hard and too long for this right for The McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 11:33:05 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 11:17:48 AM
Thanks, VS.  I can't do anything else.  I have fought too hard and too long for this right for The McCanns.

There is no evidence at the moment that their right to the presumption of innocence has been breached. Rumour, accusations and beliefs are not evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 11:58:08 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 11:33:05 AM
There is no evidence at the moment that their right to the presumption of innocence has been breached. Rumour, accusations and beliefs are not evidence.

Read this Forum.

Not that I have a problem with the right to an opinion.  But if anyone thinks this Forum can be turned into a Cess Pit  with misinformation, lies and innuendo then it will happen over my dead body.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 18, 2021, 12:24:12 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 11:58:08 AM
Read this Forum.

Not that I have a problem with the right to an opinion.  But if anyone thinks this Forum can be turned into a Cess Pit  with misinformation, lies and innuendo then it will happen over my dead body.

There's none so blind as those who will not see.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 12:34:43 PM
Quote from: barrier on August 18, 2021, 12:24:12 PM
There's none so blind as those who will not see.

And none so stupid as those who have no common sense or logic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 12:48:47 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 11:58:08 AM
Read this Forum.

Not that I have a problem with the right to an opinion.  But if anyone thinks this Forum can be turned into a Cess Pit  with misinformation, lies and innuendo then it will happen over my dead body.

Perhaps I should rephrase my post. At this time there is no record of any court finding anyone guilty of breaching the McCann's right to the presumption of innocence.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 18, 2021, 12:51:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 12:48:47 PM

Perhaps I should rephrase my post. At this time there is no record of any court finding anyone guilty of breaching the McCann's right to the presumption of innocence.
Nor that of Bruckner's so all good then, carry on as you were...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 18, 2021, 01:12:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 12:34:43 PM
And none so stupid as those who have no common sense or logic.

I'm in good company.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 01:40:49 PM
Quote from: barrier on August 18, 2021, 01:12:45 PM
I'm in good company.

Indeed you are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 18, 2021, 02:02:10 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 18, 2021, 10:45:20 AM
The main individuals in the sceptic world denied the presumption of innocence are Kate and Gerry McCann.  Brueckner's rights will be defended I presume by very expensive lawyers and the law of the land.

I have seen nowhere that Brueckner has had to take recourse to the ECHR to defend his entitlement to that human right but I know the McCanns have had to.

Why sceptics cannot see the hypocrisy of their super sensibility in defence of Brueckner's rights and their attitude in trying to trample McCann rights into the dust remains a mystery.

They both have equal rights under the law, of course. I do t think there’s much chance of anyone bringing defamation upon CB.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 18, 2021, 02:13:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 17, 2021, 11:21:59 AM
This is true.

Me?  I was a bit lonely in days of yore, living on my own at the time.  But I was involved from the start and quite devastated by this mindless desire to blame The McCanns when it was obvious that it simply wasn't possible.

For me it was Clarence ignoring Smithman at that London press conference when I’d read a report of the Smithman sighting in a UK newspaper. I even wrote to CEOPs staggered when Mitchell said he was getting “private briefings”. I’ve followed the case ever since. Despite the language on here and talk of “sceptics” I don’t loath the McCanns. Abduction or accident they have suffered a terrible tragedy as a result of leaving their very young children unsupervised.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 03:41:13 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 18, 2021, 02:13:30 PM
For me it was Clarence ignoring Smithman at that London press conference when I’d read a report of the Smithman sighting in a UK newspaper. I even wrote to CEOPs staggered when Mitchell said he was getting “private briefings”. I’ve followed the case ever since. Despite the language on here and talk of “sceptics” I don’t loath the McCanns. Abduction or accident they have suffered a terrible tragedy as a result of leaving their very young children unsupervised.

I think some people are so convinced of the McCann's innocence that they take umbridge on their behalf even though what people are saying is actually true. What is also true is that investigative opportunities were missed by the PJ, and the amateur attempts made by the parents and their PI's also involved missed opportunities.

Whether Operation Grange has been above criticism remains to be seen, but they did seem to choose to concentrate on just one possibility, as highlighted by Colin Sutton.

I was surprised to find other's discussing the possibility that Gerry McCann was away from the Tapas restaurant between 9.30pm and 10pm, although some of the accusations they levelled at the McCann's holiday group were a step too far imo. With thanks to Misty for the link. From 15.05;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YyeBAnO9V0



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 18, 2021, 03:46:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 03:41:13 PM
I think some people are so convinced of the McCann's innocence that they take umbridge on their behalf even though what people are saying is actually true. What is also true is that investigative opportunities were missed by the PJ, and the amateur attempts made by the parents and their PI's also involved missed opportunities.

Whether Operation Grange has been above criticism remains to be seen, but they did seem to choose to concentrate on just one possibility, as highlighted by Colin Sutton.

I was surprised to find other's discussing the possibility that Gerry McCann was away from the Tapas restaurant between 9.30pm and 10pm, although some of the accusations they levelled at the McCann's holiday group were a step too far imo. With thanks to Misty for the link. From 15.05;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YyeBAnO9V0
Do you think it is credible that the entire Tapas group are covering up for the McCanns?  Because this is the second time recently you have mooted the idea that Gerry was absent from the table for the best part of the entire hour between 9pm and 10pm which certainly was not in any of the Tapas diners' statements.  Also, Dianne Webster clearly recalled Kate returning to the table to tell Gerry that Madeleine was gone.  So what exactly is it you think actually happened?  Oh wait - you don't do thinking, only regurgitating snippets of statements to cast doubt. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 18, 2021, 06:23:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 03:41:13 PM
I think some people are so convinced of the McCann's innocence that they take umbridge on their behalf even though what people are saying is actually true. What is also true is that investigative opportunities were missed by the PJ, and the amateur attempts made by the parents and their PI's also involved missed opportunities.

Whether Operation Grange has been above criticism remains to be seen, but they did seem to choose to concentrate on just one possibility, as highlighted by Colin Sutton.

I was surprised to find other's discussing the possibility that Gerry McCann was away from the Tapas restaurant between 9.30pm and 10pm, although some of the accusations they levelled at the McCann's holiday group were a step too far imo. With thanks to Misty for the link. From 15.05;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YyeBAnO9V0

It is a bit rich to criticise parents for having to raise money to employ private investigators to look for a missing child while admitting the Policia Juciaria botched the job and it took years of lobbying before Madeleine's own National force opened an investigation on her behalf.

Sceptics criticise the parents by saying they did not search for Madeleine while at the same time criticising every single effort and initiative they have taken to find her.

To this end Madeleine’s fund has been excoriated and the work of PIs derided despite being the only means of the search for Madeleine taking place.

There certainly seems to be an air among sceptics of resentment that at long last investigations are taking place with Madeleine McCann at the core.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 18, 2021, 06:28:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 03:41:13 PM
I think some people are so convinced of the McCann's innocence that they take umbridge on their behalf even though what people are saying is actually true. What is also true is that investigative opportunities were missed by the PJ, and the amateur attempts made by the parents and their PI's also involved missed opportunities.

Whether Operation Grange has been above criticism remains to be seen, but they did seem to choose to concentrate on just one possibility, as highlighted by Colin Sutton.

I was surprised to find other's discussing the possibility that Gerry McCann was away from the Tapas restaurant between 9.30pm and 10pm, although some of the accusations they levelled at the McCann's holiday group were a step too far imo. With thanks to Misty for the link. From 15.05;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YyeBAnO9V0

Colin Sutton is on record as saying that he thought the Portuguese investigators concentrated on Madeleine's parents probably to the detriment of other investigative opportunities.

He said those closest to Maddie, including her parents, would have been the first line of inquiry for police.

But he added he believed Portuguese police appeared make this their only line of investigation early on in the probe.

He said: 'By concentrating just on that scenario they may have missed tips or other lines that meant going down a completely different investigation route.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4435038/amp/Did-Madeleine-McCann-wander-accident.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 07:03:08 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 18, 2021, 06:23:36 PM
It is a bit rich to criticise parents for having to raise money to employ private investigators to look for a missing child while admitting the Policia Juciaria botched the job and it took years of lobbying before Madeleine's own National force opened an investigation on her behalf.

Sceptics criticise the parents by saying they did not search for Madeleine while at the same time criticising every single effort and initiative they have taken to find her.

To this end Madeleine’s fund has been excoriated and the work of PIs derided despite being the only means of the search for Madeleine taking place.

There certainly seems to be an air among sceptics of resentment that at long last investigations are taking place with Madeleine McCann at the core.

Is pointing out that investigators made mistakes the same as criticising 'parents for having to raise money to employ private investigators to look for a missing child'?

I'll criticise what you are referring to just so you know it's a different subject. Firstly, nobody made the parents raise money; in fact it was made plain that they didn't do that initially. People spontaneously offered money without being asked apparently. Secondly, they didn't have to employ private investigators either, but they did so very quickly; although CRG seemed to appear out of nowhere, just like the money did, and seemed to come free of charge. When they did choose to hire others they chose people with no track record or skills in finding missing/abducted children.

Finally, by 'searching' I think people meant actually physically covering the ground and looking. Asking or paying others to do that is persuading, motivating and organising not searching imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 18, 2021, 07:19:07 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 07:03:08 PM
Is pointing out that investigators made mistakes the same as criticising 'parents for having to raise money to employ private investigators to look for a missing child'?

I'll criticise what you are referring to just so you know it's a different subject. Firstly, nobody made the parents raise money; in fact it was made plain that they didn't do that initially. People spontaneously offered money without being asked apparently. Secondly, they didn't have to employ private investigators either, but they did so very quickly; although CRG seemed to appear out of nowhere, just like the money did, and seemed to come free of charge. When they did choose to hire others they chose people with no track record or skills in finding missing/abducted children.

Finally, by 'searching' I think people meant actually physically covering the ground and looking. Asking or paying others to do that is persuading, motivating and organising not searching imo.
If hiring private detectives to look for your daughter is not classed as searching for her, what would you class it as? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 07:30:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 18, 2021, 07:19:07 PM
If hiring private detectives to look for your daughter is not classed as searching for her, what would you class it as?

Red Herrings I expect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 18, 2021, 07:42:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 07:03:08 PM
Is pointing out that investigators made mistakes the same as criticising 'parents for having to raise money to employ private investigators to look for a missing child'?

I'll criticise what you are referring to just so you know it's a different subject. Firstly, nobody made the parents raise money; in fact it was made plain that they didn't do that initially. People spontaneously offered money without being asked apparently. Secondly, they didn't have to employ private investigators either, but they did so very quickly; although CRG seemed to appear out of nowhere, just like the money did, and seemed to come free of charge. When they did choose to hire others they chose people with no track record or skills in finding missing/abducted children.

Finally, by 'searching' I think people meant actually physically covering the ground and looking. Asking or paying others to do that is persuading, motivating and organising not searching imo.

I think you have succinctly summed up the sceptic attitude to the parents of a missing child which has been common currency since the leaks to the Portuguese press about "badly told stories" which in reality being under the secrecy of justice should never have been aired.

Your description of the sceptic thought process of how the McCanns should have searched for their abducted child is naive and risible in the extreme for very obvious reasons to which sceptics remain oblivious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 08:17:43 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 18, 2021, 07:42:26 PM
I think you have succinctly summed up the sceptic attitude to the parents of a missing child which has been common currency since the leaks to the Portuguese press about "badly told stories" which in reality being under the secrecy of justice should never have been aired.

Your description of the sceptic thought process of how the McCanns should have searched for their abducted child is naive and risible in the extreme for very obvious reasons to which sceptics remain oblivious.

So because they're 'the parents of a missing child' no-one should comment on their actions except to heap praise and sympathy upon them?


 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 08:23:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 08:17:43 PM
So because they're 'the parents of a missing child' no-one should comment on their actions except to heap praise and sympathy upon them?

That would have been the kind thing to do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 18, 2021, 08:54:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 08:17:43 PM
So because they're 'the parents of a missing child' no-one should comment on their actions except to heap praise and sympathy upon them?

I can think of nothing worse than not knowing where a child is or what fate has befallen him or her. 

I will never understand those who go out of their way to heap malice and downright hatred on complete strangers trying to make a life for their families while living in that situation and I wouldn't want to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 08:58:08 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 18, 2021, 08:54:03 PM
I can think of nothing worse than not knowing where a child is or what fate has befallen him or her. 

I will never understand those who go out of their way to heap malice and downright hatred on complete strangers trying to make a life for their families while living in that situation and I wouldn't want to.

Just once I tried to imagine how I would feel, but it was too awful.  I don't go there anymore.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 09:05:15 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 08:23:18 PM
That would have been the kind thing to do.

It would have been kind to appreciate the efforts made by the Portuguese authorities, but that didn't happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 18, 2021, 09:08:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 18, 2021, 09:05:15 PM
It would have been kind to appreciate the efforts made by the Portuguese authorities, but that didn't happen.

That really is screwed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 18, 2021, 11:26:17 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 18, 2021, 06:23:36 PM
It is a bit rich to criticise parents for having to raise money to employ private investigators to look for a missing child while admitting the Policia Juciaria botched the job and it took years of lobbying before Madeleine's own National force opened an investigation on her behalf.

Sceptics criticise the parents by saying they did not search for Madeleine while at the same time criticising every single effort and initiative they have taken to find her.

To this end Madeleine’s fund has been excoriated and the work of PIs derided despite being the only means of the search for Madeleine taking place.

There certainly seems to be an air among sceptics of resentment that at long last investigations are taking place with Madeleine McCann at the core.

If investigations are taking place with Madeleine McCann "at the core" how much faith do you have in detectives who took 6 years to account for Tannerman when he had presented himself to the PJ in the early days? How much faith do you have in an investigation that takes 6 years to finally admit that Smithman should be a focus of greater attention? I knew about Smithman in 2007 - how is it a "revelation moment" for DCI Redwood in 2013? It's absolute nonsense..... If the 2013 Crimewatch show was a serious attempt to find the abductor - why was it dressed up as "if you were in PDL at the time, or might know this man please call our hotline" (not verbatim).... There has already been an identification of Smithman.... why weren't the viewers told the full facts? It's been the same narrative from the London press conference.... how can any serious investigation have a PR man, acting like a detective, talk about his "private briefings" from CEOPs yet fail to mention that Tannerman had presented himself to the Police.... and worse still imo fail to even mention the existence of Smithman!! How do you explain that an appeal for witnesses to an abduction fail to even mention a possible abductor!!!?? .

Abduction or accident this was tragic for the McCanns. If Madeleine is "at the core" then why does no-one point out the obvious that leaving children three and under alone in an unusual apartment is fraught with risk. On one night a child cried for an hour and a half, reportedly.... and there's some reports that some of the T9 group were in Chaplin's Bar which is further away still than the Tapas... just how effective and how frequently were their "listening outside the window" checks?? People have lost sight of the real cause of tragedy here imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 12:42:19 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 18, 2021, 11:26:17 PM
If investigations are taking place with Madeleine McCann "at the core" how much faith do you have in detectives who took 6 years to account for Tannerman when he had presented himself to the PJ in the early days? How much faith do you have in an investigation that takes 6 years to finally admit that Smithman should be a focus of greater attention? I knew about Smithman in 2007 - how is it a "revelation moment" for DCI Redwood in 2013? It's absolute nonsense..... If the 2013 Crimewatch show was a serious attempt to find the abductor - why was it dressed up as "if you were in PDL at the time, or might know this man please call our hotline" (not verbatim).... There has already been an identification of Smithman.... why weren't the viewers told the full facts? It's been the same narrative from the London press conference.... how can any serious investigation have a PR man, acting like a detective, talk about his "private briefings" from CEOPs yet fail to mention that Tannerman had presented himself to the Police.... and worse still imo fail to even mention the existence of Smithman!! How do you explain that an appeal for witnesses to an abduction fail to even mention a possible abductor!!!?? .

Abduction or accident this was tragic for the McCanns. If Madeleine is "at the core" then why does no-one point out the obvious that leaving children three and under alone in an unusual apartment is fraught with risk. On one night a child cried for an hour and a half, reportedly.... and there's some reports that some of the T9 group were in Chaplin's Bar which is further away still than the Tapas... just how effective and how frequently were their "listening outside the window" checks?? People have lost sight of the real cause of tragedy here imo.

Well done you

You've managed to squeeze in quite a number of the sceptic shibboleths in just one post: it's a long time since anyone has thought to blow their credibility if they ever had any - by mention of 😁CHAPLIN'S🤣

The real cause of the tragedy here is that someone took it upon themselves to abduct a little three year old girl.  Perhaps you should not lose sight of that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 19, 2021, 06:23:43 AM

Chaplin's!  Oh My God.  There's a blast from the past.  The night The Ocean Club had to send someone to drag Kate out to see to her screaming child.  Let's not forget that bit.

Anyone who still believes that has got a serious problem.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 07:35:29 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 19, 2021, 06:23:43 AM
Chaplin's!  Oh My God.  There's a blast from the past.  The night The Ocean Club had to send someone to drag Kate out to see to her screaming child.  Let's not forget that bit.

Anyone who still believes that has got a serious problem.

I think anyone who goes to the trouble of resurrecting canards such as that really does have a very serious problem.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 19, 2021, 07:42:59 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 07:35:29 AM
I think anyone who goes to the trouble of resurrecting canards such as that really does have a very serious problem.

I could think of a few more things to say, but probably best that I don't.

This whole trend has now become totally bizarre and is bordering on insanity.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 08:28:09 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 19, 2021, 07:42:59 AM
I could think of a few more things to say, but probably best that I don't.

This whole trend has now become totally bizarre and is bordering on insanity.

I am fed up to the back teeth of long discredited sceptic mantras being treated as if they had a shred of credibility being introduced to the forum for allegedly serious discussion.

We have the rubbishing of the McCann private detectives.  We have the rubbishing still of DCI Redwood and Scotland Yard.  We have the rubbishing of Herr Wolters and the German investigation.  Not to mention the rubbishing of witnesses who found themselves in a life changing scenario for them but a source of malign entertainment for others.

With sceptic attitudes like that, which we are told mirrored opinions in Praia da Luz where they ripped down or defaced Madeleine's posters, no wonder a criminal like Brueckner was able to carry out his activities almost unimpeded in the Algarve.  It was GERMAN investigative skills which brought him to justice and safeguarded other females from his depravity for the next seven years.

It might have been productive if Brueckner's timeline and phone traffic had been given the same scrutiny given to the McCanns and their friends back in 2007.  He was a local criminal and paedophile who didn't even escape the net, nobody bothered to cast a net in his direction. 
And if that was the situation as far as Brueckner is concerned - how many other burglars and paedophiles were ignored back in 2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 09:19:06 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 18, 2021, 11:26:17 PM
If investigations are taking place with Madeleine McCann "at the core" how much faith do you have in detectives who took 6 years to account for Tannerman when he had presented himself to the PJ in the early days? How much faith do you have in an investigation that takes 6 years to finally admit that Smithman should be a focus of greater attention? I knew about Smithman in 2007 - how is it a "revelation moment" for DCI Redwood in 2013? It's absolute nonsense..... If the 2013 Crimewatch show was a serious attempt to find the abductor - why was it dressed up as "if you were in PDL at the time, or might know this man please call our hotline" (not verbatim).... There has already been an identification of Smithman.... why weren't the viewers told the full facts? It's been the same narrative from the London press conference.... how can any serious investigation have a PR man, acting like a detective, talk about his "private briefings" from CEOPs yet fail to mention that Tannerman had presented himself to the Police.... and worse still imo fail to even mention the existence of Smithman!! How do you explain that an appeal for witnesses to an abduction fail to even mention a possible abductor!!!?? .

Abduction or accident this was tragic for the McCanns. If Madeleine is "at the core" then why does no-one point out the obvious that leaving children three and under alone in an unusual apartment is fraught with risk. On one night a child cried for an hour and a half, reportedly.... and there's some reports that some of the T9 group were in Chaplin's Bar which is further away still than the Tapas... just how effective and how frequently were their "listening outside the window" checks?? People have lost sight of the real cause of tragedy here imo.

Showing the Smithman efits was a bit of a gamble for Operation Grange imo. Their remit was to investigate an abduction, but they must have been aware that Mr Smith thought the man he saw was Gerry McCann. They must have seen the report which accompanied the efits too, which;

According to the Sunday Times, it had contained criticisms of the evidence provided by the friends of the McCanns, and by the McCanns themselves
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ourbeeb/crimewatch-dupers-or-duped/

To put the icing on the cake, Operation Grange must have been aware that the efits weren't new evidence, they'd been produced five years earlier.

Despite all of the above, they publicised the efits and, predictably, the whole story behind them emerged. Were Operation Grange expecting that? If so they obviously thought that showing the efits was very very important. If not, they should have been able to predict it.

The media did their best, telling people that Mr Smith had changed his mind about the identity of the man he saw. Except that he didn't, according to a later story.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 19, 2021, 09:51:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 09:19:06 AM
Showing the Smithman efits was a bit of a gamble for Operation Grange imo. Their remit was to investigate an abduction, but they must have been aware that Mr Smith thought the man he saw was Gerry McCann. They must have seen the report which accompanied the efits too, which;

According to the Sunday Times, it had contained criticisms of the evidence provided by the friends of the McCanns, and by the McCanns themselves
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ourbeeb/crimewatch-dupers-or-duped/

To put the icing on the cake, Operation Grange must have been aware that the efits weren't new evidence, they'd been produced five years earlier.

Despite all of the above, they publicised the efits and, predictably, the whole story behind them emerged. Were Operation Grange expecting that? If so they obviously thought that showing the efits was very very important. If not, they should have been able to predict it.

The media did their best, telling people that Mr Smith had changed his mind about the identity of the man he saw. Except that he didn't, according to a later story.


The hidden hand of a spin doctor, no doubt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 10:14:36 AM
Quote from: jassi on August 19, 2021, 09:51:44 AM

The hidden hand of a spin doctor, no doubt.

Perhaps. Making deals with journalists began quite early on if Richard Bilton is to be believed;

A BBC reporter claims he was offered exclusive access to the McCanns' team if he agreed to spy on the press pack for their investigators.

Richard Bilton, who covered the disappearance in 2007, said investigators hired by the family offered him the deal because they wanted information on a suspect.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4471474/BBC-reporter-claims-McCanns-team-offered-deal-spy.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 11:50:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 09:19:06 AM
Showing the Smithman efits was a bit of a gamble for Operation Grange imo. Their remit was to investigate an abduction, but they must have been aware that Mr Smith thought the man he saw was Gerry McCann. They must have seen the report which accompanied the efits too, which;

According to the Sunday Times, it had contained criticisms of the evidence provided by the friends of the McCanns, and by the McCanns themselves
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ourbeeb/crimewatch-dupers-or-duped/

To put the icing on the cake, Operation Grange must have been aware that the efits weren't new evidence, they'd been produced five years earlier.

Despite all of the above, they publicised the efits and, predictably, the whole story behind them emerged. Were Operation Grange expecting that? If so they obviously thought that showing the efits was very very important. If not, they should have been able to predict it.

The media did their best, telling people that Mr Smith had changed his mind about the identity of the man he saw. Except that he didn't, according to a later story.

I disagree with your synopsis but nonetheless I do not think Scotland yard would go along with it either - but nobody knows - for the simple reason that Scotland Yard have never revealed what their investigative strategy was and is.  Not even releasing information regarding their focus being Brueckner until Amaral leaked like the sieve he is.

You ask "Were Operation Grange expecting that?"  Probably not, if they had never encountered sceptics before they would have assumed that no-one could be that stupid!
But Operation Grange were familiar with them ~ so their rabid and mistaken reaction would have come as no surprise to them at all.  They probably expected it.

By the way - NB - the Times was discredited and it cost them a substantial contribution to charities of the McCann choice.  So I really do not think it is sensible for you to raise the same calumnies which are recognised as libel.



Sunday Times sued by McCanns over story which wrongly claimed evidence was withheld from police
By William Turvill
The parents of missing child Madeleine McCann have sued The Sunday Times for libel over a story which they said gave the impression they had hindered the investigation into her disappearance.

According to publisher News UK the claim has been settled.

Kate and Gerry McCann took issue with a front-page story from last year, which the couple said suggested they had kept "secret from investigating authorities a crucial piece of evidence concerning the disappearance of their daughter".

In addition to the article, which was published on 27 October and remained online until 8 November, the McCanns also made reference to readers' comments left on the article – in High Court papers seen by Press Gazette.

The story, for which the paper apologised on 28 December, said: “The critical new evidence at the centre of Scotland Yard’s search for Madeleine McCann was kept secret for five years after it was presented to her parents by ex-MI5 investigators.”

The title reported that an intelligence report produced for the McCanns contained “crucial E-Fits” of a man who was identified as the prime suspect last year. The paper said that the “McCanns and their advisers sidelined the report and threatened to sue its authors if they divulged its contents”.

The Insight story also quoted a source close to the McCanns as saying that the report was “hyper-critical of the people involved”.

In their claim form, in which they were claiming unspecified damages, the McCanns said that the story was understood to mean that they had hindered "the search for [Madeleine] and the investigation into her disappearance by allowing the trail to go cold".

They said that the story led to them having “suffered serious damage to their reputations and severe embarrassment and distress”.

They also claimed that the paper's Insight team, which wrote the story, had not told their spokesman the full extent of the allegations which were to be made against them.

The McCanns also said that the story did not include several points made to Insight by their spokesman. They said this denied them "a proper opportunity to inform the readers of The Sunday Times of the falsity of the allegations against them".

On 1 November, the couple sent editor Martin Ivens an email headed: “Complaint letter – urgent”.

They said that the email, outlining what was wrong with the story with a “detailed rebuttal”, was responded to by executive editor Bob Tyrer six days later.

The McCanns said in their claim form that he told them “we could have made some facts clearer in the story” and that “we could have published more of your pre-publication statement” but largely rejected their complaint.

They said Tyrer offered them “three limited revisions” to the online article, publication of the statement from their spokesman and “an extremely limited” clarification in the corrections and clarifications column.

On 8 November Gerry McCann wrote back noting his disappointment that the article remained online and he pointed to the readers’ comments below.

The McCanns then consulted lawyers Carter Ruck, who wrote to The Sunday Times on 15 November “with proposed wording for an apology”.

The Sunday Times published the following apology on 28 December:

In articles dated October 27 ("Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years" and "Investigators had E-Fits five years ago", News) we referred to efits which were included in a report prepared by private investigators for the McCanns and the Fund in 2008. We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. We also understand that a copy of the final report including the efits was passed to the Metropolitan police in August 2011, shortly after it commenced its review. We apologise for the distress caused."

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 12:16:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 10:14:36 AM
Perhaps. Making deals with journalists began quite early on if Richard Bilton is to be believed;

A BBC reporter claims he was offered exclusive access to the McCanns' team if he agreed to spy on the press pack for their investigators.

Richard Bilton, who covered the disappearance in 2007, said investigators hired by the family offered him the deal because they wanted information on a suspect.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4471474/BBC-reporter-claims-McCanns-team-offered-deal-spy.html

WOW!!!

These journalists were really in it right up to their necks n'est-ce pas?   Bilton dropping the McCann investigators in it.

Sandra Felguieras blowing the whistle on Amaral who lied to her to have incriminating propaganda and his lies printed and broadcast about the McCanns and their friends really takes the biscuit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 12:19:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 10:14:36 AM
Perhaps. Making deals with journalists began quite early on if Richard Bilton is to be believed;

A BBC reporter claims he was offered exclusive access to the McCanns' team if he agreed to spy on the press pack for their investigators.

Richard Bilton, who covered the disappearance in 2007, said investigators hired by the family offered him the deal because they wanted information on a suspect.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4471474/BBC-reporter-claims-McCanns-team-offered-deal-spy.html

You seem to be leaving no stone unturned to trash the McCanns whenever and however you can.  Very, very sad🙄
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 19, 2021, 12:26:49 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 12:19:53 PM
You seem to be leaving no stone unturned to trash the McCanns whenever and however you can.  Very, very sad🙄

It's what happens when people know they are losing the battle.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 12:29:26 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 19, 2021, 12:26:49 PM
It's what happens when people know they are losing the battle.

I think the writing is on the wall and they know it.  What mystifies me is why they are taking it so personally.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 12:52:09 PM
 (&^&
Quote from: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 11:50:58 AM

Snip/

You ask "Were Operation Grange expecting that?"  Probably not, if they had never encountered sceptics before they would have assumed that no-one could be that stupid!
But Operation Grange were familiar with them ~ so their rabid and mistaken reaction would have come as no surprise to them at all.  They probably expected it.

By the way - NB - the Times was discredited and it cost them a substantial contribution to charities of the McCann choice.  So I really do not think it is sensible for you to raise the same calumnies which are recognised as libel.

I wasn't referring to the reaction of sceptics, I was referring to the various issues related to the efits and revealed by the media.

The Times apology referred solely to the allegations that the efits were hidden imo. My quote was about the report, the details of which were published in other publications as well as The Times;

Irish Independent
the report they produced was "hypercritical" of the McCanns and their friends and the authors were threatened with legal action if it were ever published.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/maddie-evidence-was-from-hidden-report-28-10-13-t21310.html

The Huffington Post
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/27/madeleine-mccann-kate-gerry-mi5_n_4167645.html


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 12:55:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 12:52:09 PM
(&^&
I wasn't referring to the reaction of sceptics, I was referring to the various issues related to the efits and revealed by the media.

The Times apology referred solely to the allegations that the efits were hidden imo. My quote was about the report, the details of which were published in other publications as well as The Times;

Irish Independent
the report they produced was "hypercritical" of the McCanns and their friends and the authors were threatened with legal action if it were ever published.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/maddie-evidence-was-from-hidden-report-28-10-13-t21310.html

The Huffington Post
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/27/madeleine-mccann-kate-gerry-mi5_n_4167645.html

I was referring to the fact that you are pushing what is a known libel in your posts.  Please desist.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 12:57:03 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 19, 2021, 12:26:49 PM
It's what happens when people know they are losing the battle.

Is there a battle? Between whom? I know the McCanns (according to Kate's uncle Brian) were fortunate enough to have a fighting fund. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 01:00:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 12:57:03 PM
Is there a battle? Between whom? I know the McCanns (according to Kate's uncle Brian) were fortunate enough to have a fighting fund.

There you go again.  I really don't think you can help yourself.  So sad 😢
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 01:11:06 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 01:00:04 PM
There you go again.  I really don't think you can help yourself.  So sad 😢

I'm not involved in a battle in my opinion. What battle?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 01:47:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 01:11:06 PM
I'm not involved in a battle in my opinion. What battle?

Please don't do yourself down😁 as far as I can see you spare no effort to be in the vanguard of whatever is afoot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 02:26:06 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 01:47:03 PM
Please don't do yourself down😁 as far as I can see you spare no effort to be in the vanguard of whatever is afoot.

Are forum discussions battles? Not in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 19, 2021, 05:44:06 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 02:26:06 PM
Are forum discussions battles? Not in my opinion.
Not literally, with swords and guns, but there is usually a combative element to most “discussions” that take place on here I’m sure you’ll agree (or not snd then we can have an argument about it!)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 06:19:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 19, 2021, 05:44:06 PM
Not literally, with swords and guns, but there is usually a combative element to most “discussions” that take place on here I’m sure you’ll agree (or not snd then we can have an argument about it!)

Some do come across as aggressive. Those who can, discuss, those who can't, attack imo.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 19, 2021, 06:22:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 06:19:25 PM
Some do come across as aggressive. Those who can, discuss, those who can't, attack imo.
Some are good at discussing as well as attacking disingenuous, evasive or nonsensical posts imo.   ?>)()<
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 19, 2021, 07:05:06 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 12:42:19 AM
Well done you

You've managed to squeeze in quite a number of the sceptic shibboleths in just one post: it's a long time since anyone has thought to blow their credibility if they ever had any - by mention of 😁CHAPLIN'S🤣

The real cause of the tragedy here is that someone took it upon themselves to abduct a little three year old girl.  Perhaps you should not lose sight of that

The abduction isn’t a proven fact don’t forget.

Let’s just take one aspect of what I wrote. That Redwood presents Smithman as some kind of new revelation in 2013. At the same time he discounts Tannerman as the abductor. Totman presented himself to the PJ in 2007. How do you not see as ridiculous that this is a revelation moment??!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 19, 2021, 07:14:57 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 19, 2021, 07:05:06 PM
The abduction isn’t a proven fact don’t forget.

Let’s just take one aspect of what I wrote. That Redwood presents Smithman as some kind of new revelation in 2013. At the same time he discounts Tannerman as the abductor. Totman presented himself to the PJ in 2007. How do you not see as ridiculous that this is a revelation moment??!!
Where is Totman in the PJ files?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 07:21:10 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 19, 2021, 07:05:06 PM
The abduction isn’t a proven fact don’t forget.

Let’s just take one aspect of what I wrote. That Redwood presents Smithman as some kind of new revelation in 2013. At the same time he discounts Tannerman as the abductor. Totman presented himself to the PJ in 2007. How do you not see as ridiculous that this is a revelation moment??!!

Maybe you ought to inform the present police investigations that you and all other sceptics don't accept that Madeleine was abducted.  I think they will treat the information with the contempt it deserves.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on August 19, 2021, 07:33:36 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 19, 2021, 07:05:06 PM
The abduction isn’t a proven fact don’t forget.

Let’s just take one aspect of what I wrote. That Redwood presents Smithman as some kind of new revelation in 2013. At the same time he discounts Tannerman as the abductor. Totman presented himself to the PJ in 2007. How do you not see as ridiculous that this is a revelation moment??!!
Redwood said “we are almost certain”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 08:17:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 19, 2021, 06:22:39 PM
Some are good at discussing as well as attacking disingenuous, evasive or nonsensical posts imo.   ?>)()<

Judging other's posts and finding them wanting is a bit arrogant imo. Attacking them is very unkind and when the person is attacked rather than the post that becomes bullying imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 19, 2021, 08:30:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 08:17:36 PM
Judging other's posts and finding them wanting is a bit arrogant imo. Attacking them is very unkind and when the person is attacked rather than the post that becomes bullying imo.
I assume you’re not levelling any of those hurtful allegations at me? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 09:46:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 19, 2021, 08:30:33 PM
I assume you’re not levelling any of those hurtful allegations at me?

I'm not making allegations at all, I'm explaining how, in my opinion, discussions can become something else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 19, 2021, 10:02:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 19, 2021, 09:46:25 PM
I'm not making allegations at all, I'm explaining how, in my opinion, discussions can become something else.
Just so long as you weren’t judging any of my posts and finding them wanting, unkind, arrogant or bullying that’s fine by me!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 19, 2021, 10:34:04 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 19, 2021, 07:14:57 PM
Where is Totman in the PJ files?

Who needs the PJ Files when Totman’s wife confirms what I’m saying?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 19, 2021, 10:36:34 PM
Quote from: Anthro on August 19, 2021, 07:33:36 PM
Redwood said “we are almost certain”.

It’s not that I’m talking about. He presented it in 2013 as a revelation moment!!! This is complete nonsense!! I even knew about Smithman in 2007!!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 10:53:42 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 19, 2021, 10:34:04 PM
Who needs the PJ Files when Totman’s wife confirms what I’m saying?

She said they had spoken to the local police - but they didn't get back to them and she has no idea what happened thereafter.

That is contrary to your claim which I believe was that Dr Totman was eliminated from the inquiry.  I suggest you find a cite for that or stop posting it as a fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 19, 2021, 10:57:11 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 19, 2021, 10:34:04 PM
Who needs the PJ Files when Totman’s wife confirms what I’m saying?
Well, they may well have gone to the PJ but how is anyone else supposed to know that if the PJ filed their statements in the waste paper basket?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 19, 2021, 11:12:41 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 19, 2021, 10:57:11 PM
Well, they may well have gone to the PJ but how is anyone else supposed to know that if the PJ filed their statements in the waste paper basket?

What does DCI stand for? How many years and how much money was spent between 2007 and 2013? And don’t forget the two forces were sharing information in 2007. There’s no way that Dr Totman coming forward in 2007 is a revelation moment for Redwood imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 19, 2021, 11:53:38 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 19, 2021, 11:12:41 PM
What does DCI stand for? How many years and how much money was spent between 2007 and 2013? And don’t forget the two forces were sharing information in 2007. There’s no way that Dr Totman coming forward in 2007 is a revelation moment for Redwood imo.
You didn’t answer my question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 20, 2021, 12:02:59 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 19, 2021, 11:53:38 PM
You didn’t answer my question.

I did earlier. I said the UK and Portuguese Police were talking to each other in 2007. I honestly don’t believe they won’t have shared the Totman information. Also, isn’t it to the PJ credit that they didn’t go chasing after Totman as the abductor unlike the Clarence Mitchell at the London press conference!! That same press conference where inexplicably a sighting of a man carrying a child in PDL is ignored! This is an investigation into very serious criminal activity. You don’t get much worse than a paedophile abducting a child imo. You would put out all the relevant information you had imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 20, 2021, 12:05:48 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 10:53:42 PM
She said they had spoken to the local police - but they didn't get back to them and she has no idea what happened thereafter.

That is contrary to your claim which I believe was that Dr Totman was eliminated from the inquiry.  I suggest you find a cite for that or stop posting it as a fact.

Why do you think they needed no further information from Dr Totman if he was still the suspected abductor?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 20, 2021, 12:12:05 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 19, 2021, 10:53:42 PM
She said they had spoken to the local police - but they didn't get back to them and she has no idea what happened thereafter.

That is contrary to your claim which I believe was that Dr Totman was eliminated from the inquiry.  I suggest you find a cite for that or stop posting it as a fact.

I suggest you read my posts again. I said he “came forward” and “presented himself” and earlier he was “accounted for”.  I already posted the cite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 20, 2021, 12:31:32 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 20, 2021, 12:12:05 AM
I suggest you read my posts again. I said he “came forward” and “presented himself” and earlier he was “accounted for”.  I already posted the cite.

I have read the cite and like many other ignored witnesses, such as the young women whose bedrooms had been invaded by a paedophile while they holidayed in Luz as children - no-one had ever heard about them until 2013.

No-one had ever heard about Dr Totman until 2013.  So you are making up a scenario to suit whatever whim takes your fancy.  And all in the name of on this occasion getting a dig in at Scotland Yard.

The failure here was a Judicial Police one.  Your cite explains that although Dr Totman "presented himself" no-one bothered to get back to him - so no interview there to "account for him".

DCI Redwood's information leading to Dr Totman came from the creche records and not from a witness statement or an intelligence report ruling him out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 20, 2021, 02:59:44 AM
Quote from: Brietta on August 20, 2021, 12:31:32 AM
I have read the cite and like many other ignored witnesses, such as the young women whose bedrooms had been invaded by a paedophile while they holidayed in Luz as children - no-one had ever heard about them until 2013.

No-one had ever heard about Dr Totman until 2013.  So you are making up a scenario to suit whatever whim takes your fancy.  And all in the name of on this occasion getting a dig in at Scotland Yard.

The failure here was a Judicial Police one.  Your cite explains that although Dr Totman "presented himself" no-one bothered to get back to him - so no interview there to "account for him".

DCI Redwood's information leading to Dr Totman came from the creche records and not from a witness statement or an intelligence report ruling him out.

I thought you might have offered an apology for making up stuff I never said. That's not goading btw. I genuinely thought you might, on reflection, recognise when you've alleged I have said things that I actually have not.

Why would the PJ have to get back in touch with Dr Totman? They have no need to. They realise that he isn't the abductor because Dr Totman has told them himself and he is of no relevance to the missing child. The PJ moved on. IMO it's fanciful to believe that UK Police were not aware that Dr Totman came forward in 2007. The PJ were also aware of the night creche records and they were talking to Police in the UK.

Cite for "no-one had heard of Dr Totman before 2013" please? He played tennis with Gerry. He told the PJ he believed he was Tannerman and the PJ don't spend time chasing this up as Dr Totman is not the abductor imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 20, 2021, 03:07:55 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 20, 2021, 02:59:44 AM
I thought you might have offered an apology for making up stuff I never said. That's not goading btw. I genuinely thought you might, on reflection, recognise when you've alleged I have said things that I actually have not.

Why would the PJ have to get back in touch with Dr Totman? They have no need to. They realise that he isn't the abductor because Dr Totman has told them himself and he is of no relevance to the missing child. The PJ moved on. IMO it's fanciful to believe that UK Police were not aware that Dr Totman came forward in 2007. The PJ were also aware of the night creche records and they were talking to Police in the UK.

Cite for "no-one had heard of Dr Totman before 2013" please? He played tennis with Gerry. He told the PJ he believed he was Tannerman and the PJ don't spend time chasing this up as Dr Totman is not the abductor imo.

Where in the PJ files does it state that Jane's sighting was ruled out because it was really just an innocent holidaymaker? Why doesn't this feature in Amaral's book?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 20, 2021, 03:20:22 AM
Quote from: misty on August 20, 2021, 03:07:55 AM
Where in the PJ files does it state that Jane's sighting was ruled out because it was really just an innocent holidaymaker? Why doesn't this feature in Amaral's book?

I would imagine that not all of the files are public. We know it's true though from Dr Totman and his wife who both confirm that hereported to Police that they thought Dr Totman was the peson that Tanner saw..... There's also the photo with the Ocean Club blanket on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 20, 2021, 07:16:56 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 20, 2021, 12:02:59 AM
I did earlier. I said the UK and Portuguese Police were talking to each other in 2007. I honestly don’t believe they won’t have shared the Totman information. Also, isn’t it to the PJ credit that they didn’t go chasing after Totman as the abductor unlike the Clarence Mitchell at the London press conference!! That same press conference where inexplicably a sighting of a man carrying a child in PDL is ignored! This is an investigation into very serious criminal activity. You don’t get much worse than a paedophile abducting a child imo. You would put out all the relevant information you had imo.
You can believe what you like, it doesn’t make it true.  This was a vital piece of information which cancelled out the (by now) famous Tannerman sighting and they didn’t think to take a statement or even leak it to the press to undermine The abduction theory?  Do me a favour…
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 20, 2021, 07:20:09 AM
Quote from: misty on August 20, 2021, 03:07:55 AM
Where in the PJ files does it state that Jane's sighting was ruled out because it was really just an innocent holidaymaker? Why doesn't this feature in Amaral's book?
Amaral was determined to paint JT as a liar and fantasist.  Totman proved she wasn’t.  That’s probably why he didn’t mention it IMO - better for his conspiracy theory if he has her inventing stuff.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 20, 2021, 07:29:39 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 20, 2021, 07:16:56 AM
You can believe what you like, it doesn’t make it true.  This was a vital piece of information which cancelled out the (by now) famous Tannerman sighting and they didn’t think to take a statement or even leak it to the press to undermine The abduction theory?  Do me a favour…

So you don't believe Totman's own wife???? That's real conspiracy theory stuff!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 20, 2021, 07:57:34 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 20, 2021, 07:29:39 AM
So you don't believe Totman's own wife???? That's real conspiracy theory stuff!!
Can you explain by what process of logic you arrived at the conclusion that I don’t believe Totman’s wife?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 20, 2021, 10:09:24 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 20, 2021, 07:57:34 AM
Can you explain by what process of logic you arrived at the conclusion that I don’t believe Totman’s wife?

You implied it, I thought, by saying "it doesn't make it true".

You seemed to imply that if it was true Amaral would have taken a statement or leaked it to the press? They did hear Dr Totman and didn't need to question him further. They had quickly established that Tannerman was not the abductor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 20, 2021, 10:24:10 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 20, 2021, 10:09:24 AM
You implied it, I thought, by saying "it doesn't make it true".

You seemed to imply that if it was true Amaral would have taken a statement or leaked it to the press? They did hear Dr Totman and didn't need to question him further. They had quickly established that Tannerman was not the abductor.
No, what you seem to believe is that the PJ took a statement from Totman's and his wife and passed it on to the UK police.   That's what I am disputing.  There is no evidence for this, no statement in the file, no evidence that Amaral knew Tannerman actually existed and was Totman, nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 22, 2021, 11:48:24 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 20, 2021, 10:24:10 AM
No, what you seem to believe is that the PJ took a statement from Totman's and his wife and passed it on to the UK police.   That's what I am disputing.  There is no evidence for this, no statement in the file, no evidence that Amaral knew Tannerman actually existed and was Totman, nothing.

IMO someone else (not Jane) either saw Dr Totman + daughter near 5A at around 9.10pm or knew that this man was carrying a child wearing long-sleeved pyjamas.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 03:05:55 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 20, 2021, 10:24:10 AM
No, what you seem to believe is that the PJ took a statement from Totman's and his wife and passed it on to the UK police.   That's what I am disputing.  There is no evidence for this, no statement in the file, no evidence that Amaral knew Tannerman actually existed and was Totman, nothing.

Yes there is. There is confirmation that he presented himself to the PJ as the man likely to be Tannerman. Furthermore we know that the PJ were working closely at the time with Leicestershire Police and sharing information about sightings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 26, 2021, 07:14:45 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 03:05:55 AM
Yes there is. There is confirmation that he presented himself to the PJ as the man likely to be Tannerman. Furthermore we know that the PJ were working closely at the time with Leicestershire Police and sharing information about sightings.
And the evidence that the PJ took a statement from him and passed it on to Leicestershire Police is where exactly?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 08:55:41 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 26, 2021, 07:14:45 AM
And the evidence that the PJ took a statement from him and passed it on to Leicestershire Police is where exactly?

He presented himself. They maybe didn’t need to take a formal statement. Maybe it’s not been made public. It was the most significant early sighting. It was held up as solid evidence of an abduction. Given the level of cooperation described it’s inconceivable to think Dr Totman wasn’t discussed. They state that they cooperated and shared info into all credible sightings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 26, 2021, 10:19:11 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 08:55:41 AM
He presented himself. They maybe didn’t need to take a formal statement. Maybe it’s not been made public. It was the most significant early sighting. It was held up as solid evidence of an abduction. Given the level of cooperation described it’s inconceivable to think Dr Totman wasn’t discussed. They state that they cooperated and shared info into all credible sightings.
What is entirely inconceivable (yet apparently true) that a witness came forward as Tannerman and the PJ said or did nothing to rule out this potential sighting of an abductor.  Why on earth didn't they? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 26, 2021, 10:34:46 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 26, 2021, 10:19:11 AM
What is entirely inconceivable (yet apparently true) that a witness came forward as Tannerman and the PJ said or did nothing to rule out this potential sighting of an abductor.  Why on earth didn't they?

Because he said he was walking in entirely the opposite direction?



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 26, 2021, 10:54:26 AM

The only logical explanation I can think of for how the MET could be 'almost certain' Totman was Tannerman, despite the direction anomaly, is that Jane Tanner has told the MET she was mistaken & that the man she saw was indeed walking the other way.

Can anyone think of any other explanations?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 11:09:41 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 26, 2021, 10:19:11 AM
What is entirely inconceivable (yet apparently true) that a witness came forward as Tannerman and the PJ said or did nothing to rule out this potential sighting of an abductor.  Why on earth didn't they?

They did. He came forward. It’s clear that Amaral never believed Tannerman was the abductor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 26, 2021, 11:16:27 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 11:09:41 AM
They did. He came forward. It’s clear that Amaral never believed Tannerman was the abductor.

I'm 'almost certain' that he was correct in that respect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 11:44:54 AM
Quote from: jassi on August 26, 2021, 11:16:27 AM
I'm 'almost certain' that he was correct in that respect.

Me too…. Though it seemed he didn’t believe her at all whereas Totman shows she saw someone. She just got the direction of travel a bit muddled…. And is it possible she missed Gerry and Gez because she turned left before walking past them to do the normal listening only check? (A question please note, and all hypothetical of course)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 26, 2021, 11:56:27 AM
A witness who was walking the streets of Luz round about the time Madeleine disappeared and who was never interviewed despite making an approach to the police, may very well have given details to Scotland Yard which are of relevance to the current investigation as a whole.

Tannerman is still very much a person who has not yet been traced.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 12:08:33 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 26, 2021, 11:56:27 AM
A witness who was walking the streets of Luz round about the time Madeleine disappeared and who was never interviewed despite making an approach to the police, may very well have given details to Scotland Yard which are of relevance to the current investigation as a whole.

Tannerman is still very much a person who has not yet been traced.

So you disagree with SY that it was Dr Totman?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 26, 2021, 01:23:39 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 26, 2021, 10:34:46 AM
Because he said he was walking in entirely the opposite direction?
Given that the man said he was there at the time of the alleged sighting you would have thought the PJ might have gone back to JT and asked her if it was possibile that she saw the man walking the other way, or in fact anything else to verify that it was Totman she saw, like showing her a picture of him for example?  Or was that beyond the wit of the PJ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 26, 2021, 01:25:04 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 11:09:41 AM
They did. He came forward. It’s clear that Amaral never believed Tannerman was the abductor.
Please can I have a cite for the PJ ruling out Tannerman on the basis that he had been identified as Totman. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 26, 2021, 01:40:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 26, 2021, 01:23:39 PM
Given that the man said he was there at the time of the alleged sighting you would have thought the PJ might have gone back to JT and asked her if it was pssobile that she saw the man walking the other way, or in fact anything else to verify that it was Totman she saw, like showing her a picture of him for example?  Or was that beyond the wit of the PJ?

The PJ had no wit, although they might have found some after Amaral was sacked.  Not entirely sure about that.

How on earth a man who was already involved in a Perjury Case was ever allowed any where near this case will forever defeat me.  That is the beginning and the end.  And Amaral will forever be a disgrace to The PJ.

Good.  They jolly well deserve it.  They employed a philandering, debt ridden liar.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 26, 2021, 01:42:01 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 26, 2021, 01:23:39 PM
Given that the man said he was there at the time of the alleged sighting you would have thought the PJ might have gone back to JT and asked her if it was possibile that she saw the man walking the other way, or in fact anything else to verify that it was Totman she saw, like showing her a picture of him for example?  Or was that beyond the wit of the PJ?

They did go back to Jane Tanner, & she implied that it looked like Robert Murat in the way he walked.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 02:32:45 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 26, 2021, 01:25:04 PM
Please can I have a cite for the PJ ruling out Tannerman on the basis that he had been identified as Totman.

I never claimed that. I said Dr Totman presented himself to the PJ (or GNR I think) and said he was most likely Tannerman. It’s therefore reasonable to assume that strengthened their reported doubts that Tanner saw an abductor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 26, 2021, 02:55:53 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 02:32:45 PM
I never claimed that. I said Dr Totman presented himself to the PJ (or GNR I think) and said he was most likely Tannerman. It’s therefore reasonable to assume that strengthened their reported doubts that Tanner saw an abductor.

Which was it?  The PJ or The GNR?

So therefor not reasonable to assume anything.  Least of all the reported doubts of anyone.

Your apparent doubts are irrelevant.  And certainly not reasonable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 03:05:35 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 26, 2021, 02:55:53 PM
Which was it?  The PJ or The GNR?

So therefor not reasonable to assume anything.  Least of all the reported doubts of anyone.

Your apparent doubts are irrelevant.  And certainly not reasonable.

This link says GNR and “local police”. You’re free to believe this information wasn’t shared with the investigation and I’m free to assume that on the balance of probabilities that it was.

https://metro.co.uk/2018/05/07/madeleine-mccann-police-wasted-years-hunting-man-already-spoken-7527943/ (https://metro.co.uk/2018/05/07/madeleine-mccann-police-wasted-years-hunting-man-already-spoken-7527943/)


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 26, 2021, 03:13:42 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 03:05:35 PM
This link says GNR and “local police”. You’re free to believe this information wasn’t shared with the investigation and I’m free to assume that on the balance of probabilities that it was.

https://metro.co.uk/2018/05/07/madeleine-mccann-police-wasted-years-hunting-man-already-spoken-7527943/ (https://metro.co.uk/2018/05/07/madeleine-mccann-police-wasted-years-hunting-man-already-spoken-7527943/)

I see.  You are free to assume whatever you like.  But then aren't we all.

 Do keep on running.  You are becoming a laugh a minute with your assumptions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 05:16:12 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 26, 2021, 03:13:42 PM
I see.  You are free to assume whatever you like.  But then aren't we all.

 Do keep on running.  You are becoming a laugh a minute with your assumptions.

Do you believe the report that his wife said he presented himself to the Police in Portugal?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 26, 2021, 05:39:03 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 02:32:45 PM
I never claimed that. I said Dr Totman presented himself to the PJ (or GNR I think) and said he was most likely Tannerman. It’s therefore reasonable to assume that strengthened their reported doubts that Tanner saw an abductor.
Why did they doubt Jane Tanner’s sighting in the first place?  Wasn’t it because they thought she’d made the whole thing up?  And them along comes Totman and says it was him and thr police say ok fine well we never thought it was an abductor anyway and didn’t even bother to write it up in their report?  Did they even bother to check out Totman to make sure he hadn’t actually abducted Madeleine?  Isn’t that what  a professional police force would do?  So is there any evidence that they follwed up on his coming forward?  There isn’t a single mention of anything related to it in the files which considering the prominence given to JT’s sighting is utterly baffling IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 26, 2021, 06:11:56 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 05:16:12 PM
Do you believe the report that his wife said he presented himself to the Police in Portugal?

I don't know what you are even talking about.  But then I mostly don't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 06:31:17 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 26, 2021, 11:56:27 AM
A witness who was walking the streets of Luz round about the time Madeleine disappeared and who was never interviewed despite making an approach to the police, may very well have given details to Scotland Yard which are of relevance to the current investigation as a whole.

Tannerman is still very much a person who has not yet been traced.

So you don’t believe that Jane Tanner saw Dr Totman?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 26, 2021, 07:36:41 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 26, 2021, 05:39:03 PM
Why did they doubt Jane Tanner’s sighting in the first place?  Wasn’t it because they thought she’d made the whole thing up?  And them along comes Totman and says it was him and thr police say ok fine well we never thought it was an abductor anyway and didn’t even bother to write it up in their report?  Did they even bother to check out Totman to make sure he hadn’t actually abducted Madeleine?  Isn’t that what  a professional police force would do?  So is there any evidence that they follwed up on his coming forward?  There isn’t a single mention of anything related to it in the files which considering the prominence given to JT’s sighting is utterly baffling IMO.

Yer well.  Me too.  Much good it will do for either of us.  But then I am past caring.  Whoever they were did nothing.  And I do not know why.

It is probably much too late now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 07:43:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 26, 2021, 01:23:39 PM
Given that the man said he was there at the time of the alleged sighting you would have thought the PJ might have gone back to JT and asked her if it was possibile that she saw the man walking the other way, or in fact anything else to verify that it was Totman she saw, like showing her a picture of him for example?  Or was that beyond the wit of the PJ?

Amaral’s book explains what doubts existed around the Tanner sighting. Hypothetically speaking some. Police investigations, imo, don’t tell witnesses everything they know (especially if the reliability of a witness is being considered). I believe that Totman told the Police in Portugal that he thought it likely he was the man seen by Tanner. I also believe that the PJ did not believe that Tannerman was the abductor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 26, 2021, 07:57:26 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 07:43:08 PM
Amaral’s book explains what doubts existed around the Tanner sighting. Hypothetically speaking some. Police investigations, imo, don’t tell witnesses everything they know (especially if the reliability of a witness is being considered). I believe that Totman told the Police in Portugal that he thought it likely he was the man seen by Tanner. I also believe that the PJ did not believe that Tannerman was the abductor.

I believe that you are the most boring thing that was ever inflcted on this Forum.

Is there any chance that you might just go away?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 26, 2021, 08:05:50 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 26, 2021, 05:39:03 PM
Why did they doubt Jane Tanner’s sighting in the first place?  Wasn’t it because they thought she’d made the whole thing up?  And them along comes Totman and says it was him and thr police say ok fine well we never thought it was an abductor anyway and didn’t even bother to write it up in their report?  Did they even bother to check out Totman to make sure he hadn’t actually abducted Madeleine?  Isn’t that what  a professional police force would do?  So is there any evidence that they follwed up on his coming forward?  There isn’t a single mention of anything related to it in the files which considering the prominence given to JT’s sighting is utterly baffling IMO.

Certainly makes one wonder just a bit more about the vendetta of calling Jane Tanner a liar from the earliest days until it was realised that Dr Totman had been abroad that night and had told police he was at the time.

There is an interesting point here.

Dr Totman walked a fair distance carrying a sleeping child;  absolutely no-one reported seeing him en route.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 26, 2021, 08:08:11 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 07:43:08 PM
Amaral’s book explains what doubts existed around the Tanner sighting. Hypothetically speaking some. Police investigations, imo, don’t tell witnesses everything they know (especially if the reliability of a witness is being considered). I believe that Totman told the Police in Portugal that he thought it likely he was the man seen by Tanner. I also believe that the PJ did not believe that Tannerman was the abductor.

And I do not believe that you have the faintest idea of what you think you are talking about.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 26, 2021, 08:15:37 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 26, 2021, 07:57:26 PM
I believe that you are the most boring thing that was ever inflcted on this Forum.

Is there any chance that you might just go away?

Unfortunately I am required to read the nonsense but I have gladly given up making any response to it.  In my opinion nothing but a waste of time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 26, 2021, 09:08:30 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 26, 2021, 08:05:50 PM
Certainly makes one wonder just a bit more about the vendetta of calling Jane Tanner a liar from the earliest days until it was realised that Dr Totman had been abroad that night and had told police he was at the time.

There is an interesting point here.

Dr Totman walked a fair distance carrying a sleeping child;  absolutely no-one reported seeing him en route.

Do you have a cite for Dr Totman being abroad "that night"?

With regards to carrying a child - he was "almost certainly" seen according to SY - by Tanner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 27, 2021, 10:15:06 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 26, 2021, 08:05:50 PM
Certainly makes one wonder just a bit more about the vendetta of calling Jane Tanner a liar from the earliest days until it was realised that Dr Totman had been abroad that night and had told police he was at the time.

There is an interesting point here.

Dr Totman walked a fair distance carrying a sleeping child;  absolutely no-one reported seeing him en route.

Just in case you missed it, do yo have a cite please for Dr Totman being “abroad that night”? Also what do you mean by “abroad”? Do you just mean Portugal?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on August 28, 2021, 02:12:01 PM
Everyone is entitled to an opinion within the rules but condescending remarks towards another member will not be tolerated. This is my last warning on this subject!

I will sanction any member making such comments in future regardless of their status.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on August 29, 2021, 01:12:26 AM
Does anyone know if there were reports that Dr Totman wasn’t in PDL that night?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 01, 2021, 02:23:05 AM
Having just read the attached article from earlier this year in the French press about the Jonathan Coulom case, one part of it piqued my interest and may hold the answers to a few questions about how an abductor could have left through the open window with Madeleine & carry her in the manner Tannerman did.

https://www.lefigaro.fr/faits-divers/affaire-jonathan-coulom-un-pedocriminel-allemand-denonce-par-son-codetenu-20210218.
*snipped*
"The French investigators already had the German lead in mind, because there were very important similarities between what had happened for Jonathan and the little boys killed in Germany by Martin Ney: they were all found with fists and knees tied, in the same fetal position..."

Hypothetically & imo...
It is possible that Madeleine was bound at the wrists and just above the knees then the former bound to the latter to provide almost total restraint. She would not have been able to remove any gag used to silence her. An abductor could have easily passed her through the open window and lowered her to the ground in her trussed state before quickly exiting himself.
Looking at the image of Tannerman, Jane saw the child's knees close together. It would be very difficult to carry a child restrained in the manner described above, both upright & against an adult's shoulder - a more favoured position for carrying a child any distance, especially a sleeping one - as opposed to the carrying style witnessed by Jane.
Equipment required by abductor:- rope, cloth for gag & possibly a utility knife.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 01, 2021, 02:57:30 AM
Quote from: misty on September 01, 2021, 02:23:05 AM
Having just read the attached article from earlier this year in the French press about the Jonathan Coulom case, one part of it piqued my interest and may hold the answers to a few questions about how an abductor could have left through the open window with Madeleine & carry her in the manner Tannerman did.

https://www.lefigaro.fr/faits-divers/affaire-jonathan-coulom-un-pedocriminel-allemand-denonce-par-son-codetenu-20210218.
*snipped*
"The French investigators already had the German lead in mind, because there were very important similarities between what had happened for Jonathan and the little boys killed in Germany by Martin Ney: they were all found with fists and knees tied, in the same fetal position..."

Hypothetically & imo...
It is possible that Madeleine was bound at the wrists and just above the knees then the former bound to the latter to provide almost total restraint. She would not have been able to remove any gag used to silence her. An abductor could have easily passed her through the open window and lowered her to the ground in her trussed state before quickly exiting himself.
Looking at the image of Tannerman, Jane saw the child's knees close together. It would be very difficult to carry a child restrained in the manner described above, both upright & against an adult's shoulder - a more favoured position for carrying a child any distance, especially a sleeping one - as opposed to the carrying style witnessed by Jane.
Equipment required by abductor:- rope, cloth for gag & possibly a utility knife.

How long would this elaborate tying and gagging take in the apartment?

SY believe Tannerman is almost certainly not an abductor?

IMO Kate is correct when reportedly she uses the term "red herring" to describe the open shutters / open window:

The window which is a ground floor window was completely open and is large enough for a person to easily climb through it. Whether it had been opened for this purpose remains unknown. It could of course have been opened by the perpetrator when inside the apartment as a potential escape route or left open as a 'red herring' (Kate McCann)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 01, 2021, 03:10:10 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 01, 2021, 02:57:30 AM
How long would this elaborate tying and gagging take in the apartment?

SY believe Tannerman is almost certainly not an abductor?

IMO Kate is correct when reportedly she uses the term "red herring" to describe the open shutters / open window. http://www.findmadeleine.com (http://www.findmadeleine.com)

Your first point - about a minute for someone experienced at tying knots using rope.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 01, 2021, 03:16:12 AM
Quote from: misty on September 01, 2021, 03:10:10 AM
Your first point - about a minute for someone experienced at tying knots using rope.

Hmmm "about a minute"?....  maybe.... but not plausible to me.... and then they walk outside with a bound and gagged toddler? I very much doubt it.... In the example you give of another paedophile previously linked to this case I would hazard a guess that the binding and gagging was not done at the start of an abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 01, 2021, 08:21:39 AM
I doubt Madeleine was trussed up before being abducted too but the case Misty highlights is interesting for another reason imo.  It’s yet another example of a child abduction from a room with other children present and adults nearby in which the abductor was able to take a child silently and without waking anyone up, something which has oft been claimed as virtually impossible in the McCann case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:06:08 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 01, 2021, 03:16:12 AM
Hmmm "about a minute"?....  maybe.... but not plausible to me.... and then they walk outside with a bound and gagged toddler? I very much doubt it.... In the example you give of another paedophile previously linked to this case I would hazard a guess that the binding and gagging was not done at the start of an abduction.

In both the Behan & Menkes rapes the victims were bound & gagged.
In the Behan case the intruder also removed his shoes before entering her room. If an abductor had also done this before entering & leaving 5A through the window it would explain the lack of any footwear evidence on the bed or floor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 01, 2021, 01:12:13 PM
Quote from: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:06:08 PM
In both the Behan & Menkes rapes the victims were bound & gagged.
In the Behan case the intruder also removed his shoes before entering her room. If an abductor had also done this before entering & leaving 5A through the window it would explain the lack of any footwear evidence on the bed or floor.

You don't think there would be DNA transfer from either sock or bare skin ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 01, 2021, 01:19:22 PM
Quote from: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:06:08 PM
In both the Behan & Menkes rapes the victims were bound & gagged.
In the Behan case the intruder also removed his shoes before entering her room. If an abductor had also done this before entering & leaving 5A through the window it would explain the lack of any footwear evidence on the bed or floor.

How long did the binding and gagging take in those cases and where did it take place?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:20:12 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 01, 2021, 01:12:13 PM
You don't think there would be DNA transfer from either sock or bare skin ?

PJ didn't check the bedspread immediately under the window for DNA transfer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 01, 2021, 01:24:57 PM
Quote from: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:20:12 PM
PJ didn't check the bedspread immediately under the window for DNA transfer.

What about the floor - carpet I assume ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:25:24 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 01, 2021, 01:19:22 PM
How long did the binding and gagging take in those cases and where did it take place?

Restraint took place inside the victims' premises. A grown woman can offer more resistance to her attacker than a 3 year old but I do not have details of the time it took for restraining in each case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:26:29 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 01, 2021, 01:24:57 PM
What about the floor - carpet I assume ?

The floor throughout 5A was tiled.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 01, 2021, 01:28:05 PM
Quote from: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:25:24 PM
Restraint took place inside the victims' premises. A grown woman can offer more resistance to her attacker than a 3 year old but I do not have details of the time it took for restraining in each case.

Neither Tanner nor Smith described a child restrained by binding.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 01, 2021, 01:31:46 PM
Quote from: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:20:12 PM
PJ didn't check the bedspread immediately under the window for DNA transfer.

To be fair to the Portuguese Police it’s unlikely that any investigation would start by immediately checking for DNA transfer. I agree the scene should have been sealed off sooner but again to be fair most cases of missing children don’t involve stranger abduction. I lost a child in a camp site in Wales and the first response wasn’t to establish a crime scene. The child was quickly found locked in a toilet and unable to unlock the door!!

In the McCann case forensic investigation of the window was performed the very next morning as far as I recall. It happened, I recall, whilst the UK TV media were full of stories about a break in and jemmied shutters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:32:35 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 01, 2021, 01:28:05 PM
Neither Tanner nor Smith described a child restrained by binding.

Jane could only see the lower legs of the child Tannerman was carrying.
I disregard Smith sighting of a child wearing long-sleeved, long-legged clothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 01, 2021, 01:33:49 PM
Quote from: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:32:35 PM
Jane could only see the lower legs of the child Tannerman was carrying.
I disregard Smith sighting of a child wearing long-sleeved, long-legged clothing.

SY all but disregard the Tanner sighting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:42:48 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 01, 2021, 01:31:46 PM
To be fair to the Portuguese Police it’s unlikely that any investigation would start by immediately checking for DNA transfer. I agree the scene should have been sealed off sooner but again to be fair most cases of missing children don’t involve stranger abduction. I lost a child in a camp site in Wales and the first response wasn’t to establish a crime scene. The child was quickly found locked in a toilet and unable to unlock the door!!

In the McCann case forensic investigation of the window was performed the very next morning as far as I recall. It happened, I recall, whilst the UK TV media were full of stories about a break in and jemmied shutters.

I agree that it's unfair to cast blame on the Portuguese police for not checking DNA transfer. In a holiday let it would have been an impossible task anyway, notwithstanding the legal restrictions on obtaining DNA samples from people not regarded as suspects. However, just because they couldn't/didn't check doesn't mean the evidence wasn't there. I don't think Ney's DNA was ever found at the scene of crimes he committed but, using Locard's Principle, there must have been traces - places of multiple occupancy must be a gift for criminals.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:46:25 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 01, 2021, 01:33:49 PM
SY all but disregard the Tanner sighting.

They didn't disregard it; the revelation allowed them to move the clock on from that point, not go back to ground zero. I am not using the presumption the abductor was the same man who carried Madeleine away from 5A and was seen by Jane.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 01, 2021, 05:28:15 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 01, 2021, 01:28:05 PM
Neither Tanner nor Smith described a child restrained by binding.
Only one child fitting a description close to that of Madeleine was seen being carried .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on September 01, 2021, 06:11:57 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 01, 2021, 05:28:15 PM
Only one child fitting a description close to that of Madeleine was seen being carried .
Oh, Tannerman, where you gonna run to?

Oh, Tannerman, where you gonna run to?

Oh, Tannerman, where you gonna run to?

All on that night!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on September 02, 2021, 01:47:42 PM
Quote from: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:06:08 PM
In both the Behan & Menkes rapes the victims were bound & gagged.
In the Behan case the intruder also removed his shoes before entering her room. If an abductor had also done this before entering & leaving 5A through the window it would explain the lack of any footwear evidence on the bed or floor.


I mentioned a while back that the abductor could have taken his shoes off.    In the case with the man entering to abuse children in apartments didn't one child say the man had covers on his feet like a surgeon?   This person is very aware of DNA recovery.   I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was CB he was well aware of DNA.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on September 02, 2021, 01:49:47 PM
Quote from: misty on September 01, 2021, 01:32:35 PM
Jane could only see the lower legs of the child Tannerman was carrying.
I disregard Smith sighting of a child wearing long-sleeved, long-legged clothing.

I did wonder about one of the Smith family saying the child"s pyjamas had long sleeves.   How could this person tell if the arms of the man were across the child's arms?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 02, 2021, 07:05:06 PM
Quote from: Lace on September 02, 2021, 01:49:47 PM
I did wonder about one of the Smith family saying the child"s pyjamas had long sleeves.   How could this person tell if the arms of the man were across the child's arms?

It would be hard to carry a child that way and totally obscure some sight of their arms with your arms…. It’s more normal of course for the arms to be round the parents back…. But they did say this girl looked asleep so I guess she’s not clinging on to her Dad imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 02, 2021, 07:48:12 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 02, 2021, 07:05:06 PM
It would be hard to carry a child that way and totally obscure some sight of their arms with your arms…. It’s more normal of course for the arms to be round the parents back…. But they did say this girl looked asleep so I guess she’s not clinging on to her Dad imo

Aoife Smith;

She did not see the child's face because she was lying against the individual's left shoulder in a vertical position against the individual. She appeared to be sleeping. Her arms were suspended along her body and were not around the individual's neck.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

Like this;

(https://i.cbc.ca/1.2293947.1383189660!/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/original_1180/mccann-cp-3555132.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 03, 2021, 01:37:31 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 02, 2021, 07:48:12 PM
Aoife Smith;

She did not see the child's face because she was lying against the individual's left shoulder in a vertical position against the individual. She appeared to be sleeping. Her arms were suspended along her body and were not around the individual's neck.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

Like this;

(https://i.cbc.ca/1.2293947.1383189660!/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/original_1180/mccann-cp-3555132.jpg)

Yes exactly. So here you can also see the adult's arm is "across" the arm of the child but it does not prevent you seeing the sleeves of the child's top.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 03, 2021, 02:24:02 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 03, 2021, 01:37:31 AM
Yes exactly. So here you can also see the adult's arm is "across" the arm of the child but it does not prevent you seeing the sleeves of the child's top.

So you are absolutely in no doubt that Aoife saw a child wearing long-sleeved clothing and couldn't possibly have been mistaken. Bearing in mind that not one of the Smith family disagreed with her either at the time or later on in the year, what possible reason would anyone looking for Madeleine have had for believing that the child seen by the Smiths was Madeleine?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 03, 2021, 07:25:47 AM
Quote from: misty on September 03, 2021, 02:24:02 AM
So you are absolutely in no doubt that Aoife saw a child wearing long-sleeved clothing and couldn't possibly have been mistaken. Bearing in mind that not one of the Smith family disagreed with her either at the time or later on in the year, what possible reason would anyone looking for Madeleine have had for believing that the child seen by the Smiths was Madeleine?
Why did Redwood describe the child, fitting the description close to that of Madeleine ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 03, 2021, 07:38:59 AM
Quote from: misty on September 03, 2021, 02:24:02 AM
So you are absolutely in no doubt that Aoife saw a child wearing long-sleeved clothing and couldn't possibly have been mistaken. Bearing in mind that not one of the Smith family disagreed with her either at the time or later on in the year, what possible reason would anyone looking for Madeleine have had for believing that the child seen by the Smiths was Madeleine?

Why would abyone have believed that Tannerman was carrying Madeleine, based on a pair of legs?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 03, 2021, 07:42:39 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 03, 2021, 07:25:47 AM
Why did Redwood describe the child, fitting the description close to that of Madeleine ?

Who knows what Redwood thought.  He doesn't seem to have had much handle on it all as far as I can see.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 03, 2021, 07:56:15 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 03, 2021, 07:38:59 AM
Why would abyone have believed that Tannerman was carrying Madeleine, based on a pair of legs?

Why would anyone believe thst Smiths ID of Smithman could be in any way reliable being based on the way the child was being carried
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 03, 2021, 07:59:40 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 03, 2021, 07:38:59 AM
Why would abyone have believed that Tannerman was carrying Madeleine, based on a pair of legs?

Why would anyone have believed anything of anything?

On balance I think that Smithman was carrying Madeleine, but quite possibly because I hope that Madeleine is still alive.  While you appear to hope not.  Although exactly by whose hand doesn't leave much to the imagination.

And I don't understand why you are doing this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2021, 08:38:51 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 03, 2021, 07:38:59 AM
Why would abyone have believed that Tannerman was carrying Madeleine, based on a pair of legs?
because she was believed to have gone missing at around the same time of the sighting, which was right by the child’s apartment, a child that appeared to be small and female.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 03, 2021, 09:21:48 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 03, 2021, 07:42:39 AM
Who knows what Redwood thought.  He doesn't seem to have had much handle on it all as far as I can see.


Well you say that, ground was searched, couldn't have been on a whim could it, nothing was found but there again nothing has been found linking CB in the German digs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 03, 2021, 09:24:10 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 03, 2021, 08:38:51 AM
because she was believed to have gone missing at around the same time of the sighting, which was right by the child’s apartment, a child that appeared to be small and female.

It was Jane Tanner who saw the man, decided the child was female, and gave the time. It was all based on the testimony of one witness.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 03, 2021, 09:27:40 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 03, 2021, 08:38:51 AM
because she was believed to have gone missing at around the same time of the sighting, which was right by the child’s apartment, a child that appeared to be small and female.


There's a circa 45 minute's of time, who decided it was around the time of the Tanner sighting ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 03, 2021, 09:28:44 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 03, 2021, 08:38:51 AM
because she was believed to have gone missing at around the same time of the sighting, which was right by the child’s apartment, a child that appeared to be small and female.

You do know that we are all beating our heads against a brick wall, don't you.

I can't actually get myself into thinking that Brueckner did it because I can see no proof.  But I don't need any proof that The McCanns didn't do it because it defies logic. 

And you can forget the wailing and the crying.  That alone wouldn't have convinced me.  But for The McCanns there was never any How did they do this.  They simply could not have done.

For various reasons that I won't go into, I probably wouldn't have liked The McCanns very much, but it's a personal thing and of no consequence.

But for the moment I am very fed up with it all. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 03, 2021, 09:59:49 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 03, 2021, 09:28:44 AM
You do know that we are all beating our heads against a brick wall, don't you.

I can't actually get myself into thinking that Brueckner did it because I can see no proof.  But I don't need any proof that The McCanns didn't do it because it defies logic.

And you can forget the wailing and the crying.  That alone wouldn't have convinced me.  But for The McCanns there was never any How did they do this.  They simply could not have done.

For various reasons that I won't go into, I probably wouldn't have liked The McCanns very much, but it's a personal thing and of no consequence.

But for the moment I am very fed up with it all.


I fail to see how.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 03, 2021, 10:08:46 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 03, 2021, 09:59:49 AM

I fail to see how.


So do I, though it makes a change from Stopthemyths  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 03, 2021, 10:24:36 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 03, 2021, 09:21:48 AM

Well you say that, ground was searched, couldn't have been on a whim could it, nothing was found but there again nothing has been found linking CB in the German digs.

A dead dog - pen drive - etc, etc
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 03, 2021, 10:35:45 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 03, 2021, 09:59:49 AM

I fail to see how.

Looking at the overall picture ~ I can assure you that I see exactly how. 😁
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 03, 2021, 10:35:49 AM
It would depend on what these finds link CB to, beyond the online sites from which he downloaded material.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 03, 2021, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 03, 2021, 09:59:49 AM

I fail to see how.

Fail to see what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 03, 2021, 12:35:11 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 03, 2021, 10:24:36 AM
A dead dog - pen drive - etc, etc

Nothing forensically, meaning no photos of Madeleine imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 03, 2021, 12:35:38 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 03, 2021, 10:46:42 AM
Fail to see what?

The influence of cmomm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2021, 12:36:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 03, 2021, 09:24:10 AM
It was Jane Tanner who saw the man, decided the child was female, and gave the time. It was all based on the testimony of one witness.
you asked why anyone would believe the child might have been Madeleine and I have given you the reasons.  Jane Tanner’s sighting was confirmed as being broadly accurate, so that is another reason.  Sorry you can’t accept that but that’s your problem.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 03, 2021, 12:46:09 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 03, 2021, 07:56:15 AM
Why would anyone believe thst Smiths ID of Smithman could be in any way reliable being based on the way the child was being carried

When you read the Email from the police he first spoke to it described exactly how the human brain works. Of course he may be mistaken. But an involuntary recognition was triggered in his brain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 03, 2021, 01:06:43 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 03, 2021, 09:28:44 AM
You do know that we are all beating our heads against a brick wall, don't you.

There are only two questions here.  Did The McCanns kill their daughter or did someone else come into the frame?  The how's, why's and wherefore's are irrelevant in either case.

I can't actually get myself into thinking that Brueckner did it because I can see no proof.  But I don't need any proof that The McCanns didn't do it because it defies logic. 

And you can forget the wailing and the crying.  That alone wouldn't have convinced me.  But for The McCanns there was never any How did they do this.  They simply could not have done.

For various reasons that I won't go into, I probably wouldn't have liked The McCanns very much, but it's a personal thing and of no consequence.

But for the moment I am very fed up with it all.  Bored rigid as it happens, at least in so far as Moderating is concerned.  There is nothing that I can do that won't be questioned or reversed.  And so I have to leave it to the influence of CMoMM which is currently influencing this Forum.

I truly believe that there are many cases where there’s just no way that passive onlookers would have believed that things that have happened were possible.

With regards to the influence of CMoMM I don’t see that here. From what little I’ve seen the consensus there seems to be that Madeleine died days before she was reported missing. They also seem to promote Richard Hall. To me he is a useful stooge to the “supporters” - perhaps unintentionally.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 03, 2021, 01:56:59 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 03, 2021, 01:06:43 PM
I truly believe that there are many cases where there’s just no way that passive onlookers would have believed that things that have happened were possible.

With regards to the influence of CMoMM I don’t see that here. From what little I’ve seen the consensus there seems to be that Madeleine died days before she was reported missing. They also seem to promote Richard Hall. To me he is a useful stooge to the “supporters” - perhaps unintentionally.

I can't be doing with any of the partisan sites that only allow one point of view, so couldn't care less what they say.

IMO life is too short to spend time to keep up with the various sites.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 03, 2021, 02:00:46 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 03, 2021, 12:35:11 PM
Nothing forensically, meaning no photos of Madeleine imo.

But that is not what you said in the post to which I've replied.  There is forensic photographic evidence.  We just do not know what it is.  Which is exactly as it should be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on September 03, 2021, 02:55:35 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 03, 2021, 02:51:02 PM
Deleted

Doubled posted in error ☺️

I don't think we need to consider other sites whose theories are so silly as to be laughable. In fact, mentioning them here is a breach of our rules and moderators should know better.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 03, 2021, 03:05:52 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on September 03, 2021, 02:55:35 PM
I don't think we need to consider other sites whose theories are so silly as to be laughable. In fact, mentioning them here is a breach of our rules and moderators should know better.

Do you mean mentioning the other forums or the various theories they put forward?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2021, 05:05:03 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on September 03, 2021, 02:55:35 PM
I don't think we need to consider other sites whose theories are so silly as to be laughable. In fact, mentioning them here is a breach of our rules and moderators should know better.
Is there a list of forums and/or theories we are not allowed to mention on here?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 03, 2021, 09:24:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 03, 2021, 05:05:03 PM
Is there a list of forums and/or theories we are not allowed to mention on here?

This one takes some beating……

https://deconstructingmadeleine.home.blog/2020/06/13/deconstructing-the-madeleine-mccann-story-part-1/ (https://deconstructingmadeleine.home.blog/2020/06/13/deconstructing-the-madeleine-mccann-story-part-1/)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2021, 09:28:50 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 03, 2021, 09:24:54 PM
This one takes some beating……

https://deconstructingmadeleine.home.blog/2020/06/13/deconstructing-the-madeleine-mccann-story-part-1/ (https://deconstructingmadeleine.home.blog/2020/06/13/deconstructing-the-madeleine-mccann-story-part-1/)
Why have you linked to a forbidden blog?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 03, 2021, 09:31:05 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 03, 2021, 09:24:54 PM
This one takes some beating……

https://deconstructingmadeleine.home.blog/2020/06/13/deconstructing-the-madeleine-mccann-story-part-1/ (https://deconstructingmadeleine.home.blog/2020/06/13/deconstructing-the-madeleine-mccann-story-part-1/)

One for Sadie by the sounds of it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 03, 2021, 11:11:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 02, 2021, 07:48:12 PM
Aoife Smith;

She did not see the child's face because she was lying against the individual's left shoulder in a vertical position against the individual. She appeared to be sleeping. Her arms were suspended along her body and were not around the individual's neck.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

Like this;

(https://i.cbc.ca/1.2293947.1383189660!/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/original_1180/mccann-cp-3555132.jpg)

From: Long Lindsay
Sent: 20th September, 2007 11:37
CC: Hughes John (DC)
Re: Smith Family

Rec via: TELEPHONE Series: 241 Ident: BC19-8286-1055 20/09/07
Telephone: *********
Locale: Portugal/Out of country
Origin: Mr. Martin Smith 'Ireland

Text: Reported that he passed a male carrying a child in Praia da Luz the night Maddie went missing. Went and made a statement to Portugal police in Portimao on 26th of May and returned to the U.K. Is saying that after seeing McCANNS on the news on 9th of September when they returned to the U.K. He has not slept and is worried sick. He states he was watching the 10 pm news on BBC and saw the McCANNS getting off the plane and coming down the steps. He states it was like watching an action replay of the night he saw the male carrying the child back in Portugal. He states the way Gerry was carrying his twin triggered something in his head. It was exactly the same way and look of the other male seen the night Maddy went missing. He also watched ITV news and SKY news and inferred it looked like the same person both times carrying the children. Is asking a member of the OP Task Force to ring him back. He was with a group of 9 family and friends the night he saw the male in Portugal. He sounded quite shaken and worried whilst speaking to me.

Rec by: TPHONE Serial: 241 Ident:BC19-8286 1055 20/09/07
1101 8286-BC19 Incident linked to 209 26/06/07
1101 8286-BC19 Incident Result ODI: ADMIN DUPLICATE INCIDENT
QNG: QUALIFIER NOT REQUIRED
1101 8286-BC19 Incident Closed

Lindsay Long
Holmes Indexer
Major Crime
Braunstone Police Station

Processos Vol XI Page 2875

Policia Judiciaria
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 03, 2021, 11:18:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 03, 2021, 09:28:50 PM
Why have you linked to a forbidden blog?
[/q

"Forbidden"??? Really - IMO claiming it's a fictional allusion to biblical stories is about as likely as CB or Tannerman being the real abductor!! But those theories aren't forbidden.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on September 04, 2021, 07:11:31 AM
Quote from: jassi on September 03, 2021, 09:31:05 PM
One for Sadie by the sounds of it.
And one for Holly Goheavily... https://deconstructingmadeleine.home.blog/2020/07/19/carole-tranmer/ (https://deconstructingmadeleine.home.blog/2020/07/19/carole-tranmer/)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2021, 07:17:04 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 03, 2021, 11:18:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 03, 2021, 09:28:50 PM
Why have you linked to a forbidden blog?


"Forbidden"??? Really - IMO claiming it's a fictional allusion to biblical stories is about as likely as CB or Tannerman being the real abductor!! But those theories aren't forbidden.

“I don't think we need to consider other sites whose theories are so silly as to be laughable. In fact, mentioning them here is a breach of our rules and moderators should know better.” said Angelo, senior moderator of this forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 04, 2021, 08:13:18 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2021, 07:17:04 AM
“I don't think we need to consider other sites whose theories are so silly as to be laughable. In fact, mentioning them here is a breach of our rules and moderators should know better.” said Angelo, senior moderator of this forum.

Can you link to which sites are on the banned list?

I posted it, in answer to your question, to provide some light relief!! You've got to admit it's a brilliant article.... I love the numbers; How the Da Vinci code also starts with Robert the Translator (Murat); the author laughing at the blatant audacity of including Ivor Messiah in the tale (who it seems also made rude gestures to a juror in court); the donkey link; Samuel 2:11 (Kate's Bible pages and following verse) in which David watched the young Bathsheba as she bathed.  "David watched her bathe and he lusted after her"; that Gaspar (Caspar) was one of the three wise men; the witness named Fatima and the allusion to the story of Mary Magdalen (Madeleine) complete with reference to the emitting of bright lights (the girls' trainers)!!!

Of course I don't believe the whole Madeleine McCann story is a work of fiction written as a nod and a wink to those who know it's just alluding to a messianic / biblical tale !!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2021, 04:16:51 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 04, 2021, 08:13:18 AM
Can you link to which sites are on the banned list?

I posted it, in answer to your question, to provide some light relief!! You've got to admit it's a brilliant article.... I love the numbers; How the Da Vinci code also starts with Robert the Translator (Murat); the author laughing at the blatant audacity of including Ivor Messiah in the tale (who it seems also made rude gestures to a juror in court); the donkey link; Samuel 2:11 (Kate's Bible pages and following verse) in which David watched the young Bathsheba as she bathed.  "David watched her bathe and he lusted after her"; that Gaspar (Caspar) was one of the three wise men; the witness named Fatima and the allusion to the story of Mary Magdalen (Madeleine) complete with reference to the emitting of bright lights (the girls' trainers)!!!

Of course I don't believe the whole Madeleine McCann story is a work of fiction written as a nod and a wink to those who know it's just alluding to a messianic / biblical tale !!
If you read back you will see that I recently ASKED Angelo the Mod for a list of banned cites, no answer was forthcoming.  Quelle surprise. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 04, 2021, 08:47:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2021, 04:16:51 PM
If you read back you will see that I recently ASKED Angelo the Mod for a list of banned cites, no answer was forthcoming.  Quelle surprise.

I regret posting it now!! It was only meant for some light relief!! Now some posters think there's been a troll invasion!! I had no intention of doing anything more than providing light relief from the usual incredibly sad situation we all discuss here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 04, 2021, 09:52:15 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 03, 2021, 11:11:47 PM
From: Long Lindsay
Sent: 20th September, 2007 11:37
CC: Hughes John (DC)
Re: Smith Family

Rec via: TELEPHONE Series: 241 Ident: BC19-8286-1055 20/09/07
Telephone: *********
Locale: Portugal/Out of country
Origin: Mr. Martin Smith 'Ireland

Text: Reported that he passed a male carrying a child in Praia da Luz the night Maddie went missing. Went and made a statement to Portugal police in Portimao on 26th of May and returned to the U.K. Is saying that after seeing McCANNS on the news on 9th of September when they returned to the U.K. He has not slept and is worried sick. He states he was watching the 10 pm news on BBC and saw the McCANNS getting off the plane and coming down the steps. He states it was like watching an action replay of the night he saw the male carrying the child back in Portugal. He states the way Gerry was carrying his twin triggered something in his head. It was exactly the same way and look of the other male seen the night Maddy went missing. He also watched ITV news and SKY news and inferred it looked like the same person both times carrying the children. Is asking a member of the OP Task Force to ring him back. He was with a group of 9 family and friends the night he saw the male in Portugal. He sounded quite shaken and worried whilst speaking to me.

Rec by: TPHONE Serial: 241 Ident:BC19-8286 1055 20/09/07
1101 8286-BC19 Incident linked to 209 26/06/07
1101 8286-BC19 Incident Result ODI: ADMIN DUPLICATE INCIDENT
QNG: QUALIFIER NOT REQUIRED
1101 8286-BC19 Incident Closed

Lindsay Long
Holmes Indexer
Major Crime
Braunstone Police Station

Processos Vol XI Page 2875

Policia Judiciaria

To believe Martin Smith's identification of Gerry (the only witness who formally stated that) requires acceptance of the following points:-
1. Gerry changed his clothes and no-one noticed
2. Madeleine wasn't wearing the same clothing as reported by the parents
3. Multiple other witnesses lied or were mistaken about Gerry's whereabouts at the time
4. Martin was right & the rest of his family were wrong

How much should the truth be bent to accommodate the revised statement of this sole witness, to remove a potential abductor from the equation and identify him as an existing arguido?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 04, 2021, 11:00:37 PM
Quote from: misty on September 04, 2021, 09:52:15 PM
To believe Martin Smith's identification of Gerry (the only witness who formally stated that) requires acceptance of the following points:-
1. Gerry changed his clothes and no-one noticed
2. Madeleine wasn't wearing the same clothing as reported by the parents
3. Multiple other witnesses lied or were mistaken about Gerry's whereabouts at the time
4. Martin was right & the rest of his family were wrong

How much should the truth be bent to accommodate the revised statement of this sole witness, to remove a potential abductor from the equation and identify him as an existing arguido?

1) Who confirms exactly what Gerry was wearing?
2) Yes it's quite possible her parents lied about the pyjamas.
3) Yes it's quite possible the witnesses were mistaken about the exact time.
4) Yes it's quite possible Martin was right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2021, 11:11:14 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 04, 2021, 11:00:37 PM
1) Who confirms exactly what Gerry was wearing?
2) Yes it's quite possible her parents lied about the pyjamas.
3) Yes it's quite possible the witnesses were mistaken about the exact time.
4) Yes it's quite possible Martin was right.
No it’s highly implausible and illogical for all these factors to in place (plus all the myriad others such as silent murder, body parading, brilliant acting, the conveniently emptied bin etc etc etc) in order for the McCanns to be the ones wot dunnit.  Ever heard of Occams Razor?  For the McCanns to be the culprits it would have to be the opposite which is known as “Smacco Rozar” or “a load of curly curly woo woo bollix” if you prefer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 04, 2021, 11:12:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2021, 11:11:14 PM
No it’s highly implausible and illogical for all these factors to in place (plus all the myriad others such as silent murder, body parading, brilliant acting, the conveniently emptied bin etc etc etc) in order for the McCanns to be the ones wot dunnit.  Ever heard of Occams Razor?  For the McCanns to be the culprits it would have to be the opposite which is known as “Smacco Rozar” or “a load of curly curly woo woo bollix” if you prefer.

^^
None of this waffles disproves the possibility of McCann involvement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2021, 11:58:36 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 04, 2021, 11:12:38 PM
^^
None of this waffles disproves the possibility of McCann involvement.
no but then again it does imo highlight how many incredibly unlikely mental hoops anyone would need to jump through in order to arrive at the conclusion that they were involved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 12:06:43 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2021, 11:58:36 PM
no but then again it does imo highlight how many incredibly unlikely mental hoops anyone would need to jump through in order to arrive at the conclusion that they were involved.

No it doesn't.

Returning to your points..

A strangulation would be a silent murder, the witnesses didn't describe anybody being 'paraded' (plus they'd have no way of knowing if the child was alive or dead anyway) , the McCanns acting didn't convince me & bins get emptied all the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 05, 2021, 08:45:46 AM
Quote from: misty on September 04, 2021, 09:52:15 PM
To believe Martin Smith's identification of Gerry (the only witness who formally stated that) requires acceptance of the following points:-
1. Gerry changed his clothes and no-one noticed
2. Madeleine wasn't wearing the same clothing as reported by the parents
3. Multiple other witnesses lied or were mistaken about Gerry's whereabouts at the time
4. Martin was right & the rest of his family were wrong

How much should the truth be bent to accommodate the revised statement of this sole witness, to remove a potential abductor from the equation and identify him as an existing arguido?

1. Could he could have changed his clothes twice (upon return)? How many of the T7 describe what he was wearing? There are a pair of biege trousers on top of the bed ("Foto 17" - PJ Files)
2. Light coloured pajammas - everyone agrees on that.
3. Do you mean T7? Is there anyone who accounts exactly where he was from 9:50 to 10:15. Also consider the other time anomalies in the timeline and you can see differences of 15-20 minutes. Therefore no-one needs to lie. They may just be mistaken.
How many of the T7 say exactly where Gerry was just AFTER 10pm? Two independent witnesses seem to imply Gerry was away from the table for 30 minutes before the al,arm was raised
4. The whole family saw the man. The description is similar in most respects.

Also why was the sighting ignored for years by Mitchell but held up as centrally important by Redwood in 2013. Why after Redwood's comments does Smithman remain somewhat hidden on the Find Madeleine web site? Why is Tannerman still held up as the abductor when he's been accounted for?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on September 05, 2021, 08:48:15 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 05, 2021, 08:45:46 AM
1. Could he could have changed his clothes twice (upon return)? How many of the T7 describe what he was wearing? There are a pair of biege trousers on top of the bed ("Foto 17" - PJ Files)
2. Light coloured pajammas - everyone agrees on that.
3. Do you mean T7? Is there anyone who accounts exactly where he was from 9:50 to 10:15. Also consider the other time anomalies in the timeline and you can see differences of 15-20 minutes. Therefore no-one needs to lie. They may just be mistaken.
How many of the T7 say exactly where Gerry was just AFTER 10pm? Two independent witnesses seem to imply Gerry was away from the table for 30 minutes before the al,arm was raised
4. The whole family saw the man. The description is similar in most respects.

Also why was the sighting ignored for years by Mitchell but held up as centrally important by Redwood in 2013. Why after Redwood's comments does Smithman remain somewhat hidden on the Find Madeleine web site? Why is Tannerman still held up as the abductor when he's been accounted for?


Ah so Gerry left the trousers he was wearing when he carried Madeleine on the bed for all to see. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 09:04:22 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 12:06:43 AM
No it doesn't.

Returning to your points..

A strangulation would be a silent murder, the witnesses didn't describe anybody being 'paraded' (plus they'd have no way of knowing if the child was alive or dead anyway) , the McCanns acting didn't convince me & bins get emptied all the time.
Yes it does.  So many improbable ducks need to be lined up in a row for you theory to work.  Strangulation may be silent, but  was it premeditated in your view?  Were the children quietly sitting there colouring in when Kate decided to murder Madeleine?  How many murderers or their accomplices decide to hide a body by carrying it uncovered through the streets only minutes after kicking up an almighty stink about the victim going missing?  And how very fortuitous that the guy hiding the body picked one that no one checked before it was swiftly emptied before the search parties were out.   Yes, individually all these aspects are possible but when you string them together with all the other highly unlikely factors necessary to twist Kate and Gerry into the culprits, not so much.    Occam’s Razor.  Your theory is quite the opposite.  All IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 09:07:32 AM
Quote from: Lace on September 05, 2021, 08:48:15 AM

Ah so Gerry left the trousers he was wearing when he carried Madeleine on the bed for all to see.
Knowing he’d been spotted wearing them.  Clearly whatever injury Madeleine suffered then, there was no blood otherwise this would have been a very risky strategy to wear and then display light coloured trousers for the police to photograph, so we can rule out “blood spatter” in the apartment as being relevant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 05, 2021, 09:17:29 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 09:07:32 AM
Knowing he’d been spotted wearing them.  Clearly whatever injury Madeleine suffered then, there was no blood otherwise this would have been a very risky strategy to wear and then display light coloured trousers for the police to photograph, so we can rule out “blood spatter” in the apartment as being relevant.


Why was a injury needed, the story of drug overdose from Sept 2007 is still on line to see.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 09:23:00 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 05, 2021, 09:17:29 AM

Why was a injury needed, the story of drug overdose from Sept 2007 is still on line to see.
To explain the “blood spatter” of course!  You do know some daft ha’porths believe the McCanns performed an emergency tracheotomy on their daughter resulting in gore all over the wall don’t you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 05, 2021, 09:26:32 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 09:23:00 AM
To explain the “blood spatter” of course!  You do know some daft ha’porths believe the McCanns performed an emergency tracheotomy on their daughter resulting in gore all over the wall don’t you?


Each to their own.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 05, 2021, 09:47:20 AM
I'll put it here, is Wolters a prosecutor or does he just work under the prosecutors umbrella.

Piece from Clarkes book.


"I am only involved primarily in the press work, so I don't know eveything in detail. I only know things in general terms. Because, thank God, my colleague who does all the investigation, she doesn't tell me everything in detail, so I don't run the risk of blabbing everything."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2021, 09:56:17 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 05, 2021, 09:47:20 AM
I'll put it here, is Wolters a prosecutor or does he just work under the prosecutors umbrella.

Piece from Clarkes book.


"I am only involved primarily in the press work, so I don't know eveything in detail. I only know things in general terms. Because, thank God, my colleague who does all the investigation, she doesn't tell me everything in detail, so I don't run the risk of blabbing everything."

Mark S made s big point about Wolters not knowing the details of the phone evidence... I made the point he msy not know sll the technical fetails.. Looks like I was right
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 09:58:23 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 05, 2021, 09:47:20 AM
I'll put it here, is Wolters a prosecutor or does he just work under the prosecutors umbrella.

Piece from Clarkes book.


"I am only involved primarily in the press work, so I don't know eveything in detail. I only know things in general terms. Because, thank God, my colleague who does all the investigation, she doesn't tell me everything in detail, so I don't run the risk of blabbing everything."
Maybe he just said that to stop Clarke asking questions he didn’t want to answer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 05, 2021, 10:02:20 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 09:58:23 AM
Maybe he just said that to stop Clarke asking questions he didn’t want to answer.


Thats easy, if you like the answer don't ask the question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 05, 2021, 10:03:43 AM
Quote from: Davel on September 05, 2021, 09:56:17 AM
Mark S made s big point about Wolters not knowing the details of the phone evidence... I made the point he msy not know sll the technical fetails.. Looks like I was right

Which is why I ask, is he a prosecutor or works for the prosecutors office, seems more the latter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2021, 10:06:37 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 09:58:23 AM
Maybe he just said that to stop Clarke asking questions he didn’t want to answer.

I think Wolters may well have learnt his lesson after this e Mark S interview
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2021, 10:10:50 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 05, 2021, 10:03:43 AM
Which is why I ask, is he a prosecutor or works for the prosecutors office, seems more the latter.
Imo.. Hes the prosecutor and the spokesman for the prosecution team. As Ive said before that means his statement are not just personal opinion but that of the whole team
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 05, 2021, 10:15:41 AM
Quote from: Davel on September 05, 2021, 10:10:50 AM
Imo.. Hes the prosecutor and the spokesman for the prosecution team. As Ive said before that means his statement are not just personal opinion but that of the whole team

Given that being the case in your imo, then when Rowley says they never investigated the McCann's because it was dealt with in the initial investigation you see that as a ringing endorsement of the PJ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 05, 2021, 10:47:19 AM
Quote from: Lace on September 05, 2021, 08:48:15 AM

Ah so Gerry left the trousers he was wearing when he carried Madeleine on the bed for all to see.

Hypothetically speaking I'd say it was more likely he changed in a rush and forgot and had to be seen somewhere else rather than leaving them out because he wanted everyone to see them, in my opinion. Their presence suggests he possessed beige trousers and it it possible he either wore them or tried them on at some stage that day.

This is what was said he wore at Tapas Bar:

KM - Gerry was wearing blue denim trousers and trainers (tennis shoes). She doesn't remember what else he was wearing.
GM -  He was wearing tennis shoes (trainers), blue jeans and a light brown polar top.

DP - doesn't say
FP - doesn't say
JT - doesn't say
DW- doesn't say
RO - doesn't say
MO -doesn't say
ROB - doesn't say

Jez Wilkins - doesn't say

So no-one noticed or was asked about what he was wearing (apart from K&G). Which means hypothetically speaking he may not have changed his trousers until whatever point it was that they were left on the bed, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 10:58:07 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 05, 2021, 10:47:19 AM
Hypothetically speaking I'd say it was more likely he changed in a rush and forgot and had to be seen somewhere else rather than leaving them out because he wanted everyone to see them, in my opinion. Their presence suggests he possessed beige trousers and it it possible he either wore them or tried them on at some stage that day.

This is what was said he wore at Tapas Bar:

KM - Gerry was wearing blue denim trousers and trainers (tennis shoes). She doesn't remember what else he was wearing.
GM -  He was wearing tennis shoes (trainers), blue jeans and a light brown polar top.

DP - doesn't say
FP - doesn't say
JT - doesn't say
DW- doesn't say
RO - doesn't say
MO -doesn't say
ROB - doesn't say

Jez Wilkins - doesn't say

So no-one noticed or was asked about what he was wearing (apart from K&G). Which means hypothetically speaking he may not have changed his trousers until whatever point it was that they were left on the bed, in my opinion.
Why would he say he was wearing blue jeans if he wasn't wearing blue jeans?  Loads of witnesses to say otherwise if he hadn't been.  So, let's assume he WAS wearing blue jeans that night, seems very risky to claim you were wearing something completely diffferent with so many potential witnesses saying otherwise.  Right.  When do you think he hypotethically changed into beige trousers and why?  And then why do you think he changed trousers again that night and then left them on the bed?  Any plausible logical reasons gratefully received.  Also, let's add that to the long list of improbable ducks we need to line up for it to be Gerry wot dunnit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 05, 2021, 11:41:39 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 10:58:07 AM
Why would he say he was wearing blue jeans if he wasn't wearing blue jeans?  Loads of witnesses to say otherwise if he hadn't been.  So, let's assume he WAS wearing blue jeans that night, seems very risky to claim you were wearing something completely diffferent with so many potential witnesses saying otherwise.  Right.  When do you think he hypotethically changed into beige trousers and why?  And then why do you think he changed trousers again that night and then left them on the bed?  Any plausible logical reasons gratefully received.  Also, let's add that to the long list of improbable ducks we need to line up for it to be Gerry wot dunnit.

There's too many variables to offer ONE hypothesis. But it looks like he tried on or thought about wearing beige trousers that day, in my opinion. If indeed that is what is on the bed. (source: photo 17 - PJ Files)

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 05, 2021, 11:46:51 AM
Quote from: Davel on September 05, 2021, 10:10:50 AM
Imo.. Hes the prosecutor and the spokesman for the prosecution team. As Ive said before that means his statement are not just personal opinion but that of the whole team

Just the same as PJ team and G.A then -  till the uk got involved
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 05, 2021, 11:53:22 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 05, 2021, 11:41:39 AM
There's too many variables to offer ONE hypothesis. But it looks like he tried on or thought about wearing beige trousers that day, in my opinion. If indeed that is what is on the bed. (source: photo 17 - PJ Files)

That is the most ridiculous opinion I have ever heard.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on September 05, 2021, 11:57:36 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 05, 2021, 10:47:19 AM
Hypothetically speaking I'd say it was more likely he changed in a rush and forgot and had to be seen somewhere else rather than leaving them out because he wanted everyone to see them, in my opinion. Their presence suggests he possessed beige trousers and it it possible he either wore them or tried them on at some stage that day.

This is what was said he wore at Tapas Bar:

KM - Gerry was wearing blue denim trousers and trainers (tennis shoes). She doesn't remember what else he was wearing.
GM -  He was wearing tennis shoes (trainers), blue jeans and a light brown polar top.

DP - doesn't say
FP - doesn't say
JT - doesn't say
DW- doesn't say
RO - doesn't say
MO -doesn't say
ROB - doesn't say

Jez Wilkins - doesn't say

So no-one noticed or was asked about what he was wearing (apart from K&G). Which means hypothetically speaking he may not have changed his trousers until whatever point it was that they were left on the bed, in my opinion.

So,  changed his trousers but not the top that Madeleine would have been resting against?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 11:57:49 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 09:04:22 AM
Yes it does.  So many improbable ducks need to be lined up in a row for you theory to work.  Strangulation may be silent, but  was it premeditated in your view?  Were the children quietly sitting there colouring in when Kate decided to murder Madeleine?  How many murderers or their accomplices decide to hide a body by carrying it uncovered through the streets only minutes after kicking up an almighty stink about the victim going missing?  And how very fortuitous that the guy hiding the body picked one that no one checked before it was swiftly emptied before the search parties were out.   Yes, individually all these aspects are possible but when you string them together with all the other highly unlikely factors necessary to twist Kate and Gerry into the culprits, not so much.    Occam’s Razor.  Your theory is quite the opposite.  All IMO.

What difference does it make if the strangulation was premeditated? None is the answer.

It's likely people have carried dead bodies before or how else would you move one?
Even if you used a car you'd still need to carry the body to the car.

I don't know what the twins were doing when Maddie could have been murdered.

Corrie McKeague was a grown man when he went in the bin & no one ever found him.

Nothing you have said disproves this possibility & no investigative force has proven abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 12:02:34 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 05, 2021, 10:47:19 AM
Hypothetically speaking I'd say it was more likely he changed in a rush and forgot and had to be seen somewhere else rather than leaving them out because he wanted everyone to see them, in my opinion. Their presence suggests he possessed beige trousers and it it possible he either wore them or tried them on at some stage that day.

This is what was said he wore at Tapas Bar:

KM - Gerry was wearing blue denim trousers and trainers (tennis shoes). She doesn't remember what else he was wearing.
GM -  He was wearing tennis shoes (trainers), blue jeans and a light brown polar top.

DP - doesn't say
FP - doesn't say
JT - doesn't say
DW- doesn't say
RO - doesn't say
MO -doesn't say
ROB - doesn't say

Jez Wilkins - doesn't say

So no-one noticed or was asked about what he was wearing (apart from K&G). Which means hypothetically speaking he may not have changed his trousers until whatever point it was that they were left on the bed, in my opinion.

But where does Kate's description of the clothes they wore come from?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 12:11:13 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 11:57:49 AM
What difference does it make if the strangulation was premeditated? None is the answer.

It's likely people have carried dead bodies before or how else would you move one?
Even if you used a car you'd still need to carry the body to the car.

I don't know what the twins were doing when Maddie could have been murdered.

Corrie McKeague was a grown man when he went in the bin & no one ever found him.

Nothing you have said disproves this possibility & no investigative force has proven abduction.
I asked whether or not you thought the murder was pre-meditated or not because if so I could envisage it taking place with the minimum fuss, however if it was as a result of Kate flipping out and flying into a murderous rage I would imagine there would be at least some accompanying noise, eg the screaming of the child that triggered the rage, or some shouting beforehand, or some upset from the twins witnessing a horrible incident.  But no, bat-eared Pamela Fenn must either have had her hearing aid switched off during the murder or the rage was all silent and unwitnessed by the twins, and Gerry's reaction on discovering his little girl had been murdered by his wife was also very subdued.   No sobbing, no crying, no arguing, no panicking.  How very civilised! 

Nothing I have said disproves anything, but IMO it does shine a light on how improbable the scenario is.  Kate, enraged, silently murders her child.  Her husband is cool enough with this occurrence to hatch a plan with her which involves staging an abduction.  The plan includes leaving the apartment unlocked, allowing friends to perform checks on the kids, raising the alarm during dinner, sending the friends one way while Gerry retrieves the corpse from its hiding place somewhere unspecified then, while everyone is in a blind panic looking for a missing child, carries the corpse through town (after having changed his trousers of course), is seen by half a dozen people, then conveniently finds a bin in which to dispose of the corpse, a bin which is also conveniently emptied within a few hours, then returns to the apartment with no one having noticed his absence, changes back into his jeans, then submits to the gaze of the world's media within 24 hours of the disposal (knowing that at least half a dozen people saw him carrying a child at the time the alarm was raised), and subsequently spearheads a massive fraud to make a million, whilst all the while striving to keep the public's attention focused on the crime that he himself committed together with his wife.  Yes, all very logical and plausible I'm sure.  Dismiss this all as affle as I'm sure you will, if you went to the cinema to watch a film in which this was the plot you'd sneer at the ridiculousness of it all.  Well I would anyway!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 12:17:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 12:11:13 PM
I asked whether or not you thought the murder was pre-meditated or not because if so I could envisage it taking place with the minimum fuss, however if it was as a result of Kate flipping out and flying into a murderous rage I would imagine there would be at least some accompanying noise, eg the screaming of the child that triggered the rage, or some shouting beforehand, or some upset from the twins witnessing a horrible incident.  But no, bat-eared Pamela Fenn must either have had her hearing aid switched off during the murder or the rage was all silent and unwitnessed by the twins, and Gerry's reaction on discovering his little girl had been murdered by his wife was also very subdued.   No sobbing, no crying, no arguing, no panicking.  How very civilised! 

Nothing I have said disproves anything, but IMO it does shine a light on how improbable the scenario is.  Kate, enraged, silently murders her child.  Her husband is cool enough with this occurrence to hatch a plan with her which involves staging an abduction.  The plan includes leaving the apartment unlocked, allowing friends to perform checks on the kids, raising the alarm during dinner, sending the friends one way while Gerry retrieves the corpse from its hiding place somewhere unspecified then, while everyone is in a blind panic looking for a missing child, carries the corpse through town (after having changed his trousers of course), is seen by half a dozen people, then conveniently finds a bin in which to dispose of the corpse, a bin which is also conveniently emptied within a few hours, then returns to the apartment with no one having noticed his absence, changes back into his jeans, then submits to the gaze of the world's media within 24 hours of the disposal (knowing that at least half a dozen people saw him carrying a child at the time the alarm was raised), and subsequently spearheads a massive fraud to make a million, whilst all the while striving to keep the public's attention focused on the crime that he himself committed together with his wife.  Yes, all very logical and plausible I'm sure.  Dismiss this all as affle as I'm sure you will, if you went to the cinema to watch a film in which this was the plot you'd sneer at the ridiculousness of it all.  Well I would anyway!

(after having changed his trousers of course)

Who say's what clothes he was wearing & when?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 12:21:38 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 12:17:43 PM
(after having changed his trousers of course)

Who say's what clothes he was wearing & when?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.10995
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 12:23:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 12:21:38 PM
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.10995

Oh, was Billy there?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 12:25:46 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 12:23:48 PM
Oh, was Billy there?
ERm, no - what led you to ask such a stupid question?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 12:26:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 12:25:46 PM
ERm, no - what led you to ask such a stupid question?

I'm wondering where he got the information from.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 12:38:39 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 12:26:39 PM
I'm wondering where he got the information from.
it's in the files.  I think you need to read the last page or so of this thread, you don't seem to understand what's been said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 05, 2021, 12:38:52 PM
Anyone who believes anything that Spammy has to say needs a sick reality check.  And he isn't even very good at it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 12:43:23 PM
It comes from 4 months after the event.

4 months after that fateful night, Kate had kept a mental note of one very important detail, what clothes Gerry wore.

Can anyone here remember what they were wearing one night 4 months ago?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 01:00:35 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 12:43:23 PM
It comes from 4 months after the event.

4 months after that fateful night, Kate had kept a mental note of one very important detail, what clothes Gerry wore.

Can anyone here remember what they were wearing one night 4 months ago?
If it was the night my daughter went missing and I knew that I didn't get changed that night and was photographed by the press the next day then yes, maybe. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 05, 2021, 02:16:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 01:00:35 PM
If it was the night my daughter went missing and I knew that I didn't get changed that night and was photographed by the press the next day then yes, maybe.

I think the question would be - why would you want to make a mental note in the first place of what you were wearing that  night
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 04:21:57 PM
Quote from: kizzy on September 05, 2021, 02:16:30 PM
I think the question would be - why would you want to make a mental note in the first place of what you were wearing that  night
you wouldn’t NEED to make a mental note if there was photographic evidence of what you were wearing that night.  That’s my point.  In any case, when you go on holiday you tend not to have a vast wardrobe of clothes with you.  Perhaps jeans were the only long trousers he had and knew that because the evenings were cooler he wolud have been wearing them.  We know he wasn’t wearing the beige trousers because they were photographed by the police on a bed. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 05, 2021, 05:46:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 05, 2021, 11:53:22 AM
That is the most ridiculous opinion I have ever heard.

Why do you think the beige trousers were on the bed? (If indeed that is what they are in Photo 17)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 05, 2021, 05:51:49 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 05, 2021, 05:46:45 PM
Why do you think the beige trousers were on the bed? (If indeed that is what they are in Photo 17)

I have absolutely no idea.  If indeed that is what they are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 05, 2021, 06:19:31 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 04:21:57 PM
you wouldn’t NEED to make a mental note if there was photographic evidence of what you were wearing that night.  That’s my point.  In any case, when you go on holiday you tend not to have a vast wardrobe of clothes with you.  Perhaps jeans were the only long trousers he had and knew that because the evenings were cooler he wolud have been wearing them.  We know he wasn’t wearing the beige trousers because they were photographed by the police on a bed.

That could have been because he took them off after wearing them the night before,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 05, 2021, 06:29:02 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 04:21:57 PM
you wouldn’t NEED to make a mental note if there was photographic evidence of what you were wearing that night.  That’s my point.  In any case, when you go on holiday you tend not to have a vast wardrobe of clothes with you.  Perhaps jeans were the only long trousers he had and knew that because the evenings were cooler he wolud have been wearing them.  We know he wasn’t wearing the beige trousers because they were photographed by the police on a bed.

We know he wasn’t wearing the beige trousers because they were photographed by the police on a bed.

Like you say you don't take many clothes - so if he hadn't wore them they would have still been in wardrobe ....not  on a bed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 06:38:06 PM
Quote from: kizzy on September 05, 2021, 06:29:02 PM

We know he wasn’t wearing the beige trousers because they were photographed by the police on a bed.

Like you say you don't take many clothes - so if he hadn't wore them they would have still been in wardrobe ....not  on a bed.
Fine, so give me a good reason why he changed out of his beige trousers when he got back to the apartment and then left them lying in the bed.  He would presumably have been seen by every witness involved in the drama in he beige trousers already that night prior to allegedly changing, so…
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 06:52:21 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 06:38:06 PM
Fine, so give me a good reason why he changed out of his beige trousers when he got back to the apartment and then left them lying in the bed.  He would presumably have been seen by every witness involved in the drama in he beige trousers already that night prior to allegedly changing, so…

Maybe he got a fright when he saw the Smith family coming towards him & he pissed himself a little.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 05, 2021, 06:53:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 06:38:06 PM
Fine, so give me a good reason why he changed out of his beige trousers when he got back to the apartment and then left them lying in the bed.  He would presumably have been seen by every witness involved in the drama in he beige trousers already that night prior to allegedly changing, so…

The point is its not as if he didn't have beige trousers - an them being thrown on a bed he obviously got changed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 05, 2021, 06:53:54 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 06:52:21 PM
Maybe he got a fright when he saw the Smith family coming towards him & he pissed himself a little.

 @)(++(*  Maybe more than a little. Possible doubly incontinent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 06:57:29 PM
Quote from: kizzy on September 05, 2021, 06:53:06 PM
The point is its not as if he didn't have beige trousers - an them being thrown on a bed he obviously got changed.
Can you please supply a full length picture of him wearing these trousers, thanks.  The point is more to do with why he would change out of them as soon as he returned to the apartment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 06:58:41 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2021, 06:52:21 PM
Maybe he got a fright when he saw the Smith family coming towards him & he pissed himself a little.
You are nothing if not entirely predictable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 05, 2021, 07:12:30 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 05, 2021, 06:53:54 PM
@)(++(*  Maybe more than a little. Possible doubly incontinent.

Charming, eh what.  Although not frightfully funny.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 05, 2021, 07:13:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 06:57:29 PM
Can you please supply a full length picture of him wearing these trousers, thanks.  The point is more to do with why he would change out of them as soon as he returned to the apartment.

Were these they?

(https://images.theconversation.com/files/340055/original/file-20200605-176595-w8zwid.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 05, 2021, 07:14:07 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 06:57:29 PM
Can you please supply a full length picture of him wearing these trousers, thanks.  The point is more to do with why he would change out of them as soon as he returned to the apartment.

well, why were they on the bed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 05, 2021, 07:14:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 05, 2021, 07:13:19 PM
Were these they?

(https://images.theconversation.com/files/340055/original/file-20200605-176595-w8zwid.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2)

Golly Gosh.  Jolly well done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2021, 07:15:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 05, 2021, 07:13:19 PM
Were these they?

(https://images.theconversation.com/files/340055/original/file-20200605-176595-w8zwid.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2)
Perhaps you could highlight the very distinctive buttons that were so noticeable in the dark  as the man was parading his daughter’s corpse through town?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 05, 2021, 07:17:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 05, 2021, 07:13:19 PM
Were these they?

(https://images.theconversation.com/files/340055/original/file-20200605-176595-w8zwid.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2)

That must be quite an early picture - there's no sign of the quality coloured rubber bands.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 05, 2021, 08:02:32 PM
Quote from: kizzy on September 05, 2021, 07:14:07 PM
well, why were they on the bed.
Because he was considering wearing them to dinner but changed his mind?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 06, 2021, 12:27:36 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 06:57:29 PM
Can you please supply a full length picture of him wearing these trousers, thanks.  The point is more to do with why he would change out of them as soon as he returned to the apartment.

Why do you want a picture of Gerry in the beige trousers that were on the bed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 06, 2021, 12:41:25 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2021, 07:15:57 PM
Perhaps you could highlight the very distinctive buttons that were so noticeable in the dark  as the man was parading his daughter’s corpse through town?

These trousers fit that description.... and for the third time "parading" is the wrong word for the man that the Smith;s saw.....

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 06, 2021, 01:34:02 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 06, 2021, 12:41:25 AM
These trousers fit that description.... and for the third time "parading" is the wrong word for the man that the Smith;s saw.....

IMO it's Kate's beige fleece on the bed - the same fleece she was pictured in the following morning. The openings on the ends of the clothing pictured on the bed are far too narrow to be those on trousers.
https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/exterior-shots-of-gerry-and-kate-mccann-departing-the-news-footage/487715646?adppopup=true
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 06, 2021, 02:49:40 AM
Quote from: misty on September 06, 2021, 01:34:02 AM
IMO it's Kate's beige fleece on the bed - the same fleece she was pictured in the following morning. The openings on the ends of the clothing pictured on the bed are far too narrow to be those on trousers.
https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/exterior-shots-of-gerry-and-kate-mccann-departing-the-news-footage/487715646?adppopup=true

Yes, agreed could very well be.

Thanks for all those other images. There's some more of Gerry with his beige trousers on for VS.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2021, 07:15:13 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 06, 2021, 12:41:25 AM
These trousers fit that description.... and for the third time "parading" is the wrong word for the man that the Smith;s saw.....
Those are notfull length trousers IMO (see Misty’s link with video of Gerry walking across beach with Kate, him wearing same shirt).  So we need a pair of long khaki trousers with distinctive buttons please.   PS until the word “parading” is banned on this forum I shall continue to use it, thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 06, 2021, 01:02:18 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 06, 2021, 12:41:25 AM
These trousers fit that description.... and for the third time "parading" is the wrong word for the man that the Smith;s saw.....

Seems he had quite a few pair of beige trousers  the one you show do fit the description.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 06, 2021, 01:22:00 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 05, 2021, 08:02:32 PM
Because he was considering wearing them to dinner but changed his mind?

or maybe  he took them off scuffing them after kneeling on the floor. or maybe else where imo

In the Process, page 3287

Snippets from one of the statements given by José M B R, GNR Officer, with 21 years on the force, about the events of the night of the 3rd of May 2007.

“When she arrived near the GNR officers, she verified that Gerry, Madeleine’s father, was behind her, in the company of another individual whose identity she doesn’t remember. At that moment, Gerry placed both knees on the floor, hit the floor with both hands, too, placing himself like a praying arab,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2021, 01:33:24 PM
Quote from: kizzy on September 06, 2021, 01:02:18 PM
Seems he had quite a few pair of beige trousers  the one you show do fit the description.
No they don't IMO, unless Martin Smith described short trousers ending at the calf.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 06, 2021, 02:11:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2021, 01:33:24 PM
No they don't IMO, unless Martin Smith described short trousers ending at the calf.

Try looking at the picture billy put on previous page - do they look 3/4
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2021, 02:22:02 PM
Quote from: kizzy on September 06, 2021, 02:11:54 PM
Try looking at the picture billy put on previous page - do they look 3/4
Hard to tell, that's why I asked for a full length picture.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 06, 2021, 02:40:30 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2021, 02:22:02 PM
Hard to tell, that's why I asked for a full length picture.

I asked for a full length picture.

Who promoted you - why should I have to convince you with anything.

You make posts just like me with an opinion VS.

My opinion is he looks as if he is being interviewed on the pic Billy showed  - I hardly think he would be doing that in trouses half mast.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2021, 06:08:58 PM
Quote from: kizzy on September 06, 2021, 02:40:30 PM
I asked for a full length picture.

Who promoted you - why should I have to convince you with anything.

You make posts just like me with an opinion VS.

My opinion is he looks as if he is being interviewed on the pic Billy showed  - I hardly think he would be doing that in trouses half mast.
I beg your pardon?  Not sure why you have taken such umbrage at my post, I didn’t ask you to convince me of anything.  Also, I didn’t realise there was a law that said you couldn’t be interviewed in 3/4 length trousers. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 06, 2021, 07:57:01 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2021, 06:08:58 PM
I beg your pardon?  Not sure why you have taken such umbrage at my post, I didn’t ask you to convince me of anything.  Also, I didn’t realise there was a law that said you couldn’t be interviewed in 3/4 length trousers.


I didn’t realise there was a law that said you couldn’t be interviewed in 3/4 length trousers.


Well you don't know they was do you - but look very similar to those described by Smith IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 06, 2021, 08:10:23 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 06, 2021, 12:41:25 AM
These trousers fit that description.... and for the third time "parading" is the wrong word for the man that the Smith;s saw.....

Is there a date for this photo ?
Just wondering if these trousers were ever seen after Smithman statements became public knowledge.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2021, 08:20:41 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 06, 2021, 08:10:23 PM
Is there a date for this photo ?
Just wondering if these trousers were ever seen after Smithman statements became public knowledge.
What date was that then? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2021, 08:29:47 PM
Quote from: kizzy on September 06, 2021, 07:57:01 PM

I didn’t realise there was a law that said you couldn’t be interviewed in 3/4 length trousers.


Well you don't know they was do you - but look very similar to those described by Smith IMO
Martin Smith’s description

“He was wearing cream or beige-coloured cloth trousers in a classic cut”

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2021, 08:41:03 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2021, 08:29:47 PM
Martin Smith’s description

“He was wearing cream or beige-coloured cloth trousers in a classic cut”

Aoife only said 'possibly' with buttons.

But they agreed on the beige.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2021, 10:01:43 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2021, 08:41:03 PM
Aoife only said 'possibly' with buttons.

But they agreed on the beige.
And of course beige trousers in PdL were rare as hen’s teeth back in May 2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 07, 2021, 05:55:22 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2021, 10:01:43 PM
And of course beige trousers in PdL were rare as hen’s teeth back in May 2007.
What was even rarer was a child being carried fitting a description close to that of Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2021, 07:31:17 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 07, 2021, 05:55:22 AM
What was even rarer was a child being carried fitting a description close to that of Madeleine.
There were at least two of those that night.  Do you believe it was the same man and child?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2021, 07:40:46 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2021, 07:31:17 AM
There were at least two of those that night.  Do you believe it was the same man and child?

Jane Tanner only saw some legs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 07, 2021, 07:55:36 AM
Quote from: barrier on September 07, 2021, 05:55:22 AM
What was even rarer was a child being carried fitting a description close to that of Madeleine.

I thought the creche was full of little blonde girls
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2021, 08:02:59 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2021, 07:40:46 AM
Jane Tanner only saw some legs.
Belonging to a young female as confirmed by Totman.  So that’s at least two men in beige trousers spotted carrying young girls that night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2021, 08:06:33 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2021, 08:02:59 AM
Belonging to a young female as confirmed by Totman.  So that’s at least two men in beige trousers spotted carrying young girls that night.

Oh I see, young female legs is a description close to that of Madeleine.

My mistake.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 07, 2021, 08:29:47 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2021, 08:06:33 AM
Oh I see, young female legs is a description close to that of Madeleine.

My mistake.

Overwhelming evidence that CB is guilty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2021, 08:44:00 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2021, 08:06:33 AM
Oh I see, young female legs is a description close to that of Madeleine.

My mistake.
Don’t know what you’re on about.  We were discussing the prevalence of men in beige trousers in pdl
 that night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 07, 2021, 08:47:00 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2021, 08:35:17 AM
Christian Brueckner is not guilty.

I never said he was... You dont know he isnt so its clear you are prepared to post absolute rubbish
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2021, 08:48:44 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2021, 08:35:17 AM
Christian Brueckner is not guilty.
neither are the McCanns, now refute that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2021, 08:48:50 AM
Quote from: Davel on September 07, 2021, 08:47:00 AM
I never said he was... You dont know he isnt so its clear you are prepared to post absolute rubbish

I know he's innocent, because he hasn't been found guilty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2021, 08:52:57 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2021, 08:51:27 AM
if that was true the PJ would have charged them in 2007, they didn’t so there isn’t.

If there was overwhelming evidence against Brueckner he'd be charged, he hasn't, so there isn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2021, 08:54:00 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2021, 08:52:57 AM
If there was overwhelming evidence against Brueckner he'd be charged, he hasn't, so there isn't.
I didn’t say there was overwhelming evidence against Bruckner so your argument is fallacious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 07, 2021, 08:56:16 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2021, 08:52:57 AM
If there was overwhelming evidence against Brueckner he'd be charged, he hasn't, so there isn't.

You claimed he wasnt guilty... None of that proves hes not guilty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2021, 08:58:07 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2021, 08:54:00 AM
I didn’t say there was overwhelming evidence against Bruckner so your argument is fallacious.

No, Davel did.

Looking forward to the new topic 'The overwhelming evidence against Brueckner'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2021, 09:02:43 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2021, 08:58:07 AM
No, Davel did.

Looking forward to the new topic 'The overwhelming evidence against Brueckner'.
So you’re arguing with me about something I didn’t say.  That’s very mature I’m sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 07, 2021, 10:07:05 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2021, 08:58:07 AM
No, Davel did.

Looking forward to the new topic 'The overwhelming evidence against Brueckner'.

Why dont you start it... Im not interested in discussing it.. Afaic its 100 per cent fact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on September 07, 2021, 10:11:11 AM
Quote from: misty on September 06, 2021, 01:34:02 AM
IMO it's Kate's beige fleece on the bed - the same fleece she was pictured in the following morning. The openings on the ends of the clothing pictured on the bed are far too narrow to be those on trousers.
https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/exterior-shots-of-gerry-and-kate-mccann-departing-the-news-footage/487715646?adppopup=true


Well spotted misty,  I agree,  if you look closely you can see the sleeve.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 07, 2021, 12:57:43 PM
Quote from: Lace on September 07, 2021, 10:11:11 AM

Well spotted misty,  I agree,  if you look closely you can see the sleeve.

Therefore at some time after the crime scene photographs were taken and before the McCanns had been taken to Portimao to make statements ~ someone had access to the McCann apartment to pick up at least that item of clothing.

I would suggest that while they were at it they picked up a complete change of clothing for the parents and for the twins.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 08, 2021, 07:04:17 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 07, 2021, 08:56:16 AM
You claimed he wasnt guilty... None of that proves hes not guilty

You don’t have to prove someone is “not guilty”. You have to prove that they are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 08, 2021, 07:07:45 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 08, 2021, 07:04:17 PM
You don’t have to prove someone is “not guilty”. You have to prove that they are.

CB may well be guilty...so you cant claim he isnt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 08, 2021, 07:17:31 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 08, 2021, 07:07:45 PM
CB may well be guilty...so you cant claim he isnt.

I have concrete evidence he isn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 08, 2021, 08:16:17 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 08, 2021, 07:17:31 PM
I have concrete evidence he isn't.
Please contact The BKA and /or Fulscher with your concrete evidence and let’s put this chapter to bed once and for all then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 08, 2021, 08:21:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 08, 2021, 08:16:17 PM
Please contact The BKA and /or Fulscher with your concrete evidence and let’s put this chapter to bed once and for all then.

Fulscher has the evidence, he's saving it for when Brueckner is questioned.
Shouldn't be much longer now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 08, 2021, 08:35:31 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 08, 2021, 08:21:14 PM
Fulscher has the evidence, he's saving it for when Brueckner is questioned.
Shouldn't be much longer now.
Good job.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 08, 2021, 11:25:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 08, 2021, 07:07:45 PM
CB may well be guilty...so you cant claim he isnt.

I didn't claim anything about his guilt. Though it is undeniable that he is presumed innocent at this moment in time..

Equally, then, by your logic you can not claim the McCann's are not guilty.

The burden of proof rests with the prosecution. Additionally, it terms of legal methodology it's very hard to prove something did not happen as there is no evidence for something not happening. You can only prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that something did happen based on the evidence created by the execution of the event that happened.

I was making a legalistic point... you do not have to prove someone is not guilty in law (at least that's the case in the UK).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 09, 2021, 03:35:44 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 08, 2021, 11:25:28 PM
I didn't claim anything about his guilt. Though it is undeniable that he is presumed innocent at this moment in time..

Equally, then, by your logic you can not claim the McCann's are not guilty.

The burden of proof rests with the prosecution. Additionally, it terms of legal methodology it's very hard to prove something did not happen as there is no evidence for something not happening. You can only prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that something did happen based on the evidence created by the execution of the event that happened.

I was making a legalistic point... you do not have to prove someone is not guilty in law (at least that's the case in the UK).
You need to see my post in context.... Spam claims CB is not guilty..if you claim something you need to prove it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 09, 2021, 04:27:06 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 08, 2021, 11:25:28 PM
I didn't claim anything about his guilt. Though it is undeniable that he is presumed innocent at this moment in time..

Equally, then, by your logic you can not claim the McCann's are not guilty.

The burden of proof rests with the prosecution. Additionally, it terms of legal methodology it's very hard to prove something did not happen as there is no evidence for something not happening. You can only prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that something did happen based on the evidence created by the execution of the event that happened.

I was making a legalistic point... you do not have to prove someone is not guilty in law (at least that's the case in the UK).

More Semantics.  You are going to have to up your game.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 09, 2021, 05:17:42 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 08, 2021, 11:25:28 PM
I didn't claim anything about his guilt. Though it is undeniable that he is presumed innocent at this moment in time..

Equally, then, by your logic you can not claim the McCann's are not guilty.

The burden of proof rests with the prosecution. Additionally, it terms of legal methodology it's very hard to prove something did not happen as there is no evidence for something not happening. You can only prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that something did happen based on the evidence created by the execution of the event that happened.

I was making a legalistic point... you do not have to prove someone is not guilty in law (at least that's the case in the UK).

We can say the Mccanns are innocent on the balance of probabilities.... Or even beyond reasonable  doubt.. The same cant be said for CB
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 09, 2021, 09:40:37 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 09, 2021, 04:27:06 PM
More Semantics.  You are going to have to up your game.

It's not a question of semantics. It's a question of law. You do not prove innocence in law. Innocence is presumed. You prove guilt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 09, 2021, 09:47:36 PM
Quote from: Davel on September 09, 2021, 05:17:42 PM
We can say the Mccanns are innocent on the balance of probabilities.... Or even beyond reasonable  doubt.. The same cant be said for CB

Dave you know too well that no-one sets out to prove innocence in law.... The burden of proof you refer to is with regards to proving guilt. Innocence is presumed and a jury decides only if you are guilty or not guilty. This is not semantics but central to our concept of justice.

I disagree that there is any more evidence against CB then there is against the parents of Madeleine McCann, in my own opinion.

From what evidence is known in the public domain I do not believe either would be convicted on murder charges (in CB's case) or negligence and concealment of a corpse in the parents case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 09, 2021, 09:59:55 PM
IMO Martin Ney must be due in court very soon as there have been a few media reports about him during the last couple of days. He was extradited from Germany to France at the end of Jan 2021 for a period of 8 months.

https://www.rtl.fr/actu/justice-faits-divers/meurtre-de-jonathan-coulom-les-derniers-secrets-de-martin-ney-7900068783
https://nyheder.tv2.dk/2021-09-09-hans-bror-var-maskemandens-offer-og-et-spoergsmaal-har-plaget-ham-i-aarevis
https://nyheder.tv2.dk/2021-09-09-den-danske-mordgaade-blev-foerst-loest-da-masken-blev-hevet-af-en-af-tysklands-vaerste
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 09, 2021, 10:46:52 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 09, 2021, 09:47:36 PM
Dave you know too well that no-one sets out to prove innocence in law.... The burden of proof you refer to is with regards to proving guilt. Innocence is presumed and a jury decides only if you are guilty or not guilty. This is not semantics but central to our concept of justice.

I disagree that there is any more evidence against CB then there is against the parents of Madeleine McCann, in my own opinion.

From what evidence is known in the public domain I do not believe either would be convicted on murder charges (in CB's case) or negligence and concealment of a corpse in the parents case.

Are you not aware the archiving despatch said by not attending the recon the mccanns lost their chance to prove their innocence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 14, 2021, 06:48:32 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on September 09, 2021, 09:40:37 PM
It's not a question of semantics. It's a question of law. You do not prove innocence in law. Innocence is presumed. You prove guilt.

Shrodinger's Brueckner.

Simultaneously innocent & guilty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 14, 2021, 07:19:17 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 14, 2021, 06:48:32 AM
Shrodinger's Brueckner.

Simultaneously innocent & guilty.
What are the McCanns then in your view? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 14, 2021, 08:40:11 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 14, 2021, 07:19:17 AM
What are the McCanns then in your view?

Not Suspects.

Which is of course, absolute proof of absolute innocence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 14, 2021, 08:50:26 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 14, 2021, 08:40:11 AM
Not Suspects.

Which is of course, absolute proof of absolute innocence.
Bruckner is the prime suspect though, so just a little less innocent than the McCanns  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 14, 2021, 11:01:53 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 14, 2021, 08:50:26 AM
Bruckner is the prime suspect though, so just a little less innocent than the McCanns  8(0(*

Yes, maybe that's how it all works. The McCanns are more innocent than Brueckner, but by logical extension, less innocent than myself, having never been a suspect at all.
Unless of course I am a suspect & didn't know it.

Hmmm....Could Brueckner be more innocent today than yesterday, but not half as much as tomorrow?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 14, 2021, 11:08:22 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 14, 2021, 11:01:53 AM
Yes, maybe that's how it all works. The McCanns are more innocent than Brueckner, but by logical extension, less innocent than myself, having never been a suspect at all.
Unless of course I am a suspect & didn't know it.

Hmmm....Could Brueckner be more innocent today than yesterday, but not half as much as tomorrow?

Brueckner will be as innocent or as guilty as the evidence says he is.  The Germans have enough to convince them to class him as the prime suspect in Madeleine's disappearance;  so let's just wait and see where that takes us, or not as the case may be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 14, 2021, 11:35:14 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 14, 2021, 11:01:53 AM
Yes, maybe that's how it all works. The McCanns are more innocent than Brueckner, but by logical extension, less innocent than myself, having never been a suspect at all.
Unless of course I am a suspect & didn't know it.

Hmmm....Could Brueckner be more innocent today than yesterday, but not half as much as tomorrow?
Personally I think you're very suspect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 14, 2021, 06:22:31 PM
Just sharing. As you (may) know, Danie Krugel’s home is a few km’s from mine. On the school run this afternoon, his home was on fire with two fire engines and -fighters on site.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 14, 2021, 09:28:10 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 14, 2021, 06:22:31 PM
Just sharing. As you (may) know, Danie Krugel’s home is a few km’s from mine. On the school run this afternoon, his home was on fire with two fire engines and -fighters on site.

Hope all is well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 14, 2021, 09:35:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 14, 2021, 09:28:10 PM
Hope all is well.
I think so, Brietta. Seems to be a veldfire driven by wind.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 14, 2021, 09:58:29 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 14, 2021, 09:35:36 PM
I think so, Brietta. Seems to be a veldfire driven by wind.

Very dangerous.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on September 14, 2021, 10:23:25 PM
https://www.ouest-france.fr/pays-de-la-loire/nantes-44000/loire-atlantique-affaire-jonathan-pas-d-aveux-mais-des-indices-1402ea30-1562-11ec-8099-22348eda56be

Martin Ney will be returned to Germany within the next 8 days as the extradition period expires. He has not been tried but the French investigation into him/murder of Coulom will continue.
IMO Ney's alleged confessions to his cellmate Mario T may be extremely important in relation to the case against Brueckner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 15, 2021, 07:27:29 PM
Quote from: misty on September 14, 2021, 10:23:25 PM
https://www.ouest-france.fr/pays-de-la-loire/nantes-44000/loire-atlantique-affaire-jonathan-pas-d-aveux-mais-des-indices-1402ea30-1562-11ec-8099-22348eda56be

Martin Ney will be returned to Germany within the next 8 days as the extradition period expires. He has not been tried but the French investigation into him/murder of Coulom will continue.
IMO Ney's alleged confessions to his cellmate Mario T may be extremely important in relation to the case against Brueckner.
Thank you for sharing the link, Misty. I believe German authorities are awaiting Ney’s extradition to Germany in order to move forward their case re. Brückner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 15, 2021, 07:31:20 PM
Quote from: Anthro on September 15, 2021, 07:27:29 PM
Thank you for sharing the link, Misty. I believe German authorities are awaiting Ney’s extradition to Germany in order to move forward their case re. Brückner.

Ney is being returned to Germany, not extradited.
I'm sure they wouldn't even have sent him to France if they had a strong case of their own.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on September 15, 2021, 07:42:41 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 15, 2021, 07:31:20 PM
Ney is being returned to Germany, not extradited.
I'm sure they wouldn't even have sent him to France if they had a strong case of their own.
My bad. Hopefully, within context, you do get what I’m saying (?)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 20, 2021, 09:53:38 AM
Please share this link on all your social media.

https://www.cumnockchronicle.com/news/19591223.new-cumnock-missing-person-carson-shepherd-search-continues/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 20, 2021, 10:34:23 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 20, 2021, 09:53:38 AM
Please share this link on all your social media.

https://www.cumnockchronicle.com/news/19591223.new-cumnock-missing-person-carson-shepherd-search-continues/

He's been found.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 20, 2021, 11:25:42 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 20, 2021, 10:34:23 AM
He's been found.

That’s great news. Thanks WS.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 21, 2021, 08:49:21 AM
I read this morning that he was found in his grandmother's loft, with whom he had been staying.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 21, 2021, 11:00:14 AM
Quote from: jassi on September 21, 2021, 08:49:21 AM
I read this morning that he was found in his grandmother's loft, with whom he had been staying.

I saw that. It must have been a terrible time for his family.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 22, 2021, 09:37:32 AM
Every day another story of violence against women and children by men


https://news.sky.com/story/killamarsh-man-31-arrested-after-deaths-of-four-people-was-taken-to-hospital-with-self-inflicted-injuries-12413654

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16179930/woman-found-greenwich-pictured-murder-probe-continues/

What is wrong with these men?  Why do they feel they have the right to terminate the lives of those who won’t give them what they want?  Or perhaps they just enjoy the feeling of power over others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 22, 2021, 11:18:02 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 22, 2021, 09:37:32 AM
Every day another story of violence against women and children by men


https://news.sky.com/story/killamarsh-man-31-arrested-after-deaths-of-four-people-was-taken-to-hospital-with-self-inflicted-injuries-12413654

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16179930/woman-found-greenwich-pictured-murder-probe-continues/

What is wrong with these men?  Why do they feel they have the right to terminate the lives of those who won’t give them what they want?  Or perhaps they just enjoy the feeling of power over others.

It's something that's always happened. On the whole, women and children do have more power and freedom today than ever before. They are no longer seen a man's property. In my young days I had to produce a letter of permission from my husband to put our children on my passport. I wasn't allowed to sign a credit or loan agreement and if we were caught without a TV licence the head of the household (my husband) was blamed, not me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 22, 2021, 04:59:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 22, 2021, 11:18:02 AM
It's something that's always happened. On the whole, women and children do have more power and freedom today than ever before. They are no longer seen a man's property. In my young days I had to produce a letter of permission from my husband to put our children on my passport. I wasn't allowed to sign a credit or loan agreement and if we were caught without a TV licence the head of the household (my husband) was blamed, not me.
Just because it’s always happened doesn’t mean it always should or that we should just put up with it. IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 06:06:23 PM

Women on average live longer than men.

Men do more difficult jobs & are more likely to die in the workplace or suffer industrial illness.

Men were sent to war whilst women stayed home.

Until recently women got to retire sooner than men.

Women can be financially supported by men without shame.

Women have better support systems in society, particularly around homelessness, despite there being more homeless men.

Women can make a well paid career from just opening their legs.

There are multiple examples of how a woman's lot in life is better & easier than a man's, so I'm sorry that women often get murder by men but it seems fair to me on balance, given how much tougher men have it in life.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 22, 2021, 06:20:23 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 06:06:23 PM
Women on average live longer than men.

Men do more difficult jobs & are more likely to die in the workplace or suffer industrial illness.

Men were sent to war whilst women stayed home.

Until recently women got to retire sooner than men.

Women can be financially supported by men without shame.

Women have better support systems in society, particularly around homelessness, despite there being more homeless men.

Women can make a well paid career from just opening their legs.

There are multiple examples of how a woman's lot in life is better & easier than a man's, so I'm sorry that women often get murder by men but it seems fair to me on balance, given how much tougher men have it in life.
I was 100% certain you would troll my post so thanks for not disappointing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 06:44:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 22, 2021, 06:20:23 PM
I was 100% certain you would troll my post so thanks for not disappointing.

I forgot to mention the Titanic.

'Women & children first'

Men got to drown because they were men whilst the women & children sailed off into the sunset.

A disgusting example of age discrimination & misandry imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 22, 2021, 07:01:33 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 06:06:23 PM
Women on average live longer than men.

Men do more difficult jobs & are more likely to die in the workplace or suffer industrial illness.

Men were sent to war whilst women stayed home.

Until recently women got to retire sooner than men.

Women can be financially supported by men without shame.

Women have better support systems in society, particularly around homelessness, despite there being more homeless men.

Women can make a well paid career from just opening their legs.

There are multiple examples of how a woman's lot in life is better & easier than a man's, so I'm sorry that women often get murder by men but it seems fair to me on balance, given how much tougher men have it in life.

I must admit I prefer being a woman.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 07:33:01 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 22, 2021, 07:01:33 PM
I must admit I prefer being a woman.

I don't blame you.

I have this discussion with a female friend of mine of around the same age & she doesn't disagree with me either.

149 women were killed by 147 men in the UK in 2018

https://www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/femicide-census-reveals-half-of-uk-women-killed-by-men-die-at-hands-of-partner-or-ex/

Thankfully it's a very small number, but the total number of murders that year was 716.

So that's a lot of men getting murdered.

Nope, I'm sorry the women folk, enjoy yourselves because men are the ones who have it worse in society, it's no wonder they become murderers more frequently, what with being the victims of discrimination & inequality.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on September 22, 2021, 07:56:06 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 07:33:01 PM
I don't blame you.

I have this discussion with a female friend of mine of around the same age & she doesn't disagree with me either.

149 women were killed by 147 men in the UK in 2018

https://www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/femicide-census-reveals-half-of-uk-women-killed-by-men-die-at-hands-of-partner-or-ex/

Thankfully it's a very small number, but the total number of murders that year was 716.

So that's a lot of men getting murdered.

Nope, I'm sorry the women folk, enjoy yourselves because men are the ones who have it worse in society, it's no wonder they become murderers more frequently, what with being the victims of discrimination & inequality.

Men are more likely to enter into a situation where the outcome is murder. Women tend to be the victims as they are generally non combative.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 08:12:02 PM
Quote from: Admin on September 22, 2021, 07:56:06 PM
Men are more likely to enter into a situation where the outcome is murder. Women tend to be the victims as they are generally non combative.

I know if I was a woman I would feel unsafe walking the streets at night, I'd definitely carry a rape alarm & I'd also be wary of the type of men I might socialise with & where.

But those are small sacrifices when being paid by the state to have children & getting cheaper car insurance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 22, 2021, 08:15:12 PM
Quote from: Admin on September 22, 2021, 07:56:06 PM
Men are more likely to enter into a situation where the outcome is murder. Women tend to be the victims as they are generally non combative.

I once read that victims are chosen. The idea was that some women are more likely to be easy to dominate and they give off some kind of signal. Maybe body language? I took to stomping around confidently if I was out late at night. @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 22, 2021, 08:19:55 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 08:12:02 PM
I know if I was a woman I would feel unsafe walking the streets at night, I'd definitely carry a rape alarm & I'd also be wary of the type of men I might socialise with & where.

But those are small sacrifices when being paid by the state to have children & getting cheaper car insurance.

It becomes a habit to think about safety because it's too late if you get it wrong. In theory women have the right to go where they want, wear what they want and get as drunk as they like. In the real world they need to take steps to keep themselves safe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 08:43:25 PM

We're never going to end male violence against women, it's impossible, unless we segregate all the men & women.

But then the women would probably end up being more violent towards each other, or I could be wrong & they might live in a lesbianic utopia.

Personally I'm thankful the number of women murdered a week in this country is only around 3 & that we don't live somewhere like South Africa where it's 7.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 09:05:00 PM

And it should be noted that only 13% of female murder victims in 2020 were killed by strangers.

So generally I think we are a safe country, but of course it could always be safer.

It's domestic violence which is the greatest problem & there's some personal responsibility some women need to take there too.

The moment a man threatens or assaults a woman they should be getting the hell away from them but all too often women stay in abusive relationships for various different reasons & personally were I a woman that's something I simply wouldn't do.

As a man if I had a 'friend' who threatened or assaulted me, they would be cast out of my life immediately, I wouldn't be sticking around hoping it won't happen again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 22, 2021, 09:28:15 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 22, 2021, 08:15:12 PM
I once read that victims are chosen. The idea was that some women are more likely to be easy to dominate and they give off some kind of signal. Maybe body language? I took to stomping around confidently if I was out late at night. @)(++(*
Women are easier to dominate because generally they are not as physically strong as men, it’s nothing to do with giving off a signal.  Stomping around confidently at night does not protect you from being raped or murdered by someone who has decided they want to murder you.  In any case most female victims are not murdered by strangers on the streets at night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 22, 2021, 09:31:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 22, 2021, 07:01:33 PM
I must admit I prefer being a woman.
Have you ever lived life as a man?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 09:39:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 22, 2021, 09:31:29 PM
Have you ever lived life as a man?

I did ponder that as well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 22, 2021, 09:47:25 PM
Quote from: Admin on September 22, 2021, 07:56:06 PM
Men are more likely to enter into a situation where the outcome is murder. Women tend to be the victims as they are generally non combative.

And you should be ashamed of yourself for even entering this discussion,  no matter who.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 09:51:52 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 22, 2021, 09:47:25 PM
And you should be ashamed of yourself for even entering this discussion,  no matter who.

It seems like a sensible & reasoned discussion to me.

No one is disagreeing that violence against women is bad, but on balance, men have it worse in life in general.

I forgot to mention the suicide rate, men top themselves at 3 times the rate of women.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 22, 2021, 10:14:04 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 22, 2021, 09:31:29 PM
Have you ever lived life as a man?

No, I've just known, married, raised and observed them for 77 years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 22, 2021, 10:24:27 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 09:51:52 PM
It seems like a sensible & reasoned discussion to me.

No one is disagreeing that violence against women is bad, but on balance, men have it worse in life in general.

I forgot to mention the suicide rate, men top themselves at 3 times the rate of women.
I don’t agree that men have it worse in life.  Men still control the world and earn the most money.  They are taken more seriously than women, are stronger, age better, remain fertile longer, don’t have blood gushing out of their privates on a monthly basis often with crippling side effects, don’t have to endure the agony of childbirth or the mind-numbing boredom of raising babies, can pee standing up and don’t have to queue for ages for the loo, suffer less depression and domestic violence than women, medicine, machinery, architecture, everything is created and designed around the typical male rather than the typical female, there are dozens more ways in which men have it better than women and still they hate and despise women and moan about how unfairly they are treated by women and society in general.  Men need to grow up and get a grip. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 22, 2021, 10:30:47 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 09:05:00 PM
And it should be noted that only 13% of female murder victims in 2020 were killed by strangers.

So generally I think we are a safe country, but of course it could always be safer.

It's domestic violence which is the greatest problem & there's some personal responsibility some women need to take there too.

The moment a man threatens or assaults a woman they should be getting the hell away from them but all too often women stay in abusive relationships for various different reasons & personally were I a woman that's something I simply wouldn't do.

As a man if I had a 'friend' who threatened or assaulted me, they would be cast out of my life immediately, I wouldn't be sticking around hoping it won't happen again.
A close family member finally plucked up the courage to leave her bully of a husband earlier this year.  This is a man who has boasted of killing people in Afghanistan and who keeps guns in the house.  He has never threatened her life before but has bullied her verbally and occasionally physically  but since she left him he has become quite unhinged and she is now even more fearful that he will attack her, or possibly injure of kill her.   His male pride has been injured and this has made him much more of a threat than ever before.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 22, 2021, 10:33:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 22, 2021, 10:14:04 PM
No, I've just known, married, raised and observed them for 77 years.
And do you think these men would have preferred to have been women? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 10:38:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 22, 2021, 10:24:27 PM
I don’t agree that men have it worse in life.  Men still control the world and earn the most money.  They are taken more seriously than women, are stronger, age better, remain fertile longer, don’t have blood gushing out of their privates on a monthly basis often with crippling side effects, don’t have to endure the agony of childbirth or the mind-numbing boredom of raising babies, can pee standing up and don’t have to queue for ages for the loo, suffer less depression and domestic violence than women, medicine, machinery, architecture, everything is created and designed around the typical male rather than the typical female, there are dozens more ways in which men have it better than women and still they hate and despise women and moan about how unfairly they are treated by women and society in general.  Men need to grow up and get a grip.

It is illegal to pay a woman less than a man for the same job.

The gender wage gap is a myth, the disparity exists because men on the whole do more dangerous or demanding & better paid jobs than women who are more likely to be happy to sit on the till at Waitrose & take time off to be with their families, rather than working longer hours driving heavy goods vehicles around the country or keeping the electricity supply running.

Women report more depression, boo hoo, men obviously suffer more since they kill themselves at 3 times the rate.

Women get to sit down when they pee, which is more comfortable than standing imo.

I disagree that medicine or machinery & architecture are geared towards men.

How are the washing machine, ironing board, kitchen or paracetamol sexist?

Nope I'm sorry, when the number of troops killed in military service is equally split between men & women then get back to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 22, 2021, 10:49:46 PM

I will be deleting any more of this rubbish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 22, 2021, 10:53:07 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 10:38:39 PM
It is illegal to pay a woman less than a man for the same job.

The gender wage gap is a myth, the disparity exists because men on the whole do more dangerous or demanding & better paid jobs than women who are more likely to be happy to sit on the till at Waitrose & take time off to be with their families, rather than working longer hours driving heavy goods vehicles around the country or keeping the electricity supply running.

Women report more depression, boo hoo, men obviously suffer more since they kill themselves at 3 times the rate.

Women get to sit down when they pee, which is more comfortable than standing imo.

I disagree that medicine or machinery & architecture are geared towards men.

How are the washing machine, ironing board, kitchen or paracetamol sexist?

Nope I'm sorry, when the number of troops killed in military service is equally split between men & women then get back to me.
It obviously wasn’t illegal to pay a woman less than a man in the 90s and 2000s when I was paid significantly less than men with the same job title as me.  And yes, as women are generally  the ones that give birth to and care for the next generstion we’re the ones that have to put our careers on hold or give them up all together, meaning we lose out financially in terms of wages, savings and pensions.  Not everyone who commits suicide does so because of depression and not all depressed people commit suicide. 
You can disagree all you like about medicine, machinery etc being designed around men but it is - read this book https://www.waterstones.com/book/invisible-women/caroline-criado-perez/9781784706289
If men are stupid enough to start and fight wars then they shouldn’t be surprised if more men than women are killed in action.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 22, 2021, 11:11:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 22, 2021, 10:33:12 PM
And do you think these men would have preferred to have been women?

I have no idea.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 11:17:31 PM
Caroline Carido Perez is a wealthy, educated elite, I'm sure she knows all about female suffering.
I won't be reading her man hating book any time soon.
Women have a choice, they don't have to have children & could quite easily achieve the same as men if they put career before reproduction.
Nope, I'm sorry, women could do just as much as men, but they don't want to, they want their own version of equality, which does'nt involve them working in dangerous industry like coal, steel, gas, construction, mechanics or being stuck out at sea trawling for fish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 11:23:23 PM

Why aren't there more Bin Women?
Surely this isn't because women don't want to get covered in shit & has deeper roots founded in societal misogyny & the patriarchy within the refuse collection industry.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 07:15:16 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 22, 2021, 11:11:14 PM
I have no idea.
I teckon I do, but why don’t you ask them?  I’ve never met a man who would have preferred to be a woman (excluding those with gender dysmorphia).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 07:18:33 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 11:17:31 PM
Caroline Carido Perez is a wealthy, educated elite, I'm sure she knows all about female suffering.
I won't be reading her man hating book any time soon.
Women have a choice, they don't have to have children & could quite easily achieve the same as men if they put career before reproduction.
Nope, I'm sorry, women could do just as much as men, but they don't want to, they want their own version of equality, which does'nt involve them working in dangerous industry like coal, steel, gas, construction, mechanics or being stuck out at sea trawling for fish.
Stay ignorant then, your choice.  If all women chose career over children the human race would be finished in under 100 years.  Instead women make massive sacrifices on a personal, professional and physical level for the sake of MANkind.  A bit more gratitude from men wouldn’t go amiss, but no, instead we get beaten up, raped, abused and murdered.  Thanks guys.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 07:23:08 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 22, 2021, 11:23:23 PM
Why aren't there more Bin Women?
Surely this isn't because women don't want to get covered in shit & has deeper roots founded in societal misogyny & the patriarchy within the refuse collection industry.
Women get covered in shit in other jobs - social care and nursing to name but two, and I’m talking literal shit here. Being a bin man requires physical strength, so more suited to physically stronger humans. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 07:35:41 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 07:18:33 AM
Stay ignorant then, your choice.  If all women chose career over children the human race would be finished in under 100 years.  Instead women make massive sacrifices on a personal, professional and physical level for the sake of MANkind.  A bit more gratitude from men wouldn’t go amiss, but no, instead we get beaten up, raped, abused and murdered.  Thanks guys.

Women wouldn't be able to reproduce without men & the planet is massively overpopulated already anyway.

There are plenty of children requiring adoption before a woman chooses to give birth to children of their own.

"The UK has a constant shortage of foster carers and adoptive parents and is failing to meet the needs of thousands of children whose birth families are unable to bring them up."

Yes, it's dreadful that women get abused raped & murdered by men, but in western societies that amount is significantly lower than it is in the third world. Men are murdered by men much more frequently than men murder women.

Men contribute significantly more in income tax every year than women, yet women get to receive the same rate of state pension & benefits as men.

How is that even fair?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 07:39:49 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 07:23:08 AM
Women get covered in shit in other jobs - social care and nursing to name but two, and I’m talking literal shit here. Being a bin man requires physical strength, so more suited to physically stronger humans.

Yes, there's a difference between the sexes, so the push for equality is unrealistic & if anything harmful to women, because we simply aren't the same.

Seriously, until I see women dying in the workplace at the same rate as men I think the women folk should pipe down a bit, be happy with their lot, and carry a rape alarm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 07:58:07 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 07:35:41 AM
Women wouldn't be able to reproduce without men & the planet is massively overpopulated already anyway.

There are plenty of children requiring adoption before a woman chooses to give birth to children of their own.

"The UK has a constant shortage of foster carers and adoptive parents and is failing to meet the needs of thousands of children whose birth families are unable to bring them up."

Yes, it's dreadful that women get abused raped & murdered by men, but in western societies that amount is significantly lower than it is in the third world. Men are murdered by men much more frequently than men murder women.

Men contribute significantly more in income tax every year than women, yet women get to receive the same rate of state pension & benefits as men.

How is that even fair?
Because men earn a lot more over their lifetimes and women do years of unpaid labour such as housekeeping and child-rearing, that’s how it’s even fair.  I’m glad you reminded us that this argument is very western centric and that globally there are millions of women suffering on a daily basis thanks to patriarchal opression and attitudes.  So yes, men still rule the world, and just because they kill more men than women it’s not really a valid reason for women not to highlight the issues of rape, domestic abuse and murder we face at the hands of men worldwide. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 08:00:00 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 07:39:49 AM
Yes, there's a difference between the sexes, so the push for equality is unrealistic & if anything harmful to women, because we simply aren't the same.

Seriously, until I see women dying in the workplace at the same rate as men I think the women folk should pipe down a bit, be happy with their lot, and carry a rape alarm.
Likewise, until I see a lot more men being raped and murdered by women I think they should pipe down and stop being such misogynistic dickheads.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 23, 2021, 08:48:28 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 07:18:33 AM
Stay ignorant then, your choice.  If all women chose career over children the human race would be finished in under 100 years.  Instead women make massive sacrifices on a personal, professional and physical level for the sake of MANkind.  A bit more gratitude from men wouldn’t go amiss, but no, instead we get beaten up, raped, abused and murdered.  Thanks guys.

You make it sound simple, but it's not. I don't feel like I made massive sacrifices for MANkind by having children and staying home to raise them for the first five years of their lives. I saw myself as an equal partner, not a victim. I didn't find it boring to be at home with my babies I felt privileged to care for those I loved. There are many honourable men who respect women and wouldn't dream of treating them badly. My husband was my rock and my best friend and I was his. We had our ups and downs, but we were a team. I enjoy men's company more than women's too. I think on the whole they are more straightforward, funnier, less bitchy and less self-obsessed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 09:02:42 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 23, 2021, 08:48:28 AM
You make it sound simple, but it's not. I don't feel like I made massive sacrifices for MANkind by having children and staying home to raise them for the first five years of their lives. I saw myself as an equal partner, not a victim. I didn't find it boring to be at home with my babies I felt privileged to care for those I loved. There are many honourable men who respect women and wouldn't dream of treating them badly. My husband was my rock and my best friend and I was his. We had our ups and downs, but we were a team. I enjoy men's company more than women's too. I think on the whole they are more straightforward, funnier, less bitchy and less self-obsessed.
That’s YOUR experience, it doesn’t mean ALL women share your experience.  MY experience is different.  IMO Western women DO make personal sacrifices to raise children and keep house, especially highly educated professional women who put their careers on hold, or are forced to take a cut in hours or job share for a variety of reasons, who support their husbands by uprooting their own lives to move where their jobs take them etc.  I like men too, prefer their company too even, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t a massive problem in this country with domestic violence against women, and as we have seen this year women are still not completely safe from attack by random male strangers who seem to think that they are there simply to be used, discarded and destroyed.  Men do not have to worry about this, and whilst some men are also victims of domestic violence it’s nothing like the scale of domestic violence against women.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 09:31:30 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 09:02:42 AM
That’s YOUR experience, it doesn’t mean ALL women share your experience.  MY experience is different.  IMO Western women DO make personal sacrifices to raise children and keep house, especially highly educated professional women who put their careers on hold, or are forced to take a cut in hours or job share for a variety of reasons, who support their husbands by uprooting their own lives to move where their jobs take them etc.  I like men too, prefer their company too even, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t a massive problem in this country with domestic violence against women, and as we have seen this year women are still not completely safe from attack by random male strangers who seem to think that they are there simply to be used, discarded and destroyed.  Men do not have to worry about this, and whilst some men are also victims of domestic violence it’s nothing like the scale of domestic violence against women.

The number of men murdered by strangers every year is considerably higher than that of women.

Plus the majority of domestic violence against women isn't being carried out by wealthy educated oxford grads.

Funnily enough it's poor women who are abused the most & are the ones irresponsibly plopping out the most kids (even though they can't actually afford them), partly because they are uneducated & because they often make very bad decisions when selecting partners imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 09:33:35 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 07:58:07 AM
Because men earn a lot more over their lifetimes and women do years of unpaid labour such as housekeeping and child-rearing, that’s how it’s even fair.  I’m glad you reminded us that this argument is very western centric and that globally there are millions of women suffering on a daily basis thanks to patriarchal opression and attitudes.  So yes, men still rule the world, and just because they kill more men than women it’s not really a valid reason for women not to highlight the issues of rape, domestic abuse and murder we face at the hands of men worldwide.

Go protest for womens rights in Afghanistan & you might realise how lucky you are to live in such decent country.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 23, 2021, 09:56:04 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 09:31:30 AM
The number of men murdered by strangers every year is considerably higher than that of women.

Plus the majority of domestic violence against women isn't being carried out by wealthy educated oxford grads.

Funnily enough it's poor women who are abused the most & are the ones irresponsibly plopping out the most kids (even though they can't actually afford them), partly because they are uneducated & because they often make very bad decisions when selecting partners imo.

Hah, I don't think that's restricted to  poor or poorly educated people.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:11:21 AM

In 2018.

2 women were killed on their first contact with a sexually motivated killer.

So the chances of being raped & murdered by a complete stranger in 2018 were only 1 in about 17 million.

The odds of matching 5 numbers plus the bonus ball & pocketing a million pounds were actually better than that at 1 in 7.5 million.


102 femicides (68%) took place in the woman’s house – which may (35%) or may not (33%) have been shared with the perpetrator

(Women in the UK are safer walking the streets than in their own home.)

52% of perpetrators had previous histories of violence against the victim or other women.

3 men had previously killed a woman.

So either these women had no idea their chosen partner had a history of violence against women or they did know but decided they loved the man so much for some reason that they were willing to be knocked about & stay & risk getting murdered.

I remember an amusing quote from The Royle Family, where the old grandmother was talking about a female friend of hers, how she married a joiner, "he knocked her about a bit but they had a lovely house".
.............

Domestic violence is wrong, I'm not disputing that, but so is choosing violent partners & staying with them when they abuse you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:28:38 AM

Maybe I have a different view because my mother & father worked hard, didn't abuse each other at all & stayed together until death. 

Perhaps as a result of my reasonably decent upbringing I'm not a total asshole to women & can't understand the choices some people make in partners.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 23, 2021, 10:38:51 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 09:02:42 AM
That’s YOUR experience, it doesn’t mean ALL women share your experience.  MY experience is different.  IMO Western women DO make personal sacrifices to raise children and keep house, especially highly educated professional women who put their careers on hold, or are forced to take a cut in hours or job share for a variety of reasons, who support their husbands by uprooting their own lives to move where their jobs take them etc.  I like men too, prefer their company too even, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t a massive problem in this country with domestic violence against women, and as we have seen this year women are still not completely safe from attack by random male strangers who seem to think that they are there simply to be used, discarded and destroyed.  Men do not have to worry about this, and whilst some men are also victims of domestic violence it’s nothing like the scale of domestic violence against women.

You can't use your personal experiences to judge all men. There are some women (and men) I might want to punch if I had to live with them. Domestic violence isn't always about a weak woman cowering in fear from a violent man. Sometimes it's about a man being hounded and criticised until he loses control. It's not all about one sex preying on another, it's much more complicated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:50:26 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 23, 2021, 10:38:51 AM
You can't use your personal experiences to judge all men. There are some women (and men) I might want to punch if I had to live with them. Domestic violence isn't always about a weak woman cowering in fear from a violent man. Sometimes it's about a man being hounded and criticised until he loses control. It's not all about one sex preying on another, it's much more complicated.

But the issue is simplified into men are abusing women, without any insight into the social & economic factors involved.

We live in the age of irresponsibility, where pointing out that some women are making poor choices is 'victim blaming'.  It isn't imo, it's common sense.

If I came to your house for tea & you gave me a black eye I would report you to the police, seek to get an injunction & we would not be meeting for tea again.

In some cases undoubtedly women who are assaulted, threatened by the men in their lives are not then going on to make sensible decisions in the aftermath.

Men need to be educated not to harm women, but equally some women need to be educated in not accepting harm from men.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 23, 2021, 11:16:24 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:50:26 AM
But the issue is simplified into men are abusing women, without any insight into the social & economic factors involved.

We live in the age of irresponsibility, where pointing out that some women are making poor choices is 'victim blaming'.  It isn't imo, it's common sense.

If I came to your house for tea & you gave me a black eye I would report you to the police, seek to get an injunction & we would not be meeting for tea again.

In some cases undoubtedly women who are assaulted, threatened by the men in their lives are not then going on to make sensible decisions in the aftermath.

Men need to be educated not to harm women, but equally some women need to be educated in not accepting harm from men.

I think it goes further than that.
Men are often violent towards other men as well - think road rage and stabbings.
For a certain type of man violence is second nature and I attribute this largely  to poor education and poor role models in the home.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 11:27:48 AM
Quote from: jassi on September 23, 2021, 11:16:24 AM
I think it goes further than that.
Men are often violent towards other men as well - think road rage and stabbings.
For a certain type of man violence is second nature and I attribute this largely  to poor education and poor role models in the home.

The degradation of society.
Violence is glorified in the likes of rap music, degrading women into 'bitches & ho's', yet this type of disgusting misogyny is available to stream any time on i tunes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 23, 2021, 11:34:30 AM
Quote from: jassi on September 23, 2021, 11:16:24 AM
I think it goes further than that.
Men are often violent towards other men as well - think road rage and stabbings.
For a certain type of man violence is second nature and I attribute this largely  to poor education and poor role models in the home.

It's a huge subject and men aren't going to respond if women blame them for everything. I'm just grateful that they're making better vacuum cleaners now that men find themselves having to use them lol.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on September 23, 2021, 12:13:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 23, 2021, 11:34:30 AM
It's a huge subject and men aren't going to respond if women blame them for everything. I'm just grateful that they're making better vacuum cleaners now that men find themselves having to use them lol.
Too true!!!... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtooNbOtxGk&t=1224s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtooNbOtxGk&t=1224s)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 06:47:37 PM


Damien Bendall, the man accused of murdering the woman & 3 children in Killamarsh apparently has 2 previous convictions for robbery & an attempted armed robbery as well as a history of drug use.

https://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/13619465.jail-for-knife-wielding-robber-who-fled-after-brave-shopkeeper-produced-club/

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 09:37:51 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:11:21 AM
In 2018.

2 women were killed on their first contact with a sexually motivated killer.

So the chances of being raped & murdered by a complete stranger in 2018 were only 1 in about 17 million.

The odds of matching 5 numbers plus the bonus ball & pocketing a million pounds were actually better than that at 1 in 7.5 million.


102 femicides (68%) took place in the woman’s house – which may (35%) or may not (33%) have been shared with the perpetrator

(Women in the UK are safer walking the streets than in their own home.)

52% of perpetrators had previous histories of violence against the victim or other women.

3 men had previously killed a woman.

So either these women had no idea their chosen partner had a history of violence against women or they did know but decided they loved the man so much for some reason that they were willing to be knocked about & stay & risk getting murdered.

I remember an amusing quote from The Royle Family, where the old grandmother was talking about a female friend of hers, how she married a joiner, "he knocked her about a bit but they had a lovely house".
.............

Domestic violence is wrong, I'm not disputing that, but so is choosing violent partners & staying with them when they abuse you.
Leaving an abusive partner can actually make things even worse for the woman.  And - women don’t choose violent partners IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 09:43:50 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 09:37:51 PM
Leaving an abusive partner can actually make things even worse for the woman.  And - women don’t choose violent partners IMO.

Well that's obviously nonsense.

No woman in history has ever got with an ex-offender?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 09:52:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 23, 2021, 10:38:51 AM
You can't use your personal experiences to judge all men. There are some women (and men) I might want to punch if I had to live with them. Domestic violence isn't always about a weak woman cowering in fear from a violent man. Sometimes it's about a man being hounded and criticised until he loses control. It's not all about one sex preying on another, it's much more complicated.
I have not used my personal experience to judge all men, I was giving you my opinion of my experience just as you shared your opinion of yours.  There is no excuse for violence no matter what the provocation, especially when the attacker is physically more powerful than the victim.  It seems you don’t agree.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 09:53:58 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 11:27:48 AM
The degradation of society.
Violence is glorified in the likes of rap music, degrading women into 'bitches & ho's', yet this type of disgusting misogyny is available to stream any time on i tunes.
I absolutely agree with this, it horrifies me. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 09:56:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 09:53:58 PM
I absolutely agree with this, it horrifies me.

Well that's great, one of those rare occasions we've managed to agree on something.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:12:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 23, 2021, 11:34:30 AM
It's a huge subject and men aren't going to respond if women blame them for everything. I'm just grateful that they're making better vacuum cleaners now that men find themselves having to use them lol.
You’re making a strawman argument.  Who is blaming men for everything?  This conversation started when I drew attention to another two senseless murders of women by men - are we just supposed to accept them because it’s always happened and most men are decent and men are often victims too?  Should it not matter because women in Afghanistan have it worse? Did the mother and three children in Killamarsh deserved to be butchered because she might have been a bit too critical?  These are all irrelevant to the issue I raised of male on female violence. You may not think iit’s a problem but I do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:16:35 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 09:43:50 PM
Well that's obviously nonsense.

No woman in history has ever got with an ex-offender?
being violent is not usually a criterion that women would look for in a man IMO.  You think women choose to be victims of violence and seek out men in the hopes that they will be beaten and/or murdered?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:19:55 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 09:56:11 PM
Well that's great, one of those rare occasions we've managed to agree on something.
Billie Eilish had to apologise for posting a video years ago in which she can be seenmouthing the lyrics of a Tyler The Creator rap in which the word “chink” is mentioned (racial epithet).  I looked up the lyrics of this song and was shocked and disgusted that no one was calling for Tyler The Creator to apologise for the rest of the lyrics which were all about murdering and cutting up women.  Talk about double standards, it makes me sick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:23:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:12:30 PM
You’re making a strawman argument.  Who is blaming men for everything?  This conversation started when I drew attention to another two senseless murders of women by men - are we just supposed to accept them because it’s always happened and most men are decent and men are often victims too?  Should it not matter because women in Afghanistan have it worse? Did the mother and three children in Killamarsh deserved to be butchered because she might have been a bit too critical?  These are all irrelevant to the issue I raised of male on female violence. You may not think iit’s a problem but I do.

I think things are being blown out of proportion.

I noticed Sadiq Khan said there was an 'epidemic' of violence against women.

The statistics don't support that imo.

Quite how roughly 3 women a week being murdered out of a population of roughly 35 million women can be described as an epidemic escapes me.

If women's lives were of genuine concern & there's risk they'll be wiped out then surely roads need to be banned. RTA's are killing women in greater numbers every year.

It's all virtue signalling, as if it needed to be said that 'murder bad'.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:27:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:19:55 PM
Billie Eilish had to apologise for posting a video years ago in which she can be seen mouthing the lyrics of a Tyler The Creator rap in which the word “chink” is mentioned (racial epithet).  I looked up the lyrics of this song and was shocked and disgusted that no one was calling for Tyler The Creator to apologise for the rest of the lyrics which were all about murdering and cutting up women.  Talk about double standards, it makes me sick.

Thankfully I preserve my sanity by refusing to listen to todays trash music.

In the car I occasionally listen to radio 2, I turn it off if the likes of Eilish comes on.

Radio 1 & commercial radio are totally banned in my car & I also refuse to listen to modern black music.

I am equally averse to all things Hollywood.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:28:23 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:23:40 PM
I think things are being blown out of proportion.

I noticed Sadiq Khan said there was an 'epidemic' of violence against women.

The statistics don't support that imo.

Quite how roughly 3 women a week being murdered out of a population of roughly 35 million women can be described as an epidemic escapes me.

If women's lives were of genuine concern & there's risk they'll be wiped out then surely roads need to be banned. RTA's are killing women in greater numbers every year.

It's all virtue signalling, as if it needed to be said that 'murder bad'.
Murder is the extreme end of the scale.  Violence against women doesn’t always end in murder.  So your use of statsitics of the “3 women a week” arguement is  more than a little misleading.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:29:18 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:27:58 PM
Thankfully I preserve my sanity by refusing to listen to todays trash music.

In the car I occasionally listen to radio 2, I turn it off if the likes of Eilish comes on.

Radio 1 & commercial radio are totally banned in my car & I also refuse to listen to modern black music.

I am equally averse to all things Hollywood.
Well me too, on all counts (though I do quite like Billie Eilish).  Actually there’s also lots of modern black music which is not offensive, unlistenable and misogynistic.  Michael Kiwanuka for example.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:31:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:28:23 PM
Murder is the extreme end of the scale.  Violence against women doesn’t always end in murder.  So your use of statsitics of the “3 women a week” arguement is  more than a little misleading.

Sadiq's comments were in response to the murder of the teacher girl.

Probably hundreds of women were battered in the weeks preceding & he never spoke up then.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:35:28 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:31:08 PM
Sadiq's comments were in response to the murder of the teacher girl.

Probably hundreds of women were battered in the weeks preceding & he never spoke up then.
I’m not interested in using this woman’s murder to make political points whether for or against Sadiq Khan.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:40:35 PM
The Crime Survey for England and Wales shows 151,000 people - including 144,000 women - were victims of rape or attempted rape in the last year for which these figures are available.

Thats’s just under 400 women being raped or sexually assaulted a day in the UK alone. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:42:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:40:35 PM
The Crime Survey for England and Wales shows 151,000 people - including 144,000 women - were victims of rape or attempted rape in the last year for which these figures are available.

Thats’s just under 400 women being raped or sexually assaulted a day in the UK alone.

That's a survey. The figures would be inaccurate.
I prefer conviction statistics because innocent until proven guilty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:44:20 PM
For the 12-month period to year ending March 2020:

the Crime Survey for England and Wales showed that an estimated 2.3 million adults aged 16 to 74 years experienced domestic abuse in the last year (1.6 million women and 757,000 men), a slight but non-significant decrease from the previous year

That’s nearly 4400 women being abused every day in the UK. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:45:23 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:42:42 PM
That's a survey. The figures would be inaccurate.
I prefer conviction statistics because innocent until proven guilty.
Where’s Faithlilly when you need her?  Are you of the opinion that all rapes result in a conviction? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:48:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:45:23 PM
Where’s Faithlilly when you need her?  Are you of the opinion that all rapes result in a conviction?

No. I'm of the opinion that a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
It's all very well carrying out a victim survey but some are going to exaggerate or be dishonest. Some people do these things, it's a fact of life.
Too much margin for error imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:52:33 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:48:52 PM
No. I'm of the opinion that a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
It's all very well carrying out a victim survey but some are going to exaggerate or be dishonest. Some people do these things, it's a fact of life.
Too much margin for error imo.
No persons were named in the survey so it’s ridiculous to invoke the innocent until guilty mantra on this occasion.  even if (and I’m being generous here) 50% of reported rapes and attempted rapes were made up that’s still 200 women being sexually assaulted a day.  Another thing to bear in mind is that many girls and women never report their assaults to the police.  I didn’t for example.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:54:51 PM
I've no doubt there are a myriad of reasons why people don't report instances of domestic violence to the police, but none of them are reasonable imo.
If I'm a victim of crime, any crime, the first thing I do is report it to the police.
I was robbed at knife point a few years ago. I was on the phone to the law the moment they took my £20 change.
And if a guy raped me in a dark alley one night, I'd call the police, or murder him. One of the two.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:57:52 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 10:54:51 PM
I've no doubt there are a myriad of reasons why people don't report instances of domestic violence to the police, but none of them are reasonable imo.
If I'm a victim of crime, any crime, the first thing I do is report it to the police.
I was robbed at knife point a few years ago. I was on the phone to the law the moment they took my £20 change.
And if a guy raped me in a dark alley one night, I'd call the police, or murder him. One of the two.
Until it’s happened to you you really don’t know what you’d do or how you’d react imo.  Male rape is greatly underreported.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 23, 2021, 10:59:50 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:12:30 PM
You’re making a strawman argument.  Who is blaming men for everything?  This conversation started when I drew attention to another two senseless murders of women by men - are we just supposed to accept them because it’s always happened and most men are decent and men are often victims too?  Should it not matter because women in Afghanistan have it worse? Did the mother and three children in Killamarsh deserved to be butchered because she might have been a bit too critical?  These are all irrelevant to the issue I raised of male on female violence. You may not think iit’s a problem but I do.

It sure sounded like you were blaming men for everything.

snip/

"there are dozens more ways in which men have it better than women and still they hate and despise women and moan about how unfairly they are treated by women and society in general.  Men need to grow up and get a grip. "
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 11:01:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 10:57:52 PM
Until it’s happened to you you really don’t know what you’d do or how you’d react imo.  Male rape is greatly underreported.

I've reported every crime I've been a victim of in my life. Which isn't many thankfully.
I don't think I'm about to change that for anything because it's absolutely the right thing to do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 11:02:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 23, 2021, 10:59:50 PM
It sure sounded like you were blaming men for everything.

snip/

"there are dozens more ways in which men have it better than women and still they hate and despise women and moan about how unfairly they are treated by women and society in general.  Men need to grow up and get a grip. "

I think she meant me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 11:03:55 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 11:02:00 PM
I think she meant me.
Exactly!  At least you get me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 11:06:46 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 11:01:08 PM
I've reported every crime I've been a victim of in my life. Which isn't many thankfully.
I don't think I'm about to change that for anything because it's absolutely the right thing to do.
Sexual crime should absolutely be reported but some men find it difficult to do so because they feel ashamed or weak.  And girls and women also can feel ashamed or as if they were somehow to blame for it.  Just because you think you would behave in a certain way doesn’t necessarily mean all people would follow suit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 11:07:50 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 23, 2021, 11:03:55 PM
Exactly!  At least you get me.

Well I greatly enjoy the chalk & cheese time we have together.

You name something demonstrably terrible then I explain why it's not so terrible in my own opinion & we tend to completely disagree.
I wake up some mornings looking forward to what we can disagree about next.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 11:14:51 PM
One of my 'friends' is in an abusive relationship.
She's the abuser, has spent the last few years constantly accusing her partner of cheating on her, assaulted him, broke his house windows, has been arrested twice & in the last incident was even tasered by the police. She's currently sweating on a possible charge for affray.
I keep her at a distance. She is not really welcome in my house & I only occasionally talk to her on the phone.
She's a total ass when she's had a drink.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 11:22:42 PM

And even though she's assaulted him trashed his house, threw paint all over his front doorstep & makes his life hell, he keeps forgiving her & taking her back, until the next time & the next.
When she's been sober I've warned her about it but she takes no notice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2021, 11:48:14 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 23, 2021, 11:07:50 PM
Well I greatly enjoy the chalk & cheese time we have together.

You name something demonstrably terrible then I explain why it's not so terrible in my own opinion & we tend to completely disagree.
I wake up some mornings looking forward to what we can disagree about next.
Your “voice” is uncannily like a guy I used to work with.  We would have similarly polarized conversations in the Cricketers after work and wind each other up something rotten, but there was always an underlying sense of humour which meant it never ended in violence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 10:33:32 AM

I read a post on social media the other day questioning why people aren't more angry with the death of the murdered school teacher like they were about Sarah Everard.

It got me wondering...

How angry am I supposed to be exactly & why must I be angry about the murder of a woman I never met, didn't know & had absolutely no connection to?

Can anyone explain?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 24, 2021, 11:02:20 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 10:33:32 AM
I read a post on social media the other day questioning why people aren't more angry with the death of the murdered school teacher like they were about Sarah Everard.

It got me wondering...

How angry am I supposed to be exactly & why must I be angry about the murder of a woman I never met, didn't know & had absolutely no connection to?

Can anyone explain?

No I can't, but who are we supposed to be angry with and how should this anger be expressed ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2021, 11:11:42 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 10:33:32 AM
I read a post on social media the other day questioning why people aren't more angry with the death of the murdered school teacher like they were about Sarah Everard.

It got me wondering...

How angry am I supposed to be exactly & why must I be angry about the murder of a woman I never met, didn't know & had absolutely no connection to?

Can anyone explain?
I guess what they mean is - why hasn't her death been co-opted by those with a political agenda, to use her death for demonstrations and civil disorder.  I believe there is a vigil for her tonight so give it time.   That said I think women have good cause to be angry and saddened by the fact that it is still not possible to walk through a well-used city park at 8pm on the way to meet a friend without the risk of being attacked hanging over their heads.  Why should we have to carry rape alarms?  Why shouldn't men have to wear a device that renders them impotent when out and about? If all women are potential rape victims then all men are potential rapists.  IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 24, 2021, 11:20:55 AM
I feel despair, rather than anger that society has degenerated to this level.
There are some nasty f**kers out there just waiting to inflict violence, not just on women at night, but also in broad daylight, judging by the number of shootings and stabbing reported in the media.

Fortunately it's only a relatively small number of incidents, though that is small comfort to the victims & their families and seems to be restricted mainly to some cities and large towns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 24, 2021, 11:31:48 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2021, 11:11:42 AM
I guess what they mean is - why hasn't her death been co-opted by those with a political agenda, to use her death for demonstrations and civil disorder.  I believe there is a vigil for her tonight so give it time.   That said I think women have good cause to be angry and saddened by the fact that it is still not possible to walk through a well-used city park at 8pm on the way to meet a friend without the risk of being attacked hanging over their heads.  Why should we have to carry rape alarms?  Why shouldn't men have to wear a device that renders them impotent when out and about? If all women are potential rape victims then all men are potential rapists.  IMO.

Some women report being raped when it never happened, but asking all women to wear a recording device so they can't do that would be insulting. Why do you choose to insult all men with your suggestion of them wearing a device? That's how not to gather support from all human beings imo, and to ignore the fact that most men never hurt women.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 12:25:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2021, 11:11:42 AM
I guess what they mean is - why hasn't her death been co-opted by those with a political agenda, to use her death for demonstrations and civil disorder.  I believe there is a vigil for her tonight so give it time.   That said I think women have good cause to be angry and saddened by the fact that it is still not possible to walk through a well-used city park at 8pm on the way to meet a friend without the risk of being attacked hanging over their heads.  Why should we have to carry rape alarms?  Why shouldn't men have to wear a device that renders them impotent when out and about? If all women are potential rape victims then all men are potential rapists.  IMO.

I think it's a tad ridiculous to be angry about the murder of women you didn't know, never met & had no connection to, just because you're the same gender along with 35 million other people.

From my perspective if a 28 year old man minding his own business in a park after dark got stabbed to death by a random stranger, I might think 'perhaps I shouldn't go to the park after dark', but then I already knew that probably wouldn't be a good idea anyway.

And if there was a vigil in the park for this man, since I didn't know him, never met him, had no connection to him other than being the same sex, along with 35million other people, I really wouldn't see the point of standing in the park with candles amongst a bunch of randoms pretending to mourn the tragic loss of this man that I didn't know, never met & had absolutely no connection to.

Maybe I'm just a bit weird like that.
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 12:45:21 PM

I got heavily down voted on another forum when pointing out the murder rate of women is only 3 a week compared to men who are murdered at more than twice that rate, or the combined total of road traffic accidents each year which kill more women & men than murderers do.

But, no, we must be in a moral panic about rampant femicide wiping all the women off the face of the planet as if murders haven't been happening since the beginning of recorded time.

People get murdered, it's part of life's rich tapestry.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2021, 01:08:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 24, 2021, 11:31:48 AM
Some women report being raped when it never happened, but asking all women to wear a recording device so they can't do that would be insulting. Why do you choose to insult all men with your suggestion of them wearing a device? That's how not to gather support from all human beings imo, and to ignore the fact that most men never hurt women.
You really don't have a sense of humour do you?  Did you actually think I was being serious about men wearing an impotency device?  Oh dear.  It was an ironic riposte to those that suggest that all women should carry a rape alarm.  It's nice that you're so supportive of men and don't seem to have any real words of support for the female of the species, only criticism.  Nice work sistah!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2021, 01:21:29 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 12:25:55 PM
I think it's a tad ridiculous to be angry about the murder of women you didn't know, never met & had no connection to, just because you're the same gender along with 35 million other people.

From my perspective if a 28 year old man minding his own business in a park after dark got stabbed to death by a random stranger, I might think 'perhaps I shouldn't go to the park after dark', but then I already knew that probably wouldn't be a good idea anyway.

And if there was a vigil in the park for this man, since I didn't know him, never met him, had no connection to him other than being the same sex, along with 35million other people, I really wouldn't see the point of standing in the park with candles amongst a bunch of randoms pretending to mourn the tragic loss of this man that I didn't know, never met & had absolutely no connection to.

Maybe I'm just a bit weird like that.
So nothing that happens to others' in your neighbourhood or your country or your society concerns, upsets or angers you, nor can you understand why it should.  Well that's just fine, but without anger there would never be any social change, it's partly what drives it IMO, an anger at the status quo and a desire for improvement and betterment for people who are oppressed, victimised, enslaved, whatever.   Anger is also an expression of empathy for those people.  If you don't have empathy then you can never get angry and demand change on their behalf.   And it's not just people.  It's animals too.  You profess to "loving animals".  Did the Faroe Islanders massacre of 1200 dolphins not make you just a teensy bit cross?  Or did you think, "I never knew those dolphins personally so why should I care if they all get hunted to extinction and killed horribly"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2021, 01:30:39 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 12:45:21 PM
I got heavily down voted on another forum when pointing out the murder rate of women is only 3 a week compared to men who are murdered at more than twice that rate, or the combined total of road traffic accidents each year which kill more women & men than murderers do.

But, no, we must be in a moral panic about rampant femicide wiping all the women off the face of the planet as if murders haven't been happening since the beginning of recorded time.

People get murdered, it's part of life's rich tapestry.
Just because things have always happened doesn't mean they always should or that we shouldn't as a society strive for change.  IMO.  Look at child slavery.  It's always happened, it still does but we should IMO be striving to live in a world without such exploitation.  You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 24, 2021, 01:34:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2021, 01:08:52 PM
You really don't have a sense of humour do you?  Did you actually think I was being serious about men wearing an impotency device?  Oh dear.  It was an ironic riposte to those that suggest that all women should carry a rape alarm.  It's nice that you're so supportive of men and don't seem to have any real words of support for the female of the species, only criticism.  Nice work sistah!

I'm not anyone's 'sistah', whatever you mean by that. Neither do I support anyone just because of their gender. I don't deal in generalisations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 01:37:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2021, 01:30:39 PM
Just because things have always happened doesn't mean they always should or that we shouldn't as a society strive for change.  IMO.  Look at child slavery.  It's always happened, it still does but we should IMO be striving to live in a world without such exploitation.  You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one...

Ok so how do we go about eradicating murder?

I think we should set out a serious plan here &, as a country, convert to a renewable non-murder plan & commit to becoming murder neutral by 2030.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 01:56:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2021, 01:21:29 PM
So nothing that happens to others' in your neighbourhood or your country or your society concerns, upsets or angers you, nor can you understand why it should.  Well that's just fine, but without anger there would never be any social change, it's partly what drives it IMO, an anger at the status quo and a desire for improvement and betterment for people who are oppressed, victimised, enslaved, whatever.   Anger is also an expression of empathy for those people.  If you don't have empathy then you can never get angry and demand change on their behalf.   And it's not just people.  It's animals too.  You profess to "loving animals".  Did the Faroe Islanders massacre of 1200 dolphins not make you just a teensy bit cross?  Or did you think, "I never knew those dolphins personally so why should I care if they all get hunted to extinction and killed horribly"?

It's terrible that animals get needlessly killed, hunted to extinction or are have their habitats destroyed by climate change (which isn't real) but to be honest, when I'm sat in McDonalds eating my third cow burger of the week I don't really give much thought to Daisy's life that was brutally extinguished, or her calves left motherless or turned into veal, I tend to just enjoy the delicious gluttony.

But I wouldn't eat my cat because I know her. (Although obviously, in a starvation situation with no access to other food sources my mind would eventually be naturally drawn to eating my cat)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2021, 01:58:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 24, 2021, 01:34:53 PM
I'm not anyone's 'sistah', whatever you mean by that. Neither do I support anyone just because of their gender. I don't deal in generalisations.
You never heard of the Sisterhood, sistah?  Oh well, obviously Women's Lib passed you by...

Here's a generalisation about men:

"...more straightforward, funnier, less bitchy and less self-obsessed".

Sound familiar?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2021, 02:02:37 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 01:37:55 PM
Ok so how do we go about eradicating murder?

I think we should set out a serious plan here &, as a country, convert to a renewable non-murder plan & commit to becoming murder neutral by 2030.
I think that's a great idea, and in fact it's a project human beings have been working on for a while now with a few noticeable hiccups.  We live in a far less murderous society than we used to hundreds of years ago so that's something to be pleased about, but doesn't mean we should be complacent about it. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2021, 02:04:32 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 01:56:13 PM
It's terrible that animals get needlessly killed, hunted to extinction or are have their habitats destroyed by climate change (which isn't real) but to be honest, when I'm sat in McDonalds eating my third cow burger of the week I don't really give much thought to Daisy's life that was brutally extinguished, or her calves left motherless or turned into veal, I tend to just enjoy the delicious gluttony.

But I wouldn't eat my cat because I know her. (Although obviously, in a starvation situation with no access to other food sources my mind would eventually be naturally drawn to eating my cat)
So hunting animals to extinction or deliberate cruelty to animals doesn't anger you even a little bit and you can't understand why anyone would be so angry about it as to want to prevent the destruction of species?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 02:19:59 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2021, 02:04:32 PM
So hunting animals to extinction or deliberate cruelty to animals doesn't anger you even a little bit and you can't understand why anyone would be so angry about it as to want to prevent the destruction of species?

It certainly doesn't anger me no.

Anger is quite a strong feeling. I might get a bit annoyed when I'm stuck behind a slow moving tractor holding up a queue of traffic on the northbound section of the A22 or if some idiot is fumbling around in front of me at the cashpoint as if they've never set eyes on one before, but that's just annoyance.

Anger is reserved for more serious situations that affect me directly & more profoundly & I seriously can't remember the last time I was genuinely angry about anything.

I can understand wanting to save the planet but we're not going to do that if people keep sh*tting out endless amounts of children since we live on a limited sized planet with finite resources & no amount of going red in the face & stamping one's feet is going to stop the darkies making potions out of Rhino horn.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2021, 02:38:45 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 02:19:59 PM
It certainly doesn't anger me no.

Anger is quite a strong feeling. I might get a bit annoyed when I'm stuck behind a slow moving tractor holding up a queue of traffic on the northbound section of the A22 or if some idiot is fumbling around in front of me at the cashpoint as if they've never set eyes on one before, but that's just annoyance.

Anger is reserved for more serious situations that affect me directly & more profoundly & I seriously can't remember the last time I was genuinely angry about anything.

I can understand wanting to save the planet but we're not going to do that if people keep sh*tting out endless amounts of children since we live on a limited sized planet with finite resources & no amount of going red in the face & stamping one's feet is going to stop the darkies making potions out of Rhino horn.
I think you'll find it's the Chinese with an obsession for rhino horn.  OK, I accept nothing angers you, but that doesn't invalidate anger as an appropriate reaction to many injustices and actions that happen in the world that don't directly impact on your nearest and dearest (though I would argue that everything that makes me angry does have some effect on me and my nearest and dearest to a greater or lesser extent - a woman murdered in a park for example contributes to the sense of insecurity many women feel when going about their business in public, for me as a mother it reinforces my anxiety about the safety of my own daughter who lives in a city where crime is quite prevalent).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 02:47:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2021, 02:38:45 PM
I think you'll find it's the Chinese with an obsession for rhino horn.  OK, I accept nothing angers you, but that doesn't invalidate anger as an appropriate reaction to many injustices and actions that happen in the world that don't directly impact on your nearest and dearest (though I would argue that everything that makes me angry does have some effect on me and my nearest and dearest to a greater or lesser extent - a woman murdered in a park for example contributes to the sense of insecurity many women feel when going about their business in public, for me as a mother it reinforces my anxiety about the safety of my own daughter who lives in a city where crime is quite prevalent).

Well, as a man, even though men are murdered at a higher rate than women & more men are murdered by strangers than women, I can't say I feel a sense of anger, panic or fear for myself or my nephew just because some dude was stabbed in the neck on Hamstead Heath, probably because the media doesn't push the narrative that men are under daily threat of murder. Even though they are at a demonstrably greater risk of murder than women.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2021, 03:59:05 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 02:47:49 PM
Well, as a man, even though men are murdered at a higher rate than women & more men are murdered by strangers than women, I can't say I feel a sense of anger, panic or fear for myself or my nephew just because some dude was stabbed in the neck on Hamstead Heath, probably because the media doesn't push the narrative that men are under daily threat of murder. Even though they are at a demonstrably greater risk of murder than women.
Do you have a cite for this news story please?  I think most people feel anger and indignation  and sorrow for murders of innocent men, women and children, for example for ALL the innocent victims of that Incel down in Plymouth the other day. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 04:09:02 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2021, 03:59:05 PM
Do you have a cite for this news story please?  I think most people feel anger and indignation  and sorrow for murders of innocent men, women and children, for example for ALL the innocent victims of that Incel down in Plymouth the other day.

It was only a hypothetical story.

I forgot about the shotgun murders, but then I didn't feel any anger, indignation or sorrow about that either because I didn't know, never met or had any connection to the victims or the murderer (apart from also being a member of the incel movement & secretly harbouring a hatred for the chads & staceys).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2021, 04:32:25 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 04:09:02 PM
It was only a hypothetical story.

I forgot about the shotgun murders, but then I didn't feel any anger, indignation or sorrow about that either because I didn't know, never met or had any connection to the victims or the murderer (apart from also being a member of the incel movement & secretly harbouring a hatred for the chads & staceys).
I knew it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 05:13:53 PM

Sabina Nessa killing: Does following the 'rules' keep women safe?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58665603
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2021, 05:16:36 PM

Sabina Nessa’s killer struck her on the head with an unknown object moments after she left her flat, CCTV footage has reportedly revealed.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/sabina-nessa-murder-cctv-met-police-appeal-kidbrooke-b957102.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2021, 10:02:45 PM
One of my friends was at the vigil tonight.  She said there was a big turnout.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 25, 2021, 10:34:37 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 24, 2021, 10:02:45 PM
One of my friends was at the vigil tonight.  She said there was a big turnout.

Kate Middleton didn't go apparently.

I wonder why she went to the vigil for the murdered white woman she didn't know but wasn't willing do the same for the brown one?


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 25, 2021, 10:37:38 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 25, 2021, 10:34:37 AM
Kate Middleton didn't go apparently.

I wonder why she went to the vigil for the murdered white woman she didn't know but wasn't willing do the same for the brown one?
Perhaps she was the Royal Racist Megan and Harry were referring to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 25, 2021, 10:41:33 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 25, 2021, 10:37:38 AM
Perhaps she was the Royal Racist Megan and Harry were referring to.

Yes, that did cross my mind.

It certainly doesn't look good if you ask me.

I think it's her obligation now to attend every vigil for every murdered woman in Britain every time it happens.

Either that or I'd like her to explain why Sarah Everard was more important to her than all the rest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 25, 2021, 11:04:55 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 25, 2021, 10:34:37 AM
Kate Middleton didn't go apparently.

I wonder why she went to the vigil for the murdered white woman she didn't know but wasn't willing do the same for the brown one?

Maybe she decided once was enough for  anyone, though i don't think she attended a vigil anyway, just did a daytime walk about.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 25, 2021, 11:11:37 AM
"Police need to do more to make the streets safe for women and girls after the death of Sabina Nessa, the victims’ commissioner for England and Wales has said."

Wonder how she thinks they might do that ?  Enforce an 'after dark' curfew?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 25, 2021, 11:14:07 AM
Quote from: jassi on September 25, 2021, 11:11:37 AM
"Police need to do more to make the streets safe for women and girls after the death of Sabina Nessa, the victims’ commissioner for England and Wales has said."

Wonder how she thinks they might do that ?  Enforce an 'after dark' curfew?
Good idea - for men only of course.  No man on the streets without a valid reason after 8pm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 25, 2021, 11:17:25 AM
Quote from: jassi on September 25, 2021, 11:11:37 AM
"Police need to do more to make the streets safe for women and girls after the death of Sabina Nessa, the victims’ commissioner for England and Wales has said."

Wonder how she thinks they might do that ?  Enforce an 'after dark' curfew?

Yes, everyone is angry, but no one actually has a solution.

We have charities calling to 'End violence against women & girls'

As if there were some feasible way to eradicate violence & murder from society & it's just that the government have been holding back on it year after year.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 25, 2021, 01:04:07 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 25, 2021, 11:14:07 AM
Good idea - for men only of course.  No man on the streets without a valid reason after 8pm

I agree, let the women only out & they can drive the HGV's replenishing food stocks & fuel supplies, cleaning the streets, police them themselves, everything that men do between 8pm & 6am can be done by the women, whilst we men stay at home trying not to be abusive towards the children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 25, 2021, 01:48:34 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 25, 2021, 11:17:25 AM
Yes, everyone is angry, but no one actually has a solution.

We have charities calling to 'End violence against women & girls'

As if there were some feasible way to eradicate violence & murder from society & it's just that the government have been holding back on it year after year.
It's the same with most action groups.  "Stop destroying the rainforest", "Save the whale", "ban the bomb", "Against FGM", whatever it is - chances are the problem won't be completely eradicated but it raises consciousness about the issue, encourages discussion, and sometime does lead to positive change.
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 25, 2021, 01:53:01 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 25, 2021, 01:04:07 PM
I agree, let the women only out & they can drive the HGV's replenishing food stocks & fuel supplies, cleaning the streets, police them themselves, everything that men do between 8pm & 6am can be done by the women, whilst we men stay at home trying not to be abusive towards the children.
No, those would all be valid reasons for men to be out after 8pm, mind you as most serial killers are long distance lorry drivers and you can't trust policemen not to be rapists and murderers these days, that might be a slight flaw in my plan....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 25, 2021, 02:15:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 25, 2021, 01:53:01 PM
No, those would all be valid reasons for men to be out after 8pm, mind you as most serial killers are long distance lorry drivers and you can't trust policemen not to be rapists and murderers these days, that might be a slight flaw in my plan....

Sorry yes, I was excluding the valid reasons method because it wouldn't be 100% preventative & the stated aims are apparently ending violence against women completely, a reduction in the number of instances simply doesn't go far enough imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 26, 2021, 02:07:04 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 25, 2021, 10:41:33 AM
Yes, that did cross my mind.

It certainly doesn't look good if you ask me.

I think it's her obligation now to attend every vigil for every murdered woman in Britain every time it happens.

Either that or I'd like her to explain why Sarah Everard was more important to her than all the rest.
She must be reading this forum because she has left flowers according to the Sunday Times.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 26, 2021, 03:26:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 26, 2021, 02:07:04 PM
She must be reading this forum because she has left flowers according to the Sunday Times.

I read elsewhere that 'It is understood flowers have been laid on the duchess’s behalf.'

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/kate-middleton-saddened-death-another-21673997

Whereas with Sarah Everard she actually went to the local park personally & lay the flowers herself.

You see, it's not quite the same.

I'm still not satisfied this isn't because of racism.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 26, 2021, 05:33:43 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 26, 2021, 03:26:54 PM
I read elsewhere that 'It is understood flowers have been laid on the duchess’s behalf.'

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/kate-middleton-saddened-death-another-21673997

Whereas with Sarah Everard she actually went to the local park personally & lay the flowers herself.

You see, it's not quite the same.

I'm still not satisfied this isn't because of racism.
Maybe she went incognito this time on account of all the flak she got from people like you the last time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 18, 2021, 01:44:39 PM
Let’s hope she is soon found alive and well (and no, I won’t apologise for hoping).

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/abduction-fears-after-girl-4-goes-missing-on-camping-trip-wk8q2l5pd

Cleo Smith: Abduction fears after girl, 4, goes missing on camping trip
Police have been stopping and searching cars and caravans and taking drivers’ details before they leave the area, Inspector Jon Munday of Western Australia police said.

Police were “certainly” not ruling out the possibility that the four-year-old was abducted.

Munday said it was highly unusual for a child to disappear from a tent they shared with their parents in the middle of the night.

“[The disappearance] is extremely concerning and not something we come across very often at all,” he said today. “We are throwing everything at this, but at this point in time we do not have any answers about where Cleo is.”

Yesterday Cleo’s distraught mother, Ellie Smith, had issued a plea for help. “It’s been over 24 hours since I last saw the sparkle in my little girl’s eyes. Please help me find her,” she wrote in a Facebook post.

“Last seen at 1.30am and gone when woken up at 6am from our shared tent. Very, very unusual for Cleo. Please if you see anything unusual or suspicious call the police.”

The little girl was wearing pink one-piece pyjamas when she was last seen. Yesterday police said her sleeping bag was gone but they were not “at liberty to divulge what else may be missing”.

Eddie Smith, shire of Carnarvon president, said that the community was rallying behind Cleo’s family. “One of the local churches had a candlelit vigil last night which was open to everybody which was really well attended,” he said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 19, 2021, 12:41:16 PM
Lord Janner: Police ‘reluctant’ to investigate child sex abuse allegations, inquiry finds

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/lord-janner-child-sexual-abuse-inquiry-b1941002.html

Leicestershire Police’s Operation Magnolia, which probed allegations against the former Labour MP in 1999, “was insufficient and seemingly involved a deliberate decision to withhold key witness statements from the Crown Prosecution Service”, according to The Independent Inquiry Into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA).


"This investigation has brought up themes we are now extremely familiar with, such as deference to powerful individuals, the barriers to reporting faced by children and the need for institutions to have clear policies and procedures setting out how to respond to allegations of child sexual abuse, regardless of the prominence of the alleged abuser.”

Not a conspiracy to pervert justice, perhaps, but clearly shows how police officers can be swayed by 'powerful' people.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 19, 2021, 01:34:41 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 19, 2021, 12:41:16 PM
Lord Janner: Police ‘reluctant’ to investigate child sex abuse allegations, inquiry finds

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/lord-janner-child-sexual-abuse-inquiry-b1941002.html

Leicestershire Police’s Operation Magnolia, which probed allegations against the former Labour MP in 1999, “was insufficient and seemingly involved a deliberate decision to withhold key witness statements from the Crown Prosecution Service”, according to The Independent Inquiry Into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA).


"This investigation has brought up themes we are now extremely familiar with, such as deference to powerful individuals, the barriers to reporting faced by children and the need for institutions to have clear policies and procedures setting out how to respond to allegations of child sexual abuse, regardless of the prominence of the alleged abuser.”

Not a conspiracy to pervert justice, perhaps, but clearly shows how police officers can be swayed by 'powerful' people.
One only has to look as far as the Casa Pia scandal to know that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 22, 2021, 08:42:09 PM
Hmmm.


MADELEINE McCann top cop Jim Gamble has said missing Cleo Smith likely would have known her abductor who may be someone who was following the family ahead of their trip.

Mr Gamble - who was the senior child protection officer in the UK investigation into the Maddie case - explained the chance of the girl being taken away silently by a total stranger in the middle of the night was low.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16501977/madeleine-mccann-cleo-smith-australia-missing/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 22, 2021, 08:52:21 PM
Quote from: barrier on October 22, 2021, 08:42:09 PM
Hmmm.


MADELEINE McCann top cop Jim Gamble has said missing Cleo Smith likely would have known her abductor who may be someone who was following the family ahead of their trip.

Mr Gamble - who was the senior child protection officer in the UK investigation into the Maddie case - explained the chance of the girl being taken away silently by a total stranger in the middle of the night was low.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16501977/madeleine-mccann-cleo-smith-australia-missing/

Tell me something I don't already know.. Your post just shows how little you understand the situation.. Imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 22, 2021, 11:34:00 PM
Quote from: barrier on October 22, 2021, 08:42:09 PM
Hmmm.


MADELEINE McCann top cop Jim Gamble has said missing Cleo Smith likely would have known her abductor who may be someone who was following the family ahead of their trip.

Mr Gamble - who was the senior child protection officer in the UK investigation into the Maddie case - explained the chance of the girl being taken away silently by a total stranger in the middle of the night was low.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16501977/madeleine-mccann-cleo-smith-australia-missing/
You do know Jim Gamble believes Madeleine was taken by a stranger don’t you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 23, 2021, 12:17:33 AM
Quote from: barrier on October 22, 2021, 08:42:09 PM
Hmmm.


MADELEINE McCann top cop Jim Gamble has said missing Cleo Smith likely would have known her abductor who may be someone who was following the family ahead of their trip.

Mr Gamble - who was the senior child protection officer in the UK investigation into the Maddie case - explained the chance of the girl being taken away silently by a total stranger in the middle of the night was low.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16501977/madeleine-mccann-cleo-smith-australia-missing/

The Australian police are certain that Cleo was abducted and are looking for her remains.

That is a sobering thought.

Deputy police commissioner Col Blanch admitted today that investigators are searching for the child's remains.

He said: "Cleo disappeared from her family's tent, despite an extensive land, sea and air search, we have not yet located her body."

The law enforcement chief said that if the little girl had left her tent by herself then she would have been found by now

"That leads us to believe she was taken," Mr Blanch added.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16493343/cleo-smith-mum-ellie-plea-picture/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 23, 2021, 05:37:07 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 22, 2021, 08:52:21 PM
Tell me something I don't already know.. Your post just shows how little you understand the situation.. Imo
Did I write the article?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 23, 2021, 07:29:21 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 22, 2021, 08:52:21 PM
Tell me something I don't already know.. Your post just shows how little you understand the situation.. Imo

Yet you generally still believe rare stranger abduction is the more likely
scenario in the McCann case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 23, 2021, 07:30:54 AM
IMO Jim Gamble is assuming a child would immediately start screaming the moment an abductor started trying to remove them but I don’t brlieve it is a given and in fact there is video evidence of another child being abducted from their room in their sleep (an American case which we’ve discussed before) which proves it is entirely possible to do so silently.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 23, 2021, 07:34:50 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 23, 2021, 07:30:54 AM
IMO Jim Gamble is assuming a child would immediately start screaming the moment an abductor started trying to remove them but I don’t brlieve it is a given and in fact there is video evidence of another child being abducted from their room in their sleep (an American case which we’ve discussed before) which proves it is entirely possible to do so silently.

Why do you believe Gamble is making assumptions?  Isn't it just the case that stranger abduction is a rare scenario, so he's just telling it as it is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 23, 2021, 08:00:23 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 23, 2021, 07:34:50 AM
Why do you believe Gamble is making assumptions?  Isn't it just the case that stranger abduction is a rare scenario, so he's just telling it as it is.
I’m talking about his assumption that a sleeping child being abducted would wake up and scream.  Obviously it’s an assumption so unless he has some scientific evidence to back up his assertion I can’t see what else it could be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 23, 2021, 09:01:33 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 23, 2021, 08:00:23 AM
I’m talking about his assumption that a sleeping child being abducted would wake up and scream.  Obviously it’s an assumption so unless he has some scientific evidence to back up his assertion I can’t see what else it could be.

I don't think it is an assumption.

I think the evidence is that drowsy or sleeping children do not kick and scream when being abducted.

In the instance of the one case we know of when a child was abducted from her bath ~ she made no noise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 23, 2021, 09:13:46 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 23, 2021, 07:34:50 AM
Why do you believe Gamble is making assumptions?  Isn't it just the case that stranger abduction is a rare scenario, so he's just telling it as it is.

We all know that stranger abduction is rare.. But it seems the most likely scenario in this case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 23, 2021, 09:15:59 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 23, 2021, 07:29:21 AM
Yet you generally still believe rare stranger abduction is the more likely
scenario in the McCann case.

Absolutely
100%......that is where all the evidence points
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 23, 2021, 10:05:51 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 23, 2021, 09:15:59 AM
Absolutely
100%......that is where all the evidence points

Which evidence points towards abduction?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 23, 2021, 10:12:22 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 23, 2021, 10:05:51 AM
Which evidence points towards abduction?

I've explained it all before... you won't accept it but I'm right
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 23, 2021, 10:51:30 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 23, 2021, 10:12:22 AM
I've explained it all before... you won't accept it but I'm right

I can't remember you explaining anything other than a good attempt at discrediting the dog evidence (which, however good, I still don't agree with); the open window; and a strange statistical assumption that it is the most likely scenario. That's very little to be so assured  that you know the absolute truth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 23, 2021, 10:53:00 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 23, 2021, 10:51:30 PM
I can't remember you explaining anything other than a good attempt at discrediting the dog evidence (which, however good, I still don't agree with); the open window; and a strange statistical assumption that it is the most likely scenario. That's very little to be so assured  that you know the absolute truth.

You have to read a little more... I've never claimed the absolute truth... Just the most likely by far
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 23, 2021, 10:57:21 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 23, 2021, 10:53:00 PM
You have to read a little more... I've never claimed the absolute truth... Just the most likely by far

In your opinion... and not based on anything concrete other than it's the most likely scenario.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 23, 2021, 11:12:20 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 23, 2021, 10:57:21 PM
In your opinion... and not based on anything concrete other than it's the most likely scenario.

Based on all the available evidence... What make you think CB is not involved
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 24, 2021, 05:40:00 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 23, 2021, 11:12:20 PM
Based on all the available evidence... What make you think CB is not involved

The absence in credible evidence of his involvement?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 24, 2021, 09:09:36 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 23, 2021, 10:51:30 PM
I can't remember you explaining anything other than a good attempt at discrediting the dog evidence (which, however good, I still don't agree with); the open window; and a strange statistical assumption that it is the most likely scenario. That's very little to be so assured  that you know the absolute truth.


The blessed open window which had , had its shutter broken, which is on record that GM told his sister of such, then Mitchell went on record later to say no such thing occurred and that K&G are of the opinion someone came into the room and  went out the window as their means of escape, it was that easy CB left no evidence of such.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 24, 2021, 02:11:14 PM
Quote from: barrier on October 24, 2021, 09:09:36 AM

The blessed open window which had , had its shutter broken, which is on record that GM told his sister of such, then Mitchell went on record later to say no such thing occurred and that K&G are of the opinion someone came into the room and  went out the window as their means of escape, it was that easy CB left no evidence of such.

The problem with sceptics is I think the demonstrable lack of the ability to take in and absorb information despite how many times it is imparted.

There is absolutely nothing in your post which has not been gone over ad nauseam and resolved.  On the other hand I think most issues can be addressed if a modicum of common sense were to be employed.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 25, 2021, 10:30:41 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 24, 2021, 02:11:14 PM
The problem with sceptics is I think the demonstrable lack of the ability to take in and absorb information despite how many times it is imparted.

There is absolutely nothing in your post which has not been gone over ad nauseam and resolved.  On the other hand I think most issues can be addressed if a modicum of common sense were to be employed.

The question of the window has certainly not been resolved in my opinion. I'm more than happy to listen to well researched argument and the presentation of information. I just haven't seen anything on this forum to support the theory that CB was involved, nor have I seen any concrete evidence of rare stranger abduction, No-one on this forum has even successfully accounted for "Smithman". Yet there's a strong conviction from the "pro McCann" posters that CB is 100% guilty based on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence that is in the public domain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 25, 2021, 10:36:30 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 25, 2021, 10:30:41 PM
The question of the window has certainly not been resolved in my opinion. I'm more than happy to listen to well researched argument and the presentation of information. I just haven't seen anything on this forum to support the theory that CB was involved, nor have I seen any concrete evidence of rare stranger abduction, No-one on this forum has even successfully accounted for "Smithman". Yet there's a strong conviction from the "pro McCann" posters that CB is 100% guilty based on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence that is in the public domain.

Then there's the dogs... Unless grime encouraged the cadaver dog to alert.. Then Maddie died in the apartment.. But Wolters almost certainly has proof she didn't.. Lol
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 25, 2021, 10:46:41 PM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 25, 2021, 10:30:41 PM
The question of the window has certainly not been resolved in my opinion. I'm more than happy to listen to well researched argument and the presentation of information. I just haven't seen anything on this forum to support the theory that CB was involved, nor have I seen any concrete evidence of rare stranger abduction, No-one on this forum has even successfully accounted for "Smithman". Yet there's a strong conviction from the "pro McCann" posters that CB is 100% guilty based on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence that is in the public domain.
That is simply untrue.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 26, 2021, 08:11:18 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 25, 2021, 10:46:41 PM
That is simply untrue.

Yes, It is untrue.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 26, 2021, 09:37:59 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 26, 2021, 08:11:18 AM
Yes, It is untrue.

It is untrue... Blly is wrong and he might ask himself if he's got this wrong what else is he wrong about
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 26, 2021, 10:11:15 AM
Quote from: Davel on October 26, 2021, 09:37:59 AM
It is untrue... Blly is wrong and he might ask himself if he's got this wrong what else is he wrong about

Perhaps Billy Wizz assumes opinions that aren't actually here.  There's a lot of that about on this Forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 26, 2021, 10:27:23 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 26, 2021, 10:11:15 AM
Perhaps Billy Wizz assumes opinions that aren't actually here.  There's a lot of that about on this Forum.
I genuinely don't know a single "Pro" that has claimed to be 100% certain that CB is the person who took Madeleine.  As far as I'm concerned I would go for 60%-80% certain which I know in some quarters means "absolutely certain without any shadow of a doubt"...  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 26, 2021, 10:37:02 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 26, 2021, 10:27:23 AM
I genuinely don't know a single "Pro" that has claimed to be 100% certain that CB is the person who took Madeleine.  As far as I'm concerned I would go for 60%-80% certain which I know in some quarters means "absolutely certain without any shadow of a doubt"...  @)(++(*

Ah, well, that's hypocrisy for you.  And there's a lot of that as well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 26, 2021, 10:58:40 AM
Quote from: Billy Whizz Fan Club on October 25, 2021, 10:30:41 PM
The question of the window has certainly not been resolved in my opinion. I'm more than happy to listen to well researched argument and the presentation of information. I just haven't seen anything on this forum to support the theory that CB was involved, nor have I seen any concrete evidence of rare stranger abduction, No-one on this forum has even successfully accounted for "Smithman". Yet there's a strong conviction from the "pro McCann" posters that CB is 100% guilty based on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence that is in the public domain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 26, 2021, 11:33:36 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 26, 2021, 10:11:15 AM
Perhaps Billy Wizz assumes opinions that aren't actually here. There's a lot of that about on this Forum.

There certain is.
Now who is it who keeps bringing up opinions from CMOMM ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 26, 2021, 11:43:12 AM
Quote from: jassi on October 26, 2021, 11:33:36 AM
There certain is.
Now who is it who keeps bringing up opinions from CMOMM ?

Billy's claim isn't anywhere apart from Wolters and his team who have seen the evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 26, 2021, 11:46:01 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 26, 2021, 10:11:15 AM
Perhaps Billy Wizz assumes opinions that aren't actually here.  There's a lot of that about on this Forum.

I agree. Far too many assumptions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 26, 2021, 11:55:20 AM
Quote from: jassi on October 26, 2021, 11:33:36 AM
There certain is.
Now who is it who keeps bringing up opinions from CMOMM ?

G-Unit?  Who else?

And what motivated your question?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 26, 2021, 11:59:33 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 26, 2021, 11:46:01 AM
I agree. Far too many assumptions.
Of course assumptions can sometimes be correct, especially when those whose views are being assumed about refuse to either confirm or deny the assumptions.  It's very easy to put people straight as I did above wrt to my views on CB's possible involvement, but some people for some reason prefer the "enigmatic" approach.  Their choice but then they shouldn't be too surprised when people assume what their position is based on their posting history. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 26, 2021, 12:01:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 26, 2021, 11:46:01 AM
I agree. Far too many assumptions.

Billy is wrong and it looks like you are too.
Saying CB may well be guilty if Wolters, has the evidence he claims is not making an assumption. Saying I think Wolters may well have the evidence is also not an assumption..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 26, 2021, 12:09:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on October 26, 2021, 12:01:46 PM
Billy is wrong and it looks like you are too.
Saying CB may well be guilty if Wolters, has the evidence he claims is not making an assumption. Saying I think Wolters may well have the evidence is also not an assumption..

I of course meant assumptions of the opinions of others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 27, 2021, 09:56:08 AM
I see the Aus police are concentrating the search for the missing girl on the family house, two visits apparently.

https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/cleo-smith/cleo-smith-search-police-return-to-missing-four-year-olds-family-home-in-hunt-for-clues-ng-b882054573z
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 10:03:48 AM
Quote from: barrier on October 27, 2021, 09:56:08 AM
I see the Aus police are concentrating the search for the missing girl on the family house, two visits apparently.

https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/cleo-smith/cleo-smith-search-police-return-to-missing-four-year-olds-family-home-in-hunt-for-clues-ng-b882054573z

I really don't want to go there at the moment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 03:14:08 PM
Quote from: barrier on October 27, 2021, 09:56:08 AM
I see the Aus police are concentrating the search for the missing girl on the family house, two visits apparently.

https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/cleo-smith/cleo-smith-search-police-return-to-missing-four-year-olds-family-home-in-hunt-for-clues-ng-b882054573z
Sceptics will literally try anything to validate their flawed theories of parental involvement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 27, 2021, 03:22:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 10:03:48 AM
I really don't want to go there at the moment.


Not a cut and dried abduction i'd venture.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 27, 2021, 03:31:13 PM
Quote from: barrier on October 27, 2021, 03:22:30 PM

Not a cut and dried abduction i'd venture.

It'll be the Dingo what done it - isn't that the fall-guy in Australia ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 03:39:49 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 27, 2021, 03:31:13 PM
It'll be the Dingo what done it - isn't that the fall-guy in Australia ?

Dingos can't unzip tents.  At least as far as I know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 27, 2021, 04:41:48 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 03:39:49 PM
Dingos can't unzip tents.  At least as far as I know.

I used to think Dingoes didn't bark either ~ but apparently that is a fallacy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 27, 2021, 04:45:43 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 03:39:49 PM
Dingos can't unzip tents.  At least as far as I know.

Maybe it had help.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 04:48:06 PM
Quote from: jassi on October 27, 2021, 04:45:43 PM
Maybe it had help.

The Dingo is Innocent Until Proven Guilty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 27, 2021, 05:00:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 03:39:49 PM
Dingos can't unzip tents.  At least as far as I know.

Yes, unzipped higher than she could reach apparently.

But, as a sceptic, it is my duty to point out that we only have the parents word for this.

Not much unlike Kate's window.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 27, 2021, 06:03:04 PM
Quote from: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 03:14:08 PM
Sceptics will literally try anything to validate their flawed theories of parental involvement.
Serious question- are you play acting? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 08:36:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 27, 2021, 06:03:04 PM
Serious question- are you play acting?
Well Vertigo, I've been handed 40 forum points today for pointing out an error in a post, so in short, I like a laugh, but the time for levity has passed.

...and isn't your post 'goading'?

Some odd rules here, arbitrarily moderated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 09:16:38 PM
Quote from: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 08:36:54 PM
Well Vertigo, I've been handed 40 forum points today for pointing out an error in a post, so in short, I like a laugh, but the time for levity has passed.

...and isn't your post 'goading'?

Some odd rules here, arbitrarily moderated.

30 Points, as far as I can see.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 09:28:58 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 09:16:38 PM
30 Points, as far as I can see.
Apologies, 30.
Thanks for those.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 27, 2021, 09:31:15 PM
Quote from: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 09:28:58 PM
Apologies, 30.
Thanks for those.

Think of them as an initiation rite  8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 27, 2021, 09:31:25 PM
Quote from: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 08:36:54 PM
Well Vertigo, I've been handed 40 forum points today for pointing out an error in a post, so in short, I like a laugh, but the time for levity has passed.

...and isn't your post 'goading'?

Some odd rules here, arbitrarily moderated.
No, it’s not goading, it was a sincere question asked in all seriousness.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 09:32:46 PM
Quote from: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 09:28:58 PM
Apologies, 30.
Thanks for those.

I just clicked on your user name to get your profile where points are registered.  Anyone can do that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 09:40:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 27, 2021, 09:31:25 PM
No, it’s not goading, it was a sincere question asked in all seriousness.
To answer the question, no. Although your question is inadvertently inciteful, as I've been heavily involved in amdram for many years. What I don't know about Pinter and Miller ain't worth knowing.

But I will take the forum points, lick my wounds and press on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 09:57:06 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 09:32:46 PM
I just clicked on your user name to get your profile where points are registered.  Anyone can do that.
I assumed it was 20 points per offence. Seems not. Where's the scoreboard posted?
Mild, anachronistic, Manningesque, casual racism - 5 points
Veiled, drunken threat of cyber investigation - 10 points
Anti-Semitic, out of context rant - 15 points
Outrageous, egregious personal slur - 20 points
Point out an obvious, glaring error in a quote in a post - 20 points.
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 10:00:26 PM
Quote from: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 09:57:06 PM
I assumed it was 20 points per offence. Seems not. Where's the scoreboard posted?
Mild, anachronistic, Manningesque, casual racism - 5 points
Veiled, drunken threat of cyber investigation - 10 points
Anti-Semitic, out of context rant - 15 points
Outrageous, egregious personal slur - 20 points
Point out an obvious, glaring error in a quote in a post - 20 points.

I don't know.  It's something I so very rarely do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 10:03:16 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 10:00:26 PM
I don't know.  It's something I so very rarely do.
Until today....:)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 10:08:29 PM
Quote from: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 10:03:16 PM
Until today....:)

I don't know who did it.  I never check.  It could have been John for all I know.  He does read every Report.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 27, 2021, 10:10:55 PM
Quote from: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 09:57:06 PM
I assumed it was 20 points per offence. Seems not. Where's the scoreboard posted?
Mild, anachronistic, Manningesque, casual racism - 5 points
Veiled, drunken threat of cyber investigation - 10 points
Anti-Semitic, out of context rant - 15 points
Outrageous, egregious personal slur - 20 points
Point out an obvious, glaring error in a quote in a post - 20 points.
Racism is positively encouraged on certain parts of the forum, especially the immigration threads.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 10:11:10 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 27, 2021, 10:08:29 PM
I don't know who did it.  I never check.  It could have been John for all I know.  He does read every Report.
Fair enough. Onwards and upwards.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 10:12:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 27, 2021, 10:10:55 PM
Racism is positively encouraged on certain parts of the forum, especially the immigration threads.
Sounds like my kind of place. I'll check it out.
Are there any references to 'bloody foreigners, taking our jobs'?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 27, 2021, 10:32:49 PM
Quote from: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 10:12:23 PM
Sounds like my kind of place. I'll check it out.
Are there any references to 'bloody foreigners, taking our jobs'?
look for yourself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 27, 2021, 10:46:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 27, 2021, 10:10:55 PM
Racism is positively encouraged on certain parts of the forum, especially the immigration threads.

Given the excess of anti-racism in society today I think it's only right there are platforms with pro racist opinions, that's diversity imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 27, 2021, 10:51:36 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on October 27, 2021, 10:46:27 PM
Given the excess of anti-racism in society today I think it's only right there are platforms with pro racist opinions, that's diversity imo.
Do you have any sincerely held views or do you just enjoy being a contrarian (posh word for troll)?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 27, 2021, 11:03:07 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 27, 2021, 10:51:36 PM
Do you have any sincerely held views or do you just enjoy being a contrarian (posh word for troll)?

Yes I know what a centurion is & I'm not one of those, I just disagree with the general consensus on any given subject.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 27, 2021, 11:04:38 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on October 27, 2021, 11:03:07 PM
Yes I know what a centurion is & I'm not one of those, I just disagree with the general consensus on any given subject.
Have you had an eye test recently?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 28, 2021, 08:59:37 AM
Quote from: Uncle Jr on October 27, 2021, 09:28:58 PM
Apologies, 30.
Thanks for those.

I got 55 once for being un nice to moderate or words to that effect, I'll have to get some to see the exact wording.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 28, 2021, 09:43:37 AM
Spammy seems to run at that most of the time. Can't imagine why.  ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 29, 2021, 08:55:53 AM
One can only hope he dies where he's at .


Paedophile child murderer Sidney Cooke fails in his TENTH bid for freedom as parole board tells him he is STILL a risk to society aged 94

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10140945/Paedophile-child-killer-Sidney-Cooke-fails-bid-freed.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on October 29, 2021, 09:40:44 AM
At 94 I'm surprised he even wants to leave prison.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 29, 2021, 10:04:01 AM

I heard he'd already been blasted into space in a one man prison capsule so he'd pose no further threat to children,
only an 8 year old boy was also placed in the capsule by mistake.

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

(Recalling this clip has just reminded me how hilarious Chris Morris & the Brass Eye Paedogeddon special  was, going to have to watch it again later, possibly the greatest news spoof ever made)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2021, 10:10:15 PM
What phenomenal news in the Cleo Smith story, found alive!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2021, 10:11:00 PM
Cleo Smith: Missing 4-year-old found alive in Australia https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-59143494
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2021, 10:12:17 PM
Thank god the police did not stop searching for this girl after one week.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2021, 10:15:45 PM
Of course Perter Mac knew exactly what happened weeks ago when he wrote a propos of Cleo’s stepfather:

“We've seen it all before.  Very sad.
[It is what a new Pride lion does when taking over. It systematically kills all the cubs, before mating with the lionesses to guarantee the succession of HIS genes.]”

What a charmer!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2021, 11:47:33 PM
man arrested in Cleo Smith case has no  family connection according to latest reports

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2021/nov/03/cleo-smith-found-update-western-australia-police-missing-four-year-old-alive-carnarvon-live-updates
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 02, 2021, 11:59:34 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2021, 11:47:33 PM
man arrested in Cleo Smith case has no  family connection according to latest reports

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2021/nov/03/cleo-smith-found-update-western-australia-police-missing-four-year-old-alive-carnarvon-live-updates

The problem seems to be the creeps who haunt cases such as Cleo's expressing their opinions on social media and thinking they do a better job of it than the police.

The Australian police did their job wonderfully well and I rather suspect had they adopted the Amaral style of policing and stopped looking for Cleo the day after her abduction her parents would perhaps never have found out what happened to her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 03, 2021, 12:30:11 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2021, 10:15:45 PM
Of course Perter Mac knew exactly what happened weeks ago when he wrote a propos of Cleo’s stepfather:

“We've seen it all before.  Very sad.
[It is what a new Pride lion does when taking over. It systematically kills all the cubs, before mating with the lionesses to guarantee the succession of HIS genes.]”

What a charmer!

Oh My God, did PeterMcac actually say that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 03, 2021, 01:35:31 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 03, 2021, 12:30:11 AM
Oh My God, did PeterMcac actually say that?
by Verdi 23.10.21 16:32
If you watch the video footage again there is no meaning, no feeling, no expression, no emotion - the woman can't even feign distress.

She talks roughly about the lay-out of the tent, there was a divider, Cleo was sleeping where the zipper tent entrance was.

So many parallels with Kate McCann's version of events and her use of language, I'll wager the mother has been watching the case very carefully in preparation of her debut before the camera.

This case stinks.

I don't think there are any "parallels" with Madeleine's case.  The Australian police were still looking for a live child after eighteen days; the Portuguese gave up on Madeleine as soon as Amaral got out of bed on the morning of the fourth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 03, 2021, 02:47:28 AM

I think that I might just go away and have a nervous breakdown.

I can't cope with this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 03, 2021, 02:53:38 AM

The Child has been found alive. The rest of it is irrelevant for the moment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 03, 2021, 06:50:23 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 03, 2021, 02:47:28 AM
I think that I might just go away and have a nervous breakdown.

I can't cope with this.
A photo to make your day, Ellie...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10158649/Miracle-Australias-Madeleine-McCann-ALIVE.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10158649/Miracle-Australias-Madeleine-McCann-ALIVE.html)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2021, 07:23:04 AM
Quote from: Myster on November 03, 2021, 06:50:23 AM
A photo to make your day, Ellie...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10158649/Miracle-Australias-Madeleine-McCann-ALIVE.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10158649/Miracle-Australias-Madeleine-McCann-ALIVE.html)
This is so utterly brilliant.  I just hope Cleo didn’t suffer too much at the hands of the creep who abducted her.  Also noteworthy is the apparent lack of interest in the resolution of this case by those who sneer at the possibility of stranger abduction, who claim a child will wake up and scream if anyone tries to take them, who suddenly become body language experts and wag fingers at distraught parents claiming their grief is incincere, put on, not enough,who mock the scant evidence of abduction that the police choose to share with the public, who cite statistics to solve cases, who pronounce that a child taken by a stranger is better off dead than found anyway.  I think these people have a lot to learn from this case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 03, 2021, 07:29:12 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 03, 2021, 07:23:04 AM
This is so utterly brilliant.  I just hope Cleo didn’t suffer too much at the hands of the creep who abducted her.  Also noteworthy is the apparent lack of interest in the resolution of this case by those who sneer at the possibility of stranger abduction, who claim a child will wake up and scream if anyone tries to take them, who suddenly become body language experts and wag fingers at distraught parents claiming their grief is incincere, put on, not enough,who mock the scant evidence of abduction that the police choose to share with the public, who cite statistics to solve cases, who pronounce that a child taken by a stranger is better off dead than found anyway.  I think these people have a lot to learn from this case.

Personally I just wasn't interested in the case that's why I didn't comment.
But I can see now how a child going missing & turning up alive in Australia means the McCanns had absolutely no involvement whatsoever in Madeleine's disappearance from Portugal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2021, 07:40:55 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 03, 2021, 07:29:12 AM
Personally I just wasn't interested in the case that's why I didn't comment.
But I can see now how a child going missing & turning up alive in Australia means the McCanns had absolutely no involvement whatsoever in Madeleine's disappearance from Portugal.
Why did the case not interest you when there were obvious parallels with the case you have spent many years trolling about?  Prior to yesterday and the child being found what would you have said was evidence of abduction and non-parental involvement?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 03, 2021, 07:52:51 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 03, 2021, 07:40:55 AM
Why did the case not interest you when there were obvious parallels with the case you have spent many years trolling about?  Prior to yesterday and the child being found what would you have said was evidence of abduction and non-parental involvement?

Because I just wasn't interested, I read a few articles & didn't think much of it after that. Why should I care about the wellbeing of a child I don't know & lives thousands of miles away?
The only evidence released was a zipper open further than it was left, a missing child & sleeping bag, plus audio evidence of the presence of the child at the campsite.
The audio evidence proved the child was at the site & the missing sleeping bag was evidence she didn't walk off on her own, & in that respect it's dissimilar to the McCann case, there being no evidence ,other than a window that was maybe or maybe not open, that the child was actually abducted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2021, 07:56:30 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 03, 2021, 07:52:51 AM
Because I just wasn't interested, I read a few articles & didn't think much of it after that. Why should I care about the wellbeing of a child I don't know & lives thousands of miles away?
The only evidence released was a zipper open further than it was left, a missing child & sleeping bag, plus audio evidence of the presence of the child at the campsite.
The audio evidence proved the child was at the site & the missing sleeping bag was evidence she didn't walk off on her own, & in that respect it's dissimilar to the McCann case, there being no evidence ,other than a window that was maybe or maybe not open, that the child was actually abducted.
So basically no evidence that couldn’t easily have been explained as parental involvement.  Of course in Madeleine’s case not only was there visual evidence in the form of photos) but dozens of eye witnesses. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 03, 2021, 08:04:54 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 03, 2021, 07:56:30 AM
So basically no evidence that couldn’t easily have been explained as parental involvement.  Of course in Madeleine’s case not only was there visual evidence in the form of photos) but dozens of eye witnesses.

To what, her presence at the OC? Great, so she wasn't dead before she went on holiday.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2021, 08:35:36 AM
Incidentally I wasn’t aware there had been audio evidence of Cleo’s presence at the csmp, so obviously Spammy followed this case more closely than I did, despite claiming zero interest in it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 03, 2021, 08:39:05 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 03, 2021, 08:35:36 AM
Incidentally I wasn’t aware there had been audio evidence of Cleo’s presence at the csmp, so obviously Spammy followed this case more closely than I did, despite claiming zero interest in it.

Yeah I saw about 2 or 3 articles because I tend to read the headline news whenever I scroll through my phone.

I was just reading now how there were over 200 reported sightings of her, these people should be cautioned for wasting police time imo.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2021, 09:20:50 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 03, 2021, 08:39:05 AM
Yeah I saw about 2 or 3 articles because I tend to read the headline news whenever I scroll through my phone.

I was just reading now how there were over 200 reported sightings of her, these people should be cautioned for wasting police time imo.
From what I can gather members of the general public were instrumental in her recovery, but we shall see when more information is released.  A happy day, though maybe a bit of an embarrassing one for all those who claimed to know her parents had something to do with it.  That said, no shame or embarrassment to be seen over on CMOMM by those who did exactly that.  Some people just don’t have the capacity for it I guess.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 03, 2021, 09:36:06 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 03, 2021, 09:20:50 AM
From what I can gather members of the general public were instrumental in her recovery, but we shall see when more information is released.  A happy day, though maybe a bit of an embarrassing one for all those who claimed to know her parents had something to do with it.  That said, no shame or embarrassment to be seen over on CMOMM by those who did exactly that.  Some people just don’t have the capacity for it I guess.

One thing I noticed is the abductor seems to have done a good job of looking after her, she's smiling & looking well, hasn't been starved.

This gives renewed hope Madeleine could be living a happy life amongst the paedophile gang that abducted her.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2021, 09:42:45 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 03, 2021, 09:36:06 AM
One thing I noticed is the abductor seems to have done a good job of looking after her, she's smiling & looking well, hasn't been starved.

This gives renewed hope Madeleine could be living a happy life amongst the paedophile gang that abducted her.
It does, you’re right.  Nothing wrong with hoping.  If anything this case has taught me is that miracles can happen.  I was privately convinced Cleo was dead and had little hope of being proved wrong.  Glad I was though. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 03, 2021, 09:57:53 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 03, 2021, 09:42:45 AM
It does, you’re right.  Nothing wrong with hoping.  If anything this case has taught me is that miracles can happen.  I was privately convinced Cleo was dead and had little hope of being proved wrong.  Glad I was though.

Well, unfortunately there's concrete evidence Maddie is dead, she was murdered by a paedophile & there's no possibility other than this.

I'm sorry to break this to you but we must face the undeniable truth, based on the evidence, or just take Wolters word for it, the two have equal merit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 03, 2021, 10:05:07 AM

Another case that I read about this week was the retired lawyer who murdered her husband.

When the police arrived on the scene & found him he was still alive, so she told them she should have stabbed him some more.

There were gasps from the jury as the 999 call was played, she could be heard stabbing him some more as she told the operator what she was doing.

Ah, wedded bliss.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Snowgirl on November 03, 2021, 10:13:44 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 03, 2021, 09:36:06 AM
One thing I noticed is the abductor seems to have done a good job of looking after her, she's smiling & looking well, hasn't been starved.

This gives renewed hope Madeleine could be living a happy life amongst the paedophile gang that abducted her.
Could be living a happy llife amongst paedophiles ? In the immortal words of John McEnroe " you cannot be serious! "
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 03, 2021, 10:20:29 AM
Quote from: Myster on November 03, 2021, 06:50:23 AM
A photo to make your day, Ellie...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10158649/Miracle-Australias-Madeleine-McCann-ALIVE.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10158649/Miracle-Australias-Madeleine-McCann-ALIVE.html)

Absolutely wonderful news,  after two weeks it looked very bleak,  but there she is smiling and waving, bet her parents and family are over the moon.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2021, 10:46:24 AM
Quote from: Snowgirl on November 03, 2021, 10:13:44 AM
Could be living a happy llife amongst paedophiles ? In the immortal words of John McEnroe " you cannot be serious! "
He’s not, he’s trolling.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2021, 10:57:47 AM
Well they’re not letting it lie on the cesspit re Cleo Smith.  They are now invoking the name of Shannon Matthews despite their faux outrage at comparisons between this case and Madeleine McCann’s. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Snowgirl on November 03, 2021, 11:59:13 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 03, 2021, 10:57:47 AM
Well they’re not letting it lie on the cesspit re Cleo Smith.  They are now invoking the name of Shannon Matthews despite their faux outrage at comparisons between this case and Madeleine McCann’s.
Who are " they"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2021, 12:08:16 PM
Quote from: Snowgirl on November 03, 2021, 11:59:13 AM
Who are " they"?
Them on the Cesspit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 04, 2021, 05:36:35 PM
Quote from: barrier on October 22, 2021, 08:42:09 PM
Hmmm.


MADELEINE McCann top cop Jim Gamble has said missing Cleo Smith likely would have known her abductor who may be someone who was following the family ahead of their trip.

Mr Gamble - who was the senior child protection officer in the UK investigation into the Maddie case - explained the chance of the girl being taken away silently by a total stranger in the middle of the night was low.


Hmmm…

No admission that he was wrong to assume in his previous pronouncement…

Cleo Smith: Irish detective who led Madeleine McCann probe says 'hope wins out for a change' as missing Australian girl found alive

Jim Gamble also said he feels 'overwhelmed' and that Cleo’s rescue is 'simply the best news ever'

By Nicola Donnelly

05:00, 4 NOV 2021Updated08:29, 4 NOV 2021

An Irish detective who led an investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann said “hope wins out for a change” as missing Australian girl Cleo Smith has been found alive after going missing more than two weeks ago.

Jim Gamble - who was the senior child protection officer in the UK investigation into missing Maddie case - also said he feels “overwhelmed” and that Cleo’s rescue is “simply the best news ever.”

The former chief executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, who served as the senior child protection officer in the UK’s first investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance, also praised the work of Australian police who rescued four-year-old Cleo - dubbed ‘Aussie Maddie’ - on Wednesday after a late-night raid at a house which followed a tip to police the previous day.

Taking to Twitter as the news of Cleo’s rescue was announced, Mr Gamble wrote: “Simply the best news ever. Fantastic work. What an amazing result under such difficult circumstances and the glare of the media.”

The Bangor man, who is one of the UK’s most experienced and outspoken experts on the safeguarding of children online, also said he is “overjoyed that there is a happy ending in this case.”

“Thank God. Sometimes things can work out. There’ll be more work to do and plenty of support needed, but this is an amazing result,”

Mr Gamble, who now runs the Belfast-based INEQE Group which continues to spearhead the battle to make the online world safer for children, said he has “felt so overwhelmed” by the news of Cleo’s rescue.


Enlarge this image Click to see fullsize

Search for 'Aussie Madeleine McCann' as public told to check bins for missing girl, 4 - Page 7 1_tm10
Jim Gamble

“So often in these cases you hope against all the odds. You keep believing in the possibility of a good outcome.

“Everytime it fails to materialise you lose something. This is a powerful reminder that good things can happen,” he said. “Hope wins out for a change.”

Following the rescue of Cleo, a 36-year-old local man was arrested.

Australian media reported that officials wept with relief after seeing a body camera video of a police officer scooping up the girl and hearing her say: “My name is Cleo.”

The girl was reunited with her mother Ellie Smith and stepfather Jake Gliddon soon after her rescue.

Western Australia State police commissioner Chris Dawson said the girl is “as well as you can expect”, adding: “This has been an ordeal. I won’t go into any more details, other than to say we’re so thankful she’s alive.”

Mr Dawson said “dogged, methodical police work” led to the girl being found.

Australian prime minister Scott Morrison reacted from the United Arab Emirates on his way home from the Cop26 climate summit in Scotland, thanking police for finding Cleo and supporting her family.

“It’s every parent’s worst nightmare. The fact that that nightmare has come to an end and our worst fears were not realised is just a huge relief, a moment for great joy,” Mr Morrison told reporters.

“This particular case, obviously, has captured the hearts of Australians as we felt such terrible sorrow for the family,” he added.

Cleo’s family lives in Carnarvon, a community of 5,000 people, and the girl had disappeared with her sleeping bag on the second day of a family camping trip at Blowholes Campground, 47 miles north of Carnarvon, on October 16.

A massive land and sea search was initially mounted in the sparsely populated region on the assumption that she had wandered from the tent. But more evidence began to support the theory that she had been abducted.

A vehicle was reported speeding away from the area in the early hours of the morning. A zip on a flap of the tent compartment where Cleo and her sister were sleeping was too high for the girl to have reached.

Forensic scientists examined the exterior of the family’s home to see if a predator had stalked Cleo and attempted to break in.

A distraught Ellie Smith made emotional public appeals for information on her daughter’s whereabouts that were broadcast across Australia over the past two weeks.

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/cleo-smith-irish-detective-who-25372615

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16501977/madeleine-mccann-cleo-smith-australia-missing/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 04, 2021, 05:43:16 PM
“Hope wins out for a change”, how that must stick in the craw of the hope-less.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 05, 2021, 01:14:06 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 04, 2021, 05:43:16 PM
“Hope wins out for a change”, how that must stick in the craw of the hope-less.

There are a lot of very strange individuals about and there can be few stranger than the guy who took it upon himself to abduct Cleo and rip her from her family.

He was watching Cleo and her family.  Entirely unbeknownst to the family they were being stalked.  Innocent posting on social media became the abductor's window into their world and their activities.

The kidnapper followed Cleo's mother on social media and played with dolls
Terry K., the kidnapper of four-year-old Cleo, appeared in court for the first time. Meanwhile, footage of him with children's dolls appears on the net. His behaviour on social media is also described as abnormal.
http://test.lessentiel.lu/de/panorama/#showid=145709&index=0

Nobody knows what goes on behind closed doors.  One wonders how many other fetishists there are out there in the world - this is certainly a new one on me or maybe not.  I know there are people with train sets or all sorts of model scenarios from wars to galaxies none of which I have ever thought the slightest bit odd.

This guy has taken his interest one step too far.  I think there is probably quite a bit to be gained as far as understanding his motivations for doing what he did.
At the moment the best that can be said for him is that he didn't physically harm Cleo but he must have caused her a lot of trauma and how she must have missed her family.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2021, 07:16:47 AM
“The chances of a girl being taken away silently by a stranger in the middle of the night are low” - but it happened. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 09, 2021, 09:56:16 PM

French 17-year-old feared abducted while jogging

Police in north-western France are searching for a young jogger and have opened an inquiry into her abduction.

The 17-year-old, who has not been named, disappeared on Monday afternoon in the French district of Mayenne.

Her father raised the alarm when he found her phone and GPS watch on her running route after she failed to return home as usual.

Some 200 police officers, rescue dogs, divers and a helicopter have joined the search, covering woodland and a river.

Local prosecutor Céline Maigné told a news conference that the inquiry was initially seen as a "worrying disappearance" but was now classed as an abduction and holding someone against their will.

The teenager, described as a regular runner, left her home for the local Bellebranche forest at around 16:00 on Monday. Her father contacted police less than three hours later, after discovering items belonging to his daughter that had traces of blood.

"The current investigation has only just begun and there are many lines of inquiry," Ms Maigné said, adding that teams were searching a partly wooded area with stretches of water of about 190 hectares (470 acres).

She appealed to residents not to join the search so as not to get in the way of investigators.

She said police were interviewing an individual related to the case due to some inconsistencies in initial statements made to officers but did not suggest he was a suspect.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59210425
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2021, 10:21:19 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 09, 2021, 09:56:16 PM
French 17-year-old feared abducted while jogging

Police in north-western France are searching for a young jogger and have opened an inquiry into her abduction.

The 17-year-old, who has not been named, disappeared on Monday afternoon in the French district of Mayenne.

Her father raised the alarm when he found her phone and GPS watch on her running route after she failed to return home as usual.

Some 200 police officers, rescue dogs, divers and a helicopter have joined the search, covering woodland and a river.

Local prosecutor Céline Maigné told a news conference that the inquiry was initially seen as a "worrying disappearance" but was now classed as an abduction and holding someone against their will.

The teenager, described as a regular runner, left her home for the local Bellebranche forest at around 16:00 on Monday. Her father contacted police less than three hours later, after discovering items belonging to his daughter that had traces of blood.

"The current investigation has only just begun and there are many lines of inquiry," Ms Maigné said, adding that teams were searching a partly wooded area with stretches of water of about 190 hectares (470 acres).

She appealed to residents not to join the search so as not to get in the way of investigators.

She said police were interviewing an individual related to the case due to some inconsistencies in initial statements made to officers but did not suggest he was a suspect.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59210425

Please could you start a new Topic on this.  Not Madeleine related, but not entirely unrelated.

Merci Beaucoup.  I will Approve it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on November 13, 2021, 11:03:48 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 09, 2021, 10:21:19 PM
Please could you start a new Topic on this.  Not Madeleine related, but not entirely unrelated.

Merci Beaucoup.  I will Approve it.

For some reason best known to herself, she made it up.
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20211112-teen-french-jogger-admits-to-lying-over-alleged-kidnapping
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on December 24, 2021, 07:24:03 PM
Merry Christmas to my Christian friends here.💫
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 24, 2021, 07:32:52 PM
Quote from: Anthro on December 24, 2021, 07:24:03 PM
Merry Christmas to my Christian friends here.💫

Merry Christmas to you and yours, Anthro  xx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on December 24, 2021, 08:28:01 PM
Merry Christmas to one and all. x
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 24, 2021, 09:32:40 PM
(https://images.indianexpress.com/2018/12/christmas-feature_759.jpg)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 07:45:06 AM
The Met have failed to demonstrate their expertise again. Anyone watch Four Lives?

How Met failings contributed to the deaths of three men
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59576717
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 06, 2022, 08:15:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 07:45:06 AM
The Met have failed to demonstrate their expertise again. Anyone watch Four Lives?

How Met failings contributed to the deaths of three men
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59576717
Yes I did.  It would seem homophobia played a large part in the shocking failures to join the dots.  I wonder if such police failings would ever be the subject of a similar docudrama in Portugal?  Perhps when the Madeleine case is finally solved such a drama series will be commissioned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 08:33:55 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 06, 2022, 08:15:23 AM
Yes I did.  It would seem homophobia played a large part in the shocking failures to join the dots.  I wonder if such police failings would ever be the subject of a similar docudrama in Portugal?  Perhps when the Madeleine case is finally solved such a drama series will be commissioned.

It seems to me that The Met operates on assumptions rather than on facts. Not only did they fail to follow the evidence in the Port case, they failed to see it.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 06, 2022, 08:39:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 08:33:55 AM
It seems to me that The Met operates on assumptions rather than on facts. Not only did they fail to follow the evidence in the Port case, they failed to see it.

Do you think the Germans are wrong too.  Why do you think the Grrmans are so convinced the McCanns are innocent
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 06, 2022, 09:26:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 08:33:55 AM
It seems to me that The Met operates on assumptions rather than on facts. Not only did they fail to follow the evidence in the Port case, they failed to see it.
Is that the general rule then as far as you're concerned?  That they are completely and utterly useless in all cases?  Can we simply write the Met off as a credible force and in so doing draw the conclusion that they must be wrong in the mcCann case? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 09:44:41 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 06, 2022, 09:26:44 AM
Is that the general rule then as far as you're concerned?  That they are completely and utterly useless in all cases?  Can we simply write the Met off as a credible force and in so doing draw the conclusion that they must be wrong in the mcCann case?

I think those who sing The Met's praises should face the fact that they aren't the shining example that they see them as. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 06, 2022, 10:01:50 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 09:44:41 AM
I think those who sing The Met's praises should face the fact that they aren't the shining example that they see them as.

You cannot state as  fact that the Met are not a shining example of a police force... Where's your evidence... Who are you comparing them to.  Once again you quote opinion as fact and show an ignorance of what constitutes evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 06, 2022, 10:05:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 09:44:41 AM
I think those who sing The Met's praises should face the fact that they aren't the shining example that they see them as.
Perhaps you can tell us who you are referring to by "those" in the sentence above?  Who here is "singing the Met's praises?"  Please give examples to illustrate your claim.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 06, 2022, 10:10:34 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 09:44:41 AM
I think those who sing The Met's praises should face the fact that they aren't the shining example that they see them as.
What gives you the right...with an obvious lack of knowledge to tell us how good the Met are.  Perhaps you could tell us how they rate in Europe ..the fact is... You haven't got a clue
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 06, 2022, 10:18:11 AM
To their credit the Met solved the abduction, rape and murder of Sarah Everard very promptly even though the perpetrator was one of their own but you won't see their detractors giving them any credit for that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 10:36:12 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 06, 2022, 10:05:58 AM
Perhaps you can tell us who you are referring to by "those" in the sentence above?  Who here is "singing the Met's praises?"  Please give examples to illustrate your claim.  Thanks.

They have been consistently lauded as the 'professionals' but people need to face the facts; professionals can get it wrong as The Met seem to do regularly.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=12126.msg661751#msg661751
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 06, 2022, 10:41:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 10:36:12 AM
They have been consistently lauded as the 'professionals' but people need to face the facts; professionals can get it wrong as The Met seem to do regularly.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=12126.msg661751#msg661751
Whether you like it or not the Met ARE professionals and have received far more training and have had a lot more experience and access to far more information than you have.  So, given the choice between accepting your opinion or theirs I would choose theirs every time. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 06, 2022, 10:44:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 10:36:12 AM
They have been consistently lauded as the 'professionals' but people need to face the facts; professionals can get it wrong as The Met seem to do regularly.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=12126.msg661751#msg661751
From what I have read they are regarded as one of the best police forces in the world... What proper evidence di you have of how they rate... Quoting individual case, s just shiws an ignorance of how evidence is collatecd and what constututes evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on January 06, 2022, 11:06:43 AM
Quote from: Davel on January 06, 2022, 10:44:23 AM
From what I have read they are regarded as one of the best police forces in the world... What proper evidence di you have of how they rate... Quoting individual case, s just shiws an ignorance of how evidence is collatecd and what constututes evidence

Are SY really one of the best police forces in the world?

According to whom?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 06, 2022, 11:13:19 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on January 06, 2022, 11:06:43 AM
Are SY really one of the best police forces in the world?

According to whom?

Well different inquiries have them has institutionally racist and institutionally corrupt, does that count.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on January 06, 2022, 11:18:38 AM
Quote from: barrier on January 06, 2022, 11:13:19 AM
Well different inquiries have them has institutionally racist and institutionally corrupt, does that count.

I'd like to see the data comparisons with other police forces from around the world.

Perhaps an SY enthusiast could supply a link to the official police force world rankings & statistics.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 06, 2022, 11:19:15 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 10:36:12 AM
They have been consistently lauded as the 'professionals' but people need to face the facts; professionals can get it wrong as The Met seem to do regularly.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=12126.msg661751#msg661751

I don't think there is precedent for the Met giving up on the search for a missing three year old before it had even started with a senior investigating officer writing a book confirming that fact and accusing her parents, friends and governments of involvement in her death and the subsequent cover up. 

Can't think of many instances of such a display of lack of professionalism in an institution and few of such an avaricious money grubbing disgraceful display from an individual.

Can you?

For starters I give you this one ~
Aussie hacked to death, cops say suicide
1:00pm Oct 24, 2010
An Australian woman's death in Portugal was ruled a suicide despite forensic evidence showing she suffered repeated blows from an axe, according to reports.
Former model and fashion executive Jacinta Rees was found dead at her cottage in the Algarve, in southern Portugal, in April 2008.
A coronial examination into the Melbourne woman's death found she died of axe wounds and had marks on her arms and legs indicating she had tried to defend herself, the Daily Telegraph reports.
But despite the evidence her family says the death was ruled a suicide in the European nation and the Australian government has failed to contest the decision.
"Jacinta's skull had been caved in with an axe. She clearly had defensive wounds also," Jacinta's sister-in-law Louise told News Ltd.
"She suffered a horrendous death and she most certainly fought for her life.
"The GNR (Portugese national police) determined this was a suicide and our embassy concurred."
Jacinta's brother, Cameron, said that consular officials had abandoned the family after they botched their initial dealings with the Portuguese.
"All we want is to know the truth about what happened to her. She was our sister and our parents' child — she deserves better than this," Cameron said.
Jacinta was found dead in the courtyard of her home at Sao Bras de Alportel, near the city of Faro.
Local police initially said her death was an accident, and then said it was suicide, despite an autopsy indicating it was a murder, according to News Ltd.
A separate Victorian Coroners' report referred the case to the Victorian Police Department's homicide squad.
"This injury pattern with trauma to both head and the left arm raises serious concerns. Further investigations are being undertaken via the Victorian Police Department's homicide squad," read.
The Portuguese police have closed their investigation.
https://www.9news.com.au/world/aussie-hacked-to-death-cops-say-suicide/c2faea72-7cf3-4b5f-9b7c-a11cb1cb7244

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on January 06, 2022, 11:22:09 AM
Quote from: barrier on January 06, 2022, 11:13:19 AM
Well different inquiries have them has institutionally racist and institutionally corrupt, does that count.
Not only 'different inquiries', there's entire catalogues on dedicated websites documenting all of that and much, much more. A simple Google search will send you to dozens upon dozens of cases stretching back to when Bobby Peel himself was presiding over the embryonic Met Police, right up to yesterday afternoon.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on January 06, 2022, 11:29:38 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on January 06, 2022, 11:18:38 AM
I'd like to see the data comparisons with other police forces from around the world.

Perhaps an SY enthusiast could supply a link to the official police force world rankings & statistics.
It's not quite that simple. There are very few parameters / KPI's that can be used as apples for apples - too many variables, such as resources, demographics, hierarchical structure, funding, political regime, judicial process, etc.
Canada may be comparable, if everyone is in agreement - so perhaps Ottawa could be used as a relative comparison.
I think you'll find a similar story, just on a sliding scale.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on January 06, 2022, 11:39:56 AM

From what I've seen lately our police forces have become political organisations.

Taking the knee for BLM, painting their cars in the intersectionalist rainbow pride flags & getting their advice from Stonewall.

They don't seem very effective at stemming the flow of stabbed black kids though.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 06, 2022, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on January 06, 2022, 11:39:56 AM
From what I've seen lately our police forces have become political organisations.

Taking the knee for BLM, painting their cars in the intersectionalist rainbow pride flags & getting their advice from Stonewall.

They don't seem very effective at stemming the flow of stabbed black kids though.

2021 was a record year for that .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on January 06, 2022, 11:47:17 AM
Quote from: barrier on January 06, 2022, 11:42:56 AM
2021 was a record year for that .

It's the racists in this country targeting the minorities.

That's who's committing all the knife crime in our cities.

Definitely not majority BAME offenders these days.

I wonder why Crimewatch got taken off air?  Really can't imagine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 11:49:47 AM
Quote from: Davel on January 06, 2022, 10:44:23 AM
From what I have read they are regarded as one of the best police forces in the world... What proper evidence di you have of how they rate... Quoting individual case, s just shiws an ignorance of how evidence is collatecd and what constututes evidence

The best of a bad bunch perhaps...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on January 06, 2022, 11:50:47 AM
Quote from: barrier on January 06, 2022, 11:42:56 AM
2021 was a record year for that .

Race realism or idealism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqVCBqrQmaw&t=2s
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on January 06, 2022, 11:54:03 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 11:49:47 AM
The best of a bad bunch perhaps...
Large, antiquated organisations breed the same endemic problems, particularly ones with complex hierarchies and large volumes of long term employees, public or private.
One of which is that real competence is often not a prerequisite for upward progression.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on January 06, 2022, 12:06:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 11:49:47 AM
The best of a bad bunch perhaps...
Perhaps running such a large police force.. Solving crime is more difficult than you think
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on January 06, 2022, 12:16:53 PM
Quote from: The General on January 06, 2022, 11:54:03 AM
Large, antiquated organisations breed the same endemic problems, particularly ones with complex hierarchies and large volumes of long term employees, public or private.
One of which is that real competence is often not a prerequisite for upward progression.

No indeed; time served, office politics or being kicked upstairs can all play a part. My only experience is of the Army, where promotion often goes to those with what was referred to as 'khaki brains', which means total commitment to the aims and rules of the organisation and it's senior officers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 11, 2022, 04:00:10 PM
No witness's saying this, no prosecutor saying that, its how it should be done, no names either.


Police make two arrests in one of UK's most baffling missing persons cases: Two men, 45 and 38, are held for kidnap and trafficking over 2007 disappearance of Andrew Gosden, 14, who bought one-way train ticket to London and was never seen again
Andrew Gosden was 14 when he vanished without a trace in September 2007
The schoolboy had skipped school and took a train from Doncaster to London
Last seen on CCTV at King's Cross at around 11.20am same day he disappeared
Two men, 45 and 38, were arrested on suspicion of kidnap and human trafficking
Both have now been released under investigation while enquiries continue
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10390809/Two-men-held-suspicion-kidnap-human-trafficking-disappearance-Andrew-Gosden.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 11, 2022, 04:03:56 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 11, 2022, 04:00:10 PM
No witness's saying this, no prosecutor saying that, its how it should be done, no names either.


Police make two arrests in one of UK's most baffling missing persons cases: Two men, 45 and 38, are held for kidnap and trafficking over 2007 disappearance of Andrew Gosden, 14, who bought one-way train ticket to London and was never seen again
Andrew Gosden was 14 when he vanished without a trace in September 2007
The schoolboy had skipped school and took a train from Doncaster to London
Last seen on CCTV at King's Cross at around 11.20am same day he disappeared
Two men, 45 and 38, were arrested on suspicion of kidnap and human trafficking
Both have now been released under investigation while enquiries continue
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10390809/Two-men-held-suspicion-kidnap-human-trafficking-disappearance-Andrew-Gosden.html
If they've been released then there can't be much evidence against them.  I do sincerely hope this leads to a breakthrough in this case - imagine if they find Andrew alive, how wonderful would that be?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 11, 2022, 04:10:57 PM
Quote from: barrier on January 11, 2022, 04:00:10 PM
No witness's saying this, no prosecutor saying that, its how it should be done, no names either.


Police make two arrests in one of UK's most baffling missing persons cases: Two men, 45 and 38, are held for kidnap and trafficking over 2007 disappearance of Andrew Gosden, 14, who bought one-way train ticket to London and was never seen again
Andrew Gosden was 14 when he vanished without a trace in September 2007
The schoolboy had skipped school and took a train from Doncaster to London
Last seen on CCTV at King's Cross at around 11.20am same day he disappeared
Two men, 45 and 38, were arrested on suspicion of kidnap and human trafficking
Both have now been released under investigation while enquiries continue
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10390809/Two-men-held-suspicion-kidnap-human-trafficking-disappearance-Andrew-Gosden.html
Of course like in Portugal the police were initially incompetent in this case too, wasting valuable time in the initial days of the disappearance by focusing too much of their attention on Andrew's father and failing to gather potential vital evidence. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on January 11, 2022, 04:18:32 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on January 11, 2022, 04:03:56 PM
If they've been released then there can't be much evidence against them.  I do sincerely hope this leads to a breakthrough in this case - imagine if they find Andrew alive, how wonderful would that be?

I think he'd have some serious explaining to do around how he's treated his poor family for the past 15 years, unless of course his captors had him locked in a basement with no means of outside communication all this time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on January 19, 2022, 01:59:03 AM
OMG!

Did anyone watch the TV show this evening (Tuesday) on Ghislaine Maxwell, Prince Andrew, Jeffrey Epstein etc.?

IIRC it was on ITV at about 10pm

I have been looking at photos of her for a long time now, showing her with very short hair for a comparison to a photofit, but there were none that I could find with very short hair.


In the very last few minutes of the tv program one came up.  I think it was the very last photo of her of a series being shown in the program.  So in the last 4 minutes probably.


OMG !!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on January 19, 2022, 07:16:49 AM
I hope the above isn't going to be the start of another one of your silly conspiracy theories.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 19, 2022, 09:12:49 AM
Quote from: Myster on January 19, 2022, 07:16:49 AM
I hope the above isn't going to be the start of another one of your silly conspiracy theories.

I think the conspiracy theories have been around for some time; wasn't the person concerned ID'd as an Aussie millionaire?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 19, 2022, 09:23:37 AM
Quote from: Brietta on January 19, 2022, 09:12:49 AM
I think the conspiracy theories have been around for some time; wasn't the person concerned ID'd as an Aussie millionaire?
She purportedly had an Australian accent but I don’t think she was ever identified?  The photofit and description really does look and sound like Maxwell though. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on January 19, 2022, 09:28:49 AM
Quote from: Brietta on January 19, 2022, 09:12:49 AM
I think the conspiracy theories have been around for some time; wasn't the person concerned ID'd as an Aussie millionaire?
I guess so and this one doesn't need resurrecting.  Epstein, the louche, lantern-jawed lizard had a vulgar taste for seducing and bedding vulnerable young women, not in abducting and hawking around four-year old toddlers for procreation to the highest bidder.

Maxwell's mugshot on ITV...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 19, 2022, 09:36:49 AM
Quote from: Myster on January 19, 2022, 09:28:49 AM
I guess so and this one doesn't need resurrecting.  Epstein, the louche, lantern-jawed lizard had a vulgar taste for seducing and bedding vulnerable young women, not in abducting and hawking around four-year old toddlers for procreation to the highest bidder.

Maxwell's mugshot on ITV...
Nevertheless it could have been her, not awaiting delivery of a toddler “daughter” but a teenage “daughter” for sex trafficking.  It would be interesting to know if anyone investigating her movements and activities attempted to connect the dots in this regard.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on January 19, 2022, 12:06:49 PM
Quote from: Myster on January 19, 2022, 09:28:49 AM
I guess so and this one doesn't need resurrecting.  Epstein, the louche, lantern-jawed lizard had a vulgar taste for seducing and bedding vulnerable young women, not in abducting and hawking around four-year old toddlers for procreation to the highest bidder.

Maxwell's mugshot on ITV...

Well sorry but I do like the idea that a bankrupt vagrant paedophile who slept in a knackered campervan was secretly rubbing shoulders with & delivering abducted children to wealthy elite socialites.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on January 19, 2022, 12:23:30 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on January 19, 2022, 12:06:49 PM
Well sorry but I do like the idea that a bankrupt vagrant paedophile who slept in a knackered campervan was secretly rubbing shoulders with & delivering abducted children to wealthy elite socialites.
He couldn't even deliver pop bottles of jarg diesel to peasants without getting caught, ffs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on January 19, 2022, 12:37:43 PM

If you've never seen the Prince Andrew interview, you should watch it.

He went to visit Epstein, after he'd been convicted, & stayed in his house for 4 days because.....he needed to tell him he couldn't see him anymore.

I'm too honourable for my own good m'lud & that photo of me with the girl I believe I never met, may or may not be a fake.

It's about 50 minutes of a lie spotters wet dream.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtBS8COhhhM
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on January 19, 2022, 12:56:26 PM
Did you notice a two-gallon bucket hidden behind his chair to catch the sweat?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on January 19, 2022, 12:59:07 PM
Quote from: Myster on January 19, 2022, 12:56:26 PM
Did you notice a two-gallon bucket hidden behind his chair to catch the sweat?

I like the look of shock on his face when she mentions the name of a man he says he didn't know & who definitely didn't see him having a foot massage.

After @12:45

https://youtu.be/QtBS8COhhhM?t=768
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 20, 2022, 07:16:20 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on January 19, 2022, 12:59:07 PM
I like the look of shock on his face when she mentions the name of a man he says he didn't know & who definitely didn't see him having a foot massage.

After @12:45

https://youtu.be/QtBS8COhhhM?t=768

How can you not believe him?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 28, 2022, 05:44:13 PM
Possibly of interest to some (and no, I don’t think the Leonor in the article is Cipriano before one of you wise guys says it):
From today’s Times-
Portugal’s political stability put to the test in knife-edge election
“I’m a single mother and as I can’t find a job I take what I can,” said the 36-year-old unemployed estate agent, who prefers not to giver her surname. “But it’s very difficult in Portugal as the economy is stagnant. So I must ask for help to eat. Can you imagine what this means?”

The snap election is a critical test of Portugal’s political stability; perhaps, some commentators argue, the biggest it has faced since the country’s return to democracy in 1974. The crisis began in October when the minority Socialist government of Antonio Costa, the prime minister, failed to pass a budget. It was the first time that had occurred since the 1974 “Revolution of Carnations”, a left-wing coup that overthrew the authoritarian regime, which had ruled since 1928, and restored democracy.

The budget’s failure signalled the end of Costa’s idiosyncratic government, known as the geringonça, or “odd contraption”, which functioned with the support of the anti-capitalist Left Bloc and the hardline Communist Party. Unable to reconcile EU fiscal rules with Marxist-Leninism, the two far-left parties sided with right-wing adversaries to reject the bill.

Portugal is confronting for the first time the rise of a far-right party, as well as increasing poverty, high levels of youth emigration, low wages and economic growth. Experts warn it urgently needs a stable government — not least to unlock billions of euros of EU pandemic funds.

The two main parties, the centre-left Socialist Party and the centre-right Social Democratic Party, are neck-and-neck in the polls, but both fall short of a majority and face complicated challenges to form a coalition.

“Fortunately for Portugal the two main moderate parties have provided the country with stability for decades but now the prospect of coalitions having to be built on the right or the left will be a huge challenge,” said Francisco Pedro Balsemão, the head of Impresa, a powerful media conglomerate, and the son of a former Social Democrat prime minister. “What I fear is that there will not be a strong government and this will again lead to instability, a further failure to pass the budget and yet more elections this year, which is very probable.”

The rise of the right-wing populist party Chega, which translates as “Enough”, has put paid to the prized notion that the country was immune to such a movement. With only one seat in parliament at present, the party, founded in 2019 by André Ventura, a former football television pundit, is polling to take a dozen seats, which would make it the third-largest party and a possible kingmaker.

Standing on an anti-corruption, anti-establishment ticket Ventura has called for life imprisonment for violent crimes, chemical castration for paedophiles and verbally attacked the country’s small Roma community.

Antonio Costa has been acknowledged as a safe pair of hands but his minority government was unable to pass a budget in October, precipitating the snap election
Antonio Costa has been acknowledged as a safe pair of hands but his minority government was unable to pass a budget in October, precipitating the snap election
PATRICIA DE MELO MOREIRA/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES
Costa’s six years in office revealed him to be an efficient guardian of fiscal discipline. Before the pandemic hit unemployment was at its lowest since 2004 and the budget was in surplus for the first time in 45 years. But low growth persisted and low wages have brought many to the brink of poverty.

Portugal’s dependence on tourism, the sector that helped o drive the country’s recovery from the global economic crisis of 2008 and accounts for about 15 per cent of national output and 9 per cent of employment, has made it especially susceptible to its impact.

“In Portugal we have a very high poverty rate that has increased a lot during the pandemic,” said Isabel Jonet, an economist who runs the country’s largest network of food banks, which distributes 100 tonnes of food daily.

“We have one million people who live on less than €250 per month and two million people who live on less than €450.” Two million people are estimated to be at risk of poverty in Portugal and 4 per cent of its ten million population are believed to be reliant on food banks.

For centre-right voters Costa’s tenure has brought the country to a crossroads. “These six years have been totally lost. No progress has been made in terms of reducing public debt and developing the country. That state is involved in every aspect of Portuguese economic life and is paralysing it. This is the price of a central-left party having to bargain with the extreme left,” said a civil engineer who declined to give his name. “The current economic model is catastrophic.”

For some observers the economic hardships are real but the political crisis is artificial. The failure to pass a budget, according to José Santana Pereira, a politics professor at Lisbon University, was due to political parties putting their own agendas first. “The Socialists were aiming for an absolute majority, the far-left allies reacted to negative results in municipal or presidential elections, linking them to having abandoned their stance as protest parties to support the government,” he said.

Santana Pereira believes the parties will make efforts to form stable coalitions after the poll. “Further irresponsible behaviour after the election — that is, not contributing to a stable governmental result — will create further discontent among the population in such a delicate moment,” he added.

But the country’s political fragmentation, although less marked than that of neighbouring Spain, poses a threat to coalition-building efforts. Elections in 2019 led to a greater fragmentation of parliament, with three new parties taking one seat each and a small left-leaning environmentalist and animal-rights group winning four.

The post-election parliamentary arithmetic makes it very challenging for a stable government to emerge. Ricardo Pereira, a comedian and political commentator who hosts a daily television show, warned that the future is uncertain. “In 47 years only three times has a single party won a majority and now it is even more difficult,” he said. “We have a political crisis, a health crisis and an economic crisis. If we don’t have some political stability it’s difficult to know how we will escape these troubles.”

For Leonor her trips to the food banks look set to continue. “Nothing will change because the policies are the same, left or right,” she said. “Portuguese politicians don’t care about the people or the future of the country. We go from bad to worse.”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 28, 2022, 05:53:41 PM

Still an absolute mess then.  Not that I thought otherwise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 07, 2022, 04:10:24 PM
Not so long ago they stood to lose all of the fund ,now its a paltry amount in comparison, oh what a tangled web we weave.....................

A sum of £26,834 has been set aside as “provisions for liabilities”, which appears to be a sum Kate and Gerry McCann may have to pay ex Portuguese police chief Goncalo Amaral if they lose a long-running libel battle.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17572507/maddie-fund-million/

The very same paper .

MADDIE HUNT CRISIS Fund to find Madeline could be wiped out if McCanns lose £750k case against cop who claimed they were responsible for daughter’s death

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7281872/madeline-mcann-fund-750k-case/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 07, 2022, 04:19:04 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 07, 2022, 04:10:24 PM
Not so long ago they stood to lose all of the fund ,now its a paltry amount in comparison, oh what a tangled web we weave.....................

A sum of £26,834 has been set aside as “provisions for liabilities”, which appears to be a sum Kate and Gerry McCann may have to pay ex Portuguese police chief Goncalo Amaral if they lose a long-running libel battle.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17572507/maddie-fund-million/

The very same paper .

MADDIE HUNT CRISIS Fund to find Madeline could be wiped out if McCanns lose £750k case against cop who claimed they were responsible for daughter’s death

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7281872/madeline-mcann-fund-750k-case/

Looks like the usual media bollocks,

Why are they running with this just now? Low circulation figures  or something else?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 07, 2022, 04:25:31 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 07, 2022, 04:10:24 PM
Not so long ago they stood to lose all of the fund ,now its a paltry amount in comparison, oh what a tangled web we weave.....................

A sum of £26,834 has been set aside as “provisions for liabilities”, which appears to be a sum Kate and Gerry McCann may have to pay ex Portuguese police chief Goncalo Amaral if they lose a long-running libel battle.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17572507/maddie-fund-million/

The very same paper .

MADDIE HUNT CRISIS Fund to find Madeline could be wiped out if McCanns lose £750k case against cop who claimed they were responsible for daughter’s death

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7281872/madeline-mcann-fund-750k-case/

Just another example of the malice directed towards the fund set up to pay for the costs involved in searching for an innocent three year old child who some individuals must prefer is never found.  Really very, very sad but amazing there are some who just cannot let it go as illustrated here; despite the fact German police are currently investigating a paedophile they suspect of her murder.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 07, 2022, 04:39:29 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 07, 2022, 04:25:31 PM
Just another example of the malice directed towards the fund set up to pay for the costs involved in searching for an innocent three year old child who some individuals must prefer is never found.  Really very, very sad but amazing there are some who just cannot let it go as illustrated here; despite the fact German police are currently investigating a paedophile they suspect of her murder.

Oh Good.  Wandering Off Topic.  I am very good at that.

I don't know if Brueckner is responsible.  But we won't find out unless he is investigated.

More to the point are the people who seriously want The McCanns to be found guilty.  This isn't going to happen, but they go on lying and producing misinformation.  I wish sometimes that I could feel sorry for these people.  Their own lives must have been really awful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 07, 2022, 04:51:14 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 07, 2022, 04:39:29 PM
Oh Good.  Wandering Off Topic.  I am very good at that.

I don't know if Brueckner is responsible.  But we won't find out unless he is investigated.

More to the point are the people who seriously want The McCanns to be found guilty.  This isn't going to happen, but they go on lying and producing misinformation.  I wish sometimes that I could feel sorry for these people.  Their own lives must have been really awful.


Well, that's Tabloids for you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 07, 2022, 04:56:04 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 07, 2022, 04:25:31 PM
Just another example of the malice directed towards the fund set up to pay for the costs involved in searching for an innocent three year old child who some individuals must prefer is never found.  Really very, very sad but amazing there are some who just cannot let it go as illustrated here; despite the fact German police are currently investigating a paedophile they suspect of her murder.

Have they been searching anywhere in particular recently?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 07, 2022, 04:58:07 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 07, 2022, 04:51:14 PM

Well, that's Tabloids for you.

Tabloids are Tabloids.  People are People.  Take your pick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 07, 2022, 05:04:23 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 07, 2022, 04:39:29 PM
Oh Good.  Wandering Off Topic.  I am very good at that.

I don't know if Brueckner is responsible.  But we won't find out unless he is investigated.

More to the point are the people who seriously want The McCanns to be found guilty.  This isn't going to happen, but they go on lying and producing misinformation.  I wish sometimes that I could feel sorry for these people.  Their own lives must have been really awful.

I don't think they can help themselves.

It is the total absence of any thought being given to that little girl and her family and the absolute industrialisation of the industry set up by them specifically to trash and demean.
I think there is something desperate about people who can keep up that level of downright bullying while nursing and caressing their entrenched prejudice that has the family of a missing child at it's centre.

How is it possible to keep that level of hatred going for fifteen years for people you just do not know without suffering corrosion of mental wellbeing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 07, 2022, 05:12:19 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 07, 2022, 05:04:23 PM
I don't think they can help themselves.

It is the total absence of any thought being given to that little girl and her family and the absolute industrialisation of the industry set up by them specifically to trash and demean.
I think there is something desperate about people who can keep up that level of downright bullying while nursing and caressing their entrenched prejudice that has the family of a missing child at it's centre.

How is it possible to keep that level of hatred going for fifteen years for people you just do not know without suffering corrosion of mental wellbeing.


I blame the editors myself. They approve all this stuff.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 07, 2022, 05:13:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 07, 2022, 05:04:23 PM
I don't think they can help themselves.

It is the total absence of any thought being given to that little girl and her family and the absolute industrialisation of the industry set up by them specifically to trash and demean.
I think there is something desperate about people who can keep up that level of downright bullying while nursing and caressing their entrenched prejudice that has the family of a missing child at it's centre.

How is it possible to keep that level of hatred going for fifteen years for people you just do not know without suffering corrosion of mental wellbeing.

Or is it just wickedness?  Some trait that has always been there?  It is beyond my comprehension.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 07, 2022, 05:34:46 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 07, 2022, 05:13:36 PM
Or is it just wickedness?  Some trait that has always been there?  It is beyond my comprehension.

Whatever it may be it is very unattractive aberration to witness; lacking any vestige of humanity as it does..

It isn't the game some have made of it it is the life of a little girl whose loved ones have been deprived of the knowledge of what may have happened to her.  Until now ... and my sympathy goes out to them until the police finish or resolve their investigation of Madeleine's disappearance..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 07, 2022, 05:39:37 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 07, 2022, 04:10:24 PM
Not so long ago they stood to lose all of the fund ,now its a paltry amount in comparison, oh what a tangled web we weave.....................

A sum of £26,834 has been set aside as “provisions for liabilities”, which appears to be a sum Kate and Gerry McCann may have to pay ex Portuguese police chief Goncalo Amaral if they lose a long-running libel battle.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17572507/maddie-fund-million/

The very same paper .

MADDIE HUNT CRISIS Fund to find Madeline could be wiped out if McCanns lose £750k case against cop who claimed they were responsible for daughter’s death

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7281872/madeline-mcann-fund-750k-case/
Great news!  Hurrah!!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 07, 2022, 08:14:03 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 07, 2022, 04:25:31 PM
Just another example of the malice directed towards the fund set up to pay for the costs involved in searching for an innocent three year old child who some individuals must prefer is never found.  Really very, very sad but amazing there are some who just cannot let it go as illustrated here; despite the fact German police are currently investigating a paedophile they suspect of her murder.

You do have to wonder what the sun is playing at .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 07, 2022, 08:18:42 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 07, 2022, 08:14:03 PM
You do have to wonder what the sun is playing at .

I don't; but I certainly do have scope to question the antics of some others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 07, 2022, 09:43:27 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 07, 2022, 08:14:03 PM
You do have to wonder what the sun is playing at .

Wonder no longer - the reporter is  Tracey, McCann friend and confident   8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 10, 2022, 09:12:34 PM
Not before time, who's next in line for the poisoned chalice.

Cressida Dick FINALLY quits: Scandal-hit Met Commissioner resigns 'with huge sadness' as Sadiq Khan shows her the door for failing to root out 'racism, sexism and homophobia' in the force... just hours after she said she had no intention of leaving

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 10, 2022, 09:58:58 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 10, 2022, 09:12:34 PM
Not before time, who's next in line for the poisoned chalice.

Cressida Dick FINALLY quits: Scandal-hit Met Commissioner resigns 'with huge sadness' as Sadiq Khan shows her the door for failing to root out 'racism, sexism and homophobia' in the force... just hours after she said she had no intention of leaving

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html

How long now have they been trying to clean up The Met? It's culture seems able to survive no matter what they try.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 11, 2022, 07:10:42 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 10, 2022, 09:58:58 PM
How long now have they been trying to clean up The Met? It's culture seems able to survive no matter what they try.
Well, the fish rots from the head, only in this case there's a lot of heads in that organisation, not just Dick.
Misogyny, racism, Nepotism and homophobia are running amok almost unchecked across all sections of society. I Racism, homophobia, etc are not simply the result of private prejudices held by individuals, but are also produced and reproduced by laws, rules, and practices, sanctioned and even implemented by various levels of government, and embedded in the economic system as well as in cultural and societal norms.

They're going nowhere and Cressida Dick was on a hiding to nothing the moment Khan issued his challenge, as will be her successor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 11, 2022, 07:34:04 AM
Quote from: The General on February 11, 2022, 07:10:42 AM
Well, the fish rots from the head, only in this case there's a lot of heads in that organisation, not just Dick.
Misogyny, racism, Nepotism and homophobia are running amok almost unchecked across all sections of society. I Racism, homophobia, etc are not simply the result of private prejudices held by individuals, but are also produced and reproduced by laws, rules, and practices, sanctioned and even implemented by various levels of government, and embedded in the economic system as well as in cultural and societal norms.

They're going nowhere and Cressida Dick was on a hiding to nothing the moment Khan issued his challenge, as will be her successor.

You're right, of course, but in this specific case I was thinking it might make sense to break The Met up into smaller units with their own Chief Constables. It would perhaps allow more control to be exercised.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 11, 2022, 07:41:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 11, 2022, 07:34:04 AM
You're right, of course, but in this specific case I was thinking it might make sense to break The Met up into smaller units with their own Chief Constables. It would perhaps allow more control to be exercised.
In the next 10 years it will be privatised, so we might as well wait for that to happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 11, 2022, 07:46:49 AM
Quote from: The General on February 11, 2022, 07:41:00 AM
In the next 10 years it will be privatised, so we might as well wait for that to happen.

You think? Privatised prisons didn't work too well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 11, 2022, 08:21:42 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 11, 2022, 07:46:49 AM
You think? Privatised prisons didn't work too well.
Yes, an Orwellian, dystopian, Jackbooted, paramilitary 'police'. We're part way there already, with blanket surveillance and Thought Police.
Then throw in a smattering of Fahrenheit 451.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 11, 2022, 09:14:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 11, 2022, 07:34:04 AM
You're right, of course, but in this specific case I was thinking it might make sense to break The Met up into smaller units with their own Chief Constables. It would perhaps allow more control to be exercised.

I would agree with that. It should concentrate on general policing within the Metropolitan district and leave other areas such as counter terrorism diplomatic protection, etc to other organisations like MI5 and NCA.
By trying to be all-encompassing it fails across the board.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 11, 2022, 09:30:51 AM
Quote from: jassi on February 11, 2022, 09:14:14 AM
I would agree with that. It should concentrate on general policing within the Metropolitan district and leave other areas such as counter terrorism diplomatic protection, etc to other organisations like MI5 and NCA.
By trying to be all-encompassing it fails across the board.

There's the opinion of ordinary officers who are just trying to do their jobs too;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/02/police-officer-london-lost-control-streets-knife-crime-cuts

It sounds like just getting through their days is difficult enough, without being denigrated for their culture also.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 11, 2022, 09:38:44 AM
Dick always seemed weighed down by her epaulets - far too big for her little frame.
A question I asked myself now and again was did she wear them on her pajamas as well ?
One needs to know these things
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 11, 2022, 09:49:57 AM
Quote from: jassi on February 11, 2022, 09:38:44 AM
Dick always seemed weighed down by her epaulets - far too big for her little frame.
A question I asked myself now and again was did she wear them on her pajamas as well ?
One needs to know these things

Rank is a strange thing. I remember a certain Army Major whose CSM always inspected him before he inspected the Company. The reason was that the Major wasn't always properly dressed himself, which led to tittering in the ranks. Wearing one's jumper back to front or one's lanyard on the wrong shoulder isn't setting a good example.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 11, 2022, 09:58:34 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 10, 2022, 09:58:58 PM
How long now have they been trying to clean up The Met? It's culture seems able to survive no matter what they try.

Not fit for purpose really is it, with the litany of failures behind it , also Grange can't be described to be a roaring success , its under the same banner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 11, 2022, 10:46:55 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 11, 2022, 09:58:34 AM
Not fit for purpose really is it, with the litany of failures behind it , also Grange can't be described to be a roaring success , its under the same banner.

I think Grange is a good example of one of the met's faults - political interference and agendas.

They would never have got involved without interference from Cameron.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 11, 2022, 11:38:54 AM
Quote from: jassi on February 11, 2022, 10:46:55 AM
I think Grange is a good example of one of the met's faults - political interference and agendas.

They would never have got involved without interference from Cameron.
Their abject failure to tackle inner city knife crime (and nearly half a million violent offences last year alone) is an indelible stain on them all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 11, 2022, 11:48:47 AM
Quote from: The General on February 11, 2022, 11:38:54 AM
Their abject failure to tackle inner city knife crime (and nearly half a million violent offences last year alone) is an indelible stain on them all.

Is it. Or is it a fact that the police do not receive enough support to tackle knife crime.. Stop and search would help but then people like you and gunit would complain about those carrying 12 inch combat knives having their civil liberties removed. I have a lot of respect for the police who do a very difficult job
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 11, 2022, 01:22:38 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 11, 2022, 11:48:47 AM
Is it. Or is it a fact that the police do not receive enough support to tackle knife crime.. Stop and search would help but then people like you and gunit would complain about those carrying 12 inch combat knives having their civil liberties removed. I have a lot of respect for the police who do a very difficult job

You may think stop and search is the answer, but it needs to be done fairly and sensitively and combined with other initiatives.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/07/police-officer-stop-and-search-powers-public-trust

I also respect the police, but not the racist, homophobic and sexist ones. The Met needs to weed them out by making it clear that there's no place in a modern police force for such prejudices.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 11, 2022, 02:53:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 11, 2022, 01:22:38 PM
You may think stop and search is the answer, but it needs to be done fairly and sensitively and combined with other initiatives.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/07/police-officer-stop-and-search-powers-public-trust

I also respect the police, but not the racist, homophobic and sexist ones. The Met needs to weed them out by making it clear that there's no place in a modern police force for such prejudices.

When the home office appoints a commissioner who under their watch oversaw an innocent man going about his lawful business ends  up being shot 7 time in the head , then you know the MET not going to perform.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 11, 2022, 03:16:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 11, 2022, 01:22:38 PM
You may think stop and search is the answer, but it needs to be done fairly and sensitively and combined with other initiatives.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/07/police-officer-stop-and-search-powers-public-trust

I also respect the police, but not the racist, homophobic and sexist ones. The Met needs to weed them out by making it clear that there's no place in a modern police force for such prejudices.

I think Davel probably made that bit about combat knives up, but that aside what constitutes a lethal weapon?

You used to be able to buy aluminium combs, the last bit of which could be sharpened to a point and only a few weeks ago I bought a plastic comb, the last 4 inches of which is a steel spike - legitimately used for styling hair I understand.


Where do you draw the line on these things ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 11, 2022, 03:22:34 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 11, 2022, 03:16:14 PM
I think Davel probably made that bit about combat knives up, but that aside what constitutes a lethal weapon?

You used to be able to buy aluminium combs, the last bit of which could be sharpened to a point and only a few weeks ago I bought a plastic comb, the last 4 inches of which is a steel spike - legitimately used for styling hair I understand.


Where do you draw the line on these things ?
Are you seriously suggesting that there haven't been numerous incidents involving lethal weapons such as 12" combat knives on the streets of Britain and that Davel just invented this?  Carrying knives about one's person should always be an imprisonable offence (with a few notable exemptions), carrying combs should not, IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 11, 2022, 04:14:42 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 11, 2022, 11:48:47 AM
Is it. Or is it a fact that the police do not receive enough support to tackle knife crime.. Stop and search would help but then people like you and gunit would complain about those carrying 12 inch combat knives having their civil liberties removed. I have a lot of respect for the police who do a very difficult job
Stop libelling me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 11, 2022, 05:08:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 11, 2022, 01:22:38 PM
You may think stop and search is the answer, but it needs to be done fairly and sensitively and combined with other initiatives.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/07/police-officer-stop-and-search-powers-public-trust

I also respect the police, but not the racist, homophobic and sexist ones. The Met needs to weed them out by making it clear that there's no place in a modern police force for such prejudices.

Its not me who thinks stop and search is the answer its the rank and file policeman who does. The knife carriers must be laughing at the restrictions placed on the police taht allows them to carry on with their criminal acts. 8 times as many black youths stoppped than whites. that may well be because in the araes where knife crime is a real problem most of the residents are black.......Im sure that is a fact. its this softly softly approach that is fuelling the problem. give the police the powers they want and need....or perhaps do what some of the community leaders want in these areas and remove the police from them..let them self police and see where that gets them.

AS far as police being racist etc...do you not realise thay only reflect the population as a whole..no more racist than any other similar socio economic group......theres racism on this board.

the fact is taht it is predominately black youngsters carrying knives ...but people are frightened to say so 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 11, 2022, 05:18:46 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 11, 2022, 05:08:27 PM
Its not me who thinks stop and search is the answer its the rank and file policeman who does. The knife carriers must be laughing at the restrictions placed on the police taht allows them to carry on with their criminal acts. * times as many black youths stoppped than whites. that may well be because in the araes where knife crime is a real problem most of the residents are black.......Im sure that is a fact. its this softly softly approach that is fuelling the problem. give the police the powers they want and need....or perhaps do what some of the community leaders want in these areas and remove the police from them..let them self police and see where that gets them.

AS far as police being racist etc...do you not realise thay only reflect the population as a whole..no more racist than any other similar socio economic group......theres racism on this board.

the fact is taht it is predominately black youngsters carrying knives ...but people are frightened to say so
I mY have dreamt it but I thought I saw something recently about police being able to detect concealed knives on a person at a distance with some sort of device…?  Equipping the police with them might make for a more targeted  stop and search policy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 11, 2022, 06:03:12 PM

We should have the right to carry firearms from age 9 or something, so the kids can defend themselves from knife attacks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 11, 2022, 06:56:03 PM
Certainly if we all carried guns, knife crime would become a thing of the past.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 11, 2022, 07:15:08 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 11, 2022, 06:56:03 PM
Certainly if we all carried guns, knife crime would become a thing of the past.
And if Russia nukes London, we don’t need to worry about who will replace Cressida Dick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 11, 2022, 09:02:01 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 11, 2022, 07:15:08 PM
And if Russia nukes London, we don’t need to worry about who will replace Cressida Dick.

Should never have got rid of the cruise missiles, get the retaliation in first and nuke moscow.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 11, 2022, 10:01:13 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 11, 2022, 05:08:27 PM
Its not me who thinks stop and search is the answer its the rank and file policeman who does. The knife carriers must be laughing at the restrictions placed on the police taht allows them to carry on with their criminal acts. 8 times as many black youths stoppped than whites. that may well be because in the araes where knife crime is a real problem most of the residents are black.......Im sure that is a fact. its this softly softly approach that is fuelling the problem. give the police the powers they want and need....or perhaps do what some of the community leaders want in these areas and remove the police from them..let them self police and see where that gets them.

AS far as police being racist etc...do you not realise thay only reflect the population as a whole..no more racist than any other similar socio economic group......theres racism on this board.

the fact is taht it is predominately black youngsters carrying knives ...but people are frightened to say so
That last sentence isn't true. It is in London and Birmingham, but not nationally.
Stop and search v racial profiling. Playing the odds?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 11, 2022, 10:06:57 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 11, 2022, 09:02:01 PM
Should never have got rid of the cruise missiles, get the retaliation in first and nuke moscow.
Everyone chill. If it was going to happen it would have been in October 1962.
Put the kettle on, this will all be chip wrappings next week.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 11, 2022, 10:07:06 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 11, 2022, 09:02:01 PM
Should never have got rid of the cruise missiles, get the retaliation in first and nuke moscow.
How do you get retaliation in first?  That don’t make no sense.
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 11, 2022, 10:10:39 PM
Quote from: The General on February 11, 2022, 10:01:13 PM
That last sentence isn't true. It is in London and Birmingham, but not nationally.
Stop and search v racial profiling. Playing the odds?

Obviously in areas that are overwhelmingly white ther won't be many black youngsters carrying knives.
Im basing my conclusions on my perception and I think it's accurate.. Knife crime is disproportionately a black on black phenomenon.


Almost half of all murder victims in the capital in 2019 were Black despite them making up only 13 per cent of the city’s population, according to analysis conducted by the charity Action on Armed Violence (AOAV) and shared with The Independent.Almost half of all murder victims in the capital in 2019 were Black despite them making up only 13 per cent of the city’s population, according to analysis conducted by the charity Action on Armed Violence (AOAV) and shared with The Independent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 16, 2022, 11:34:27 PM
Quote from: The General on February 11, 2022, 10:06:57 PM
Everyone chill. If it was going to happen it would have been in October 1962.
Put the kettle on, this will all be chip wrappings next week.

It’s impossible to hear the truth over the sound of West’s sabre rattling.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 16, 2022, 11:40:26 PM
Did anyone catch the story on the ITV news involving John McCann?. The poor man had a heat attack on a Glasgow bus and the bus driver saved him from almost certain death.

https://news.stv.tv/west-central/billy-bell-saved-bus-passenger-john-mccanns-life-with-cpr-following-cardiac-arrest
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 16, 2022, 11:52:59 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 16, 2022, 11:34:27 PM
It’s impossible to hear the truth over the sound of West’s sabre rattling.
Who’s West?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2022, 07:11:36 AM
Quote from: The General on February 11, 2022, 10:06:57 PM
Everyone chill. If it was going to happen it would have been in October 1962.
Put the kettle on, this will all be chip wrappings next week.

The Russian foreign ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova, who enjoys prodding foreign media, wrote a “request to the mass disinformation outlets of the USA and Britain – Bloomberg, the New York Times, the Sun etc – announce the schedule of our ‘invasions’ for the coming year. I’d like to plan my vacation”.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/16/russians-ridicule-western-media-on-day-of-no-invasion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 17, 2022, 09:06:41 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 16, 2022, 11:34:27 PM
It’s impossible to hear the truth over the sound of West’s sabre rattling.

The west's media sabre rattling.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2022, 09:13:46 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 17, 2022, 09:06:41 AM
The west's media sabre rattling.

And Hillary's campaign created the Russia/Trump collusion conspiracy.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/hillary-clinton-trump-russia-collusion-hoax-justice-gregg-jarrett


It was fine to declare the 2016 election as compromised & illegitimate for the entirety of Trump's term, but it's domestic terrorism to question the legitimacy of the 2020 election.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 17, 2022, 09:23:42 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 17, 2022, 09:06:41 AM
The west's media sabre rattling.

It’s the chicken and egg conundrum all over again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 17, 2022, 10:51:15 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 17, 2022, 09:06:41 AM
The west's media sabre rattling.
Ah, so it's the West who are threatening to invade Ukraine.  Who knew?!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 17, 2022, 03:02:53 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 17, 2022, 10:51:15 AM
Ah, so it's the West who are threatening to invade Ukraine.  Who knew?!

Well reports are the army is on standby............................................................there's a big storm approaching, don't panic Mr Mainwaring.

Army is put on standby for worst storm in decades:
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 17, 2022, 04:54:14 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 17, 2022, 03:02:53 PM
Well reports are the army is on standby............................................................there's a big storm approaching, don't panic Mr Mainwaring.

Army is put on standby for worst storm in decades:
Do you having anything remotely sensible to contribute? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on February 17, 2022, 05:29:34 PM
Such as the origin of "The legend is writ"?  *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 17, 2022, 06:35:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 17, 2022, 04:54:14 PM
Do you having anything remotely sensible to contribute?

I'll follow your lead .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 17, 2022, 06:44:37 PM
The Russians have already invaded the Crimea
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 17, 2022, 07:31:36 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 17, 2022, 06:35:16 PM
I'll follow your lead .
Don’t be a sheep, be a shepherd.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 17, 2022, 07:33:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on February 17, 2022, 06:44:37 PM
The Russians have already invaded the Crimea
How do you know, have you actually been there and witnessed it yourself?  Otherwise it’s just vicious western propaganda promulgated by the MSM  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2022, 07:36:46 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 17, 2022, 07:33:00 PM
How do you know, have you actually been there and witnessed it yourself?  Otherwise it’s just vicious western propaganda promulgated by the MSM  @)(++(*

To be fair, the militia which seized control of Crimea (after the illegal U.S backed overthrow of the legitimate ruling party & President of Ukraine) didn't wear any insignias.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 17, 2022, 07:38:52 PM
I did wonder where Faithlilly got her funny ideas from and now I know,

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1564904/jeremy-corbyn-russia-ukraine-invasion

 *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 17, 2022, 07:46:45 PM
I'm totally pro Russia. I admire the level of anti-lgbt sentiment in the country & their laws protecting children from disgustingly immoral homosexual teachings & upholding orthodox Christian family values.

I think Putin looks hot riding shirtless on horseback as well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on February 22, 2022, 12:33:44 AM
Having had a good chat with her, I think that sadly and probably in disgust, Eleanor has left the forum.

She has always shown herself to be an honourable woman with passion and sometimes differing views which she has never shrunk from expressing.   No lies from Elli.   I value people like that.

Her empathy for The Mccanns has been manifest.
Her knowledge of the Law impressive.

It is very sad that we have lost such a valuable member and friend, whose main concern is Justice, including for Brueckner.   This along with supporting the suffering family of Madeleine.   Like me she believes in innocent until proven guilty



We have all enjoyed Eleanors way with words and her incredible humour.   We shall miss many laughs at the expence of her much loved dachshund, O'Connor

Thank you Elli.


We shall miss you
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 22, 2022, 07:14:48 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 07, 2022, 05:34:46 PM
Whatever it may be it is very unattractive aberration to witness; lacking any vestige of humanity as it does..

It isn't the game some have made of it it is the life of a little girl whose loved ones have been deprived of the knowledge of what may have happened to her.  Until now ... and my sympathy goes out to them until the police finish or resolve their investigation of Madeleine's disappearance..
Really? My Vicarious Sanctimony Detector just exploded. Reel it in.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 22, 2022, 07:15:41 AM
Quote from: sadie on February 22, 2022, 12:33:44 AM
Having had a good chat with her, I think that sadly and probably in disgust, Eleanor has left the forum.

She has always shown herself to be an honourable woman with passion and sometimes differing views which she has never shrunk from expressing.   No lies from Elli.   I value people like that.

Her empathy for The Mccanns has been manifest.
Her knowledge of the Law impressive.

It is very sad that we have lost such a valuable member and friend, whose main concern is Justice, including for Brueckner.   This along with supporting the suffering family of Madeleine.   Like me she believes in innocent until proven guilty



We have all enjoyed Eleanors way with words and her incredible humour.   We shall miss many laughs at the expence of her much loved dachshund, O'Connor

Thank you Elli.

We shall miss you
Check in the staff room for us pet, see if she left any biscuits.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2022, 07:19:13 AM
Quote from: sadie on February 22, 2022, 12:33:44 AM
Having had a good chat with her, I think that sadly and probably in disgust, Eleanor has left the forum.

She has always shown herself to be an honourable woman with passion and sometimes differing views which she has never shrunk from expressing.   No lies from Elli.   I value people like that.

Her empathy for The Mccanns has been manifest.
Her knowledge of the Law impressive.

It is very sad that we have lost such a valuable member and friend, whose main concern is Justice, including for Brueckner.   This along with supporting the suffering family of Madeleine.   Like me she believes in innocent until proven guilty



We have all enjoyed Eleanors way with words and her incredible humour.   We shall miss many laughs at the expence of her much loved dachshund, O'Connor

Thank you Elli.


We shall miss you
Perhaps when there’s a development on the case she will comment again, after all we are all just going round and round in ever diminishing circles and should probably have withdrawn years back.  A break from the nastiness is always a good idea if you feel it is getting you down. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 22, 2022, 07:21:19 AM
Far more worryingly:

Russia's invasion of Ukraine has already begun - UK
Russia's invasion of Ukraine has already begun so Britain will sanction Russia, UK Health Secretary Sajid Javid has said following an emergency Cobra meeting.

"You can conclude that the invasion of Ukraine has begun," Javid told Sky News.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2022, 07:47:59 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 22, 2022, 07:19:13 AM
Perhaps when there’s a development on the case she will comment again, after all we are all just going round and round in ever diminishing circles and should probably have withdrawn years back.  A break from the nastiness is always a good idea if you feel it is getting you down.

Well the door isn't closed, she's still a member of the forum and still a moderator at the moment, so she can comment if she wants to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on February 22, 2022, 08:07:08 AM
Quote from: The General on February 22, 2022, 07:15:41 AM
Check in the staff room for us pet, see if she left any biscuits.
Des's reject Winalot Shapes hopefully. 8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 22, 2022, 08:07:31 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 22, 2022, 07:47:59 AM
Well the door isn't closed, she's still a member of the forum and still a moderator at the moment, so she can comment if she wants to.
I've said it before, but this isn't some convivial, benevolent community, it's two warring factions who despise each other; like two demented seagulls squabbling over the same errant chip every day for 15 years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 22, 2022, 09:29:09 AM
Quote from: sadie on February 22, 2022, 12:33:44 AM
Having had a good chat with her, I think that sadly and probably in disgust, Eleanor has left the forum.

She has always shown herself to be an honourable woman with passion and sometimes differing views which she has never shrunk from expressing.   No lies from Elli.   I value people like that.

Her empathy for The Mccanns has been manifest.
Her knowledge of the Law impressive.

It is very sad that we have lost such a valuable member and friend, whose main concern is Justice, including for Brueckner.   This along with supporting the suffering family of Madeleine.   Like me she believes in innocent until proven guilty



We have all enjoyed Eleanors way with words and her incredible humour.   We shall miss many laughs at the expence of her much loved dachshund, O'Connor

Thank you Elli.


We shall miss you

Eleanor loves this forum with a vengeance and it pains her to witness the unrelenting onslaught being mounted against it.

But fear not, Sadie, we most definitely have not seen the back of her.  It is not possible to address the nastiness directed against us without needing a break from it sometimes - and at the moment there is nothing else happening anyway.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 22, 2022, 09:58:20 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 22, 2022, 09:29:09 AM
Eleanor loves this forum with a vengeance and it pains her to witness the unrelenting onslaught being mounted against it.

But fear not, Sadie, we most definitely have not seen the back of her.  It is not possible to address the nastiness directed against us without needing a break from it sometimes - and at the moment there is nothing else happening anyway.
Where is all this happening?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 22, 2022, 10:07:10 AM
In a galaxy far far away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 22, 2022, 10:59:12 AM
Quote from: The General on February 22, 2022, 09:58:20 AM
Where is all this happening?

Beats me. I've seen no unrelenting onslaught against this forum. If I see posts criticising the forum I moderate them where possible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 22, 2022, 12:05:32 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 22, 2022, 10:07:10 AM
In a galaxy far far away.

Absolutely, Jassi, and one populated by very, very strange inhabitants come to that 😁
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on February 22, 2022, 12:22:06 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 22, 2022, 12:05:32 PM
Absolutely, Jassi, and one populated by very, very strange inhabitants come to that 😁
I think some of you aren't all that strange, but point taken.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 24, 2022, 08:25:54 AM
Putin offered a chilling warning to any Western allies who might consider coming to Ukraine’s aide:

“To anyone who would consider interfering from outside: If you do, you will face consequences greater than any you have faced in history. All the relevant decisions have been taken. I hope you hear me.”

Oh look, the West is sabre rattling again this morning. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 24, 2022, 09:38:30 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 24, 2022, 08:25:54 AM
Putin offered a chilling warning to any Western allies who might consider coming to Ukraine’s aide:

“To anyone who would consider interfering from outside: If you do, you will face consequences greater than any you have faced in history. All the relevant decisions have been taken. I hope you hear me.”

Oh look, the West is sabre rattling again this morning.

I've not been reading it or watching the news - far too horrific!

I just cannot believe all the macho posturing that has brought us to this impasse.

A famous comedian used to sign off his show "May your God go with you" and I can only echo that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 24, 2022, 12:25:59 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 24, 2022, 08:25:54 AM
Putin offered a chilling warning to any Western allies who might consider coming to Ukraine’s aide:

“To anyone who would consider interfering from outside: If you do, you will face consequences greater than any you have faced in history. All the relevant decisions have been taken. I hope you hear me.”

Oh look, the West is sabre rattling again this morning.

All Putin has to do is turn off the gas pipes to Europe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 24, 2022, 12:47:44 PM
Quote from: misty on February 24, 2022, 12:25:59 PM
All Putin has to do is turn off the gas pipes to Europe.

That would cause alarm and despondancy. The UK gets 5% of it's gas from Russia, but others are more dependant;

According to Statista, the countries in Europe that receive the highest percentage of their natural gas from Russia include, North Macedonia (100 percent), Finland (94 percent), Bulgaria (74 percent), Slovakia (70 percent), Germany (49 percent), Italy (46 percent), Poland (40 percent), and France (24 percent).

https://en.as.com/en/2022/02/19/latest_news/1645226791_016614.html#:~:text=According%20to%20Statista%2C%20the%20countries,and%20France%20(24%20percent).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 24, 2022, 12:52:26 PM
A shortage of gas from Russia would result in a massive price rise  as affected nations clamour for existing supplies which would affect everyone including UK
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 24, 2022, 01:03:50 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 24, 2022, 12:52:26 PM
A shortage of gas from Russia would result in a massive price rise  as affected nations clamour for existing supplies which would affect everyone including UK

The same applies to oil from Russia with the effects of a shortage being felt in USA who import 40% of their supply from Russia. Economies would be crippled in a matter of weeks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 24, 2022, 01:22:04 PM
Quote from: misty on February 24, 2022, 12:25:59 PM
All Putin has to do is turn off the gas pipes to Europe.

Bite the hand that feeds him, don't think so .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 24, 2022, 01:30:18 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 24, 2022, 01:22:04 PM
Bite the hand that feeds him, don't think so .

I'm sure China will buy it, at least in the short term.
Sanctions will only hold where they don't significantly hurt the nations imposing them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on February 24, 2022, 01:31:26 PM
Quote from: misty on February 24, 2022, 01:03:50 PM
The same applies to oil from Russia with the effects of a shortage being felt in USA who import 40% of their supply from Russia. Economies would be crippled in a matter of weeks.
Where are you getting your statistics from?...

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 24, 2022, 01:49:04 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 24, 2022, 01:30:18 PM
I'm sure China will buy it, at least in the short term.
Sanctions will only hold where they don't significantly hurt the nations imposing them.

Sanctions need to be all in or nothing, the same imo with the response , either we support the Ukraine militarily  with everything we have or not at all , if it means nukes so be it, whats the point of them, they haven't deterred Putin, they're supposed to keep the peace in Europe, at the moment there's an invasion happening to a European country.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 24, 2022, 01:59:19 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 24, 2022, 01:49:04 PM
Sanctions need to be all in or nothing, the same imo with the response , either we support the Ukraine militarily  with everything we have or not at all , if it means nukes so be it, whats the point of them, they haven't deterred Putin, they're supposed to keep the peace in Europe, at the moment there's an invasion happening to a European country.
Sorry, but are you advocating the launch of nuclear missiles on Russia to support Ukraine?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 24, 2022, 02:03:32 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 24, 2022, 01:49:04 PM
Sanctions need to be all in or nothing, the same imo with the response , either we support the Ukraine militarily  with everything we have or not at all , if it means nukes so be it, whats the point of them, they haven't deterred Putin, they're supposed to keep the peace in Europe, at the moment there's an invasion happening to a European country.

There is no point in them at all.
A mutual exchange of nuclear weapons would result in the destruction of civilisation, if not mankind.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 24, 2022, 03:22:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 24, 2022, 01:59:19 PM
Sorry, but are you advocating the launch of nuclear missiles on Russia to support Ukraine?

What do you think when Putin says that if any one interferes there will be consequence the world would of not seen the like before .

ETA, what Putin said :To anyone who would consider interfering from the outside - if you do, you will face consequences greater than any you have faced in history'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 24, 2022, 04:11:37 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 24, 2022, 02:03:32 PM
There is no point in them at all.
A mutual exchange of nuclear weapons would result in the destruction of civilisation, if not mankind.

Agreed.  With that in mind I cannot see the bloody minded logic behind any of this insanity.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 24, 2022, 04:24:34 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 24, 2022, 03:22:11 PM
What do you think when Putin says that if any one interferes there will be consequence the world would of not seen the like before .

ETA, what Putin said :To anyone who would consider interfering from the outside - if you do, you will face consequences greater than any you have faced in history'


I'm not sure what he means, but it's worthy of note that the only nation to use nuclear weapons has been the USA and that was against one who no means of retaliation.

I don't think Biden will want to swap missiles with Russia..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 24, 2022, 05:27:16 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 24, 2022, 03:22:11 PM
What do you think when Putin says that if any one interferes there will be consequence the world would of not seen the like before .

ETA, what Putin said :To anyone who would consider interfering from the outside - if you do, you will face consequences greater than any you have faced in history'
I ask again: are you advocating the launch of nuclear missiles on Russia to support Ukraine?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 24, 2022, 05:31:31 PM
Putin doesn’t have to launch nuclear weapons to kill hundreds of thousands of European citizens.  Chuck a barrel of Novichock into the water supply and job’s a good un. He’s also keen to get his hands on Chernobyl if he hasn’t done so already, with what aim in mind I wonder…?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 24, 2022, 06:19:28 PM
It seems to me the only ones who can stop this are the Russians. We can only hope they will turn on Putin.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 24, 2022, 06:38:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 24, 2022, 06:19:28 PM
It seems to me the only ones who can stop this are the Russians. We can only hope they will turn on Putin.
We might be in for a long wait if that’s our strategy, meanwhile Putin is more or less able to roll into any country he feels like and taking it over by force and there’s nothing we can practically do to stop him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 25, 2022, 09:37:32 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 24, 2022, 06:38:36 PM
We might be in for a long wait if that’s our strategy, meanwhile Putin is more or less able to roll into any country he feels like and taking it over by force and there’s nothing we can practically do to stop him.


Cut the head off the snake, in todays world of supposed intelligence it can't be said its not known where he is surely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 25, 2022, 09:57:07 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 25, 2022, 09:37:32 AM

Cut the head off the snake, in todays world of supposed intelligence it can't be said its not known where he is surely.
He is quite difficult to get to, but by all means give it a go. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 25, 2022, 10:01:04 AM
The Russian people have shown their displeasure. Perhaps it will spread and those in the Kremlin will take note.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 25, 2022, 10:02:40 AM
I can't see how assassination of a legal Head of State is likely to ease matters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 25, 2022, 03:43:39 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 25, 2022, 10:02:40 AM
I can't see how assassination of a legal Head of State is likely to ease matters.

Denazification of Ukraine isn't going to ease matters either , bit ironic , the leaders are Jewish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 27, 2022, 02:08:40 PM
I see the West are still sabre-rattling

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/feb/27/russia-ukraine-latest-news-missile-strikes-on-oil-facilities-reported-as-some-russian-banks-cut-off-from-swift-system-live

If it was one minute to midnight before all this shit kicked off, what time is it now please?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 27, 2022, 04:02:47 PM
Putin is upping the stakes, he upped  the nuclear to alert, time to go defcom 1.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 27, 2022, 04:54:19 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 27, 2022, 04:02:47 PM
Putin is upping the stakes, he upped  the nuclear to alert, time to go defcom 1.
DEFCON1
Currently at DEFCON2 apparently
https://www.defconlevel.com/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 27, 2022, 05:29:29 PM
All this defcon business sounds awfully American to me. No doubt if it all goes tits up we'll be dragged into it,
Ah we'll, nothing I can do about it other than be instantly vaporised or die of radiation sickness.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 27, 2022, 05:45:55 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 27, 2022, 05:29:29 PM
All this defcon business sounds awfully American to me. No doubt if it all goes tits up we'll be dragged into it,
Ah we'll, nothing I can do about it other than be instantly vaporised or die of radiation sickness.
Unless you live in London, Birmingham or Manchester I doubt you will be instantly vaporized, so a long, lingering death it is then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 27, 2022, 07:30:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 27, 2022, 05:45:55 PM
Unless you live in London, Birmingham or Manchester I doubt you will be instantly vaporized, so a long, lingering death it is then.

There was once a list of the most likely targets;

Liverpool
Cardiff
Manchester
Southampton
Leeds
Newcastle
Bristol
Sheffield
Swansea
Hull
Teesside
London
Edinburgh
York
Nottingham
Plymouth
Dover
Cambridge
Birmingham
Belfast

Plus military targets
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/cold-war-map-reveals-russian-26327100
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 27, 2022, 07:59:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 27, 2022, 07:30:15 PM
There was once a list of the most likely targets;

Liverpool
Cardiff
Manchester
Southampton
Leeds
Newcastle
Bristol
Sheffield
Swansea
Hull
Teesside
London
Edinburgh
York
Nottingham
Plymouth
Dover
Cambridge
Birmingham
Belfast

Plus military targets
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/cold-war-map-reveals-russian-26327100
well that’s my entire family vaporised then, thanks for that!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 27, 2022, 08:05:53 PM
This is why nuclear disarmament is the only answer if we want to live in a world free of fear. They have no deterrent effect on autocrats like Putin.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 27, 2022, 08:06:33 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 27, 2022, 07:59:02 PM
well that’s my entire family vaporised then, thanks for that!

Whats there to survive for, not that its going to happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 27, 2022, 08:14:03 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 27, 2022, 08:05:53 PM
This is why nuclear disarmament is the only answer if we want to live in a world free of fear. They have no deterrent effect on autocrats like Putin.
That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 27, 2022, 08:16:39 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 27, 2022, 08:06:33 PM
Whats there to survive for, not that its going to happen.
I agree, even one nuclear bomb going off in this country and life for us all is effectively not worth living.  I hope it’s not going to happen but Putin is a mad rat, and when rats are cornered they are at their most dangerous.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 27, 2022, 10:12:33 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 27, 2022, 07:59:02 PM
well that’s my entire family vaporised then, thanks for that!

You're welcome! I live near a military target, but I came to terms with the threat posed by Russia years ago.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 27, 2022, 10:36:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 27, 2022, 10:12:33 PM
You're welcome! I live near a military target, but I came to terms with the threat posed by Russia years ago.
The thing is there has not been a threat of nuclear annihilation since the mid-80s, and even then it was never as likely as it is now, so I don’t see that you had that much to come to terms with frankly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 27, 2022, 10:42:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 27, 2022, 10:12:33 PM
You're welcome! I live near a military target, but I came to terms with the threat posed by Russia years ago.

Action needs to come from within the Kremlin. Those around Putin need to recognise the damage that is being done to their country’s reputation and move to oust him. Unfortunately Putin,  like Johnson here, has surrounded himself with individuals who have a vested interest in him staying in power.

I have a Russian born friend who is desperately trying to get back home from Russia at the moment. She pointedly said to my partner last week that she hopes that people don’t think that this is being done in the Russian people’s name.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 27, 2022, 10:45:12 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 27, 2022, 10:42:05 PM
Action needs to come from within the Kremlin. Those around Putin need to recognise the damage that is being done to their country’s reputation and move to oust him. Unfortunately Putin,  like Johnson here, has surrounded himself with individuals who have a vested interest in him staying in power.

I have a Russian born friend who is desperately trying to get back home from Russia at the moment. She pointedly said to my partner last week that she hopes that people don’t think that this is being done in the Russian people’s name.
Johnson is not like Putin, please do grow up.  You and your ilk will stop at nothing to make anti government political capital out of each and every crisis that comes along.  Shameful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 27, 2022, 11:11:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 27, 2022, 10:36:50 PM
The thing is there has not been a threat of nuclear annihilation since the mid-80s, and even then it was never as likely as it is now, so I don’t see that you had that much to come to terms with frankly.

I was around when JFK took on Khrushchev, let alone in the 80's.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 27, 2022, 11:40:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 27, 2022, 11:11:27 PM
I was around when JFK took on Khrushchev, let alone in the 80's.
I wonder how long it will be before before the potect and survive public service announcements will be rolled out, or perhaps they won’t bother for the good they will do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 28, 2022, 07:28:47 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 27, 2022, 11:40:36 PM
I wonder how long it will be before before the potect and survive public service announcements will be rolled out, or perhaps they won’t bother for the good they will do.

I remember those; hide under the table lol!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 08:04:09 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 28, 2022, 07:28:47 AM
I remember those; hide under the table lol!
That’s where I am at the moment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 08:07:30 AM
“In Belarus, everything is ready to host Russia-Ukraine negotiations. Waiting for delegations to arrive,” Belarus Ministry of Foreign Affairs has announced this morning.
https://thepavlovictoday.com/this-is-the-venue-of-todays-russia-ukraine-negotiations/

Let us hope that sanity prevails today and there is a little less sabre rattling from all including those who wish to shut down news stations as they edge ever Eastward.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 08:10:01 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2022, 08:04:09 AM
That’s where I am at the moment.

Metaphorically speaking that's where I've been for the past wee while.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 08:19:51 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 08:07:30 AM
“In Belarus, everything is ready to host Russia-Ukraine negotiations. Waiting for delegations to arrive,” Belarus Ministry of Foreign Affairs has announced this morning.
https://thepavlovictoday.com/this-is-the-venue-of-todays-russia-ukraine-negotiations/

Let us hope that sanity prevails today and there is a little less sabre rattling from all including those who wish to shut down news stations as they edge ever Eastward.
I read today that these talks are just a Putin sham to give him some breathing space and a PR exercise.  I am not overly optimistic.  Is also read the most frightening article on the BBC website entitled “Would Putin Use Nuclear Weapons?” and the answer seems quite uniquivocal - don’t read if you don’t want to know the answer…
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 28, 2022, 08:31:01 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 08:07:30 AM
“In Belarus, everything is ready to host Russia-Ukraine negotiations. Waiting for delegations to arrive,” Belarus Ministry of Foreign Affairs has announced this morning.
https://thepavlovictoday.com/this-is-the-venue-of-todays-russia-ukraine-negotiations/

Let us hope that sanity prevails today and there is a little less sabre rattling from all including those who wish to shut down news stations as they edge ever Eastward.

Indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 08:42:40 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2022, 08:19:51 AM
I read today that these talks are just a Putin sham to give him some breathing space and a PR exercise.  I am not overly optimistic.  Is also read the most frightening article on the BBC website entitled “Would Putin Use Nuclear Weapons?” and the answer seems quite uniquivocal - don’t read if you don’t want to know the answer…

Putin isn't in Biden's back yard but by proxy that's where I think Biden is in his.  I must admit to being massively underwhelmed by the results of recent US foreign policy and don't relish the thought of any more interference.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 28, 2022, 08:45:52 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2022, 08:04:09 AM
That’s where I am at the moment.

There used to be nuclear bunkers around the country for the 'important' people to go to, but I don't know if they're still operational.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 09:08:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 28, 2022, 08:45:52 AM
There used to be nuclear bunkers around the country for the 'important' people to go to, but I don't know if they're still operational.
I'm sure Boris has the keys to his, clutched in his pudgy little fist as we speak.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 09:11:27 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 08:42:40 AM
Putin isn't in Biden's back yard but by proxy that's where I think Biden is in his.  I must admit to being massively underwhelmed by the results of recent US foreign policy and don't relish the thought of any more interference.
I don't think for the last 20+ years the West has fully understood just how paranoid and dangerous Putin was and is, and that is why we are where we are today.  The more things look bad for Putin just now the more scared I get.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 09:27:10 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2022, 09:11:27 AM
I don't think for the last 20+ years the West has fully understood just how paranoid and dangerous Putin was and is, and that is why we are where we are today.  The more things look bad for Putin just now the more scared I get.

While on the Long March out of Poland in 1945 my father said that Germans told the guys that in a few years they would be back to fight side by side with them against the common enemy of Russia.

So it has been a long time coming and I don't think that is all Putin's fault, VS.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 28, 2022, 09:29:02 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 28, 2022, 08:45:52 AM
There used to be nuclear bunkers around the country for the 'important' people to go to, but I don't know if they're still operational.

I know of one where the ROC used to meet, don't know what its like now though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 09:30:59 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 09:27:10 AM
While on the Long March out of Poland in 1945 my father said that Germans told the guys that in a few years they would be back to fight side by side with them against the common enemy of Russia.

So it has been a long time coming and I don't think that is all Putin's fault, VS.
Only inasmuch as the West should have been a little less naive and trusting that they were dealing with a rational person, IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 28, 2022, 09:32:25 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2022, 09:11:27 AM
I don't think for the last 20+ years the West has fully understood just how paranoid and dangerous Putin was and is, and that is why we are where we are today.  The more things look bad for Putin just now the more scared I get.

There one would hope of a sequence where more than one guy can order a strike, he needs to made aware  he won't be around to see the destruction .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 28, 2022, 09:35:52 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 27, 2022, 08:16:39 PM
I agree, even one nuclear bomb going off in this country and life for us all is effectively not worth living.  I hope it’s not going to happen but Putin is a mad rat, and when rats are cornered they are at their most dangerous.

Not often we agree .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 09:46:13 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 28, 2022, 09:32:25 AM
There one would hope of a sequence where more than one guy can order a strike, he needs to made aware  he won't be around to see the destruction .
If you think of Putin as the ultimate suicide bomber it's not difficult to see him issuing the order.  He has also stated before that without Russia there is no point to the rest of the world, and he clearly believes the West wants to destroy Russia.  The only hope we have is that his generals are not of a similar mindset and are prepared to defy him but people like Putin don't keep power for 22+ years without being surrounded by extremely loyal, like-minded support. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 09:46:36 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 28, 2022, 09:35:52 AM
Not often we agree .
Not often I hope we are both wrong!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 28, 2022, 09:50:33 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2022, 09:46:13 AM
If you think of Putin as the ultimate suicide bomber it's not difficult to see him issuing the order.  He has also stated before that without Russia there is no point to the rest of the world, and he clearly believes the West wants to destroy Russia.  The only hope we have is that his generals are not of a similar mindset and are prepared to defy him but people like Putin don't keep power for 22+ years without being surrounded by extremely loyal, like-minded support.

Agreed but the trappings of power under threat may galvanise the team against him, keep your enemies close Putin, your friends even closer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 28, 2022, 10:09:06 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2022, 09:46:13 AM
If you think of Putin as the ultimate suicide bomber it's not difficult to see him issuing the order.  He has also stated before that without Russia there is no point to the rest of the world, and he clearly believes the West wants to destroy Russia.  The only hope we have is that his generals are not of a similar mindset and are prepared to defy him but people like Putin don't keep power for 22+ years without being surrounded by extremely loyal, like-minded support.

What of Africa, South America, China, sub Continent, Australia, middle east , China would love a nuke war if doesn't affect them imo, the world without Russia is a daft statement by people with ideas above their station. Sure  nuclear fall out would have an impact which basically is an unknown quantity not knowing how many bombs would be unleased  , but the strongest will survive.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on February 28, 2022, 10:10:52 AM
Even Putin must realise that the West will annihilate Russia if he uses the nuclear option. No-one will win a nuclear war.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 10:10:52 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2022, 09:30:59 AM
Only inasmuch as the West should have been a little less naive and trusting that they were dealing with a rational person, IMO.

In those days they weren't.

Stalin was the top dog and I think life was pretty dismal for the Russian people and those in the satellite states for a very long time.

What my father was told betrayed a particular mindset and it is one which I was brought up under.  To my way of thinking Putin is no better and no worse than Biden both being different sides of the same coin.

The Russians had nothing to do with Hiroshima and Nagasaki but I'm sure they have studied the history and have learned from it.  All possibly the wrong lessons from ours and every point of view including theirs - I never really appreciated the film makers' interpretation of a post apocalyptic world and here I am gazing down the barrel towards one.

Sheer and unadulterated insanity being displayed here from all the idiots who hold so many fates in their hands!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 28, 2022, 10:17:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 28, 2022, 08:45:52 AM
There used to be nuclear bunkers around the country for the 'important' people to go to, but I don't know if they're still operational.

https://youtu.be/m9K5-09q6f4

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 10:19:43 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on February 28, 2022, 10:10:52 AM
Even Putin must realise that the West will annihilate Russia if he uses the nuclear option. No-one will win a nuclear war.
He doesn't seem to care, judging on what he has said in the past.  Hopefully it's just braggadocio but it could also be a sign of mental instability, extreme delusion or whatever it is that drives people to blow themselves up in the name of a cause.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 10:19:48 AM
Quote from: barrier on February 28, 2022, 10:09:06 AM
What of Africa, South America, China, sub Continent, Australia, middle east , China would love a nuke war if doesn't affect them imo, the world without Russia is a daft statement by people with ideas above their station. Sure  nuclear fall out would have an impact which basically is an unknown quantity not knowing how many bombs would be unleased  , but the strongest will survive.

Barrier, anyone unbalanced enough to launch present day nuclear armaments in anger won't do that in isolation.  I think there are many places in the world where materials of destruction can be released which will make the pandemic we are still struggling with look like a walk in the park.

Like the dinosaurs we will have had our time which will be over.  Welcome to the cockroaches ~ I think they are one of the lifeforms which may survive - I don't think I would really want to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 10:22:33 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 10:10:52 AM
In those days they weren't.

Stalin was the top dog and I think life was pretty dismal for the Russian people and those in the satellite states for a very long time.

What my father was told betrayed a particular mindset and it is one which I was brought up under.  To my way of thinking Putin is no better and no worse than Biden both being different sides of the same coin.

The Russians had nothing to do with Hiroshima and Nagasaki but I'm sure they have studied the history and have learned from it.  All possibly the wrong lessons from ours and every point of view including theirs - I never really appreciated the film makers' interpretation of a post apocalyptic world and here I am gazing down the barrel towards one.

Sheer and unadulterated insanity being displayed here from all the idiots who hold so many fates in their hands!
I honestly don't think you can compare Putin with Biden.  Biden has not threatened to nuke us all for starters, nor has he ordered the invasion of a sovereign state.  A more apt comparison might be George W Bush, aided and abetted by Tony Blair though....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 10:24:14 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 10:19:48 AM
Barrier, anyone unbalanced enough to launch present day nuclear armaments in anger won't do that in isolation.  I think there are many places in the world where materials of destruction can be released which will make the pandemic we are still struggling with look like a walk in the park.

Like the dinosaurs we will have had our time which will be over.  Welcome to the cockroaches ~ I think they are one of the lifeforms which may survive - I don't think I would really want to.
Haha, funnily enough while having my shower this morning I imagined a cartoon showing two cockroaches in the foreground with a nuclear bomb explosion in the distance, one cockroach saying to the other "time to prepare for government". 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 28, 2022, 10:25:48 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 10:10:52 AM
In those days they weren't.

Stalin was the top dog and I think life was pretty dismal for the Russian people and those in the satellite states for a very long time.

What my father was told betrayed a particular mindset and it is one which I was brought up under.  To my way of thinking Putin is no better and no worse than Biden both being different sides of the same coin.

The Russians had nothing to do with Hiroshima and Nagasaki but I'm sure they have studied the history and have learned from it.  All possibly the wrong lessons from ours and every point of view including theirs - I never really appreciated the film makers' interpretation of a post apocalyptic world and here I am gazing down the barrel towards one.

Sheer and unadulterated insanity being displayed here from all the idiots who hold so many fates in their hands!

Let’s hope the threat of annihilation steels the courage of those around Putin and they neutralise him if the time comes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 10:33:19 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2022, 10:22:33 AM
I honestly don't think you can compare Putin with Biden.  Biden has not threatened to nuke us all for starters, nor has he ordered the invasion of a sovereign state.  A more apt comparison might be George W Bush, aided and abetted by Tony Blair though....

While checking through the West's agitation to suppress the voice of RT from the airwaves I discovered that Tony Blair was instrumental in deterring Bush from bombing the offices of Aljazeera - I've closed the link, but it is on record.

So I don't think that Blair was always the bad guy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 10:33:42 AM
I always firmly believed that nuclear weapons would once again be deployed in some hostile situation, I just truly hoped it would not be in my or my children's lifetimes.  I still hope (I know having hope is sneered at by some on here but what else do I have?)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 10:35:32 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 28, 2022, 10:25:48 AM
Let’s hope the threat of annihilation steels the courage of those around Putin and they neutralise him if the time comes.

I don't necessarily agree with that sentiment - bearing in mind that 'it takes two to tango'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 10:38:40 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 10:33:19 AM
While checking through the West's agitation to suppress the voice of RT from the airwaves I discovered that Tony Blair was instrumental in deterring Bush from bombing the offices of Aljazeera - I've closed the link, but it is on record.

So I don't think that Blair was always the bad guy.
I think in striving to do what he thought was the right thing, he did a very wrong thing.  The death and misery inflicted on innocent Iraqis was no different to that which is presently being inflicted on the Ukranians, and the reasons for it similar, driven by IMO paranoia and muscle-flexing and a desire to lash out and punish. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 28, 2022, 10:41:59 AM
Quote from: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 10:35:32 AM
I don't necessarily agree with that sentiment - bearing in mind that 'it takes two to tango'.

It does indeed and I have been condemning of the west’s approach to this situation too but atm Putin is the only leader threatening nuclear destruction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 10:43:29 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2022, 10:22:33 AM
I honestly don't think you can compare Putin with Biden.  Biden has not threatened to nuke us all for starters, nor has he ordered the invasion of a sovereign state.  A more apt comparison might be George W Bush, aided and abetted by Tony Blair though....

Last time round Kennedy played brinksmanship to the nth degree at the thought of Russia having a foothold in independent Cuba.

I think the Russians are equally as sensitive to our troops having a locus in a neighbouring independent state - and I would not gamble on Putin being the only Russian thinking that way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 10:55:19 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2022, 10:38:40 AM
I think in striving to do what he thought was the right thing, he did a very wrong thing.  The death and misery inflicted on innocent Iraqis was no different to that which is presently being inflicted on the Ukranians, and the reasons for it similar, driven by IMO paranoia and muscle-flexing and a desire to lash out and punish.

To my great shame I had forgotten this - but there are those who never will forget what great powers are capable of and I don't think America's hands are entirely clean when it comes to that.

Al-Amiriyya: Once upon a bombing in Iraq
Iraqis still remember the more than 400 civilians the US military killed in a single bombing in Baghdad in 1991.

Sinan Antoon
Sinan Antoon is an Iraqi poet and novelist. His latest novel is The Book of Collateral Damage.
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2018/2/13/al-amiriyya-once-upon-a-bombing-in-iraq
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 28, 2022, 11:33:08 AM
Not sure on the source but we must hope its right.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-interested-reaching-agreement-with-ukraine-talks-says-negotiator-2022-02-28/


Russia interested in reaching agreement with Ukraine at talks, says negotiator
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 01:02:09 PM
"Russia blames Liz Truss for nuclear threat" - lol, I know she's not everyone's cup of tea, but seriously?!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on February 28, 2022, 01:14:22 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 10:55:19 AM
To my great shame I had forgotten this - but there are those who never will forget what great powers are capable of and I don't think America's hands are entirely clean when it comes to that.

Al-Amiriyya: Once upon a bombing in Iraq
Iraqis still remember the more than 400 civilians the US military killed in a single bombing in Baghdad in 1991.

Sinan Antoon
Sinan Antoon is an Iraqi poet and novelist. His latest novel is The Book of Collateral Damage.
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2018/2/13/al-amiriyya-once-upon-a-bombing-in-iraq

UK and the US. Bombed Iraq into submission. Putin isn't doing that he wants to have the support of the Ukrainian people. He's sending tanks and soldiers in with no air support. They are sitting ducks for the Ukrainian drones. His tactics are very strange
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 28, 2022, 01:24:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2022, 01:02:09 PM
"Russia blames Liz Truss for nuclear threat" - lol, I know she's not everyone's cup of tea, but seriously?!

Takes the heat off of Boris with party gate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on February 28, 2022, 01:32:38 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 28, 2022, 01:24:42 PM
Takes the heat off of Boris with party gate.

Well it worked for Margaret Thatcher with the Falklands.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 01:41:00 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 28, 2022, 01:24:42 PM
Takes the heat off of Boris with party gate.
I think it rather increases the heat - on all of us!!  But who knew the Russians were so sensitive to the witterings of Liz Truss.  I mean no one here takes her very seriously and yet the Russkies are threatening to nuke us because she said something that upset them - such snowflakes!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 28, 2022, 02:13:26 PM
Quote from: Brietta on February 28, 2022, 10:55:19 AM
To my great shame I had forgotten this - but there are those who never will forget what great powers are capable of and I don't think America's hands are entirely clean when it comes to that.

Al-Amiriyya: Once upon a bombing in Iraq
Iraqis still remember the more than 400 civilians the US military killed in a single bombing in Baghdad in 1991.

Sinan Antoon
Sinan Antoon is an Iraqi poet and novelist. His latest novel is The Book of Collateral Damage.
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2018/2/13/al-amiriyya-once-upon-a-bombing-in-iraq

I do think the partial failure of the Russian invasion was because initially  they were trying to avoid a lot of physical damage and civilian casualties as their intention was to integrate Ukraine back into the Motherland.

If they had followed the American form of warfare, they would have bombed the shit out of the country long before they sent soldiers across the border and to the devil with the consequences.

Clearly this strategy has failed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 02:44:20 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 28, 2022, 02:13:26 PM
I do think the partial failure of the Russian invasion was because initially  they were trying to avoid a lot of physical damage and civilian casualties as their intention was to integrate Ukraine back into the Motherland.

If they had followed the American form of warfare, they would have bombed the shit out of the country long before they sent soldiers across the border and to the devil with the consequences.

Clearly this strategy has failed.
That's not actually what happened in the second Iraq war though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 03:37:50 PM
"Swiss officials have concluded that Russia is unlikely to use its nuclear weapons against the West in a conflict over Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, Defence Minister Viola Amherd said on Monday.

The comments came after Switzerland adopted EU sanctions against Russia.

“We are, of course, looking at all scenarios, but our investigations indicate that the likelihood of these nuclear weapons being used is low,” she told a news conference in Bern".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 28, 2022, 04:11:29 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on February 28, 2022, 01:41:00 PM
I think it rather increases the heat - on all of us!!  But who knew the Russians were so sensitive to the witterings of Liz Truss.  I mean no one here takes her very seriously and yet the Russkies are threatening to nuke us because she said something that upset them - such snowflakes!


I think we can forgive them for that,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 04:52:09 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 28, 2022, 04:11:29 PM

I think we can forgive them for that,
why?  Creating worldwide fear of imminent nuclear annihilation because Liz Truss was nasty about them?  I'm not forgiving them for that, nor anything else they have done recently such as killing dozens of civilians in rocket strikes today.  Absolute b........s.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on February 28, 2022, 10:49:42 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on February 28, 2022, 01:32:38 PM
Well it worked for Margaret Thatcher with the Falklands.

and Tony bliar
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on February 28, 2022, 11:00:45 PM
Quote from: jassi on February 28, 2022, 02:13:26 PM
I do think the partial failure of the Russian invasion was because initially  they were trying to avoid a lot of physical damage and civilian casualties as their intention was to integrate Ukraine back into the Motherland.

If they had followed the American form of warfare, they would have bombed the shit out of the country long before they sent soldiers across the border and to the devil with the consequences.

Clearly this strategy has failed.

I agree and would add...

Reading some of the comments from Russian soldiers, some didn't know they were going to actual war and would be killing civilians, others thought they were on an army exercise,  and PUTIN may well actually try and convince his public that he is liberating the Ukraine. my money is on him not expecting any kind of fight back from the Ukraine people he maybe thought  oh a walk in the park...

It is interesting that the Ukraine Government agreed to give up nuclear armory in order to join NATO, they found themselves very vulnerable to an attack- no weapons and no NATO support.
The Russian people would never forgive Putin if he nooked a Ukrainian city -the sign of a loooooozur!

This is a global version of  cancel culture...

 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 28, 2022, 11:07:17 PM

Oil was cheaper, Inflation lower & the world felt a slightly safer place when the President was waking up every morning & Tweeting 'f..k around & find out'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2022, 11:41:19 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on February 28, 2022, 11:00:45 PM
I agree and would add...

Reading some of the comments from Russian soldiers, some didn't know they were going to actual war and would be killing civilians, others thought they were on an army exercise,  and PUTIN may well actually try and convince his public that he is liberating the Ukraine. my money is on him not expecting any kind of fight back from the Ukraine people he maybe thought  oh a walk in the park...

It is interesting that the Ukraine Government agreed to give up nuclear armory in order to join NATO, they found themselves very vulnerable to an attack- no weapons and no NATO support.
The Russian people would never forgive Putin if he nooked a Ukrainian city -the sign of a loooooozur!

This is a global version of  cancel culture...
If Putin nukes anyone there won’t be many Russian people left to do any forgiving.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on March 01, 2022, 09:45:32 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on February 28, 2022, 10:49:42 PM
and Tony bliar

Blair was secure in his prime ministership and in the polls. His reasons for going to war were just as malignant but different.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 01, 2022, 11:32:24 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on March 01, 2022, 09:45:32 AM
Blair was secure in his prime ministership and in the polls. His reasons for going to war were just as malignant but different.
What reasons were they, out of interest?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 01, 2022, 04:46:39 PM
To lighten the mood a trifle  @)(++(*


https://www.primetimer.com/watch/ukrainian-president-volodymyr-zelenskyy-penis-piano 



What a guy.  Can you do that ?





Jeez, I have forgotten how to post a video
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 01, 2022, 05:12:27 PM
Quote from: sadie on March 01, 2022, 04:46:39 PM
To lighten the mood a trifle  @)(++(*


https://www.primetimer.com/watch/ukrainian-president-volodymyr-zelenskyy-penis-piano 



What a guy.  Can you do that ?





Jeez, I have forgotten how to post a video
funny though it is, it’s kind of heartbreaking too, to think this heroic  guy will probably be swinging from a lampost in the near future.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 01, 2022, 05:36:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on March 01, 2022, 05:12:27 PM
funny though it is, it’s kind of heartbreaking too, to think this heroic  guy will probably be swinging from a lampost in the near future.

So sad.   He is such a brave guy.  He must be loved by the people of Ukraine.

I hope that they can keep him hidden.   How the morale of the country will drop if he is assassinated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on March 02, 2022, 07:55:15 AM
You know what I find very odd is that  those who roundly lambasted Jeremy Corbyn for saying in no circumstances would he launch a nuclear attack are the same ones quivering in their boots that Putin might.

It’s a strange old world.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 02, 2022, 08:09:17 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on March 02, 2022, 07:55:15 AM
You know what I find very odd is that  those who roundly lambasted Jeremy Corbyn for saying in no circumstances would he launch a nuclear attack are the same ones quivering in their boots that Putin might.

It’s a strange old world.
Another sentence that makes absolutely no sense imo. Putin is far MORE likely to use nuclear weapons if Jeremy Corbyn had had his way and  all nukes from NATO countries had been removed imo.  If Russia nukes London I take it St Jeremy thinks we should just suck it up and try and make friends with Putin?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on March 02, 2022, 08:27:59 AM
And while painting Corbyn as a Russian stooge it was actually our very own Mr Johnson dragging his heels when it came to sanctioning Russia and the oligarchs who funnel their dirty money through dear old Blighty.

https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1498629995572441098?s=21
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 02, 2022, 08:41:51 AM
Johnson was of course pushing for kicking Russia out of SWIFT while the EU were dragging their heels.  I don’t know what Jeremy Corbyn has got to do with the price of fish and I think it’s extremely distasteful to be using this horrific turn of world events in an attempt to win some pathetic argument that “Jeremy was right all along”.  He wasn’t and he isn’t.   He has no answers, no solutions, and nor do his supporters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 02, 2022, 09:36:22 AM
When you look at the list of individuals blaming NATO or who are historically anti-NATO it does make you wonder doesn’t it…
Trump, Putin, Farage, Corbyn, the Chinese…
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 02, 2022, 11:52:12 AM

It is my understanding that Youtube has taken down RT and Sputnik.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 04, 2022, 04:29:36 PM
Bless his cottons:

"Saudi Arabia’s powerful crown prince has said that his feelings were “hurt” and that his own human rights were violated when he was accused of ordering the murder of the prominent dissident Jamal Khashoggi.

While admitting that the journalist’s death in Turkey at the hands of a Saudi kill squad in 2018 was a “huge mistake”, Mohammed bin Salman, 36, insisted that it was “obvious” that he had played no part — and “if that is the way we did things ... Khashoggi would not even be among the top 1,000 people” on his hit list.

In the interview with the The Atlantic magazine Bin Salman, often known as MBS, said that he understood “the anger, especially among journalists. I respect their feelings. But we also have feelings here, pain here”.


“I feel that human rights law wasn’t applied to me,” he said. “Article XI of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that any person is innocent until proven guilty.”

I wonder if he will sue?  He's certainly got the resources....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 19, 2022, 10:37:18 AM

The magnificent racist MET are still up to their tricks, other news outlets are available. Good job Madeleine is white they'd never be looking otherwise.

A black child was subjected by police to a strip search at her London school that involved exposure of intimate body parts, according to an official investigation which found racism was likely to have been an “influencing factor” in the officers’ actions.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/mar/15/black-girl-racism-police-strip-search-london-school-hackney?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 19, 2022, 01:55:22 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 19, 2022, 10:37:18 AM
The magnificent racist MET are still up to their tricks, other news outlets are available. Good job Madeleine is white they'd never be looking otherwise.

A black child was subjected by police to a strip search at her London school that involved exposure of intimate body parts, according to an official investigation which found racism was likely to have been an “influencing factor” in the officers’ actions.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/mar/15/black-girl-racism-police-strip-search-london-school-hackney?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Be good to hear the police side to this story
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 19, 2022, 02:08:09 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 19, 2022, 01:55:22 PM
Be good to hear the police side to this story

The Metropolitan police on Tuesday said they apologised for what a senior officer described as the child’s “truly regrettable” treatment, which has been the subject of a separate Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) investigation, whose report is nearing completion.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/mar/15/black-girl-racism-police-strip-search-london-school-hackney?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 19, 2022, 04:01:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 19, 2022, 02:08:09 PM
The Metropolitan police on Tuesday said they apologised for what a senior officer described as the child’s “truly regrettable” treatment, which has been the subject of a separate Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) investigation, whose report is nearing completion.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/mar/15/black-girl-racism-police-strip-search-london-school-hackney?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

My point was I would like to hear the other side of the story...your reply doesnt address my post. do you understand we ahve only heard the families side......I prefer to here all the evidence before jumping to conclusions....I think thats quite sensible
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 12:42:23 AM
Quote from: Davel on March 19, 2022, 04:01:22 PM
My point was I would like to hear the other side of the story...your reply doesnt address my post. do you understand we ahve only heard the families side......I prefer to here all the evidence before jumping to conclusions....I think thats quite sensible

Do you believe that there is any way the strip searching of a 14 year old on her monthly cycle can ever be justified, especially a strip search where no appropriate adult or solicitor is present? There is no dispute that the incident took place as reported.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on March 20, 2022, 12:43:06 AM
Quote from: Davel on March 19, 2022, 04:01:22 PM
My point was I would like to hear the other side of the story...your reply doesnt address my post. do you understand we ahve only heard the families side......I prefer to here all the evidence before jumping to conclusions....I think thats quite sensible

Well said, Davel.   
Me too, I like to hear all sides of the story before jumping to conclusions

ETA:    Having now read Faiths post, maybe we have now heard all sides of the story.   But I would like confirmation that the report is bona fide and not slanted.  We are all so used now to disinformation that I have become suspicious of everything.  Sad

From what I have read in Faiths post, I don't like the sound of it.   But I would want to know details of all the whys and wherefores before I came to any conclusion,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 20, 2022, 02:15:45 AM
Quote from: sadie on March 20, 2022, 12:43:06 AM
Well said, Davel.   
Me too, I like to hear all sides of the story before jumping to conclusions

ETA:    Having now read Faiths post, maybe we have now heard all sides of the story.   But I would like confirmation that the report is bona fide and not slanted.  We are all so used now to disinformation that I have become suspicious of everything.  Sad

From what I have read in Faiths post, I don't like the sound of it.   But I would want to know details of all the whys and wherefores before I came to any conclusion,

I am totally confused from start to finish by the report on this incident in the Guardian.

" ... the search had been conducted after her bag and outer clothing had already been searched by staff at the school prior to police arrival."

Was that lawful in the first instance?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 20, 2022, 07:58:33 AM
There’s no denying the fact that the Met has some serious underlying issues concerning a culture of misogyny and racism.  Crime clear-up rates are at an all time low and the whole service needs a massive overhaul, better recruiting and more higher calibre (wo)manpower.  That’s not to say that for the most part the police don’t also do a great (if thankless) job with the dwindling resources they have, and clearly the only reason we are discussing this here is to undermine their dedicated efforts in trying to solve the McCann case.  For instance I doubt Barrier would be quick to bring us examples of PJ failings, of which there must I’m sure also be numerous examples.  PC Plod strip searching a 14 year old ethnic minority school girl on her period does not mean that Met detectives are incapable of carrying out a competent criminal investigation no matter how determined some are to suggest that it does.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 20, 2022, 08:14:05 AM
Quote from: Brietta on March 20, 2022, 02:15:45 AM
I am totally confused from start to finish by the report on this incident in the Guardian.

" ... the search had been conducted after her bag and outer clothing had already been searched by staff at the school prior to police arrival."

Was that lawful in the first instance?

Yes;

"Headteachers and staff authorised by them have a statutory power to search
pupils or their possessions, without consent, where they have reasonable grounds
for suspecting that the pupil may have a prohibited item."
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/674416/Searching_screening_and_confiscation.pdf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2022, 08:34:17 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 12:42:23 AM
Do you believe that there is any way the strip searching of a 14 year old on her monthly cycle can ever be justified, especially a strip search where no appropriate adult or solicitor is present? There is no dispute that the incident took place as reported.

I believe in the rule of law. I think its important to hear both sides of an incident before making any judgement.
From the link provided by gunit the search was lawful..

Having said that the alleged incident is so far away from what is considered acceptable I feel there must be more to the story than we are being told

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 20, 2022, 08:50:21 AM
Quote from: Davel on March 20, 2022, 08:34:17 AM
I believe in the rule of law. I think its important to hear both sides of an incident before making any judgement.
From the link provided by gunit the search was lawful..

Having said that the alleged incident is so far away from what is considered acceptable I feel there must be more to the story than we are being told

The teachers acted lawfully, the police didn't;

Children aged 17 and under need to have an appropriate adult present if they are to be strip-searched, except in urgent cases where there is risk of harm or if a juvenile has specifically stated that they don’t want an appropriate adult there. However, this decision must be recorded and signed by an appropriate adult.
https://www.theweek.co.uk/news/crime/956109/the-law-on-police-strip-searches
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2022, 08:57:20 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 20, 2022, 08:50:21 AM
The teachers acted lawfully, the police didn't;

Children aged 17 and under need to have an appropriate adult present if they are to be strip-searched, except in urgent cases where there is risk of harm or if a juvenile has specifically stated that they don’t want an appropriate adult there. However, this decision must be recorded and signed by an appropriate adult.
https://www.theweek.co.uk/news/crime/956109/the-law-on-police-strip-searches

We still don't know the full details
.. Is that so difficult for some to understand
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2022, 09:02:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 20, 2022, 08:50:21 AM
The teachers acted lawfully, the police didn't;

Children aged 17 and under need to have an appropriate adult present if they are to be strip-searched, except in urgent cases where there is risk of harm or if a juvenile has specifically stated that they don’t want an appropriate adult there. However, this decision must be recorded and signed by an appropriate adult.
https://www.theweek.co.uk/news/crime/956109/the-law-on-police-strip-searches

Is the article quoting guidelines or laws.. Under the law teachers can act in loco parentis
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 20, 2022, 09:18:36 AM
Quote from: Davel on March 20, 2022, 09:02:58 AM
Is the article quoting guidelines or laws.. Under the law teachers can act in loco parentis

It seems no appropriate adult was present, just two female police officers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2022, 09:25:56 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 20, 2022, 09:18:36 AM
It seems no appropriate adult was present, just two female police officers.

I think it's sensible to hear the background. If the report is totally accurate the officers should be suspended immediately... And sacked after an investigation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 20, 2022, 09:41:03 AM
Quote from: Davel on March 20, 2022, 09:25:56 AM
I think it's sensible to hear the background. If the report is totally accurate the officers should be suspended immediately... And sacked after an investigation

I think the police investigation is already under way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 20, 2022, 09:57:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 20, 2022, 09:41:03 AM
I think the police investigation is already under way.

Jim Gamble involved, a investigation as already taken place.

https://chscp.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Child-Q-PUBLISHED-14-March-22.pdf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 20, 2022, 10:27:54 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 20, 2022, 08:50:21 AM
The teachers acted lawfully, the police didn't;

Children aged 17 and under need to have an appropriate adult present if they are to be strip-searched, except in urgent cases where there is risk of harm or if a juvenile has specifically stated that they don’t want an appropriate adult there. However, this decision must be recorded and signed by an appropriate adult.
https://www.theweek.co.uk/news/crime/956109/the-law-on-police-strip-searches

" ... except in urgent cases where there is risk of harm"  If that was the assessment of the situation made by the attending officers ... it would appear to me they acted lawfully.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 20, 2022, 10:31:12 AM
Quote from: Brietta on March 20, 2022, 10:27:54 AM
" ... except in urgent cases where there is risk of harm"  If that was the assessment of the situation made by the attending officers ... it would appear to me they acted lawfully.
This is lawful in your considered judgement is it.

5.63 Finding 8: Having considered the context of the incident, the views of
those engaged in the review and the impact felt by Child Q and her family,
racism (whether deliberate or not) was likely to have been an influencing
factor in the decision to undertake a strip search.[/b]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2022, 10:36:44 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 20, 2022, 10:31:12 AM
This is lawful in your considered judgement is it.

5.63 Finding 8: Having considered the context of the incident, the views of
those engaged in the review and the impact felt by Child Q and her family,
racism (whether deliberate or not) was likely to have been an influencing
factor in the decision to undertake a strip search.[/b]
Sounds like political correctness to me
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 20, 2022, 10:41:24 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 20, 2022, 10:31:12 AM
This is lawful in your considered judgement is it.

5.63 Finding 8: Having considered the context of the incident, the views of
those engaged in the review and the impact felt by Child Q and her family,
racism (whether deliberate or not) was likely to have been an influencing
factor in the decision to undertake a strip search.[/b]
This is why the police cannot stop and search suspects they think are carrying knives (unless they are white).  If they search and there is no knife then they will undoubtedly be accused of racism, so what’s the solution?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 20, 2022, 10:52:37 AM
I’d like to know why the school called the police in the first place.  Is it a racist school?  It seems an extreme thing to do when you suspect a pupil *might* have brought drugs into school.  Why wouldn’t a search of the child’s personal effects and pockets have been sufficient to satisfy the teachers that she was “clean”?  Perhaps the school should invest in a trained drugs sniffer dog and then all this nastiness could have been avoided.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 20, 2022, 10:52:49 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on March 20, 2022, 10:41:24 AM
This is why the police cannot stop and search suspects they think are carrying knives (unless they are white).  If they search and there is no knife then they will undoubtedly be accused of racism, so what’s the solution?

This is a young school girl in school who previously had smelt allegedly of drugs, its now illegal to smell it would seem .She was on her period and stripped to reveal her intimate parts, you ok with this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 20, 2022, 10:53:20 AM
Quote from: Davel on March 20, 2022, 10:36:44 AM
Sounds like political correctness to me

Take it up with Gamble.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 20, 2022, 10:54:29 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on March 20, 2022, 10:52:37 AM
I’d like to know why the school called the police in the first place.  Is it a racist school?  It seems an extreme thing to do when you suspect a pupil *might* have brought drugs into school.  Why wouldn’t a search of the child’s personal effects and pockets have been sufficient to satisfy the teachers that she was “clean”?  Perhaps the school should invest in a trained drugs sniffer dog and then all this nastiness could have been avoided.

Or the police could have brought a drugs dog in, mind dogs are unreliable we're informed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 20, 2022, 10:59:19 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 20, 2022, 10:52:49 AM
This is a young school girl in school who previously had smelt allegedly of drugs, its now illegal to smell it would seem .She was on her period and stripped to reveal her intimate parts, you ok with this.
Perhaps you could point to where I said I was ok with this?  Many thanks for your cooperation in this matter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 11:00:39 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 20, 2022, 10:52:49 AM
This is a young school girl in school who previously had smelt allegedly of drugs, its now illegal to smell it would seem .She was on her period and stripped to reveal her intimate parts, you ok with this.

It would appear so.Take the racist element out of it and it’s still an appalling way for the police to treat a child.

No wonder the Met conducts itself with such impunity if the public that they are meant to serve are accepting of this kind of behaviour against a mere child.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 20, 2022, 11:00:54 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 20, 2022, 10:54:29 AM
Or the police could have brought a drugs dog in, mind dogs are unreliable we're informed.
I guess if she smelt strongly of cannabis the dog would have alerted, so that would have made her guilty going by sceptic logic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 20, 2022, 11:01:33 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 11:00:39 AM
It would appear so.Take the racist element out of it and it’s still an appalling way for the police to treat a child.

No wonder the Met conducts itself with such impunity if they public that they are meant to search are accepting of this kind of behaviour against a mere child.
Of do get off your soap box.  I did not say I was ok with it, you WUM.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 20, 2022, 11:25:38 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 20, 2022, 10:31:12 AM
This is lawful in your considered judgement is it.

5.63 Finding 8: Having considered the context of the incident, the views of
those engaged in the review and the impact felt by Child Q and her family,
racism (whether deliberate or not) was likely to have been an influencing
factor in the decision to undertake a strip search.[/b]

Please don't be deliberately obtuse in the effort to be offensive.  My post is quite clear

" ... except in urgent cases where there is risk of harm"  If that was the assessment of the situation made by the attending officers ... it would appear to me they acted lawfully.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg678969#msg678969

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 20, 2022, 11:46:39 AM
No child, black, white or any hue between should be strip searched and their bodily orifices examined, certainly not unless there is a medical emergency and only then always with parental of guardian consent and in their presence.  That’s my view and I would thank those on here seeking to exploit this unfortunate episode to score points against people on this forum they don’t like to remember that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2022, 12:13:46 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 11:00:39 AM
It would appear so.Take the racist element out of it and it’s still an appalling way for the police to treat a child.

No wonder the Met conducts itself with such impunity if they public that they are meant to search are accepting of this kind of behaviour against a mere child.

Still only one side of the story heard
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 20, 2022, 12:58:54 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 20, 2022, 12:13:46 PM
Still only one side of the story heard

Not according to the investigation by Gamble.


5.22 In Child Q’s circumstances, whilst two people were present, they were both
police officers. In the account of one of these officers seen by the review, they
comment that Child Q ‘indicated’ that she didn’t mind one of the teachers acting
as an Appropriate Adult but was uncomfortable about them being in the room.
The officer further states that this teacher (and another) ‘seemed’ happy to be
outside whilst the search was undertaken. ‘Indicated’ and ‘Seemed’ do not
suggest a thorough process whereby specific clarification was being sought
about how Child Q’s best interests would be protected.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2022, 01:06:14 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 20, 2022, 12:58:54 PM
Not according to the investigation by Gamble.


5.22 In Child Q’s circumstances, whilst two people were present, they were both
police officers. In the account of one of these officers seen by the review, they
comment that Child Q ‘indicated’ that she didn’t mind one of the teachers acting
as an Appropriate Adult but was uncomfortable about them being in the room.
The officer further states that this teacher (and another) ‘seemed’ happy to be
outside whilst the search was undertaken. ‘Indicated’ and ‘Seemed’ do not
suggest a thorough process whereby specific clarification was being sought
about how Child Q’s best interests would be protected.

Where is the account from the two police officers
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 20, 2022, 01:09:33 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 20, 2022, 01:06:14 PM
Where is the account from the two police officers

The clue is is these words "In the account of one of these officers seen by the review" the fact they haven't shared them publicly with you is something you'll have to take up with those concerned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2022, 01:09:51 PM
I would like to know why the officers felt a strip search was necessary... Have the officers been disciplined.. If not why not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2022, 01:11:37 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 20, 2022, 01:09:33 PM
The clue is is these words "In the account of one of these officers seen by the review" the fact they haven't shared them publicly with you is something you'll have to take up with those concerned.

The words.. In the account of the police officers... Indicates they gave a full account which we have not seen... Why... We have only heard one side of the story9
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 02:21:27 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 20, 2022, 01:11:37 PM
The words.. In the account of the police officers... Indicates they gave a full account which we have not seen... Why... We have only heard one side of the story9

There is no dispute that a child was strip searched in a degrading manner. That is agreed by all parties. There is no justification for such abhorrent treatment of a minor.

It does seem to me though that those not wholeheartedly condemning such treatment of a child are motivated by a dislike of those who are condemning it rather than by the treatment itself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2022, 02:55:39 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 02:21:27 PM
There is no dispute that a child was strip searched in a degrading manner. That is agreed by all parties. There is no justification for such abhorrent treatment of a minor.

It does seem to me though that those not wholeheartedly condemning such treatment of a child are motivated by a dislike of those who are condemning it rather than by the treatment itself.

I'm fairly sure we are not getting the full facts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 20, 2022, 02:59:24 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 02:21:27 PM
There is no dispute that a child was strip searched in a degrading manner. That is agreed by all parties. There is no justification for such abhorrent treatment of a minor.

It does seem to me though that those not wholeheartedly condemning such treatment of a child are motivated by a dislike of those who are condemning it rather than by the treatment itself.
It seems to me the only reason we are discussing this at all is because it's been raised here to poke in the eye those who support the Met's investigation into Madeleine McCann. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 03:59:49 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 20, 2022, 02:55:39 PM
I'm fairly sure we are not getting the full facts

So what facts would make this child’s treatment in any way right?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2022, 04:09:40 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 03:59:49 PM
So what facts would make this child’s treatment in any way right?

I wouldn't say right... But understandable in the, eyes of the two officers. Again... Why have the officers not been disciplined
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 04:14:19 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 20, 2022, 04:09:40 PM
I wouldn't say right... But understandable in the, eyes of the two officers. Again... Why have the officers not been disciplined

You really do need to check your moral compass.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2022, 04:17:36 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 04:14:19 PM
You really do need to check your moral compass.
I don't.... You need to understand the importance of gathering all the facts before reaching conclusions... You obviously dont
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on March 20, 2022, 04:33:23 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 20, 2022, 02:55:39 PM
I'm fairly sure we are not getting the full facts
You're right, for a change. There's more to come about a couple of people involved apparently.
*cough racists *cough
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 04:34:30 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 20, 2022, 04:17:36 PM
I don't.... You need to understand the importance of gathering all the facts before reaching conclusions... You obviously dont

Jim Gamble seems to have done that for us. Do you doubt his judgment?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2022, 04:42:40 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 04:34:30 PM
Jim Gamble seems to have done that for us. Do you doubt his judgment?

I agree with his report in that it was wrong.. No doubt about it... Im interested in why it happened... It may well be not as black and white as you thinkp
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 20, 2022, 04:48:33 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 04:14:19 PM
You really do need to check your moral compass.
This from a woman who has spent years of her life smearing and bitching about the family of a missing child online.  Your hypocrisy is rank.  IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 04:49:33 PM
Quote from: Davel on March 20, 2022, 04:42:40 PM
I agree with his report in that it was wrong.. No doubt about it... Im interested in why it happened... It may well be not as black and white as you thinkp

Oh I think it was.

Only the really rather stupid would not now be acquainted with the facts but crack on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 20, 2022, 04:53:32 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on March 20, 2022, 04:49:33 PM
Oh I think it was.

Only the really rather stupid would not now be acquainted with the facts but crack on.
Blimey where's your scepticism?!  Lapping up official reports from Jim Gamble without batting so much as an eye.  What do you make of his views on the McCann case then? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 22, 2022, 04:46:12 PM
Once again the MET come out smelling like shite, this is the rabble that has spent circa £13 million supposedly looking for Madeleine, whilst there's nothing to say officers involved with OG are any of the things mentioned they do belong to that organisation.

Met Police 'fundamentally flawed' when tackling corruption in its ranks: Damning report blasts 'arrogant, secretive and lethargic' force for hiring staff with criminal records, 2,000 missing warrant cards and failure to properly vet officers

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10639517/Met-Police-fundamentally-flawed-tackling-corruption-ranks.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 22, 2022, 04:47:32 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 22, 2022, 04:46:12 PM
Once again the MET come out smelling like shite, this is the rabble that has spent circa £13 million supposedly looking for Madeleine, whilst there's nothing to say officers involved with OG are any of the things mentioned they do belong to that organisation.

Met Police 'fundamentally flawed' when tackling corruption in its ranks: Damning report blasts 'arrogant, secretive and lethargic' force for hiring staff with criminal records, 2,000 missing warrant cards and failure to properly vet officers

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10639517/Met-Police-fundamentally-flawed-tackling-corruption-ranks.html
DEFUND THE POLICE!!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 22, 2022, 04:49:37 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on March 22, 2022, 04:47:32 PM
DEFUND THE POLICE!!!

Theres a case for the MET to be defunded it could be argued, fit for purpose ? hard pressed to defend them, but no doubt apologist on here will.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 22, 2022, 05:50:27 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 22, 2022, 04:49:37 PM
Theres a case for the MET to be defunded it could be argued, fit for purpose ? hard pressed to defend them, but no doubt apologist on here will.
In fact the opposite should happen IMO.  More investment, more coppers on the beat, better training and higher standards of recruitment at all levels, less form-filling, more policing, greater powers but with greater assessment and accountability.  I don’t know how you achieve all that but there needs to be a radical overhaul if the Met really is as rotten as these reports suggest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on March 23, 2022, 08:45:37 PM
I have decided to do a full moderator review given recent events and as it is badly overdue.

Anyone wishing to provide an input to this process please message me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 01, 2022, 09:20:59 AM
Hands up who today wishes Labour had won the 2019 general election and renationalised the energy industry as promised?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/15/corbyn-to-reveal-labour-plans-to-nationalise-uks-energy-network
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 01, 2022, 09:49:15 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 01, 2022, 09:20:59 AM
Hands up who today wishes Labour had won the 2019 general election and renationalised the energy industry as promised?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/15/corbyn-to-reveal-labour-plans-to-nationalise-uks-energy-network

I wonder what his Russia/Ukraine stance would have been?

Would he have been arming & funding the Ukranians to provoke the sh*t out of Russia, or might he have taken a more cautious & neutral stance.

I didn't vote for anyone in the last general by the way, probably the first time I haven't voted, I was away at the time of the election, otherwise I'd have voted BNP or Britain First or something.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 01, 2022, 09:52:18 AM


He did indeed warn of Tory connections to Russian oligarchs IIRC.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 01, 2022, 11:56:59 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 01, 2022, 09:52:18 AM

He did indeed warn of Tory connections to Russian oligarchs IIRC.

And then, of course, there is Peter Mandelson.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 12:03:56 PM

Blimmin 'ell.  I don't know.  Fortunately I no longer have to care.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 01, 2022, 01:06:09 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 12:03:56 PM
Blimmin 'ell.  I don't know.  Fortunately I no longer have to care.

I remember you saying you use foodbanks (this isn't any attack on you by the way)

You might begin to care about politics in the coming months when you can't afford utilities, & even more so if the China/Russia plan to kill the dollar (& with it the euro) succeeds.

Europeans & Americans are facing the biggest fall in living standards since the 1970's according to some analysts, even without the war.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 01:25:36 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 01, 2022, 01:06:09 PM
I remember you saying you use foodbanks (this isn't any attack on you by the way)

You might begin to care about politics in the coming months when you can't afford utilities, & even more so if the China/Russia plan to kill the dollar (& with it the euro) succeeds.

Europeans & Americans are facing the biggest fall in living standards since the 1970's according to some analysts, even without the war.

France also subsidises my fuel costs, by far more than The Winter Fuel Allowance, of which I was deprived by UK.

My living standards have always been basic.  More so when I lived in Britain than they are now.

And then I have The Wood Burner and a very lot of Trees.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 01, 2022, 02:03:04 PM
If Labour had won the last election we'd probably today be in the process of holding a referendum on whether to hold another referendum on whether or not we should hold a referendum about leaving the EU. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 02:42:13 PM

During the thirty years that I have lived in Brittany I have worried about Britain.  Well, England actually.

I don't really know for why, other than it is the land of my misbegotten birth.  And perhaps I hoped that things would improve.

But the Island of Britain isn't European and never can be.  it's in the psych and The Island Race.  Although probably closer to Bretons than any other part of The Continent.

I so wanted Britain to leave The EU for it's own sake..  They should never have joined in the first place.  Britain never got conquered you see.  Europe will never forgive them for that.

However, France has been very good to me.  Perhaps they see me as a turncoat.  I don't really care.  I know who I am.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 01, 2022, 02:53:31 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 02:42:13 PM
During the thirty years that I have lived in Brittany I have worried about Britain.  Well, England actually.

I don't really know for why, other than it is the land of my misbegotten birth.  And perhaps I hoped that things would improve.

But the Island of Britain isn't European and never can be.  it's in the psych and The Island Race.  Although probably closer to Bretons than any other part of The Continent.

I so wanted Britain to leave The EU for it's own sake..  They should never have joined in the first place.  Britain never got conquered you see.  Europe will never forgive them for that.

However, France has been very good to me.  Perhaps they see me as a turncoat.  I don't really care.  I know who I am.
The Romans conquered Britain, though god knows what they ever did for us.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 01, 2022, 02:59:14 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 01, 2022, 11:56:59 AM
And then, of course, there is Peter Mandelson.

Oh that’s a whole thread all on its own Sadie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 01, 2022, 03:00:35 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 12:03:56 PM
Blimmin 'ell.  I don't know.  Fortunately I no longer have to care.

I’ll bet your move to France seems inspired now?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 03:59:40 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 01, 2022, 03:00:35 PM
I’ll bet your move to France seems inspired now?

Just desperation at the time.  I was so tired that I could no longer think straight from running a small business 24/7.  With my Staff robbing me.

Fortunately I had this Breton Hovel.  So I shut the door and slept for six months.  And then got off my backside and started a Gardening Business, which I continued to do until I was seventy five.  It wasn't easy for a woman but French Gardeners were notoriously unreliable.

My youngest son then inherited my very expensive tools and is now doing much better than I did.  But I did survive.

My house remains a hovel.  But it is my hovel and I love it.  Along with the ghastly O'Connor.  Rotten little pisser.  Probably the dearest dog I have ever owned.

Perhaps all things do come to those who wait.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 04:17:57 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 01, 2022, 02:53:31 PM
The Romans conquered Britain, though god knows what they ever did for us.

The Romans bogged off when it was getting really interesting.  But we did get a few straight roads, which were actually very boring.

So how did The Romans conquer Britain?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on April 01, 2022, 04:30:45 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 01, 2022, 02:53:31 PM
The Romans conquered Britain, though god knows what they ever did for us.
Well, they gave me a Roman nose for starters, but Boudicca is still to this day keeping foreign invaders at bay...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 04:55:25 PM
Quote from: Myster on April 01, 2022, 04:30:45 PM
Well, they gave me a Roman nose for starters, but Boudicca is still to this day keeping foreign invaders at bay...

How did you escape The Moderator Cull?  Or was this all about me?  I didn't do any moderating for about four weeks.  When did you do any moderating?

I don't really mind.  It is much more fun to be back in the fray.  But I would like to see a bit of honesty.  Nine years came hard.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 05:03:07 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 01, 2022, 01:06:09 PM
I remember you saying you use foodbanks (this isn't any attack on you by the way)

You might begin to care about politics in the coming months when you can't afford utilities, & even more so if the China/Russia plan to kill the dollar (& with it the euro) succeeds.

Europeans & Americans are facing the biggest fall in living standards since the 1970's according to some analysts, even without the war.

One thing about us older ones; we remember lower living standards. Coal fires, no bathroom or inside toilet, ice on the inside of a window and food rationing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 01, 2022, 05:32:34 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 04:17:57 PM
The Romans bogged off when it was getting really interesting.  But we did get a few straight roads, which were actually very boring.

So how did The Romans conquer Britain?
I dunno, it was before my time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 01, 2022, 05:33:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 05:03:07 PM
One thing about us older ones; we remember lower living standards. Coal fires, no bathroom or inside toilet, ice on the inside of a window and food rationing.
Ah, the good ol’ days will soon be here again, you oldies must be delighted!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 01, 2022, 05:37:06 PM
Remember the three day week and rubbish piled high in the streets?  Remember when you could buy 4 chews for a penny? Remember you’re a w omble?  In the 70s we never had it so good.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 01, 2022, 05:38:00 PM
Why is w..ble not allowed? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 05:49:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 05:03:07 PM
One thing about us older ones; we remember lower living standards. Coal fires, no bathroom or inside toilet, ice on the inside of a window and food rationing.

Really?  What would you have known about Food Rationing?  You aren't old enough.

The rest of it was just normal.  And often still is around here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on April 01, 2022, 05:56:36 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 04:55:25 PM
How did you escape The Moderator Cull?  Or was this all about me?  I didn't do any moderating for about four weeks.  When did you do any moderating?

I don't really mind.  It is much more fun to be back in the fray.  But I would like to see a bit of honesty.  Nine years came hard.
I haven't the faintest idea why you were sacked, unless you complained too much to the chief cullmaster. Moderating on the McCann boards has never been of much interest, as I wasn't born there and had no intention wasting time on censoring the same repetitive, tired old tripe as you used to do... or rather, attempted to do.  And I'm happy not to spend 12/7/365 here as the few obsessing about someone else's missing child, when there are far more important things to do in my own life. It's just far too short. So if anyone wants this horrible man's job, you know where to apply...... again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 06:25:22 PM
Quote from: Myster on April 01, 2022, 05:56:36 PM
I haven't the faintest idea why you were sacked, unless you complained too much to the chief cullmaster. Moderating on the McCann boards has never been of much interest, as I wasn't born there and had no intention wasting time on censoring the same repetitive, tired old tripe as you used to do... or rather, attempted to do.  And I'm happy not to spend 12/7/365 here as the few obsessing about someone else's missing child, when there are far more important things to do in my own life. It's just far too short. So if anyone wants this horrible man's job, you know where to apply...... again.

I have never complained to anyone.   But obviously others did.  It no longer matters.

Someone wanted rid of me for some reason that is unknown to me.

It is the lack of honesty that matters.  I have still not been told for why, or even notified.

Cor blimey.  Nine years and out you go without a word.

You, of course have been remarkably funny about O'Connor.  So obviously you read my Blog.  And you have given me a lovely picture, which is now up on my old stone wall.

Thank you for that.  O'Connor is there beside Hamlet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 01, 2022, 06:37:57 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 06:25:22 PM
I have never complained to anyone.   But obviously others did.  It no longer matters.

Someone wanted rid of me for some reason that is unknown to me.

It is the lack of honesty that matters.  I have still not been told for why, or even notified.

Cor blimey.  Nine years and out you go without a word.

You, of course have been remarkably funny about O'Connor.  So obviously you read my Blog.  And you have given me a lovely picture, which is now up on my old stone wall.

Thank you for that.  O'Connor is there beside Hamlet.

The least you deserved was to be given a reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 06:45:19 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 01, 2022, 05:33:31 PM
Ah, the good ol’ days will soon be here again, you oldies must be delighted!

Do you think it was enjoyable? It wasn't. Tottering off to bed with my stone hot water bottle, dressed in my pyjamas, cardigan and bedsocks wasn't fun, but I could do it again if I had to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 01, 2022, 06:51:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 06:45:19 PM
Do you think it was enjoyable? It wasn't. Tottering off to bed with my stone hot water bottle, dressed in my pyjamas, cardigan and bedsocks wasn't fun, but I could do it again if I had to.

The point is that you shouldn’t have to. It was an ideological decision, the consequences of which will never be felt by those making that decision.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 06:53:46 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 05:49:49 PM
Really?  What would you have known about Food Rationing?  You aren't old enough.

The rest of it was just normal.  And often still is around here.

How old am I then? I was born well before the end of rationing in 1954.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 06:58:04 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 01, 2022, 06:37:57 PM
The least you deserved was to be given a reason.

I don't know why I wasn't.  But then there is no rule that says I should have been.

I doubt that I will be missed.  It isn't all that important on a Forum like this.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 07:00:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 06:53:46 PM
How old am I then? I was born well before the end of rationing in 1954.

I know how old you are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 07:01:05 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 01, 2022, 06:51:24 PM
The point is that you shouldn’t have to. It was an ideological decision, the consequences of which will never be felt by those making that decision.

We are all at the mercy of those making the decisions. I just thank my lucky stars that I was born in the UK where I was ocassionally uncomfortable but nothing worse than that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 01, 2022, 07:01:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 06:53:46 PM
How old am I then? I was born well before the end of rationing in 1954.

Old enough to be my mother, possibly even grandmother.

I strongly suspect you're not alone in that regard here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 07:06:18 PM

This is all nonsense.  Central Heating was unheard of as were inside lavatories or even bathrooms.

Why should this be some sort of abuse?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 01, 2022, 07:10:41 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 07:06:18 PM
This is all nonsense.  Central Heating was unheard of as were inside lavatories or even bathrooms.

Why should this be some sort of abuse?

Those of us born post 1980 only know relative luxury.

Crapping in the back garden is something we've only ever done when we couldn't get the keys in the front door at the end of a heavy nights drinking.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 01, 2022, 07:12:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 07:01:05 PM
We are all at the mercy of those making the decisions. I just thank my lucky stars that I was born in the UK where I was ocassionally uncomfortable but nothing worse than that.

Unfortunately some weren’t, and aren’t, as lucky.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 01, 2022, 07:20:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 06:45:19 PM
Do you think it was enjoyable? It wasn't. Tottering off to bed with my stone hot water bottle, dressed in my pyjamas, cardigan and bedsocks wasn't fun, but I could do it again if I had to.
I don’t know, many of the old people I talk to tell me life was much better in the good ol’ days and that what this country really needs is another war to sort it out.  Looks like dreams are about to come true!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 01, 2022, 07:22:08 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 01, 2022, 07:01:42 PM
Old enough to be my mother, possibly even grandmother.

I strongly suspect you're not alone in that regard here.

Correct, I'm a '46 er myself. Mind you along with the primitive sanitation, we did have the best popular music ever, so it wasn't all bad   8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 01, 2022, 07:26:28 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 07:06:18 PM
This is all nonsense.  Central Heating was unheard of as were inside lavatories or even bathrooms.

Why should this be some sort of abuse?
I used to HATE staying at my grandparents which we had to do one winter, in the mid 70s.  They had no central heating and for me as a girl brought up in the Tropics the prospect of getting into an ice cold bed (no hot water bottle either) with my breath visible and ice on the inside of the windows, well it was just inhumane.  At least their lav was indoors (though it may as well have been outside, the seat was colder than a witch’s tit).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 01, 2022, 07:29:22 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 01, 2022, 07:22:08 PM
Correct, I'm a '46 er myself. Mind you along with the primitive sanitation, we did have the best popular music ever, so it wasn't all bad   8)--))
The best decade for music was the 70s, end of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on April 01, 2022, 07:33:46 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 06:25:22 PM
I have never complained to anyone.   But obviously others did.  It no longer matters.

Someone wanted rid of me for some reason that is unknown to me.

It is the lack of honesty that matters.  I have still not been told for why, or even notified.

Cor blimey.  Nine years and out you go without a word.

You, of course have been remarkably funny about O'Connor.  So obviously you read my Blog.  And you have given me a lovely picture, which is now up on my old stone wall.

Thank you for that.  O'Connor is there beside Hamlet.
Yes, I do read your musings whenever I have a few minutes to spare, on your life in Brittany and interests in gardening, machinery (both of which I share) and your time in the Wrens (which I don't). Although I'm a landlubber, my dad served on HMS Suffolk during the Far Eastern Campaign, bombarding Japanese positions on the Malay peninsula. He used to brag about being the button boy, climbing right to the top of the mast (without any safety harness in those days) whilst training as a new recruit at HMS Ganges... but his middle name was Mitty so that tall tale might be apocryphal.  Shame that in recent years the Establishment buildings and mast became derelict, unless proposed plans to incorporate them in a new housing development have now been successful...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1v6uuyREePs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1v6uuyREePs)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBooiTUfSk8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBooiTUfSk8)

Why were your two new doors so expensive?  Made of solid oak?  Such a pity that you have to ruin one of them with a doggone dog flap!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 01, 2022, 07:36:08 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 01, 2022, 07:26:28 PM
I used to HATE staying at my grandparents which we had to do one winter, in the mid 70s.  They had no central heating and for me as a girl brought up in the Tropics the prospect of getting into an ice cold bed (no hot water bottle either) with my breath visible and ice on the inside of the windows, well it was just inhumane.  At least their lav was indoors (though it may as well have been outside, the seat was colder than a witch’s tit).


Great grannies toilet was in a flimsy lean-to at the back of her small garden flat, almost an outside toilet.
I remember there'd always be slugs crawling around the place. Never had to stay there for more than a couple of hours thankfully.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 01, 2022, 07:39:13 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 01, 2022, 07:36:08 PM

Great grannies toilet was in a flimsy lean-to at the back of her small garden flat, almost an outside toilet.
I remember there'd always be slugs crawling around the place. Never had to stay there for more than a couple of hours thankfully.

Suffered from constipation, did you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 01, 2022, 07:42:01 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 01, 2022, 07:39:13 PM
Suffered from constipation, did you?

 ?8)@)-) (constipation face) Yes, I didn't quite word that properly.

I realised as soon as I wrote it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 07:52:59 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 01, 2022, 07:26:28 PM
I used to HATE staying at my grandparents which we had to do one winter, in the mid 70s.  They had no central heating and for me as a girl brought up in the Tropics the prospect of getting into an ice cold bed (no hot water bottle either) with my breath visible and ice on the inside of the windows, well it was just inhumane.  At least their lav was indoors (though it may as well have been outside, the seat was colder than a witch’s tit).

This is all such a joke.  So, it was a bit chilly in 1950 and even before that.  But it wasn't a surprise.  It happened every Winter.  Winter gets a bit like that, even now.  I don't have any central heating but I have got a hot water bottle.
Somedebody is bringing me a new one from England.  The French hot water bottles are not very good because they have a tendency to leak.

But for heaven's sake.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 01, 2022, 07:56:21 PM
My Grannies toilet... In a coronation style street.. Was in a toilet block at the end of the road..

I'm waiting for someone to say.. But you were lucky
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 08:05:01 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 01, 2022, 07:22:08 PM
Correct, I'm a '46 er myself. Mind you along with the primitive sanitation, we did have the best popular music ever, so it wasn't all bad   8)--))

It wasn't easy to hear it though, until;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcsvRqUsiHE
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 01, 2022, 08:10:47 PM
Ah yes, I was living in Barrow at the time so Caroline North always came in loud & clear.  8(*(

Before that it was Radio Luxembourg, which was always a bit hit & miss.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 08:12:56 PM
Quote from: Myster on April 01, 2022, 07:33:46 PM
Yes, I do read your musings whenever I have a few minutes to spare, on your life in Brittany and interests in gardening, machinery (both of which I share) and your time in the Wrens (which I don't). Although I'm a landlubber, my dad served on HMS Suffolk during the Far Eastern Campaign, bombarding Japanese positions on the Malay peninsula. He used to brag about being the button boy, climbing right to the top of the mast (without any safety harness in those days) whilst training as a new recruit at HMS Ganges... but his middle name was Mitty so that tall tale might be apocryphal.  Shame that in recent years the Establishment buildings and mast became derelict, unless proposed plans to incorporate them in a new housing development have now been successful...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1v6uuyREePs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1v6uuyREePs)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBooiTUfSk8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBooiTUfSk8)

Why were your two new doors so expensive?  Made of solid oak?  Such a pity that you have to ruin one of them with a doggone dog flap!

I don't have a price yet for the next two new doors.  But the others are  Oak on the inside and doubly insulated, so I get 30% back from The Revenue.

Look now.  The little pisser has to get in and out, presuming he so chooses, which I sometimes doubt.  And a well built dog flap will be better than the current tatty curtain that has served many dogs before him.

And in case you were wondering,  No,  I can't be asked to think about when he might feel motivated to pee outside.  I just live in hope.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 08:14:37 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 01, 2022, 07:39:13 PM
Suffered from constipation, did you?

Oh God.  That was funny.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 08:17:31 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 01, 2022, 07:56:21 PM
My Grannies toilet... In a coronation style street.. Was in a toilet block at the end of the road..

I'm waiting for someone to say.. But you were lucky

Very Mucky Hunslet.  If anyone remembers that.  Not very funny it you were pregnant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 08:19:26 PM
I don't miss bed making in those days, that's for sure. It began with evening out the flock mattress, then adding sheets, blankets, counterpane and slippery eiderdown.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 08:21:02 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 01, 2022, 07:56:21 PM
My Grannies toilet... In a coronation style street.. Was in a toilet block at the end of the road..

I'm waiting for someone to say.. But you were lucky

Flush or tub?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 01, 2022, 08:23:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 08:21:02 PM
Flush or tub?

Flush... It was in Brighouse.. Yorkshire about 60 years ago. Washing was hung across the road and the lines had to be raised to let a car through
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 08:26:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 01, 2022, 08:23:56 PM
Flush... It was in Brighouse.. Yorkshire about 60 years ago. Washing was hung across the road and the lines had to be raised to let a car through

What car?  There were none in Mucky Hunslet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on April 01, 2022, 08:28:49 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 07:52:59 PM
This is all such a joke.  So, it was a bit chilly in 1950 and even before that.  But it wasn't a surprise.  It happened every Winter.  Winter gets a bit like that, even now.  I don't have any central heating but I have got a hot water bottle.
Somedebody is bringing me a new one from England.  The French hot water bottles are not very good because they have a tendency to leak.

But for heaven's sake.
I didn't know HW bottles were still made here!  One of my ten-year old Boots rubber bottles sprang a leak at Christmas, so I invested in a German-made PVC "Fashy" - with a wider mouth than rubber ones so easier to fill, stronger too and they retain their heat for longer.  You could have bought one as I did from a reputable seller on eBay for home devilry...

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/292631403998?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110006%26algo%3DHOMESPLICE.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20200818143230%26meid%3D160f2ca4771c4ed3aafd0674b871a223%26pid%3D101224%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D5%26sd%3D291441349829%26itm%3D292631403998%26pmt%3D0%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DDefaultOrganicWeb%26brand%3DFashy&_trksid=p2047675.c101224.m-1 (https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/292631403998?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110006%26algo%3DHOMESPLICE.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20200818143230%26meid%3D160f2ca4771c4ed3aafd0674b871a223%26pid%3D101224%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D5%26sd%3D291441349829%26itm%3D292631403998%26pmt%3D0%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DDefaultOrganicWeb%26brand%3DFashy&_trksid=p2047675.c101224.m-1)

Or support the Ukrainians!... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxAY1YRmiag (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxAY1YRmiag)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 08:36:21 PM
Quote from: Myster on April 01, 2022, 08:28:49 PM
I didn't know HW bottles were still made here!  One of my ten-year old Boots rubber bottles sprang a leak at Christmas, so I invested in a German-made PVC "Fashy" - with a wider mouth than rubber ones so easier to fill, stronger too and they retain their heat for longer.  You could have bought one as I did from a reputable seller on eBay for home devilry...

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/292631403998?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110006%26algo%3DHOMESPLICE.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20200818143230%26meid%3D160f2ca4771c4ed3aafd0674b871a223%26pid%3D101224%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D5%26sd%3D291441349829%26itm%3D292631403998%26pmt%3D0%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DDefaultOrganicWeb%26brand%3DFashy&_trksid=p2047675.c101224.m-1 (https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/292631403998?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110006%26algo%3DHOMESPLICE.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20200818143230%26meid%3D160f2ca4771c4ed3aafd0674b871a223%26pid%3D101224%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D5%26sd%3D291441349829%26itm%3D292631403998%26pmt%3D0%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DDefaultOrganicWeb%26brand%3DFashy&_trksid=p2047675.c101224.m-1)

Or support the Ukrainians!... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxAY1YRmiag (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxAY1YRmiag)

Okay.  Thanks for that.  Maybe next year.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 08:37:50 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 01, 2022, 08:23:56 PM
Flush... It was in Brighouse.. Yorkshire about 60 years ago. Washing was hung across the road and the lines had to be raised to let a car through

Brass bands and mills, just like where I grew up in Lancashire.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 01, 2022, 08:43:03 PM
Quote from: Myster on April 01, 2022, 08:28:49 PM
I didn't know HW bottles were still made here!  One of my ten-year old Boots rubber bottles sprang a leak at Christmas, so I invested in a German-made PVC "Fashy" - with a wider mouth than rubber ones so easier to fill, stronger too and they retain their heat for longer.  You could have bought one as I did from a reputable seller on eBay for home devilry...

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/292631403998?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110006%26algo%3DHOMESPLICE.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20200818143230%26meid%3D160f2ca4771c4ed3aafd0674b871a223%26pid%3D101224%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D5%26sd%3D291441349829%26itm%3D292631403998%26pmt%3D0%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DDefaultOrganicWeb%26brand%3DFashy&_trksid=p2047675.c101224.m-1 (https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/292631403998?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110006%26algo%3DHOMESPLICE.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20200818143230%26meid%3D160f2ca4771c4ed3aafd0674b871a223%26pid%3D101224%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D5%26sd%3D291441349829%26itm%3D292631403998%26pmt%3D0%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DDefaultOrganicWeb%26brand%3DFashy&_trksid=p2047675.c101224.m-1)

Or support the Ukrainians!... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxAY1YRmiag (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxAY1YRmiag)

Electric overblankets were the answer
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 01, 2022, 08:48:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 08:37:50 PM
Brass bands and mills, just like where I grew up in Lancashire.

I grew up in Neasden.  Beat that if you can.

My trips to Leeds and Mucky Hunslet were mind boggling for a London gutter snipe.

I ran away to sea in the end.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on April 01, 2022, 09:04:05 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 01, 2022, 08:43:03 PM
Electric overblankets were the answer
I have under-used and unused overblankets and underblankets still in their original boxes, but you can't snuggle up to them as you can with a bottle... How sad is that !!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 01, 2022, 09:45:30 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 01, 2022, 08:23:56 PM
Flush... It was in Brighouse.. Yorkshire about 60 years ago. Washing was hung across the road and the lines had to be raised to let a car through

Only the rich had cars down this way, hoss and cart or shanks pony.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 01, 2022, 10:04:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 05:03:07 PM
One thing about us older ones; we remember lower living standards. Coal fires, no bathroom or inside toilet, ice on the inside of a window and food rationing.

I'm not that old, but had that back in the early 60's, save the food rationing, but there again early 70's brought elecy rationing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 01, 2022, 10:42:49 PM
This is all very Four Yorkshiremen isn’t it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Ms Para glider on April 01, 2022, 11:49:52 PM
I actually think it's lovely. I find it truly fascinating how civil people can be to one another in contrast to how vicious those same people act when discussing the various possibilities about a missing child. If the same mutual respect was extended to opposing opionions in the general discussion, the forum would be a lot better off IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Ms Para glider on April 02, 2022, 12:50:56 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 01, 2022, 10:42:49 PM
This is all very Four Yorkshiremen isn’t it?
@)(++(* I love that sketch though. I can't take the pish mind, I've had it a lot easier than some folks here. Not happy that I've had to cut the russian caviar from me cornflakes like but we all have to make sacrifices.

https://youtu.be/ue7wM0QC5LE
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Ms Para glider on April 02, 2022, 01:35:45 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 01, 2022, 06:53:46 PM
How old am I then?

I assumed you were about 13. Learn something new every day.    8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 02, 2022, 02:03:32 AM
Quote from: Myster on April 01, 2022, 09:04:05 PM
I have under-used and unused overblankets and underblankets still in their original boxes, but you can't snuggle up to them as you can with a bottle... How sad is that !!!

RetsyM/Myster, maybe pass them on to the Ukrainians coming over here?  I bet they would love them.

Little ones have been dying from cold in Afghanistan too.


Me, I had two long hot water bottles (about 3 feet and slim)   They were lovely Christmas pressies with knitted overcoats
but too long for the basin space under the taps.  8(8-))     Someone at Oxfam will have enjoyed them.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 02, 2022, 02:15:22 AM
After the war sweets came off ration and ice creams ... Yoohoo

The queue stretched for ... must have been a hundred yards ... I am exagerating! 
I just joined it again and again eating my icecream, until the shop ran out   They had long white icecream blocks which they kept cutting from and slapping the icecream between wafers.

Nothing fancy .... but soooo yummie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 06:02:44 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 02, 2022, 01:35:45 AM
I assumed you were about 13. Learn something new every day.    8)--))

Fooled you there then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 07:10:42 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 02, 2022, 12:50:56 AM
@)(++(* I love that sketch though. I can't take the pish mind, I've had it a lot easier than some folks here. Not happy that I've had to cut the russian caviar from me cornflakes like but we all have to make sacrifices.

https://youtu.be/ue7wM0QC5LE
Coincidentally, in today’s Times:

Back to the days when net curtains froze stiff
Carol Midgley
Friday April 01 2022, 9.00pm, The Times
The only light relief amid the wretched gloom of the fuel bills crisis has been people trying to outdo each other in the “our house was colder than yours when I was a nipper” stakes. Competitive misery is so British. I heard a chap boast, Four Yorkshiremen-style, that pre-central heating, the glass of water by his bed would freeze in winter. Ten points. Someone tried to raise him net curtains welded to the window with ice. Six points.

I like remembering pre-radiator days (we didn’t get central heating until I was ten) because it proves that, now a massive heating wuss, once I must have been quite resilient. I’d like some of that back. When you were cold, your dad’s big coat would be laid atop your eiderdown. My mum told us to “blow the hairdryer in your bedroom” as we weren’t allowed the smelly paraffin heater upstairs lest it set the bed alight.

Dashing out of the unheated bathroom wrapped in a towel to shiver in front of the living room gas fire, feet against the bars until they burnt, is an indelible memory. My grandmother put newspaper down our jumpers on arctic days and plastic bags inside my wellies. For her generation, who’d scoff at Hive and my husband’s battery-heated socks, even a hot water bottle was a preposterous luxury. They warmed house bricks in the oven. Grimly, some people soon won’t even be able to afford to switch the oven on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 07:44:42 AM
I think the younger ones need to know that they can survive without foreign holidays, foods from all over the world, central heating and constant hot water. Such things have always been a privilege, not a right. On the plus side everyone's carbon footprint will be reduced.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 08:13:16 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 07:44:42 AM
I think the younger ones need to know that they can survive without foreign holidays, foods from all over the world, central heating and constant hot water. Such things have always been a privilege, not a right. On the plus side everyone's carbon footprint will be reduced.
This is not about “privileged” younger people, it’s about people across the age spectrum having to make fundamental, existential choices about how best to spend their dwindling bank balances - whether to choose heating or eating.  Expect an increase in the numbers of old people freezing to death, abuse and violence increasing within families as the stress of day to day living grows, increased, stress, suffering and misery all round for those of us already unable to take foreign holidays and run a car.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 08:47:44 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 08:13:16 AM
This is not about “privileged” younger people, it’s about people across the age spectrum having to make fundamental, existential choices about how best to spend their dwindling bank balances - whether to choose heating or eating.  Expect an increase in the numbers of old people freezing to death, abuse and violence increasing within families as the stress of day to day living grows, increased, stress, suffering and misery all round for those of us already unable to take foreign holidays and run a car.

As I said, we have been leading privileged lives. If that's going to change all we can do is adjust to the new reality and change our lives accordingly. I see no point in allowing ourselves to get stressed by things we can't change. We live on a beautiful planet and if life becomes a bit harder we should rise to the challenge and take satisfaction from finding ways to deal with it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 09:01:47 AM

There's a simple solution to avoiding child hunger & poverty in this country, & for every country in the world really.
Don't shit out kids if you can't afford them.
For some reason, millions, billions of people fail to comprehend this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 09:05:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 07:44:42 AM
I think the younger ones need to know that they can survive without foreign holidays, foods from all over the world, central heating and constant hot water. Such things have always been a privilege, not a right. On the plus side everyone's carbon footprint will be reduced.

When sanctions were issued on Russia, one politician questioned how Russians will manage without essential western goods, like Nike trainers or Prada handbags.
They'll probably have to make do with affordable utilities & food instead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 02, 2022, 09:17:23 AM
Problem is that circumstances change, often without warning but you can't just discard children because you can't really afford them any more.

I find that much depends on what you expect out of life.
I genuinely grew up in a poor single parent household in the 50s, but we didn't live in a consumer-driven society, so not having much wasn't really a problem. Subsequent generations have come to expect more and more as the norm, so having to cut back on things they take for granted will no doubt be hard.

Won't be a major problem for me as I'm relatively well off and I don't participate in the consumer society, neither wanting nor needing most of what is on offer, I can see adjustment will be difficult for some.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 09:34:12 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 02, 2022, 09:17:23 AM
Problem is that circumstances change, often without warning but you can't just discard children because you can't really afford them any more.

I find that much depends on what you expect out of life.
I genuinely grew up in a poor single parent household in the 50s, but we didn't live in a consumer-driven society, so not having much wasn't really a problem. Subsequent generations have come to expect more and more as the norm, so having to cut back on things they take for granted will no doubt be hard.

Won't be a major problem for me as I'm relatively well off and I don't participate in the consumer society, neither wanting nor needing most of what is on offer, I can see adjustment will be difficult for some.


I'm not saying discard living children, although, obviously, if we minced all the excess children of the world into a pulp they'd provide ample food & fertiliser for years to come.

All I'm saying is, don't have things you can't afford.

The average cost of raising a child to the age of 18 in the UK is roughly £150,000 - £180,000. (according to child poverty action group).

Not cheap at all, I think there should be a requirement that you must have at least that much in the bank before you're allowed to have kids, & if you break the rules your child is taken & sold into prostitution & slavery, until they've earned enough to pay for themselves.

It sounds harsh, but if we really want to save the economy & the planet then we need realistic solutions.

Adding 10p a week to the rate of child benefit simply isn't going to cut it I'm afraid.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 09:39:08 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 08:47:44 AM
As I said, we have been leading privileged lives. If that's going to change all we can do is adjust to the new reality and change our lives accordingly. I see no point in allowing ourselves to get stressed by things we can't change. We live on a beautiful planet and if life becomes a bit harder we should rise to the challenge and take satisfaction from finding ways to deal with it.
If you can't see how losing control over the lifestyle you once enjoyed causes unavoidable stress to individuals and families I can't really help you understand the situation at all really.  I guess it's that ol' empathy thing again.  Oh well never mind. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 09:48:03 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 02, 2022, 09:17:23 AM
Problem is that circumstances change, often without warning but you can't just discard children because you can't really afford them any more.

I find that much depends on what you expect out of life.
I genuinely grew up in a poor single parent household in the 50s, but we didn't live in a consumer-driven society, so not having much wasn't really a problem. Subsequent generations have come to expect more and more as the norm, so having to cut back on things they take for granted will no doubt be hard.

Won't be a major problem for me as I'm relatively well off and I don't participate in the consumer society, neither wanting nor needing most of what is on offer, I can see adjustment will be difficult for some.
My parents are in their 80s.  They have health problems.  Owing to personal circumstances any wealth they accumulated while my dad worked has dwindled to nothing more than the equity in their modest 3 bed house and have been struggling for years, haven't had a foreign holiday for decades, drive a car that was 10 years old when they were given it 10 years ago (by me), rarely buy themselves new clothes, never eat out, never go to the cinema.  It is people like this who are now stressing out about the thermostat, how long to have the heating on for, whether or not they can afford to buy the food that my mum likes to cook for my dad.  They are older than you and G-Unit and they know all about the war, and rationing and deprivation but that doesn't make it any easier.  They are going to their deaths living through the hardest, most stressful times of their lives.   My poor old Dad - we went to a funeral the other day and his old suit was covered in mildew spots from being stored in a damp wardrobe for years.  It was heartbreaking but the lives they are living are commonplace the length and breadth of the country.   But yeah, they should just man up and get on with it, put on another jumper (which obviously they are already doing).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 02, 2022, 09:55:44 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 09:34:12 AM

I'm not saying discard living children, although, obviously, if we minced all the excess children of the world into a pulp they'd provide ample food & fertiliser for years to come.

All I'm saying is, don't have things you can't afford.

The average cost of raising a child to the age of 18 in the UK is roughly £150,000 - £180,000. (according to child poverty action group).

Not cheap at all, I think there should be a requirement that you must have at least that much in the bank before you're allowed to have kids, & if you break the rules your child is taken & sold into prostitution & slavery, until they've earned enough to pay for themselves.

It sounds harsh, but if we really want to save the economy & the planet then we need realistic solutions.

Adding 10p a week to the rate of child benefit simply isn't going to cut it I'm afraid.

The Chinese rationed parents to one child, they are reaping a financial whirlwind now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 09:57:44 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 09:48:03 AM
My parents are in their 80s.  They have health problems.  Owing to personal circumstances any wealth they accumulated while my dad worked has dwindled to nothing more than the equity in their modest 3 bed house and have been struggling for years, haven't had a foreign holiday for decades, drive a car that was 10 years old when they were given it 10 years ago (by me), rarely buy themselves new clothes, never eat out, never go to the cinema.  It is people like this who are now stressing out about the thermostat, how long to have the heating on for, whether or not they can afford to buy the food that my mum likes to cook for my dad.  They are older than you and G-Unit and they know all about the war, and rationing and deprivation but that doesn't make it any easier.  They are going to their deaths living through the hardest, most stressful times of their lives.   My poor old Dad - we went to a funeral the other day and his old suit was covered in mildew spots from being stored in a damp wardrobe for years.  It was heartbreaking but the lives they are living are commonplace the length and breadth of the country.   But yeah, they should just man up and get on with it, put on another jumper (which obviously they are already doing).

They're still privileged, believe it or not. They get a guaranteed state pension, & free healthcare from the fantastic NHS. (which definitely isn't a massive waste of money & we should all stand outside & applaud or do laps of our garden for the people who choose to work there.) (why we don't also clap for the butcher, baker or candlestick maker too I'm not quite sure)



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 10:00:18 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 02, 2022, 09:55:44 AM
The Chinese rationed parents to one child, they are reaping a financial whirlwind now.


They've also cracked down on 'Sissy Men' which I thoroughly applaud them for, while the United States Army are parading the Rainbow flag of unnatural anti-straightness.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 02, 2022, 10:00:56 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 09:48:03 AM
My parents are in their 80s.  They have health problems.  Owing to personal circumstances any wealth they accumulated while my dad worked has dwindled to nothing more than the equity in their modest 3 bed house and have been struggling for years, haven't had a foreign holiday for decades, drive a car that was 10 years old when they were given it 10 years ago (by me), rarely buy themselves new clothes, never eat out, never go to the cinema.  It is people like this who are now stressing out about the thermostat, how long to have the heating on for, whether or not they can afford to buy the food that my mum likes to cook for my dad.  They are older than you and G-Unit and they know all about the war, and rationing and deprivation but that doesn't make it any easier.  They are going to their deaths living through the hardest, most stressful times of their lives.   My poor old Dad - we went to a funeral the other day and his old suit was covered in mildew spots from being stored in a damp wardrobe for years.  It was heartbreaking but the lives they are living are commonplace the length and breadth of the country.   But yeah, they should just man up and get on with it, put on another jumper (which obviously they are already doing).

The answer is ? what though .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 10:12:58 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 02, 2022, 10:00:56 AM
The answer is ? what though .
I honestly don't know.  There are no easy answers.  My parents realise this.  They are not resentful, they are resigned to their lot, but it doesn't mean they are happy, comfortable or not completely stressed out pretty much all of the time (as am I on their behalf - I have begged them to sell all their stuff and move into a smaller home nearer to me but the stress involved in selling their beloved house and moving would probably finish them off).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 02, 2022, 10:16:02 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 02, 2022, 10:00:56 AM
The answer is ? what though .

A caring government who would look after it's population would help.

The problem over energy costs could be alleviated by introducing a banding system for charges, such as we have for income tax.
E.G. the 1st X units per month are free to everyone. Then the next Y units are charged at perhaps the current rate. Over and above that the price increases according to usage, so that those using the most bear the brunt of the cost.

Instead, what do they do - offer advice on how to use less energy and how to save by spending money you haven't got on insulation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 10:22:29 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 02, 2022, 09:17:23 AM
Problem is that circumstances change, often without warning but you can't just discard children because you can't really afford them any more.

I find that much depends on what you expect out of life.
I genuinely grew up in a poor single parent household in the 50s, but we didn't live in a consumer-driven society, so not having much wasn't really a problem. Subsequent generations have come to expect more and more as the norm, so having to cut back on things they take for granted will no doubt be hard.

Won't be a major problem for me as I'm relatively well off and I don't participate in the consumer society, neither wanting nor needing most of what is on offer, I can see adjustment will be difficult for some.

I too have never participated in the consumer society. I think it's all a con trick to convince us that wants are needs. Perhaps that's why I have no problem at all managing on my state pension - it provides what I need. My children didn't have a lot, but they had two parents who loved them and they have great memories of family times - going for walks, snuggling up watching films on Sunday afternoons, and, above all, laughing together. They will never forget their father's stories and wit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 10:24:03 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 10:12:58 AM
I honestly don't know.  There are no easy answers.  My parents realise this.  They are not resentful, they are resigned to their lot, but it doesn't mean they are happy, comfortable or not completely stressed out pretty much all of the time (as am I on their behalf - I have begged them to sell all their stuff and move into a smaller home nearer to me but the stress involved in selling their beloved house and moving would probably finish them off).

Do you have a spare room at home?

Why not move them into yours where you'd be able to care for them directly, then sell their house & organise their stuff for them?

That's what I'd persuade them to do.

The excess money from the sale of their house could be spent on private healthcare.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 02, 2022, 10:33:19 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 10:12:58 AM
I honestly don't know.  There are no easy answers.  My parents realise this.  They are not resentful, they are resigned to their lot, but it doesn't mean they are happy, comfortable or not completely stressed out pretty much all of the time (as am I on their behalf - I have begged them to sell all their stuff and move into a smaller home nearer to me but the stress involved in selling their beloved house and moving would probably finish them off).

We're lucky in that respect we don't have surviving parents .Don't envy your position or theirs come to that .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 10:33:37 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 10:22:29 AM
I too have never participated in the consumer society. I think it's all a con trick to convince us that wants are needs. Perhaps that's why I have no problem at all managing on my state pension - it provides what I need. My children didn't have a lot, but they had two parents who loved them and they have great memories of family times - going for walks, snuggling up watching films on Sunday afternoons, and, above all, laughing together. They will never forget their father's stories and wit.
How much money have you spent on cigarettes over the years though?  a complete and utter waste of money that has put a small fortune  into the pockets of some particularly unsavoury big businesses, leaving you and your children less healthy and less wealthy and all for what benefit exactly?  Talk about being conned into believing wants are needs, isn't that the ultimate example of the consumer society getting you hooked onto something you don't really need?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 10:34:30 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 02, 2022, 10:33:19 AM
We're lucky in that respect we don't have surviving parents .Don't envy your position or theirs come to that .
Thank you for your empathetic response, I appreciate it, though I'm not sure that I will feel lucky not to have my parents around anymore. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 10:37:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 10:22:29 AM
I too have never participated in the consumer society. I think it's all a con trick to convince us that wants are needs. Perhaps that's why I have no problem at all managing on my state pension - it provides what I need. My children didn't have a lot, but they had two parents who loved them and they have great memories of family times - going for walks, snuggling up watching films on Sunday afternoons, and, above all, laughing together. They will never forget their father's stories and wit.

I have an ex friend who spent the last 30 odd years claiming sickness benefit, whilst drinking himself stupid.

He was always skint & trying to 'loan' money from me, which he never paid back, hence why he's now an ex friend.

Even though he was completely broke each week, he insisted on having to buy the latest Home & Away replica kit of his favourite Premiership football team, every season (which cost around 2 to 3 full weeks of his income).

Many people in the west can't distinguish between wants & needs anymore imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 10:40:57 AM
I'll get the Council Tax rebate of £150.00 soon, although my gas & electricity bills won't rise until my fixed tariff agreement ends in August.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 10:44:45 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 10:40:57 AM
I'll get the Council Tax rebate of £150.00 soon, although my gas & electricity bills won't rise until my fixed tariff agreement ends in August.

I have always only ever put the washing machine on after 12:30pm, economy 7.

Timer switch, then chuck it all on the washing line in the morning.

Winter is annoying because I have to get up at about 2am to load the tumble dryer, but I've always done it because why would I not?  I'm not just giving my money to the electricity company when I could better spend that extra cash on crack cocaine.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 10:49:52 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 10:33:37 AM
How much money have you spent on cigarettes over the years though?  a complete and utter waste of money that has put a small fortune  into the pockets of some particularly unsavoury big businesses, leaving you and your children less healthy and less wealthy and all for what benefit exactly?  Talk about being conned into believing wants are needs, isn't that the ultimate example of the consumer society getting you hooked onto something you don't really need?

It wasn't the 'consumer society' that started me smoking, it was the fact that most of the population did it. As to my health; I've lived beyond my three score years and ten, having never had a serious illness, an operation or a stay in hospital. I recently developed high blood pressure and that's it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 10:53:35 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 10:44:45 AM
I have always only ever put the washing machine on after 12:30pm, economy 7.

Timer switch, then chuck it all on the washing line in the morning.

Winter is annoying because I have to get up at about 2am to load the tumble dryer, but I've always done it because why would I not?  I'm not just giving my money to the electricity company when I could better spend that extra cash on crack cocaine.

Years ago we knew a man who cooked his family's meals for the following day the night before.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 11:05:40 AM
My smoking has always been my one expensive & shameful habit

I currently smoke & vape, but I smoke cheap rolling tobacco, not expensive brand tailor mades, pretty much everything I do in life I'm a total tight wad, it's all I've ever known.

My hybrid car is now about 12 years old, I bought it specifically for the reduced fuel costs.

The new hybrid gives the same mpg as my current one , maybe has a fancier stereo & looks prettier, but that's it, no point changing.

The new trainers I bought 10 years ago still fit & are now my gardening shoes.

I might treat myself to some new underpants next year, but I still get a full months usage from the current pair if I keep turning them inside out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 11:23:51 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 10:49:52 AM
It wasn't the 'consumer society' that started me smoking, it was the fact that most of the population did it. As to my health; I've lived beyond my three score years and ten, having never had a serious illness, an operation or a stay in hospital. I recently developed high blood pressure and that's it.
You were influenced by other consumers, in society, to smoke.  Multi national tobacco companies have spent billions encouraging smoking and keeping people smoking - you are a victim/willing participant of that aspect of the consumer society whether you like to think so or not.  Unless you are living off grid and growing your own food then you are a participant in the consumer society, and no different from the countless millions in this country who are struggling to meet their bills who are not necessarily wild spendthrifts who have "bought into" the consumer society but who have come to expect a certain standard of living in what is supposedly one of the richest countries in the world.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 11:40:28 AM
"come to expect a certain standard of living in what is supposedly one of the richest countries in the world"

Here's the thing.....

Britain's debt is 85% of GDP.

America, who if they sneeze the west dies, are $30 trillion dollars plus in debt!

(https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/moneysupplyexplosion-1024x778.jpg)
U.S Dollar Printing.

We have been living beyond our means for decades, there was a financial crash in 2008, we've been trying to print our way out of it with quantitative easing, at the expense of the rest of the world, only China, Russia, India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Africa etc, are about ready to put a stop to it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 12:17:59 PM

We have devalued our currencies by printing, Hitler tried it , it worked for a while but never ends well.

Putin's demand of Roubles for gas bypasses the U.S/Euro hegemony, which, through it's printing, is causing massive inflation.

I've heard the phrase 'the great reset'

America, & the allies with it, have a choice. Accept the death of the U.S dollar as the superior global reserve currency, have a financial reset & reduced living standards, or go to war with the Eastern hemisphere.

America are behaving like they're willing to risk WW3 rather than suffer the inevitable financial reset, why?

Because we'd have to sacrifice all our excesses, freedoms & live within our means, like much of the rest of the world do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 01:05:32 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 11:23:51 AM
You were influenced by other consumers, in society, to smoke.  Multi national tobacco companies have spent billions encouraging smoking and keeping people smoking - you are a victim/willing participant of that aspect of the consumer society whether you like to think so or not.  Unless you are living off grid and growing your own food then you are a participant in the consumer society, and no different from the countless millions in this country who are struggling to meet their bills who are not necessarily wild spendthrifts who have "bought into" the consumer society but who have come to expect a certain standard of living in what is supposedly one of the richest countries in the world.

Many years ago I realised that getting stressed and unhappy did me no good at all, and it's up to everyone now to accept that times are changing and to adapt. Happiness can still be achieved, even on a lower standard of living. Who knows - this could indeed be the end of the dominance of capitalism and it's values.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 02, 2022, 01:10:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 10:49:52 AM
It wasn't the 'consumer society' that started me smoking, it was the fact that most of the population did it. As to my health; I've lived beyond my three score years and ten, having never had a serious illness, an operation or a stay in hospital. I recently developed high blood pressure and that's it.

Pretending that smoking isn't bad for your health is totally immoral
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 01:17:28 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 02, 2022, 01:10:56 PM
Pretending that smoking isn't bad for your health is totally immoral

Anymore immoral than faking an abduction?

I doubt it, and besides, who has the right to pass judgement on morality?

It would be terrible if I died from smoking I'm sure, but it wouldn't much better if I get hit by a bus tomorrow or freeze to death after the next energy cap increase, so might as well smoke if you got 'em.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 02, 2022, 01:27:19 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 01:17:28 PM
Anymore immoral than faking an abduction?

I doubt it, and besides, who has the right to pass judgement on morality?

It would be terrible if I died from smoking I'm sure, but it wouldn't much better if I get hit by a bus tomorrow or freeze to death after the next energy cap increase, so might as well smoke if you got 'em.
I think faking an abduction would be criminal.. Not just immmoal
Pretending smoking is not only immoral but is quite stupid too
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 01:30:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 01:05:32 PM
Many years ago I realised that getting stressed and unhappy did me no good at all, and it's up to everyone now to accept that times are changing and to adapt. Happiness can still be achieved, even on a lower standard of living. Who knows - this could indeed be the end of the dominance of capitalism and it's values.

Something is going to happen, & history tells us that pretty much every great empire had a collapse in it's economy prior to it's demise as world leader.

The USA is no different.  It's military deterrent isn't enough anymore, China has a nice big military now too, sanctions against Russia are actually hurting us more than Russia, the Rouble dipped then rebounded.
Russia has abundant commodities, America exports overpriced tinselled snake oil.

When you realise Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya & Syria had nothing to do with WMD's or removing tyrants & their sole purpose was to defend the FIAT petrodollar, & you now see Boris coming back from Saudi Arabia empty handed, I suppose it's more comforting to talk about Madeleine McCann or something.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 01:39:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 01:05:32 PM
Many years ago I realised that getting stressed and unhappy did me no good at all, and it's up to everyone now to accept that times are changing and to adapt. Happiness can still be achieved, even on a lower standard of living. Who knows - this could indeed be the end of the dominance of capitalism and it's values.
What if your standard of living is below the poverty line already?  How would you advise people to find happiness on a sink estate with not enough money to heat their home or buy food for their kids?  You sound more Tory than Norman Tebbit tbh. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 01:42:27 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 01:39:05 PM
What if your standard of living is below the poverty line already?  How would you advise people to find happiness on a sink estate with not enough money to heat their home or buy food for their kids?  You sound more Tory than Norman Tebbit tbh.

Sell the kids (or just have the sense to not have kids in the first place when you're already too poor to feed yourself).

Problem solved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 01:44:58 PM

Doug Stanhope.

Nobody wants to mention overpopulation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgyumGSF9-4
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 02, 2022, 01:48:06 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 01:05:32 PM
Many years ago I realised that getting stressed and unhappy did me no good at all, and it's up to everyone now to accept that times are changing and to adapt. Happiness can still be achieved, even on a lower standard of living. Who knows - this could indeed be the end of the dominance of capitalism and it's values.

It's going to be hard. Expectations and self-entitlement have developed over decades and won't just suddenly disappear . The rich will still expect their rents and dividends to be paid - at the expense of the poor - and middle earners will clamour for pay rises to pay for their current lifestyle.
Apart from the poor, the ones that will suffer the most are those who provide services that are not really needed and can be easily ditched  - the Nail Bars, dog walkers, even restaurants.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 02:03:52 PM
Imagine how many council estate kids, that everyone here really cares deeply about, could have been fed with the money blown on investigating the disappearance of a single middle class child.

Morality or equality or something.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 02:05:25 PM
I'd like to know how desperate people are supposed to just tell themselves to stop stressing and be happy instead.  Perhaps G-Unit can share her secrets and I will pass them on to those I know who are facing an otherwise bleak future. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 02:08:02 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 02:05:25 PM
I'd like to know how desperate people are supposed to just tell themselves to stop stressing and be happy instead.  Perhaps G-Unit can share her secrets and I will pass them on to those I know who are facing an otherwise bleak future.

Tell them to sell their unnecessary shit, like TV's, Sky subscriptions & iPads, stop living with luxuries, eat pasta & be thankful you weren't born in Somalia, oh & stop shitting out kids.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 02:14:44 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 02, 2022, 01:48:06 PM
It's going to be hard. Expectations and self-entitlement have developed over decades and won't just suddenly disappear . The rich will still expect their rents and dividends to be paid - at the expense of the poor - and middle earners will clamour for pay rises to pay for their current lifestyle.
Apart from the poor, the ones that will suffer the most are those who provide services that are not really needed and can be easily ditched  - the Nail Bars, dog walkers, even restaurants.

My guilty pleasure is sometimes a McDonalds double sausage breakfast muffin meal.

I'd get one for me & one for the Mrs.   Bloody £15 !

I can get 15 eggs for a quid & eat breakfast for a week.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 02:46:52 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 01:39:05 PM
What if your standard of living is below the poverty line already?  How would you advise people to find happiness on a sink estate with not enough money to heat their home or buy food for their kids?  You sound more Tory than Norman Tebbit tbh.

I don't have all the answers you know. Every person has to deal with their own situation as best they can. All I'm saying is that those who are 'suffering' because they can't afford foreign holidays or restaurant meals need to get a grip. As for those on low incomes already, then they will have to choose between spending less, earning more or going under. That could be the harsh truth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 02, 2022, 02:55:51 PM
I think the underlying issue is affordable housing.
The Landlord class must have their return irrespective of hardship for others.
Personally I would like to see all rented property in the hands of Councils/Housing Associations where rents could be controlled.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 03:05:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 02:46:52 PM
I don't have all the answers you know. Every person has to deal with their own situation as best they can. All I'm saying is that those who are 'suffering' because they can't afford foreign holidays or restaurant meals need to get a grip. As for those on low incomes already, then they will have to choose between spending less, earning more or going under. That could be the harsh truth.
The only person here talking about people suffering because they can't afford foreign holidays or restaurant meals is you.  I am not referring to those people so why are you? As for the rest of your post - well you display the usual lack of empathy I've come to expect from you.  "f..k 'em" seems to be your basic attitude to those on low income or living on or below the poverty line, very similar to those on the right of the Tory party IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 03:15:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 02:46:52 PM
I don't have all the answers you know. Every person has to deal with their own situation as best they can. All I'm saying is that those who are 'suffering' because they can't afford foreign holidays or restaurant meals need to get a grip. As for those on low incomes already, then they will have to choose between spending less, earning more or going under. That could be the harsh truth.

I used a credit card once in around 2005 to pay in part for a car.

Paid it back within weeks, cut the the card up & never got another one.

I wonder how much of the UK credit card debt is spent on 'essentials'.


UK credit card debt soars: a worrying new trend?

People borrowed £1.5bn on credit cards in February, the highest monthly amount since records began

UK consumers borrowed a record amount on credit cards in February, prompting one economist to speculate that the economic recovery “is about to shift down a gear”.

Data published by the Bank of England showed that individuals borrowed a net £1.5bn on credit cards, the highest monthly amount since records began in 1993, noted This Is Money.

The figure was more than three times higher than the average of £400m borrowed in the previous six months, pushing total consumer credit, which includes personal loans and car dealership finance, to £1.9bn net - the highest level in five years.

Meanwhile, the latest fortnightly survey by the Office for National Statistics found that 12% of respondents were using credit cards more than usual to cope with increased prices in the first half of March. The proportion rose to 18% for those aged 30 to 49 and to 21% among renters.

The Financial Times noted that although consumer borrowing is usually considered “a measure of spending growth”, with inflation at a 30-year high and falling consumer confidence, some believe it is a sign of consumers “falling into debt to maintain their standard of living”.

“The big rise in consumer borrowing in February likely reflects households attempting to maintain their consumption at a time when real disposable income is falling sharply, rather than them going on a spending spree,” said Samuel Tombs, chief UK economist at consultancy Pantheon Macroeconomics.

He added that the figures “suggest that the economic recovery is about to shift down a gear”.

Thomas Pugh, UK economist at the accountancy firm RSM UK, agreed, saying the latest figures “suggest that consumers are increasingly borrowing more to protect their lifestyles from the surge in inflation”.

However, said The Guardian, some experts believe the increase in credit card spending, which followed the lifting of restrictions related to the Omicron variant, might show a renewed confidence among consumers before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Paul Dales, the chief UK economist at the consultancy Capital Economics, said: “It is more likely that households had the confidence to borrow and spend a bit more and/or were willing to use borrowing/savings to smooth their spending.”

Therefore, predicted Dales, “the economy may have a bit more near-term momentum than we thought”.

Anti-poverty charities remain concerned. Joanna Elson, the chief executive of the Money Advice Trust, the charity that runs National Debtline and Business Debtline, said the figures provide “an indicator of the underlying challenges households face in meeting the growing cost of living”.

Calling on Rishi Sunak to provide more help for under-pressure householders, she added: “Our concern is that more people will be pushed to credit to cover rising bills, which could be storing up problems further down the line when repayments are due.”

https://www.theweek.co.uk/news/business/956264/uk-credit-card-debt-soars-a-worrying-new-trend


I can't afford it, but I'm going to get it anyway, society.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 02, 2022, 03:16:18 PM
I read all these horror stories about destitute and wonder why our government allows it.
Labour have their problems but I do think they would do much more for this underclass, even if it was just out of self-interest to get these people to vote for them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 02, 2022, 03:22:45 PM
I used to use a credit card regularly -diesel and the like, paying it off fully each month.
Then I thought, 'what's the point',  it's just something else to keep track of so now I pay for everything by debit card, Paypal or bank transfer.
It doesn't help the situation when Supermarkets accept credit cards
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 03:26:21 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 02, 2022, 03:16:18 PM
I read all these horror stories about destitute and wonder why our government allows it.
Labour have their problems but I do think they would do much more for this underclass, even if it was just out of self-interest to get these people to vote for them.

So you want big government to control our lives & finances more?

What about freedom of choice?

The people should be free to make their own reckless, short sighted lifestyle & financial decisions & suffer the devastating consequences imo.

Let charities, not the tax payer, pick up the pieces. If sympathetic morons want to subsidise western decay & decadence that's entirely up to them, but they're not getting a penny out of me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 02, 2022, 03:38:56 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 03:26:21 PM
So you want big government to control our lives & finances more?

What about freedom of choice?

The people should be free to make their own reckless, short sighted lifestyle & financial decisions & suffer the devastating consequences imo.

Let charities, not the tax payer, pick up the pieces. If sympathetic morons want to subsidise western decay & decadence that's entirely up to them, but they're not getting a penny out of me.

And where are charities going to get the money? From tax-payers.
And the Tax rebates ?  Taxpayers again.
What will they then spend it on ? Largely on salaries for their Chief Officers
Little left over for the needy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 03:39:12 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 02, 2022, 03:22:45 PM
I used to use a credit card regularly -diesel and the like, paying it off fully each month.
Then I thought, 'what's the point',  it's just something else to keep track of so now I pay for everything by debit card, Paypal or bank transfer.
It doesn't help the situation when Supermarkets accept credit cards
I haven't used a credit card since the 90s.   My mother, on the other hand, survives thanks to credit cards and "playing the system", getting 0% interest deals and hopping from one card to another, to pay for house repairs and car bills that they couldn't afford to pay in one go.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 03:43:24 PM
Of course the poor end up paying more for their gas and electricity than anyone else in society, which is deeply unfair too.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 03:51:08 PM
Don't move to France.  They have enough to be going on with supporting me.  Mind you, they did have to bump off their Royal Family in the process.

France doesn't seem to do Credit Cards, but Debit Cards are a bit subversive.  I don't watch what I spend quite so well as I used to when dealing with cash, or even cheques.

Thank God for The Food Bank.  They are so bloody nice to everybody.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 04:09:41 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 03:39:12 PM
I haven't used a credit card since the 90s.   My mother, on the other hand, survives thanks to credit cards and "playing the system", getting 0% interest deals and hopping from one card to another, to pay for house repairs and car bills that they couldn't afford to pay in one go.

How many spare bedrooms have they got though?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 04:18:42 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 02, 2022, 03:38:56 PM
And where are charities going to get the money? From tax-payers.
And the Tax rebates ?  Taxpayers again.
What will they then spend it on ? Largely on salaries for their Chief Officers
Little left over for the needy.

Yep, I'd scrap tax rebates for charities.

The tax payer can choose to pay the charity tax if they want to, or, just let poor people die in the gutter until we rid the earth of the excessive glut of human population that's destroying the eco system & consuming it's natural resources at an unsustainable rate.

I think my final solution would work better than anything Greta Thunberg is whining about.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 05:14:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 03:51:08 PM
Don't move to France.  They have enough to be going on with supporting me.  Mind you, they did have to bump off their Royal Family in the process.

France doesn't seem to do Credit Cards, but Debit Cards are a bit subversive.  I don't watch what I spend quite so well as I used to when dealing with cash, or even cheques.

Thank God for The Food Bank.  They are so bloody nice to everybody.
I’d like to move to Thailand but as it’s full of sleazy old white men looking for underage sex that puts me off a bit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 05:30:02 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 05:14:30 PM
I’d like to move to Thailand but as it’s full of sleazy old white men looking for underage sex that puts me off a bit.

Yes, but the money the Western perverts are paying families for child sex helps feed the destitute, so it isn't all bad.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 05:34:55 PM
Seriously, there are families in Cambodia & Thailand that would starve to death if not for prostituting one child to feed the other six.

We should be encouraging more child sex tourism if we genuinely care about wealth distribution & saving lives.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 05:58:41 PM


It's an untapped industry that could save the economy.

If we opened government regulated child brothels in this country there'd be millions of paedophiles from all around the world eager to spend their hard earned cash on a simple half hour with a minor.

It's a win-win situation.

The pervert gets what he wants, the child can then afford the latest i-phone, the government gets a cut, there'd be increased demands on travel, accommodation, catering etc.

I'm struggling to see any real downside to this idea & I'll be recommending we adopt this policy at my next party conference.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 06:48:00 PM


Mitchell and Webb - Kill The Poor

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owI7DOeO_yg
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 02, 2022, 06:54:26 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 02, 2022, 10:16:02 AM
A caring government who would look after it's population would help.

The problem over energy costs could be alleviated by introducing a banding system for charges, such as we have for income tax.
E.G. the 1st X units per month are free to everyone. Then the next Y units are charged at perhaps the current rate. Over and above that the price increases according to usage, so that those using the most bear the brunt of the cost.

Instead, what do they do - offer advice on how to use less energy and how to save by spending money you haven't got on insulation.

And people with disabilities and those who use, and depend, on electrical equipment just to keep them alive?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 07:06:25 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 02, 2022, 06:54:26 PM
And people with disabilities and those who use, and depend, on electrical equipment just to keep them alive?

Such people are a hindrance to capitalism.
We should be encouraging filling the country with a healthy, able bodied workforce & eradicating illnesses & disabled people.
They are a drain on resources & we shouldn't be encouraging them to breed or breathe.
There should be a disability island somewhere where they could all be dropped off & never worried about again.

Jacob Rees Johnson.
Conservative minister for the department of Work and pensions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 07:16:59 PM

End poverty, by abolishing the NHS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9CO65EmNGs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 02, 2022, 07:27:27 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 07:06:25 PM
Such people are a hindrance to capitalism.
We should be encouraging filling the country with a healthy, able bodied workforce & eradicating illnesses & disabled people.
They are a drain on resources & we shouldn't be encouraging them to breed or breathe.
There should be a disability island somewhere where they could all be dropped off & never worried about again.

Jacob Rees Johnson.
Conservative minister for the department of Work and pensions.

Yep sounds Toryesque.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 02, 2022, 08:05:10 PM
We're on an economy drive  , it's enforced no electric at the moment theres a power cut around the town.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 08:11:27 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 03:05:30 PM
The only person here talking about people suffering because they can't afford foreign holidays or restaurant meals is you.  I am not referring to those people so why are you? As for the rest of your post - well you display the usual lack of empathy I've come to expect from you.  "f..k 'em" seems to be your basic attitude to those on low income or living on or below the poverty line, very similar to those on the right of the Tory party IMO.

Empathy doesn't pay people's bills - in fact it achieves nothing. Actions make a difference so what do you do to help the poor?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 08:12:42 PM
Is that it?  Good God.   Sexually Abuse small children.  This is a disgrace.  And not a word from any of you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 08:19:51 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 08:12:42 PM
Is that it?  Good God.   Sexually Abuse small children.  This is a disgrace.  And not a word from any of you.

Yeah, they probably all realised I wasn't being serious, even though it's hard to deny implementing the idea would produce a net benefit to the treasury, same with kill all the poor & disabled.

Blame VS, she planted the seed in my mind by talking about sex tourism in Thailand, I'd have been satisfied with just killing the poor until she mentioned that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 08:28:25 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 02, 2022, 08:05:10 PM
We're on an economy drive  , it's enforced no electric at the moment theres a power cut around the town.

And our lives are so heavily dependant on electricity & gas theses days that there's no going back.

The oil runs out in the next hundred years, no one wants Nuclear, renewables are inefficient, what are we going to do?

I reckon we made a mistake ever climbing down from the trees & walking upright tbh.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 08:31:30 PM
I am so offended that I can't even think.  If John is so hot on the spot then he should have seen this.  But apparently not.  John only sees what he wants to see.

No wonder that I don't want to be a Moderator anymore.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 02, 2022, 08:31:57 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 08:28:25 PM
And our lives are so heavily dependant on electricity & gas theses days that there's no going back.

The oil runs out in the next hundred years, no one wants Nuclear, renewables are inefficient, what are we going to do?

I reckon we made a mistake ever climbing down from the trees & walking upright tbh.
Yep this mobile will want some trickery to charge later  even my lamp will need it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 08:34:59 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 07:06:25 PM
Such people are a hindrance to capitalism.
We should be encouraging filling the country with a healthy, able bodied workforce & eradicating illnesses & disabled people.
They are a drain on resources & we shouldn't be encouraging them to breed or breathe.
There should be a disability island somewhere where they could all be dropped off & never worried about again.

Jacob Rees Johnson.
Conservative minister for the department of Work and pensions.

Capitalism rests on the assumption that human beings always act in their own interests. They wotk hard to look after themselves and their families. Those who did well opposed calls for an end to child labour, a reasonable working day, decent pay and trades unions. Concessions were made, but reluctantly. Thatcher epitomised the face of capitalism; withdrawing free school milk, imposing a poll tax and smashing the miner's unions. Then she sold our assets. Make no mistake; when the going gets tough those with money and power will take care of number one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 02, 2022, 08:35:11 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 08:28:25 PM
And our lives are so heavily dependant on electricity & gas theses days that there's no going back.

The oil runs out in the next hundred years, no one wants Nuclear, renewables are inefficient, what are we going to do?

I reckon we made a mistake ever climbing down from the trees & walking upright tbh.

Nuclear Fusion..clean nuclear energy.. Dig a hole 30k down and tap into an almost inexhaustible heat source to boil water to drive turbines.. And there's more
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 08:37:55 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 02, 2022, 08:31:57 PM
Yep this mobile will want some trickery to charge later  even my lamp will need it.

Nobody thought this through.

I had a roughly 8 hour power cut at my house during the storm a few weeks ago.

Without the internet, can't bank, buy, pay bills, do anything.

If every shop & home in town had a long term power outage & nobody had cash anymore, only a chip & pin, then what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 08:38:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 08:11:27 PM
Empathy doesn't pay people's bills - in fact it achieves nothing. Actions make a difference so what do you do to help the poor?
I do what I can, when I can.  A lack of empathy is a defining characteristic of the present government imo (and just look at their performance), therefore I think you are quite wrong to say empathy achieves nothing. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 08:39:14 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 08:12:42 PM
Is that it?  Good God.   Sexually Abuse small children.  This is a disgrace.  And not a word from any of you.
What, what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 08:39:50 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 08:31:30 PM
I am so offended that I can't even think.  If John is so hot on the spot then he should have seen this.  But apparently not.  John only sees what he wants to see.

No wonder that I don't want to be a Moderator anymore.

Oh get a sense of humour.

I very obviously wasn't being serious ffs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 02, 2022, 08:40:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 08:34:59 PM
Capitalism rests on the assumption that human beings always act in their own interests. They wotk hard to look after themselves and their families. Those who did well opposed calls for an end to child labour, a reasonable working day, decent pay and trades unions. Concessions were made, but reluctantly. Thatcher epitomised the face of capitalism; withdrawing free school milk, imposing a poll tax and smashing the miner's unions. Then she sold our assets. Make no mistake; when the going gets tough those with money and power will take care of number one.

Unfortunately socialism works on caring about those less fortunate.. But as we see on this forum its looked upon with derision that we should sympathise with the McCanns whom we've never met. That's why socialism/communism can't work.. Because whether you have a capitalist or socialist society a lot of people care only about themselves.. Not a lot of difference
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 08:41:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 08:34:59 PM
Capitalism rests on the assumption that human beings always act in their own interests. They wotk hard to look after themselves and their families. Those who did well opposed calls for an end to child labour, a reasonable working day, decent pay and trades unions. Concessions were made, but reluctantly. Thatcher epitomised the face of capitalism; withdrawing free school milk, imposing a poll tax and smashing the miner's unions. Then she sold our assets. Make no mistake; when the going gets tough those with money and power will take care of number one.
You’ve pretty much summed up where a lack of empathy will get you IMO.  I can’t work out if you admire what you have described or are critical of it tbh.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 08:44:11 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 02, 2022, 08:40:26 PM
Unfortunately socialism works on caring about those less fortunate.. But as we see on this forum its looked upon with derision that we should sympathise with the McCanns whom we've never met. That's why socialism/communism can't work.. Because whether you have a capitalist or socialist society a lot of people care only about themselves.. Not a lot of difference

Can't get rid of corruption in any system imo.

All the socialist leaders are fantastically wealthy while their people have to eat their pets.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 08:46:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 08:34:59 PM
Capitalism rests on the assumption that human beings always act in their own interests. They wotk hard to look after themselves and their families. Those who did well opposed calls for an end to child labour, a reasonable working day, decent pay and trades unions. Concessions were made, but reluctantly. Thatcher epitomised the face of capitalism; withdrawing free school milk, imposing a poll tax and smashing the miner's unions. Then she sold our assets. Make no mistake; when the going gets tough those with money and power will take care of number one.

I had more less the same life style a you did, although my time without my husband was always much longer than yours.  Two years away at sea was normal for me.

Meanwhile who the hell do you think you were with your privileges?  You wouldn't understand normal people anymore than I could have done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 08:51:39 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 08:39:50 PM
Oh get a sense of humour.

I very obviously wasn't being serious ffs.

Oh Really.  Even in fun you are disgusting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 08:54:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 08:51:39 PM
Oh Really.  Even in fun you are disgusting.

I'm a realist.

The world isn't a nice place, you can either try & see the funny side or just be miserable.

I tend to combine the two, gallows humour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 09:11:32 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 08:54:45 PM
I'm a realist.

The world isn't a nice place, you can either try & see the funny side or just be miserable.

I tend to combine the two, gallows humour.

You wouldn't understand realism if it smacked you in the gob.  There is nothing even remotely funny about sexually abusing small children.

Personally, I think you only wish to shock for some abhorrent reason known only to you.

But if you have a real problem then my PM is always open for you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 09:15:59 PM

I remember reading about Colonel Gadaffi years ago.

He used Libya's oil reserves to bring the country to zero debt.

They had free education & healthcare, if you wanted to start a farm you'd be supplied with the land & materials to do so, gas prices were almost non existent, plenty of food etc etc.

But unfortunately for Libyan's, he wanted to stop trading his oil in U.S dollars, so Obama had to take him out, like they did with Saddam.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 09:17:24 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 08:39:14 PM
What, what?

Read back a bit.  Not funny.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 09:19:24 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 02, 2022, 08:40:26 PM
Unfortunately socialism works on caring about those less fortunate.. But as we see on this forum its looked upon with derision that we should sympathise with the McCanns whom we've never met. That's why socialism/communism can't work.. Because whether you have a capitalist or socialist society a lot of people care only about themselves.. Not a lot of difference

If only anyone understood what you are talking about.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 09:22:15 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 02, 2022, 08:40:26 PM
Unfortunately socialism works on caring about those less fortunate.. But as we see on this forum its looked upon with derision that we should sympathise with the McCanns whom we've never met. That's why socialism/communism can't work.. Because whether you have a capitalist or socialist society a lot of people care only about themselves.. Not a lot of difference

Whatever happened to Madeleine McCann I have sympathy for her parents because they have undoubtedly suffered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 09:23:53 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 02, 2022, 08:31:57 PM
Yep this mobile will want some trickery to charge later  even my lamp will need it.

My daughter has a solar powered charger.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 09:24:08 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 09:11:32 PM
You wouldn't understand realism if it smacked you in the gob.  There is nothing even remotely funny about sexually abusing small children.

Personally, I think you only wish to shock for some abhorrent reason known only to you.

But if you have a real problem then my PM is always open for you.

Well, I found the very obviously morally abhorrent idea of financially exploiting a pre-existing illegal child sex trade for capitalist & government benefit did happen to bring me a moments mirth, even if you didn't, but never mind.

No good stamping your feet about, have a cup of tea & a lie down for a bit, you'll be alright.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 09:26:06 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 08:41:32 PM
You’ve pretty much summed up where a lack of empathy will get you IMO.  I can’t work out if you admire what you have described or are critical of it tbh.

There isn't anything to choose.  It is all just the same.

Some of us are a bit stronger than others.  And God forbid, some of us are a bit brighter.   Although that is probably the worst to be.  No one likes a smart arse.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 02, 2022, 09:30:13 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 08:28:25 PM
And our lives are so heavily dependant on electricity & gas theses days that there's no going back.

The oil runs out in the next hundred years, no one wants Nuclear, renewables are inefficient, what are we going to do?

I reckon we made a mistake ever climbing down from the trees & walking upright tbh.

Several in our road have invested in solar panels but I think they're rubbish. I'm building a compact tokamak in my shed and by bashing hydrogen atoms into each other in a super heated plasma I hope to be totally energy self sufficient within the next couple of weeks. Problem is if it goes tits up I could destroy the whole of the Black Country.... Its a tricky one
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 09:37:55 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 02, 2022, 09:30:13 PM
Several in our road have invested in solar panels but I think they're rubbish. I'm building a compact tokamak in my shed and by bashing hydrogen atoms into each other in a super heated plasma I hope to be totally energy self sufficient within the next couple of weeks. Problem is if it goes tits up I could destroy the whole of the Black Country.... Its a tricky one

One thing I like about you davel is that you're not entirely humour neutral.

I did contemplate solar panels, I can probably do the roof with a storage battery for about ten to fifteen grand, but it wouldn't pay for itself for roughly ten to fifteen years & hoping I'll be long dead before then tbh.

If I dare mix a joke about child sex tourism, capitalist greed & economics again, I reckon Eleanor might see to it!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 09:44:30 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 08:41:32 PM
You’ve pretty much summed up where a lack of empathy will get you IMO.  I can’t work out if you admire what you have described or are critical of it tbh.

It's the reality underlying politics, economics and history which I'm describing. Whether I deplore it or admire it is immaterial, it's the truth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 09:48:27 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 08:46:43 PM
I had more less the same life style a you did, although my time without my husband was always much longer than yours.  Two years away at sea was normal for me.

Meanwhile who the hell do you think you were with your privileges?  You wouldn't understand normal people anymore than I could have done.

What are you talking about? What privileges did I have? Who are these 'normal' people you refer to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 09:48:59 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 09:24:08 PM
Well, I found the very obviously morally abhorrent idea of financially exploiting a pre-existing illegal child sex trade for capitalist & government benefit did happen to bring me a moments mirth, even if you didn't, but never mind.

No good stamping your feet about, have a cup of tea & a lie down for a bit, you'll be alright.

Where does this figure in The McCann case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 09:53:04 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 02, 2022, 09:30:13 PM
Several in our road have invested in solar panels but I think they're rubbish. I'm building a compact tokamak in my shed and by bashing hydrogen atoms into each other in a super heated plasma I hope to be totally energy self sufficient within the next couple of weeks. Problem is if it goes tits up I could destroy the whole of the Black Country.... Its a tricky one

Cost benefit analysis required.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 09:56:20 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 02, 2022, 09:30:13 PM
Several in our road have invested in solar panels but I think they're rubbish. I'm building a compact tokamak in my shed and by bashing hydrogen atoms into each other in a super heated plasma I hope to be totally energy self sufficient within the next couple of weeks. Problem is if it goes tits up I could destroy the whole of the Black Country.... Its a tricky one

What a hoot.  I prefer to go with the vast amounts of Wood pertinent to Brittany.   There are so many trees that need to be managed, although they always have been.  For many a long year before this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 09:59:40 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 09:37:55 PM
One thing I like about you davel is that you're not entirely humour neutral.

I did contemplate solar panels, I can probably do the roof with a storage battery for about ten to fifteen grand, but it wouldn't pay for itself for roughly ten to fifteen years & hoping I'll be long dead before then tbh.

If I dare mix a joke about child sex tourism, capitalist greed & economics again, I reckon Eleanor might see to it!

Probably not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 10:02:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 09:48:27 PM
What are you talking about? What privileges did I have? Who are these 'normal' people you refer to?

I think that might be my point.  You didn't even see it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 10:07:09 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 09:48:59 PM
Where does this figure in The McCann case?

Sorry, I thought this was just a broad discussion that began with the energy price cap & moved on to the impending financial death of western living standards, but I appreciate some people find Madeleine McCann of more importance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 10:07:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 09:44:30 PM
It's the reality underlying politics, economics and history which I'm describing. Whether I deplore it or admire it is immaterial, it's the truth.
No, it’s your opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 10:21:55 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 09:17:24 PM
Read back a bit.  Not funny.
I don’t read his rubbish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 10:44:27 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 10:07:09 PM
Sorry, I thought this was just a broad discussion that began with the energy price cap & moved on to the impending financial death of western living standards, but I appreciate some people find Madeleine McCann of more importance.

But somehow led to your thoughts on the abuse of small children.

My living standards are absolutely fine.  The French State pays for my energy use.  But then I have never been a waster anyway.  I have never used any more energy than I NEEDED.  Needed being the operative word.

Some of us are quite capable of living with some care and concern for others.  I am very fortunate because I don't have to worry about whatever it is that you are talking about.  I don't waste anything ever.  It is beyond my soul to do so.

No one actually owes me anything and so I remain grateful for whatever anyone thinks I might be entitled to.

And I have no doubt that my life won't alter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 10:47:39 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 10:07:58 PM
No, it’s your opinion.

Yer, well.  and that's a fact.  Who are these people?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 10:49:00 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 10:21:55 PM
I don’t read his rubbish.

Well, you missed out.

You too could have taken offence at the contents of an obviously facetious paragraph.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 10:50:30 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 10:21:55 PM
I don’t read his rubbish.

Sorry.  I was trying to be understanding.  Probably not a good idea.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 10:52:39 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 10:02:36 PM
I think that might be my point.  You didn't even see it.

Oh well. I don't really care if I don't understand your pronouncements.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 10:54:28 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 10:49:00 PM
Well, you missed out.

You too could have taken offence at the contents of an obviously facetious paragraph.

Oh.  Sorry are you now?  And I should bloody well thinks so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 10:55:44 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 10:07:58 PM
No, it’s your opinion.

No, what I posted actually happened - look it up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 02, 2022, 11:06:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 10:55:44 PM
No, what I posted actually happened - look it up.
Please do not patronise me.  Your interpretation of what people are, what they do and and what motivates  them is your opinion, and an overly simplistic one at that.  And yes, that is my opinion, though probably if I were you I would claim it was the truth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 11:17:02 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 10:54:28 PM
Oh.  Sorry are you now?  And I should bloody well thinks so.

I never mentioned anything about being sorry.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 11:27:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 10:52:39 PM
Oh well. I don't really care if I don't understand your pronouncements.

The wives and families of Service Personnel were priviledged, often without realising.

I don't have a problem with this.  It was the way things were.  A job for life and a Pension. 

It was a teensy bit difficult for the wives on occasions when they had to uproot and live somewhere else.  Or worse still to be left alone with the ghastly children.  My children were always ghastly, by the way.  Still are as it happens.  But then three boys were never all that much fun.

That is what I meant.  I thought that you were nearly as brave as I was.  I am so sorry that I lost you somewhere along the way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 11:42:57 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 10:44:27 PM
But somehow led to your thoughts on the abuse of small children.

My living standards are absolutely fine.  The French State pays for my energy use.  But then I have never been a waster anyway.  I have never used any more energy than I NEEDED.  Needed being the operative word.

Some of us are quite capable of living with some care and concern for others.  I am very fortunate because I don't have to worry about whatever it is that you are talking about.  I don't waste anything ever.  It is beyond my soul to do so.

No one actually owes me anything and so I remain grateful for whatever anyone thinks I might be entitled to.

And I have no doubt that my life won't alter.


VS bought up child abuse by westerners in Thailand, I simply added the subject that she raised into the wider point about decline in western living standards, economy, capitalism & greed, as I've already unnecessarily explained, because you seem to be the only one here who didn't get it.

Of course, if you genuinely are concerned about child sex exploitation & the like, no amount of bleating about it on here is going to help, you need to actually put your hand in your pocket & donate to a charity that attempts to tackle the problem, but I suspect you'd be more into just virtue signalling really.

Not that I'm willing to spare a penny to help kids either to be fair, I'm just not about to pretend I give a damn about them for internet brownie points.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 11:57:40 PM

I don't quite understand why you weren't more outraged by my idea of executing poor people or mincing all the destitute children into a meaty pulp?

Surely that's worse than prostituting them, isn't it?

Strange.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 03, 2022, 01:03:42 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 11:42:57 PM

VS bought up child abuse by westerners in Thailand, I simply added the subject that she raised into the wider point about decline in western living standards, economy, capitalism & greed, as I've already unnecessarily explained, because you seem to be the only one here who didn't get it.

Of course, if you genuinely are concerned about child sex exploitation & the like, no amount of bleating about it on here is going to help, you need to actually put your hand in your pocket & donate to a charity that attempts to tackle the problem, but I suspect you'd be more into just virtue signalling really.

Not that I'm willing to spare a penny to help kids either to be fair, I'm just not about to pretend I give a damn about them for internet brownie points.

Dear Spammy,  I am feeling very kind tonight and I don't believe that you are actually an horrible person.  Although you did throw me for a minute.

But it is always easy to over react.

I don't understand why you say what you do when in fact you are far from uneducated or stupid and I don't understand why you want to shock the likes of me.  Do you think that I am more clever than you?  That would be a very silly mistake.  Although always to my benefit. 

First regard your adversary.  And don't ever believe that they are better than you.  Just don't talk shit to beat them.  This is very boring.  And you can do better than that.

However, perhaps you think that the loss of Madeleine is a bit of a joke, although I somewhat doubt that.

My thoughts on the matter are irrelevant and only mine own.  This is why we are all here.  Or at least I think so.  Although I suppose that I could be wrong about that.

Unfortunately or not, you have a habit of giving away the fact that that you are perfectly able on other subjects.  Actually quite remarkable  to read and of some pleasure to me, even if I don't necessarily agree.


Could you just cut the awful crap on this one?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 03, 2022, 01:24:56 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 02, 2022, 11:42:57 PM

VS bought up child abuse by westerners in Thailand, I simply added the subject that she raised into the wider point about decline in western living standards, economy, capitalism & greed, as I've already unnecessarily explained, because you seem to be the only one here who didn't get it.

Of course, if you genuinely are concerned about child sex exploitation & the like, no amount of bleating about it on here is going to help, you need to actually put your hand in your pocket & donate to a charity that attempts to tackle the problem, but I suspect you'd be more into just virtue signalling really.

Not that I'm willing to spare a penny to help kids either to be fair, I'm just not about to pretend I give a damn about them for internet brownie points.

VS and I both lived in Singapore with all attending Amahs.  Servants as such.  I always paid my Amah over the odds.  She was my life's blood.  My one and only opportunity to escape my ghastly children.

She loved my baby better than I did.  VS will understand that.
.
As it was I spent my time running a Nursery School for the ghastly children of other people.  And what fun they all were.  No, really.  They were fun.  Most things are as you see them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 05:59:53 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 02, 2022, 11:06:39 PM
Please do not patronise me.  Your interpretation of what people are, what they do and and what motivates  them is your opinion, and an overly simplistic one at that.  And yes, that is my opinion, though probably if I were you I would claim it was the truth.

They are not my opinions, they are the opinions of people like Adam Smith and Milton Friedman, both much admired by Margaret Thatcher
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 07:24:40 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 05:59:53 AM
They are not my opinions, they are the opinions of people like Adam Smith and Milton Friedman, both much admired by Margaret Thatcher
So now you’re admitting to passing off other people’s opinions as your own and insisting they’re facts.   Thanks for confirming what I said in the first place.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 08:01:24 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 03, 2022, 07:24:40 AM
So now you’re admitting to passing off other people’s opinions as your own and insisting they’re facts.   Thanks for confirming what I said in the first place.

If you could ignore your need to always attack me you might learn something. I studied politics and quickly realised that to understand the subject it was necessary to understand economics and the relationship between the two.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 09:20:17 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 08:01:24 AM
If you could ignore your need to always attack me you might learn something. I studied politics and quickly realised that to understand the subject it was necessary to understand economics and the relationship between the two.
Oh wow, being educated by one so learned as yourself, once again I am simply thrilled once  by your patronage.  What exactly do you think you are teaching me that I don’t already know?

But wait -  I’m not here for lectures from you thanks, I was pointing out that a lack of empathy in politics can lead to the situation we find ourselves in today - a cost of living crisis in which many millions will struggle to make ends meet.  You don’t appear to have a problem with this so there’s nothing more to say is there?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 09:47:36 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 03, 2022, 09:20:17 AM
Oh wow, being educated by one so learned as yourself, once again I am simply thrilled once  by your patronage.  What exactly do you think you are teaching me that I don’t already know?

But wait -  I’m not here for lectures from you thanks, I was pointing out that a lack of empathy in politics can lead to the situation we find ourselves in today - a cost of living crisis in which many millions will struggle to make ends meet.  You don’t appear to have a problem with this so there’s nothing more to say is there?

So wholesale gas prices don't come into it?

The energy cap has increased, due to lack of empathy?

If you say so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 09:55:34 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 03, 2022, 09:20:17 AM
Oh wow, being educated by one so learned as yourself, once again I am simply thrilled once  by your patronage.  What exactly do you think you are teaching me that I don’t already know?

But wait -  I’m not here for lectures from you thanks, I was pointing out that a lack of empathy in politics can lead to the situation we find ourselves in today - a cost of living crisis in which many millions will struggle to make ends meet.  You don’t appear to have a problem with this so there’s nothing more to say is there?

I have been accused recently of not understanding 'normal' people (which is rubbish by the way). Why would politicions understand and empathise with the poor? Norman Tebbit clearly didn't, expecting people to cycle off to find work after the government of which he was a part had destroyed their previous jobs. A few politicians appeared on TV living on benefits for a week, which they found difficult, but I don't think that helped them to understand the long-term effects of living on benefits.

Despite that, measures to help the poorest have been put in place with the rebate being given on Council Tax bands A-D. So they are using some of the millions they collect in taxes from the oil and gas companies to ease the impact on the poor. The government has to balance the interests of everyone, however, and that includes the interests of businesses which are having to charge higher prices.

So the empathy of politicians can't be reserved purely for consumers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 09:58:48 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 09:47:36 AM
So wholesale gas prices don't come into it?

The energy cap has increased, due to lack of empathy?

If you say so.

I think the Beatles were wrong when they said "All you need is love". Abba were closer; "Money, money, money"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 10:07:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 09:55:34 AM
I have been accused recently of not understanding 'normal' people (which is rubbish by the way). Why would politicions understand and empathise with the poor? Norman Tebbit clearly didn't, expecting people to cycle off to find work after the government of which he was a part had destroyed their previous jobs. A few politicians appeared on TV living on benefits for a week, which they found difficult, but I don't think that helped them to understand the long-term effects of living on benefits.

Despite that, measures to help the poorest have been put in place with the rebate being given on Council Tax bands A-D. So they are using some of the millions they collect in taxes from the oil and gas companies to ease the impact on the poor. The government has to balance the interests of everyone, however, and that includes the interests of businesses which are having to charge higher prices.

So the empathy of politicians can't be reserved purely for consumers.

It can, if you want businesses to shut up shop & relocate to countries with more favourable taxation.

I mean, it might cause a minor ripple in the jobs market, but the people won't mind because they'll be paying less out of the monthly pay check, which they wouldn't be receiving.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 10:18:30 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 09:58:48 AM
I think the Beatles were wrong when they said "All you need is love". Abba were closer; "Money, money, money"

A friend of mine was shocked the other day that the price of her dog food had risen by 50p.

I explained that inflation is approaching record levels, oil prices are high & will effect the price of everything & that European countries have excessive levels of debt, there's likely going to be recession, possibly a collapse the likes hasn't been seen in years, the biggest cost of living crisis in living memory & that the true value of our money is falling.

She said "they can always print more money".

I gave up trying to explain anything after that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 03, 2022, 10:26:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 02, 2022, 09:23:53 PM
My daughter has a solar powered charger.

We've solar powered lights in the garden, not worth a chocolate tea pot in the winter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 03, 2022, 10:30:09 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 09:55:34 AM
I have been accused recently of not understanding 'normal' people (which is rubbish by the way). Why would politicions understand and empathise with the poor? Norman Tebbit clearly didn't, expecting people to cycle off to find work after the government of which he was a part had destroyed their previous jobs. A few politicians appeared on TV living on benefits for a week, which they found difficult, but I don't think that helped them to understand the long-term effects of living on benefits.

Despite that, measures to help the poorest have been put in place with the rebate being given on Council Tax bands A-D. So they are using some of the millions they collect in taxes from the oil and gas companies to ease the impact on the poor. The government has to balance the interests of everyone, however, and that includes the interests of businesses which are having to charge higher prices.

So the empathy of politicians can't be reserved purely for consumers.

Without consumers the UK economy will collapse as that's what it's based on.

However, consumers have a limited amount of disposable income and if it has to be spent on essential such as fuel and food, it won't be available for less essential things.

It's inevitable that purveyors of such products are going to suffer and maybe go out of business.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 03, 2022, 10:32:10 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 10:18:30 AM
A friend of mine was shocked the other day that the price of her dog food had risen by 50p.

I explained that inflation is approaching record levels, oil prices are high & will effect the price of everything & that European countries have excessive levels of debt, there's likely going to be recession, possibly a collapse the likes hasn't been seen in years, the biggest cost of living crisis in living memory & that the true value of our money is falling.

She said "they can always print more money".

I gave up trying to explain anything after that.

To be fair thats what happened after 2008, we're paying the price now of course, but it makes the world go round, actually it doesn't in reality.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 10:35:39 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 03, 2022, 10:32:10 AM
To be fair thats what happened after 2008, we're paying the price now of course, but it makes the world go round, actually it doesn't in reality.

This is what people don't get.

We didn't recover from that crash because we printed our way out of it.

The governments did what they could to protect businesses & consumers, by kicking the can down the road.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 10:42:02 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 09:55:34 AM
I have been accused recently of not understanding 'normal' people (which is rubbish by the way). Why would politicions understand and empathise with the poor? Norman Tebbit clearly didn't, expecting people to cycle off to find work after the government of which he was a part had destroyed their previous jobs. A few politicians appeared on TV living on benefits for a week, which they found difficult, but I don't think that helped them to understand the long-term effects of living on benefits.

Despite that, measures to help the poorest have been put in place with the rebate being given on Council Tax bands A-D. So they are using some of the millions they collect in taxes from the oil and gas companies to ease the impact on the poor. The government has to balance the interests of everyone, however, and that includes the interests of businesses which are having to charge higher prices.

So the empathy of politicians can't be reserved purely for consumers.
Politicians are elected by the constituents they represent.  If they can’t empathise with their issues and problems then they have no business being in politics. 
Measures to help the poorest have been put in place and will make very little difference, nearly everyone will be worse off despite these measures, so people who are struggling now will be struggling even more in 6 months time - fact.
I didn’t ever suggest politicians should have no empathy for businesses (“f..k business” Boris Johnson - though he clearly did, for a split second at any rate).   I appreciate that politics is a balancing act and a thankless task, but the country is now in a crisis situation, a crisis not being suffered by the ultra rich in this country, or the politicans running it, but by a large percentage of the men, women and children living in it.  Politicians are elected to help their constituents so they need to get on with it and do more to help.  IMO.  An effective opposition would be a start.  We’re slowly getting there after years in the wilderness (thanks Jeremy), but more action needs to be taken soon if not now before civil unrest and rebellion returns to the streets.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 10:49:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 09:58:48 AM
I think the Beatles were wrong when they said "All you need is love". Abba were closer; "Money, money, money"
So the solution is for everyone to find themselves a wealthy man?  I’m not sure there are enough of those to go round atm tbh but if you no one who is happy to shower me in expensive gifts and take me to Las Vegas or Monaco without expecting anything from me in return please forward his detail by pm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 03, 2022, 10:51:58 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 10:18:30 AM
A friend of mine was shocked the other day that the price of her dog food had risen by 50p.

I explained that inflation is approaching record levels, oil prices are high & will effect the price of everything & that European countries have excessive levels of debt, there's likely going to be recession, possibly a collapse the likes hasn't been seen in years, the biggest cost of living crisis in living memory & that the true value of our money is falling.

She said "they can always print more money".

I gave up trying to explain anything after that.

It'll soon be a dog eat dog world, or possibly dog eat owner world.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 11:01:01 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2022, 10:30:09 AM
Without consumers the UK economy will collapse as that's what it's based on.

However, consumers have a limited amount of disposable income and if it has to be spent on essential such as fuel and food, it won't be available for less essential things.

It's inevitable that purveyors of such products are going to suffer and maybe go out of business.

Exactly. If consumers can't buy then producers can't sell. Our capitalist system needs both or it will collapse. If people can't consume and businesses therefore can't sell this affects the government's ability to help any of them as it's income shrinks due to loss of revenue from direct and indirect taxation.

Suggesting that empathetic government is the answer ignores the complex issues involved, sadly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 11:07:12 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2022, 10:51:58 AM
It'll soon be a dog eat dog world, or possibly dog eat owner world.

Owner would have to eat dog, that already happens in socialist Venezuela.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 03, 2022, 11:15:03 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 11:01:01 AM
Exactly. If consumers can't buy then producers can't sell. Our capitalist system needs both or it will collapse. If people can't consume and businesses therefore can't sell this affects the government's ability to help any of them as it's income shrinks due to loss of revenue from direct and indirect taxation.

Suggesting that empathetic government is the answer ignores the complex issues involved, sadly.


Very often it's not producers directly. Many UK sellers just sell on 'boxes' containing some foreign import without adding any sort of value at all. This actually weakens our economy unless there are corresponding exports to balance things up.

We do need a government that is more attuned to the needs of all  it's population and not just the top few percent
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 11:17:08 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 03, 2022, 10:42:02 AM
Politicians are elected by the constituents they represent.  If they can’t empathise with their issues and problems then they have no business being in politics. 
Measures to help the poorest have been put in place and will make very little difference, nearly everyone will be worse off despite these measures, so people who are struggling now will be struggling even more in 6 months time - fact.
I didn’t ever suggest politicians should have no empathy for businesses (“f..k business” Boris Johnson - though he clearly did, for a split second at any rate).   I appreciate that politics is a balancing act and a thankless task, but the country is now in a crisis situation, a crisis not being suffered by the ultra rich in this country, or the politicans running it, but by a large percentage of the men, women and children living in it.  Politicians are elected to help their constituents so they need to get on with it and do more to help.  IMO.  An effective opposition would be a start.  We’re slowly getting there after years in the wilderness (thanks Jeremy), but more action needs to be taken soon if not now before civil unrest and rebellion returns to the streets.


There should be a billionaires tax of like 80% in this country, that way they'll take their investments & entrepreneurship elsewhere.  We don't want them creating employment here, they can sod off to China & do it thankyou very much.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 03, 2022, 11:21:45 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 11:17:08 AM

There should be a billionaires tax of like 80% in this country, that way they'll take their investments & entrepreneurship elsewhere.  We don't want them creating employment here, they can sod off to China & do it thankyou very much.

Like Mr Dyson you mean ?

And then there are plenty of million/billionaires, who just move money around - usually beyond the reach of the Taxman.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 03, 2022, 11:24:14 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2022, 11:21:45 AM
Like Mr Dyson you mean ?

But some ones employed to get it to your door,a lot less than Dyson himself but more than those that make or assemble his over priced gadgets.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 11:34:02 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2022, 10:51:58 AM
It'll soon be a dog eat dog world, or possibly dog eat owner world.

Or owner eat dog, although not me I hasten to add.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 11:35:31 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 11:34:02 AM
Or owner eat dog, although not me I hasten to add.

I'm more a cat person.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 11:40:37 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 03, 2022, 11:24:14 AM
But some ones employed to get it to your door,a lot less than Dyson himself but more than those that make or assemble his over priced gadgets.

The plight of the poor Brits having to pay more at the tanning salon, while the 6 year old girl in Somalia spends 18  hours a day picking old circuit boards apart.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 03, 2022, 11:41:22 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 03, 2022, 11:24:14 AM
But some ones employed to get it to your door,a lot less than Dyson himself but more than those that make or assemble his over priced gadgets.

Yes, but that just redistribution of domestic wealth from the not so wealth to the even less wealth with others gouging  a chunk out along the way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 03, 2022, 11:44:06 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 11:40:37 AM
The plight of the poor Brits having to pay more at the tanning salon, while the 6 year old girl in Somalia spends 18  hours a day picking old circuit boards apart.

Tanning salon - if ever there was an unnecessary 'industry' that must be near the top  of the list.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 11:51:17 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2022, 11:44:06 AM
Tanning salon - if ever there was an unnecessary 'industry' that must be near the top  of the list.

When you really think about it, even a hairdressers is completely nonessential & outright vanity, but westerners would have panic attacks if they couldn't get their highlights done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 11:52:39 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 03, 2022, 10:42:02 AM
Politicians are elected by the constituents they represent.  If they can’t empathise with their issues and problems then they have no business being in politics. 
Measures to help the poorest have been put in place and will make very little difference, nearly everyone will be worse off despite these measures, so people who are struggling now will be struggling even more in 6 months time - fact.
I didn’t ever suggest politicians should have no empathy for businesses (“f..k business” Boris Johnson - though he clearly did, for a split second at any rate).   I appreciate that politics is a balancing act and a thankless task, but the country is now in a crisis situation, a crisis not being suffered by the ultra rich in this country, or the politicans running it, but by a large percentage of the men, women and children living in it.  Politicians are elected to help their constituents so they need to get on with it and do more to help.  IMO.  An effective opposition would be a start.  We’re slowly getting there after years in the wilderness (thanks Jeremy), but more action needs to be taken soon if not now before civil unrest and rebellion returns to the streets.

Politicians may be elected by constituents, and may well empathise with them. Some of their constituents may be opposed to putting other's needs before theirs, however. ('benefit scoungers' being one example)

On the other hand, constituents are only able to choose from those candidates put forward - usually by one or other of the political parties. Therefore they are obligated to those who proposed them as well as those who elected them.

An individual may empathise with his/her constituents, but their party leaders and it's ideologists may think that constituents may have to deal with an inevitably lower standard of living. If politicians believe it's inevitable then the balancing act comes into play yet again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 11:52:50 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2022, 10:51:58 AM
It'll soon be a dog eat dog world, or possibly dog eat owner world.
More likely owner eat dog world.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 11:54:28 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 11:01:01 AM
Exactly. If consumers can't buy then producers can't sell. Our capitalist system needs both or it will collapse. If people can't consume and businesses therefore can't sell this affects the government's ability to help any of them as it's income shrinks due to loss of revenue from direct and indirect taxation.

Suggesting that empathetic government is the answer ignores the complex issues involved, sadly.
You have completely misrepresented what I have said as per usual.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 11:55:04 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2022, 11:15:03 AM

Very often it's not producers directly. Many UK sellers just sell on 'boxes' containing some foreign import without adding any sort of value at all. This actually weakens our economy unless there are corresponding exports to balance things up.

We do need a government that is more attuned to the needs of all  it's population and not just the top few percent
Exactly.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 11:59:09 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2022, 11:44:06 AM
Tanning salon - if ever there was an unnecessary 'industry' that must be near the top  of the list.
You could say that about the entire beauty industry, including hairdressers, just buy a pair of scissors or clippers.  Of course if tanning salons all close down then that’s even more empty premises on the high street, less reason for people going into town centres, less passing trade for other businesses and so on and so on.  Picking on tanning salons specifically  is just middle class snobbery imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 12:01:10 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 11:35:31 AM
I'm more a cat person.

Fine, but I think we need to follow Australia's example and make cat owners take responsibilty for their pets.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 03, 2022, 12:07:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 12:01:10 PM
Fine, but I think we need to follow Australia's example and make cat owners take responsibilty for their pets.
People don't own cats. They merely share their lives with them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 12:10:53 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 03, 2022, 11:59:09 AM
You could say that about the entire beauty industry, including hairdressers, just buy a pair of scissors or clippers.  Of course if tanning salons all close down then that’s even more empty premises on the high street, less reason for people going into town centres, less passing trade for other businesses and so on and so on.  Picking on tanning salons specifically  is just middle class snobbery imo.

If a person gets upset and stressed because they can't afford a tanning session I think they need to rearrange their priorities.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 12:13:34 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2022, 12:07:25 PM
People don't own cats. They merely share their lives with them.

If you buy something it belongs to you, as you'll discover if you nick your neighbour's cat.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 12:17:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 12:10:53 PM
If a person gets upset and stressed because they can't afford a tanning session I think they need to rearrange their priorities.

She missed the context entirely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 03, 2022, 12:24:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 12:13:34 PM
If you buy something it belongs to you, as you'll discover if you nick your neighbour's cat.

You can't steal a cat, unless you completely relocate it. People get hung up about ownership, but given a choice, cats go where they want.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 12:24:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 12:10:53 PM
If a person gets upset and stressed because they can't afford a tanning session I think they need to rearrange their priorities.
FGS.  Who here has suggested that people are getting stressed because they can’t afford their tanning sessions?  Once again you have misrepresented what I have said and completely missed the point of my last post. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 12:28:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 12:01:10 PM
Fine, but I think we need to follow Australia's example and make cat owners take responsibilty for their pets.
And their dogs.  I am surrounded at home by neighbours dogs on all sides that bark and yelp regularly throughout the day.  It is very annoying but the owners don’t seem to mind it.  My cat is by comparison virtually silent and does not crap on the pavement.  Sure, he kills s few mice for fun and the occasional bird but so far he hasn’t savaged any children to death which is good (he did just attack my hand for failing to stroke him sufficiently though).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 01:11:20 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 03, 2022, 12:24:53 PM
FGS.  Who here has suggested that people are getting stressed because they can’t afford their tanning sessions?  Once again you have misrepresented what I have said and completely missed the point of my last post.

So people are getting stressed and upset because they fear they won't be able to afford to pay for food and energy....is that what you're saying?

Average energy bills are set to rise by £693 per year or £57.75 per month. My provider overestimated my energy usage last year, and set my DD at £85 per month. At the end of my fixed term they had to repay £600 to me. My fixed term ends in August and I think they will again owe me a repayment as I'm already in credit and my usage is going to decrease during the summer months.

My bills are actually lower than average, but even if I have to pay a DD of the amount I am paying at present plus £57.75 I will have to pay £102.75. which is less than £20 a month more than I paid during the year ending August 2021. The CT rebate I will get soon cuts that down by another £12.50 per month, so I can see no reason for me to stress and worry. I know my pension income will cover the increase.

I do spend a lot on food because, due to a lessening appetite, I make sure I have choices; so I can cut down on my food shopping if I need to.

As a pensioner I have more income than those on benefits and I probably have less demands on my funds, so I'm lucky. The FACT that a single pensioner gets more to live on than a single person on Universal Credit is down to ideaological beliefs - I am deemed to have earned my pension and to deserve enough to live on. Universal Credit is lower because those claiming it need 'encouraging' to either get a job or to get a better paid one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 01:17:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 01:11:20 PM
So people are getting stressed and upset because they fear they won't be able to afford to pay for food and energy....is that what you're saying?

Average energy bills are set to rise by £693 per year or £57.75 per month. My provider overestimated my energy usage last year, and set my DD at £85 per month. At the end of my fixed term they had to repay £600 to me. My fixed term ends in August and I think they will again owe me a repayment as I'm already in credit and my usage is going to decrease during the summer months.

My bills are actually lower than average, but even if I have to pay a DD of the amount I am paying at present plus £57.75 I will have to pay £102.75. which is less than £20 a month more than I paid during the year ending August 2021. The CT rebate I will get soon cuts that down by another £12.50 per month, so I can see no reason for me to stress and worry. I know my pension income will cover the increase.

I do spend a lot on food because, due to a lessening appetite, I make sure I have choices; so I can cut down on my food shopping if I need to.

As a pensioner I have more income than those on benefits and I probably have less demands on my funds, so I'm lucky. The FACT that a single pensioner gets more to live on than a single person on Universal Credit is down to ideaological beliefs - I am deemed to have earned my pension and to deserve enough to live on. Universal Credit is lower because those claiming it need 'encouraging' to either get a job or to get a better paid one.
You know what I’m saying, it’s there in black and white in my posts.  Nowhere did I suggest that people are getting stressed because they can’t afford a spray tan.  I’m glad you’re alright Jacqueline, my parents energy bill is due to increase by £800 in May and then again some more in October perhaps by the same amount again.  Given that their joint state pension is their only income you do the math.  Now tell them to just be happy and enjoy the pretty trees.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 01:44:35 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 03, 2022, 01:17:50 PM
You know what I’m saying, it’s there in black and white in my posts.  Nowhere did I suggest that people are getting stressed because they can’t afford a spray tan.  I’m glad you’re alright Jacqueline, my parents energy bill is due to increase by £800 in May and then again some more in October perhaps by the same amount again.  Given that their joint state pension is their only income you do the math.  Now tell them to just be happy and enjoy the pretty trees.

The average energy bill for a 3 bedroomed house is £600 per year.
https://usave.co.uk/energy/average-gas-and-electricity-bill-for-a-3-bed-house/#:~:text=using%20too%20much.-,The%20average%20electricity%20bill%20for%20a%203%2Dbed%20house,or%20%C2%A350%20per%20month.

Bills are predicted to rise by 54%, which takes the average price above to £924.
https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2022/01/martin-lewis--the-energy-price-cap-s-now-predicted-to-rise-a-hor/

Your parent's bills seem to be well above the average cost for a 3 bedroomed property?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 01:52:45 PM

It sounds like they should be downsizing.

It makes perfect economic sense.

Why do they need a 3 bed if there's two of them?

There's thousands of pounds of cash sitting there they could be spending on the food, healthcare & things they need in their final years. They could probably even afford that precious foreign holiday too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 02:06:29 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 01:52:45 PM
It sounds like they should be downsizing.

It makes perfect economic sense.

Why do they need a 3 bed if there's two of them?

There's thousands of pounds of cash sitting there they could be spending on the food, healthcare & things they need in their final years. They could probably even afford that precious foreign holiday too.

Not to mention other benefits such as lowering other bills and the workload involved in everyday maintenance such as cleaning and gardening. A one-bedroomed flat is quite enough for me to manage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 03, 2022, 02:09:51 PM
In this case I find averages useless as I don't live in what would be considered an average house.

Jassi Towers, being of late 18th century construction is particularly bad to heat and despite my best efforts, much of it seems to rapidly escape.  I definitely need more insulation.
I heat by oil and wood, the cost of neither of which is regulated. If I can find a cheap source, I am considering supplementing that with paperback books, which are proving to burn very well and put out a lot of heat per volume.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 02:18:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 02:06:29 PM
Not to mention other benefits such as lowering other bills and the workload involved in everyday maintenance such as cleaning and gardening. A one-bedroomed flat is quite enough for me to manage.
All absolutely true and I’ve been on at them for years about it.  They are stubborn old codgers for whom moving would be the ultimate horror, so they are in the situation that they are in.  Of course you should have absolutely no sympathy for them whatsoever for wanting to remain living in the house that they love and feel comfortable in, silly old gits how very dare they, they should get on their bikes and move all their gear into a one bed flat like any right minded person would.  But the process of putting their house  on the market, finding somewhere to move to and pack up all their belongings now  would certainly cause them at least as much stress and upset as the worry they have over their bills (if not more) so which is worse at the end of the day?  The phrase a rock and a hard place springs to mind.  So - they are resigned to staying put at least until one of them dies of hypothermia  or hunger then who knows…
Incidentally I live in a four bed house and my bills are going up by £100 a month so…and yes, I am looking at downsizing too before anyone feels the need to lecture me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 02:29:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 01:44:35 PM
The average energy bill for a 3 bedroomed house is £600 per year.
https://usave.co.uk/energy/average-gas-and-electricity-bill-for-a-3-bed-house/#:~:text=using%20too%20much.-,The%20average%20electricity%20bill%20for%20a%203%2Dbed%20house,or%20%C2%A350%20per%20month.

Bills are predicted to rise by 54%, which takes the average price above to £924.
https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2022/01/martin-lewis--the-energy-price-cap-s-now-predicted-to-rise-a-hor/

Your parent's bills seem to be well above the average cost for a 3 bedroomed property?
These figures are a joke.  My gas bill alone is to double from£780 to £1440 and my house is not a palace.  My total energy costs work out at roughly 10% of my gross annual earnings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 03, 2022, 02:34:15 PM
In theory downsizing is fine, but the reality is anything but.  In my case it's two of us in a 4 bedroom house, but having lived there since 1970, the amount of junk to get rid of is beyond consideration. Added to which, finding a nice small bungalow in an area of our choice at a sensible price is probably impossible.
It's like we shall stay put until carried out in a box.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 02:44:07 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2022, 02:34:15 PM
In theory downsizing is fine, but the reality is anything but.  In my case it's two of us in a 4 bedroom house, but having lived there since 1970, the amount of junk to get rid of is beyond consideration. Added to which, finding a nice small bungalow in an area of our choice at a sensible price is probably impossible.
It's like we shall stay put until carried out in a box.
Exactly, again. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 03:01:46 PM
I'm probably lucky as I've never become attached to a house. I did love the farmhouse I lived in before, but with my husband's health failing and other considerations, it was necessary to move. I'm glad I did now, as I couldn't have coped there alone. I still have my memories of happy times there, moving couldn't take them from me. Living there was a chapter in my life, not the whole story.

It's stressful for relatives when they have to deal with properties packed with belongings on top of losing loved ones. Often their solution is to sell what they can and order a skip for the rest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 03, 2022, 03:15:13 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2022, 02:34:15 PM
In theory downsizing is fine, but the reality is anything but.  In my case it's two of us in a 4 bedroom house, but having lived there since 1970, the amount of junk to get rid of is beyond consideration. Added to which, finding a nice small bungalow in an area of our choice at a sensible price is probably impossible.
It's like we shall stay put until carried out in a box.
Same here, to downsize to a bungalow would cost us more .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 03:16:44 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2022, 02:34:15 PM
In theory downsizing is fine, but the reality is anything but.  In my case it's two of us in a 4 bedroom house, but having lived there since 1970, the amount of junk to get rid of is beyond consideration. Added to which, finding a nice small bungalow in an area of our choice at a sensible price is probably impossible.
It's like we shall stay put until carried out in a box.

Why are you hanging onto junk & not just binning It?
If there's stuff worth money then sell it now & enjoy the proceeds , it will be no use to you when you're dead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 03, 2022, 03:23:50 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 03:16:44 PM
Why are you hanging onto junk & not just binning It?
If there's stuff worth money then sell it now & enjoy the proceeds , it will be no use to you when you're dead.

It might be useful  8)--))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 03:50:14 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 03, 2022, 03:23:50 PM
It might be useful  8)--))

It will all be thrown in a skip when you're dead, so you're right I suppose, the incinerator at the power station could make use of it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 03:56:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 03:01:46 PM
I'm probably lucky as I've never become attached to a house. I did love the farmhouse I lived in before, but with my husband's health failing and other considerations, it was necessary to move. I'm glad I did now, as I couldn't have coped there alone. I still have my memories of happy times there, moving couldn't take them from me. Living there was a chapter in my life, not the whole story.

It's stressful for relatives when they have to deal with properties packed with belongings on top of losing loved ones. Often their solution is to sell what they can and order a skip for the rest.

I pretty much emptied my mum & dad's house before my mum died, because they had mountains of worthless shite. My dad has now taken quite keenly to minimalism & he seems happier these days. He's not tripping over boxes of crap & it's much easier to keep the house clean, which is then good for his mental health & has helped him cope with bereavement. And now, if he needs to sell the house in a hurry to pay for his own care, it would only take a couple of days for him to move out & the house is already decorated so the sale would be quick & easy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on April 03, 2022, 04:24:45 PM
It's amazing how much clutter you can build up over the years. When I decamped the family back to the UK in 2002 with most of our personal belongings boxed up, little did I think that most would still be taking up space in a farm outbuilding 20 years later.  %#&%4%
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 04:27:50 PM
Quote from: John on April 03, 2022, 04:24:45 PM
It's amazing how much clutter you can build up over the years. When I decamped the family back to the UK in 2002 with most of our personal belongings boxed up, little did I think that most would still be taking up space in a farm outbuilding 20 years later.  %#&%4%
If you haven’t used it or even looked at it in 20 years it’s probably time to get rid.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 03, 2022, 04:39:34 PM
I’ve shaved approximately 100 hours of heating time per year and one degree off the thermostat today so that will reduce my bills a little bit. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2022, 04:54:15 PM
Quote from: John on April 03, 2022, 04:24:45 PM
It's amazing how much clutter you can build up over the years. When I decamped the family back to the UK in 2002 with most of our personal belongings boxed up, little did I think that most would still be taking up space in a farm outbuilding 20 years later.  %#&%4%

We tend to get sentimentally attached to junk, It took some persuasion at first to convince my dad he had to clear out, but my mum had just been diagnosed with dementia (although I noticed it was coming before formal diagnosis) & I knew she'd be gone within a minimum of 8 years
She lasted six years, was doubly incontinent & couldn't speak by the time she went, but he had space in the house for all the equipment she needed during that time & I beat dad into getting an accessible bathroom fitted before it was really needed. He's getting both knees replaced next month, so he's quite grateful now I had the foresight to make him change things.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 03, 2022, 05:08:24 PM
My parents in law's house was bought by a single man. He got the house fully furnished including all the kitchen equipment, a shed full of tools and even half a coalshed full of coal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 09:16:27 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 02, 2022, 11:27:45 PM
The wives and families of Service Personnel were priviledged, often without realising.

I don't have a problem with this.  It was the way things were.  A job for life and a Pension. 

It was a teensy bit difficult for the wives on occasions when they had to uproot and live somewhere else.  Or worse still to be left alone with the ghastly children.  My children were always ghastly, by the way.  Still are as it happens.  But then three boys were never all that much fun.

That is what I meant.  I thought that you were nearly as brave as I was.  I am so sorry that I lost you somewhere along the way.

I don't think the lives of the wives and families of service personnel were privileged at all, just different. The men had job security, but the price was to be sent to dangerous places where they could die. Friendships were difficult because of constantly having to move to new places and start again. Being so far from relatives was hard too, especially if there was illness at home. My husband was flown home on an Air Force flight when his Dad had a heart attack, but no flights were offered to me and the children - we were left to wait and worry.

My children were a constant delight and helped me to cope with my husband's absences. I wonder why you only knew 'ghastly' children? Surely they weren't all horrible and scary?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 05, 2022, 09:24:40 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 09:16:27 AM
I don't think the lives of the wives and families of service personnel were privileged at all, just different. The men had job security, but the price was to be sent to dangerous places where they could die. Friendships were difficult because of constantly having to move to new places and start again. Being so far from relatives was hard too, especially if there was illness at home. My husband was flown home on an Air Force flight when his Dad had a heart attack, but no flights were offered to me and the children - we were left to wait and worry.

My children were a constant delight and helped me to cope with my husband's absences. I wonder why you only knew 'ghastly' children? Surely they weren't all horrible and scary?
Quite right too.  Why would you expect the army to fly your whole family home in such a situation?  If I worked abroad for a private company I would expect to pay for my own flights home even in an emergency.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 11:29:49 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 05, 2022, 09:24:40 AM
Quite right too.  Why would you expect the army to fly your whole family home in such a situation?  If I worked abroad for a private company I would expect to pay for my own flights home even in an emergency.

Really? You'd be surprised then. I worked on the accounts of a multi-national oil company and employees received free travel and subsistence. Colleagues at PwC who were sent abroad received free travel and housing costs. I received a free lunch every day from our own staff restaurant, with lots of choice ranging from sandwiches and cakes to a cooked main course and pudding. Completely free Summer and Christmas Balls with overnight accomodation too. I did feel privileged there and didn't retire until my 70th birthday.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 05, 2022, 12:26:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 11:29:49 AM
Really? You'd be surprised then. I worked on the accounts of a multi-national oil company and employees received free travel and subsistence. Colleagues at PwC who were sent abroad received free travel and housing costs. I received a free lunch every day from our own staff restaurant, with lots of choice ranging from sandwiches and cakes to a cooked main course and pudding. Completely free Summer and Christmas Balls with overnight accomodation too. I did feel privileged there and didn't retire until my 70th birthday.
I guess it depends on which company you're working for and what package you're on doesn't it?  My father worked for an advertising agency for many years abroad and he took unpaid leave to visit his sick mother and had to pay for his own flights there and back (KL to UK).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 12:52:32 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 05, 2022, 12:26:23 PM
I guess it depends on which company you're working for and what package you're on doesn't it?  My father worked for an advertising agency for many years abroad and he took unpaid leave to visit his sick mother and had to pay for his own flights there and back (KL to UK).

When my husband first joined up he was on poor wages. If he went away they reduced his pay to cover the cost of his food while he was gone. That was stressful. He went to the foot and mouth outbreak in Shropshire and to the Investiture of Prince Charles in Caernarfon, both times for six weeks. I struggled because in addition to the reduction in pay my husband needed spending money too.

Eventually the pay was restructured and it got easier, but very often we had little choice of shops, so had to rely on the NAAFI shop. The cost of living in the Hebrides was high, due to items having to be flown in, for example.

As I said, our lives were different, but by no means privileged.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 05, 2022, 04:25:59 PM
All very fascinating but none of this really addresses the issues that so many families and individuals will now be facing in this country.  Yes, we will have to suck it up, grin and bear it, put on another jumper, make do and mend, find joy in the little things and all the other helpful little epithets that more privileged people like to trot out at such times but that doesn't mean that the suffering won't be real and long-lasting.  What it means for the political landscape of this country remains to be seen.  I can't imagine the Tories clinging onto power at the next GE and the local elections in May are likely to be disastrous for them IMO.  Perhaps it will serve as a wake-up call, that the electorate is fed up of being led by donkeys and taken for fools.  Perhaps they will be forced to take more effective action to curb the crisis of poverty that that many in this country are plunging further into.  Or perhaps not...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 05:16:07 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 05, 2022, 04:25:59 PM
All very fascinating but none of this really addresses the issues that so many families and individuals will now be facing in this country.  Yes, we will have to suck it up, grin and bear it, put on another jumper, make do and mend, find joy in the little things and all the other helpful little epithets that more privileged people like to trot out at such times but that doesn't mean that the suffering won't be real and long-lasting.  What it means for the political landscape of this country remains to be seen.  I can't imagine the Tories clinging onto power at the next GE and the local elections in May are likely to be disastrous for them IMO.  Perhaps it will serve as a wake-up call, that the electorate is fed up of being led by donkeys and taken for fools.  Perhaps they will be forced to take more effective action to curb the crisis of poverty that that many in this country are plunging further into.  Or perhaps not...

Well I won't be putting my faith in any government. I remember in the 1980's we lived in the country and my three children all got on a bus to school. It was free because we lived more than three miles from their school. Thatcher's government decided to scrap that scheme and charge the parents for the bus rides. With three children the cost would have had a disastrous effect on our finances. The House of Lords stopped that Bill going through (probably because it would have affected those who worked on their country estates).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 05, 2022, 05:24:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 05:16:07 PM
Well I won't be putting my faith in any government. I remember in the 1980's we lived in the country and my three children all got on a bus to school. It was free because we lived more than three miles from their school. Thatcher's government decided to scrap that scheme and charge the parents for the bus rides. With three children the cost would have had a disastrous effect on our finances. The House of Lords stopped that Bill going through (probably because it would have affected those who worked on their country estates).
Interesting that you would consider having to pay for 3 children’s bus fares disastrous to your finances but seem to have little understanding or sympathy for those whose current finances are being impacted by hugely rising costs across all areas including transport, food and heating/electricity. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 05:30:18 PM
Portugal Newswatch
Reflections on current affairs in Portugal by journalist and author Len Port.

Sunday, March 27, 2022
Madeleine inquiry in the UK - questions still needing answers
https://algarvenewswatch.blogspot.com/2022/03/madeleine-inquiry-in-uk-questions-still.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 05, 2022, 05:42:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 05:30:18 PM
Portugal Newswatch
Reflections on current affairs in Portugal by journalist and author Len Port.

Sunday, March 27, 2022
Madeleine inquiry in the UK - questions still needing answers
https://algarvenewswatch.blogspot.com/2022/03/madeleine-inquiry-in-uk-questions-still.html
What a load of baloney.  Sounds like he spends too long on conspiracy forums.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 06:49:45 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 05, 2022, 05:42:00 PM
What a load of baloney.  Sounds like he spends too long on conspiracy forums.

I agree with some of his points.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 05, 2022, 07:19:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 06:49:45 PM
I agree with some of his points.
So do I, his opinion of Putin and the invasion of Ukraine for example.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 05, 2022, 07:25:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 06:49:45 PM
I agree with some of his points.

Yes, I think the questions are quite valid, but one can be sure that they will never be officially asked and a curtain of  obscurity over the whole affair will prevail.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 05, 2022, 08:07:43 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 05, 2022, 07:25:44 PM
Yes, I think the questions are quite valid, but one can be sure that they will never be officially asked and a curtain of  obscurity over the whole affair will prevail.
There’s some pretty valid questions he neglected to ask his reader to consider as well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 05, 2022, 08:14:05 PM
Is it REALLY valid to ask if Madeleine was still alive on 3rd May?  Really??!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 08:44:33 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 05, 2022, 08:14:05 PM
Is it REALLY valid to ask if Madeleine was still alive on 3rd May?  Really??!

There are, imo, valid questions in the article;

why did the British Government, diplomats and certain other influential individuals immediately give unprecedented support to the parents of this particular missing child?

Why such a limited remit when suspicions hovered over Madeleine’s parents and while there was very little credible evidence that Madeleine had been abducted? (Operation Grange)

Why have the British news media – especially the ‘red-tops’, but also some of the ‘quality broadsheets’ – become so biased and sycophantic in their reporting by always referring to Madeleine’s “abduction” without  adding a word such as “alleged” or “suspected”, and without questioning other possibilities?

why has the British press long been castigating the Portuguese police and implying that the peaceful resort of Praia da Luz was a den of iniquity, an insult that the local residents emphatically deny?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 05, 2022, 09:22:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 08:44:33 PM
There are, imo, valid questions in the article;

why did the British Government, diplomats and certain other influential individuals immediately give unprecedented support to the parents of this particular missing child?

Why such a limited remit when suspicions hovered over Madeleine’s parents and while there was very little credible evidence that Madeleine had been abducted? (Operation Grange)

Why have the British news media – especially the ‘red-tops’, but also some of the ‘quality broadsheets’ – become so biased and sycophantic in their reporting by always referring to Madeleine’s “abduction” without  adding a word such as “alleged” or “suspected”, and without questioning other possibilities?

why has the British press long been castigating the Portuguese police and implying that the peaceful resort of Praia da Luz was a den of iniquity, an insult that the local residents emphatically deny?
What is stopping Len Port alleged highly successful journalist from seeking the answers to his  supposedly valid questions?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 09:53:53 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 05, 2022, 09:22:45 PM
What is stopping Len Port alleged highly successful journalist from seeking the answers to his  supposedly valid questions?

How?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 05, 2022, 10:09:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 09:53:53 PM
How?
By doing what he was presumably trained to do. Does he not have contacts within the MSM?  Surely one of them can tell him (off the record if necessary) why the media has been muzzled, silenced, forced to cover up for and suck up to the McCanns?  Likewise the Met.  Find a whistleblower prepared to dish the dirt on OpGrange.  It’s what journalists worth their salt do isn’t it? uncover corruption in high places.  Don’t you understand that a free media is there to hold the High Ups to account?  Surely the McCanns are not more important than sleazy MPs and Royals, corrupt sex pest policemen etc that the media expose and write about?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 07:15:16 AM
There is for example a new Netflix documentary film coming out which explores the close friendship between Prince Charles  and depraved paedophile Jimmy Savile focusing on 20 years of correspondence between the two.  If the Establishment has been powerless to prevent that expose why do people think the McCanns are more important to protect and cover up for than our future king?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 06, 2022, 07:59:28 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 05:30:18 PM
Portugal Newswatch
Reflections on current affairs in Portugal by journalist and author Len Port.

Sunday, March 27, 2022
Madeleine inquiry in the UK - questions still needing answers
https://algarvenewswatch.blogspot.com/2022/03/madeleine-inquiry-in-uk-questions-still.html

Quite extraordinary that there were and still are individuals mired in groundhog day conspiracy theories.

I don't think there ever was a case to be made for them.  But in this day and age and being aware of the investigative path now being followed this fringe mentality still being promoted is I think beyond malice and verging on the insane.

Madeleine McCann is not a conspiracy theory.

Madeleine is a victim of crime and the only conspiracy involving her emanates from those in denial of that fact.

Madeleine is a real person with a real family who have moved heaven and earth to find their little girl and who are waiting for the truth about her disappearance.
I cannot comprehend the blindness which allows the slur industry to ply their wares in the face of that knowledge.

The pretence from conspiracy theorists such as Port that there ever was an idyllically safe child friendly or safe for females of any age Portugal has been well and truly dismissed by the reality.

The truth is that the false news of 2007 has been exposed;  check that out with Sandra Felgueiras.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on April 06, 2022, 09:09:22 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 05, 2022, 05:30:18 PM
Portugal Newswatch
Reflections on current affairs in Portugal by journalist and author Len Port.

Sunday, March 27, 2022
Madeleine inquiry in the UK - questions still needing answers
https://algarvenewswatch.blogspot.com/2022/03/madeleine-inquiry-in-uk-questions-still.html


The UK charity Missing People says that 140,000 people go missing in Britain every year. That’s 383 a day. Two thirds of the cases examined by the charity are under 18 years-of-age. So why did the British Government, diplomats and certain other influential individuals immediately give unprecedented support to the parents of this particular missing child? That’s the first of many fundamental questions that need answering.


So the British Government, diplomats and certain other influential individuals immediately give unprecedented support to the parents did they?

Is that why Gerry and Kate had to beg the Portuguese Police to tell them what was going on?   They were left not knowing how the case was unfolding.

Is that why they were made Arguidos?

Please give it a rest.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 09:20:35 AM
Quote from: Lace on April 06, 2022, 09:09:22 AM

The UK charity Missing People says that 140,000 people go missing in Britain every year. That’s 383 a day. Two thirds of the cases examined by the charity are under 18 years-of-age. So why did the British Government, diplomats and certain other influential individuals immediately give unprecedented support to the parents of this particular missing child? That’s the first of many fundamental questions that need answering.


So the British Government, diplomats and certain other influential individuals immediately give unprecedented support to the parents did they?

Is that why Gerry and Kate had to beg the Portuguese Police to tell them what was going on?   They were left not knowing how the case was unfolding.

Is that why they were made Arguidos?

Please give it a rest.
Of the 383 children that go missing each day how many are under 5 who have not been taken by an estranged parent?   How many of those 383 children who go missing every day are not found within 48 hours?

ETA: 90% of missing children are found within 48 hours of disappearance.  So if we're going to start quoting statistics let's add some relevant ones such as around 40 children go missing every day for longer than 48 hours.  what percentage of those 40 children will be under 5, not removed by an estranged parent?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 09:30:27 AM
There were 975 child abductions in the UK in 20/21
https://www.statista.com/statistics/303536/child-abduction-in-england-and-wales-uk/
 - a far more common occurrence it would seem than children being killed by their parents (1 a week according to this)
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/one-child-in-britain-is-killed-like-baby-peter-every-week-1740220.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 09:32:41 AM
Is anyone seriously suggesting that the disappearance on Madeleine McCann was so commonplace, so unremarkable that it is a mystery why representatives of the child's birth country would get involved in assisting the family?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 09:46:24 AM
How many children die from falls each year in the UK?
10
https://www.rospa.com/home-safety/advice/accidents-to-children#falls
The statistics don't tell us how many actually died instantly at home as a result of their fall but it's likely to be a low %
The statistics therefore demonstrate that a child is far more likely to be abducted than die in a fall.

Isn't it amazing what you can do with statistics?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 09:49:12 AM
Denial, anger, outrage and insults are not answers. For me, the most important question is when, how, why and by whom was it decided that the crime was stranger abduction? That was purely a UK decision, so someone in the UK knows the answer to that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 10:19:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 09:49:12 AM
Denial, anger, outrage and insults are not answers. For me, the most important question is when, how, why and by whom was it decided that the crime was stranger abduction? That was purely a UK decision, so someone in the UK knows the answer to that.
Where are you seeing denial, anger, outrage and insults?  Perhaps another question you might consider adding to your list is why the German police are also convinced that Madeleine was abducted and murdered by a paedophile - do you think they are being hoodwinked by the British authorities, or coerced by them to come to this conclusion?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 11:07:43 AM
when, how, why and by whom was it decided that the crime was stranger abduction?
When - when Operation Grange performed an extensive review of all the info collated by the PJ, Leicestershire Police and private detectives.
How - see above
Why - because according to those tasked with carrying out the review that's the way the evidence pointed.
By Whom - by those tasked with carrying out the review.

There you go, questions answered.  NEXT!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 12:35:26 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 06, 2022, 11:07:43 AM
when, how, why and by whom was it decided that the crime was stranger abduction?
When - when Operation Grange performed an extensive review of all the info collated by the PJ, Leicestershire Police and private detectives.
How - see above
Why - because according to those tasked with carrying out the review that's the way the evidence pointed.
By Whom - by those tasked with carrying out the review.

There you go, questions answered.  NEXT!!

I think the UK authorities made their minds up before Operation Grange existed.

The Strategic Debrief of Operation Task, written in 2009, is already referring to Madeleine's 'abduction', and state's OT's aim as endeavouring to 'ensure the safe return of Madeleine'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 01:26:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 12:35:26 PM
I think the UK authorities made their minds up before Operation Grange existed.

The Strategic Debrief of Operation Task, written in 2009, is already referring to Madeleine's 'abduction', and state's OT's aim as endeavouring to 'ensure the safe return of Madeleine'.
Please supply a link.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 02:28:25 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 06, 2022, 01:26:33 PM
Please supply a link.

Page 8

file:///home/chronos/u-5a253a7fb53e4cbd7a2db0d0cb7b1234a6beb594/MyFiles/Downloads/Strategic-debrief-operation-task-2009.pdf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 06, 2022, 02:30:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 12:35:26 PM
I think the UK authorities made their minds up before Operation Grange existed.

The Strategic Debrief of Operation Task, written in 2009, is already referring to Madeleine's 'abduction', and state's OT's aim as endeavouring to 'ensure the safe return of Madeleine'.

According to Wolters they failed in that respect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 06, 2022, 02:40:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 02:28:25 PM
Page 8

file:///home/chronos/u-5a253a7fb53e4cbd7a2db0d0cb7b1234a6beb594/MyFiles/Downloads/Strategic-debrief-operation-task-2009.pdf

The link doesn't work.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 06, 2022, 02:56:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 02:28:25 PM
Page 8

file:///home/chronos/u-5a253a7fb53e4cbd7a2db0d0cb7b1234a6beb594/MyFiles/Downloads/Strategic-debrief-operation-task-2009.pdf

Task seems unobtainable now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on April 06, 2022, 03:11:16 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 06, 2022, 01:26:33 PM
Please supply a link.
Open sesame...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 06, 2022, 03:21:15 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 02:28:25 PM
Page 8

file:///home/chronos/u-5a253a7fb53e4cbd7a2db0d0cb7b1234a6beb594/MyFiles/Downloads/Strategic-debrief-operation-task-2009.pdf
I don't know why you bother providing the links, and even page numbers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 03:48:09 PM
Quote from: Myster on April 06, 2022, 03:11:16 PM
Open sesame...
Thank you.  So it seems the process was - a massive review of all the evidence under Operation Task, which led the police to conclude that the evidence pointed to abduction, then launched Operation Grange to investigate the abduction, and this is all very sinister because...?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 03:50:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 12:35:26 PM
I think the UK authorities made their minds up before Operation Grange existed.

The Strategic Debrief of Operation Task, written in 2009, is already referring to Madeleine's 'abduction', and state's OT's aim as endeavouring to 'ensure the safe return of Madeleine'.
yeah, as a result of the review of all the evidence which is what Operation Task was all about right?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 03:54:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 02:28:25 PM
Page 8

file:///home/chronos/u-5a253a7fb53e4cbd7a2db0d0cb7b1234a6beb594/MyFiles/Downloads/Strategic-debrief-operation-task-2009.pdf
The only time the word abduction is mentioned on Page 8 is when it describes individuals who claimed they had abducted Madeleine.  What word should the police have used instead to describe these individuals' claims?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 06, 2022, 04:03:53 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 06, 2022, 03:54:14 PM
The only time the word abduction is mentioned on Page 8 is when it describes individuals who claimed they had abducted Madeleine.  What word should the police have used instead to describe these individuals' claims?
Page 5 (https://i.imgur.com/HfRDNpV.png)
Then 8
(https://i.imgur.com/9zXUxmV.png)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 04:12:50 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 06, 2022, 04:03:53 PM
Page 5 (https://i.imgur.com/HfRDNpV.png)
Then 8
(https://i.imgur.com/9zXUxmV.png)
Your first quote does not refer specifically to Madeleine's case as an abduction. 
Your second quote I didn't see in the report, it's certainly not on page 8 of the document I was looking at anyway though it may well be on another page.

ETA - found it - it was on Page 7. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 04:17:50 PM
So because this document refers to Madeleine having been abducted (after a thorough police review of all the evidence) does that prove there's been some sinister cover up going on?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 05:40:59 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 06, 2022, 04:17:50 PM
So because this document refers to Madeleine having been abducted (after a thorough police review of all the evidence) does that prove there's been some sinister cover up going on?

A review by whom?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 05:44:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 05:40:59 PM
A review by whom?
The police?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 06, 2022, 06:22:30 PM
https://www.mailplus.co.uk/edition/news/courts/169288/cody-ackland-pleads-guilty-to-bobbi-anne-mcleod-murder
https://www.mailplus.co.uk/edition/news/crime/169432/indie-band-guitarist-murdered-teen-girl-he-snatched-at-bus-stop

Bobbi-Anne McCleod was abducted from a bus stop by Cody Ackland. Three days later Ackland led police to her body.
According to sceptic lore that is an abduction and a murder that couldn't have happened.  Unfortunately - it did.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 06:50:36 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 06, 2022, 05:44:59 PM
The police?

They didn't have access to the PJ files or to any of the evidence gathered by the PI's, so any review carried out at that stage only included evidence gathered by Leicestershire Police.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 06:54:49 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 06, 2022, 06:22:30 PM
https://www.mailplus.co.uk/edition/news/courts/169288/cody-ackland-pleads-guilty-to-bobbi-anne-mcleod-murder
https://www.mailplus.co.uk/edition/news/crime/169432/indie-band-guitarist-murdered-teen-girl-he-snatched-at-bus-stop

Bobbi-Anne McCleod was abducted from a bus stop by Cody Ackland. Three days later Ackland led police to her body.
  • Ackland was a stranger
  • a Guardian report stated he had no history of violence
  • he had no history of psychiatric problems as an adult
  • the police said they believed that Bobbi-Anne had been abducted
  • there was no motive given for the killing
  • Ackland will not be tried on the separate charge of kidnap because of his confession of murder

According to sceptic lore that is an abduction and a murder that couldn't have happened.  Unfortunately - it did.

So someone without any 'pointers' in his background committed a crime. So box ticking is a waste of time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 08:20:06 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 06:50:36 PM
They didn't have access to the PJ files or to any of the evidence gathered by the PI's, so any review carried out at that stage only included evidence gathered by Leicestershire Police.
Did that include the Smiths and statements and the dog alerts report?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 08:23:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 06:54:49 PM
So someone without any 'pointers' in his background committed a crime. So box ticking is a waste of time.
Crazy logic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 08:33:37 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 06, 2022, 08:20:06 PM
Did that include the Smiths and statements and the dog alerts report?

Why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2022, 08:50:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 06, 2022, 08:33:37 PM
Why?
Why not?  Did it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 06:16:29 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 06, 2022, 08:50:38 PM
Why not?  Did it?

I don't see the relevance. The point is that Leicestershire Police, despite not having access to all the evidence, and despite supposedly working to support the PJ, reached a different conclusion. Perhaps Amaral was right to say that the UK police were only investigating those leads that Madeleine's parents, Gerry and Kate McCann, wanted following up.

In my opinion the UK authorities decided very early on that Madeleine McCann had been abducted by a stranger; long before they had access to all the evidence in the case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 07, 2022, 07:20:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 06:16:29 AM
I don't see the relevance. The point is that Leicestershire Police, despite not having access to all the evidence, and despite supposedly working to support the PJ, reached a different conclusion. Perhaps Amaral was right to say that the UK police were only investigating those leads that Madeleine's parents, Gerry and Kate McCann, wanted following up.

In my opinion the UK authorities decided very early on that Madeleine McCann had been abducted by a stranger; long before they had access to all the evidence in the case.
You said that any review conducted by the police at that point would not include all the evidence in the files, so I am asking if the UK  police would not have known about the Smiths and Dogs (really the only info in the files that might point to the McCanns imo) when they produced that report you cited to show their “abduction bias”.   What other evidence in the files points to their involvement?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 07, 2022, 08:14:35 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 06:16:29 AM
I don't see the relevance. The point is that Leicestershire Police, despite not having access to all the evidence, and despite supposedly working to support the PJ, reached a different conclusion. Perhaps Amaral was right to say that the UK police were only investigating those leads that Madeleine's parents, Gerry and Kate McCann, wanted following up.

In my opinion the UK authorities decided very early on that Madeleine McCann had been abducted by a stranger; long before they had access to all the evidence in the case.

Leicestershire police had boots on the ground in Portugal and had first hand information to work from.

Quite obviously any conclusion reached by them was arrived at as a result of following the evidence.  Much as the PJ reached their conclusions many years down the line by following evidence which seems to have been ignored by the PJ in 2007.


A PJ source told the Lusa agency that “the information released today by the Metropolitan Police corresponds to the line of investigation discovered by the PJ team led by Helena Monteiro”.

The same source explained that the judicial “reopening of the investigation” came as a result of the investigation of the suspect by the PJ.

“This line of investigation was made known to the English police and Maddie's parents [Gerry and Kate McCann], at a meeting held in October 2013, at the PJ's premises in Lisbon”, he said.

The source also clarified that “the investigation remains open and the PJ continues the investigation with the reserve and discretion that has characterized it”, adding that “the identification of five situations with the same 'modus operandi' allows admitting as possible that these crimes have been committed by the same author and that this may be related to the disappearance of Madeleine”.


Metropolitan Police Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood said today that British police are investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann by the alleged pedophile who attacked five children in the Algarve.

https://zap.aeiou.pt/pj-descobre-pedofilo-relacionado-com-desaparecimento-de-maddie-22115
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 09:08:52 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 07, 2022, 07:20:10 AM
You said that any review conducted by the police at that point would not include all the evidence in the files, so I am asking if the UK  police would not have known about the Smiths and Dogs (really the only info in the files that might point to the McCanns imo) when they produced that report you cited to show their “abduction bias”.   What other evidence in the files points to their involvement?

I don't think it was anything to do with reviews or with evidence. I think the UK authorities, for whatever reason, decided very early on that the McCanns and their friends were blameless.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 07, 2022, 09:18:53 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 09:08:52 AM
I don't think it was anything to do with reviews or with evidence. I think the UK authorities, for whatever reason, decided very early on that the McCanns and their friends were blameless.
And that is just speculation based on your gut feel and tendency towards conspiracy theories to explain mysteries such as this case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 07, 2022, 09:33:22 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 09:08:52 AM
I don't think it was anything to do with reviews or with evidence. I think the UK authorities, for whatever reason, decided very early on that the McCanns and their friends were blameless.

That is absolute classic conspiracy theory lore without a shred of evidence to back anything up.

As has been pointed out these shadows in which you believe didn't bother with a cover up for the future British king, but they pulled out all the stops for two obscure doctors from Leicestershire.

There is no remedy for a mind set like that and it is beyond sad.

In the meantime a family awaits the result of the attempt to find out what happened to their daughter after their fifteen year search for her; spare a thought for what they are going through right at this very moment and make it a benign one if you can.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 07, 2022, 09:39:28 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 07, 2022, 09:18:53 AM
And that is just speculation based on your gut feel and tendency towards conspiracy theories to explain mysteries such as this case.

There would be no mystery associated with this case if the Portuguese police had conducted their investigation into it with any competence.

The mysteries exist to explain the preposterous because there is nothing else which can.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 07, 2022, 09:43:33 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 07, 2022, 09:18:53 AM
And that is just speculation based on your gut feel and tendency towards conspiracy theories to explain mysteries such as this case.

Well the CB tale is nothing but a conspiracy, was he there, was he not, I saw him, I know he did it , all to be read in the rag of choice, not one iota of substance of note.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 07, 2022, 09:47:37 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 07, 2022, 09:43:33 AM
Well the CB tale is nothing but a conspiracy, was he there, was he not, I saw him, I know he did it , all to be read in the rag of choice, not one iota of substance of note.
I don't think you understand what a conspiracy theory is.  It would be a conspiracy theory to suggest that CB was being fitted up to protect the McCanns for example.  Is this something you think might be the case?  What conspiracy theory do you think I believe in?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 10:11:17 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 07, 2022, 09:18:53 AM
And that is just speculation based on your gut feel and tendency towards conspiracy theories to explain mysteries such as this case.

I don't think it's anything to do with a conspiracy, that's not how I see it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 07, 2022, 10:30:42 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 10:11:17 AM
I don't think it's anything to do with a conspiracy, that's not how I see it.
What do you think it's to do with then?  Explain your thoughts and feelings otherwise one can only surmise that you view it all as a giant establishment conspiracy...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 11:26:11 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 07, 2022, 09:47:37 AM
I don't think you understand what a conspiracy theory is.  It would be a conspiracy theory to suggest that CB was being fitted up to protect the McCanns for example.  Is this something you think might be the case?  What conspiracy theory do you think I believe in?

I have no idea what, if any, conspiracy theories you believe in. What seems to be a feature of McCann supporters, however, is a tendency to accuse others of believing in them.

At the same time there are suggestions from some supporters that the PJ might have conspired against the McCanns; some seem to think they personally have been victimised and that people are manipulating the internet somehow and others that posters here might be getting instructed on what to post by those on other forums.

I find some posters quite paranoid to be honest - they see conspiracies eveywhere.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 07, 2022, 11:29:26 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 11:26:11 AM
I have no idea what, if any, conspiracy theories you believe in. What seems to be a feature of McCann supporters, however, is a tendency to accuse others of believing in them.

At the same time there are suggestions from some supporters that the PJ might have conspired against the McCanns; some seem to think they personally have been victimised and that people are manipulating the internet somehow and others that posters here might be getting instructed on what to post by those on other forums.

I find some posters quite paranoid to be honest - they see conspiracies eveywhere.
In fairness, for 60 years everyone maintained that JFK was killed by Oswald acting alone, whereas we now know with some certainty that there was a large-scale conspiracy at work.

But we did land on the moon; 'we' being humans, for those of us here who fall in to that classification.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 07, 2022, 11:32:53 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 11:26:11 AM
I have no idea what, if any, conspiracy theories you believe in. What seems to be a feature of McCann supporters, however, is a tendency to accuse others of believing in them.

At the same time there are suggestions from some supporters that the PJ might have conspired against the McCanns; some seem to think they personally have been victimised and that people are manipulating the internet somehow and others that posters here might be getting instructed on what to post by those on other forums.

I find some posters quite paranoid to be honest - they see conspiracies eveywhere.
I don't think there is a conspiracy in this case, so why even suggest it?  *Oh I see, you replied to a post I wrote that wasn't even addressed to you*.  You claim you don't think there is a conspiracy either, however as you claim not to have ruled anything out including death before the 3rd that would suggest to me you haven't ruled out a conspiracy somewhere along the line. 

You claim you don't believe that it's a conspiracy that the police decided it was an abduction from the off and deliberately chose not to look at the parents, yet you have failed to say why you believe this and on what grounds you believe the police chose to take this action.  I asked you to give your thoughts on what other reasons the police might have for not (according to you) considering parental involvement and you deflected, yet again.

You are not an honest debater IMO.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 11:57:30 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 07, 2022, 10:30:42 AM
What do you think it's to do with then?  Explain your thoughts and feelings otherwise one can only surmise that you view it all as a giant establishment conspiracy...

I think it became a sort of fashionable view; the 'poor Kate and Gerry' message became accepted because anything else tended to be savagely attacked. Those who actually weren't sure kept quiet, only admitting to having had doubts with the assurance that they didn't have them any more. David Jones for example;

"Kate McCann's haunting account makes me rue the day I doubted them"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1384977/Kate-McCanns-haunting-account-makes-rue-day-I-doubted-them.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 07, 2022, 12:06:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 11:57:30 AM
I think it became a sort of fashionable view; the 'poor Kate and Gerry' message became accepted because anything else tended to be savagely attacked. Those who actually weren't sure kept quiet, only admitting to having had doubts with the assurance that they didn't have them any more. David Jones for example;

"Kate McCann's haunting account makes me rue the day I doubted them"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1384977/Kate-McCanns-haunting-account-makes-rue-day-I-doubted-them.html
Wow.  Just wow.  Can I remind you that earlier today you wrote:
" I think the UK authorities, for whatever reason, decided very early on that the McCanns and their friends were blameless".
When did it become "fashionable" to have sympathy for Kate and Gerry then?  Your article you posted in support of your contention is dated 2011.  I remember it being VERY fashionable to be putting the boot into Kate and Gerry for the best part of a year at least from 2007, which is "very early on" so I think your rationale is somewhat flawed.  Your opinion of the UK authorities must be extremely low if you think they didn't investigate the McCanns because they feared being lambasted by the Mail in 2011.  Why would they have been if their investigations were kept undercover anyway?  Your notions are utterly absurd when you really think about it - imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 07, 2022, 01:08:07 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 11:57:30 AM
I think it became a sort of fashionable view; the 'poor Kate and Gerry' message became accepted because anything else tended to be savagely attacked. Those who actually weren't sure kept quiet, only admitting to having had doubts with the assurance that they didn't have them any more. David Jones for example;

"Kate McCann's haunting account makes me rue the day I doubted them"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1384977/Kate-McCanns-haunting-account-makes-rue-day-I-doubted-them.html

I think your view of the press treatment of the McCanns is preposterous and not only ill researched but not researched at all.
Your opinion does not reflect the actuality of the situation.

Page last updated at 10:37 GMT, Wednesday, 19 March 2008

Papers paying damages to McCanns

A newspaper group is paying £550,000 to the parents of Madeleine McCann after it settled a libel case over reports of her disappearance.

Express Newspapers' titles, including the Daily Express, Daily Star and Sunday Express, are also printing front-page apologies.

They say they were wrong to suggest the couple, of Rothley, Leicestershire, were responsible for Madeleine's death.

The McCanns say the money will go to the Find Madeleine campaign.
In a statement read out on behalf of the McCanns at the High Court on Wednesday, they said they were pleased that Express Newspapers had admitted the "utter falsity" of the numerous stories written about them over many months.

Their spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, added that the allegations had caused them "great distress".

'Wholehearted apology'

It is understood that the sum donated to the campaign doubles the amount left in the fund.

Madeleine disappeared, days before her fourth birthday, during a family holiday in the resort of Praia da Luz, in the Algarve, on 3 May last year.

Her parents, Kate and Gerry, have been named as suspects in the case by Portuguese police but have always denied any involvement.

The settlement was confirmed at a High Court hearing, although the amount of damages was not formally disclosed.

It came after Wednesday's editions of the Daily Express and Daily Star both carried front-page apologies under the headline, "Kate and Gerry McCann: Sorry".

The Express said it accepted that a "number of articles in the newspaper have suggested that the couple caused the death of their missing daughter Madeleine and then covered it up".

It also acknowledged there was "no evidence whatsoever" to support that theory.

The paper added that Mr and Mrs McCann are "completely innocent of any involvement in their daughter's disappearance".

A similarly worded statement appeared in the Daily Star.

The Star said it was making a "wholehearted apology to Kate and Gerry McCann for stories suggesting the couple were responsible for, or may be responsible for, the death of their daughter Madeleine and for covering it up".

Further apologies are expected in the publications' sister Sunday titles at the weekend.

The libel action related to more than 100 stories across the four titles, including 42 printed in the Daily Express.

All four titles are published by the Express Newspapers group, which has agreed to all the McCanns' requests. It is also paying all their costs.

A spokesman for the company said: "We have nothing to add to what will be said in court and in our titles."

The McCanns' lawyers said that some of the newspapers' articles were "grossly defamatory".

'Trust and credibility'

Richard Bilton, BBC News special correspondent, said one of the couple's representatives had said the response of the newspaper group was "much more responsible than they were perhaps initially with these articles".

Media commentator Roy Greenslade said that for two national newspapers to carry front-page apologies at the same time was "unprecedented".

"I think this is an amazing stand-down, U-turn, by the Express newspapers," he said.

"I think when people realise that more than 100 stories have been complained about as being grossly defamatory, it will annihilate the Express' readers sense of trust and credibility in their newspaper."

Media lawyer Paul Gilbert, from Finers Stephens Innocent, said the courts encourage early settlement of defamation cases.

"Clearly the Express' lawyers felt this was a case they should settle without a high-profile trial - which it would be - and as a result have saved considerable costs," he said.

"It certainly is a warning sign to newspapers in the future - if they're going to speculate, they've got to be very careful about what they speculate about."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7303801.stm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 07:01:10 PM
Ah yes. The UK newspapers who admitted their wrongdoing and paid compensation without being ordered to do so by the courts....unlike Amaral who fought back and paid them nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 07, 2022, 09:16:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 07:01:10 PM
Ah yes. The UK newspapers who admitted their wrongdoing and paid compensation without being ordered to do so by the courts....unlike Amaral who fought back and paid them nothing.
More deflection.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 07, 2022, 09:19:13 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 07:01:10 PM
Ah yes. The UK newspapers who admitted their wrongdoing and paid compensation without being ordered to do so by the courts....unlike Amaral who fought back and paid them nothing.

As you are well aware.. It isn't over yet
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on April 07, 2022, 09:42:52 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 07, 2022, 01:08:07 PM
I think your view of the press treatment of the McCanns is preposterous and not only ill researched but not researched at all.
Your opinion does not reflect the actuality of the situation.

Page last updated at 10:37 GMT, Wednesday, 19 March 2008

Papers paying damages to McCanns

A newspaper group is paying £550,000 to the parents of Madeleine McCann after it settled a libel case over reports of her disappearance.

Express Newspapers' titles, including the Daily Express, Daily Star and Sunday Express, are also printing front-page apologies.

They say they were wrong to suggest the couple, of Rothley, Leicestershire, were responsible for Madeleine's death.

The McCanns say the money will go to the Find Madeleine campaign.
In a statement read out on behalf of the McCanns at the High Court on Wednesday, they said they were pleased that Express Newspapers had admitted the "utter falsity" of the numerous stories written about them over many months.

Their spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, added that the allegations had caused them "great distress".

'Wholehearted apology'

It is understood that the sum donated to the campaign doubles the amount left in the fund.

Madeleine disappeared, days before her fourth birthday, during a family holiday in the resort of Praia da Luz, in the Algarve, on 3 May last year.

Her parents, Kate and Gerry, have been named as suspects in the case by Portuguese police but have always denied any involvement.

The settlement was confirmed at a High Court hearing, although the amount of damages was not formally disclosed.

It came after Wednesday's editions of the Daily Express and Daily Star both carried front-page apologies under the headline, "Kate and Gerry McCann: Sorry".

The Express said it accepted that a "number of articles in the newspaper have suggested that the couple caused the death of their missing daughter Madeleine and then covered it up".

It also acknowledged there was "no evidence whatsoever" to support that theory.

The paper added that Mr and Mrs McCann are "completely innocent of any involvement in their daughter's disappearance".

A similarly worded statement appeared in the Daily Star.

The Star said it was making a "wholehearted apology to Kate and Gerry McCann for stories suggesting the couple were responsible for, or may be responsible for, the death of their daughter Madeleine and for covering it up".

Further apologies are expected in the publications' sister Sunday titles at the weekend.

The libel action related to more than 100 stories across the four titles, including 42 printed in the Daily Express.

All four titles are published by the Express Newspapers group, which has agreed to all the McCanns' requests. It is also paying all their costs.

A spokesman for the company said: "We have nothing to add to what will be said in court and in our titles."

The McCanns' lawyers said that some of the newspapers' articles were "grossly defamatory".

'Trust and credibility'

Richard Bilton, BBC News special correspondent, said one of the couple's representatives had said the response of the newspaper group was "much more responsible than they were perhaps initially with these articles".

Media commentator Roy Greenslade said that for two national newspapers to carry front-page apologies at the same time was "unprecedented".

"I think this is an amazing stand-down, U-turn, by the Express newspapers," he said.

"I think when people realise that more than 100 stories have been complained about as being grossly defamatory, it will annihilate the Express' readers sense of trust and credibility in their newspaper."

Media lawyer Paul Gilbert, from Finers Stephens Innocent, said the courts encourage early settlement of defamation cases.

"Clearly the Express' lawyers felt this was a case they should settle without a high-profile trial - which it would be - and as a result have saved considerable costs," he said.

"It certainly is a warning sign to newspapers in the future - if they're going to speculate, they've got to be very careful about what they speculate about."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7303801.stm

Until it is established what really happened to Madeleine McCann I'm afraid all scenarios are still on the table even now nearly 15 years on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 07, 2022, 09:59:17 PM
Quote from: John on April 07, 2022, 09:42:52 PM
Until it is established what really happened to Madeleine McCann I'm afraid all scenarios are still on the table even now nearly 15 years on.

The justice system doesn't deal in absolutes so.. If an abductor is found guilty.. Does that mean Maddies fate has been established..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 07, 2022, 10:47:32 PM
Quote from: John on April 07, 2022, 09:42:52 PM
Until it is established what really happened to Madeleine McCann I'm afraid all scenarios are still on the table even now nearly 15 years on.
Clearly they are not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Ms Para glider on April 07, 2022, 10:49:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 10:11:17 AM
I don't think it's anything to do with a conspiracy, that's not how I see it.

Hmmm. That's exactly what a conspiracy theorist would say........
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Ms Para glider on April 07, 2022, 11:29:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 07:01:10 PM
Ah yes. The UK newspapers who admitted their wrongdoing and paid compensation without being ordered to do so by the courts....unlike Amaral who fought back and paid them nothing.

So the UK papers "admitted" their wrongdoing, their 'wrongdoing' being promoting what Amaral was claiming... yet you say "unlike Amaral"... who presumably didn't admit his wrongdoing...? What are you claiming exactly?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Ms Para glider on April 07, 2022, 11:44:51 PM
Quote from: John on April 07, 2022, 09:42:52 PM
Until it is established what really happened to Madeleine McCann I'm afraid all scenarios are still on the table even now nearly 15 years on.

Indeed. Which is why I find it incredibly stange why you continually seek to write CB off as a credible suspect. On what basis.... he hasn't been convicted of murdering anyone before appears to be the primary reason.

Upon that logic, we can expect murderers to become extinct in the near future since anyone who hasn't been covicted for murder beforehand is not a credible suspect in any future murder.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 08, 2022, 01:29:23 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 07, 2022, 11:44:51 PM
Indeed. Which is why I find it incredibly stange why you continually seek to write CB off as a credible suspect. On what basis.... he hasn't been convicted of murdering anyone before appears to be the primary reason.

Upon that logic, we can expect murderers to become extinct in the near future since anyone who hasn't been covicted for murder beforehand is not a credible suspect in any future murder.


 8@??)(

Excellent! Straighforward and simple logic.   Why didn't I think of that before?

Well done Ms Para.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 08, 2022, 07:17:33 AM
Meanwhile  DCI Mark Cranwell  has  been  working  elsewhere
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10697951/Police-call-week-long-search-Muriel-Mckays-remains-1969-murder.html
Detective Chief Inspector Mark Cranwell said: 'We are very grateful to the landowners for allowing us to carry out this work and have been keeping Muriel's family fully informed.




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 08, 2022, 07:18:49 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 07, 2022, 11:44:51 PM
Indeed. Which is why I find it incredibly stange why you continually seek to write CB off as a credible suspect. On what basis.... he hasn't been convicted of murdering anyone before appears to be the primary reason.

Upon that logic, we can expect murderers to become extinct in the near future since anyone who hasn't been covicted for murder beforehand is not a credible suspect in any future murder.
Strawman. Not even subtle either.
The point being, while we're box ticking, is that criminality is, as a rule, often predictable, with an escalation displayed when unchecked, often labelled 'criminal spin' - 'I can' moves to 'I must'.
There's nothing to suggest CB has escalated to murder. For a man who has apparently abducted and killed a child and, as is being proposed here, he may have killed before, he gets caught quite often having perpetrated other acts, but is somehow also capable of hiding two corpses successfully and has essentially got away with it.
Your boxes are not being ticked.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 08, 2022, 07:28:22 AM
Quote from: The General on April 08, 2022, 07:18:49 AM
Strawman. Not even subtle either.
The point being, while we're box ticking, is that criminality is, as a rule, often predictable, with an escalation displayed when unchecked, often labelled 'criminal spin' - 'I can' moves to 'I must'.
There's nothing to suggest CB has escalated to murder. For a man who has apparently abducted and killed a child and, as is being proposed here, he may have killed before, he gets caught quite often having perpetrated other acts, but is somehow also capable of hiding two corpses successfully and has essentially got away with it.
Your boxes are not being ticked.

I thought you had more sense than that... Do you think he would use this as a defense at any future trial... Can't be me because I've never been caught for murder before. I'm surprised he didn't use it at the rape trial.. Can't be me I'm a paedo. The.frightening thing is people like you can vote and sit on juries...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 08:14:15 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 07, 2022, 09:19:13 PM
As you are well aware.. It isn't over yet

Oh, I think the case against Amaral is definitely over. The McCanns took it to the Portuguese Supreme Court and ended up out of pocket themselves. Well, not personally, they used Madeleine's Fund.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 08, 2022, 08:20:31 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 08, 2022, 07:28:22 AM
I thought you had more sense than that... Do you think he would use this as a defense at any future trial... Can't be me because I've never been caught for murder before. I'm surprised he didn't use it at the rape trial.. Can't be me I'm a paedo. The.frightening thing is people like you can vote and sit on juries...
Yes, Ian Huntley should have pleaded not guilty on the basis that there had been nothing to suggest he would escalate to murder prior to encountering Holly and Jessica.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 08, 2022, 08:21:09 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 08:14:15 AM
Oh, I think the case against Amaral is definitely over. The McCanns took it to the Portuguese Supreme Court and ended up out of pocket themselves. Well, not personally, they used Madeleine's Fund.

You think... I know.. That's the difference. It depends on the result at the ECHR
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 08, 2022, 08:24:29 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 08, 2022, 08:20:31 AM
Yes, Ian Huntley should have pleaded not guilty on the basis that there had been nothing to suggest he would escalate to murder prior to encountering Holly and Jessica.

CB hasn't proved his innocence yet.. It seems in sceptic world if you are a suspect this is what you have to do then you are cleared
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 08:46:21 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 07, 2022, 07:01:10 PM
Ah yes. The UK newspapers who admitted their wrongdoing and paid compensation without being ordered to do so by the courts....unlike Amaral who fought back and paid them nothing.

Please, please do read the information I posted and note that yet again your opinion is remarkably ill informed and unrealistic.

Newspaper groups do not voluntarily "donate" money to those they libel because they have been asked nicely - they do so on the advice of high powered lawyers who realise that a court case based on the evidence would have opened the door to an award which would have made the amount of agreed damages a mere pittance.

But you know that already, don't you.  I have already provided the link which unequivocally gives the information about which you are in the denial which you uphold unashamedly in your posts.



The libel action related to more than 100 stories across the four titles, including 42 printed in the Daily Express.

Which gives the lie to your initial post contending that in effect the McCanns had an easy ride from a sycophantic and compliant British press; they MOST DEFINNITLY did not.

All four titles are published by the Express Newspapers group, which has agreed to all the McCanns' requests. It is also paying all their costs.

A spokesman for the company said: "We have nothing to add to what will be said in court and in our titles."

The McCanns' lawyers said that some of the newspapers' articles were "grossly defamatory".

'Trust and credibility'

Richard Bilton, BBC News special correspondent, said one of the couple's representatives had said the response of the newspaper group was "much more responsible than they were perhaps initially with these articles".

Media commentator Roy Greenslade said that for two national newspapers to carry front-page apologies at the same time was "unprecedented".

"I think this is an amazing stand-down, U-turn, by the Express newspapers," he said.

Front page apologies for the lies printed by the publications were quite obviously demanded as per the COURT AGREEMENT reached by both parties.
Nota Bene - that is UNPRECEDENTED.

"I think when people realise that more than 100 stories have been complained about as being grossly defamatory, it will annihilate the Express' readers sense of trust and credibility in their newspaper."

Media lawyer Paul Gilbert, from Finers Stephens Innocent, said the courts encourage early settlement of defamation cases.

"Clearly the Express' lawyers felt this was a case they should settle without a high-profile trial - which it would be - and as a result have saved considerable costs," he said.

"It certainly is a warning sign to newspapers in the future - if they're going to speculate, they've got to be very careful about what they speculate about."

Be in no mistake about it.

The damages award for numerous defamations made about the McCanns was made in court.  Please bear that in mind for future reference before pressing the "post" button on sceptic disinformation.

In a statement read out on behalf of the McCanns at the High Court on Wednesday, they said they were pleased that Express Newspapers had admitted the "utter falsity" of the numerous stories written about them over many months.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7303801.stm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 08:49:43 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 08:14:15 AM
Oh, I think the case against Amaral is definitely over. The McCanns took it to the Portuguese Supreme Court and ended up out of pocket themselves. Well, not personally, they used Madeleine's Fund.

Did they?

I wonder if you would be so kind as to provide an unbiased link to that information.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 08:53:18 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 08:14:15 AM
Oh, I think the case against Amaral is definitely over. The McCanns took it to the Portuguese Supreme Court and ended up out of pocket themselves. Well, not personally, they used Madeleine's Fund.

Actually ~ who cares about Amaral ... ... ... for the moment. 

Although when one thinks about it very carefully - that may not always be so in the future.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 08:57:39 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 07, 2022, 11:29:49 PM
So the UK papers "admitted" their wrongdoing, their 'wrongdoing' being promoting what Amaral was claiming... yet you say "unlike Amaral"... who presumably didn't admit his wrongdoing...? What are you claiming exactly?

The UK newspapers were, like Amaral, accused of libelling the McCanns. They decided to pay up without attempting to defend themselves in court. Therefore no-one knows if they were actually guilty in law or not. Amaral defended himself in court, and the McCanns were ultimately unable to prove their case. Perhaps the McCanns would have failed to prove their case against the newspapers in the courts too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 09:01:46 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 08:46:21 AM
Please, please do read the information I posted and note that yet again your opinion is remarkably ill informed and unrealistic.

Newspaper groups do not voluntarily "donate" money to those they libel because they have been asked nicely - they do so on the advice of high powered lawyers who realise that a court case based on the evidence would have opened the door to an award which would have made the amount of agreed damages a mere pittance.

But you know that already, don't you.  I have already provided the link which unequivocally gives the information about which you are in the denial which you uphold unashamedly in your posts.



The libel action related to more than 100 stories across the four titles, including 42 printed in the Daily Express.

Which gives the lie to your initial post contending that in effect the McCanns had an easy ride from a sycophantic and compliant British press; they MOST DEFINNITLY did not.

All four titles are published by the Express Newspapers group, which has agreed to all the McCanns' requests. It is also paying all their costs.

A spokesman for the company said: "We have nothing to add to what will be said in court and in our titles."

The McCanns' lawyers said that some of the newspapers' articles were "grossly defamatory".

'Trust and credibility'

Richard Bilton, BBC News special correspondent, said one of the couple's representatives had said the response of the newspaper group was "much more responsible than they were perhaps initially with these articles".

Media commentator Roy Greenslade said that for two national newspapers to carry front-page apologies at the same time was "unprecedented".

"I think this is an amazing stand-down, U-turn, by the Express newspapers," he said.

Front page apologies for the lies printed by the publications were quite obviously demanded as per the COURT AGREEMENT reached by both parties.
Nota Bene - that is UNPRECEDENTED.

"I think when people realise that more than 100 stories have been complained about as being grossly defamatory, it will annihilate the Express' readers sense of trust and credibility in their newspaper."

Media lawyer Paul Gilbert, from Finers Stephens Innocent, said the courts encourage early settlement of defamation cases.

"Clearly the Express' lawyers felt this was a case they should settle without a high-profile trial - which it would be - and as a result have saved considerable costs," he said.

"It certainly is a warning sign to newspapers in the future - if they're going to speculate, they've got to be very careful about what they speculate about."

Be in no mistake about it.

The damages award for numerous defamations made about the McCanns was made in court.  Please bear that in mind for future reference before pressing the "post" button on sceptic disinformation.

In a statement read out on behalf of the McCanns at the High Court on Wednesday, they said they were pleased that Express Newspapers had admitted the "utter falsity" of the numerous stories written about them over many months.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7303801.stm

There was no trial, so the case wasn't proved in a court of law.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 08, 2022, 09:28:39 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 08:57:39 AM
The UK newspapers were, like Amaral, accused of libelling the McCanns. They decided to pay up without attempting to defend themselves in court. Therefore no-one knows if they were actually guilty in law or not. Amaral defended himself in court, and the McCanns were ultimately unable to prove their case. Perhaps the McCanns would have failed to prove their case against the newspapers in the courts too.
LOL at "no one knows if they were guilty or not" - except maybe the newspapers' lawyers who suggested to their clients that they didn't have a cat's chance in hell of successfully defending a libel action perhaps...

Have you read the Leveson report btw?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 08, 2022, 09:32:35 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 08, 2022, 07:28:22 AM
I thought you had more sense than that... Do you think he would use this as a defense at any future trial... Can't be me because I've never been caught for murder before. I'm surprised he didn't use it at the rape trial.. Can't be me I'm a paedo. The.frightening thing is people like you can vote and sit on juries...
No.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 08, 2022, 09:35:43 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 09:01:46 AM
There was no trial, so the case wasn't proved in a court of law.
Approximately 90% of all civil action never see the inside of a court room. Many defendants prefer the ambiguity of the term 'settled out of court' for a reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 09:39:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 09:01:46 AM
There was no trial, so the case wasn't proved in a court of law.

The case was proven by the full acceptance of the newspaper group that they had printed lies about the McCanns.
(https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIP.QUPyN09XQlw5kSJm3EIEggHaEK?pid=ImgDet&rs=1)
But not before the McCanns did bring the Express Group to the High Court where they were on a very solid legal footing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 09:45:31 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 08, 2022, 09:28:39 AM
LOL at "no one knows if they were guilty or not" - except maybe the newspapers' lawyers who suggested to their clients that they didn't have a cat's chance in hell of successfully defending a libel action perhaps...

Have you read the Leveson report btw?

I'm a bit incredulous that this non "argument" is still ongoing.

I've read a good bit of the Leveson report and watched televised evidence too.  Quite a bit of the evidence given under oath was quite startling and thought provoking.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 09:52:33 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 08:57:39 AM
The UK newspapers were, like Amaral, accused of libelling the McCanns. They decided to pay up without attempting to defend themselves in court. Therefore no-one knows if they were actually guilty in law or not. Amaral defended himself in court, and the McCanns were ultimately unable to prove their case. Perhaps the McCanns would have failed to prove their case against the newspapers in the courts too.

I think the McCanns have proved their case where it now matters.  The BKA -SY - and the PJ investigations are all in their own particular ways proof positive of that.

It is now the Portuguese State which is in the European sticky wicket at the moment - and the result of that judgement is likely to be an interesting one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 08, 2022, 09:55:03 AM
I wonder if it was a case of once bitten twice shy for Express newspapers, Archer took them on and won, mind it later transpired what they printed was right and Archer had to pay back with interest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 08, 2022, 09:57:40 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 08, 2022, 07:28:22 AM
I thought you had more sense than that... Do you think he would use this as a defense at any future trial... Can't be me because I've never been caught for murder before. I'm surprised he didn't use it at the rape trial.. Can't be me I'm a paedo. The.frightening thing is people like you can vote and sit on juries...

Its more frightening that you can also, future trial, in your dreams.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 08, 2022, 10:00:48 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 08, 2022, 08:24:29 AM
CB hasn't proved his innocence yet.. It seems in sceptic world if you are a suspect this is what you have to do then you are cleared

Remind us what charges are laid at CB's door to prove his innocence, his guilt is assured on here and in your mind maybe, in the real world ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 10:27:06 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 09:39:01 AM
The case was proven by the full acceptance of the newspaper group that they had printed lies about the McCanns.
(https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIP.QUPyN09XQlw5kSJm3EIEggHaEK?pid=ImgDet&rs=1)
But not before the McCanns did bring the Express Group to the High Court where they were on a very solid legal footing.

What was proved was Express Group's reluctance to go to court. No doubt their lawyers told them they would lose the case. I expect Isobel Duarte told the McCanns they would win the case in Portugal against Amaral. My conclusion? Lawyers aren't always right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 08, 2022, 10:40:21 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 10:27:06 AM
What was proved was Express Group's reluctance to go to court. No doubt their lawyers told them they would lose the case. I expect Isobel Duarte told the McCanns they would win the case in Portugal against Amaral. My conclusion? Lawyers aren't always right.
Neither are juries, judges and armchair internet sleuths.  Who knew?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 08, 2022, 10:40:37 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 10:27:06 AM
What was proved was Express Group's reluctance to go to court. No doubt their lawyers told them they would lose the case. I expect Isobel Duarte told the McCanns they would win the case in Portugal against Amaral. My conclusion? Lawyers aren't always right.

Of course lawyers aren't always right but I doubt very much you are right. I would say Duarte gave no guarantee.
Then we have the fact that courts aren't always right. The SC were absolutely wrong to say the POI does not apply to civil cases.. It absolutely does.. Except in one compensatory instance
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 10:55:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 10:27:06 AM
What was proved was Express Group's reluctance to go to court. No doubt their lawyers told them they would lose the case. I expect Isobel Duarte told the McCanns they would win the case in Portugal against Amaral. My conclusion? Lawyers aren't always right.

I think you may be floundering just the teeniest wee bit there.  The media in the shape of the Express group admitted the libels they had made.

This is a very well heeled group who had the where-with-all to enable them not to fear the results of a court decision had they - and their lawyers - been convinced that the lies printed were not lies.
I think it is called integrity.

You have ignored the link I posted about that too.  Allow me to remind you first of the apology then of a big consideration regarding that word 'integrity'.


It came after Wednesday's editions of the Daily Express and Daily Star both carried front-page apologies under the headline, "Kate and Gerry McCann: Sorry".

The Express said it accepted that a "number of articles in the newspaper have suggested that the couple caused the death of their missing daughter Madeleine and then covered it up".

It also acknowledged there was "no evidence whatsoever" to support that theory.

The paper added that Mr and Mrs McCann are "completely innocent of any involvement in their daughter's disappearance".


'Trust and credibility'
"I think when people realise that more than 100 stories have been complained about as being grossly defamatory, it will annihilate the Express' readers sense of trust and credibility in their newspaper."  Roy Greenslade
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7303801.stm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 11:20:05 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 08, 2022, 10:40:21 AM
Neither are juries, judges and armchair internet sleuths.  Who knew?

Nevertheless only a court ruling can declare a case proved. Express Newspapers were never found guilty of libel - they chose to declare themselves guilty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 08, 2022, 11:32:05 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 11:20:05 AM
Nevertheless only a court ruling can declare a case proved. Express Newspapers were never found guilty of libel - they chose to declare themselves guilty.
So what, actually? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 12:09:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 11:20:05 AM
Nevertheless only a court ruling can declare a case proved. Express Newspapers were never found guilty of libel - they chose to declare themselves guilty.

They chose to declare the truth and to apologise for printing indefensible lies.

At this stage it is pertinent to recall that despite exhaustive investigation at the time when everything was fresh, there was not one shred of evidence which allowed the police to charge the McCanns of any wrong doing.
And that includes the flawed thinking behind the 'arguido' fiasco.  NO EVIDENCE.

Fifteen years down the line and with all the investigative opportunities there have been leading the police to the point in Madeleine's case they are at now I think your posts dredging up past libels are ~ hmmm just a bit extraordinary to say the least.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 08, 2022, 12:35:59 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 12:09:29 PM
They chose to declare the truth and to apologise for printing indefensible lies.

At this stage it is pertinent to recall that despite exhaustive investigation at the time when everything was fresh, there was not one shred of evidence which allowed the police to charge the McCanns of any wrong doing.
And that includes the flawed thinking behind the 'arguido' fiasco.  NO EVIDENCE.

Fifteen years down the line and with all the investigative opportunities there have been leading the police to the point in Madeleine's case they are at now I think your posts dredging up past libels are ~ hmmm just a bit extraordinary to say the least.
What else is a poor sceptic to do though?  In the absence of any investigation into the McCanns, or any new evidence of their involvement at all, what is left but to replay past "glories" from the good ol' days of 2007 when the parents' were being smeared and attacked from all quarters?  It's comforting for some to be stuck in that rut, though why I really can't fathom.  The chances of them bouncing out of that rut seem diminishingly small which is a shame for them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 12:42:04 PM

Oh God, we aren't still doing this, are we?  What more ancient rubbish will The Sceptics drag up.

It isn't going anywhere.  Talk about a dead dog.

Whoops, Eddie and Keella are now dead, along with Morse.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 01:14:32 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 08, 2022, 12:35:59 PM
What else is a poor sceptic to do though?  In the absence of any investigation into the McCanns, or any new evidence of their involvement at all, what is left but to replay past "glories" from the good ol' days of 2007 when the parents' were being smeared and attacked from all quarters?  It's comforting for some to be stuck in that rut, though why I really can't fathom.  The chances of them bouncing out of that rut seem diminishingly small which is a shame for them.

Logic dictates that the wrong way to 'cover up' a heinous crime is to keep banging the drum to have it fully investigated.

The McCanns worked their fingers to the bone to keep Madeleine's case alive and in the public eye.

They lobbied and they petitioned tirelessly to have proper police investigation of Madeleine's case started and kept running in the face of fierce opposition which tried to cut the ground from under their feet.
WOW!!! the absolute resentment there is to MADELEINE'S FUND - which at one time was the sole source of income to finance the campaigns to have Madeleine's fate discovered.

The McCanns could have retired gracefully and buried themselves in obscurity.  But they wanted to find their little girl so they undertook superhuman feats of endurance to keep Madeleine McCann in the public and police consciousness.

You have to ask - would they have worked on that aim as hard and successfully as they did if they were the criminals portrayed by some.

You also have to ask - why there was and is a coterie of folk who have worked equally as hard against any initiative to have it uncovered what happened to Madeleine or to have her found.  Very strange.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 01:23:41 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 12:42:04 PM
Oh God, we aren't still doing this, are we?  What more ancient rubbish will The Sceptics drag up.

It isn't going anywhere.  Talk about a dead dog.

Whoops, Eddie and Keella are now dead, along with Morse.

It is beyond belief in my opinion.

I found it preposterous when I discovered this ordure floating around on the internet in 2013 to cries of 'read the files' and 'dogs don't lie'.

All these years later and in the knowledge of how the investigation has developed over that time 'preposterous' isn't the word I would use for it now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 08, 2022, 01:41:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 11:20:05 AM
Nevertheless only a court ruling can declare a case proved. Express Newspapers were never found guilty of libel - they chose to declare themselves guilty.
I think that's rubbish and just opinion.
If someone at work steals some money.. I investigate. I accuse them.. They admit it and offer to pay it back. That's proven.. No court involved
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 02:35:41 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 12:09:29 PM
They chose to declare the truth and to apologise for printing indefensible lies.

At this stage it is pertinent to recall that despite exhaustive investigation at the time when everything was fresh, there was not one shred of evidence which allowed the police to charge the McCanns of any wrong doing.
And that includes the flawed thinking behind the 'arguido' fiasco.  NO EVIDENCE.

Fifteen years down the line and with all the investigative opportunities there have been leading the police to the point in Madeleine's case they are at now I think your posts dredging up past libels are ~ hmmm just a bit extraordinary to say the least.

If you look back you'll find that it was you who dredged up past libels. I simply pointed out that they were alleged libels, which triggered the usual responses.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 08, 2022, 02:55:28 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 12:42:04 PM
Oh God, we aren't still doing this, are we?  What more ancient rubbish will The Sceptics drag up.

It isn't going anywhere.  Talk about a dead dog.

Whoops, Eddie and Keella are now dead, along with Morse.

I find your lack of sympathy for the dead dogs quite unpleasant. They were here boy, good boy, good boys & girl & they never did you or me any harm.
Let them rest in peace in the great dog walking park in the sky.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 03:11:18 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 08, 2022, 02:55:28 PM
I find your lack of sympathy for the dead dogs quite unpleasant. They were here boy, good boy, good boys & girl & they never did you or me any harm.
Let them rest in peace in the great dog walking park in the sky.

Dogs die.  Sometimes sooner than we would like them to.  My latest little shite could find a corpse if there was one.  That's the thing you see.  There was No Corpse.  And nor were the means for The McCanns to dispose of such.

The big problem here is that most of you weren't around in the beginning and so you make it up as you go along.

I have no real idea of why you do this other than for some inherent nastiness.

How very sad is that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 03:15:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 02:35:41 PM
If you look back you'll find that it was you who dredged up past libels. I simply pointed out that they were alleged libels, which triggered the usual responses.

And if you look back you have no conception of what happened in the beginning because you obviously weren't interested.

Why did you suddenly become involved?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 08, 2022, 03:25:11 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 03:15:21 PM
And if you look back you have no conception of what happened in the beginning because you obviously weren't interested.

Why did you suddenly become involved?

In the beginning a little girl disappeared with out a trace, still the same today, all that as gone on in between is noise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 03:27:22 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 08, 2022, 03:25:11 PM
In the beginning a little girl disappeared with out a trace, still the same today, all that as gone on in between is noise.

How very inconsiderate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 08, 2022, 03:30:54 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 03:27:22 PM
How very inconsiderate.

If you mean to the family (supporters) yep, Madeleine who ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 05:00:33 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 08, 2022, 03:30:54 PM
If you mean to the family (supporters) yep, Madeleine who ?

Madeleine McCann.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 08, 2022, 05:11:52 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 03:11:18 PM
Dogs die.  Sometimes sooner than we would like them to.  My latest little shite could find a corpse if there was one.  That's the thing you see.  There was No Corpse.  And nor were the means for The McCanns to dispose of such.

The big problem here is that most of you weren't around in the beginning and so you make it up as you go along.

I have no real idea of why you do this other than for some inherent nastiness.

How very sad is that?

Who have I been nasty to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 05:25:19 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 08, 2022, 03:30:54 PM
If you mean to the family (supporters) yep, Madeleine who ?

Madeleine McCann is not a figure of scorn.
Without realising it though, I think your post has managed to sum up the essence and characterisation which typifies those of the particular mindset to which members have referred.

Not a pretty thing to witness.  But well done you! for highlighting it's existence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 05:50:16 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 03:15:21 PM
And if you look back you have no conception of what happened in the beginning because you obviously weren't interested.

Why did you suddenly become involved?

The advantage of being interested 'in the beginning' being?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 08, 2022, 06:06:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 02:35:41 PM
If you look back you'll find that it was you who dredged up past libels. I simply pointed out that they were alleged libels, which triggered the usual responses.

Very interesting the way you interpret discussion ~ in fact ~ fascinating.

For the record
I responded to your 'poor Kate and Gerry' post at  https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg680531#msg680531
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on April 08, 2022, 06:22:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 11:20:05 AM
Nevertheless only a court ruling can declare a case proved. Express Newspapers were never found guilty of libel - they chose to declare themselves guilty.

Good point, I've always wondered why they were so quick to fill the McCann coffers when even the Portuguese Supreme Court is on record stating that the McCanns have NOT been cleared.

In fact, as it stands, Madeleine's fate is still undetermined. Who killed her is still an unknown quantity.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 08, 2022, 06:49:04 PM
Quote from: John on April 08, 2022, 06:22:16 PM
Good point, I've always wondered why they were so quick to fill the McCann coffers when even the Portuguese Supreme Court is on record stating that the McCanns have NOT been cleared.

In fact, as it stands, Madeleine's fate is still undetermined. Who killed her is still an unknown quantity.

Same as the Cipriano case. A guilty verdict is just a court verdict and we know courts get things wrong. In truth Joannas fate has not been determined beyond all doubt.
In the McCann case it seems the investigators are convinced Maddie was abducted.. The parents have been ruled out of the investigation.. I know you don't like that but it's a fact.
Even if CB was found guilty we don't know yet if that would determine Maddies fate. As ive said often courts work on what's most likely.

The SC said the McCanns were not ruled out by the archiving dispatch... Not that they haven't been cleared subsequently.
In fact even that is a moot point.. Has Ben Needhams family been ruled out.. No they haven't but they are no longer suspects.

If CB is not charged.. Can we say he hasn't been ruled out. Its a very unjust thing to say but you and others keep repeating it.

The fact is the McCanns are not suspects and all the evidence used to make them arguidos was not confirmed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 08, 2022, 07:18:14 PM
Quote from: John on April 08, 2022, 06:22:16 PM
Good point, I've always wondered why they were so quick to fill the McCann coffers when even the Portuguese Supreme Court is on record stating that the McCanns have NOT been cleared.

In fact, as it stands, Madeleine's fate is still undetermined. Who killed her is still an unknown quantity.
So CB wouldn’t have a leg to stand on then, if he tried to take the papers to court…?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 07:34:01 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 08, 2022, 05:11:52 PM
Who have I been nasty to?

You don't really know how.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Ms Para glider on April 08, 2022, 07:37:36 PM
Quote from: John on April 08, 2022, 06:22:16 PM
Good point, I've always wondered why they were so quick to fill the McCann coffers when even the Portuguese Supreme Court is on record stating that the McCanns have NOT been cleared.

In fact, as it stands, Madeleine's fate is still undetermined. Who killed her is still an unknown quantity.

It's not really a "good" point is it, it's a technicality. In the vast majority of cases, lawyers settle on a pay out because they know there's a high chance they'll lose if they tried to fight it. The fact they issued a public apology too is an admission of wrongdoing. Not all claims settled in this way result in an admission of guilt as well as the payout.

I have to say, I find the comment about being "so quick to fill the McCann coffers" rather peculiar. So too the comment that continues "In fact"..."Madeleine’s fate is still undetermined" and "who killed her is still an unknown quantity". The context of the comment (which began with agreeing with G-Unit) feels like it is aimed at supporters. Yet I haven't seen any supporter stating anything along the lines of Madeleine’s fate HAS been determined, or that who killed her IS a known quantity. The only people I see here who are totally resolute in what happened are those who are adamant the parents covered up Madeleine’s death. JMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 07:41:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 05:50:16 PM
The advantage of being interested 'in the beginning' being?

Something to do with what was actually going on while Amaral was up to no good for his own agrandisment

What a shite he was.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 08:30:24 PM
Quote from: John on April 08, 2022, 06:22:16 PM
Good point, I've always wondered why they were so quick to fill the McCann coffers when even the Portuguese Supreme Court is on record stating that the McCanns have NOT been cleared.

In fact, as it stands, Madeleine's fate is still undetermined. Who killed her is still an unknown quantity.

All good stuff of course.  But who on earth do you think you are.?

John has stated that Madeleine is dead.  So she must be dead.

John hasn't yet stated by whose hand, but no doubt he knows.

Could he possibly enlighten us all?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 08:46:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 05:50:16 PM
The advantage of being interested 'in the beginning' being?

If you can't see this then I can't help you.  There was so much that you never saw.

But if you want to use your ignorance to blame The McCanns then jolly good show.

It won't ever work of course. 
.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 09:33:11 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 08, 2022, 08:46:41 PM
If you can't see this then I can't help you.  There was so much that you never saw.

But if you want to use your ignorance to blame The McCanns then jolly good show.

It won't ever work of course. 
.

What, pray, was there to see that can't still be found on the internet? Apart from the posts by Vee8, that is, which were almost all deleted at one point.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Ms Para glider on April 08, 2022, 09:34:23 PM
Quote from: The General on April 08, 2022, 07:18:49 AM
Strawman. Not even subtle either.
The point being, while we're box ticking, is that criminality is, as a rule, often predictable, with an escalation displayed when unchecked, often labelled 'criminal spin' - 'I can' moves to 'I must'.
There's nothing to suggest CB has escalated to murder. For a man who has apparently abducted and killed a child and, as is being proposed here, he may have killed before, he gets caught quite often having perpetrated other acts, but is somehow also capable of hiding two corpses successfully and has essentially got away with it.
Your boxes are not being ticked.

And what are you basing that assertion on? On what has been leaked to us in the Press?

Like how he has allegedly confessed to a friend that he did it... Or the webchat transcripts where he discussed his fantasies of raping and killing a child... Or the several friends who are convinced he killed Madeleine based purely on their perception of what he was capable of... Or the Prosecutor asserting they are 100% certain he killed her based on the evidence they've found after an intensive 4 year investigation
...

Yeah, apart from all that, nothing to "suggest" CB has escalated to murder.

Ok, there may be a gap in terms of proving it, but claiming there is "nothing" to "suggest" he escalated to murder is inaccurate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 08, 2022, 11:20:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 09:33:11 PM
What, pray, was there to see that can't still be found on the internet? Apart from the posts by Vee8, that is, which were almost all deleted at one point.
Much of the absolubollocks spouted about the McCanns on fora like the Mirror and Three Arguidos website has now all mercifully vanished into the ether.  You had to be there to believe it, the sheer hateful madness of it all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 08:08:59 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 08, 2022, 11:20:05 PM
Much of the absolubollocks spouted about the McCanns on fora like the Mirror and Three Arguidos website has now all mercifully vanished into the ether.  You had to be there to believe it, the sheer hateful madness of it all.

Why would I be interested in all that? I'm interested in evidence, and not in speculation and arguments now, let alone then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 08:14:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 08:08:59 AM
Why would I be interested in all that? I'm interested in evidence, and not in speculation and arguments now, let alone then.
Can I ask why you mentioned Vee8’s posts then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 08:39:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 08, 2022, 09:33:11 PM
What, pray, was there to see that can't still be found on the internet? Apart from the posts by Vee8, that is, which were almost all deleted at one point.

There is stupidity but there is also malice attached to much of what is posted by internet groupies.  None of which has anything in the slightest to do with a little girl who vanished from her bed in 2007 and the family who really have left "NO STONE UNTURNED" in their efforts to have her returned to them and who have known from the very beginning the statistical chances of that happening.

For those who do not know - V8 was a prolific poster on behalf of Madeleine and her family who was convicted of having pornographic photographs of children on his hard drive.

Why his nom de plume is being mentioned here and at this time does not mystify me in the slightest.  However he has been found out and convicted for his crime and my only complaint about that is that he got of lightly in terms of sentence but not in terms of reputation.

What I will say is that like almost everyone else posting on the internet he was an unknown quantity.  He was not a known career criminal nor had he prior convictions for paedophilia or torture and rape.

Yet there are those who bandy V8's name around in a pejorative and snide fashion while expressing outrage that a convicted paedophile and rapist is the prime suspect in Madeleine McCann's case.

I think there is a little bit of a dichotomy there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 09:09:11 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 08, 2022, 11:20:05 PM
Much of the absolubollocks spouted about the McCanns on fora like the Mirror and Three Arguidos website has now all mercifully vanished into the ether.  You had to be there to believe it, the sheer hateful madness of it all.

I wasn't around to even be aware of the three arguidos (bit of a misnomer since there were actually four arguidos involved in Madeleine's case) but I did catch a flavour of it from those that were but who had the intelligence to eventually see and realise exactly what it was.
Perhaps the very first English language McCann hate site and the fore runner and model for many.  But it did leave a legacy and residue which has been carried on in all sorts of social media to this day.

The thing is though I think all the bile and hatred is actually pointless.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 09:22:53 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 09:09:11 AM
I wasn't around to even be aware of the three arguidos (bit of a misnomer since there were actually four arguidos involved in Madeleine's case) but I did catch a flavour of it from those that were but who had the intelligence to eventually see and realise exactly what it was.
Perhaps the very first English language McCann hate site and the fore runner and model for many.  But it did leave a legacy and residue which has been carried on in all sorts of social media to this day.

The thing is though I think all the bile and hatred is actually pointless.
  • the majority of ordinary people are unaware of it
  • if they do stumble across it they are so disgusted they avoid it like the plague then and for the future
  • it is a side issue fringe pastime for a few like us and we are all a dying breed - making the knitting of many sceptic socks even more important than ever (there's a new word I learned the 'meaning' of in 2014 - 'socks')
I first encountered online fury and hatred on the McCann subforum of the Mirror forum.  It was June 2007.  I couldn't believe what I was reading and my first post expressed my incredulity at the viciousness on display.  I'd never posted on any sort of forum until that day so was not au fait with any of the pejorative terms oft bandied about.  The very first reply to my very first post was simply one word: "troll".   I had no idea what that meant but I soon found out I was in a minority on that forum and was about as welcome as a pork pie at a Vegan convention.   The rest is history.... @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 09:33:02 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 08:39:10 AM
There is stupidity but there is also malice attached to much of what is posted by internet groupies.  None of which has anything in the slightest to do with a little girl who vanished from her bed in 2007 and the family who really have left "NO STONE UNTURNED" in their efforts to have her returned to them and who have known from the very beginning the statistical chances of that happening.

For those who do not know - V8 was a prolific poster on behalf of Madeleine and her family who was convicted of having pornographic photographs of children on his hard drive.

Why his nom de plume is being mentioned here and at this time does not mystify me in the slightest.  However he has been found out and convicted for his crime and my only complaint about that is that he got of lightly in terms of sentence but not in terms of reputation.

What I will say is that like almost everyone else posting on the internet he was an unknown quantity.  He was not a known career criminal nor had he prior convictions for paedophilia or torture and rape.

Yet there are those who bandy V8's name around in a pejorative and snide fashion while expressing outrage that a convicted paedophile and rapist is the prime suspect in Madeleine McCann's case.

I think there is a little bit of a dichotomy there.
The introduction of Vee8's name by G-Unit to the conversation was about as subtle as a brick.  "Your side has the convicted paedophile so don't come the moral high ground with me Sonny Jim", conveniently
forgetting (or pretending to be unaware of) all the crooks, criminals, paedos and murderers that "batted for the other side"...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 09:41:31 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 09, 2022, 08:14:36 AM
Can I ask why you mentioned Vee8’s posts then?

Just an example of something which is no longer on the internet. Airbrushed out by either him or those who shared his venomous no holds barred attacks on those who didn't share his views about the case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 09:46:49 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 09:41:31 AM
Just an example of something which is no longer on the internet. Airbrushed out by either him or those who shared his venomous no holds barred attacks on those who didn't share his views about the case.
@)(++(*  yeah right, of course that's why you chose him in particular as an example, you little tinker. 8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 09, 2022, 09:57:41 AM
Twitter is still full of the nonsense from both sides.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 09:58:38 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 09:09:11 AM
I wasn't around to even be aware of the three arguidos (bit of a misnomer since there were actually four arguidos involved in Madeleine's case) but I did catch a flavour of it from those that were but who had the intelligence to eventually see and realise exactly what it was.
Perhaps the very first English language McCann hate site and the fore runner and model for many.  But it did leave a legacy and residue which has been carried on in all sorts of social media to this day.

The thing is though I think all the bile and hatred is actually pointless.
  • the majority of ordinary people are unaware of it
  • if they do stumble across it they are so disgusted they avoid it like the plague then and for the future
  • it is a side issue fringe pastime for a few like us and we are all a dying breed - making the knitting of many sceptic socks even more important than ever (there's a new word I learned the 'meaning' of in 2014 - 'socks')

I know of at least one forum where bile and hatred is still expressed. It's members refer to another forum as a 'cesspit', and to people who's views are different to theirs as cowards, fools, [ censored word ]s, liars and trolls. They don't realise that such attacks say far more about those launching them than those they target. I look at it ocasionally because it amuses me and to see what crazy things they might be saying about me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 10:00:31 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 09, 2022, 09:46:49 AM
@)(++(*  yeah right, of course that's why you chose him in particular as an example, you little tinker. 8(0(*

It's the only example of things disappearing that I actually know about, having watched it happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 10:12:28 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 09:58:38 AM
I know of at least one forum where bile and hatred is still expressed. It's members refer to another forum as a 'cesspit', and to people who's views are different to theirs as cowards, fools, [ censored word ]s, liars and trolls. They don't realise that such attacks say far more about those launching them than those they target. I look at it ocasionally because it amuses me and to see what crazy things they might be saying about me.
That's a teensy bit narcissistic isn't it?  I guess there's only one thing worse than being talked about and that's not being talked about....

Abuse between anonymous forum users and platforms is par for the course, it's what we've all signed up for (yes even those of us who pretend to be diligent serious researchers).  Where the abuse is a lot less edifying is when it is targeted at identifiable "real" people whose home address is readily shared by those abusers, whose trips on trains and to restaurants is recorded and shared online with imprecations to verbally and physically abuse said individuals.  That's REAL nasty stuff and I have seen plenty of that from "sceptics", not so much from "supporters". 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 09, 2022, 10:34:56 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 09:58:38 AM
I know of at least one forum where bile and hatred is still expressed. It's members refer to another forum as a 'cesspit', and to people who's views are different to theirs as cowards, fools, [ censored word ]s, liars and trolls. They don't realise that such attacks say far more about those launching them than those they target. I look at it ocasionally because it amuses me and to see what crazy things they might be saying about me.

Are you referring to CMOMM or the twitter group. that regularly attack this forum
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 09, 2022, 10:36:33 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 09:58:38 AM
I know of at least one forum where bile and hatred is still expressed. It's members refer to another forum as a 'cesspit', and to people who's views are different to theirs as cowards, fools, [ censored word ]s, liars and trolls. They don't realise that such attacks say far more about those launching them than those they target. I look at it ocasionally because it amuses me and to see what crazy things they might be saying about me.

I still find it incredibly sinister the lengths that some supporters will go to to ‘punish’ no-believers. Employers being contacted, names being shared with the media and addresses revealed to name but a few manoeuvres employed. Why? What do they really think it will achieve?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 10:50:58 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 09, 2022, 09:22:53 AM
I first encountered online fury and hatred on the McCann subforum of the Mirror forum.  It was June 2007.  I couldn't believe what I was reading and my first post expressed my incredulity at the viciousness on display.  I'd never posted on any sort of forum until that day so was not au fait with any of the pejorative terms oft bandied about.  The very first reply to my very first post was simply one word: "troll".   I had no idea what that meant but I soon found out I was in a minority on that forum and was about as welcome as a pork pie at a Vegan convention.   The rest is history.... @)(++(*

Likewise.
My first ever post was when the British investigation was opened in 2013 to express my hope for success in finding Madeleine. 

In doing that it would be no exaggeration to say that I called the hounds of hell down upon my head.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 10:52:48 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 09, 2022, 10:36:33 AM
I still find it incredibly sinister the lengths that some supporters will go to to ‘punish’ no-believers. Employers being contacted, names being shared with the media and addresses revealed to name but a few manoeuvres employed. Why? What do they really think it will achieve?
As if this is something that only supporters have done, don't be such a raving hypocrite as you will know only too well the trend started on 3 Arguidos, if not the Mirror forum with several so-called supporters being outed and their place of work contacted in an attempt to get them into trouble with their employer.  Your onetime online pal Synonymph was one of the worst and scariest offenders - I don't know how she did it but she was some sort of tech-head who was able to track people down via their online activity and intimidate them in real life.  She is (was) a sexual fetishist and self-confessed kinky dominatrix.  So please don't make out "your" side were the victims, they were very much worse as there was so many of them, and their tactics were disgraceful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 10:57:08 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 09, 2022, 10:36:33 AM
I still find it incredibly sinister the lengths that some supporters will go to to ‘punish’ no-believers. Employers being contacted, names being shared with the media and addresses revealed to name but a few manoeuvres employed. Why? What do they really think it will achieve?

There was a dossier of 'offenders' too, wasn't there? I think the point was to scare people away, and it worked on some.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 09, 2022, 10:58:00 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 09, 2022, 10:36:33 AM
I still find it incredibly sinister the lengths that some supporters will go to to ‘punish’ no-believers. Employers being contacted, names being shared with the media and addresses revealed to name but a few manoeuvres employed. Why? What do they really think it will achieve?

Steven tried to do that to me.. Remember.. But you deny it when it's a sceptic.. Hypocrite or what
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 09, 2022, 10:59:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 10:57:08 AM
There was a dossier of 'offenders' too, wasn't there? I think the point was to scare people away, and it worked on some.

I didn't see you criticise posters doing this to me on Stephens forum.. Hypocrite or what
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 11:15:05 AM
Hypocrisy is a defining characteristic of many sceptics I find, as is a tendency to propagandise and re-write history to cast themselves as the victims.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 11:21:06 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 09:41:31 AM
Just an example of something which is no longer on the internet. Airbrushed out by either him or those who shared his venomous no holds barred attacks on those who didn't share his views about the case.

Do you know what.

YOU ARE RIGHT.  There are definitely  - venomous no holds barred attacks on those who don't share a particular view being airbrushed out by those whose intention is that only their view will prevail.

I have just tried to access particular sites one to which V8 contributed for example, to find that the link used by me to do so now takes me direct to a hideho fabrication.

Please tell me exactly how you knew that the internet is being sanitised of sites alien to the particular views you hold.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 11:32:26 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 09:58:38 AM
I know of at least one forum where bile and hatred is still expressed. It's members refer to another forum as a 'cesspit', and to people who's views are different to theirs as cowards, fools, [ censored word ]s, liars and trolls. They don't realise that such attacks say far more about those launching them than those they target. I look at it ocasionally because it amuses me and to see what crazy things they might be saying about me.

Remember how you all used to have a great laugh at Sadie for posting her observations about information vanishing from the internet and subtle alterations being made to that which was allowed to remain ... well guess what! you can start laughing at me now.

It will be interesting to do the death watch on the forum to which you refer ... I think it may very well be the last man standing so I imagine it won't be too long now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 11:33:57 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 11:21:06 AM
Do you know what.

YOU ARE RIGHT.  There are definitely  - venomous no holds barred attacks on those who don't share a particular view being airbrushed out by those whose intention is that only their view will prevail.

I have just tried to access particular sites one to which V8 contributed for example, to find that the link used by me to do so now takes me direct to a hideho fabrication.

Please tell me exactly how you knew that the internet is being sanitised of sites alien to the particular views you hold.

I quoted the only example I'm aware of and have no knowledge of anything else. What was the link?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 09, 2022, 11:40:08 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 11:33:57 AM
I quoted the only example I'm aware of and have no knowledge of anything else. What was the link?

Do you think it affects anyone here that V8 was exposed as a paedophile. It doesn't reflect on anyone else.. Only himself
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 11:52:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 11:33:57 AM
I quoted the only example I'm aware of and have no knowledge of anything else. What was the link?

There are occasions when denial is a positive short term reaction.

Prolonged denial is however far more likely to produce extremely harmful results.

Why do want me to give you a link which no longer works ~ what is the point of that since you must already know it as you state your rather specialised knowledge of v8's vanished posts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 12:58:39 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 11:52:59 AM
There are occasions when denial is a positive short term reaction.

Prolonged denial is however far more likely to produce extremely harmful results.

Why do want me to give you a link which no longer works ~ what is the point of that since you must already know it as you state your rather specialised knowledge of v8's vanished posts.

I read his objectionable opinions on a site owned by him which disappeared. I also read his posts on a forum, but they all disappeared too. I just wondered if your link was to either of them, that's all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 01:34:20 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 12:58:39 PM
I read his objectionable opinions on a site owned by him which disappeared. I also read his posts on a forum, but they all disappeared too. I just wondered if your link was to either of them, that's all.
Seems like you had a bit of a "thing" for Vee8 following him around the internet like that, and there was me thinking you weren't interested in anything that objectionable McCann supporters had to say...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 01:48:32 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 09, 2022, 01:34:20 PM
Seems like you had a bit of a "thing" for Vee8 following him around the internet like that, and there was me thinking you weren't interested in anything that objectionable McCann supporters had to say...

I became curious when I read about his conviction, went looking and discovered what a very objectionable person he was in other ways too; not to mention the hypocrisy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 02:09:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 01:48:32 PM
I became curious when I read about his conviction, went looking and discovered what a very objectionable person he was in other ways too; not to mention the hypocrisy.
And yet here you are pretending not to be remotely interested in such online behaviour but only in facts and evidence.  Sounds like you went looking for ammunition in the online war, why else would you seek out a convicted paedophile's witterings?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 02:20:46 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 09, 2022, 02:09:54 PM
And yet here you are pretending not to be remotely interested in such online behaviour but only in facts and evidence.  Sounds like you went looking for ammunition in the online war, why else would you seek out a convicted paedophile's witterings?

Online war? Is that what you think you're engaged in? I don't pretend, I'm not interested in any 'war', but I admit I was curious about the type of person Vee8 was.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 02:45:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 02:20:46 PM
Online war? Is that what you think you're engaged in? I don't pretend, I'm not interested in any 'war', but I admit I was curious about the type of person Vee8 was.
Listen.  YOU brought up Vee8 today for absolutely no reason other than to score some sort of pathetic point against those on here whose views you find anathema, objectionable, whatever.  You pretend not to be interested in the conflict between the two sides but IMO you enjoy it, you provoke it, you go looking for it.  Your postings today are evidence of that. IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 04:44:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 01:48:32 PM
I became curious when I read about his conviction, went looking and discovered what a very objectionable person he was in other ways too; not to mention the hypocrisy.

You knew enough about v8 to know his real name.

Much more than a passing interest I would opine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 05:48:50 PM
It seems like Vee8 is a bit of a sore subject.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 09, 2022, 06:01:03 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 04:44:22 PM
You knew enough about v8 to know his real name.

Much more than a passing interest I would opine.

Nigel’s name was well known to those interested in the case. You certainly didn’t have to look too hard to find it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 09, 2022, 06:04:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 05:48:50 PM
It seems like Vee8 is a bit of a sore subject.

Well he was a pretty nasty example of of the type. I’m sure no one wants to be reminded that he was once lauded by some. It shows rather poor judgment I’d say.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 06:18:15 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 09, 2022, 05:48:50 PM
It seems like Vee8 is a bit of a sore subject.

No more so than the "McCann Troll" who went off on a jolly to Spain for five weeks leaving her dementia suffering parents from whom she had stolen £18,400 to finance her 'holiday', to fend for themselves.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 09, 2022, 06:22:52 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 06:18:15 PM
No more so than the "McCann Troll" who went off on a jolly to Spain for five weeks leaving her dementia suffering parents from whom she had stolen £18,400 to finance her 'holiday', to fend for themselves.
  • Her 74-year-old mother died after being left helpless for more than a month
  • Her father, a Royal Marines veteran, was found covered in own filth
  • She had taken cash from her parents’ accounts, used their debit cards and diverted their state pension and care allowance.

Shocking case but on the morality scale no where near the scale of supporting the rape of children for his own gratification.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 06:56:19 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 09, 2022, 06:01:03 PM
Nigel’s name was well known to those interested in the case. You certainly didn’t have to look too hard to find it.
But not to those who claimed to be completely new to the case in 2014 IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 06:59:21 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 09, 2022, 06:22:52 PM
Shocking case but on the morality scale no where near the scale of supporting the rape of children for his own gratification.
.  The law doesn’t quite see it that way though does it?  Fraud, theft  and physical abuse crimes tend to get longer jail sentences than possession of child pornography.   Butler got a longer (suspended) jail sentence than Nessling.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 07:01:57 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 09, 2022, 06:04:42 PM
Well he was a pretty nasty example of of the type. I’m sure no one wants to be reminded that he was once lauded by some. It shows rather poor judgment I’d say.
Perhaps you’d like to explain how anyone was supposed to know by posting alongside him that he had a stash of kiddie porn on his computer?  Did people laud him knowing that he was a paedophile in the same way that sceptics lauded a convicted axe murderer knowing that that’s what he was?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 07:08:19 PM
It would seem Nigel Nessling really is a favourite subject of our esteemed resesarcher G-Unit.  Guess who started this thread all those years ago…?

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=fd96aue7u14vpgfdam1dck4mp7;PHPSESSID=rsop03du4stm7r8r31kvpge4j4;PHPSESSID=paiqji53ogdk60fvv85ia12hr1&topic=8745.0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2022, 07:38:49 PM
An interesting post from Websleuths yesterday…

Some might be interested to know that the MM case is not the only murder charge without a body that the Braunschweig Prosecutor's office are currently pursuing.

In the case of Karsten M., who has been missing since April, the Braunschweig public prosecutor's office has brought charges against a 50-year-old federal police officer. He is said to have murdered his best friend insidiously.

According to the public prosecutor's office, the motive for the crime was the accused's desire to officially live with Karsten M.'s wife. Authorities spokesman Christian Wolters said that bloody traces of grinding were found on the victim's property in Groß Döhren in the municipality of Liebenburg (Goslar district) and at the alleged crime scene. Investigators assume that the suspect lured his victim out of the house and then probably attacked him with a crossbow. Karsten M. had to take an anticoagulant, which led to a lot of blood loss. The investigators also found traces of blood in the victim's car, which they were able to make visible again using chemical agents. The car was later discovered at the Expo site in Hanover. A body has not yet been found.

The prosecution is sure of their accusation, even without a body. "When we file charges, we always assume a conviction, otherwise we should not file charges," Wolters said. It is not entirely unusual to charge a murder without a body. "It is and remains a circumstantial process, but we believe that we can prove it."

Besten Freund getötet? Anklage gegen Bundespolizisten


The trial is currently ongoing and all of the Prosecution evidence is circumstantial in nature. Much like the MM case, the body of the victim has still not been found and there are no eye-witnesses to the crime.

The main evidence in the prosecution case is as follows-

- The victim's kitchen showed signs of an unplanned departure. Uneaten toast, the victim's phone and his bag remained, yet the victim's car had gone.
- A substantial amount of blood was found in the garden of the victim's home along with drag marks.
- Extensive traces of the victim's blood was found in the victim's car which turned up miles away from his home.
- The suspect had been having an affair with the victim's wife for several years but the wife was unwilling to leave her husband.
- The victim's family had recently found out about the affair.
- The suspect purchased various items from hardware stores in the weeks leading up to the crime including paving slabs, wire mesh and concrete footings. None of which were ever found. (The Prosecutor's assumption being the materials were used to conceal the victim's body).
- A Fiat 500 car was spotted outside the victims home by several witnesses on the morning of his disappearance. One witness also saw a man (that was not the victim) stood next to the car shortly before the time of the disappearance.
- After the suspect's car had left that morning, the Fiat 500 remained until some time later that day. It was gone by 1pm.
- Rental records show the suspect rented a Fiat 500 car matching the description during the time frame of the crime.
- Remnants of a crossbow arrow were located at the alleged crime scene (victim's garden).
- A corresponding crowbow was purchased online using the suspect's ID in the weeks beforehand.
- The crossbow purchase was debited from the suspect's PayPal account.
- A postman confirms delivering the crossbow to the supect's home address.
- Several weeks later, the day after the victim's car was found the suspect lodged a PayPal dispute that someone else had bought the crossbow under his name and he never received it. The Prosecutor alleges this was a means of covering up posession of the crossbow after realising an arrow was missing.
- A taxi driver collected a man that morning from the location of where the victim's car was found and took him to a train station. The taxi driver said the man was wearing a covid mask and although not certain, states the man matched the suspect's appearance.


Here's an update on the trial itself which is still ongoing. More details of the case can be found on the same website but I thought this particular article was especially interesting as it outlines many of the points the defence are trying to argue.

Manczak-Prozess: Hat ein Zeuge den Toten gesehen?


There are several interesting parallels with this case and the CB/MM case. The Prosecutors launched a public TV appeal for witnesses after identifying their suspect. Similarly, they appealed for details relating to certain vehicles and any sightings of their suspect. The suspect has remained silent throughout, refusing to respond to any police questions. All of the evidence against the suspect is circumstantial. The Prosecutors only released certain details to the public "so as not to jeopardise the investigation" - that's a direct HCW quote about this investigation and exactly what he also said about the CB case.

The defence has argued several points that, while predictable, the Prosecutors can expect similar points to be raised should the MM case go to trial. The suspect claims someone stole his identity to order the crossbow and that he was not in possession of it. CB's defence may similarly want to argue the phone was not in his posession on the 3rd. The defence has called witnesses who believe they may have seen the victim (or the victim's car) after the time the Prosecutors allege the victim to have been murdered. Again, FF would likley point to the many alleged sightings of MM. The defence argue that the Prosecutors did not adequately investigate other possibilities such as the victim going into hiding or having committed suicide. I think we can guess at what alternative explanations FF might propose for MM's disappearance.

What is intriguing is that the circumstantial evidence in this case must be quite different to that in the CB case. While each of the circumstantial points are not damning on their own, it is the culmination of them which is compelling. The pieces of the puzzle as HCW puts it. The motive is established via the conflict of the affair. The evidence of death is supported by the vast amount of victims blood, drag marks and a potential murder weapon. Placing the suspect at the crime scene is supported by the sighting of the suspect's hire car. Placing the suspect at the site of the victims disposed car is supported by the taxi driver. On the face of it, the BKA would not appear to have that sort of evidence against CB. So it will be interesting to see what evidence they do have to bridge these gaps in a similarly compelling manner, given that HCW states they do "now" have enough evidence to charge him.

What is also interesting is that this trial was meant to have finished quite some time ago. It was initially delayed after one of the judges fell ill just before the trial was due to commence in November, the trial was scheduled for 11 days. It was then meant to conclude in February but has since been prolonged after further witnesses came forward. The latest is that it might conclude some time in April or May. I don't know whether these developments have anything to do with any delays to charges against CB, but it's possible. The Prosecutors have the luxury of time with CB whereas they didn't in this case. The period of pre-trial detention was up, which may have resulted in a need to focus their efforts away from CB for the time being. Whatever the case, the result of this trial will be interesting to see and a potential benchmark for evidence threshold in any future murder trials where there is no body.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 09, 2022, 08:41:32 PM
@ Anthro

I am not being allowed to PM you atm

I have tried 4 times over the past 3-4 days including twice today.

This makes me think that you and *A* are right, but I had lots of info.  Forum refised to send it and there was a great big red marker by your name on the *pm to send* list, gone now.  I think that was on 06/04/2022  at about 3-4am ish



I don't know if you have been trying to reach me, but nothing arrived since 05/04/2022


I wonder if this post will remain or vanish?

Interesting,   Doncha think?   why is our correspondance being stopped?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on April 09, 2022, 09:50:23 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 09, 2022, 08:41:32 PM
@ Anthro

I am not being allowed to PM you atm

I have tried 4 times over the past 3-4 days including twice today.

This makes me think that you and *A* are right, but I had lots of info.  Forum refised to send it and there was a great big red marker by your name on the *pm to send* list, gone now.  I think that was on 06/04/2022  at about 3-4am ish



I don't know if you have been trying to reach me, but nothing arrived since 05/04/2022


I wonder if this post will remain or vanish?

Interesting,   Doncha think?   why is our correspondance being stopped?
Hi Sadie, just confirming, I haven’t received any correspondence from you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 09, 2022, 09:58:27 PM
Quote from: Anthro on April 09, 2022, 09:50:23 PM
Hi Sadie, just confirming, I haven’t received any correspondence from you.

Very interesting.  What does that indicate?   Don't bother to respond to that.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 10:02:50 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 09, 2022, 09:58:27 PM
Very interesting.  What does that indicate?   Don't bother to respond to that.

Hi Sadie
Just sent you a 'test' pm.
B
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 09, 2022, 10:28:05 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 10:02:50 PM
Hi Sadie
Just sent you a 'test' pm.
B

Thank you.  Received.  Have responded.   Looks like I can reach others OK or maybe just moderators?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 09, 2022, 10:43:21 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 09, 2022, 10:28:05 PM
Thank you.  Received.  Have responded.   Looks like I can reach others OK or maybe just moderators?

Have you received my response, Brie?  This includes some new stuff that may have surprised you.

Thank you for looking at this.  So many, even on our side, just seem to ignore me, which is sad.

sadie Xxx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 11:48:08 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 09, 2022, 10:43:21 PM
Have you received my response, Brie?  This includes some new stuff that may have surprised you.

Thank you for looking at this.  So many, even on our side, just seem to ignore me, which is sad.

sadie Xxx

Received and understood, Sadie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 10, 2022, 01:23:42 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 09, 2022, 11:48:08 PM
Received and understood, Sadie.


Have just received a PM from a friend who is not a moderator.  Thank you my friend.


Seems that I am not permitted to correspond with Anthro, or pass stuff about the case on to her., but maybe it is OK to pm the rest of you ?   Maybe?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 10, 2022, 09:08:53 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 09, 2022, 07:38:49 PM
An interesting post from Websleuths yesterday…

Some might be interested to know that the MM case is not the only murder charge without a body that the Braunschweig Prosecutor's office are currently pursuing.

In the case of Karsten M., who has been missing since April, the Braunschweig public prosecutor's office has brought charges against a 50-year-old federal police officer. He is said to have murdered his best friend insidiously.

According to the public prosecutor's office, the motive for the crime was the accused's desire to officially live with Karsten M.'s wife. Authorities spokesman Christian Wolters said that bloody traces of grinding were found on the victim's property in Groß Döhren in the municipality of Liebenburg (Goslar district) and at the alleged crime scene. Investigators assume that the suspect lured his victim out of the house and then probably attacked him with a crossbow. Karsten M. had to take an anticoagulant, which led to a lot of blood loss. The investigators also found traces of blood in the victim's car, which they were able to make visible again using chemical agents. The car was later discovered at the Expo site in Hanover. A body has not yet been found.

The prosecution is sure of their accusation, even without a body. "When we file charges, we always assume a conviction, otherwise we should not file charges," Wolters said. It is not entirely unusual to charge a murder without a body. "It is and remains a circumstantial process, but we believe that we can prove it."

Besten Freund getötet? Anklage gegen Bundespolizisten


The trial is currently ongoing and all of the Prosecution evidence is circumstantial in nature. Much like the MM case, the body of the victim has still not been found and there are no eye-witnesses to the crime.

The main evidence in the prosecution case is as follows-

- The victim's kitchen showed signs of an unplanned departure. Uneaten toast, the victim's phone and his bag remained, yet the victim's car had gone.
- A substantial amount of blood was found in the garden of the victim's home along with drag marks.
- Extensive traces of the victim's blood was found in the victim's car which turned up miles away from his home.
- The suspect had been having an affair with the victim's wife for several years but the wife was unwilling to leave her husband.
- The victim's family had recently found out about the affair.
- The suspect purchased various items from hardware stores in the weeks leading up to the crime including paving slabs, wire mesh and concrete footings. None of which were ever found. (The Prosecutor's assumption being the materials were used to conceal the victim's body).
- A Fiat 500 car was spotted outside the victims home by several witnesses on the morning of his disappearance. One witness also saw a man (that was not the victim) stood next to the car shortly before the time of the disappearance.
- After the suspect's car had left that morning, the Fiat 500 remained until some time later that day. It was gone by 1pm.
- Rental records show the suspect rented a Fiat 500 car matching the description during the time frame of the crime.
- Remnants of a crossbow arrow were located at the alleged crime scene (victim's garden).
- A corresponding crowbow was purchased online using the suspect's ID in the weeks beforehand.
- The crossbow purchase was debited from the suspect's PayPal account.
- A postman confirms delivering the crossbow to the supect's home address.
- Several weeks later, the day after the victim's car was found the suspect lodged a PayPal dispute that someone else had bought the crossbow under his name and he never received it. The Prosecutor alleges this was a means of covering up posession of the crossbow after realising an arrow was missing.
- A taxi driver collected a man that morning from the location of where the victim's car was found and took him to a train station. The taxi driver said the man was wearing a covid mask and although not certain, states the man matched the suspect's appearance.


Here's an update on the trial itself which is still ongoing. More details of the case can be found on the same website but I thought this particular article was especially interesting as it outlines many of the points the defence are trying to argue.

Manczak-Prozess: Hat ein Zeuge den Toten gesehen?


There are several interesting parallels with this case and the CB/MM case. The Prosecutors launched a public TV appeal for witnesses after identifying their suspect. Similarly, they appealed for details relating to certain vehicles and any sightings of their suspect. The suspect has remained silent throughout, refusing to respond to any police questions. All of the evidence against the suspect is circumstantial. The Prosecutors only released certain details to the public "so as not to jeopardise the investigation" - that's a direct HCW quote about this investigation and exactly what he also said about the CB case.

The defence has argued several points that, while predictable, the Prosecutors can expect similar points to be raised should the MM case go to trial. The suspect claims someone stole his identity to order the crossbow and that he was not in possession of it. CB's defence may similarly want to argue the phone was not in his posession on the 3rd. The defence has called witnesses who believe they may have seen the victim (or the victim's car) after the time the Prosecutors allege the victim to have been murdered. Again, FF would likley point to the many alleged sightings of MM. The defence argue that the Prosecutors did not adequately investigate other possibilities such as the victim going into hiding or having committed suicide. I think we can guess at what alternative explanations FF might propose for MM's disappearance.

What is intriguing is that the circumstantial evidence in this case must be quite different to that in the CB case. While each of the circumstantial points are not damning on their own, it is the culmination of them which is compelling. The pieces of the puzzle as HCW puts it. The motive is established via the conflict of the affair. The evidence of death is supported by the vast amount of victims blood, drag marks and a potential murder weapon. Placing the suspect at the crime scene is supported by the sighting of the suspect's hire car. Placing the suspect at the site of the victims disposed car is supported by the taxi driver. On the face of it, the BKA would not appear to have that sort of evidence against CB. So it will be interesting to see what evidence they do have to bridge these gaps in a similarly compelling manner, given that HCW states they do "now" have enough evidence to charge him.

What is also interesting is that this trial was meant to have finished quite some time ago. It was initially delayed after one of the judges fell ill just before the trial was due to commence in November, the trial was scheduled for 11 days. It was then meant to conclude in February but has since been prolonged after further witnesses came forward. The latest is that it might conclude some time in April or May. I don't know whether these developments have anything to do with any delays to charges against CB, but it's possible. The Prosecutors have the luxury of time with CB whereas they didn't in this case. The period of pre-trial detention was up, which may have resulted in a need to focus their efforts away from CB for the time being. Whatever the case, the result of this trial will be interesting to see and a potential benchmark for evidence threshold in any future murder trials where there is no body.

What an interesting post. Explains the delay in MM case.. Explains why Wolters has been quiet.. He's busy.
Explains that a no body murder case is a reasonable proposition..
I think we will definitely see some action in the coming months...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 10, 2022, 09:47:30 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 10, 2022, 09:08:53 AM
What an interesting post. Explains the delay in MM case.. Explains why Wolters has been quiet.. He's busy.
Explains that a no body murder case is a reasonable proposition..
I think we will definitely see some action in the coming months...

Really !!, thats the most obvious and pointless sentence you've ever writ .Wolters declared he had evidence to charge, he cannot now not charge, or it might be all bluster .Wolters busy with other cases will not delay the MM case, look at the old bailey listing's plenty of cases being heard unless Germany only has one court and one prosecutor then its a nonsense to say its because of another case there is a hold up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 10, 2022, 09:54:57 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 10, 2022, 09:47:30 AM
Really !!, thats the most obvious and pointless sentence you've ever writ .Wolters declared he had evidence to charge, he cannot now not charge, or it might be all bluster .Wolters busy with other cases will not delay the MM case, look at the old bailey listing's plenty of cases being heard unless Germany only has one court and one prosecutor then its a nonsense to say its because of another case there is a hold up.
you're welcome to disagree
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 10, 2022, 10:14:48 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 10, 2022, 09:47:30 AM
Really !!, thats the most obvious and pointless sentence you've ever writ .Wolters declared he had evidence to charge, he cannot now not charge, or it might be all bluster .Wolters busy with other cases will not delay the MM case, look at the old bailey listing's plenty of cases being heard unless Germany only has one court and one prosecutor then its a nonsense to say its because of another case there is a hold up.
Wasn't it you who claimed "no body" murder charges never happen in Germany?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 10, 2022, 11:36:58 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 10, 2022, 10:14:48 AM
Wasn't it you who claimed "no body" murder charges never happen in Germany?

I said with information available they are as rare as hens teeth. just because one is going through court doesn't automatically follow another will.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 10, 2022, 11:53:01 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 10, 2022, 11:36:58 AM
I said with information available they are as rare as hens teeth. just because one is going through court doesn't automatically follow another will.
Of course not, but on the other hand nor does the fact that they are rare mean that Madeleine's case couldn't also be tried without a body.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 10, 2022, 12:02:16 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 10, 2022, 11:53:01 AM
Of course not, but on the other hand nor does the fact that they are rare mean that Madeleine's case couldn't also be tried without a body.

Agreed, looking at the one you brought over from sleuths, an awful lot of forensics is being used ie: blood in at least two locations, the rest is circumstantial which with the blood builds a strong case imo, now to Madeleine, Wolters admits to no forensics, its circumstantial, with out the forensics imo they are struggling,   but if Wolters is true to his word, they cannot now not charge CB, concrete he said, not even in the one you brought over is set in concrete.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 10, 2022, 12:40:56 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 10, 2022, 12:02:16 PM
Agreed, looking at the one you brought over from sleuths, an awful lot of forensics is being used ie: blood in at least two locations, the rest is circumstantial which with the blood builds a strong case imo, now to Madeleine, Wolters admits to no forensics, its circumstantial, with out the forensics imo they are struggling,   but if Wolters is true to his word, they cannot now not charge CB, concrete he said, not even in the one you brought over is set in concrete.
I think too much is being read into the word "concrete" personally. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 10, 2022, 01:12:01 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 10, 2022, 12:02:16 PM
Agreed, looking at the one you brought over from sleuths, an awful lot of forensics is being used ie: blood in at least two locations, the rest is circumstantial which with the blood builds a strong case imo, now to Madeleine, Wolters admits to no forensics, its circumstantial, with out the forensics imo they are struggling,   but if Wolters is true to his word, they cannot now not charge CB, concrete he said, not even in the one you brought over is set in concrete.

The forensics only relate as evidence of death.. Not linking the accused to the crime.. Wolters seems to have proof of death from nis cconcre evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 10, 2022, 01:14:13 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 10, 2022, 12:40:56 PM
I think too much is being read into the word "concrete" personally.

Wolters says this evidence convinces him 100% CB murdered Maddie.. Anfmd if he shared it we would agree.. I think we can read a lot into that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 10, 2022, 01:25:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 10, 2022, 01:12:01 PM
The forensics only relate as evidence of death.. Not linking the accused to the crime.. Wolters seems to have proof of death from nis cconcre evidence

Agreed but look at the post Swirl brought over, lots of forensics added to the circumstantial is a strong case, now apply it to Madeleines case, he has no forensics, what would constitute concrete .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 10, 2022, 01:27:35 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 10, 2022, 12:02:16 PM
Agreed, looking at the one you brought over from sleuths, an awful lot of forensics is being used ie: blood in at least two locations, the rest is circumstantial which with the blood builds a strong case imo, now to Madeleine, Wolters admits to no forensics, its circumstantial, with out the forensics imo they are struggling,   but if Wolters is true to his word, they cannot now not charge CB, concrete he said, not even in the one you brought over is set in concrete.

I think you have the impression that circumstantial evidence is somehow inferior.  My understanding is that it is not.

Indisputably the police have been investigating Brueckner since 2017.  Logic dictates that they must have built up quite a dossier on him which has resulted in the German Prosecutor stating that there is now enough evidence to lay charges against him. 

The police have their reasons for not progressing with that.  They know what they are.  We can only speculate.

One speculation I have seen (Sleuths) makes reference to Portuguese law and the statute of limitations they are bound by.  Thinking that 4th May 2022 might be a date worth watching out for.

I think Madeleine's case has been ruled by all sorts of limitations and this is a three sided complication the investigators can well do without.
I think it probable that agreement has been reached which circumvents that - hence the delay. 

But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.

The implications of that will be horrendous and it would be appropriate to spare a thought for the little girl at the centre and her family doing their best in the circumstances as they can while they wait for what to them is much more than a series of debating points.  It is their lives :(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 10, 2022, 01:40:23 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 10, 2022, 01:25:00 PM
Agreed but look at the post Swirl brought over, lots of forensics added to the circumstantial is a strong case, now apply it to Madeleines case, he has no forensics, what would constitute concrete .
That's Ms Swirl to you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 10, 2022, 03:01:51 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 10, 2022, 01:27:35 PM
I think you have the impression that circumstantial evidence is somehow inferior.  My understanding is that it is not.

Indisputably the police have been investigating Brueckner since 2017.  Logic dictates that they must have built up quite a dossier on him which has resulted in the German Prosecutor stating that there is now enough evidence to lay charges against him. 

The police have their reasons for not progressing with that.  They know what they are.  We can only speculate.

One speculation I have seen (Sleuths) makes reference to Portuguese law and the statute of limitations they are bound by.  Thinking that 4th May 2022 might be a date worth watching out for.

I think Madeleine's case has been ruled by all sorts of limitations and this is a three sided complication the investigators can well do without.
I think it probable that agreement has been reached which circumvents that - hence the delay. 

But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.

The implications of that will be horrendous and it would be appropriate to spare a thought for the little girl at the centre and her family doing their best in the circumstances as they can while they wait for what to them is much more than a series of debating points.  It is their lives :(

The ‘concrete’ evidence against Brueckner appears to be a few old lags attempting either to save their own necks from a long jail sentence or hoping for a nice payday from the tabloids. It will be interesting to see if there really is anything else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 10, 2022, 03:47:19 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 10, 2022, 01:25:00 PM
Agreed but look at the post Swirl brought over, lots of forensics added to the circumstantial is a strong case, now apply it to Madeleines case, he has no forensics, what would constitute concrete .

From what I've read the forensics don't link the accused to the crime.. Its all circumstantial. Wolters it seems has proof of death.. But not forensic... He doesn't need forensic evidence to prove death
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 10, 2022, 05:09:04 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 10, 2022, 03:01:51 PM
The ‘concrete’ evidence against Brueckner appears to be a few old lags attempting either to save their own necks from a long jail sentence or hoping for a nice payday from the tabloids. It will be interesting to see if there really is anything else.
The “concrete “ evidence hasn’t been revealed yet, so think again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 10, 2022, 05:43:41 PM

Goodness me, what a laugh.  A Rapist and a Child Sex Abuser.  But nothing much to worry about.  This must be all frightfully ordinary to some of you.  Which makes me wonder of who you are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 10, 2022, 06:16:10 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 10, 2022, 03:47:19 PM
From what I've read the forensics don't link the accused to the crime.. Its all circumstantial. Wolters it seems has proof of death.. But not forensic... He doesn't need forensic evidence to prove death

If he has proof of death shouldn’t he be telling Madeleine’s parents what it is and shouldn’t they, in turn, be removing their donate button from the official website?

Asking for a friend.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 10, 2022, 06:18:40 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 10, 2022, 05:43:41 PM
Goodness me, what a laugh.  A Rapist and a Child Sex Abuser.  But nothing much to worry about.  This must be all frightfully ordinary to some of you.  Which makes me wonder of who you are.

How about this one >

Judge frees suspect of abusing child at carousel prohibiting him from attending amusement parks

Pedro Sales Dias
28 de Julho de 2014, 15:09

Suspect of child attack is accused of abusing another girl four years ago.

He cannot attend amusement parks. This was the decision of a judge to let a man go free - registered by previous abuses - arrested Saturday when abused of an eight year old girl on a carousel in Gaia.

Presented for the first interrogation, this Monday at the Criminal Court, the magistrate also banned him from contacting the child and forced him to submit periodically to the police until he is judged.

Indicted for the crime of sexual abuse of children, the man risked a penalty of up to a maximum of ten years imprisonment as provided in the Penal Code.

The carousel was a mere decoy for allegedly abusing an eight-year curious to know how it worked the fun equipment. The man of 27 years, so captivated the interest of a child in the Feasts of Saint Cristovao in Gaia on the Saturday afternoon, when he abused the girl inside the carousel.

The girl had gone to those parties, in the square of the church of Mafamude, accompanied by grandparents, but at the time she was alone.

Nobody saw anything, assured the source pf PJ to Publico newspaper.

At that time, no employee was in the cabin as the carousel was not in operation.

It was the child who later told grandparents what had happened when returned in tears.

Relatives warned PSP and PJ was immediately called. The suspect, who is unemployed was arrested by 17h after being located in the vicinity of the enclosure parties.

Source of PJ stressed that man already has a record for the same crime.

Four years ago was also arrested for allegedly assaulting another eight year old girl in Gaia, where he lives. It was then accused by prosecutors and the process is still running in court.

News updated at 19h14 with coercive measures ordered by the court to the defendant .

https://www.publico.pt/2014/07/28/sociedade/noticia/pj-detem-suspeito-de-abuso-sexual-de-menina-na-cabina-de-um-carrossel-em-gaia-1664552


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 10, 2022, 06:21:34 PM
They seem a little coy about what the abuse amounted to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 10, 2022, 06:26:28 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 10, 2022, 06:16:10 PM
If he has proof of death shouldn’t he be telling Madeleine’s parents what it is and shouldn’t they, in turn, be removing their donate button from the official website?

Asking for a friend.
Who the hell is Brett? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 10, 2022, 06:27:48 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 10, 2022, 06:21:34 PM
They seem a little coy about what the abuse amounted to.
What do you want - diagrams?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 10, 2022, 06:29:42 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 10, 2022, 06:16:10 PM
If he has proof of death shouldn’t he be telling Madeleine’s parents what it is and shouldn’t they, in turn, be removing their donate button from the official website?

Asking for a friend.

Perhaps he has, but they don't accept it.
There is money involved here, though probably not much these days.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 10, 2022, 06:31:13 PM
It amazes me the close tabs some sceptics keep on the Find Madeleine website, it’s quite obsessive imo.  It’s  not a website that I would ever bother to look at or worry about yet some here seem very concerned about it on an going basis.  They and their concerned “friends” should chill the fk out IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 10, 2022, 06:34:27 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 10, 2022, 06:18:40 PM
How about this one >

Judge frees suspect of abusing child at carousel prohibiting him from attending amusement parks

Pedro Sales Dias
28 de Julho de 2014, 15:09

Suspect of child attack is accused of abusing another girl four years ago.

He cannot attend amusement parks. This was the decision of a judge to let a man go free - registered by previous abuses - arrested Saturday when abused of an eight year old girl on a carousel in Gaia.

Presented for the first interrogation, this Monday at the Criminal Court, the magistrate also banned him from contacting the child and forced him to submit periodically to the police until he is judged.

Indicted for the crime of sexual abuse of children, the man risked a penalty of up to a maximum of ten years imprisonment as provided in the Penal Code.

The carousel was a mere decoy for allegedly abusing an eight-year curious to know how it worked the fun equipment. The man of 27 years, so captivated the interest of a child in the Feasts of Saint Cristovao in Gaia on the Saturday afternoon, when he abused the girl inside the carousel.

The girl had gone to those parties, in the square of the church of Mafamude, accompanied by grandparents, but at the time she was alone.

Nobody saw anything, assured the source pf PJ to Publico newspaper.

At that time, no employee was in the cabin as the carousel was not in operation.

It was the child who later told grandparents what had happened when returned in tears.

Relatives warned PSP and PJ was immediately called. The suspect, who is unemployed was arrested by 17h after being located in the vicinity of the enclosure parties.

Source of PJ stressed that man already has a record for the same crime.

Four years ago was also arrested for allegedly assaulting another eight year old girl in Gaia, where he lives. It was then accused by prosecutors and the process is still running in court.

News updated at 19h14 with coercive measures ordered by the court to the defendant .

https://www.publico.pt/2014/07/28/sociedade/noticia/pj-detem-suspeito-de-abuso-sexual-de-menina-na-cabina-de-um-carrossel-em-gaia-1664552

Or this?

https://www.thisiswiltshire.co.uk/news/20005171.swindon-man-walks-free-despite-12-000-child-abuse-images/




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 10, 2022, 06:41:46 PM
I think the courts have to be pragmatic about this, else the prison population would mushroom.
Like it or not some abuse is viewed as  more serious than others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 10, 2022, 06:46:32 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 10, 2022, 06:41:46 PM
I think the courts have to be pragmatic about this, else the prison population would mushroom.
Like it or not some abuse is viewed as  more serious than others.

And lets not get too worried about abused children.

Jesus Christ.  God preserve me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 10, 2022, 06:50:07 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 10, 2022, 06:46:32 PM
And lets not get too worried about abused children.

Jesus Christ.  God preserve me.

Like it or not , the courts decide.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 10, 2022, 07:24:10 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 10, 2022, 06:50:07 PM
Like it or not , the courts decide.

And you think that small and abused children should be left to the letter of The Law?

There are about six of these children who's parents are up for Murder at the moment.

What a pity that no one noticed before these children died.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 10, 2022, 07:29:56 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 10, 2022, 07:24:10 PM
And you think that small and abused children should be left to the letter of The Law?

There are about six of these children who's parents are up for Murder at the moment.

What a pity that no one noticed before these children died.

I think we can all agree on that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 10, 2022, 07:31:38 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 10, 2022, 07:24:10 PM
And you think that small and abused children should be left to the letter of The Law?

There are about six of these children who's parents are up for Murder at the moment.

What a pity that no one noticed before these children died.

At the end of the day that's all there is. Courts deal with crimes that have happened, not those that might happen.
While adequate support services are not properly funded, these things will happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 10, 2022, 07:44:54 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 10, 2022, 06:16:10 PM
If he has proof of death shouldn’t he be telling Madeleine’s parents what it is and shouldn’t they, in turn, be removing their donate button from the official website?

Asking for a friend.

He's explained why he's not releasing any info to SY.. The PJ or the parents. Im sure once they have proof the donate button will be removed and all monies distributed to charities
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 10, 2022, 09:01:25 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 10, 2022, 07:44:54 PM
He's explained why he's not releasing any info to SY.. The PJ or the parents. Im sure once they have proof the donate button will be removed and all monies distributed to charities

I've forgotten that. Could you remind me?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 10, 2022, 09:15:14 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 10, 2022, 07:31:38 PM
At the end of the day that's all there is. Courts deal with crimes that have happened, not those that might happen.
While adequate support services are not properly funded, these things will happen.

Golly Gosh.  When do you think The McCanns beat their daughter to death?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 10, 2022, 10:00:23 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 10, 2022, 07:44:54 PM
He's explained why he's not releasing any info to SY.. The PJ or the parents. Im sure once they have proof the donate button will be removed and all monies distributed to charities

Are you saying that the parents don’t believe Wolter when he says that Madeleine is dead?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 10, 2022, 10:59:58 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 10, 2022, 10:00:23 PM
Are you saying that the parents don’t believe Wolter when he says that Madeleine is dead?

Who knows?  What do you think?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 10, 2022, 11:17:56 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 10, 2022, 10:00:23 PM
Are you saying that the parents don’t believe Wolter when he says that Madeleine is dead?
Why would that be remarkable?  What parent wants to believe their child is dead?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 10, 2022, 11:21:01 PM
In so far as I am concerned, Madeleine is dead or not.  But she is not my child and so I can never be totally involved.

It could so easily have been me.  I don't know about the rest of you because I am not sure that the rest of you are actually telling the truth.

I never left my children alone ever.?  Really?



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 10, 2022, 11:50:14 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 10, 2022, 10:59:58 PM
Who knows?  What do you think?

I think if Wolter is claiming in public that Madeleine is dead without making it clear to her parents, in private, what evidence he has for such a catastrophic statement then that is cruel in the extreme and tbh I don’t think any professional prosecutor with an ounce of compassion would do that.

Wolter has gone extremely quiet of late so perhaps the realisation is dawning on even him that he will never have enough evidence to bring Brueckner to trial. In fact at this juncture it very well may be Wolter’s preferred outcome that the case against Brueckner is quietly moved to the back burner or even closed through lack of evidence. He would never have the scalp he so obviously was after but then again he could always claim that Brueckner was never cleared.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 10, 2022, 11:51:48 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 10, 2022, 11:21:01 PM
In so far as I am concerned, Madeleine is dead or not.  But she is not my child and so I can never be totally involved.

It could so easily have been me.  I don't know about the rest of you because I am not sure that the rest of you are actually telling the truth.

I never left my children alone ever.?  Really?

Were your children 18 months and 3 years old?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 11, 2022, 01:38:12 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 10, 2022, 11:51:48 PM
Were your children 18 months and 3 years old?

Yes, they were actually.  Almost that precise age.  My husband was away at sea for two years and I was totally alone.  So I used to nip next door for a cup of tea and a teensy bit of conversation.

I have no guilt about this.  Who the hell do you think was defending Queen and Country?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 07:26:46 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 11, 2022, 01:38:12 AM
Yes, they were actually.  Almost that precise age.  My husband was away at sea for two years and I was totally alone.  So I used to nip next door for a cup of tea and a teensy bit of conversation.

I have no guilt about this.  Who the hell do you think was defending Queen and Country?

I think your situation was different. It was a different time, before people worried so much and  children were allowed to roam free from an early age. Times had changed beyond recognition by 2007. Parents were much more fearful and protective by then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 11, 2022, 09:10:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 07:26:46 AM
I think your situation was different. It was a different time, before people worried so much and  children were allowed to roam free from an early age. Times had changed beyond recognition by 2007. Parents were much more fearful and protective by then.
I left my kids in much the same way Eleanor did.  Often I left my infant son asleep in his cot to go and fetch his sister from school (which was a 10 minute round trip on foot).  Once we left them both in a hotel room (aged 5 and 2) and went downstairs for a bite to eat, absent from the room for about 40 minutes.  This was in the early 2000s Quick, call social services, or perhaps just tell me what a horror of a parent I am, I'm sure it will add to your sense of superiority over me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 11, 2022, 09:12:16 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 11, 2022, 01:38:12 AM
Yes, they were actually.  Almost that precise age.  My husband was away at sea for two years and I was totally alone.  So I used to nip next door for a cup of tea and a teensy bit of conversation.

I have no guilt about this.  Who the hell do you think was defending Queen and Country?
I think this is why we can empathise with the McCanns and others can't.  We see something of ourselves in what they did, feel bad for them, feel some guilt too perhaps that we got away with it and they didn't. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 11, 2022, 09:51:51 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 10, 2022, 01:14:13 PM
Wolters says this evidence convinces him 100% CB murdered Maddie.. Anfmd if he shared it we would agree.. I think we can read a lot into that

Yet he can't charge because he needs a stronger case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 09:53:44 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 11, 2022, 09:10:01 AM
I left my kids in much the same way Eleanor did.  Often I left my infant son asleep in his cot to go and fetch his sister from school (which was a 10 minute round trip on foot).  Once we left them both in a hotel room (aged 5 and 2) and went downstairs for a bite to eat, absent from the room for about 40 minutes.  This was in the early 2000s Quick, call social services, or perhaps just tell me what a horror of a parent I am, I'm sure it will add to your sense of superiority over me.

I don't care what others did. What interests me about the McCanns is the dichotomy between way they were portrayed by family, friends and themselves and what their behaviour said about them.

Jill Renwick; "Ms Renwick said of the holiday: 'This is the first time they have done this. They are very, very anxious parents and very careful..."
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/parents-distraught-over-missing-holiday-girl-metro-t11833.html

They didn't behave like they were anxious or careful though.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 11, 2022, 10:06:18 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 09:53:44 AM
I don't care what others did. What interests me about the McCanns is the dichotomy between way they were portrayed by family, friends and themselves and what their behaviour said about them.

Jill Renwick; "Ms Renwick said of the holiday: 'This is the first time they have done this. They are very, very anxious parents and very careful..."
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/parents-distraught-over-missing-holiday-girl-metro-t11833.html

They didn't behave like they were anxious or careful though.
So what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 10:12:13 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 11, 2022, 09:12:16 AM
I think this is why we can empathise with the McCanns and others can't.  We see something of ourselves in what they did, feel bad for them, feel some guilt too perhaps that we got away with it and they didn't.

Empathising involves imagining how others are thinking and feeling. In order to do that you first need to know exactly what has happened to them. For you, that was the abduction of their daughter by a stranger. Others have doubts about that. As there's no proof it's possible that you are reading the situation wrongly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 11, 2022, 10:12:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 09:53:44 AM
I don't care what others did. What interests me about the McCanns is the dichotomy between way they were portrayed by family, friends and themselves and what their behaviour said about them.

Jill Renwick; "Ms Renwick said of the holiday: 'This is the first time they have done this. They are very, very anxious parents and very careful..."
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/parents-distraught-over-missing-holiday-girl-metro-t11833.html

They didn't behave like they were anxious or careful though.

Here we are nigh on 15 yrs later because of or in spite of it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 10:14:40 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 11, 2022, 10:06:18 AM
So what?

Actions speak louder than words imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 11, 2022, 10:58:22 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 10:12:13 AM
Empathising involves imagining how others are thinking and feeling. In order to do that you first need to know exactly what has happened to them. For you, that was the abduction of their daughter by a stranger. Others have doubts about that. As there's no proof it's possible that you are reading the situation wrongly.
I think it's safe to say that if and when it is established that Madeleine was indeed taken by an abductor your empathy with the McCanns will remain low to non-existent.  I would think in such an eventuality  most sceptics would simply blame the McCanns for "allowing" Madeleine to be abducted and most of their opprobrium would still be reserved for the parents rather than the abductor.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 11, 2022, 11:00:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 10:14:40 AM
Actions speak louder than words imo.
So what again?  Is your problem with the McCanns' friends for claiming they were anxious, caring parents?  Or is your problem with the McCanns for not being anxious and caring enough in your opinion?  And if so, who cares what you think?  They don't and neither do I, plus you're always telling us your opinion is beside the point and not to ask for it so why are you giving it to us now (and again, and again and again)?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 11:54:14 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 11, 2022, 11:00:36 AM
So what again?  Is your problem with the McCanns' friends for claiming they were anxious, caring parents?  Or is your problem with the McCanns for not being anxious and caring enough in your opinion?  And if so, who cares what you think?  They don't and neither do I, plus you're always telling us your opinion is beside the point and not to ask for it so why are you giving it to us now (and again, and again and again)?

Perhaps their friend thought that leaving small children home alone in an unlocked apartment every night was what anxious and caring parents do?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 11, 2022, 11:57:03 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 11:54:14 AM
Perhaps their friend thought that leaving small children home alone in an unlocked apartment every night was what anxious and caring parents do?
So now you're reduced to making silly facetious comments. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 12:38:12 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 11, 2022, 11:57:03 AM
So now you're reduced to making silly facetious comments.

Actions speak louder than words.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 11, 2022, 01:32:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 07:26:46 AM
I think your situation was different. It was a different time, before people worried so much and  children were allowed to roam free from an early age. Times had changed beyond recognition by 2007. Parents were much more fearful and protective by then.

Times changed when Madeleine disappeared.  No one I knew even thought about that possibility.

But thank you for your kind words.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 11, 2022, 02:00:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 12:38:12 PM
Actions speak louder than words.
LOL, are you on auto repeat?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 11, 2022, 03:43:47 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 11, 2022, 09:12:16 AM
I think this is why we can empathise with the McCanns and others can't.  We see something of ourselves in what they did, feel bad for them, feel some guilt too perhaps that we got away with it and they didn't.

Guilt never entered my head.  But it certainly would have done if I had been a hypocrite about this.

I actually stated this back in 2007.  And several times since.  Although I have never given a reason in so far as I can remember.  But then I wasn't looking for justification or sympathy.  I was just stating a fact, which was all that was necessary to me at the time.

Oh Dear, poor old me with a husband away at sea and unseen for two whole years.  In fact I don't know why I bothered to mention it on this occasion.  So please don't feel sorry for me.  The choice was always mine alone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 11, 2022, 07:37:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 11, 2022, 09:53:44 AM
I don't care what others did. What interests me about the McCanns is the dichotomy between way they were portrayed by family, friends and themselves and what their behaviour said about them.

Jill Renwick; "Ms Renwick said of the holiday: 'This is the first time they have done this. They are very, very anxious parents and very careful..."
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/parents-distraught-over-missing-holiday-girl-metro-t11833.html

They didn't behave like they were anxious or careful though.

I’m not sure how admitting that they also left their very small children to fend for themselves somehow negates the danger that their, or indeed the McCann’s, children were put in.

It does however go some way to explaining the blinkered support.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 11, 2022, 08:09:19 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 11, 2022, 07:37:52 PM
I’m not sure how admitting that they also left their very small children to fend for themselves somehow negates the danger that their, or indeed the McCann’s, children were put in.

It does however go some way to explaining the blinkered support.
It doesn’t negate anything, it’s simply being honest and explains why some of us are not horribly judgmental and sanctimonious about it like you are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 11, 2022, 09:04:48 PM
@ Anthro

I responded to your message last night, but I ahve just noticed that it has been wipede from my outbox.

Also have just sent you another short pm .  Have you received that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on April 11, 2022, 09:37:05 PM
I’ve mentioned a year or two ago, that we did the same with our children re. sleeping in their room while we were dining within the resort complex in Mauritius. I was told, I’m trying to mislead the forum because my children were older at the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 11, 2022, 10:34:18 PM
Mum and Dad used to come away with us when we had little ones, but when they were about 3 and 5 we bought a caravan,  Usually they stayed up with us, but on occasions we were sitting outside a couple of caravans along having a nightcap wh friends.   Everywhere was pitch black except for an odd camp fire, but we never felt any danger.   It all felt so safe, as I feel certain Kate and Gerry would have felt.


And we used to be in our own back garden which was 50 metres long and backed on to a golf course.  We would chat over the fence to golfers with a small orchard between us and the kids asleep upstairs in our house.   We didn't bother to lock the side gate or the back door.   One never dreamt that anything could or would happen to thm.


I guess that times were different then, or were they?   Were we just lucky?  Dunno
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on April 12, 2022, 07:27:19 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 11, 2022, 10:34:18 PM
Mum and Dad used to come away with us when we had little ones, but when they were about 3 and 5 we bought a caravan,  Usually they stayed up with us, but on occasions we were sitting outside a couple of caravans along having a nightcap wh friends.   Everywhere was pitch black except for an odd camp fire, but we never felt any danger.   It all felt so safe, as I feel certain Kate and Gerry would have felt.


And we used to be in our own back garden which was 50 metres long and backed on to a golf course.  We would chat over the fence to golfers with a small orchard between us and the kids asleep upstairs in our house.   We didn't bother to lock the side gate or the back door.   One never dreamt that anything could or would happen to thm.

I guess that times were different then, or were they?   Were we just lucky?  Dunno


I agree, Sadie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on April 13, 2022, 01:09:24 AM
Quote from: sadie on April 11, 2022, 10:34:18 PM
Mum and Dad used to come away with us when we had little ones, but when they were about 3 and 5 we bought a caravan,  Usually they stayed up with us, but on occasions we were sitting outside a couple of caravans along having a nightcap wh friends.   Everywhere was pitch black except for an odd camp fire, but we never felt any danger.   It all felt so safe, as I feel certain Kate and Gerry would have felt.


And we used to be in our own back garden which was 50 metres long and backed on to a golf course.  We would chat over the fence to golfers with a small orchard between us and the kids asleep upstairs in our house.   We didn't bother to lock the side gate or the back door.   One never dreamt that anything could or would happen to thm.


I guess that times were different then, or were they?   Were we just lucky?  Dunno

I think you were just lucky Sadie. Leaving young children alone in a hotel room or in a holiday apartment is just asking for trouble imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 07:27:55 AM
Quote from: John on April 13, 2022, 01:09:24 AM
I think you were just lucky Sadie. Leaving young children alone in a hotel room or in a holiday apartment is just asking for trouble imo.
I think it’s more likely that you’d be terribly unlucky for something bad to happen.  Thinking of my own children when they were tiny, apart from when they were young babies or on the few occasions when they were sick in the night, they would sleep right through, never got up, never cried out.  We never had a fire, we were never burgled in the night, no sudden sink holes appeared, I never had an occasion to pick them off the floor where they’d fallen out of bed or off a sofa, or pull their fingers out of a plug socket, or rush them to A & E after drinking bleach and just one occasion when I had to retrieve a purple fuzzy felt dinosaur from the mouth of my young son (though that was during the day anyway and he had not been put to bed but was playing in his room).

 I’m not saying “it’s fine to leave sleeping kids alone” because bad things like those I have described above could happen, but the likelihood is small.  It would still be incredible bad luck if a terrible thing did happen imo, but the way some people go on about it you’d think leaving sleeping children alone for 30 minutes at a time was akin to dropping them off asleep on the hard shoulder of the M1, an almost dead cert that they would have a life changing accident or worse.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 13, 2022, 07:50:09 AM
Newsflash: supporters of a couple who routinely left 3 nursery age children alone in an unlocked apartment while they went out boozing, are also supporters of child abuse by negligence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 13, 2022, 08:18:07 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 13, 2022, 07:27:55 AM
I think it’s more likely that you’d be terribly unlucky for something bad to happen.  Thinking of my own children when they were tiny, apart from when they were young babies or on the few occasions when they were sick in the night, they would sleep right through, never got up, never cried out.  We never had a fire, we were never burgled in the night, no sudden sink holes appeared, I never had an occasion to pick them off the floor where they’d fallen out of bed or off a sofa, or pull their fingers out of a plug socket, or rush them to A & E after drinking bleach and just one occasion when I had to retrieve a purple fuzzy felt dinosaur from the mouth of my young son (though that was during the day anyway and he had not been put to bed but was playing in his room).

 I’m not saying “it’s fine to leave sleeping kids alone” because bad things like those I have described above could happen, but the likelihood is small.  It would still be incredible bad luck if a terrible thing did happen imo, but the way some people go on about it you’d think leaving sleeping children alone for 30 minutes at a time was akin to dropping them off asleep on the hard shoulder of the M1, an almost dead cert that they would have a life changing accident or worse.

It's not about what they did, it's about the denial that what they did was wrong.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 13, 2022, 08:21:21 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 13, 2022, 08:18:07 AM
It's not about what they did, it's about the denial that what they did was wrong.

Same old.. Same old.. And untrue
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 13, 2022, 08:22:30 AM
Quote from: The General on April 13, 2022, 07:50:09 AM
Newsflash: supporters of a couple who routinely left 3 nursery age children alone in an unlocked apartment while they went out boozing, are also supporters of child abuse by negligence.

More sceptic junk
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 08:32:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 13, 2022, 08:18:07 AM
It's not about what they did, it's about the denial that what they did was wrong.
No, it’s definitely about what they did.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 08:34:19 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 13, 2022, 08:22:30 AM
More sceptic junk
Actually I wholeheartedly endorse child negligence as my post made clear (but only if you’re a hard-of-thinking moron, or sanctimonious troll intent on deliberately misunderstanding what I wrote).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 13, 2022, 08:34:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 13, 2022, 08:18:07 AM
It's not about what they did, it's about the denial that what they did was wrong.

That post is a total misrepresentation of the truth. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 08:42:51 AM
Given that I have owned up to some incidents of so-called “child neglect and abuse” (leaving my son asleep but unattended when fetching his daughter from school, dining in the hotel lobby leaving sleeping kids upstairs), do readers consider my kids incredibly lucky to have made it into their adulthood?  Were the odds firmly stacked against them?  Should they have been taken into care when they were young children? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 13, 2022, 08:45:05 AM
The McCanns will have been professionally counselled in order to deal with the trauma of their ordeal. They will have been told not to blame themselves.. But we know that they do
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 13, 2022, 08:56:14 AM

Speaking of negligence, there don't seem to have been any updates on the woman who b....red off to Sainsburys & left her kids burning to death.

That was back around Christmas, the last I remember reading was that she was bailed until January.

I don't quite understand why it's taking so long, it's an open & shut case, just chuck her in the slammer already.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 13, 2022, 09:02:30 AM
Quote from: John on April 13, 2022, 01:09:24 AM
I think you were just lucky Sadie. Leaving young children alone in a hotel room or in a holiday apartment is just asking for trouble imo.

There is a Sin of Omission.

There is also a Sin of Commission.

I have never understood why in this case the sin committed inadvertently has been adopted as the benchmark for all blame.

While the sin carried out with deliberate malice for the innocent is forgotten and does not merit any opprobrium or blame at all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 09:04:38 AM
Please don't try to deprive them of their last ditch screech.  This would be cruel.  And a waste of time anyway. 

When all else fails.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 09:12:28 AM
I’m guessing most sceptics are utterly outraged by this programme and have already sent numerous letters of complaint to social services et al…

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/apr/07/old-enough-the-japanese-tv-show-that-abandons-toddlers-on-public-transport
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 09:21:12 AM
Just remembered another time we left the kids asleep to go to the neighbours who lived in the house attached to ours.  This pre-dates Madeleine’s disappearance and I did take the child monitor but it didn’t work so like the McCanns I went back two or three times that evening to check.  Of course they were both fast asleep and unaware of our absence during the evening, amazing they survived the night now I look back on it…
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 09:28:45 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 13, 2022, 09:21:12 AM
Just remembered another time we left the kids asleep to go to the neighbours who lived in the house attached to ours.  This pre-dates Madeleine’s disappearance and I did take the child monitor but it didn’t work so like the McCanns I went back two or three times that evening to check.  Of course they were both fast asleep and unaware of our absence during the evening, amazing they survived the night now I look back on it…

I'm surprised my children survived at all, after what they got up to.  Most of which I didn't know about until much later.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 09:40:24 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 09:28:45 AM
I'm surprised my children survived at all, after what they got up to.  Most of which I didn't know about until much later.
By rights I should have been murdered or died in an accident too when I was a kid, my parents were even more “abusive” and “neglectful” than I was, and all in a foreign country filled with all manner of extra danger..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 13, 2022, 10:03:17 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 13, 2022, 08:45:05 AM
The McCanns will have been professionally counselled in order to deal with the trauma of their ordeal. They will have been told not to blame themselves.. But we know that they do

1st January 2008;

‘At the time we did it, it was not irresponsible!” Gerry snaps.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id63.htm

I wonder what he meant? That in his opinion they behaved responsibly in May 2007, but he now realises they were wrong?

Aptil 2008;

The father of three said he and his wife Kate had thought at the time it was "perfectly reasonable" to leave Madeleine, then three, and their two-year-old twins alone in an unlocked holiday apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz...

He added: "Hindsight has proven we made a mistake and we would never leave the children again."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-561818/Madeleine-We-mistake-leave-children-says-Gerry-McCann.html

So if Madeleine hadn't disappeared they would have continued to think their childcare choices were perfectly reasonable imo.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:06:01 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 13, 2022, 09:40:24 AM
By rights I should have been murdered or died in an accident too when I was a kid, my parents were even more “abusive” and “neglectful” than I was, and all in a foreign country filled with all manner of extra danger..


My Julian at the age of three and bit would climb the seven foot garden fence and run off down to The Kampong when I or The Amah weren't watching him.  But then my Amah lived in this conglomeration of mud and wooden huts, so I could be pretty sure that her mother was watching out for him.

I once allowed my Amah to take the baby with her for the three days of Chinese New Year, probably because I couldn't face looking after the squalling brat myself.

His feet never touched the ground.  She and her four sisters saw to that.

Taking him away from her is the most painful thing I have ever done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:06:42 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 13, 2022, 09:02:30 AM
There is a Sin of Omission.

There is also a Sin of Commission.

I have never understood why in this case the sin committed inadvertently has been adopted as the benchmark for all blame.

While the sin carried out with deliberate malice for the innocent is forgotten and does not merit any opprobrium or blame at all.
What part of leaving your 3 nursery age kids to fend for themselves in an unlocked apartment, to continually go out boozing night after night inadvertent?
It's abuse and it's a model example of why child neglect laws are required, because it appears some are utterly oblivious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:08:53 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 13, 2022, 10:03:17 AM
1st January 2008;

‘At the time we did it, it was not irresponsible!” Gerry snaps.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id63.htm

I wonder what he meant? That in his opinion they behaved responsibly in May 2007, but he now realises they were wrong?

Aptil 2008;

The father of three said he and his wife Kate had thought at the time it was "perfectly reasonable" to leave Madeleine, then three, and their two-year-old twins alone in an unlocked holiday apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz...

He added: "Hindsight has proven we made a mistake and we would never leave the children again."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-561818/Madeleine-We-mistake-leave-children-says-Gerry-McCann.html

So if Madeleine hadn't disappeared they would have continued to think their childcare choices were perfectly reasonable imo.

Such a pity that No One knew that a predator was breaking into appartments and assaulting children, even when their parents were at home.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:10:34 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 13, 2022, 08:45:05 AM
The McCanns will have been professionally counselled in order to deal with the trauma of their ordeal. They will have been told not to blame themselves.. But we know that they do
That would have been a waste of resources then; they should have been counseled that they were to blame.
'We've let her down' my arse, they are responsible and that should haunt them every minute.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 13, 2022, 10:12:02 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:08:53 AM
Such a pity that No One knew that a predator was breaking into appartments and assaulting children, even when their parents were at home.

Has any link been shown between these events and the disappearance of Madeleine ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:15:41 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:08:53 AM
Such a pity that No One knew that a predator was breaking into appartments and assaulting children, even when their parents were at home.
Nothing was going to get in the way of those boozy, 8 hour dinners, not even the desperate pleas of their own daughter when one of the poor little mites was sobbing for their mummy and daddy.
Abuse and neglect is one thing, having it pointed out to you by your own 3 year old and repeating it is unconscionable and takes a cold heart.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:18:02 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 13, 2022, 10:12:02 AM
Has any link been shown between these events and the disappearance of Madeleine ?
It wouldn't have made a difference. They were going out; OUT OUT and those kids were just going to have to deal with it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:18:44 AM
Quote from: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:06:42 AM
What part of leaving your 3 nursery age kids to fend for themselves in an unlocked apartment, to continually go out boozing night after night inadvertent?
It's abuse and it's a model example of why child neglect laws are required, because it appears some are utterly oblivious.

Is there any Law against this?  The answer is No, of course.  Only the circumstances are taken into consideration.

And even The Portuguese Whoever said that there was No Intent to Abandon or Neglect.  Suck it up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:20:06 AM
Quote from: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:10:34 AM
That would have been a waste of resources then; they should have been counseled that they were to blame.
'We've let her down' my arse, they are responsible and that should haunt them every minute.

And I am sure that it does haunt them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:20:34 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:18:44 AM
Is there any Law against this?  The answer is No, of course.  Only the circumstances are taken into consideration.

And even The Portuguese Whoever said that there was No Intent to Abandon or Neglect.  Suck it up.
Which is what they probably said to Maddie on their way out the door.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:24:32 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 13, 2022, 10:12:02 AM
Has any link been shown between these events and the disappearance of Madeleine ?

Does there need to be?  Small girls being sexually assaulted was small beer to The PJ.  Why bother to investigate or even warn anyone?

But somedebody was doing this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:26:06 AM
Quote from: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:15:41 AM
Nothing was going to get in the way of those boozy, 8 hour dinners, not even the desperate pleas of their own daughter when one of the poor little mites was sobbing for their mummy and daddy.
Abuse and neglect is one thing, having it pointed out to you by your own 3 year old and repeating it is unconscionable and takes a cold heart.

More lies.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 13, 2022, 10:27:49 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:24:32 AM
Does there need to be?  Small girls being sexually assaulted was small beer to The PJ.  Why bother to investigate or even warn anyone?

But somedebody was doing this.

Well PDL was Paedophile Heaven. Were they small girls or is that your interpretation of events ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:28:56 AM
Quote from: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:20:34 AM
Which is what they probably said to Maddie on their way out the door.

I think you will find that the children were asleep before The McCanns left.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:31:39 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 13, 2022, 10:27:49 AM
Well PDL was Paedophile Heaven. Were they small girls or is that your interpretation of events ?

Big Girls then.  Is there a difference?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:32:34 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:28:56 AM
I think you will find that the children were asleep before The McCanns left.
I know, every night, all 3 of the wee mites were all exhausted and never stirred for the first time recorded in human history.
(Until Maddie and/or Shaun were sobbing inconsolably for a prolonged period, poor little sods)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:34:56 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:24:32 AM
Does there need to be?  Small girls being sexually assaulted was small beer to The PJ.  Why bother to investigate or even warn anyone?

But somedebody was doing this.
Mark Warner should have put it in the brochure really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:37:26 AM
Quote from: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:32:34 AM
I know, every night, all 3 of the wee mites were all exhausted and never stirred for the first time recorded in human history.
(Until Maddie and/or Shaun were sobbing inconsolably for a prolonged period, poor little sods)

The McCanns were never gone for eight hours.  Not even three most of the evenings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 10:39:45 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:06:01 AM

My Julian at the age of three and bit would climb the seven foot garden fence and run off down to The Kampong when I or The Amah weren't watching him.  But then my Amah lived in this conglomeration of mud and wooden huts, so I could be pretty sure that her mother was watching out for him.

I once allowed my Amah to take the baby with her for the three days of Chinese New Year, probably because I couldn't face looking after the squalling brat myself.

His feet never touched the ground.  She and her four sisters saw to that.

Taking him away from her is the most painful thing I have ever done.
Haha, my mum never knew the half of what I got up to.  I remember going for a ride through the streets of KL with my amah's BOYFRIEND on the front of his scooter, no crash helmet, aged about 6 or 7, blonde little girl miles from home being driven about by a virtual stranger.  Hilarious!!  I really should be dead or a very, very old white sex slave. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:41:49 AM
Quote from: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:34:56 AM
Mark Warner should have put it in the brochure really.

The PJ should have investigated and caught him.  But Actual Investigating wasn't the strong suit of The PJ.

Just pick on a likely subject and stitch them up.  Usually The Mother.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 10:42:56 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 13, 2022, 10:03:17 AM
1st January 2008;

‘At the time we did it, it was not irresponsible!” Gerry snaps.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id63.htm

I wonder what he meant? That in his opinion they behaved responsibly in May 2007, but he now realises they were wrong?

Aptil 2008;

The father of three said he and his wife Kate had thought at the time it was "perfectly reasonable" to leave Madeleine, then three, and their two-year-old twins alone in an unlocked holiday apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz...

He added: "Hindsight has proven we made a mistake and we would never leave the children again."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-561818/Madeleine-We-mistake-leave-children-says-Gerry-McCann.html

So if Madeleine hadn't disappeared they would have continued to think their childcare choices were perfectly reasonable imo.
Do you keep a spreadsheet of damning mccann quotes that you can trot out at a moment's notice, carefully indexed by subject ? 
- Neglect allegations
- Sedation
- Timeline
etc..
Your ability to lay your hands on an appropriate quote (iyo) to bolster your posts at a moment's notice is really quite impressive (if a little obsessive IMO). 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:46:35 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 13, 2022, 10:39:45 AM
Haha, my mum never knew the half of what I got up to.  I remember going for a ride through the streets of KL with my amah's BOYFRIEND on the front of his scooter, no crash helmet, aged about 6 or 7, blonde little girl miles from home being driven about by a virtual stranger.  Hilarious!!  I really should be dead or a very, very old white sex slave.

But I bet you had a lot of fun.  I know Julian did.  He was the brave one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:49:22 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 13, 2022, 10:42:56 AM
Do you keep a spreadsheet of damning mccann quotes that you can trot out at a moment's notice, carefully indexed by subject ? 
- Neglect allegations
- Sedation
- Timeline
etc..
Your ability to lay your hands on an appropriate quote (iyo) to bolster your posts at a moment's notice is really quite impressive (if a little obsessive IMO).

Try CMoMM.  If you can be bothered to read it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 10:55:15 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:46:35 AM
But I bet you had a lot of fun.  I know Julian did.  He was the brave one.
I had the greatest childhood, yes, "neglectful, abusive" parents notwithstanding. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 13, 2022, 10:56:26 AM
Quote from: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:10:34 AM
That would have been a waste of resources then; they should have been counseled that they were to blame.
'We've let her down' my arse, they are responsible and that should haunt them every minute.

Thats an idiotic post.. I doubt you are serious.
It would haunt them every day and potentially lead to suicide.. That's what therapy is trying to avoid
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 11:02:59 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 13, 2022, 10:56:26 AM
Thats an idiotic post.. I doubt you are serious.
It would haunt them every day and potentially lead to suicide.. That's what therapy is trying to avoid
Seriously, don't feed the troll, his sanctimonious bleatings here today are very obviously insincere.  Talk about faux outrage...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 13, 2022, 11:05:02 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 13, 2022, 10:42:56 AM
Do you keep a spreadsheet of damning mccann quotes that you can trot out at a moment's notice, carefully indexed by subject ? 
- Neglect allegations
- Sedation
- Timeline
etc..
Your ability to lay your hands on an appropriate quote (iyo) to bolster your posts at a moment's notice is really quite impressive (if a little obsessive IMO).

No.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 11:10:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 13, 2022, 11:05:02 AM
No.
So you've simply committed to memory whole swathes of interviews like the Vanity Fair one?  Have you considered entering in for Mastermind?  I wonder if they would accept "The Rather Iffy Behaviour Of Kate And Gerry McCann" as a specialist subject...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 13, 2022, 11:40:54 AM
Quote from: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:15:41 AM
Nothing was going to get in the way of those boozy, 8 hour dinners, not even the desperate pleas of their own daughter when one of the poor little mites was sobbing for their mummy and daddy.
Abuse and neglect is one thing, having it pointed out to you by your own 3 year old and repeating it is unconscionable and takes a cold heart.

One wonders why the active abuse of Madeleine's siblings throughout their formative years has never been an issue for trolls and sceptics.

Apart from the active measures taken to separate them from their parents ~ they have been actively stalked and internet discussion has taken place on kidnapping them.

Is there a parent or a grandparent posting here who would condone that behaviour if it were affecting their family.

I doubt it.

So why doesn't it occur, that having a hobby designed to impart levels of calculated insecurity being inflicted on an already traumatised family to some here.
Why isn't it considered cold hearted abuse as far as Madeleine's siblings are concerned.
Do you think that what has been unnecessarily inflicted on those children isn't abusive.   Or would giving it serious thought, risk spoiling the game
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 13, 2022, 11:57:32 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 13, 2022, 10:27:49 AM
Well PDL was Paedophile Heaven. Were they small girls or is that your interpretation of events ?

The files record the number of known paedophiles who were domicile in Luz at the time of Madeleine's disappearance so you seem to be correct in thinking it was "paedophile heaven" or if not that at least, a very popular venue for them.

Small girls were targeted as was confirmed when British police investigated ~
" ... they announced they are looking for a prolific paedophile who was suspected of breaking into holiday properties where British families were staying and sexually abusing five white British girls aged between seven and 10.

In six of the break-ins, the man sat on or got into bed with young girls. On one occasion, he abused two young girls in the same villa.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2586038/Portuguese-police-say-interviewed-heroin-addict-linked-disappearance-Madeleine-McCann-sex-attacks-five-five-British-girls.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 13, 2022, 12:07:24 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 13, 2022, 11:10:52 AM
So you've simply committed to memory whole swathes of interviews like the Vanity Fair one?  Have you considered entering in for Mastermind?  I wonder if they would accept "The Rather Iffy Behaviour Of Kate And Gerry McCann" as a specialist subject...

No and no.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 13, 2022, 12:10:10 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 13, 2022, 11:40:54 AM
One wonders why the active abuse of Madeleine's siblings throughout their formative years has never been an issue for trolls and sceptics.

Apart from the active measures taken to separate them from their parents ~ they have been actively stalked and internet discussion has taken place on kidnapping them.

Is there a parent or a grandparent posting here who would condone that behaviour if it were affecting their family.

I doubt it.

So why doesn't it occur, that having a hobby designed to impart levels of calculated insecurity being inflicted on an already traumatised family to some here.
Why isn't it considered cold hearted abuse as far as Madeleine's siblings are concerned.
Do you think that what has been unnecessarily inflicted on those children isn't abusive.   Or would giving it serious thought, risk spoiling the game

Serious stuff. Was this followed up by police and charges brought ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 13, 2022, 12:13:59 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 13, 2022, 10:55:15 AM
I had the greatest childhood, yes, "neglectful, abusive" parents notwithstanding.

What I remember most about my childhood was the security of it and the freedom I enjoyed.

The McCann children were never granted that.

In the first instance someone invaded their bedroom and abducted their older sister.

In the second instance their parents became the object of unprecedented abuse and they suffered not only collateral damage as a result but were directly targeted themselves.

Hard enough for a family to cope with one of them being kidnapped.

But ensuring that two kids continued to have their childhood totally disrupted by the hatred of strangers is something which is almost impossible to comprehend.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 12:47:00 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 10:49:22 AM
Try CMoMM.  If you can be bothered to read it.
It's odd isn't it, how some sceptics are so very familiar with every word uttered by the McCanns across all the many interviews that they have given over the years, that they can with such ease reach for the precise quote that they need to illustrate their point.  It's really impressive but shows a level of devotion to the subject that is also quite bewildering and just a little sinister IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 13, 2022, 01:25:12 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 13, 2022, 12:13:59 PM
What I remember most about my childhood was the security of it and the freedom I enjoyed.

The McCann children were never granted that.

In the first instance someone invaded their bedroom and abducted their older sister.

In the second instance their parents became the object of unprecedented abuse and they suffered not only collateral damage as a result but were directly targeted themselves.

Hard enough for a family to cope with one of them being kidnapped.

But ensuring that two kids continued to have their childhood totally disrupted by the hatred of strangers is something which is almost impossible to comprehend.
Allegedly.
Heartbreaking.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 13, 2022, 01:37:27 PM
Serious question: Rizolli or Isles?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 01:39:45 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 13, 2022, 12:10:10 PM
Serious stuff. Was this followed up by police and charges brought ?
No, it happened in Portugal remember?  To British children, so of little interest to the PT authorities it would seem…
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 03:09:24 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 13, 2022, 01:39:45 PM
No, it happened in Portugal remember?  To British children, so of little interest to the PT authorities it would seem…

What about the parents being in situ while these abuses were actually happening?  No one interested in that?

In fact, if The McCanns were in anyway involved, why did they not wait until the morning to report the disappearance of Madeleine?  That would have been the sensible thing to do.

This was one of the first things I thought of.  But it was such a long time ago that I had almost forgotten this piece of basic logic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 03:30:35 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 03:09:24 PM
What about the parents being in situ while these abuses were actually happening?  No one interested in that?

In fact, if The McCanns were in anyway involved, why did they not wait until the morning to report the disappearance of Madeleine?  That would have been the sensible thing to do.

This was one of the first things I thought of.  But it was such a long time ago that I had almost forgotten this piece of basic logic.
Sceptic logic is that the McCanns had to create an alibi hence going to dinner giving the alleged abductor a chance to strike.  But then as those crafty sceptics have also pointed out going to dinner, acting perfectly normal etc is no alibi at all because, well just because.  Add into that Gerry deliberately throwing his alibi further under the bus by apparently claiming that the alarm was raised at 10.14pm not to mention closing the “staged” open window, then you have one hot mess of a panicked half-arsed plan that somehow against all the odds turned into the perfect crime with both evil abusers/neglectors/body occulters getting off scott-free with no likelihood of them ever facing justice..  Mazin’ innit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 13, 2022, 04:04:43 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 03:09:24 PM
What about the parents being in situ while these abuses were actually happening?  No one interested in that?

In fact, if The McCanns were in anyway involved, why did they not wait until the morning to report the disappearance of Madeleine?  That would have been the sensible thing to do.

This was one of the first things I thought of.  But it was such a long time ago that I had almost forgotten this piece of basic logic.
It's a toss up. Leave it til morning, raise the alarm early and claim silent intruder, or do what they did (allegedly) and raise the alarm once the evidence had been dealt with and make sure they're out when it 'happens' (allegedly). Which is more likely a scenario? I'd suggest the latter, with abduction while the house is occupied being statistically less likely.
I don't think it's an alibi at this point, as neither scenario requires one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 06:34:40 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 13, 2022, 03:30:35 PM
Sceptic logic is that the McCanns had to create an alibi hence going to dinner giving the alleged abductor a chance to strike.  But then as those crafty sceptics have also pointed out going to dinner, acting perfectly normal etc is no alibi at all because, well just because.  Add into that Gerry deliberately throwing his alibi further under the bus by apparently claiming that the alarm was raised at 10.14pm not to mention closing the “staged” open window, then you have one hot mess of a panicked half-arsed plan that somehow against all the odds turned into the perfect crime with both evil abusers/neglectors/body occulters getting off scott-free with no likelihood of them ever facing justice..  Mazin’ innit.

Those McCanns must be incredibly stupid for a couple of very clever Doctors.  Or not.  They could have disposed of Madeleine before anyone was even awake.  And no one around to even see them.  Let alone The Smiths.

No Waiters watching them and no need to involve the rest of their group.  In fact we would probably never have heard of them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 13, 2022, 06:37:55 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 06:34:40 PM
Those McCanns must be incredibly stupid for a couple of very clever Doctors.  Or not.  They could have disposed of Madeleine before anyone was even awake.  And no one around to even see them.  Let alone The Smiths.

No Waiters watching them and no need to involve the rest of their group.  In fact we would probably never have heard of them.

Whose to say they didn't ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2022, 06:40:50 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 13, 2022, 06:37:55 PM
Whose to say they didn't ?

When do you think they did that?

Sunday, Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 13, 2022, 11:23:55 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 13, 2022, 06:37:55 PM
Whose to say they didn't ?
Just how many times do you think they disposed of her?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 14, 2022, 01:01:47 AM
Quote from: The General on April 13, 2022, 10:15:41 AM
Nothing was going to get in the way of those boozy, 8 hour dinners, not even the desperate pleas of their own daughter when one of the poor little mites was sobbing for their mummy and daddy.
Abuse and neglect is one thing, having it pointed out to you by your own 3 year old and repeating it is unconscionable and takes a cold heart.

8 hours!  What lies!   

They usually left before midnight cos the staff left at that time.   They were usually there for a normal eating with friends period.      One night - ONE NIGHT ONLY, - they were a little later, as was mentioned in, I believe, Jeronimos statement.   Or maybe, the statement of another member of staff who waited at table.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 14, 2022, 01:21:17 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 13, 2022, 11:40:54 AM
One wonders why the active abuse of Madeleine's siblings throughout their formative years has never been an issue for trolls and sceptics.

Apart from the active measures taken to separate them from their parents ~ they have been actively stalked and internet discussion has taken place on kidnapping them.

Is there a parent or a grandparent posting here who would condone that behaviour if it were affecting their family.

I doubt it.

So why doesn't it occur, that having a hobby designed to impart levels of calculated insecurity being inflicted on an already traumatised family to some here.
Why isn't it considered cold hearted abuse as far as Madeleine's siblings are concerned.
Do you think that what has been unnecessarily inflicted on those children isn't abusive.   Or would giving it serious thought, risk spoiling the game

OMG.   I didn't realise that the stalking abuse happened and I assumed that the internet abuse had stopped.

How disgusting some people are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 14, 2022, 01:31:13 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 13, 2022, 12:47:00 PM
It's odd isn't it, how some sceptics are so very familiar with every word uttered by the McCanns across all the many interviews that they have given over the years, that they can with such ease reach for the precise quote that they need to illustrate their point.  It's really impressive but shows a level of devotion to the subject that is also quite bewildering and just a little sinister IMO.

Very sinister.

Someone is desperately trying to hide the truth.   It is so obvious IMO.


As I have said before, I have reason to believe that Madeleine was looked after and alive in 2012 and because of this I think she was wanted for a special purpose and is most likely to still be alive today.   Her bloodline is pure.

I have a new theory on it, but because of the derision meted out before, I am not sharing it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 14, 2022, 07:08:21 AM
Quote from: sadie on April 14, 2022, 01:01:47 AM

8 hours!  What lies!   

They usually left before midnight cos the staff left at that time.   They were usually there for a normal eating with friends period.      One night - ONE NIGHT ONLY, - they were a little later, as was mentioned in, I believe, Jeronimos statement.   Or maybe, the statement of another member of staff who waited at table.

You got wind of the incident in La Paz?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 15, 2022, 07:28:46 PM
Quote from: The General on April 14, 2022, 07:08:21 AM
You got wind of the incident in La Paz?

Delete that, whoever.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 15, 2022, 11:44:08 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 15, 2022, 07:28:46 PM
Delete that, whoever.

Why was Ellis post part deleted?   I can't make sense of it now Gunit,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 15, 2022, 11:57:20 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 15, 2022, 11:44:08 PM
Why was Ellis post part deleted?   I can't make sense of it now Gunit,

I didn't delete that.  This makes no sense to me either, Sadie.

But there you go, Our Kid.  Heaven knows what is going on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 16, 2022, 12:15:22 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 15, 2022, 11:57:20 PM
I didn't delete that.  This makes no sense to me either, Sadie.

But there you go, Our Kid.  Heaven knows what is going on.

Try rewording it Elli.  Let's see if that is deleted too, or whether we can understand it,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 16, 2022, 12:18:14 AM
Okay.  I have given you all Five Threads to reply to when The Forum got a bit moribund.  But perhaps you don't have the wit.

I did try to do this as a Moderator, but that wasn't seen as Moderating.

I might be frightfully sorry if I didn't actually Moderate anyone, but I didn't quite see the point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 16, 2022, 12:27:30 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 16, 2022, 12:18:14 AM
Okay.  I have given you all Five Threads to reply to when The Forum got a bit moribund.  But perhaps you don't have the wit.

I did try to do this as a Moderator, but that wasn't seen as Moderating.

I might be frightfully sorry if I didn't actually Moderate anyone, but I didn't quite see the point.

I wonder why that was mainly deleted?   I can't see anything wrong with it.


They say,

Give someone a title or a uniform and see them swell!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 16, 2022, 12:31:42 AM
They, whoever 'they' is, logged me out in the middle of my responding to your post above.   They keep doing this.  I suspect cos they don't want my reply.

Anyway, I got there!

Time wasting and trying to put me off, it seems,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 16, 2022, 12:51:06 AM
Quote from: sadie on April 16, 2022, 12:27:30 AM
I wonder why that was mainly deleted?   I can't see anything wrong with it.


They say,

Give som.eone a title or a uniform and see them swell!

You could be right about that, Sadie.  It was so long ago that I can't remember why I took it on.  But I doubt that I thought that it would help anyone.  My mind doesn't work like that.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 16, 2022, 01:15:41 AM
I'm off to peepins now Elli.

Good chatting now that I am unable to phone, nor risk emails. 

Nigh night    xxx sadie
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 16, 2022, 01:23:48 AM
Quote from: sadie on April 16, 2022, 01:15:41 AM
I'm off to peepins now Elli.

Good chatting now that I am unable to phone, nor risk emails. 

Nigh night    xxx sadie

I love you.   Don't you ever forget that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 17, 2022, 11:20:31 PM

@  Dear Anthro

Have been worrying about you.

A lot of water near you atm.

Are you affected by the floods at all?

Perhaps move to higher land?   It looks horrendous with so many died. 

As if you haven't got enough with Covid and a shortage of vaccinations, or have you caught up?  It seems a mighty dangerous area where you live, what with bandits and snakes as well as this flooding.


Do take care.   Thinking of you

Love to all, sadie Xxxx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on April 18, 2022, 12:39:40 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 17, 2022, 11:20:31 PM
@  Dear Anthro

Have been worrying about you.

A lot of water near you atm.

Are you affected by the floods at all?

Perhaps move to higher land?   It looks horrendous with so many died. 

As if you haven't got enough with Covid and a shortage of vaccinations, or have you caught up?  It seems a mighty dangerous area where you live, what with bandits and snakes as well as this flooding.


Do take care.   Thinking of you

Love to all, sadie Xxxx

Thank you, dear Sadie. The floods are in the Durban/Ethekwini area on the east coast. We live in central South Africa. The situation is desperate there. With more than 400 people killed and 70 still missing, rainfall is continuing. In one instance a 15-year-old girl, her mother and grandmother were killed when their home was swept away by a mudslide. Three generations gone. The brother was working night shift and discovered his family upon returning home in the morning. The sad reality is that poor families are encouraged (by opposition parties such as the EFF) to erect their homes on floodline land. The rationale is that it would be the only way for authorities to realise their plight for proper housing. Thank you for thinking of me and my family. Much love to you too. xxx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 18, 2022, 01:13:52 PM
Quote from: Anthro on April 18, 2022, 12:39:40 PM
Thank you, dear Sadie. The floods are in the Durban/Ethekwini area on the east coast. We live in central South Africa. The situation is desperate there. With more than 400 people killed and 70 still missing, rainfall is continuing. In one instance a 15-year-old girl, her mother and grandmother were killed when their home was swept away by a mudslide. Three generations gone. The brother was working night shift and discovered his family upon returning home in the morning. The sad reality is that poor families are encouraged (by opposition parties such as the EFF) to erect their homes on floodline land. The rationale is that it would be the only way for authorities to realise their plight for proper housing. Thank you for thinking of me and my family. Much love to you too. xxx

How dreadful.  Make sure that you are not on a flood plain.   More difficult to ensure that you are not in a mudslide area, but do your best.

We have been flooded and no way would you think our house was in a flood area.   IIRC we had £40,000 of damage last time   The insurance company were very good, their builders were excellent, but it was a shock!

 Keep safe.  Take care. 

Love to all, sadie Xxxx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on April 19, 2022, 10:26:48 AM
Quote from: Anthro on April 18, 2022, 12:39:40 PM
Thank you, dear Sadie. The floods are in the Durban/Ethekwini area on the east coast. We live in central South Africa. The situation is desperate there. With more than 400 people killed and 70 still missing, rainfall is continuing. In one instance a 15-year-old girl, her mother and grandmother were killed when their home was swept away by a mudslide. Three generations gone. The brother was working night shift and discovered his family upon returning home in the morning. The sad reality is that poor families are encouraged (by opposition parties such as the EFF) to erect their homes on floodline land. The rationale is that it would be the only way for authorities to realise their plight for proper housing. Thank you for thinking of me and my family. Much love to you too. xxx

That is horrifying Anthro I hope there is an end to it soon.  Take care.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on April 19, 2022, 04:39:40 PM
Quote from: Lace on April 19, 2022, 10:26:48 AM
That is horrifying Anthro I hope there is an end to it soon.  Take care.
Thank you, Lace. xx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 20, 2022, 01:35:48 PM

I am having absolute hell with my computer at the moment.  A two year old Apple which cost nearly a thousand pounds.
I don't even know if this comment will survive.  everything seems to be self destructing.

Shades of Sadie who eve Something.  Sorry about that.  My comment was interfered with yet again.

There is something not quite right going on here.  Don't make a spelling mistake because it cannot be retrieved.

However, I am made of sterner stuff.  So don't try me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on April 20, 2022, 06:51:39 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 20, 2022, 01:35:48 PM
I am having absolute hell with my computer at the moment.  A two year old Apple which cost nearly a thousand pounds.
I don't even know if this comment will survive.  everything seems to be self destructing.

Shades of Sadie who eve Something.  Sorry about that.  My comment was interfered with yet again.

There is something not quite right going on here.  Don't make a spelling mistake because it cannot be retrieved.

However, I am made of sterner stuff.  So don't try me.
Same here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 20, 2022, 06:56:40 PM
he fact that you can post suggests that there's nothing very wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 20, 2022, 07:10:34 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 20, 2022, 06:56:40 PM
he fact that you can post suggests that there's nothing very wrong.

Maybe some kind of virus is being passed around.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on April 20, 2022, 07:21:34 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 20, 2022, 06:56:40 PM
he fact that you can post suggests that there's nothing very wrong.
‘he fact’ is that the pm option is not what it used to be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 20, 2022, 07:33:53 PM
Quote from: Anthro on April 20, 2022, 07:21:34 PM
‘he fact’ is that the pm option is not what it used to be.

I wouldn't know, I don't need to use that function.
All my posts are up front and visible to everyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 20, 2022, 07:35:14 PM
Quote from: Anthro on April 20, 2022, 07:21:34 PM
‘he fact’ is that the pm option is not what it used to be.

Only 3 people are having a problem, however.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Anthro on April 20, 2022, 08:49:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 20, 2022, 07:35:14 PM
Only 3 people are having a problem, however.
Yes, it doesn’t make sense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 20, 2022, 09:31:24 PM
Quote from: Anthro on April 20, 2022, 08:49:40 PM
Yes, it doesn’t make sense.

If it's a fault with the forum it should affect everyone. Do you have any problems elsewhere?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 20, 2022, 10:48:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 20, 2022, 09:31:24 PM
If it's a fault with the forum it should affect everyone. Do you have any problems elsewhere?

But it doesn't.  It only affects 4 strong supporters as far as we know.

I wonder why ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 20, 2022, 11:07:35 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 20, 2022, 10:48:31 PM
But it doesn't.  It only affects 4 strong supporters as far as we know.

I wonder why ?

I don't know, but it would affect everyone if there was a fault with the forum imo. I'm no IT expert, but I would be looking at any connections between those people, like emails for example. I thought there were only 3 people affected; you, Eleanor and Anthro?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 21, 2022, 08:00:35 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 20, 2022, 11:07:35 PM
I don't know, but it would affect everyone if there was a fault with the forum imo. I'm no IT expert, but I would be looking at any connections between those people, like emails for example. I thought there were only 3 people affected; you, Eleanor and Anthro?
Nobody is affected. There's no unseen hand at work here, it's just user error imo.

'imo'? Who says imo? Who edited this, a 7 year old? Pack it in.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 21, 2022, 08:22:39 AM
Quote from: The General on April 21, 2022, 08:00:35 AM
Nobody is affected. There's no unseen hand at work here, it's just user error imo.

Could it be that they've overlooked the reduction to the number of people you can pm at once, I wonder?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 21, 2022, 08:31:38 AM
Quote from: The General on April 21, 2022, 08:00:35 AM
Nobody is affected. There's no unseen hand at work here, it's just user error imo.

I do have times when posting a reply from my phone  when the post freezes and I can't continue and lose the reply.. Only from my phone.  Certainly not confused
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 21, 2022, 08:43:51 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 21, 2022, 08:31:38 AM
I do have times when posting a reply from my phone  when the post freezes and I can't continue and lose the reply.. Only from my phone.  Certainly not confused

Perhaps connected to your WiFi signal, I would think. I had similar problems recently and although my provider denied it, I thought it was probably caused by repair work in my area; which they acknowledged was being carried out. I've had no problems since.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 21, 2022, 09:39:42 AM
Perhaps we sceptics have unseen privileges, now there's s thought.  (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 21, 2022, 10:00:31 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 21, 2022, 09:39:42 AM
Perhaps we sceptics have unseen privileges, now there's s thought.  (&^&

 @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 21, 2022, 12:00:52 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 21, 2022, 08:31:38 AM
I do have times when posting a reply from my phone  when the post freezes and I can't continue and lose the reply.. Only from my phone.  Certainly not confused

Sounds like your computer / phone has got the dreaded lurgy.   An awful 'sickness' inflicted by the malicioius people who are anxious to destroy our sides participation on this forum

What I have noticed is that all the ones affected have either given their addresses or had them maliciously revealed  on here.   In my case, I have given my address in emails to friends, but never on here, unless possibly in a PM from years ago.    Then I was naive and trusting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 21, 2022, 12:21:11 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 21, 2022, 12:00:52 PM
Sounds like your computer / phone has got the dreaded lurgy.   An awful 'sickness' inflicted by the malicioius people who are anxious to destroy our sides participation on this forum

What I have noticed is that all the ones affected have either given their addresses or had them maliciously revealed  on here.   In my case, I have given my address in emails to friends, but never on here, unless possibly in a PM from years ago.    Then I was naive and trusting.

I don't see any grounds for suspecting others. Why should anyone care what is said in pm's? I have seen nothing telling me your address, nor those of the 3 other people you claim are affected. Who is the 4th person again? Perhaps you would like to explain, as a matter of interest, the connection between people's addresses and interfering with their pm's on a forum?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 21, 2022, 12:37:01 PM
FFS, get a grip people, the only modifying of posts is by one mod.
There's nothing underhand. Incompetent, yes, but not malicious. It's the user or the chosen device at fault.
Now pack this crap in and move on






....or I'll get them to infect you all again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 21, 2022, 02:20:52 PM
Quote from: The General on April 21, 2022, 12:37:01 PM
FFS, get a grip people, the only modifying of posts is by one mod.
There's nothing underhand. Incompetent, yes, but not malicious. It's the user or the chosen device at fault.
Now pack this crap in and move on






....or I'll get them to infect you all again.

...or I'll get them to infect you all again.

Oh, yeah ?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 21, 2022, 02:24:26 PM
Quote from: The General on April 21, 2022, 12:37:01 PM
FFS, get a grip people, the only modifying of posts is by one mod.
There's nothing underhand. Incompetent, yes, but not malicious. It's the user or the chosen device at fault.
Now pack this crap in and move on






....or I'll get them to infect you all again.

Yeah but....if it's the users or their devices then it's their own problem and they have to solve it. That's hard work!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 21, 2022, 02:28:21 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 21, 2022, 02:20:52 PM
...or I'll get them to infect you all again.

Oh, yeah ?
Yeh that was a joke, kid*




*totally not a joke!**



**nah, it's a joke. Not funny, but a joke.***
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 21, 2022, 02:30:07 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 21, 2022, 02:24:26 PM
Yeah but....if it's the users or their devices then it's their own problem and they have to solve it. That's hard work!
That is true; it requires some effort. Perhaps there's less effort involved in blaming the obscure, low-subscriber, niche subject forum illuminati.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 21, 2022, 02:32:03 PM
Quote from: The General on April 21, 2022, 02:28:21 PM
Yeh that was a joke, kid*




*totally not a joke!**



**nah, it's a joke. Not funny, but a joke.***

No it's not a joke; it is a serious interference with our computers.  Stop it.

It's  *totally not a joke!**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 21, 2022, 02:36:11 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 21, 2022, 02:32:03 PM
No it's not a joke; it is a serious interference with our computers.  Stop it.

It's  *totally not a joke!**
No, seriously, it's a joke.


....I do need £3000 to pay the ransom for my new friend the Nigerian Prince though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 21, 2022, 07:40:32 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 21, 2022, 02:32:03 PM
No it's not a joke; it is a serious interference with our computers.  Stop it.

It's  *totally not a joke!**

You say it's a serious interference with your computers but you have no evidence, you're not prepared to say who your alleged 4th affected person is or whether you contact each other other than via this forum. Nor will you say if you have problems on other sites. I think you've decided that it's something to do with 'malicious people' who know where you all live and you aren't interested in exploring other possibilities. It looks like you'll just have to learn to live with it then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 21, 2022, 08:20:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 21, 2022, 07:40:32 PM
You say it's a serious interference with your computers but you have no evidence, you're not prepared to say who your alleged 4th affected person is or whether you contact each other other than via this forum. Nor will you say if you have problems on other sites. I think you've decided that it's something to do with 'malicious people' who know where you all live and you aren't interested in exploring other possibilities. It looks like you'll just have to learn to live with it then.

Hmmm - bit of a diatribe there don't you think.  Good of you to show an interest though although I can't see why you've bothered, particularly since you yourself have confirmed you have no computer skills.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 21, 2022, 10:36:56 PM
Quote from: Brietta on April 21, 2022, 08:20:32 PM
Hmmm - bit of a diatribe there don't you think.  Good of you to show an interest though although I can't see why you've bothered, particularly since you yourself have confirmed you have no computer skills.

I said I wasn't an IT expert, but I do have some understanding of how computers work. I  suppose it's possible for someone to hack into this forum and somehow prevent some people from communicating via pm's, but I can't think of a motive. Otherwise there are viruses which can travel between computers when people communicate. Then there's user error. I can't think of anything else, and as those affected are seemingly reluctant to answer questions it's not possible to progress.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2022, 10:43:01 PM

Interesting.  I managed to Log In about half an hour ago and have been automatically Logged Out three times since.

I have received No Emails from Sadie and No PMs either.  Nor am I having any problems anywhere else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 21, 2022, 10:51:05 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 21, 2022, 10:43:01 PM
Interesting.  I managed to Log In about half an hour ago and have been automatically Logged Out three times since.

I have received No Emails from Sadie and No PMs either.  Nor am I having any problems anywhere else.

Thank you Eleanor. Before the forum was updated I occasionally found myself being logged out too. My computer still tells me this site is not secure and that might cause problems depending on your computer's security settings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 21, 2022, 11:02:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 21, 2022, 10:36:56 PM
I said I wasn't an IT expert, but I do have some understanding of how computers work. I  suppose it's possible for someone to hack into this forum and somehow prevent some people from communicating via pm's, but I can't think of a motive. Otherwise there are viruses which can travel between computers when people communicate. Then there's user error. I can't think of anything else, and as those affected are seemingly reluctant to answer questions it's not possible to progress.
"I  suppose it's possible for someone to hack into this forum and somehow prevent some people from communicating"

I can affirm there was no supposing about it when I received first hand experience of my Yahoo account and others being flagrantly controlled.  So it does happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2022, 11:05:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 21, 2022, 10:51:05 PM
Thank you Eleanor. Before the forum was updated I occasionally found myself being logged out too. My computer still tells me this site is not secure and that might cause problems depending on your computer's security settings.

Just had to Log In again.  Four times in little more than half an hour is a trifle excessive.

I know that this Site is Insecure.  There is nothing lacking in my Security Settings.  It is a very expensive Mac.

However, I am not so far having the dreadful problems that I had a couple of days ago.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 21, 2022, 11:43:00 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 21, 2022, 11:05:28 PM
Just had to Log In again.  Four times in little more than half an hour is a trifle excessive.

I know that this Site is Insecure.  There is nothing lacking in my Security Settings.  It is a very expensive Mac.

However, I am not so far having the dreadful problems that I had a couple of days ago.

It's not that your security settings are 'wrong' but they might prevent you from using insecure sites. Usually though that means you wouldn't be allowed to access the site at all.

Well that's the limit of my knowledge. Maybe it's worth paying someone to check it all out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2022, 11:48:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 21, 2022, 11:43:00 PM
It's not that your security settings are 'wrong' but they might prevent you from using insecure sites. Usually though that means you wouldn't be allowed to access the site at all.

Well that's the limit of my knowledge. Maybe it's worth paying someone to check it all out.

Apple Mac has long been warning me that this Site is Insecure.  Their obligation stops there.

I am having No Problems anywhere else and I am certainly not paying when I know that there is nothing wrong with my computer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Ms Para glider on April 21, 2022, 11:59:18 PM
This site is massively corrupted and comprised. I tried to warn others here before, and my posts were deleted. Followed by a rather soft admission by Admin that the site was unsecure and you can 'feel free to change your password'... what do you think that really means?
I advise anyone who has an account here to change all their passwords on this, and any other site for which you use the same email address or log in details.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 22, 2022, 12:13:14 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 21, 2022, 11:05:28 PM
Just had to Log In again.  Four times in little more than half an hour is a trifle excessive.

I know that this Site is Insecure.  There is nothing lacking in my Security Settings.  It is a very expensive Mac.

However, I am not so far having the dreadful problems that I had a couple of days ago.

Me too.  I have to keep logging in.   But at least atm I can get in. 

A few months ago, the site kept refusing my password meaning that I had to keep giving new ones.   Havng a suspicion that having various ports of entry via different passwords might enable some malicious person to get into my computer, I temporarily stopped posting.

My mind mulls overthings and I just wonder if people using your blog, Elli, could be using it as a seperate channel to help get into your computer?  Strangely they are nearly all sceptics, albeit very charming ones.   


But that, Elli, is the way that a lot of the scams are done.   Ooze charm, bull yourself up as perfect and important, whilst doing underhand things.   Some of the biggest and most trusted organisations in the world do it and get extraordinarily rich and powerful.   Thanks to you, me and our ancesters being such suckers

I know this Site is insecure as well.  Several pointers to that.

My whole computer is now Bu^^^red up and I have a pretty good idea who are the people behind it.



Here endeth the first lesson  ^*&&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 12:23:41 AM
Quote from: sadie on April 22, 2022, 12:13:14 AM
Me too.  I have to keep logging in.   But at least atm I can get in. 

A few months ago, the site kept refusing my password meaning that I had to keep giving new ones.   Havng a suspicion that having various ports of entry via different passwords might enable some malicious person to get into my computer, I temporarily stopped posting.

My mind mulls overthings and I just wonder if people using your blog, Elli, could be using it as a seperate channel to help get into your computer?  Strangely they are nearly all sceptics, albeit very charming ones.   


But that, Elli, is the way that a lot of the scams are done.   Ooze charm, bull yourself up as perfect and important, whilst doing underhand things.   Some of the biggest and most trusted organisations in the world do it and get extraordinarily rich and powerful.   Thanks to you, me and our ancesters being such suckers

I know this Site is insecure as well.  Several pointers to that.

My whole computer is now Bu^^^red up and I have a pretty good idea who are the people behind it.



Here endeth the first lesson  ^*&&

I don't have to use a password to access my Blog, Sadie.  And I have no idea who reads it because there are rarely any comments.

Neither do I ever discuss this Forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 22, 2022, 12:31:16 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 21, 2022, 11:59:18 PM
This site is massively corrupted and comprised. I tried to warn others here before, and my posts were deleted. Followed by a rather soft admission by Admin that the site was unsecure and you can 'feel free to change your password'... what do you think that really means?
I advise anyone who has an account here to change all their passwords on this, and any other site for which you use the same email address or log in details.

Me too.  I have repeatedly tried to warn people about this site, but posters from both sides ignore me.   I am unpopular, but hopefully they will listen to you.

Thanks for your input



Remember to look at the address that comes up when you enter this forum

1)  Make sure that it has httpS at the beginning and not http, wihout the S
2)  If the padlock icon immediately in front of the http has an orange diagonal strike through line through it, that also means that it is not safe.


This is only part of the corruption on this forum.   John how about mending it?  There's a dear.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 22, 2022, 12:40:47 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 12:23:41 AM
I don't have to use a password to access my Blog, Sadie.  And I have no idea who reads it because there are rarely any comments.

Neither do I ever discuss this Forum.

Well that's good news.   I spent best part of a day reading your blog and thoroughly enjoyed it.

Your style is so original and warm.   Your personality shines through.  I think that your wit must have been formed by being an Eastender, working with virtually all men at sea, then having 3 sons.   Men are much funnier than women usually, but you got an extra dose from somewhere.   

Thanks for sharing your experiences with us.

sadie Xxx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Ms Para glider on April 22, 2022, 12:41:39 AM
Quote from: sadie on April 22, 2022, 12:31:16 AM
Me too.  I have repeatedly tried to warn people about this site, but posters from both sides ignore me.   I am unpopular, but hopefully they will listen to you.

Thanks for your input



Remember to look at the address that comes up when you enter this forum

1)  Make sure that it has httpS at the beginning and not http, wihout the S
2)  If the padlock icon immediately in front of the http has an orange diagonal strike through line through it, that also means that it is not safe.


This is only part of the corruption on this forum.   John how about mending it?  There's a dear.

I reported my findings and concerns directly and was ignored. Make of that what you will. After all the warnings about using the unsecured version of the website (without the s suffix), I  notice G Unit then went and posted links to the unsecure version of the site for Moderation queries. It's a shambles.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 12:45:24 AM
Quote from: sadie on April 22, 2022, 12:40:47 AM
Well that's good news.   I spent best part of a day reading your blog and thoroughly enjoyed it.

Your style is so original and warm.   Your personality shines through.  I think that your wit must have been formed by being an Eastender, working with virtually all men at sea, then having 3 sons.   Men are much funnier than women usually, but you got an extra dose from somewhere.   

Thanks for sharing your experiences with us.

sadie Xxx

Thank you, Sadie.  You are very kind.  I do hope only to amuse.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 22, 2022, 12:55:22 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 12:23:41 AM
I don't have to use a password to access my Blog, Sadie.  And I have no idea who reads it because there are rarely any comments.

Neither do I ever discuss this Forum.

I am not sure if it is a good thing or a bad thing, security wise, to not need a password to access your Blog Elli

Prhaps you should check with an expert



But believe you me, once they are into your computer it is virtually impossible to stop it being wrecked.   Maybe the professionals are able to sort things out ?

Nigh night.  Sleep well Elli.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 22, 2022, 01:02:13 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 22, 2022, 12:41:39 AM
I reported my findings and concerns directly and was ignored. Make of that what you will. After all the warnings about using the unsecured version of the website (without the s suffix), I  notice G Unit then went and posted links to the unsecure version of the site for Moderation queries. It's a shambles.

And perchance it is deliberate?

We must have faith, I suppose   &%^^
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Ms Para glider on April 22, 2022, 01:09:35 AM
Quote from: sadie on April 22, 2022, 01:02:13 AM
And perchance it is deliberate?

We must have faith, I suppose   &%^^

Personally I don't think G-Unit's links to an unsecured site were deliberate, just lazy and reckless.

As for what I reported...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 22, 2022, 07:52:34 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 21, 2022, 11:59:18 PM
This site is massively corrupted and comprised. I tried to warn others here before, and my posts were deleted. Followed by a rather soft admission by Admin that the site was unsecure and you can 'feel free to change your password'... what do you think that really means?
I advise anyone who has an account here to change all their passwords on this, and any other site for which you use the same email address or log in details.
I'm not sure this site is on the radar of Anonymous. Any site can be hacked, even the most secure, as is ably demonstrated by ransomware attacks on major corporations whose budget to combat such infiltrations are massive.
Forums are low hanging fruit for your common or garden hacker, but of little or insignificant value.
I think we'll be OK.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 09:30:21 AM

More interesting developments.

I was Logged In but I wasn't.  I am now Logged In after six attempts.  I don't expect this to last.

Is someone trying to shut me up?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 22, 2022, 09:40:59 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 09:30:21 AM
More interesting developments.

I was Logged In but I wasn't.  I am now Logged In after six attempts.  I don't expect this to last.

Is someone trying to shut me up?
I've had these same problems for months too if it's any consolation.  I just put it down to a glitchy website.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 09:44:41 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 22, 2022, 09:40:59 AM
I've had these same problems for months too if it's any consolation.  I just put it down to a glitchy website.

Thank you,  I hope so.

Just had to Log In again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 22, 2022, 09:48:15 AM
For those having trouble, do you clear your history and cache ?

I'm using windows 10, no issues .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 22, 2022, 09:49:56 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 22, 2022, 09:48:15 AM
For those having trouble, do you clear your history and cache ?

I'm using windows 10, no issues .
Probably not as often as I should have.  Will give it a go....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 22, 2022, 09:50:10 AM
Quote from: The General on April 22, 2022, 07:52:34 AM
I'm not sure this site is on the radar of Anonymous. Any site can be hacked, even the most secure, as is ably demonstrated by ransomware attacks on major corporations whose budget to combat such infiltrations are massive.
Forums are low hanging fruit for your common or garden hacker, but of little or insignificant value.
I think we'll be OK.

Members having the problems as described probably would disagree with your assessment of OK.  Bearing in mind these are those who have manged to communicate the problem to us - there may be more who haven't been able to do so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 22, 2022, 09:55:27 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 09:30:21 AM
More interesting developments.

I was Logged In but I wasn't.  I am now Logged In after six attempts.  I don't expect this to last.

Is someone trying to shut me up?

It must be very frustrating, I do sympathise. However, it's clear that no-one here can help. I can't imagine why anyone would want to shut you up, but such a person wouldn't expose themselves and admit it if they existed, would they? In your shoes my last ditch attempt would be to re-register on the secure site with a new name, email and password.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 22, 2022, 10:01:33 AM
Quote from: Brietta on April 22, 2022, 09:50:10 AM
Members having the problems as described probably would disagree with your assessment of OK.  Bearing in mind these are those who have manged to communicate the problem to us - there may be more who haven't been able to do so.
Clear your cookies, dear.
Then check your software version.
Then do a quick virus check.
It's not the forum, 70% of the time it's the user every time. There's no hacking. There's no sinister expert hacker. If there was I'm pretty sure faffing around with 4 people's posts and logging them in and out would not be high on the list of targets.
The forum might not be as secure as it could be, but there's 300 million others just like it.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 22, 2022, 10:21:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 22, 2022, 09:55:27 AM
It must be very frustrating, I do sympathise. However, it's clear that no-one here can help. I can't imagine why anyone would want to shut you up, but such a person wouldn't expose themselves and admit it if they existed, would they? In your shoes my last ditch attempt would be to re-register on the secure site with a new name, email and password.
We have to remember that the platform that these forums are built on are open source and an iteration of one built 20 years ago. They use the same software, SQL, XML, etc and it can be unstable. That's all it is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 10:41:08 AM

Well Well.  Lookie here.  I told you this would happen
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 22, 2022, 10:58:05 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 22, 2022, 12:41:39 AM
I reported my findings and concerns directly and was ignored. Make of that what you will. After all the warnings about using the unsecured version of the website (without the s suffix), I  notice G Unit then went and posted links to the unsecure version of the site for Moderation queries. It's a shambles.

Yep. most probably.  Sorry, Elli that it is happening to you, now.

Very disturbing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 22, 2022, 11:06:05 AM
Quote from: sadie on April 22, 2022, 10:58:05 AM
Yep. most probably.  Sorry, Elli that it is happening to you, now.

Very disturbing.
Guys, there's nothing to see here. Well, that's not strictly true, it's just an unstable forum. Most are the same.
I used to run one called Dungeons and Dragons Figurines and Boardgames - same SQL / XML databases. Glitchy as a glitchy thing at Glitchmas.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 12:59:08 PM
Quote from: The General on April 22, 2022, 11:06:05 AM
Guys, there's nothing to see here. Well, that's not strictly true, it's just an unstable forum. Most are the same.
I used to run one called Dungeons and Dragons Figurines and Boardgames - same SQL / XML databases. Glitchy as a glitchy thing at Glitchmas.

We now appear to be Comrades at Arms.  Inappropriate Language, allegedly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on April 22, 2022, 06:18:00 PM
It would appear that the latest revelations concerning the status of Christian Brückner has served to increase the need for proactive moderation once more. I will be watching very closely for any infringement of the rules for the foreseeable future.

Continued goading and the use of inappropriate language will result in posting restrictions for those concerned.

Admin
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 07:06:14 PM
Goodness me. Is there any point any more?

For God's sake don't express an opinion.  Unless you wan't to protect The Paedophile.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on April 22, 2022, 07:31:47 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 07:06:14 PM
Goodness me. Is there any point any more?

For God's sake don't express an opinion.  Unless you wan't to protect The Paedophile.

Totally irrelevant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 08:08:56 PM
EVERYTNG I say gets eaten before my eyes.  AND I can't do this any more.

But I did try.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 08:11:58 PM
Quote from: Admin on April 22, 2022, 07:31:47 PM
Totally irrelevant.

Obviously.  Thanks a bunch for the nine years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 08:28:04 PM
Quote from: Admin on April 22, 2022, 07:31:47 PM
Totally irrelevant.

I somewhat missed thet in passing.  This Forum exists because people Comment.  Nothing is irrelevant.  Or are you beyond The Pale?

 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 22, 2022, 10:51:15 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 08:28:04 PM
I somewhat missed thet in passing. This Forum exists because people Comment.  Nothing is irrelevant.  Or are you beyond The Pale?

 

Well said Eleanor

I somewhat missed thet in passing. This Forum exists because people Comment.  Nothing is irrelevant.  Or are you beyond The Pale?
   

and

Quote from: Eleanor on April 22, 2022, 07:06:14 PM
Goodness me. Is there any point any more?

For God's sake don't express an opinion.  Unless you wan't to protect The Paedophile.
[/b][/size][/color]   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Ms Para glider on April 22, 2022, 10:58:46 PM
Rather interesting that Admin, now all of a sudden, feel the need to step in to closely monitor any "goading and inappropriate language" in light of the recent developments.

Shouldn't you have been doing that anyway?

Or is just because of the direction the "goading and inappropriate language" might now start to blow?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 23, 2022, 12:01:57 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 22, 2022, 10:58:46 PM
Rather interesting that Admin, now all of a sudden, feel the need to step in to closely monitor any "goading and inappropriate language" in light of the recent developments.

Shouldn't you have been doing that anyway?

Or is just ecause of the direction the "goading and inappropriate language" might now start to blow?

This is all gong dreadfully down hill now.  Admin is getting shirty.  But all power to the elbow.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Ms Para glider on April 23, 2022, 01:48:51 AM
Quote from: The General on April 22, 2022, 10:21:32 AM
We have to remember that the platform that these forums are built on are open source and an iteration of one built 20 years ago. They use the same software, SQL, XML, etc and it can be unstable. That's all it is.
Coming from a Computer Science background myself, I can confirm that is extremely accurate.

Let me ask you a hypothetical question then -

If someone with an in-depth knowledge of the very rudimentary and basic database this site employs wanted to extract user details (email addresses, passwords, phone numbers, IP addresses of their locations), how hard do you think that would be to do? Particularly given this site for a lengthy period of time was running without any security certificate to protect those kind of invasions.

All hypothetically of course.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 23, 2022, 02:18:00 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 23, 2022, 01:48:51 AM
Coming from a Computer Science background myself, I can confirm that is extremely accurate.

Let me ask you a hypothetical question then -

If someone with an in-depth knowledge of the very rudimentary and basic database this site employs wanted to extract user details (email addresses, passwords, phone numbers, IP addresses of their locations), how hard do you think that would be to do? Particularly given this site for a lengthy period of time was running without any security certificate to protect those kind of invasions.

All hypothetically of course.

Good Question.

I wonder how many of us have been broken into?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 23, 2022, 02:30:50 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 23, 2022, 01:48:51 AM
Coming from a Computer Science background myself, I can confirm that is extremely accurate.

Let me ask you a hypothetical question then -

If someone with an in-depth knowledge of the very rudimentary and basic database this site employs wanted to extract user details (email addresses, passwords, phone numbers, IP addresses of their locations), how hard do you think that would be to do? Particularly given this site for a lengthy period of time was running without any security certificate to protect those kind of invasions.

All hypothetically of course.

I can't say that this worries me.  But it might worry others..  Isn't this what Anonymous is all about?

I have never been Anonymous and so it has never mattered to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Ms Para glider on April 23, 2022, 02:38:56 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 23, 2022, 02:30:50 AM
I can't say that this worries me.  But it might worry others..  Isn't this what Anonymous is all about?

I have never been Anonymous and so it has never mattered to me.

Anonymous are a different kettle of fish. They go after accounts based on their political agenda. When it comes to basic forums such as this, some unscrupulous hackers will just extract user data for other motives. Sometimes just to mess with people. More often to take the email address and paswords they've obtained to see if they also work on other websites whereby they can gain access to money in some way. Most people use the same email login and passwords across their web activities unfortunately so it's quite a successful enterprise for them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 23, 2022, 03:19:42 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 23, 2022, 01:48:51 AM
Coming from a Computer Science background myself, I can confirm that is extremely accurate.

Let me ask you a hypothetical question then -

If someone with an in-depth knowledge of the very rudimentary and basic database this site employs wanted to extract user details (email addresses, passwords, phone numbers, IP addresses of their locations), how hard do you think that would be to do? Particularly given this site for a lengthy period of time was running without any security certificate to protect those kind of invasions.

All hypothetically of course.

The funniest thing of all is that I don't care.  What are they going to do to me?  I am a put your money where your mouth is sort of person.

But don't think that you can turn up on my door step.   My neighbours will call The GendarmesL. And O'Connor will mash your knees.  This dog is vicious.;

Just don't read my Blog.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on April 23, 2022, 06:50:01 AM
More likely they'll slip on your pooch's puddles and break their bonce before ever getting a chance to lay their hands on you... either that or overcome to a stupor by the combined intoxicating stench of stale urea and baccy smoke.

Off to read your blo.... fumigate my damsons and blackcurrants before they're decimated by greenfly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 23, 2022, 06:53:17 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 23, 2022, 01:48:51 AM
Coming from a Computer Science background myself, I can confirm that is extremely accurate.

Let me ask you a hypothetical question then -

If someone with an in-depth knowledge of the very rudimentary and basic database this site employs wanted to extract user details (email addresses, passwords, phone numbers, IP addresses of their locations), how hard do you think that would be to do? Particularly given this site for a lengthy period of time was running without any security certificate to protect those kind of invasions.

All hypothetically of course.

I am a computer illiterate but I do know that the most secure systems in the world have been hacked into.  On one occasion at least by a boy from his bedroom.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 23, 2022, 11:54:24 AM
Strangely if I use edge I can see this video, but using chrome I can't theres a glitch somewhere. Edit, I just updated edge to secure and can't see it.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on April 23, 2022, 12:22:26 PM
This direct YouTube link should work... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsC2TRtDu4Q (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsC2TRtDu4Q)

But what utter nonsense to say that "We're no further forward today than in 2007 when Madeleine went missing"?!!!

Some sour grapes right there because his delayed adventure has been sidelined by the latest news.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 23, 2022, 12:50:26 PM
Quote from: Myster on April 23, 2022, 12:22:26 PM
This direct YouTube link should work... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsC2TRtDu4Q (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsC2TRtDu4Q)

But what utter nonsense to say that "We're no further forward today than in 2007 when Madeleine went missing"?!!!

Some sour grapes right there because his delayed adventure has been sidelined by the latest news.

Not as if the two are clashing. His documentary still hasn't a date and the aguido news will soon be old news, particularly if not followed up on by major advance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 23, 2022, 03:34:15 PM
Quote from: Myster on April 23, 2022, 12:22:26 PM
This direct YouTube link should work... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsC2TRtDu4Q (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsC2TRtDu4Q)

But what utter nonsense to say that "We're no further forward today than in 2007 when Madeleine went missing"?!!!

Some sour grapes right there because his delayed adventure has been sidelined by the latest news.

I have reasons that I wouldn't risk opening that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 23, 2022, 04:03:49 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 23, 2022, 03:34:15 PM
I have reasons that I wouldn't risk opening that

It's a safe link, Sadie with a padlock in the url.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 23, 2022, 10:37:54 PM
Quote from: misty on April 23, 2022, 04:03:49 PM
It's a safe link, Sadie with a padlock in the url.

Thanks Misty, but I think that I already opened it (part of it)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 25, 2022, 07:34:30 AM
Quote from: Ms Para glider on April 23, 2022, 01:48:51 AM
Coming from a Computer Science background myself, I can confirm that is extremely accurate.

Let me ask you a hypothetical question then -

If someone with an in-depth knowledge of the very rudimentary and basic database this site employs wanted to extract user details (email addresses, passwords, phone numbers, IP addresses of their locations), how hard do you think that would be to do? Particularly given this site for a lengthy period of time was running without any security certificate to protect those kind of invasions.

All hypothetically of course.
My point was that, while I have no doubt that a semi-skilled hacker could harvest every byte of data from this forum with relative ease, their skills would be and probably are better deployed elsewhere, particularly given the unstable platform that we know is problematic.
There's no outside interference on here, it's just the vagaries of the databases.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 25, 2022, 10:27:55 AM
German news for English speakers.


https://www.thelocal.de/20220423/15-years-on-portugal-eyes-german-suspect-in-missing-maddie-case/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 25, 2022, 10:41:21 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 25, 2022, 10:27:55 AM
German news for English speakers.


https://www.thelocal.de/20220423/15-years-on-portugal-eyes-german-suspect-in-missing-maddie-case/
Not long now until Dr. Snr. Amaral is asked for a soundbite or full interview. Cheeky little invoice to follow, no doubt. Sweet gig he's got going there, like being David Schwimmer being paid residuals for global re-runs of Friends - cracking pension top up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2022, 10:43:13 AM
Quote from: The General on April 25, 2022, 10:41:21 AM
Not long now until Dr. Snr. Amaral is asked for a soundbite or full interview. Cheeky little invoice to follow, no doubt. Sweet gig he's got going there, like being David Schwimmer being paid residuals for global re-runs of Friends - cracking pension top up.

I can't wait but hes taking his time
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 25, 2022, 10:47:03 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 25, 2022, 10:43:13 AM
I can't wait but hes taking his time
He is. I wonder if he's choosing which of the many offers to take up. Probably weighing up the invoice value, which would be fair enough.
Alternatively, and I doubt this, but perhaps he's keeping his powder dry so as not to impinge on the investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2022, 11:36:59 AM
Quote from: The General on April 25, 2022, 10:47:03 AM
He is. I wonder if he's choosing which of the many offers to take up. Probably weighing up the invoice value, which would be fair enough.
Alternatively, and I doubt this, but perhaps he's keeping his powder dry so as not to impinge on the investigation.
Either that or he's topped himself
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 25, 2022, 11:52:23 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 25, 2022, 11:36:59 AM
Either that or he's topped himself
I mean, it's one possibility, but it's doubtful given that his income is about to grow exponentially.
I know, it's not all about money and, really, you shouldn't make light of mental health, but I suppose that's how this forum's going, with comments like that going unchecked.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 25, 2022, 12:07:35 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 25, 2022, 11:36:59 AM
Either that or he's topped himself

I think that's a very strange suggestion. Amaral's ability to deal with the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune has been amply demonstrated imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2022, 12:16:07 PM
Quote from: The General on April 25, 2022, 11:52:23 AM
I mean, it's one possibility, but it's doubtful given that his income is about to grow exponentially.
I know, it's not all about money and, really, you shouldn't make light of mental health, but I suppose that's how this forum's going, with comments like that going unchecked.

I like to consider all possibilities and he has looked, a bit stressed lately
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 03:33:58 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 25, 2022, 12:16:07 PM
I like to consider all possibilities and he has looked, a bit stressed lately

I thought he looked in fine fettle. Probably something to do with dating a woman half his age.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 25, 2022, 03:49:11 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 03:33:58 PM
I thought he looked in fine fettle. Probably something to do with dating a woman half his age.
Eww.  Is it Isabelle McFadden by any chance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 25, 2022, 03:56:20 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 03:33:58 PM
I thought he looked in fine fettle. Probably something to do with dating a woman half his age.
Legend.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2022, 05:00:17 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 03:33:58 PM
I thought he looked in fine fettle. Probably something to do with dating a woman half his age.
Older men are often attracted to younger women.. Connected to something in their jeans evidently
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 06:18:30 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 25, 2022, 05:00:17 PM
Older men are often attracted to younger women.

And some don’t even have to buy them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 25, 2022, 06:37:47 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 06:18:30 PM
And some don’t even have to buy them.
Money must surely be a factor in Amaral’s case?  It certainly can’t be anything to do with his suave good looks and sparkling personality as he has neither imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2022, 06:46:11 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 06:18:30 PM
And some don’t even have to buy them.

Lol... At least I can afford it.. Expensive mind
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2022, 06:48:41 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 06:18:30 PM
And some don’t even have to buy them.
Did you see the article when I was featured in the Sunday Times... Superstar
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 07:12:06 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 25, 2022, 06:46:11 PM
Lol... At least I can afford it.. Expensive mind

You have to be pretty repulsive to have to though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 25, 2022, 07:15:59 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 07:12:06 PM
You have to be pretty repulsive to have to though.

I think it's probably a power thing - being in control.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2022, 07:23:15 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 07:12:06 PM
You have to be pretty repulsive to have to though.

Not at all.. I've been a, babe magnet all my life.  ..

All men die.. Some men live has always been my philosophy
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2022, 07:51:30 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 25, 2022, 06:46:11 PM
Lol... At least I can afford it.. Expensive mind

For those that don't realise... This isn't serious... It's a quote from Little Britain
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 25, 2022, 07:51:53 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 07:12:06 PM
You have to be pretty repulsive to have to though.
It’s all getting a bit personal and bullying again.  Faithlilly is positively OBSESSED by Davel’s personal life.  Sad really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2022, 07:53:19 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 25, 2022, 07:15:59 PM
I think it's probably a power thing - being in control.

I get a lot of criticism from the ugly sisters when I married Cinderella
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 25, 2022, 07:58:14 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 25, 2022, 07:51:53 PM
It’s all getting a bit personal and bullying again.  Faithlilly is positively OBSESSED by Davel’s personal life.  Sad really.

I'm absolutely not bothered in the slightest.  I expected criticism from some for my lifestyle choice.  Being the person I am I met it head on.. Been featured in TV four or 5 times... On the Wright stuff I was up against Kate Siilverton.. The whole audience was very surprised to see her very cleverly put in her place
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on April 25, 2022, 10:54:15 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 25, 2022, 07:15:59 PM
I think it's probably a power thing - being in control.

Or someone to look after them in really old age!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on April 25, 2022, 10:56:00 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 25, 2022, 07:58:14 PM
I'm absolutely not bothered in the slightest.  I expected criticism from some for my lifestyle choice.  Being the person I am I met it head on.. Been featured in TV four or 5 times... On the Wright stuff I was up against Kate Siilverton.. The whole audience was very surprised to see her very cleverly put in her place


Is being on TV a badge of honour?  Jimmy Saville was also on TV  more times I would imagine. eugh
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 11:30:44 PM
Quote from: Davel on April 25, 2022, 07:58:14 PM
I'm absolutely not bothered in the slightest.  I expected criticism from some for my lifestyle choice.  Being the person I am I met it head on.. Been featured in TV four or 5 times... On the Wright stuff I was up against Kate Siilverton.. The whole audience was very surprised to see her very cleverly put in her place

You do make me chuckle sometimes Dave. Your 1970s style of misogyny does appear to have a degree of support from unexpected quarters though. Takes all kinds I guess.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 25, 2022, 11:35:06 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 11:30:44 PM
You do make me chuckle sometimes Dave. Your 1970s style of misogyny does appear to have a degree of support from unexpected quarters though. Takes all kinds I guess.
The best way to deal with on.ine bullies is by subtly taking the piss, something Davel is rather good at I think.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 11:44:37 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 25, 2022, 11:35:06 PM
The best way to deal with on.ine bullies is by subtly taking the piss, something Davel is rather good at I think.

There is nothing subtle about Dave or his suggestion regarding IMcF. I’d like to say that I’m surprised you’re a fan but….
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 26, 2022, 12:15:43 AM
Quote from: The General on April 25, 2022, 07:34:30 AM
My point was that, while I have no doubt that a semi-skilled hacker could harvest every byte of data from this forum with relative ease, their skills would be and probably are better deployed elsewhere, particularly given the unstable platform that we know is problematic.
There's no outside interference on here, it's just the vagaries of the databases.

Oh really? 8**8:/:
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 26, 2022, 12:22:00 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 25, 2022, 10:27:55 AM
German news for English speakers.


https://www.thelocal.de/20220423/15-years-on-portugal-eyes-german-suspect-in-missing-maddie-case/

When clicked upon, why has the padlock on the above addie got a black triangle over it?

Trying to hack computers perchance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 26, 2022, 01:04:43 AM
Quote from: sadie on April 26, 2022, 12:22:00 AM
When clicked upon, why has the padlock on the above addie got a black triangle over it?

Trying to hack computers perchance?

Are you using Firefox, Sadie?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 26, 2022, 08:09:57 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 25, 2022, 11:44:37 PM
There is nothing subtle about Dave or his suggestion regarding IMcF. I’d like to say that I’m surprised you’re a fan but….
You just can’t tell when your chain is being yanked, which is just Davel’s way of dealing with your snide nasty insinuations about his personal life, which over the years amount to bullying and harassment in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 26, 2022, 08:22:33 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 26, 2022, 08:09:57 AM
You just can’t tell when your chain is being yanked, which is just Davel’s way of dealing with your snide nasty insinuations about his personal life, which over the years amount to bullying and harassment in my opinion.

A very feeble attempt at bullying and harassment.. Lol Lol
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 26, 2022, 09:11:16 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on April 25, 2022, 10:54:15 PM
Or someone to look after them in really old age!

Ha, hadn't thought of that. Must be getting towards that age by now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 26, 2022, 09:32:47 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 26, 2022, 09:11:16 AM
Ha, hadn't thought of that. Must be getting towards that age by now.

Its more like who wants a frizzled dried currant when they can a tasre a juicy fresh grape... I presume you and others criticising are dried currants.. Lol
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 26, 2022, 10:13:10 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 26, 2022, 09:32:47 AM
Its more like who wants a frizzled dried currant when they can a tasre a juicy fresh grape... I presume you and others criticising are dried currants.. Lol

I'm not criticizing at all, but yes, I'm getting a bit wrinkly now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 26, 2022, 10:18:38 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 26, 2022, 10:13:10 AM
I'm not criticizing at all, but yes, I'm getting a bit wrinkly now.
I swear by Oil of Olay or whatever it's called these days - been using it since I was a teenager and don't look a day over 60 (I'm 59 next birthday).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 26, 2022, 10:52:07 AM
Quote from: jassi on April 26, 2022, 10:13:10 AM
I'm not criticizing at all, but yes, I'm getting a bit wrinkly now.

apologies if you are not criticising..but to a certain extent a younger wife is asset  ..we had 3 tons of coal delivered last night and although it took her two hours she managed to get it all in
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 26, 2022, 11:14:45 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 26, 2022, 10:52:07 AM
apologies if you are not criticising..but to a certain extent a younger wife is asset  ..we had 3 tons of coal delivered last night and although it took her two hours she managed to get it all in
Unfortunately, most women are older than me by definition, so I'm not at that stage of cradle snatching.
But if you want to claim the somewhat dubious title of Forum M**** Magnet, be my guest. Maybe change your signature?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 26, 2022, 11:20:25 AM
Quote from: The General on April 26, 2022, 11:14:45 AM
Unfortunately, most women are older than me by definition, so I'm not at that stage of cradle snatching.
But if you want to claim the somewhat dubious title of Forum M**** Magnet, be my guest. Maybe change your signature?

I dont wish to claim anything...but if faith is going to continually make personal posts Ill respond...yours Mr Gray
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 26, 2022, 11:24:44 AM
Quote from: Davel on April 26, 2022, 11:20:25 AM
I dont wish to claim anything...but if faith is going to continually make personal posts Ill respond...yours Mr Gray
Mr Gray is a bit lame, Dav, in fairness.
I'm more of a young Denzel Foxx.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 26, 2022, 11:28:11 AM
Quote from: The General on April 26, 2022, 11:24:44 AM
Mr Gray is a bit lame, Dav, in fairness.
I'm more of a young Denzel Foxx.

its not my choice...its what my younger wife calls me
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 26, 2022, 11:37:18 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on April 26, 2022, 11:28:11 AM
its not my choice...its what my younger wife calls me
There's literally no end to the accolades:
Been on telly 5 times
Beat Kate Silverton (?) in a lunchtime TV debate on Titsmarsh Today
Gets called Mr Gray by his marginally younger wife.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 26, 2022, 11:44:31 AM
Quote from: The General on April 26, 2022, 11:37:18 AM
There's literally no end to the accolades:
Been on telly 5 times
Beat Kate Silverton (?) in a lunchtime TV debate on Titsmarsh Today
Gets called Mr Gray by his marginally younger wife.

Who knew we had a celebrity in our midst! Closer to Z than A imo, but still......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 26, 2022, 11:57:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 26, 2022, 11:44:31 AM
Who knew we had a celebrity in our midst! Closer to Z than A imo, but still......
I'm no celebrity, but I have a friend who is an actual celebrity. I say friend, he's a nob, but he's 'famous' in the sense that even the old people on this forum would recognise him.
I'll ask him if he knows Davel Gray.
I've been to more shbuznuzz soiree's in the last 5 years than I can remember, although not Golden Globes - but he was nominated, the plank.
Do I win a fiver?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 26, 2022, 12:06:29 PM
Quote from: The General on April 26, 2022, 11:57:44 AM
I'm no celebrity, but I have a friend who is an actual celebrity. I say friend, he's a nob, but he's 'famous' in the sense that even the old people on this forum would recognise him.
I'll ask him if he knows Davel Gray.
I've been to more shbuznuzz soiree's in the last 5 years than I can remember, although not Golden Globes - but he was nominated, the plank.
Do I win a fiver?

I made the deision to end my TV career..lol..due to the vile online abuse I received. Didnt bother me but when my children said..dad..why are people being mean to us..i realised it was better to take a back seat.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 26, 2022, 12:10:20 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on April 26, 2022, 12:06:29 PM
I made the deision to end my TV career..lol..due to the vile online abuse I received. Didnt bother me but when my children said..dad..why are people being mean to us..i realised it was better to take a back seat.
Understandable. My friend, who does exist, honest, is a very popular guy here and the US....but the abuse from certain elements is absolutely next level and ceaseless. He has a dude who deals legally with all of the residual shit that is bandied about on social media. It's mainly jealousy - council estate lad makes good never goes down well.
So I don't blame you, Gray, given your intellect and good looks - must almost be a curse.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 26, 2022, 12:35:29 PM
Quote from: misty on April 26, 2022, 01:04:43 AM
Are you using Firefox, Sadie?

Yep.  Has that got something odd about it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 26, 2022, 12:43:04 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 26, 2022, 12:35:29 PM
Yep.  Has that got something odd about it?
Yes. It's needy, always wants an update, always with the security settings schtick.
Maybe try Chrome. It's more stable, but wants to you to sign all of your human rights away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on April 26, 2022, 12:43:57 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 26, 2022, 12:35:29 PM
Yep.  Has that got something odd about it?

Yes. It's probably to do with the images on this site. I use Chrome and don't have any issues at present.
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/mixed-content-blocking-firefox#:~:text=%3A%20A%20padlock%20with%20a%20triangle,page%20isn't%20fully%20secure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 26, 2022, 12:52:01 PM
Quote from: The General on April 26, 2022, 11:57:44 AM
I'm no celebrity, but I have a friend who is an actual celebrity. I say friend, he's a nob, but he's 'famous' in the sense that even the old people on this forum would recognise him.
I'll ask him if he knows Davel Gray.
I've been to more shbuznuzz soiree's in the last 5 years than I can remember, although not Golden Globes - but he was nominated, the plank.
Do I win a fiver?

The only 'celebrity' I know is Roy Chubby Brown.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on April 26, 2022, 12:57:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 26, 2022, 12:52:01 PM
The only 'celebrity' I know is Roy Chubby Brown.
Seems like a decent chap, despite his somewhat outmoded material.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 26, 2022, 01:03:01 PM
Quote from: The General on April 26, 2022, 12:57:21 PM
Seems like a decent chap, despite his somewhat outmoded material.

I've never seen his act but he's a nice man off stage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on April 26, 2022, 01:16:42 PM
NB
Reference to a member's family is firmly against forum rules whether the member has treated all such infringements with dignified contempt or not.
Please do not be surprised if any future 'jollity' in this vein is removed on sight.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 26, 2022, 01:57:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on April 26, 2022, 12:52:01 PM
The only 'celebrity' I know is Roy Chubby Brown.

Royston Vasey, his real name, inspired one of the funniest ever (imo) comedy series 'The League of Gentlemen'

Are you local?  This is a local forum for local people, we'll have no trouble here!'
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 26, 2022, 05:42:32 PM
Won't be long now before the fat lady sings .

Psychic claims Madeleine McCann is buried 13 miles from where she disappeared

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/german-psychic-makes-huge-madeleine-26795565#
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 26, 2022, 06:29:52 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 26, 2022, 05:42:32 PM
Won't be long now before the fat lady sings .

Psychic claims Madeleine McCann is buried 13 miles from where she disappeared

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/german-psychic-makes-huge-madeleine-26795565#

Haven't we been there before?

Let me concentrate - I see water and hills
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 26, 2022, 06:39:28 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 26, 2022, 08:09:57 AM
You just can’t tell when your chain is being yanked, which is just Davel’s way of dealing with your snide nasty insinuations about his personal life, which over the years amount to bullying and harassment in my opinion.

None of which explains why you are supportive of a ‘man’ who has suggested that a suitable punishment for a woman whose opinion didn’t concur with his was to put her alone in a room with a convicted rapist. Maybe you can explain….don’t worry I’ll wait.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 26, 2022, 06:46:08 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 26, 2022, 06:39:28 PM
None of which explains why you are supportive of a ‘man’ who has suggested that a suitable punishment for a woman whose opinion didn’t concur with his was to put her alone in a room with a convicted rapist. Maybe you can explain….don’t worry I’ll wait.

Lol
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 26, 2022, 06:48:50 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 26, 2022, 06:29:52 PM
Haven't we been there before?

Let me concentrate - I see water and hills

I can see water and bills. (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 26, 2022, 07:06:49 PM
Quote from: barrier on April 26, 2022, 05:42:32 PM
Won't be long now before the fat lady sings .

Psychic claims Madeleine McCann is buried 13 miles from where she disappeared

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/german-psychic-makes-huge-madeleine-26795565#

Oh great, another psychic charlatan.

Why can they never predict the winning lottery numbers?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 26, 2022, 07:29:24 PM


Worlds greatest psychic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rd79Ie_vWyQ
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 26, 2022, 07:38:45 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 26, 2022, 06:39:28 PM
None of which explains why you are supportive of a ‘man’ who has suggested that a suitable punishment for a woman whose opinion didn’t concur with his was to put her alone in a room with a convicted rapist. Maybe you can explain….don’t worry I’ll wait.
I already explained my take on it  last night (since removed with other posts last night)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 26, 2022, 09:16:46 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 26, 2022, 07:38:45 PM
I already explained my take on it  last night (since removed with other posts last night)

Seems to be..the enemy of my enemy is my friend…is the cliche of the day, even if that ‘friend’ condones locking up females with convicted rapists. Someone’s moral compass appears to be broken.

Oh and don’t worry, you’ll be back on ignore soon enough.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 26, 2022, 09:20:40 PM

Wandering off topic....

Elon Musk buying Twitter has caused the greatest democrat freak out since Trump 2016.

The democrats used Twitter as a propaganda arm, they blocked all mention of Hunter Biden's Laptop in the run up to the 2020 election, even though the story was absolutely true. Also blocked any mention of BLM leaders buying luxurious mansions.

When Trump spoke of the election being rigged he was in part right, democrats in big tech prevented news damaging to Joe Biden from being published.

The Whitehouse are all of a sudden concerned about free speech on the platform. (don't dare say Women are adult human females)

Musk is an uber-chad, his position being that speech you don't like from people you don't like should not be censored just because you don't agree.

Long live Elon Musk, I hope he buys Facebook next.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on April 26, 2022, 09:37:32 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 26, 2022, 09:16:46 PM
Seems to be..the enemy of my enemy is my friend…is the cliche of the day, even if that ‘friend’ condones locking up females with convicted rapists. Someone’s moral compass appears to be broken.

Oh and don’t worry, you’ll be back on ignore soon enough.

He isn't s rapist according to mcfattem
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 26, 2022, 10:06:22 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on April 26, 2022, 09:37:32 PM
He isn't s rapist according to mcfattem

Do you think he is?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 26, 2022, 11:05:22 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 26, 2022, 09:16:46 PM
Seems to be..the enemy of my enemy is my friend…is the cliche of the day, even if that ‘friend’ condones locking up females with convicted rapists. Someone’s moral compass appears to be broken.

Oh and don’t worry, you’ll be back on ignore soon enough.
Before you put me back on ignore perhaps you can provide a cite for me condoning locking up women with convicted rapists?  I think the person with the broken compass is the one who tells great big porky pies about other members of the forum, quite frankly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on April 26, 2022, 11:33:34 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 26, 2022, 11:05:22 PM
Before you put me back on ignore perhaps you can provide a cite for me condoning locking up women with convicted rapists?  I think the person with the broken compass is the one who tells great big porky pies about other members of the forum, quite frankly.

Back in your box VS and back on ignore.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 27, 2022, 12:11:00 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 26, 2022, 11:33:34 PM
Back in your box VS and back on ignore.
so no cite and no apology for telling shameless, blatant lies about me?  Well there’s a surprise.  You can’t put me in a box and you sure as hell can’t ignore me no matter how hard you try, so until the next time, baby…  &^&*%
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on April 27, 2022, 08:43:17 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on April 26, 2022, 11:33:34 PM
Back in your box VS and back on ignore.


Stop being so high and mighty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 27, 2022, 06:04:24 PM
Please can anyone remind me how to start a new thread?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 27, 2022, 06:36:42 PM
Quote from: sadie on April 27, 2022, 06:04:24 PM
Please can anyone remind me how to start a new thread?
click on the madeleine forum and click new topic above the list of threads.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 27, 2022, 10:26:02 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on April 27, 2022, 06:36:42 PM
click on the madeleine forum and click new topic above the list of threads.
Thankyou VS 8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 28, 2022, 02:27:49 AM
Quote from: sadie on April 27, 2022, 10:26:02 PM
Thankyou VS 8((()*/

Am unable to post some images, so unable to start a new fun (for some) thread.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on April 28, 2022, 07:32:13 AM
Quote from: sadie on April 28, 2022, 02:27:49 AM
Am unable to post some images, so unable to start a new fun (for some) thread.
If these images are on the net, just give horrible man a link then he'll post them without a Photoshop filter in sight.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 28, 2022, 01:35:22 PM
Quote from: Myster on April 28, 2022, 07:32:13 AM
If these images are on the net, just give horrible man a link then he'll post them without a Photoshop filter in sight.

Thank you so much for promoting O'Connor.  Dear little shit.  Not content with catching me a good one at the back of my knees, he yesterday smacked me right on the nose in his excitement to get at his dinner.  Dear of him.

So many years of Blogging and now it is all about the little horror story.  The sweetest dog I have ever owned.  And I have owned a fair few good dogs in my life.

But whatever else I have to say on my Blog, O'Connor is always there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 28, 2022, 01:44:10 PM

Okay.  I am off again now.

Too much utter rubbish for me, when Libel seems to be the order of the day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 28, 2022, 01:52:21 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 28, 2022, 01:44:10 PM
Okay.  I am off again now.

Too much utter rubbish for me, when Libel seems to be the order of the day.

Don't slam the door on your way out, there's a love.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 28, 2022, 02:04:05 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on April 28, 2022, 01:52:21 PM
Don't slam the door on your way out, there's a love.

Haven't we all heard that one before, you poor little imbecile.  O'Connor has got more brains than you have.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on April 29, 2022, 10:39:33 AM
Justice after 28 yrs.

A 28-year-old piece of Sellotape brought one of Britain’s most notorious cold cases to a close last week. The ‘taping’, pressed on to the coat of six-year-old Rikki Neave and stored in an archive decades ago, picked up fibres that would ultimately be linked to James Watson, then 13, who followed the younger boy into a Peterborough woodland in 1994 – and strangled him from behind with the zip of his coat. Watson had then allegedly stripped Neave naked and arranged him in a star pose, possibly for his own “sexual gratification”.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/04/29/piece-sellotape-unlocked-one-britains-notorious-cold-cases/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 29, 2022, 10:46:43 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 29, 2022, 10:39:33 AM
Justice after 28 yrs.

A 28-year-old piece of Sellotape brought one of Britain’s most notorious cold cases to a close last week. The ‘taping’, pressed on to the coat of six-year-old Rikki Neave and stored in an archive decades ago, picked up fibres that would ultimately be linked to James Watson, then 13, who followed the younger boy into a Peterborough woodland in 1994 – and strangled him from behind with the zip of his coat. Watson had then allegedly stripped Neave naked and arranged him in a star pose, possibly for his own “sexual gratification”.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/04/29/piece-sellotape-unlocked-one-britains-notorious-cold-cases/
Just goes to show the virtue of patience and not sneering at the police when they are trying their best to build a case against a subject but it seems to take a long time to amass the necessary evidence to secure a conviction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on April 29, 2022, 11:52:08 AM
Quote from: barrier on April 29, 2022, 10:39:33 AM
Justice after 28 yrs.

A 28-year-old piece of Sellotape brought one of Britain’s most notorious cold cases to a close last week. The ‘taping’, pressed on to the coat of six-year-old Rikki Neave and stored in an archive decades ago, picked up fibres that would ultimately be linked to James Watson, then 13, who followed the younger boy into a Peterborough woodland in 1994 – and strangled him from behind with the zip of his coat. Watson had then allegedly stripped Neave naked and arranged him in a star pose, possibly for his own “sexual gratification”.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/04/29/piece-sellotape-unlocked-one-britains-notorious-cold-cases/


Yet Amaral let the bedding go to the laundry it beggars belief,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 29, 2022, 12:18:24 PM
Quote from: Lace on April 29, 2022, 11:52:08 AM

Yet Amaral let the bedding go to the laundry it beggars belief,

Rather irrelevant, considering Wolters has already solved it without forensics.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 29, 2022, 01:08:40 PM
Quote from: Lace on April 29, 2022, 11:52:08 AM

Yet Amaral let the bedding go to the laundry it beggars belief,

What you expect it to have shown?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on April 29, 2022, 01:21:15 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 29, 2022, 01:08:40 PM
What you expect it to have shown?

What might it have shown?  Oppportunity lost.

Why don't you try thinking?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 29, 2022, 01:23:58 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 29, 2022, 01:08:40 PM
What you expect it to have shown?

Brueckner shed his skin cells when he lifted Maddie off the bed, or got into bed with her or something, at whatever time that was supposed to have been, after he'd finished fooling around with the bedroom door or hiding in the wardrobe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on April 29, 2022, 01:55:34 PM
Quote from: Lace on April 29, 2022, 11:52:08 AM

Yet Amaral let the bedding go to the laundry it beggars belief,

I thought that was a decision taken by the SCO's? In this case that would be the Crime Scene section of the Scientific Police Laboratory,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on April 29, 2022, 03:28:47 PM
Members are again warned about the language being used in some posts. As the bank holiday weekend approaches let's please at least try to keep posts civil and relevant to the topics being explored.

Moderators should remove any posts which are less than appropriate and sanction those posting them.

Should this bad behaviour continue I will suspend any member who continues to flaunt our rules.

That said, have a super weekend   8((()*/

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 01, 2022, 12:25:33 PM
Caveat for swirl, brit rags, gotta be true.


https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1601563/madeleine-mccann-15-years-on-disappearance-never-parked-forgotten-missing-person-expert


Mr Hedges added: “If you look at it in its purest sense, she went missing in Portugal. That's where the whole thing lives. And that's where the ownership is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 01, 2022, 12:33:58 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 01, 2022, 12:25:33 PM
Caveat for swirl, brit rags, gotta be true.


https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1601563/madeleine-mccann-15-years-on-disappearance-never-parked-forgotten-missing-person-expert


Mr Hedges added: “If you look at it in its purest sense, she went missing in Portugal. That's where the whole thing lives. And that's where the ownership is.
It’s Virl to you, and no need for your caveats ta.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 01, 2022, 12:36:52 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 01, 2022, 12:25:33 PM
Caveat for swirl, brit rags, gotta be true.


https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1601563/madeleine-mccann-15-years-on-disappearance-never-parked-forgotten-missing-person-expert


Mr Hedges added: “If you look at it in its purest sense, she went missing in Portugal. That's where the whole thing lives. And that's where the ownership is.

Unfortunately Portugal isn't very good at this sort of thing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 02, 2022, 10:25:38 AM
Being reported that the Murat property in Luz has been sold and construction has started on building flats, guess they never turned up Madeleines remains, aka S Birch.

https://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/casa-de-murat-onde-foram-feitas-buscas-por-maddie-foi-vendida-e-da-lugar-a-12-apartamentos


Murat's house where searches for Maddie were made has been sold and gives way to 12 apartments
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 02, 2022, 10:38:05 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 01, 2022, 12:36:52 PM
Unfortunately Portugal isn't very good at this sort of thing.

Your opinion doesn't alter the fact that Portugal have jurisdiction in this case. To give UK police their due, they have always acknowledged that fact. Whether the Germans will accept it remains to be seen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 02, 2022, 10:48:43 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 02, 2022, 10:38:05 AM
Your opinion doesn't alter the fact that Portugal have jurisdiction in this case. To give UK police their due, they have always acknowledged that fact. Whether the Germans will accept it remains to be seen.

I wouldn't half like to see Portugal trying to extradite Brueckner after they failed so miserably to even investigate him in the first place.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 02, 2022, 11:43:46 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 02, 2022, 10:48:43 AM
I wouldn't half like to see Portugal trying to extradite Brueckner after they failed so miserably to even investigate him in the first place.

I don't think that would be of any significance. Nobody was interested in him until all his 'friends' emerged with their pointy fingers. Perhaps they should have contacted the PJ at an earlier date.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 02, 2022, 12:11:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 02, 2022, 11:43:46 AM
I don't think that would be of any significance. Nobody was interested in him until all his 'friends' emerged with their pointy fingers. Perhaps they should have contacted the PJ at an earlier date.

The PJ were too busy pursuing The McCanns.  And what a waste of their time that turned out to be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 02, 2022, 12:34:29 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 02, 2022, 12:11:08 PM
The PJ were too busy pursuing The McCanns.  And what a waste of their time that turned out to be.

As his 'friends' didn't bother we'll never know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 02, 2022, 12:44:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 02, 2022, 12:34:29 PM
As his 'friends' didn't bother we'll never know.

I thought it was the job of Police Forces to investigate crimes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 02, 2022, 12:52:44 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 02, 2022, 12:44:31 PM
I thought it was the job of Police Forces to investigate crimes.

Why did it take so long for SY to investigate CB then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 02, 2022, 01:02:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 02, 2022, 12:52:44 PM
Why did it take so long for SY to investigate CB then?

Not their jurisdiction.  As you never fail to point out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 02, 2022, 01:15:24 PM
 A resigned acceptance of Madeleine dead ?


http://findmadeleine.com/updates/index.html

This year we mark fifteen years since we last saw Madeleine. It feels no harder than any other but no easier either. It’s a very long time.

Many people talk about the need for ‘closure’. It’s always felt a strange term. Regardless of outcome, Madeleine will always be our daughter and a truly horrific crime has been committed. These things will remain. It is true though that uncertainty creates weakness; knowledge and certainty give strength, and for this reason our need for answers, for the truth, is essential. We are grateful for the ongoing work and commitment of the UK, Portuguese and German authorities as it is this combined police effort which will yield results and bring us those answers.

As always, we would like to thank all of our supporters for their continued good wishes and support. It is a huge comfort to know that regardless of time passed, Madeleine is still in people’s hearts and minds. Thank you.



Kate & Gerry
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 02, 2022, 10:21:40 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 02, 2022, 09:12:44 PM
But it wasn’t money, nor was it any other consideration, said the Greek police.  I expect they (like everyone else who says something that doesn’t sit well with you) were lying.

I don't know why he suddenly decided to speak to the Met after 9 years, but I suspect it wasn't a belated sense of social responsibility.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 02, 2022, 10:48:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 02, 2022, 10:21:40 PM
I don't know why he suddenly decided to speak to the Met after 9 years, but I suspect it wasn't a belated sense of social responsibility.
you haven’t a clue basically, but are apparently content to cast sly aspersions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 02, 2022, 10:58:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 02, 2022, 10:21:40 PM
I don't know why he suddenly decided to speak to the Met after 9 years, but I suspect it wasn't a belated sense of social responsibility.

According to an internal Greek police report, Busching’s information was described as “given voluntarily and without monetary or other consideration”.

It added that it had been “cross-checked and is considered a reliable source”. It also revealed how Busching had tried to report his concerns to the Portuguese police but had been fobbed off.

                                                ::::    ::::    ::::    ::::    ::::

There is always the possibility that his allegation met with the same reaction from the Portuguese police that a few others reported they received.

This is not a nice guy.  Law breaking was a way of life for him although it seems he did draw the line at some things ~ for example, abducting a child.

I don't think he would find making an approach to the police an easy thing to do.  If he was "fobbed off" when he did make the approach ~ I really don't see him hanging around to try for a second go.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 02, 2022, 11:02:23 PM
Being fobbed off by the PJ is a definite recurring theme throughout the early investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 02, 2022, 11:27:59 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 02, 2022, 10:58:23 PM
According to an internal Greek police report, Busching’s information was described as “given voluntarily and without monetary or other consideration”.

It added that it had been “cross-checked and is considered a reliable source”. It also revealed how Busching had tried to report his concerns to the Portuguese police but had been fobbed off.

                                                ::::    ::::    ::::    ::::    ::::

There is always the possibility that his allegation met with the same reaction from the Portuguese police that a few others reported they received.

This is not a nice guy.  Law breaking was a way of life for him although it seems he did draw the line at some things ~ for example, abducting a child.

I don't think he would find making an approach to the police an easy thing to do.  If he was "fobbed off" when he did make the approach ~ I really don't see him hanging around to try for a second go.

Wasn’t he under arrest for human trafficking when he gave his information to the police?

Further do you think the Greek police would have admitted that he was ‘rewarded’ for his information? Perhaps by giving the information Busching hoped it may go better for him with the police. Are you really so naive that you believe that the minute he was arrested for trafficking Busching, coincidentally, obtained a moral compass too ( and please don’t insult my or your intelligence with that old ‘ he told the Portuguese police’ chestnut )…in the words of Mandy Rice-Davies, he would say that, wouldn’t he!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 02, 2022, 11:37:36 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 02, 2022, 11:27:59 PM
Wasn’t he under arrest for human trafficking when he gave his information to the police?

Further do you think the Greek police would have admitted that he was ‘rewarded’ for his information? Perhaps by giving the information Busching hoped it may go better for him with the police. Are you really so naive that you believe that the minute he was arrested for trafficking Busching, coincidentally, obtained a moral compass too ( and please don’t insult my or your intelligence with that old ‘ he told the Portuguese police’ chestnut )…in the words of Mandy Rice-Davies, he would say that, wouldn’t he!
And are you really so credulous as to believe that Busching would be able tomake up such an apparently far fetched  tale on the spot simply to get on the good side of the Greek police or that they would in turn be so credulous as to just fall for it hook line and sinker without any further investigation or corroboation?  What was in it for the Greeks again, remind me?

PS: it’s about time you dropped the Mandy Rice- Davies quote now, it’s getting boring.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 02, 2022, 11:40:21 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 02, 2022, 11:37:36 PM
And are you really so credulous as to believe that Busching would be able tomake up such an apparently far fetched  tale on the spot simply to get on the good side of the Greek police or that they would in turn be so credulous as to just fall for it hook line and sinker without any further investigation or corroboation?  What was in it for the Greeks again, remind me?

Being a part of the investigation that solved the biggest missing child case in history? I’m sure that’d be a feather in any police force’s cap.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 02, 2022, 11:53:39 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 02, 2022, 11:40:21 PM
Being a part of the investigation that solved the biggest missing child case in history? I’m sure that’d be a feather in any police force’s cap.
Not if it turned out they’d lied and done a deal with a mad fantasist, that’s not much of a feather to boast about  is it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 02, 2022, 11:56:19 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 02, 2022, 11:53:39 PM
Not if it turned out they’d lied and done a deal with a mad fantasist, that’s not much of a feather to boast about  is it?

But then they wouldn’t have boasted, would they? We’d never have heard about it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 03, 2022, 12:00:15 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 02, 2022, 11:56:19 PM
But then they wouldn’t have boasted, would they? We’d never have heard about it.
We have heard about it, were they boasting about it?  I thought you said that that was their motive for doing a deal with Busching?

PS: why am I not on ignore?  Please put me back where I belong, it’s disorientating.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 09:00:08 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 02, 2022, 11:02:23 PM
Being fobbed off by the PJ is a definite recurring theme throughout the early investigation.

Only among those who spoke to the press rather than the police imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 03, 2022, 09:49:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 09:00:08 AM
Only among those who spoke to the press rather than the police imo.
Of course there’s plenty of evidence of police fobbing off in the Files, and from Amaral himself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 03, 2022, 09:52:33 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 03, 2022, 12:00:15 AM
We have heard about it, were they boasting about it?  I thought you said that that was their motive for doing a deal with Busching?

PS: why am I not on ignore?  Please put me back where I belong, it’s disorientating.

If the Brueckner lead hadn’t lead anywhere we’d have heard nothing about it. The Greek police took a chance that they might receive some of the reflected glory if the information lead anywhere

BTW have you read what MWT says about Busching?

As to the ignore thing…I’m afraid comment is thin on the ground at the moment and as you appear to be here 24/7 I’m afraid you’ll have to do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2022, 10:03:03 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 03, 2022, 09:52:33 AM
If the Brueckner lead hadn’t lead anywhere we’d have heard nothing about it. The Greek police took a chance that they might receive some of the reflected glory if the information lead anywhere

BTW have you read what MWT says about Busching?

As to the ignore thing…I’m afraid comment is thin on the ground at the moment and as you appear to be here 24/7 I’m afraid you’ll have to do.

My sentiments exactly.  I'll read any old rubbish when I haven't got anything better to do.  Although others talk more rubbish than SW and a jolly sight more often.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 03, 2022, 10:03:53 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 03, 2022, 09:49:23 AM
Of course there’s plenty of evidence of police fobbing off in the Files, and from Amaral himself.

Amaral has constantly condemned himself in his own words.  I think there is a fair chance many of them will come back to haunt him in the not too distant future.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 03, 2022, 10:06:11 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 03, 2022, 10:03:53 AM
Amaral has constantly condemned himself in his own words.  I think there is a fair chance many of them will come back to haunt him in the not too distant future.

I’m sure Amaral isn’t the slightest bit bothered. In fact the latest developments could be very lucrative for him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 03, 2022, 10:14:50 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 03, 2022, 10:06:11 AM
I’m sure Amaral isn’t the slightest bit bothered. In fact the latest developments could be very lucrative for him.
Only if he rents himself out at a "Throw Rotten Tomatoes At The Rotten Ex Cop" stall at the PdL Summer Fair. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 10:37:03 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 03, 2022, 09:49:23 AM
Of course there’s plenty of evidence of police fobbing off in the Files, and from Amaral himself.

Refusing to speak to people? Who?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 03, 2022, 10:37:22 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 10:37:03 AM
Refusing to speak to people? Who?
Come again?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 03, 2022, 10:49:31 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 03, 2022, 10:06:11 AM
I’m sure Amaral isn’t the slightest bit bothered. In fact the latest developments could be very lucrative for him.
You only have to look at the latest mouth on a stick offering from Harry Grout from CEOP, or whatever he's called. The Mail have got that lad's number of speed dial and I doubt his soundbites are free.
It's the money fountain and it's unlikely to end.
No wonder so many wannabee's and cling ons are trying to inject themselves in to it - there's easy money to be made. Even CB himself is in on it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 11:21:25 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 03, 2022, 10:37:22 AM
Come again?

What evidence in the files shows people being 'fobbed off'?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 03, 2022, 11:42:46 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 11:21:25 AM
What evidence in the files shows people being 'fobbed off'?
Everything not properly investigated that was marked "not relevant to the investigation" for one thing. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 03, 2022, 12:04:47 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 03, 2022, 11:42:46 AM
Everything not properly investigated that was marked "not relevant to the investigation" for one thing.

Do you think that the ‘leads’ in that file had been investigated but found to be ‘not relevant’ ?

Nahhh….that’s far too simple.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 03, 2022, 12:17:49 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 03, 2022, 12:04:47 PM
Do you think that the ‘leads’ in that file had been investigated but found to be ‘not relevant’ ?

Nahhh….that’s far too simple.
Stop being so simple then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 12:25:27 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 03, 2022, 11:42:46 AM
Everything not properly investigated that was marked "not relevant to the investigation" for one thing.

I was referring to claims that the PJ didn't interview people who approached them. Others claimed they had been interviewed, but those interviews weren't in the files.

That's not the same as the PJ listening to people then deciding whether their information was useful or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 03, 2022, 12:55:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 12:25:27 PM
I was referring to claims that the PJ didn't interview people who approached them. Others claimed they had been interviewed, but those interviews weren't in the files.

That's not the same as the PJ listening to people then deciding whether their information was useful or not.
Do you understand the meaning of the phrase "fobbed off"?  That was the phrase I used.  Look it up if you don't understand its meaning.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 03, 2022, 01:32:05 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 03, 2022, 12:17:49 PM
Stop being so simple then.

Dodged that rather pertinent question. Well done you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 01:52:04 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 03, 2022, 12:55:35 PM
Do you understand the meaning of the phrase "fobbed off"?  That was the phrase I used.  Look it up if you don't understand its meaning.

We were discussing Busching's claim; "It also revealed how Busching had tried to report his concerns to the Portuguese police but had been fobbed off." Clearly it was about the police refusing to make a record of his 'concerns', not about them recording them but not investigating them or dismissing them. A very common claim made by people who preferred speaking to the press than to the police imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2022, 02:16:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 01:52:04 PM
We were discussing Busching's claim; "It also revealed how Busching had tried to report his concerns to the Portuguese police but had been fobbed off." Clearly it was about the police refusing to make a record of his 'concerns', not about them recording them but not investigating them or dismissing them. A very common claim made by people who preferred speaking to the press than to the police imo.

This Comment doesn't make sense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 02:43:40 PM
Allow me to explain. Busching, just like others who spoke to the press, claimed that the Portuguese police fobbed him off when he tried to tell them what he knew. There's no evidence that this happened to anyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 03, 2022, 02:52:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 02:43:40 PM
Allow me to explain. Busching, just like others who spoke to the press, claimed that the Portuguese police fobbed him off when he tried to tell them what he knew. There's no evidence that this happened to anyone.
Yes there is - their own words, and the fact that there are instances in the files and in Amaral's own anecdotes of reports being dismissed as unimportant or irrelevant to the investigation.  I doubt even the PJ would be so stupid as to keep a written record entitled "witnesses we fobbed off" to make it easy for you to find them all but one can see evidence in the files where that has been the case.  It happened to so many individuals they can't ALL be part of some giant conspiracy to push the abduction theory. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 03, 2022, 02:53:45 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 03, 2022, 01:32:05 PM
Dodged that rather pertinent question. Well done you.
you say "pertinent", I say "completely nonsensical".   Try asking again in a way that makes sense. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 03, 2022, 03:03:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 02:43:40 PM
Allow me to explain. Busching, just like others who spoke to the press, claimed that the Portuguese police fobbed him off when he tried to tell them what he knew. There's no evidence that this happened to anyone.

Some people spoke to the press in sheer frustration that the Portuguese police were either fobbing them off or ignoring the information they were trying to pass on to them.

One of the many cases in point


In an exclusive interview, Jayne Jensen and Annie Wiltshire told how they saw two blond men in their 30s, standing on the balcony of an empty apartment only a couple of doors away from the McCanns' flat in Praia da Luz.

Although the two sisters contacted Portuguese police within hours of Madeleine's disappearance, their evidence was ignored for six months.

The women met police three times within 24 hours, tried to find out who the strangers were themselves and made several follow-up phone calls to the authorities.

But it was not until six weeks ago that a formal statement was finally taken.

The two women, both divorcees from Maidstone, Kent, spent 11 hours with British police officers providing details of their evidence and later met private detectives from Metodo 3, the agency employed by the McCanns to find their daughter.

They intended to remain anonymous but when their names were leaked to a Portuguese newspaper and they found themselves wrongly accused of waiting eight months before coming forward, they decided to reveal the truth.

The sisters said they were immediately struck by the behaviour of the two men on the balcony.
The pair, tanned and in Bermuda shorts, were standing outside the patio doors of a groundfloor apartment, which had been unoccupied all week, and were looking out over the resort's family swimming pool and restaurant area.

Mrs Wiltshire, 58, a mother of two, said: "It was odd because I hadn't seen them before. In May the resort wasn't busy.

"There were only about 60 of us staying in the apartments and you got to recognise all the other people.
"One of the guys was walking down the steps and as I looked at him, he walked back up and started talking to the other one.

"They had a view of the whole Ocean Club and the McCanns' apartment. It just showed how easy it would be for anyone to use those balconies to watch the area. It has haunted me ever since."

Mrs Wiltshire, who went on holiday with her sister to recover from a cancer operation, said: "The theory is that Madeleine could have been targeted. This story proves how easily it could have been done but the Portuguese police were not interested.

"It makes you wonder if there are more of us out there who have tried and not succeeded in reporting things they saw but have given up.

"They might not have been as persistent and tenacious as us but we were determined to get the information to the police somehow."

As the hours passed without any sighting of Madeleine, Mrs Wiltshire became increasingly concerned about the strangers she had seen the day before.

She said: "I didn't know if it was significant or not but I needed to tell the police in case it helped.

"I got a member of Mark Warner's staff to get a policeman to come and see me and told two officers about the men I had seen.

"I told them they were blond and one had curly hair. One was stockier than the other and they had obviously just opened the gate and walked up to the balcony.

"I showed the policemen the balcony and as I was explaining the circumstances, Robert Murat appeared and started translating for me."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-504950/British-witnesses-We-saw-blond-men-balcony-Madeleine-apartment.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 03, 2022, 03:10:35 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 03, 2022, 02:53:45 PM
you say "pertinent", I say "completely nonsensical".   Try asking again in a way that makes sense.

It really doesn’t matter dear. Don’t let it worry you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 03, 2022, 03:43:31 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 03, 2022, 03:10:35 PM
It really doesn’t matter dear. Don’t let it worry you.
I'm not remotely worried dear but thanks for your faux concern. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 04:58:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 03, 2022, 03:03:16 PM
Some people spoke to the press in sheer frustration that the Portuguese police were either fobbing them off or ignoring the information they were trying to pass on to them.

One of the many cases in point


In an exclusive interview, Jayne Jensen and Annie Wiltshire told how they saw two blond men in their 30s, standing on the balcony of an empty apartment only a couple of doors away from the McCanns' flat in Praia da Luz.

Although the two sisters contacted Portuguese police within hours of Madeleine's disappearance, their evidence was ignored for six months.

The women met police three times within 24 hours, tried to find out who the strangers were themselves and made several follow-up phone calls to the authorities.

But it was not until six weeks ago that a formal statement was finally taken.

The two women, both divorcees from Maidstone, Kent, spent 11 hours with British police officers providing details of their evidence and later met private detectives from Metodo 3, the agency employed by the McCanns to find their daughter.

They intended to remain anonymous but when their names were leaked to a Portuguese newspaper and they found themselves wrongly accused of waiting eight months before coming forward, they decided to reveal the truth.

The sisters said they were immediately struck by the behaviour of the two men on the balcony.
The pair, tanned and in Bermuda shorts, were standing outside the patio doors of a groundfloor apartment, which had been unoccupied all week, and were looking out over the resort's family swimming pool and restaurant area.

Mrs Wiltshire, 58, a mother of two, said: "It was odd because I hadn't seen them before. In May the resort wasn't busy.

"There were only about 60 of us staying in the apartments and you got to recognise all the other people.
"One of the guys was walking down the steps and as I looked at him, he walked back up and started talking to the other one.

"They had a view of the whole Ocean Club and the McCanns' apartment. It just showed how easy it would be for anyone to use those balconies to watch the area. It has haunted me ever since."

Mrs Wiltshire, who went on holiday with her sister to recover from a cancer operation, said: "The theory is that Madeleine could have been targeted. This story proves how easily it could have been done but the Portuguese police were not interested.

"It makes you wonder if there are more of us out there who have tried and not succeeded in reporting things they saw but have given up.

"They might not have been as persistent and tenacious as us but we were determined to get the information to the police somehow."

As the hours passed without any sighting of Madeleine, Mrs Wiltshire became increasingly concerned about the strangers she had seen the day before.

She said: "I didn't know if it was significant or not but I needed to tell the police in case it helped.

"I got a member of Mark Warner's staff to get a policeman to come and see me and told two officers about the men I had seen.

"I told them they were blond and one had curly hair. One was stockier than the other and they had obviously just opened the gate and walked up to the balcony.

"I showed the policemen the balcony and as I was explaining the circumstances, Robert Murat appeared and started translating for me."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-504950/British-witnesses-We-saw-blond-men-balcony-Madeleine-apartment.html

I wonder who leaked their names to a Portuguese newspaper? It wasn't the PJ because they never spoke to them. So was it Leicestershire police or Metodo 3?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 03, 2022, 05:02:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 04:58:36 PM
I wonder who leaked their names to a Portuguese newspaper? It wasn't the PJ because they never spoke to them. So was it Leicestershire police or Metodo 3?
According to the article they did speak to the police, six weeks prior to the article in which they gave a formal statement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 03, 2022, 05:17:21 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 03, 2022, 05:02:00 PM
According to the article they did speak to the police, six weeks prior to the article in which they gave a formal statement.

Murat translated for them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 03, 2022, 05:21:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 04:58:36 PM
I wonder who leaked their names to a Portuguese newspaper? It wasn't the PJ because they never spoke to them. So was it Leicestershire police or Metodo 3?
As the hours passed without any sighting of Madeleine, Mrs Wiltshire became increasingly concerned about the strangers she had seen the day before.

She said: "I didn't know if it was significant or not but I needed to tell the police in case it helped.

"I got a member of Mark Warner's staff to get a policeman to come and see me and told two officers about the men I had seen.

"I told them they were blond and one had curly hair. One was stockier than the other and they had obviously just opened the gate and walked up to the balcony.

"I showed the policemen the balcony and as I was explaining the circumstances, Robert Murat appeared and started translating for me."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-504950/British-witnesses-We-saw-blond-men-balcony-Madeleine-apartment.html

Why is it you appear never to read the link provided and supply a contradiction instead?  Very sloppy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 06:31:56 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 03, 2022, 05:02:00 PM
According to the article they did speak to the police, six weeks prior to the article in which they gave a formal statement.

They spoke to the UK police in November 2007. Whatever they said, no statements were passed on to the PJ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 03, 2022, 09:58:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 03, 2022, 06:31:56 PM
They spoke to the UK police in November 2007. Whatever they said, no statements were passed on to the PJ.

More to the point - they spoke to the Portuguese police repeatedly in the 'golden hours' in the immediate aftermath of Madeleine abduction.

They had important identification information to convey to them.

They were totally ignored.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2022, 10:05:02 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 03, 2022, 09:58:38 PM
More to the point - they spoke to the Portuguese police repeatedly in the 'golden hours' in the immediate aftermath of Madeleine abduction.

They had important identification information to convey to them.

They were totally ignored.

We saw two blokes on a balcony.

Not much you can do with that really is there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 04, 2022, 06:15:52 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2022, 10:05:02 PM
We saw two blokes on a balcony.

Not much you can do with that really is there.

There were two blokes on a balcony that afternoon; Matthew Oldfield and Russell O'Brien.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2022, 06:55:47 AM

Jesus Christ.  What a glorious start to another fine day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 04, 2022, 09:00:07 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 03, 2022, 09:58:38 PM
More to the point - they spoke to the Portuguese police repeatedly in the 'golden hours' in the immediate aftermath of Madeleine abduction.

They had important identification information to convey to them.

They were totally ignored.

So they said. I wonder why the UK police didn't pass their statements to the PJ? Maybe they saw them as not relevant to the investigation?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 04, 2022, 09:18:19 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 04, 2022, 09:00:07 AM
So they said. I wonder why the UK police didn't pass their statements to the PJ? Maybe they saw them as not relevant to the investigation?
Or maybe the PJ filed them in the waste paper basket as they were focused on building a case against the parents at the time?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 04, 2022, 09:18:40 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 04, 2022, 09:00:07 AM
So they said. I wonder why the UK police didn't pass their statements to the PJ? Maybe they saw them as not relevant to the investigation?

I wonder why Metodo3 didn't immediately release the crucial details of their statements either?

Too busy trying to get them both to pin it on Murat instead.

Sisters Jayne Jensen and Annie Wiltshire say they are 100 per cent sure they saw Robert Murat nearby minutes after Madeleine McCann vanished.

A friend said last night: "Jayne and Annie know what they saw and that is that."

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jayne-and-ann-know-what-they-saw-531273
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 04, 2022, 09:34:49 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 04, 2022, 06:55:47 AM
Jesus Christ.  What a glorious start to another fine day.

He didn't say that on the cross.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 04, 2022, 09:38:18 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 04, 2022, 09:34:49 AM
He didn't say that on the cross.

No, he said "I'm Brian & so's my wife"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 04, 2022, 10:30:41 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 04, 2022, 09:18:19 AM
Or maybe the PJ filed them in the waste paper basket as they were focused on building a case against the parents at the time?

Various statements taken by the UK police don't appear in the PJ files. Others appear much later than they were taken. I've seen no evidence that the PJ rejected paperwork sent to them by the UK police, but it does seem that the UK police decided what they passed to the PJ and what they didn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 04, 2022, 11:17:08 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 04, 2022, 10:30:41 AM
Various statements taken by the UK police don't appear in the PJ files. Others appear much later than they were taken. I've seen no evidence that the PJ rejected paperwork sent to them by the UK police, but it does seem that the UK police decided what they passed to the PJ and what they didn't.
LOl.  What evidence of that would you expect to see? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 04, 2022, 01:41:42 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 04, 2022, 11:17:08 AM
LOl.  What evidence of that would you expect to see?

The lack of evidence didn't stop you from snide speculations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 04, 2022, 01:50:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 04, 2022, 01:41:42 PM
The lack of evidence didn't stop you from snide speculations.
About what?  There IS evidence that these women went to the police.  They said they did and have no reason to lie.  That is evidence, like it or lump it.  Now what evidence would you expect to see in the files of the PJ rejecting paperwork?  It's a ridiculous premise when you think about it isn't it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 04, 2022, 01:53:28 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 04, 2022, 01:50:09 PM
About what?  There IS evidence that these women went to the police.  They said they did and have no reason to lie.  That is evidence, like it or lump it.  Now what evidence would you expect to see in the files of the PJ rejecting paperwork?  It's a ridiculous premise when you think about it isn't it?

So we're they telling the truth about Murat?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 04, 2022, 04:16:07 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 04, 2022, 01:50:09 PM
About what?  There IS evidence that these women went to the police.  They said they did and have no reason to lie.  That is evidence, like it or lump it.  Now what evidence would you expect to see in the files of the PJ rejecting paperwork?  It's a ridiculous premise when you think about it isn't it?

What…you mean apart from the payment they’d have been paid by whatever rag they sold their story to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 04, 2022, 04:20:18 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 04, 2022, 04:16:07 PM
What…you mean apart from the payment they’d have been paid by whatever rag they sold their story to?
I trust you have evidence for that accusation, that they lied to the media for money? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 04, 2022, 05:12:06 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 04, 2022, 04:20:18 PM
I trust you have evidence for that accusation, that they lied to the media for money?

Didn’t they also say that they saw Murat that night? Yet Murat says that he wasn’t there, so someone’s lying?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 04, 2022, 05:27:31 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 04, 2022, 05:12:06 PM
Didn’t they also say that they saw Murat that night? Yet Murat says that he wasn’t there, so someone’s lying?
It’s always so black and white with you isn’t it?  Of course they couldn’t possibly have mistaken Murat for someone else so they must have lied, lied and lied again and then sold their fat juicy lies to the Mail for enormous wodges of cash.  They now live on individual super yachts anchored off Monaco and are fed individual grapes by their own personal tanned young bodyguards, so rich did they get off the back of their ENORMOUS LIES.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 04, 2022, 05:44:05 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 04, 2022, 01:50:09 PM
About what?  There IS evidence that these women went to the police.  They said they did and have no reason to lie.  That is evidence, like it or lump it.  Now what evidence would you expect to see in the files of the PJ rejecting paperwork?  It's a ridiculous premise when you think about it isn't it?

Therefore you are speculating when you suggest that the PJ disposed  of evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 04, 2022, 06:27:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 04, 2022, 05:44:05 PM
Therefore you are speculating when you suggest that the PJ disposed  of evidence.
Quote from: G-Unit on May 04, 2022, 05:44:05 PM
Therefore you are speculating when you suggest that the PJ disposed  of evidence.
Quote from: G-Unit on May 04, 2022, 05:44:05 PM
Therefore you are speculating when you suggest that the PJ disposed  of evidence.
No, I am making a reasoned deduction based on the evidence.  The women say they went to the Portuguese police in May 2007.  Either the police took statements and didn’t file them or they didn’t bother recording their evidence in the first place or they got lost or they witheld them from the files for some reason.  Or the women are bare faced liars who waited 8 months to go to the British police.  Why would they do that though?  The logical explanation is the the Portuguese police (probably the GNR) never passed it on to the PJ, or if they did it was ignored or overlooked. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 04, 2022, 06:47:40 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 04, 2022, 05:27:31 PM
It’s always so black and white with you isn’t it?  Of course they couldn’t possibly have mistaken Murat for someone else so they must have lied, lied and lied again and then sold their fat juicy lies to the Mail for enormous wodges of cash.  They now live on individual super yachts anchored off Monaco and are fed individual grapes by their own personal tanned young bodyguards, so rich did they get off the back of their ENORMOUS LIES.

But surely when it’s pointed out to you that the man you are accusing denies that he was out that night you might think….mmmm maybe I was wrong? The day after Madeleine’s disappearance the sisters met Murat so surely at that point they would realise that they’d been wrong. Further if it was so clear that they weren’t being listened to by the Portuguese police why not contact the British police? Why wait eight whole months?

BTW tabloids don’t pay enough for a super yacht but a couple of gins and some tapas….absolutely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 04, 2022, 07:20:54 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 04, 2022, 06:47:40 PM
But surely when it’s pointed out to you that the man you are accusing denies that he was out that night you might think….mmmm maybe I was wrong? The day after Madeleine’s disappearance the sisters met Murat so surely at that point they would realise that they’d been wrong. Further if it was so clear that they weren’t being listened to by the Portuguese police why not contact the British police? Why wait eight whole months?

BTW tabloids don’t pay enough for a super yacht but a couple of gins and some tapas….absolutely.
Is this you evidence that they lied to the media for cash?  It’s pisspoor really isn’t it? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 04, 2022, 07:26:40 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 04, 2022, 07:20:54 PM
Is this you evidence that they lied to the media for cash?  It’s pisspoor really isn’t it?

Not a phrase I’d use but then……!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 05, 2022, 05:34:37 PM
Probably lucky the brits won't prosecute  Madeleine's case, we let kiddie killers out on the streets again.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/18471823/baby-p-mum-tracey-connelly-freed-jail-parole-board/


BACK ON THE STREETS Baby P’s evil mother Tracey Connelly WILL be freed from jail after serving just 11 years for sick crimes
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 10, 2022, 09:05:41 PM
Was there a church service for Madeleine this year?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2022, 09:17:20 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 10, 2022, 09:05:41 PM
Was there a church service for Madeleine this year?

There was an outdoor vigil, so I recall reading, not sure about an actual church service.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 10, 2022, 11:21:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 10, 2022, 09:05:41 PM
Was there a church service for Madeleine this year?
Why do you ask?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 11, 2022, 10:25:03 AM
I guess we’ll never know why the question of whether or not the McCanns held a church service for Madeleine this year was considered important or interesting enough to raise on this forum…
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 11, 2022, 10:36:05 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 11, 2022, 10:25:03 AM
I guess we’ll never know why the question of whether or not the McCanns held a church service for Madeleine this year was considered important or interesting enough to raise on this forum…

Well, I could try to explain, but only through the medium of interpretative dance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 11, 2022, 12:06:53 PM
Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. / Re: It has taken fifteen years ~ is Madeleine's case close to being solved?
« on: May 10, 2022, 04:51:06 PM »
Quote
Wonderfulspam on May 10, 2022, 04:07:35 PM
Wouldn't the time for defending her have been between 9pm & 10pm on May 3rd?

It's not much use defending her now if she's already dead, is it.

She is not dead.   Why is everyone prepared to accept she is dead?   
You do realise, don't you all, that if you keep saying it without any proof, she will become dead in the eyes of the World.   And the search will cease.


Scotland Yard believe her to be missing.    Note:  NOT DEAD

I have reasons for believing her to be very much alive


Some very clever disinformation has been drip fed to us persuading people that Madeleine is dead.   She is alive and either pregnant or has given birth (or maybe miscarried) from things that I have seen/deduced.   

 
I seem to remember that Kate, her Mum, had carrying/birthing problems needing medical assistance

Every time someone on here, or elsewhere, says that Madeleine is dead puts another nail in the coffin of the search IMO

Please stop saying it.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 12, 2022, 12:44:31 PM
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=12181.msg683442#msg683442

I've been accused on another thread of 'getting it wrong' and assured that the McCanns decided to leave Portugal after they were made arguidos, not before. I present my evidence and await the presentation of my accuser's evidence with interest.

On 27th August, according to Kate McCann,

"we learned that we would need to vacate our villa by 11 September...We had waited in vain for the police to call us back for interview. Finally, and very reluctantly, I agreed to set a date for our departure. Monday 10 September it would have to be" [madeleine]

On 3rd September Ricardo Paiva visited them;

"He clarified with us the date of our planned departure back to the UK and told us that the PJ wanted to ‘interrogate’
me on Wednesday and Gerry on Thursday. We’d waited almost four weeks for these interviews and it was obvious they had been hastily arranged once Bob Small notified the PJ that we would be leaving the country. Otherwise, why now?" [madeleine]

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 12, 2022, 03:36:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 12, 2022, 12:44:31 PM
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=12181.msg683442#msg683442

I've been accused on another thread of 'getting it wrong' and assured that the McCanns decided to leave Portugal after they were made arguidos, not before. I present my evidence and await the presentation of my accuser's evidence with interest.

On 27th August, according to Kate McCann,

"we learned that we would need to vacate our villa by 11 September...We had waited in vain for the police to call us back for interview. Finally, and very reluctantly, I agreed to set a date for our departure. Monday 10 September it would have to be" [madeleine]

On 3rd September Ricardo Paiva visited them;

"He clarified with us the date of our planned departure back to the UK and told us that the PJ wanted to ‘interrogate’
me on Wednesday and Gerry on Thursday. We’d waited almost four weeks for these interviews and it was obvious they had been hastily arranged once Bob Small notified the PJ that we would be leaving the country. Otherwise, why now?" [madeleine]

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail/20071207/282076272528330

lots of lies were told about them including that they were swingers.  How could they have faith in such a non-investigation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2022, 04:54:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 12, 2022, 12:44:31 PM
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=12181.msg683442#msg683442

I've been accused on another thread of 'getting it wrong' and assured that the McCanns decided to leave Portugal after they were made arguidos, not before. I present my evidence and await the presentation of my accuser's evidence with interest.

On 27th August, according to Kate McCann,

"we learned that we would need to vacate our villa by 11 September...We had waited in vain for the police to call us back for interview. Finally, and very reluctantly, I agreed to set a date for our departure. Monday 10 September it would have to be" [madeleine]

On 3rd September Ricardo Paiva visited them;

"He clarified with us the date of our planned departure back to the UK and told us that the PJ wanted to ‘interrogate’
me on Wednesday and Gerry on Thursday. We’d waited almost four weeks for these interviews and it was obvious they had been hastily arranged once Bob Small notified the PJ that we would be leaving the country. Otherwise, why now?" [madeleine]
given that Kate says they had been waiting 4 weeks for these interviews  it would seem your accuser was right and you were wrong. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 12, 2022, 05:39:03 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 12, 2022, 04:54:28 PM
given that Kate says they had been waiting 4 weeks for these interviews  it would seem your accuser was right and you were wrong.

Only in McCannland.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 12, 2022, 06:04:13 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 12, 2022, 04:54:28 PM
given that Kate says they had been waiting 4 weeks for these interviews  it would seem your accuser was right and you were wrong.

They didn't decide to leave after they were made arguidos, they decided before.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2022, 06:34:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 12, 2022, 06:04:13 PM
They didn't decide to leave after they were made arguidos, they decided before.
What interviews was Kate referring to that they had already been waiting 4 weeks for?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 16, 2022, 08:55:06 PM
The Greek pilot who murdered his wife and killed the family puppy has been found guilty but that hasn’t put off his sick fanclub

“Despite the evidence against Anagnostopoulos, a small group of women gathered outside the courthouse to support the pilot. “By no means do I justify what he did,” Evaggelia Selekou, 52, told The Times. “But he’s quite handsome and dashing, and I am 100 per cent sure that Babis acted in a fit of rage.” Another mid-aged woman said: “He’s quite sensitive, not the narcissist they paint him out to be.”

“I think of him a lot,” she said, adjusting a thick gold necklace on her bright orange blouse. “I’ve collected pictures of him and pinned them on my bedroom wall.”


“If I could, I would try and visit him in prison. I am concerned that the nice chap that he is, he will not endure the prison time. I fear he may slash his wrists or something”

What is wrong with these people?  I guess it’s the same mentality that enables people to minimise and downplay the crimes of people like Brückner.  I expect there are plenty of women sending him fanmail (and probably some men too), and if he’s found guilty of further rapes (or even murder) no doubt his sex appeal will be further enhanced in the eyes of sickos like this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 16, 2022, 10:45:14 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 16, 2022, 08:55:06 PM
The Greek pilot who murdered his wife and killed the family puppy has been found guilty but that hasn’t put off his sick fanclub

“Despite the evidence against Anagnostopoulos, a small group of women gathered outside the courthouse to support the pilot. “By no means do I justify what he did,” Evaggelia Selekou, 52, told The Times. “But he’s quite handsome and dashing, and I am 100 per cent sure that Babis acted in a fit of rage.” Another mid-aged woman said: “He’s quite sensitive, not the narcissist they paint him out to be.”

“I think of him a lot,” she said, adjusting a thick gold necklace on her bright orange blouse. “I’ve collected pictures of him and pinned them on my bedroom wall.”


“If I could, I would try and visit him in prison. I am concerned that the nice chap that he is, he will not endure the prison time. I fear he may slash his wrists or something”

What is wrong with these people?  I guess it’s the same mentality that enables people to minimise and downplay the crimes of people like Brückner.  I expect there are plenty of women sending him fanmail (and probably some men too), and if he’s found guilty of further rapes (or even murder) no doubt his sex appeal will be further enhanced in the eyes of sickos like this.

I think they're more to be pitied than reviled. How does someone end up so far off track?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 16, 2022, 10:47:06 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 16, 2022, 08:55:06 PM
The Greek pilot who murdered his wife and killed the family puppy has been found guilty but that hasn’t put off his sick fanclub

“Despite the evidence against Anagnostopoulos, a small group of women gathered outside the courthouse to support the pilot. “By no means do I justify what he did,” Evaggelia Selekou, 52, told The Times. “But he’s quite handsome and dashing, and I am 100 per cent sure that Babis acted in a fit of rage.” Another mid-aged woman said: “He’s quite sensitive, not the narcissist they paint him out to be.”

“I think of him a lot,” she said, adjusting a thick gold necklace on her bright orange blouse. “I’ve collected pictures of him and pinned them on my bedroom wall.”


“If I could, I would try and visit him in prison. I am concerned that the nice chap that he is, he will not endure the prison time. I fear he may slash his wrists or something”

What is wrong with these people?  I guess it’s the same mentality that enables people to minimise and downplay the crimes of people like Brückner.  I expect there are plenty of women sending him fanmail (and probably some men too), and if he’s found guilty of further rapes (or even murder) no doubt his sex appeal will be further enhanced in the eyes of sickos like this.

You seem to have rather a morbid fascination about these sorts of people yourself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 16, 2022, 11:42:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 16, 2022, 10:45:14 PM
I think they're more to be pitied than reviled. How does someone end up so far off track?
People who admire rapists and murderers and seek to minimise or find excuses for their crimes should be reviled imo.  The people deserving the pity are the victims of those murderers and rapists that they so admire.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 16, 2022, 11:44:52 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 16, 2022, 10:47:06 PM
You seem to have rather a morbid fascination about these sorts of people yourself.
I would say you’re a good example of someone with a morbid fascination about a murderer.  Luke Mitchell - how’s your mate’s campaign to get him out of jail coming along?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 07:52:46 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 16, 2022, 10:47:06 PM
You seem to have rather a morbid fascination about these sorts of people yourself.

I see a fascination with judging others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 07:58:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 07:52:46 AM
I see a fascination with judging others.
Yes, she does doesn’t she?  Been at it since 2007, judging the McCanns and finding their every thought, word and deed wanting.  Mind you she is only one of many thousands over the years who have indulged in their favourite hobby of daily judging the McCanns online though fortunately the numbers have dwindled to a just small hardcore cabal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 17, 2022, 08:05:43 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 16, 2022, 10:45:14 PM
I think they're more to be pitied than reviled. How does someone end up so far off track?

What a revealing post... The sceptic mind-set.
The paedophile rapist is to be pitied but not an ouce of pity for the McCanns.  Can you explain why that is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 08:29:13 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 17, 2022, 08:05:43 AM
What a revealing post... The sceptic mind-set.
The paedophile rapist is to be pitied but not an ouce of pity for the McCanns.  Can you explain why that is.
I think she was referring to the women who fancy paedophile rapists rather than the paedophile rapists themselves.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 08:57:34 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 07:58:55 AM
Yes, she does doesn’t she?  Been at it since 2007, judging the McCanns and finding their every thought, word and deed wanting.  Mind you she is only one of many thousands over the years who have indulged in their favourite hobby of daily judging the McCanns online though fortunately the numbers have dwindled to a just small hardcore cabal.

There are also those who judged the McCanns and either found their every thought word and deed perfect or decided they could explain any anomalies. Unfortunately the explanations sometimes contradicted each other.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 09:07:04 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 08:57:34 AM
There are also those who judged the McCanns and either found their every thought word and deed perfect or decided they could explain any anomalies. Unfortunately the explanations sometimes contradicted each other.
That is bullshit imo.  I don’t know anyone who has ever claimed the McCanns were perfect in every thought, word or deed.  As for contradicting themselves, you’ll never find two sceptics who can agree on an explanation for what they believe happened that night (apart from the curly wurly cuckoo brigade who have swallowed the CMOMM kool-aid, and even they don’t always appear to be in full accord).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:11:18 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 16, 2022, 11:44:52 PM
I would say you’re a good example of someone with a morbid fascination about a murderer.  Luke Mitchell - how’s your mate’s campaign to get him out of jail coming along?

Do you call believing that someone has been the victim of a miscarriage of justice ‘morbid fascination’ ? If so I’m guilty as charged. Just as I was in turn widen I campaigned for Guildford Four, yes all four of them, the Birmingham Six, yes all six of them and Michael Stone who, incidentally, I wouldn’t like to meet in a dark alley but who, nonetheless, I think is innocent of the crime he has been convicted of.

As to Sandra Lean, I assume that’s who you’re talking about, she valiantly presses on. It often takes the victims of a miscarriage  of justice many years and multiple appeals to have their convictions overturned and I’ve no doubt Luke Mitchell’s will be the same. However that Luke has so many eminent experts on his side does bode well for his eventual exoneration.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:12:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 07:52:46 AM
I see a fascination with judging others.

Indeed.

I imagine there’s a lot of pearl clutching goes on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:13:42 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 07:58:55 AM
Yes, she does doesn’t she?  Been at it since 2007, judging the McCanns and finding their every thought, word and deed wanting.  Mind you she is only one of many thousands over the years who have indulged in their favourite hobby of daily judging the McCanns online though fortunately the numbers have dwindled to a just small hardcore cabal.

Why do you care?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:15:42 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 17, 2022, 08:05:43 AM
What a revealing post... The sceptic mind-set.
The paedophile rapist is to be pitied but not an ouce of pity for the McCanns.  Can you explain why that is.

I think G was talking about the individuals who communicate with imprisoned murderers not the murderers themselves.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:16:04 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 08:29:13 AM
I think she was referring to the women who fancy paedophile rapists rather than the paedophile rapists themselves.

Indeed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 09:19:36 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:11:18 AM
Do you call believing that someone has been the victim of a miscarriage of justice ‘morbid fascination’ ? If so I’m guilty as charged. Just as I was in turn widen I campaigned for Guildford Four, yes all four of them, the Birmingham Six, yes all six of them and Michael Stone who, incidentally, I wouldn’t like to meet in a dark alley but who, nonetheless, I think is innocent of the crime he has been convicted of.

As to Sandra Lean, I assume that’s who you’re talking about, she valiantly presses on. It often takes the victims of a miscarriage  of justice many years and multiple appeals to have their convictions overturned and I’ve no doubt Luke Mitchell’s will be the same. However that Luke has so many eminent experts on his side does bode well for his eventual exoneration.
@)(++(*  thanks for confirming.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 09:20:47 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:13:42 AM
Why do you care?
Why do you? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 09:22:36 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:12:24 AM
Indeed.

I imagine there’s a lot of pearl clutching goes on.
Unlike of course all the pearl clutching that occurs every time the issue of the McCanns leaving their kids unattended you mean?  Actually that's less pearl-clutching, more flaming torches and pitchforks. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:32:41 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 09:19:36 AM
@)(++(*  thanks for confirming.

No problem.

I know it’s hard for you to not be swept along by the hysteria, you’re not alone. Thankfully though there are people who look behind the lazy headlines and actually do some research.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:34:10 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 09:20:47 AM
Why do you?

Is it you don’t know or aren’t willing to share?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:39:30 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 09:22:36 AM
Unlike of course all the pearl clutching that occurs every time the issue of the McCanns leaving their kids unattended you mean?  Actually that's less pearl-clutching, more flaming torches and pitchforks.

Never owned a pitchfork, or indeed a flaming torch in my life.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 09:51:05 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:39:30 AM
Never owned a pitchfork, or indeed a flaming torch in my life.
And I've never owned a string of pearls, so you point is...?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:54:00 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 09:51:05 AM
And I've never owned a string of pearls, so you point is...?

A likely tale !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 09:54:14 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:32:41 AM
No problem.

I know it’s hard for you to not be swept along by the hysteria, you’re not alone. Thankfully though there are people who look behind the lazy headlines and actually do some research.
Great, you have decided that a convicted murderer is innocent based on your "research" into a really nasty brutal crime but according to you that doesn't mean you have a morbid fascination with and desire to help a convicted murderer.  However you've decided I do have a morbid fascination with and desire to help and support such individuals based on what evidence exactly? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 09:55:41 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:54:00 AM
A likely tale !
But you're not judgey at all, no sirree.  You've decided I'm the kind of person who wears pearls.  I suppose it's an upgrade from the days when you thought I was an old bloke dribbling down my cardi. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 17, 2022, 09:57:49 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 09:39:30 AM
Never owned a pitchfork, or indeed a flaming torch in my life.
I can understand why angry mobs turned to the pitchfork as a secondary use, they're almost useless as a gardening implement. If you lost it in the melee, or got it lodged in a skull, then there's not much lost.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 10:24:08 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 09:22:36 AM
Unlike of course all the pearl clutching that occurs every time the issue of the McCanns leaving their kids unattended you mean?  Actually that's less pearl-clutching, more flaming torches and pitchforks.

I couldn't care less if the McCanns decided leaving their kids home alone was OK. What I object to is them trying to pretend it was a responsible decision.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 10:43:57 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 09:54:14 AM
Great, you have decided that a convicted murderer is innocent based on your "research" into a really nasty brutal crime but according to you that doesn't mean you have a morbid fascination with and desire to help a convicted murderer.  However you've decided I do have a morbid fascination with and desire to help and support such individuals based on what evidence exactly?

Ah see, you’re presuming again. It’s not on my ‘research’ but on others, much more knowledgeable than me in the way of these things. People like barristers, psychologists, police officers and, in the case of Luke Mitchell, the FBI’s world renowned Behavioural Analysis Unit.

Does ‘convicted’ always mean guilty and, if there is doubt that that a conviction is unsafe, shouldn’t that conviction be corrected?

Why do you care so much what I ‘think’….if indeed I do?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 10:45:23 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 09:55:41 AM
But you're not judgey at all, no sirree.  You've decided I'm the kind of person who wears pearls.  I suppose it's an upgrade from the days when you thought I was an old bloke dribbling down my cardi.

You really are rather easy to trigger, aren’t you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 10:50:03 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 10:24:08 AM
I couldn't care less if the McCanns decided leaving their kids home alone was OK. What I object to is them trying to pretend it was a responsible decision.

Based on known facts at the time since The PJ weren't even investigating known Crimes in the area.

I have never denied that I sometimes left my children alone under similar circumstances.

What really pees me off is the sanctimonious clap trap from supposedly Perfect Parents.  There is no such thing as a Perfect Parent.  Everyone fails in some way.  No Parent gets born with a Master's Degree.  Some of the mistakes are hidden in the eons of time.  Mostly emotional, of course.

But if all you managed to teach your children that no one is perfect then you might have achieved something.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 10:55:30 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 10:43:57 AM
Ah see, you’re presuming again. It’s not on my ‘research’ but on others, much more knowledgeable than me in the way of these things. People like barristers, psychologists, police officers and, in the case of Luke Mitchell, the FBI’s world renowned Behavioural Analysis Unit.

Does ‘convicted’ always mean guilt and, if there is doubt that that a conviction is unsafe, shouldn’t that conviction be corrected?

Why do you care so much what I ‘think’….if indeed I do?

I only ever really cared about The Death Penalty.  Once that was abolished my day was done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 10:56:25 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 10:50:03 AM
Based on known facts at the time since The PJ weren't even investigating known Crimes in the area.

I have never denied that I sometimes left my children alone under similar circumstances.

What really pees me off is the sanctimonious clap trap from supposedly Perfect Parents.  There is no such thing as a Perfect Parent.  Everyone fails in some way.  No Parent gets born with a Master's Degree.  Some of the mistakes are hidden in the eons of time.  Mostly emotional, of course.

But if all you managed to teach your children that no one is perfect then you might have achieved something.

Parents make mistakes….that’s a given but what singles the parents and their friends out is that this wasn’t a mistake…this was a calculated risk, and a risk with no mitigation. The parents not only left the patio doors unlocked on an apartment which bordered a main road but also failed, if they are to be believed, to check if the windows or front door was also locked. That was not a mistake but a calculated risk.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 10:58:30 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 10:55:30 AM
I only ever really cared about The Death Penalty.  Once that was abolished my day was done.

Unfortunately some would like to see it return and, in the case of Luke Mitchell, that would have meant a state execution of a 16 year old.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 11:03:29 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 10:24:08 AM
I couldn't care less if the McCanns decided leaving their kids home alone was OK. What I object to is them trying to pretend it was a responsible decision.
You do realise your two sentences directly contradict each other don't you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 11:07:15 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 10:43:57 AM
Ah see, you’re presuming again. It’s not on my ‘research’ but on others, much more knowledgeable than me in the way of these things. People like barristers, psychologists, police officers and, in the case of Luke Mitchell, the FBI’s world renowned Behavioural Analysis Unit.

Does ‘convicted’ always mean guilty and, if there is doubt that that a conviction is unsafe, shouldn’t that conviction be corrected?

Why do you care so much what I ‘think’….if indeed I do?
Says the person who just now asked me why I care!  LOL.. I don't give a shit what you think, I am merely pointing out your hypocrisy and inability to think logically.  You started by jumping in with an accusation that I had a morbid fascination with "these sorts of people" but offered no evidence to support your claims.  I was merely pointing out your own morbid fascination with Luke Mitchell, a fascination to which you are perfectly entitled (it takes all sorts) but don't claim the moral high ground over me because that's just plain hypocritical. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 11:08:16 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 10:45:23 AM
You really are rather easy to trigger, aren’t you?
Ah, and so we get to the nub of the matter.  You enjoy "triggering" me.  You know that there's a word for people like that don't you...? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 11:14:08 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 10:56:25 AM
Parents make mistakes….that’s a given but what singles the parents and their friends out is that this wasn’t a mistake…this was a calculated risk, and a risk with no mitigation. The parents not only left the patio doors unlocked on an apartment which bordered a main road but also failed, if they are to be believed, to check if the windows or front door was also locked. That was not a mistake but a calculated risk.

Okay.  I took calculated risks.  But I did think about what I was doing.  And my children didn't half have some fun.

You have to give them some autonomy.  This doesn't stop at a holiday appartment in some second rate Portuguese holiday resort.

As it is, I would never have taken my children to Praia da Luz.  But then I knew a bit more about Portugal by 2007.  And their misbegotten Police Services.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 11:21:17 AM
Oh look we're talking about the McCanns "neglect".  Again.  Some people will never get over it.  It's as if it was the single most pivotal moment in events of the 21st Century to date.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 11:21:40 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 10:58:30 AM
Unfortunately some would like to see it return and, in the case of Luke Mitchell, that would have meant a state execution of a 16 year old.

Who was the Supposed Accomplice who was hanged while the 16 year old Perpetrator  was only sent to prison?  Craig someone?

So that one won't wash.

The Death Penalty will never return.  Ever.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 11:21:51 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 10:50:03 AM
Based on known facts at the time since The PJ weren't even investigating known Crimes in the area.

I have never denied that I sometimes left my children alone under similar circumstances.

What really pees me off is the sanctimonious clap trap from supposedly Perfect Parents.  There is no such thing as a Perfect Parent.  Everyone fails in some way.  No Parent gets born with a Master's Degree.  Some of the mistakes are hidden in the eons of time.  Mostly emotional, of course.

But if all you managed to teach your children that no one is perfect then you might have achieved something.

As I said, it's not what they did, it's how they tried to defend what they did. For your information I made sure that admitted my imperfections to my children. Like everyone I did my best, but if I realised at times that I was wrong I told them so and apologised.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 17, 2022, 11:23:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 11:21:51 AM
As I said, it's not what they did, it's how they tried to defend what they did. For your information I made sure that admitted my imperfections to my children. Like everyone I did my best, but if I realised at times that I was wrong I told them so and apologised.

yawn
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 11:34:24 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 11:21:17 AM
Oh look we're talking about the McCanns "neglect".  Again.  Some people will never get over it.  It's as if it was the single most pivotal moment in events of the 21st Century to date.

I shall continue to beat myself half to death for allowing my children to have some fun.

But this is the bad bit.  My grandchildren were never afforded the same freedom for fear that they might get up to all sorts.  Do as I say.  Don't do as I did.

All history now.  Grandmother is a raving lunatic who fortunately bogged off to France.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 11:45:54 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 11:21:51 AM
As I said, it's not what they did, it's how they tried to defend what they did. For your information I made sure that admitted my imperfections to my children. Like everyone I did my best, but if I realised at times that I was wrong I told them so and apologised.

Goodness me.  I have never admitted to to my children for being wrong.  What would you like me to say?  Sorry that I allowed you to have some fun?  Sorry that I didn't lock you up?  Sorry that I allowed you all to choose?

The one thing I never did was to suggest that they were incapable of deciding for them selves given a bit of common sense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 12:01:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 11:21:51 AM
As I said, it's not what they did, it's how they tried to defend what they did. For your information I made sure that admitted my imperfections to my children. Like everyone I did my best, but if I realised at times that I was wrong I told them so and apologised.
Did you use the national media to apologise to your children?  If not why do you expect the McCanns to have done so?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 12:02:17 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 17, 2022, 11:23:59 AM
yawn
I agree, the sanctimony is quite tiresome. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 12:10:12 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 11:45:54 AM
Goodness me.  I have never admitted to to my children for being wrong.  What would you like me to say?  Sorry that I allowed you to have some fun?  Sorry that I didn't lock you up?  Sorry that I allowed you all to choose?

The one thing I never did was to suggest that they were incapable of deciding for them selves given a bit of common sense.

I hope that worked. My way did, I think. I'm still there for my kids and they're there for me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 12:27:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 12:10:12 PM
I hope that worked. My way did, I think. I'm still there for my kids and they're there for me.

You think.  But you were only married to The Military.  I was Part of The Navy.  And if you couldn't think for yourself then you didn't have much chance.  Perhaps this was what taught me to teach my children to think for themselves.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 12:30:19 PM
My mother recently apologised to me for all the times she left me unattended (but I don't think she really meant it).  It was nice of her to take a full page ad out in all the leading British newspapers to do so though, perhaps the McCanns should take a leaf out of her book so that everyone knows of their own contrition.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 12:41:02 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 12:30:19 PM
My mother recently apologised to me for all the times she left me unattended (but I don't think she really meant it).  It was nice of her to take a full page ad out in all the leading British newspapers to do so though, perhaps the McCanns should take a leaf out of her book so that everyone knows of their own contrition.

Your Mother should have blamed the Amah.  Although I doubt that the Amah ever left you alone.  Mine never did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 12:56:11 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 12:41:02 PM
Your Mother should have blamed the Amah.  Although I doubt that the Amah ever left you alone.  Mine never did.
It's funny.  There was none of the CRB checks or professional childminding qualifications stuff back in those days.  You'd get a young woman up from the ulu or the kampong and apart from the odd handwritten reference you really had no idea about her capabilities or motivations.  And yet - they were completely  entrusted with the house, the pets, even the children.  Nearly all of them became friends (or at least surrogate mothers) to me and I saw more of them than my own parents. We did have a wrong 'un though.  She let burglars in whilst we were on leave, they ransacked the joint and even slept in our beds, they did so much damage we had to stay in the Hilton for a few days on our return.  Looking back on it I am really quite ashamed about the fact that we had servants and the way they were treated (not badly as such, but as servants expected to do pretty much everything from childcare to cooking to laundry), I think even my mother feels bad about it these days...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 01:01:45 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 12:56:11 PM
It's funny.  There was none of the CRB checks or professional childminding qualifications stuff back in those days.  You'd get a young woman up from the ulu or the kampong and apart from the odd handwritten reference you really had no idea about her capabilities or motivations.  And yet - they were completely  entrusted with the house, the pets, even the children.  Nearly all of them became friends (or at least surrogate mothers) to me and I saw more of them than my own parents. We did have a wrong 'un though.  She let burglars in whilst we were on leave, they ransacked the joint and even slept in our beds, they did so much damage we had to stay in the Hilton for a few days on our return.  Looking back on it I am really quite ashamed about the fact that we had servants and the way they were treated (not badly as such, but as servants expected to do pretty much everything from childcare to cooking to laundry), I think even my mother feels bad about it these days...

I don't feel bad about it.  My Amah actually loved my children.  Especially the mewling brat.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 01:51:40 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 12:27:18 PM
You think.  But you were only married to The Military.  I was Part of The Navy.  And if you couldn't think for yourself then you didn't have much chance.  Perhaps this was what taught me to teach my children to think for themselves.

I haven't a clue what you think was the difference - or what it has to do with parenting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 01:54:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 01:51:40 PM
I haven't a clue what you think was the difference - or what it has to do with parenting.

Of course you don't.

Some people do while others merely follow the band.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 02:43:04 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 01:54:53 PM
Of course you don't.

Some people do while others merely follow the band.

I was married to a soldier, you were married to a sailor. Both part of the MOD. The differences were?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 17, 2022, 02:45:10 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 11:21:17 AM
Oh look we're talking about the McCanns "neglect".  Again.  Some people will never get over it.  It's as if it was the single most pivotal moment in events of the 21st Century to date.

They're at it still.  Despite the passage of the years.  Despite investigators following a different direction in Madeleine's case or perhaps even because they have ~ rubbish continues till this very day.

From yet another poster full of hate in combination with a distinct lack of brain cells comes the following which refers to Madeleine as " ... the poor, unfortunate “missing” - Miss McCann"  >

STOP NONSENSICAL MADELEINE MCCANN SEARCH – £14M WASTED
May 14, 2022

£14 million has thus far been spent on a nonsensical search for a child left alone with its two siblings in an apartment with an unlocked door onto a public highway. That apartment contained evidence of death in a cupboard – clearly sensed by skilled cadaver dogs – and traces of blood, as referenced by The Guardian, in it also.

In December 2017, when £11 million of British taxpayers’ money had been spent towards the search for ‘missing’ Madeleine McCann, 86% of viewers of ITV1’s ‘Loose Women’ said the public purse should cease to fund the investigation. Now, in May 2022, with that sum now in excess of £14 million (aside from the millions in private money also), it is time to allocate resources to the search for missing people who actually can be found, we would suggest.

It is a mindset.  Which I think shows adherents up as having little else in their lives to keep them going.  I have always thought the last thing on their minds was any "justice for Madeleine" or should that now be, Miss McCann?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 03:06:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 02:43:04 PM
I was married to a soldier, you were married to a sailor. Both part of the MOD. The differences were?

I was a Wren Air Mechanic and served my own time keeping Royal Navy Jets up in the sky.

What were you doing?

Wren Mitchell.  115051.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 04:21:22 PM

One never forgets one's service number or one's service.  How very fortunate I was.  But it was a bit hard sometimes when your husband goes off to sea for two years and absolutely no cause for complaint from you.  Such was life.  This was service.  I had to see to my children.  There wasn't anyone else.  And so I brought them up with my own ideas of who I wanted them to be.

I have no idea if the children understood.  I might need to criticise their Father to discover this.  And I won't ever do that.

They are all in their Fifties now and largely smart arses.  But then I was a bit of a smart arse once upon a time.

We are all only what we think of ourselves.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 06:13:32 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 11:07:15 AM
Says the person who just now asked me why I care!  LOL.. I don't give a shit what you think, I am merely pointing out your hypocrisy and inability to think logically.  You started by jumping in with an accusation that I had a morbid fascination with "these sorts of people" but offered no evidence to support your claims.  I was merely pointing out your own morbid fascination with Luke Mitchell, a fascination to which you are perfectly entitled (it takes all sorts) but don't claim the moral high ground over me because that's just plain hypocritical.

Your posts are evidence enough.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 06:20:34 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 11:08:16 AM
Ah, and so we get to the nub of the matter.  You enjoy "triggering" me.  You know that there's a word for people like that don't you...?

I don’t intentionally trigger you, it just seems to happen…though to be fair not only with me.

The word your reaching for is TROLL. It’s rather low rent name calling but you do seem rather fond of it. No sure though why I’m supposed to be bothered when you go all school playground on me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 06:23:28 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 03:06:36 PM
I was a Wren Air Mechanic and served my own time keeping Royal Navy Jets up in the sky.

What were you doing?

Wren Mitchell.  115051.

Then you left and became a wife and mother.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 06:35:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 06:23:28 PM
Then you left and became a wife and mother.

With a husband away at sea more times than not.

While you appear to have no idea of the real world.  But then that's The Army for you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 17, 2022, 07:42:53 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 17, 2022, 06:35:54 PM
With a husband away at sea more times than not.

While you appear to have no idea of the real world.  But then that's The Army for you.

It's quite usual for sailors to sail, I would imagine. Every life has it's challenges and everyone has to deal with them. You're not special, you're not unique in 'living in the real world' you faced the same challenges as other navy wives.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 07:56:54 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 06:13:32 PM
Your posts are evidence enough.
That is simply untrue.  I do not have a morbid fascination with murderers and rapists.  I do not support them, minimise or deny their crimes or write to or visit  them.  Kindly desist from making stupid and inaccurate observations, many thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 07:57:34 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 06:20:34 PM
I don’t intentionally trigger you, it just seems to happen…though to be fair not only with me.

The word your reaching for is TROLL. It’s rather low rent name calling but you do seem rather fond of it. No sure though why I’m supposed to be bothered when you go all school playground on me.
I think you have a morbid fascination with me too, sweetie xx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 08:40:29 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 17, 2022, 07:57:34 PM
I think you have a morbid fascination with me too, sweetie xx

If I had followed you from board to board, even when you were ignored I’d agree….but i didn’t, did I?
.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 08:47:19 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 08:40:29 PM
If I had followed you from board to board, even when you were ignored I’d agree….but i didn’t, did I?
.
It seems you’re paranoid as well as desperate for my attention.  Enough now. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 10:30:08 PM
Alex Tiffin has tweeted that a certain Tory MP has been arrested on multiple sexual abuse charges. This was a tweet in reply.

‘Hi Alex,
Please can I ask you politely to delete this tweet?
Giving this accused person the possible argument that they cannot expect a fair trial because they were named on social media is undesirable.
Many thanks.’

Now tell me that Brueckner won’t have a similar argument if he ever comes to trial?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 17, 2022, 10:55:39 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 10:30:08 PM
Alex Tiffin has tweeted that a certain Tory MP has been arrested on multiple sexual abuse charges. This was a tweet in reply.

‘Hi Alex,
Please can I ask you politely to delete this tweet?
Giving this accused person the possible argument that they cannot expect a fair trial because they were named on social media is undesirable.
Many thanks.’

Now tell me that Brueckner won’t have a similar argument if he ever comes to trial?
Who is Alex Tiffin and who asked him to withdraw the tweet?  Actually I’m more interested to know who the Tory MP is….anyone we’ve heard of? One wink for yes, two for no, three if it’s a blonde with silly hair. 

 Personally I don’t see how naming him now if he goes on to be charged would affect his right to a fair trial, however I can see how naming him now would affect his reputation and lifestyle were charges never to be brought. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 17, 2022, 11:16:17 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 17, 2022, 10:30:08 PM
Alex Tiffin has tweeted that a certain Tory MP has been arrested on multiple sexual abuse charges. This was a tweet in reply.

‘Hi Alex,
Please can I ask you politely to delete this tweet?
Giving this accused person the possible argument that they cannot expect a fair trial because they were named on social media is undesirable.
Many thanks.’

Now tell me that Brueckner won’t have a similar argument if he ever comes to trial?

I think that you may be right.  Even if guilty, Brueckner may get off very lightly, even scot free, because of things said about him on the internet and in newspapers, IMO.
Accusations etc.

And who started it all?   Our dear friend Goncalo de Sousa Amaral.  Cunning devil (IMO).   I wonder, was he paid to expose Brueckner?   If so, by whom?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 07:41:03 AM
Quote from: sadie on May 17, 2022, 11:16:17 PM
I think that you may be right.  Even if guilty, Brueckner may get off very lightly, even scot free, because of things said about him on the internet and in newspapers, IMO.
Accusations etc.

And who started it all?   Our dear friend Goncalo de Sousa Amaral.  Cunning devil (IMO).   I wonder, was he paid to expose Brueckner?   If so, by whom?

Who told the world Brueckner was guilty of murder? That's what will affect his trial, if it ever happens, not anything Amaral said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 18, 2022, 08:13:47 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 07:41:03 AM
Who told the world Brueckner was guilty of murder? That's what will affect his trial, if it ever happens, not anything Amaral said.
In your opinion... Which is worthless imo.
It will all depend on the evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 18, 2022, 08:17:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 07:41:03 AM
Who told the world Brueckner was guilty of murder? That's what will affect his trial, if it ever happens, not anything Amaral said.

Amaral went out of his way to start the whole thing which thanks to some jiggery-pokery (disinformation somewhere) appears to have created a cloud hiding what is actually going on from the watchful ones.  The watchful ones being us and any detectives working on the case.


We all knew that Amaral was virtually always up to something anti-Mccann.  Why didn't we think of this?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 09:13:50 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 18, 2022, 08:13:47 AM
In your opinion... Which is worthless imo.
It will all depend on the evidence

The evidence is clear.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 18, 2022, 09:18:26 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 09:13:50 AM
The evidence is clear.
No it isn’t unless you believe that HCW has told us everything he has.  Do you believe that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 09:23:46 AM
Quote from: sadie on May 18, 2022, 08:17:01 AM
Amaral went out of his way to start the whole thing which thanks to some jiggery-pokery (disinformation somewhere) appears to have created a cloud hiding what is actually going on from the watchful ones.  The watchful ones being us and any detectives working on the case.


We all knew that Amaral was virtually always up to something anti-Mccann.  Why didn't we think of this?

It still doesn't have any effect on Brueckner's right to the presumption of innocence, just as Amaral's book didn't affect the McCanns' right to the presumption of innocence. (according to Portugal's Supreme Court)

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 09:26:22 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 18, 2022, 09:18:26 AM
No it isn’t unless you believe that HCW has told us everything he has.  Do you believe that?

It's not about what Wolters has, it's about who can pronounce guilt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 18, 2022, 09:33:33 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 18, 2022, 09:18:26 AM
No it isn’t unless you believe that HCW has told us everything he has.  Do you believe that?

Does he actually have anything?

It doesn't appear so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 18, 2022, 09:50:18 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 09:26:22 AM
It's not about what Wolters has, it's about who can pronounce guilt.
So when you say "the evidence is clear" what do you mean exactly?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 18, 2022, 09:56:53 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 18, 2022, 09:50:18 AM
So when you say "the evidence is clear" what do you mean exactly?

That there isn't any.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 10:26:33 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 18, 2022, 09:50:18 AM
So when you say "the evidence is clear" what do you mean exactly?

The evidence that Wolters pronounced Brueckner guilty of murder.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 18, 2022, 10:41:30 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 10:26:33 AM
The evidence that Wolters pronounced Brueckner guilty of murder.
THat wasn't the evidence Davel was referring to as I'm sure you were aware.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 10:49:26 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 18, 2022, 10:41:30 AM
THat wasn't the evidence Davel was referring to as I'm sure you were aware.

The evidence to which Davel was referring is immaterial to a suspect's right to the presumption of innocence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 18, 2022, 11:30:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 10:49:26 AM
The evidence to which Davel was referring is immaterial to a suspect's right to the presumption of innocence.
which he will have if and when his case appears before German judges.  If this right has already been forfeited as you suggest then clearly HCW and the BKA are wasting their time and should already have been advised of such, but that doesn't appear to be the case...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 18, 2022, 12:04:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 10:26:33 AM
The evidence that Wolters pronounced Brueckner guilty of murder.

do you have a cite fo that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 18, 2022, 12:17:24 PM

In so far as I understand, it is only forbidden in German Law to announce the name of the suspect.  Wolters didn't and hasn't done that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on May 18, 2022, 12:31:43 PM
Except to Mark Watchamacallit one time...

Around 13:10 minutes in... https://omny.fm/shows/they-ve-taken-her/maddies-dead (https://omny.fm/shows/they-ve-taken-her/maddies-dead)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 12:46:55 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 18, 2022, 12:17:24 PM
In so far as I understand, it is only forbidden in German Law to announce the name of the suspect.  Wolters didn't and hasn't done that.

It's not about German Law.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 18, 2022, 12:49:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 12:46:55 PM
It's not about German Law.

Really?  What is it about then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 18, 2022, 12:58:25 PM
Quote from: Myster on May 18, 2022, 12:31:43 PM
Except to Mark Watchamacallit one time...

Around 13:10 minutes in... https://omny.fm/shows/they-ve-taken-her/maddies-dead (https://omny.fm/shows/they-ve-taken-her/maddies-dead)
  That's not what I heard, not at 13mins 10 anyway...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on May 18, 2022, 01:04:05 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 18, 2022, 12:58:25 PM
  That's not what I heard, not at 13mins 10 anyway...
"The one we tell the TV show (i.e. phone number) belongs to Mr. Brueckner..."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 18, 2022, 01:37:21 PM
Quote from: Myster on May 18, 2022, 01:04:05 PM
"The one we tell the TV show (i.e. phone number) belongs to Mr. Brueckner..."
Sorry, I thought you were referring to a pronouncement of guilt. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 02:12:22 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 18, 2022, 01:37:21 PM
Sorry, I thought you were referring to a pronouncement of guilt.

19:00 "last week... we were sure that she was killed and that... Christian B is a murderer"
https://omny.fm/shows/they-ve-taken-her/maddies-dead
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 18, 2022, 02:37:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 12:46:55 PM
It's not about German Law.

Do you really think Wolters doesn't understand what he's, doing
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 18, 2022, 02:42:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 02:12:22 PM
19:00 "last week... we were sure that she was killed and that... Christian B is a murderer"
https://omny.fm/shows/they-ve-taken-her/maddies-dead
like I say, if HCW has compromised the possibility of CB ever receiving a fair trial then the German judiciary would already know this and he would have been sacked from his role.  The fact that he continues to speak to the media and make similar claims suggests that in Germany at least he has not breached CB’s rights.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 18, 2022, 04:46:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 18, 2022, 02:12:22 PM
19:00 "last week... we were sure that she was killed and that... Christian B is a murderer"
https://omny.fm/shows/they-ve-taken-her/maddies-dead

Who is Christian B?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on May 19, 2022, 07:10:54 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 18, 2022, 04:46:16 PM
Who is Christian B?
Batman / Bruce Wayne.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on May 19, 2022, 07:28:55 AM
Naah... he was only a fly-by-night public servant who Baled out after three episodes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 07:36:50 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 18, 2022, 04:46:16 PM
Who is Christian B?

A murderer, according to Wolters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on May 19, 2022, 07:41:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 07:36:50 AM
A murderer, according to Wolters.
Well spotted!... he did say he killed MM, if I remember correctly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 19, 2022, 07:42:57 AM
CB has already come out and shown he has no alibi due to the pressure put on him by Wolters.. Well done Wolters
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 19, 2022, 07:55:49 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 07:36:50 AM
A murderer, according to Wolters.

Wolters also said if we knew the evidence he had we would agree with him... That's quite significant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 08:13:42 AM

How many Christian Bs does anyone think there might be in Germany.  Or even in prison?

And who actually first said that his name is Brueckner?

That's who violated Christian Brueckner's Human Rights.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 19, 2022, 08:56:01 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 08:13:42 AM
How many Christian Bs does anyone think there might be in Germany.  Or even in prison?

And who actually first said that his name is Brueckner?

That's who violated Christian Brueckner's Human Rights.

Brueckner is going to be akin to those murders who claim their human rights were breached and win oodles of money. You know that they are abhorrent reprobates but the law is blind and we can’t pick and chose when and where it’s applied.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 19, 2022, 09:07:11 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 19, 2022, 07:42:57 AM
CB has already come out and shown he has no alibi due to the pressure put on him by Wolters.. Well done Wolters

It's not much use really is it, considering he isn't being charged with anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 09:16:58 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 19, 2022, 08:56:01 AM
Brueckner is going to be akin to those murders who claim their human rights were breached and win oodles of money. You know that they are abhorrent reprobates but the law is blind and we can’t pick and chose when and where it’s applied.

Who is he going to sue?  And who will pay him oodles of money.

And with his track record will there be Fair Comment?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 09:25:05 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 08:13:42 AM
How many Christian Bs does anyone think there might be in Germany.  Or even in prison?

And who actually first said that his name is Brueckner?

That's who violated Christian Brueckner's Human Rights.

Naming someone doesn't violate their human rights. A prosecutor saying someone is guilty before they're tried does.
Bild seems to have broken German law by printing the suspect's full name. The prosecutor is clearly discussing the same man, breaching his human rights under Article 6:2. 

https://www.bild.de/news/inland/news-inland/mutmasslicher-maddie-moerder-christian-brueckner-jammerbrief-ans-ministerium-79541602.bild.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 09:29:43 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 09:16:58 AM
Who is he going to sue?  And who will pay him oodles of money.

And with his track record will there be Fair Comment?

What has his track record got to do with it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 09:30:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 09:25:05 AM
Naming someone doesn't violate their human rights. A prosecutor saying someone is guilty before they're tried does.
Bild seems to have broken German law by printing the suspect's full name. The prosecutor is clearly discussing the same man, breaching his human rights under Article 6:2. 

https://www.bild.de/news/inland/news-inland/mutmasslicher-maddie-moerder-christian-brueckner-jammerbrief-ans-ministerium-79541602.bild.html

So which Christian B were we originally talking about?.  And how many people on this forum have abused his human rights?  Not me, obviously.  Or Wolters as far as I can see.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 09:32:43 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 09:29:43 AM
What has his track record got to do with it?

Could it suggest Fair Comment?

This Human Rights lark isn't a walk in the park, as we all know by now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 09:57:31 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 09:32:43 AM
Could it suggest Fair Comment?

This Human Rights lark isn't a walk in the park, as we all know by now.

No.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 10:17:06 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 09:57:31 AM
No.

So how come Amaral got to say that The McCanns killed Madeleine?

And was it not Amaral who exposed the name of Brueckner?  Among other things.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 19, 2022, 10:37:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 09:25:05 AM
Naming someone doesn't violate their human rights. A prosecutor saying someone is guilty before they're tried does.
Bild seems to have broken German law by printing the suspect's full name. The prosecutor is clearly discussing the same man, breaching his human rights under Article 6:2. 

https://www.bild.de/news/inland/news-inland/mutmasslicher-maddie-moerder-christian-brueckner-jammerbrief-ans-ministerium-79541602.bild.html
Like on this forum it's ok to say IMO person X committed a crime but not ok to say person X is guilty of a crime without providing proof of the claim.  Has HCW expressed the opinion of the investigation or has he stated without providing proof that CB is definitely guilty?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 19, 2022, 10:38:33 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 19, 2022, 08:56:01 AM
Brueckner is going to be akin to those murders who claim their human rights were breached and win oodles of money. You know that they are abhorrent reprobates but the law is blind and we can’t pick and chose when and where it’s applied.
What is stopping him from mounting the claim now?  It's been 2 years already....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 10:42:18 AM

It all comes back to the same old same Double Standards.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 19, 2022, 10:44:57 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 10:17:06 AM
So how come Amaral got to say that The McCanns killed Madeleine?

And was it not Amaral who exposed the name of Brueckner?  Among other things.

Did Amaral say the parents killed Madeleine or that she died in an accident?

And no it wasn’t Amaral you exposed the name of Brueckner, that was the tabloids.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 11:06:39 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on May 19, 2022, 10:44:57 AM
Did Amaral say the parents killed Madeleine or that she died in an accident?

And no it wasn’t Amaral you exposed the name of Brueckner, that was the tabloids.

A question mark, eh.  Was the non existent Calpol an accident?  Difficult to say since it didn't exist.

So Brueckner can sue The Tabloids.  Well, that's okay.  But it obviously wasn't Wolters.

And why did Amaral produce those photos with Brueckner having dread locks when it was patently untrue.  That was a deliberate attempt to Pervert the Course of Justice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 12:24:18 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 10:17:06 AM
So how come Amaral got to say that The McCanns killed Madeleine?

And was it not Amaral who exposed the name of Brueckner?  Among other things.

1. Amaral didn't say that.
2. He was sued for defamation, for which 'fair comment' can be used as a defence.
3. No, Amaral didn't name Brueckner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 19, 2022, 12:51:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 12:24:18 PM
1. Amaral didn't say that.
2. He was sued for defamation, for which 'fair comment' can be used as a defence.
3. No, Amaral didn't name Brueckner.

Then what is the rationale behind the sceptic movement which utilises the fantasies written about by Amaral to cast slurs every minute of every day against the parents of a missing child for over fifteen years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 12:58:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 12:24:18 PM
1. Amaral didn't say that.
2. He was sued for defamation, for which 'fair comment' can be used as a defence.
3. No, Amaral didn't name Brueckner.

What is Defamation in this context, other than Libel? 

Was the photograph of Breuckner with dreadlocks enough to identify him, along with his camper van covered in cartoons?  Bearing in mind that Brueckner was resident in the area at the time.

For certain sure someone worked it out.  Wolters did not publish his name.

So Brueckner is going to have to find someone else to sue.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 01:15:13 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 19, 2022, 12:51:43 PM
Then what is the rationale behind the sceptic movement which utilises the fantasies written about by Amaral to cast slurs every minute of every day against the parents of a missing child for over fifteen years.

I am still struggling with that.  But Amaral is a washed out old has been who never was anything else.

And Brueckner has got no chance against Wolters or The BKA, although I very much doubt he would even try.  Brueckner would have to drop himself in the doodoo in the process because he has No Alibi.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 02:38:57 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 19, 2022, 12:51:43 PM
Then what is the rationale behind the sceptic movement which utilises the fantasies written about by Amaral to cast slurs every minute of every day against the parents of a missing child for over fifteen years.

The supporter's fantasy is that everyone who has doubts about the case or about the T9's story was influenced by Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 02:45:15 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 12:58:23 PM
What is Defamation in this context, other than Libel? 

Was the photograph of Breuckner with dreadlocks enough to identify him, along with his camper van covered in cartoons?  Bearing in mind that Brueckner was resident in the area at the time.

For certain sure someone worked it out.  Wolters did not publish his name.

So Brueckner is going to have to find someone else to sue.

A prosecutor wno says someone is guilty without a trial and conviction is breaching the European Convention on Human Rights. It's nothing to do with defamation or libel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 03:03:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 02:45:15 PM
A prosecutor wno says someone is guilty without a trial and conviction is breaching the European Convention on Human Rights. It's nothing to do with defamation or libel.

So exactly whose Rights did Wolters breach?  And when did he mention any name in full?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 19, 2022, 04:45:29 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 08:13:42 AM
How many Christian Bs does anyone think there might be in Germany.  Or even in prison?

And who actually first said that his name is Brueckner?

That's who violated Christian Brueckner's Human Rights.

Spot on Elli.

The man who first said his name is Brueckner is the one who violated his Human Rights.

Now who was that?  *%6^
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 19, 2022, 04:47:46 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 09:30:52 AM
So which Christian B were we originally talking about?.  And how many people on this forum have abused his human rights?  Not me, obviously.  Or Wolters as far as I can see.

Nor me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 19, 2022, 05:11:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 02:45:15 PM
A prosecutor wno says someone is guilty without a trial and conviction is breaching the European Convention on Human Rights. It's nothing to do with defamation or libel.

So why is he not taking action if its so clear cut....perhaps thats what wolters wants him to do...if so well done wolters
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 19, 2022, 05:20:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 02:45:15 PM
A prosecutor wno says someone is guilty without a trial and conviction is breaching the European Convention on Human Rights. It's nothing to do with defamation or libel.
Did he say he was guilty or did he say that it was his opinion that he was guilty?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 19, 2022, 05:21:30 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 19, 2022, 05:11:16 PM
So why is he not taking action if its so clear cut....perhaps thats what wolters wants him to do...if so well done wolters
A question I also asked earlier today which was ignored.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 19, 2022, 05:30:00 PM
As per sceptic logic the killer of Bobbi-Anne McLeod, Cody Ackland, jailed today for 31 years for her abduction and murder cannot be guilty as he had no previous criminal convictions of any kind.

Please never let us hear again that a rapist / paedophile could not become a child abductor and murderer on the basis that they had no previous history of such crimes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 19, 2022, 06:38:27 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 19, 2022, 05:30:00 PM
As per sceptic logic the killer of Bobbi-Anne McLeod, Cody Ackland, jailed today for 31 years for her abduction and murder cannot be guilty as he had no previous criminal convictions of any kind.

Please never let us hear again that a rapist / paedophile could not become a child abductor and murderer on the basis that they had no previous history of such crimes.

The McCanns have no criminal history either......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 19, 2022, 06:39:08 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 01:15:13 PM
I am still struggling with that.  But Amaral is a washed out old has been who never was anything else.

And Brueckner has got no chance against Wolters or The BKA, although I very much doubt he would even try.  Brueckner would have to drop himself in the doodoo in the process because he has No Alibi.

I am incredulous that it is possible for sceptics to grant him and his illogical conclusions the time of day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 19, 2022, 06:45:20 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 01:15:13 PM
I am still struggling with that.  But Amaral is a washed out old has been who never was anything else.

And Brueckner has got no chance against Wolters or The BKA, although I very much doubt he would even try.  Brueckner would have to drop himself in the doodoo in the process because he has No Alibi.

What does Brueckner need an alibi for exactly?

Is it for the abduction he isn't accused of, or the murder he isn't accused of either?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 07:21:32 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 19, 2022, 05:30:00 PM
As per sceptic logic the killer of Bobbi-Anne McLeod, Cody Ackland, jailed today for 31 years for her abduction and murder cannot be guilty as he had no previous criminal convictions of any kind.

Please never let us hear again that a rapist / paedophile could not become a child abductor and murderer on the basis that they had no previous history of such crimes.

I don't think anyone here has ever expressed that view. I may have heard it being used in support of the McCann arguidos though.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 19, 2022, 07:55:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 07:21:32 PM
I don't think anyone here has ever expressed that view. I may have heard it being used in support of the McCann arguidos though.
you really haven’t been paying attention then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 19, 2022, 07:58:16 PM
One example:

“Rapists and abusers don't normally commit murder.  This is the basic difficulty with Bruckner, he might fit some boxes but he certainly doesn't have the profile of a killer”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 19, 2022, 08:06:29 PM
Another example:

“Boxes ticked except for the main one that Bruckner had no known prior for child trafficking. In other words, for him to be guilty he would have had to have done something completely out of character and never done it twice.  Just doesn't add up imo, a bit like Amaral's theories”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 19, 2022, 08:20:06 PM
Another example

Does Brückner tick the boxes in your view?

“All except the murderer box. He had/has no previous in this area. He also had no motive.”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 08:40:30 PM
Quote from: sadie on May 19, 2022, 04:45:29 PM
Spot on Elli.

The man who first said his name is Brueckner is the one who violated his Human Rights.

Now who was that?  *%6^

Not apparently that important.  But then no one is actually telling<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<;
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 19, 2022, 08:53:51 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 19, 2022, 06:39:08 PM
I am incredulous that it is possible for sceptics to grant him and his illogical conclusions the time of day.

May I say that I pay no attention to this alleged rubbish.  But I might if I have to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 20, 2022, 08:45:40 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 07:21:32 PM
I don't think anyone here has ever expressed that view. I may have heard it being used in support of the McCann arguidos though.
You never miss a trick do you nor are you capable of recognising the hypocrisy of your reference to "the McCann arguidos" fifteen years down the line in comparison with. 
What seems to be outwith your comprehension is not that the there was no disgrace attached to the McCanns as a result of the belated and wrong decision to make them suspects directing the investigation more totally off course than it already was.
The disgrace lies entirely with the Portuguese state and sceptics. The former for allowing a man suspected of torture in the case of a missing child to be the lead detective in Madeleine's case in which he had set his sights on another mother.  The latter for perpetuating the disgraceful Amaral nonsense in word and deed.

Are the biggest conspiracy theorists of all time blind to the attempts made by Amaral to pervert the course of justice by promoting more lies as he supported the suspect against the forces of law and order investigating him?

Seems they are if your little snide remark is anything to go by.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 09:25:40 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 19, 2022, 08:06:29 PM
Another example:

“Boxes ticked except for the main one that Bruckner had no known prior for child trafficking. In other words, for him to be guilty he would have had to have done something completely out of character and never done it twice.  Just doesn't add up imo, a bit like Amaral's theories”.

If you read that post in context the poster was referring to child trafficking, not abducting and murdering a child. Is that why there's no link?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2022, 09:39:57 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 09:25:40 AM
If you read that post in context the poster was referring to child trafficking, not abducting and murdering a child. Is that why there's no link?
No that is not the reason, nor is your observation relevant.  The excuse  being made frequently in CB's defense both on this forum and elsewhere is that as he doesn't have a past history of committing a specific crime - child abduction, murder, whatever, then it means he's likely innocent of those crimes.  That is such a stupidly illogical deduction I'm surprised I even need to spell it out, but then again this is sceptic logic we're dealing with so...

" for him to be guilty he would have had to have done something completely out of character and never done it twice" - now apply that logic to the killer of Bobbi-Anne McLeod.  Presumably using that logic he cannot be guilty!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2022, 09:51:09 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 20, 2022, 09:39:57 AM
No that is not the reason, nor is your observation relevant.  The excuse  being made frequently in CB's defense both on this forum and elsewhere is that as he doesn't have a past history of committing a specific crime - child abduction, murder, whatever, then it means he's likely innocent of those crimes.  That is such a stupidly illogical deduction I'm surprised I even need to spell it out, but then again this is sceptic logic we're dealing with so...

Well, considering he isn't being charged with either child abduction, or murder, then he isn't going to be found guilty of either anytime soon, is he.
So, it's quite right to say he is likely innocent of those crimes, because he hasn't done either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 10:02:28 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 20, 2022, 08:45:40 AM
You never miss a trick do you nor are you capable of recognising the hypocrisy of your reference to "the McCann arguidos" fifteen years down the line in comparison with
  • the Amaral arguido from the same era who was charged, tried and found guilty of the offence of which he was suspected
  • your stout defence of Brueckner arguido's entitlement to the presumption of innocence
. 
What seems to be outwith your comprehension is not that the there was no disgrace attached to the McCanns as a result of the belated and wrong decision to make them suspects directing the investigation more totally off course than it already was.
The disgrace lies entirely with the Portuguese state and sceptics. The former for allowing a man suspected of torture in the case of a missing child to be the lead detective in Madeleine's case in which he had set his sights on another mother.  The latter for perpetuating the disgraceful Amaral nonsense in word and deed.

Are the biggest conspiracy theorists of all time blind to the attempts made by Amaral to pervert the course of justice by promoting more lies as he supported the suspect against the forces of law and order investigating him?

Seems they are if your little snide remark is anything to go by.

The McCanns were made arguidos, Brietta, no matter how you feel about it, and their background was used in their support. Are you denying that?

A person's background is taken into account by police officers during investigations and it's one of the 'main' reasons why Ian Horrocks thought making the McCanns arguidos was 'preposterous'.

"Firstly and most importantly, it is statistically unlikely, the main reason being that there is no family history that would point in any way to this."
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Ian_Horrocks.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 20, 2022, 10:03:40 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 20, 2022, 09:39:57 AM
No that is not the reason, nor is your observation relevant.  The excuse  being made frequently in CB's defense both on this forum and elsewhere is that as he doesn't have a past history of committing a specific crime - child abduction, murder, whatever, then it means he's likely innocent of those crimes.  That is such a stupidly illogical deduction I'm surprised I even need to spell it out, but then again this is sceptic logic we're dealing with so...

" for him to be guilty he would have had to have done something completely out of character and never done it twice" - now apply that logic to the killer of Bobbi-Anne McLeod.  Presumably using that logic he cannot be guilty!

Logic dictates that there must always be a first time for anything.

Logic also dictates that when first suspected and/or caught, may not necessarily be the first time of doing.

What happened to Bobbi-Anne McLeod - and to many other innocent victims - is a salutary lesson.  It is also an indication of just how difficult it is for the forces of law and order to conduct an investigation when the perpetrator and the victim are strangers or a chance encounter.

That is without any outside interference set on disrupting an investigation for every single step of the way and even denying a crime has taken place as has happened with Madeleine McCann's abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 10:09:11 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 20, 2022, 09:39:57 AM
No that is not the reason, nor is your observation relevant.  The excuse  being made frequently in CB's defense both on this forum and elsewhere is that as he doesn't have a past history of committing a specific crime - child abduction, murder, whatever, then it means he's likely innocent of those crimes.  That is such a stupidly illogical deduction I'm surprised I even need to spell it out, but then again this is sceptic logic we're dealing with so...

" for him to be guilty he would have had to have done something completely out of character and never done it twice" - now apply that logic to the killer of Bobbi-Anne McLeod.  Presumably using that logic he cannot be guilty!

I don't think anyone has claimed he's likely innocent at all. It's been pointed out, however, that his past can't be used to predict his future behaviour. Imo some people are very close to saying that it can.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 10:12:11 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2022, 09:51:09 AM
Well, considering he isn't being charged with either child abduction, or murder, then he isn't going to be found guilty of either anytime soon, is he.
So, it's quite right to say he is likely innocent of those crimes, because he hasn't done either.

After 5 years of investigation an arrest seems no nearer, despite the prosecutor's brave claims.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 20, 2022, 10:14:51 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 10:09:11 AM
I don't think anyone has claimed he's likely innocent at all. It's been pointed out, however, that his past can't be used to predict his future behaviour. Imo some people are very close to saying that it can.

of course his past can be used to predict his future
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2022, 10:15:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 10:09:11 AM
I don't think anyone has claimed he's likely innocent at all. It's been pointed out, however, that his past can't be used to predict his future behaviour. Imo some people are very close to saying that it can.
Once again, I really don't think you've been paying attention.  If you are unaware that most sceptics think (and claim) he's likely innocent as far as Madeleine's disappearance is concerned then I can only assume you reside on a different planet to the rest of us.  You have also completely sidestepped again the issue I raised which was the faulty logic that a person who has never murdered or abducted before is highly unlikely to be the perpetrator in a child abduction / murder.  Deflect as much as you like, it makes no difference to the glaring idiocy of that logic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2022, 10:17:47 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 10:12:11 AM
After 5 years of investigation an arrest seems no nearer, despite the prosecutor's brave claims.
So, the longer you're investigated the more likely you are to be innocent?  Is that the logic you are using here?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 20, 2022, 10:25:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 10:02:28 AM
The McCanns were made arguidos, Brietta, no matter how you feel about it, and their background was used in their support. Are you denying that?

A person's background is taken into account by police officers during investigations and it's one of the 'main' reasons why Ian Horrocks thought making the McCanns arguidos was 'preposterous'.

"Firstly and most importantly, it is statistically unlikely, the main reason being that there is no family history that would point in any way to this."
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Ian_Horrocks.htm

The McCanns were made arguidos based on entirely the wrong premises. The same circumstances do not apply to anyone being made an arguido in Portugal today including Brueckner; a fact which you contest vehemently but for all your denial, remains just that - a fact.

The only relevance to "the McCanns arguidos" as you so deftly would have it, is that they never faced charges.

Whereas "Amaral arguido" did and was found guilty of a heinous crime.  Which is an event all sceptics manage to wipe entirely from the equation.

Can you possibly explain to me why Brueckner, currently an untried arguido most certainly in the sceptic mind enjoys the right to the presumption of innocence.  But the whipping boys of sceptics, the McCanns, are denied the right to the presumption of innocence despite three police forces publicly declaring for them?

If you cannot bring yourself to attempting to trying to explain sceptic logic, how about having a go at explaining why you think "McCann arguidos" is an appropriate soubriquet for you to use.

Did you come up with that all by yourself? or is it common parlance thought up by someone else in the darker reaches of the internet to where you appear to be trying to drag this little corner of ours?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2022, 10:35:35 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 20, 2022, 10:17:47 AM
So, the longer you're investigated the more likely you are to be innocent?  Is that the logic you are using here?

The police have been investigating abduction for the past umpteen years.
Still no sign of either Maddie or an abductor though.
So, maybe they're on the wrong track, that would explain why they are at a total dead end.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 20, 2022, 10:47:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 10:12:11 AM
After 5 years of investigation an arrest seems no nearer, despite the prosecutor's brave claims.

But we don't know what evidence Wolters has.
He could be about to solve the case any day now.
Maybe if Amaral hadn't shared a picture of Brueckner with dreadlocks then Wolters might have found the murder weapon by now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 11:24:38 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 20, 2022, 10:15:55 AM
Once again, I really don't think you've been paying attention.  If you are unaware that most sceptics think (and claim) he's likely innocent as far as Madeleine's disappearance is concerned then I can only assume you reside on a different planet to the rest of us.  You have also completely sidestepped again the issue I raised which was the faulty logic that a person who has never murdered or abducted before is highly unlikely to be the perpetrator in a child abduction / murder.  Deflect as much as you like, it makes no difference to the glaring idiocy of that logic.

Most sceptics, imo, aren't convinced by Wolters' claims that he's guilty, which is a completely different thing than thinking he's likely to be innocent.

I answered your point about faulty logic; not by deflecting, but by pointing out that Ian Horrocks thought that examining a person's past can inform investigators about their future actions. The Met seem to use your 'faulty logic' too imo.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2022, 11:48:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 11:24:38 AM
Most sceptics, imo, aren't convinced by Wolters' claims that he's guilty, which is a completely different thing than thinking he's likely to be innocent.

I answered your point about faulty logic; not by deflecting, but by pointing out that Ian Horrocks thought that examining a person's past can inform investigators about their future actions. The Met seem to use your 'faulty logic' too imo.
Of course a suspect's past can inform investigator's about what such a person is capable of, what their predilections are, their habits and interests, there's nothing faulty in creating a picture of a suspect, it's what investigators do, or do you think the police are remiss in calling up information on a suspect's previous criminal history?  It's very different from claiming that the absence of a previous criminal record for murder or abduction means it's unlikely a person committed such a crime which, despite your protestations, is precisely what has regularly been argued wrt to CB. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 12:54:04 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 20, 2022, 11:48:55 AM
Of course a suspect's past can inform investigator's about what such a person is capable of, what their predilections are, their habits and interests, there's nothing faulty in creating a picture of a suspect, it's what investigators do, or do you think the police are remiss in calling up information on a suspect's previous criminal history?  It's very different from claiming that the absence of a previous criminal record for murder or abduction means it's unlikely a person committed such a crime which, despite your protestations, is precisely what has regularly been argued wrt to CB.

So it's not 'likely innocent' now, it's 'unlikely he committed murder or/and abduction'? They don't mean the same thing, you know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2022, 02:00:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 12:54:04 PM
So it's not 'likely innocent' now, it's 'unlikely he committed murder or/and abduction'? They don't mean the same thing, you know.
so you're resorting to your usual pathetic semantic quibbles, always the last resort of he or she who has run out of any other reasonable argument.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 06:10:08 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 20, 2022, 02:00:27 PM
so you're resorting to your usual pathetic semantic quibbles, always the last resort of he or she who has run out of any other reasonable argument.

You can argue, wriggle and squirm all you like, it still doesn't make your original statement true;

"Please never let us hear again that a rapist / paedophile could not become a child abductor and murderer on the basis that they had no previous history of such crimes."

Who said 'could not' then? Or was it 'unlikely to become'?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2022, 06:32:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 06:10:08 PM
You can argue, wriggle and squirm all you like, it still doesn't make your original statement true;

"Please never let us hear again that a rapist / paedophile could not become a child abductor and murderer on the basis that they had no previous history of such crimes."

Who said 'could not' then? Or was it 'unlikely to become'?
what difference does it make?  The logic is faulty whichever words you use.  Claiming that a person such as CB could not or is unlikely to have committed a crime because they have no previous history of committing a similar crime is just plain dumb. End of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 07:56:47 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 20, 2022, 06:32:45 PM
what difference does it make?  The logic is faulty whichever words you use.  Claiming that a person such as CB could not or is unlikely to have committed a crime because they have no previous history of committing a similar crime is just plain dumb. End of.

Returning to the facts it's evidence that matters, not speculation or rumour. If Wolters' concrete evidence is as shaky as that he has released then his chances of charging his suspect seem low. So whatever the significance of his background, it's not going to help to convict him imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2022, 08:17:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 07:56:47 PM
Returning to the facts it's evidence that matters, not speculation or rumour. If Wolters' concrete evidence is as shaky as that he has released then his chances of charging his suspect seem low. So whatever the significance of his background, it's not going to help to convict him imo.
This has nothing to do with my point and is stating the obvious imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 08:49:02 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 20, 2022, 08:17:24 PM
This has nothing to do with my point and is stating the obvious imo.

I'm afraid I have zero interest in your point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2022, 09:05:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 20, 2022, 08:49:02 PM
I'm afraid I have zero interest in your point.
The last few posts of yours attempting  to argue the toss with me tell a different story.  If my posts really hold zero interest for you I strongly suggest you don’t respond to them.   &^&*%
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 20, 2022, 10:13:05 PM
My argument is that pointing out CB has no previous convictions for abduction or murder (as some have done on here) is entirely irrelevant.  It means nothing, and certainly does not mean CB is unlikely or unable to have committed such crimes. It may be of zero interest to some but nonetheless it is an entirely logical and IMO  irrefutable point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on May 21, 2022, 06:57:42 PM
My argument is that pointing out the parents have no previous convictions is entirely irrelevant.  It means nothing, and certainly does not mean that the parents are unlikely or unable to have committed a crime.  It may be of zero interest to some but nonetheless it is an entirely logical and IMO  irrefutable point.

See how it works?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 22, 2022, 11:02:46 AM

What happened to Faithlily's Comment?  Although I can't remember now exactly what it was.

On balance, I would say that Brueckner's previous record makes him a very likely candidate as opposed to The McCanns, which is what it is all about on this Forum, if truth be told.

I have found the hypocrisy levelled against The McCanns absolutely mind blowing, when they have no record of anything at all.  Innocent Until Proven Guilty never came into it with some.  But I will continue to expect the same for Brueckner until proven otherwise.

How any of you have the nerve to deny The McCanns a basic Right which you now call on for Brueckner, Human Rights notwithstanding is completely beyond me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 22, 2022, 12:42:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 22, 2022, 11:02:46 AM
What happened to Faithlily's Comment?  Although I can't remember now exactly what it was.

On balance, I would say that Brueckner's previous record makes him a very likely candidate as opposed to The McCanns, which is what it is all about on this Forum, if truth be told.

I have found the hypocrisy levelled against The McCanns absolutely mind blowing, when they have no record of anything at all.  Innocent Until Proven Guilty never came into it with some.  But I will continue to expect the same for Brueckner until proven otherwise.

How any of you have the nerve to deny The McCanns a basic Right which you now call on for Brueckner, Human Rights notwithstanding is completely beyond me.

If the ECHR rule that Portugal did not support the Mccanns human rights will gunit be critical of Portugal and the SC verdict or will she refuse to accept the ruling
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 22, 2022, 01:02:56 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 22, 2022, 12:42:30 PM
If the ECHR rule that Portugal did not support the Mccanns human rights will gunit be critical of Portugal and the SC verdict or will she refuse to accept the ruling

Dear God.  If only I could care about what Gunit thinks of anything.  This is hard and fast prejudice for many a long year.  So I don't care what she thinks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 22, 2022, 01:25:09 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 22, 2022, 12:42:30 PM
If the ECHR rule that Portugal did not support the Mccanns human rights will gunit be critical of Portugal and the SC verdict or will she refuse to accept the ruling

It's not a question of whether Portugal supported the McCanns' human rights; the question is did it breach them. I believe in the rule of law, which means accepting decisions handed down by all courts, not just those we agree with.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 22, 2022, 01:43:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 22, 2022, 01:25:09 PM
It's not a question of whether Portugal supported the McCanns' human rights; the question is did it breach them. I believe in the rule of law, which means accepting decisions handed down by all courts, not just those we agree with.
What on earth are you doing as a mod on The Miscarriage Of Justice Forum then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 22, 2022, 01:52:23 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 22, 2022, 01:43:56 PM
What on earth are you doing as a mod on The Miscarriage Of Justice Forum then?

Does everyone else here reject the rule of law then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 22, 2022, 01:58:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 22, 2022, 01:25:09 PM
It's not a question of whether Portugal supported the McCanns' human rights; the question is did it breach them. I believe in the rule of law, which means accepting decisions handed down by all courts, not just those we agree with.

Or was Portugal more interested in the Rights of a Convicted Liar?  And if so, why would that be?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 22, 2022, 02:16:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 22, 2022, 01:25:09 PM
It's not a question of whether Portugal supported the McCanns' human rights; the question is did it breach them. I believe in the rule of law, which means accepting decisions handed down by all courts, not just those we agree with.

So if the ECHR rule that Portugal , the SC and Amaral with his book breached the McCanns Human Rights you will be as critical of them as you are of Wolters....Good to know but I find it hard to beleive
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 22, 2022, 02:20:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 22, 2022, 01:52:23 PM
Does everyone else here reject the rule of law then?

What Rule of whose Law?  Try not to be too ridiculous.  Amaral was convicted of Perjury by a Portuguese Court.  He is a liar.  And has proved it yet again.

So what you are saying is that Amaral has a Right to Lie if he feels like it and that's okay.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 22, 2022, 02:21:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 22, 2022, 01:52:23 PM
Does everyone else here reject the rule of law then?
Did I say that?  Do you respect the rule of law in the Jeremy Bamber case?  I seem to recall you were of the view that he might be a victim of a terrible miscarriage of justice.  Are you now  saying that though you believe it may be a miscarriage of justice that you nevertheless respect the legal decision to find him guilty and incarcerate him for the rest of his life?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 22, 2022, 02:25:43 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 22, 2022, 02:21:50 PM
Did I say that?  Do you respect the rule of law in the Jeremy Bamber case?  I seem to recall you were of the view that he might be a victim of a terrible miscarriage of justice.  Are you now  saying that though you believe it may be a miscarriage of justice that you nevertheless respect the legal decision to find him guilty and incarcerate him for the rest of his life?

I wouldn't bother if I was you.  Gunit's thinking is seriously skewed.  Unto her only what she wants to believe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 22, 2022, 05:48:22 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 20, 2022, 10:13:05 PM
My argument is that pointing out CB has no previous convictions for abduction or murder (as some have done on here) is entirely irrelevant.  It means nothing, and certainly does not mean CB is unlikely or unable to have committed such crimes. It may be of zero interest to some but nonetheless it is an entirely logical and IMO  irrefutable point.

That elderly woman could have died of a heart attack being beaten and raped.   It's ridiculous to say he is not capable of murder,  he has just been lucky so far.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on May 22, 2022, 06:00:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 19, 2022, 02:38:57 PM
The supporter's fantasy is that everyone who has doubts about the case or about the T9's story was influenced by Amaral.


Not everyone of course but a lot.   The people who believe Amaral then go on to tweet about it endlessly convincing others.   People to this day believe the McCann's drugged their children, that they washed the curtains that there was blood in the car.  I could go on but you probably know it all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 22, 2022, 06:39:55 PM
Quote from: Lace on May 22, 2022, 05:48:22 PM
That elderly woman could have died of a heart attack being beaten and raped.   It's ridiculous to say he is not capable of murder,  he has just been lucky so far.

Wouldn't that be manslaughter?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 22, 2022, 06:53:59 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 22, 2022, 02:25:43 PM
I wouldn't bother if I was you.  Gunit's thinking is seriously skewed.  Unto her only what she wants to believe.
Or perchance, what she has been told to promote ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 22, 2022, 09:00:33 PM
Quote from: sadie on May 22, 2022, 06:53:59 PM
Or perchance, what she has been told to promote ?

Oh, the fantasies!  *&^^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 23, 2022, 07:45:21 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 22, 2022, 11:02:46 AM
What happened to Faithlily's Comment?  Although I can't remember now exactly what it was.

On balance, I would say that Brueckner's previous record makes him a very likely candidate as opposed to The McCanns, which is what it is all about on this Forum, if truth be told.

I have found the hypocrisy levelled against The McCanns absolutely mind blowing, when they have no record of anything at all.  Innocent Until Proven Guilty never came into it with some.  But I will continue to expect the same for Brueckner until proven otherwise.

How any of you have the nerve to deny The McCanns a basic Right which you now call on for Brueckner, Human Rights notwithstanding is completely beyond me.

This comment?

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg683782#msg683782
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 23, 2022, 08:24:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 23, 2022, 07:45:21 AM
This comment?

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg683782#msg683782
I guessd  it would be an attack on me orone of my posts, and clearly whatever she said was deemed necessary for editing by John.  What a surprise!   what he left of her post makes little sense so I guess I shall never know the full extent of the undoubtedly nasty, spiteful comment she left for me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 29, 2022, 09:54:56 AM
No fanfare for the common man just justice going about its course albeit 30 yrs on, no salacious gossip about previous, that will we be played out in court if it is the case, silence and how it should be.
One issue though, she's unlikely to have been stabbed to death 37 times , but received 37 stab wounds.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10848865/Murder-suspect-54-appears-court-Nikki-Allan-seven-dead-nearly-30-years-ago.html



Murder suspect, 54, appears in court over schoolgirl Nikki Allan, seven, found dead in derelict building after going missing nearly 30 years ago
Man, 54, charged with murdering seven-year-old Nikki Allan in 1992
Nikki was killed after leaving her grandparents' home in Sunderland
She was found brutally stabbed to death 37 times and beaten with a brick
On Tuesday, David Thomas Boyd appeared at Newcastle Crown Court
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 29, 2022, 10:19:59 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 23, 2022, 08:24:01 AM
I guessd  it would be an attack on me orone of my posts, and clearly whatever she said was deemed necessary for editing by John.  What a surprise!   what he left of her post makes little sense so I guess I shall never know the full extent of the undoubtedly nasty, spiteful comment she left for me.

It makes perfect sense to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 29, 2022, 10:49:47 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 29, 2022, 10:19:59 AM
It makes perfect sense to me.
I have re-read it and yes, I can see I misunderstood the post first time round.  My apologies.  I wonder what John felt necessary to remove however?  That we shall probably never know...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on May 29, 2022, 10:53:07 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2022, 09:54:56 AM
No fanfare for the common man just justice going about its course albeit 30 yrs on, no salacious gossip about previous, that will we be played out in court if it is the case, silence and how it should be.
One issue though, she's unlikely to have been stabbed to death 37 times , but received 37 stab wounds.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10848865/Murder-suspect-54-appears-court-Nikki-Allan-seven-dead-nearly-30-years-ago.html



Murder suspect, 54, appears in court over schoolgirl Nikki Allan, seven, found dead in derelict building after going missing nearly 30 years ago
Man, 54, charged with murdering seven-year-old Nikki Allan in 1992
Nikki was killed after leaving her grandparents' home in Sunderland
She was found brutally stabbed to death 37 times and beaten with a brick
On Tuesday, David Thomas Boyd appeared at Newcastle Crown Court

Seems the police got it wrong a couple of times, their first prime suspect even standing trial and being acquitted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 29, 2022, 11:35:03 AM
Quote from: jassi on May 29, 2022, 10:53:07 AM
Seems the police got it wrong a couple of times, their first prime suspect even standing trial and being acquitted.
And it seems to have taken them 4 years of investigation to bring charges against the current suspect, yet some on here seem to think that the longer a suspect is being investigated the less likely he or she is to have committed the crime!  No logic to that at all...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10845551/Man-charged-murdering-seven-year-old-Nikki-Allan-1992.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 29, 2022, 12:05:06 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 29, 2022, 11:35:03 AM
And it seems to have taken them 4 years of investigation to bring charges against the current suspect, yet some on here seem to think that the longer a suspect is being investigated the less likely he or she is to have committed the crime!  No logic to that at all...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10845551/Man-charged-murdering-seven-year-old-Nikki-Allan-1992.html

Yet his name has not been plastered over the media with updates from the police force saying he's murdered the girl, how it should be done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 29, 2022, 12:18:23 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2022, 12:05:06 PM
Yet his name has not been plastered over the media with updates from the police force saying he's murdered the girl, how it should be done.
Then you must send instruction to the German prosecutor.  Perhaps they could do with some advice from us British, we know how to do things proper, innit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 29, 2022, 12:34:58 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2022, 12:05:06 PM
Yet his name has not been plastered over the media with updates from the police force saying he's murdered the girl, how it should be done.

He must have very strong evidence to be so confident
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 29, 2022, 12:58:45 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 29, 2022, 12:34:58 PM
He must have very strong evidence to be so confident

They had supposed strong evidence against some one else who was acquitted.

He confessed but..................... The trial heard that although he had confessed to the killing, a judge ruled police had used "oppressive methods" during questioning and he was found not guilty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 29, 2022, 01:05:10 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 29, 2022, 12:34:58 PM
He must have very strong evidence to be so confident

IMO its DNA.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 29, 2022, 01:32:09 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2022, 12:58:45 PM
They had supposed strong evidence against some one else who was acquitted.

He confessed but..................... The trial heard that although he had confessed to the killing, a judge ruled police had used "oppressive methods" during questioning and he was found not guilty.

I think the definitive observation here is "although he had confessed to the killing, a judge ruled police had used "oppressive methods" "

Now think back to it being judged in a Portuguese court that Leonor Cipriano was tortured into confessing a crime which she subsequently denied being guilty of.
I would say that being hospitalised and almost blinded by beating makes the Portuguese assault quite "oppressive" - so any idea why she wasn't acquitted but had to spend many years of her life in Jail instead?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 29, 2022, 01:53:48 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 29, 2022, 01:32:09 PM
I think the definitive observation here is "although he had confessed to the killing, a judge ruled police had used "oppressive methods" "

Now think back to it being judged in a Portuguese court that Leonor Cipriano was tortured into confessing a crime which she subsequently denied being guilty of.
I would say that being hospitalised and almost blinded by beating makes the Portuguese assault quite "oppressive" - so any idea why she wasn't acquitted but had to spend many years of her life in Jail instead?

Because she's a child killer.
That's why.
But, if you're happy to support murderers that's up to you.
I'll stick to supporting paedophiles, seems fair enough.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 29, 2022, 02:11:07 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 29, 2022, 01:32:09 PM
I think the definitive observation here is "although he had confessed to the killing, a judge ruled police had used "oppressive methods" "

Now think back to it being judged in a Portuguese court that Leonor Cipriano was tortured into confessing a crime which she subsequently denied being guilty of.
I would say that being hospitalised and almost blinded by beating makes the Portuguese assault quite "oppressive" - so any idea why she wasn't acquitted but had to spend many years of her life in Jail instead?

Amazing how these things always turn themselves around in the end.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 29, 2022, 02:26:44 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 29, 2022, 12:58:45 PM
They had supposed strong evidence against some one else who was acquitted.

He confessed but..................... The trial heard that although he had confessed to the killing, a judge ruled police had used "oppressive methods" during questioning and he was found not guilty.
Fancy, police using oppressive methods to get a confession, that would never happen in Portugal. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 29, 2022, 02:37:06 PM


I'm still waiting for a link to the find Joana fundraiser. It's easy to set up a go fund me but no one ever does it.

Why isn't anyone looking for Joana?

Why aren't the McCann supporters doing anything to help clear the Cipriano's name?

I know why, it's because it's obvious Joana was murdered by her mother & uncle, only, McCann supporters won't ever admit as much.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 29, 2022, 06:12:18 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 29, 2022, 02:37:06 PM

I'm still waiting for a link to the find Joana fundraiser. It's easy to set up a go fund me but no one ever does it.

Why isn't anyone looking for Joana?

Why aren't the McCann supporters doing anything to help clear the Cipriano's name?

I know why, it's because it's obvious Joana was murdered by her mother & uncle, only, McCann supporters won't ever admit as much.

We have already ascertained that you have no logic.

Go bury your head in the sand rather than make such dreadful accusations
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on May 30, 2022, 12:03:37 AM

Some facts about Mark Williams Thomas.

He joined the Police as a Constable in 1989.  He left the Police Force in the year 2000 at the age of 30 with the lowly rank of Detective Constable.  So not much of a career as a Detective.

His statement that Brueckner has an Alibi is a gross distortion of the facts as the girl in question has stated that she can't remember precise dates or times.  This could have been a preplanned attempt to set up aforementioned Alibi.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 30, 2022, 09:35:16 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on May 30, 2022, 12:03:37 AM
Some facts about Mark Williams Thomas.

He joined the Police as a Constable in 1989.  He left the Police Force in the year 2000 at the age of 30 with the lowly rank of Detective Constable.  So not much of a career as a Detective.

His statement that Brueckner has an Alibi is a gross distortion of the facts as the girl in question has stated that she can't remember precise dates or times.  This could have been a preplanned attempt to set up aforementioned Alibi.

He doesn't need an alibi, Wolters told MWT   he can't place CB in Luz on the night of 3/05/2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2022, 11:16:37 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 30, 2022, 09:35:16 AM
He doesn't need an alibi, Wolters told MWT   he can't place CB in Luz on the night of 3/05/2007.

I'm not sure how many more times this needs explaining before it sinks in.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 11:35:01 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2022, 11:16:37 AM
I'm not sure how many more times this needs explaining before it sinks in.

Wolters' 'evidence' pointing to CB's presence in Luz has been revealed subsequently as extremely unreliable. Even if he did recieve a phone call in the area at 7.30pm, that's not an indication of guilt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 30, 2022, 11:56:47 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 11:35:01 AM
Wolters' 'evidence' pointing to CB's presence in Luz has been revealed subsequently as extremely unreliable. Even if he did recieve a phone call in the area at 7.30pm, that's not an indication of guilt.

What evidence is that, then?

As far as I am aware none of the evidence gathered by the BKA in the McCann case has been passed to Brieckner's legal team as yet.
Therefore they know nothing ~
You may make suppositions based on MSM but I don't think you can pretend to know anything at all about the actual evidence which may determine whether or not charges are laid against Brueckner in Madeleine's case.

So why do it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 12:07:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 11:35:01 AM
Wolters' 'evidence' pointing to CB's presence in Luz has been revealed subsequently as extremely unreliable. Even if he did recieve a phone call in the area at 7.30pm, that's not an indication of guilt.

Without knowing what Wolters has you may end up looking very foolish... Like MWT.. and many others.  I cannot see Wolters making his claims without very strong eviidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 12:45:55 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 12:07:26 PM
Without knowing what Wolters has you may end up looking very foolish... Like MWT.. and many others.  I cannot see Wolters making his claims without very strong eviidence

I've never encountered a case where the crime and the criminal have been publicly identified without any charges being brought or any evidence being offered. I can't share your faith in a man who was prepared to breach his suspect's human rights in that way. Strong evidence leads to charges and a trial, not to public accusations of guilt imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 12:56:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 12:45:55 PM
I've never encountered a case where the crime and the criminal have been publicly identified without any charges being brought or any evidence being offered. I can't share your faith in a man who was prepared to breach his suspect's human rights in that way. Strong evidence leads to charges and a trial, not to public accusations of guilt imo.

I think you are going to look very foolish.  I don't share your faith in Grime and his dogs for the reasons I've given... And It  seems I'm right not to.
I've never seen a case where the suspect was beaten by the police and found guilty with no real other evidence.
I see Wolters as shrewed and professional... He's already made CB talk..
I will judge him when we see all the evidence and if he solves the case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 01:34:32 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 12:56:30 PM
I think you are going to look very foolish.  I don't share your faith in Grime and his dogs for the reasons I've given... And It  seems I'm right not to.
I've never seen a case where the suspect was beaten by the police and found guilty with no real other evidence.
I see Wolters as shrewed and professional... He's already made CB talk..
I will judge him when we see all the evidence and if he solves the case

I think you've already judged him and jumped onto his bandwagon. It's you who are in danger of looking very foolish imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 02:04:07 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 01:34:32 PM
I think you've already judged him and jumped onto his bandwagon. It's you who are in danger of looking very foolish imo.

Ive made a measured judgement that he wouldnt make these claims unless he had his strong evidence. Seems I was right about Grime and his cadaver dog.
.SY and the BKA seem happy to ignore them
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2022, 02:46:29 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 02:04:07 PM
Ive made a measured judgement that he wouldnt make these claims unless he had his strong evidence. Seems I was right about Grime and his cadaver dog.
.SY and the BKA seem happy to ignore them

But, aren't you always telling us that no inference can be drawn from the dog alerts, that they are meaningless?

So, what are they supposed to be ignoring exactly?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 30, 2022, 03:03:22 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2022, 02:46:29 PM
But, aren't you always telling us that no inference can be drawn from the dog alerts, that they are meaningless?

So, what are they supposed to be ignoring exactly?

Now if Wolters were to say his evidence is the dog alerts...................................
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2022, 03:11:33 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 30, 2022, 03:03:22 PM
Now if Wolters were to say his evidence is the dog alerts...................................

They're not evidence though, so that's a non starter, but Wolters didn't want to deny that they found anything in Brueckner's van, but he denied there was anything physical or forensic, so, reading between the lines, I reckon dogs alerted to in the back of the VW.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 30, 2022, 03:49:21 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 30, 2022, 03:03:22 PM
Now if Wolters were to say his evidence is the dog alerts...................................
Which he won’t, but what if he did, eh?  Where would that leave the dog worshiping sceptics…?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 30, 2022, 04:18:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 12:45:55 PM
I've never encountered a case where the crime and the criminal have been publicly identified without any charges being brought or any evidence being offered. I can't share your faith in a man who was prepared to breach his suspect's human rights in that way. Strong evidence leads to charges and a trial, not to public accusations of guilt imo.

What is that Fulcher guy getting paid for if he is allowing every tomdickorharry to pick up on alleged breaches to his client's human rights while he has done nothing.
Wonder why that is?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 30, 2022, 04:27:15 PM
Quote from: barrier on May 30, 2022, 03:03:22 PM
Now if Wolters were to say his evidence is the dog alerts...................................

I think the only dogs which will feature in this case will be the ones Brueckner is suing about re his alleged ill treatment of them and the one whose carcass was found with its head sticking out above ground with some of Brueckner's paedophile hoard buried under it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 30, 2022, 04:29:34 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2022, 03:11:33 PM
They're not evidence though, so that's a non starter, but Wolters didn't want to deny that they found anything in Brueckner's van, but he denied there was anything physical or forensic, so, reading between the lines, I reckon dogs alerted to in the back of the VW.

The little girls' bathing costumes are going to take a wee bit if explaining away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 04:37:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 12:45:55 PM
I've never encountered a case where the crime and the criminal have been publicly identified without any charges being brought or any evidence being offered. I can't share your faith in a man who was prepared to breach his suspect's human rights in that way. Strong evidence leads to charges and a trial, not to public accusations of guilt imo.

I've got far mor respect for Wolters. At least he's honest... Not like Amaral and the PJ who leaked lies to the press to publicly accuse the mccanns
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on May 30, 2022, 05:28:09 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 30, 2022, 04:18:46 PM
What is that Fulcher guy getting paid for if he is allowing every tomdickorharry to pick up on alleged breaches to his client's human rights while he has done nothing.
Wonder why that is?

I'm wondering if he, Fulcher,  welcomes comment, especially unfair comment because that is Brueckners 'get-out-of-jail' card.  Maybe they will attempt the 'Tried by Media' plea?  Maybe it will be successful ?    Even, maybe, it was all planned like this beforehand ?

Is this why Amaral interceded?   Was he paid to do it?   To get all the rumours going.

Anyone who bothered to read my early posts will know that I felt that CB was a patsy.   
Not a Pasty for the Mccann side, but a Patsy for the perps side.

To create a 'Cloud' to protect the perps by taking the 'eye' off them and simultaniously have Madeleine pronounced dead.  So the Perps are safe for ever, cos with a 'dead' Madeleine, no reason to go on searching

just my wonderings again.


Only my thoughts, but what has gone on has been mighty strange
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2022, 05:32:51 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 30, 2022, 04:29:34 PM
The little girls' bathing costumes are going to take a wee bit if explaining away.

Why?

Is he being charged with theft from washing lines or something?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2022, 05:36:59 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 04:37:36 PM
I've got far mor respect for Wolters. At least he's honest... Not like Amaral and the PJ who leaked lies to the press to publicly accuse the mccanns

How do you actually know that he's honest, though?

I suppose you'd just have to take his word for it really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 05:50:08 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2022, 05:36:59 PM
How do you actually know that he's honest, though?

I suppose you'd just have to take his word for it really.

I expect Wolters thinks/hopes the evidence he has is concrete. He's going to look silly if it isn't. One way of reading the situation at the moment is the resounding silence from the Met suggests a giant step back from them. The arguido status conferred on CB by the Portuguese could be seen as them reminding the Germans that they have jurisdiction. Who knows?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 06:01:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 05:50:08 PM
I expect Wolters thinks/hopes the evidence he has is concrete. He's going to look silly if it isn't. One way of reading the situation at the moment is the resounding silence from the Met suggests a giant step back from them. The arguido status conferred on CB by the Portuguese could be seen as them reminding the Germans that they have jurisdiction. Who knows?

Giant step back by the met.. Because they realise the Germans have solved it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 30, 2022, 06:06:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 05:50:08 PM
I expect Wolters thinks/hopes the evidence he has is concrete. He's going to look silly if it isn't. One way of reading the situation at the moment is the resounding silence from the Met suggests a giant step back from them. The arguido status conferred on CB by the Portuguese could be seen as them reminding the Germans that they have jurisdiction. Who knows?

They did have jurisdiction in rape case No2 but it seems they abrogated their responsibility on that one and allowed it to be timed out by statute.
The Germans were able to take it to trial and get justice for the victim.

They also had jurisdiction in rape case No1 but it seems they abrogated their responsibility on that one too and also allowed that one to be timed out by statute.
It is to be hoped that the Germans have enough evidence to take that one to trial too and get justice for the victim.

Perhaps someone in authority might tip the wink to the Portuguese Judicial Police and remind them of their role in protecting women and children in their jurisdiction before someone has to do it for them.
If they had, perhaps they could have found enough evidence back in 2007 to make Brueckner an arguido then had they just kept knocking his door until he answered it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2022, 06:14:35 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 06:01:37 PM
Giant step back by the met.. Because they realise the Germans have solved it

We'll know if OG shut down this year, that will mean Wolters has definitely solved it so they're not needed anymore, either that or they're leaving the Germans to waste their own Euros on the futile endeavour.

Though, obviously, if OG don't shut down, that will mean Wolters is still making real progress on the case, or something or other, & charges are imminent.

Just depends what you care to imagine really, in the absence of evidence, which is a point I seem to remember making again & again, but, no one cares about evidence here, claims are an equal substitute for anything tangible, as ever it were in the abduction of Madeleine McCann.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2022, 06:21:03 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 30, 2022, 06:06:36 PM
They did have jurisdiction in rape case No2 but it seems they abrogated their responsibility on that one and allowed it to be timed out by statute.
The Germans were able to take it to trial and get justice for the victim.

They also had jurisdiction in rape case No1 but it seems they abrogated their responsibility on that one too and also allowed that one to be timed out by statute.
It is to be hoped that the Germans have enough evidence to take that one to trial too and get justice for the victim.

Perhaps someone in authority might tip the wink to the Portuguese Judicial Police and remind them of their role in protecting women and children in their jurisdiction before someone has to do it for them.
If they had, perhaps they could have found enough evidence back in 2007 to make Brueckner an arguido then had they just kept knocking his door until he answered it.

Yeah, we have absolutely no issues with our treatment of women & girls, police incompetence, lack of successful prosecutions for rapes & we've certainly never had a copper falsely arrest, rape & murder some poor young woman in our green & pleasant utopia.

What a backwards country Portugal is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2022, 06:31:24 PM

It's probably worth remembering too that the police had no evidence against Brueckner in 2007, unless anyone knows any different, but, maybe the PJ should have had the foresight to realise Brueckner would be confessing to Busching in 2008, & then keeping it to himself for a further 9 years.

If SY & Wolters had been involved from the beginning they'd have prevented Maddie from being abducted in the first place, that's how good they are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 07:08:47 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 06:01:37 PM
Giant step back by the met.. Because they realise the Germans have solved it

As I said, the answer could be quite different. The fact is we just don't know what any of them think; except Wolters who has spent two years telling us what he thinks, but not how he formed his opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 07:14:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 07:08:47 PM
As I said, the answer could be quite different. The fact is we just don't know what any of them think; except Wolters who has spent two years telling us what he thinks, but not how he formed his opinion.
Yes he has.. He's formed his opinion from the evidence he has.. And he says if we, saw the evidence we would agree with him
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 07:32:52 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 07:14:30 PM
Yes he has.. He's formed his opinion from the evidence he has.. And he says if we, saw the evidence we would agree with him

How arrogant. Especially from a man who clearly demonstrated his lack of understanding of the mobile phone 'evidence'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 07:49:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 07:32:52 PM
How arrogant. Especially from a man who clearly demonstrated his lack of understanding of the mobile phone 'evidence'.

I think your post is pure sour grapes because the BKA see the mccanns are innocent.. Pathetic,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 30, 2022, 08:08:03 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 30, 2022, 06:31:24 PM
It's probably worth remembering too that the police had no evidence against Brueckner in 2007, unless anyone knows any different, but, maybe the PJ should have had the foresight to realise Brueckner would be confessing to Busching in 2008, & then keeping it to himself for a further 9 years.

If SY & Wolters had been involved from the beginning they'd have prevented Maddie from being abducted in the first place, that's how good they are.

It is probably worth remembering too that the police had no evidence against the McCanns in 2007.  It did not stop them looking for some though, did it.

I wonder what they might have turned up against Brueckner had he been afforded the same diligence the McCanns were subjected to if only they had looked.
Guess what a good starting point might vey well have been ~ phone pings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 09:10:15 PM
The mobile phone 'pings' are of no use at all, imo. It's not been confirmed that it was CB's phone and the location of the phone can't be pinpointed. Nothing can be deduced from the reregistration of CB's Jaguar either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on May 31, 2022, 01:37:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 09:10:15 PM
The mobile phone 'pings' are of no use at all, imo. It's not been confirmed that it was CB's phone and the location of the phone can't be pinpointed. Nothing can be deduced from the reregistration of CB's Jaguar either.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-brueckner-26851632
*snipped*
"German police reportedly found a photograph of the woman lying in Brueckner’s campervan, during their investigation into a rape for which the 44-year-old is now serving a seven-year jail sentence in Germany"

On which device was that photo taken/found? Would you concede that BKA, by revealing this information, are directly linking the German witness to a specific device (a phone) used by CB around the time of Madeleine's disappearance and which may also contain image(s) of Madeleine?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 06:08:04 AM
Quote from: misty on May 31, 2022, 01:37:24 AM
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-brueckner-26851632
*snipped*
"German police reportedly found a photograph of the woman lying in Brueckner’s campervan, during their investigation into a rape for which the 44-year-old is now serving a seven-year jail sentence in Germany"

On which device was that photo taken/found? Would you concede that BKA, by revealing this information, are directly linking the German witness to a specific device (a phone) used by CB around the time of Madeleine's disappearance and which may also contain image(s) of Madeleine?

There have been various claims in the press, but are they true? The article you quote also says;

"According to police data, Brueckner’s mobile phone was in the village when it received a call."

That statement is misleading, as the phone hasn't been identified as Brueckner's and it wasn't definitely 'in the village'

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 07:30:30 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 06:08:04 AM
There have been various claims in the press, but are they true? The article you quote also says;

"According to police data, Brueckner’s mobile phone was in the village when it received a call."

That statement is misleading, as the phone hasn't been identified as Brueckner's and it wasn't definitely 'in the village'
According to HCW the phone has been identified as that used by Brückner at the time so why are you saying otherwise?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on May 31, 2022, 07:38:03 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 07:30:30 AM
According to HCW the phone has been identified as that used by Brückner at the time so why are you saying otherwise?
I wonder if the BKA have found Brueckner's fingerprints all over it and no-one else's?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 08:12:31 AM
Quote from: Myster on May 31, 2022, 07:38:03 AM
I wonder if the BKA have found Brueckner's fingerprints all over it and no-one else's?

...and there are photos of Maddie stored on it, with a digital footprint showing the photos were taken during the same week as that picture of the girlfriend

But, Wolters can't let Brueckner know he's found these photos, or he could change his story, that'll be why he's let it be known via mass media that he found Brueckner's phone with the photos on it.

Yeah, this still isn't making much sense, so, maybe there just aren't any photos of Maddie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 08:22:26 AM
Quote from: Myster on May 31, 2022, 07:38:03 AM
I wonder if the BKA have found Brueckner's fingerprints all over it and no-one else's?

As far as I know the Germans were told the mobile phone number was Brueckners. According to MWT only one person sais that, others gave him another name for the phone owner. I've seen nothing suggesting they had hold of the phone itself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 08:25:26 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 08:22:26 AM
As far as I know the Germans were told the mobile phone number was Brueckners. According to MWT only one person sais that, others gave him another name for the phone owner. I've seen nothing suggesting they had hold of the phone itself.
So you have chosen to believe MWT but to disbelieve HCW, if I’m reading you right…?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 08:31:39 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 08:25:26 AM
So you have chosen to believe MWT but to disbelieve HCW, if I’m reading you right…?

We have 'evidence' the phone was used by someone else, MWT interviewed a witness who stated as much during the documentary.

....and that is a darn sight more evidence than Wolters has ever shown, of anything, but, I think we should ignore the evidence & just take Wolters word for it, plus, ignore the totally illogical idea that Brueckner wouldn't already know Wolters has found the paedo photos.

I suppose if we do that, we can continue to believe he's solved it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 09:20:44 AM
Given that MWT is an independent researcher and investigstor and clearly not controlled by the High Ups, how do sceptics explain his complete failure to arrive at the conclusion wrt to Madeleine’s parents  that is so blatantly obvious to themselves?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 09:31:32 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 09:20:44 AM
Given that MWT is an independent researcher and investigstor and clearly not controlled by the High Ups, how do sceptics explain his complete failure to arrive at the conclusion wrt to Madeleine’s parents  that is so blatantly obvious to themselves?


MWT doesn't believe the window was open, he believes in woke & wandered.

So, to his mind, the McCanns must be mistaken about the window then, &, if the window wasn't open, then Maddie wasn't abducted, they themselves have stated there is no way she could have left the apartment on her own.

But guess what, due to libel laws, MWT is unable to say what he genuinely believes.

Get it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 09:35:56 AM
No, what  MWT genuinely believes is that Maddie just wandered out, & by a terrible, tragic coincidence, a passing paedophile struck the jackpot that night.

Ok, I'll give you that, he did believe Pistorious, if you believe him about that, & that he wasn't just saying whatever to pay his mortgage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 09:51:31 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 08:25:26 AM
So you have chosen to believe MWT but to disbelieve HCW, if I’m reading you right…?

You need to remember that Wolters appealed about the phone call because he needed to trace the caller in order to ASK THEM WHO THEY SPOKE TO. Therefore Wolters et al weren't absolutely sure who was answering that phone on 3rd May 2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 31, 2022, 09:54:01 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 30, 2022, 06:01:37 PM
Giant step back by the met.. Because they realise the Germans have solved it

Defence too prosecution, how was Madeleine removed from 5a, in answer, err, lets not get bogged down in detail, he's guilty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 09:57:06 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 31, 2022, 09:54:01 AM
Defence to prosecution, how was Madeleine removed from 5a, in answer, err, lets not get bogged down in detail, he's guilty.

Indeed, just look at this photo of Maddie we don't have.

Can't argue with it really can you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 31, 2022, 10:00:58 AM
Wolters on tape on screen on CH5,  he cannot place CB in Luz on the night of 3/05/2007, he has no forensic evidence into the death of Madeleine .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 10:01:51 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 31, 2022, 09:54:01 AM
Defence too prosecution, how was Madeleine removed from 5a, in answer, err, lets not get bogged down in detail, he's guilty.
Irrelevant to securing a conviction if there's incontrovertible evidence that CB murdered Madeleine. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2022, 10:02:17 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 31, 2022, 10:00:58 AM
Wolters on tape on screen on CH5,  he cannot place CB in Luz on the night of 3/05/2007, he has no forensic evidence into the death of Madeleine .

He doesn't necessarily need to
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 10:03:49 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 09:51:31 AM
You need to remember that Wolters appealed about the phone call because he needed to trace the caller in order to ASK THEM WHO THEY SPOKE TO. Therefore Wolters et al weren't absolutely sure who was answering that phone on 3rd May 2007.
And you have to remember that that was not what we were discussing - HCW said the phone was owned by CB, you are claiming that the phone has not been identified as Bruckner's.  So which is it? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 10:05:45 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 09:20:44 AM
Given that MWT is an independent researcher and investigstor and clearly not controlled by the High Ups, how do sceptics explain his complete failure to arrive at the conclusion wrt to Madeleine’s parents  that is so blatantly obvious to themselves?
I wonder if we will get a sensible answer to this question...?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 10:07:07 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 10:05:45 AM
I wonder if we will get a sensible answer to this question...?

You've already had it, but I suppose you can just carry on pretending otherwise. Suit yourself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 10:12:38 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 31, 2022, 10:02:17 AM
He doesn't necessarily need to

You are all in on this imaginary paedo photo, aren't you.

So was it found under the dog or somewhere else?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 31, 2022, 10:17:26 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 10:01:51 AM
Irrelevant to securing a conviction if there's incontrovertible evidence that CB murdered Madeleine.

At some point some one is going to have to explain how Madeleine and CB came together for him to have allegedly done for her .

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 10:19:55 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 31, 2022, 10:17:26 AM
At some point some one is going to have to explain how Madeleine and CB came together for him to have allegedly done for her .

No no, the photo alone is enough, whilst simultaneously being not enough.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 10:21:28 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 10:01:51 AM
Irrelevant to securing a conviction if there's incontrovertible evidence that CB murdered Madeleine.

Yeah, there isn't, that's why he isn't being charged.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 10:29:32 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 31, 2022, 10:17:26 AM
At some point some one is going to have to explain how Madeleine and CB came together for him to have allegedly done for her .

Mr Brueckner, where were you on the unknown time & date that we're unable to show Maddie was murdered?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2022, 10:30:31 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 31, 2022, 10:17:26 AM
At some point some one is going to have to explain how Madeleine and CB came together for him to have allegedly done for her .

Not true.. It's enough to establish that they did come together... Not necessarily how
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 10:34:17 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 31, 2022, 10:30:31 AM
Not true.. It's enough to establish that they did come together... Not necessarily how

Only it's impossible to establish that either, so I wouldn't waste time thinking about it if I were you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 10:37:02 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 31, 2022, 10:17:26 AM
At some point some one is going to have to explain how Madeleine and CB came together for him to have allegedly done for her .
Why?  If CB is in the dock and refuses to explain how he managed to gain entrance to an unlocked ground floor apartment why should that prevent a successful conviction for murder if there is incontrovertible evidence that he did murder her?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 10:38:24 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 31, 2022, 10:20:52 AM
The photo was taken of the girl after Smithman left her, for more movement later on, if some can speculate on photos so can I.
Yes, I'm sure the judges would believe that very convincing excuse.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 31, 2022, 10:42:12 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 10:37:02 AM
Why?  If CB is in the dock and refuses to explain how he managed to gain entrance to an unlocked ground floor apartment why should that prevent a successful conviction for murder if there is incontrovertible evidence that he did murder her?

Thats the thing though, there isn't is there, its all circumstantial at best, they can't put CB in Luz on that night, so how did the two come together ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 10:43:34 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 10:38:24 AM
Yes, I'm sure the judges would believe that very convincing excuse.

Is there ever going to be a prosecution?

Wolters is certainly doubting as much, he can't see it happening anytime, ever.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 10:55:48 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 31, 2022, 10:17:26 AM
At some point some one is going to have to explain how Madeleine and CB came together for him to have allegedly done for her .

The explanation might lie along the lines of how other murderers access their victims; for example Levi Bellfield is living with two whole life orders to protect society from the type of crimes he inflicted when he "came together" with his victims.
His victims had no say in the matter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 11:18:01 AM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 10:55:48 AM
The explanation might lie along the lines of how other murderers access their victims; for example Levi Bellfield is living with two whole life orders to protect society from the type of crimes he inflicted when he "came together" with his victims.
His victims had no say in the matter.

Funny you should mention Levi Bellfield.
Him & Brueckner have something in common, they've both claimed to have committed crimes that they didn't really do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 11:30:53 AM
Quote from: barrier on May 31, 2022, 10:42:12 AM
Thats the thing though, there isn't is there, its all circumstantial at best, they can't put CB in Luz on that night, so how did the two come together ?
we don't know the nature of the evidence HCW says he has so until we do it's pointless speculating IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 11:44:37 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 11:30:53 AM
we don't know the nature of the evidence HCW says he has so until we do it's pointless speculating IMO.

Well nothing physical or forensic, but he's still got the paedo photo of Maddie, like I haven't debunked that idea several times over already.
Not bad for a vapid troll.
Anyway, I guess that leaves alleged confessions & Brueckner destroying the evidence, but keeping the imaginary paedo photo evidence for posterity.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 12:01:38 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 10:03:49 AM
And you have to remember that that was not what we were discussing - HCW said the phone was owned by CB, you are claiming that the phone has not been identified as Bruckner's.  So which is it?

Wolters thought the phone was CB's but he wanted the person who made the phone call to confirm they spoke to him, so he wasn't 100% sure, was he?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on May 31, 2022, 12:05:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 12:01:38 PM
Wolters thought the phone was CB's but he wanted the person who made the phone call to confirm they spoke to him, so he wasn't 100% sure, was he?

he says hes 100% sure CB murdered Maddie
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 12:17:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 12:01:38 PM
Wolters thought the phone was CB's but he wanted the person who made the phone call to confirm they spoke to him, so he wasn't 100% sure, was he?
He seemed pretty sure the phone was registered to CB, but was seeking confirmation that he took the call that night, but you're telling us that the phone was not identified as Bruckner's - were you posting misinformation?  It looks like it to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 31, 2022, 01:12:27 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 31, 2022, 12:05:33 PM
he says hes 100% sure CB murdered Maddie

Some people are 100% sure of aliens, doesn't make them right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 01:14:11 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 12:17:16 PM
He seemed pretty sure the phone was registered to CB, but was seeking confirmation that he took the call that night, but you're telling us that the phone was not identified as Bruckner's - were you posting misinformation?  It looks like it to me.

I don't think either of the phones the Germans were appealing about were registered to anyone, were they?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on May 31, 2022, 01:18:35 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on May 31, 2022, 12:05:33 PM
he says hes 100% sure CB murdered Maddie

He's never said he's 100% sure of CB taking Madeleine out of 5a though, wonder why ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 01:44:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 12:01:38 PM
Wolters thought the phone was CB's but he wanted the person who made the phone call to confirm they spoke to him, so he wasn't 100% sure, was he?
Every fact corroborated by another fact forms another piece of indirect evidence providing another jigsaw piece wich makes up the full picture.

All the police need to follow this line of inquiry is Brueckner's verified phone number possession of which will lead on to another line of inquiry and so on and so on.

I reckon there is little information remaining from these investigative opportunities which present day investigators don't know about.  Back in the day even calls from two phone boxes which at that time in history would perhaps have been a more realistic solution than burner phones.

The receptionist who made Madeleine McCann's abduction possible
He had Brueckner in his phone book and told him that "Maddie's" family dined every day in the same place and at the same time.
PACO RODRÍGUEZ@PacoRlarazon
CREATED09-06-2020
According to the newspaper "Correio da Manha", investigators managed to identify the receptionist who provided the information and the opportunity to Brueckner to enter the apartment and take Madeleine away. In fact, in the Ocean Club employee's phone book was the suspect's phone.

What is not yet known is whether the receptionist's collaboration was accidental or was a collaborator who makes him an accomplice.

The main suspect (Brueckner) worked as a waiter and it is still unknown if he did it at the Ocean Club, but he could know that there was a guestbook and he consulted it or knew the staff for having worked with them on occasion or simply got the information by approaching the restaurant and talking to the employee.
https://www.larazon.es/internacional/20200609/zt3i2u7mpfc2nbn5ji6atuslia.html


I think by now the BKA will know as much as they require to know about Brueckner's phone contacts.  Particularly one lasting half an hour pinging off the closest mast which happened to be in Praia da Luz and shortly prior to Madeleine's abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 01:53:13 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 01:44:35 PM
Every fact corroborated by another fact forms another piece of indirect evidence providing another jigsaw piece wich makes up the full picture.

All the police need to follow this line of inquiry is Brueckner's verified phone number possession of which will lead on to another line of inquiry and so on and so on.

I reckon there is little information remaining from these investigative opportunities which present day investigators don't know about.  Back in the day even calls from two phone boxes which at that time in history would perhaps have been a more realistic solution than burner phones.

The receptionist who made Madeleine McCann's abduction possible
He had Brueckner in his phone book and told him that "Maddie's" family dined every day in the same place and at the same time.
PACO RODRÍGUEZ@PacoRlarazon
CREATED09-06-2020
According to the newspaper "Correio da Manha", investigators managed to identify the receptionist who provided the information and the opportunity to Brueckner to enter the apartment and take Madeleine away. In fact, in the Ocean Club employee's phone book was the suspect's phone.

What is not yet known is whether the receptionist's collaboration was accidental or was a collaborator who makes him an accomplice.

The main suspect (Brueckner) worked as a waiter and it is still unknown if he did it at the Ocean Club, but he could know that there was a guestbook and he consulted it or knew the staff for having worked with them on occasion or simply got the information by approaching the restaurant and talking to the employee.
https://www.larazon.es/internacional/20200609/zt3i2u7mpfc2nbn5ji6atuslia.html


I think by now the BKA will know as much as they require to know about Brueckner's phone contacts.  Particularly one lasting half an hour pinging off the closest mast which happened to be in Praia da Luz and shortly prior to Madeleine's abduction.

I was going on what Wolters said rather than relying on press rumours.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 01:54:55 PM

One wonders why so many posts for which there are dedicated topics are discussed instead on "Wandering Off Topic"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 02:01:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 01:53:13 PM
I was going on what Wolters said rather than relying on press rumours.

Hmmm ~ the answer to that might very well lie in the fact you appear to have dispensed with quotations or cites making clear when the prosecutor is making an official pronouncement as spokesman.

Indeed you appear to be posting a surfeit of opinion pieces with the prosecutor as your theme.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 02:17:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 12:01:38 PM
Wolters thought the phone was CB's but he wanted the person who made the phone call to confirm they spoke to him, so he wasn't 100% sure, was he?
I’m going on what HCW has said, that the phone was CB’s, clearly you don’t believe him, your choice,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 02:19:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 31, 2022, 01:53:13 PM
I was going on what Wolters said rather than relying on press rumours.
No you’re not, you’re saying HCW is lying when he says the phone was CB’s!  You prefer to believe MWT, obviously. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 02:46:57 PM

Information from Websleuths about the successful prosecution of a murder case without a body which resulted in a conviction.

https://regionalheute.de/manczak-prozess-hat-ein-zeuge-den-toten-gesehen-braunschweig-gifhorn-goslar-harz-helmstedt-peine-salzgitter-wolfenbuettel-wolfsburg-1644597435/

There are several interesting parallels with this case and the CB/MM case.   

It is looking very much as if it matters little to these prosecutors that despite little evidence the sum of the evidence stacks up; nor does it matter how forensically astute one may be in disposing of human remains with no trace, other evidence of death substitutes and suffices.
Indeed "No hiding place!" seems to be the slogan in Braunschweig.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 02:48:01 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 02:19:05 PM
No you’re not, you’re saying HCW is lying when he says the phone was CB’s!  You prefer to believe MWT, obviously.

Maybe G- Unit follows evidence. Because MWT has shown evidence, in the form of a witness, compared to Wolters, who hasn't actually shown any evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 02:50:35 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 02:48:01 PM
Maybe G- Unit follows evidence. Because MWT has shown evidence, in the form of a witness, compared to Wolters, who hasn't actually shown any evidence.

A witness unable to provide an alibi is possibly worse than no witness at all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 02:58:03 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 02:50:35 PM
A witness unable to provide an alibi is possibly worse than no witness at all.

I was talking about the witness on the documentary who said the phone wasn't Brueckners.
But since you bring it up again I'll have to remind you, again, that Brueckner doesn't need an alibi for May 3rd, because Wolters hasn't actually accused Brueckner of anything regarding May 3rd.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 03:08:48 PM
So what evidence is there the phone was Brueckner's?

B...r me if it isn't, because Wolters said so.

Like SY, who said it was a criminal act by a stranger, & the McCanns who said Maddie was abducted.

All we have from any of them is their word, because none have shown any evidence to back their claims up.

MWT, on the other hand, has shown evidence in the form of a witness, that the phone wasn't Brueckners.

So what should we believe, claims without evidence, or evidence Itself?

I'll stick to believing in evidence over claims of evidence, if it's all the same.

Unless MWT paid this woman to lie on camera about the phone number, or she wanted to help Brueckner because she was an accomplice to the pre-planned abduction, or maybe she just likes lying to defend paedophiles for some reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 03:53:42 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 02:50:35 PM
A witness unable to provide an alibi is possibly worse than no witness at all.
In fact MWT was unable to provide any evidence for any of his claims, not for the alibi, and not for the owner of the phone, nor frustratingly for his claim that the person making the phone call that evening had child pornography on their phone (a fact which bizarrely he divulged without comment on what a massive coincidence this would be, should it be true). 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 03:54:59 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 02:58:03 PM
I was talking about the witness on the documentary who said the phone wasn't Brueckners.
But since you bring it up again I'll have to remind you, again, that Brueckner doesn't need an alibi for May 3rd, because Wolters hasn't actually accused Brueckner of anything regarding May 3rd.

With all due respect I prefer my witnesses to be police ones rather than performers in a tv entertainment video.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 04:01:55 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 03:08:48 PM
So what evidence is there the phone was Brueckner's?

B...r me if it isn't, because Wolters said so.

Like SY, who said it was a criminal act by a stranger, & the McCanns who said Maddie was abducted.

All we have from any of them is their word, because none have shown any evidence to back their claims up.

MWT, on the other hand, has shown evidence in the form of a witness, that the phone wasn't Brueckners.

So what should we believe, claims without evidence, or evidence Itself?

I'll stick to believing in evidence over claims of evidence, if it's all the same.

Unless MWT paid this woman to lie on camera about the phone number, or she wanted to help Brueckner because she was an accomplice to the pre-planned abduction, or maybe she just likes lying to defend paedophiles for some reason.

For some obscure reason there is rather a lot of "lying to defend paedophiles".

Dreadlocks and cartoon covered vehicles immediately spring to mind whenever lying is mentioned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 04:03:50 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 03:54:59 PM
With all due respect I prefer my witnesses to be police ones rather than performers in a tv entertainment video.

I knew it had to be something like that, MWT's witness was just paid for a documentary, rather than being honest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 04:11:27 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 04:01:55 PM
For some obscure reason there is rather a lot of "lying to defend paedophiles".

Dreadlocks and cartoon covered vehicles immediately spring to mind whenever lying is mentioned.
Interesting which on-screen witnesses some people choose to believe and which ones they immediately assume are lying for cash. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 04:33:17 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 04:11:27 PM
Interesting which on-screen witnesses some people choose to believe and which ones they immediately assume are lying for cash.

Well, since Brueckner isn't being charged anytime in the foreseeable future, that rather suggests Wolters can't prove the phone was Brueckner's, or that even if he can, it's not actually much use, since all it shows is that he recieved a half hour phone call, somewhere.
Unless, with improvements in modern technology, & the witness who only came forward years later, Brueckner can now be placed standing right outside the front of 5a.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 04:51:31 PM
I wonder if it’s genuine stupidity or wilfull obtuseness that keeps some people in a rut, trotting out the same old illogical nonsense day in, day out?  I guess we will never know….
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 04:53:14 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 04:51:31 PM
I wonder if it’s genuine stupidity or wilfull obtuseness that keeps some people in a rut, trotting out the same old illogical nonsense day in, day out?  I guess we will never know….

Care to point out the fault in the logic?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 05:13:50 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 02:46:57 PM
Information from Websleuths about the successful prosecution of a murder case without a body which resulted in a conviction.

https://regionalheute.de/manczak-prozess-hat-ein-zeuge-den-toten-gesehen-braunschweig-gifhorn-goslar-harz-helmstedt-peine-salzgitter-wolfenbuettel-wolfsburg-1644597435/

There are several interesting parallels with this case and the CB/MM case.
  • The Prosecutors launched a public TV appeal for witnesses after identifying their suspect.
  • Similarly, they appealed for details relating to certain vehicles and any sightings of their suspect.
  • The suspect has remained silent throughout, refusing to respond to any police questions.
  • All of the evidence against the suspect is circumstantial.
  • The Prosecutors only released certain details to the public "so as not to jeopardise the investigation"

    - that's a direct HCW quote about this investigation and exactly what he also said about the CB case.
   

It is looking very much as if it matters little to these prosecutors that despite little evidence the sum of the evidence stacks up; nor does it matter how forensically astute one may be in disposing of human remains with no trace, other evidence of death substitutes and suffices.
Indeed "No hiding place!" seems to be the slogan in Braunschweig.
It doesn’t look like anyone’s that interested in the fact that HCW was today partly responsible for bringing a murderer to justice despite the lack of body and with only circumstantial evidence.  Still, I guess today’s result has put his demotion or sacking on hold for a while yet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 31, 2022, 05:17:19 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 05:13:50 PM
It doesn’t look like anyone’s that interested in the fact that HCW was today partly responsible for bringing a murderer to justice despite the lack of body and with only circumstantial evidence.  Still, I guess today’s result has put his demotion or sacking on hold for a while yet.

Yeah, he probably actually charged that person first, & the suspect was genuinely a murderer, unlike in this case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 05:56:54 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 05:13:50 PM
It doesn’t look like anyone’s that interested in the fact that HCW was today partly responsible for bringing a murderer to justice despite the lack of body and with only circumstantial evidence.  Still, I guess today’s result has put his demotion or sacking on hold for a while yet.

I think it proves the point that only McCann bashing is of any interest for some posters.

I don't think the murderer was of any real danger to society;  just to his victim whose wife he coveted.

Brueckner is a different kettle of fish.
He is a proven entrepreneur in all sorts of criminal ventures from burglary to stealing diesel and he is a proven sexual predator whose lawyer is on record that he would trust him with his dog, but not his daughter.

The parallels between police strategies in these two cases is interesting.  It will certainly be worth the watch when eventually Madeleine's case can be progressed. Once Brueckner's lawyer has had a chance to study the rest of the case files of evidence he will be defending his client against. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 31, 2022, 06:40:00 PM
Quote from: Brietta on May 31, 2022, 05:56:54 PM
I think it proves the point that only McCann bashing is of any interest for some posters.

I don't think the murderer was of any real danger to society;  just to his victim whose wife he coveted.

Brueckner is a different kettle of fish.
He is a proven entrepreneur in all sorts of criminal ventures from burglary to stealing diesel and he is a proven sexual predator whose lawyer is on record that he would trust him with his dog, but not his daughter.

The parallels between police strategies in these two cases is interesting.  It will certainly be worth the watch when eventually Madeleine's case can be progressed. Once Brueckner's lawyer has had a chance to study the rest of the case files of evidence he will be defending his client against.
I wonder if the defendant in the case claimed his human rights had been violated by being named on TV as a suspect prior to being charged?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 08:22:08 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on May 30, 2022, 12:45:55 PM
I've never encountered a case where the crime and the criminal have been publicly identified without any charges being brought or any evidence being offered. I can't share your faith in a man who was prepared to breach his suspect's human rights in that way. Strong evidence leads to charges and a trial, not to public accusations of guilt imo.

It seems you have decided Wolters is guilty of breaching CBs human rights.. what gives you the authority to decide that.  Is Wolters not entitled to the presumption of innocence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 01, 2022, 09:33:30 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on May 31, 2022, 05:13:50 PM
It doesn’t look like anyone’s that interested in the fact that HCW was today partly responsible for bringing a murderer to justice despite the lack of body and with only circumstantial evidence.  Still, I guess today’s result has put his demotion or sacking on hold for a while yet.

The parallels with Madeleine is ? no body, that's it, one is a brit subject one  allegedly abducted in a foreign country by a German subject, where the BKA have no jurisdiction, they cannot search with out ILOR's this is known through Grange, know trail of blood no marital affairs, yep its worth the effort.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 01, 2022, 09:58:23 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 01, 2022, 09:33:30 AM
The parallels with Madeleine is ? no body, that's it, one is a brit subject one  allegedly abducted in a foreign country by a German subject, where the BKA have no jurisdiction, they cannot search with out ILOR's this is known through Grange, know trail of blood no marital affairs, yep its worth the effort.

The Portuguese authorities are working in conjunction with the British and German authorities to solve Madeleine McCann's case - among others.

Recently the Portuguese have made Brueckner an arguido in Madeleine's case.

I am afraid whatever sentiment you are attempting to convey in your post is remarkably obscure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2022, 10:24:29 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 01, 2022, 09:33:30 AM
The parallels with Madeleine is ? no body, that's it, one is a brit subject one  allegedly abducted in a foreign country by a German subject, where the BKA have no jurisdiction, they cannot search with out ILOR's this is known through Grange, know trail of blood no marital affairs, yep its worth the effort.
No that's not "it" but now you come to mention it, you're always banging on about how the Germans don't try "no body" murder cases, so maybe you need to think again, eh?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 12:06:48 PM
I wonder how journalists think they're 'informing' the public when they print their stories? In June 2020 Dieter F emerged, telling the press about meeting Christian B when he visited his daughter in Portugal. Apparently "The prime suspect in the abduction of Madeleine McCann showed off his campervan just months before she disappeared and boasted: ‘I can transport children in this.’"

So that was months before she disappeared.

Now Herr F has been telling Australian TV a slightly different story. "But now he told Australian TV that he is haunted that Madeleine could have been inside."

If it was months before Madeleine disappeared when Herr F met Herr B, then his own common sense should tell him that it wasn't so. It seems that journalists will write anything they're told without question, so it's up to the reader to work out what to make of their scribblings.

2020 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8418063/Prime-suspect-Madeleine-McCann-abduction-boasted-transport-children-campervan.html

2022 https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/man-fears-madeleine-mccann-inside-27106623

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 12:17:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 12:06:48 PM
I wonder how journalists think they're 'informing' the public when they print their stories? In June 2020 Dieter F emerged, telling the press about meeting Christian B when he visited his daughter in Portugal. Apparently "The prime suspect in the abduction of Madeleine McCann showed off his campervan just months before she disappeared and boasted: ‘I can transport children in this.’"

So that was months before she disappeared.

Now Herr F has been telling Australian TV a slightly different story. "But now he told Australian TV that he is haunted that Madeleine could have been inside."

If it was months before Madeleine disappeared when Herr F met Herr B, then his own common sense should tell him that it wasn't so. It seems that journalists will write anything they're told without question, so it's up to the reader to work out what to make of their scribblings.

2020 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8418063/Prime-suspect-Madeleine-McCann-abduction-boasted-transport-children-campervan.html

2022 https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/man-fears-madeleine-mccann-inside-27106623

Have you not learnt that the press may not be accurate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2022, 12:37:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 12:06:48 PM
I wonder how journalists think they're 'informing' the public when they print their stories? In June 2020 Dieter F emerged, telling the press about meeting Christian B when he visited his daughter in Portugal. Apparently "The prime suspect in the abduction of Madeleine McCann showed off his campervan just months before she disappeared and boasted: ‘I can transport children in this.’"

So that was months before she disappeared.

Now Herr F has been telling Australian TV a slightly different story. "But now he told Australian TV that he is haunted that Madeleine could have been inside."

If it was months before Madeleine disappeared when Herr F met Herr B, then his own common sense should tell him that it wasn't so. It seems that journalists will write anything they're told without question, so it's up to the reader to work out what to make of their scribblings.

2020 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8418063/Prime-suspect-Madeleine-McCann-abduction-boasted-transport-children-campervan.html

2022 https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/man-fears-madeleine-mccann-inside-27106623
Using the forum rule that only direct quotes will do please provide quotes from Herr F saying two different things, much obliged.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2022, 12:39:52 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 12:17:19 PM
Have you not learnt that the press may not be accurate.
Why anyone should be surprised that international tabloid media will provide conflicting reports beats me.  Is there an assumption that they should all collaborate before going to print to ensure they are all writing the exact same version of events? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 12:51:58 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 12:17:19 PM
Have you not learnt that the press may not be accurate.

I don't think that Gunit does accuracy.  Only that which supports her biased views.

The interesting thing is that every time The Sceptics post something that they think is important and insightful, then A  Supporter finds something to contradict the  sceptical rubbish.

It's actually quite good fun to watch these days.  If only it were funny.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 01, 2022, 01:08:53 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 12:51:58 PM
I don't think that Gunit does accuracy.  Only that which supports her biased views.

The interesting thing is that every time The Sceptics post something that they think is important and insightful, then A  Supporter finds something to contradict the  sceptical rubbish.

It's actually quite good fun to watch these days.  If only it were funny.

Is that not the sole purpose of a supporter ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 01:11:10 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 01, 2022, 01:08:53 PM
Is that not the sole purpose of a supporter ?

And accurate.  Of course.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 01, 2022, 01:11:36 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 12:17:19 PM
Have you not learnt that the press may not be accurate.

Away with you, I once read JFK was shot dead, turns out he was.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 01, 2022, 01:12:03 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 01:11:10 PM
And accurate.  Of course.

Jassi's post is you mean.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 01:16:43 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 01, 2022, 01:12:03 PM
Jassi's post is you mean.

No.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 01:27:43 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 12:17:19 PM
Have you not learnt that the press may not be accurate.

You know very well that I don't rate newspaper stories very highly. I was just reminding those who post them regularly to support their opinions that they can't be relied on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2022, 01:27:48 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 01, 2022, 01:08:53 PM
Is that not the sole purpose of a supporter ?
yes and we’re paid to do so too, dontcha know…  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 01:30:28 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 12:51:58 PM
I don't think that Gunit does accuracy.  Only that which supports her biased views.

The interesting thing is that every time The Sceptics post something that they think is important and insightful, then A  Supporter finds something to contradict the  sceptical rubbish.

It's actually quite good fun to watch these days.  If only it were funny.

My 'biased views' that newspaper stories aren't a reliable source of information? Contradicted by whom?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2022, 01:32:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 01:27:43 PM
You know very well that I don't rate newspaper stories very highly. I was just reminding those who post them regularly to support their opinions that they can't be relied on.
Without the MSM you wouldn’t have a scooby what was going on in this case.  IMO you should have a bit more respect for the work of journalists who, by and large, do a good job reporting news stories of interest and importance to the public.  They don’t always get it 100% accurate but that’s to be expected.  Exercise discretion and take certain stories with a pinch of salt by all means but don’t use slight discrepancies as the basis for rubbishing the entire MSM output, that’s just childish. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 02:04:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 01:27:43 PM
You know very well that I don't rate newspaper stories very highly. I was just reminding those who post them regularly to support their opinions that they can't be relied on.

As Barrier said... JFK was shot
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2022, 02:18:01 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 01, 2022, 01:11:36 PM
Away with you, I once read JFK was shot dead, turns out he was.
I read on the internet that his shooting was staged and that he ran off to start a new life with Marilyn Monroe in Honduras.  Of course the internet is a much more accurate sauce (sic) of news than any old MSM nonsense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 02:26:26 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 01, 2022, 02:18:01 PM
I read on the internet that his shooting was staged and that he ran off to start a new life with Marilyn Monroe in Honduras.  Of course the internet is a much more accurate sauce (sic) of news than any old MSM nonsense.

I don't bother with MSM anymore.. Get all my news from Sonia Poultons show.. Much note reliable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 02:40:54 PM

I get all my news from Jon Clarke & the Olive press.
According to them, there may be traces of Maddie in the camper, & also, Wolters say's he'll be charging Brueckner for murdering Madeleine very soon, I see absolutely no reason to doubt him, apart from the fact that he's completely wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2022, 02:42:51 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 02:26:26 PM
I don't bother with MSM anymore.. Get all my news from Sonia Poultons show.. Much note reliable
@)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 02:46:28 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 02:26:26 PM
I don't bother with MSM anymore.. Get all my news from Sonia Poultons show.. Much note reliable

Doesn't she say there wasn't an abduction?

Well, she's not wrong about that is she, even your hero Wolters can't find any evidence that there actually was one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 02:46:53 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 02:26:26 PM
I don't bother with MSM anymore.. Get all my news from Sonia Poultons show.. Much note reliable

Good Heavens.  Is she still around?  I thought she had disappeared into the ether while running after some politician.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 03:07:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 01:27:43 PM
You know very well that I don't rate newspaper stories very highly. I was just reminding those who post them regularly to support their opinions that they can't be relied on.

I was utterly horrified to read about the systemic mass rape of Ukranian women & children by Russian soldiers.

It was definitely true you know, CNN said so.

Only, it wasn't....


Ukraine Fires Own Human Rights Chief For Perpetuating Russian Troop 'Systematic Rape' Stories

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/ukraine-fires-human-rights-chief-perpetuating-russian-troop-systematic-rape-stories
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 03:19:32 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 03:07:24 PM
I was utterly horrified to read about the systemic mass rape of Ukranian women & children by Russian soldiers.

It was definitely true you know, CNN said so.

Only, it wasn't....


Ukraine Fires Own Human Rights Chief For Perpetuating Russian Troop 'Systematic Rape' Stories

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/ukraine-fires-human-rights-chief-perpetuating-russian-troop-systematic-rape-stories

More Warning Points I see.  What a laugh.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2022, 03:22:29 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 03:19:32 PM
More Warning Points I see.  What a laugh.
And what is hysterical is that the Putin / Rapist loving troll is posting far right misinformation and propaganda to counteract what he believes is MSM propaganda. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 03:27:49 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 01, 2022, 03:22:29 PM
And what is hysterical is that the Putin / Rapist loving troll is posting far right misinformation and propaganda to counteract what he believes is MSM propaganda.

But then Spammy always was a bit of a duckhead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 03:28:09 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 01, 2022, 03:22:29 PM
And what is hysterical is that the Putin / Rapist loving troll is posting far right misinformation and propaganda to counteract what he believes is MSM propaganda.

You didn't even read the article & just dismissed it as far right propaganda. There's a surprise.

It's in the Wall Street Journal now as well, so I suppose they must be far right propagandists too.

“The unclear focus of the Ombudsman's media work on the numerous details of ‘sexual crimes committed in an unnatural way’ and ‘rape of children’ in the occupied territories that could not be confirmed by evidence, only harmed Ukraine,” Mr. Frolov said in a Facebook post.

https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/russia-ukraine-latest-news-2022-05-31/card/ukraine-s-parliament-dismisses-human-rights-chief-1kQWT7i0GHXyeqh6spRe
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 04:01:11 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 01, 2022, 01:32:02 PM
Without the MSM you wouldn’t have a scooby what was going on in this case.  IMO you should have a bit more respect for the work of journalists who, by and large, do a good job reporting news stories of interest and importance to the public.  They don’t always get it 100% accurate but that’s to be expected.  Exercise discretion and take certain stories with a pinch of salt by all means but don’t use slight discrepancies as the basis for rubbishing the entire MSM output, that’s just childish.

Yes they print facts, but they're in short supply compared to rumours, attention/money-seekers stories, and incorrect 'facts'. Anyone who swallows their tales wholesale is naive imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 04:09:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 04:01:11 PM
Yes they print facts, but they're in short supply compared to rumours, attention/money-seekers stories, and incorrect 'facts'. Anyone who swallows their tales wholesale is naive imo.

VS is only interested in news that fits with her preconceived opinions, anything that runs contrary to her beliefs can be instantly dismissed as far right propaganda, without actually assessing the content itself.
She's rational like that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2022, 04:20:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 04:01:11 PM
Yes they print facts, but they're in short supply compared to rumours, attention/money-seekers stories, and incorrect 'facts'. Anyone who swallows their tales wholesale is naive imo.
And who here, in your opinion, does that?  I read the Times and I wouldn't say that the majority of reporting is incorrect, rumour or made up stories, do you have some actual data that proves the majority of what the MSM prints is  "incorrect facts"? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 04:40:02 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 01, 2022, 04:20:00 PM
And who here, in your opinion, does that?  I read the Times and I wouldn't say that the majority of reporting is incorrect, rumour or made up stories, do you have some actual data that proves the majority of what the MSM prints is  "incorrect facts"?

Dieter F either spoke to Christian B in Foral before Madeleine's disappearance or he didn't. I've seen no journalists questioning his claim that she could have been in the Winnebago though, not even a Times journalist. Perhaps, like policemen, they have each other's backs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 04:41:01 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 03:07:24 PM
I was utterly horrified to read about the systemic mass rape of Ukranian women & children by Russian soldiers.

It was definitely true you know, CNN said so.

Only, it wasn't....


Ukraine Fires Own Human Rights Chief For Perpetuating Russian Troop 'Systematic Rape' Stories

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/ukraine-fires-human-rights-chief-perpetuating-russian-troop-systematic-rape-stories


you have been fooled...there is no war in Ukraine...its a PSYOP......manufactured by the CIA...co ordinated by JFK from his home in Honduras
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2022, 04:43:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 04:40:02 PM
Dieter F either spoke to Christian B in Foral before Madeleine's disappearance or he didn't. I've seen no journalists questioning his claim that she could have been in the Winnebago though, not even a Times journalist. Perhaps, like policemen, they have each other's backs.
I think you have a somewhat skewed view of what most Times readers consider the burning issues of the day.  NEWSFLASH - the date DF spoke to CB is not one of them. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 04:44:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 04:01:11 PM
Yes they print facts, but they're in short supply compared to rumours, attention/money-seekers stories, and incorrect 'facts'. Anyone who swallows their tales wholesale is naive imo.

You seem to have swallowed a few incorrect facts about The McCanns.

And from where did you get those?  Divine Intervention?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 04:45:49 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 04:41:01 PM

you have been fooled...there is no war in Ukraine...its a PSYOP......manufactured by the CIA...co ordinated by JFK from his home in Honduras

You're right, it isn't a war, it's a special military operation. Russia is defending itself, same way the USA/UK had to save us all from Sadam Husseins WMD's.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2022, 04:48:33 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 04:41:01 PM

you have been fooled...there is no war in Ukraine...its a PSYOP......manufactured by the CIA...co ordinated by JFK from his home in Honduras
Haha, that's is what I heard too, did you read it on Sonia Poulton's blog?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 04:49:55 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 01, 2022, 04:20:00 PM
And who here, in your opinion, does that?  I read the Times and I wouldn't say that the majority of reporting is incorrect, rumour or made up stories, do you have some actual data that proves the majority of what the MSM prints is  "incorrect facts"?

What ever suits them.  There are two rules going on around here.  Sceptics have a right to deny The McCanns of Innocence while affording Brueckner that same right.

I seriously don't know why I bother anymore, other than to counteract their hypocrisy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2022, 04:50:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 04:40:02 PM
Dieter F either spoke to Christian B in Foral before Madeleine's disappearance or he didn't. I've seen no journalists questioning his claim that she could have been in the Winnebago though, not even a Times journalist. Perhaps, like policemen, they have each other's backs.
I tell you who will be on this like a shot  - MWT.  I suggest you tweet him to get the full SP on this shadowy Dieter F character.  He's clearly in the pay of the High Ups.  See what MWT can uncover, this could blow the whole case sky high. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 04:54:34 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 04:49:55 PM
What ever suits them.  There are two rules going on around here.  Sceptics have a right to deny The McCanns of Innocence while affording Brueckner that same right.

I seriously don't know why I bother anymore, other than to counteract their hypocrisy.

Supporters deny the right of everyone in human existence, except the McCanns, of the right to the presumption of innocence by saying that there was an abduction.

Can you not see your own hypocrisy?.

In fairness, if everyone must be presumed innocent, then there was no abduction, Maddie disappeared, until proven otherwise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 05:12:18 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 01, 2022, 04:48:33 PM
Haha, that's is what I heard too, did you read it on Sonia Poulton's blog?

yes..Sonias reallly on the ball...covids a plandemic...the vaccine killing millions...theres no war in Ukraine....and CBs  a patsy and the McCanns are guilty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 05:17:24 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 01, 2022, 05:12:18 PM
yes..Sonias reallly on the ball...covids a plandemic...the vaccine killing millions...theres no war in Ukraine....and CBs  a patsy and the McCanns are guilty

Why is no one proffering the word of this amazing woman?  I would like a laugh if no one else does.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 01, 2022, 05:49:10 PM
July 2020, to be fair its not said which two months, it was in the press at the time so had to be true .


He said he hoped to be able to charge Brueckner within the next two months – but has added their investigation will not drag on forever.



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8543033/German-police-solved-90-cent-Madeleine-McCann-case.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 06:02:46 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 01, 2022, 05:49:10 PM
July 2020, to be fair its not said which two months, it was in the press at the time so had to be true .


He said he hoped to be able to charge Brueckner within the next two months – but has added their investigation will not drag on forever.



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8543033/German-police-solved-90-cent-Madeleine-McCann-case.html

I don't care of what he does.  Let Brueckner loose for all I care.  And then let's see who is responsible for this predator.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 01, 2022, 06:09:17 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 05:17:24 PM
Why is no one proffering the word of this amazing woman?  I would like a laugh if no one else does.
Can't stand the woman and her incessant squawking din, just makes me want to throw up...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnJktSiE-eo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnJktSiE-eo)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2022, 06:42:27 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 01, 2022, 06:09:17 PM
Can't stand the woman and her incessant squawking din, just makes me want to throw up...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnJktSiE-eo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnJktSiE-eo)
Perhaps G-Unit could message her to get to the bottom of that all important issue of exactly when Dieter F spoke  to CB about his campervan.  The world waits with baited breath…
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 06:42:49 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 01, 2022, 06:09:17 PM
Can't stand the woman and her incessant squawking din, just makes me want to throw up...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnJktSiE-eo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnJktSiE-eo)

Oh My God.  I actually watched that.  Well, I had to. But what on earth it had to do with Madeleine McCann completely escaped me. 

But if that was it, then heaven forfend.  And No, I don't know what that means either.

Cor Blimey Mate.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 07:08:45 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 01, 2022, 06:09:17 PM
Can't stand the woman and her incessant squawking din, just makes me want to throw up...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnJktSiE-eo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnJktSiE-eo)

Do you know what I hate, it's the amount of black people on TV & in advertising these days.
Black people make up only 4% of the UK population but are massively over represented in media & advertising.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 07:15:31 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 01, 2022, 04:50:39 PM
I tell you who will be on this like a shot  - MWT.  I suggest you tweet him to get the full SP on this shadowy Dieter F character.  He's clearly in the pay of the High Ups.  See what MWT can uncover, this could blow the whole case sky high.

I don't think it's very important, it just shows the MSM will print anything and that this man isn't a reliable witness.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 07:28:45 PM


Also, this is why I support Russia's special military operation, I haven't read a single western media outlet that doesn't support Ukraine, & since I will not be told what opinions I must have, I have no choice other than to support Russia.

and I'm totally getting one of these......

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Stand-Russia-Support-Russian-T-Shirt/dp/B09TSTB8LL/ref=asc_df_B09TSTB8LL/?tag=googshopuk-21&linkCode=df0&hvadid=594502841902&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=3282313363127118393&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9045120&hvtargid=pla-1650901335249&th=1&psc=1

......it would be interesting to see if I get kicked out of Tescos & arrested for having the wrong opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 07:33:06 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 07:28:45 PM
Also, this is why I support Russia's special military operation, I haven't read a single western media outlet that doesn't support Ukraine, & since I will not be told what opinions I must have, I have no choice other than to support Russia.

and I'm totally getting one of these......

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Stand-Russia-Support-Russian-T-Shirt/dp/B09TSTB8LL/ref=asc_df_B09TSTB8LL/?tag=googshopuk-21&linkCode=df0&hvadid=594502841902&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=3282313363127118393&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9045120&hvtargid=pla-1650901335249&th=1&psc=1

......it would be interesting to see if I get kicked out of Tescos & arrested for having the wrong opinion.

You don't actually shop in Tescos, do you?  Poor you.  Lidl is the only place to go.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 07:39:31 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 07:33:06 PM
You don't actually shop in Tescos, do you?  Poor you.  Lidl is the only place to go.

Waitrose & Sainsburys are too upmarket for me I'm afraid, I shop at Asda quite a lot, they have a nice value range, I'm very averse to buying major brands because I'm a tight git.
But then actually, as a total contrarian, thinking about it now, I should be refusing to eat altogether, since my body insists upon me that I must. Yes, from now on I'm going on hunger strike in protest against myself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 01, 2022, 07:42:48 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 07:33:06 PM
You don't actually shop in Tescos, do you?  Poor you.  Lidl is the only place to go.
I don't shop there because they pinched Tesco's catchphrase - "Like the flea that peed in the sea... Every Lidl Helps".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 01, 2022, 07:52:28 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 07:39:31 PM
Waitrose & Sainsburys are too upmarket for me I'm afraid, I shop at Asda quite a lot, they have a nice value range, I'm very averse to buying major brands because I'm a tight git.
But then actually, as a total contrarian, thinking about it now, I should be refusing to eat altogether, since my body insists upon me that I must. Yes, from now on I'm going on hunger strike in protest against myself.
Shopping online is the way to go - last monthly shop was from Iceland, £40 minimum spend for free devilry. All in strong plastic bags carried direct to your door, unlike Sainsbury's (mean bu**ers since they ditched plastic) where you have to handball every item from their trays to your hallway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 07:53:14 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 07:39:31 PM
Waitrose & Sainsburys are too upmarket for me I'm afraid, I shop at Asda quite a lot, they have a nice value range, I'm very averse to buying major brands because I'm a tight git.
But then actually, as a total contrarian, thinking about it now, I should be refusing to eat altogether, since my body insists upon me that I must. Yes, from now on I'm going on hunger strike in protest against myself.

Do me a favour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 07:58:41 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 01, 2022, 07:42:48 PM
I don't shop there because they pinched Tesco's catchphrase - "Like the flea that peed in the sea... Every Lidl Helps".

Tell me about it.  O'Connor always has Fleas despite the endless amounts of money I spend.  What a dear little shit he is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 08:01:50 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 01, 2022, 07:52:28 PM
Shopping online is the way to go - last monthly shop was from Iceland, £40 minimum spend for free devilry. All in strong plastic bags carried direct to your door, unlike Sainsbury's (mean bu**ers since they ditched plastic) where you have to handball every item from their trays to your hallway.

I got Iceland delivered during the lockdown, not bad yes, all comes in bags which is the convenient selling point, but I found their range of products a bit limited.

No bags with Asda online, so yes, I have to handball, I load it into my own bags for life at the front door & then drag it all downstairs to the kitchen.

I could just drive myself to the supermarket more often & actually physically shop, but since I detest the human race I often prefer to limit my contact with it wherever possible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 01, 2022, 08:05:06 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 07:15:31 PM
I don't think it's very important, it just shows the MSM will print anything and that this man isn't a reliable witness.
Perhaps you could supply the direct quotes from this man to prove your point (second time of asking).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 08:17:24 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 08:01:50 PM
I got Iceland delivered during the lockdown, not bad yes, all comes in bags which is the convenient selling point, but I found their range of products a bit limited.

No bags with Asda online, so yes, I have to handball, I load it into my own bags for life at the front door & then drag it all downstairs to the kitchen.

I could just drive myself to the supermarket more often & actually physically shop, but since I detest the human race I often prefer to limit my contact with it wherever possible.

I should if I was you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 01, 2022, 08:35:28 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 08:01:50 PM
I got Iceland delivered during the lockdown, not bad yes, all comes in bags which is the convenient selling point, but I found their range of products a bit limited.

No bags with Asda online, so yes, I have to handball, I load it into my own bags for life at the front door & then drag it all downstairs to the kitchen.

I could just drive myself to the supermarket more often & actually physically shop, but since I detest the human race I often prefer to limit my contact with it wherever possible.
That's true, but it means you don't waste time scrolling through endless choices with the major supermarkets, if you only want the basics. Use the others intermittently for expensive and hard to find items. Iceland's own bread is good, long-lasting and their fruit and veg has always been fresh for me...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 08:50:16 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 01, 2022, 07:52:28 PM
Shopping online is the way to go - last monthly shop was from Iceland, £40 minimum spend for free devilry. All in strong plastic bags carried direct to your door, unlike Sainsbury's (mean bu**ers since they ditched plastic) where you have to handball every item from their trays to your hallway.

I keep bags next to my front door to load my shopping into. The driver can stand and watch, but most pick up a bag too and help.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 09:25:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 01, 2022, 08:50:16 PM
I keep bags next to my front door to load my shopping into. The driver can stand and watch, but most pick up a bag too and help.

Gosh.  All suddenly fascinated by Spammy's shopping habits.  But I suppose that anything is better than perpetual garbage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 10:16:09 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 09:25:12 PM
Gosh.  All suddenly fascinated by Spammy's shopping habits.  But I suppose that anything is better than perpetual garbage.

Oh good, well I only ever buy my trainers from an Asics outlet, their running shoes are built to last & very comfortable, much better quality than any Nike, Adidas or Reebok off the shelf rubbish.
I usually buy Under Armour 9" boxer shorts & wear a base layer with them. They give a nice feeling of genital security.
My swimming trunks are always 9" jammer shorts by Speedo,  but on my last pair the first 'S' wore off & so I'm banned from the pool now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 10:29:53 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 10:16:09 PM
Oh good, well I only ever buy my trainers from an Asics outlet, their running shoes are built to last & very comfortable, much better quality than any Nike, Adidas or Reebok off the shelf rubbish.
I usually buy Under Armour 9" boxer shorts & wear a base layer with them. They give a nice feeling of genital security.
My swimming trunks are always 9" jammer shorts by Speedo,  but on my last pair the first 'S' wore off & so I'm banned from the pool now.

Is this some illusion on your part about the size of your penis?  We did have to get there somehow I suppose.  I am only surprised by how long it has taken.

Okay.  I will willingly accept Warning Points for that comment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 10:35:01 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 10:29:53 PM
Is this some illusion on your part about the size of your penis?  We did have to get there somehow I suppose.  I am only surprised by how long it has taken.

Okay.  I will willingly accept Warning Points for that comment.
No, I was just saying how I like everything downstairs to be tucked in a bit rather than dangling about the place in loose flappy undergarments.
Another plus side is that a good base layer slightly reduces the size of my massive fat ass.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 02, 2022, 07:07:41 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 01, 2022, 09:25:12 PM
Gosh.  All suddenly fascinated by Spammy's shopping habits.  But I suppose that anything is better than perpetual garbage.
In cap-doffing troglodyte-land we have to get enough grub in for a four-day bingefest celebrating the country's most dysfunctional family...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10874541/Queens-Platinum-Jubilee-UK-mark-milestone-four-days-joyous-celebrations.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10874541/Queens-Platinum-Jubilee-UK-mark-milestone-four-days-joyous-celebrations.html)

Just wait until Macron, or more likely his heir, gifts you an old nag to commemorate your centennial and services to your adoptive country.  Vive la Frawnce!...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10875183/Macron-sends-Queen-behaved-horse-named-Fabulous-gift-mark-Platinum-Jubilee.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10875183/Macron-sends-Queen-behaved-horse-named-Fabulous-gift-mark-Platinum-Jubilee.html)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2022, 07:50:04 AM
I’m rather surprised John has failed to pin a jubilee tribute to Her Maj at the top of the forum, is he a republican?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 02, 2022, 08:07:44 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 02, 2022, 07:50:04 AM
I’m rather surprised John has failed to pin a jubilee tribute to Her Maj at the top of the forum, is he a republican?
And I'm surprised the banner from last Christmas isn't still up.  Takes his time and animal farm is the priority these days.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 02, 2022, 08:18:37 AM
Right... I'm off now for a sh*t, shave and a shove ashore... as they used to say in the Wrens!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 02, 2022, 08:21:26 AM
Quote from: Myster on June 02, 2022, 08:07:44 AM
And I'm surprised the banner from last Christmas isn't still up.  Takes his time and animal farm is the priority these days.
Haha, that’s nothing - G-Unit is still congratulating England for coming second in the Euros in her sig line!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 02, 2022, 09:33:48 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 02, 2022, 07:50:04 AM
I’m rather surprised John has failed to pin a jubilee tribute to Her Maj at the top of the forum, is he a republican?

I see Hairy and meagain have landed, no airport queues!!! , there was a gruesome twosome in the wacky races.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 02, 2022, 12:30:09 PM
Well, in the name of racial justice, we should be abolishing the monarchy.

The crown jewels & royal riches were stolen from Africa & are forever tainted by slavery & drenched in the blood of the oppressed.

The royal family represent WHITE SUPREMACY, & in our age of diversity & inclusion, atoning for the sins of our ancestors, this is totally unacceptable.

I think it's time we had a head of state elected by the people, preferably mixed race & LGBT.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 02, 2022, 12:52:03 PM
They gained their wealth through 400 years of violent oppression, it's appalling.


IMO the royal family should be abolished, stripped of their assets & their ill gotten gains handed back to the former colonies.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 02, 2022, 03:22:23 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 02, 2022, 08:18:37 AM
Right... I'm off now for a sh*t, shave and a shove ashore... as they used to say in the Wrens!

Do you need to keep abusing Eleanor?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 02, 2022, 04:38:26 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 02, 2022, 03:22:23 PM
Do you need to keep abusing Eleanor?
That must be where she learned her expletives... can't be anywhere else, surely?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 02, 2022, 04:41:21 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2022, 07:28:45 PM

Also, this is why I support Russia's special military operation, I haven't read a single western media outlet that doesn't support Ukraine, & since I will not be told what opinions I must have, I have no choice other than to support Russia.

and I'm totally getting one of these......

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Stand-Russia-Support-Russian-T-Shirt/dp/B09TSTB8LL/ref=asc_df_B09TSTB8LL/?tag=googshopuk-21&linkCode=df0&hvadid=594502841902&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=3282313363127118393&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9045120&hvtargid=pla-1650901335249&th=1&psc=1

......it would be interesting to see if I get kicked out of Tescos & arrested for having the wrong opinion.

I would like to hear how you get on adorned in that t-shirt?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 02, 2022, 04:43:03 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 02, 2022, 12:52:03 PM
They gained their wealth through 400 years of violent oppression, it's appalling.


IMO the royal family should be abolished, stripped of their assets & their ill gotten gains handed back to the former colonies.

Can't argue there but the wealth should be handed back to the ordinary man and woman in the UK.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 02, 2022, 04:47:22 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 02, 2022, 07:07:41 AM
In cap-doffing troglodyte-land we have to get enough grub in for a four-day bingefest celebrating the country's most dysfunctional family...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10874541/Queens-Platinum-Jubilee-UK-mark-milestone-four-days-joyous-celebrations.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10874541/Queens-Platinum-Jubilee-UK-mark-milestone-four-days-joyous-celebrations.html)

Just wait until Macron, or more likely his heir, gifts you an old nag to commemorate your centennial and services to your adoptive country.  Vive la Frawnce!...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10875183/Macron-sends-Queen-behaved-horse-named-Fabulous-gift-mark-Platinum-Jubilee.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10875183/Macron-sends-Queen-behaved-horse-named-Fabulous-gift-mark-Platinum-Jubilee.html)

It's probably been trained to buck the second she says Gee Up Neddy.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on June 02, 2022, 04:48:02 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 02, 2022, 07:50:04 AM
I’m rather surprised John has failed to pin a jubilee tribute to Her Maj at the top of the forum, is he a republican?

What would you like?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 02, 2022, 04:53:31 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 02, 2022, 03:22:23 PM
Do you need to keep abusing Eleanor?
Oh and while we're at it... stop abusing me by your accusations that I manipulate images and change colours of your folders!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 02, 2022, 05:39:50 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 02, 2022, 04:48:02 PM
What would you like?
I don't think Britannia will be doing much Ruling in future going by the recent disastrous Royal tour of the Caribbean and Australia's Albanese chomping at the bit to leave the Commonwealth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 02, 2022, 06:19:32 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on June 02, 2022, 04:43:03 PM
Can't argue there but the wealth should be handed back to the ordinary man and woman in the UK.

I wasn't being entirely serious, as ever, but as Myster said, they weren't very welcome in the Caribbean  Australia want out. I think it's a good job her maj isn't much longer for this world, because otherwise she could be watching the commonwealth disintegrate entirely, if she sticks around another few decades.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 02, 2022, 09:47:36 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 02, 2022, 04:38:26 PM
That must be where she learned her expletives... can't be anywhere else, surely?

You are a mysogenist Myster

To my knowledge you have insulted/abused Elli, Brie and me, two of us at least twice..   Pack it in.  With your priviledged upbringing, you should know better.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 02, 2022, 10:12:45 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 02, 2022, 04:53:31 PM
Oh and while we're at it... stop abusing me by your accusations that I manipulate images and change colours of your folders!

You actually gave the correct Lavender colour for the folders.  Well done.

And the video from which CB's falsely desperately overshot jaw came from was in one of your posts - but it was OK a couple of days later.  Now was that of your doing, or not?  You are the expert whiz-kid on technical matters on the forum, are you not?

Please do not be so rude to Elli, Brie, me or anyone else.   It is not necessary, Whiz-kid, and you can be so polite and friendly when you want something.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 03, 2022, 07:14:39 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 02, 2022, 10:12:45 PM
You actually gave the correct Lavender colour for the folders.  Well done.

And the video from which CB's falsely desperately overshot jaw came from was in one of your posts - but it was OK a couple of days later.  Now was that of your doing, or not?  You are the expert whiz-kid on technical matters on the forum, are you not?

Please do not be so rude to Elli, Brie, me or anyone else.   It is not necessary, Whiz-kid, and you can be so polite and friendly when you want something.

I think it's rude to constantly accuse others of manipulating information.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 03, 2022, 12:28:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 03, 2022, 07:14:39 AM
I think it's rude to constantly accuse others of manipulating information.

Why do your set frequently do it ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 03, 2022, 02:34:18 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 03, 2022, 12:28:42 PM
Why do your set frequently do it ?

Do what? If you mean manipulate it's time you started offering facts to support your accusations imo. Where's your evidence that a video of Brueckner was altered, for example?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 03, 2022, 05:20:10 PM
I'm still waiting for sadie's evidence that I insulted Brie!   I know she's a bit cheesy, bland and got a thin crusty skin... but can't see where I offended her!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 03, 2022, 09:40:22 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 03, 2022, 05:20:10 PM
I'm still waiting for sadie's evidence that I insulted Brie!   I know she's a bit cheesy, bland and got a thin crusty skin... but can't see where I offended her!

You have grossly under estimated  Brietta.  Sillly Billy. And never any need for that.  Why did you need to do that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 03, 2022, 09:48:02 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 03, 2022, 09:40:22 PM
You have grossly under estimated  Brietta.  Sillly Billy. And never any need for that.  Why did you need to do that?
Oh for crying out loud, get a sense of humour, woman!  I've NEVER insulted Brietta!

As a matter of fact, I said she was the brains of this forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 03, 2022, 10:19:30 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 03, 2022, 09:48:02 PM
Oh for crying out loud, get a sense of humour, woman!  I've NEVER insulted Brietta!

As a matter of fact, I said she was the brains of this forum.

Golly Gosh, so glad to hear that?  But much more than you would ever know. I was always a dilly by comparison;
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 03, 2022, 10:40:01 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 03, 2022, 09:48:02 PM
Oh for crying out loud, get a sense of humour, woman!  I've NEVER insulted Brietta!

As a matter of fact, I said she was the brains of this forum.

I thought that you were a bit of fun.  Silly me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 03, 2022, 10:57:44 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 03, 2022, 10:40:01 PM
I thought that you were a bit of fun.  Silly me.
The point is Eleanor, that you (and some others) spend all your waking and often sleeping hours pontificating and worrying about someone else's missing child.  I doubt that even the McCanns think about their daughter THAT much.

Off now to liaise with my secret FWB.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 03, 2022, 11:40:57 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 03, 2022, 05:20:10 PM
I'm still waiting for sadie's evidence that I insulted Brie!   I know she's a bit cheesy, bland and got a thin crusty skin... but can't see where I offended her!

Shut up!

How rude.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 03, 2022, 11:52:40 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 03, 2022, 10:57:44 PM
The point is Eleanor, that you (and some others) spend all your waking and often sleeping hours pontificating and worrying about someone else's missing child.  I doubt that even the McCanns think about their daughter THAT muc
Off now to liaise with my secret FWB.

Oh Dear.  Is that what you think of Me?   In which case there is no where to go.

I don't have to do this anymore.  And nor do you.  I repeat.  Nor do you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 04, 2022, 12:05:04 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 03, 2022, 11:40:57 PM
Shut up!

How rude.

Dear Goodness  Gracious Me.  For some odd reason.  But forget that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 04, 2022, 12:16:15 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 02, 2022, 09:47:36 PM
You are a mysogenist Myster

To my knowledge you have insulted/abused Elli, Brie and me, two of us at least twice..   Pack it in.  With your priviledged upbringing, you should know better.

Dear Sadie,  It isn't possible to insult me.  I just am.  And a blimming sight better than most.  And Brietta is even better than me.  So try not to be upset?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 04, 2022, 07:26:07 AM
Am I missing something here?  I thought Myster was just pulling your (collective) legs?   Nothing malicious that I can see but maybe you guys have “history” I dunno… the cheesy thing was a description of Brie the cheese, so just a play on words, an attempt at humour (which I personally found quite funny) not an indictment of Brietta herself.   But I guess as there’s nothing else to argue about… 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 04, 2022, 08:04:18 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 04, 2022, 07:26:07 AM
Am I missing something here?  I thought Myster was just pulling your (collective) legs?   Nothing malicious that I can see but maybe you guys have “history” I dunno… the cheesy thing was a description of Brie the cheese, so just a play on words, an attempt at humour (which I personally found quite funny) not an indictment of Brietta herself.   But I guess as there’s nothing else to argue about…
Precisely... and can't argue with that!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 04, 2022, 08:13:24 AM
Quote from: Myster on June 04, 2022, 08:04:18 AM
Precisely... and can't argue with that!

Well, I'm sorry, but something, something, something or other, & I disagree completely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 06, 2022, 09:57:48 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 02, 2022, 09:33:48 AM
I see Hairy and meagain have landed, no airport queues!!! , there was a gruesome twosome in the wacky races.

Hairy and meagain soon departed, back in the good old US of A before granma went to bed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 08, 2022, 09:16:27 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 08, 2022, 06:23:58 PM
Look, there's obviously nothing to talk about this minute, so lets all just sit tight & wait patiently until Wolters reveals the concrete evidence. It shouldn't be much longer now.

CB's ready for a full physical to check his legs, like its not been done before.


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-agrees-thighs-27182972
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 08, 2022, 10:06:47 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 08, 2022, 09:16:27 PM
CB's ready for a full physical to check his legs, like its not been done before.


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-agrees-thighs-27182972

Good Heavens.

However, is anything pertinent anymore?  Or is this just the product of various Forums?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 08, 2022, 11:20:41 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 08, 2022, 09:16:27 PM
CB's ready for a full physical to check his legs, like its not been done before.


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-agrees-thighs-27182972

He seems confident he doesn't have this distinctive scar on his thigh.

Maybe he had a leg replacement, at the same time he got his teeth done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 09, 2022, 12:45:15 AM
It's his fingerprints Brueckner should be most concerned about. It's not every intruder who pauses to examine the contents of the cutlery drawer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 09, 2022, 01:30:16 AM
Quote from: misty on June 09, 2022, 12:45:15 AM
It's his fingerprints Brueckner should be most concerned about. It's not every intruder who pauses to examine the contents of the cutlery drawer.

I am not sure of what you mean.  Although I doubt that you are wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 09, 2022, 01:51:41 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 09, 2022, 01:30:16 AM
I am not sure of what you mean.  Although I doubt that you are wrong.

The rapist was described as having a mark on his thigh.  He was also described as wearing tights.  The mark could be anything from a pimple to a pulled thread in his tights.

However a fingerprint which is a match for Brueckner's is probably quite definitive and if the police have one, that's probably "game set and match" for Brueckner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 09, 2022, 02:38:27 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 09, 2022, 01:30:16 AM
I am not sure of what you mean.  Although I doubt that you are wrong.

https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2021/12/24/exclusive-explosive-fingerprint-clue-as-madeleine-mccann-suspect-faces-three-new-charges/

In the Behan rape case the intruder picked up one of her kitchen knives and threatened her with it.
Whilst most of the crime scene forensics had been destroyed by PJ in 2007, half a fingerprint was part of evidence uploaded onto their computer system. It matched Brueckner's prints.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 09, 2022, 03:14:32 AM
Quote from: misty on June 09, 2022, 02:38:27 AM
https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2021/12/24/exclusive-explosive-fingerprint-clue-as-madeleine-mccann-suspect-faces-three-new-charges/

In the Behan rape case the intruder picked up one of her kitchen knives and threatened her with it.
Whilst most of the crime scene forensics had been destroyed by PJ in 2007, half a fingerprint was part of evidence uploaded onto their computer system. It matched Brueckner's prints.

Gosh.  You don't ever live and learn.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 09, 2022, 03:22:19 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 09, 2022, 03:14:32 AM
Gosh.  You don't ever live and learn.

I think that under the German system, if that forensic (concrete?) evidence is accepted and Brueckner is brought to trial and convicted of another rape he is likely to spend a long, long time behind bars.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 09, 2022, 06:46:39 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2022, 03:22:19 AM
I think that under the German system, if that forensic (concrete?) evidence is accepted and Brueckner is brought to trial and convicted of another rape he is likely to spend a long, long time behind bars.

Right.  What to think of that?  Another Seven Years?  Taking Brueckner to approximately 60 years of age, if even that.  Probably about 57.

I don't know if that could be beyond the age of danger.  Or even if it matters.  He will remain a problem for Germany.  And how the hell is Germany supposed to deal with that?  Within the bounds of The EU?

Brueckner could always hot foot back to Portugal, or Italy, or even France or Spain.  I would rather not have to think about that.

Someone's Grandmother could have a problem.  And the likes of Brueckner don't change.

I don't know anything much about Psychopathy, but they don't appear to have any boundaries.  So any last ditch might do.  Another child or another old woman.

None of this has anything to do with Madeleine McCann.

And if you really want my opinion then I feel awfully sorry for him.  Psychopaths don't get born.  Something dreadful happens to them which doesn't necessarily affect other people in the same way.  Like some people finish up nasty while others don't under the same circumstance.   And I know all too much about that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 09, 2022, 09:33:29 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 09, 2022, 06:46:39 AM
Right.  What to think of that?  Another Seven Years?  Taking Brueckner to approximately 60 years of age, if even that.  Probably about 57.

I don't know if that could be beyond the age of danger.  Or even if it matters.  He will remain a problem for Germany.  And how the hell is Germany supposed to deal with that?  Within the bounds of The EU?

Brueckner could always hot foot back to Portugal, or Italy, or even France or Spain.  I would rather not have to think about that.

Someone's Grandmother could have a problem.  And the likes of Brueckner don't change.

I don't know anything much about Psychopathy, but they don't appear to have any boundaries.  So any last ditch might do.  Another child or another old woman.

None of this has anything to do with Madeleine McCann.

And if you really want my opinion then I feel awfully sorry for him.  Psychopaths don't get born.  Something dreadful happens to them which doesn't necessarily affect other people in the same way.  Like some people finish up nasty while others don't under the same circumstance.   And I know all too much about that.

Thats why its in off topic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 09, 2022, 09:38:20 AM
Quote from: misty on June 09, 2022, 02:38:27 AM
https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2021/12/24/exclusive-explosive-fingerprint-clue-as-madeleine-mccann-suspect-faces-three-new-charges/

In the Behan rape case the intruder picked up one of her kitchen knives and threatened her with it.
Whilst most of the crime scene forensics had been destroyed by PJ in 2007, half a fingerprint was part of evidence uploaded onto their computer system. It matched Brueckner's prints.

Where and when was this supposed half finger print lifted which supposedly match's CB, Wolters is on record saying he (CB) cannot be placed in Luz on the night of 3/05/2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 09, 2022, 10:59:56 AM

I have just been threatened with expulsion.

I thought I should let you all know, in case you think I jumped ship.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on June 09, 2022, 12:33:40 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 09, 2022, 09:38:20 AM
Where and when was this supposed half finger print lifted which supposedly match's CB, Wolters is on record saying he (CB) cannot be placed in Luz on the night of 3/05/2007.

The print was lifted from the Behan crime scene in 2004 by the Portuguese CSI team. Whilst the accused may or may not have some sort of distinctive mark on his thigh it will be rather more difficult for him to explain how his fingerprint was found in Hazel's apartment, although I'm pretty sure he'll claim to have merely burgled the place a few days before the rape took place.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 09, 2022, 01:29:30 PM
Quote from: misty on June 09, 2022, 12:33:40 PM
The print was lifted from the Behan crime scene in 2004 by the Portuguese CSI team. Whilst the accused may or may not have some sort of distinctive mark on his thigh it will be rather more difficult for him to explain how his fingerprint was found in Hazel's apartment, although I'm pretty sure he'll claim to have merely burgled the place a few days before the rape took place.

Thanks, you mentioned 2007 in the post I quoted, thought that was wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 09, 2022, 05:00:56 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 09, 2022, 10:59:56 AM
I have just been threatened with expulsion.

I thought I should let you all know, in case you think I jumped ship.

I have just "approved" this post to allow your message to be read, Eleanor.   My opinion is that there are all too many posts allowed to stand which really do bring the forum into disrepute by their cumulative effect and I cannot express how much I regret the treatment being meted out to you when measured against that.

https://youtu.be/4sEXWjTyAbA

https://poemsfromtheholocaust.weebly.com/first-they-came-for-the-communists#:~:text=Martin%20Niem%C3%B6ller%E2%80%99s%20poem%20%E2%80%98First%20they%20came%20for%20the,how%20nobody%20tried%20to%20stand%20up%20for%20them.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 09, 2022, 05:27:20 PM
Quote from: misty on June 09, 2022, 12:33:40 PM
The print was lifted from the Behan crime scene in 2004 by the Portuguese CSI team. Whilst the accused may or may not have some sort of distinctive mark on his thigh it will be rather more difficult for him to explain how his fingerprint was found in Hazel's apartment, although I'm pretty sure he'll claim to have merely burgled the place a few days before the rape took place.

Has this been stated by a named police officer, or just by journalists ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 09, 2022, 07:24:31 PM

IS THIS A THREAT OR NOT ?


Quote from: Brietta on June 09, 2022, 05:00:56 PM
I have just "approved" this post to allow your message to be read, Eleanor.   My opinion is that there are all too many posts allowed to stand which really do bring the forum into disrepute by their cumulative effect and I cannot express how much I regret the treatment being meted out to you when measured against that.

https://youtu.be/4sEXWjTyAbA

https://poemsfromtheholocaust.weebly.com/first-they-came-for-the-communists#:~:text=Martin%20Niem%C3%B6ller%E2%80%99s%20poem%20%E2%80%98First%20they%20came%20for%20the,how%20nobody%20tried%20to%20stand%20up%20for%20them.



Quote from: sadie on June 09, 2022, 06:33:19 PM
Yes, she was abducted .  She still lives

1.  Her presence in a video from 2012 proves that.  SY also accept that video, it seems, and my full theory which has to remain secret.
2.  All the worlds best quality psychics say that she still lives and have basically said the same all through.   Comments are also made from Tarot readings and the like that there is a sophisticated and organised attempt to try and hide 'the truth behind a cloud'.
3.  A youing man has been partly identified in Matt James recent Tarots and the identification fits with my thoughts.
4.  Since I mentioned Matt James in my posts, someone initially marked it with a red circle, meaning, I think, that it is unsafe to enter this blogspot.  Anyway I risked it and found my way in again with seemingly no harm to my computer.
5.  The last time that I went in, there seemed to be additional paragraphs added and ALL anti-Mccann.


Hmmm ... The internet is a dangerous place for the truth; it can so easily be changed.



Now that I have said this I have to wait for my punishment.


I have just posted the above, which is something that someone on here will not like, and a photo of the private road behind and adjacent to my house has just flashed up on my screen.


IS THIS A THREAT OR NOT ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 09, 2022, 08:09:41 PM
Sadie, calm down... your computer is either playing up or this photo is stored somewhere on it and you pressed a button accidentally to reveal it.  If you have a security camera guarding your property, is it linked to your computer?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 09, 2022, 11:14:06 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 09, 2022, 10:59:56 AM
I have just been threatened with expulsion.

I thought I should let you all know, in case you think I jumped ship.

Why?

Who threatened you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 10, 2022, 04:17:07 AM
Hi folks
I'll be taking a summer break.  Be good while I'm away.  Brie xx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 10, 2022, 07:09:56 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 10, 2022, 04:17:07 AM
Hi folks
I'll be taking a summer break.  Be good while I'm away.  Brie xx
If you're going to Ellieland, would you be kind enough to bring me back some stinky Epoisse de Bourgogne?... or anything, other than Brie.   That's caused me enough trouble already.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 08:20:01 AM
According to the Mirror there have been developments in the Bahan rape allegation;

Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner has agreed to have his thighs examined by cops in a bid to escape a rape charge.

German newspaper Bild says Brueckner claims to have no scars on his thighs and has consented to have them examined.
https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-agrees-police-27185143
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 10, 2022, 08:24:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 08:20:01 AM
According to the Mirror there have been developments in the Bahan rape allegation;

Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner has agreed to have his thighs examined by cops in a bid to escape a rape charge.

German newspaper Bild says Brueckner claims to have no scars on his thighs and has consented to have them examined.
https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-agrees-police-27185143
already discussed two days ago here https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg684562#msg684562
Wake me up when he’s absolved of all involvement based on his blemish-free legs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 10, 2022, 12:06:25 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 10, 2022, 08:24:59 AM
already discussed two days ago here https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg684562#msg684562 (https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg684562#msg684562)
Wake me up when he’s absolved of all involvement based on his blemish-free legs.
He'll have scrubbed the evidence off by now... with some spittle and a donkey stone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 12:16:33 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 10, 2022, 12:06:25 PM
He'll have scrubbed the evidence off by now... with some spittle and a donkey stone.

I thought they stoned your steps, not your thighs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 10, 2022, 12:23:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 12:16:33 PM
I thought they stoned your steps, not your thighs.
You'd be surprised what they bring off.  Mind you, he'd have to exchange a few kiddies swimming costumes for one from his nearest rag-and-bone man.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 10, 2022, 12:57:23 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 10, 2022, 04:17:07 AM
Hi folks
I'll be taking a summer break.  Be good while I'm away.  Brie xx

Thank you for letting us know Brie, I will be monitoring things very closely until you get back. Have a good break.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 10, 2022, 12:59:16 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 09, 2022, 10:59:56 AM
I have just been threatened with expulsion.

I thought I should let you all know, in case you think I jumped ship.

Oh pleeeease Eleanor.  Don't exaggerate  @)(++(*

It is really very simple, abide by the rules and there won't be an issue.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 10, 2022, 01:05:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 08:20:01 AM
According to the Mirror there have been developments in the Bahan rape allegation;

Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner has agreed to have his thighs examined by cops in a bid to escape a rape charge.

German newspaper Bild says Brueckner claims to have no scars on his thighs and has consented to have them examined.
https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-agrees-police-27185143

Bruckner is fast becoming the go-to guy for every historic crime involving foreigners on the Algarve. His face is plastered all over the media these days, surely any victim of assault would immediately recognise him?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 01:29:25 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 10, 2022, 12:23:50 PM
You'd be surprised what they bring off.  Mind you, he'd have to exchange a few kiddies swimming costumes for one from his nearest rag-and-bone man.

I remember going to get them from the rag and bone man for my mum. Then having to avoid stepping on the white line and smearing it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 01:36:25 PM
Quote from: John on June 10, 2022, 01:05:14 PM
Bruckner is fast becoming the go-to guy for every historic crime involving foreigners on the Algarve. His face is plastered all over the media these days, surely any victim of assault would immediately recognise him?

There are so many rumours that it's difficult to know what might be true and what isn't. Remember how many people 'saw' Madeleine McCann after seeing her photos in the MSM.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2022, 02:38:49 PM
Quote from: John on June 10, 2022, 12:59:16 PM
Oh pleeeease Eleanor.  Don't exaggerate  @)(++(*

It is really very simple, abide by the rules and there won't be an issue.

The problem is that the rules dont seem to apply to half the posters and others are edited and sanctioned for minor things.  That's why numbers have gone through the floor
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 05:05:50 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 10, 2022, 02:38:49 PM
The problem is that the rules dont seem to apply to half the posters and others are edited and sanctioned for minor things.  That's why numbers have gone through the floor

I don't think you have grounds to complain. Since you changed your posting style you very rarely get moderated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 10, 2022, 05:13:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 05:05:50 PM
I don't think you have grounds to complain. Since you changed your posting style you very rarely get moderated.
Could your new sig line be anymore patronizing?  If I wanted to be treated like a child I would sign up to Club Penguin.  Is that still a thing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 05:39:05 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 10, 2022, 05:13:25 PM
Could your new sig line be anymore patronizing?  If I wanted to be treated like a child I would sign up to Club Penguin.  Is that still a thing?

Just a reminder.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 10, 2022, 05:44:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 05:39:05 PM
Just a reminder.
It’s unnecessary.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 10, 2022, 06:25:56 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 09, 2022, 08:09:41 PM
Sadie, calm down... your computer is either playing up or this photo is stored somewhere on it and you pressed a button accidentally to reveal it.  If you have a security camera guarding your property, is it linked to your computer?

How can my computer manage to produce an image of the road behind our house ?   An image of the road free from vehicles?   An image that has never been photographed by any of us?

My husband has confirmed this, that no such photograph ever existed .  It is not stored in my computer, unlessi it has been magicked in, as several photos pertinent to the case have been magicked was out.  Completely vanished, at someone elses hand.

We have security cameras but none would be able to view the road from that angle.


It was placed on my screen as a threat, but it will not stop me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 10, 2022, 06:33:40 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 09, 2022, 10:59:56 AM
I have just been threatened with expulsion.

I thought I should let you all know, in case you think I jumped ship.

Who threatened you ... and what was the eason given ?



Do take care.   I worry about you being so far from family and old friends.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 10, 2022, 06:59:24 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 10, 2022, 06:25:56 PM
How can my computer manage to produce an image of the road behind our house ?   An image of the road free from vehicles?   An image that has never been photographed by any of us?

My husband has confirmed this, that no such photograph ever existed .  It is not stored in my computer, unlessi it has been magicked in, as several photos pertinent to the case have been magicked was out.  Completely vanished, at someone elses hand.

We have security cameras but none would be able to view the road from that angle.


It was placed on my screen as a threat, but it will not stop me.
Have you tried a reverse image search?   If the image is accessible again, try to upload it to this site to search for similar photos.  Once uploaded, you have to click on the various search engines lower down the page - Google, Bing, etc., which will often discover different results.  It could even come up with an exact match and tell you where it originated...

https://www.duplichecker.com/reverse-image-search.php (https://www.duplichecker.com/reverse-image-search.php)

Other than that, sorry I can't help you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2022, 07:34:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 05:05:50 PM
I don't think you have grounds to complain. Since you changed your posting style you very rarely get moderated.

total rubbish...since John corrected the mods who were abusing their powers against me things got better...but with patronising posts such as your signature line ...when Admin...John .. Angelo and you yourself dont obey the rules its  a damn cheek to point the finger at the last few remaining posters
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 07:55:41 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 10, 2022, 07:34:42 PM
total rubbish...since John corrected the mods who were abusing their powers against me things got better...but with patronising posts such as your signature line ...when Admin...John .. Angelo and you yourself dont obey the rules its  a damn cheek to point the finger at the last few remaining posters

Your complaints are noted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 10, 2022, 08:54:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 01:36:25 PM
There are so many rumours that it's difficult to know what might be true and what isn't. Remember how many people 'saw' Madeleine McCann after seeing her photos in the MSM.

I remember that only too well, the Riff Mountains in particular come to mind. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 10, 2022, 08:56:57 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 10, 2022, 02:38:49 PM
The problem is that the rules dont seem to apply to half the posters and others are edited and sanctioned for minor things.  That's why numbers have gone through the floor

To be honest there just isn't the stuff around to debate as everything has gone so quiet. And for some of us it is usually a case of going over old ground again for the umpteenth time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 10, 2022, 09:00:24 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 10, 2022, 06:25:56 PM
How can my computer manage to produce an image of the road behind our house ?   An image of the road free from vehicles?   An image that has never been photographed by any of us?

My husband has confirmed this, that no such photograph ever existed .  It is not stored in my computer, unlessi it has been magicked in, as several photos pertinent to the case have been magicked was out.  Completely vanished, at someone elses hand.

We have security cameras but none would be able to view the road from that angle.


It was placed on my screen as a threat, but it will not stop me.

People can't just put a picture on your screen Sadie. That's just silliness.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 10, 2022, 09:02:06 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 10, 2022, 06:33:40 PM
Who threatened you ... and what was the eason given ?



Do take care.   I worry about you being so far from family and old friends.

Nobody threatened Eleanor with expulsion, she was reported for forum bashing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 10, 2022, 09:10:59 PM
Quote from: John on June 10, 2022, 09:00:24 PM
People can't just put a picture on your screen Sadie. That's just silliness.


I'm afraid paranoia overwhelms common sense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 09:29:05 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 10, 2022, 09:10:59 PM

I'm afraid paranoia overwhelms common sense.

In my opinion there's no huge conspiracy around Madeleine's disappearance. I suspect the solution is much more mundane than some people think.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 10, 2022, 10:27:39 PM
Quote from: John on June 10, 2022, 09:00:24 PM
People can't just put a picture on your screen Sadie. That's just silliness.

Excuse me, but you are wrong.

Do not call me a liar, John
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 10, 2022, 10:30:29 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 10, 2022, 09:10:59 PM

I'm afraid paranoia overwhelms common sense.

I am not surprised some of your side are paranoid at the moment.  I wonder what is going on with SY ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 10, 2022, 10:34:43 PM
Quote from: John on June 10, 2022, 08:56:57 PM
To be honest there just isn't the stuff around to debate as everything has gone so quiet. And for some of us it is usually a case of going over old ground again for the umpteenth time.

Agreed. There was a slight uptick in new members around the time of Wolters concrete revelations, but mostly it's us same, what ten or twelve, life termers, that end up just tearing lumps out of each other because we've ran out of things to talk about.

It's scary to think us select few have all been here trolling each other for the past 15 years (10 in my case). I was young & sexy when I joined the forum, now I'm old & bald and wisened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 10, 2022, 10:36:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 09:29:05 PM
In my opinion there's no huge conspiracy around Madeleine's disappearance. I suspect the solution is much more mundane than some people think.

I am sure that you are right and the red herrings put about trying to blame The Mccanns are scandalous.

The altering of images and webpages is more than scandalous.

I never dreamt that mankind could sink so low.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 10, 2022, 10:40:07 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 10, 2022, 10:36:48 PM
I am sure that you are right and the red herrings put about trying to blame The Mccanns are scandalous.

The altering of images and webpages is more than scandalous.

I never dreamt that mankind could sink so low.

Yeah, I mean what kind of person would crop a picture of the McCanns and have them holding the Smith's e-fit. That has to be one of the most disgraceful I've seen. Appalling.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 10, 2022, 10:42:59 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 10, 2022, 10:27:39 PM
Excuse me, but you are wrong.

Do not call me a liar, John

My computer was 'taken over' years ago.   Nothing I say or receive via the internet is private any more.

But I have battled on regardles.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 10, 2022, 10:56:15 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 09:29:05 PM
In my opinion there's no huge conspiracy around Madeleine's disappearance. I suspect the solution is much more mundane than some people think.
Exactly.  The simple amd most logical explanation is that she was abducted. The apartment was ground floor, it was unlocked, it would have take less than 5 minutes to enter and remove her, no need for any convoluted story telling or getting your mates to tell lies on your behalf, no improbable deadly fall off a sofa after an even more improbable Calpol overdose, no carrying corpses around town, no staging open windows, or mopping up spilt blood from the tiled floor, no frozen cadavers in the boot being moved 23 days later, no death days before the disappearance with substitute Madeleines, just a straightforward terrible stranger abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 11:17:21 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 10, 2022, 10:56:15 PM
Exactly.  The simple amd most logical explanation is that she was abducted. The apartment was ground floor, it was unlocked, it would have take less than 5 minutes to enter and remove her, no need for any convoluted story telling or getting your mates to tell lies on your behalf, no improbable deadly fall off a sofa after an even more improbable Calpol overdose, no carrying corpses around town, no staging open windows, or mopping up spilt blood from the tiled floor, no frozen cadavers in the boot being moved 23 days later, no death days before the disappearance with substitute Madeleines, just a straightforward terrible stranger abduction.

I was referring to conspirators who target elderly British women's computers.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 10, 2022, 11:25:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 10, 2022, 11:17:21 PM
I was referring to conspirators who target elderly British women's computers.  @)(++(*
And I was referring to the sentence in your post “ there's no huge conspiracy around Madeleine's disappearance”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 05:59:29 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 10, 2022, 11:25:59 PM
And I was referring to the sentence in your post “ there's no huge conspiracy around Madeleine's disappearance”.

Aye, pick a phrase to run with and ignore the rest, as per usual.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 11, 2022, 07:02:34 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 10, 2022, 10:34:43 PM
Agreed. There was a slight uptick in new members around the time of Wolters concrete revelations, but mostly it's us same, what ten or twelve, life termers, that end up just tearing lumps out of each other because we've ran out of things to talk about.

It's scary to think us select few have all been here trolling each other for the past 15 years (10 in my case). I was young & sexy when I joined the forum, now I'm old & bald and wisened.
But bald men are still sexy...................... to lonely trichologists.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 07:15:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 05:59:29 AM
Aye, pick a phrase to run with and ignore the rest, as per usual.
OK so the rest of you post included the phrases “in my opinion” and “I suspect the solution is much more mundane than some people think.”. so let’s address these startling revelations too.  Yes, you post was your opinion, as was mine, I get that.  The solution to Madeleine’s disappearance is more mundane than a conspiracy?  Totally agree, that’s what I said in my post.  So just what is it about your post that you feel hasn’t been explored fully? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 07:17:41 AM
Quote from: Myster on June 11, 2022, 07:02:34 AM
But bald men are still sexy...................... to lonely trichologists.

I was 12 when I realised hair wasn't everything;

(https://www.goldenglobes.com/sites/default/files/styles/portrait_medium/public/people/cover_images/yul_brynner.jpg?format=pjpg&auto=webp&optimize=high)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 08:41:05 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 05:59:29 AM
Aye, pick a phrase to run with and ignore the rest, as per usual.
You have totally contradicted yourself.  You have claimed there is a conspiracy not to investigate the McCanns.. You infer there's a coonsiracyy to implicate CB.... Seems like you think there's a lot of conspiring going on
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 09:14:49 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 08:41:05 AM
You have totally contradicted yourself.  You have claimed there is a conspiracy not to investigate the McCanns.. You infer there's a coonsiracyy to implicate CB.... Seems like you think there's a lot of conspiring going on

I have pointed out that there was, according to Colin Sutton, a decision not to investigate the McCanns, not a conspiracy. I don't think there has been a conspiracy to implicate CB; a decision by his mates to do so, and a determination by the authorities to prove them right, that's all. No overarching conspiracies at all, and definitely nothing so earth shattering that elderly British ladies might need to be threatened.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 09:16:53 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 08:41:05 AM
You have totally contradicted yourself.  You have claimed there is a conspiracy not to investigate the McCanns.. You infer there's a coonsiracyy to implicate CB.... Seems like you think there's a lot of conspiring going on
Quite.  It seems G-Unit believes the explanation for Madeleine's disappearance was a mundane ol' accidental death covered up by the family and friends which involved carrying the uncovered corpse through town in front of numerous witnesses, and yet getting away with said crime for 15 years thanks to friends in high places.  Just a common or garden mundane explanation like that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 09:19:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 09:14:49 AM
I have pointed out that there was, according to Colin Sutton, a decision not to investigate the McCanns, not a conspiracy. I don't think there has been a conspiracy to implicate CB; a decision by his mates to do so, and a determination by the authorities to prove them right, that's all. No overarching conspiracies at all, and definitely nothing so earth shattering that elderly British ladies might need to be threatened.  @)(++(*
A decision to look the other way in a serious crime by the highest of authorities a.k.a. a cover up / conspiracy.   Thanks for confirming your beliefs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 09:20:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 09:14:49 AM
I have pointed out that there was, according to Colin Sutton, a decision not to investigate the McCanns, not a conspiracy. I don't think there has been a conspiracy to implicate CB; a decision by his mates to do so, and a determination by the authorities to prove them right, that's all. No overarching conspiracies at all, and definitely nothing so earth shattering that elderly British ladies might need to be threatened.  @)(++(*
A determination to prove a bunch of no mark low-lifes right by the German authorities because....?  Let's here your reasoned explanation for THAT one!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 09:21:20 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 09:14:49 AM
I have pointed out that there was, according to Colin Sutton, a decision not to investigate the McCanns, not a conspiracy. I don't think there has been a conspiracy to implicate CB; a decision by his mates to do so, and a determination by the authorities to prove them right, that's all. No overarching conspiracies at all, and definitely nothing so earth shattering that elderly British ladies might need to be threatened.  @)(++(*

You are wriggling badly.. A decision not to investigate the McCanns by two or more people would meet the definition of a conspiracy... It seems you don't even realise that. Carry on contradictibg yourself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 11, 2022, 09:36:38 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 10, 2022, 10:34:43 PM
Agreed. There was a slight uptick in new members around the time of Wolters concrete revelations, but mostly it's us same, what ten or twelve, life termers, that end up just tearing lumps out of each other because we've ran out of things to talk about.

It's scary to think us select few have all been here trolling each other for the past 15 years (10 in my case). I was young & sexy when I joined the forum, now I'm old & bald and wisened.

Ten or twelve, thats pushing it , half a dozen at best, its obvious the case no longer hold an appeal, more important things, like cost of petrol,cost of luxuries like a loaf of bread, etc .................................
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 09:59:50 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 11, 2022, 09:16:53 AM
Quite.  It seems G-Unit believes the explanation for Madeleine's disappearance was a mundane ol' accidental death covered up by the family and friends which involved carrying the uncovered corpse through town in front of numerous witnesses, and yet getting away with said crime for 15 years thanks to friends in high places.  Just a common or garden mundane explanation like that.

It's obvious that you don't pay attention to what I say, preferring to suggest something completely different. Do you think Sadie's correct to suspect she's the target of a conspiracy to silence her?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 10:13:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 09:59:50 AM
It's obvious that you don't pay attention to what I say, preferring to suggest something completely different. Do you think Sadie's correct to suspect she's the target of a conspiracy to silence her?
No I do not but that is not what you said.  You said that in your opinion there was no huge conspiracy around Madeleine's disappearance - yet you are quite obviously reluctant to dismiss all sorts of ridiculous conspiracies just so long as the parents involvement is central to them.  I know this because I DO pay attention to what you write. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 10:20:20 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 09:21:20 AM
You are wriggling badly.. A decision not to investigate the McCanns by two or more people would meet the definition of a conspiracy... It seems you don't even realise that. Carry on contradictibg yourself.

No I'm not. I'm sticking with my point and you won't suceed in diverting me. Do you think Sadie's correct to suspect she's the target of a conspiracy to silence her?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 10:22:43 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 10:20:20 AM
No I'm not. I'm sticking with my point and you won't suceed in diverting me. Do you think Sadie's correct to suspect she's the target of a conspiracy to silence her?
Did you write this?   Where do you mention Sadie?
"In my opinion there's no huge conspiracy around Madeleine's disappearance. I suspect the solution is much more mundane than some people think".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 10:29:08 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 11, 2022, 10:22:43 AM
Did you write this?   Where do you mention Sadie?
"In my opinion there's no huge conspiracy around Madeleine's disappearance. I suspect the solution is much more mundane than some people think".

I was forced to specify what I was referring to, although I thought it would have been obvious given the context and previous posts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 10:45:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 10:29:08 AM
I was forced to specify what I was referring to, although I thought it would have been obvious given the context and previous posts.
So your post was a sly dig at Sadie, but in actual fact despite what you wrote you are still prepared to entertain all sorts of conspiracy theories that put the McCann parents in the frame?  OK, understood now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 11, 2022, 10:48:45 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 10:20:20 AM
No I'm not. I'm sticking with my point and you won't suceed in diverting me. Do you think Sadie's correct to suspect she's the target of a conspiracy to silence her?

Sadie has espoused many theories over the years, some very apt while others have been exposed as wishful thinking. I have no doubt she has her detractors but she will always have a voice on here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 10:50:56 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 11, 2022, 10:45:12 AM
So your post was a sly dig at Sadie, but in actual fact despite what you wrote you are still prepared to entertain all sorts of conspiracy theories that put the McCann parents in the frame?  OK, understood now.

Your opinion is noted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 11:00:01 AM
Quote from: John on June 11, 2022, 10:48:45 AM
Sadie has espoused many theories over the years, some very apt while others have been exposed as wishful thinking. I have no doubt she has her detractors but she will always have a voice on here.

She has a voice, and just like everyone else her views are surely allowed to be questioned?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 11:00:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 10:50:56 AM
Your opinion is noted.
Jolly good - is that in your notebook of crazed McCann supporters' mentally ill opinions?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 11, 2022, 11:02:31 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 11:00:01 AM
She has a voice, and just like everyone else her views are surely allowed to be questioned?

Absolutely and I have done so often.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 11:03:19 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 11:00:01 AM
She has a voice, and just like everyone else her views are surely allowed to be questioned?
Mocked would be a more apt description of your last few posts on here wrt to Sadie, rather than questioned IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 11:18:18 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 11, 2022, 11:03:19 AM
Mocked would be a more apt description of your last few posts on here wrt to Sadie, rather than questioned IMO.

Your opinion is noted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 11:35:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 11:18:18 AM
Your opinion is noted.
Your noting is noted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 11:44:57 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 10:20:20 AM
No I'm not. I'm sticking with my point and you won't suceed in diverting me. Do you think Sadie's correct to suspect she's the target of a conspiracy to silence her?

wriggling...I already know you are wrong. If two or more SY officers take the decision not to investigate the McCanns then thats  a conspiracy...not opinion but a fact...a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in fact. Thats what you are ridiculously accusing SY of...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 12:07:46 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 11:44:57 AM
wriggling...I already know you are wrong. If two or more SY officers take the decision not to investigate the McCanns then thats  a conspiracy...not opinion but a fact...a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in fact. Thats what you are ridiculously accusing SY of...

I have never accused SY of conspiring.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 12:19:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 12:07:46 PM
I have never accused SY of conspiring.
How do you explain the fact that three police forces have all been concentrating on investigating Madeleine's abduction for the last few years?  How do you rationalise this to yourself?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 12:51:20 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 12:07:46 PM
I have never accused SY of conspiring.

You have said a  decision had been made not to investigate the parents....thats a conspiracy to pervert thr course of justice...that is a fact...not opinion...thats your accusation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 02:57:50 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 12:51:20 PM
You have said a  decision had been made not to investigate the parents....thats a conspiracy to pervert thr course of justice...that is a fact...not opinion...thats your accusation

So in your opinion deciding not to investigate the McCanns was perverting the course of justice? Perhaps it was assumed that the parents had been cleared by the Portuguese? That's what the McCanns and the MSM said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 03:00:05 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 11, 2022, 12:19:42 PM
How do you explain the fact that three police forces have all been concentrating on investigating Madeleine's abduction for the last few years?  How do you rationalise this to yourself?
^^^the elephant in the room ^^^
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 11, 2022, 03:52:49 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 11, 2022, 12:19:42 PM
How do you explain the fact that three police forces have all been concentrating on investigating Madeleine's abduction for the last few years?  How do you rationalise this to yourself?

That just maybe the very reason no ones been brought to book .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 03:55:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 02:57:50 PM
So in your opinion deciding not to investigate the McCanns was perverting the course of justice? Perhaps it was assumed that the parents had been cleared by the Portuguese? That's what the McCanns and the MSM said.

If SY had decided not to investigate the McCanns that would be conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. I think its clear as was stated they looked at all the evidence against the McCanns and came to their opinion they were not involved. I think..like me...they think all the evidence you think implicates them is total junk.

Sutton was never told he could not investigate the Mccanns...more sceptic junk



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 04:03:57 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 11, 2022, 03:52:49 PM
That just maybe the very reason no ones been brought to book .
How about actually answering the question? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 11, 2022, 04:29:34 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 03:55:16 PM
If SY had decided not to investigate the McCanns that would be conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. I think its clear as was stated they looked at all the evidence against the McCanns and came to their opinion they were not involved. I think..like me...they think all the evidence you think implicates them is total junk.

Sutton was never told he could not investigate the Mccanns...more sceptic junk

Its on tape, Colin Sutton was told that he wouldn't be happy leading the investigation , the SY investigation would be narrowly focused and the investigation would be away from any suspicion of the McCann's or tapas friends.
Seek and you will find.

Also in the press, the very same that keeps telling us CB is the one, so its true.


Colin Sutton said a high-ranking friend in the Met called him and warned him not to lead the case when Scotland Yard announced it would get involved in 2010.

The source warned that he would be tasked with proving her parents Kate and Gerry were innocent and ignoring any alternatives to the abduction theory, he claims.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4467832/Met-interested-proving-McCann-parents-innocent.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 04:39:53 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 11, 2022, 04:29:34 PM
Its on tape, Colin Sutton was told that he wouldn't be happy leading the investigation , the SY investigation would be narrowly focused and the investigation would be away from any suspicion of the McCann's or tapas friends.
Seek and you will find.

Also in the press, the very same that keeps telling us CB is the one, so its true.


Colin Sutton said a high-ranking friend in the Met called him and warned him not to lead the case when Scotland Yard announced it would get involved in 2010.

The source warned that he would be tasked with proving her parents Kate and Gerry were innocent and ignoring any alternatives to the abduction theory, he claims.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4467832/Met-interested-proving-McCann-parents-innocent.html

From suttons blog telling the totality of the advice he received... He was not told he could not investigate the mccanns.. Sceptic junk

However, before this, just a few days after the NotW story I did receive a call from a senior officer in the Met whom I knew quite well.  This officer told me I would do better to avoid the McCann investigation if it did happen, because "You wouldn't be happy leading an investigation where you were told what you could look at and what you could not".

That is the totality of the advice I received. It was made clear that this was an ‘unofficial’
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 11, 2022, 05:23:20 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 04:39:53 PM
From suttons blog telling the totality of the advice he received... He was not told he could not investigate the mccanns.. Sceptic junk

However, before this, just a few days after the NotW story I did receive a call from a senior officer in the Met whom I knew quite well.  This officer told me I would do better to avoid the McCann investigation if it did happen, because "You wouldn't be happy leading an investigation where you were told what you could look at and what you could not".

That is the totality of the advice I received. It was made clear that this was an ‘unofficial’

So, what was he being told he couldn't look for then?

Perhaps it was some types of abduction evidence that were deemed off limits.

Maybe certain kinds of abductor or something.

I was saying before how no one has ever suggested that a female lesbian paedophile could have abducted Maddie, so maybe it was that.

Or Muslim grooming gangs perhaps, never heard them being suggested as potentially responsible either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 05:41:55 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 11, 2022, 05:23:20 PM
So, what was he being told he couldn't look for then?

Perhaps it was some types of abduction evidence that were deemed off limits.

Maybe certain kinds of abductor or something.

I was saying before how no one has ever suggested that a female lesbian paedophile could have abducted Maddie, so maybe it was that.

Or Muslim grooming gangs perhaps, never heard them being suggested as potentially responsible either.
He wouldnt be able to look at anything without the permission of the pj
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 11, 2022, 07:15:28 PM

I've seen it mentioned here before that the PJ could be involved in Maddie's abduction.

Thinking it all through, maybe Wolters is actually the abductor, that would explain why he's trying so hard to frame Brueckner.

It all makes sense now, yes, that's my new theory.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 09:39:26 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 04:39:53 PM
From suttons blog telling the totality of the advice he received... He was not told he could not investigate the mccanns.. Sceptic junk

However, before this, just a few days after the NotW story I did receive a call from a senior officer in the Met whom I knew quite well.  This officer told me I would do better to avoid the McCann investigation if it did happen, because "You wouldn't be happy leading an investigation where you were told what you could look at and what you could not".

That is the totality of the advice I received. It was made clear that this was an ‘unofficial’

Nevertheless;

my position was one where I was as sceptical of the accepted (abduction) theory as I was of any other. I said I would also like to make the point that Operation Grange was so restricted from the start as to be destined to fail.  In support of this I presented the original Grange terms of reference and told them of the advice I had received in the phone call...
http://colinsutton.blogspot.com/

It looks like he may be correct; Grange may close with nothing achieved.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 09:47:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 09:39:26 PM
Nevertheless;

my position was one where I was as sceptical of the accepted (abduction) theory as I was of any other. I said I would also like to make the point that Operation Grange was so restricted from the start as to be destined to fail.  In support of this I presented the original Grange terms of reference and told them of the advice I had received in the phone call...
http://colinsutton.blogspot.com/

It looks like he may be correct; Grange may close with nothing achieved.
It doesn't look like he may be correct... That's your opinion not a fact... Do I need to remind you of forum rules..
Imo... It's a fact that Maddie was murdered by a paedophile.. And Wolters has the proof
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 11, 2022, 10:05:20 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 09:47:59 PM
It doesn't look like he may be correct... That's your opinion not a fact... Do I need to remind you of forum rules..
Imo... It's a fact that Maddie was murdered by a paedophile.. And Wolters has the proof

 @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 10:39:02 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 09:47:59 PM
It doesn't look like he may be correct... That's your opinion not a fact... Do I need to remind you of forum rules..
Imo... It's a fact that Maddie was murdered by a paedophile.. And Wolters has the proof
You can say Madeleine was abducted without putting IMO now, the precedent was set when mods turned a blind eye to the numerous posts stating Madeleine was not abducted without any IMO caveat.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 10:43:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 09:39:26 PM
Nevertheless;

my position was one where I was as sceptical of the accepted (abduction) theory as I was of any other. I said I would also like to make the point that Operation Grange was so restricted from the start as to be destined to fail.  In support of this I presented the original Grange terms of reference and told them of the advice I had received in the phone call...
http://colinsutton.blogspot.com/

It looks like he may be correct; Grange may close with nothing achieved.
how can you be sceptical of ALL theories pertaining to Madeleine’s disappearance?   Strange he hasn’t made any comment on the case since Brückner was id’ed - or maybe he has and I missed it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 11:00:20 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 11, 2022, 10:43:10 PM
how can you be sceptical of ALL theories pertaining to Madeleine’s disappearance?   Strange he hasn’t made any comment on the case since Brückner was id’ed - or maybe he has and I missed it.

Perhaps, like me, he has doubts about all the theories which have been suggested. Imo none of them is totally convincing. They are, after all, just theories. The truth could be something no-one has thought of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 11, 2022, 11:23:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 11, 2022, 11:00:20 PM
Perhaps, like me, he has doubts about all the theories which have been suggested. Imo none of them is totally convincing. They are, after all, just theories. The truth could be something no-one has thought of.
no it couldn’t.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 11, 2022, 11:29:22 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 11, 2022, 10:39:02 PM
You can say Madeleine was abducted without putting IMO now, the precedent was set when mods turned a blind eye to the numerous posts stating Madeleine was not abducted without any IMO caveat.

There's already a thread called 'Perceptions of Madeleine's Abduction' started by a mod, ffs

Not an IMO in sight.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=12372.0

I have just as much right to say that she wasn't abducted. Actually, thinking about it, I have even more right.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 11, 2022, 11:48:20 PM

I've had an idea.

Let's all agree to refer to Madeleine's disappearance as a disappearance, then I wouldn't have to keep saying she wasn't abducted, and also, let's agree to stop saying Wolters has solved the case, then I wouldn't have to keep telling you he hasn't.

Sounds fair enough to me, if it's fair forum you're after.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 05:59:21 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 11, 2022, 11:23:30 PM
no it couldn’t.

Why not? 'Abduction' has been investigated and it's beginning to look like a fail. Grange is said to be closing and they didn't find the abductor. The Germans seem no nearer to charging their suspect. Who knows what the Portuguese are doing. None of them are looking as if they're suceeding, to be honest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 06:04:07 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 09:47:59 PM
It doesn't look like he may be correct... That's your opinion not a fact... Do I need to remind you of forum rules..
Imo... It's a fact that Maddie was murdered by a paedophile.. And Wolters has the proof

When's the trial beginning?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 12, 2022, 06:45:57 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 06:04:07 AM
When's the trial beginning?

Wolters: "Your honour, I have concrete evidence that Brueckner is the murderer, & if you saw it you'd be left in no doubt, only I can't show you what it is because it's a secret, so you'll just have to take my word for it"

Judge: "Right you are then, I find the defendant guilty"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 12, 2022, 07:15:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 05:59:21 AM
Why not? 'Abduction' has been investigated and it's beginning to look like a fail. Grange is said to be closing and they didn't find the abductor. The Germans seem no nearer to charging their suspect. Who knows what the Portuguese are doing. None of them are looking as if they're suceeding, to be honest.
Ludicrous logic.  There are only three possible explanations for Madeleine’s disappearance: abduction, woke and wandered or parental abduction.  To suggest thst there might be another explanation that no one has yet thought of is ridiculous, to suggest that because the case has not yet been definitively solved that abduction is a “fail” is absurd, to pretend that the Portuguese police aren’t also now treating the case as one of abduction is to be in complete denial.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 08:09:46 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 12, 2022, 07:15:24 AM
Ludicrous logic.  There are only three possible explanations for Madeleine’s disappearance: abduction, woke and wandered or parental abduction.  To suggest thst there might be another explanation that no one has yet thought of is ridiculous, to suggest that because the case has not yet been definitively solved that abduction is a “fail” is absurd, to pretend that the Portuguese police aren’t also now treating the case as one of abduction is to be in complete denial.

Logic doesn't work in this case, because it's so difficult to know who's telling the truth.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 12, 2022, 08:11:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 08:09:46 AM
Logic doesn't work in this case, because it's so difficult to know who's telling the truth.
Don’t be silly please..   Using logic kindly explain why you think 3 police forces are treating Madeleine’s disappearance as an abduction.  What can you see that these three police forces are all failing to take into account and why are they all inferior in their approach to the disappearance compared  to an old armchair detective such as yourself?  Do you sincerely believe you have a better handle on this case than they do? If so, why, when they have far more evidence and information than you have?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 09:24:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 08:09:46 AM
Logic doesn't work in this case, because it's so difficult to know who's telling the truth.
Let me help you.. The McCanns are telling the truth.. Wolters is telling the truth.. CB is telling lies.. The original Portuguese investigation didn't have a clue
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 09:25:25 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 12, 2022, 08:11:14 AM
Don’t be silly please..   Using logic kindly explain why you think 3 police forces are treating Madeleine’s disappearance as an abduction.  What can you see that these three police forces are all failing to take into account and why are they all inferior in their approach to the disappearance compared  to an old armchair detective such as yourself?  Do you sincerely believe you have a better handle on this case than they do? If so, why, when they have far more evidence and information than you have?

Grange is investigating an abduction because that's what their remit was. The Germans are investigating an abduction because they were told their suspect admitted it in 2008. The Portuguese are saying nothing atm.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 12, 2022, 09:32:33 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 09:24:41 AM
Let me help you.. The McCanns are telling the truth.. Wolters is telling the truth.. CB is telling lies.. The original Portuguese investigation didn't have a clue

You mean the curtains really did go whoosh?

How could I ever have doubted Kate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 12, 2022, 09:35:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 09:25:25 AM
Grange is investigating an abduction because that's what their remit was. The Germans are investigating an abduction because they were told their suspect admitted it in 2008. The Portuguese are saying nothing atm.
Heavens, you really are so deep in denial I bet you couldn't even bring yourself to answer the questions I asked you even in your own head.  It is very clear to anyone with an ounce of common sense that the PJ are supporting the German investigation (albeit in their own, sweet, plodding obstructive way), the Germans have said as much and if I'm not very mistaken so have the PJ, quite recently - don't ask for a cite, but it's on here somewhere.  And of course there is the little matter of the PJ having made Bruckner an arguido, which I'm sure means they're not investigating abduction - at all, no sirree....  (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 12, 2022, 09:47:52 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 12, 2022, 09:35:48 AM
Heavens, you really are so deep in denial I bet you couldn't even bring yourself to answer the questions I asked you even in your own head.  It is very clear to anyone with an ounce of common sense that the PJ are supporting the German investigation (albeit in their own, sweet, plodding obstructive way), the Germans have said as much and if I'm not very mistaken so have the PJ, quite recently - don't ask for a cite, but it's on here somewhere.  And of course there is the little matter of the PJ having made Bruckner an arguido, which I'm sure means they're not investigating abduction - at all, no sirree....  (&^&

Not getting very far though are they, it's Brueckner or bust, & Brueckner doesn't look like being charged anytime ever.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 12, 2022, 10:03:14 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 11, 2022, 09:47:59 PM
It doesn't look like he may be correct... That's your opinion not a fact... Do I need to remind you of forum rules..
Imo... It's a fact that Maddie was murdered by a paedophile.. And Wolters has the proof

Nope, its a fact Wolters says she was murdered , the rest is pure conjecture.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 12, 2022, 10:11:50 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 12, 2022, 09:35:48 AM
Heavens, you really are so deep in denial I bet you couldn't even bring yourself to answer the questions I asked you even in your own head.  It is very clear to anyone with an ounce of common sense that the PJ are supporting the German investigation (albeit in their own, sweet, plodding obstructive way), the Germans have said as much and if I'm not very mistaken so have the PJ, quite recently - don't ask for a cite, but it's on here somewhere.  And of course there is the little matter of the PJ having made Bruckner an arguido, which I'm sure means they're not investigating abduction - at all, no sirree....  (&^&

The PJ made Murat an arguido, the PJ made the McCanns arguidos, the PJ had the three amigos back in 2014 that SY had nailed on to have abducted and killed Madeleine arguidos, then around December 2014 there was another passel of arguidos made it was reported, the sum total of that, feck all, just as it is now. CB could well be an important witness to the events of 3/05/2007 if he was around that night, although Wolters is on record on ch5 telling the world CB cannot be placed in Luz that night, so thats why he's bang to rights over the abduction, not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 10:24:32 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 09:24:41 AM
Let me help you.. The McCanns are telling the truth.. Wolters is telling the truth.. CB is telling lies.. The original Portuguese investigation didn't have a clue

Thanks for sharing your beliefs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 10:27:02 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 12, 2022, 10:03:14 AM
Nope, its a fact Wolters says she was murdered , the rest is pure conjecture.

Ive decided to follow the example set by admin and gunit and state my opinion as fact...and it is
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 10:36:00 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 09:24:41 AM
Let me help you.. The McCanns are telling the truth.. Wolters is telling the truth.. CB is telling lies.. The original Portuguese investigation didn't have a clue

So. If the McCanns told the truth was the nanny telling lies?

"I was in the apartment less than five minutes after they found that Madeleine had gone...We told the head of department what had happened and she took us straight to the apartment.
 
"There were no children in the room. The twins had been taken out already, I think by one of the McCanns' friends.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id70.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 11:22:39 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 10:36:00 AM
So. If the McCanns told the truth was the nanny telling lies?

"I was in the apartment less than five minutes after they found that Madeleine had gone...We told the head of department what had happened and she took us straight to the apartment.
 
"There were no children in the room. The twins had been taken out already, I think by one of the McCanns' friends.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id70.htm

You look at things very simplistically. statements were translated ina very unreliable way....one persons recall of the same incident may be different...no one was lying. I find tht  avery silly thing to say
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 11:26:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 10:36:00 AM
So. If the McCanns told the truth was the nanny telling lies?

"I was in the apartment less than five minutes after they found that Madeleine had gone...We told the head of department what had happened and she took us straight to the apartment.
 
"There were no children in the room. The twins had been taken out already, I think by one of the McCanns' friends.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id70.htm

i think its absolutely pathetic of you and shows a poor understanding of the case taht you see such trivial inconsistencies as important...absolutely laughable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 12, 2022, 11:42:03 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 11:26:48 AM
i think its absolutely pathetic of you and shows a poor understanding of the case taht you see such trivial inconsistencies as important...absolutely laughable

Yet  CB's trivial inconsistencies become major.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 11:53:31 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 11:22:39 AM
You look at things very simplistically. statements were translated ina very unreliable way....one persons recall of the same incident may be different...no one was lying. I find tht  avery silly thing to say

Do you? No translation was involved in this claim by the nanny. So either she was in 5A 'less than 5 minutes' after Madeleine's disappearance and failed to see two cots with children in them, or she made the story up or the twins weren't there. Your choice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 12, 2022, 11:54:36 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 12, 2022, 11:42:03 AM
Yet  CB's trivial inconsistencies become major.

Well yeah, & if he did tell Busching he murdered Maddie, then he was definitely telling the truth & there's even a photo which proves it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 11:54:53 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 11:53:31 AM
Do you? No translation was involved in this claim by the nanny. So either she was in 5A 'less than 5 minutes' after Madeleine's disappearance and failed to see two cots with children in them, or she made the story up or the twins weren't there. Your choice.

Laughable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 12:03:13 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 12, 2022, 11:54:36 AM
Well yeah, & if he did tell Busching he murdered Maddie, then he was definitely telling the truth & there's even a photo which proves it.

In your dreams.....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 12, 2022, 12:25:25 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 12, 2022, 10:03:14 AM
Nope, its a fact Wolters says she was murdered , the rest is pure conjecture.

Wolters certainly claims that Madeleine was murdered but has provided nothing to support that claim. I think for the time being we are correct to be sceptical of anything he says.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 12:37:49 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 11:54:53 AM
Laughable

A lot of peculiar things were said and we don't know if they were true, or made up for attention or money. Truth in this case is very hard to identify imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 12, 2022, 12:53:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 10:36:00 AM
So. If the McCanns told the truth was the nanny telling lies?

"I was in the apartment less than five minutes after they found that Madeleine had gone...We told the head of department what had happened and she took us straight to the apartment.
 
"There were no children in the room. The twins had been taken out already, I think by one of the McCanns' friends.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id70.htm
For a senior citizen you really are very childish IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 12, 2022, 12:54:20 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 12, 2022, 11:42:03 AM
Yet  CB's trivial inconsistencies become major.
such as?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 12, 2022, 12:55:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 10:36:00 AM
So. If the McCanns told the truth was the nanny telling lies?

"I was in the apartment less than five minutes after they found that Madeleine had gone...We told the head of department what had happened and she took us straight to the apartment.
 
"There were no children in the room. The twins had been taken out already, I think by one of the McCanns' friends.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id70.htm
What is this quote from? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 01:06:42 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 12, 2022, 12:53:33 PM
For a senior citizen you really are very childish IMO.

When unable to respond to a point attack the poster. Very mature.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 12, 2022, 01:10:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 01:06:42 PM
When unable to respond to a point attack the poster. Very mature.
Isn't that what you're doing then?  Calling me "very mature" implying that I am not?  Very mature. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 12, 2022, 01:17:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 10:36:00 AM
So. If the McCanns told the truth was the nanny telling lies?

"I was in the apartment less than five minutes after they found that Madeleine had gone...We told the head of department what had happened and she took us straight to the apartment.
 
"There were no children in the room. The twins had been taken out already, I think by one of the McCanns' friends.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id70.htm
It is IMO incredibly childish to assume that EITHER the McCanns were lying OR that the nanny was lying.  It's immature because it shows that the person making the accusation is unable or unwilling to consider any other possibility such as - the nanny was mistaken, or that the Daily Mail (that bastion of accuracy and truth) simply misreported what she actually said.  But no, to a childish mind it must mean someone was lying, no other explanation will do.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 01:52:08 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 12, 2022, 01:17:45 PM
It is IMO incredibly childish to assume that EITHER the McCanns were lying OR that the nanny was lying.  It's immature because it shows that the person making the accusation is unable or unwilling to consider any other possibility such as - the nanny was mistaken, or that the Daily Mail (that bastion of accuracy and truth) simply misreported what she actually said.  But no, to a childish mind it must mean someone was lying, no other explanation will do.

You failed to notice, I assume. that I offered other possible explanations in my posts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 12, 2022, 01:58:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 01:52:08 PM
You failed to notice, I assume. that I offered other possible explanations in my posts.
I quoted the post of yours I commented on.  There was a binary choice between the McCanns and the nanny telling truth or lies.  Point me to the post where you proffer "mistaken" or "misreporting" as an explanation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 02:30:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 12, 2022, 12:37:49 PM
A lot of peculiar things were said and we don't know if they were true, or made up for attention or money. Truth in this case is very hard to identify imo.

Just as we don't know how accurate the statements are in the files..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 02:43:58 PM
Quote from: John on June 12, 2022, 12:25:25 PM
Wolters certainly claims that Madeleine was murdered but has provided nothing to support that claim. I think for the time being we are correct to be sceptical of anything he says.

When an official spokesman for the German investigation makes, such a powerful statement I think it's highly significant.... I can't see him making such a statement without evidence to support it.
I think only those in total denial can't accept that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 02:47:31 PM
Quote from: John on June 12, 2022, 12:25:25 PM
Wolters certainly claims that Madeleine was murdered but has provided nothing to support that claim. I think for the time being we are correct to be sceptical of anything he says.

It's quite laughable that when Amaral says CB is a patsy sceptics accept it as fact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 12, 2022, 03:14:33 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 02:43:58 PM
When an official spokesman for the German investigation makes, such a powerful statement I think it's highly significant.... I can't see him making such a statement without evidence to support it.
I think only those in total denial can't accept that

No charges dave.

Just accept it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 03:24:10 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 12, 2022, 03:14:33 PM
No charges dave.

Just accept it.

What I should accept is that those who can't accept that Wolters has the evidence he claims are just plain daft and not bother responding to them
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 12, 2022, 03:28:05 PM
Sceptics are unable to come to terms with the fact that three police forces are treating Madeleine’s disappearance as an abduction.  They will never be able to get over it so need to invent all sorts of daft nonsense in order to rationalise it to themselves.  What they refuse to understand is that even if CB is never charged it does not mean that the only other possibility is that the parents dunnit.  The police will still continue to view the disappearance as an abduction right up until the day Gerry and Kate McCann hand themselves in to the police which is a day that will never come as they didn’t do it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 12, 2022, 03:36:14 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 03:24:10 PM
What I should accept is that those who can't accept that Wolters has the evidence he claims are just plain daft and not bother responding to them

What you need to accept is that just because Wolters says he has evidence, doesn't mean he actually has.

You've fallen into a trap set for Brueckner.

The level of cope here by supporters is hilarious.

Denial- Brueckner will still be charged one day.

Anger - lashing out at everyone who warned you Wolters didn't actually have anything.

Bargaining- Maybe the paedo photo is inadmissible for some reason.

If you can just make it to the acceptance that you've been sold London Bridge, stage, you might start to feel a bit better.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 12, 2022, 03:41:54 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 12, 2022, 03:28:05 PM
Sceptics are unable to come to terms with the fact that three police forces are treating Madeleine’s disappearance as an abduction.  They will never be able to get over it so need to invent all sorts of daft nonsense in order to rationalise it to themselves.  What they refuse to understand is that even if CB is never charged it does not mean that the only other possibility is that the parents dunnit. The police will still continue to view the disappearance as an abduction right up until the day Gerry and Kate McCann hand themselves in to the police whoch is a day that will never come as they didn’t do it.

You mean the concrete evidence could be phoney?

I've been saying that for ages.

But, yes, maybe there's still some other abductor out there, that 3 investigative forces have overlooked for 15 years.

Talk about Keystone cops.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 12, 2022, 04:21:50 PM
Quote from: John on June 10, 2022, 01:05:14 PM
Bruckner is fast becoming the go-to guy for every historic crime involving foreigners on the Algarve. His face is plastered all over the media these days, surely any victim of assault would immediately recognise him?

He doesn't seem to have been linked to anymore abductions or murders though.
Maybe he did Maddie as a one off, decided he didn't like it after all, then went back to selling weed & running a kiosk instead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 04:34:23 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 12, 2022, 03:36:14 PM
What you need to accept is that just because Wolters says he has evidence, doesn't mean he actually has.

You've fallen into a trap set for Brueckner.

The level of cope here by supporters is hilarious.

Denial- Brueckner will still be charged one day.

Anger - lashing out at everyone who warned you Wolters didn't actually have anything.

Bargaining- Maybe the paedo photo is inadmissible for some reason.

If you can just make it to the acceptance that you've been sold London Bridge, stage, you might start to feel a bit better.

What  you need to understand is you are in no position to give me advice.. I've simply got a far better understanding of what's going on
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 12, 2022, 04:39:53 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 04:34:23 PM
What  you need to understand is you are in no position to give me advice.. I've simply got a far better understanding of what's going on

Well, please, do enlighten us.
Wait, don't tell me, they are still trying to trace where the imaginary photo was taken, then they can link it to Brueckner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 05:14:15 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 12, 2022, 04:39:53 PM
Well, please, do enlighten us.
Wait, don't tell me, they are still trying to trace where the imaginary photo was taken, then they can link it to Brueckner.

Why should I waste my time.. I'm not bothered what you think.. It's like telling a Jehovas witness there's no God.. But I can't prove it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 12, 2022, 05:20:54 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 05:14:15 PM
Why should I waste my time.. I'm not bothered what you think.. It's like telling a Jehovas witness there's no God.. But I can't prove it

Wolters is a bit like Jehova really, you just have to believe in him, only, he doesn't have any credible witnesses to anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 12, 2022, 05:35:46 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 04:34:23 PM
What  you need to understand is you are in no position to give me advice.. I've simply got a far better understanding of what's going on

A more fertile imagination more like.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 12, 2022, 05:44:44 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 12, 2022, 10:11:50 AM
The PJ made Murat an arguido, the PJ made the McCanns arguidos, the PJ had the three amigos back in 2014 that SY had nailed on to have abducted and killed Madeleine arguidos, then around December 2014 there was another passel of arguidos made it was reported, the sum total of that, feck all, just as it is now. CB could well be an important witness to the events of 3/05/2007 if he was around that night, although Wolters is on record on ch5 telling the world CB cannot be placed in Luz that night, so thats why he's bang to rights over the abduction, not.
Anyone who seriously entertains the idea that CB witnessed Gerry throwing Madeleine’s body in a bin and then took a photo of it certainly has a very fertile imagination (or rocks in their head). 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 12, 2022, 05:47:07 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 12, 2022, 05:44:44 PM
Anyone who seriously entertains the idea that CB witnessed Gerry throwing Madeleine’s body in a bin and then took a photo of it certainly has a very fertile imagination (or rocks in their head).

Blimey thats a new one, you think that up all by yourself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 12, 2022, 05:57:55 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 12, 2022, 05:47:07 PM
Blimey thats a new one, you think that up all by yourself.
It’s a dumb theory I’ve heard on here once or twice by those who think CB is more likely to be a witness than a suspect.  Know anyone like that do you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 12, 2022, 06:02:52 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 12, 2022, 05:57:55 PM
It’s a dumb theory I’ve heard on here once or twice by those who think CB is more likely to be a witness than a suspect.  Know anyone like that do you?

 I might have mentioned the photography bit, but the bin ? and GM ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 06:19:07 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 12, 2022, 05:35:46 PM
A more fertile imagination more like.

I regard those who still think Maddie died in an accident in the apartment as more than a bit dim... So their opinions are of no significance to me.  We may well have the ECHR vetdict this year which will show I do have a better understanding than my criticd
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 12, 2022, 06:21:28 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 12, 2022, 06:19:07 PM
I regard those who still think Maddie died in an accident in the apartment as more than a bit dim... So their opinions are of no significance to me.  We may well have the ECHR vetdict this year which will show I do have a better understanding than my criticd

And I'm gonna win the lottery.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 12, 2022, 06:32:55 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 12, 2022, 06:02:52 PM
I might have mentioned the photography bit, but the bin ? and GM ?
Ah, yes I recall now.  You believe CB may have stumbled across a child’s corpse im some random hiding place and decided to photograph it and keep quiet about it rather than going to the police and getting fame and fortune for being the guy who  found the most famous missing child in the world. As I said, a very fertile imagination/rocks in head delete as applicable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 09:34:52 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 12, 2022, 06:32:55 PM
Ah, yes I recall now.  You believe CB may have stumbled across a child’s corpse im some random hiding place and decided to photograph it and keep quiet about it rather than going to the police and getting fame and fortune for being the guy who  found the most famous missing child in the world. As I said, a very fertile imagination/rocks in head delete as applicable.

Madeleine McCann is probably the most famous missing child in the world but that doesn't mean she's the most important one. Her fame arose for other reasons.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 13, 2022, 09:51:32 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 12, 2022, 06:32:55 PM
Ah, yes I recall now.  You believe CB may have stumbled across a child’s corpse im some random hiding place and decided to photograph it and keep quiet about it rather than going to the police and getting fame and fortune for being the guy who  found the most famous missing child in the world. As I said, a very fertile imagination/rocks in head delete as applicable.

Using that as a benchmark, why didn't CB's bestest mates dob him in it way back in 2008 when the supposed confession was heard over a pint .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 10:01:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 09:34:52 AM
Madeleine McCann is probably the most famous missing child in the world but that doesn't mean she's the most important one. Her fame arose for other reasons.

She's the most famous missing child in the world... Nothing to do with importance... Every missing child is important
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2022, 10:02:20 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 13, 2022, 09:51:32 AM
Using that as a benchmark, why didn't CB's bestest mates dob him in it way back in 2008 when the supposed confession was heard over a pint .
Maybe because they were his "bestest" mates and thought he was bullshitting?  Had they seen the rape video at this point?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 10:06:06 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 10:02:20 AM
Maybe because they were his "bestest" mates and thought he was bullshitting?  Had they seen the rape video at this point?

He was. That much is obvious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 10:22:50 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 10:02:20 AM
Maybe because they were his "bestest" mates and thought he was bullshitting?  Had they seen the rape video at this point?

They saw the video (allegedly) when they raided his house when he was in jail for stealing diesel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 10:34:45 AM
It's not simply believing things are true because Wolters says so.  What some don't seem to understand is it's a matter of looking at the situation in it's entirety.... not simplistically
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 10:36:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 10:22:50 AM
They saw the video (allegedly) when they raided his house when he was in jail for stealing diesel.

How would they know the rape video existed.. We know because the victim said so
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 10:39:08 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 10:22:50 AM
They saw the video (allegedly) when they raided his house when he was in jail for stealing diesel.

Do you understand that the only reason CB was caught for the rape was that the description given by his friends matched the details of the reported rape precisely.. Perhaps you think that was just a coincidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2022, 10:45:13 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 09:34:52 AM
Madeleine McCann is probably the most famous missing child in the world but that doesn't mean she's the most important one. Her fame arose for other reasons.
Firstly, I never claimed she was "the most important" one. Secondly, who is the most important missing child and why aren't you spending all your time trying to solve the mystery of their disappearance instead of the "not as important" Madeleine McCann? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 10:45:55 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 10:34:45 AM
It's not simply believing things are true because Wolters says so.  What some don't seem to understand is it's a matter of looking at the situation in it's entirety.... not simplistically

Yeah, if you ignore the 3 times moving bedroom door, meaning the abductor spent about half hour in the apartment, plus the complete incredulity of Kate's curtains, then Brueckner's confession becomes credible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 10:47:25 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 10:22:50 AM
They saw the video (allegedly) when they raided his house when he was in jail for stealing diesel.

They didn't find the Maddie video though, but Wolters has, just have faith.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 10:55:05 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 10:45:55 AM
Yeah, if you ignore the 3 times moving bedroom door, meaning the abductor spent about half hour in the apartment, plus the complete incredulity of Kate's curtains, then Brueckner's confession becomes credible.

LOL
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2022, 11:10:03 AM
Yeah, the three times moving door and the whooshing curtains, I bet they give the Met, the BKA and the PJ sleepless nights.   *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 11:14:54 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 11:10:03 AM
Yeah, the three times moving door and the whooshing curtains, I bet they give the Met, the BKA and the PJ sleepless nights.   *%87

Brueckner isn't accused of 'the abduction'. Just the murder apparently.
Probably because there's no evidence of abduction & only Brueckner's weak as piss murder confession.
That would explain why he's never being charged with either abduction, or murder, or both.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 11:19:58 AM

Maybe the 3 investigative forces believe there was a different abductor, who sold Maddie to Brueckner, so he could murder her, then go back to selling weed & abstaining from anymore murder thereafter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 13, 2022, 11:21:19 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 10:39:08 AM
Do you understand that the only reason CB was caught for the rape was that the description given by his friends matched the details of the reported rape precisely.. Perhaps you think that was just a coincidence

Its obvious that type of detail does not exist in the Madeleine case and therefore it'll never be solved imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 11:24:09 AM
Despite the success of this  organised abduction & murder, no children were ever abducted from Europe's holiday apartments since.
Strange case, this one off preplanned abduction & murder.
Maybe one was enough, then move on to something else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 11:26:44 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 13, 2022, 11:21:19 AM
Its obvious that type of detail does not exist in the Madeleine case and therefore it'll never be solved imo.

Not obvious at all... CB may well have kept a diary chronicling his cases and of course a video
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 11:28:07 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 11:24:09 AM
Despite the success of this  organised abduction & murder, no children were ever abducted from Europe's holiday apartments since.
Strange case, this one off preplanned abduction & murder.
Maybe one was enough, then move on to something else.

Anymore children disappeared in Kos.. Only Ben
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 11:29:21 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 11:26:44 AM
Not obvious at all... CB may well have kept a diary chronicling his cases and of course a video

Now we have to imagine a diary, aswell as video evidence, & an abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 11:29:59 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 11:28:07 AM
Anymore children disappeared in Kos.. Only Ben

Does Brueckner have an Alibi?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 11:30:49 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 11:29:21 AM
Now we have to imagine a diary, aswell as video evidence, & an abduction.

Imagined nothing.... But I can't be bothered to explain
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 11:32:24 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 10:39:08 AM
Do you understand that the only reason CB was caught for the rape was that the description given by his friends matched the details of the reported rape precisely.. Perhaps you think that was just a coincidence

How do you know?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 11:33:39 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 11:30:49 AM
Imagined nothing.... But I can't be bothered to explain

I know, I'm going to look a bit foolish when Brueckner is found guilty on the strength of all this imaginary evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 11:39:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 11:32:24 AM
How do you know?

You mean you are not aware..

The details of the rape from the video were given to the PJ.
They looked back through their records of reported rapes and found one that matched... The one that had a recovered pubic hair.  I would think you know the rest
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2022, 11:42:41 AM
Sceptics can attack and sneer as much as they like, they still obviously can't get their heads around the fact that three police forces are treating Madeleine's disappearance as a case of abduction.  It must really do their heads in.  How do they explain it to themselves?  They can't without inventing ridiculous conspiracy theories.  Oh well, their problem. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 11:47:57 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 11:42:41 AM
Sceptics can attack and sneer as much as they like, they still obviously can't get their heads around the fact that three police forces are treating Madeleine's disappearance as a case of abduction.  It must really do their heads in.  How do they explain it to themselves?  They can't without inventing ridiculous conspiracy theories.  Oh well, their problem.

Yes, & the 3 investigative forces have made huge progress in finally catching the abductor.
Just got to prove there actually was an abduction in the first place now, then they can wrap things up.
Shouldn't be too difficult.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2022, 12:14:00 PM
Using sceptic logic it's possible to deduce that as the PJ spent the best part of a year investigating Madeleine's parents and failing to press charges against them that obviously this was not a case of accidental death and cover up.  Glad we've got that one sorted at long last.  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 12:23:28 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 11:42:41 AM
Sceptics can attack and sneer as much as they like, they still obviously can't get their heads around the fact that three police forces are treating Madeleine's disappearance as a case of abduction.  It must really do their heads in.  How do they explain it to themselves?  They can't without inventing ridiculous conspiracy theories.  Oh well, their problem.

It all stems from our wonderful Met police managing to identify the crime. I was listening to one of my favourite comedians this morning; Alfie Moore, a retired policeman. He often makes fun of the Met police; this morning's gem was 'I once applied to join the Met but I got one of the questions right so they didn't want me'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfie_Moore_(comedian)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2022, 12:26:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 12:23:28 PM
It all stems from our wonderful Met police managing to identify the crime. I was listening to one of my favourite comedians this morning; Alfie Moore, a retired policeman. He often makes fun of the Met police; this morning's gem was 'I once applied to join the Met but I got one of the questions right so they didn't want me'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfie_Moore_(comedian)
attack and sneer, attack and sneer, it's all you have left in this case, keep it up, I know it makes you feel better.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 12:39:33 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 12:26:08 PM
attack and sneer, attack and sneer, it's all you have left in this case, keep it up, I know it makes you feel better.

Thanks, if you insist, I will.

How's the case against Brueckner going?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 12:41:58 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 11:39:38 AM
You mean you are not aware..

The details of the rape from the video were given to the PJ.
They looked back through their records of reported rapes and found one that matched... The one that had a recovered pubic hair.  I would think you know the rest

Were they?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 12:44:17 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 12:26:08 PM
attack and sneer, attack and sneer, it's all you have left in this case, keep it up, I know it makes you feel better.

What's your excuse for attacking and sneering?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 12:50:20 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 12:41:58 PM
Were they?

you obviously arent up to date.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2022, 01:24:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 12:44:17 PM
What's your excuse for attacking and sneering?
I don't need an excuse.  I have no problem in understanding why three police forces are treating Madeleine's disappearance as an abduction.  You do however, and that leaves you with only attacking and sneering when faced with this uncomfortable (for you) truth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 01:57:17 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 01:24:57 PM
I don't need an excuse.  I have no problem in understanding why three police forces are treating Madeleine's disappearance as an abduction.  You do however, and that leaves you with only attacking and sneering when faced with this uncomfortable (for you) truth.

I have no difficulty in understanding why they aren't getting anywhere, your side do however, which is why there is the need for the imaginary photo & now an imaginary diary entry about Maddie, being somehow inadmissible as evidence.
Still, let's hope they find an imaginary witness to help bolster the case. Oh wait no, we had that one the other week already, when someone must have come forward saying they saw Brueckner standing outside the front of 5a.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 02:12:57 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 12:50:20 PM
you obviously arent up to date.

I haven't seen the details you appear to have access to. Please share your source(s)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 02:20:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 02:12:57 PM
I haven't seen the details you appear to have access to. Please share your source(s)

cant be bothered...draw what inference you wish...doesnt matter in the slightest.  how e;se would the PJ have pinpointed that particualar rape...where the matched hair was
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 02:39:16 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 01:57:17 PM
I have no difficulty in understanding why they aren't getting anywhere, your side do however, which is why there is the need for the imaginary photo & now an imaginary diary entry about Maddie, being somehow inadmissible as evidence.
Still, let's hope they find an imaginary witness to help bolster the case. Oh wait no, we had that one the other week already, when someone must have come forward saying they saw Brueckner standing outside the front of 5a.

I was referring to the attacks and sneers you regularly aim at other members. I was quoting someone else; an uninvolved ex policeman who clearly doesn't idolise the Met like some do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2022, 03:15:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 02:39:16 PM
I was referring to the attacks and sneers you regularly aim at other members. I was quoting someone else; an uninvolved ex policeman who clearly doesn't idolise the Met like some do.
LOL, thanks for acknowledging Wonderfulspam’s attacks and sneers, they were a perfect example of what I was talking about.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2022, 03:29:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 02:39:16 PM
I was referring to the attacks and sneers you regularly aim at other members. I was quoting someone else; an uninvolved ex policeman who clearly doesn't idolise the Met like some do.
Do you think the Met are incompetent and stupid then?  What about the BKA?  Incompetent or corrupt, or something else?  How about the PJ?  Easily led?  Political interference?   
Which police force would you trust to do the right thing and start investigating parental involvement again?  Or perhaps they are all bent and stupid and perhaps we should leave it to armchair detectives such as yourself, eh?  Never mind that you don’t have access to all the evidence and information pertaining to the case and to CB, you clearly know better than these three rubbish police forces, right? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 13, 2022, 03:33:09 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 03:15:32 PM
LOL, thanks for acknowledging Wonderfulspam’s attacks and sneers, they were a perfect example of what I was talking about.

I thought Gunit had put that comment in the wrong place.  LOL.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 04:31:23 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 03:29:55 PM
Do you think the Met are incompetent and stupid then?  What about the BKA?  Incompetent or corrupt, or something else?  How about the PJ?  Easily led?  Political interference?   
Which police force would you trust to do the right thing and start investigating parental involvement again?  Or perhaps they are all bent and stupid and perhaps we should leave it to armchair detectives such as yourself, eh?  Never mind that you don’t have access to all the evidence and information pertaining to the case and to CB, you clearly know better than these three rubbish police forces, right?

Get back to us when the concrete evidence 3 police forces have convicts Brueckner, won't you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 06:54:09 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 03:29:55 PM
Do you think the Met are incompetent and stupid then?  What about the BKA?  Incompetent or corrupt, or something else?  How about the PJ?  Easily led?  Political interference?   
Which police force would you trust to do the right thing and start investigating parental involvement again?  Or perhaps they are all bent and stupid and perhaps we should leave it to armchair detectives such as yourself, eh?  Never mind that you don’t have access to all the evidence and information pertaining to the case and to CB, you clearly know better than these three rubbish police forces, right?

Are you sneering at me? All police forces make mistakes at times.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2022, 08:35:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 06:54:09 PM
Are you sneering at me? All police forces make mistakes at times.
And here we have a situation where you and your fellow sceptics believe that not one, not two, but THREE police forces in three different countries are all making the same mistake - investigating an abduction.  What are the chances eh?  How do you explain this incredibly bizarre turn of events to yourself?  Come on, you must have given it some thought…or maybe not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2022, 08:59:01 PM
So on the one hand we have a group of amateurs, with Case Files (incomplete) covering just one year of information and evidence gathering.  On the other hand we have a group of professionals with the Case Files (complete) plus a further 14 years worth of information and evidence gathering at their disposal.  Which group has the most credibilty?  Whose opinions count more?  What do we think?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 09:44:14 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 08:59:01 PM
So on the one hand we have a group of amateurs, with Case Files (incomplete) covering just one year of information and evidence gathering.  On the other hand we have a group of professionals with the Case Files (complete) plus a further 14 years worth of information and evidence gathering at their disposal.  Which group has the most credibilty?  Whose opinions count more?  What do we think?

Yes.. On one hand a bunch of crack cops.. On the other hand a bunch of crack pots...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 09:45:47 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 02:20:39 PM
cant be bothered...draw what inference you wish...doesnt matter in the slightest.  how e;se would the PJ have pinpointed that particualar rape...where the matched hair was

Is that because it's guesswork, like your photographic evidence?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 09:53:42 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 08:35:45 PM
And here we have a situation where you and your fellow sceptics believe that not one, not two, but THREE police forces in three different countries are all making the same mistake - investigating an abduction.  What are the chances eh?  How do you explain this incredibly bizarre turn of events to yourself?  Come on, you must have given it some thought…or maybe not.

I wonder why supporters spend so much time questioning how and why 'sceptics' reached their conclusions? There's no point in explaining anything to them because they seem incapable of understanding other points of view.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 13, 2022, 09:56:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 09:45:47 PM
Is that because it's guesswork, like your photographic evidence?


No it's because I don't see proving it you you is of any importance..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2022, 10:40:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 13, 2022, 09:53:42 PM
I wonder why supporters spend so much time questioning how and why 'sceptics' reached their conclusions? There's no point in explaining anything to them because they seem incapable of understanding other points of view.
So do you believe sceptics generally have more credible opinions and a better understanding of the case than the three police forces currently investigating an abduction?  I’m very keen to understand your point of view on this   ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2022, 11:15:00 PM
I would sincerely like a sceptic to explain why they think they have a better understanding of this case than those professionals who have the entire 15 years worth of case files at their disposal plus direct access to all the people and places involved in this case.  Please try and educate me.  What is it you can see that the professionals cannot?  What gives you greater insight than they have?   You know that abduction is virtually impossible and yet the police don’t see it that way, so how can they with all the evidence  at their disposal be so blind and yet sceptics with only a very incomplete grasp of all the evidence know so much better? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 13, 2022, 11:37:03 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 11:15:00 PM
I would sincerely like a sceptic to explain why they think they have a better understanding of this case than those professionals who have the entire 15 years worth of case files at their disposal plus direct access to all the people and places involved in this case.  Please try and educate me.  What is it you can see that the professionals cannot?  What gives you greater insight than they have?   You know that abduction is virtually impossible and yet the police don’t see it that way, so how can they with all the evidence  at their disposal be so blind and yet sceptics with only a very incomplete grasp of all the evidence know so much better?

The evidence you refer to is highly suspect. I don't believe for a second that Wolters has anything of consequence in relation to Madeline's disappearance. It's all bluster and spin in my view.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 11:37:56 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 11:15:00 PM
I would sincerely like a sceptic to explain why they think they have a better understanding of this case than those professionals who have the entire 15 years worth of case files at their disposal plus direct access to all the people and places involved in this case.  Please try and educate me.  What is it you can see that the professionals cannot? What gives you greater insight than they have?   You know that abduction is virtually impossible and yet the police don’t see it that way, so how can they with all the evidence  at their disposal be so blind and yet sceptics with only a very incomplete grasp of all the evidence know so much better?

Well lets look at that shall we.

2 years ago Wolters, in possession of all the evidence, said that Brueckner murdered Maddie & he could prove as much.

I said no he couldn't, & 2 years later I'm still right about that.

So yeah, get back to me when Wolters proves me wrong really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 13, 2022, 11:41:46 PM
The fact that Wolters cannot share the details of Brückner's alleged involvement in Madeleine's murder with her parents goes against the code of good policing. Says it all really imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 13, 2022, 11:45:29 PM
Quote from: John on June 13, 2022, 11:41:46 PM
The fact that Wolters cannot share the details of Brückner's alleged involvement in Madeleine's murder with her parents goes against the code of good policing. Says it all really imo.

It speaks volumes that the murder evidence hasn't been shared with Maddie's parents.
I suppose it's a bit difficult to disclose nothing really, flimsy confessions aside.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 13, 2022, 11:54:18 PM
Quote from: John on June 13, 2022, 11:37:03 PM
The evidence you refer to is highly suspect. I don't believe for a second that Wolters has anything of consequence in relation to Madeline's disappearance. It's all bluster and spin in my view.
I wasn’t specifically referring to evidence against Brückner, it was a more general point- how do you know better than the police how good or otherwise the evidence is, out of interest?  Did they ask you to evaluate it?  Your reply does not explain why sceptics know better about what happened to Madeleine than the investigating teams on the case.  Perhaps you could enlighten me?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 12:04:04 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 11:54:18 PM
I wasn’t specifically referring to evidence against Brückner, it was a more general point- how do you know better than the police how good or otherwise the evidence is, out of interest?  Did they ask you to evaluate it?

So you think the 3 police forces could be wrong about Brueckner?

That there might be some other abductor/murderer out there the abduction evidence should have led them to instead?

It's got a broad scope this abduction evidence, it can point to pretty much anyone other than the McCanns.

I wonder what it is?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 12:48:12 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 10:40:14 PM
So do you believe sceptics generally have more credible opinions and a better understanding of the case than the three police forces currently investigating an abduction?  I’m very keen to understand your point of view on this   ?{)(**

Interestingly, Sceptics said Jane Tanner never saw an abductor, & we were right about that. Sceptics also said Brueckner didn't do it & 3 police forces can't prove he did, & sceptics said the police couldn't prove abduction at all, & 15 years later we're still right about that.
So, pretty good track record for the sceptics so far.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 14, 2022, 12:58:26 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 10, 2022, 06:25:56 PM
How can my computer manage to produce an image of the road behind our house ?  An image of the road free from vehicles?   An image that has never been photographed by any of us?

My husband has confirmed this, that no such photograph ever existed .  It is not stored in my computer, unlessi it has been magicked in, as several photos pertinent to the case have been magicked was out.  Completely vanished, at someone elses hand.

We have security cameras but none would be able to view the road from that angle.


It was placed on my screen as a threat, but it will not stop me.

Hubby didn't like it when I told him about the photo and agreed that he had never taken  such a photo.   He lay awake worrying about it, then suddenly remembered that he had taken one, so apologies about that.

However, when you have recently made a contravertial point that some on here may strongly dislike, it is not nice to have a photo flash up that says "We know where you live".  I did know that certain people have worked ot where I live and also know that my house has been visited by prying persons.  A well known comic  was peering over the high wall.   This comic has interesting connections.   Also damage has been attempted and achieved.


I have a list of things that have happened to me/us and some involve attemts at killing me, it seems.



I am leaving it there, but SY are aware of a number of them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 06:11:10 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 13, 2022, 10:40:14 PM
So do you believe sceptics generally have more credible opinions and a better understanding of the case than the three police forces currently investigating an abduction?  I’m very keen to understand your point of view on this   ?{)(**

Can anyone explain how a case that was archived by the Portuguese as an unknown crime in 2008 became a known abduction in 2011 when Grange became involved?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 07:12:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 06:11:10 AM
Can anyone explain how a case that was archived by the Portuguese as an unknown crime in 2008 became a known abduction in 2011 when Grange became involved?
Yes I can, but first I’d like you to actually answer my questions, then I will answer yours, that’s only fair and courteous is it not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 07:22:16 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 06:11:10 AM
Can anyone explain how a case that was archived by the Portuguese as an unknown crime in 2008 became a known abduction in 2011 when Grange became involved?

It is a curious one, considering the abductors confession didn't materialise until 2017.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 07:53:09 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 07:22:16 AM
It is a curious one, considering the abductors confession didn't materialise until 2017.

Exactly. The PJ left three options on the table when they archived the case, but Grange only ever concentrated on one of them. When the remit was released that confirmed what the purpose of Grange was imo. They were being funded to investigate 'the abduction'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 08:21:31 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 07:53:09 AM
Exactly. The PJ left three options on the table when they archived the case, but Grange only ever concentrated on one of them. When the remit was released that confirmed what the purpose of Grange was imo. They were being funded to investigate 'the abduction'.
How do you explain the fact that all subsequent arguidos in this case have been made arguidos by the PJ on the basis of strong indications of the practice of a crime, and none of them was the parents or their friends?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 08:24:41 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 07:12:41 AM
Yes I can, but first I’d like you to actually answer my questions, then I will answer yours, that’s only fair and courteous is it not?

My post answers your question as to why, unlike you, I'm not prepared to believe in Grange. The Germans are investigating Brueckner because he was handed to them on a plate. The Portuguese probably made him an arguido to avoid the statute of limitations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 14, 2022, 08:27:56 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 14, 2022, 12:58:26 AM
Hubby didn't like it when I told him about the photo and agreed that he had never taken  such a photo.   He lay awake worrying about it, then suddenly remembered that he had taken one, so apologies about that.

However, when you have recently made a contravertial point that some on here may strongly dislike, it is not nice to have a photo flash up that says "We know where you live".  I did know that certain people have worked ot where I live and also know that my house has been visited by prying persons.  A well known comic  was peering over the high wall.   This comic has interesting connections.   Also damage has been attempted and achieved.


I have a list of things that have happened to me/us and some involve attemts at killing me, it seems.



I am leaving it there, but SY are aware of a number of them.
Thank gawd for that!   Hope hubby didn't hire a plane from which to bombard your back garden with adders or peered over your boundary wall wearing a Freddie Starr mask too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 08:39:22 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 08:21:31 AM
How do you explain the fact that all subsequent arguidos in this case have been made arguidos by the PJ on the basis of strong indications of the practice of a crime, and none of them was the parents or their friends?

I don't know what grounds were used to create these arguidos. Do you have a cite? My understanding was that the PJ didn't have any questions for these people, they were asking questions on behalf of Grange. Questions which, by their nature, could only be asked of arguidos.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 08:50:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 08:24:41 AM
My post answers your question as to why, unlike you, I'm not prepared to believe in Grange. The Germans are investigating Brueckner because he was handed to them on a plate. The Portuguese probably made him an arguido to avoid the statute of limitations.
No it doesn’t.  Here is my question again, better luck on you next attempt

“do you believe sceptics generally have more credible opinions and a better understanding of the case than the three police forces currently investigating an abduction?”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 14, 2022, 08:52:42 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 06:11:10 AM
Can anyone explain how a case that was archived by the Portuguese as an unknown crime in 2008 became a known abduction in 2011 when Grange became involved?

Oh come on.   Any experienced Police force would have ruled out the nonsense Amaral left behind.   Gerry was sitting at the table when the alert was made not running around trying to find somewhere to hide Madeleine.   There was no 100% DNA of Madeleine in the car.   To say they were driving around with a defrosting corpse in their car having retrieved it from somewhere no one had found it,  is absolutely ridiculous.   It could be comedy gold if it wasn't for the fact this is  a missing beloved daughter of the McCann's he was talking about.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 14, 2022, 08:54:34 AM
Thank god for OG plus the German Police now and the Portuguese.   Hopefully they will now end the torment for the McCann's and family.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 08:56:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 08:39:22 AM
I don't know what grounds were used to create these arguidos. Do you have a cite? My understanding was that the PJ didn't have any questions for these people, they were asking questions on behalf of Grange. Questions which, by their nature, could only be asked of arguidos.
So you agree that the PJ is co-operating with the Germans and British authorities in making it possible for suspected abductors to be questioned?  Why would they not protect the interests of their own people (some were PT nationals) if they felt there was little or no likelihood that Madeleine had been abducted?  Is Portugal such a weak entity that it just goes along with whatever the British and Germans instruct them to do?    In order to be made an arguido it is necessary for there to be strong indications of the practice of a crime - do you think these conditions were blatantly flouted just to placate foreign police investigations?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 09:01:28 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 06:11:10 AM
Can anyone explain how a case that was archived by the Portuguese as an unknown crime in 2008 became a known abduction in 2011 when Grange became involved?
I've explained it many times... You just refuse to accept the truth
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 09:11:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 08:24:41 AM
My post answers your question as to why, unlike you, I'm not prepared to believe in Grange. The Germans are investigating Brueckner because he was handed to them on a plate. The Portuguese probably made him an arguido to avoid the statute of limitations.

In the same way Levi Belfield was handed to Sutton on a plate. I seem to remember it being said many times that this case would not be solved unless someone talked.
Now Wolters says he has concrete evidence... You dont believe him because you can't accept you have been totally wrong all along... And are still hanging on by your fingernails
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 09:15:46 AM
Quote from: John on June 13, 2022, 11:37:03 PM
The evidence you refer to is highly suspect. I don't believe for a second that Wolters has anything of consequence in relation to Madeline's disappearance. It's all bluster and spin in my view.

I think you are going to look very foolish.... But at least you have the conviction to state your opinion. I don't think for one minute Wolters would lie.. And looking at the big picture I'm certain he has the evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 09:18:40 AM
Over the years I’ve no doubt that dozens if not hundreds of people have been “handed on a plate” to the police, either by an acquaintance dobbing them in, or by people giving false confessions (for attention because of some psychiatric condition or attention seeking)..  None of them has become subject to such intense scrutiny as CB.  There must be a good reason for that, unless sceptics feel that the German authorities enjoy wasting their time and money on nailing random citizens for crimes they didn’t commit?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 09:39:48 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 09:15:46 AM
I think you are going to look very foolish.... But at least you have the conviction to state your opinion. I don't think for one minute Wolters would lie.. And looking at the big picture I'm certain he has the evidence

Just no charges though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 09:40:51 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 09:18:40 AM
Over the years I’ve no doubt that dozens if not hundreds of people have been “handed on a plate” to the police, either by an acquaintance dobbing them in, or by people giving false confessions (for attention because of some psychiatric condition or attention seeking)..  None of them has become subject to such intense scrutiny as CB.  There must be a good reason for that, unless sceptics feel that the German authorities enjoy wasting their time and money on nailing random citizens for crimes they didn’t commit?

Well, they're not having much luck nailing him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 14, 2022, 09:41:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 06:11:10 AM
Can anyone explain how a case that was archived by the Portuguese as an unknown crime in 2008 became a known abduction in 2011 when Grange became involved?

Exactly, PJ Files legal summary.

Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 09:42:03 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 09:11:00 AM
In the same way Levi Belfield was handed to Sutton on a plate. I seem to remember it being said many times that this case would not be solved unless someone talked.
Now Wolters says he has concrete evidence... You dont believe him because you can't accept you have been totally wrong all along... And are still hanging on by your fingernails

Yes, because Brueckner is going to be charged any day now, right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 09:42:31 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 08:52:42 AM
Oh come on.   Any experienced Police force would have ruled out the nonsense Amaral left behind.   Gerry was sitting at the table when the alert was made not running around trying to find somewhere to hide Madeleine.   There was no 100% DNA of Madeleine in the car.   To say they were driving around with a defrosting corpse in their car having retrieved it from somewhere no one had found it,  is absolutely ridiculous.   It could be comedy gold if it wasn't for the fact this is  a missing beloved daughter of the McCann's he was talking about.

So SY decided to ignore the findings of the Portuguese investigation just because it was nonsense? That's how they decided that the crime was abduction? No evidence needed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 14, 2022, 09:43:34 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 09:40:51 AM
Well, they're not having much luck nailing him.

Patience, Wolters is certain, but its alleged he's going for less serious offences first ( not for the victims though) murder is low on priority unless the evidence doesn't exist of course .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 14, 2022, 09:46:55 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 09:18:40 AM
Over the years I’ve no doubt that dozens if not hundreds of people have been “handed on a plate” to the police, either by an acquaintance dobbing them in, or by people giving false confessions (for attention because of some psychiatric condition or attention seeking)..  None of them has become subject to such intense scrutiny as CB.  There must be a good reason for that, unless sceptics feel that the German authorities enjoy wasting their time and money on nailing random citizens for crimes they didn’t commit?

Well its not working, Wolters in on record on tape on CH5, telling the world CB cannot be placed in Luz on the night of 3/05/2007 .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 09:47:17 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 09:01:28 AM
I've explained it many times... You just refuse to accept the truth

Your explanations, if I remember rightly, were speculative.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 09:49:13 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 09:11:00 AM
In the same way Levi Belfield was handed to Sutton on a plate. I seem to remember it being said many times that this case would not be solved unless someone talked.
Now Wolters says he has concrete evidence... You dont believe him because you can't accept you have been totally wrong all along... And are still hanging on by your fingernails

there aint never gonna be any charges, whilst supporters come up with every excuse under the sun for why the concrete evidence, imaginary photo, imaginary diary now too, are inadmissible, & we're the ones hanging on by our fingernails  @)(++(*

The cope here is hilarious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 14, 2022, 09:49:29 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 09:42:31 AM
So SY decided to ignore the findings of the Portuguese investigation just because it was nonsense? That's how they decided that the crime was abduction? No evidence needed?

They ruled out Amaral theory and did their own investigation.   The evidence of course was the fact that Madeleine was missing and no where to be found.   Abducted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 14, 2022, 09:55:02 AM
Mr Redwood said one reading of the evidence is that the kidnapping had “the hallmarks of a pre-planned abduction that would undoubtedly have involved reconnaissance”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 09:56:00 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 09:55:02 AM
Mr Redwood said one reading of the evidence is that the kidnapping had “the hallmarks of a pre-planned abduction that would undoubtedly have involved reconnaissance”.

What were the other readings?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 09:56:18 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 09:47:17 AM
Your explanations, if I remember rightly, were speculative.

It's not important if you dismiss my explanation... It's based on evidence and logic.

You seem to want absolute 100% proof of things in this case but you accept opinion in all other cases... That's, hypocritical
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 14, 2022, 09:57:05 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 14, 2022, 09:43:34 AM
Patience, Wolters is certain, but its alleged he's going for less serious offences first ( not for the victims though) murder is low on priority unless the evidence doesn't exist of course .

Yes patience,  Wolters said a while back these other crimes would be dealt with first.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 14, 2022, 10:02:15 AM
Man seen around 5a before Madeleine's abduction -


He was 30 to 35, thin, with short hair, shaving spots on his face and was wearing a black leather jacket. Another witness saw a similar-looking man in the resort.


CB was known to wear a black leather jacket.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 10:04:40 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 10:02:15 AM
Man seen around 5a before Madeleine's abduction -


He was 30 to 35, thin, with short hair, shaving spots on his face and was wearing a black leather jacket. Another witness saw a similar-looking man in the resort.


CB was known to wear a black leather jacket.

Is it a crime for men to wear leather jackets?

Lets hope so, maybe Wolters can nail him for that, because he won't be nailing him for any abduction or murder anytime ever.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 14, 2022, 10:06:25 AM
Lia Silva -


She said: 'I didn't know his name at the time but he was a very good friend of Nicole. He was an ugly man who always wore a black leather jacket.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 10:06:42 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 09:49:29 AM
They ruled out Amaral theory and did their own investigation.   The evidence of course was the fact that Madeleine was missing and no where to be found.   Abducted

So every child who's missing and can't be found must have been abducted?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 10:07:04 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 10:06:25 AM
Lia Silva -


She said: 'I didn't know his name at the time but he was a very good friend of Nicole. He was an ugly man who always wore a black leather jacket.

The evidence is piling up isn't it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 10:09:41 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 09:55:02 AM
Mr Redwood said one reading of the evidence is that the kidnapping had “the hallmarks of a pre-planned abduction that would undoubtedly have involved reconnaissance”.

Another reading of the evidence is that there was no kidnapping, but he wasn't tasked with investigating that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 10:15:11 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 10:06:42 AM
So every child who's missing and can't be found must have been abducted?

You have to look at all the evidence in the case to decide what most likely happened.
I cant believe the level of ignorance your post shows
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 10:17:52 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 10:06:25 AM
Lia Silva -


She said: 'I didn't know his name at the time but he was a very good friend of Nicole. He was an ugly man who always wore a black leather jacket.

I think she was repeating what she'd been told, because;

Silva, who is Portuguese but bizarrely speaks with an Australian accent, said she had never met Brueckner when he stayed at her home.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11585.975
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 10:21:20 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 14, 2022, 09:46:55 AM
Well its not working, Wolters in on record on tape on CH5, telling the world CB cannot be placed in Luz on the night of 3/05/2007 .
so does that mean Madeleine was not abducted?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 10:21:55 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 10:15:11 AM
You have to look at all the evidence in the case to decide what most likely happened.
I cant believe the level of ignorance your post shows

Not my ignorance. Who within the Met looked at all the evidence and decided what most likely happened then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 14, 2022, 10:25:39 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 10:06:42 AM
So every child who's missing and can't be found must have been abducted?

Obviously they looked into any other scenarios.   How do you think the case of Jessica and Holly was deduced?   They disappeared couldn't be found.   They were looking at abduction.   Sarah Payne disappeared couldn't be found abduction.
There are many more.   Though you seem to think Madeleine was not abducted so how do you come to that conclusion?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 14, 2022, 10:27:30 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 10:17:52 AM
I think she was repeating what she'd been told, because;

Silva, who is Portuguese but bizarrely speaks with an Australian accent, said she had never met Brueckner when he stayed at her home.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11585.975

She never met him but she saw him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 14, 2022, 10:40:51 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 10:21:20 AM
so does that mean Madeleine was not abducted?
It's means exactly what it says  CB cannot be placed in Luz on the night of 3/05/2007, so what are the odds he wasn't  involved in an alleged abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 10:45:10 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 10:25:39 AM
Obviously they looked into any other scenarios.   How do you think the case of Jessica and Holly was deduced?   They disappeared couldn't be found.   They were looking at abduction.   Sarah Payne disappeared couldn't be found abduction.
There are many more.   Though you seem to think Madeleine was not abducted so how do you come to that conclusion?

So you believe that Grange looked into other scenarios? Do you have any evidence that they did? I don't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 11:18:31 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 10:25:39 AM
Obviously they looked into any other scenarios.   How do you think the case of Jessica and Holly was deduced?   They disappeared couldn't be found.   They were looking at abduction.   Sarah Payne disappeared couldn't be found abduction.
There are many more.  Though you seem to think Madeleine was not abducted so how do you come to that conclusion?
Don't expect a straight answer to that one!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 11:20:01 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 14, 2022, 10:40:51 AM
It's means exactly what it says  CB cannot be placed in Luz on the night of 3/05/2007, so what are the odds he wasn't  involved in an alleged abduction.
I don't know why don't you have a go at calculating them?  So CB cannot be definitively proven to have been in Luz that night.  So does that mean Madeleine was not abducted?  Is that a logical conclusion iyo?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 11:22:10 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 11:18:31 AM
Don't expect a straight answer to that one!

How about the total absence of any credible, tangible, reliable or verifiable abduction evidence.

That do?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 11:23:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 10:45:10 AM
So you believe that Grange looked into other scenarios? Do you have any evidence that they did? I don't.
Yes.  They reviewed the PJ's case files in their entirety which (in case you have forgotten) were in  large part focussed on the parents.  How do you suppose they reviewed the case files without considering the possibility that the parents might have done it?  Or do you think that they privately believed the parents should be further investigated but were threatened or coerced or otherwise ordered into "looking the other way" by the High Ups?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 11:33:38 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 11:23:00 AM
Yes.  They reviewed the PJ's case files in their entirety which (in case you have forgotten) were in  large part focussed on the parents.  How do you suppose they reviewed the case files without considering the possibility that the parents might have done it?  Or do you think that they privately believed the parents should be further investigated but were threatened or coerced or otherwise ordered into "looking the other way" by the High Ups?

She asked for evidence, not speculation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 11:34:52 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 09:57:05 AM
Yes patience,  Wolters said a while back these other crimes would be dealt with first.

Did you hear that from Jon Clarke?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 11:37:10 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 10:21:20 AM
so does that mean Madeleine was not abducted?

Oh right, must be a different abductor out there somewhere then, while Wolters chases after the wrong guy.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 14, 2022, 11:45:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 10:09:41 AM
Another reading of the evidence is that there was no kidnapping, but he wasn't tasked with investigating that.

OG went right back to the beginning  what proof is there that they didn't investigate the McCann's?    I don't believe they didn't go over everything.   They didn't need to interview the McCann's that had already been done,  they saw the statements,  they poured over the evidence and came to their conclusion.   They are experts unlike you and I.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 11:47:30 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 11:45:00 AM
OG went right back to the beginning  what proof is there that they didn't investigate the McCann's?    I don't believe they didn't go over everything.   They didn't need to interview the McCann's that had already been done,  they saw the statements,  they poured over the evidence and came to their conclusion.   They are experts unlike you and I.

The twice translated unreliable statements, you mean?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 14, 2022, 11:48:12 AM
Some have the absolutely ridiculous belief that the McCann's were being protected by the 'establishment'.  What utter BS they were treated like any other  member of the public in Portugal.   Didn't stop them being made arguido's did it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 12:26:37 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 11:23:00 AM
Yes.  They reviewed the PJ's case files in their entirety which (in case you have forgotten) were in  large part focussed on the parents.  How do you suppose they reviewed the case files without considering the possibility that the parents might have done it?  Or do you think that they privately believed the parents should be further investigated but were threatened or coerced or otherwise ordered into "looking the other way" by the High Ups?

When was their remit written?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 12:30:34 PM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 11:45:00 AM
OG went right back to the beginning  what proof is there that they didn't investigate the McCann's?    I don't believe they didn't go over everything.   They didn't need to interview the McCann's that had already been done,  they saw the statements,  they poured over the evidence and came to their conclusion.   They are experts unlike you and I.

Quite. You 'believe' that they investigated the evidence against the McCanns and dismissed it, because you 'believe' that they are experts. You don't know that's what they did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 14, 2022, 12:53:39 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 11:20:01 AM
I don't know why don't you have a go at calculating them?  So CB cannot be definitively proven to have been in Luz that night.  So does that mean Madeleine was not abducted?  Is that a logical conclusion iyo?

My opinion is that Wolters says  CB cannot be placed in Luz on the night of 3/05/2007 , so logically he can't be the one who supposedly half inched Madeleine out of 5a . Now if you know of any one else in the frame I'm sure the reader would like to know who it is . Further more Wolters also says there is no forensics into the girls death, with which Wolters agrees with me that person/s unknown took Madeleine out of 5a without leaving a trace to her whereabouts .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 01:15:19 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 14, 2022, 12:53:39 PM
My opinion is that Wolters says  CB cannot be placed in Luz on the night of 3/05/2007 , so logically he can't be the one who supposedly half inched Madeleine out of 5a . Now if you know of any one else in the frame I'm sure the reader would like to know who it is . Further more Wolters also says there is no forensics into the girls death, with which Wolters agrees with me that person/s unknown took Madeleine out of 5a without leaving a trace to her whereabouts .

The other unknown abductor accomplice snatched Maddie, gave her to Brueckner so he could photograph & murder her.
Brueckner's diary entries for that week detail everything, just wait & see.
Shouldn't be much longer now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 01:34:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 12:26:37 PM
When was their remit written?
You don’t ask questions unless you already know the answer so why don’t you tell me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 01:35:35 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 14, 2022, 12:53:39 PM
My opinion is that Wolters says  CB cannot be placed in Luz on the night of 3/05/2007 , so logically he can't be the one who supposedly half inched Madeleine out of 5a . Now if you know of any one else in the frame I'm sure the reader would like to know who it is . Further more Wolters also says there is no forensics into the girls death, with which Wolters agrees with me that person/s unknown took Madeleine out of 5a without leaving a trace to her whereabouts .
Your logic is fk’ed, scuse my French.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 01:58:01 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 11:47:30 AM
The twice translated unreliable statements, you mean?

Which, nevertheless, both the McCanns and SY had translated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 02:33:32 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 14, 2022, 10:40:51 AM
It's means exactly what it says  CB cannot be placed in Luz on the night of 3/05/2007, so what are the odds he wasn't  involved in an alleged abduction.
Your logic is clearly totally flawed. CB may well have been in Luz that night
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 02:41:04 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 02:33:32 PM
Your logic is clearly totally flawed. CB may well have been in Luz that night
that's the polite way of putting it.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 02:43:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 01:58:01 PM
Which, nevertheless, both the McCanns and SY had translated.
Yes, and apparently found plenty of errors and discrepancies.  Have you been privy to the properly translated files?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 02:45:07 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 12:30:34 PM
Quite. You 'believe' that they investigated the evidence against the McCanns and dismissed it, because you 'believe' that they are experts. You don't know that's what they did.
Do you think it's wrong to believe the Met are the experts when it comes to investigating crimes, particular when comparing them to someone like yourself?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 14, 2022, 03:26:55 PM

I thought that Scotland Yard and The McCanns had The Files independently translated, each to their own cost.

During the questioning of Kate and Gerry McCann, independently, there was no check on the accuracy.

We still don't know what was asked or what was answered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 04:28:37 PM
To paraphrase Michael Gove "sceptics have had enough of experts".  Who needs 'em when Barrier, Spam and G-Unit are on the case.  We post amongst intellectual giants.  Truly humbled.   8(8-))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 04:31:07 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 04:28:37 PM
To paraphrase Michael Gove "sceptics have had enough of experts".  Who needs 'em when Barrier, Spam and G-Unit are on the case.  We post amongst intellectual giants.  Truly humbled.   8(8-))

We're all going to left looking pretty foolish when Brueckner is finally prosecuted, shouldn't be much longer now.  8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 14, 2022, 04:45:57 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 02:33:32 PM
Your logic is clearly totally flawed. CB may well have been in Luz that night

Wolters is on record as saying CB cannot be placed there, so its your logic that is screwed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 14, 2022, 04:50:15 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 14, 2022, 04:45:57 PM
Wolters is on record as saying CB cannot be placed there, so its your logic that is screwed.

Cannot be placed there does not mean that he wasn't there.

I had begun to hope that the understanding of The English Language was improving.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 04:55:08 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 14, 2022, 04:50:15 PM
Cannot be placed there does not mean that he wasn't there.

I had begun to hope that the understanding of The English Language was improving.

Do you have any evidence he was there though, or must we just presume so out of necessity?


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 05:07:12 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 14, 2022, 04:45:57 PM
Wolters is on record as saying CB cannot be placed there, so its your logic that is screwed.
LOL. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 14, 2022, 05:09:12 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 05:07:12 PM
LOL.

LOL is about it these days.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 05:09:21 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 14, 2022, 04:50:15 PM
Cannot be placed there does not mean that he wasn't there.

I had begun to hope that the understanding of The English Language was improving.
Sceptic logic = if the Germans can’t prove CB was in PdL on the night of 3rd May then it proved Madeleine wasn’t abducted.   *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 14, 2022, 05:13:46 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 05:09:21 PM
Sceptic logic = if the Germans can’t prove CB was in PdL on the night of 3rd May then it proved Madeleine wasn’t abducted.   *%87

LOL.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 14, 2022, 05:14:18 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 05:09:21 PM
Sceptic logic = if the Germans can’t prove CB was in PdL on the night of 3rd May then it proved Madeleine wasn’t abducted.   *%87

Better that than think the sick paedo did for Madeleine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 14, 2022, 05:14:48 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 14, 2022, 05:13:46 PM
LOL.

LOL, its catchy ain't it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 05:18:44 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 14, 2022, 04:45:57 PM
Wolters is on record as saying CB cannot be placed there, so its your logic that is screwed.

It's simple... Wolters doesn't have proof he was there.. That doesn't mean he wasn't
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 14, 2022, 05:19:16 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 14, 2022, 05:14:48 PM
LOL, its catchy ain't it.

Yay.  Good one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 05:23:05 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 04:55:08 PM
Do you have any evidence he was there though, or must we just presume so out of necessity?

Some people believe Tasmin Silence saw him in his leather jacket.

(https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/tasminman.gif)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 05:27:05 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 05:09:21 PM
Sceptic logic = if the Germans can’t prove CB was in PdL on the night of 3rd May then it proved Madeleine wasn’t abducted.   *%87

Well, if he wasn't in PDL, then he couldn't have abducted her, and even if he was in PDL, that still isn't evidence he abducted Maddie either.

But, considering the 3 investigative forces, evidence of abduction from apartment by a stranger, 15 years worth of work, one digestive system, etc , how could they possibly be wrong about Brueckner?  There can't be some other paedo abductor guy out there, surely, considering the sheer weight of irrefutable evidence against Brueckner & the zero evidence found against anyone else.

So, it must be Brueckner then, only it isn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 05:36:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 05:23:05 PM
Some people believe Tasmin Silence saw him in his leather jacket.

(https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/tasminman.gif)

It's a dead ringer isn't it, minus the buck teeth, dreadlocks & prosthetic thigh.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 05:37:02 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 14, 2022, 05:14:18 PM
Better that than think the sick paedo did for Madeleine.
Is that why you prefer to believe her Daddy hid her body after she od’ed on Calpol and fell off the sofa?  I agree that’s a more palatable scenario but guess what?  Madeleine’s disappearance is not a video game and we do not control her fate by preferring one scenario over another.  Children are abducted, raped and murdered in their thousands worldwide every year and it’s necessary to face this harsh reality especially when it is clearly the most logical and plausible explanation for her disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 05:41:17 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 05:37:02 PM
Is that why you prefer to believe her Daddy hid her body after she od’ed on Calpol and fell off the sofa?  I agree that’s a more palatable scenario but guess what?  Madeleine’s disappearance is not a video game and we do not control her fate by preferring one scenario over another.  Children are abducted, raped and murdered in their thousands worldwide every year and it’s necessary to face this harsh reality especially when it is clearly the most logical and plausible explanation for her disappearance.

Yeah, just ignore the incredulous story about gusting curtains & moving bedroom doors, then abduction becomes a bit more plausible.

Factor that evidence in however, the McCanns own testimony that is, & Brueckner is in the apartment before, hiding somewhere during & still hanging out there after Gerry's check, screwing around with doors & the window for some reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 05:44:27 PM

^^

But we always skip straight past that inconvenience, don't we, & go straight to an uncomplicated abduction theory, excluding the McCanns own wholly accurate & truthful testimony.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 05:48:40 PM


He crept in through the back door, opened the children's bedroom door further than the McCanns had left it (the very thing which prompted Gerry to actually enter), but, before he could interfere with Maddie, he must have heard Gerry coming up the back steps, or maybe the accomplice watcher signalled to him somehow.
Perhaps Brueckner & his accomplice worked out the plan during the dummy abduction run, that Kate believes happened the night before.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 05:54:16 PM

Nope, much easier to just say it was an abduction, rather than attempt to explain how it might have gone down, whilst accounting for the McCanns own evidence.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=12361.0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 14, 2022, 05:58:01 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 12:30:34 PM
Quite. You 'believe' that they investigated the evidence against the McCanns and dismissed it, because you 'believe' that they are experts. You don't know that's what they did.

Of course they dismissed it they are investigating abduction.   They are experts or they wouldn't be detectives.  You are in a time warp you need to get up to date.  It's what makes this forum so boring,  same old thing all the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 05:59:35 PM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 05:58:01 PM
Of course they dismissed it they are investigating abduction.   They are experts or they wouldn't be detectives.  You are in a time warp you need to get up to date.  It's what makes this forum so boring,  same old thing all the time.

Yeah, that's because the case against 'the abductor' isn't getting anywhere.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 14, 2022, 05:59:55 PM
Why do some people question Kate about the door slamming shut when a gust of wind blew through the window?  Read the beginning of Amaral's book he said it was windy at night on the 3rd of May.  So do a bit of digging before you mock it makes you look rather silly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 06:02:05 PM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 05:59:55 PM
Why do some people question Kate about the door slamming shut when a gust of wind blew through the window?  Read the beginning of Amaral's book he said it was windy at night on the 3rd of May.  So do a bit of digging before you mock it makes you look rather silly.

Because it's clearly hogwash, but you keep believing in the fantasy abductor if you want to, I'll stick to reality thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 06:05:31 PM

In her first statement, upon entering she notices immediately the window was open, no gusting curtains or slamming doors, then a bit later on, the story changes.

At around 10pm, the interviewee went to check on the children. She went into the apartment by the side door, which was closed but not locked, as she said before. She noticed that the door to her children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains open, while she was certain of having closed them all as she always did.

I'm sure one version must be true, or maybe not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 06:12:46 PM

The translator sat motionless whilst Kate recounted the door slamming, not being able to make out if the flat bed clothes were Maddie or not & the closed curtains gusting open.

But, no doubt this matter was all cleared up when SY, the PJ & BKA interviewed the McCanns again
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 06:20:01 PM


But anyway, the investigation has moved on.

Moved on to a place where they still can't prove there was actually an abduction.

Real progress right there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 07:19:19 PM
Quote from: Lace on June 14, 2022, 05:58:01 PM
Of course they dismissed it they are investigating abduction.   They are experts or they wouldn't be detectives.  You are in a time warp you need to get up to date.  It's what makes this forum so boring,  same old thing all the time.

I get the feeling that some people think the story is simple. The PJ made a mess of things; influenced by Amaral. Grange set out to investigate the abduction (which obviously happened) and now all that remains is to charge Brueckner. The problem is it's not simple. What happened in the past affects what is happening now. People doubted the McCanns quite early on and nothing which followed changed their opinions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 08:03:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 07:19:19 PM
I get the feeling that some people think the story is simple. The PJ made a mess of things; influenced by Amaral. Grange set out to investigate the abduction (which obviously happened) and now all that remains is to charge Brueckner. The problem is it's not simple. What happened in the past affects what is happening now. People doubted the McCanns quite early on and nothing which followed changed their opinions.
Newsflash: no one who matters cares what those people thought or continue to think.  Things have moved on, those people stuck in 2007 haven’t.  They are like those Japanese soldiers stuck in the jungle after the war, ignorant, cut off from reality  and in denial.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 08:05:25 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 08:03:24 PM
Newsflash: no one who matters cares what those people thought or continue to think.  Things have moved on, those people stuck in 2007 haven’t.  They are like those Japanese soldiers stuck in the jungle after the war, ignorant, cut off from reality  and in denial.

Yes, I already said, things have moved on, to a point where 3 investigative forces still can't prove there was an abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 09:18:20 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 08:03:24 PM
Newsflash: no one who matters cares what those people thought or continue to think.  Things have moved on, those people stuck in 2007 haven’t.  They are like those Japanese soldiers stuck in the jungle after the war, ignorant, cut off from reality  and in denial.

Some people can't get over their conviction that all the McCann's troubles were caused by Amaral. The endless discussions of his faults is sooo boring.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 14, 2022, 09:36:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 09:18:20 PM
Some people can't get over their conviction that all the McCann's troubles were caused by Amaral. The endless discussions of his faults is sooo boring.

You are imagining things
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2022, 10:32:06 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 06:05:31 PM
In her first statement, upon entering she notices immediately the window was open, no gusting curtains or slamming doors, then a bit later on, the story changes.

At around 10pm, the interviewee went to check on the children. She went into the apartment by the side door, which was closed but not locked, as she said before. She noticed that the door to her children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains open, while she was certain of having closed them all as she always did.

I'm sure one version must be true, or maybe not.

It's always good to have  aback up story just in case... then there is the memory lapsing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2022, 10:39:11 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 14, 2022, 08:05:25 PM
Yes, I already said, things have moved on, to a point where 3 investigative forces still can't prove there was an abduction.

Or that a friendly loving childless  couple broke into the apartment and stole her to love her and look after her.

oh no wait. Kate forgave the 'paedophiles  who  kidnapped her

erm  um  hang on Kate N Gerry have moved on  they  seemed to have moved on next day by their behavior.

Imagine the horror of Brukner or someone of his ilk grabbing Maddy and doing despicable things and mum n dad are jogging, blogging setting up a business yeah leaves  people feeling sick to the stomach as they did back then...nothing has changed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 14, 2022, 10:45:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 09:18:20 PM
Some people can't get over their conviction that all the McCann's troubles were caused by Amaral. The endless discussions of his faults is sooo boring.
  I can fully understand why you would prefer not to have to keep being reminded of  thr lying, deflecting toe rag but I haven’t mentioned Amaral recently so better take it up with those that have.  Perhaps you could start issuing warnings to people who bore you?  Or who mention the A word?   That would make you feel better I’m sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 06:11:23 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 14, 2022, 10:45:04 PM
  I can fully understand why you would prefer not to have to keep being reminded of  thr lying, deflecting toe rag but I haven’t mentioned Amaral recently so better take it up with those that have.  Perhaps you could start issuing warnings to people who bore you?  Or who mention the A word?   That would make you feel better I’m sure.

It's never entered my head to misuse my position to silence views I disagree with.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2022, 08:33:13 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 06:11:23 AM
It's never entered my head to misuse my position to silence views I disagree with.
Great.  Perhaps you’d like to suggest a topic of discussion that you don’t find boring then?  How about the McCanns’ so-called neglect?  I’m sure you’re not bored of that discussion yet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 09:02:07 AM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 15, 2022, 08:33:13 AM
Great.  Perhaps you’d like to suggest a topic of discussion that you don’t find boring then?  How about the McCanns’ so-called neglect?  I’m sure you’re not bored of that discussion yet.

I only revisit that when those who deny the facts raise the subject.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 15, 2022, 09:07:07 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2022, 10:32:06 PM
It's always good to have  aback up story just in case... then there is the memory lapsing.

If you had any sense you would have realised that the first statement is a condensed description of what happened.  Later Kate explains in detail.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 15, 2022, 09:09:12 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2022, 10:39:11 PM
Or that a friendly loving childless  couple broke into the apartment and stole her to love her and look after her.

oh no wait. Kate forgave the 'paedophiles  who  kidnapped her

erm  um  hang on Kate N Gerry have moved on  they  seemed to have moved on next day by their behavior.

Imagine the horror of Brukner or someone of his ilk grabbing Maddy and doing despicable things and mum n dad are jogging, blogging setting up a business yeah leaves  people feeling sick to the stomach as they did back then...nothing has changed.


Oh you are back with your nasty comments.    Your version of things is just imaginary hate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2022, 09:20:25 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 09:02:07 AM
I only revisit that when those who deny the facts raise the subject.
The McCanns left their kids alone and went out for dinner.  They checked on them periodically throughout the night.  Them’s the facts IMO.  No doubt in your version of the facts the McCanns abandoned their kids to go and get drunk and probably lied about how often they checked on them, so let’s just agree that there are only opinions, not facts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 15, 2022, 10:10:08 AM
It's good to see that the ECHR can move swiftly when faced with a serious case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 10:22:50 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 14, 2022, 09:18:20 PM
Some people can't get over their conviction that all the McCann's troubles were caused by Amaral. The endless discussions of his faults is sooo boring.

Some people can't get over the fact that the McCanns are no longer and never will be suspects in the case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 15, 2022, 10:54:53 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 10:22:50 AM
Some people can't get over the fact that the McCanns are no longer and never will be suspects in the case

That would explain why the police can't solve it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 11:17:39 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 15, 2022, 10:54:53 AM
That would explain why the police can't solve it.

Good to see you supporting my claim that posting opinion as fact is now acceptable...the case is solved of course
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 11:23:23 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 15, 2022, 09:07:07 AM
If you had any sense you would have realised that the first statement is a condensed description of what happened.  Later Kate explains in detail.

When was her detailed explanation given? Her only other interview (speaking) was on 6th September and they got to 10pm on 3rd May then stopped. Kate never gave a detailed account to the PJ imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 11:25:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 11:23:23 AM
When was her detailed explanation given? Her only other interview (speaking) was on 6th September and they got to 10pm on 3rd May then stopped. Kate never gave a detailed account to the PJ imo.

so boring
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 11:28:28 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 11:25:52 AM
so boring

LOL.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 15, 2022, 11:36:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 11:23:23 AM
When was her detailed explanation given? Her only other interview (speaking) was on 6th September and they got to 10pm on 3rd May then stopped. Kate never gave a detailed account to the PJ imo.

Did the PJ ask for a detailed account?   All they seemed to want is what Kate found when she entered 5a and that is what she told them.

So saying she changed her account is rubbish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 12:57:43 PM
Quote from: Lace on June 15, 2022, 11:36:12 AM
Did the PJ ask for a detailed account?   All they seemed to want is what Kate found when she entered 5a and that is what she told them.

So saying she changed her account is rubbish.

I didn't say she did, I said that your claim that she gave a more detailed account was rubbish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 12:59:45 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 11:25:52 AM
so boring

But true, which the post I was responding to wasn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2022, 01:04:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 12:57:43 PM
I didn't say she did, I said that your claim that she gave a more detailed account was rubbish.
What do you mean by “a more detailed account”.  Do you think the PJ statements (written in the third person, non-verbatim) represent every detail she gave to the police?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2022, 01:08:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 12:57:43 PM
I didn't say she did, I said that your claim that she gave a more detailed account was rubbish.
Have you not read Kate’s book?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 15, 2022, 01:13:33 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 11:17:39 AM
Good to see you supporting my claim that posting opinion as fact is now acceptable...the case is solved of course

Really ? how , where and when did she die ? Wolters : we have no forensics .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 01:14:11 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 15, 2022, 01:13:33 PM
Really ? how , where and when did she die ? Wolters : we have no forensics .


dont need forensics
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 01:18:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 12:59:45 PM
But true, which the post I was responding to wasn't.
very boring
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 01:46:13 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 01:18:46 PM
very boring

I do agree. Long term posters should know what the facts are by now.  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 01:53:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 01:46:13 PM
I do agree. Long term posters should know what the facts are by now.  8(>((

I agree..its a shame you dont
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2022, 02:03:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 01:46:13 PM
I do agree. Long term posters should know what the facts are by now.  8(>((
Lace has only posted facts, and you are calling her out for no good reason IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 15, 2022, 02:05:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 12:57:43 PM
I didn't say she did, I said that your claim that she gave a more detailed account was rubbish.

We all know what her more detailed account is,  so how can it be rubbish?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 15, 2022, 03:13:01 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 01:14:11 PM

dont need forensics

Yep, the imaginary photo, video & diary entry about Maddie will be enough, just got to get the imaginary trial out of the way.

Shouldn't be much longer now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 04:21:36 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 15, 2022, 01:04:44 PM
What do you mean by “a more detailed account”.  Do you think the PJ statements (written in the third person, non-verbatim) represent every detail she gave to the police?

Was that not the problem?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 04:22:52 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 01:18:46 PM
very boring

LOL.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 15, 2022, 05:59:54 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 01:14:11 PM

dont need forensics

CB cannot be placed in Luz, no forensics .


A miracle is what's needed .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 15, 2022, 06:02:11 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 15, 2022, 10:10:08 AM
It's good to see that the ECHR can move swiftly when faced with a serious case.

If it doesn't go the way of the McCanns it'll because of brexit, just wait and see, no one likes a brit now, did they ever ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 06:12:51 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 15, 2022, 05:59:54 PM
CB cannot be placed in Luz, no forensics .


A miracle is what's needed .
They don't necessarily have to prove he was in Luz
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 06:32:59 PM
Quote from: Lace on June 15, 2022, 02:05:10 PM
We all know what her more detailed account is,  so how can it be rubbish?

Who can forget; it was acted out enough. To the UK MSM, to Oprah and in documentaries. To the PJ? I think not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 06:35:53 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 06:12:51 PM
They don't necessarily have to prove he was in Luz

But proving he wasn't where he said he was could help.

Actually, there is nothing to be done with this Forum now.  We will be forever subjected to Rinse and Repeat, even if Brueckner and or anyone else is ever convicted.

The only thing that we can be certain about is that The McCanns will never be charged.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 06:40:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 06:32:59 PM
Who can forget; it was acted out enough. To the UK MSM, to Oprah and in documentaries. To the PJ? I think not.

You appear to believe that The McCanns are culpable.

Good luck with that one.  It is never going to happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 15, 2022, 07:56:08 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 06:35:53 PM
But proving he wasn't where he said he was could help.

Actually, there is nothing to be done with this Forum now.  We will be forever subjected to Rinse and Repeat, even if Brueckner and or anyone else is ever convicted.

The only thing that we can be certain about is that The McCanns will never be charged.

Or any abductor either, that much is obvious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2022, 08:31:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 06:32:59 PM
Who can forget; it was acted out enough. To the UK MSM, to Oprah and in documentaries. To the PJ? I think not.
What details did Kate omit to tell the PJ in your view?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 15, 2022, 08:31:15 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 06:40:39 PM
You appear to believe that The McCanns are culpable.

Good luck with that one.  It is never going to happen.

Doesn't really matter. They'll never be free of this. Fine by me
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 08:41:32 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 15, 2022, 08:31:15 PM
Doesn't really matter. They'll never be free of this. Fine by me

Oh Dear.  How sad.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2022, 08:46:03 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 08:41:32 PM
Oh Dear.  How sad.
funny how these sceptics claim not to be emotionally invested in this case whilst at the same time relishing the McCanns ongoing and future unhappiness. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 08:50:22 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 15, 2022, 08:46:03 PM
funny how these sceptics claim not to be emotionally invested in this case whilst at the same time relishing the McCanns ongoing and future unhappiness.

Worse than that if you ask me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 15, 2022, 08:59:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 08:50:22 PM
Worse than that if you ask me.

I consider them pretty appalling people and don't care how much they suffer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 15, 2022, 09:02:45 PM
Quote from: Swertigo Virl on June 15, 2022, 08:46:03 PM
funny how these sceptics claim not to be emotionally invested in this case whilst at the same time relishing the McCanns ongoing and future unhappiness.

Is there any reason I should wish them well?

Can't think of any myself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 09:08:06 PM

Such bitterness is a mystery to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 15, 2022, 09:10:27 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 09:08:06 PM
Such bitterness is a mystery to me.

Such support for them is a mystery to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 09:18:54 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 15, 2022, 09:10:27 PM
Such support for them is a mystery to me.

I don't spend my life despising anyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 15, 2022, 09:25:32 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 09:18:54 PM
I don't spend my life despising anyone.

I don't spend my life idolising anyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 09:28:50 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 15, 2022, 09:25:32 PM
I don't spend my life idolising anyone.

Nor do I.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 15, 2022, 09:37:28 PM
Well anyway, on a slightly more positive note, I still hope Maddie is found alive.

Then refuses to speak to her parents, except via a solicitor, pursues & wins a very bitter & highly publicised civil case against them for their gross negligence, winning a large amount of damages, which she then spends on budget holidays, she takes her own children with her of course, then, in a bizarre twist of fate, one of them dies in a holiday apartment & she covers up their death by faking an abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 15, 2022, 09:40:26 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 09:08:06 PM
Such bitterness is a mystery to me.
IMO such posts say far more about the [ censored word ]s than the objects of their hatred.  Clearly these are very unhappy people, to be pitied more than anything else, to have invested so much of their lives despising the parents of a missing child is just plain odd.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 16, 2022, 02:43:48 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 15, 2022, 06:02:11 PM
If it doesn't go the way of the McCanns it'll because of brexit, just wait and see, no one likes a brit now, did they ever ?

Oh I thought that we won the European Song Contest at expert level, then came second only to Ukraine at intrnational Joe Public level.  The World has a funny way of showing its hatred
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 16, 2022, 02:59:44 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 15, 2022, 09:37:28 PM
Well anyway, on a slightly more positive note, I still hope Maddie is found alive.

Then refuses to speak to her parents, except via a solicitor, pursues & wins a very bitter & highly publicised civil case against them for their gross negligence, winning a large amount of damages, which she then spends on budget holidays, she takes her own children with her of course, then, in a bizarre twist of fate, one of them dies in a holiday apartment & she covers up their death by faking an abduction.

WS, such hatred. 
Sorry to say it, but you are s..m with a *cu* in the middle.
And to think, I quite liked you at one time.

You must have had an awful upbringing / life to react like that, so I also feel sorry for you
or maybe you are drunk or drugged?

All IMO , of course. 8(*(
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2022, 07:10:16 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 16, 2022, 02:43:48 AM
Oh I thought that we won the European Song Contest at expert level, then came second only to Ukraine at intrnational Joe Public level.  The World has a funny way of showing its hatred

Maybe they were just pleased we'd gone from the EU.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 16, 2022, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2022, 07:10:16 AM
Maybe they were just pleased we'd gone from the EU.
yes, that’s why we got nul point the year before, they were so pleased.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 16, 2022, 07:28:29 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 16, 2022, 02:59:44 AM
WS, such hatred. 
Sorry to say it, but you are s..m with a *cu* in the middle.
And to think, I quite liked you at one time.

You must have had an awful upbringing / life to react like that, so I also feel sorry for you
or maybe you are drunk or drugged?

All IMO , of course. 8(*(
I’d add an *nt* into the mix just for good measure.  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2022, 07:42:32 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 15, 2022, 09:18:54 PM
I don't spend my life despising anyone.

Have you changed your mind since 2014 then?

"I do not hate or loath Goncalo Amaral.  But I do despise him."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3213.msg122215#msg122215
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2022, 08:24:21 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2022, 07:42:32 AM
Have you changed your mind since 2014 then?

"I do not hate or loath Goncalo Amaral.  But I do despise him."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3213.msg122215#msg122215

He can't help being a bit thick.... Like many others he was fooled by the hype surrounding the cadaver dog
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 16, 2022, 09:17:53 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2022, 07:42:32 AM
Have you changed your mind since 2014 then?

"I do not hate or loath Goncalo Amaral.  But I do despise him."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3213.msg122215#msg122215

That was in 2014.  Time moves on.

It must have taken you a minute or ten to find that.  Well done you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 16, 2022, 09:22:08 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 16, 2022, 09:17:53 AM
That was in 2014.  Time moves on.

It must have taken you a minute or ten to find that.  Well done you.
not for those here who hate the McCanns, sadly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 16, 2022, 09:38:08 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 15, 2022, 06:12:51 PM
They don't necessarily have to prove he was in Luz

Course they do .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on June 16, 2022, 09:55:13 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 15, 2022, 06:32:59 PM
Who can forget; it was acted out enough. To the UK MSM, to Oprah and in documentaries. To the PJ? I think not.

PJ interview with Kate 'what did you see when you entered the bedroom'.  Kate 'the door was open the window was open'
Do you think they wanted to hear the whole saga of how the wind blew the door shut?  No they were just interested in what was seen in the bedroom.

For goodness sake why are you making such a big deal of it?   The fact is Kate did not give a different recollection of what she saw she just give a condensed description.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2022, 11:04:46 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 16, 2022, 09:38:08 AM
Course they do .

you havent got a clue...if they can prove murder..they dont need to prove abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 16, 2022, 11:14:18 AM
Quote from: Lace on June 16, 2022, 09:55:13 AM
PJ interview with Kate 'what did you see when you entered the bedroom'.  Kate 'the door was open the window was open'
Do you think they wanted to hear the whole saga of how the wind blew the door shut?  No they were just interested in what was seen in the bedroom.

For goodness sake why are you making such a big deal of it?   The fact is Kate did not give a different recollection of what she saw she just give a condensed description.
making mountains out of molehills is the conspiracy theorist's stock in trade.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 16, 2022, 11:15:20 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 16, 2022, 11:04:46 AM
you havent got a clue...if they can prove murder..they dont need to prove abduction.

Only they can't prove murder either, so that's the end of that really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 16, 2022, 11:46:30 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 16, 2022, 02:59:44 AM
WS, such hatred. 
Sorry to say it, but you are s..m with a *cu* in the middle.
And to think, I quite liked you at one time.

You must have had an awful upbringing / life to react like that, so I also feel sorry for you
or maybe you are drunk or drugged?

All IMO , of course. 8(*(

I expressed hope that Maddie was alive, didn't I?
Sure it had some conditions attached, but at least she'd be alive.
All your side seem to be salivating over the prospect of Maddie pornography & that she was murdered by a paedo these days, & I'm the sicko, apparently.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 16, 2022, 11:49:11 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 16, 2022, 11:04:46 AM
you havent got a clue...if they can prove murder..they dont need to prove abduction.

Nor have you, people leave a trail, Madeleines ended at 5a, how do you suppose CB is alleged to have killed her if he can't be linked to 5a. There is no trail to CB.

April Jones, no body case, she was seen getting in her killers vehicle, that was the trail .
 Before you start nonsense about photo's, who is supposed to have took them,

Wolters : If we had photos of Madeleine with CB we wouldn't have had to make an appeal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2022, 11:53:48 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 16, 2022, 11:49:11 AM
Nor have you, people leave a trail, Madeleines ended at 5a, how do you suppose CB is alleged to have killed her if he can't be linked to 5a. There is no trail to CB.

April Jones, no body case, she was seen getting in her killers vehicle, that was the trail .

You are so misguided it's pointless.  Getting into her killers vehicle was the proof.
If they can prove CB murdered Maddie.. They do not need to prove he abducted her
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 16, 2022, 12:03:12 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 16, 2022, 11:53:48 AM
You are so misguided it's pointless.  Getting into her killers vehicle was the proof.
If they can prove CB murdered Maddie.. They do not need to prove he abducted her

Its you who is misguided, where did the trail of Madeleine end, 5a !  if we had a photo of Madeleine with our suspect we wouldn't need to make an appeal , so once again this imaginary photo you've alluded to in the past who took it, if CB is not in shot .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 16, 2022, 12:06:18 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 16, 2022, 11:53:48 AM
You are so misguided it's pointless.  Getting into her killers vehicle was the proof.
If they can prove CB murdered Maddie.. They do not need to prove he abducted her

Thats an interesting point you concede there, don't have to prove abduction, not least did one really occur, if it can't be proved ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2022, 12:13:45 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 16, 2022, 12:06:18 PM
Thats an interesting point you concede there, don't have to prove abduction, not least did one really occur, if it can't be proved ?

If they have proof of murder then that's proof of abduction
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 16, 2022, 12:36:35 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 16, 2022, 12:13:45 PM
If they have proof of murder then that's proof of abduction

They haven't on either point .

The Irish rape victim came forward after CB was announced the prime suspect in 2020, her case was reopened its said claiming CB was the rapist  , some news articles suggest that CB's legal team have received papers about this , two yrs in the making, CB was investigated for 3 yrs years prior to 2020 , its  now 5 yrs and counting ,( he did after all come to the BKA's attention back in 2013), whats so hard at seeing that the BKA do not have the evidence against CB.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 16, 2022, 12:53:33 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 16, 2022, 12:36:35 PM
They haven't on either point .

The Irish rape victim came forward after CB was announced the prime suspect in 2020, her case was reopened its said claiming CB was the rapist  , some news articles suggest that CB's legal team have received papers about this , two yrs in the making, CB was investigated for 3 yrs years prior to 2020 , its  now 5 yrs and counting ,( he did after all come to the BKA's attention back in 2013), whats so hard at seeing that the BKA do not have the evidence against CB.

There is a photo that shows Maddie, but not Brueckner, it was found on Brueckner's hard drive under his dog or he shared it on some paedo platform or something or other.
Anyway, about 2 years ago Wolters mumbled something about wanting pictures of places where Brueckner had lived or ever been, so, obviously, this had to be specifically concerning Maddie & none of the other cases against him, & if Wolters can just find the hovel with distinctive 70's wallpaper in the background, & that matches the wallpaper seen in the background of the Maddie photo, then he'll be able to prove Brueckner took it, & Maddie will likely be buried somewhere nearby, even though Brueckner destroyed all the evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 16, 2022, 01:06:13 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 16, 2022, 12:13:45 PM
If they have proof of murder then that's proof of abduction

If they can prove murder what are they waiting for? Telling the world that someone is a murderer but not taking it before a court is very wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2022, 01:10:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 16, 2022, 01:06:13 PM
If they can prove murder what are they waiting for? Telling the world that someone is a murderer but not taking it before a court is very wrong.

You need to read my posts again slowly.. I didn't say they could prove murder.  Proof isn't absolute when it comes to court.. You need to remember that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 16, 2022, 09:59:16 PM
@Anthro

Did you get my five emails and " pms in the past hour or so?

Also, did you get the three PM'S i sent during the night?


tHERE APPEAR TO BE A TRIO OF GLITCHES THAT HAVE ALL OF A SUDDEN APPEARED AND THIS REVERSE UPPER CASE / LOWER CASE IS ONE OF THEM

sADIE    Xxx


Sorry to interupt the thread, but nothING is going on at present anyway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 16, 2022, 10:47:15 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 16, 2022, 11:46:30 AM
I expressed hope that Maddie was alive, didn't I?
Sure it had some conditions attached, but at least she'd be alive.


[sniped] .... a large amount of damages, which she then spends on budget holidays, she takes her own children with her of course, then, in a bizarre twist of fate, one of them dies in a holiday apartment & she covers up their death by faking an abduction.[/QUOTE]

Wishing that Madeleines child dies prematurely?
What a low life you are.   YUK ! !
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 16, 2022, 11:23:36 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 16, 2022, 10:47:15 PM
[sniped] .... a large amount of damages, which she then spends on budget holidays, she takes her own children with her of course, then, in a bizarre twist of fate, one of them dies in a holiday apartment & she covers up their death by faking an abduction.

Wishing that Madeleines child dies prematurely?
What a low life you are.   YUK ! !
[/quote]

You have to take the rough with the smooth in life, sadie, you can't just expect sunshine & lollipops all the time, if Maddie is found alive then that's great, but there has to be some kind of trade off, good for bad, & if that means one of her offspring falling from the back of the sofa then, well, that's just the universe keeping things in balance I'm afraid.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 17, 2022, 09:21:38 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 16, 2022, 10:47:15 PM
[sniped] .... a large amount of damages, which she then spends on budget holidays, she takes her own children with her of course, then, in a bizarre twist of fate, one of them dies in a holiday apartment & she covers up their death by faking an abduction.

Wishing that Madeleines child dies prematurely?
What a low life you are.   YUK ! !
[/quote]Sadie, you're playing right into his hands, stop feeding him - please!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 17, 2022, 09:59:00 AM
Always worth checking back over things, recent reports as yet unfounded have papers being sent to CB's legal team, some suggest its about the rape of an Irish woman, but yet reports back in 2020 say his dna never matched to the scene, a birthmark was mentioned which he didn't have then but its morthed into a tattoo recently.

https://www.thesun.ie/news/5966160/cops-madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-b-rape-dna/


POLICE investigating Madeleine McCann prime suspect Christian B over a rape case have suffered a blow after it emerged his DNA is not a match of that found at the scene.

In another blow to investigators, Ms Behan told police that the man who raped her had a "birthmark" on his upper right thigh but photographs taken of Christian B by German police show no such mark exists.

Portugal resident said this later on in 2020.

“Hazel B said the perpetrator had a noticeable tattoo or birthmark on his right buttock”, explained Fülscher. “That excludes Christian B straight away as he doesn’t have anything like that”.


https://www.portugalresident.com/german-police-investigating-maddie-suspect-have-eye-on-16-year-old-praia-da-rocha-rape-case/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2022, 10:54:02 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 17, 2022, 09:59:00 AM
Always worth checking back over things, recent reports as yet unfounded have papers being sent to CB's legal team, some suggest its about the rape of an Irish woman, but yet reports back in 2020 say his dna never matched to the scene, a birthmark was mentioned which he didn't have then but its morthed into a tattoo recently.

https://www.thesun.ie/news/5966160/cops-madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-b-rape-dna/


POLICE investigating Madeleine McCann prime suspect Christian B over a rape case have suffered a blow after it emerged his DNA is not a match of that found at the scene.

In another blow to investigators, Ms Behan told police that the man who raped her had a "birthmark" on his upper right thigh but photographs taken of Christian B by German police show no such mark exists.

Portugal resident said this later on in 2020.

“Hazel B said the perpetrator had a noticeable tattoo or birthmark on his right buttock”, explained Fülscher. “That excludes Christian B straight away as he doesn’t have anything like that”.


https://www.portugalresident.com/german-police-investigating-maddie-suspect-have-eye-on-16-year-old-praia-da-rocha-rape-case/
Might br worth looking precisely which is saying what.  It's FF who is being quoted.
Looks like you take the Portugal resident as fact.. Lol
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 18, 2022, 09:39:28 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 17, 2022, 10:54:02 AM
Might br worth looking precisely which is saying what.  It's FF who is being quoted.
Looks like you take the Portugal resident as fact.. Lol

"Portugal Resident had this to say " from that you can gleam it as I take it as fact, you ought really stop posting your opinion of other peoples thoughts , its worthless.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2022, 12:48:31 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 18, 2022, 09:39:28 AM
"Portugal Resident had this to say " from that you can gleam it as I take it as fact, you ought really stop posting your opinion of other peoples thoughts , its worthless.
Worthless?
As is the Potugal Residence as a source of facts... Based on this article.. So take your own advice and stop quoting it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 18, 2022, 04:35:31 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 18, 2022, 12:48:31 PM
Worthless?
As is the Potugal Residence as a source of facts... Based on this article.. So take your own advice and stop quoting it

You don't have great deduction skills imo. People post quotes all the time. That doesn't mean they see them as facts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 18, 2022, 05:23:01 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 18, 2022, 04:35:31 PM
You don't have great deduction skills imo. People post quotes all the time. That doesn't mean they see them as facts.
They usually post media quotes to support their own opinion which imo means they see some truth in them or that they have some value.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 18, 2022, 05:32:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 18, 2022, 05:23:01 PM
They usually post media quotes to support their own opinion which imo means they see some truth in them or that they have some value.

I can't say what Barrier was thinking, but I can appreciate the value of the quote. Either later reports are wrong or, it seems, nobody knows what was seen; a birthmark or tattoo on a buttock or a birthmark, tattoo or ladder on the thigh of the rapist. All speculation imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2022, 06:16:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 18, 2022, 04:35:31 PM
You don't have great deduction skills imo. People post quotes all the time. That doesn't mean they see them as facts.
Your opinion has no value to me based on the standard of your deduction skills which I rate as very poor.  The Resident is notoriously biased.. I saw an article today where it said CB was applying for parole as he had completed two thirds of his sentence for drug dealing... Trying to hide the rape verfict
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 18, 2022, 06:20:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 18, 2022, 05:32:14 PM
I can't say what Barrier was thinking, but I can appreciate the value of the quote. Either later reports are wrong or, it seems, nobody knows what was seen; a birthmark or tattoo on a buttock or a birthmark, tattoo or ladder on the thigh of the rapist. All speculation imo.
and therefore quite pointless having a discussion about it.  Best to wait and see imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 18, 2022, 07:18:58 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 18, 2022, 06:16:12 PM
Your opinion has no value to me based on the standard of your deduction skills which I rate as very poor.  The Resident is notoriously biased.. I saw an article today where it said CB was applying for parole as he had completed two thirds of his sentence for drug dealing... Trying to hide the rape verfict

It seems our opinions of each other are similar. An article by whom? Written when?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2022, 08:12:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 18, 2022, 07:18:58 PM
It seems our opinions of each other are similar. An article by whom? Written when?

Then you need to accept it's pointless making such posts..

Natashs Don.. June 2020
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 18, 2022, 08:22:28 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 18, 2022, 08:12:25 PM
Then you need to accept it's pointless making such posts..

Natashs Don.. June 2020

I'm sure Natashs Don did as you say, but go on, give me a link. Or is it just your secret?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2022, 08:28:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 18, 2022, 08:22:28 PM
I'm sure Natashs Don did as you say, but go on, give me a link. Or is it just your secret?
It's on the crackpot forum today.. You know the one with solicitors... Expolice.. Crackpots...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2022, 09:11:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 18, 2022, 08:22:28 PM
I'm sure Natashs Don did as you say, but go on, give me a link. Or is it just your secret?
I've studied a bit of psychology and you making an issue out of my simple typo highlights your insecurity
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 18, 2022, 09:31:30 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 18, 2022, 08:28:19 PM
It's on the crackpot forum today.. You know the one with solicitors... Expolice.. Crackpots...

I see. Somecrackpots told you about it, did they? That sounds believable, strangely.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 18, 2022, 09:32:59 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 18, 2022, 09:11:16 PM
I've studied a bit of psychology and you making an issue out of my simple typo highlights your insecurity

Did you make a typo?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2022, 09:45:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 18, 2022, 09:31:30 PM
I see. Somecrackpots told you about it, did they? That sounds believable, strangely.  @)(++(*
No.. The crackpots posted the article
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2022, 09:49:33 PM
Brueckner’s lawyers meantime are pushing for their client’s release from jail where he has already served ⅔ of a drug sentence.

natasha.donn@algarveresident.com

https://www.portugalresident.com/what-kidnap-maddie-detective-gives-interview-as-mainstream-warns-investigation-could-be-dropped-if-missing-evidence-isnt-found/

What a liar she is
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 05:36:02 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 18, 2022, 09:49:33 PM
Brueckner’s lawyers meantime are pushing for their client’s release from jail where he has already served ⅔ of a drug sentence.

natasha.donn@algarveresident.com

https://www.portugalresident.com/what-kidnap-maddie-detective-gives-interview-as-mainstream-warns-investigation-could-be-dropped-if-missing-evidence-isnt-found/

What a liar she is

Ms Donn's story was dated 26th June 2020. On 9th June 2020 Mailonline said;

The prime suspect in the Madeleine McCann case has formally applied for early release from prison after becoming eligible for parole.

Christian Brueckner, 43, has served two thirds of his 15-month drug dealing sentence in jail in Kiel, northern Germany, and is believed to have lodged papers seeking release last Friday.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8403371/Maddie-McCann-suspect-applies-early-release-prison-Germany.html

Are Nick Fagge and James Fielding liars too?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 08:57:42 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 05:36:02 AM
Ms Donn's story was dated 26th June 2020. On 9th June 2020 Mailonline said;

The prime suspect in the Madeleine McCann case has formally applied for early release from prison after becoming eligible for parole.

Christian Brueckner, 43, has served two thirds of his 15-month drug dealing sentence in jail in Kiel, northern Germany, and is believed to have lodged papers seeking release last Friday.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8403371/Maddie-McCann-suspect-applies-early-release-prison-Germany.html

Are Nick Fagge and James Fielding liars too?

Did you get up at 5.30 to tell me that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 09:13:19 AM

What happened to the Rape Conviction?  Have I lost the plot again?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 09:16:39 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 09:13:19 AM
What happened to the Rape Conviction?  Have I lost the plot again?

The mail confirms he was being held on the rape conviction.. Natasha hides it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 09:29:53 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 09:16:39 AM
The mail confirms he was being held on the rape conviction.. Natasha hides it

Thank you.

Why would she want to do that?  Could it be something to do with the shame of Portugal?  One of them at least.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 19, 2022, 09:47:41 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 18, 2022, 09:45:02 PM
No.. The crackpots posted the article

Yet the site you despise you visit, its like the paedo apologist that only look out of curiosity.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 09:51:55 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 19, 2022, 09:47:41 AM
Yet the site you despise you visit, its like the paedo apologist that only look out of curiosity.

Must remember to have a quick look.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 19, 2022, 09:52:17 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 19, 2022, 09:47:41 AM
Yet the site you despise you visit, its like the paedo apologist that only look out of curiosity.
there's one slight difference - looking at images of child abuse is illegal, looking at the crap on the cesspit isn't.  You look at supporter forums so don't be a hypocrite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 09:53:21 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 19, 2022, 09:47:41 AM
Yet the site you despise you visit, its like the paedo apologist that only look out of curiosity.

You do spout some absolute junk... Despise really isn't part of my make up. Knowledge is.  It's only idiots who consider one side of the argument.  As for paedo sites.. Don't judge me based on your own beliefs and actions
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 19, 2022, 09:57:20 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 09:53:21 AM
You do spout some absolute junk... Despise really isn't part of my make up. Knowledge is.  It's only idiots who consider one side of the argument.  As for paedo sites.. Don't judge me based on your own beliefs and actions

I'm trying to keep up with you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 19, 2022, 09:58:07 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 19, 2022, 09:52:17 AM
there's one slight difference - looking at images of child abuse is illegal, looking at the crap on the cesspit isn't.  You look at supporter forums so don't be a hypocrite.

Show me one , apart from here .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 19, 2022, 10:02:55 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 09:16:39 AM
The mail confirms he was being held on the rape conviction.. Natasha hides it

Behind what ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 10:07:21 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 08:57:42 AM
Did you get up at 5.30 to tell me that

No. I got up at 5 coz I was awake.  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 10:09:54 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 09:13:19 AM
What happened to the Rape Conviction?  Have I lost the plot again?

It was being appealed, so wasn't final.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 19, 2022, 10:12:20 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 09:29:53 AM
Thank you.

Why would she want to do that?  Could it be something to do with the shame of Portugal?  One of them at least.

At the time of the report by N Donn and the Mail articles, CB was not serving time for the rape conviction's even after being found guilty  , those were under appeal , that is why he it was being said he was serving time for the drug offence , most if not all the brit news outlets carried the same news so davel is not exactly up to speed .

Nov 2020.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/17/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-bruckner-injured-in-german-court
Suspect, who is serving time for drug conviction, sustains two broken ribs in incident
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 10:13:47 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 09:16:39 AM
The mail confirms he was being held on the rape conviction.. Natasha hides it

In your opinion. I could equally accuse the Mail of 'hiding' Amaral's interview, which was the main subject of her article. It doesn't mean any of them were actually 'lying' or 'hiding' though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 19, 2022, 10:17:22 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 10:13:47 AM
In your opinion. I could equally accuse the Mail of 'hiding' Amaral's interview, which was the main subject of her article. It doesn't mean any of them were actually 'lying' or 'hiding' though.
Ooh, I think you're beginning to cotton on...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 19, 2022, 10:24:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 10:07:21 AM
No. I got up at 5 coz I was awake.  8(>((

See thats the most important part, the rest of the day is a bonus.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 19, 2022, 10:26:33 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 09:13:19 AM
What happened to the Rape Conviction?  Have I lost the plot again?

The BEEB in Nov 2020 also talks of the drugs rap.

Christian B, who is currently serving a prison sentence for drug offences in Germany, was given a seven-year term for raping a 72-year-old woman.

His appeal hinged on a legal point in relation to his extradition to Germany

It was rejected by Germany's Federal Court of Justice which means he will now remain in prison beyond January, when his prison sentence for the drug offences ended.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-55015467
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 10:30:06 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 19, 2022, 10:17:22 AM
Ooh, I think you're beginning to cotton on...

Perhaps you could spread the news; there's no evidence that Natasha Donn lied or hid anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 19, 2022, 10:35:37 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 10:30:06 AM
Perhaps you could spread the news; there's no evidence that Natasha Donn lied or hid anything.
I think Davel was probably just using sceptic logic as it seems to be the only logic you people understand.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 11:06:35 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 10:30:06 AM
Perhaps you could spread the news; there's no evidence that Natasha Donn lied or hid anything.

Once you spread the news that the mccanns didn't lie in their statements or hide anything... Good to see you spell Natasha correctly now. She his the fact that he had been convicted and sentenced for rape.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 11:08:07 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 19, 2022, 10:12:20 AM
At the time of the report by N Donn and the Mail articles, CB was not serving time for the rape conviction's even after being found guilty  , those were under appeal , that is why he it was being said he was serving time for the drug offence , most if not all the brit news outlets carried the same news so davel is not exactly up to speed .

Nov 2020.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/17/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-bruckner-injured-in-german-court
Suspect, who is serving time for drug conviction, sustains two broken ribs in incident


If you think I'm behind you that's because I've lapped you several times
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 11:10:03 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 10:13:47 AM
In your opinion. I could equally accuse the Mail of 'hiding' Amaral's interview, which was the main subject of her article. It doesn't mean any of them were actually 'lying' or 'hiding' though.

The lying accusation was tongue in cheek... A joke aimed at yours and others continual accusation of people lying..
Google parody
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 11:10:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 10:09:54 AM
It was being appealed, so wasn't final.

Who won The Appeal?

I thought that a Conviction stands until after the Appeal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 11:12:10 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 19, 2022, 10:12:20 AM
At the time of the report by N Donn and the Mail articles, CB was not serving time for the rape conviction's even after being found guilty  , those were under appeal , that is why he it was being said he was serving time for the drug offence , most if not all the brit news outlets carried the same news so davel is not exactly up to speed .

Nov 2020.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/17/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-bruckner-injured-in-german-court
Suspect, who is serving time for drug conviction, sustains two broken ribs in incident


So the original Conviction is worthless?  I don't think so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 11:15:32 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 19, 2022, 09:58:07 AM
Show me one , apart from here .
In order to criticise something you need knowledge of it.  I reject the parental involvement from a position of knowledge
My rejection would not be valid if I didn't look at both sides.  Is that so difficult for you to understand
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 11:35:59 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 11:10:03 AM
The lying accusation was tongue in cheek... A joke aimed at yours and others continual accusation of people lying..
Google parody

Nice swerve!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 11:36:32 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 11:15:32 AM
In order to criticise something you need knowledge of it.  I reject the parental involvement from a position of knowledge
My rejection would not be valid if I didn't look at both sides.  Is that so difficult for you to understand

This is the primary problem.  I looked at everything eventually.  I began in June 2007 when I initially suspected The McCanns, mainly due to my stupidity for being hooked in by The Media.

It didn't take long for me to notice the inverted commas and question marks.  I remain mortally ashamed of my original suspicions.  Just how stupid was I in those days?

No one does themselves any favours by coming to conclusions without thought.  They only demean themselves.

What anyone else on this Forum thinks of my opinion is totally irrelevant to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 11:38:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 11:35:59 AM
Nice swerve!

Or you are just not bright enough to understand.. Take your pick
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 11:39:26 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 11:35:59 AM
Nice swerve!

What is it that you do?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 19, 2022, 11:54:34 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 11:39:26 AM
What is it that you do?
oh this, in spades.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 19, 2022, 11:56:50 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 11:35:59 AM
Nice swerve!
Davel got you hook, line and sinker.  Now perhaps you have had a lesson in logic you can apply it to (for example) the question you posed to the forum a few days ago when you gave us the option of choosing who was the liar - Kate or the nanny. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 19, 2022, 11:57:18 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 11:08:07 AM
If you think I'm behind you that's because I've lapped you several times

Tortoise and the Hare old chap .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 19, 2022, 11:59:09 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 11:12:10 AM
So the original Conviction is worthless?  I don't think so.

No one said it was, but in relation to what was being written down, clearly the press had CB down for the drug offence before the rape conviction was upheld, best take it up with them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 12:00:15 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 19, 2022, 11:59:09 AM
No one said it was, but in relation to what was being written down, clearly the press had CB down for the drug offence before the rape conviction was upheld, best take it up with them.

the press get a lot wrong. he may have appealed...does that cancel the sentence..no it doesnt
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 19, 2022, 12:02:21 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 12:00:15 PM
the press get a lot wrong. he may have appealed...does that cancel the sentence..no it doesnt

Who said it did ? you have an issue with the press take it up with them, they all from what one can see wrote as such.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 19, 2022, 12:03:39 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 11:36:32 AM
This is the primary problem.  I looked at everything eventually.  I began in June 2007 when I initially suspected The McCanns, mainly due to my stupidity for being hooked in by The Media.

It didn't take long for me to notice the inverted commas and question marks.  I remain mortally ashamed of my original suspicions.  Just how stupid was I in those days?

No one does themselves any favours by coming to conclusions without thought.  They only demean themselves.

What anyone else on this Forum thinks of my opinion is totally irrelevant to me.

Well you want some one to think something of it, or why press send.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 12:13:07 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 19, 2022, 12:02:21 PM
Who said it did ? you have an issue with the press take it up with them, they all from what one can see wrote as such.

Im pointing out the press got it wrong.....from what i can see evry paper mentioned the rape apart from Natashs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 12:19:14 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 19, 2022, 12:03:39 PM
Well you want some one to think something of it, or why press send.

You yourself press Send frequently.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 01:10:08 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 11:36:32 AM
This is the primary problem.  I looked at everything eventually.  I began in June 2007 when I initially suspected The McCanns, mainly due to my stupidity for being hooked in by The Media.

It didn't take long for me to notice the inverted commas and question marks.  I remain mortally ashamed of my original suspicions.  Just how stupid was I in those days?

No one does themselves any favours by coming to conclusions without thought.  They only demean themselves.

What anyone else on this Forum thinks of my opinion is totally irrelevant to me.

You're perfectly entitled to your opinions about this case, as are all other members. I'm sure you're not alone in thinking before reaching conclusions either. None of us should worry about other's opinions or feel the need to justify their own.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 01:20:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 01:10:08 PM
You're perfectly entitled to your opinions about this case, as are all other members. I'm sure you're not alone in thinking before reaching conclusions either. None of us should worry about other's opinions or feel the need to justify their own.

I will justify my own conclusions if I feel so inclined.  Otherwise, what is the point in commenting at all?

Meanwhile, why don't you have another laugh at Sadie?  Is she not entitled to her opinions?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 19, 2022, 01:21:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 01:10:08 PM
You're perfectly entitled to your opinions about this case, as are all other members. I'm sure you're not alone in thinking before reaching conclusions either. None of us should worry about other's opinions or feel the need to justify their own.
What exactly is the purpose of a chat forum like this if not to challenge each others' opinions on all manner of topics? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 01:26:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 19, 2022, 01:21:27 PM
What exactly is the purpose of a chat forum like this if not to challenge each others' opinions on all manner of topics?

Only if you stick with the programme, apparently.

Meanwhile, Gunit remains remarkably ignorant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 02:42:25 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 01:20:02 PM
I will justify my own conclusions if I feel so inclined.  Otherwise, what is the point in commenting at all?

Meanwhile, why don't you have another laugh at Sadie?  Is she not entitled to her opinions?

Sadie is entitled to her opinions and others are entitled to question them too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 02:49:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 19, 2022, 01:21:27 PM
What exactly is the purpose of a chat forum like this if not to challenge each others' opinions on all manner of topics?

The purpose is to exchange, discuss and question each other's opinions more than to challenge them imo. Challenging suggests combating, I think, and it can get personal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 02:59:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 02:42:25 PM
Sadie is entitled to her opinions and others are entitled to question them too.

Are they entitled to repeatedly mock Sadie, as you have done?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 19, 2022, 03:13:46 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 01:20:02 PM
I will justify my own conclusions if I feel so inclined.  Otherwise, what is the point in commenting at all?

Meanwhile, why don't you have another laugh at Sadie? Is she not entitled to her opinions?

Indeed, but no one needs to take it seriously.

If you can't take a joke, you shouldn't have joined.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 19, 2022, 03:17:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 02:49:08 PM
The purpose is to exchange, discuss and question each other's opinions more than to challenge them imo. Challenging suggests combating, I think, and it can get personal.
semantic quibble.  If you don't think questioning each other's opinions can get just as personal as challenging them then I think you're being a little naive. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 19, 2022, 03:21:22 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 19, 2022, 03:13:46 PM
Indeed, but no one needs to take it seriously.

If you can't take a joke, you shouldn't have joined.
Having a sense of humour is essential on this forum, but like most things humour is subjective. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 03:37:31 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 19, 2022, 03:13:46 PM
Indeed, but no one needs to take it seriously.

If you can't take a joke, you shouldn't have joined.

Oh Yes, very funny.   @)(++(*

I wouldn't be so unkind to you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 03:41:47 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 19, 2022, 03:21:22 PM
Having a sense of humour is essential on this forum, but like most things humour is subjective.

Mocking isn't humour.  It is downright unkind.   @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 19, 2022, 03:47:02 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 03:41:47 PM
Mocking isn't humour.  It is downright unkind.   @)(++(*
I only got involved in this nonsense in the first place because of the avalanche of unkindness.  I think some of it may have rubbed off on me by now but I do find it hard to be kind towards unkind people...  8(8-))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 03:58:18 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 19, 2022, 03:47:02 PM
I only got involved in this nonsense in the first place because of the avalanche of unkindness.  I think some of it may have rubbed off on me by now but I do find it hard to be kind towards unkind people...  8(8-))

You don't have to do anything at all.  It is possible to ignore it.  What you don't have to do is to state that someone has lost their marbles and then laugh about it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 19, 2022, 04:02:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 19, 2022, 03:47:02 PM
I only got involved in this nonsense in the first place because of the avalanche of unkindness.  I think some of it may have rubbed off on me by now but I do find it hard to be kind towards unkind people...  8(8-))

Me too, VS.

I come from a very positive family and it hurts me that sometimes I cannot contain myself from making a tart response.

But the hatred or lies / disinformation must be there before I respond in that way
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 19, 2022, 05:52:46 PM
I expect in some quarters kindness (like hope and empathy) is not considered a virtue.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 07:17:32 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 19, 2022, 05:52:46 PM
I expect in some quarters kindness (like hope and empathy) is not considered a virtue.

Some people are so busy pointing out the qualities that they think others lack that it never occurs to them how patronising and unkind that is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 19, 2022, 07:31:24 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 19, 2022, 03:41:47 PM
Mocking isn't humour.  It is downright unkind.   @)(++(*

I've always been told that one shouldn't mock the afflicted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 19, 2022, 08:49:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 07:17:32 PM
Some people are so busy pointing out the qualities that they think others lack that it never occurs to them how patronising and unkind that is.
And that is exactly what drew me into this in the first place: the barrage of unkind comments aimed at the McCanns from so-called perfect parents who allegedly never take their eyes off their children for more than a second and who would have smashed down every door in  Portugal and beyond looking for their child in the unlikely event they had inadvertently take their eyes off their child from more than one second.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 10:17:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 19, 2022, 08:49:53 PM
And that is exactly what drew me into this in the first place: the barrage of unkind comments aimed at the McCanns from so-called perfect parents who allegedly never take their eyes off their children for more than a second and who would have smashed down every door in  Portugal and beyond looking for their child in the unlikely event they had inadvertently take their eyes off their child from more than one second.

I'm sure the McCanns appreciate your support, if they know you've spent years lambasting those you perceive as lacking your virtues.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 10:41:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 10:17:17 PM
I'm sure the McCanns appreciate your support, if they know you've spent years lambasting those you perceive as lacking your virtues.

Compassion for others is an incredibly important  quality to make the world a better place for our children.. It's such a shame more people don't realise
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 19, 2022, 10:44:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 19, 2022, 10:17:17 PM
I'm sure the McCanns appreciate your support, if they know you've spent years lambasting those you perceive as lacking your virtues.
They have no idea, nor do I seek their acknowledgment or appreciation, nor do I make any claim to having any great virtues, I simply don’t like sanctimonious, virtue-signalling “perfect parents”, and I enjoy picking holes in ludicrous conspiracy theories.  This probably makes me a Very Bad Person too.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 08:55:24 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 10:41:53 PM
Compassion for others is an incredibly important  quality to make the world a better place for our children.. It's such a shame more people don't realise

How have you demonstrated your compassion? Apart from lambasting those you find wanting, that is.......
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 09:44:10 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 19, 2022, 10:41:53 PM
Compassion for others is an incredibly important  quality to make the world a better place for our children.. It's such a shame more people don't realise

You're right, we should have compassion for everyone, even rapists, murderers & paedophiles, especially paedophiles, although, I'm not sure how that would make the world a better place for children, but who am I to argue.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 10:17:26 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 19, 2022, 10:44:26 PM
They have no idea, nor do I seek their acknowledgment or appreciation, nor do I make any claim to having any great virtues, I simply don’t like sanctimonious, virtue-signalling “perfect parents”, and I enjoy picking holes in ludicrous conspiracy theories.  This probably makes me a Very Bad Person too.  @)(++(*

My mistake. I assumed that only those who saw themselves as virtuous would constantly accuse others of lacking those virtues. So you're no more virtuous than anyone else, you just concentrate on pointing out what, in your opinion, others lack?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 10:21:41 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 09:44:10 AM
You're right, we should have compassion for everyone, even rapists, murderers & paedophiles, especially paedophiles, although, I'm not sure how that would make the world a better place for children, but who am I to argue.

Compassion for certain police officers excepted, obviously.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 10:23:20 AM
The supporters compassion for the McCanns is based on the presumption that Maddie was abducted.

Well, what if there wasn't any abductor?

I mean, we have no way of knowing for sure there actually was one, do we, other than because the McCanns said so.

Is it right to support the McCanns, considering they could in fact have been involved in Madeleine's disappearance?

No, I don't think it is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 10:24:45 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 08:55:24 AM
How have you demonstrated your compassion? Apart from lambasting those you find wanting, that is.......

Total junk...could you give me some examples of this lambasting or remove your post...

Did you see my post not so long ago where i said I had sympathy for Amaral because he had simply beleived the hype re the dogs capabilities and achievements.

you are posting absolute junk...but i forgive your lack of comprehension
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 10:25:54 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 10:23:20 AM
The supporters compassion for the McCanns is based on the presumption that Maddie was abducted.

Well, what if there wasn't any abductor?

I mean, we have no way of knowing for sure there actually was one, do we, other than because the McCanns said so.

Is it right to support the McCanns, considering they could in fact have been involved in Madeleine's disappearance?

No, I don't think it is.

if Maddie ddied in an accident i see no reason not to feel compassionate towards her parents
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 10:34:42 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 10:25:54 AM
if Maddie ddied in an accident i see no reason not to feel compassionate towards her parents

Even though, in that instance, they'd have lied about an abduction, wasted police time, misled the public & set up a fraudulent fund?

You'd still have compassion for them if that is in fact what happened?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 10:35:44 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 10:25:54 AM
if Maddie ddied in an accident i see no reason not to feel compassionate towards her parents

.....& what if it wasn't an accident?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 11:00:57 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 10:34:42 AM
Even though, in that instance, they'd have lied about an abduction, wasted police time, misled the public & set up a fraudulent fund?

You'd still have compassion for them if that is in fact what happened?

I think it's an absolutely stupid suggestion.. But hypotheically the part I would have problems with is the fund.. But I think based on all the evidence it's a stupid idea
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 11:04:06 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 11:00:57 AM
I think it's an absolutely stupid suggestion.. But hypotheically the part I would have problems with is the fund.. But I think based on all the evidence it's a stupid idea

But there's no way to rule it out entirely, until the abductor is caught, & that still hasn't happened, so it's quite possible really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 11:23:41 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 10:25:54 AM
if Maddie ddied in an accident i see no reason not to feel compassionate towards her parents

Whatever happened to Madeleine it caused her parents to suffer, and they deserve sympathy for that. What they don't deserve any sympathy for is if they then embarked on a huge scam designed to paint themselves as innocent victims.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 11:27:05 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 11:23:41 AM
Whatever happened to Madeleine it caused her parents to suffer, and they deserve sympathy for that. What they don't deserve any sympathy for is if they then embarked on a huge scam designed to paint themselves as innocent victims.

I agree but i think its more than stupid to think they did. theres no real evidence to support that so you are simply beleiving something taht is not supported by evidence
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 20, 2022, 11:29:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 11:23:41 AM
Whatever happened to Madeleine it caused her parents to suffer, and they deserve sympathy for that. What they don't deserve any sympathy for is if they then embarked on a huge scam designed to paint themselves as innocent victims.

IF.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 11:31:20 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 11:04:06 AM
But there's no way to rule it out entirely, until the abductor is caught, & that still hasn't happened, so it's quite possible really.

Every other suspect does not have to be ruled out entirely...just the mccanns it seems...thats hypocrisy. Whatever happens to CB he wont be ruled out entirely.
remember the ciprianos  have not been shown to be 100% guilty...thats a fact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 11:36:44 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 11:31:20 AM
Every other suspect does not have to be ruled out entirely...just the mccanns it seems...thats hypocrisy. Whatever happens to CB he wont be ruled out entirely.
remember the ciprianos  have not been shown to be 100% guilty...thats a fact

First prove there actually was an abduction, the police aren't having much luck with that, so, probably didn't happen then.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 11:38:43 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 11:36:44 AM
First prove there actually was an abduction, the police aren't having much luck with that, so, probably didn't happen then.

same old...same old...

if its proved Maddie was murdered by a paedophile which seems to be the case..then abduction is proved
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 11:39:35 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 20, 2022, 11:29:48 AM
IF.

Just no way to be sure, is there, so, probably best not to support the McCanns at all, just to be on the safe side.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 11:40:57 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 11:38:43 AM
same old...same old...

if its proved Maddie was murdered by a paedophile which seems to be the case..then abduction is proved

To you maybe, not to the satisfaction of a court judge however, & nor will it ever be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 11:45:25 AM

Not happy to presume the McCanns guilty, but quite happy to presume Brueckner or any other paedophile is though.

Bunch of hypocrites these McCann supporters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 20, 2022, 11:46:35 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 11:38:43 AM
same old...same old...

if its proved Maddie was murdered by a paedophile which seems to be the case..then abduction is proved


It doesn't seem to be the case, a German prosecutor said so does not make it fact with out the proof to back it up, there is obviously an issue with what they have , hence no papers served. Canaan is prime suspect in the Lamplugh  case, how did that go, the CPS said no .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 11:51:46 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 20, 2022, 11:46:35 AM

It doesn't seem to be the case, a German prosecutor said so does not make it fact with out the proof to back it up, there is obviously an issue with what they have , hence no papers served. Canaan is prime suspect in the Lamplugh  case, how did that go, the CPS said no .

I read that he's receiving end of life care, no doubt the compassionate amongst us here will be wishing him well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 12:01:47 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 11:27:05 AM
I agree but i think its more than stupid to think they did. theres no real evidence to support that so you are simply beleiving something taht is not supported by evidence

All anyone has at the moment is suspicion. CB's record isn't evidence that he harmed Madeleine and the McCanns lack of a record isn't evidence that they are blameless.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 20, 2022, 01:02:44 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 11:51:46 AM
I read that he's receiving end of life care, no doubt the compassionate amongst us here will be wishing him well.

Don't know if you ever look at Websleuths, there's a couple of interesting threads there with snippets like he was questioned without being cautioned, that would put the kybosh on any charges .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2022, 01:26:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 10:17:26 AM
My mistake. I assumed that only those who saw themselves as virtuous would constantly accuse others of lacking those virtues. So you're no more virtuous than anyone else, you just concentrate on pointing out what, in your opinion, others lack?
I said I don't make any claims to having any great virtues.  I'm not a saint but on the other hand I don't get my jollies by kicking people when they are down and suffering, which is what was happening online to the McCanns when I joined this bizarre 15 year old conversation.  I do find that sort of online pile on hard to fathom and it happens all the time, not just to the McCanns but it just so happens that it was this case which first opened my eyes to the "worst of the human psyche, electronically unleashed".  Why would you have a problem with me pointing out that the relentless deluge of nastiness directed at people who find themselves in the eye of a shit-storm is not very kind?  You have spent years criticising the McCanns decisions, what they have said and what they have done - does that mean that you consider yourself a more virtuous person than either of them? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2022, 01:30:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 11:23:41 AM
Whatever happened to Madeleine it caused her parents to suffer, and they deserve sympathy for that. What they don't deserve any sympathy for is if they then embarked on a huge scam designed to paint themselves as innocent victims.
But you don't know if they did that or not (and certainly in 15 years no one has been able to prove that they did), so the best course of action would be to give them the benefit of the doubt and treat them sympathetically, or if you can't do that then keep your opinions to yourself. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2022, 01:32:32 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 20, 2022, 01:02:44 PM
Don't know if you ever look at Websleuths, there's a couple of interesting threads there with snippets like he was questioned without being cautioned, that would put the kybosh on any charges .
It will be very sad if Cannan goes to his grave taking his secrets with him. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 01:40:21 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 20, 2022, 01:30:03 PM
But you don't know if they did that or not (and certainly in 15 years no one has been able to prove that they did), so the best course of action would be to give them the benefit of the doubt and treat them sypathetically, or if you can't do that shut up.

But it's ok to accuse 'the abductor' (which is basically anyone other than the McCanns)?

Hypocrisy.

Maddie disappeared, until proven otherwise, should be the correct position.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 01:42:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 20, 2022, 01:32:32 PM
It will be very sad if Canaan goes to his grave taking his secrets with him.

Oh, I see, Canaan isn't entitled to the same presumption as the McCanns.

Yeah, double standards right here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 01:54:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 12:01:47 PM
All anyone has at the moment is suspicion. CB's record isn't evidence that he harmed Madeleine and the McCanns lack of a record isn't evidence that they are blameless.

The lack of evidence against the McCann's is evidence of innocence... That's a fact sceptics seem unable to grasp as you have shown several times

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 02:03:46 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 01:54:16 PM
The lack of evidence against the McCann's is evidence of innocence... That's a fact sceptics seem unable to grasp as you have shown several times

Same applies for any 'abductor' then.

So, Maddie disappeared, no parental involvement, or abductor either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2022, 02:09:13 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 12:01:47 PM
All anyone has at the moment is suspicion. CB's record isn't evidence that he harmed Madeleine and the McCanns lack of a record isn't evidence that they are blameless.
No one who matters still harbours suspicion against the McCanns.  They are not considered suspects by the three police forces conducting the investigation into their daughter's disappearance and who have access to ALL the available evidence and information.  Suspicions amongst the less well informed really don't count for much. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 02:12:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 20, 2022, 02:09:13 PM
No one who matters still harbours suspicion against the McCanns.  They are not considered suspects by the three police forces conducting the investigation into their daughter's disappearance and who have access to ALL the available evidence and information.  Suspicions amongst the less well informed really don't count for much.

Well, the 3 investigative forces with access to ALL the information, still can't prove there ever actually was an abduction, so, their suspicions don't count for much either, in the grand scheme of things.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 04:02:11 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 02:12:42 PM
Well, the 3 investigative forces with access to ALL the information, still can't prove there ever actually was an abduction, so, their suspicions don't count for much either, in the grand scheme of things.

You don't know they can't prove an abduction.. I would say they can
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 04:03:26 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 02:03:46 PM
Same applies for any 'abductor' then.

So, Maddie disappeared, no parental involvement, or abductor either.

Wolters claims evidence of abduction
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 04:05:55 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 04:03:26 PM
Wolters claims evidence of abduction

He doesn't really have any though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 04:11:54 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 04:02:11 PM
You don't know they can't prove an abduction.. I would say they can

Well, you'd be totally wrong then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 04:35:35 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 04:11:54 PM
Well, you'd be totally wrong then.

Lol...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 04:40:00 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 20, 2022, 02:09:13 PM
No one who matters still harbours suspicion against the McCanns.  They are not considered suspects by the three police forces conducting the investigation into their daughter's disappearance and who have access to ALL the available evidence and information.  Suspicions amongst the less well informed really don't count for much.

This forum looks at miscarriages of justice, most of which involve the police getting it wrong. It would be interesting if three forces got it wrong, wouldn't it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 04:41:45 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 04:35:35 PM
Lol...

I know dave, I'm going to look a bit foolish when Wolters whips out the concrete evidence, shouldn't be much longer now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 04:44:00 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 04:41:45 PM
I know dave, I'm going to look a bit foolish when Wolters whips out the concrete evidence, shouldn't be much longer now.

no you are not going to look a bit foolish...you are going to look very stupid along with many others...9including so called professionals.....and a so called world class cadaver dog
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 04:40:00 PM
This forum looks at miscarriages of justice, most of which involve the police getting it wrong. It would be interesting if three forces got it wrong, wouldn't it?

Anyone who thinks 3 forces have got it wrong has a very poor understanding of the evidence..imo. we will wait and see.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 04:49:30 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 04:45:18 PM
Anyone who thinks 3 forces have got it wrong has a very poor understanding of the evidence..imo. we will wait and see.

Have they got anything right so far?

They did rule out Tannerman I suppose, they were right to do that, & so were the sceptics.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 04:53:07 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 04:44:00 PM
no you are not going to look a bit foolish...you are going to look very stupid along with many others...9including so called professionals.....and a so called world class cadaver dog

You still aren't letting go of Wolters concrete evidence are you.

Sorry, when does Brueckner's trial start again?

Oh that's right, there isn't going to be one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 05:03:09 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 04:53:07 PM
You still aren't letting go of Wolters concrete evidence are you.

Sorry, when does Brueckner's trial start again?

Oh that's right, there isn't going to be one.

It's not really worth discussing anything with you because you have a poor grasp of reality... Which I will refer to in future as pgor..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2022, 05:06:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 04:40:00 PM
This forum looks at miscarriages of justice, most of which involve the police getting it wrong. It would be interesting if three forces got it wrong, wouldn't it?
Interesting?!  It would be unprecedented!!  Perhaps you can provide examples of where after many years of investigation 3 police forces came to entirely the wrong conclusion about what sort of crime had been committed?  I bet you can't!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2022, 05:09:30 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 05:03:09 PM
It's not really worth discussing anything with you because you have a poor grasp of reality... Which I will refer to in future as pgor..
Spam and others clutch to the belief that if the investigation fails to bring charges against CB then that must mean Madeleine was not abducted and the parents dunnit.  It is of course entirely illogical but what do you expect from people who think that parental involvement is the only logical and plausible explanation for Madeleine's disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 20, 2022, 05:12:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 04:40:00 PM
This forum looks at miscarriages of justice, most of which involve the police getting it wrong. It would be interesting if three forces got it wrong, wouldn't it?

Please don't include SY.   They are looking for a missing person.   I wonder why they are different from PT PJ and German police ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 05:40:26 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 20, 2022, 05:09:30 PM
Spam and others clutch to the belief that if the investigation fails to bring charges against CB then that must mean Madeleine was not abducted and the parents dunnit.  It is of course entirely illogical but what do you expect from people who think that parental involvement is the only logical and plausible explanation for Madeleine's disappearance.

Well, if CB isn't convicted, then there wasn't an abduction, since he's the only suspect, against whom ALL the evidence must lead, apparently.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 05:42:49 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 20, 2022, 05:12:14 PM
Please don't include SY.   They are looking for a missing person.   I wonder why they are different from PT PJ and German police ?

They are treating it as a missing person case... Because they have no definitive evidence of death... That doesn't mean they think Maddie is still alive
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 05:44:09 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 05:03:09 PM
It's not really worth discussing anything with you because you have a poor grasp of reality... Which I will refer to in future as pgor..

Well, let's have a look at that shall we.

Wolters said he could prove Maddie was murdered, I said no he couldn't, & I was right about that.

So, not a bad grasp on reality from me there really,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 05:44:30 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 05:40:26 PM
Well, if CB isn't convicted, then there wasn't an abduction, since he's the only suspect, against whom ALL the evidence must lead, apparently.

You're wrong again
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 05:45:06 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 05:44:30 PM
You're wrong again

Nope, Wolters still hasn't proven me wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 05:46:05 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 05:44:09 PM
Well, let's have a look at that shall we.

Wolters said he could prove Maddie was murdered, I said no he couldn't, & I was right about that.

So, not a bad grasp on reality from me there really,

In reality you don't know wolters cannot prove madfie was abducted and murdered
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 05:47:13 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 05:45:06 PM
Nope, Wolters still hasn't proven me wrong.

That does nt mean you are right.. Reality
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 05:48:25 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 05:46:05 PM
In reality you don't know wolters cannot prove madfie was abducted and murdered

Well, I do, since he can't prove it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 05:48:59 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 05:47:13 PM
That does nt mean you are right.. Reality

I am though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2022, 05:50:40 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 05:48:59 PM
I am though.

You are that much of a fool you don't understand why you are wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 05:52:15 PM

Look, this is getting us nowhere.

Let's all just sit tight & wait patiently & peacefully until Wolters reveals the concrete evidence, if really has any that is, which he obviously doesn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 20, 2022, 06:01:56 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 20, 2022, 05:12:14 PM
Please don't include SY.   They are looking for a missing person.   I wonder why they are different from PT PJ and German police ?

They have always said that, haven't they? Why do you think Redwood looked underground though?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 20, 2022, 07:04:28 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 20, 2022, 01:32:32 PM
It will be very sad if Canaan goes to his grave taking his secrets with him.

What if there are none to take ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 07:23:13 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 20, 2022, 07:04:28 PM
What if there are none to take ?

"When the police interviewed Cannan about the significance of the number plate on the Mini, he acknowledged that the initials could stand for Suzy Lamplugh but said a "Bristol businessman" from whom he bought the car for £100 was responsible for the deaths of Lamplugh, Banks and another woman. Asked if that businessman was him, he replied "Yes", but then immediately recanted."

I chuckled slightly when I read that, then felt a bit guilty about it, it's terrible I know because it's about murder, but I'm sorry, I had to give the him slight kudos for brazenly stringing the pigs along in such a way.

Yeah, he probably murdered Suzy, but the police can't prove it, so, technically, he didn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 20, 2022, 07:45:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 20, 2022, 01:32:32 PM
It will be very sad if Canaan goes to his grave taking his secrets with him.
"There are one or two (crimes) I haven't been caught for"...

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7652995/suzy-lamplugh-murder-suspect-police-tapes/ (https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7652995/suzy-lamplugh-murder-suspect-police-tapes/)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 07:54:38 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 20, 2022, 07:45:11 PM
"There are one or two (crimes) I haven't been caught for"...

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7652995/suzy-lamplugh-murder-suspect-police-tapes/ (https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7652995/suzy-lamplugh-murder-suspect-police-tapes/)

I'd be interested to see the interview tapes, shame they only released a few minutes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 20, 2022, 07:58:41 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2022, 07:54:38 PM
I'd be interested to see the interview tapes, shame they only released a few minutes.
Eighteen hours worth chucked on a rubbish tip... what a waste!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2022, 07:59:16 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 20, 2022, 07:04:28 PM
What if there are none to take ?
Everyone has secrets.  He is a serial rapist and killer, and the Met think there is a very high likelihood he was involved in the Lamplugh case.  Chances are we will never know but that does not mean Suzi was not abducted and murdered (even if trolls say otherwise just for the laffs).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 21, 2022, 07:03:51 AM
Posh John Cannaaaaan with his put on plummy voice, who dislikes inflated egos but admires Prince Charles, Bertrand Russell and Mahatma Ghandi...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U3mmHpaS6U (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U3mmHpaS6U)

Long live psycho killers whose eyebrows meet in the middle... or not, as the case might soon be...

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/local-news/suzy-lamplugh-murder-suspect-john-7200891 (https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/local-news/suzy-lamplugh-murder-suspect-john-7200891)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 07:08:12 AM
Quote from: Myster on June 21, 2022, 07:03:51 AM
Posh John Cannaaaaan with his put on plummy voice, who dislikes inflated egos but admires Prince Charles, Bertrand Russell and Mahatma Ghandi...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U3mmHpaS6U (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U3mmHpaS6U)

Long live psycho killers whose eyebrows meet in the middle... or not, as the case might soon be...

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/local-news/suzy-lamplugh-murder-suspect-john-7200891 (https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/local-news/suzy-lamplugh-murder-suspect-john-7200891)
I wonder why he never sued the police or appealed to the ECHR when he was publicly named as the chief suspect in Suzy’s disappearance?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 07:44:31 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 21, 2022, 07:08:12 AM
I wonder why he never sued the police or appealed to the ECHR when he was publicly named as the chief suspect in Suzy’s disappearance?

Did they say they suspected him or did they say he was guilty?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 08:24:19 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 07:44:31 AM
Did they say they suspected him or did they say he was guilty?
they made it very clear that they though he was guilty and weren't interested in pursuing any other line of enquiry  https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/jul/30/ukcrime.theobserver
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 08:56:16 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 21, 2022, 08:24:19 AM
they made it very clear that they though he was guilty and weren't interested in pursuing any other line of enquiry  https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/jul/30/ukcrime.theobserver

One policeman seems convinced, but he never used the 'guilty' word.

Cannon made it clear he would respond;

Even if sufficient evidence is uncovered to charge him, it might not lead to a trial. Cannan could argue that, given the massive publicity surrounding the case, selecting a fair-minded jury would be impossible. Cannan, claiming his innocence, has already said he has been convicted by the media.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 09:08:07 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 08:56:16 AM
One policeman seems convinced, but he never used the 'guilty' word.

Cannon made it clear he would respond;

Even if sufficient evidence is uncovered to charge him, it might not lead to a trial. Cannan could argue that, given the massive publicity surrounding the case, selecting a fair-minded jury would be impossible. Cannan, claiming his innocence, has already said he has been convicted by the media.

Like The McCanns you mean?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 21, 2022, 09:51:30 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 09:08:07 AM
Like The McCanns you mean?

No, I think it would be that state that wouldn't get a fair trial, given 15 years of mass media insisting that Maddie was abducted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 10:02:05 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 09:08:07 AM
Like The McCanns you mean?

The McCanns collaborated with the media, unlike Cannon.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 21, 2022, 10:06:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 08:56:16 AM
One policeman seems convinced, but he never used the 'guilty' word.

Cannon made it clear he would respond;

Even if sufficient evidence is uncovered to charge him, it might not lead to a trial. Cannan could argue that, given the massive publicity surrounding the case, selecting a fair-minded jury would be impossible. Cannan, claiming his innocence, has already said he has been convicted by the media.

Cannan was told in 2002 that he would never face trial over the Lamplugh disappearance  ETA,  the caveat that it was reported as such, the CPS said because of lack of evidence and trial by media.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 10:26:46 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 21, 2022, 10:06:23 AM
Cannan was told in 2002 that he would never face trial over the Lamplugh disappearance  ETA,  the caveat that it was reported as such, the CPS said because of lack of evidence and trial by media.

Relying on the police to always get it right isn't a good idea. They never got the evidence they needed to charge Cannon, and it's beginning to look like the Germans are in a similar situation with Brueckner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 10:33:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 10:02:05 AM
The McCanns collaborated with the media, unlike Cannon.

The McCanns told all those lies that The Media got sued for?  Well I never.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 10:57:11 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 08:56:16 AM
One policeman seems convinced, but he never used the 'guilty' word.

Cannon made it clear he would respond;

Even if sufficient evidence is uncovered to charge him, it might not lead to a trial. Cannan could argue that, given the massive publicity surrounding the case, selecting a fair-minded jury would be impossible. Cannan, claiming his innocence, has already said he has been convicted by the media.
FGS.  You really are in denial.  Please tell me what the difference is between saying "we think he's guilty" and "we think he abducted and murdered SL" - was he a rogue cop btw?  Did no one else in the force agree with him?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 21, 2022, 10:57:45 AM
Media tend to get carried away and embellish stories.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 10:58:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 10:02:05 AM
The McCanns collaborated with the media, unlike Cannon.
@)(++(*  yes the McCanns asked the media to write up stories about them swinging and hiding a deep dark secret, those were the findings of the Leveson Report if I recall correctly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 11:00:07 AM
duplicate
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 11:02:21 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 10:26:46 AM
Relying on the police to always get it right isn't a good idea. They never got the evidence they needed to charge Cannon, and it's beginning to look like the Germans are in a similar situation with Brueckner.
His name's not Cannon btw.  Do you understand the concept of identifying the right culprit but being unable to get the necessary evidence to take it to a successful conviction, or are you of the belief that failure to get a charge to stick means that the suspect did not commit the crime?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 21, 2022, 11:11:47 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 08:56:16 AM
One policeman seems convinced, but he never used the 'guilty' word.

Cannon made it clear he would respond;

Even if sufficient evidence is uncovered to charge him, it might not lead to a trial. Cannan could argue that, given the massive publicity surrounding the case, selecting a fair-minded jury would be impossible. Cannan, claiming his innocence, has already said he has been convicted by the media.

Wolters hasn't used the guilty word
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 11:28:52 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 21, 2022, 10:06:23 AM
Cannan was told in 2002 that he would never face trial over the Lamplugh disappearance  ETA,  the caveat that it was reported as such, the CPS said because of lack of evidence and trial by media.
who told him that?  You mean if he had confessed he would not have faced trial?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 21, 2022, 11:37:59 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 21, 2022, 11:28:52 AM
who told him that?  You mean if he had confessed he would not have faced trial?

Reports say the CPS.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 11:40:24 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 21, 2022, 11:37:59 AM
Reports say the CPS.
do you have an exact quote?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 12:10:56 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 10:33:23 AM
The McCanns told all those lies that The Media got sued for?  Well I never.

Were they found guilty?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 12:15:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 12:10:56 PM
Were they found guilty?

Who?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 21, 2022, 12:38:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 12:10:56 PM
Were they found guilty?

Ss I recall they admitted it and apologised.

Woltere has not been found guilty of breaching CBs human rights but you treat it as a fact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 12:44:37 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 12:15:37 PM
Who?
I think she means the media.  The sceptics cling on to the fact that the papers settled out of court so technically were not found guilty of libel.  They also conveniently turn a blind eye to the findings of the Leveson Report.  Dey are so deep in denial de crocodiles gone have dem for dinner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 01:14:18 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 21, 2022, 12:44:37 PM
I think she means the media.  The sceptics cling on to the fact that the papers settled out of court so technically were not found guilty of libel.  They also conveniently turn a blind eye to the findings of the Leveson Report.  Dey are so deep in denial de crocodiles gone have dem for dinner.

The fact that the newspapers weren't found guilty only crops up when others ignore it. As the McCanns learned later, suing doesn't guarantee getting the money.

Are you OK? Your native language seems to have deserted you.  @)(++(*

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 01:15:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 21, 2022, 12:44:37 PM
I think she means the media.  The sceptics cling on to the fact that the papers settled out of court so technically were not found guilty of libel.  They also conveniently turn a blind eye to the findings of the Leveson Report.  Dey are so deep in denial de crocodiles gone have dem for dinner.

Oh God.  Not that old chestnut again.

What do Sceptics not understand about settling out of court because they know they are going to lose?

Or do the Sceptics think that The McCanns paid The Media?  And then stood on the court steps to add to their humiliation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 02:09:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2022, 01:14:18 PM
The fact that the newspapers weren't found guilty only crops up when others ignore it. As the McCanns learned later, suing doesn't guarantee getting the money.

Are you OK? Your native language seems to have deserted you.  @)(++(*
So you think the only reason they sued was for the money.  And the media just thought “ yeah what the hell here’s half a mill, can’t be arsed to defend ourselves against the outrageous suggestion that we libelled them”.  Right you are then. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 02:23:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 21, 2022, 02:09:14 PM
So you think the only reason they sued was for the money.  And the media just thought “ yeah what the hell here’s half a mill, can’t be arsed to defend ourselves against the outrageous suggestion that we libelled them”.  Right you are then.

I believe that the money all went into The Fund.  Including that which was paid out to the other members of The McCann Party.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 02:54:46 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 02:23:17 PM
I believe that the money all went into The Fund.  Including that which was paid out to the other members of The McCann Party.
Is that the Fund that was used to buy the McCanns mansion, yacht and keep Kate in dangly earrings in perpetuity *counts down the seconds until someone pipes up with “mortgage payments”*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 02:56:22 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 01:15:36 PM
Oh God.  Not that old chestnut again.

What do Sceptics not understand about settling out of court because they know they are going to lose?

Or do the Sceptics think that The McCanns paid The Media?  And then stood on the court steps to add to their humiliation.
It is possible to settle out of court without admitting guilt.  Did the papers choose this option?  No they did not. Instead they issued front page apologies. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 21, 2022, 03:27:04 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 01:15:36 PM
Oh God.  Not that old chestnut again.

What do Sceptics not understand about settling out of court because they know they are going to lose?

Or do the Sceptics think that The McCanns paid The Media?  And then stood on the court steps to add to their humiliation.

J Archer won half million quid from express newspapers for liblel, trouble is he was later proved to be the liar and had to pay Express newspapers back the money plus interest.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2171185.stm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 21, 2022, 03:29:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 21, 2022, 11:40:24 AM
do you have an exact quote?

Reports say it was the CPS.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 05:04:57 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 21, 2022, 03:29:19 PM
Reports say it was the CPS.
let’s see exactly what it says in the report then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 05:06:29 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 21, 2022, 03:27:04 PM
J Archer won half million quid from express newspapers for liblel, trouble is he was later proved to be the liar and had to pay Express newspapers back the money plus interest.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2171185.stm
So what? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 05:38:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 21, 2022, 02:54:46 PM
Is that the Fund that was used to buy the McCanns mansion, yacht and keep Kate in dangly earrings in perpetuity *counts down the seconds until someone pipes up with “mortgage payments”*

Two Mortgage Payments that were then repaid to The Fund shortly afterwards.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 05:40:51 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 21, 2022, 03:27:04 PM
J Archer won half million quid from express newspapers for liblel, trouble is he was later proved to be the liar and had to pay Express newspapers back the money plus interest.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2171185.stm

When do you think this might happen?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 21, 2022, 06:51:50 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 05:40:51 PM
When do you think this might happen?

To whom, I'm just showing in an off topic thread what can happen should libel cases go wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2022, 07:06:09 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 21, 2022, 06:51:50 PM
To whom, I'm just showing in an off topic thread what can happen should libel cases go wrong.

Oh Dear, what is the point anymore?  This decision will not be reversed.  The Media outlets admitted culpability without even going into Court.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 21, 2022, 07:54:41 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 21, 2022, 05:04:57 PM
let’s see exactly what it says in the report then.

All 4,"In the Footsteps of killers" CPS wouldn't take it to court, do process not followed, trial by media already. its there if you look.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2022, 08:40:23 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 21, 2022, 07:54:41 PM
All 4,"In the Footsteps of killers" CPS wouldn't take it to court, do process not followed, trial by media already. its there if you look.
Right, so they didn’t say he would never face charges, thanks for comfirming.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 22, 2022, 09:43:46 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 21, 2022, 08:40:23 PM
Right, so they didn’t say he would never face charges, thanks for comfirming.

The lead detective of the second investigation was asked why he (JC) wasn't charged, his answer was that a judge said he would not get a fair trial because of the trial by media and do process was not followed, that can never go away a half decent defence would use it, hence the CPS would not convict, once again the wonderful MET fecked up.

So he'll never face charges over the Lamplugh case and didn't .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 22, 2022, 12:35:03 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 22, 2022, 09:43:46 AM
The lead detective of the second investigation was asked why he (JC) wasn't charged, his answer was that a judge said he would not get a fair trial because of the trial by media and do process was not followed, that can never go away a half decent defence would use it, hence the CPS would not convict, once again the wonderful MET fecked up.

So he'll never face charges over the Lamplugh case and didn't .

No, using your langiage, the Media fecked up, NOT the MET.

And history might be repeating itself with CB's case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 22, 2022, 12:45:14 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 22, 2022, 12:35:03 PM
No, using your langiage, the Media fecked up, NOT the MET.

And history might be repeating itself with CB's case.

Well, both the police & Suzy's family f*cked up a bit really.

Police officer missed chance to nail Suzy Lamplugh’s ‘killer’ John Cannan because he fell out with her mum and ‘failed to check alibi’

Det Supt Malcolm Hackett’s view of 'Mr Kipper' suspect John Cannan was prejudiced by his belief Diana Lamplugh was behind media stories, according to official review

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7622791/suzy-lamplugh-murder-suspect-missed-opportunities/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2022, 01:07:16 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 22, 2022, 09:43:46 AM
The lead detective of the second investigation was asked why he (JC) wasn't charged, his answer was that a judge said he would not get a fair trial because of the trial by media and do process was not followed, that can never go away a half decent defence would use it, hence the CPS would not convict, once again the wonderful MET fecked up.

So he'll never face charges over the Lamplugh case and didn't .
It’s “due” process not do process.  If JC had confessed are you telling me he would have got off then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 22, 2022, 01:23:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 22, 2022, 01:07:16 PM
It’s “due” process not do process.  If JC had confessed are you telling me he would have got off then?

He did confess, then immediately retracted.

The problem is the case against him was weak.

Suzy's dna in his car proves only that she'd been in that car at some point, not when, the police never found the photo of Suzy tied up in the back of it, unlike with Brueckner, Maddie & whichever of his vehicles you care to choose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 22, 2022, 06:13:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 22, 2022, 01:07:16 PM
It’s “due” process not do process.  If JC had confessed are you telling me he would have got off then?

How about dew process, you'll have to ask the CPS about the second point . Bellfield allegedly confessed to the Russel murders, that it seems is bull , so even if JC were to confess could it have been heard ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2022, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 22, 2022, 06:13:39 PM
How about dew process, you'll have to ask the CPS about the second point . Bellfield allegedly confessed to the Russel murders, that it seems is bull , so even if JC were to confess could it have been heard ?
No, it’s not dew process, not do process, nor Jew process, but due process.  I guess it’s only in Portugal where a confession without any other evidence is sufficient for charges to be brought then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 22, 2022, 10:55:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 22, 2022, 08:20:25 PM
No, it’s not dew process, not do process, nor Jew process, but due process.  I guess it’s only in Portugal where a confession without any other evidence is sufficient for charges to be brought then.

Well, you'd guess wrongly, Michael Stone was convicted on the strength of hearsay evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 23, 2022, 07:20:38 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 22, 2022, 10:55:38 PM
Well, you'd guess wrongly, Michael Stone was convicted on the strength of hearsay evidence.
CB fessed to a mate he killed Madeleine so all is  right in the world.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 23, 2022, 07:30:37 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 23, 2022, 07:20:38 AM
CB fessed to a mate he killed Madeleine so all is  right in the world.
Did Michael Stone confess?  I was not aware that he had.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 23, 2022, 01:33:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 23, 2022, 07:30:37 AM
Did Michael Stone confess?  I was not aware that he had.

Allegedly :

A fellow prisoner called Damien Daley told police that Stone had confessed to the murders as they talked from next-door cells.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 23, 2022, 02:15:17 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 23, 2022, 01:33:36 PM
Allegedly :

A fellow prisoner called Damien Daley told police that Stone had confessed to the murders as they talked from next-door cells.
I'm talking about a confession to police, not a hearsay confession.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 23, 2022, 02:59:59 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 23, 2022, 02:15:17 PM
I'm talking about a confession to police, not a hearsay confession.

Nope he didn't to the police, he  has always protested his innocence and was convicted on the flimsiest evidence, its reported.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 23, 2022, 07:11:23 PM

Roe vs Wade Federal abortion rights, supreme court decision expected today or tomorrow.

Expect mass civil unrest in the states if the justices do the right thing & criminalise infanticide in the w..b.
Judges have already had their lives threatened, protesters damaging their homes.

What's wrong with just using a johnny, or the pill, or the coil, the implant, the morning after pill?

No, we should just let the foetus gestate for a while & then have it crushed to bits & vacuumed out. Much more ethical, & anyone who believes otherwise is a bigot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 23, 2022, 08:29:45 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 23, 2022, 07:11:23 PM
Roe vs Wade Federal abortion rights, supreme court decision expected today or tomorrow.

Expect mass civil unrest in the states if the justices do the right thing & criminalise infanticide in the w..b.
Judges have already had their lives threatened, protesters damaging their homes.

What's wrong with just using a johnny, or the pill, or the coil, the implant, the morning after pill?

No, we should just let the foetus gestate for a while & then have it crushed to bits & vacuumed out. Much more ethical, & anyone who believes otherwise is a bigot.

It'll be alright ,easier to carry a gun.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61915237
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 23, 2022, 08:56:29 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 23, 2022, 07:11:23 PM
Roe vs Wade Federal abortion rights, supreme court decision expected today or tomorrow.

Expect mass civil unrest in the states if the justices do the right thing & criminalise infanticide in the w..b.
Judges have already had their lives threatened, protesters damaging their homes.

What's wrong with just using a johnny, or the pill, or the coil, the implant, the morning after pill?

No, we should just let the foetus gestate for a while & then have it crushed to bits & vacuumed out. Much more ethical, & anyone who believes otherwise is a bigot.

Abortion isn't infanticide.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 23, 2022, 09:05:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 23, 2022, 08:56:29 PM
Abortion isn't infanticide.

Well, whatever you care to call it, I think it's gruesome, barbaric & should only be permissible in extreme circumstances, in what should by now be a modern & civilised society IMO.

Education is free & there are more than enough forms of contraception available these days.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 23, 2022, 09:25:08 PM

Alright, fine, I'll support a woman's right to choose, provided men are equally entitled to paper abortions.

That's true equality IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 23, 2022, 09:59:04 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 23, 2022, 08:29:45 PM
It'll be alright ,easier to carry a gun.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61915237

Yep, I suppose if the children don't get aborted first they can can always get gunned down in school or at the supermarket later.

You'd be crazy not to carry a gun in the states.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 23, 2022, 10:27:20 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 23, 2022, 08:56:29 PM
Abortion isn't infanticide.
Don’t feed the troll please.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 23, 2022, 10:28:43 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 23, 2022, 09:05:56 PM
Well, whatever you care to call it, I think it's gruesome, barbaric & should only be permissible in extreme circumstances, in what should by now be a modern & civilised society IMO.

Education is free & there are more than enough forms of contraception available these days.

It's not pleasant, but it's better than back-street abortions imo. Making it illegal won't stop those happening; it never did. For women, the price of a failed contraceptive or a mistake is high.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 23, 2022, 10:43:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 23, 2022, 10:28:43 PM
It's not pleasant, but it's better than back-street abortions imo. Making it illegal won't stop those happening; it never did. For women, the price of a failed contraceptive or a mistake is high.
Not to mention the price of becoming pregnant as a result of rape.  You are debating with a troll who claims to hate children and who believes that the population is too high and should be culled so I don’t know why you’re bothering tbh.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 23, 2022, 11:00:05 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 23, 2022, 10:43:33 PM
Not to mention the price of becoming pregnant as a result of rape. You are debating with a troll who claims to hate children and who believes that the population is too high and should be culled so I don’t know why you’re bothering tbh.

I did say except in extreme circumstances, but I'd like to see rape proven in a court of law first, just in case it was only regret & not an actual rape.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 23, 2022, 11:07:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 23, 2022, 10:28:43 PM
It's not pleasant, but it's better than back-street abortions imo. Making it illegal won't stop those happening; it never did. For women, the price of a failed contraceptive or a mistake is high.

They're not planning on a nationwide ban, unfortunately, just allowing individual states the right to choose, ironically.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 23, 2022, 11:13:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 23, 2022, 10:43:33 PM
Not to mention the price of becoming pregnant as a result of rape.  You are debating with a troll who claims to hate children and who believes that the population is too high and should be culled so I don’t know why you’re bothering tbh.

There should be some effort made toward depopulation really, we live on a finite planet with finite resources, climate emergency, carbon footprints etc, yet we seem intent on expanding the population indefinitely, so technically yes, I should be in favour of abortion, but since the right to choose only applies to the mother & not the father I'm obliged to oppose it, until both sexes get equal rights over the matter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 07:24:26 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 23, 2022, 10:43:33 PM
Not to mention the price of becoming pregnant as a result of rape.  You are debating with a troll who claims to hate children and who believes that the population is too high and should be culled so I don’t know why you’re bothering tbh.

I wouldn't cull, but I do see human beings as a plague upon this beautiful planet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 07:44:47 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 23, 2022, 11:13:48 PM
There should be some effort made toward depopulation really, we live on a finite planet with finite resources, climate emergency, carbon footprints etc, yet we seem intent on expanding the population indefinitely, so technically yes, I should be in favour of abortion, but since the right to choose only applies to the mother & not the father I'm obliged to oppose it, until both sexes get equal rights over the matter.

When men can carry foetuses and give birth to infants they can have equal rights. I had three children in the 1960's, but legally they belonged to my husband. When I applied for them to be placed onto my passport at the end of the 1960's so I could take them abroad to join their father I had to produced proof of my husband's permission to do it.
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 08:21:20 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 07:24:26 AM
I wouldn't cull, but I do see human beings as a plague upon this beautiful planet.

What a very odd idea.  Humans don't ask to be born and never did.

And what is the point of a beautiful planet if no one gets to live on it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 24, 2022, 08:45:02 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 07:24:26 AM
I wouldn't cull, but I do see human beings as a plague upon this beautiful planet.

No doubt that doesn't include yourself
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 09:19:18 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 07:24:26 AM
I wouldn't cull, but I do see human beings as a plague upon this beautiful planet.
without humans there would be no one to appreciate the beauty.  Good to know you wouldn't cull though, at least you're not all bad.  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 24, 2022, 09:21:42 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 08:21:20 AM
What a very odd idea.  Humans don't ask to be born and never did.

And what is the point of a beautiful planet if no one gets to live on it?

But also ruin it ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 09:22:33 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 07:44:47 AM
When men can carry foetuses and give birth to infants they can have equal rights. I had three children in the 1960's, but legally they belonged to my husband. When I applied for them to be placed onto my passport at the end of the 1960's so I could take them abroad to join their father I had to produced proof of my husband's permission to do it.
"Men" can now carry foetuses and give birth, yes it's a crazy ol' mixed up world we now live in and no mistake.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 24, 2022, 09:25:31 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 09:22:33 AM
"Men" can now carry foetuses and give birth, yes it's a crazy ol' mixed up world we now live in and no mistake.

It's not the world that is mixed up, it's the loonies who inhabit it. There are freaks everywhere!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 24, 2022, 09:27:28 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 07:24:26 AM
I wouldn't cull, but I do see human beings as a plague upon this beautiful planet.

Absolutely agree. The planet will still be here long after the destructive human race has destroyed itself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 09:28:38 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 08:21:20 AM
What a very odd idea.  Humans don't ask to be born and never did.

And what is the point of a beautiful planet if no one gets to live on it?

You mean if no human beings get to live on it, I assume. Earth has always teemed with life. I don't think humans are more important than other life forms.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 09:28:55 AM
Quote from: John on June 24, 2022, 09:27:28 AM
Absolutely agree. The planet will be here after the destructive human race has destroyed itself.
and I bet you don't even believe in anthropogenic climate change!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 09:29:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 09:28:38 AM
You mean if no human beings get to live on it, I assume. Earth has always teemed with life. I don't think humans are more important than other life forms.
Interesting.  So if you step on an ant and kill it should you be charged with murder?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 09:37:36 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 24, 2022, 08:45:02 AM
No doubt that doesn't include yourself

Of course it does, I'm a member of the human race believe it or not.  8(>((

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 09:39:08 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 09:22:33 AM
"Men" can now carry foetuses and give birth, yes it's a crazy ol' mixed up world we now live in and no mistake.

Are you sure?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 09:44:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 09:39:08 AM
Are you sure?
About what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 09:48:30 AM
The Human Race will only destroy itself, if this is at all possible.  But it certainly won't destroy Planet Earth.

And bearing in mind of course, that we Humans are only a slightly advanced breed of Mammal who are here simply to procreate, then trying to have a nice time doesn't seem such a bad idea.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 24, 2022, 09:50:26 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 09:48:30 AM
The Human Race will only destroy itself, if this is at all possible.  But it certainly won't destroy Planet Earth.

And bearing in mind of course, that we Humans are only a slightly advanced breed of Mammal who are here simply to procreate, then trying to have a nice time doesn't seem such a bad idea.

Climate change linked to human activity not destroying the planet ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 09:55:44 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 24, 2022, 09:50:26 AM
Climate change linked to human activity not destroying the planet ?

Planet Earth is looking fine from where I am sitting.  But we do have a glorious amount of trees.  Many more so than when I arrived here 30 years ago.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 09:57:18 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 09:29:38 AM
Interesting.  So if you step on an ant and kill it should you be charged with murder?

That's a silly question imo. Human views of right and wrong are not the issue and nor is one human treading on one ant. You may as well ask if the stingray which killed Steve Irwin should have been charged with murder.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 24, 2022, 09:57:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 09:28:38 AM
You mean if no human beings get to live on it, I assume. Earth has always teemed with life. I don't think humans are more important than other life forms.

So you are a vegan

You dont take antibiotics

And if either your rabbit or your child had to die you would find that a difficult decision
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 24, 2022, 10:02:53 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 09:55:44 AM
Planet Earth is looking fine from where I am sitting.  But we do have a glorious amount of trees.  Many more so than when I arrived here 30 years ago.

Rose tinted, Ukraine is nice this year it seems.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 24, 2022, 10:09:20 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 09:28:55 AM
and I bet you don't even believe in anthropogenic climate change!

You'd be wrong then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 10:10:15 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 09:57:18 AM
That's a silly question imo. Human views of right and wrong are not the issue and nor is one human treading on one ant. You may as well ask if the stingray which killed Steve Irwin should have been charged with murder.
It was you who claimed humans are no more important than animals, which suggests to me that you put equal value on the lives of all animals as you do on human lives (and I bet you enjoy a good Sunday Roast!)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 24, 2022, 10:10:38 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 09:29:38 AM
Interesting.  So if you step on an ant and kill it should you be charged with murder?

A curious thought  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 10:11:01 AM
Quote from: John on June 24, 2022, 10:09:20 AM
You'd be wrong then.
Consider me astonished.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 10:12:41 AM

I'd love to know what the Neanderthals were doing to cause the end of the last ice age.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 24, 2022, 10:12:46 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 10:10:15 AM
It was you who claimed humans are no more important than animals, which suggests to me that you put equal value on the lives of all animals as you do on human lives (and I bet you enjoy a good Sunday Roast!)

I believe it's something to do with being at the top of the food chain.  When a human eating alien appears from another galaxy that should all change.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 10:13:12 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 09:55:44 AM
Planet Earth is looking fine from where I am sitting.  But we do have a glorious amount of trees.  Many more so than when I arrived here 30 years ago.

Unfortunately the state of the Earth can't be judged by looking at your little corner of it. The country you live in has more licenced hunters than any other EU country. They kill 17 million birds each year. Around 200,000 larks are shot every year in France alone. Millions of song thrushes, redwing, fieldfare and blackbirds are also shot down. That's humans having their 'nice times' for you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 10:13:58 AM
Quote from: John on June 24, 2022, 10:10:38 AM
A curious thought  @)(++(*
Indeed.  Consider all the years wasted worrying about the fate of Madeleine McCann when G-Unit could have devoted the same amount of time to the equally serious matter of who killed Cock Robin.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 10:15:40 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 10:12:41 AM
I'd love to know what the Neanderthals were doing to cause the end of the last ice age.
didn't they invent fire?  And I bet there was a lot of farting and belching by the fireside after a good helping of roast mammoth. Need I say more?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on June 24, 2022, 10:17:00 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 10:12:41 AM
I'd love to know what the Neanderthals were doing to cause the end of the last ice age.

Actually that was down to the ice buildup in the northern hemisphere and consequently a weight imbalance which caused the planet to change its tilt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 10:17:27 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 10:13:12 AM
Unfortunately the state of the Earth can't be judged by looking at your little corner of it. The country you live in has more licenced hunters than any other EU country. They kill 17 million birds each year. Around 200,000 larks are shot every year in France alone. Millions of song thrushes, redwing, fieldfare and blackbirds are also shot down. That's humans having their 'nice times' for you.

In that case, why are you judging it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 10:19:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 10:13:12 AM
Unfortunately the state of the Earth can't be judged by looking at your little corner of it. The country you live in has more licenced hunters than any other EU country. They kill 17 million birds each year. Around 200,000 larks are shot every year in France alone. Millions of song thrushes, redwing, fieldfare and blackbirds are also shot down. That's humans having their 'nice times' for you.
Do you eat chicken?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 24, 2022, 10:20:15 AM
Quote from: John on June 24, 2022, 10:17:00 AM
Actually that was down to the ice buildup in the northern hemisphere and consequently a weight imbalance which caused the planet to change its tilt.

Thats what gave us the four seasons, good job too, Vivaldi would have been stuck.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 10:29:28 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 10:10:15 AM
It was you who claimed humans are no more important than animals, which suggests to me that you put equal value on the lives of all animals as you do on human lives (and I bet you enjoy a good Sunday Roast!)

In the context of the survival of the planet we share, other species are often more valuable than humans; bees for example.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 10:33:07 AM

Lake Mead, the Hoover dam, 1983-2021


(https://cms.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/8322.jpg?itok=dXz7FBB2)


Drought-Stricken Lake Mead Less Than 150 Feet From "Dead Pool"

The surface of Lake Mead, North America's largest artificial reservoir, now stands at 1044 feet above sea level and is dropping fast. If Lake Mead's water level falls another 149 feet, a dangerous level known as a "dead pool" could wreak havoc across Southwestern US.

Since the beginning of March, Lake Mead has dropped about 23 feet, and compared with the 5-year trend, the reservoir's water levels are well below average, at the lowest point since the lake was filled nearly a century ago.

................

https://www.zerohedge.com/weather/lake-mead-less-150-feet-dead-pool
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 10:40:22 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 10:19:58 AM
Do you eat chicken?

That's what we raise them for. I don't have any desire to eat ortolan buntings, though, which don't exist to feed me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 10:48:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 10:40:22 AM
That's what we raise them for. I don't have any desire to eat ortolan buntings, though, which don't exist to feed me.

Do you get your Chicken from France?  Most people do these days.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 11:03:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 10:40:22 AM
That's what we raise them for. I don't have any desire to eat ortolan buntings, though, which don't exist to feed me.
So chickens only exist for your benefit?  How selfish is that?!  Chickens are by and large raised in the most squalid and cruel conditions worldwide and are slaughtered in their billions to keep people like you in chicken nuggets and all you can bleat on about is a few hundred thousand freebirds being shot down by hunters each year?  What a hypocrite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 11:04:49 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 10:29:28 AM
In the context of the survival of the planet we share, other species are often more valuable than humans; bees for example.
So if you would put the value of a bee above that of the value of a human why would you not make crimes against bees such as murder, accidental death (aka beeslaughter), false imprisonment etc against the law?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 24, 2022, 11:11:32 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 11:04:49 AM
So if you would put the value of a bee above that of the value of a human why would you not make crimes against bees such as murder, accidental death (aka beeslaughter), false imprisonment etc against the law?

It is against the law to steal bee's(hives) , but if a swarm should land on your property then that swarm is yours not from whence they came.

A swarm in May is worth a load of hay, a swarm in June is worth a silver spoon.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 11:14:40 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 24, 2022, 11:11:32 AM
It is against the law to steal bee's(hives) , but if a swarm should land on your property then that swarm is yours not from whence they came.

A swarm in May is worth a load of hay, a swarm in June is worth a silver spoon.
that's a crime against another person - the crime of theft, it's not a crime against bees.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 24, 2022, 11:17:08 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 11:14:40 AM
that's a crime against another person - the crime of theft, it's not a crime against bees.


Stick your hand in a hive and see if they agree.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 11:23:03 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 24, 2022, 11:17:08 AM

Stick your hand in a hive and see if they agree.
silly
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 11:42:20 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 11:03:14 AM
So chickens only exist for your benefit?  How selfish is that?!  Chickens are by and large raised in the most squalid and cruel conditions worldwide and are slaughtered in their billions to keep people like you in chicken nuggets and all you can bleat on about is a few hundred thousand freebirds being shot down by hunters each year?  What a hypocrite.

Raising animals for food means we don't have to slaughter wild animals. Chickens are not in danger of extinction, songbirds are. Illegally hunting songbirds until they're close to extinction like the ortolan bunting is not sensible or acceptable. I don't eat chicken nuggets, btw. I do buy free range British meat.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 11:47:12 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 11:42:20 AM
Raising animals for food means we don't have to slaughter wild animals. Chickens are not in danger of extinction, songbirds are. Illegally hunting songbirds until they're close to extinction like the ortolan bunting is not sensible or acceptable. I don't eat chicken nuggets, btw. I do buy free range British meat.

Save The Planet with Free Range British Meat.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 11:48:37 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 11:42:20 AM
Raising animals for food means we don't have to slaughter wild animals. Chickens are not in danger of extinction, songbirds are. Illegally hunting songbirds until they're close to extinction like the ortolan bunting is not sensible or acceptable. I don't eat chicken nuggets, btw. I do buy free range British meat.
I am against illegal hunting of animals but I am also against cruelty to animals, factory farming and eating animals generally.  Birds are birds and cruelty is cruelty no matter the raritiy of the species or variety in question.  Just because you buy free range British meat does not mean that you do not also consume meat products that were generated using factory farming methods.  Do you consume eggs?  Milk?  Do you keep your own chickens, and milk your own cow?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 11:57:45 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 11:04:49 AM
So if you would put the value of a bee above that of the value of a human why would you not make crimes against bees such as murder, accidental death (aka beeslaughter), false imprisonment etc against the law?

You need to move away from the idea that our (invented) morality and laws have anything to do with anything. Wildlife is perfectly capable of surviving without us, but we can't survive without it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 12:20:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 11:57:45 AM
You need to move away from the idea that our (invented) morality and laws have anything to do with anything. Wildlife is perfectly capable of surviving without us, but we can't survive without it.
And you need to stop patronizing me.  I have never made the claim that we can survive without "wildlife" but we humans are in charge around here and so clearly morality and laws have a lot to do with everything.  We have laws to protect wildlife and the countryside for example.  Our morality means we abhor cruelty to animals (well, some of us do) but also hypocrites (as we continue to exploit animals on a mass scale).  Bees are not more valuable than humans, but of course they are a vital part of the ecosystem.  You could argue that flowers are more valuable than bees if you really want to take it to the logical conclusion because without flowers there would be no bees.  Does that mean flowers are more valuable than humans?  if so, stop picking them and putting them in vases!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 12:35:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 12:20:29 PM
And you need to stop patronizing me.  I have never made the claim that we can survive without "wildlife" but we humans are in charge around here and so clearly morality and laws have a lot to do with everything.  We have laws to protect wildlife and the countryside for example.  Our morality means we abhor cruelty to animals (well, some of us do) but also hypocrites (as we continue to exploit animals on a mass scale).  Bees are not more valuable than humans, but of course they are a vital part of the ecosystem.  You could argue that flowers are more valuable than bees if you really want to take it to the logical conclusion because without flowers there would be no bees.  Does that mean flowers are more valuable than humans?  if so, stop picking them and putting them in vases!

It's because we're 'in charge' that I see us as a plague on the face of the Earth.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 12:48:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 12:35:36 PM
It's because we're 'in charge' that I see us as a plague on the face of the Earth.
Oh dear.  You're part of the problem with your 3 kids and god knows how many grandkids.  Shame on you and your pestilent progeny!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 01:00:49 PM

If Planet Earth wasn't capable of sustaining Human Life then there wouldn't be any Humans.  It's all quite simple.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 02:00:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 12:48:09 PM
Oh dear.  You're part of the problem with your 3 kids and god knows how many grandkids.  Shame on you and your pestilent progeny!

We're all part of the problem.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 02:12:33 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 02:00:15 PM
We're all part of the problem.

It's no good saying that if you haven't got a solution.

As it is, I don't feel that I am part of The Problem.  In fact I'm not halfway sure that there is a problem.

I do my best to save energy in ways that most people never even think of and I never waste anything, let alone food.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 02:15:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 02:00:15 PM
We're all part of the problem.
you're the one describing humaity as a plague, I'm not. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 02:22:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 02:15:09 PM
you're the one describing humaity as a plague, I'm not.

Humanity obviously isn't a plague.  We would all be dead if it was.

Mind you, Covid copped for a few.  And there will be another one along in a minute.  So perhaps Nature knows what it is doing after all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 02:45:14 PM
"When your love for the planet leads to a deep disdain for humanity, you need to reassess why you’re an environmentalist in the first place. If you believe that the earth is better off without us, that includes you too! And if we’re all gone, there won’t be anyone around to appreciate an earth that’s whole and free of destruction.

So I say, embrace your love of humanity, fellow environmentalists. Let that love drive you to heal the earth, instead of the hate for other people. Ultimately, we have a world to win—one in which there’s enough room for all of us."

https://www.bard.edu/cep/blog/?p=11973
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 06:07:41 PM

Beautiful

US Supreme Court ends constitutional right to abortion

Millions of women in the US will lose the constitutional right to abortion, after the Supreme Court overturned a 50-year-old ruling that legalised it.

The court struck down the landmark Roe v Wade decision, weeks after an unprecedented leaked document suggested it favoured doing so.

The judgement will transform abortion rights in America, with individual states now able to ban the procedure.

Half of US states are expected to introduce new restrictions or bans.

Thirteen have already passed so-called trigger laws to automatically outlaw abortion following the Supreme Court's ruling. A number of others are likely to pass new restrictions quickly.

In total, abortion access is expected to be cut off for about 36 million women of reproductive age, according to research from Planned Parenthood, a healthcare organisation that provides abortions.

Outside the Supreme Court, demonstrators from both sides had gathered before the judgement came, with police keeping them apart.

One anti-abortion activist told the BBC she was "elated" as her side cheered the decision. "It's not enough just to make this the law of the land. To be pro-life is to make [abortion] unthinkable," she said.

Across the divide, pro-choice supporters decried the decision as "illegitimate" and even a form of "fascism".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61928898
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 06:34:07 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 06:07:41 PM
Beautiful

US Supreme Court ends constitutional right to abortion

Millions of women in the US will lose the constitutional right to abortion, after the Supreme Court overturned a 50-year-old ruling that legalised it.

The court struck down the landmark Roe v Wade decision, weeks after an unprecedented leaked document suggested it favoured doing so.

The judgement will transform abortion rights in America, with individual states now able to ban the procedure.

Half of US states are expected to introduce new restrictions or bans.

Thirteen have already passed so-called trigger laws to automatically outlaw abortion following the Supreme Court's ruling. A number of others are likely to pass new restrictions quickly.

In total, abortion access is expected to be cut off for about 36 million women of reproductive age, according to research from Planned Parenthood, a healthcare organisation that provides abortions.

Outside the Supreme Court, demonstrators from both sides had gathered before the judgement came, with police keeping them apart.

One anti-abortion activist told the BBC she was "elated" as her side cheered the decision. "It's not enough just to make this the law of the land. To be pro-life is to make [abortion] unthinkable," she said.

Across the divide, pro-choice supporters decried the decision as "illegitimate" and even a form of "fascism".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61928898

I wonder if these children whose mothers are going to be legally forced to carry and give birth to them will have good lives?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 06:48:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 06:34:07 PM
I wonder if these children whose mothers are going to be legally forced to carry and give birth to them will have good lives?

Would you have ever aborted a child?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 06:52:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 06:34:07 PM
I wonder if these children whose mothers are going to be legally forced to carry and give birth to them will have good lives?
Some will be neglected, some will be abused, some will grow up never knowing their own parents, but as long as God is happy (and all the American morons who are using their faith as a justification for this backward step) then I’m sure they’ll be just fine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 06:56:39 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 06:48:41 PM
Would you have ever aborted a child?
I would have had I discovered that my baby had a life limiting condition or disability, but probably not simply because it was an inconvenient.time to have a baby.  But that said, I respect a woman’s right to have a termination whatever her reasons.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 07:02:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 06:56:39 PM
I would have had I discovered that my baby had a life limiting condition or disability, but probably not simply because it was an inconvenient.time to have a baby.  But that said, I respect a woman’s right to have a termination whatever her reasons.

I doubt that I could even have done that.  But the right to do so has to remain with the woman.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 07:02:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 06:34:07 PM
I wonder if these children whose mothers are going to be legally forced to carry and give birth to them will have good lives?

Not all of the states are banning it, some will likely impose their own term limits, & women who do live in states where it's controlled can always travel to a Democrat run state, where they'll probably be allowed to terminate well into the twelfth trimester, or they could just try practicing safer sex in the first place.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 07:04:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 06:56:39 PM
I would have had I discovered that my baby had a life limiting condition or disability, but probably not simply because it was an inconvenient.time to have a baby.  But that said, I respect a woman’s right to have a termination whatever her reasons.

Up to what term in pregnancy though?

Let's say, she's laying on the table dilated, still ok?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 07:13:05 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 06:48:41 PM
Would you have ever aborted a child?

I wouldn't rule it out. I think it's a personal decision for a woman, not one to be made by others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 07:16:06 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 07:13:05 PM
I wouldn't rule it out. I think it's a personal decision for a woman, not one to be made by others.

Good.  And so it is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 07:28:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 07:13:05 PM
I wouldn't rule it out. I think it's a personal decision for a woman, not one to be made by others.

Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 07:16:06 PM
Good.  And so it is.

.....and the father should have a right to a paper abortion if he chooses, right?

That would be fair, wouldn't it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 07:40:27 PM

I have no conception of any man who thinks he might have a right to decide.  In exchange for a quick poke.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 07:47:18 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 07:40:27 PM
I have no conception of any man who thinks he might have a right to decide.  In exchange for a quick poke.

He doesn't decide on termination per se, he can't make a woman terminate, a paper abortion means if the woman chooses to carry the child against the fathers wishes, he has a right to opt out of any contact or financial support for the child.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 07:58:25 PM

Surely the father gets a say in that.

Lets say, a one night stand from 10 years ago turns up on his doorstep.

He had absolutely no contact or connection to the woman in the 10 year interim.

She essentially chose to carry & give birth, knowing the father wouldn't be involved.

Is it right that she can later demand child support, when he never consented to the birth of the child? 

Or, is poking it in to be presumed as consent to child birth, & if so, surely a woman couldn't terminate against the fathers wishes either, in fairness.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 08:19:47 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 07:58:25 PM
Surely the father gets a say in that.

Lets say, a one night stand from 10 years ago turns up on his doorstep.

He had absolutely no contact or connection to the woman in the 10 year interim.

She essentially chose to carry & give birth, knowing the father wouldn't be involved.

Is it right that she can later demand child support, when he never consented to the birth of the child? 

Or, is poking it in to be presumed as consent to child birth, & if so, surely a woman couldn't terminate against the fathers wishes either, in fairness.

Changing the abortion laws make it more likely that men will have to contribute to the upbringing of a child they didn't want. Now the child has two parents who resent having to care for it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 08:29:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 08:19:47 PM
Changing the abortion laws make it more likely that men will have to contribute to the upbringing of a child they didn't want. Now the child has two parents who resent having to care for it.

What a very twisted attitude to some poor child who never had a choice.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 08:45:33 PM
It won’t be long before America makes homosexuality illegal and women have to wear head coverings and are denied the vote.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 08:48:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 08:45:33 PM
It won’t be long before America makes homosexuality illegal and women have to wear head coverings and are denied the vote.

You don't like the middle east then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 08:54:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 08:19:47 PM
Changing the abortion laws make it more likely that men will have to contribute to the upbringing of a child they didn't want. Now the child has two parents who resent having to care for it.

They are teaching sex education to 6 year olds, have such a thing as drag queen story hour, gender identity & sexuality is the latest fashion in the states, they could try more lessons in not poking it in unless you want babies, while they're at it.  That's the root of the problem really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 09:00:26 PM
The similarities between far right American so-called Christians and the Taliban are quite marked IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 09:01:26 PM
Obama, Hillary, Biden, AOC have all condemned the decision, so I know I'm on the right side of the debate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 09:06:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 09:00:26 PM
The similarities between far right American so-called Christians and the Taliban are quite marked IMO.

Yeah, but American men don't bury women up to the shoulders & stone them to death for things like adultery. They tend to either divorce or just shoot them instead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2022, 09:35:52 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2022, 08:29:17 PM

What a very twisted attitude to some poor child who never had a choice.

Children often suffer the consequences of other people's decisions. Still, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger, they say.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 09:41:54 PM
America is a shitty f..ked up country (apart from New York which isn’t really representative of the rest).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 09:47:09 PM
Roe v Wade: Will abortion be illegal in the US and could access to contraception be next?

The US Supreme Court has overturned Roe v Wade in a historic move that will pave the way for individual states to completely remove a woman's right to have an abortion.

For almost 50 years pregnant people in the US have had the legal right to an abortion, which was laid out in the 1973 Roe v Wade court case.

On Friday, the US Supreme Court overturned that ruling after the conservative-dominated court ruled 6-3 in favour of the decision.

The move has immediately sparked protests and an uproar from liberal politicians in the United States and is likely to further widen the partisan gap between Democrats and Republicans.

When and where will abortion become illegal in the US?

The ruling itself did not make abortion illegal, it just moved the decision over whether a state should provide abortion services from the Supreme Court to politicians.

Referencing this in the court’s opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito, noted women “are not without electoral or political power.”

Many states have passed so-called "trigger laws" that came into effect as soon as Roe v Wade was overturned that will outlaw abortion.

Others have left old laws regarding abortion still technically in their laws which can now be reactivated.

Finally, some states have tried to pass laws making abortion illegal in all but a few circumstances, usually if the pregnancy endangers the woman's life, which have been struck down by courts for violating Roe v Wade - these could now be brought back.

Overall, 17 states in the US will now be moving quickly to ban abortion except to save a mother's life.

These states are:

Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Oklahoma, Texas, Ohio, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Wisconsin, Wyoming.

Some will permit abortion if the child was conceived by rape or incest.

Georgia, Iowa and South Carolina have said they plan to limit abortions to the first six weeks of pregnancy - often before a woman knows she is pregnant.

Arizona, North Carolina and West Virginia have said they plan on limiting to the first 13 weeks.

All of these states are at least in some way controlled by the Republican Party.

On the other end of the argument, liberal states like New York and California have vowed to make access to abortion a legal right within their own state constitutions.

Despite a majority of states planning to limit access to abortion, almost all of them have relatively small populations meaning only a minority of Americans will lose access to it.

It is expected around 40 million women of childbearing age will be impacted by the ruling, out of the US's 332 million population.

What does this mean for other rights in the US?

The ruling has sparked alarm from among LGBTQ advocates in the US, who fear their rights could now be threatened.

In a separate concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas said the court should review other precedents, including its 2015 decision legalising same-sex marriage, a 2003 decision striking down laws criminalising gay sex and a 1965 decision declaring that married couples have a right to use contraception.

“Let’s just be clear. Today is about this horrifying invasion of privacy that this court is now allowing, and when we lose one right that we have relied on and enjoyed, other rights are at risk,” said Jim Obergefell, the plaintiff in the landmark ruling legalising same-sex marriage, who is now running as a Democrat for the Ohio House.
Justice Thomas is widely viewed as the most conservative member of the court and his opinion was not reflected in Justice Alito's statement.

Justice Alito said: "And to ensure that our decision is not misunderstood or mischaracterized, we emphasize that our decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right."

He added: "Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion."

However, there remains fears people's right to access contraception could be struck down.

Some abortion opponents treat some forms of contraception as forms of abortion, particularly IUDs and emergency birth control such as the morning-after pill.

Lawmakers in Idaho and Missouri last year discussed banning state funding for emergency contraception, and Idaho prevents public schools or universities from dispersing it.

President Joe Biden himself noted this Supreme Court's ruling on Friday could undermine rights to contraception and gay marriage speaking soon after it was announced.

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, a Democrat, called the decision “dangerous” and warned that it carves the nation into two parts. He predicted there will be “a tsunami of radical litigation and legislation aimed at further eroding rights we have taken for granted.”

"Make no mistake — this is just the beginning of a systematic right-wing effort to rewrite decades of bedrock legal precedent," he said.

What does this mean for the UK?

Abortions can take place in the first 24 weeks of pregnancy in England, Scotland and Wales.

However, they have to be approved by two doctors.

They must agree having the baby would pose a greater risk to the physical or mental health of the woman than a termination.

It is allowed after this time period if there is a risk to the life of the woman, evidence of severe foetal abnormality or risk of grave physical and mental injury to the woman.

However, in Northern Ireland, abortion can only be obtained if the woman’s life is at risk and in some cases of foetal abnormality.

Although some Conservative MPs, most notably Jacob Rees Mogg, have voiced their support for restricting abortions in the UK, the idea has never been very popular.

After the ruling, Boris Johnson said the US court's decision to overturn constitutional protections for abortion was a “big step backwards."

“I’ve always believed in a woman’s right to choose," the prime minister added.

There is some support for it in the UK, mainly from Christian groups, some of which have been funded by large US anti-abortion lobby groups.

In the UK, charity Christian Action Research and Education (Care) said “the most compassionate societies esteem and protect” both mothers and babies.

Chief executive Ross Hendry said: “Limiting access to abortion must be accompanied by appropriate support for women experiencing crisis pregnancies, and families raising children.

“This is what a true pro-life ethic looks like.”

https://www.itv.com/news/2022-06-24/will-abortion-be-illegal-in-the-us-and-could-access-to-contraception-be-next

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 09:55:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 09:41:54 PM
America is a shitty f..ked up country (apart from New York which isn’t really representative of the rest).

It's a dying superpower, a bloated, expensive, overextended military fighting wars it can't win, a FIAT currency that's being devalued by excessive money printing, massive government & public debt, a huge gap between the rich & poor, & it's also tearing itself apart from within.

The comparisons to the descent of the Roman empire are quite noticeable, if you care to look.

China, Russia & the BRICS countries are far from oblivious to this, which is why they are going their own way, & we in Europe, as vassals of the U.S empire, are trapped in it's descent along with it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2022, 11:17:29 PM
In the book Freakonomics, Steven Levitt explains that when women have access to abortion crime rates 15 years later drop right off. Watch crime rise in 15-20 years massively because of this decision. A whole generation of unwanted kids, forced into poverty, addiction, violence and crime. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2022, 11:36:12 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 24, 2022, 11:17:29 PM
In the book Freakonomics, Steven Levitt explains that when women have access to abortion crime rates 15 years later drop right off. Watch crime rise in 15-20 years massively because of this decision. A whole generation of unwanted kids, forced into poverty, addiction, violence and crime.

Only in the red states though, they're only likely to ban or restrict abortion in the red states, presumably, the blue states will be blissful crime free utopias thanks to all the late term abortions, that's if the U.S still exists in 20 years, based on current trajectory there seems a fair chance it won't. I'm still not entirely sure how they are going to ever pay back the 30 trillion dollar debt they have, perhaps they could just print it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 25, 2022, 07:38:18 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the world needs religion. I saw campaigners singing 'Jesus loves the little children'. Maybe He does, but does He want to force women to carry and raise unwanted children? This legal change isn't about loving children, it's about adherents to a religious ideology forcing others to adhere to it's beliefs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 25, 2022, 08:16:18 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 25, 2022, 07:38:18 AM
Sometimes I wonder if the world needs religion. I saw campaigners singing 'Jesus loves the little children'. Maybe He does, but does He want to force women to carry and raise unwanted children? This legal change isn't about loving children, it's about adherents to a religious ideology forcing others to adhere to it's beliefs.
Jesus loves little children unless they turn out gay in which case Jesus hates faggots (apparently).   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 08:19:02 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 25, 2022, 08:16:18 AM
Jesus loves little children unless they turn out gay in which case Jesus hates faggots (apparently).

But Republican Christians aren't executing gays.

Democrats are executing unborn gays though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 08:23:05 AM


The party that can't define what a woman is are suddenly all about womens rights.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 08:33:20 AM

Just 1% of abortions are as a result of rape, 0.5% a result of incest.

The rest appear to be lifestyle choices.

Here's a lifestyle choice for you, try contraception or sodomy instead


(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2019/05/24/USAT/a28e0b20-fe3a-447a-a45f-98d798613719-052419-abortion-decisions_Online.png)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 25, 2022, 09:06:10 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 25, 2022, 08:16:18 AM
Jesus loves little children unless they turn out gay in which case Jesus hates faggots (apparently).

Exactly, and it's the people who hold such contradictory beliefs who have managed (with Trump's help) to highjack the Supreme Court.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 25, 2022, 09:17:11 AM
Isn't it ironic (as Alanis Morrissette would say) that the people in the US who have the biggest problem with POC and the "extinction of the white race" have also unwittingly supported an increase in the population of POC in the US? 
https://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/the-demographics-of-abortion-in-america/
Perhaps the next step is enforced sterilization of people that threaten white supremacy in those states?  I mean Jesus Loves White Supremacists right?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 25, 2022, 09:25:19 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 25, 2022, 09:17:11 AM
Isn't it ironic (as Alanis Morrissette would say) that the people in the US who have the biggest problem with POC and the "extinction of the white race" have also unwittingly supported an increase in the population of POC in the US? 
https://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/the-demographics-of-abortion-in-america/
Perhaps the next step is enforced sterilization of people that threaten white supremacy in those states?  I mean Jesus Loves White Supremacists right?

Perhaps Jesus loves the little white children best?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 25, 2022, 09:26:43 AM
If abortion is akin to murdering ickle children does that mean anyone who gets an abortion or performs one in the states that have outlawed it will be tried for murder?  Will they be executed if found guilty?  Or just get life without parole? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 09:27:34 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 25, 2022, 09:17:11 AM
Isn't it ironic (as Alanis Morrissette would say) that the people in the US who have the biggest problem with POC and the "extinction of the white race" have also unwittingly supported an increase in the population of POC in the US? 
https://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/the-demographics-of-abortion-in-america/
Perhaps the next step is enforced sterilization of people that threaten white supremacy in those states?  I mean Jesus Loves White Supremacists right?

So it's a good thing then, I mean, Black Lives Matter, right, even in the w..b, surely.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 25, 2022, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 25, 2022, 09:25:19 AM
Perhaps Jesus loves the little white children best?
I'm sure though perhaps his PR agency would rather play that one down, it's a bit creepy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 09:29:04 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 25, 2022, 09:26:43 AM
If abortion is akin to murdering ickle children does that mean anyone who gets an abortion or performs one in the states that have outlawed it will be tried for murder?  Will they be executed if found guilty?  Or just get life without parole?

Can you explain to me how killing a child isn't murder?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 09:32:12 AM


What if the child doesn't consent to being aborted?

I think the standard procedure should be for women to carry the child full term, raise it to the age of sixteen, then ask the child whether it wants to be killed or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 25, 2022, 09:49:52 AM
Perhaps in America they should start criminalizing women who have miscarriages, on the grounds of child neglect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 25, 2022, 09:53:17 AM
Where do these Republican states that have outlawed abortion stand on contraception?  Against God's Holy Law I suppose.   I trust there is a movement to make using contraception illegal again in those states, just think of all the billions of  ickle children that these callous adults have prevented from bringing into the world. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 09:56:15 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 25, 2022, 09:49:52 AM
Perhaps in America they should start criminalizing women who have miscarriages, on the grounds of child neglect.

Well, if they are knowingly pregnant, & miscarry as a result of drug or alcohol abuse, then yes, perhaps that should apply.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 10:02:10 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 25, 2022, 09:53:17 AM
Where do these Republican states that have outlawed abortion stand on contraception?  Against God's Holy Law I suppose.   I trust there is a movement to make using contraception illegal again in those states, just think of all the billions of  ickle children that these callous adults have prevented from bringing into the world.

Some do oppose the morning after pill.

Anyway, just think out of the billions of aborted children, any one of them could have been the next Einstein & invented a sustainable clean energy, or the world leader who ended famine & poverty, we'll never know, because the poor defenceless mite was callously vacuumed up before they ever got a chance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 10:21:56 AM

The Mississippi law, which kicked this whole thing off, prohibited abortion after 15 weeks.

In France & Germany the limit is 12 weeks.

That's one of the redest states actually more liberal about abortion than parts of modern Europe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 10:45:01 AM

Anyway, this isn't a nationwide ban, although the media hysterics might have you believe it is.

Individual states can now set their own limits, rather than the decision being made by the SC.

The people now have the power to vote for a pro-life or pro-abortion candidate & it make the difference, this judgement actually returns power to women.  And they've always had the right to choose to sod off & live in a blue state & just leave the conservatives in peace.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 25, 2022, 11:06:40 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 09:29:04 AM
Can you explain to me how killing a child isn't murder?

When a child isn't a child; before it's born. Until then it has the potential to become a child, but not the certainty that it will.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 11:33:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 25, 2022, 11:06:40 AM
When a child isn't a child; before it's born. Until then it has the potential to become a child, but not the certainty that it will.

Does it only become a child once it's popped out then?

When it's kicking around at eight & half months, is it still a non human clump of cells at that point?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 25, 2022, 11:39:05 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 25, 2022, 11:06:40 AM
When a child isn't a child; before it's born. Until then it has the potential to become a child, but not the certainty that it will.
Foetuses are not children.  They are foetuses.  However at some point during gestation (still hotly contested by some) they cross the line from foetus to unborn child.  I consider that line to be around the 24 week mark as it is in this country.  That's not to say abortions after 24 weeks should be considered murder if there are sound and urgent medical reasons for performing them, but these should only be performed in extreme circumstances and certainly not because a woman has decided she doesn't want the baby after all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 11:44:56 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 25, 2022, 11:39:05 AM
Foetuses are not children.  They are foetuses.  However at some point during gestation (still hotly contested by some) they cross the line from foetus to unborn child.  I consider that line to be around the 24 week mark as it is in this country.  That's not to say abortions after 24 weeks should be considered murder if there are sound and urgent medical reasons for performing them, but these should only be performed in extreme circumstances and certainly not because a woman has decided she doesn't want the baby after all.

24 weeks?!

That's horrific.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 25, 2022, 01:05:52 PM
Seen on a sign: "He Who Hath Not A Uterus Should Shut The f..keth Up" Fallopians 13:13
 @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 03:04:03 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 25, 2022, 01:05:52 PM
Seen on a sign: "He Who Hath Not A Uterus Should Shut The f..keth Up" Fallopians 13:13
 @)(++(*

Oh I see, only women are allowed to debate abortion rights.

Women's privilege, misandry basically.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 25, 2022, 05:26:20 PM

Dave Chappelle's abortion stance.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoudH-RPnEE

If she can kill this m'f'cker, I can at least abandon it, my money my choice, & if I'm wrong then maybe we're both wrong.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 26, 2022, 10:09:41 AM
The fact that 85% of Americans think abortion should be legal in some or all circumstances means that the overturning of Roe v Wade may well backfire on Trumpian Republicans in future elections and give the Dems an advantage in mobilizing previously apathetic women voters.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23167397/abortion-public-opinion-polls-americans

Here’s hoping common sense prevails.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 10:59:00 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 26, 2022, 10:09:41 AM
The fact that 85% of Americans think abortion should be legal in some or all circumstances means that the overturning of Roe v Wade may well backfire on Trumpian Republicans in future elections and give the Dems an advantage in mobilizing previously apathetic women voters.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23167397/abortion-public-opinion-polls-americans

Here’s hoping common sense prevails.

Yeah, it's basically saved Biden for the midterms.

Americans will ignore the massive inflation, gas prices, tampon shortages, unwinnable proxy wars etc & focus on regaining their right to murder children.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 11:05:51 AM
Abortion is not something that I personally think is a good idea.  But men cannot justifiably be involved in this decision.  They don't carry and birth the baby and ordinarily would not have to raise it.

If men did have any rights then The Courts could wind up full of cases trying to prevent women from obtaining an abortion, no matter what the circumstances of conception.  Rapists for a start, demanding access to their child.  This is already happening.

The choice has to remain with the woman.

Not that this is particularly pertinent at the moment.

The question seems to be, "Does a woman have a right to an abortion?"

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 26, 2022, 11:18:39 AM
If women are forced to have children they don’t want then then sperm donor should be forced to contribute 50% of the cost of raising the child to the mother for 18 years.   That would soon put a stop to men’s interfering in women’s matters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 26, 2022, 11:25:12 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 11:05:51 AM
Abortion is not something that I personally think is a good idea.  But men cannot justifiably be involved in this decision.  They don't carry and birth the baby and ordinarily would not have to raise it.

If men did have any rights then The Courts could wind up full of cases trying to prevent women from obtaining an abortion, no matter what the circumstances of conception.  Rapists for a start, demanding access to their child.  This is already happening.

The choice has to remain with the woman.

Not that this is particularly pertinent at the moment.

The question seems to be, "Does a woman have a right to an abortion?"

Women make mistakes just like men do. I don't think they deserve having to spend 9 months carrying their mistake in their tummy, having to push it out of there, then providing for it's needs for many years afterwards. I don't think the punishment fits the crime.

Some women will be brave and serve their 'sentences' without taking it out on the result of their mistake, but others will be unable to deal with the change of direction that's been forced upon them.

Have these pro-lifers thought through the consequences of their beliefs, I wonder?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 26, 2022, 11:28:24 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 26, 2022, 11:18:39 AM
If women are forced to have children they don’t want then then sperm donor should be forced to contribute 50% of the cost of raising the child to the mother for 18 years.   That would soon put a stop to men’s interfering in women’s matters.

They should also provide 50% of the care, day and night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 11:29:21 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 26, 2022, 11:18:39 AM
If women are forced to have children they don’t want then then sperm donor should be forced to contribute 50% of the cost of raising the child to the mother for 18 years.   That would soon put a stop to men’s interfering in women’s matters.

Try getting the money.  One of my sons has worked for The Child Support Agency since it's inception and it so often isn't worth the pointless effort.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 11:35:21 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 26, 2022, 11:25:12 AM
Women make mistakes just like men do. I don't think they deserve having to spend 9 months carrying their mistake in their tummy, having to push it out of there, then providing for it's needs for many years afterwards. I don't think the punishment fits the crime.

Some women will be brave and serve their 'sentences' without taking it out on the result of their mistake, but others will be unable to deal with the change of direction that's been forced upon them.

Have these pro-lifers thought through the consequences of their beliefs, I wonder?

There is No Punishment for men.

Pro Lifers don't care.  They don't care about the woman and they don't care about the baby.  It is never their problem.  Just a means to control the implementation of their views.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 11:36:39 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 26, 2022, 11:28:24 AM
They should also provide 50% of the care, day and night.

Can't be done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 11:42:19 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 11:05:51 AM
Abortion is not something that I personally think is a good idea.  But men cannot justifiably be involved in this decision.  They don't carry and birth the baby and ordinarily would not have to raise it.

If men did have any rights then The Courts could wind up full of cases trying to prevent women from obtaining an abortion, no matter what the circumstances of conception.  Rapists for a start, demanding access to their child.  This is already happening.

The choice has to remain with the woman.

Not that this is particularly pertinent at the moment.

The question seems to be, "Does a woman have a right to an abortion?"

Yes she does, but in fairness, if she decides to keep a baby against the fathers wishes, he too should have the right not to have to pay for it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_abortion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 26, 2022, 11:54:54 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 11:35:21 AM
There is No Punishment for men.

Pro Lifers don't care.  They don't care about the woman and they don't care about the baby.  It is never their problem.  Just a means to control the implementation of their views.
Very much this.  If they seriously cared about the welfare of children and girls / young women they would not have reversed a law which by doing so guarantees an increase in self harm, back street abortions and the horrible after affects these can have on a woman’s reproductive health, infanticide, child neglect, mental health issues, etc.  Pro-lifers should instead channel their energies into establishing laws which help to reduce the horrific death toll which is a direct result of gun ownership in their (godforsaken) country.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 11:55:46 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 26, 2022, 11:25:12 AM
Women make mistakes just like men do. I don't think they deserve having to spend 9 months carrying their mistake in their tummy, having to push it out of there, then providing for it's needs for many years afterwards. I don't think the punishment fits the crime.

Some women will be brave and serve their 'sentences' without taking it out on the result of their mistake, but others will be unable to deal with the change of direction that's been forced upon them.

Have these pro-lifers thought through the consequences of their beliefs, I wonder?

They won't have to, just travel to a blue state, and if they work for Starbucks, they'll pay the travel expenses.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/roe-v-wade-abortion-travel-costs-b2108999.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 12:00:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 26, 2022, 11:54:54 AM
Very much this.  If they seriously cared about the welfare of children and girls / young women they would not have reversed a law which by doing so guarantees an increase in self harm, back street abortions and the horrible after affects these can have on a woman’s reproductive health, infanticide, child neglect, mental health issues, etc.  Pro-lifers should instead channel their energies into establishing laws which help to reduce the horrific death toll which is a direct result of gun ownership in their (godforsaken) country.

Will it though?

Perhaps women will just think harder before letting him shove it in unprotected, or they'll just cross state lines.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 12:21:36 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 26, 2022, 11:54:54 AM
Very much this.  If they seriously cared about the welfare of children and girls / young women they would not have reversed a law which by doing so guarantees an increase in self harm, back street abortions and the horrible after affects these can have on a woman’s reproductive health, infanticide, child neglect, mental health issues, etc.  Pro-lifers should instead channel their energies into establishing laws which help to reduce the horrific death toll which is a direct result of gun ownership in their (godforsaken) country.

Furthermore.....

Countries with the Highest Total Gun Deaths (all causes) in 2019

1: Brazil — 49,436

2:
United States — 37,038

Venezuela — 28,515

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gun-deaths-by-country


Number of abortions in 2019

Based on available state-level data, approximately 887,000 abortions took place in the United States in 2019.

https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/


Guns are actually killing a lot less people than abortions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 26, 2022, 12:58:03 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 11:42:19 AM
Yes she does, but in fairness, if she decides to keep a baby against the fathers wishes, he too should have the right not to have to pay for it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_abortion

I actually agree with that. Forcing men to pay for the keep of an unwanted child is almost as bad as forcing a woman to carry an unwanted child. Having unwilling parents is unlikely to give the child a happy childhood. Should a child be condemned to suffer because strangers decide they must live?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 01:13:29 PM

Women should just say No.  But that will likely lead to more Rapes.  Women often don't have a right to say No these days.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 01:18:42 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 26, 2022, 12:58:03 PM
I actually agree with that. Forcing men to pay for the keep of an unwanted child is almost as bad as forcing a woman to carry an unwanted child. Having unwilling parents is unlikely to give the child a happy childhood. Should a child be condemned to suffer because strangers decide they must live?

It's an interesting twist to the abortion debate.

Unfortunately, the only legal test case in America was dismissed & the plaintiff declined to appeal to the supreme court.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubay_v._Wells

I'm hoping some day some brave man see's this argument through & regains equal abortion rights for men.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 01:21:10 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 01:13:29 PM
Women should just say No.  But that will likely lead to more Rapes.  Women often don't have a right to say No these days.

Women should carry more guns, the constitution allows it, less chance they'll be raped.

I'm pretty sure self defence laws allow the use of lethal force to prevent rape.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 26, 2022, 02:12:23 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 01:21:10 PM
Women should carry more guns, the constitution allows it, less chance they'll be raped.

I'm pretty sure self defence laws allow the use of lethal force to prevent rape.

If a woman shoots a man and either injures or kills him would her version of events let her off the hook? Rape is difficult to prove unless there are injuries to the woman. It often comes down to who is believed in court. Not all women are truthful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 02:26:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 26, 2022, 02:12:23 PM
If a woman shoots a man and either injures or kills him would her version of events let her off the hook? Rape is difficult to prove unless there are injuries to the woman. It often comes down to who is believed in court. Not all women are truthful.

You need only reasonably perceive an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm to justify lethal force in self defence.

If the evidence supports the claim a jury should find that. Aim for the face, should guarantee death, he won't be able to take the stand against her then.  But if the bullet wound is to his back then she might find it more difficult to explain away.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 26, 2022, 02:29:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 26, 2022, 02:12:23 PM
If a woman shoots a man and either injures or kills him would her version of events let her off the hook? Rape is difficult to prove unless there are injuries to the woman. It often comes down to who is believed in court. Not all women are truthful.
Actually, the troll has made me see the benefits of gun carrying.  Yes, all women in America should carry guns at all times, and if a man starts harrassing a woman for sex she should have the legal unquestionable right to shoot him in the balls.  Perfect solution. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 02:34:07 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 26, 2022, 02:29:23 PM
Actually, the troll has made me see the benefits of gun carrying.  Yes, all women in America should carry guns at all times, and if a man starts harrassing a woman for sex she should have the legal right to shoot him in the balls.  Perfect solution.

Well, if he poses an imminent threat, she can legally shoot him.

I have no issue with that, as a second amendment fan.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 02:46:39 PM
In the same week women were told they could no longer have abortions, the supreme court expanded their right to carry guns.

Sometimes in life, the solutions present themselves.

I'm glad you girls here are now pro gun, just got to persuade you immigrants are bad you'll be voting Trump/DeSa-nt-is 2024.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 02:58:02 PM

I wonder if a foetus has second amendment rights?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCbA3R6HN2Q

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 04:04:06 PM
If I lived in the states (Man or Woman) I'd always carry a gun, at home, outside, pretty much anywhere, I'd have a holstered concealed pistol.  I'd get plenty of training, & I'd practice.

If the bad guy can carry a gun, then you need to level the playing field.

If a guy tried to rape, rob, or assault me, I'd gladly exercise my lawful right to self defence, thankyou kindly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 26, 2022, 05:02:46 PM
OK until someone else with a gun decides you might be the bad guy and shoots first   8(8-))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 26, 2022, 05:17:51 PM
Imagine living in a society where the prospect of killing or being killed was at the forefront of your mind every morning when you got ready to go out to. work, to school, to shop, to fetch the kids, to go to the cinema, to have a romantic dimner with a date.  It’s not for me thanks, very grateful to live in the UK despite its many other problems.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 05:18:45 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 26, 2022, 05:02:46 PM
OK until someone else with a gun decides you might be the bad guy and shoots first   8(8-))

You'd need to be posing some kind of threat to them.

Having a concealed gun isn't enough, reaching for it might be & brandishing the thing definitely would.

An armed society is a polite society, best not to start an argument with the next guy, just incase he's carrying.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 05:20:05 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 26, 2022, 05:17:51 PM
Imagine living in a society where the prospect of killing or being killed was at the forefront of your mind every morning when you got ready to go out to. work, to school, to shop, to fetch the kids, to go to the cinema, to have a romantic dimner with a date. It’s not for me thanks, very grateful to live in the UK despite its many other problems.

Yeah, just steer clear of the youths with knives in our cities.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 06:04:39 PM

It isn't the owning of guns that is the problem.  It's the type of guns and the purpose for which they are intended.

The Right to Bear Arms was taken by America from The British Constitution of the time, which in England only applied to The Militia.  America applied it to everyone.  This was a ghastly mistake.  America will have to deal with this one day.

I have only ever handled a gun in the process of training in The Navy and for hunting.   Likewise everyone I know around here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 26, 2022, 06:52:55 PM
Best FB comment on thr abortion thing:

I'm not pro-murdering babies.

I'm pro-Becky who found out at her 20-week anatomy scan that the infant she had been so excited to bring into this world had developed without life sustaining organs.

I'm pro-Susan who was sexually assaulted on her way home from work, only to come to the horrific realization that her assailant planted his seed in her when she got a positive pregnancy test result a month later.

I'm pro-Theresa who hemorrhaged due to a placental abruption, causing her parents, spouse, and children to have to make the impossible decision on whether to save her or her unborn child.

I'm pro-little Cathy who had her innocence ripped away from her by someone she should have been able to trust and her 11-year-old body isn't mature enough to bear the consequence of that betrayal.

I'm pro-Melissa who's working two jobs just to make ends meet and has to choose between bringing another child into poverty or feeding the children she already has because her spouse walked out on her.

I'm pro-Brittany who realizes that she is in no way financially, emotionally, or physically able to raise a child.

I'm pro-Emily who went through IVF, ending up with SIX viable implanted eggs requiring selective reduction to ensure the safety of her and a SAFE number of fetuses.

I'm pro-Jessica who is FINALLY getting the strength to get away from her physically abusive spouse only to find out that she is carrying the monster's child.

I'm pro-Vanessa who went into her confirmation appointment after YEARS of trying to conceive only to hear silence where there should be a heartbeat.

I'm pro-Lindsay who lost her virginity in her sophomore year with a broken condom and now has to choose whether to be a teenage mom or just a teenager.

I'm pro-Courtney who just found out she's already 13 weeks along, but the egg never made it out of her fallopian tube so either she terminates the pregnancy or risks dying from internal bleeding.

You can argue and say that I'm pro-choice all you want, but the truth is:
I'm pro-life.
Their lives.
Women's lives.

You don't get to pick and choose which scenarios should be accepted. It's not about which stories you don't agree with. It's about fighting for the women in the stories that you do agree with and the CHOICE that was made.

Women's rights are meant to protect ALL women, regardless of their situation!

Overturning Roe does not stop abortions, it stops SAFE abortions!

Abortion is healthcare.

#roevwade #prochoice #abortion #women #womensrights #mybody #mychoice #mybodymychoice #promedical
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 07:04:02 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 26, 2022, 06:52:55 PM
Best FB comment on thr abortion thing:

I'm not pro-murdering babies.

I'm pro-Becky who found out at her 20-week anatomy scan that the infant she had been so excited to bring into this world had developed without life sustaining organs.

I'm pro-Susan who was sexually assaulted on her way home from work, only to come to the horrific realization that her assailant planted his seed in her when she got a positive pregnancy test result a month later.

I'm pro-Theresa who hemorrhaged due to a placental abruption, causing her parents, spouse, and children to have to make the impossible decision on whether to save her or her unborn child.

I'm pro-little Cathy who had her innocence ripped away from her by someone she should have been able to trust and her 11-year-old body isn't mature enough to bear the consequence of that betrayal.

I'm pro-Melissa who's working two jobs just to make ends meet and has to choose between bringing another child into poverty or feeding the children she already has because her spouse walked out on her.

I'm pro-Brittany who realizes that she is in no way financially, emotionally, or physically able to raise a child.

I'm pro-Emily who went through IVF, ending up with SIX viable implanted eggs requiring selective reduction to ensure the safety of her and a SAFE number of fetuses.

I'm pro-Jessica who is FINALLY getting the strength to get away from her physically abusive spouse only to find out that she is carrying the monster's child.

I'm pro-Vanessa who went into her confirmation appointment after YEARS of trying to conceive only to hear silence where there should be a heartbeat.

I'm pro-Lindsay who lost her virginity in her sophomore year with a broken condom and now has to choose whether to be a teenage mom or just a teenager.

I'm pro-Courtney who just found out she's already 13 weeks along, but the egg never made it out of her fallopian tube so either she terminates the pregnancy or risks dying from internal bleeding.

You can argue and say that I'm pro-choice all you want, but the truth is:
I'm pro-life.
Their lives.
Women's lives.

You don't get to pick and choose which scenarios should be accepted. It's not about which stories you don't agree with. It's about fighting for the women in the stories that you do agree with and the CHOICE that was made.

Women's rights are meant to protect ALL women, regardless of their situation!

Overturning Roe does not stop abortions, it stops SAFE abortions!

Abortion is healthcare.

#roevwade #prochoice #abortion #women #womensrights #mybody #mychoice #mybodymychoice #promedical

Susan should have carried a gun, Brittany & Mellisa should have practiced safer sex, Jessica should have stopped letting her physically abusive partner screw her & got an injunction out against him the moment he ever threatened her.

The statistics are pretty clear, very few abortions are because of defects in the child, the overwhelming majority are lifestyle choices.

Ladies, please, just make better life choices.

<0.5%   Victim of rape
3%   Fetal health problems
4%   Physical health problems
4%   Would interfere with education or career
7%   Not mature enough to raise a child
8%   Don't want to be a single mother
19%   Done having children
23%   Can't afford a baby
25%   Not ready for a child
6%   Other


0.01%   The pregnancy resulted from an incestuous relationship
0.15%   The woman was raped
0.20%   The woman's life was endangered by the pregnancy
0.98%   There was a serious fetal abnormality
1.48%   The woman's physical health was threatened by the pregnancy
1.88%   The woman's psychological health was threatened by the pregnancy
20.4%   The woman aborted for social or economic reasons
74.9%   No reason (elective)

https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 07:15:36 PM


There should be some kind of religion or something in which everyone can freely participate, where part of it's practices involve abstaining from sex until you've met a stable partner & later married them, once you've really got to know them & formed a loving relationship.

I suppose that's too much to ask these days.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 07:30:51 PM
Seriously though, 800,000+ abortions a year in the states, that's a pretty gruesome statistic, considering the mass availability of multiple different forms of contraception these days, only a small number of those abortions would be genuinely medically necessary for the child, or the mother, or as a result of failed contraception.

There's a wider issue at play here, & it's our societies shunning religious practices, morality & ethics & indulging in unrestrained sexual promiscuity instead.

Oh well, hopefully the four horsemen will be here soon & Jesus will come back & sort things out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 07:53:31 PM

Anyway, someone had to play Pro-Life devils advocate here & it might as well be me.

But, Ladies, true story.

About 10 years ago female friend of mine got pregnant (not mine), the father obviously wasn't going to be around, she wasn't in any position mentally, financially etc to raise another child, so I persuaded her to have it murdered, although, obviously it was her own decision ultimately, & I even drove her about 90 miles to the clinic & waited outside for her for the several hours it takes.
She got an implant after that & the problem hasn't reoccurred since, so, see, I'm not really a total b........ to women.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 08:08:43 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 07:53:31 PM
Anyway, someone had to play Pro-Life devils advocate here & it might as well be me.

But, Ladies, true story.

About 10 years ago female friend of mine got pregnant (not mine), the father obviously wasn't going to be around, she wasn't in any position mentally, financially etc to raise another child, so I persuaded her to have it murdered, although, obviously it was her own decision ultimately, & I even drove her about 90 miles to the clinic & waited outside for her for the several hours it takes.
She got an implant after that & the problem hasn't reoccurred since, so, see, I'm not really a total b........ to women.

Thank you for that slightly more uplifting comment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 08:22:34 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 08:08:43 PM
Thank you for that slightly more uplifting comment.

Yeah, I'm not really totally anti abortion, but I think it should be rare & have limits, & both sexes should be taking strong measures to try to prevent the woman getting pregnant in the first place, if they're not genuinely intent on having a child.

Education & bit of personal restraint needed, but, we've been around long enough as a species that we really should have worked out by now there will more than likely be consequences for sticking it in.

Anyway, yeah, my friend is doing fine now & she knew she made the right choice, her baby might not have enjoyed it much, but some win, some lose in the game we call life.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 08:29:19 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 08:22:34 PM
Yeah, I'm not really totally anti abortion, but I think it should be rare & have limits, & both sexes should be taking strong measures to try to prevent the woman getting pregnant in the first place, if they're not genuinely intent on having a child.

Education & bit of personal restraint needed, but, we've been around long enough as a species that we really should have worked out by now there will more than likely be consequences for sticking it in.

Anyway, yeah, my friend is doing fine now & she knew she made the right choice, her baby might not have enjoyed it much, but some win, some lose in the game we call life.

I agree with you up to a point.  And I very much doubt that I could have done it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 08:42:27 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 08:29:19 PM
I agree with you up to a point.  And I very much doubt that I could have done it.

I think as a society we have become desensitised to abortion, it is now couched in language such as 'womens healthcare', we are talking about snuffing a human life here, we don't consider it at all acceptable post 9 months, so we should be very reluctant to do it in the weeks prior really.

I had unprotected one drunken night with a girl when I was in my early twenties, bought her the morning after pill the very next day, get it done quickly, before the problem has much chance to develop.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 08:46:02 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 08:42:27 PM
I think as a society we have become desensitised to abortion, it is now couched in language such as 'womens healthcare', we are talking about snuffing a human life here, we don't consider it at all acceptable post 9 months, so we should be very reluctant to do it in the weeks prior really.

I had unprotected one drunken night with a girl when I was in my early twenties, bought her the morning after pill the very next day, get it done quickly, before the problem has much chance to develop.

It is much more complicated than you seem to realise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 26, 2022, 08:48:32 PM
While we’re being simcere and baring our souls, my sister got pregnant by her boyfriend when she was 16-17 - contraceeption fail.   She decided to have a termination which really upset me.  I offered (as a single woman, 10 years her senior) to adopt her baby but she declined and had the termination instead.  The best decision for her (and me) as it turned out, of that I have no doubt whatsoever.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 08:50:20 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 08:46:02 PM
It is much more complicated than you seem to realise.

I've watched an ultrasound video of a mid/late term abortion, you can find one on Youtube if you care to look, guarantee it'll make you think!

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 08:52:19 PM

I also knew a guy who, for a time, worked in a clinic, the experience made him quite strongly anti-abortion, strangely enough.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 09:07:06 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 08:50:20 PM
I've watched an ultrasound video of a mid/late term abortion, you can find one on Youtube if you care to look, guarantee it'll make you think!

I don't need to think.  It's the right for other women to choose that concerns me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 09:10:36 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 08:50:20 PM
I've watched an ultrasound video of a mid/late term abortion, you can find one on Youtube if you care to look, guarantee it'll make you think!

Bear in mind, I stomached the ISIS execution videos, the African lynching & burnings etc, but, the poor defenceless mite being dismembered was a bit too far for me, I think that may just have been what cemented my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 09:17:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 09:07:06 PM
I don't need to think.  It's the right for other women to choose that concerns me.

They still have the right & choice, they might need to travel to a blue state to do it, but they can still get it done, or, the red states might soon turn blue & expand their own abortion rights anyway, in protest at the SC judgement.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 09:27:33 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 09:17:45 PM
They still have the right & choice, they might need to travel to a blue state to do it, but they can still get it done, or, the red states might soon turn blue & expand their own abortion rights anyway, in protest at the SC judgement.

I agree.  This American Court Ruling is of little interest to me and a colossal fuss about not very much at all.

Does anyone know why they have done this after all these years?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 09:42:24 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 09:27:33 PM
I agree.  This American Court Ruling is of little interest to me and a colossal fuss about not very much at all.

Does anyone know why they have done this after all these years?

Prior to the 2016 election, Trump promised to appoint new SC judges & get Roe vs Wade overturned to win the evangelical Pro Life vote. 6 Republican judges for, vs 3 democrat against voted to overturn, promises made promises kept by Trump.

I haven't yet read the 300 page judgement & actually won't, but individual rights have been returned to states.

This is likely going to come back & bite Republicans very, very strongly in the ass, unless the Red states see sense & set sensible term limits, allow early intervention abortion medication etc, instead of outright bans, but Texas, for example, appears to be going down the outright ban path.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 09:49:18 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 09:42:24 PM
Prior to the 2016 election, Trump promised to appoint new SC judges & get Roe vs Wade overturned to win the evangelical Pro Life vote. 6 Republican judges for, vs 3 democrat against voted to overturn, promises made promises kept by Trump.

I haven't yet read the 300 page judgement & actually won't, but individual rights have been returned to states.

This is likely going to come back & bite Republicans very, very strongly in the ass, unless the Red states see sense & set sensible term limits, allow early intervention abortion medication etc, instead of outright bans, but Texas, for example, appears to be going down the outright ban path.

Thank you.

As you say, things will likely sort themselves out shortly.  And people will manage without Texas if necessary.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 09:53:56 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 09:49:18 PM
Thank you.

As you say, things will likely sort themselves out shortly. And people will manage without Texas if necessary.

Mid term elections in November, barring a Nuclear attack preventing elections in the states I think the Dems might just be making a few gains.

Oh well, at least I got to enjoy President Trump for 4 years, but I might never see a Republican president again in my lifetime.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 10:01:44 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 09:53:56 PM
Mid term elections in November, barring a Nuclear attack preventing elections in the states I think the Dems might just be making a few gains.

Oh well, at least I got to enjoy President Trump for 4 years, but I might never see a Republican president again in my lifetime.

I thought Trump was okay and at least he was interesting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 10:16:55 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 26, 2022, 10:01:44 PM
I thought Trump was okay and at least he was interesting.

If you recall, he made friendly overtures to Putin & Russia.

He knew the USA couldn't possibly win a war against Russia, the Ukraine conflict, following the Western backed overthrow of Ukraine's president, was already 2 years underway when he got elected, none of his doing.

For his efforts at peace, he was smeared & investigated, held back from attempting peace by the Dems & some of his own party, eventually he caved into pressure & began sending arms to Ukraine.

One wonders what might be happening in the world now if his own country hadn't been so Russophobic, but, the intent by the states all along has been to try & get Putin out, spread 'democracy' to Russia, so it can be plundered for it's natural resources, join NATO & be on our side in the coming war with China.

But, alas, now we're going to be at war (we sort of already are) with both Russia & China soon instead, I don't fancy our chances really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 26, 2022, 10:42:39 PM

So yeah, the abortion ruling is a very welcome distraction for the democrats from the massive inflation by excessive money printing, their unsustainable debt problem, the U.S dollar dominance fading, the military being over extended. For the first time in my memory it's actually the republican party now who are the party of peace, resisting arming Ukraine further. But it won't save them, the abortion outrage will give free pass for the dems to do whatever they like from now on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 27, 2022, 06:10:46 AM


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMooGEw6vTc
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 27, 2022, 07:17:27 AM
Not sure if there's a thread on Justice Forum but this could be interesting

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10955217/French-court-hears-Russian-hitman-dispatched-kill-blonde-reporter-Jill-Dando-shot.html
Was Jill Dando killed by MISTAKE? French sex assault case hears bombshell claim Russian mafia hitman was sent to London to 'deal with' a DIFFERENT blonde BBC reporter whose doctor was Jill's fiancee... weeks later the Crimewatch host was shot dead
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 27, 2022, 09:59:26 AM

I have just waded through Wikipedia's  reporting of The Roe v Wade long ongoing Case.

Phew.  I thought it was complicated before I read it.  But I didn't know the half of it.  Some of these women misrepresented their issues, as did some of the people arguing for and against.  A bit too much economics and social justice for me.  Although basically it was not a bad Law.

I remain largely against Abortion for myself.  But I also remain in favour of a woman's right to choose within the bounds of The Law.

Some women appear to be able to deal with the consequences and some women don't.  I would not have been able to do so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 27, 2022, 12:03:19 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 27, 2022, 09:59:26 AM
I have just waded through Wikipedia's  reporting of The Roe v Wade long ongoing Case.

Phew.  I thought it was complicated before I read it.  But I didn't know the half of it.  Some of these women misrepresented their issues, as did some of the people arguing for and against.  A bit too much economics and social justice for me.  Although basically it was not a bad Law.

I remain largely against Abortion for myself.  But I also remain in favour of a woman's right to choose within the bounds of The Law.

Some women appear to be able to deal with the consequences and some women don't.  I would not have been able to do so.

That's really interesting, how different women can deal with different pressures. I dealt with giving up a baby for adoption, which was harder imo because I'd formed a bond after looking after my baby for 6 weeks. I never formed a bond with my babies until they were born, though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 27, 2022, 12:32:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 27, 2022, 12:03:19 PM
That's really interesting, how different women can deal with different pressures. I dealt with giving up a baby for adoption, which was harder imo because I'd formed a bond after looking after my baby for 6 weeks. I never formed a bond with my babies until they were born, though.

This is so cruel, in my opinion.  But I doubt you had much of a choice.

To abort or to have adopted?  I don't know which is worse.  Either would have lived with me for all the days of my life.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 27, 2022, 12:51:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 27, 2022, 12:03:19 PM
That's really interesting, how different women can deal with different pressures. I dealt with giving up a baby for adoption, which was harder imo because I'd formed a bond after looking after my baby for 6 weeks. I never formed a bond with my babies until they were born, though.
It’s sad that you had to give your baby up for adoption, it must have been incredibly difficult.  I do however think maybe you underestimate the bond you formed with your babies whilst they were in your w..b?  Had you miscarried in the second or third trimester do you not think you would have felt a profound sense of loss also?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 27, 2022, 01:11:10 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 26, 2022, 08:48:32 PM
While we’re being simcere and baring our souls, my sister got pregnant by her boyfriend when she was 16-17 - contraceeption fail.   She decided to have a termination which really upset me.  I offered (as a single woman, 10 years her senior) to adopt her baby but she declined and had the termination instead.  The best decision for her (and me) as it turned out, of that I have no doubt whatsoever.

One of my daughters got pregnant at 17..had a year off school then went back... Got 2 degrees... He's 19 now
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 27, 2022, 01:16:07 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 27, 2022, 01:11:10 PM
One of my daughters got pregnant at 17..had a year off school then went back... Got 2 degrees... He's 19 now

Your daughter was fortunate to have a parent like you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 27, 2022, 03:08:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 27, 2022, 12:51:29 PM
It’s sad that you had to give your baby up for adoption, it must have been incredibly difficult.  I do however think maybe you underestimate the bond you formed with your babies whilst they were in your w..b?  Had you miscarried in the second or third trimester do you not think you would have felt a profound sense of loss also?

I don't know, but I don't think so. I've always been very practical. I always thought about my first child on her birthday, but losing her didn't cause me the upset some women suffered. They had trouble getting me to sign the final papers three months after she was taken, but once I did that I pretty much moved on. It was lovely to reconnect with her many years later and to see that she was OK. She lives in Atlanta, her parents emigrated when she was 10 years old.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 27, 2022, 03:46:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 27, 2022, 03:08:23 PM
I don't know, but I don't think so. I've always been very practical. I always thought about my first child on her birthday, but losing her didn't cause me the upset some women suffered. They had trouble getting me to sign the final papers three months after she was taken, but once I did that I pretty much moved on. It was lovely to reconnect with her many years later and to see that she was OK. She lives in Atlanta, her parents emigrated when she was 10 years old.
I guess everyone is different.  One of my close friends had a stillbirth at full term and it completely devastated  her for a good year or two.  She already had three children and went on to have another some time later but still talks about the dead child as part of the family.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 28, 2022, 09:59:06 PM
Oh dear, which force is investigating the Madeleine case.
Crisis-hit Met Police is taken into SPECIAL MEASURES: Britain's largest force is ordered to improve after Wayne Couzens' murder of Sarah Everard, the strip search of Child Q and Charing Cross scandals laid bare string of failures
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10961487/Met-Police-placed-SPECIAL-MEASURES-catalogue-scandals.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 28, 2022, 10:03:58 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 28, 2022, 09:59:06 PM
Oh dear, which force is investigating the Madeleine case.
Crisis-hit Met Police is taken into SPECIAL MEASURES: Britain's largest force is ordered to improve after Wayne Couzens' murder of Sarah Everard, the strip search of Child Q and Charing Cross scandals laid bare string of failures
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10961487/Met-Police-placed-SPECIAL-MEASURES-catalogue-scandals.html
It's the BKA... And they've just successfully prosecuted a no body circumstancial case
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 28, 2022, 10:48:53 PM
Quote from: barrier on June 28, 2022, 09:59:06 PM
Oh dear, which force is investigating the Madeleine case.
Crisis-hit Met Police is taken into SPECIAL MEASURES: Britain's largest force is ordered to improve after Wayne Couzens' murder of Sarah Everard, the strip search of Child Q and Charing Cross scandals laid bare string of failures
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10961487/Met-Police-placed-SPECIAL-MEASURES-catalogue-scandals.html
About time too, the Met needs a serious overhaul but that does not mean every aspect of its function and all its officers are unfit for purpose. .  Being put into special measure does not mean they have not carried out any important and vital crime-fighting/solving work over the last 10 years. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 29, 2022, 09:18:39 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on June 28, 2022, 10:48:53 PM
About time too, the Met needs a serious overhaul but that does not mean every aspect of its function and all its officers are unfit for purpose. .  Being put into special measure does not mean they have not carried out any important and vital crime-fighting/solving work over the last 10 years.

Just not having much luck finding Maddie's abductor though, despite the overwhelming mass of concrete abduction evidence in their possession.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 29, 2022, 09:36:00 AM
I see according to the Mail article, Rowley is in the running for MET commissioner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 29, 2022, 09:44:04 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 29, 2022, 09:36:00 AM
I see according to the Mail article, Rowley is in the running for MET commissioner.
Oh dear, not good news for anyone hoping the Met would go after the parents once they’ve been overhauled.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 29, 2022, 09:51:28 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 29, 2022, 09:36:00 AM
I see according to the Mail article, Rowley is in the running for MET commissioner.

I thought he'd long retired and was no longer in the police.
Does a Met Commissioner not need to be a serving police officer ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 29, 2022, 10:03:16 AM
Quote from: barrier on June 29, 2022, 09:36:00 AM
I see according to the Mail article, Rowley is in the running for MET commissioner.

Great choice.. An ex Handsworth Grammar School boy... Like me
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 29, 2022, 11:51:54 AM
Quote from: jassi on June 29, 2022, 09:51:28 AM
I thought he'd long retired and was no longer in the police.
Does a Met Commissioner not need to be a serving police officer ?

Apparently not. Only one of the applicants was a serving police officer, it seems.

Assistant Commissioner Ephgrave was the only serving Scotland Yard officer who applied to replace Dame Cressida.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/met-commmissioner-job-process-mark-rowley-nick-ephgrave-candidates-sadiq-khan-b1003148.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on June 29, 2022, 01:32:21 PM
Just for balance its not just the Mail reporting the measures.

https://news.sky.com/story/met-police-being-monitored-over-poor-performance-independent-inspectors-say-12642017
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 04, 2022, 09:44:15 AM
Anyone want a nice T Shirt now summer's here?
https://www.shirtbox.com/products/i-may-be-wrong-but-its-highly-unlikely-mens-t-shirt?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=paid&utm_campaign=TC%20DYN%20BROAD&utm_term=TC%20DYN%20BROAD%20%E2%80%93%204&utm_content=TC%20DYN%20BROAD&fbadid=23850037755870409&fbclid=IwAR37t-V9NN_O6M1h0LhDRdtgCtF2t5o8DTIKOh41IRM3W9U84ccpN91KmRk

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 04, 2022, 11:16:56 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 04, 2022, 09:44:15 AM
Anyone want a nice T Shirt now summer's here?
https://www.shirtbox.com/products/i-may-be-wrong-but-its-highly-unlikely-mens-t-shirt?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=paid&utm_campaign=TC%20DYN%20BROAD&utm_term=TC%20DYN%20BROAD%20%E2%80%93%204&utm_content=TC%20DYN%20BROAD&fbadid=23850037755870409&fbclid=IwAR37t-V9NN_O6M1h0LhDRdtgCtF2t5o8DTIKOh41IRM3W9U84ccpN91KmRk

Do they come in Gray ?    8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 04, 2022, 11:39:22 AM
I think it's safe to say this T-shirt would equally suit most people on this forum, both sides of the debate. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 04, 2022, 12:43:07 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 04, 2022, 11:16:56 AM
Do they come in Gray ?    8(0(*

Perhaps when the ECHR verdict is announced the sceptics on the forum should club together and buy me one
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 04, 2022, 01:08:27 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on July 04, 2022, 12:43:07 PM
Perhaps when the ECHR verdict is announced the sceptics on the forum should club together and buy me one

Think they'll be long out of stock by then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 04, 2022, 01:27:18 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on July 04, 2022, 12:43:07 PM
Perhaps when the ECHR verdict is announced the sceptics on the forum should club together and buy me one

When do you reckon it'll happen, turn of the decade ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 04, 2022, 01:34:54 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on July 04, 2022, 12:43:07 PM
Perhaps when the ECHR verdict is announced the sceptics on the forum should club together and buy me one

I can afford one of these on my own. It just needs nah nah nah nah nah added imo.
https://www.etsy.com/uk/listing/1173160657/i-told-you-so-pinback-button-i-tqld-you?ga_order=most_relevant&ga_search_type=all&ga_view_type=gallery&ga_search_query=i+told+you+so&ref=sr_gallery-1-5&pro=1&sts=1
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 04, 2022, 02:05:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 04, 2022, 01:34:54 PM
I can afford one of these on my own. It just needs nah nah nah nah nah added imo.
https://www.etsy.com/uk/listing/1173160657/i-told-you-so-pinback-button-i-tqld-you?ga_order=most_relevant&ga_search_type=all&ga_view_type=gallery&ga_search_query=i+told+you+so&ref=sr_gallery-1-5&pro=1&sts=1

I would never wear a t shirt saying  I might be wrong because I very very rarely am
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 04, 2022, 09:33:56 PM
Interesting episode of 24 Hours In Police Custody on now about the death of Rikki Neave,  Who was the police’s number one suspect?  Why the mother of course.  They followed their nose, and developed tunnel vision in the process.  Sounds familiar…
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 04, 2022, 09:49:50 PM
She was charged with murder despite there being literally no evidence that she committed the murder, only a history of being a neglectful and abusive mother.  Shocking case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on July 04, 2022, 11:23:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 04, 2022, 09:44:15 AM
Anyone want a nice T Shirt now summer's here?


Do you wear it all the time?   $65*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 05, 2022, 09:59:08 PM
Another interesting feature about the murder of Rikki Neave - his murderer had a long record of theft, motoring and sexual offences, committed AFTER committing the murder of Rikki, but no further murder convictions.  The police were sure he did it but didn’t have enough evidence for a charge to stick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 05, 2022, 10:14:38 PM
It took the police reinvestigating his murder the best part of 10 years to gather sufficient evidence to satisfy the CPS and bring a successful conviction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 05, 2022, 10:22:42 PM
Another interesting feature of the case is that there were over 30 “ghost” sightings of Rikki on the evening of his disappearance but he was by that time already considered by the police to have been killed earlier n the day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 06, 2022, 08:31:52 PM
I was thinking about Colin Sutton... The sceptics favourite police officer who said the Met should have interviewed the McCann's under caution.

The question is... Do they have the jurisdiction to caution and interview them Re Maddie's disappearance. Colin doesnt seem as smart as sceptics might think he is
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 06, 2022, 09:04:20 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on July 06, 2022, 08:31:52 PM
I was thinking about Colin Sutton... The sceptics favourite police officer who said the Met should have interviewed the McCann's under caution.

The question is... Do they have the jurisdiction to caution and interview them Re Maddie's disappearance. Colin doesnt seem as smart as sceptics might think he is

My favourite former police officer is Alfie Moore.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 08, 2022, 02:23:25 PM
Sir Mark Rowley appointed as new commisioner of the Met
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on July 08, 2022, 02:56:12 PM
I suppose he won't be any worse that the previous one.
The Met requires a severe purge of dubious officers and maybe  a slimming down of function . Will he be up to it ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 08, 2022, 04:03:39 PM
Quote from: jassi on July 08, 2022, 02:56:12 PM
I suppose he won't be any worse that the previous one.
The Met requires a severe purge of dubious officers and maybe  a slimming down of function . Will he be up to it ?

Just has he gets to know a new boss another will come along.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on July 08, 2022, 05:20:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 08, 2022, 02:23:25 PM
Sir Mark Rowley appointed as new commisioner of the Met
"How ever she left that apartment... she's been abducted"  (The Scottish Sun, 2017)...

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/video/news/ac-mark-rowley-says-there-are-significant-leads-in-madeleine-mccann-enquiry/ (https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/video/news/ac-mark-rowley-says-there-are-significant-leads-in-madeleine-mccann-enquiry/)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 08, 2022, 05:26:00 PM
Quote from: Myster on July 08, 2022, 05:20:39 PM
"How ever she left that apartment... she's been abducted"  (The Scottish Sun, 2017)...

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/video/news/ac-mark-rowley-says-there-are-significant-leads-in-madeleine-mccann-enquiry/ (https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/video/news/ac-mark-rowley-says-there-are-significant-leads-in-madeleine-mccann-enquiry/)

Never said stranger though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 08, 2022, 05:30:10 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 08, 2022, 05:26:00 PM
Never said stranger though.
Abducted by her parents or one of their friends you think?  Get real.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 08, 2022, 05:31:51 PM
Quote from: Myster on July 08, 2022, 05:20:39 PM
"How ever she left that apartment... she's been abducted"  (The Scottish Sun, 2017)...

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/video/news/ac-mark-rowley-says-there-are-significant-leads-in-madeleine-mccann-enquiry/ (https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/video/news/ac-mark-rowley-says-there-are-significant-leads-in-madeleine-mccann-enquiry/)

His justification for that statement?

It is not a 20-year-old who has gone missing and who has made a decision to start a new life

Talk about stating the obvious!












Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 08, 2022, 05:32:28 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 08, 2022, 05:26:00 PM
Never said stranger though.

Lol... Priceless.. Keep em coming
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 08, 2022, 05:34:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 08, 2022, 05:31:51 PM
His justification for that statement?

It is not a 20-year-old who has gone missing and who has made a decision to start a new life

Talk about stating the obvious!

Another junk post.  That was not his justification for abduction... You should understand that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 08, 2022, 05:37:01 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on July 08, 2022, 05:34:34 PM
Another junk post.  That was not his justification for abduction... You should understand that

It's the only one he offered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 08, 2022, 05:39:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 08, 2022, 05:30:10 PM
Abducted by her parents or onemof their friends you think?  Get real.

You never know, Ricky Neaves mother was the prime suspect for the boys murder until they closed the case after she was found not guilty, a reopening of a cold case proved otherwise , police later admitting they showed suspect bias.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 08, 2022, 05:43:11 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on July 08, 2022, 05:32:28 PM
Lol... Priceless.. Keep em coming

Better than saying its been solved, when the evidence isn't strong enough to support a charge let alone be put before a court of law.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 08, 2022, 05:44:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 08, 2022, 05:37:01 PM
It's the only one he offered.
The fact that he said that does not mean that it was his sole justification for believing Maddie was abducted.
Can you not understand that simple fact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 08, 2022, 05:46:23 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 08, 2022, 05:39:16 PM
You never know, Ricky Neaves mother was the prime suspect for the boys murder until they closed the case after she was found not guilty, a reopening of a cold case proved otherwise , police later admitting they showed suspect bias.
you are aware that Mark Rowley has stated unequivocally that the parents are not suspects, right?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 08, 2022, 05:47:49 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 08, 2022, 05:43:11 PM
Better than saying its been solved, when the evidence isn't strong enough to support a charge let alone be put before a court of law.

Total junk..... So you can support that statement with proof.. Lol
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 08, 2022, 05:49:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 08, 2022, 05:37:01 PM
It's the only one he offered.
Wrong.  He said they had a number or important leads that lead them to believe she was abducted possibly in a burglary gone wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 08, 2022, 06:05:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 08, 2022, 05:49:48 PM
Wrong.  He said they had a number or important leads that lead them to believe she was abducted possibly in a burglary gone wrong.

There were many leads that led nowhere. I was asking what convinced them there was an abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 08, 2022, 06:07:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 08, 2022, 06:05:42 PM
There were many leads that led nowhere. I was asking what convinced them there was an abduction.

The totality of the evidence..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 08, 2022, 06:13:52 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on July 08, 2022, 06:07:19 PM
The totality of the evidence..

Or their remit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 08, 2022, 06:13:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 08, 2022, 05:49:48 PM
Wrong.  He said they had a number or important leads that lead them to believe she was abducted possibly in a burglary gone wrong.

Yeah they went in for some cash and came out with a child, how the devil is that a burglary gone wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 08, 2022, 06:22:46 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on July 08, 2022, 05:47:49 PM
Total junk..... So you can support that statement with proof.. Lol

Quote from: Mr Gray on January 01, 2022, 02:36:21 PM
The SC never said they had not been cleared. I think you will find the SC will be heavily criticised in my view.  It has a very poor recirdvat the ECHR.
It obviously won't affect thevcade which imo has been solved by the Germans
The mist interesting point is that it has been shown that a favourable verdict could lead to the libel case being reopened in Portugal

For clarity the SC in 2017 said the mccanns were not clesred by the archiving despatch in 2008. They didn't say they had not been cleared.  I think it's quite obvious the despatch was evidence if innocence which the SC refused to accept
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 08, 2022, 06:26:08 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 08, 2022, 05:43:11 PM
Better than saying its been solved, when the evidence isn't strong enough to support a charge let alone be put before a court of law.

You claim the evidence isn't enough to charge.. You state it as a fact... That's junk...your opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 08, 2022, 06:30:33 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on July 08, 2022, 06:26:08 PM
You claim the evidence isn't enough to charge.. You state it as a fact... That's junk...your opinion

If he hasn't been charged then my statement is fact at this moment in time .

Despite J Canaan being the prime suspect in the Lamplugh case there is not enough to charge , that is fact .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 08, 2022, 06:41:12 PM
Quote from: barrier on July 08, 2022, 06:30:33 PM
If he hasn't been charged then my statement is fact at this moment in time .

Despite J Canaan being the prime suspect in the Lamplugh case there is not enough to charge , that is fact .

No it isn't.  There may be other  reasons why he hasn't been charged.. Reasons already explained
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 08, 2022, 11:07:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 08, 2022, 06:05:42 PM
There were many leads that led nowhere. I was asking what convinced them there was an abduction.
No you claimed their only justification for pursuing the abduction theory was that Madeleine couldn’t have run away and started a new life, and I was pointing out that you were wrong - that Rowley gave other justifications, ie: other strong leads, as he felt they were at the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 12, 2022, 08:09:06 PM
This'll be fun the terrible duo are back in charge, abandon hope all ye who enter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on July 23, 2022, 09:04:30 AM
People keep saying mccanns have not been cleared but they had their arguido status removed as did robert murat. If mccanns had not been cleared why for 15 years not do anything? Were is the legal document stating they have not been cleared or is this word of mouth by an opinion of a prosecutor?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 23, 2022, 09:18:29 AM
Quote from: Rossb on July 23, 2022, 09:04:30 AM
People keep saying mccanns have not been cleared but they had their arguido status removed as did robert murat. If mccanns had not been cleared why for 15 years not do anything? Were is the legal document stating they have not been cleared or is this word of mouth by an opinion of a prosecutor?
By any reasonable interpretation of the situation fifteen years down the line and with 3 police forces focusing firmly on stranger abduction it is as clear as day that the McCanns (and Murat) have been cleared and WERE cleared many, many years ago. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 23, 2022, 09:26:01 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 23, 2022, 09:18:29 AM
By any reasonable interpretation of the situation fifteen years down the line and with 3 police forces focusing firmly on stranger abduction it is as clear as day that the McCanns (and Murat) have been cleared and WERE cleared many, many years ago.

They just can't prove that Maddie was actually abducted by a stranger, that's all, no big deal.
But Wolters is going to sort that, isn't he.

It shouldn't be much longer now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 23, 2022, 09:29:43 AM
Furthermore people claiming the McCanns have not been cleared might like to consider what the opposite of "cleared" is, and supply evidence of them still being under suspicion by the authorities.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 23, 2022, 09:31:40 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on July 23, 2022, 09:26:01 AM
They just can't prove that Maddie was actually abducted by a stranger, that's all, no big deal.
But Wolters is going to sort that, isn't he.

It shouldn't be much longer now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 23, 2022, 09:33:24 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on July 23, 2022, 09:26:01 AM
They just can't prove that Maddie was actually abducted by a stranger, that's all, no big deal.
But Wolters is going to sort that, isn't he.

It shouldn't be much longer now.

More of your worthless opinion is fact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 23, 2022, 09:42:28 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on July 23, 2022, 09:33:24 AM
More of your worthless opinion is fact
"It shouldn't be much longer now" is such a childish sceptic mantra, it really shows these people up for what they are - only here to needle and provoke.  "It shouldn't be much longer now before the scales fall from the collective eyes of three police forces and they realise that the McCanns dunnit all along"  Duh.   *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 23, 2022, 09:44:46 AM
46 yrs later, DNA and Cybernetics  lead to an arrest, the very same people who have offered their help in the McCann case.

https://lancaster.crimewatchpa.com/da/11617/post/dna-leads-investigators-charge-suspect-killing-lindy-sue-biechler-46-years-ago

https://www.forensicmag.com/588288-DNA-from-Coffee-Cup-Confirms-Genetic-Genealogy-Suspect-in-1975-Murder-of-Teen/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 23, 2022, 09:47:32 AM
Quote from: Rossb on July 23, 2022, 09:04:30 AM
People keep saying mccanns have not been cleared but they had their arguido status removed as did robert murat. If mccanns had not been cleared why for 15 years not do anything? Were is the legal document stating they have not been cleared or is this word of mouth by an opinion of a prosecutor?

It sounds like a simple question, but over time it became a complex one. It ended up in Portugal's Supreme Court. The McCanns lawyer claimed that the archiving dispatch, written by the prosecutors, cleared them. The Supreme Court Judges said;

"the appellants claim in the conclusions of their appeal allegations, beyond their being absolutely innocent and cleared by virtue of the filing order to close the proceedings"


But the judges rejected their claim;

"let not be said, too, that the appellants were cleared by the order of filing the criminal proceedings."
pages 69-70 http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.15
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 23, 2022, 09:49:59 AM
Quote from: barrier on July 23, 2022, 09:44:46 AM
46 yrs later, DNA and Cybernetics  lead to an arrest, the very same people who have offered their help in the McCann case.

https://lancaster.crimewatchpa.com/da/11617/post/dna-leads-investigators-charge-suspect-killing-lindy-sue-biechler-46-years-ago

https://www.forensicmag.com/588288-DNA-from-Coffee-Cup-Confirms-Genetic-Genealogy-Suspect-in-1975-Murder-of-Teen/

Most likely because the investigation doesn't need their help
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 23, 2022, 09:50:20 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 23, 2022, 09:42:28 AM
"It shouldn't be much longer now" is such a childish sceptic mantra, it really shows these people up for what they are - only here to needle and provoke. "It shouldn't be much longer now before the scales fall from the collective eyes of three police forces and they realise that the McCanns dunnit all along"  Duh.   *%87

No, I'm here to discuss the concrete evidence Maddie was abducted by a stranger & murdered Brueckner.
Let's discuss that shall we.
Only, there isn't much of any of that to talk about really is there, & Brueckner isn't being convicted of murder anytime in the forseeable future either, if you feel provoked by that in anyway, well, I guess that's your own problem really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on July 23, 2022, 09:53:48 AM
Quote from: barrier on July 23, 2022, 09:44:46 AM
46 yrs later, DNA and Cybernetics  lead to an arrest, the very same people who have offered their help in the McCann case.

https://lancaster.crimewatchpa.com/da/11617/post/dna-leads-investigators-charge-suspect-killing-lindy-sue-biechler-46-years-ago

https://www.forensicmag.com/588288-DNA-from-Coffee-Cup-Confirms-Genetic-Genealogy-Suspect-in-1975-Murder-of-Teen/

Quote from: Mr Gray on July 23, 2022, 09:49:59 AM
Most likely because the investigation doesn't need their help

But it could lead to the very thing Hans is lacking, Forensics, what an opportunity .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on July 23, 2022, 09:56:39 AM
Quote from: barrier on July 23, 2022, 09:53:48 AM
But it could lead to the very thing Hans is lacking, Forensics, what an opportunity .

In what way could it possibly help... I don't see it could and it seems the investigation agrees, with me
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 23, 2022, 10:00:46 AM
Quote from: barrier on July 23, 2022, 09:53:48 AM
But it could lead to the very thing Hans is lacking, Forensics, what an opportunity .

Please explain exactly what forensics you would wish to see tested and the reasons for your choice.  I believe there is a comprehensive list available for you to work from.  Thanks in anticipation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 23, 2022, 10:04:17 AM
Quote from: Brietta on July 23, 2022, 10:00:46 AM
Please explain exactly what forensics you would wish to see tested and the reasons for your choice.  I believe there is a comprehensive list available for you to work from.  Thanks in anticipation.

Maybe Brueckner shed some hair when he was hiding in the wardrobe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on July 23, 2022, 10:25:55 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 23, 2022, 09:47:32 AM
It sounds like a simple question, but over time it became a complex one. It ended up in Portugal's Supreme Court. The McCanns lawyer claimed that the archiving dispatch, written by the prosecutors, cleared them. The Supreme Court Judges said;

"the appellants claim in the conclusions of their appeal allegations, beyond their being absolutely innocent and cleared by virtue of the filing order to close the proceedings"


But the judges rejected their claim;

"let not be said, too, that the appellants were cleared by the order of filing the criminal proceedings."
pages 69-70 http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.15

Ive seen the document though of being cleared of arguido status which means suspicion but also legal right to refuse to answer as opposed to being a witness. So even of that happened with the case being shelved theor clearly was no real intention to continue to suspect and investigate the parents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 26, 2022, 06:49:14 PM
BREAKING NEWS!!! Kate McCann has apparently fainted on live TV!  No, no that one, anyone else watching the tory leader’s debate on Talk TV?  I was and then something happened, a loud crash and Liz Truss looked horrified.  I assumed someone had been attacked but word is it was the presenter McCann who collapsed…. very dramatic..l
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 26, 2022, 06:53:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on July 26, 2022, 06:49:14 PM
BREAKING NEWS!!! Kate McCann has apparently fainted on live TV!  No, no that one, anyone else watching the tory leader’s debate on Talk TV?  I was and then something happened, a loud crash and Liz Truss looked horrified.  I assumed someone had been attacked but word is it was the presenter McCann who collapsed…. very dramatic..l

Maybe the thought of Liz Truss ever being prime minister could have caused that.

It's enough to make me want to vote Lib Dem or top myself, to be fair.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 26, 2022, 07:39:48 PM
News just in:  the loud noise was Rishi dropping his wallet.  Thanks to a Times commentator for that one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 04, 2022, 10:00:43 PM
Has anyone been reading about Archie Batersbee? The poor lad was declared dead months ago, but the media have been using terms like him being 'in a coma'.
I read the court judgement & medical reports, he had no blood flow to the brain & major necrosis of brain tissue as early as the end of April, parts of his brain have literally slipped into his lumbar spine, he has no prospect for any sort of recovery at all. But his mother refused to listen to the science, has slandered the hospital staff calling them 'executioners' , accused them of deliberately starving the boy & showing her false MRI scans from another patient.
She's obviously a grieving mother but her attitude to care staff has been appalling, not to mention soliciting for donations from gullible members of the public as if there were some life saving treatment somewhere that he could receive. His mothers real name isn't Hollie Dance, if you search for Lisa Pittaway there's some interesting reading to be found.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 05, 2022, 08:54:24 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 04, 2022, 10:00:43 PM
Has anyone been reading about Archie Batersbee? The poor lad was declared dead months ago, but the media have been using terms like him being 'in a coma'.
I read the court judgement & medical reports, he had no blood flow to the brain & major necrosis of brain tissue as early as the end of April, parts of his brain have literally slipped into his lumbar spine, he has no prospect for any sort of recovery at all. But his mother refused to listen to the science, has slandered the hospital staff calling them 'executioners' , accused them of deliberately starving the boy & showing her false MRI scans from another patient.
She's obviously a grieving mother but her attitude to care staff has been appalling, not to mention soliciting for donations from gullible members of the public as if there were some life saving treatment somewhere that he could receive. His mothers real name isn't Hollie Dance, if you search for Lisa Pittaway there's some interesting reading to be found.

Technology can give the impression that life isn't extinct and then it's left to the courts to make these awful decisions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 05, 2022, 08:59:41 AM
It's just another case which highlights the vile nastiness of the online hate mob towards grieving mothers.  IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 09:06:45 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 05, 2022, 08:59:41 AM
It's just another case which highlights the vile nastiness of the online hate mob towards grieving mothers.  IMO.

Have you bothered to read any of the details?
She's literally accused NHS staff of wanting to harvest her dead sons organs.
How sad, She's grieving, but that doesn't give her the right to be a vile bitch to the very people keeping her dead son sort of alive against his best interests.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 05, 2022, 09:09:32 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 09:06:45 AM
Have you bothered to read any of the details?
She's literally accused NHS staff of wanting to harvest her dead sons organs.
How sad, She's grieving, but that doesn't give her the right to be a vile bitch to the very people keeping her dead son sort of alive against his best interests.

On this point I'm with you..she trashes the very people who tried to have her son
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 09:19:01 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on August 05, 2022, 09:09:32 AM
On this point I'm with you..she trashes the very people who tried to have her son

We agree on something for once.
Her grief & low intelligence have lead her to refuse scientific evidence   . The poor kid is dead, it must be horrifying for nurses having to treat a child they know has been dead for months while his mother slags them off to the media. She now wants him moved to a hospice, pointless, he had zero ability to breathe on his own. He'll be dead, or his heart will stop beating, he's already gone really , as soon as they take the vent tube out. She claims she wants him to die with dignity. Should have let him go 3 months ago then when the medical evidence showed his brain was putrifiying.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 05, 2022, 09:21:45 AM
I don't want to know the details, it's none of my business so I deliberately avoid reading articles about it.  She hasn't upset me personally.  She is grieving.  I would probably be the world's biggest bitch in similar circumstances, but I have no idea how I would react.  If she's broken the law or committed an offence then let the authorities deal with it, we don't need thousands of armchair judges slagging her off online, it's pointless and nasty IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 09:33:48 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 05, 2022, 09:21:45 AM
I don't want to know the details, it's none of my business so I deliberately avoid reading articles about it.  She hasn't upset me personally.  She is grieving.  I would probably be the world's biggest bitch in similar circumstances, but I have no idea how I would react.  If she's broken the law or committed an offence then let the authorities deal with it, we don't need thousands of armchair judges slagging her off online, it's pointless and nasty IMO.

Seems like fair comment to me, she encouraged the media spotlight.
We're expected to have sympathy for her even though she's been a giant bitch. I sympathise with her, she's lost her son it's tragic, but her behaviour warrants a mention imo
The NHS staff aren't allowed to answer back but she gets free rein to call then murderers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 05, 2022, 09:40:05 AM
The irony is - it's probably the same people lambasting the McCanns for not smashing down every door in PdL and searching to the ends of the earth for their daughter (as they tell us they would have done) who are now criticising this child's mother for doing everything she can to keep him alive.   Mothers in such cases cannot win.  They are either too neglectful or not crying enough, or they are demented deranged harpies. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 09:47:40 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 05, 2022, 09:40:05 AM
The irony is - it's probably the same people lambasting the McCanns for not smashing down every door in PdL and searching to the ends of the earth for their daughter (as they tell us they would have done) who are now criticising this child's mother for doing everything she can to keep him alive.   Mothers in such cases cannot win.  They are either too neglectful or not crying enough, or they are demented deranged harpies.

He was declared dead 3 months ago. His brain & body are stuck in a bed decaying. It's in his best interests they stop treatment, or all his organs will fail in the coming days & weeks anyway.
If he can still feel anything, which is highly unlikely, allowing him to decay in a hospital bed is cruel & just delaying the inevitable. We don't often get to hear about cases like this because normally family members see sense & accept the medical evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 09:57:09 AM

JAN MOIR: Spare a thought for the doctors who looked after Archie Battersbee so devotedly with so little thanks

By the time you read this, Archie Battersbee may have died. Or he may still be clinging on to life, locked in a world where only machines keep him alive.

He has been in a coma since April, when he was hospitalised after, his mother believes, attempting the 'blackout challenge', a dangerous TikTok trend that has killed at least two other children.

Doctors believe Archie is brain-stem dead and, having exhausted every medical avenue over the past four months, they argued it would be better for the 12-year-old if he were allowed to die.

They wanted to switch off his life-support machine and let him go in peace. However, his parents, Hollie Dance and Paul Battersbee, did not agree with this diagnosis — and a terrible battle ensued.

They took their fight to keep him alive to the United Nations, to the Supreme Court and finally to the European Court of Human Rights. The latter decreed that they would not interfere with previous court rulings, bringing the parents right back to square one.

Suffused with grief at her son's seemingly hopeless predicament, Miss Dance said some damning things about his NHS treatment.

'They haven't given Archie any care,' she complained this week.

One can understand her anguish while simultaneously appreciating that this is patently not true. Not just because Archie has been in an ICU for all this time at an approximate cost of £225,000 — not that the money matters.

It is more that medical teams at Barts and at the Royal Hospital in London have worked around the clock to keep Archie alive — but even the most dedicated ICU worker cannot perform miracles.

Hollie's words may be insulting and unfair, but she is swaddled in the blanket of compassion that the parent of every desperately ill child warrants, even if their ungratefulness sometimes grates. For emotions are running high and everyone understands that.

And we have been here before. Four years ago in Liverpool, a little boy called Alfie Evans had a neuro-degenerative disorder so rare it didn't even have a name.

He was treated at Alder Hey Children's Hospital for 15 months before doctors applied to have his life-support machine switched off. His parents convinced themselves the hospital was not fit for purpose and began a battle that went all the way to the Vatican.

The year before it was a baby called Charlie Gard. When doctors at Great Ormond Street Hospital first suggested that further medical intervention would not be in Charlie's best interests, and that he should be moved to palliative care, his father and mother disagreed. They argued in the courts that their critically ill child, not yet one-year-old, should be allowed to undergo experimental treatment in the U.S.

Again, this request was denied, and in both cases it was the opinion of the doctors, and not the wishes of the parents, that prevailed.

And rightly so, because doctors must do what is in the best interest of their patients, not the interests of the distraught parents.

These life-or-death situations with sick children are difficult enough to witness from the sidelines. One can only imagine the horror of being an involved parent; helpless in the face of what they see as intransigent medical opinion, desperate to delay the approaching hour of death.

Perhaps that is why, unable to accept the inevitable, parents embark on these doomed legal manoeuvres. The meetings, the court appearances; it all gives false illusion of a battle the parents can fight, maybe even win.

Mum and Dad are not sitting around shredding their fingernails; they are squaring up to the doctors, who conveniently provide them with an enemy in clear sight. An enemy that is easier to combat than the dreadful, unwinnable situation that is the reality of their position.

The media attention on their struggle must be gratifying, too, as the world watches and the sick child becomes a cause celebre.

'The atmosphere at the hospital is very tense,' said a television reporter outside the Royal London Hospital yesterday morning. I bet it was.

perhaps one day, though, the parents might come to understand that these caring professionals are friends, not foes — instead of using legal battles as a kind of coping strategy.

At some point this week, the Battersbee family seemed finally to accept that time was running out for Archie. Yet the fight was still not over.

At the time of writing, they were pursuing a last request to move Archie to a hospice where he could 'die in peace'.

Doctors were against this, arguing that the child's unstable condition meant that moving him would be too big a risk.

A spokeswoman for his family said it was 'absolutely disgusting' that the family were 'not even allowed to choose where Archie takes his last moments'.

The word 'inhumane' was also tossed around.

But is it really disgusting? Or is it just that frail Archie might not survive the journey and would possibly die in pain and chaos in a hospital corridor?

One can see why moving Archie to the relative peace of a hospice room might be easier for his family, but it won't necessarily be easier for him.

In the end, in all these tragic cases, the law inevitably decides that the wishes of the parents are trumped by the learned opinion of the doctors.

In Archie's case, they have decided that the kindest thing of all would be to let nature take its terrible course.

Unlike Archie's parents, I don't see this as cruel or inhumane — but the very highest form of pure compassion that the medical profession can offer.

The loss for the Battersbee family is a devastating one, and they have all my sympathy.

But spare a thought for the doctors and medics who have looked after Archie devotedly and been given so little thanks for their efforts. They deserve our support and prayers, too.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-11082377/JAN-MOIR-Spare-thought-doctors-looked-Archie-Battersbee-little-thanks.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 05, 2022, 10:33:16 AM

Archie should be allowed to die!  What?   What has Archie got to do with this?  According to the doctors Archie is already dead, so he shouldn't be too much of a problem.

Meanwhile, his mother is distraught.  As I know I would be.  And so she cannot be held responsible for what she has said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 05, 2022, 10:46:52 AM
Meanwhile, here's a very sensitive and sensible article from the Daily Mail some years ago:

By Jan Moir
PUBLISHED: 01:39, 13 September 2013 | UPDATED: 01:39, 13 September 2013

The courage of Kate McCann

The agony never ends for Kate McCann. This week she must be bracing herself for more public scrutiny as she returns to a country that she must now hate, in a journey that revisits a very, very dark place in her own mind.

Mrs McCann is once more in Portugal, the scene of her three-year-old daughter Madeleine’s disappearance in 2007.

She is there for a £1 million libel case against former police chief Goncalo Amaral, once in charge of the Madeleine investigation. He published a book accusing the McCanns of covering up their daughter’s death — a case that he could not make in real life, so he made it in print instead.


These claims were the basis for much of the suspicion against the McCanns, forcing them to fight allegations that they had harmed their little girl.

The bad smell from the allegations, published in a book that is still available in Portugal, lingers.

Why does Kate bother? What good can it do? Why rake over the pain? Perhaps the old saying holds true: innocence is important to the innocent. The McCanns feel it poisoned the hunt for Madeleine, that the smokescreen allowed the real culprit to go free. While Kate and her husband Gerry try to get on with family life, they clearly feel they cannot let these damaging allegations stand.

What a never-ending nightmare. You’ve got to admire her stoicism. Many mothers would have been broken by this terrible ordeal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 11:05:26 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 05, 2022, 10:33:16 AM
Archie should be allowed to die!  What?   What has Archie got to do with this?  According to the doctors Archie is already dead, so he shouldn't be too much of a problem.

Meanwhile, his mother is distraught.  As I know I would be.  And so she cannot be held responsible for what she has said.

Well, legally she can't, but in my world she's still responsible for her own actions. Grief doesn't permit free rein to be calling NHS staff executioners, they're working round the clock keeping him kind of alive when it's slowly killing him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on August 05, 2022, 11:35:16 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 05, 2022, 10:33:16 AM
Archie should be allowed to die!  What?   What has Archie got to do with this?  According to the doctors Archie is already dead, so he shouldn't be too much of a problem.

Meanwhile, his mother is distraught.  As I know I would be.  And so she cannot be held responsible for what she has said.

NHS staff, I'm sure, are used to excusing distraught mothers for saying things they shouldn't say. Should these mothers be excused for making unsupported vile allegations against NHS staff in the media and the courts? I think that's a step too far imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 05, 2022, 11:37:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on August 05, 2022, 11:35:16 AM
NHS staff, I'm sure, are used to excusing distraught mothers for saying things they shouldn't say. Should these mothers be excused for making unsupported vile allegations against NHS staff in the media and the courts? I think that's a step too far imo.
What do you think should happen to them then?  Is getting abused online by judgemental trolls sufficient punishment, or would you devise something more punitive?  Perhaps a week in the stocks?  Or jail even? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 11:42:12 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 05, 2022, 11:37:48 AM
What do you think should happen to them then?  Is getting abused online by judgemental trolls sufficient punishment, or would you devise something more punitive?  Perhaps a week in the stocks?  Or jail even?

Someone needed to take the poor woman aside & give her head a  damn good shake, but she's so heavily in denial with grief that she's convinced the poor lad was improving & gaining weight, trying to breathe etc.
The medical report, which I found quite disturbing to read but had to to get the facts, paints a very different picture to the story she's been portraying to the media.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 05, 2022, 11:45:06 AM

Is Archie dead or not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 05, 2022, 11:49:00 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 05, 2022, 11:45:06 AM
Is Archie dead or not?
He is currently being kept alive in hospital I believe.  He's not the first child in a brain dead state whose parents have fought tooth and nail over keeping him on life support and I don't suppose he shall be the last, but clearly it's good entertainment value for some people to sit in judgement over what is right and what is wrong for another person's child and how they react in the face of such devastating circumstances.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 05, 2022, 11:51:46 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 05, 2022, 11:49:00 AM
He is currently being kept alive in hospital I believe.  He's not the first child in a brain dead state whose parents have fought tooth and nail over keeping him on life support and I don't suppose he shall be the last, but clearly it's good entertainment value for some people to sit in judgement over what is right and what is wrong for another person's child and how they react in the face of such devastating circumstances.

Same old same old.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 05, 2022, 11:52:41 AM
I read in the Guardian or Independent, forget which, that she's prepared to give mouth to mouth if he's taken off oxygen.
Good luck with that one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on August 05, 2022, 12:03:32 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 05, 2022, 11:45:06 AM
Is Archie dead or not?
Court Judgement - June 2022, Page 42 onwards...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 12:04:17 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 05, 2022, 11:45:06 AM
Is Archie dead or not?

He was declared dead months ago.
He needs something like 20+ medical interventions to keep his heart beating, but has no blood flow in the brain & major necrosis.  The court medical report makes for horrific reading.
Thankfully the court have seen sense & are refusing his move to a hospice.
His mother might need to be dragged screaming by police from his bedside when they switch off the machines.
It's sad, I do feel for his mother, she's in such major denial & anger, but her behaviour just warrants a mention imo. No harm in that really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 12:05:04 PM
Quote from: Myster on August 05, 2022, 12:03:32 PM
Court Judgement - June 2022, Page 42 onwards...

It's horrific. The poor lad is literally decomposing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 05, 2022, 12:07:18 PM
Quote from: Myster on August 05, 2022, 12:03:32 PM
Court Judgement - June 2022, Page 42 onwards...
9. The devotion of the family is extraordinary, their dignity obvious, I have no
doubt at all that their worst fear is that the clinicians are right, and that their
much-loved son has lost his present and his future and that this period in which
their lives have been in suspension is coming to an end.

I couldn't read much more - just too sad
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 12:10:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 05, 2022, 12:07:18 PM
9. The devotion of the family is extraordinary, their dignity obvious, I have no
doubt at all that their worst fear is that the clinicians are right, and that their
much-loved son has lost his present and his future and that this period in which
their lives have been in suspension is coming to an end.

Yes, the judges tried to be as tactful & caring as they good.
Her social media posts accusing the hospital of malpractice show her other side.
But hey, nobody's innocent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 12:15:50 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 05, 2022, 12:07:18 PM
9. The devotion of the family is extraordinary, their dignity obvious, I have no
doubt at all that their worst fear is that the clinicians are right, and that their
much-loved son has lost his present and his future and that this period in which
their lives have been in suspension is coming to an end.

I couldn't read much more - just too sad

You wouldn't want to read what's happening to his brain & body.
That lovely looking boy in the press photos has withered away to almost nothing, his skin appears waxy like a corpse. As I was saying earlier, the medical staff 'treating' him have complained of the distress tending to his needs has caused them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 05, 2022, 12:18:03 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 12:15:50 PM
You wouldn't want to read what's happening to his brain & body.
That lovely looking boy in the press photos has withered away to almost nothing, his skin appears waxy like a corpse. As I was saying earlier, the medical staff 'treating' him have complained of the distress tending to his needs has caused them.

Isn't this their job?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on August 05, 2022, 12:21:04 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 12:15:50 PM
You wouldn't want to read what's happening to his brain & body.
That lovely looking boy in the press photos has withered away to almost nothing, his skin appears waxy like a corpse. As I was saying earlier, the medical staff 'treating' him have complained of the distress tending to his needs has caused them.

And the mother is blaming them for it all. Maybe she should look closer to home.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 12:21:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 05, 2022, 12:18:03 PM
Isn't this their job?

The bodies don't normally stay in the ward for 3 months after they've been declared dead.
They are tending a corpse, they can do nothing to make him better, just slow his inevitable decline.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 05, 2022, 12:24:20 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 12:21:45 PM
The bodies don't normally stay in the ward for 3 months after they've been declared dead.
They are tending a corpse, they can do nothing to make him better, just slow his inevitable decline.

Added to which, resources are finite and the equipment  could be put to better use treating someone who had a better chance of living.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 05, 2022, 12:26:26 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 05, 2022, 12:21:04 PM
And the mother is blaming them for it all. Maybe she should look closer to home.
Meaning?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 12:28:19 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on August 05, 2022, 12:21:04 PM
And the mother is blaming them for it all. Maybe she should look closer to home.

She's grieving, I don't want to lay into her too much, but when you do look closer to home, the boy tried to hang himself the day before, he was depressed according to some of his social media. Her story that he might have been copying a TikTok choking game becomes a little questionable. She has given more than one version of the manner in which she found him hanging & the events leading up to it. She probably has a huge amount of guilt along with the denial anger grief & everything else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on August 05, 2022, 01:09:24 PM
She's a deluded troublemaker, nothing more...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11083827/Archie-Battersbees-parents-9-45am-TODAY-hospice.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11083827/Archie-Battersbees-parents-9-45am-TODAY-hospice.html)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 05, 2022, 01:14:13 PM
Quote from: Myster on August 05, 2022, 01:09:24 PM
She's a deluded troublemaker, nothing more...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11083827/Archie-Battersbees-parents-9-45am-TODAY-hospice.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11083827/Archie-Battersbees-parents-9-45am-TODAY-hospice.html)

How sad.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 01:27:14 PM
Quote from: Myster on August 05, 2022, 01:09:24 PM
She's a deluded troublemaker, nothing more...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11083827/Archie-Battersbees-parents-9-45am-TODAY-hospice.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11083827/Archie-Battersbees-parents-9-45am-TODAY-hospice.html)

That lays it out quite well.
He's not in a coma or vegative state, his brain is literally dead & the only reason his heart beats is the machines. No amount of stem cell treatment can heal that & she insists she was shown someone else's MRI, even though the court & hospital have already explained she wasn’t.
The level of denial is incredible.
In the most recent court ruling she had insisted she was ok with risking him dying in the back of an ambulance on route to a hospice, whilst also maintaining she wants his death to be dignified?
Poor woman is seriously messed up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 05, 2022, 01:32:58 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 01:27:14 PM
That lays it out quite well.
He's not in a coma or vegative state, his brain is literally dead & the only reason his heart beats is the machines. No amount of stem cell treatment can heal that & she insists she was shown someone else's MRI, even though the court & hospital have already explained she wasn’t.
The level of denial is incredible.
In the most recent court ruling she had insisted she was ok with risking him dying in the back of an ambulance on route to a hospice, whilst also maintaining she wants his death to be dignified?
Poor woman is seriously messed up.

So would you be messed up if it happened to you.

Although on reflection you probably wouldn't be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 01:40:59 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 05, 2022, 01:32:58 PM
So would you be messed up if it happened to you.

Although on reflection you probably wouldn't be.

I have had people in my life die you know, I tried to save one with cpr but it was too late.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 05, 2022, 01:44:09 PM
On another subject isn't it great that the conspiracy loon Alex Jones is having to pay the parents of the victims of Sandy Hook $4m for peddling myths about their children's murders? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 01:50:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 05, 2022, 01:44:09 PM
On another subject isn't it great that the conspiracy loon Alex Jones is having to pay the parents of the victims of Sandy Hook $4m for peddling myths about their children's murders?

I still believe it was a hoax.
I've read all about Adam Lanza, he had a 7 foot spread sheet on his computer listing mass murders & ranking them by weapons used, total kills, head shots etc. He would amend details on wiki about mass murders.
When his mother wanted to move to a new place, that's when his autism, anxiety peaked, so he blew her brains out then stormed the school with his rifle & combat gear.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 05, 2022, 01:52:48 PM
Yet more excellent news:
A Russian army commander who called herself the “she-wolf” after boasting that she enjoyed killing Ukrainians has died in a missile strike.

Lieutenant Colonel Olga “Korsa” Kachura is Moscow’s first female army chief to die since the invasion started in February. Kachura, 52, was killed instantly after a rocket struck her car in the city of Horlivka, Donetsk.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 02:17:32 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 05, 2022, 01:52:48 PM
Yet more excellent news:
A Russian army commander who called herself the “she-wolf” after boasting that she enjoyed killing Ukrainians has died in a missile strike.

Lieutenant Colonel Olga “Korsa” Kachura is Moscow’s first female army chief to die since the invasion started in February. Kachura, 52, was killed instantly after a rocket struck her car in the city of Horlivka, Donetsk.

They won that battle but they're losing the war.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 05, 2022, 02:25:40 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 01:40:59 PM
I have had people in my life die you know, I tried to save one with cpr but it was too late.

I am very sad for you to hear this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 05, 2022, 02:34:04 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 02:17:32 PM
They won that battle but they're losing the war.

We're bombarded by so much Western propaganda that I find it impossible to discern the truth about the war and it's progress.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 05, 2022, 02:39:32 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 05, 2022, 02:34:04 PM
We're bombarded by so much Western propaganda that I find it impossible to discern the truth about the war and it's progress.
Yeah, probably best to rely on the Russian media, they tend to be wholly accurate and fact based.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 05, 2022, 04:43:30 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 05, 2022, 02:34:04 PM
We're bombarded by so much Western propaganda that I find it impossible to discern the truth about the war and it's progress.

There's very little talk of pushing the invading forces back to Russia & taking back Crimea anymore.
Russia have pretty much turned off the gas taps to Europe, the sanctions were designed to cripple the Russian economy, but it's Europe experiencing inflation, recession & pending fuel shortages this coming winter. Things are going that well for the collective west they tried to provoke China to distract from Ukraine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 05, 2022, 06:47:01 PM
I don't have any answer to this,  but Zelensky,aided by the  western powers is steadily allowing the destruction of Ukraine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 05, 2022, 08:00:13 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 05, 2022, 06:47:01 PM
I don't have any answer to this,  but Zelensky,aided by the  western powers is steadily allowing the destruction of Ukraine.
Yes, quite right, absolutely nothing to do with Russia, at all. when a democratic country is invaded by a neighbour it is incumbent on the occupied country to simply roll over and invite the invaders to take over without a fight,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 06, 2022, 08:17:52 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 05, 2022, 01:44:09 PM
On another subject isn't it great that the conspiracy loon Alex Jones is having to pay the parents of the victims of Sandy Hook $4m for peddling myths about their children's murders?
the news gets even better:

A jury in Texas yesterday ordered right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones to pay $49.3 million in total damages to the parents of a 6-year-old boy killed in the Sandy Hook school massacre, which the Infowars founder had claimed was a hoax.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 06, 2022, 08:33:04 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 06, 2022, 08:17:52 AM
the news gets even better:

A jury in Texas yesterday ordered right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones to pay $49.3 million in total damages to the parents of a 6-year-old boy killed in the Sandy Hook school massacre, which the Infowars founder had claimed was a hoax.
It seems the alleged victims want to silence anyone who doesn't believe in their narrative...what does that tell us
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 06, 2022, 09:22:24 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on August 06, 2022, 08:33:04 AM
It seems the alleged victims want to silence anyone who doesn't believe in their narrative...what does that tell us
Oh yeah, you got a point.   @)(++(* 
Of course the victims families should just have allowed this idiot to spout any old claptrap denying them the existence of their grief, their children, their reality and then making a shed load of money from it.  They should have remained silent in the face of all the hate and death threats they received thanks to Jones' campaign, that's what I would have done OBVIOUSLY.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 06, 2022, 09:42:14 AM

I wish I knew more about The Warsaw Pact.  I've heard of it but I don't know what it means.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 06, 2022, 09:46:57 AM
Google is your friend  -  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Pact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 06, 2022, 09:52:16 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 05, 2022, 08:00:13 PM
Yes, quite right, absolutely nothing to do with Russia, at all. when a democratic country is invaded by a neighbour it is incumbent on the occupied country to simply roll over and invite the invaders to take over without a fight,
Furthermore, it is essential that all countries adjacent to the occupied country should offer no military or other assistance to their neighbour and must also prepare to surrender their borders should the occupier decide to expand their operation into their territory. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 06, 2022, 09:52:25 AM
Quote from: jassi on August 06, 2022, 09:46:57 AM
Google is your friend  -  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Pact

Thank you.  I might have a look at it later.  But I suspect it could be a bit late now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 06, 2022, 10:36:18 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 05, 2022, 08:00:13 PM
Yes, quite right, absolutely nothing to do with Russia, at all. when a democratic country is invaded by a neighbour it is incumbent on the occupied country to simply roll over and invite the invaders to take over without a fight,

Affordable energy prices or a free & democratic Ukraine?
I'll take the cheap oil & gas Mr Putin, thanks.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 06, 2022, 11:51:03 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 06, 2022, 10:36:18 AM
Affordable energy prices or a free & democratic Ukraine?
I'll take the cheap oil & gas Mr Putin, thanks.

I'd rather have cheap UK gas ...need to sort out the eco zealots and start fracking
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 06, 2022, 11:56:48 AM
Apparently it is too late as most of the Members have left The Pact already, but it seems that Ukraine was suggesting that they might join NATO and Russia wasn't having that.  Although how this entitles Russia to invade Ukraine is a bit much to take.  Russia didn't attack any of the others when they left, but then Russia would have been on a very sticky wicket if they had.

However, Ukraine is right on the border of Russia, along with a couple of other countries who are still in The Pact.

I think Putin has lost his marbles as The West was bound to help to defend Ukraine, but Putin doesn't seem to have seen this coming.  And now of course, it has all escalated way beyond proportion.

Funnily enough, I didn't even know where Ukraine was before this happened.  So nothing lost as far as I am concerned.  The prevailing wind for where I live is Westwards, which means if Putin drops a Nuclear Bomb on Paris all that Nuclear Shite will blow back on Russia.  Has Putin thought about this I have to wonder?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 06, 2022, 12:23:56 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on August 06, 2022, 11:51:03 AM
I'd rather have cheap UK gas ...need to sort out the eco zealots and start fracking
and building a few more nuclear power stations (but not near where I live, ta).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 06, 2022, 12:27:48 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 06, 2022, 11:56:48 AM
Apparently it is too late as most of the Members have left The Pact already, but it seems that Ukraine was suggesting that they might join NATO and Russia wasn't having that.  Although how this entitles Russia to invade Ukraine is a bit much to take.  Russia didn't attack any of the others when they left, but then Russia would have been on a very sticky wicket if they had.

However, Ukraine is right on the border of Russia, along with a couple of other countries who are still in The Pact.

I think Putin has lost his marbles as The West was bound to help to defend Ukraine, but Putin doesn't seem to have seen this coming.  And now of course, it has all escalated way beyond proportion.

Funnily enough, I didn't even know where Ukraine was before this happened.  So nothing lost as far as I am concerned.  The prevailing wind for where I live is Westwards, which means if Putin drops a Nuclear Bomb on Paris all that Nuclear Shite will blow back on Russia. Has Putin thought about this I have to wonder?
[/b]

If it gets to that stage I don't suppose it will really matter where the wind blows.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 06, 2022, 12:32:18 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 06, 2022, 12:27:48 PM
[/b]

If it gets to that stage I don't suppose it will really matter where the wind blows.

Of course it will matter.  But then this is where Hope comes in, again.  I would much rather die hoping than give up.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 06, 2022, 12:37:14 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 06, 2022, 12:32:18 PM
Of course it will matter.  But then this is where Hope comes in, again.  I would much rather die hoping than give up.

Hoping for what?
A major nuclear exchange would be the end of civilisation as we currently know it. The only thing to look forward to would be an early and preferably painless death.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 06, 2022, 12:56:25 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 06, 2022, 12:37:14 PM
Hoping for what?
A major nuclear exchange would be the end of civilisation as we currently know it. The only thing to look forward to would be an early and preferably painless death.

Hoping that I'm not going to die just yet.

There will be no major nuclear exchange.

Jesus.  What a ball of fun you are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 06, 2022, 01:15:31 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 06, 2022, 12:56:25 PM
Hoping that I'm not going to die just yet.

There will be no major nuclear exchange.

Jesus.  What a ball of fun you are.

Until there is, then it's too late.

Given Johnson with his Churchill tribute act and Truss as Thatcher Mk11 an escalation of political hostility is very much on the cards if the West is not careful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 06, 2022, 01:34:35 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 06, 2022, 01:15:31 PM
Until there is, then it's too late.

Given Johnson with his Churchill tribute act and Truss as Thatcher Mk11 an escalation of political hostility is very much on the cards if the West is not careful.

Personally, I think it's Putin who needs to worry.  I don't suppose he wants to die or spend the rest of his life in a fall out shelter.

In the meantime he won't get the time to annihilate the rest of the world.  Think Logistics.  This always helps.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 06, 2022, 01:41:22 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 06, 2022, 12:23:56 PM
and building a few more nuclear power stations (but not near where I live, ta).

Wave power, wind power and sun power are the only real solutions as I see it.   I don't mind oil fields at sea


I don't want any more nuclear, thank you very much.


Fracking?   Mmmmm?   What happens to the ground later when it is hollowed out below?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 06, 2022, 01:42:15 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 06, 2022, 11:56:48 AM
Apparently it is too late as most of the Members have left The Pact already, but it seems that Ukraine was suggesting that they might join NATO and Russia wasn't having that.  Although how this entitles Russia to invade Ukraine is a bit much to take.  Russia didn't attack any of the others when they left, but then Russia would have been on a very sticky wicket if they had.

However, Ukraine is right on the border of Russia, along with a couple of other countries who are still in The Pact.

I think Putin has lost his marbles as The West was bound to help to defend Ukraine, but Putin doesn't seem to have seen this coming.  And now of course, it has all escalated way beyond proportion.

Funnily enough, I didn't even know where Ukraine was before this happened.  So nothing lost as far as I am concerned.  The prevailing wind for where I live is Westwards, which means if Putin drops a Nuclear Bomb on Paris all that Nuclear Shite will blow back on Russia.  Has Putin thought about this I have to wonder?

When Chernobyl blew up, the radiation was detected in the uk, prevailing winds matter not.

https://inews.co.uk/news/science/chernobyl-disaster-radiation-uk-today-most-radioactive-areas-britain-299435
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 06, 2022, 01:44:00 PM
One of my favourites singers sadly passed this morning, the Carnival is sadly over for Judith.




https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-62447650


https://youtu.be/Kb5V7MHFJXI
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 06, 2022, 01:46:14 PM
Quote from: barrier on August 06, 2022, 01:42:15 PM
When Chernobyl blew up, the radiation was detected in the uk, prevailing winds matter not.

https://inews.co.uk/news/science/chernobyl-disaster-radiation-uk-today-most-radioactive-areas-britain-299435

Did we all die?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 06, 2022, 01:50:49 PM
Quote from: barrier on August 06, 2022, 01:44:00 PM
One of my favourites singers sadly passed this morning, the Carnival is sadly over for Judith.




https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-62447650


https://youtu.be/Kb5V7MHFJXI

One of mine to..great songs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 06, 2022, 01:51:51 PM
Quote from: barrier on August 06, 2022, 01:44:00 PM
One of my favourites singers sadly passed this morning, the Carnival is sadly over for Judith.




https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-62447650


https://youtu.be/Kb5V7MHFJXI

That was nice.  And all of those men were hot.  Just my age as well.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 06, 2022, 01:51:58 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 06, 2022, 01:46:14 PM
Did we all die?

Did any say they did , still if they'd have nuked Putin at the start ,this mess would have been all over and China wouldn't be sabre rattling over Taiwan .The wind has been sown .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on August 06, 2022, 01:53:17 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on August 06, 2022, 01:50:49 PM
One of mine to..great songs


There is some times a common ground between us.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 06, 2022, 02:35:36 PM
Quote from: barrier on August 06, 2022, 01:51:58 PM
Did any say they did , still if they'd have nuked Putin at the start ,this mess would have been all over and China wouldn't be sabre rattling over Taiwan .The wind has been sown .
Do you suppose we could have nuked Putin without Russian retaliation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on August 21, 2022, 03:20:46 AM
Am worrying about SIL.  He has been quite poorly over a period.   

https://shininginluz.wordpress.com/2022/06/04/madeleine-v-illness/

No blog since July

Anyone know if he is OK


Please give him my very best wishes.

sadie Xxx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 23, 2022, 05:05:54 PM
Such great news.  A public appeal for information re: a missing person pays dividends after hundreds of sightings were reported

Owami Davies: Missing student nurse found alive and well https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-62649615
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on August 23, 2022, 06:09:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on August 23, 2022, 05:05:54 PM
Such great news.  A public appeal for information re: a missing person pays dividends after hundreds of sightings were reported

Owami Davies: Missing student nurse found alive and well https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-62649615

That's excellent news. I feared the worst.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 23, 2022, 06:26:34 PM
Strange story.
"Five people were arrested and bailed in connection with her disappearance – two on suspicion of murder and three on suspicion of kidnap – but police said there was no evidence she had come to harm."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/aug/23/owami-davies-found-safe-well-police-say

So why did they arrest people ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 23, 2022, 06:29:24 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 23, 2022, 06:26:34 PM
Strange story.
"Five people were arrested and bailed in connection with her disappearance – two on suspicion of murder and three on suspicion of kidnap – but police said there was no evidence she had come to harm."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/aug/23/owami-davies-found-safe-well-police-say

So why did they arrest people ?

I am wondering about that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 23, 2022, 07:06:35 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 23, 2022, 06:26:34 PM
Strange story.
"Five people were arrested and bailed in connection with her disappearance – two on suspicion of murder and three on suspicion of kidnap – but police said there was no evidence she had come to harm."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/aug/23/owami-davies-found-safe-well-police-say

So why did they arrest people ?
Maybe there were inconsistencies in their witness statements.  Perhaps a dog barked at their trousers.  Who knows?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on August 23, 2022, 07:49:40 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 23, 2022, 06:26:34 PM
Strange story.
"Five people were arrested and bailed in connection with her disappearance – two on suspicion of murder and three on suspicion of kidnap – but police said there was no evidence she had come to harm."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/aug/23/owami-davies-found-safe-well-police-say

So why did they arrest people ?

Rather like OG who have Madeleine down as a missing person and the Germans who have her murdered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 23, 2022, 08:32:31 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on August 23, 2022, 07:49:40 PM
Rather like OG who have Madeleine down as a missing person and the Germans who have her murdered.

Some of us understand exactly why that is..no inconsistency
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 23, 2022, 09:04:57 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on August 23, 2022, 08:32:31 PM
Some of us understand exactly why that is..no inconsistency

Yes, it's because Wolters doesn't have concrete evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 03, 2022, 11:49:26 AM
How the mighty fall. One minute you’re king of the PR world, the next you’re a gaslit Tory on some random voxpop.

https://youtu.be/uiGUp1fTGJc
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 03, 2022, 12:20:30 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 03, 2022, 11:49:26 AM
How the mighty fall. One minute you’re king of the PR world, the next you’re a gaslit Tory on some random voxpop.

https://youtu.be/uiGUp1fTGJc

Ah, my cousin Clarence.  I haven't seen him for a while, like never.  Hope you are okay.  There is always a bed here for you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2022, 01:23:35 PM
Jesus, how do these sceptics keep tabs on all these McCann-related people?  Do they spend all day trawling through the internet with facial recognition apps to track them down or something?  Bizarre and strange!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 03, 2022, 04:45:34 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 03, 2022, 01:23:35 PM
Jesus, how do these sceptics keep tabs on all these McCann-related people?  Do they spend all day trawling through the internet with facial recognition apps to track them down or something?  Bizarre and strange!

Sheer fluke. 

Sorry for the distress this might cause you…..we know how comforting you find your simplistic stereotypes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2022, 05:30:20 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 03, 2022, 04:45:34 PM
Sheer fluke. 

Sorry for the distress this might cause you…..we know how comforting you find your simplistic stereotypes.
Why would it distress me?  Silly sausage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 03, 2022, 05:52:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 03, 2022, 05:30:20 PM
Why would it distress me?  Silly sausage.

I explained why within my post. Didn’t you read it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2022, 06:08:09 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 03, 2022, 05:52:35 PM
I explained why within my post. Didn’t you read it?
Of course I did but it didn’t make much sense to me.  Anyway rest assured I am not remotely distressed, just rather amused by your spiteful nonsense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 03, 2022, 06:19:51 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 03, 2022, 06:08:09 PM
Of course I did but it didn’t make much sense to me.  Anyway rest assured I am not remotely distressed, just rather amused by your spiteful nonsense.

Anyhooo it does rather appear that Clarence, having sold his soul to the highest bidder for many years, has found his natural home within the moral vacuum that is the current Tory membership. He’ll fit in perfectly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2022, 06:42:21 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 03, 2022, 06:19:51 PM
Anyhooo it does rather appear that Clarence, having sold his soul to the highest bidder for many years, has found his natural home within the moral vacuum that is the current Tory membership. He’ll fit in perfectly.
I thought he’d been an active Tory member / supporter / activist for years, is this news to you?   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 03, 2022, 07:32:11 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 03, 2022, 06:19:51 PM
Anyhooo it does rather appear that Clarence, having sold his soul to the highest bidder for many years, has found his natural home within the moral vacuum that is the current Tory membership. He’ll fit in perfectly.

Tried to become the dissolute Member of Parliament for a Brighton seat a few years ago  but failed. Maybe even too seedy for Tory voters
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 03, 2022, 07:36:04 PM

Please let us not have any Libellous Comments about Clarence Mitchell.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 03, 2022, 07:38:36 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 03, 2022, 07:32:11 PM
Tried to become the dissolute Member of Parliament for a Brighton seat a few years ago  but failed. Maybe even too seedy for Tory voters
It seems eeven the mention of Clarence causes so much discomfort to sceptics....another one who must be vilified
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2022, 07:46:30 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 03, 2022, 07:38:36 PM
It seems eeven the mention of Clarence causes so much discomfort to sceptics....another one who must be vilified
I reckon he’s even more hated than the McCanns amongst certain sceptics , though not entirely sure why apart from Blacksmith despised him and his own hatred probably rubbed off on his fanclub.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 03, 2022, 08:35:47 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 03, 2022, 07:46:30 PM
I reckon he’s even more hated than the McCanns amongst certain sceptics , though not entirely sure why apart from Blacksmith despised him and his own hatred probably rubbed off on his fanclub.

I wonder why some people think sceptics are always influenced by others? Perhaps it's just part of the myth they peddle that they're superior in every way to those who don't agree with them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2022, 08:58:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 03, 2022, 08:35:47 PM
I wonder why some people think sceptics are always influenced by others? Perhaps it's just part of the myth they peddle that they're superior in every way to those who don't agree with them.
What are you on about?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 03, 2022, 09:44:14 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 03, 2022, 07:32:11 PM
Tried to become the dissolute Member of Parliament for a Brighton seat a few years ago  but failed. Maybe even too seedy for Tory voters

Ah yes, the lovely Caroline Lucas beat him, didn’t she?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 03, 2022, 09:48:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 03, 2022, 08:35:47 PM
I wonder why some people think sceptics are always influenced by others? Perhaps it's just part of the myth they peddle that they're superior in every way to those who don't agree with them.

Unfortunately some judge everyone by their own corrupted standards. Makes looking at themselves in the mirror easier I suppose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2022, 10:22:18 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 03, 2022, 09:48:32 PM
Unfortunately some judge everyone by their own corrupted standards. Makes looking at themselves in the mirror easier I suppose.
more nonsensical rubbish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2022, 10:24:24 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 03, 2022, 06:19:51 PM
Anyhooo it does rather appear that Clarence, having sold his soul to the highest bidder for many years, has found his natural home within the moral vacuum that is the current Tory membership. He’ll fit in perfectly.
Not judgemental at all no sirree bob, must be because she’s got a corrupted soul so she can look in the mirror - or something.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 07:36:21 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 03, 2022, 09:48:32 PM
Unfortunately some judge everyone by their own corrupted standards. Makes looking at themselves in the mirror easier I suppose.

Sceptics are portrayed as unthinking idiots who follow others such as Amaral and Blacksmith and adopt their theories and opinions without question. IMO it is supporters who have always accepted what they have been told by others - the McCanns, the media and Scotland Yard especially. They quote these sources constantly, while sceptics examine the evidence instead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2022, 07:51:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 07:36:21 AM
Sceptics are portrayed as unthinking idiots who follow others such as Amaral and Blacksmith and adopt their theories and opinions without question. IMO it is supporters who have always accepted what they have been told by others - the McCanns, the media and Scotland Yard especially. They quote these sources constantly, while sceptics examine the evidence instead.
So what you seem to be saying is - it’s ok to call supporters sheeple but not sceptics?  I see.   Let’s see you doing some questioning of what Amaral and Grime have said then.  Let’s see you disagree with anything Blacksmith ever wrote, I shan’t hold my breath….
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2022, 08:28:49 AM
What sceptics fail to notice is that they ARE supporters (of Amaral, of Grime, of the dogs (“dogs don’t lie”) of every blogger who slagged off the McCanns and poured vitriol onto people like Mitchell) whilst us supporters are deeply sceptical of Amaral, of the dogs, of propaganda-pushing, bile-vomiting bloggers like Blacksmith.   So, don’t think you are imbued with special superpowers that us plebby supporters don’t have, we have them too, it’s just that we have them correctly targetted.  8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 09:27:24 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2022, 08:28:49 AM
What sceptics fail to notice is that they ARE supporters (of Amaral, of Grime, of the dogs (“dogs don’t lie”) of every blogger who slagged off the McCanns and poured vitriol onto people like Mitchell) whilst us supporters are deeply sceptical of Amaral, of the dogs, of propaganda-pushing, bile-vomiting bloggers like Blacksmith.   So, don’t think you are imbued with special superpowers that us plebby supporters don’t have, we have them too, it’s just that we have them correctly targetted.  8(>((

I can only speak for myself, and I have not accepted anything anyone has said unquestionably. I understand why the McCanns were made arguidos, which their supporters claim to find incomprehensible. I can see no reason to accept that what the McCanns have said is the truth. I accept very little of what the media has said as true. I cannot understand why Operation Grange investigated only stranger abduction given the paucity of evidence.

The McCann supporters have chosen to believe uncritically what the McCanns, the media and the UK police have said. When a child has disappeared everyone's evidence should be examined and questioned, there's no room for belief.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2022, 09:34:10 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 09:27:24 AM
I can only speak for myself, and I have not accepted anything anyone has said unquestionably. I understand why the McCanns were made arguidos, which their supporters claim to find incomprehensible. I can see no reason to accept that what the McCanns have said is the truth. I accept very little of what the media has said as true. I cannot understand why Operation Grange investigated only stranger abduction given the paucity of evidence.

The McCann supporters have chosen to believe uncritically what the McCanns, the media and the UK police have said. When a child has disappeared everyone's evidence should be examined and questioned, there's no room for belief.
I don’t see any questioning  there whatsoever of the dog alerts, of Grime, of Amaral, of the PJ’s investigation, of every sceptic blogger from Poutlon to Blacksmith,  nothing, sceptics have chosen to beiieve them all uncritically.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 09:53:01 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2022, 09:34:10 AM
I don’t see any questioning  there whatsoever of the dog alerts, of Grime, of Amaral, of the PJ’s investigation, of every sceptic blogger from Poutlon to Blacksmith,  nothing, sceptics have chosen to beiieve them all uncritically.

I see no questioning of the McCanns, the media or Operation Grange. Supporters have chosen to believe them all uncritically.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 09:57:09 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 09:27:24 AM
I can only speak for myself, and I have not accepted anything anyone has said unquestionably. I understand why the McCanns were made arguidos, which their supporters claim to find incomprehensible. I can see no reason to accept that what the McCanns have said is the truth. I accept very little of what the media has said as true. I cannot understand why Operation Grange investigated only stranger abduction given the paucity of evidence.

The McCann supporters have chosen to believe uncritically what the McCanns, the media and the UK police have said. When a child has disappeared everyone's evidence should be examined and questioned, there's no room for belief.
I don't think you have a very good grasp of the reality of the way sceptics think. I  find your post total junk. Your first mistake which you cannot deny us  that you see your limited opinion as fact.
You accept the statements as 100% correct when the evidence suggests they are not.

I think you totally underestimate the intelligence and critical thinking of some posters such as myself....yet you admire those such as CMOMM posters who clearly do not have a clue
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2022, 10:09:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 09:53:01 AM
I see no questioning of the McCanns, the media or Operation Grange. Supporters have chosen to believe them all uncritically.
So both sides are firmly entrenched in their support and their beliefs making you no better than me, despite your superiority complex!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 10:14:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 07:36:21 AM
Sceptics are portrayed as unthinking idiots who follow others such as Amaral and Blacksmith and adopt their theories and opinions without question. IMO it is supporters who have always accepted what they have been told by others - the McCanns, the media and Scotland Yard especially. They quote these sources constantly, while sceptics examine the evidence instead.

What total junk...you think supporters don't look at the evidence..what total ignorance...
You think sceptics claims are based on evidence...you are so wrong it's laughable.
Pretty well every sceptic is ignorant when it comes to the evidence..exemplified by...the dogs don't lie...mantra.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 04, 2022, 10:22:10 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 10:14:14 AM
What total junk...you think supporters don't look at the evidence..what total ignorance...
You think sceptics claims are based on evidence...you are so wrong it's laughable.
Pretty well every sceptic is ignorant when it comes to the evidence..exemplified by...the dogs don't lie...mantra.

You can't cure lack of logic or ignorance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 10:36:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 09:27:24 AM
I can only speak for myself, and I have not accepted anything anyone has said unquestionably. I understand why the McCanns were made arguidos, which their supporters claim to find incomprehensible. I can see no reason to accept that what the McCanns have said is the truth. I accept very little of what the media has said as true. I cannot understand why Operation Grange investigated only stranger abduction given the paucity of evidence.

The McCann supporters have chosen to believe uncritically what the McCanns, the media and the UK police have said. When a child has disappeared everyone's evidence should be examined and questioned, there's no room for belief.

The uncritical unquestioning stance of the average believer is starkly illustrated in their belief in Wolter’s claims that on the evidence he has that Bruckner killed Madeleine. Over two years on and with no charges brought, no evidence presented and nothing of consequence happening soon and they still believe. Imagine that that had been Amaral. It is not even as if they are saying ‘shall we just wait and see what he has’ but a solid belief that Brueckner is guilty based on nothing but Wolter’s words. Of course Brueckner is simply a long line of individuals targeted to take the focus off of where believers definitely don’t want it to be. Brueckner is a nasty character who should be kept inside for as long as is legally possible but to declare him guilty at this point while presenting no evidence is fair on no one, least of all Madeleine herself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 04, 2022, 10:45:57 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 10:36:01 AM
The uncritical unquestioning stance of the average believer is starkly illustrated in their belief in Wolter’s claims that on the evidence he has that Bruckner killed Madeleine. Over two years on and with no charges brought, no evidence presented and nothing of consequence happening soon and they still believe. Imagine that that had been Amaral. It is not even as if they are saying ‘shall we just wait and see what he has’ but a solid belief that Brueckner is guilty based on nothing but Wolter’s words. Of course Brueckner is simply a long line of individuals targeted to take the focus off of where believers definitely don’t want it to be. Brueckner is a nasty character who should be kept inside for as long as is legally possible but to declare him guilty at this point while presenting no evidence is fair on no one, least of all Madeleine herself.

No Supporter here has stated that Brueckner is unequivocally guilty.  Least of all me.

Such a pity that even after 15 years some persons do not afford The McCanns the same rights.  That is what pees me off.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:05:32 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 04, 2022, 10:45:57 AM
No Supporter here has stated that Brueckner is unequivocally guilty.  Least of all me.

Such a pity that even after 15 years some persons do not afford The McCanns the same rights.  That is what pees me off.

The evidence against the parents, whether you agree with it or not, is there for all the world to see. Other than his offending history we have not one scintilla of evidence to date of Brueckner even being in the vicinity of 5a on the night in question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 04, 2022, 11:09:30 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:05:32 AM
The evidence against the parents, whether you agree with it or not, is there for all the world to see. Other than his offending history we have not one scintilla of evidence to date of Brueckner even being in the vicinity of 5a on the night in question.

There is no evidence against The McCanns.  Unless you would like to list it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:11:00 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 04, 2022, 11:09:30 AM
There is no evidence against The McCanns.  Unless you would like to list it.

You don’t agree…that’s fine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 04, 2022, 11:17:06 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:11:00 AM
You don’t agree…that’s fine.

So you can't list the evidence against The McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2022, 11:19:15 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:11:00 AM
You don’t agree…that’s fine.
There is a lack of evidence of the practice of any crime against the McCanns, even the PJ admitted it, so why can’t you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:29:58 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 10:36:01 AM
The uncritical unquestioning stance of the average believer is starkly illustrated in their belief in Wolter’s claims that on the evidence he has that Bruckner killed Madeleine. Over two years on and with no charges brought, no evidence presented and nothing of consequence happening soon and they still believe. Imagine that that had been Amaral. It is not even as if they are saying ‘shall we just wait and see what he has’ but a solid belief that Brueckner is guilty based on nothing but Wolter’s words. Of course Brueckner is simply a long line of individuals targeted to take the focus off of where believers definitely don’t want it to be. Brueckner is a nasty character who should be kept inside for as long as is legally possible but to declare him guilty at this point while presenting no evidence is fair on no one, least of all Madeleine herself.

This is a typical post that convinces me that on the whole sceptics arent too bright.....combined with the fact that your brilliant detective skills have convinced you Im some sort of imposter...if thats the level of your critical thinking you have provrd how poor it is
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:33:59 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 04, 2022, 11:17:06 AM
So you can't list the evidence against The McCanns.

No can’t, won’t. It’s all been documented elsewhere.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 04, 2022, 11:47:31 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 04, 2022, 10:45:57 AM
No Supporter here has stated that Brueckner is unequivocally guilty.  Least of all me.

Such a pity that even after 15 years some persons do not afford The McCanns the same rights.  That is what pees me off.

Well that's not true is it.
Davel has said Wolters has solved the case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 12:02:45 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 09:57:09 AM
I don't think you have a very good grasp of the reality of the way sceptics think. I  find your post total junk. Your first mistake which you cannot deny us  that you see your limited opinion as fact.
You accept the statements as 100% correct when the evidence suggests they are not.

I think you totally underestimate the intelligence and critical thinking of some posters such as myself....yet you admire those such as CMOMM posters who clearly do not have a clue

I'm sorry, but I've not been impressed by your intelligence and critical thinking. Is it intelligent to dismiss the inconsistencies in the statements by casting unproven assertions on the statements themselves? I don't think so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 12:49:01 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 12:02:45 PM
I'm sorry, but I've not been impressed by your intelligence and critical thinking. Is it intelligent to dismiss the inconsistencies in the statements by casting unproven assertions on the statements themselves? I don't think so.

I haven't dismissed the inconsistencies.....your first error.

I've stated that they could well be due to poor translation and theirs plenty of evidence to suggest that's a possibility or even a probability.

You decide to accept them uncritically without proof that they are accurate...the jokes on you
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 12:56:49 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:33:59 AM
No can’t, won’t. It’s all been documented elsewhere.
Documented as junk....it's not cadaver dogs sceptics should follow...dogs for the blind would be more appropriate
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 04, 2022, 01:02:48 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 12:56:49 PM
Documented as junk....it's not cadaver dogs sceptics should follow...dogs for the blind would be more appropriate

Thank you.  I couldn't be bothered to get my head around that non reply.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 01:17:16 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 12:49:01 PM
I haven't dismissed the inconsistencies.....your first error.

I've stated that they could well be due to poor translation and theirs plenty of evidence to suggest that's a possibility or even a probability.

You decide to accept them uncritically without proof that they are accurate...the jokes on you

There is not plenty of evidence that the statements were poorly translated imo. On the other hand the evidence of inconsistencies is clearly documented.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 01:27:42 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 04, 2022, 01:02:48 PM
Thank you.  I couldn't be bothered to get my head around that non reply.

Not sure what was ambiguous about my post but I’m glad Davel clarified it for you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 01:30:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 01:17:16 PM
There is not plenty of evidence that the statements were poorly translated imo. On the other hand the evidence of inconsistencies is clearly documented.

There is plenty..I've quote it all before. Liste n again and try to understand..I don't dispute there are inconsistencies...I dispute your blind acceptance of them being 100% accurate
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 01:56:44 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 01:30:03 PM
There is plenty..I've quote it all before. Liste n again and try to understand..I don't dispute there are inconsistencies...I dispute your blind acceptance of them being 100% accurate

Come back when you have incontravertible evidence that the statements are inaccurate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 02:48:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 01:56:44 PM
Come back when you have incontravertible evidence that the statements are inaccurate.

another junk post...you you think its ok to beleive they are accurate ......can you supply incontrevertible evidence they are...until you can its stupid to expect me to supply such

you claim they are accurate...I claim that they may well be not...  do you see the difference

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 04, 2022, 02:49:13 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 01:56:44 PM
Come back when you have incontravertible evidence that the statements are inaccurate.

In the meantime are you to decide who can post whatever?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2022, 07:00:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 01:17:16 PM
There is not plenty of evidence that the statements were poorly translated imo. On the other hand the evidence of inconsistencies is clearly documented.
there are inconsistencies in all the statements whether those of the Tapas group, the OC staff, Murat, Yvonne Martin, whoever.  Why have you decided only the tapas group statements are suspicious?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 04, 2022, 07:06:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2022, 07:00:03 PM
there are inconsistencies in all the statements whether those of the Tapas group, the OC staff, Murat, Yvonne Martin, whoever.  Why have you decided only the tapas group statements are suspicious?

Good question.  The answer should be interesting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 04, 2022, 07:07:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2022, 07:00:03 PM
there are inconsistencies in all the statements whether those of the Tapas group, the OC staff, Murat, Yvonne Martin, whoever.  Why have you decided only the tapas group statements are suspicious?

Could be something to do with one of their children going missing in questionable circumstances.
Unless the curtains really did just blow open, but the 3 investigative forces are having a hell of a job proving they did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 07:27:37 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 02:48:48 PM
another junk post...you you think its ok to beleive they are accurate ......can you supply incontrevertible evidence they are...until you can its stupid to expect me to supply such

you claim they are accurate...I claim that they may well be not...  do you see the difference

I don't claim the statements are accurate, I claim there's no evidence that the translations were faulty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2022, 07:29:09 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 04, 2022, 07:06:19 PM
Good question.  The answer should be interesting.
you think I will get an answer?  You’re optimistic!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 04, 2022, 07:31:10 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2022, 07:29:09 PM
you think I will get an answer?  You’re optimistic!

Silence is sometimes golden.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2022, 07:40:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 07:27:37 PM
I don't claim the statements are accurate, I claim there's no evidence that the translations were faulty.
apart from the fact that the McCanns had to spend a considerable amount of money getting them properly translated.  I suppose you don’t class that as evidence though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 07:52:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 07:27:37 PM
I don't claim the statements are accurate, I claim there's no evidence that the translations were faulty.

So you accept the inconsistencies may be due to te stqatements not being accurate. There certainly is evidence that thye are not accurate...KM said said they were...she should know. ..  like it or not that is evidence.Colin Sutton also raised questions about their accuracy
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 04, 2022, 08:05:39 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 07:52:29 PM
So you accept the inconsistencies may be due to te stqatements not being accurate. There certainly is evidence that thye are not accurate...KM said said they were...she should know. ..  like it or not that is evidence.Colin Sutton also raised questions about their accuracy

Well, if Kate said there were then there must have been.
There's simply no earthly reason to ever doubt her about anything really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on September 04, 2022, 08:52:28 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 04, 2022, 08:05:39 PM
Well, if Kate said there were then there must have been.
There's simply no earthly reason to ever doubt her about anything really.

Well if amaral said so....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 09:04:26 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2022, 07:40:45 PM
apart from the fact that the McCanns had to spend a considerable amount of money getting them properly translated.  I suppose you don’t class that as evidence though.

It’s always interested me that while sceptics translated virtually all of those ‘erroneous’ translations believers were unable to muster even one Portuguese translator to show where those errors lay. After all everyone would have been using the same source material, even the parents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 09:05:26 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 07:52:29 PM
So you accept the inconsistencies may be due to te stqatements not being accurate. There certainly is evidence that thye are not accurate...KM said said they were...she should know. ..  like it or not that is evidence.Colin Sutton also raised questions about their accuracy

Ms Healey signed them as accurate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 04, 2022, 09:43:23 PM
Quote from: Rossb on September 04, 2022, 08:52:28 PM
Well if amaral said so....

That doesn't make sense, I don't believe Amarals theory, I have my own thankyou.
I'd never even heard of the guy before I realised 'the abduction' didn't happen, & Wolters won't be proving it ever did anytime in the foreseeable future.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2022, 10:09:37 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 09:05:26 PM
Ms Healey signed them as accurate.
Was that before or after they’d been translated into Portuguese and back again?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 10:23:01 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 07:52:29 PM
So you accept the inconsistencies may be due to te stqatements not being accurate. There certainly is evidence that thye are not accurate...KM said said they were...she should know. ..  like it or not that is evidence.Colin Sutton also raised questions about their accuracy

Kate McCann said in her book that the interpreter misunderstood the meaning of something she said in her 4th May statement. She didn't explain what it was, she just said she raised the issue in her 6th September interview. It should have been noticed before she signed it as correct.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2022, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 10:23:01 PM
Kate McCann said in her book that the interpreter misunderstood the meaning of something she said in her 4th May statement. She didn't explain what it was, she just said she raised the issue in her 6th September interview. It should have been noticed before she signed it as correct.
Do you accept that that is evidence of innacuracies in the statements or not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 10:31:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2022, 10:09:37 PM
Was that before or after they’d been translated into Portuguese and back again?

Well she signed the original Portuguese statement in the files. Are you suggesting she did that without it being translated back to her?

She also signed the further Portuguese statements generated by her arguido interviews at a time when the relationship between herself and the Portuguese police had totally broken down and trust between the two parties must have been nonexistent. Why would she have done that if the translation wasn’t absolutely accurate?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 10:33:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 10:23:01 PM
Kate McCann said in her book that the interpreter misunderstood the meaning of something she said in her 4th May statement. She didn't explain what it was, she just said she raised the issue in her 6th September interview. It should have been noticed before she signed it as correct.

More importantly she signed the Portuguese translation as correct.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2022, 10:35:23 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 10:31:16 PM
Well she signed the original Portuguese statement in the files. Are you suggesting she did that without it being translated back to her?

She also signed the further Portuguese statements generated by her arguido interviews at a time when the relationship between herself and the Portuguese police had totally broken down and trust between the two parties must have been nonexistent. Why would she have done that if the translation wasn’t absolutely accurate?
How were her words recorded for her to sign? Written down in English?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2022, 10:37:19 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 10:33:12 PM
More importantly she signed the Portuguese translation as correct.
By that do you mean she signed as correct a document written in Portuguese?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 10:42:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 04, 2022, 10:23:01 PM
Kate McCann said in her book that the interpreter misunderstood the meaning of something she said in her 4th May statement. She didn't explain what it was, she just said she raised the issue in her 6th September interview. It should have been noticed before she signed it as correct.

You continually post junk...I've explained it all before so I won't bother again.

You should also realise none of the statements given as witnesses are admissible evidence.

I find your posts steeped in ignorance and denial
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 10:51:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2022, 10:35:23 PM
How were her words recorded for her to sign? Written down in English?

I would assume given in English, translated and written down in Portuguese and then read out in English for her to sign.

Until her book was published neither Ms Healey nor her husband nor indeed anyone else who had given a statement in Portugal claimed they had been misquoted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 10:54:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2022, 10:37:19 PM
By that do you mean she signed as correct a document written in Portuguese?

Do you believe she was stupid enough to sign a statement both in May and September that hadn’t been read back to her in English?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 10:55:29 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 10:51:06 PM
I would assume given in English, translated and written down in Portuguese and then read out in English for her to sign.

Until her book was published neither Ms Healey nor her husband nor indeed anyone else who had given a statement in Portugal claimed they had been misquoted.

Wrong...the mccsnns raised the issue very early on and gave new ststementd to CRG which were then given to the PJ.

The level of ignorance amongst sceptics is laughable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 10:56:54 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 10:54:15 PM
Do you believe she was stupid enough to sign a statement both in May and September that hadn’t been read back to her in English?
How do you know what was read back was accurate
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 10:59:45 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 10:56:54 PM
How do you know what was read back was accurate

Why wouldn’t it be?

It would have to have matched what Kate originally said. Any deviation and Kate would have pointed it out, surely?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:00:02 PM
The statements should have been written in English..signed....and then translated. Thssts how a competent police force would have done it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:03:52 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:00:02 PM
The statements should have been written in English..signed....and then translated. Thssts how a competent police force would have done it

No. If you look at the Portuguese originals they’re signed by Kate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:04:41 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 10:59:45 PM
Why wouldn’t it be?

It would have to have matched what Kate originally said. Any deviation and Kate would have pointed it out, surely?

Kates words weren't written down they were paraphrased..
Everyone was tired after hours and hours of questioning....you accept their accuracy if you wish..Its obvious mistakes were possible
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:06:09 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:03:52 PM
No. If you look at the Portuguese originals they’re signed by Kate.

Meaningless...

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:06:51 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:04:41 PM
Kates words weren't written down they were paraphrased..
Everyone was tired after hours and hours of questioning....you accept their accuracy if you wish..Its obvious mistakes were possible

Even if paraphrased if the meaning of the words were distorted or untrue Kate would not have signed the translation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:09:43 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:06:09 PM
Meaningless...

Not at all. Her signature verifies the translations were accurate.

Her arguido interview was attended by a lawyer. If the translations hadn’t been accurate, and her lawyer would have spoken Portuguese, do you think he would have let her sign them?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:19:49 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:09:43 PM
Not at all. Her signature verifies the translations were accurate.

Her arguido interview was attended by a lawyer. If the translations hadn’t been accurate, and her lawyer would have spoken Portuguese, do you think he would have let her sign them?

From a legal perspective it doesn't......anyone with an ounce of legal knowledge would know this.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 04, 2022, 11:20:03 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 10:54:15 PM
Do you believe she was stupid enough to sign a statement both in May and September that hadn’t been read back to her in English?
No I don’t believe she is stupid at all, nor do I think she should have been expected to sign a statement that was  being translated back to her verbally, which may not have been a wholly accurate representation of what was written down inPortuguese in the first place and which may have translated slightly differently the next time it was translated back to her.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:27:44 PM
I know from my own professional. Knowledge that a clients signature on a consent form does not guarantee that the client has understood what they have signed...that'd fact not opinion
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:30:30 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:19:49 PM
From a legal perspective it doesn't......anyone with an ounce of legal knowledge would know this.

Unless there’s some suggestion of coercion, and there isn’t here, Kate’s statements can, and would, be used in a court of law.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:33:50 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:30:30 PM
Unless there’s some suggestion of coercion, and there isn’t here, Kate’s statements can, and would, be used in a court of law.

Wrong again..they weren't taken under caution....and therefore cannot be used to incriminate the witness.

That's why they have arguido status
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:36:22 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 04, 2022, 11:20:03 PM
No I don’t believe she is stupid at all, nor do I think she should have been expected to sign a statement that was  being translated back to her verbally, which may not have been a wholly accurate representation of what was written down inPortuguese in the first place and which may have translated slightly differently the next time it was translated back to her.

If it was not a wholly accurate representation why would Kate, or Gerry, have signed it? She knew what had happened and what she said had happened. In September her Portuguese lawyer would certainly have been aware whether Kate’s statement was accurate and he certainly didn’t raise any objections.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:39:22 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:36:22 PM
If it was not a wholly accurate representation why would Kate, or Gerry, have signed it? She knew what had happened and what she said had happened. In September her Portuguese lawyer would certainly have been aware whether Kate’s statement was accurate and he certainly didn’t raise any objections.
Carry on believing the junk you believe...thats why you're a sceptic....how's your dental nurse contact in stourbridge...lol
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:42:43 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:33:50 PM
Wrong again..they weren't taken under caution....and therefore cannot be used to incriminate the witness.

That's why they have arguido status

This is not whether the statement would incriminate Kate but whether it was accurate.

The May statement was taken as a witness. The September ones were. as an arguido and the statements would then have the same weight as one given under caution in the U.K. There is no caution in Portugal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:45:26 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:39:22 PM
Carry on believing the junk you believe...thats why you're a sceptic....how's your dental nurse contact in stourbridge...lol

It’s not what I believe, it’s simply common sense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:53:37 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:42:43 PM
This is not whether the statement would incriminate Kate but whether it was accurate.

The May statement was taken as a witness. The September ones were. as an arguido and the statements would then have the same weight as one given under caution in the U.K. There is no caution in Portugal.
Arguido is equivalent to caution in the UK

Kates Arguido statement would of course be admissible
..what use would that be
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 12:02:18 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 04, 2022, 11:42:43 PM
This is not whether the statement would incriminate Kate but whether it was accurate.

The May statement was taken as a witness. The September ones were. as an arguido and the statements would then have the same weight as one given under caution in the U.K. There is no caution in Portugal.

You're wrong...statement on the 6th Sept not arguido
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 12:03:17 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 04, 2022, 11:53:37 PM
Arguido is equivalent to caution in the UK

Kates Arguido statement would of course be admissible
..what use would that be

Agreed…so no caution was needed.

Remember we are not only talking about Kate but Gerry’s statement as well.

The discussion is not about what use a statement may have been but if it is reasonable to assume that the translation of the statement was accurate and as no objections were raised by Kate, Gerry or their lawyers at the time then it’s safe to assume that they were.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 12:07:26 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 12:02:18 AM
You're wrong...statement on the 6th Sept not arguido

Apologies you are correct.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 12:09:49 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 12:07:26 AM
Apologies you are correct.

Of course I am..and you are wrong
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 12:11:45 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 12:03:17 AM
Agreed…so no caution was needed.

Remember we are not only talking about Kate but Gerry’s statement as well.

The discussion is not about what use a statement may have been but if it is reasonable to assume that the translation of the statement was accurate and as no objections were raised by Kate, Gerry or their lawyers at the time then it’s safe to assume that they were.

You can assume whatever junk you like..its of no importance
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 12:14:19 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 12:09:49 AM
Of course I am..and you are wrong

I was but it makes no difference to the discussion and to the veracity of the translations.

For future reference I am no longer indulging in your attempts to deflect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 12:15:17 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 12:11:45 AM
You can assume whatever junk you like..its of no importance

Nothing we discuss here is of any importance but still we discuss.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 12:28:15 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 12:15:17 AM
Nothing we discuss here is of any importance but still we discuss.

We agree on that it's totally pointless so I'll leave it there
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 05, 2022, 01:29:46 AM
How simple it all would have been had the Portuguese only used electronic equipment to record the statements.

On the other hand - why are the statements in the McCann case accessible on the internet in the first instance?

Unless someone can post a link to other Portuguese case files which have been posted on the internet, it is a unique occurrence.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2022, 07:20:13 AM
The opportunities for details to have been mistranslated are enormous.  Kate signed what she was told verbally was written down in those statements, she was unable to read them for herself as they were in Portuguese .  They were then at a later date translated back into English but Kate was not asked to sign them at that point.  If people can’t understand that mistranslations were not only possible but likely then that’s their problem but it’s certainly not one that keeps the three police forces currently investigating CB up at night. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 05, 2022, 08:00:23 AM
Quote from: Brietta on September 05, 2022, 01:29:46 AM
How simple it all would have been had the Portuguese only used electronic equipment to record the statements.

On the other hand - why are the statements in the McCann case accessible on the internet in the first instance?

Unless someone can post a link to other Portuguese case files which have been posted on the internet, it is a unique occurrence.

In so far a I can remember, The Files were available for access to certain Journalists at one of the PJ Stations, which is where Levi stepped in, messed about with them and then released them onto The Internet.  But I expect someone else can do better than this.

And then of course all sorts of people started doing Translations of a sort.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2022, 08:11:30 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2022, 07:20:13 AM
The opportunities for details to have been mistranslated are enormous.  Kate signed what she was told verbally was written down in those statements, she was unable to read them for herself as they were in Portuguese .  They were then at a later date translated back into English but Kate was not asked to sign them at that point.  If people can’t understand that mistranslations were not only possible but likely then that’s their problem but it’s certainly not one that keeps the three police forces currently investigating CB up at night.

...and how is that investigation into CB going by the way?
The three investigative forces having much luck are they?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 09:52:22 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2022, 07:20:13 AM
The opportunities for details to have been mistranslated are enormous.  Kate signed what she was told verbally was written down in those statements, she was unable to read them for herself as they were in Portuguese .  They were then at a later date translated back into English but Kate was not asked to sign them at that point.  If people can’t understand that mistranslations were not only possible but likely then that’s their problem but it’s certainly not one that keeps the three police forces currently investigating CB up at night.

When the statements were read back to Kate in the first instance they must have agreed with what she said at that time …that they were in Portuguese is a total red herring…and she signed.

Those translations are what we now see in the files. Now while I accept that the translations from Portuguese back to English may have errors they have always been available for believers to correct those errors. To date that hasn’t happened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 10:36:01 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 05, 2022, 08:00:23 AM
In so far a I can remember, The Files were available for access to certain Journalists at one of the PJ Stations, which is where Levi stepped in, messed about with them and then released them onto The Internet.  But I expect someone else can do better than this.

And then of course all sorts of people started doing Translations of a sort.

The original photostats of the statements, signed, are there for all to see. How could Levi have altered what is an obviously original statement?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2022, 10:41:27 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 09:52:22 AM
When the statements were read back to Kate in the first instance they must have agreed with what she said at that time …that they were in Portuguese is a total red herring…and she signed.

Those translations are what we now see in the files. Now while I accept that the translations from Portuguese back to English may have errors they have always been available for believers to correct those errors. To date that hasn’t happened.
You're basically contradicting yourself aren't you?  You can accept translation errors but you can't accept translation errors. Fine, nothing more to be said.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 10:59:36 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2022, 10:41:27 AM
You're basically contradicting yourself aren't you?  You can accept translation errors but you can't accept translation errors. Fine, nothing more to be said.

I accept that errors may have been made when the volunteer translators translated the statements in the files. However…and it is a big however…believers have had 15 years to translate those statements properly and highlight the errors. They have failed to do that.

What I don’t accept is that the parents signed their statements without their statements being read to them in English and that when those statements were read to them in English that the parents would not have pointed out any errors at that time before signing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 11:02:12 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 10:59:36 AM
I accept that errors may have been made when the volunteer translators translated the statements in the files. However…and it is a big however…believers have had 15 years to translate those statements properly and highlight the errors. They have failed to do that.

What I don’t accept is that the parents signed their statements without their statements being read to them in English and that when those statements were read to them in English that the parents would not have pointed out any errors at that time before signing.

what you accept is nether here nor there....i can clearly see how major mistakes could be made
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 05, 2022, 11:06:04 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 10:36:01 AM
The original photostats of the statements, signed, are there for all to see. How could Levi have altered what is an obviously original statement?

Levi's interference unfortunately still sticks and still appears on occasions for those who want to believe it.

I don't actually care anymore.  The Files are no longer of any importance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2022, 11:13:45 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 10:36:01 AM
The original photostats of the statements, signed, are there for all to see. How could Levi have altered what is an obviously original statement?

I was interested to see the answer to this & wasn't in the least bit surprised by the complete non reply.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2022, 11:15:03 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 05, 2022, 11:06:04 AM
Levi's interference unfortunately still sticks and still appears on occasions for those who want to believe it.

I don't actually care anymore.  The Files are no longer of any importance.

The case against the abductor is more important isn't it.
How's that going by the way?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2022, 11:29:15 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 10:59:36 AM
I accept that errors may have been made when the volunteer translators translated the statements in the files. However…and it is a big however…believers have had 15 years to translate those statements properly and highlight the errors. They have failed to do that.

What I don’t accept is that the parents signed their statements without their statements being read to them in English and that when those statements were read to them in English that the parents would not have pointed out any errors at that time before signing.
Firstly - this has got sod all to do with "believers" and their "failure" to study Portuguese to degree level and beyond to spend years translating the files - that's for those for more with a far more obsessive nature to take on.  This is about evidence that the files contained translation errors and you accept that these are possible from the Portuguese to English translations.   
Secondly, at what point did the McCanns complain about the errors in the files?  As far as I'm aware they are not Portuguese speakers or readers so IMO it's unlikely they were complaining about the original Portuguese transcripts they did sign, but about English translations of these transcripts which they never signed.  Who knows what nuances were lost between Kate speaking, a translator writing it all down in the third person in Portuguese, a translator reading back from a transcript (which is very different to being able to sit down and carefully read through a document yourself), then having that docoment translated back into English at a later stage.  You either accept this or you don't yet you appear to be in both camps.  I can't keep reitierating the same point over and over again so we will have to agree to both agree and disagree (as you seem to be doing both!)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 12:22:51 PM
It's all suposition anyway. I'm sure the McCanns would have been broadcasting it far and wide if they'd found any serious discrepancies in the files. There were discrepancies in the McCann's accounts, one of which was their differing accounts of the conversation with Madeleine on the morning of 3rd May. This was important enough to be included in their first statements, so what did they say about it?

Kate, 4th May; Madeleine asked her why she had not come to look in the bedroom when the twins were crying.
Gerry 4th May; Madeleine asked him why they had not gone to her room when the twins were crying.

This account changes in Gerry's 10th May statement;

MADELEINE addressed the mother and asked her ?why didn't you come last night when S*** and I were crying??.

On 6th September Kate said;

Madeleine on the next morning, Thursday, during breakfast said to both of them that she had been crying and that nobody had come to her room

I don't think the incident made much of an impression because neither of them gave a full a clear account of it. Who cried? The twins, one twin and Madeleine or just Madeleine? It seems to me that a poorly remembered conversation with a three year old wasn't significant at all. As time went by the McCanns suggested that Madeleine was talking about a crying incident (by someone) on Wednesday night, but Madeleine could have been referring to Tuesday night, imo, when crying in 5A was heard by a neighbour.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 12:31:01 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 12:22:51 PM
It's all suposition anyway. I'm sure the McCanns would have been broadcasting it far and wide if they'd found any serious discrepancies in the files. There were discrepancies in the McCann's accounts, one of which was their differing accounts of the conversation with Madeleine on the morning of 3rd May. This was important enough to be included in their first statements, so what did they say about it?

Kate, 4th May; Madeleine asked her why she had not come to look in the bedroom when the twins were crying.
Gerry 4th May; Madeleine asked him why they had not gone to her room when the twins were crying.

This account changes in Gerry's 10th May statement;

MADELEINE addressed the mother and asked her ?why didn't you come last night when S*** and I were crying??.

On 6th September Kate said;

Madeleine on the next morning, Thursday, during breakfast said to both of them that she had been crying and that nobody had come to her room

I don't think the incident made much of an impression because neither of them gave a full a clear account of it. Who cried? The twins, one twin and Madeleine or just Madeleine? It seems to me that a poorly remembered conversation with a three year old wasn't significant at all. As time went by the McCanns suggested that Madeleine was talking about a crying incident (by someone) on Wednesday night, but Madeleine could have been referring to Tuesday night, imo, when crying in 5A was heard by a neighbour.

It's all supposition on your behalf that the statements were translated accurately. We know the translator paraphrased what the Mcs said snd may well of further paraphrased when reading them back.

Without an accurate verbatim account I think it's fair to say...as sutton did that the room for error was enormous
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 12:56:24 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 12:31:01 PM
It's all supposition on your behalf that the statements were translated accurately. We know the translator paraphrased what the Mcs said snd may well of further paraphrased when reading them back.

Without an accurate verbatim account I think it's fair to say...as sutton did that the room for error was enormous

So your only contribution is that you don't believe that the McCanns misremembered what Madeleine said to them as time went by? Following the alleged leak revealed by a Spanish TV station they appeared to believe that he was telling the truth, although his version of Kate's 4th May statement differed significantly from the original. It seems to me they misremembered the contents of those first statements too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 01:22:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 12:56:24 PM
So your only contribution is that you don't believe that the McCanns misremembered what Madeleine said to them as time went by? Following the alleged leak revealed by a Spanish TV station they appeared to believe that he was telling the truth, although his version of Kate's 4th May statement differed significantly from the original. It seems to me they misremembered the contents of those first statements too.

i think based on your previous posts your analysis is totally worthless.  the way the statements were taken was arecipe for disater imo....plus they are not admissible as the Mcs were not arguidos

The problem for you and othere sceptics is taht along with the dogs the statemnets are the cornerstone of your evidence against the Mss,,,,,what that means is taht in reality there is no real evidence...which you cannot possibly accept
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2022, 01:44:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 12:22:51 PM
It's all suposition anyway. I'm sure the McCanns would have been broadcasting it far and wide if they'd found any serious discrepancies in the files. There were discrepancies in the McCann's accounts, one of which was their differing accounts of the conversation with Madeleine on the morning of 3rd May. This was important enough to be included in their first statements, so what did they say about it?

Kate, 4th May; Madeleine asked her why she had not come to look in the bedroom when the twins were crying.
Gerry 4th May; Madeleine asked him why they had not gone to her room when the twins were crying.

This account changes in Gerry's 10th May statement;

MADELEINE addressed the mother and asked her ?why didn't you come last night when S*** and I were crying??.

On 6th September Kate said;

Madeleine on the next morning, Thursday, during breakfast said to both of them that she had been crying and that nobody had come to her room

I don't think the incident made much of an impression because neither of them gave a full a clear account of it. Who cried? The twins, one twin and Madeleine or just Madeleine? It seems to me that a poorly remembered conversation with a three year old wasn't significant at all. As time went by the McCanns suggested that Madeleine was talking about a crying incident (by someone) on Wednesday night, but Madeleine could have been referring to Tuesday night, imo, when crying in 5A was heard by a neighbour.
Is this seriously the best you can do?  Where are the contradictions? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2022, 02:22:59 PM
I‘ve said it before and I’ll say it again: this is how conspiracy theorists work, by focusing on largely irrelevant minutiae and blowing it up out of all proportion.  They choose not to see the wood for the trees and this is how they are able to perpetuate and promulgate their beliefs. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 05, 2022, 05:30:13 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 12:56:24 PM
So your only contribution is that you don't believe that the McCanns misremembered what Madeleine said to them as time went by? Following the alleged leak revealed by a Spanish TV station they appeared to believe that he was telling the truth, although his version of Kate's 4th May statement differed significantly from the original. It seems to me they misremembered the contents of those first statements too.

Chinese Whispers
Players form a line or circle, and the first player comes up with a message and whispers it to the ear of the second person in the line. The second player repeats the message to the third player, and so on. When the last player is reached, they announce the message they heard to the entire group. The first person then compares the original message with the final version. Although the objective is to pass around the message without it becoming garbled along the way, part of the enjoyment is that, regardless, this usually ends up happening. Errors typically accumulate in the retellings, so the statement announced by the last player differs significantly from that of the first player, usually with amusing or humorous effect. Reasons for changes include anxiousness or impatience, erroneous corrections, and the difficult-to-understand mechanism of whispering.

The game is often played by children as a party game or on the playground. It is often invoked as a metaphor for cumulative error, especially the inaccuracies as rumours or gossip spread,[1] or, more generally, for the unreliability of typical human recollection.

I agree that - having played this game as a child - that a greater understanding of why word of mouth certainly does invoke the metaphors claimed.

Once more you display your profound ignorance of real life situations epitomised in the children's game with your insular reactions.
cumulative error, especially the inaccuracies as rumours or gossip spread, or, more generally, for the unreliability of typical human recollection. You are in denial when it suits you of the inappropriateness and inadmissibility of the materials you use constantly in what amounts to your children's game epitomising who can level the vilest slurs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 05:56:52 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 12:31:01 PM
It's all supposition on your behalf that the statements were translated accurately. We know the translator paraphrased what the Mcs said snd may well of further paraphrased when reading them back.

Without an accurate verbatim account I think it's fair to say...as sutton did that the room for error was enormous

May well of? Don’t you mean have?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 05, 2022, 05:59:49 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 05:56:52 PM
May well of? Don’t you mean have?

We don't criticise the grammar or spelling of others on this Forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 06:00:42 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 05, 2022, 05:30:13 PM
Chinese Whispers
Players form a line or circle, and the first player comes up with a message and whispers it to the ear of the second person in the line. The second player repeats the message to the third player, and so on. When the last player is reached, they announce the message they heard to the entire group. The first person then compares the original message with the final version. Although the objective is to pass around the message without it becoming garbled along the way, part of the enjoyment is that, regardless, this usually ends up happening. Errors typically accumulate in the retellings, so the statement announced by the last player differs significantly from that of the first player, usually with amusing or humorous effect. Reasons for changes include anxiousness or impatience, erroneous corrections, and the difficult-to-understand mechanism of whispering.

The game is often played by children as a party game or on the playground. It is often invoked as a metaphor for cumulative error, especially the inaccuracies as rumours or gossip spread,[1] or, more generally, for the unreliability of typical human recollection.

I agree that - having played this game as a child - that a greater understanding of why word of mouth certainly does invoke the metaphors claimed.

Once more you display your profound ignorance of real life situations epitomised in the children's game with your insular reactions.
cumulative error, especially the inaccuracies as rumours or gossip spread, or, more generally, for the unreliability of typical human recollection. You are in denial when it suits you of the inappropriateness and inadmissibility of the materials you use constantly in what amounts to your children's game epitomising who can level the vilest slurs.

I can see no similarities between giving statements to the police and playing Chinese Whispers, sorry. I'm also unable to understand how repeating the words spoken by the McCanns can be described as a vile slur.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 06:02:50 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 05, 2022, 05:59:49 PM
We don't criticise the grammar or spelling of others on this Forum.

Is Vertigo Swirl included in 'your royal we'?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 05, 2022, 06:05:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 06:02:50 PM
Is Vertigo Swirl included in 'your royal we'?

Everyone.  And if I see it again I will delete it.

Far too often it is just error anyway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 06:24:48 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 05, 2022, 05:59:49 PM
We don't criticise the grammar or spelling of others on this Forum.

Yes but it was a rather lazy error.

Don’t worry I make then too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 05, 2022, 06:26:38 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 06:24:48 PM
Yes but it was a rather lazy error.

Don’t worry I make then too.

We all do, which is why it must stop.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 06:39:11 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 05, 2022, 06:26:38 PM
We all do, which is why it must stop.

Then how would be learn?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 05, 2022, 06:46:41 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 06:39:11 PM
Then how would be learn?

This Forum is not a Grammar School.  Nor is it here to belittle others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2022, 06:52:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 05, 2022, 06:46:41 PM
This Forum is not a Grammar School.  Nor is it here to belittle others.
Crikey, it’s a bit late for that!  Faithlilly has been engaging in acts of belittlement (good word huh?) since Moses was a lad. Let’s not forget I am apparently her moral inferior for example.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 07:43:43 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 05, 2022, 05:56:52 PM
May well of? Don’t you mean have?

slight slip...always show youve lost the argument when you stoop low to criticise grammar. In reality its a point that grates my nerves...perhaps Im seeinng it taht much its becoming the norman
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 07:48:01 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 05, 2022, 06:46:41 PM
This Forum is not a Grammar School.  Nor is it here to belittle others.

Im in no way belittled ...at school I excelled in maths and science which was pretty impressive for a youg chap from a council estate....my language skills were quite average
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 05, 2022, 07:50:45 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 07:48:01 PM
Im in no way belittled ...at school I excelled in maths and science which was pretty impressive for a youg chap from a council estate....my language skills were quite average

I don't suppose you are.  But some others might be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2022, 08:17:09 PM

Clearly we can't have a serious & sensible discussion about my theory because of overzealous moderation.

I doubt there's any problem with discussing the possibility of Brueckner abducting & murdering Maddie & destroying the evidence though.

I'll bet that's acceptable.

Double standards.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2022, 08:29:52 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 07:48:01 PM
Im in no way belittled ...at school I excelled in maths and science which was pretty impressive for a youg chap from a council estate....my language skills were quite average

I have no expertise in anything really, I failed in school at maths, english, history, science & have no comprehension of things like zoology, biology, geology, geography, marine biology, cryptozoology, evolutionary theory, evolutionary biology, meteorology, limnology, herpetology, palaeontology or archaeology........ but when it comes to the Loch Ness monster.... I think.....what if a dinosaur had got in the lake?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzOv14fA-BI
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on September 05, 2022, 09:07:25 PM



If you are a parent, the likelyhood if your child disappeared in those circumstances you would think abduction. Because she or Gerry may think or believe that reasoning or theory it is possible and not because the public believe it because they said it other people say it and are allowed their thoughts and beliefs if they think they are not involved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 05, 2022, 09:17:03 PM
Quote from: Rossb on September 05, 2022, 09:07:25 PM
If you are a parent, the likelyhood if your child disappeared in those circumstances you would think abduction. Because she or gerry may think or believe that reasoning or theory it is possible and not because the public believe it because they said it other people say it and are allowed their thoughts and beliefs if they think they are not involved.

Well that doesn't answer my question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 05, 2022, 09:25:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 06:00:42 PM
I can see no similarities between giving statements to the police and playing Chinese Whispers, sorry. I'm also unable to understand how repeating the words spoken by the McCanns can be described as a vile slur.

Your opinion of my post references only the limitation of your vision or rather the lack of.

It is utterly bizarre that you continually attach so much kudos to long redundant and largely invented issues of importance only to you and others holding the same long devalued beliefs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 09:45:44 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 07:48:01 PM
Im in no way belittled ...at school I excelled in maths and science which was pretty impressive for a youg chap from a council estate....my language skills were quite average

When higher education was made available to all, many people from lower income families were able to demonstrate that brains were not the sole property of the better-off.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 10:04:01 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 05, 2022, 09:25:31 PM
Your opinion of my post references only the limitation of your vision or rather the lack of.

It is utterly bizarre that you continually attach so much kudos to long redundant and largely invented issues of importance only to you and others holding the same long devalued beliefs.

Comparing giving police interviews to playing Chinese Whispers is a visionary leap too far for me, I will admit. In fact I would go so far as to describe it as fanciful.

One point you might want to ponder about my 'beliefs'. Anyone can find and read the evidence I present. As yet I've seen the belief expressed that the PJ statements are unreliable, but I've seen no evidence at all presented to support that opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 10:15:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 09:45:44 PM
When higher education was made available to all, many people from lower income families were able to demonstrate that brains were not the sole property of the better-off.
There's no equality in education...you might think there is...better off children get a much better education

I should add...it's quite unfair
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2022, 10:20:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 10:04:01 PM
Comparing giving police interviews to playing Chinese Whispers is a visionary leap too far for me, I will admit. In fact I would go so far as to describe it as fanciful.

One point you might want to ponder about my 'beliefs'. Anyone can find and read the evidence I present. As yet I've seen the belief expressed that the PJ statements are unreliable, but I've seen no evidence at all presented to support that opinion.
you might like to take a look at this thread http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=7rp7ifisbrkuaoht2n38dfmp07&topic=6432.0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 10:21:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 10:04:01 PM
Comparing giving police interviews to playing Chinese Whispers is a visionary leap too far for me, I will admit. In fact I would go so far as to describe it as fanciful.

One point you might want to ponder about my 'beliefs'. Anyone can find and read the evidence I present. As yet I've seen the belief expressed that the PJ statements are unreliable, but I've seen no evidence at all presented to support that opinion.

There is evidence ....and you've seen it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 10:30:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 05, 2022, 10:04:01 PM
Comparing giving police interviews to playing Chinese Whispers is a visionary leap too far for me, I will admit. In fact I would go so far as to describe it as fanciful.

One point you might want to ponder about my 'beliefs'. Anyone can find and read the evidence I present. As yet I've seen the belief expressed that the PJ statements are unreliable, but I've seen no evidence at all presented to support that opinion.

Why do you think that in the UK the statement is taken snd signed by the witness in their own language....and then translated into english
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 05, 2022, 11:06:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2022, 10:20:19 PM
you might like to take a look at this thread http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=7rp7ifisbrkuaoht2n38dfmp07&topic=6432.0
Reading back through that is a timely reminder of the repository of knowledge this forum actually contains; shame some of it didn't permeate through the fog for some who although not putting up much of an argument at the time have continued to believe and promulgate the obvious errors which were irrefutably debunked.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 05, 2022, 11:20:03 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 05, 2022, 11:06:57 PM
Reading back through that is a timely reminder of the repository of knowledge this forum actually contains; shame some of it didn't permeate through the fog for some who although not putting up much of an argument at the time have continued to believe and promulgate the obvious errors which were irrefutably debunked.
there are at least two or three other threads on the same subject, but it seems we are destined to go round and round in circles forever.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 06:21:37 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 05, 2022, 10:20:19 PM
you might like to take a look at this thread http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=7rp7ifisbrkuaoht2n38dfmp07&topic=6432.0

I'm not really interested in discussing the unofficial amateur translations into English of the PJ files. They aren't anything to do with the official statement taking and never affected the official process.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 07:19:54 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 06:21:37 AM
I'm not really interested in discussing the unofficial amateur translations into English of the PJ files. They aren't anything to do with the official statement taking and never affected the official process.
Can you read and understand Portuguese and were you there when the McCanns etc gave their statements?  Have you had sight of the official, professional translations into English?  Because if not, then you’re not qualified to comment on whether or not there are errors of translation.  The ONLY people who can do that are those who gave the statements in the first place, and they say that their written PT statements had errors in them.  What sort of evidence would you expect to see other than that which they had pointed out? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 08:41:33 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 07:19:54 AM
Can you read and understand Portuguese and were you there when the McCanns etc gave their statements?  Have you had sight of the official, professional translations into English?  Because if not, then you’re not qualified to comment on whether or not there are errors of translation.  The ONLY people who can do that are those who gave the statements in the first place, and they say that their written PT statements had errors in them.  What sort of evidence would you expect to see other than that which they had pointed out?

People? Errors? I know of only one person and no evidence. It's possible that she had forgotten, by September, what she had said in May.

Kate McCann has commented on one example which, she claims, was translated into Portuguese in a way which gave it a different meaning. She doesn't explain what it was about or how it's meaning was changed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 08:56:27 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 08:41:33 AM
People? Errors? I know of only one person and no evidence. It's possible that she had forgotten, by September, what she had said in May.

Kate McCann has commented on one example which, she claims, was translated into Portuguese in a way which gave it a different meaning. She doesn't explain what it was about or how it's meaning was changed.
Do you accept that you are in absolutely no position to judge whether or not there were errors and that Kate McCann is?  And that if she says there were errors then her opinion is way more valid than yours?  If you don't accept this then please explain why Kate's opinion that there WERE translation errors is not evidence that they existed and why you are better placed to comment on the veracity of the statements in the files.  Furthermore what evidence would you expect to see that the statements in the files had been wrongly translated, given that you can't read Portuguese and weren't there when the statements were given?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 06, 2022, 08:58:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 08:41:33 AM
People? Errors? I know of only one person and no evidence. It's possible that she had forgotten, by September, what she had said in May.

Kate McCann has commented on one example which, she claims, was translated into Portuguese in a way which gave it a different meaning. She doesn't explain what it was about or how it's meaning was changed.
Kate said there were so many errors they made new ststements with CRG which were sent to the. PJ
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 06, 2022, 10:22:20 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 05, 2022, 10:15:53 PM
There's no equality in education...you might think there is...better off children get a much better education

I should add...it's quite unfair

Or you can beggar yourself forever to send them to a Public School.  I do not regret a penny of it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 06, 2022, 10:25:56 AM

It is not possible to totally accurately translate any language.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 10:26:33 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on September 06, 2022, 08:58:44 AM
Kate said there were so many errors they made new ststements with CRG which were sent to the. PJ

Yes. Why they decided on 13th May that parts of the statements they had made might have been lost in translation is not explained. Nor do these new statements appear in the PJ files, so there's no evidence of what they said or that the PJ received them. Even those statements. taken and recorded in English, weren't correct according to Kate. Unless, of course her memory of what she meant to say is the problem rather than the records.

Kate's references to 'lost in translation' have only one possible conclusion imo, which is that she is suggesting that the interpreters didn't do their jobs properly. In fact she's naming Natalia Carvalho Ferreira de Almeida and Alice Dias Homem de Gouveia Avakoff.

How do you detect that something has been lost in translation? In the McCann's situation they could only compare what they meant to say with what the interpreters read back to them. If the two accounts didn't match the time to mention it was then, rather than saying nothing and signing that it was accurate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 06, 2022, 10:31:19 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 10:26:33 AM
Yes. Why they decided on 13th May that parts of the statements they had made might have been lost in translation is not explained. Nor do these new statements appear in the PJ files, so there's no evidence of what they said or that the PJ received them. Even those statements. taken and recorded in English, weren't correct according to Kate. Unless, of course her memory of what she meant to say is the problem rather than the records.

Kate's references to 'lost in translation' have only one possible conclusion imo, which is that she is suggesting that the interpreters didn't do their jobs properly. In fact she's naming Natalia Carvalho Ferreira de Almeida and Alice Dias Homem de Gouveia Avakoff.

How do you detect that something has been lost in translation? In the McCann's situation they could only compare what they meant to say with what the interpreters read back to them. If the two accounts didn't match the time to mention it was then, rather than saying nothing and signing that it was accurate.

You choose not to believe Kate .....you think shes lying......i find her claim credible. ...you dont....end of
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 10:46:56 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 10:26:33 AM
Yes. Why they decided on 13th May that parts of the statements they had made might have been lost in translation is not explained. Nor do these new statements appear in the PJ files, so there's no evidence of what they said or that the PJ received them. Even those statements. taken and recorded in English, weren't correct according to Kate. Unless, of course her memory of what she meant to say is the problem rather than the records.

Kate's references to 'lost in translation' have only one possible conclusion imo, which is that she is suggesting that the interpreters didn't do their jobs properly. In fact she's naming Natalia Carvalho Ferreira de Almeida and Alice Dias Homem de Gouveia Avakoff.

How do you detect that something has been lost in translation? In the McCann's situation they could only compare what they meant to say with what the interpreters read back to them. If the two accounts didn't match the time to mention it was then, rather than saying nothing and signing that it was accurate.
Hang on.  If the two accounts didn't match they may well have mentioned it at the time - what was the procedure for making amendments and were these immediately re-typed and re-read to the witnesses?  When you are translating "on the hoof" as these translators would be doing (ie: reading in Portuguese and then reading aloud in English) do you not think there is any scope whatsoever for mistranslations to occur and that what they were told were in the statements were not 100% faithful to what actually WERE in the statements?  I see you have avoided addressing my previous questions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 06, 2022, 10:58:19 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 10:46:56 AM
Hang on.  If the two accounts didn't match they may well have mentioned it at the time - what was the procedure for making amendments and were these immediately re-typed and re-read to the witnesses?  When you are translating "on the hoof" as these translators would be doing (ie: reading in Portuguese and then reading aloud in English) do you not think there is any scope whatsoever for mistranslations to occur and that what they were told were in the statements were not 100% faithful to what actually WERE in the statements?  I see you have avoided addressing my previous questions.

Of course there was room for error.  In fact it is unavoidable, as I well know after thirty years of battling with The French Language.  And at least I have some personal experience of this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 12:12:03 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 10:46:56 AM
Hang on.  If the two accounts didn't match they may well have mentioned it at the time - what was the procedure for making amendments and were these immediately re-typed and re-read to the witnesses?  When you are translating "on the hoof" as these translators would be doing (ie: reading in Portuguese and then reading aloud in English) do you not think there is any scope whatsoever for mistranslations to occur and that what they were told were in the statements were not 100% faithful to what actually WERE in the statements?  I see you have avoided addressing my previous questions.

I don't know what the procedure was, but witholding signatures would have required some action imo.

Are you suggesting the interpreters lied to them about what the statements  said?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 12:14:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 12:12:03 PM
I don't know what the procedure was, but witholding signatures would have required some action imo.

Are you suggesting the interpreters lied to them about what the statements  said?

That can be the only conclusion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 06, 2022, 12:30:33 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 12:14:31 PM
That can be the only conclusion.

Nuances.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 06, 2022, 01:12:45 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 12:12:03 PM
I don't know what the procedure was, but witholding signatures would have required some action imo.

Are you suggesting the interpreters lied to them about what the statements  said?

Here's one I made earlier.

Nearly two years earlier truth be told and the wonderment is ~
right - I give you that there was absolutely noooo secret to the first part of my closing sentence "But it has all been said before many times and in many locations" easy peasy that one as I was merely speaking with the voice of experience having heard the sceptic mantras so repeatedly
but ~ and here is where the 'wonderment' comes in "and it will definitely all be said again and then again in deference to Groundhog Day." 
And I didn't even need to gaze into my crystal ball for my forecast.  Here we are yet again - yet again - yet again.
Boy! am I good or am I good! or is it a case that sceptics really can't escape groundhog day?


"Not only transcribed verbatim but recorded in audio and video.

Kate describes in her book the actual process involved in her Portuguese interviews.And members use the result in confirmation of their notion of so called 'inaccuracies' or 'inconsistences' in statements.

In my opinion it would have been impossible were there none using that process.  All it would take to introduce some would be for subsequent interviews to be interpreted by a different translator and transcribed by a different officer to introduce a poolside/carpark side ~ front door/back door misunderstood situation.

But it has all been said before many times and in many locations and it will definitely all be said again and then again in deference to Groundhog Day."

https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11731.msg624337#msg624337
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 01:41:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 12:12:03 PM
I don't know what the procedure was, but witholding signatures would have required some action imo.

Are you suggesting the interpreters lied to them about what the statements  said?
Of course I'm not suggesting that, but people make errors or interpret things differently, that is all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 01:41:43 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 12:14:31 PM
That can be the only conclusion.
only to the terminally dimwitted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 02:32:59 PM
If anyone here actually believes that individuals as intelligent as the parents would have signed a statement which hadn’t been read back to them English then it really isn’t worth my energy trying to discuss it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 02:51:12 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 02:32:59 PM
If anyone here actually believes that individuals as intelligent as the parents would have signed a statement which hadn’t been read back to them English then it really isn’t worth my energy trying to discuss it.
Who here has suggested that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 06:14:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 01:41:19 PM
Of course I'm not suggesting that, but people make errors or interpret things differently, that is all.

As the people named McCann have criticised the process I'm surprised that not one example has ever been provided.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 06:37:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 06:14:17 PM
As the people named McCann have criticised the process I'm surprised that not one example has ever been provided.
Have you read  Kate’s book?  She provides examples in there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 07:09:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 06:37:08 PM
Have you read  Kate’s book?  She provides examples in there.

Actual examples or hints?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 07:22:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 06, 2022, 07:09:23 PM
Actual examples or hints?
Examples of how excepts from her diary were mistranslated. 
Incidentally and on another subject, what I found interesting re-reading part of Kate’s book just now is that she corroborates Amaral’s claim that the PJ knocked on CB’s door years before he made it.  “Door-to-door inquiries appeared to have been delayed and haphazard.  If nobody was home, too bad: as far as I could tell they didn’t get a second visit….

Nigt after night, I read of depraved individuals, British paedophiles, Portuguese paedophiles, Spanish, Dutch and German paedophiles, and of the horrific crimes they’d committed.  The police went to visit some of them, looked around their apartments and recorded merely “No sign of the minor”.  Was that enough to eliminate these vile characters from the inquiry?”

Now I seem to recall you preferred to believe Amaral made up the PJ’s attempt to make contact with CB but it would seem that evidence for such an attempt likely languishes in parts of the files we have never been privy to.  Now you’re going to tell us Kate made up all of the above I suppose…
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 07:53:10 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 07:22:18 PM
Examples of how excepts from her diary were mistranslated. 
Incidentally and on another subject, what I found interesting re-reading part of Kate’s book just now is that she corroborates Amaral’s claim that the PJ knocked on CB’s door years before he made it.  “Door-to-door inquiries appeared to have been delayed and haphazard.  If nobody was home, too bad: as far as I could tell they didn’t get a second visit….

Nigt after night, I read of depraved individuals, British paedophiles, Portuguese paedophiles, Spanish, Dutch and German paedophiles, and of the horrific crimes they’d committed.  The police went to visit some of them, looked around their apartments and recorded merely “No sign of the minor”.  Was that enough to eliminate these vile characters from the inquiry?”

Now I seem to recall you preferred to believe Amaral made up the PJ’s attempt to make contact with CB but it would seem that evidence for such an attempt likely languishes in parts of the files we have never been privy to.  Now you’re going to tell us Kate made up all of the above I suppose…


And mistranslations in the statements?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2022, 08:04:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 07:22:18 PM
Examples of how excepts from her diary were mistranslated. 
Incidentally and on another subject, what I found interesting re-reading part of Kate’s book just now is that she corroborates Amaral’s claim that the PJ knocked on CB’s door years before he made it.  “Door-to-door inquiries appeared to have been delayed and haphazard.  If nobody was home, too bad: as far as I could tell they didn’t get a second visit….

Nigt after night, I read of depraved individuals, British paedophiles, Portuguese paedophiles, Spanish, Dutch and German paedophiles, and of the horrific crimes they’d committed.  The police went to visit some of them, looked around their apartments and recorded merely “No sign of the minor”.  Was that enough to eliminate these vile characters from the inquiry?”

Now I seem to recall you preferred to believe Amaral made up the PJ’s attempt to make contact with CB but it would seem that evidence for such an attempt likely languishes in parts of the files we have never been privy to.  Now you’re going to tell us Kate made up all of the above I suppose…

The PJ had no evidence with which to rule these sex offenders in, so what was Kate expecting the police to be able to do?
They couldn't simply turn over their apartments & haul them all in for questioning, they'd need warrants for that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 08:22:06 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 07:53:10 PM

And mistranslations in the statements?
She gives no specific examples in her book but she writes “I knew only too well from my interviews with thePJ how words and meanings could get lost in translation “.  Of course you think she lies about everything but to someone less blinkered and biased this certainly has the ring of truth to it, and even you admit mistranslations were likely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 08:24:20 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2022, 08:04:54 PM
The PJ had no evidence with which to rule these sex offenders in, so what was Kate expecting the police to be able to do?
They couldn't simply turn over their apartments & haul them all in for questioning, they'd need warrants for that.

Especially if there are as many sex offenders in the area as we are lead to believe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2022, 08:29:54 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 08:24:20 PM
Especially if there are as many sex offenders in the area as we are lead to believe.

I wonder how many of these paedos had previous for abducting children though, rather than them just molesting a family member or child of a friend/associate?
I'll bet anything they were all abductors & not just paedos, given all the child abductions that occurred around Luz.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 09:02:44 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 08:24:20 PM
Especially if there are as many sex offenders in the area as we are lead to believe.
Yeah, they may as well not have bothered at all, far too much like hard work.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2022, 09:10:32 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 09:02:44 PM
Yeah, they may as well not have bothered at all, far too much like hard work.

I agree, because let's face reality here, investigating paedos isn't getting Wolters anywhere.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 10:02:32 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 09:02:44 PM
Yeah, they may as well not have bothered at all, far too much like hard work.

Do you really think that any police force has the manpower or budget to chase up every paedophile living within any large village unless they’ve had some intelligence first? Further if Brueckner had been in what could the police have done without a shred of evidence?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 10:25:35 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 10:02:32 PM
Do you really think that any police force has the manpower or budget to chase up every paedophile living within any large village unless they’ve had some intelligence first? Further if Brueckner had been in what could the police have done without a shred of evidence?
Like I said, they may as well not have bothered at all, seeing as they had neither the time, the resources or the appropriate powers to investigate paedophiles or search their properties.  So, next time a child disappears off the face of the earth without a trace don’t whatever  you do expect the police to properly investigate known paedophiles  in the area. That would be more than their jobs are worth!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2022, 10:34:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 10:25:35 PM
Like I said, they may as well not have bothered at all, seeing as they had neither the time, the resources or the appropriate powers to investigate paedophiles or search their properties.  So, next time a child disappears off the face of the earth without a trace don’t whatever  you do expect the police to properly investigate known paedophiles  in the area. That would be more than their jobs are worth!

Were any of the paedophiles known to abduct children?
We know Brueckner wasn't, so there was no good reason to suspect him in particular really.
So he nonced two kids in Germany 12 years prior? He should immediately be suspected of abducting Maddie based on that should he?
Bit of stretch really isn't it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 10:39:24 PM
On average how many “known paedophiles” would there be living in your average Portugues “large village” I wonder?  A dozen?  A hundred?  A thousand? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 10:43:06 PM
Obviously if a child goes missing in mysterious circumstances that very last people you should spend time and money investigating are the local paedos. 

From the PJ Manual of Missing Children Investigation Top Tips: “Save time and money by knocking on local paedos’ doors and walking away before they even have a chance to come to the door, then cross them off as not relevant to the investigation.”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 10:46:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 10:39:24 PM
On average how many “known paedophiles” would there be living in your average Portugues “large village” I wonder?  A dozen?  A hundred?  A thousand?

Wasn’t it hundreds according to the headlines?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2022, 10:48:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 10:43:06 PM
Obviously if a child goes missing in mysterious circumstances that very last people you should spend time and money investigating are the local paedos. 

From the PJ Manual of Missing Children Investigation Top Tips: “Save time and money by knocking on local paedos’ doors and walking away before they even have a chance to come to the door, then cross them off as not relevant to the investigation.”

How were they supposed to go about investigating them?
They'd need to arrest them to be able to question them & they'd need a warrant to be able to search their homes & vehicles, & for both those things to happen, they'd need intel/evidence against the particular paedo, & as it happens, they didn't have any Intel or evidence at all that paedos, in particular, could be responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 10:49:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 10:43:06 PM
Obviously if a child goes missing in mysterious circumstances that very last people you should spend time and money investigating are the local paedos. 

From the PJ Manual of Missing Children Investigation Top Tips: “Save time and money by knocking on local paedos’ doors and walking away before they even have a chance to come to the door, then cross them off as not relevant to the investigation.”

So Brueckner was in, what then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2022, 10:54:05 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 10:49:19 PM
So Brueckner was in, what then?

Brueckner tells the police he's not interested in talking to police, shuts the door in their faces, the PJ are powerless to do anything about it, & Brueckner goes back into his basement & continues taking photos of Maddie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 10:58:08 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 10:49:19 PM
So Brueckner was in, what then?
Who knows?  They could have asked to come in and look around his place of residence, camper van or wherever he was living at the time, found something linking him to Madeleine such as her pjs, even found her alive, shut away in a cupboard or under a bed, we will never know.  Of course he could have refused to allow them in which would have looked suspicious and they could have got a warrant to conduct a thorough search.  But is this all too much of a bother for the police do you think?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 10:58:22 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2022, 10:54:05 PM
Brueckner tells the police he's not interested in talking to police, shuts the door in their faces, the PJ are powerless to do anything about it, & Brueckner goes back into his basement & continues taking photos of Maddie.

This ‘Brueckner wasn’t in so they just went away’ is such a red herring. Even if he was in there is very little that they could have done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 10:58:08 PM
Who knows?  They could have asked to come in and look around his place of residence, camper van or wherever he was living at the time, found something linking him to Madeleine such as her pjs, even found her alive, shut away in a cupboard or under a bed, we will never know.  Of course he could have refused to allow them in which would have looked suspicious and they could have got a warrant to conduct a thorough search.  But is this all too much of a bother for the police do you think?

What is the Portuguese law with regard to entering individual’s houses?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2022, 11:03:07 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 10:58:08 PM
Who knows?  They could have asked to come in and look around his place of residence, camper van or wherever he was living at the time, found something linking him to Madeleine such as her pjs, even found her alive, shut away in a cupboard or under a bed, we will never know.  Of course he could have refused to allow them in which would have looked suspicious and they could have got a warrant to conduct a thorough search.  But is this all too much of a bother for the police do you think?

You think someone declining to allow police into their home would be sufficient grounds to convince a judge to issue a search warrant?
Seriously?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2022, 11:05:53 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 11:01:24 PM
What is the Portuguese law with regard to entering individual’s houses?

Apparently if you committed a crime in a foreign country 12 years prior then they should have reasonable grounds to smash your front door in every time a child goes missing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 11:06:34 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 11:01:24 PM
What is the Portuguese law with regard to entering individual’s houses?
I have no idea,what the law is wrt to police entering known sex offenders homes, but I’d be surprised if there’s a law against the police asking nicely if they can come in for a look around with the owners’ permission
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2022, 11:07:37 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 11:06:34 PM
I have no idea,what the law is wrt to police entering known sex offenders homes, but I’d be surprised if there’s a law against the police asking nicely if they can come in for a look around with the owners’ permission

The owner declines.
Next?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 06, 2022, 11:09:14 PM
One thing I would have done as an investgator would have been to gather together mugshots of all known oaedophiles and sex offenders in the neighbourhood and show them to all the witnesses who claimed to have seen suspicious men in the days leading up to and on the day of Madeleine’s disappearance to see if there were any matches.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2022, 11:11:22 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 11:09:14 PM
One thing I would have done as an investgator would have been to gather together mugshots of all known oaedophiles and sex offenders in the neighbourhood and show them to all the witnesses who claimed to have seen suspicious men in the days leading up to and on the day of Madeleine’s disappearance to see if there were any matches.

They'd have been there for months given the number of suspicious men seen lurking close to the McCanns apartment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2022, 11:16:52 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 10:58:22 PM
This ‘Brueckner wasn’t in so they just went away’ is such a red herring. Even if he was in there is very little that they could have done.

It's just the tired old trope of blaming innocent paedophiles for Madeleine’s disappearance when there's absolutely no evidence paedos in particular were involved in her disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 11:23:01 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 06, 2022, 11:09:14 PM
One thing I would have done as an investgator would have been to gather together mugshots of all known oaedophiles and sex offenders in the neighbourhood and show them to all the witnesses who claimed to have seen suspicious men in the days leading up to and on the day of Madeleine’s disappearance to see if there were any matches.

Let’s get back to Brueckner. After opening the door he refuses to let you look about. You have no evidence that anything is amiss. What then ( think Portuguese not British law)?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 06, 2022, 11:32:22 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 11:23:01 PM
Let’s get back to Brueckner. After opening the door he refuses to let you look about. You have no evidence that anything is amiss. What then ( think Portuguese not British law)?

Throw him to the ground & put a knee on his neck for 9 mins.
That's how they'd handle things in the states.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 07:12:14 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 06, 2022, 11:23:01 PM
Let’s get back to Brueckner. After opening the door he refuses to let you look about. You have no evidence that anything is amiss. What then ( think Portuguese not British law)?
I have no idea.  Are you telling me the PJ have no powers to obtain a warrant to search a known paedophile’s premises when a child goes missing in the area?  If that’s the case then like I said at the outset, why even bother knocking on his door in the first place? BTW, didn’t you like my suggestion?  I suppose that’s not allowed in Portugal either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 10:10:06 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 07:12:14 AM
I have no idea.  Are you telling me the PJ have no powers to obtain a warrant to search a known paedophile’s premises when a child goes missing in the area?  If that’s the case then like I said at the outset, why even bother knocking on his door in the first place? BTW, didn’t you like my suggestion?  I suppose that’s not allowed in Portugal either.

You really don’t understand the law, do you, whether Portuguese or British?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 10:21:52 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 10:10:06 AM
You really don’t understand the law, do you, whether Portuguese or British?
Explain it to me then.  Tell me what point there is for the police to go specifically to visit local criminals and paedophiles in a missing child case if the most they can hope for is knock on the door and be told to eff off or to be greeted by silence?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 10:34:35 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 10:21:52 AM
Explain it to me then.  Tell me what point there is for the police to go specifically to visit local criminals and paedophiles in a missing child case if the most they can hope for is knock on the door and be told to eff off or to be greeted by silence?

Even paedophiles have rights, unfortunate I know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 10:38:38 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 10:34:35 AM
Even paedophiles have rights, unfortunate I know.
I realise that but you haven't answered my question.  Why bother paying them a visit in the first place if it was a complete waste of time?  If as a police officer you ask a paedophile if you can come in and have a chat with them about a missing child and they refuse to let you in, would you consider that fair enough and walk away letting them get on with it, or might it raise a tiny glimmer of suspicion?  Similarly if you knock on a paedo's door and there is no reply, would you consider that to be enough to rule them out of any further investigation?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 11:19:39 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 10:38:38 AM
I realise that but you haven't answered my question.  Why bother paying them a visit in the first place if it was a complete waste of time?  If as a police officer you ask a paedophile if you can come in and have a chat with them about a missing child and they refuse to let you in, would you consider that fair enough and walk away letting them get on with it, or might it raise a tiny glimmer of suspicion?  Similarly if you knock on a paedo's door and there is no reply, would you consider that to be enough to rule them out of any further investigation?

It would appear that every police force had access to Brueckner’s criminal record, OG certainly did in 2011, but he was allowed to slip through the net again and again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2022, 11:37:23 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 11:19:39 AM
It would appear that every police force had access to Brueckner’s criminal record, OG certainly did in 2011, but he was allowed to slip through the net again and again.

To be fair, they had no evidence Brueckner, or paedophiles in general really, were in any way responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 11:47:30 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 11:19:39 AM
It would appear that every police force had access to Brueckner’s criminal record, OG certainly did in 2011, but he was allowed to slip through the net again and again.
Once more you have avoided answering my questions.  I guess that's the end of that discussion then. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 11:57:50 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 11:47:30 AM
Once more you have avoided answering my questions.  I guess that's the end of that discussion then.

A tactic that’s becoming all too familiar from you but no problem…end of discussion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 07, 2022, 12:03:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 10:38:38 AM
I realise that but you haven't answered my question.  Why bother paying them a visit in the first place if it was a complete waste of time?  If as a police officer you ask a paedophile if you can come in and have a chat with them about a missing child and they refuse to let you in, would you consider that fair enough and walk away letting them get on with it, or might it raise a tiny glimmer of suspicion?  Similarly if you knock on a paedo's door and there is no reply, would you consider that to be enough to rule them out of any further investigation?

I've seen no evidence that any police officers knocked on any doors connected to CB.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 12:14:02 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 11:57:50 AM
A tactic that’s becoming all too familiar from you but no problem…end of discussion.
I was fully engaged in the discussion, even asked you to explain Portuguese and English law to me, but when you suddenly refuse to address the questions I put to you it ceases to be a discussion so the tactic (if you want to call it that) is all yours - I believe its called deflection, or evasion, or stonewalling. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 12:14:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 07, 2022, 12:03:57 PM
I've seen no evidence that any police officers knocked on any doors connected to CB.
@)(++(* - go back to sleep then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 01:05:42 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 12:14:02 PM
I was fully engaged in the discussion, even asked you to explain Portuguese and English law to me, but when you suddenly refuse to address the questions I put to you it ceases to be a discussion so the tactic (if you want to call it that) is all yours - I believe its called deflection, or evasion, or stonewalling.

Explain English and Portuguese law? Why ever would I ? Surely if you want make points on police procedure you should already know what you’re talking about…then looking at your previous postings maybe not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 07, 2022, 01:10:21 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 10:10:06 AM
You really don’t understand the law, do you, whether Portuguese or British?

There is a teensy bit of difference between the two.  Portuguese Law remains a mystery to me, wherein they can beat a suspect into confessing and then get a conviction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 01:13:32 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 07, 2022, 01:10:21 PM
There is a teensy bit of difference between the two.  Portuguese Law remains a mystery to me, wherein they can beat a suspect into confessing and then get a conviction.

I think you’ll find the British law allows that too…hell even death in custodies are allowed without censure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 07, 2022, 01:14:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 07, 2022, 12:03:57 PM
I've seen no evidence that any police officers knocked on any doors connected to CB.

Gosh.  I thought that Amaral said that they did.  Am I wrong about that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 07, 2022, 01:18:51 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 12:14:39 PM
@)(++(* - go back to sleep then.

I was just wondering why a 'convicted liar' is suddenly being believed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 01:22:44 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 07, 2022, 01:14:55 PM
Gosh.  I thought that Amaral said that they did.  Am I wrong about that?

Perhaps he was covering his backside, perhaps he was told that it had been done when it hadn’t …etc.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 07, 2022, 01:31:50 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 07, 2022, 01:18:51 PM
I was just wondering why a 'convicted liar' is suddenly being believed.

Damage limitation and self preservation.

Kate made the observation in her book about the slipshod way the 'door to door' inquiries were handled when she suspected that if there was no reply that was it - end of.

All Amaral was doing by releasing the information in advance was another deflection from the ineptitude of the investigation in which he was the lead detective.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 01:36:08 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 01:05:42 PM
Explain English and Portuguese law? Why ever would I ? Surely if you want make points on police procedure you should already know what you’re talking about…then looking at your previous postings maybe not.
I see, so you don't know what the law is either, fair enough.  It still begs the questions:
1) why go and knock on paedophiles' and criminals' doors if you have no hope whatsoever of gaining access to their properties or asking them about a missing child
2) having failed to make contact with known paedophiles when investigating a child's disappearance is it enough to simply knock on their door in order to dismiss them from the investigation?
I know you can't answer these questions, but I think they are rather relevant. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 07, 2022, 01:36:44 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 01:13:32 PM
I think you’ll find the British law allows that too…hell even death in custodies are allowed without censure.

So not much chance of ever getting to The Truth.

Meanwhile, The McCanns remain innocent, as does Brueckner.  While the leading Detective continues to make an ass of himself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 01:37:34 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 07, 2022, 01:18:51 PM
I was just wondering why a 'convicted liar' is suddenly being believed.
I gave the reason when I quoted from Kate's book which was written many years before Amaral's revelation and which certainly seems to back up his claim.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 07, 2022, 01:38:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 07, 2022, 01:18:51 PM
I was just wondering why a 'convicted liar' is suddenly being believed.

What?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 07, 2022, 01:42:52 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 01:22:44 PM
Perhaps he was covering his backside, perhaps he was told that it had been done when it hadn’t …etc.

Okay, fine.  But not a lot of use.  But then Amaral never was when deprived of beating suspects.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 01:54:57 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 07, 2022, 01:38:09 PM
What?
I think we can believe the convicted liar on this occasion because a) Kate backed up his claim years before he revealed it and b) his claim hardly enhances his or his force's reputation but makes them look even more useless than they did before he revealed it. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 07, 2022, 02:00:30 PM
Does no one understand what Amaral was up to?  This man is seriously challenged when it comes to detecting anything.

Fortunately The British Ambassador turned up very quickly.  But then Britain had seen this all before.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 07, 2022, 02:11:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 01:54:57 PM
I think we can believe the convicted liar on this occasion because a) Kate backed up his claim years before he revealed it and b) his claim hardly enhances his or his force's reputation but makes them look even more useless than they did before he revealed it.

Wolters is putting them all to shame isn't he.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 07, 2022, 05:00:28 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 01:37:34 PM
I gave the reason when I quoted from Kate's book which was written many years before Amaral's revelation and which certainly seems to back up his claim.

When did Kate mention the alleged knocking on CB's door?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 05:22:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 07, 2022, 05:00:28 PM
When did Kate mention the alleged knocking on CB's door?
She didn’t mention his name specifically (obviously!) Perhaps you need to read back on my posts and we can pick the discussion up again when you’re up to speed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 07:42:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 07, 2022, 05:00:28 PM
When did Kate mention the alleged knocking on CB's door?

Of course Rebelo and OG also had Brueckner’s name on file yet failed to knock on his door either
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 08:20:16 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 07:42:37 PM
Of course Rebelo and OG also had Brueckner’s name on file yet failed to knock on his door either
How do you know OG did not knock on his door, out of interest?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 08:33:41 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 08:20:16 PM
How do you know OG did not knock on his door, out of interest?

Absolutely true…I don’t but I do know that they’ve have known about Brueckner for years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 08:57:36 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 08:33:41 PM
Absolutely true…I don’t but I do know that they’ve have known about Brueckner for years.
And does that in any way, shape or form excuse the PJ from ruling him out of their investigation on the basis of an unanswered knock on his door in 2007?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 07, 2022, 09:07:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 05:22:19 PM
She didn’t mention his name specifically (obviously!) Perhaps you need to read back on my posts and we can pick the discussion up again when you’re up to speed.

No, confirm your claim yourself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 09:14:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 08:57:36 PM
And does that in any way, shape or form excuse the PJ from ruling him out of their investigation on the basis of an unanswered knock on his door in 2007?

Was he ruled out or the knock just not followed up?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 09:18:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 07, 2022, 09:07:35 PM
No, confirm your claim yourself.
I don’t follow orders.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 09:20:22 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 09:14:49 PM
Was he ruled out or the knock just not followed up?
it amounts to the same thing imo.  If the police had not ruled him out why did they make no further effort to trace him and interview him?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 09:25:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 09:20:22 PM
it amounts to the same thing imo.  If the police had not ruled him out why did they make no further effort to trace him and interview him?

No it doesn’t. It is absolutely understandable that he may have fallen between the cracks as the PJ were swamped by thousands and thousands if ridiculous sightings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 07, 2022, 09:48:59 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 09:25:23 PM
No it doesn’t. It is absolutely understandable that he may have fallen between the cracks as the PJ were swamped by thousands and thousands if ridiculous sightings.
There were not “thousands and thousands” of sightings in the first month of the investigation, so it’s totally incomprehensible why local paedophiles were not thoroughly investigated and eliminated.  But you’re a PJ apologist so I guess you don’t agree.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 11:27:35 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 09:48:59 PM
There were not “thousands and thousands” of sightings in the first month of the investigation, so it’s totally incomprehensible why local paedophiles were not thoroughly investigated and eliminated.  But you’re a PJ apologist so I guess you don’t agree.

There were thousands and thousands of sightings in the first months and for many months afterwards.

As to being a PJ apologist, that couldn’t be further from the truth. I think the PJ got many things wrong. Whether this worked in the parent’s favour is a discussion for another day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 07, 2022, 11:42:18 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 07, 2022, 09:18:47 PM
I don’t follow orders.

Neither do I. Look through your own posts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 08, 2022, 07:07:39 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 07, 2022, 11:42:18 PM
Neither do I. Look through your own posts.
I didn’t order you, I suggested.  I also don’t need to look through my own posts, I know what I wrote, it’s all there.  If you want to know what I wrote you just have to read back, it’s not hard.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 08, 2022, 07:13:40 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 07, 2022, 11:27:35 PM
There were thousands and thousands of sightings in the first months and for many months afterwards.

As to being a PJ apologist, that couldn’t be further from the truth. I think the PJ got many things wrong. Whether this worked in the parent’s favour is a discussion for another day.
A cite for “thousands and thousands of sightings” in the first few weeks of the investigation please.  In any case the vast majority of these were never followed up.  You are a PJ apologist if you believe it is acceptable that they knocked on the door of a paedophile in the locale where a child went missing and gave up when no one comes to the door. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 09:29:09 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 08, 2022, 07:07:39 AM
I didn’t order you, I suggested.  I also don’t need to look through my own posts, I know what I wrote, it’s all there.  If you want to know what I wrote you just have to read back, it’s not hard.

I think we both know Kate McCann didn't mention the PJ knocking on CB's door and you didn't post that she did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 08, 2022, 09:32:25 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 09:29:09 AM
I think we both know Kate McCann didn't mention the PJ knocking on CB's door and you didn't post that she did.
I think if you read back on my posts you will see that 1)I said KMC did not mention CB by name and 2) I didn't post that she did (no dispute there!)  Why are you picking a fight over nothing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 08, 2022, 10:37:36 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 08, 2022, 07:13:40 AM
A cite for “thousands and thousands of sightings” in the first few weeks of the investigation please.  In any case the vast majority of these were never followed up.  You are a PJ apologist if you believe it is acceptable that they knocked on the door of a paedophile in the locale where a child went missing and gave up when no one comes to the door.

I’m not sure that I said that it was acceptable but suggested that the legal situation is more complex than you seem to comprehend.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 08, 2022, 10:41:25 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 08, 2022, 10:37:36 AM
I’m not sure that I said that it was acceptable but suggested that the legal situation is more complex than you seem to comprehend.
Is it illegal to return to a paedo's house and knock on the door again at a later date if they were out the first time you tried?  Who knew?!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 08, 2022, 10:51:18 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 08, 2022, 10:41:25 AM
Is it illegal to return to a paedo's house and knock on the door again at a later date if they were out the first time you tried?  Who knew?!

TBH I, like you, wish Brueckner had been in and had been investigated thoroughly at the time then we would have at least been spared Wolter’s ridiculous showboating over the last couple of years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 08, 2022, 10:56:18 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 08, 2022, 10:51:18 AM
TBH I, like you, wish Brueckner had been in and had been investigated thoroughly at the time then we would have at least been spared Wolter’s ridiculous showboating over the last couple of years.
We might also have had resolution to this case far earlier, with Madeleine's abductor currently serving a life sentence.  Oh well never mind, the PJ couldn't have been expected to prioritize and investigate properly all the known paedos in the area, what with them having to go off an investigate all the thousands and thousands of sightings that came through in the first few weeks after the disappearance. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 11:02:25 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 08, 2022, 07:13:40 AM
A cite for “thousands and thousands of sightings” in the first few weeks of the investigation please.  In any case the vast majority of these were never followed up.  You are a PJ apologist if you believe it is acceptable that they knocked on the door of a paedophile in the locale where a child went missing and gave up when no one comes to the door.

I'm sure you can look in the PJ files just like I can trawl through your posts. Providing cites is so last year, isn't it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 08, 2022, 11:07:05 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 11:02:25 AM
I'm sure you can look in the PJ files just like I can trawl through your posts. Providing cites is so last year, isn't it?

I must say that you are awfully good at trawling through Posts.  You found one of mine from 2014 some eight years later.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 08, 2022, 11:07:28 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 08, 2022, 10:56:18 AM
We might also have had resolution to this case far earlier, with Madeleine's abductor currently serving a life sentence.  Oh well never mind, the PJ couldn't have been expected to prioritize and investigate properly all the known paedos in the area, what with them having to go off an investigate all the thousands and thousands of sightings that came through in the first few weeks after the disappearance.

We could have but seeing as it’s taken the combined efforts of 3 police forces and 5 years to get us to where we are now…no arrest, no questioning, no charges.. I very much doubt it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 11:30:26 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 08, 2022, 11:07:05 AM
I must say that you are awfully good at trawling through Posts.  You found one of mine from 2014 some eight years later.

To support a point I'm making, yes. To support someone else's point, no.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 08, 2022, 11:47:37 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 11:02:25 AM
I'm sure you can look in the PJ files just like I can trawl through your posts. Providing cites is so last year, isn't it?
I think you're being a little bit childish now.  I am not providing cites to something I wrote on this forum 3 days ago.  You are a moderator and should be able to keep up with the flow of the discussion and if you can't then a quick re-read of my last few posts is all that is required. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 08, 2022, 11:49:25 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 08, 2022, 11:07:28 AM
We could have but seeing as it’s taken the combined efforts of 3 police forces and 5 years to get us to where we are now…no arrest, no questioning, no charges.. I very much doubt it.
Some crimes take many years to solve.  I'm sure you're still holding onto a vestige of hope that one day you wake up to the joyous news that the McCann and their mates have all been rounded up and thrown into the back of a Black Maria, no?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 08, 2022, 11:52:05 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 08, 2022, 10:51:18 AM
TBH I, like you, wish Brueckner had been in and had been investigated thoroughly at the time then we would have at least been spared Wolter’s ridiculous showboating over the last couple of years.

I've found it quite amusing, he's exposed just how gullible believers are.

Convinced he'd solved it, so they were, & that he'd be wrapping things up soon.

Some believers here still haven't lost faith in Wolters & the concrete evidence.

Shouldn't be much longer now aye  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 08, 2022, 12:00:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 11:30:26 AM
To support a point I'm making, yes. To support someone else's point, no.

Did it help after eight years?  And if so, in what way?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 08, 2022, 12:34:39 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 08, 2022, 11:49:25 AM
Some crimes take many years to solve.  I'm sure you're still holding onto a vestige of hope that one day you wake up to the joyous news that the McCann and their mates have all been rounded up and thrown into the back of a Black Maria, no?

Yes many crimes do take years to solve but not usually when you have the supposed prime suspect in your sights.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 08, 2022, 12:43:28 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 08, 2022, 12:34:39 PM
Yes many crimes do take years to solve but not usually when you have the supposed prime suspect in your sights.
There are no hard and fast rules about how long a case should take to solve when you have a suspect in your sights.  I'm sure you wouldn't be lambasting the PJ if they suddenly announced that they'd been secretly investigating the parents for the last 10 years and were making progress towards securing a conviction would you?  You'd be cock-a-hoop, let's face it.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 08, 2022, 12:50:15 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 08, 2022, 12:43:28 PM
There are no hard and fast rules about how long a case should take to solve when you have a suspect in your sights.  I'm sure you wouldn't be lambasting the PJ if they suddenly announced that they'd been secretly investigating the parents for the last 10 years and were making progress towards securing a conviction would you?  You'd be cock-a-hoop, let's face it.


Could you at least try to keep to the point? You sideswipes at anyone who disagrees are not only immature but becoming rather tedious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 01:01:46 PM
Let's hope we're not heading for a State Funeral on top of everything else!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 08, 2022, 01:11:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 01:01:46 PM
Let's hope we're not heading for a State Funeral on top of everything else!

It would certainly not surprise me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 08, 2022, 01:16:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 01:01:46 PM
Let's hope we're not heading for a State Funeral on top of everything else!

Well, it's going to happen one day, she's really knocking on now, would be boom time for tourism in London, hoteliers will enjoy it & florists will be quite happy to supply the millions cut flowers & sympathy cards to get piled up wastefully outside the gates of the palace.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 08, 2022, 01:17:36 PM

I am not supporting the way in which this Thread seems to be going.  So please stop.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 08, 2022, 01:19:57 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 08, 2022, 01:17:36 PM
I am not supporting the way in which this Thread seems to be going.  So please stop.

Death does happen you know, it's a fact of life, even 90 odd year old monarchs aren't immune.

God save her anyway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 08, 2022, 01:25:18 PM

This has absolutely nothing to do with The McCann Affair.  Start a Thread somewhere else.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 08, 2022, 01:30:22 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 08, 2022, 12:50:15 PM

Could you at least try to keep to the point? You sideswipes at anyone who disagrees are not only immature but becoming rather tedious.
My post was entirely on point and in response to yours about how long some cases to solve, even if the suspect has been in the police's sights for some time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 08, 2022, 01:31:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 01:01:46 PM
Let's hope we're not heading for a State Funeral on top of everything else!
I think sadly that we are.  I rather dread the outpouring of joy and delight that will follow from the small but highly vocal anti-Monarchists online.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 01:55:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 08, 2022, 01:31:44 PM
I think sadly that we are.  I rather dread the outpouring of joy and delight that will follow from the small but highly vocal anti-Monarchists online.

I don't think they will make much of an impact as the whole world will mourn this amazing woman when she departs  this life.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 08, 2022, 02:00:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 01:55:57 PM
I don't think they will make much of an impact as the whole world will mourn this amazing woman when she departs  this life.

I'm not a monarchist but still have respect for the old gal.
She has served with grace & dignity, even when the rest of her family couldn't behave themselves.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 08, 2022, 02:10:00 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 08, 2022, 02:00:54 PM
I'm not a monarchist but still have respect for the old gal.
She has served with grace & dignity, even when the rest of her family couldn't behave themselves.

I’m a Republican but my heart goes out to the Queen’s family and all those close to her. It is such a terrible time for them all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 02:14:01 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 08, 2022, 02:00:54 PM
I'm not a monarchist but still have respect for the old gal.
She has served with grace & dignity, even when the rest of her family couldn't behave themselves.

Yes, it's like any role. It's not about the role it's about the person who filled it. I see Prince Harry's arrived from wherever, so it looks serious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 08, 2022, 02:17:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 02:14:01 PM
Yes, it's like any role. It's not about the role it's about the person who filled it. I see Prince Harry's arrived from wherever, so it looks serious.

Yes, they are all rushing to be at her bedside so must be bad.
She looked OK in the pictures with Liz Truss the other day but sadly at her age things can change suddenly.
Anyway, gawd save 'er.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 08, 2022, 02:21:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 08, 2022, 01:55:57 PM
I don't think they will make much of an impact as the whole world will mourn this amazing woman when she departs  this life.
No I know, but I don't really want to read any of their nasty shite so will have to give FB and newspaper comments a wide berth for a few weeks when it happens.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 08, 2022, 02:22:07 PM
Her husbands funeral was an insult to her. Covid restrictions, which the PM & other MP's repeatedly breached, meant the poor old gal had to sit alone.
I found that appalling.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 08, 2022, 03:08:13 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 08, 2022, 01:17:36 PM
I am not supporting the way in which this Thread seems to be going.  So please stop.
Quite often I despair that perfectly good, informative posts and discussions well worth their own threads being irretrievably 'lost' by ending up being posted here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 08, 2022, 03:22:43 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 08, 2022, 03:08:13 PM
Quite often I despair that perfectly good, informative posts and discussions well worth their own threads being irretrievably 'lost' by ending up being posted here.

I think on this occasion it’s understandable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 08, 2022, 06:25:27 PM

This is so disrespectful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 09, 2022, 06:42:21 PM
Del
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 17, 2022, 07:24:48 PM
So pleased that YouTuber, Twitter Troll and online abuser Alex Belfield got 5 1/2 years in jail for his online hate campaign against Jeremy Vine and others.  Many of the McCanns’ online tormentors should count themselves very lucky that the McCanns did not go after them as they had every right to do. 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/16/former-bbc-dj-alex-belfield-jailed-for-stalking-jeremy-vine-and-others
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 17, 2022, 07:58:49 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 17, 2022, 07:24:48 PM
So pleased that YouTuber, Twitter Troll and online abuser Alex Belfield got 5 1/2 years in jail for his online hate campaign against Jeremy Vine and others.  Many of the McCanns’ online tormentors should count themselves very lucky that the McCanns did not go after them as they had every right to do. 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/16/former-bbc-dj-alex-belfield-jailed-for-stalking-jeremy-vine-and-others

"sent abusive messages, videos and emails to his targets"

Yeah, he went a bit further than basic online wummery really didn't he.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 17, 2022, 11:06:56 PM
And then of course there was this earlier in the year.  Yes, the McCann bashers certainly have got off lightly in my view, when you think how many there were alleging the same kind of crap as this stupid woman:

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/nora-quoirin-lawsuit-over-comments-about-girls-death-settled-41853420.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 18, 2022, 08:17:29 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 17, 2022, 07:58:49 PM
"sent abusive messages, videos and emails to his targets"

Yeah, he went a bit further than basic online wummery really didn't he.

Complaints have been made previously and the law hasn't been broken in respect of the McCanns. Perhaps their supporters would like a special law created banning any mention of their name unless it's complimentary or supportive.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 18, 2022, 08:49:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 18, 2022, 08:17:29 AM
Complaints have been made previously and the law hasn't been broken in respect of the McCanns. Perhaps their supporters would like a special law created banning any mention of their name unless it's complimentary or supportive.
You are wrong yet again....the complaints have not been tested in court. Just because the police took no action does not mean the law was not broken
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 18, 2022, 08:49:50 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 18, 2022, 08:17:29 AM
Complaints have been made previously and the law hasn't been broken in respect of the McCanns. Perhaps their supporters would like a special law created banning any mention of their name unless it's complimentary or supportive.
Don’t be ridiculous.  The McCanns could certainly have pursued people like Sonia Poulton, Sharples, and other prolific hate bloggers who churned out thousands of hate filled blogs, and who harassed online and encouraged those to harass in real life - but they chose not to.  Look at the Quoirins case against the barmy ex-lawyer for example.  There is nowhere near the level on hateful FB activity devoted to their case as their is devoted to the McCann case to this day, and yet the McCanns have not sued FB, when they have every right to.  Perhaps they should now precedent has been set.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 18, 2022, 09:36:59 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 18, 2022, 08:49:50 AM
Don’t be ridiculous.  The McCanns could certainly have pursued people like Sonia Poulton, Sharples, and other prolific hate bloggers who churned out thousands of hate filled blogs, and who harassed online and encouraged those to harass in real life - but they chose not to.  Look at the Quoirins case against the barmy ex-lawyer for example.  There is nowhere near the level on hateful FB activity devoted to their case as their is devoted to the McCann case to this day, and yet the McCanns have not sued FB, when they have every right to.  Perhaps they should now precedent has been set.

I was talking about laws being broken; no action by the McCanns needed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 18, 2022, 09:45:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 18, 2022, 09:36:59 AM
I was talking about laws being broken; no action by the McCanns needed.
You were being utterly facetious, as usual.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on September 18, 2022, 10:49:43 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 18, 2022, 09:45:58 AM
You were being utterly facetious, as usual.

I wasn't, but sometimes I'm tempted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 18, 2022, 11:01:32 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 18, 2022, 10:49:43 AM
I wasn't, but sometimes I'm tempted.

I found your attempt at sarcasm pathetic..driven by bitterness imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 18, 2022, 11:06:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on September 18, 2022, 10:49:43 AM
I wasn't, but sometimes I'm tempted.
So this wasn't being facetious?
"Perhaps their supporters would like a special law created banning any mention of their name unless it's complimentary or supportive".
You are now being disingenuous, as usual.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 25, 2022, 12:15:37 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on September 18, 2022, 11:06:14 AM
So this wasn't being facetious?
"Perhaps their supporters would like a special law created banning any mention of their name unless it's complimentary or supportive".
You are now being disingenuous, as usual.
Enough!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on September 25, 2022, 02:29:07 AM
Quote from: The General on September 25, 2022, 12:15:37 AM
Enough!

No, we are not obliged to KNEEL to you as you earlier demanded
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 26, 2022, 06:45:12 PM
So a couple of days ago its said OG is still receiving £300,000 funding,with one less officer  but yet a report a couple of days ago says that SY (The MET) once again shows failing's  including not logging 69,000 offences in a year, I suppose the ones left at OG have it easy what with Wolters having solved it.

Scotland Yard gets savaged as watchdog report raises 'serious concerns' including failure to log 69,000 offences a year

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11237243/Scotland-Yard-gets-savaged-watchdog-report-raises-concerns.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 26, 2022, 06:52:37 PM
I think its probably wrong to think of OG as part of the Met.
Yes, they are nominally responsible to a DCI who has a proper day job, but they are probably staffed by "Old Tricks" type officers who are well past their best days and the funding is ring-fenced from the Home Office.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 26, 2022, 07:12:15 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 26, 2022, 06:45:12 PM
So a couple of days ago its said OG is still receiving £300,000 funding,with one less officer  but yet a report a couple of days ago says that SY (The MET) once again shows failing's  including not logging 69,000 offences in a year, I suppose the ones left at OG have it easy what with Wolters having solved it.

Scotland Yard gets savaged as watchdog report raises 'serious concerns' including failure to log 69,000 offences a year

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11237243/Scotland-Yard-gets-savaged-watchdog-report-raises-concerns.html
I'd wager that a job on Operaton Grange is akin to winning the Postcode Lottery, notwithstanding having to open the door to a grinning mong in a red sweatshirt.
10.00am - saunter in, Pret coffee in hand, scratching ones arse with other
10.05 - 12.05 - Facebook / Instagram 'research'.
12.05 - 15.05 - Boozy lunch c/w surf and turf at The Old Shades
15.10 - 15.30 - lift receiver to check if phone actually works.
15.40 - Repair to Bassoon
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 26, 2022, 07:17:03 PM
Quote from: The General on September 26, 2022, 07:12:15 PM
I'd wager that a job on Operaton Grange is akin to winning the Postcode Lottery, notwithstanding having to open the door to a grinning mong in a red sweatshirt.
10.00am - saunter in, Pret coffee in hand, scratching ones arse with other
10.05 - 12.05 - Facebook / Instagram 'research'.
12.05 - 15.05 - Boozy lunch c/w surf and turf at The Old Shades
15.10 - 15.30 - lift receiver to check if phone actually works.
15.40 - Repair to Bassoon

Don't forget 'walking the dog'. They're bound to have one, even if just for  appearances sake.

I mean. what sort of 'Madeleine investigation' would it be without a dog ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on September 30, 2022, 03:36:50 PM
Maybe just maybe they have found Keith Bennetts remains, to late for his ma though.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11266613/Skull-hunt-Ian-Brady-Myra-Hindleys-victim-Keith-Bennett.html


EXCLUSIVE: Skull found in hunt for Ian Brady and Myra Hindley's last victim: Police dig up Saddleworth Moor in search for 12-year-old Keith Bennett - 58 years after he was snatched by moors murderers
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on September 30, 2022, 04:24:08 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 30, 2022, 03:36:50 PM
Maybe just maybe they have found Keith Bennetts remains, to late for his ma though.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11266613/Skull-hunt-Ian-Brady-Myra-Hindleys-victim-Keith-Bennett.html


EXCLUSIVE: Skull found in hunt for Ian Brady and Myra Hindley's last victim: Police dig up Saddleworth Moor in search for 12-year-old Keith Bennett - 58 years after he was snatched by moors murderers
Poor little sod. RIP little man.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 30, 2022, 04:25:27 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 30, 2022, 03:36:50 PM
Maybe just maybe they have found Keith Bennetts remains, to late for his ma though.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11266613/Skull-hunt-Ian-Brady-Myra-Hindleys-victim-Keith-Bennett.html


EXCLUSIVE: Skull found in hunt for Ian Brady and Myra Hindley's last victim: Police dig up Saddleworth Moor in search for 12-year-old Keith Bennett - 58 years after he was snatched by moors murderers
Good on the police for never giving up on Keith.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 30, 2022, 04:59:37 PM
Over the moor, take me to the moor
Dig a shallow grave
And I'll lay me down

Over the moor, take me to the moor
Dig a shallow grave
And I'll lay me down

Lesley-Anne, with your pretty white beads
Oh John, you'll never be a man
And you'll never see your home again
Oh Manchester, so much to answer for

Edward, see those alluring lights?
Tonight will be your very last night
A woman said: "I know my son is dead"
"I'll never rest my hands on his sacred head"

Hindley wakes and Hindley says
Hindley wakes, Hindley wakes, Hindley wakes, and says
"Oh, wherever he has gone, I have gone"

But fresh lilaced moorland fields
Cannot hide the stolid stench of death
Fresh lilaced moorland fields
Cannot hide the stolid stench of death

Hindley wakes and says
Hindley wakes, Hindley wakes, Hindley wakes, and says
"Oh, whatever he has done, I have done"

But this is no easy ride
For a child cries

Oh, find me, find me, nothing more
We are on a sullen misty moor
We may be dead and we may be gone
But we will be, we will be, we will be, right by your side

Until the day you die
This is no easy ride
We will haunt you when you laugh
Yes, you could say we're a team
You might sleep
You might sleep
You might sleep
But you will never dream

Oh, you might sleep
But you will never dream
You might sleep
But you will never dream

Oh Manchester, so much to answer for
Oh Manchester, so much to answer for
Oh, find me, find me
Find me
I'll haunt you when you laugh
Oh, I'll haunt you when you laugh
You might sleep
But you will never dream

Oh
Oh, over the moors, I'm on the moor
Oh, over the moor
Oh, the child is on the moor
..........

Suffer Little Children

Morrissey/Marr

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xux9-UQ4wJ4
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on September 30, 2022, 07:56:38 PM
Half-an-hour to waste with the clueless... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XnBQQPAHQU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XnBQQPAHQU)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 30, 2022, 11:46:09 PM
Quote from: Myster on September 30, 2022, 07:56:38 PM
Half-an-hour to waste with the clueless... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XnBQQPAHQU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XnBQQPAHQU)

I don't understand unkindness and I never will.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on October 01, 2022, 08:59:24 AM
Quote from: Myster on September 30, 2022, 07:56:38 PM
Half-an-hour to waste with the clueless... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XnBQQPAHQU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XnBQQPAHQU)

The comments r mental.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 01, 2022, 09:24:01 AM
Quote from: Rossb on October 01, 2022, 08:59:24 AM
The comments r mental.
15 years later and people still need to remind the rest of the world what perfect parents they are.  Yes, we get it and I expect the McCanns have got it by now too, but nothing like repeating the same old mantras over and over again until you're blue in the face. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 01, 2022, 09:46:47 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 01, 2022, 09:24:01 AM
15 years later and people still need to remind the rest of the world what perfect parents they are.  Yes, we get it and I expect the McCanns have got it by now too, but nothing like repeating the same old mantras over and over again until you're blue in the face.

How awful their own lives must be if the highlights are confined to abusing others.  FIFTEEN YEARS!! of pickling oneself in hatred.  Who does that?  If their behaviour wasn't so despicable one could almost feel sorry for them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 01, 2022, 10:06:57 AM
Quote from: Rossb on October 01, 2022, 08:59:24 AM
The comments r mental.
Harsh but fair, you gotta be cruel to be kind.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 10:07:33 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 01, 2022, 09:24:01 AM
15 years later and people still need to remind the rest of the world what perfect parents they are.  Yes, we get it and I expect the McCanns have got it by now too, but nothing like repeating the same old mantras over and over again until you're blue in the face.

Pointing out that leaving three small children home alone is inacceptable is perfectly valid. Not only because it's true, but because it contradicts the image the parents and their friends projected. "They are very, very anxious parents and very careful..." said a friend. Talk is cheap and actions speak louder than words. There's no such thing as a perfect parent - even those with enough sense to know that a babysitters a good idea for small children aren't perfect, just sensible enough to know why.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 10:20:43 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 10:07:33 AM
Pointing out that leaving three small children home alone is inacceptable is perfectly valid. Not only because it's true, but because it contradicts the image the parents and their friends projected. "They are very, very anxious parents and very careful..." said a friend. Talk is cheap and actions speak louder than words. There's no such thing as a perfect parent - even those with enough sense to know that a babysitters a good idea for small children aren't perfect, just sensible enough to know why.
What rubbish.. I see it as vindictive nastiness from you and other sceptics. If what you are posting is true why have you never directed your vindictive nastiness towards the Needham. Why was Ben allowed to play outside.. Out of hearing and sight... In a dangerous environment.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 01, 2022, 10:31:44 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 10:20:43 AM
What rubbish.. I see it as vindictive nastiness from you and other sceptics. If what you are posting is true why have you never directed your vindictive nastiness towards the Needham. Why was Ben allowed to play outside.. Out of hearing and sight... In a dangerous environment.

I already know its not a good idea to leave children and don't need to be advised by the likes of you every 5 minutes
Where can one vent my fury at the Needhams? Asking for a friend.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 01, 2022, 10:36:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 10:07:33 AM
Pointing out that leaving three small children home alone is inacceptable is perfectly valid. Not only because it's true, but because it contradicts the image the parents and their friends projected. "They are very, very anxious parents and very careful..." said a friend. Talk is cheap and actions speak louder than words. There's no such thing as a perfect parent - even those with enough sense to know that a babysitters a good idea for small children aren't perfect, just sensible enough to know why.

Is that the best you can come up with "Pointing out that leaving three small children home alone is inacceptable is perfectly valid." to justify the hatred and malice for fifteen years?

I think you may have a serious problem which can be summed up in your criticism of the 'fraudulent fund' her parents set up and used to investigate her disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 01, 2022, 10:44:24 AM
Quote from: Brietta on October 01, 2022, 10:36:41 AM
Is that the best you can come up with "Pointing out that leaving three small children home alone is inacceptable is perfectly valid." to justify the hatred and malice for fifteen years?

I think you may have a serious problem which can be summed up in your criticism of the 'fraudulent fund' her parents set up and used to investigate her disappearance.

Quote from: Brietta on October 01, 2022, 01:49:11 AM
Since first encountering some of the absolutely vile McCann content available on the internet it has been obvious to me and of greatest concern, that the most vulnerable to it was always going to be the McCann children.

After a two week inquest a coroner finds that in the death of fourteen year old Molly Russell, harmful online content was likely to have contributed to Molly’s death ‘in a more than minimal way’. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/30/molly-russell-died-while-suffering-negative-effects-of-online-content-rules-coroner

It was always abusive to indulge in the McCann hate fest on the internet.  It was always obvious that at some future time Madeleine's siblings would be exposed to it in one way or another.
Indeed I have seen it claimed in mitigation by sceptic offenders, the hope that the children will "question" their parents.

If these sceptics were too obtuse to work out exactly how abusive their hobby of attacking the family is - they most certainly don't have that excuse now.

Internet content on social media has yet again played its part in influencing the death of a young person.  "Anti facebook groups etc." have been deliberately posting content which will cause distress to the young people exposed to it for years.

It is a measure of the type of individuals they are.

What's the difference?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 01, 2022, 10:53:03 AM
Quote from: The General on October 01, 2022, 10:44:24 AM
What's the difference?

She's a total hypocrite isn't she.
Spends her time hating on Amaral & sceptics every day.
You won't find her actually doing anything to help find Maddie though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 11:04:27 AM
Quote from: Brietta on October 01, 2022, 10:36:41 AM
Is that the best you can come up with "Pointing out that leaving three small children home alone is inacceptable is perfectly valid." to justify the hatred and malice for fifteen years?

I think you may have a serious problem which can be summed up in your criticism of the 'fraudulent fund' her parents set up and used to investigate her disappearance.

I'm commemting on one video, not on what you refer to as fifteen years of 'hatred and malice'. If that includes pointing out that caring, anxious, careful parents are unlikely to leave small children home alone every evening then I don't see how that can be seen as 'hatred and malice', it's just truthful.

Imo I have no serious problems and if you truly think I have perhaps you need to examine your own attitudes. I've never called the Fund fraudulent, for example, as you seem to be hinting I have.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 01, 2022, 11:08:50 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 11:04:27 AM
I'm commemting on one video, not on what you refer to as fifteen years of 'hatred and malice'. If that includes pointing out that caring, anxious, careful parents are unlikely to leave small children home alone every evening then I don't see how that can be seen as 'hatred and malice', it's just truthful.

Imo I have no serious problems and if you truly think I have perhaps you need to examine your own attitudes. I've never called the Fund fraudulent, for example, as you seem to be hinting I have.
It's cyber bullying, a practice she alleges to despise, which is also quite hypocritical, particularly from a moderator.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 11:32:43 AM
Quote from: The General on October 01, 2022, 11:08:50 AM
It's cyber bullying, a practice she alleges to despise, which is also quite hypocritical, particularly from a moderator.

There's a lot of bullying, hatred, malice and abuse on here, no need to generalise about the internet. Interesting, many of the posts made here by the supporters (including moderators) wouldn't be allowed on Websleuths. That forum does indeed make moderation on here look non-existent. 
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11585.msg676249;topicseen#msg676249
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 11:37:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 11:32:43 AM
There's a lot of bullying, hatred, malice and abuse on here, no need to generalise about the internet. Interesting, many of the posts made here by the supporters (including moderators) wouldn't be allowed on Websleuths. That forum does indeed make moderation on here look non-existent. 
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11585.msg676249;topicseen#msg676249

if you are going to criticise moderation you have allowed abuse towards me then reported my response to john...who later overruled your complaint..that has to be poor moderation
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: John on October 01, 2022, 11:38:18 AM
Please keep comments relevant and within the rules please guys and gals. TY
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 11:43:17 AM
Quote from: Brietta on October 01, 2022, 10:36:41 AM
Is that the best you can come up with "Pointing out that leaving three small children home alone is inacceptable is perfectly valid." to justify the hatred and malice for fifteen years?

I think you may have a serious problem which can be summed up in your criticism of the 'fraudulent fund' her parents set up and used to investigate her disappearance.

What is your game and motive B

In your posts, you like to come across as the caring voice of reason yetttt.

Your posts vilify anyone who has a different opinion on the mccs to yours.

Your posts show nothing but contempt for GA....yet don't realize contempt is what a lot of people have for the mccs....and you are no different from them.

YOU have spent years slagging off anyone who is on Maddie's side for justice and don't believe the mccs version.

They have as much right as you to voice their opinion...or to not believe the abduction version.

You should realize they are not bad parents ...they are people who do not believe the mccs version of events.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 12:02:36 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 11:43:17 AM
What is your game and motive B

In your posts, you like to come across as the caring voice of reason yetttt.

Your posts vilify anyone who has a different opinion on the mccs to yours.

Your posts show nothing but contempt for GA....yet don't realize contempt is what a lot of people have for the mccs....and you are no different from them.

YOU have spent years slagging off anyone who is on Maddie's side for justice and don't believe the mccs version.

They have as much right as you to voice their opinion...or to not believe the abduction version.

You should realize they are not bad parents ...they are people who do not believe the mccs version of events.

i dont have contempt for Amaral I just think hes as thick as a plank and a very poor policeman
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 01, 2022, 12:08:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 10:07:33 AM
Pointing out that leaving three small children home alone is inacceptable is perfectly valid. Not only because it's true, but because it contradicts the image the parents and their friends projected. "They are very, very anxious parents and very careful..." said a friend. Talk is cheap and actions speak louder than words. There's no such thing as a perfect parent - even those with enough sense to know that a babysitters a good idea for small children aren't perfect, just sensible enough to know why.
What purpose does making this observation continually and regularly 15 years after the event actually serve other than to make the poster feel superior and virtuous do you think?  Do you think there are significant numbers of parents out there who don't know that leaving young children alone is ill-advised and need educating?  We are always led to believe that what the McCanns did was something that virtually no parent would ever have done so surely constantly harping on about it is a waste of time - apart from it makes their critics feel so much better about themselves? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 12:24:18 PM
Quote from: John on October 01, 2022, 11:38:18 AM
Please keep comments relevant and within the rules please guys and gals. TY

Is it within the rules to tell others you think they have a serious problem or to refer to them as 'the likes of you? I don't find it acceptable I'm afraid.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 12:31:18 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 12:02:36 PM
i dont have contempt for Amaral I just think hes as thick as a plank and a very poor policeman

No problem..... it's just exactly the same as what I think to Wolt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 12:35:53 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 12:31:18 PM
No problem..... it's just exactly the same as what I think to Wolt.
The Germans solved the American rape case where the PJ. Failed. Wolters is not a policemen. Wolters is speaking for the policemen who found the evidence.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 12:39:03 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 12:31:18 PM
No problem..... it's just exactly the same as what I think to Wolt.

The supporters think that the PJ's suspicions of the McCanns were unfounded. It's looking more and more like Wolter's suspicions of CB are also unfounded.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 01, 2022, 12:53:24 PM
Quote from: John on October 01, 2022, 11:38:18 AM
Please keep comments relevant and within the rules please guys and gals. TY
What about the cyber bullying from your moderator?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 01:02:18 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 12:35:53 PM
The Germans solved the American rape case where the PJ. Failed. Wolters is not a policemen. Wolters is speaking for the policemen who found the evidence.

No, I know he isn't a police man lol.

He is just a prosecutor that came from nowhere to say he had concrete evidence to say he could solve the Maddie case.

That was two and a half years ago ....he hasn't solved it has he....or even come close.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 01:05:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 12:39:03 PM
The supporters think that the PJ's suspicions of the McCanns were unfounded. It's looking more and more like Wolter's suspicions of CB are also unfounded.
No it isnt
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 01, 2022, 01:08:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 12:39:03 PM
The supporters think that the PJ's suspicions of the McCanns were unfounded. It's looking more and more like Wolter's suspicions of CB are also unfounded.
It's a good point, as it's looking like both instances are going to have the same outcome - suspicion, circumstantial evidence, but not enough to make a case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 01:09:08 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 01:02:18 PM
No, I know he isn't a police man lol.

He is just a prosecutor that came from nowhere to say he had concrete evidence to say he could solve the Maddie case.

That was two and a half years ago ....he hasn't solved it has he....or even come close.
Based on everything I would say he has so it... Amaral's thesis was based on his poor understanding of the dog alerts.. That isnt opinion.. Its fact
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 01:10:10 PM
Quote from: The General on October 01, 2022, 01:08:48 PM
It's a good point, as it's looking like both instances are going to have the same outcome - suspicion, circumstantial evidence, but not enough to make a case.

Its a poor point.. We know what evie Amaral relied on.. And it was junk
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 01:14:15 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 01:09:08 PM
Based on everything I would say he has so it... Amaral's thesis was based on his poor understanding of the dog alerts.. That isnt opinion.. Its fact

Based on everything I would say he has so it.


Like what ...because he said so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 01, 2022, 01:16:18 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 01:10:10 PM
Its a poor point.. We know what evie Amaral relied on.. And it was junk
Again, you miss the point. It is a fact that both parties have been / are suspects. It's also looking extemely likely that both parties are not going to be charged.
Never mind the quality of the evidence, the statement is correct.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 01:23:12 PM
Quote from: The General on October 01, 2022, 01:16:18 PM
Again, you miss the point. It is a fact that both parties have been / are suspects. It's also looking extemely likely that both parties are not going to be charged.
Never mind the quality of the evidence, the statement is correct.

That doesn't make it a good choice. What's important is what evidence is their to support the suspicions
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 01:24:43 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 01:14:15 PM
Based on everything I would say he has so it.


Like what ...because he said so.

Based on everything.. If you don't understand that statement it's your problem
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 01:34:28 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 01:24:43 PM
Based on everything.. If you don't understand that statement it's your problem


 it's your problem


No, it isn't, it's yours ...you will probably still be here next year saying the same thing
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 01:36:29 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 01:34:28 PM

 it's your problem


No, it isn't, it's yours ...you will probably still be here next year saying the same thing

Sceptics have been saying the s thing for 15 years
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 01, 2022, 01:40:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 11:04:27 AM
I'm commemting on one video, not on what you refer to as fifteen years of 'hatred and malice'. If that includes pointing out that caring, anxious, careful parents are unlikely to leave small children home alone every evening then I don't see how that can be seen as 'hatred and malice', it's just truthful.

Imo I have no serious problems and if you truly think I have perhaps you need to examine your own attitudes. I've never called the Fund fraudulent, for example, as you seem to be hinting I have.

So, according to your post, there has been only ONE video castigating the McCanns with hatred and malice at its root, over the past fifteen years.

I think you may very well have got that wrong.

I rather think you are mistaken
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 01, 2022, 01:59:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 12:39:03 PM
The supporters think that the PJ's suspicions of the McCanns were unfounded. It's looking more and more like Wolter's suspicions of CB are also unfounded.
Why - simply because charges have yet to be brought?  Since when did the passing of time have a bearing on whether or not suspicions are unfounded?  You have suspected the McCanns for years, doess that mean as every hour ticks by and they are not charged your suspicions become more and more unfounded? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 02:04:26 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 01:36:29 PM
Sceptics have been saying the s thing for 15 years

Yes, consistent ....whereas you/others it seems have gone for suspect of the day ..in the past.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 02:06:21 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 01, 2022, 01:40:19 PM
So, according to your post, there has been only ONE video castigating the McCanns with hatred and malice at its root, over the past fifteen years.

I think you may very well have got that wrong.

I rather think you are mistaken

The video which was posted on here, and which I commented on, did not, imo, have 'hatred and malice at it's root'. It would be helpful if you raised specific examples instead of making generalised statements btw.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 02:37:36 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 02:04:26 PM
Yes, consistent ....whereas you/others it seems have gone for suspect of the day ..in the past.
You are totally wrong as usual.. CB is. he first suspect with claims of real evidence.... The first time I could see the case being solved
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 01, 2022, 02:38:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 11:32:43 AM
There's a lot of bullying, hatred, malice and abuse on here, no need to generalise about the internet. Interesting, many of the posts made here by the supporters (including moderators) wouldn't be allowed on Websleuths. That forum does indeed make moderation on here look non-existent. 
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11585.msg676249;topicseen#msg676249

You still haven't quite got the hang of moderator duties and responsibilities  https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8404.msg680942#msg680942

And what your conversation in the context of the present discussion regarding cyberbullies is all about is a bit of a mystery to me.  You have linked to entirely the wrong post, unless you can point out what you can see which is not there.

Some time ago in another life I posted "It makes the moderation here look non-existent and moderators look like eedjits.
But let's not kid ourselves.  The moderation on CMOMM is very tight indeed.  No doubt rampaging on here is much more amusing 😁

I think your illustration of what you think constitutes cyber bullying when measured against the example you have provided proves nothing other than that you do not know what bullying is, "There's a lot of bullying, hatred, malice and abuse on here, no need to generalise about the internet. Interesting, many of the posts made here by the supporters (including moderators) - since I am the subject of the bullying post to which you replied "It's cyber bullying, a practice she alleges to despise, which is also quite hypocritical, particularly from a moderator." So between the pair of you the perfect example of bullying has been provided.  The sad thing is you were so carried away with grasping the opportunity to get the boot in, you failed to realise how transparent your bullying tactic with me as the focus was, - wouldn't be allowed on Websleuths. That forum does indeed make moderation on here look non-existent."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11585.msg676249;topicseen#msg676249
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 01, 2022, 02:42:58 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 11:43:17 AM
What is your game and motive B

In your posts, you like to come across as the caring voice of reason yetttt.

Your posts vilify anyone who has a different opinion on the mccs to yours.

Your posts show nothing but contempt for GA....yet don't realize contempt is what a lot of people have for the mccs....and you are no different from them.

YOU have spent years slagging off anyone who is on Maddie's side for justice and don't believe the mccs version.

They have as much right as you to voice their opinion...or to not believe the abduction version.

You should realize they are not bad parents ...they are people who do not believe the mccs version of events.

Yet another example of a bullying post with no substance provided to substantiate the wild personal accusations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 02:46:13 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 02:37:36 PM
You are totally wrong as usual.. CB is. he first suspect with claims of real evidence.... The first time I could see the case being solved

You don't know I'm wrong ....... it's just as simple as you think you are right.

So what is the real evidence?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 01, 2022, 03:04:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 02:06:21 PM
The video which was posted on here, and which I commented on, did not, imo, have 'hatred and malice at it's root'. It would be helpful if you raised specific examples instead of making generalised statements btw.

I was referring to the evil which is rampant on social media which is damaging to both those who post it and those who are exposed to the content.

The specific to which I responded was reference made by you to the sceptic lexicon which has not altered since Madeleine's abduction more than fifteen years ago.

What is your purpose if for no other reason than berating all her family.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 03:06:42 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 02:46:13 PM
You don't know I'm wrong ....... it's just as simple as you think you are right.

So what is the real evidence?

I know you are wrong if you think I've considered any other suspect as guilty.. CB is the first
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 03:22:18 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 01, 2022, 02:42:58 PM
Yet another example of a bullying post with no substance provided to substantiate the wild personal accusations.

How was my post bullying...I would consider that a personal accusation.

If you can't accept what people say about the mccs is not persecution ..not everyone believes Maddie was abducted.

Your posts on the other hand seem to have a hatred for GA. He has done nothing to you....all he was doing was his job.

You dont know if he was wrong.....but he does seem to have more support than the mccs have.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 03:23:11 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 03:06:42 PM
I know you are wrong if you think I've considered any other suspect as guilty.. CB is the first

So what is this real evidence then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 01, 2022, 03:35:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 01, 2022, 01:59:32 PM
Why - simply because charges have yet to be brought?  Since when did the passing of time have a bearing on whether or not suspicions are unfounded?  You have suspected the McCanns for years, doess that mean as every hour ticks by and they are not charged your suspicions become more and more unfounded?

You're still thinking Brueckner will be charged at some point? That's optimistic. If you're ever left wondering why he still hasn't been charged at any point in the foreseeable future I'll happily explain to you why that is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 01, 2022, 03:39:48 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 03:23:11 PM
So what is this real evidence then?

imo People are utterly delusional if they still think Wolters has concrete evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 01, 2022, 04:01:03 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on October 01, 2022, 03:39:48 PM
imo People are utterly delusional if they still think Wolters has concrete evidence.
What is evidence?
Sum of investigation?
But what is missing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 01, 2022, 04:15:20 PM
Quote from: The General on October 01, 2022, 04:01:03 PM
What is evidence?
Sum of investigation?
But what is missing?

What's missing?

Madeleine. 

It's Madeleine that's still missing, & no amount of being nasty about the McCanns, or being nasty about people who are nasty about the McCanns, is ever going to bring her back.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on October 01, 2022, 04:23:47 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 10:07:33 AM
Pointing out that leaving three small children home alone is inacceptable is perfectly valid. Not only because it's true, but because it contradicts the image the parents and their friends projected. "They are very, very anxious parents and very careful..." said a friend. Talk is cheap and actions speak louder than words. There's no such thing as a perfect parent - even those with enough sense to know that a babysitters a good idea for small children aren't perfect, just sensible enough to know why.

THEY WERE AT HOME. 
Within their holiday home gardens and only about 50 metres away within good eyesight range of the group.  They would have heard Madeleine had she yelled them from the patio balcony and she would also have been able to hear them .... Gerry especially.

When our children were little, we would chat over the back fence to golfer friends who were using the practice area immediately behind us.

Our garden was 50 metres long.   Neither of our children had lungs like Madeleine seems to have , yet we could hear them if they called.  No problem.   And the back door was open with the side gate only on the latch.


Somebody has spread awful distortions about the whole situation and this basically went on until I instructed posters how they could measure distances on Google Earth and confirm the correct distances.

There has been a concerted effort to discredit The Mccanns.  Lies everywhere.   They did an impressive job and coloured the situation black for The Mccanns
I wonder why there was such a concerted effort?  And who did it.


Well actually I KNOW and I know who was behind it all and why.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 04:32:01 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 01, 2022, 03:04:17 PM
I was referring to the evil which is rampant on social media which is damaging to both those who post it and those who are exposed to the content.

The specific to which I responded was reference made by you to the sceptic lexicon which has not altered since Madeleine's abduction more than fifteen years ago.

What is your purpose if for no other reason than berating all her family.

Are you trying to be specific? Sorry, you lost me again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 01, 2022, 04:39:41 PM
Quote from: sadie on October 01, 2022, 04:23:47 PM
THEY WERE AT HOME. 
Within their holiday home gardens and only 50 about metres away within good eyesight range of the group.  They would have heard Madeleine had she yelled them from the patio balcony and she would also have been able to hear them .... Gerry especially.

When our children were little, we would chat over the back fence to golfer friends who were using the practice area immediately behind us.

Our garden was 50 metres long.   Neither of our children had lungs like Madeleine seems to have , yet we could hear them if they called.  No problem.   And the back door was open with the side gate only on the latch.


Somebody has spread awful distortions about the whole situation and this basically went on until I instructed posters how they could measure distances on Google Earth and confirm the correct distances.

There has been a concerted effort to discredit The Mccanns.  Lies everywhere.   They did an impressive job and coloured the situation black for The Mccanns
I wonder why there was such a concerted effort?  And who did it.


Well actually I KNOW and I know who was behind it all and why.

Your opinions are not universally shared.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 04:54:44 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 03:23:11 PM
So what is this real evidence then?
Evidence that is enough to convince the BKA.. That's Germanys FBI.. that CB is 100% guilty
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 05:49:54 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 04:54:44 PM
Evidence that is enough to convince the BKA.. That's Germanys FBI.. that CB is 100% guilty

Convinced ....is not evidence....is it.

GA is convinced the mccs are responsible for what happened to Maddie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 06:46:06 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 05:49:54 PM
Convinced ....is not evidence....is it.

GA is convinced the mccs are responsible for what happened to Maddie.
The Germans are convinced based on the evidence... Amaral has no evidence. It isn't just Wolters. It's the BKA.
CB is the only arguido in Portugal
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 07:27:10 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 06:46:06 PM
The Germans are convinced based on the evidence... Amaral has no evidence. It isn't just Wolters. It's the BKA.
CB is the only arguido in Portugal

CB is the only arguido in Portugal

Wasnt the mccs arguido .....doesn't mean it will come to anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 07:32:59 PM
Quote from: kizzy on October 01, 2022, 07:27:10 PM

CB is the only arguido in Portugal

Wasnt the mccs arguido .....doesn't mean it will come to anything.

All depends on the evidence... None against the mccanns
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 01, 2022, 08:49:25 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 01, 2022, 06:46:06 PM
The Germans are convinced based on the evidence... Amaral has no evidence. It isn't just Wolters. It's the BKA.
CB is the only arguido in Portugal

How is the case against Brueckner going, by the way?
Wolters wrapping things up soon is he?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 01, 2022, 09:15:22 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on October 01, 2022, 08:49:25 PM
How is the case against Brueckner going, by the way?
Wolters wrapping things up soon is he?
I do hope they wrap up this whole silly misunderstanding soon. It must be weighing heavily on the poor chaps mind, I imagine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 07, 2022, 02:35:11 PM
Not Keith
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-63173146
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 07, 2022, 02:37:35 PM
Quote from: barrier on September 30, 2022, 03:36:50 PM
Maybe just maybe they have found Keith Bennetts remains, to late for his ma though.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11266613/Skull-hunt-Ian-Brady-Myra-Hindleys-victim-Keith-Bennett.html


EXCLUSIVE: Skull found in hunt for Ian Brady and Myra Hindley's last victim: Police dig up Saddleworth Moor in search for 12-year-old Keith Bennett - 58 years after he was snatched by moors murderers
There was no skull.  The Daily Mail strikes again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 07, 2022, 04:07:37 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 07, 2022, 02:37:35 PM
There was no skull.  The Daily Mail strikes again.

Where's Grime when you need him...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 07, 2022, 04:15:46 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 07, 2022, 04:07:37 PM
Where's Grime when you need him...
Training puppies to roll over and beg.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 07, 2022, 06:36:25 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 07, 2022, 04:15:46 PM
Training puppies to roll over and beg.

Martin Grime is done now.  He afforded himself some notoriety for a short while in the process of achieving nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 07, 2022, 07:36:16 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 07, 2022, 06:36:25 PM
Martin Grime is done now.  He afforded himself some notoriety for a short while in the process of achieving nothing.
....and yet here you are, 15 years on, still discussing him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 07, 2022, 07:42:08 PM
Quote from: The General on October 07, 2022, 07:36:16 PM
....and yet here you are, 15 years on, still discussing him.

i think grime has a lot to answer for..i really should email and give him my views on his behaviour.....all based on facts....real facts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 07, 2022, 08:04:26 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 07, 2022, 07:42:08 PM
i think grime has a lot to answer for..i really should email and give him my views on his behaviour.....all based on facts....real facts

I expect he would be devastated...or maybe not.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 07, 2022, 08:15:43 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 07, 2022, 07:42:08 PM
i think grime has a lot to answer for..i really should email and give him my views on his behaviour.....all based on facts....real facts

Oh please, please post the email before you send it….at least then you’ll know that someone has read it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 07, 2022, 09:00:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 07, 2022, 08:04:26 PM
I expect he would be devastated...or maybe not.  @)(++(*

Both you and faith seem to have poor memories

The General always used to challenge me to email grime.. Its a standing joke
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 07, 2022, 09:03:38 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 07, 2022, 09:00:58 PM
Both you and faith seem to have poor memories

The General always used to challenge me to email grime.. Its a standing joke

And?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 07, 2022, 10:25:06 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 07, 2022, 09:00:58 PM
Both you and faith seem to have poor memories

The General always used to challenge me to email grime.. Its a standing joke
LinkedIn the dude instead. He's registered a new company. He closed the last one coz things were going ruff.
He's still out looking for leads.
He's being taken to a tribunal coz he treats his staff like dogs.
They were going to have a Christmas Ball, but one of his employees ran off with it and ate it.
I'm ere all week.
He was going to teach them how to dance, but it turned out they all had two left feet.
I'm told he pays them by the pound.
One of his new recruits graduated recently. He got his masters. (They're drying up now)
Davie Gray thinks they're magic. Particularly Grime's Labracadabrador.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 07, 2022, 11:23:45 PM
Quote from: The General on October 07, 2022, 10:25:06 PM
LinkedIn the dude instead. He's registered a new company. He closed the last one coz things were going ruff.
He's still out looking for leads.
He's being taken to a tribunal coz he treats his staff like dogs.
They were going to have a Christmas Ball, but one of his employees ran off with it and ate it.
I'm ere all week.
He was going to teach them how to dance, but it turned out they all had two left feet.
I'm told he pays them by the pound.
One of his new recruits graduated recently. He got his masters. (They're drying up now)
Davie Gray thinks they're magic. Particularly Grime's Labracadabrador.

Take a paws Big G….no need to hound the man, he takes enough stick as it is….I’ll get my coat.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 08, 2022, 11:25:21 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 07, 2022, 11:23:45 PM
Take a paws Big G….no need to hound the man, he takes enough stick as it is….I’ll get my coat.
Thing is, there's no need to research the guy on the internet. If Davie wants to bring his professional bonafides in to question, you can do it to his face. He's there front and centre - send him a cheeky DM.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 11:31:18 AM
Quote from: The General on October 08, 2022, 11:25:21 AM
Thing is, there's no need to research the guy on the internet. If Davie wants to bring his professional bonafides in to question, you can do it to his face. He's there front and centre - send him a cheeky DM.
What would be the point.. He would simply ignore it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 01:27:06 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 11:31:18 AM
What would be the point.. He would simply ignore it.

And he’d be absolutely right to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 08, 2022, 02:06:51 PM
Grime had at one time accepted an invitation to post on this forum - allegedly. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 02:25:56 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 08, 2022, 02:06:51 PM
Grime had at one time accepted an invitation to post on this forum - allegedly.

Allegedly being the operative word.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 08, 2022, 02:33:23 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 02:25:56 PM
Allegedly being the operative word.
I'm sure John will confirm if this was so or not.  Indeed there is a thread somewhere of questions for Grime iirc.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 04:01:34 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 01:27:06 PM
And he’d be absolutely right to.

The problem for Grime would be that every point I've made about him is backed by solid evidence... Unlike his dog alerts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 04:34:31 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 04:01:34 PM
The problem for Grime would be that every point I've made about him is backed by solid evidence... Unlike his dog alerts

Grime has said everything he needed to say in his report.

I’m afraid his expert status trumps some random dog-botherer on the internet every time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 04:37:33 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 04:34:31 PM
Grime has said everything he needed to say in his report.

I’m afraid his expert status trumps some random dog-botherer on the internet every time.

I don't see that it does... His expert status does not seem to have helped his career much. I'm sure he thought Jersey was the start... Not the end
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 05:05:03 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 04:37:33 PM
I don't see that it does... His expert status does not seem to have helped his career much. I'm sure he thought Jersey was the start... Not the end

The fact that he’s looked on as an expert proves otherwise.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 05:12:01 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 05:05:03 PM
The fact that he’s looked on as an expert proves otherwise.

doesnt prove anything...maybe evidence...but not proof...post shipman
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 08, 2022, 05:44:07 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 04:34:31 PM
Grime has said everything he needed to say in his report.

I’m afraid his expert status trumps some random dog-botherer on the internet every time.
Funny how little value some people put on expertise vs random anonymous armchair detectives when it suits them though isn’t it?  Such as the expertise of the German investigators and prosecutor in collecting and assessing evidence.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 05:48:07 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 05:12:01 PM
doesnt prove anything...maybe evidence...but not proof...post shipman

So what do you believe…that Grime said that alerts needed to be corroborated by forensic evidence so was competent or that Eddie alerted to cadaver odour so is incompetent?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 05:52:47 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 08, 2022, 05:44:07 PM
Funny how little value some people put on expertise vs random anonymous armchair detectives when it suits them though isn’t it?  Such as the expertise of the German investigators and prosecutor in collecting and assessing evidence.

And how’s that collecting and assessing of evidence going? What’s it been now…5 years?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 08, 2022, 06:09:28 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 05:52:47 PM
And how’s that collecting and assessing of evidence going? What’s it been now…5 years?
It’s going great guns, don’t you worry.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 06:19:22 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 08, 2022, 06:09:28 PM
It’s going great guns, don’t you worry.

Good to hear….won’t be long now…tick tock.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 08, 2022, 06:47:42 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 06:19:22 PM
Good to hear….won’t be long now…tick tock.
Indeed, oh ye of little faithlilly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 07:54:13 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 05:48:07 PM
So what do you believe…that Grime said that alerts needed to be corroborated by forensic evidence so was competent or that Eddie alerted to cadaver odour so is incompetent?
I object to him saying Eddie had never given a false positive... I object to him saying he didn't know the Renault was the mccanns car.. I object to him calling back Eddie when he had twice shown no interest.. Same in the apartment... I object to him promoting the alerts as reliable when the idea of using the dogs in this way was relatively new and untried... And more... All objections evidenced based..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on October 08, 2022, 08:16:21 PM
I have a bit of a mental blank here. The EVRD dog which specifically scents cadaver odour, also scented blood. Can someone remind me of the dog made a distinct bark or anything else to separate cadaver from blood. Also if I am right, specific to Madeleines blood was not proved to be hers. And finally how can you theories and accident and be so sure of it over pre meditated murder? Insane.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 08, 2022, 08:27:17 PM
Quote from: Rossb on October 08, 2022, 08:16:21 PM
I have a bit of a mental blank here. The EVRD dog which specifically scents cadaver odour, also scented blood. Can someone remind me of the dog made a distinct bark or anything else to separate cadaver from blood. Also if I am right, specific to Madeleines blood was not proved to be hers. And finally how can you theories and accident and be so sure of it over pre meditated murder? Insane.
I’ve been making that last point for years.  Why are most sceptics convinced Madeleine had an accident and wasn’t murdered in cold blood by her parents?  Only Spam reckons it was murder (but he doesn’t really, he’s just trolling). 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on October 08, 2022, 08:42:11 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 08, 2022, 08:27:17 PM
I’ve been making that last point for years.  Why are most sceptics convinced Madeleine had an accident and wasn’t murdered in cold blood by her parents?  Only Spam reckons it was murder (but he doesn’t really, he’s just trolling).

No one has been given a specific answer to accident. From sedation of a 3 year old who would wake up. Doubt it. Why not murder, no real blood splatter found to indicate how or what happened. They are both sociopaths and psychopaths and have the Illuminati and government secrets! Given their personalities as just mentioned surely that would indicate you could be a child murderer. A suppose it was all a plot for a new kitchen and extension.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 08, 2022, 08:46:33 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 08, 2022, 08:27:17 PM
I’ve been making that last point for years.  Why are most sceptics convinced Madeleine had an accident and wasn’t murdered in cold blood by her parents?  Only Spam reckons it was murder (but he doesn’t really, he’s just trolling).

No, I believe it was a lawful killing.
Maddie was angry that her parents kept sodding off out & leaving her on her own, so she armed herself with a knife from the kitchen, she lunged at Kate from atop the sofa, there was a violent struggle & Kate managed to subdue Maddie by pinning her down, but suffocated her in the process.
It's tragic, but I now believe Maddie died as a result of lawful self defense. That's my new theory.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 08:58:04 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 07:54:13 PM
I object to him saying Eddie had never given a false positive... I object to him saying he didn't know the Renault was the mccanns car.. I object to him calling back Eddie when he had twice shown no interest.. Same in the apartment... I object to him promoting the alerts as reliable when the idea of using the dogs in this way was relatively new and untried... And more... All objections evidenced based..

Okkkaaayyyy

Let’s start with this.

Prove, with evidence, that before 2007 Eddie had given at least one false positive ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 08:59:54 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 08:58:04 PM
Okkkaaayyyy

Let’s start with this.

Prove, with evidence, that before 2007 Eddie had given at least one false positive ?

Do you understand what a false positive is... Then I'll answer your question
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 08, 2022, 09:19:14 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 08:59:54 PM
Do you understand what a false positive is... Then I'll answer your question

Do you and Grime agree about the definition of a false positive?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 09:24:54 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 08:59:54 PM
Do you understand what a false positive is... Then I'll answer your question

Of course.

Now answer the question.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 09:26:15 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 09:24:54 PM
Of course.

Now answer the question.

Then explain and ill answer
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 09:31:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 08, 2022, 09:19:14 PM
Do you and Grime agree about the definition of a false positive?
I think we all understand what's meant by
A false positive
[/quote]

You may think so but a definition will make sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 10:33:04 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 08, 2022, 09:26:15 PM
Then explain and ill answer

This has become a recurring tactic of yours.

Now give the forum one example of Eddie giving a false positive before 2007.

It really is that simple.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 08, 2022, 10:45:57 PM
Recommended reading for all

https://www.science.org/content/article/should-dog-s-sniff-be-enough-convict-person-murder
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 08, 2022, 10:46:58 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 10:33:04 PM
This has become a recurring tactic of yours.

Now give the forum one example of Eddie giving a false positive before 2007.

It really is that simple.
How on earth would one know if any alert by Eddie in the field to residual odour was false or not?  How could you possibly put that to the test?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 11:00:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 08, 2022, 10:46:58 PM
How on earth would one know if any alert by Eddie in the field to residual odour was false or not?  How could you possibly put that to the test?

Shouldn’t that the question to be asked of Martin Grime before proclaiming him a liar?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 08, 2022, 11:19:26 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 11:00:58 PM
Shouldn’t that the question to be asked of Martin Grime before proclaiming him a liar?
The question is unanswerable and I haven’t called him a liar.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 11:28:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 08, 2022, 11:19:26 PM
The question is unanswerable and I haven’t called him a liar.

Apologies I didn’t mean you.

The point is unless we have much more information about the cases Eddie was involved in we have no real basis to question Grime’s claim.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 12:56:11 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 11:28:58 PM
Apologies I didn’t mean you.

The point is unless we have much more information about the cases Eddie was involved in we have no real basis to question Grime’s claim.


You are really supporting my criticism of Grime. Do you know what Grime means by a false positive...it seems you don't
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 08:00:40 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 11:28:58 PM
Apologies I didn’t mean you.

The point is unless we have much more information about the cases Eddie was involved in we have no real basis to question Grime’s claim.
If you read Grimes claim in the files... The wh sentence.. Its clear Grime is referring to specifically an alert to roadkill or food as a false positive. This is verifiable. As VS points out.... This claim does not mean Eddie has never given a false alert... That would be impossible to verify. Amaral and sceptics have taken this statement to mean Eddie was a super dog who was never wrong. Why has Grime never corrected this falsehood.. Eddie does not  have a 100% record
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 08:14:11 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 08:00:40 AM
If you read Grimes claim in the files... The wh sentence.. Its clear Grime is referring to specifically an alert to roadkill or food as a false positive. This is verifiable. As VS points out.... This claim does not mean Eddie has never given a false alert... That would be impossible to verify. Amaral and sceptics have taken this statement to mean Eddie was a super dog who was never wrong. Why has Grime never corrected this falsehood.. Eddie does not  have a 100% record

He also discusses handler cuing and believes his methods rule that out. Do you have evidence that Eddie didn't have a 100% record?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 09, 2022, 08:23:34 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 08:14:11 AM
He also discusses handler cuing and believes his methods rule that out. Do you have evidence that Eddie didn't have a 100% record?
I wasn’t aware that Grime had come up with a solution that rules out handler bias - do you have a cite to this discussion, and also to the independent acceditation which confirms his success in this endeavour?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 08:25:20 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 08, 2022, 11:28:58 PM
Apologies I didn’t mean you.

The point is unless we have much more information about the cases Eddie was involved in we have no real basis to question Grime’s claim.

Grime mentioned they never alerted to rotting meat based things over 200 or 200 times. I think thats where he means no false positive.
The evrd was deployed i think 17 or 21 times but with different handler(s) out of those investigations the evrd found five bodies 2 of which in the same case. But also with help of clues and circumstantial evidence. That is good at least we know they work. However its physically impossible to know every bark is were a corpse has been because if no body is found or cctv it cant be corroborated as well as a confession.
They certainly have not been involved in 200 cases i suspect. That is a lot.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 08:40:34 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 09, 2022, 08:23:34 AM
I wasn’t aware that Grime had come up with a solution that rules out handler bias - do you have a cite to this discussion, and also to the independent acceditation which confirms his success in this endeavour?

My experience as a trainer is that false alerts are normally caused by handler
cueing. All indications by the dog are preceded by a change in bahaviour.
This increased handler confidence in the response. This procedure also stops
handlers 'cueing' and indication. The dogs are allowed to 'free search' and
investigate areas of interest. The handler does not influence their behaviour
other than to direct the search.
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 08:48:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 08:14:11 AM
He also discusses handler cuing and believes his methods rule that out. Do you have evidence that Eddie didn't have a 100% record?

Why should I need to.. Grime has never claimed it. If a claim is made then its up to the claimant to prove it.

Grime can and does claim what he likes.... Its in his business interests to... But he has no real evidence to support his claims. Grime now says that Eddie was not a reliable cadaver dog because he wasn't trained solely on human remains.
Its a fact that Grime was starting his business in 2007 and had a financial interest in the worth of the dog alerts. Its also a fact that residual scent detectionas inteiigence was in its infancy in 2007... With no scientific evidence to support it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 08:49:42 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 08:40:34 AM
My experience as a trainer is that false alerts are normally caused by handler
cueing. All indications by the dog are preceded by a change in bahaviour.
This increased handler confidence in the response. This procedure also stops
handlers 'cueing' and indication. The dogs are allowed to 'free search' and
investigate areas of interest. The handler does not influence their behaviour
other than to direct the search.
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

The other thing for yhings like this is the onset of olfactory. Their are different studies which indicate dofferent time onsets.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 08:52:13 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 08:40:34 AM
My experience as a trainer is that false alerts are normally caused by handler
cueing. All indications by the dog are preceded by a change in bahaviour.
This increased handler confidence in the response. This procedure also stops
handlers 'cueing' and indication. The dogs are allowed to 'free search' and
investigate areas of interest. The handler does not influence their behaviour
other than to direct the search.
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

Grime has a conflict of interest... The whole point about bias is the handler is not aware of it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 08:54:25 AM
I can't see how anyone cannot realise that SY and the Germans are happy to ignore all Grimes claims...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 08:56:49 AM
If what Grime claims re his dogs are true then the Mc's are guilty... Grime has far too much faith in his dogs imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 09, 2022, 09:15:50 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 08:40:34 AM
My experience as a trainer is that false alerts are normally caused by handler
cueing. All indications by the dog are preceded by a change in bahaviour.
This increased handler confidence in the response. This procedure also stops
handlers 'cueing' and indication. The dogs are allowed to 'free search' and
investigate areas of interest. The handler does not influence their behaviour
other than to direct the search.
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
In other words the handler influences their behaviour.  This is very vague and unscientific.  It certainly does not rule out handler bias.  Unless Grime can produce peer reviewed, independent corroborative studies to back up his claims I remain deeply sceptical, as I sure you would if you weren't already subject to your own biases in this case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 09:43:05 AM
Quote from: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 08:25:20 AM
Grime mentioned they never alerted to rotting meat based things over 200 or 200 times. I think thats where he means no false positive.
The evrd was deployed i think 17 or 21 times but with different handler(s) out of those investigations the evrd found five bodies 2 of which in the same case. But also with help of clues and circumstantial evidence. That is good at least we know they work. However its physically impossible to know every bark is were a corpse has been because if no body is found or cctv it cant be corroborated as well as a confession.
They certainly have not been involved in 200 cases i suspect. That is a lot.

I think you need cites to support some of your declarations. I've bolded the ones which need cites.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 09, 2022, 10:11:19 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 08:54:25 AM
I can't see how anyone cannot realise that SY and the Germans are happy to ignore all Grimes claims...

Not getting them anywhere though is it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 10:38:35 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 09, 2022, 09:15:50 AM
In other words the handler influences their behaviour.  This is very vague and unscientific.  It certainly does not rule out handler bias.  Unless Grime can produce peer reviewed, independent corroborative studies to back up his claims I remain deeply sceptical, as I sure you would if you weren't already subject to your own biases in this case.

If a handler can trigger an alert then the Pavlovian training has either been carried out wrongly or it doesn't work. Eddie was conditioned from an early age to bark only in one situation; when he detected a certain scent. That was what triggered his bark, nothing else, and it was not a concious decision by the dog.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 09, 2022, 10:42:40 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 10:38:35 AM
If a handler can trigger an alert then the Pavlovian training has either been carried out wrongly or it doesn't work. Eddie was conditioned from an early age to bark only in one situation; when he detected a certain scent. That was what triggered his bark, nothing else, and it was not a concious decision by the dog.

Not true.  Eddie was conditioned at an early age as a Victim Recovery Dog to alert to Blood.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 10:48:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 10:38:35 AM
If a handler can trigger an alert then the Pavlovian training has either been carried out wrongly or it doesn't work. Eddie was conditioned from an early age to bark only in one situation; when he detected a certain scent. That was what triggered his bark, nothing else, and it was not a concious decision by the dog.
All opinion with no real evidence to back it up...If the alerts are relaible why are sy and BKA ignoring them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 11:39:31 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 10:48:36 AM
All opinion with no real evidence to back it up...If the alerts are relaible why are sy and BKA ignoring them.

I think understanding what a Pavlovian response is and how it works can help with understanding how these dogs react and why. I don't understand why anyone would want to add SY and the BKA into a discussion about how cadaver dogs are trained?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 11:45:15 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 11:39:31 AM
I think understanding what a Pavlovian response is and how it works can help with understanding how these dogs react and why. I don't understand why anyone would want to add SY and the BKA into a discussion about how cadaver dogs are trained?

pavlovian response is very basic biology......understanding how evidence support ideas is much more important.

The fact that SY and the BKA are happy to ignore the alerts casts collossal doubts on them.

As regards how cadaver dogs are trained....In the UK different to how every other detection dog is trained.

for example...Cash detection doigs are trained solely on cagh...they will only react to cash. Grimes dogs react to a range oif things and are not trained solely on human remains....which according to grime makes them unreliable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 12:44:28 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 11:45:15 AM
pavlovian response is very basic biology......understanding how evidence support ideas is much more important.

The fact that SY and the BKA are happy to ignore the alerts casts collossal doubts on them.

As regards how cadaver dogs are trained....In the UK different to how every other detection dog is trained.

for example...Cash detection doigs are trained solely on cagh...they will only react to cash. Grimes dogs react to a range oif things and are not trained solely on human remains....which according to grime makes them unreliable

The Pavlovian response is instinctive and therefore involuntary, reinforced by rewards. If it's set up correctly then the dog's response is involuntary and can't be manipulated. The way it works is evidence and anyone criticising Eddie needs to understand it.

Imo SY and the BKA have nothing to do with this process, so that's a different argument.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 09, 2022, 12:51:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 10:38:35 AM
If a handler can trigger an alert then the Pavlovian training has either been carried out wrongly or it doesn't work. Eddie was conditioned from an early age to bark only in one situation; when he detected a certain scent. That was what triggered his bark, nothing else, and it was not a concious decision by the dog.
So is it your opinion that Grime's training was 100% effective and the dog was 100% accurate and incapable of alerting falsely owing to Grime's faultless training?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 09, 2022, 01:26:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 12:44:28 PM
The Pavlovian response is instinctive and therefore involuntary, reinforced by rewards. If it's set up correctly then the dog's response is involuntary and can't be manipulated. The way it works is evidence and anyone criticising Eddie needs to understand it.

Imo SY and the BKA have nothing to do with this process, so that's a different argument.
Was the Pavlovian response unique to Grime's training of his dogs then?  Because in the article I cited yesterday in a study on drug and explosive dogs "No target odors were present, and yet dogs positively indicated 85% of the time, handlers said, suggesting the dogs served as loyal companions first and objective scent detectors second". 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 01:33:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 12:44:28 PM
The Pavlovian response is instinctive and therefore involuntary, reinforced by rewards. If it's set up correctly then the dog's response is involuntary and can't be manipulated. The way it works is evidence and anyone criticising Eddie needs to understand it.

Imo SY and the BKA have nothing to do with this process, so that's a different argument.
e
Perhaps its you that doent understand it. the original experiment...food, bell salivation. then the dog only needed the bell   to salivat...but would salivate for other reasons. It doesnt mean the dog will only salivate if he hears the bell

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 04:36:19 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 01:33:03 PM
e
Perhaps its you that doent understand it. the original experiment...food, bell salivation. then the dog only needed the bell   to salivat...but would salivate for other reasons. It doesnt mean the dog will only salivate if he hears the bell

In Eddies case he barked when he found cadaver scent but at no other time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 09, 2022, 04:50:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 04:36:19 PM
In Eddies case he barked when he found cadaver scent but at no other time.
How do you know?. Are you claiming Eddie did never bark at blood?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 09, 2022, 04:52:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 04:36:19 PM
In Eddies case he barked when he found cadaver scent but at no other time.

Cadaver Scent from Whom?  Any ideas?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 09, 2022, 04:54:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 04:36:19 PM
In Eddies case he barked when he found cadaver scent but at no other time.

Absolutely not true.

However even were it so.  At whose cadaver scent would he have been barking in 5A?  Considering that any one of the families who occupied the apartment after the McCann stay could have been harbouring a mass murderer.  Similarly any who stayed there prior to the McCanns.  You do remember that the flat was let out to other people between the McCann departure and Eddie's arrival.

A dog barking means nothing unless there is a clue to what it is barking about and although some believe "dogs don't lie" they certainly do not speak.  Which is why back up forensic evidence is required.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 09, 2022, 04:59:52 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 09, 2022, 04:52:58 PM
Cadaver Scent from Whom?  Any ideas?

I'm finding this cadaver scent obsession quite bizarre particularly when the files are quite explicit about dismissing it.

Mind you, the files are a bit pick and mix with folk ignoring the bits they don't like.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 05:19:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 04:36:19 PM
In Eddies case he barked when he found cadaver scent but at no other time.

According to Grime...Grime does not know if Eddie has alerted to cadaver scent..grime says the bark suggests it.

You seem to be suggesting eddie is a totally reliable robot......which he cant be because he wasnt even trained on cadaver scent but dead piglet.

My view is Eddie barked to please his handler when he was called back several times....Grime was also anxious to build his business and may have overegged his claimns.you can disagree but its of no importance...SY and BKA are happy to ignore them. I can think of no other reason they would ignore them apart from the fact they are not reliable
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 05:36:46 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 09, 2022, 01:26:39 PM
Was the Pavlovian response unique to Grime's training of his dogs then?  Because in the article I cited yesterday in a study on drug and explosive dogs "No target odors were present, and yet dogs positively indicated 85% of the time, handlers said, suggesting the dogs served as loyal companions first and objective scent detectors second".

Pavlovian classical conditioning could not be related to dogs scenting a corpse. The theory was tried to be in relation to humans to a work harder reward basis. Cadaver would and should not be classified as a reward based system.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 05:44:09 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 05:19:17 PM
According to Grime...Grime does not know if Eddie has alerted to cadaver scent..grime says the bark suggests it.

You seem to be suggesting eddie is a totally reliable robot......which he cant be because he wasnt even trained on cadaver scent but dead piglet.

My view is Eddie barked to please his handler when he was called back several times....Grime was also anxious to build his business and may have overegged his claimns.you can disagree but its of no importance...SY and BKA are happy to ignore them. I can think of no other reason they would ignore them apart from the fact they are not reliable

Who even started the 'dogs dont lie' quote lol
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 05:57:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 09:43:05 AM
I think you need cites to support some of your declarations. I've bolded the ones which need cites.


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.southyorks.police.uk/media/5551/20090062-response.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjli7_bzdP6AhURiVwKHUbiAkIQFnoECBUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0J7kodUap5PJptcg3l_qL4
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 06:03:15 PM
Quote from: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 05:36:46 PM
Pavlovian classical conditioning could not be related to dogs scenting a corpse. The theory was tried to be in relation to humans to a work harder reward basis. Cadaver would and should not be classified as a reward based system.

you are absolutely right...another mistake from the expert Grime
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 06:38:59 PM
Quote from: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 08:25:20 AM
Grime mentioned they never alerted to rotting meat based things over 200 or 200 times. I think thats where he means no false positive.
The evrd was deployed i think 17 or 21 times but with different handler(s) out of those investigations the evrd found five bodies 2 of which in the same case. But also with help of clues and circumstantial evidence. That is good at least we know they work. However its physically impossible to know every bark is were a corpse has been because if no body is found or cctv it cant be corroborated as well as a confession.
They certainly have not been involved in 200 cases i suspect. That is a lot.

Thanks very much for providing your cite Rossb. Just a little extra examination;

Eddie was only handled by Grime; Ellis handled Frankie.
The two teams were deployed togather on 20 occasions. Twice for SYP and 18 for other clients.
Grime was deployed alone with Eddie on 17 occasions, none of them for SYP

So during 2003-2007 Eddie was deployed 37 times, mostly for other Forces. How many actual searches were involved we aren't told, but we know that while deployed in PdL Grime searched with Eddie multiple times in multiple places.

I suspect that Eddie worked before 2003, so I don't know why anything before then wasn't included.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 06:42:43 PM
Quote from: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 05:36:46 PM
Pavlovian classical conditioning could not be related to dogs scenting a corpse. The theory was tried to be in relation to humans to a work harder reward basis. Cadaver would and should not be classified as a reward based system.

Eddie's reward, like most police dogs, was to play with a tennis ball when he had alerted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 09, 2022, 06:53:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 06:38:59 PM
Thanks very much for providing your cite Rossb. Just a little extra examination;

Eddie was only handled by Grime; Ellis handled Frankie.
The two teams were deployed togather on 20 occasions. Twice for SYP and 18 for other clients.
Grime was deployed alone with Eddie on 17 occasions, none of them for SYP

So during 2003-2007 Eddie was deployed 37 times, mostly for other Forces. How many actual searches were involved we aren't told, but we know that while deployed in PdL Grime searched with Eddie multiple times in multiple places.

I suspect that Eddie worked before 2003, so I don't know why anything before then wasn't included.
In 37 searches how many bodies did he find and how many times did he bark at “cadaver odour” where no remains were present?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 09, 2022, 07:08:28 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 06:42:43 PM
Eddie's reward, like most police dogs, was to play with a tennis ball when he had alerted.

Fancy that.  Reward a dog for alerting.  Did anyone tell the dog not to cheat?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 08:19:57 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 09, 2022, 07:08:28 PM
Fancy that.  Reward a dog for alerting.  Did anyone tell the dog not to cheat?

Didn't you know police dog handlers use rewards? Well I never...

Apartment H5

We searched this apartment and the dog hasn't shown any interest in this particular apartment, apart from around the table, where there was a tennis ball which is how we reward the dog for finding things, as soon as we removed the tennis ball the interest was gone. And so it was a negative search.
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 09, 2022, 08:28:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 08:19:57 PM
Didn't you know police dog handlers use rewards? Well I never...

Apartment H5

We searched this apartment and the dog hasn't shown any interest in this particular apartment, apart from around the table, where there was a tennis ball which is how we reward the dog for finding things, as soon as we removed the tennis ball the interest was gone. And so it was a negative search.
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

Nuts.  The Handler can't possibly know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 09, 2022, 08:43:57 PM
It seems G-Unit has put me on ignore  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 09, 2022, 08:51:22 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 09, 2022, 08:43:57 PM
It seems G-Unit has put me on ignore  @)(++(*

Are you sure?  Very odd thing to do for a Moderator.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 09, 2022, 08:57:54 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 09, 2022, 08:51:22 PM
Are you sure?  Very odd thing to do for a Moderator.
So is commenting on speculation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 09:09:54 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 09, 2022, 08:28:54 PM
Nuts.  The Handler can't possibly know.

Know what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 09:12:14 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 09, 2022, 08:51:22 PM
Are you sure?  Very odd thing to do for a Moderator.

Sure? No. Wrong? Yes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 09, 2022, 09:15:20 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 09:12:14 PM
Sure? No. Wrong? Yes.
Yeeesh....awkward.
The cringe is strong in this mod.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 09, 2022, 09:21:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 09:09:54 PM
Know what?
Whatever Davie Gray said, as usual.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 09, 2022, 09:31:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 08:19:57 PM
Didn't you know police dog handlers use rewards? Well I never...

Apartment H5

We searched this apartment and the dog hasn't shown any interest in this particular apartment, apart from around the table, where there was a tennis ball which is how we reward the dog for finding things, as soon as we removed the tennis ball the interest was gone. And so it was a negative search.
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
In terms of Pavlovian experimentation, as most people know, but most supporters clearly don't, the law of temporal contiguity is key. The correlation is absent if the time lapse is too great. Classical conditioning. Psychology A Level term 1.
Read on, or shut up everyone, because literally nobody here has the first clue what they're talking about. Except me, of course.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 09, 2022, 09:50:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 08:19:57 PM
Didn't you know police dog handlers use rewards? Well I never...

Apartment H5

We searched this apartment and the dog hasn't shown any interest in this particular apartment, apart from around the table, where there was a tennis ball which is how we reward the dog for finding things, as soon as we removed the tennis ball the interest was gone. And so it was a negative search.
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
He's demonstrating a rigour that most supporters can only aspire to.
DM him guys, he's on Linkedin and very receptive. But that would require cajones. Pollotas.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 09, 2022, 10:05:25 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 09, 2022, 08:28:54 PM
Nuts.  The Handler can't possibly know.
Quite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 09, 2022, 10:06:07 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 09, 2022, 08:51:22 PM
Are you sure?  Very odd thing to do for a Moderator.
She’s just being rude then.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 10:06:44 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 06:38:59 PM
Thanks very much for providing your cite Rossb. Just a little extra examination;

Eddie was only handled by Grime; Ellis handled Frankie.
The two teams were deployed togather on 20 occasions. Twice for SYP and 18 for other clients.
Grime was deployed alone with Eddie on 17 occasions, none of them for SYP

So during 2003-2007 Eddie was deployed 37 times, mostly for other Forces. How many actual searches were involved we aren't told, but we know that while deployed in PdL Grime searched with Eddie multiple times in multiple places.

I suspect that Eddie worked before 2003, so I don't know why anything before then wasn't included.

Yeah i just linked it quickly so looks as if i got it a bit wrong with numbers and handlers from a FOI. But surely that mqkes you think different with the 200 cases?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 10:08:40 PM
Quote from: The General on October 09, 2022, 09:31:22 PM
In terms of Pavlovian experimentation, as most people know, but most supporters clearly don't, the law of temporal contiguity is key. The correlation is absent if the time lapse is too great. Classical conditioning. Psychology A Level term 1.
Read on, or shut up everyone, because literally nobody here has the first clue what they're talking about. Except me, of course.

Russell i was starting to like you, but pavlov conditioning does not equate to cadaver dogs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 09, 2022, 10:10:41 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 09, 2022, 10:06:07 PM
She’s just being rude then.
No, it's not true. So pack in the bitchin', kids, move on and dream up someting real to complain about.
(apart from 'mods' abusing their pseudo-position)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 10:19:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 09, 2022, 06:42:43 PM
Eddie's reward, like most police dogs, was to play with a tennis ball when he had alerted.

Really? So if eddie barked he would bark then play with a tennis ball on actual investigations?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 09, 2022, 10:21:54 PM
Quote from: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 10:08:40 PM
Russell i was starting to like you, but pavlov conditioning does not equate to cadaver dogs
Ahh, kid, don't just type, think.
So we're talking 'conditioning'. It equates to 'conditioning' generally, with the dog being used as a subject, as those using the negative auto-maintenance paradigm.
I would argue that the evidence for a similar effect in humans is scarce, nigh on nowt. In addition, the mechanisms modulating the impact of Pavlovian responses on instrumental performance are largely unknown, both in human and non-human animals.
What's the relevance? Well, Pavlov, bless him, was concerned with the conditioining, per se, notwithstanding the many variables, such as threat distance, task controllability, punishment history, amount of training, and explicit punishment expectancy.
In short, it's a shite way to compare the 'training' of dogs with that of humans. Lad.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 09, 2022, 10:29:56 PM
Quote from: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 10:19:04 PM
Really? So if eddie barked he would bark then play with a tennis ball on actual investigations?
RossB. Are you familiar with the work of John P Cassella? He is the MAN, Yo! He's the dude, yo!
Dy'a feel me? He's the dude that dudes go to. Sheet, he's the hombre withe the nombre, mutha.
Read on brotha.
Y'all might be in for a treat.
You know, back before the war broked out, I was a saucier in San Antone.
I bet I could collar up some of them greens.
Yeah, noodle some crawfish out the paddy, yo.
And maybe some crab apples for dessert, now, you hear? Hell, yeah!
Hell, yeah!
That's how we all talk. We all talk like this, suh! Yes, suh.
Yeah, get some crawfish and some ribs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 09, 2022, 10:58:02 PM
in the article I cited yesterday in a study on drug and explosive dogs "No target odors were present, and yet dogs positively indicated 85% of the time, handlers said, suggesting the dogs served as loyal companions first and objective scent detectors second".
Do they not train these dogs as well as Grime trained his?  If not why not and why are Grime’s methods not setting the standard by which all sniffer dogs are trained, to be 100% infallibe and never make a false positive alert?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 11:47:16 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 09, 2022, 10:58:02 PM
in the article I cited yesterday in a study on drug and explosive dogs "No target odors were present, and yet dogs positively indicated 85% of the time, handlers said, suggesting the dogs served as loyal companions first and objective scent detectors second".
Do they not train these dogs as well as Grime trained his?  If not why not and why are Grime’s methods not setting the standard by which all sniffer dogs are trained, to be 100% infallibe and never make a false positive alert?

An excellent article. Grime would not be aware if he was unconsciously cueing the dog. Eddie alerted a second time to the coconut shell... Just to be sure... After Grime had been assured it was a human skull.. Major fail by Grime.

If Eddie was reliable... Grime could have contradicted..... the anthropologist and gain some real credibility... But he showed Eddie had failed.. And he failed too
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 10, 2022, 12:24:23 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 11:47:16 PM
An excellent article. Grime would not be aware if he was unconsciously cueing the dog. Eddie alerted a second time to the coconut shell... Just to be sure... After Grime had been assured it was a human skull.. Major fail by Grime.

If Eddie was reliable... Grime could have contradicted..... the anthropologist and gain some real credibility... But he showed Eddie had failed.. And he failed too

Have you emailed him yet…you know with all your fact- based evidence?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 07:13:39 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 10, 2022, 12:24:23 AM
Have you emailed him yet…you know with all your fact- based evidence?

I know exactly what I'm going to do next
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 10, 2022, 07:14:04 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 09, 2022, 11:47:16 PM
An excellent article. Grime would not be aware if he was unconsciously cueing the dog. Eddie alerted a second time to the coconut shell... Just to be sure... After Grime had been assured it was a human skull.. Major fail by Grime.

If Eddie was reliable... Grime could have contradicted..... the anthropologist and gain some real credibility... But he showed Eddie had failed.. And he failed too
Sadly no Dog Believers want to address any of the points I have made in the last day or two, nor seem to have made the effort to read the articld I linked to.  Oh well, they say ignorance  is bliss…
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 07:25:28 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 10, 2022, 07:14:04 AM
Sadly no Dog Believers want to address any of the points I have made in the last day or two, nor seem to have made the effort to read the articld I linked to.  Oh well, they say ignorance  is bliss…

The article is excellent
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 08:28:04 AM
Quote from: Rossb on October 09, 2022, 10:06:44 PM
Yeah i just linked it quickly so looks as if i got it a bit wrong with numbers and handlers from a FOI. But surely that mqkes you think different with the 200 cases?

That's why I ask for cites; people often get it wrong when referring to their sources.

The FOI deals with deployments between 2003-2007. Grime refers to 200 cases over 6 years operational deployment. So immediately there's a mismatch between the periods being discussed. Is every deployment associated only with one case? We don't know. Was Grime's work with Mark Harrison counted as a deployment? Again, we don't know.

I can't conclude anything for sure by reading this FOI.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 08:39:56 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 09, 2022, 10:58:02 PM
in the article I cited yesterday in a study on drug and explosive dogs "No target odors were present, and yet dogs positively indicated 85% of the time, handlers said, suggesting the dogs served as loyal companions first and objective scent detectors second".
Do they not train these dogs as well as Grime trained his?  If not why not and why are Grime’s methods not setting the standard by which all sniffer dogs are trained, to be 100% infallibe and never make a false positive alert?

Most of these studies are from the US, where the situation is very different to the UK. Police dogs in the UK are trained to national standards and are regularly independantly tested and licenced. No such system exists in the US, which is exactly why the FBI (a national organisation) decided to set up their own dog section, properly trained, handled and accredited.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 10, 2022, 08:48:30 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 08:39:56 AM
Most of these studies are from the US, where the situation is very different to the UK. Police dogs in the UK are trained to national standards and are regularly independantly tested and licenced. No such system exists in the US, which is exactly why the FBI (a national organisation) decided to set up their own dog section, properly trained, handled and accredited.

The Dog Handlers in America are a lot more honest about their dogs' capabilities.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 10, 2022, 09:07:53 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 08:39:56 AM
Most of these studies are from the US, where the situation is very different to the UK. Police dogs in the UK are trained to national standards and are regularly independantly tested and licenced. No such system exists in the US, which is exactly why the FBI (a national organisation) decided to set up their own dog section, properly trained, handled and accredited.
And when did that happen exactly?  I thought Grime took his dogs TO the USA because they were able to train them better over there? *%87  If UK dogs are regularly independently tested perhaps you can provide a cite from Grime to show when and who and how his dogs received their independent certificates of dog-worthiness.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 09:18:48 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 08:39:56 AM
Most of these studies are from the US, where the situation is very different to the UK. Police dogs in the UK are trained to national standards and are regularly independantly tested and licenced. No such system exists in the US, which is exactly why the FBI (a national organisation) decided to set up their own dog section, properly trained, handled and accredited.

The testing for the dogs in the UK is not very thorough and is in no way scientific.
We don't know what part grime played in the US programme as there is no independent information.
Claims that he impressed the FBI are also questionable. It seems to me he did impress one man.. Stockhouse. Was that with his skill as a dog trainer or his willingness to present them as evidence... A relatively new idea in 2007

I

Its now 17 years since Harrison and Grime got together to explore whether alerts on their own can provide intelligence... Grime considers them to be evidence.
They seem to have made little or no progress


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 09:38:29 AM
My opinion of Grime is that he totally inflated the abilities of his dogs which led the investigation in the wrong direction.... And has done nothing to correct it.
A similar criticism was made of him in the BDO report re his actions on Jersey.. So my opinion is not just that of a anon poster on the net... My views are supported by experts
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 09:39:35 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 10, 2022, 09:07:53 AM
And when did that happen exactly?  I thought Grime took his dogs TO the USA because they were able to train them better over there? *%87  If UK dogs are regularly independently tested perhaps you can provide a cite from Grime to show when and who and how his dogs received their independent certificates of dog-worthiness.

If you need the details I can recommend Google.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 09:50:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 09:39:35 AM
If you need the details I can recommend Google.

you have made a claim and should provide a cite
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 10, 2022, 10:00:53 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 09:39:35 AM
If you need the details I can recommend Google.

Your claim.  Your Cite.  But we don't get many of those, if any.

And every time we come back to No Charges against The McCanns we then get Conspiracy Theories.  Thank God you aren't in charge of The CPS.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 10:36:39 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 10, 2022, 09:07:53 AM
And when did that happen exactly?  I thought Grime took his dogs TO the USA because they were able to train them better over there? *%87  If UK dogs are regularly independently tested perhaps you can provide a cite from Grime to show when and who and how his dogs received their independent certificates of dog-worthiness.

All British police dogs, irrespective of the discipline they are trained in, must be licensed to work operationally. To obtain the licence they have to pass a test at the completion of their training, and then again every year until they retire, which is usually at about the age of 8. The standards required to become operational are laid down by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) sub-committee on police dogs and are reviewed on a regular basis to ensure that training and licensing reflects the most appropriate methods and standards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_dog#United_Kingdom
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 10, 2022, 10:47:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 09:39:35 AM
If you need the details I can recommend Google.

That's a statement worth bearing in mind but it really is not necessary to use to Google to ascertain the way in which total misrepresentation of Martin Grime and his dogs' visit to Luz influenced Madeleine McCann's case abd bolstered the witch hunt her parents have endured as a result.  It is all the files and there is a dichotomy there with belief v evidence.

Think about it rationally in present day terms.
Detective Chief Inspector Cheryl Hughes said: "In response to the report made on Thursday September 29, officers met with the member of the public who later provided us with samples and copies of the photographs he had taken.

"He also took officers to the location from which he had obtained these and provided grid references.

“In the days since, independent accredited forensic archaeologists and certified forensic anthropologists, together with GMP’s crime scene investigators, have completed a methodical forensic archaeological excavation and examination of the identified area and beyond.

“An accredited forensic geologist also took a number of soil samples – analysis of which is ongoing.

“The items given to us by the member of the public have been examined by a forensic scientist and though this hasn’t yet indicated the presence of human remains – more analysis is required.

“With regards to the photograph, we have sought the assistance of a forensic botanist.

“We are now utilising the knowledge and skills of a forensic image expert to put a standard anthropological measurement to the object to assist with identification.

“At this stage, the indications are that it would be considerably smaller than a juvenile jaw and it cannot be ruled out that it is plant-based.

“The excavation and examination at the site is complete and, to reiterate, we have found no evidence that this is the burial location of Keith Bennett.”
https://www.itv.com/news/granada/2022-10-07/no-evidence-police-end-search-for-moors-murder-victim

The original researcher has confirmed his belief and that he still stands by his original premise.  Although the evidence does not support that and the case remains open.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 10, 2022, 10:47:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 09:39:35 AM
If you need the details I can recommend Google.
you make the claims, you provide the cites, I thought that was how these things worked?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 10, 2022, 10:50:04 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 10:36:39 AM
All British police dogs, irrespective of the discipline they are trained in, must be licensed to work operationally. To obtain the licence they have to pass a test at the completion of their training, and then again every year until they retire, which is usually at about the age of 8. The standards required to become operational are laid down by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) sub-committee on police dogs and are reviewed on a regular basis to ensure that training and licensing reflects the most appropriate methods and standards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_dog#United_Kingdom
Hadn't Eddie's license run out by the time he was brought in to PdL?  Are you saying that sniffer dogs used in the USA are unlicensed?  In any case I'd be interested for independent verification of Grime's claims that his dog never gave a false positive alert ever.  I doubt even google could help me find that!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 10, 2022, 11:06:43 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 10, 2022, 10:50:04 AM
Hadn't Eddie's license run out by the time he was brought in to PdL?  Are you saying that sniffer dogs used in the USA are unlicensed?  In any case I'd be interested for independent verification of Grime's claims that his dog never gave a false positive alert ever.  I doubt even google could help me find that!

After that, Grime relied on his own ability to train Cadaver Dogs.  He didn't think he needed a Licence.

Both Praia de Luz and Jersey proved absolutely nothing.  Martin Grime did so much harm for some reason that is beyond me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 11:16:49 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 10, 2022, 10:50:04 AM
Hadn't Eddie's license run out by the time he was brought in to PdL?  Are you saying that sniffer dogs used in the USA are unlicensed?  In any case I'd be interested for independent verification of Grime's claims that his dog never gave a false positive alert ever.  I doubt even google could help me find that!

I have no idea, but Grime was still a serving police officer so I assume not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 11:24:06 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 10:36:39 AM
All British police dogs, irrespective of the discipline they are trained in, must be licensed to work operationally. To obtain the licence they have to pass a test at the completion of their training, and then again every year until they retire, which is usually at about the age of 8. The standards required to become operational are laid down by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) sub-committee on police dogs and are reviewed on a regular basis to ensure that training and licensing reflects the most appropriate methods and standards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_dog#United_Kingdom


We've seen before.. The training is basic and anecdotal.
These dogs are trained nd tested as VR dogs... Not residual scent dogs. As I understand there is no testing for remnant scent
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 10, 2022, 11:25:42 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 07:13:39 AM
I know exactly what I'm going to do next

It’s a simple enough question….have you emailed Grime yet with your concerns?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 10, 2022, 11:34:40 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 11:16:49 AM
I have no idea, but Grime was still a serving police officer so I assume not.

Grime was on Retirement Leave and had taken charge of both dogs and wasn't still a serving Police Officer.

There was No Licence for one of the dogs although I can't remember which one now.  The Licence for the other dog ran out shortly afterwards.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 11:37:11 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 11:24:06 AM

We've seen before.. The training is basic and anecdotal.
These dogs are trained nd tested as VR dogs... Not residual scent dogs. As I understand there is no testing for remnant scent

Both dogs and I are licensed as two separate working teams. We are independently

tested and licensed annually, normally at six monthly intervals as a 'rolling'

programme to ensure best practice is maintained. They are tested to units of

assessment prepared as a stand-alone system as these dogs are the only assets of their

type in the world. Training records are maintained and are available if required.
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 10, 2022, 11:45:29 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 11:37:11 AM
Both dogs and I are licensed as two separate working teams. We are independently

tested and licensed annually, normally at six monthly intervals as a 'rolling'

programme to ensure best practice is maintained. They are tested to units of

assessment prepared as a stand-alone system as these dogs are the only assets of their

type in the world. Training records are maintained and are available if required.
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm

What a load of rubbish.  One of the dogs no longer had a Licence.  And Martin Grime had retired.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 11:57:12 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 10, 2022, 11:45:29 AM
What a load of rubbish.  One of the dogs no longer had a Licence.  And Martin Grime had retired.

Which assertions you can, of course, support with corroberating evidence, showing that they are facts, not myths.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 10, 2022, 11:59:26 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 11:57:12 AM
Which assertions you can, of course, support with corroberating evidence, showing that they are facts, not myths.

Presuming that you can prove that Grime was still a serving Police Officer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 12:19:58 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 10, 2022, 11:59:26 AM
Presuming that you can prove that Grime was still a serving Police Officer.

There isn't an exact date given for Grime's retirement, just August 2007. The search of 5A was carried out on 31st July, when he was definitely a serving police officer.

Now prove that he retired on 1st August and when Eddie's licence ran out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 10, 2022, 12:32:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 12:19:58 PM
There isn't an exact date given for Grime's retirement, just August 2007. The search of 5A was carried out on 31st July, when he was definitely a serving police officer.

Now prove that he retired on 1st August and when Eddie's licence ran out.

Did Grime go to PdL on the instructions of The South Yorkshire Police?  And who got paid for the job?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 12:50:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 11:37:11 AM
Both dogs and I are licensed as two separate working teams. We are independently

tested and licensed annually, normally at six monthly intervals as a 'rolling'

programme to ensure best practice is maintained. They are tested to units of

assessment prepared as a stand-alone system as these dogs are the only assets of their

type in the world. Training records are maintained and are available if required.
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm

I'm sure you are not suggesting there was no other cadaver dog in the world. Its true the team of a blood dog and a dog that reacted to blood and cadaver... Used as a team was unique.. I'm sure anyone else would see what a useless idea it was.

Sceptics have taken this statement to mean the dogs were the best iin the world... Utter rubbish
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 01:10:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 11:37:11 AM
Both dogs and I are licensed as two separate working teams. We are independently

tested and licensed annually, normally at six monthly intervals as a 'rolling'

programme to ensure best practice is maintained. They are tested to units of

assessment prepared as a stand-alone system as these dogs are the only assets of their

type in the world. Training records are maintained and are available if required.
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm

Licensed and tested for what... Human remains... Not residual scent.. That was Harrisond new idea in 2005.. He doesn't seem to have mentioned it since
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 01:13:16 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 10, 2022, 12:32:59 PM
Did Grime go to PdL on the instructions of The South Yorkshire Police?  And who got paid for the job?

I take it you can't provide Grime's retirement date or the date when Eddie's licence allegedly expired then. Unfounded assertions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 10, 2022, 01:23:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 01:13:16 PM
I take it you can't provide Grime's retirement date or the date when Eddie's licence allegedly expired then. Unfounded assertions.
3.10.11 We now deal with the introduction of Martin GRIME and his Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog (EVRD) to Operation Rectangle. Operation Haven has established through enquiry with the NPIA, that Martin GRIME was an ACPO accredited dog handler whilst he was a serving police officer, but forfeited accreditation upon his retirement in July 2007. We mentioned that Mr GRIME remains on the ACPO accredited list of experts though his EVRD is no longer accredited by ACPO. Whilst Martin GRIME’s original contract to Jersey was for five days, his actual deployment lasted for 130 days.
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3692.msg140742#msg140742
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 01:26:40 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 01:10:54 PM
Licensed and tested for what... Human remains... Not residual scent.. That was Harrisond new idea in 2005.. He doesn't seem to have mentioned it since

How pray could they test on human remains? I doubt if they were allowed to scatter corpses around the countryside every six months for Eddie to find.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 01:48:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 01:26:40 PM
How pray could they test on human remains? I doubt if they were allowed to scatter corpses around the countryside every six months for Eddie to find.

They are supposed to be tested for their ability to detect human remains but t I agree its an absolute farce... Cadaver dogs that have never been properly tested
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 10, 2022, 03:38:37 PM
Quote from: Brietta on October 10, 2022, 01:23:22 PM
3.10.11 We now deal with the introduction of Martin GRIME and his Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog (EVRD) to Operation Rectangle. Operation Haven has established through enquiry with the NPIA, that Martin GRIME was an ACPO accredited dog handler whilst he was a serving police officer, but forfeited accreditation upon his retirement in July 2007. We mentioned that Mr GRIME remains on the ACPO accredited list of experts though his EVRD is no longer accredited by ACPO. Whilst Martin GRIME’s original contract to Jersey was for five days, his actual deployment lasted for 130 days.
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3692.msg140742#msg140742

Thank you, Brietta.  As I thought.  Grime retired in July 2007.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 03:43:24 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 10, 2022, 03:38:37 PM
Thank you, Brietta.  As I thought.  Grime retired in July 2007.

Although he says August and so do SYP;

1. Which cases has Eddie the Springer spaniel sniffer dog been used in within
the South Yorkshire Force area over the last five years?
Eddie, the specialist dog is no longer with South Yorkshire Police. He and his handler
left the Force in August 2007.
https://www.southyorks.police.uk/media/5551/20090062-response.pdf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 10, 2022, 04:01:31 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 01:26:40 PM
How pray could they test on human remains? I doubt if they were allowed to scatter corpses around the countryside every six months for Eddie to find.
What about tests for residual scent detection?  That would not have required the scsttering of corpses around the countryside every six months as you so facetiously suggest.  Did such testiing occur?  All that would be required is items that had come into contact with a corpse months earlier to have been present as they had been (allegedly) in PdL. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 10, 2022, 04:03:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 03:43:24 PM
Although he says August and so do SYP;

1. Which cases has Eddie the Springer spaniel sniffer dog been used in within
the South Yorkshire Force area over the last five years?
Eddie, the specialist dog is no longer with South Yorkshire Police. He and his handler
left the Force in August 2007.
https://www.southyorks.police.uk/media/5551/20090062-response.pdf
There’s a good case for suggesting he retired at the end of July/beginning August isn’t there?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 10, 2022, 04:09:06 PM
Is there any evidence at all that Eddie and his handler were regularly tested on residual odour in the manner of the tests carried out in the study referred to in the Science article?  Because if they weren’t tested in such a manner it is impossible for Grime to have made the claim that Eddie never gave a false positive alert for residual scent.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 04:46:41 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 10, 2022, 04:03:12 PM
There’s a good case for suggesting he retired at the end of July/beginning August isn’t there?

Suggest anything you like, but two out of three sources say August. No mention of July.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 10, 2022, 05:47:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 04:46:41 PM
Suggest anything you like, but two out of three sources say August. No mention of July.
Are you denying the report posted by Brietta?  It’s pretty evident Grime retired at the end of July/start of August.  If your last day of work is the 31st both could be considered accurate statements.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 10, 2022, 05:50:18 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 10, 2022, 04:09:06 PM
Is there any evidence at all that Eddie and his handler were regularly tested on residual odour in the manner of the tests carried out in the study referred to in the Science article?  Because if they weren’t tested in such a manner it is impossible for Grime to have made the claim that Eddie never gave a false positive alert for residual scent.
Anyway, this point is far more relevant to Grime’s claims than the date he retired.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 06:27:01 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 10, 2022, 05:50:18 PM
Anyway, this point is far more relevant to Grime’s claims than the date he retired.

What else could they test Eddie on?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 10, 2022, 06:32:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 06:27:01 PM
What else could they test Eddie on?
I have already suggested what he could be tested on - his ability to scent residual odour months after a body or body part or item with cadaver odour  has been removed. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 07:08:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 06:27:01 PM
What else could they test Eddie on?

Eddie it seems has never been tested on residual odour... Human or otherwise... I knew I should have studied law...
Evidence not admissible
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 07:59:45 PM
What would you use to train or test a dog trained to alert to cadaver odour? Could it be cadaver odour?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 10, 2022, 08:09:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 07:59:45 PM
What would you use to train or test a dog trained to alert to cadaver odour? Could it be cadaver odour?
Honest question, requiring an honest answer - how would Grime know for a fact that Eddie never did a false positive alert?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 08:24:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 07:59:45 PM
What would you use to train or test a dog trained to alert to cadaver odour? Could it be cadaver odour?

you havent just got the wrong end of the stick...youve got the wrong stick. The dogs are not trained to detect an odour....they are trained to detect human remains. grime and harrison tried to ...think outside the box...as Grime says ....and its been a monumental failure imo...but not just my opinion...jersey proved what a gross mistake to believe a dog is  a reliable indicator for remnant scent of  a cadaver
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 08:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 08:24:43 PM
you havent just got the wrong end of the stick...youve got the wrong stick. The dogs are not trained to detect an odour....they are trained to detect human remains. grime and harrison tried to ...think outside the box...as Grime says ....and its been a monumental failure imo...but not just my opinion...jersey proved what a gross mistake to believe a dog is  a reliable indicator for remnant scent of  a cadaver

OMG! How do they detect human remains? By digging or sniffing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 08:35:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on October 10, 2022, 08:29:46 PM
OMG! How do they detect human remains? By digging or sniffing?

You should know the answer to that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on October 11, 2022, 03:26:13 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on October 10, 2022, 07:08:17 PM
Eddie it seems has never been tested on residual odour... Human or otherwise... I knew I should have studied law...
Evidence not admissible

Studying ECHR shows you'd be not up to it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 12, 2022, 09:06:36 PM
https://www.reuters.com/legal/jury-begins-third-day-deliberations-alex-jones-sandy-hook-defamation-trial-2022-10-12/
Oh dear, what a shame  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 12, 2022, 11:35:00 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 12, 2022, 09:06:36 PM
https://www.reuters.com/legal/jury-begins-third-day-deliberations-alex-jones-sandy-hook-defamation-trial-2022-10-12/
Oh dear, what a shame  @)(++(*

Seems the truth outweighs opinion in the States. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 23, 2022, 07:57:30 AM
Relevant reading for those keen to downplay the seriousness of CB’s criminal history and who claim that his is not the profile of a murderer, from an article in today’s Sunday Times:

Lisa Squire remembers the precise moment in 2019 her world changed. “It was nine minutes past 1am on February the first,” she says. Squire, a nurse in the maternity ward at Stoke Mandeville hospital in Buckinghamshire, was doing a night shift. Her eldest daughter, Libby, 21, was in her second year at Hull University studying philosophy. Squire got a call from Libby’s friends.

“They said they couldn’t find her. Immediately, I just knew that this was really serious.” It was the beginning of a nightmare that, almost seven weeks later, led to Libby’s body being pulled out of the Humber estuary and culminated in the conviction last year of Pawel Relowicz for rape and murder. Relowicz, then 24, was a butcher and father of two. It later emerged he had a history of deviant sexual behaviour. He was sentenced to life with the possibility of parole only after 27 years.

Libby had gone out with friends but had been turned away from the nightclub for being too drunk. Her friends put her in a taxi home. Instead of going into her house, Libby went for a walk to clear her head. She was then picked up by Relowicz.

Squire with her mother Lisa who is now campaigning for “low level” offences such as flashing to be taken more seriously by police forces
Squire with her mother Lisa who is now campaigning for “low level” offences such as flashing to be taken more seriously by police forces
HUMBERSIDE POLICE/PA
He had no criminal record, but police found sex toys and women’s underwear in the back of his car and were able to link him to eight crimes in the preceding 18 months, almost all involving women and most of a sexual nature. Squire believes there were probably many more crimes that were never reported.

That is why Squire, 52, who lives in High Wycombe, has been campaigning for earlier intervention in lower-level sex crimes, including referrals to programmes for sexual offenders. It is also why she and Libby’s friends have taken part in a documentary to tell the full story of Libby’s death and the failures that lead to it. Libby, Are You Home Yet? airs on Sky Crime on Thursday.

Last week Baroness Casey of Blackstock, who was the first independent commissioner for victims and witnesses, published her interim report into failings at the Metropolitan police, triggered by, among other things, the murder of Sarah Everard by Wayne Couzens, a police officer who is also alleged to have exposed himself four times to women.

Casey flagged up widespread misogyny in the force. In her final report, which is due to be published in February, she is expected to address the way that perpetrators often start with lower-level offences before their behaviour escalates. Squire agrees: “I worked with a criminologist who said that while you can’t say that all ‘non-contact’ sexual offenders will go on to become rapists or murderers, you can say that most rapists and murderers started out with non-contact offences. That is why we need to take this stuff seriously.”

Sarah Everard was murdered by serving police officer Wayne Couzens, who had been reported multiple times for exposing himself to women
Sarah Everard was murdered by serving police officer Wayne Couzens, who had been reported multiple times for exposing himself to women
METROPOLITAN POLICE/REUTERS
The picture of Relowicz that emerged was horrifying. His confidence appeared to have grown as the offending carried on. On one occasion he followed a woman home and masturbated on her front door. On another occasion he put his head through the window of a young woman’s room when she was having sex with her boyfriend. He fled, leaving a used condom. After picking up Libby he went home and watched porn before going out and exposing himself again.

One of Relowicz’s early victims, who caught him staring at her through her bedroom window, says she felt ashamed of how upset she was by the incident.

“It’s because we call them low-level sex crimes,” Squire says. “We should just call them sex crimes, because they are. We, as women, have been conditioned to accept it. Because nobody was hurt. Well, not that time. But next time somebody might be.”

Reporting is crucial. “In reality, the police are not going to go out and catch that man who did it to you tonight or yesterday, but it’s about joining dots, isn’t it?” says Squire. “And if it becomes obvious there is somebody who is doing these things, they may be able to catch him in the weeks or months to come.” If the officer isn’t interested, “find one who is and report it again,” she says.

Warning systems should be strengthened, she believes. If there is a string of offences in a particular area, particularly near a university, students should be told. “I’m not victim blaming, I’m being sensible and, yes, we do actually have to protect ourselves,” Squire says.

When Libby’s body was found after 48 days, traces of Relowicz’s sperm were present and he was charged with rape and murder. The trial took place in lockdown, shortly after Everard was killed. The more muted coverage of Libby’s case may have been to do with the fact that Libby had been drinking.

Squire saw a lot of victim-blaming in the reporting of the case. “Yes, she’d been drinking but so were thousands of other young people on the same night,” she says. Libby had mental health struggles in her teens, but was the happiest she had been in years.

Relowicz has never admitted to killing Libby or revealed how she died. Her body had been in the water too long for pathologists to know if she was dead when she went into the water. That is why, three years on, her mother is fighting to meet the man who killed her.

“I’m under no illusion that he’s ever going to tell me what happened because he still says he hasn’t done anything,” she says. Relowicz has agreed in principle to a meeting but the details are still being ironed out.

Squire tries to remember Libby as she was, warm, loving and “genuinely the funniest person I have ever met. I think maybe we had such a strong bond because I was only ever going to get 21 years and we packed everything into that. If I could do it all over again and still have the same outcome, I would do it in a heartbeat.”

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: The General on October 27, 2022, 10:24:35 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 23, 2022, 07:57:30 AM
Relevant reading for those keen to downplay the seriousness of CB’s criminal history and who claim that his is not the profile of a murderer, from an article in today’s Sunday Times:

Lisa Squire remembers the precise moment in 2019 her world changed. “It was nine minutes past 1am on February the first,” she says. Squire, a nurse in the maternity ward at Stoke Mandeville hospital in Buckinghamshire, was doing a night shift. Her eldest daughter, Libby, 21, was in her second year at Hull University studying philosophy. Squire got a call from Libby’s friends.

“They said they couldn’t find her. Immediately, I just knew that this was really serious.” It was the beginning of a nightmare that, almost seven weeks later, led to Libby’s body being pulled out of the Humber estuary and culminated in the conviction last year of Pawel Relowicz for rape and murder. Relowicz, then 24, was a butcher and father of two. It later emerged he had a history of deviant sexual behaviour. He was sentenced to life with the possibility of parole only after 27 years.

Libby had gone out with friends but had been turned away from the nightclub for being too drunk. Her friends put her in a taxi home. Instead of going into her house, Libby went for a walk to clear her head. She was then picked up by Relowicz.

Squire with her mother Lisa who is now campaigning for “low level” offences such as flashing to be taken more seriously by police forces
Squire with her mother Lisa who is now campaigning for “low level” offences such as flashing to be taken more seriously by police forces
HUMBERSIDE POLICE/PA
He had no criminal record, but police found sex toys and women’s underwear in the back of his car and were able to link him to eight crimes in the preceding 18 months, almost all involving women and most of a sexual nature. Squire believes there were probably many more crimes that were never reported.

That is why Squire, 52, who lives in High Wycombe, has been campaigning for earlier intervention in lower-level sex crimes, including referrals to programmes for sexual offenders. It is also why she and Libby’s friends have taken part in a documentary to tell the full story of Libby’s death and the failures that lead to it. Libby, Are You Home Yet? airs on Sky Crime on Thursday.

Last week Baroness Casey of Blackstock, who was the first independent commissioner for victims and witnesses, published her interim report into failings at the Metropolitan police, triggered by, among other things, the murder of Sarah Everard by Wayne Couzens, a police officer who is also alleged to have exposed himself four times to women.

Casey flagged up widespread misogyny in the force. In her final report, which is due to be published in February, she is expected to address the way that perpetrators often start with lower-level offences before their behaviour escalates. Squire agrees: “I worked with a criminologist who said that while you can’t say that all ‘non-contact’ sexual offenders will go on to become rapists or murderers, you can say that most rapists and murderers started out with non-contact offences. That is why we need to take this stuff seriously.”

Sarah Everard was murdered by serving police officer Wayne Couzens, who had been reported multiple times for exposing himself to women
Sarah Everard was murdered by serving police officer Wayne Couzens, who had been reported multiple times for exposing himself to women
METROPOLITAN POLICE/REUTERS
The picture of Relowicz that emerged was horrifying. His confidence appeared to have grown as the offending carried on. On one occasion he followed a woman home and masturbated on her front door. On another occasion he put his head through the window of a young woman’s room when she was having sex with her boyfriend. He fled, leaving a used condom. After picking up Libby he went home and watched porn before going out and exposing himself again.

One of Relowicz’s early victims, who caught him staring at her through her bedroom window, says she felt ashamed of how upset she was by the incident.

“It’s because we call them low-level sex crimes,” Squire says. “We should just call them sex crimes, because they are. We, as women, have been conditioned to accept it. Because nobody was hurt. Well, not that time. But next time somebody might be.”

Reporting is crucial. “In reality, the police are not going to go out and catch that man who did it to you tonight or yesterday, but it’s about joining dots, isn’t it?” says Squire. “And if it becomes obvious there is somebody who is doing these things, they may be able to catch him in the weeks or months to come.” If the officer isn’t interested, “find one who is and report it again,” she says.

Warning systems should be strengthened, she believes. If there is a string of offences in a particular area, particularly near a university, students should be told. “I’m not victim blaming, I’m being sensible and, yes, we do actually have to protect ourselves,” Squire says.

When Libby’s body was found after 48 days, traces of Relowicz’s sperm were present and he was charged with rape and murder. The trial took place in lockdown, shortly after Everard was killed. The more muted coverage of Libby’s case may have been to do with the fact that Libby had been drinking.

Squire saw a lot of victim-blaming in the reporting of the case. “Yes, she’d been drinking but so were thousands of other young people on the same night,” she says. Libby had mental health struggles in her teens, but was the happiest she had been in years.

Relowicz has never admitted to killing Libby or revealed how she died. Her body had been in the water too long for pathologists to know if she was dead when she went into the water. That is why, three years on, her mother is fighting to meet the man who killed her.

“I’m under no illusion that he’s ever going to tell me what happened because he still says he hasn’t done anything,” she says. Relowicz has agreed in principle to a meeting but the details are still being ironed out.

Squire tries to remember Libby as she was, warm, loving and “genuinely the funniest person I have ever met. I think maybe we had such a strong bond because I was only ever going to get 21 years and we packed everything into that. If I could do it all over again and still have the same outcome, I would do it in a heartbeat.”
TL:DR, but no doubt not as relevant as stated.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 31, 2022, 01:51:33 PM
Richard Hall, isn’t he a darling of the sceptic community?  Nice man.  Not.

The UK terror survivors tracked down by ‘disaster trolls’ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63412651
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 31, 2022, 02:08:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 31, 2022, 01:51:33 PM
Richard Hall, isn’t he a darling of the sceptic community?  Nice man.  Not.

The UK terror survivors tracked down by ‘disaster trolls’ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63412651

Any old controversial rubbish will do so long as it makes money.  Madeleine isn't worth anything anymore.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 31, 2022, 02:16:48 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 31, 2022, 02:08:06 PM
Any old controversial rubbish will do so long as it makes money.  Madeleine isn't worth anything anymore.
It's clearly the business to be in, exploiting other peoples' tragedies and making life even more unpleasant for them, all for the cash and the lolz.  Sickos!  Here's hoping RDH gets his comeuppance soon a la Alex Jones.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 31, 2022, 03:03:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 31, 2022, 01:51:33 PM
Richard Hall, isn’t he a darling of the sceptic community?  Nice man.  Not.

The UK terror survivors tracked down by ‘disaster trolls’ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63412651

There is something seriously wrong with these people.  The perpetrators are bad enough but their gullible followers who give them credence and time of day really do have problems.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on October 31, 2022, 11:01:34 PM
Why do you keep on giving this individual the attention he so obviously craves?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 31, 2022, 11:30:06 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on October 31, 2022, 11:01:34 PM
Why do you keep on giving this individual the attention he so obviously craves?
The fact that so many sceptics appear to hang on his every word tells us alot about them and their mindsets IMO.  Most sceptics believe in a McCann conspiracy of some sort and frankly I think they and he are all pretty much cut from the same cloth.  Incidentally, Hall was the subject of a 30 minute BBC Panorama documentary this evening - perhaps you should write to them and complain about the attention they are giving him, eh?  I reckon the Beeb probably reached a few more people today than I did.  It's always good to shine a light on the bonkers, the depraved and the evil in society - it shows them up for the cowards they are, when confronted with the truth and when pushed to give an account of themselves, don't you agree?   I'm sincerely hoping he is sued for every penny his nasty little books and videos have made him over the years. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 12:29:12 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 31, 2022, 11:30:06 PM
The fact that so many sceptics appear to hang on his every word tells us alot about them and their mindsets IMO.  Most sceptics believe in a McCann conspiracy of some sort and frankly I think they and he are all pretty much cut from the same cloth.  Incidentally, Hall was the subject of a 30 minute BBC Panorama documentary this evening - perhaps you should write to them and complain about the attention they are giving him, eh?  I reckon the Beeb probably reached a few more people today than I did.  It's always good to shine a light on the bonkers, the depraved and the evil in society - it shows them up for the cowards they are, when confronted with the truth and when pushed to give an account of themselves, don't you agree?   I'm sincerely hoping he is sued for every penny his nasty little books and videos have made him over the years.

Was Hall cowed then by having a slot on auntie Beeb or, as is more likely, did it simply reinforce in his and his supporter’s minds the idea that things were being covered up?

If you thought that one programme produced by ‘the establishment’ would change any hearts and minds at this stage  then you are more naive than I gave you credit for. Starve them of the oxygen of publicity, that’s the only way to deal with charlatans such as Hall.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 01, 2022, 07:19:17 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 12:29:12 AM
Was Hall cowed then by having a slot on auntie Beeb or, as is more likely, did it simply reinforce in his and his supporter’s minds the idea that things were being covered up?

If you thought that one programme produced by ‘the establishment’ would change any hearts and minds at this stage  then you are more naive than I gave you credit for. Starve them of the oxygen of publicity, that’s the only way to deal with charlatans such as Hall.
He looked pretty sheepish when confronted by the BBC reporter and I reckon after what happened to Alex Jones recently he’s likely soiling his undergarments.   i do hope so.  Given that you and your ilk have spent 15 years publicly criticizing the McCanns for being shameless self promoters I think you’re a fine one to talk about starving anyone of the oxygen of publicity, however I can understand why shining a light on RDH’s activities would make you uncomfortable- you are all part of the same insidious, nasty problem IMO: “the worst of the human psyche electronically unleashed”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 01, 2022, 07:27:45 AM
Judging by the disclaimer at the top of his beastly website (I had to rinse my eyes and wash my hands after visiting) it would appear that Hall is somewhat shaken by the recent programme even if in the short time it’s meant increased traffic to his site:

“In response to recent media coverage, if any person is upset by what they have seen, Richard D. Hall apologises for any upset caused. My actions were motivated by a strong desire to search for the truth about what happened. Explanation of my actions and answers to the BBC's accusations are contained in the video below.

PLEASE NOTE : On this website we have expressed opinions about the veracity of statements made by victims of alleged terrorist attacks. These opinions are expressed always as opinion and not as an actual assertion, accusation or claim. We are exercising the legal right to hold an opinion and express it publicly. We do NOT advocate that viewers of this website make contact with alleged terror attack victims either online or in person.
>> Disaster Trolls Written Response”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 01, 2022, 08:06:25 AM
One of the most depressing facts to come out of last night’s programme is that 14% of people in Britain believe that the Manchester bombing was faked or part of some conspiracy.  I genuinely thought we were a more sensible people than the Americans who seem to lap up this kind of crap but if seems not.  So anyone on here think RDH is right on this subject?   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 09:53:08 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 01, 2022, 07:19:17 AM
He looked pretty sheepish when confronted by the BBC reporter and I reckon after what happened to Alex Jones recently he’s likely soiling his undergarments.   i do hope so.  Given that you and your ilk have spent 15 years publicly criticizing the McCanns for being shameless self promoters I think you’re a fine one to talk about starving anyone of the oxygen of publicity, however I can understand why shining a light on RDH’s activities would make you uncomfortable- you are all part of the same insidious, nasty problem IMO: “the worst of the human psyche electronically unleashed”.

Why would Hall’s bizarre beliefs and actions make me uncomfortable?

Your view of the world is often rather linear and lazy….”the unquestioning beliefs of the malleable made real” shall we say?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 01, 2022, 10:03:20 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 09:53:08 AM
Why would Hall’s bizarre beliefs and actions make me uncomfortable?

Your view of the world is often rather linear and lazy….”the unquestioning beliefs of the malleable made real” shall we say?
Simple: because broadly speaking your views wrt to this case, he shares, and vice versa.   Two conspiracy theorists cut from the same cloth, only one of you is a lot more successful at pushing his agenda.  You can quibble about the minutiae of what you believe and how it differs from what he believes but fundamentally you both believe the McCanns dunnit and that there has been a conspiracy and cover up, and that they have profited from it and that the High Ups have supported it.  You will of course deny this, but your denials would wring hollow and be exposed if you were ever to engage in an honest debate on the subject.  As there's no chance of that, it's pointless discussing further.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 01, 2022, 11:14:29 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 09:53:08 AM
Why would Hall’s bizarre beliefs and actions make me uncomfortable?

Your view of the world is often rather linear and lazy….”the unquestioning beliefs of the malleable made real” shall we say?

There's a lot of bizarre beliefs around online. Some people, for example, think there may be conspiracies surounding the case of Madeleine McCann. They think there's some sort of orchestrated attack on her parents; some have pondered if the PJ planted evidence against them! Others think people are changing stories and evidence to make them look guilty. Even the Portuguese judiciary have been suspected of unethical practices.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 01, 2022, 11:22:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 01, 2022, 11:14:29 AM
There's a lot of bizarre beliefs around online. Some people, for example, think there may be conspiracies surounding the case of Madeleine McCann. They think there's some sort of orchestrated attack on her parents; some have pondered if the PJ planted evidence against them! Others think people are changing stories and evidence to make them look guilty. Even the Portuguese judiciary have been suspected of unethical practices.
You seem to have missed out a few: that Madeleine died before the 3rd May.  That the UK government was mobilized the day after the disappearance to protect and cover up for the McCanns.  That the Met was instructed not to investigate the McCanns.  That CB is being set up as a patsy.  Any reason for missing those ones out?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 01, 2022, 11:41:50 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 01, 2022, 11:14:29 AM
There's a lot of bizarre beliefs around online. Some people, for example, think there may be conspiracies surounding the case of Madeleine McCann. They think there's some sort of orchestrated attack on her parents; some have pondered if the PJ planted evidence against them! Others think people are changing stories and evidence to make them look guilty. Even the Portuguese judiciary have been suspected of unethical practices.

The Portuguese Judiciary doesn't have any ethics.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 01, 2022, 01:26:16 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 01, 2022, 11:41:50 AM
The Portuguese Judiciary doesn't have any ethics.

Thanks for confirming the silly things some people believe.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 01, 2022, 01:34:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 01, 2022, 01:26:16 PM
Thanks for confirming the silly things some people believe.

Thanks for confirming that you have no idea of what ethics are.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 01, 2022, 01:40:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 01, 2022, 01:26:16 PM
Thanks for confirming the silly things some people believe.
And yet you believe that the top police force in this country was prevented by persons unknown from investigating the McCanns!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 01, 2022, 01:43:23 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 01, 2022, 01:40:54 PM
And yet you believe that the top police force in this country was prevented by persons unknown from investigating the McCanns!

Among other equally daft ideas.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 01, 2022, 03:56:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 01, 2022, 01:40:54 PM
And yet you believe that the top police force in this country was prevented by persons unknown from investigating the McCanns!

No, they were given a restrictive remit which meant they were only to investigate one possible crime. The Met, btw is not the 'top' police force in any country.

 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 01, 2022, 04:04:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 01, 2022, 03:56:58 PM
No, they were given a restrictive remit which meant they were only to investigate one possible crime. The Met, btw is not the 'top' police force in any country.

You do not know that this is true.  Only that Colin Sutton was told something by an anonymous source when Colin Sutton was never going to get the lead role anyway.

So just more absolute rubbish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 01, 2022, 04:27:26 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 01, 2022, 03:56:58 PM
No, they were given a restrictive remit which meant they were only to investigate one possible crime. The Met, btw is not the 'top' police force in any country.
how does that differ from what I wrote?  Who gave them the remit and why?  Hmmmmmmmm?  The Met is certainly the most internationally famous police force in the UK, I used the term "top" loosely, wihch police force would you consider the country's top force? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 01, 2022, 04:28:36 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 01, 2022, 04:04:36 PM
You do not know that this is true.  Only that Colin Sutton was told something by an anonymous source when Colin Sutton was never going to get the lead role anyway.

So just more absolute rubbish.
It plays well with the conspiracy theorists though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 01, 2022, 05:32:09 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 01, 2022, 03:56:58 PM
No, they were given a restrictive remit which meant they were only to investigate one possible crime. The Met, btw is not the 'top' police force in any country.

Who gave SY the remit... You can't answer and are just making things up
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 01, 2022, 05:38:01 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on November 01, 2022, 05:32:09 PM
Who gave SY the remit... You can't answer and are just making things up

Yep.  Who exactly is supposed to have given the order?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 01, 2022, 06:25:50 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 01, 2022, 05:38:01 PM
Yep.  Who exactly is supposed to have given the order?
That would be the High-Ups, who are lizards dressed as humans, many are paedos and all are huge supporters of child neglect.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 06:27:37 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 01, 2022, 10:03:20 AM
Simple: because broadly speaking your views wrt to this case, he shares, and vice versa.   Two conspiracy theorists cut from the same cloth, only one of you is a lot more successful at pushing his agenda.  You can quibble about the minutiae of what you believe and how it differs from what he believes but fundamentally you both believe the McCanns dunnit and that there has been a conspiracy and cover up, and that they have profited from it and that the High Ups have supported it.  You will of course deny this, but your denials would wring hollow and be exposed if you were ever to engage in an honest debate on the subject.  As there's no chance of that, it's pointless discussing further.

And yet again you yourself provide the proof for my previous post….linear and lazy.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 06:29:02 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 01, 2022, 04:04:36 PM
You do not know that this is true.  Only that Colin Sutton was told something by an anonymous source when Colin Sutton was never going to get the lead role anyway.

So just more absolute rubbish.

Have you read the remit that was posted on the Met’s website?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 01, 2022, 06:47:40 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 06:27:37 PM
And yet again you yourself provide the proof for my previous post….linear and lazy.
But accurate. 8(>((
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 07:47:55 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 01, 2022, 06:47:40 PM
But accurate. 8(>((

Nothing viewed with a jaded eye is ever accurate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 01, 2022, 07:53:31 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 07:47:55 PM
Nothing viewed with a jaded eye is ever accurate.
Jaded, linear, lazy - got any more ad homs in your bag of insults this evening?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 01, 2022, 08:54:48 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 01, 2022, 04:27:26 PM
how does that differ from what I wrote?  Who gave them the remit and why?  Hmmmmmmmm?  The Met is certainly the most internationally famous police force in the UK, I used the term "top" loosely, wihch police force would you consider the country's top force?

I know who wrote the remit qnd I assume it was written because it was thought that abduction was the crime. One day The Met might explain how they reached that conclusion.

Being famous doesn't equate to being the best. I don't say a force is the 'top' force unless I have some evidence to support my words.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 09:53:37 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 01, 2022, 07:53:31 PM
Jaded, linear, lazy - got any more ad homs in your bag of insults this evening?

You really do need to look at your own interactions with those you don’t agree with before judging others. People in glass houses and all that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 01, 2022, 10:02:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 01, 2022, 08:54:48 PM
I know who wrote the remit qnd I assume it was written because it was thought that abduction was the crime. One day The Met might explain how they reached that conclusion.

Being famous doesn't equate to being the best. I don't say a force is the 'top' force unless I have some evidence to support my words.
who wrote it then and why did they think abduction was the crime?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 01, 2022, 10:06:13 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 09:53:37 PM
You really do need to look at your own interactions with those you don’t agree with before judging others. People in glass houses and all that.
I really don’t take instructions from the likes of you.  As I said before you and Hall share many of the same barmy beliefs about this case and for that reason alone your opinion holds zero credibility as far as I’m concerned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 10:40:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 01, 2022, 10:06:13 PM
I really don’t take instructions from the likes of you.  As I said before you and Hall share many of the same barmy beliefs about this case and for that reason alone your opinion holds zero credibility as far as I’m concerned.

Gutted !

 Why on earth would you possibly think I would care how credible you think my thoughts on this case are?

You really are an odd fish at times.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 01, 2022, 11:19:52 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 10:40:27 PM
Gutted !

 Why on earth would you possibly think I would care how credible you think my thoughts on this case are?

You really are an odd fish at times.
Grow up Faithlilly, you’re becoming exceedingly tiresome now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 01, 2022, 11:41:10 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 01, 2022, 11:19:52 PM
Grow up Faithlilly, you’re becoming exceedingly tiresome now.

Here’s an idea…stop replying.

Job done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 07:18:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 01, 2022, 08:54:48 PM
I know who wrote the remit qnd I assume it was written because it was thought that abduction was the crime. One day The Met might explain how they reached that conclusion.

Being famous doesn't equate to being the best. I don't say a force is the 'top' force unless I have some evidence to support my words.
I didn’t use top to mean best necessarily .  Try googling “which is the top police force in the uk”. and see what comes up.  I know you love a good semantic quibble as it allows you to deflect and prevaricate but my point stands, and you have been unable to give a straight answer.  Who supposedly gave the Met their “restrictive” remit and why? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 02, 2022, 09:16:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 01, 2022, 03:56:58 PM
No, they were given a restrictive remit which meant they were only to investigate one possible crime. The Met, btw is not the 'top' police force in any country.

They did a review of the case.  They started at the beginning.   They used the Portuguese statements so as they said there was no need to repeat these.   They ruled the McCann's out.

Even though Colin Sutton says he would have questioned the McCann's his conclusion was that Madeleine was abducted.

The German Police say Madeleine was abducted,  I didn't see any interference by the British Police for them to come to their conclusion.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 09:22:57 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 02, 2022, 09:16:24 AM
They did a review of the case.  They started at the beginning.   They used the Portuguese statements so as they said there was no need to repeat these.   They ruled the McCann's out.

Even though Colin Sutton says he would have questioned the McCann's his conclusion was that Madeleine was abducted.

The German Police say Madeleine was abducted,  I didn't see any interference by the British Police for them to come to their conclusion.

Absolutely correct.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 02, 2022, 09:53:27 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 02, 2022, 09:16:24 AM
They did a review of the case.  They started at the beginning.   They used the Portuguese statements so as they said there was no need to repeat these.   They ruled the McCann's out.

Even though Colin Sutton says he would have questioned the McCann's his conclusion was that Madeleine was abducted.

The German Police say Madeleine was abducted,  I didn't see any interference by the British Police for them to come to their conclusion.

In my opinion the decision to rule out the parents pre-dated the Op Grange review. Those who instigated the review; PM Cameron and Home Secretary May made their motive clear; to help the McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 10:12:35 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 02, 2022, 09:53:27 AM
In my opinion the decision to rule out the parents pre-dated the Op Grange review. Those who instigated the review; PM Cameron and Home Secretary May made their motive clear; to help the McCanns.

Are you accusing Cameron and May of being involved in a cover up for The McCanns?  Dangerous ground.

You are right of course.  It was those two who instigated The Review.  But I would be a teensy bit careful if I were you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 10:17:32 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 10:12:35 AM
Are you accusing Cameron and May of being involved in a cover up for The McCanns?  Dangerous ground.

You are right of course.  It was those two who instigated The Review.  But I would be a teensy bit careful if I were you.

The parents themselves claimed that May didn’t seem eager to grant them a review. It’s said, and Rebecca Brooks was asked about this at Leveson, that she threatened the government that she would put damaging headlines about May on the front of the Sun for a week if a review wasn’t granted.

The chalice was poisoned from the start.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 10:19:50 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 10:17:32 AM
The parents themselves claimed that May didn’t seem eager to grant them a review. It’s said, and Rebecca Brooks was asked about this at Leveson, that she threatened the government that she would put damaging headlines about May on the front of the Sun for a week if a review wasn’t granted.

The chalice was poisoned from the start.
"It's said" - by whom?  What did Rebecca Brooks have to say on the matter at Leveson?  Do you think she might have had a hand in writing the Met's remit too? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 10:24:04 AM
"The chalice was poisoned from the start".  What drama queen conspira loon nonsense.  IMO. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 10:33:26 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2022, 10:19:50 AM
"It's said" - by whom?  What did Rebecca Brooks have to say on the matter at Leveson?  Do you think she might have had a hand in writing the Met's remit too?

Ya, who said what?  No one ever seems to know.

The Portuguese Investigation was a farce, which was obvious to anyone with any sense of logic.  But let's not talk about that.  Any old rubbish will do so long as The McCanns remain in the frame.

Sometimes I don't know whether to laugh or cry.  But fortunately this is only an Internet forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 10:41:39 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2022, 10:24:04 AM
"The chalice was poisoned from the start".  What drama queen conspira loon nonsense.  IMO.

Madeleine was poisoned with Calpol Night.  Which didn't actually exist at the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 10:46:03 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 10:33:26 AM
Ya, who said what?  No one ever seems to know.

The Portuguese Investigation was a farce, which was obvious to anyone with any sense of logic.  But let's not talk about that.  Any old rubbish will do so long as The McCanns remain in the frame.

Sometimes I don't know whether to laugh or cry.  But fortunately this is only an Internet forum.
In the Real World the McCanns are not in the frame, same as the Manchester Bombing happened and real people died and were maimed, same as at Sandy Hook.  Also - Muslim terrorists highjacked planes and flew them into the WTC, and smoking is one of the leading causes of heart disease and cancer.  Some people shun the real world in favour of the online and interior worlds of fantasy, conspiracy and make-believe.  Sometimes this is harmless but increasingly it is not.  Real people get hurt by these idiotic conspiracy theories.  There's not much that can be done about it apart from to keep challenging it and shining a light on the nonsense when it appears.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 10:49:06 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 10:41:39 AM
Madeleine was poisoned with Calpol Night.  Which didn't actually exist at the time.
Yes she was given an overdose of sedative which had the effect of rendering her wide awake, moving the furniture around and jumping off it her death.  Obviously.  This is usually what happens when you heavily sedate a little child.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 11:29:44 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2022, 10:46:03 AM
In the Real World the McCanns are not in the frame, same as the Manchester Bombing happened and real people died and were maimed, same as at Sandy Hook.  Also - Muslim terrorists highjacked planes and flew them into the WTC, and smoking is one of the leading causes of heart disease and cancer.  Some people shun the real world in favour of the online and interior worlds of fantasy, conspiracy and make-believe.  Sometimes this is harmless but increasingly it is not.  Real people get hurt by these idiotic conspiracy theories.  There's not much that can be done about it apart from to keep challenging it and shining a light on the nonsense when it appears.

This is why the likes of you and me are still here.  I have no desire to change the minds of embittered people, I only feel sorry for them and whatever happened to make them so.

My own childhood was not a lot of fun but I don't blame anyone because I can see the reasons for why they were as they were.

But I am not sitting here without challenging the unproven rubbish that I daily read that attempts to alleviate the hidden distress that some of these people must feel.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 02, 2022, 11:42:43 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 10:12:35 AM
Are you accusing Cameron and May of being involved in a cover up for The McCanns?  Dangerous ground.

You are right of course.  It was those two who instigated The Review.  But I would be a teensy bit careful if I were you.

Of course not. I think they believed in the abduction and in the McCann's non-involvement in any wrongdoing. Maybe basing a police investigation upon belief rather than evidence isn't the way to proceed, however.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 11:45:47 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2022, 10:49:06 AM
Yes she was given an overdose of sedative which had the effect of rendering her wide awake, moving the furniture around and jumping off it her death.  Obviously.  This is usually what happens when you heavily sedate a little child.

No sense of logic you see.  Unless The McCanns took Madeleine to Portugal just to kill her.

Unfortunately, Amaral was already in trouble with The Cipriano Case and needed another Murdering Mother to back up his theories on that one.  And along comes Kate McCann.  And fifteen years of lies and distortions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 11:58:57 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 02, 2022, 11:42:43 AM
Of course not. I think they believed in the abduction and in the McCann's non-involvement in any wrongdoing. Maybe basing a police investigation upon belief rather than evidence isn't the way to proceed, however.
So, if I understand you correctly you believe (based on no evidence whatsoever) that the government ordered the Met to review the investigation but to only consider stranger abduction as the reason for Madeleine's disappearance, is that right? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 11:59:18 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 02, 2022, 11:42:43 AM
Of course not. I think they believed in the abduction and in the McCann's non-involvement in any wrongdoing. Maybe basing a police investigation upon belief rather than evidence isn't the way to proceed, however.

Their beliefs or yours?  Presumably you think that your beliefs are more pertinent than theirs.  And so you would not have allowed The Review.

And just as a matter of interest, what Evidence do you have?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 12:05:58 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2022, 11:58:57 AM
So, if I understand you correctly you believe (based on no evidence whatsoever) that the government ordered the Met to review the investigation but to only consider stranger abduction as the reason for Madeleine's disappearance, is that right?

It would seem so.  But then Gunit thinks she is awfully good at deciding who dunnit without a scrap of evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 12:14:07 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 12:05:58 PM
It would seem so.  But then Gunit thinks she is awfully good at deciding who dunnit without a scrap of evidence.
What G-Unit doesn't seem to understand is that the police have to apply reasoning and opinion to whatever evidence is available to come to reasoned conclusions.  She may prefer to call it belief but it amounts to the same thing - "we have reason to believe that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger" for example.  That reason to believe will have been based not on the fact the McCanns are nice white middle class doctors, or that David Cameron quite fancied Kate but because of the case evidence. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 12:24:22 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2022, 12:14:07 PM
What G-Unit doesn't seem to understand is that the police have to apply reasoning and opinion to whatever evidence is available to come to reasoned conclusions.  She may prefer to call it belief but it amounts to the same thing - "we have reason to believe that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger" for example.  That reason to believe will have been based not on the fact the McCanns are nice white middle class doctors, or that David Cameron quite fancied Kate but because of the case evidence.
.

Let's face it.  Gunit can't even produce a reasonable argument in favour of her beliefs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 12:32:20 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 12:24:22 PM
.

Let's face it.  Gunit can't even produce a reasonable argument in favour of her beliefs.
G-Unit refuses to admit she even has any beliefs.  It would seem that having beliefs is utterly beyond the pale.  She is above having beliefs,  beliefs are for plebs like us.  Same thing with Jassi and "hope" - don't get her started on hope.  Ugh.  Awful stuff, hope - strictly for the birds. 
 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 02, 2022, 01:28:19 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 02, 2022, 09:16:24 AM
They did a review of the case.  They started at the beginning.   They used the Portuguese statements so as they said there was no need to repeat these.   They ruled the McCann's out.

Even though Colin Sutton says he would have questioned the McCann's his conclusion was that Madeleine was abducted.

The German Police say Madeleine was abducted,  I didn't see any interference by the British Police for them to come to their conclusion.


The claim made that the MET was confined to one avenue of investigation isNobody in their right minds would recommend initiating any sort of investigative procedure without first of all investigating everything piece of minutiae which had gone before.

This includes the 'evidence' which did not stand up against constituting Murat and Kate and Gerry McCann as arguidos; in the latter case the false dog indications which form the cornerstone of the sceptic belief system.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 02, 2022, 01:59:12 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 02, 2022, 09:53:27 AM
In my opinion the decision to rule out the parents pre-dated the Op Grange review. Those who instigated the review; PM Cameron and Home Secretary May made their motive clear; to help the McCanns.

To help the McCann's by agreeing to a review of the case,  not to find them innocent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 02, 2022, 02:00:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 02, 2022, 09:53:27 AM
In my opinion the decision to rule out the parents pre-dated the Op Grange review. Those who instigated the review; PM Cameron and Home Secretary May made their motive clear; to help the McCanns.

I was under the impression that the previous Home Secretary had ordered a fresh look in response to the McCann plea that Madeleine's case, so long neglected by investigative authorities should be looked at.  https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg649066#msg649066

But you already know this if only your predilection for 'groundhog day' didn't keep elbowing in. 

What is it that you have against Kate and Gerry McCann that you apparently abhor their diligence in approaching the only individuals capable of directing the assistance required to progress Madeleine's investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 05:14:11 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 02, 2022, 02:00:17 PM
I was under the impression that the previous Home Secretary had ordered a fresh look in response to the McCann plea that Madeleine's case, so long neglected by investigative authorities should be looked at.  https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg649066#msg649066

But you already know this if only your predilection for 'groundhog day' didn't keep elbowing in. 

What is it that you have against Kate and Gerry McCann that you apparently abhor their diligence in approaching the only individuals capable of directing the assistance required to progress Madeleine's investigation.

The Labour Home Secretary Alan Johnson told the parents that he would look into the case. Unfortunately Labour lost power before he did and the parents said in a channel 4 interview that Theresa May wasn’t keen too do anything with regard to their case.

Then Brooks got involved and the rest is history.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 05:15:17 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2022, 10:19:50 AM
"It's said" - by whom?  What did Rebecca Brooks have to say on the matter at Leveson?  Do you think she might have had a hand in writing the Met's remit too?

“ Jay says he has been told that Brooks intervened personally with the prime minister and said the Sun would put Theresa May on the front page every day until the paper's demands were met.”

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/61may12/GUARDIAN1_11_05_2012.htm
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 06:28:58 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 05:15:17 PM
“ Jay says he has been told that Brooks intervened personally with the prime minister and said the Sun would put Theresa May on the front page every day until the paper's demands were met.”

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/61may12/GUARDIAN1_11_05_2012.htm
Hearsay, denied by Brooks. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 06:32:45 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2022, 06:28:58 PM
Hearsay, denied by Brooks.

To paraphrase Miss Rice Davies “well she would say that, wouldn’t she”.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 06:54:35 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 06:32:45 PM
To paraphrase Miss Rice Davies “well she would say that, wouldn’t she”.
You do love that quote don’t you?  Fact is, there’s no evidence to support the claim apart from anonymous tittle-tattle.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 07:23:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2022, 06:54:35 PM
You do love that quote don’t you?  Fact is, there’s no evidence to support the claim apart from anonymous tittle-tattle.

Are you saying that Sir Robert Jay was merely repeating any old gossip and that Brooks, the individual who sanctioned the hacking of murder victim Milly Dowler’s voicemail, is to blindly be believed?

Next you’ll be telling me that newspapers don’t pay money-grabbing individuals money for dubious stories.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 08:14:52 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 07:23:38 PM
Are you saying that Sir Robert Jay was merely repeating any old gossip and that Brooks, the individual who sanctioned the hacking of murder victim Milly Dowler’s voicemail, is to blindly be believed?

Next you’ll be telling me that newspapers don’t pay money-grabbing individuals money for dubious stories.
No, I’m saying there’s no evidence to support the claim apart from anonymous tittle-tattle.  I think you will find that what I have written is factually correct, and you can stop goading right now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 08:27:00 PM
It's not as if The PJ didn't try to nail The McCanns.  They had them both there for six months.  And any evidence there might have been was all there under the jurisdiction of The PJ.

Or are we saying that the investigation was so abysmal that The PJ missed what was staring them the face?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 08:29:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2022, 08:14:52 PM
No, I’m saying there’s no evidence to support the claim apart from anonymous tittle-tattle.  I think you will find that what I have written is factually correct, and you can stop goading right now.

I suppose it all comes down to credibility. I prefer to believe someone who practices the law…you prefer to defend someone who stood trial for breaking it.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 08:32:32 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 08:27:00 PM
It's not as if The PJ didn't try to nail The McCanns.  They had them both there for six months.  And any evidence there might have been was all there under the jurisdiction of The PJ.

Or are we saying that the investigation was so abysmal that The PJ missed what was staring them the face?

Brueckner was identified in 2017…that’s nearly 6 years later and still no charges likely soon.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 08:33:48 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 08:29:06 PM
I suppose it all comes down to credibility. I prefer to believe someone who practices the law…you prefer to defend someone who stood trial for breaking it.
You can believe what you like, I’m just stating facts, not defending anyone.  Do you have a problem with that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 08:42:12 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 08:32:32 PM
Brueckner was identified in 2017…that’s nearly 6 years later and still no charges likely soon.

But Brueckner was also there in 2007 and committing crimes all over the place and no one seems to have noticed.
Probably too busy fixating on The McCanns.

However, I have never accused Brueckner despite his previous convictions for child abuse and rape.  Although I think there are a few more of those coming up soon.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 08:42:56 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2022, 08:33:48 PM
You can believe what you like, I’m just stating facts, not defending anyone.  Do you have a problem with that?

Why…do you want to invite me outside?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 08:45:33 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 08:42:56 PM
Why…do you want to invite me outside?
What on earth are you on about?  Please grow up, seriously. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 08:59:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2022, 08:45:33 PM
What on earth are you on about?  Please grow up, seriously.

Apologies…the last time I heard someone growl “do you have a problem with that” it was a heavily tattooed individual smelling of alcohol and violence.

It wasn’t you, was it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 09:10:58 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 08:59:57 PM
Apologies…the last time I heard someone growl “do you have a problem with that” it was a heavily tattooed individual smelling of alcohol and violence.

It wasn’t you, was it?
You obviously frequent some very rough establishments.  Now kindly stop obsessing about me, I had quite enough insults off you yesterday.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 09:16:45 PM

At least this is all Off Topic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 09:21:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2022, 09:10:58 PM
You obviously frequent some very rough establishments.  Now kindly stop obsessing about me, I had quite enough insults off you yesterday.

Shall I put you on ignore again? Would that help?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 09:27:20 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 09:21:52 PM
Shall I put you on ignore again? Would that help?

No No, I'm enjoying this, for a change.  Off Topic an all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 09:33:41 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 09:21:52 PM
Shall I put you on ignore again? Would that help?
You would have to ask yourself that question.  Would putting me on ignore help you to break your addiction to goading and insulting me?  Or are you strong enough to break the cycle of deflection, snark and snidery whilst still being able to read and reply to my posts?  It’s up to you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 09:47:45 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 02, 2022, 09:33:41 PM
You would have to ask yourself that question.  Would putting me on ignore help you to break your addiction to goading and insulting me?  Or are you strong enough to break the cycle of deflection, snark and snidery whilst still being able to read and reply to my posts?  It’s up to you.

Playing the victim really doesn’t suit you. As ever you are the architect of your own predicament.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 09:54:18 PM

Could I make a suggestion?  No?  Okay.  You are probably right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 10:00:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 02, 2022, 09:54:18 PM
Could I make a suggestion?  No?  Okay.  You are probably right.

No invite necessary.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 02, 2022, 10:11:24 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 02, 2022, 09:47:45 PM
Playing the victim really doesn’t suit you. As ever you are the architect of your own predicament.
What predicament would that be?   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 10:53:56 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 02, 2022, 01:59:12 PM
To help the McCann's by agreeing to a review of the case,  not to find them innocent.

There is evidence that suggests Cameron wasn't considering the possibility of parental involvement.

Cameron; "my heart goes out to you both...I cannot imagine the pain you must have experienced...you have been so courageous..." He goes on to say actions by the Met "will help boost efforts in the search for Madeleine".
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/49may11/SUN2_13_05_2011.htm

It seems very clear that Cameron is an admirer of the McCanns and is acting to help them achieve their stated goals; to search for and find their abducted daughter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2022, 11:45:46 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 10:53:56 AM
There is evidence that suggests Cameron wasn't considering the possibility of parental involvement.

Cameron; "my heart goes out to you both...I cannot imagine the pain you must have experienced...you have been so courageous..." He goes on to say actions by the Met "will help boost efforts in the search for Madeleine".
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/49may11/SUN2_13_05_2011.htm

It seems very clear that Cameron is an admirer of the McCanns and is acting to help them achieve their stated goals; to search for and find their abducted daughter.
how evil is that?!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 03, 2022, 11:49:21 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 10:53:56 AM
There is evidence that suggests Cameron wasn't considering the possibility of parental involvement.

Cameron; "my heart goes out to you both...I cannot imagine the pain you must have experienced...you have been so courageous..." He goes on to say actions by the Met "will help boost efforts in the search for Madeleine".
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/49may11/SUN2_13_05_2011.htm

It seems very clear that Cameron is an admirer of the McCanns and is acting to help them achieve their stated goals; to search for and find their abducted daughter.

David Cameron was allowed to have an opinion.   Just because he was Prime Minister doesn't mean he can't empathise with the parents of a missing child.

This still doesn't mean he interfered with the Police Investigation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 12:38:51 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 03, 2022, 11:49:21 AM
David Cameron was allowed to have an opinion.   Just because he was Prime Minister doesn't mean he can't empathise with the parents of a missing child.

This still doesn't mean he interfered with the Police Investigation.

Theresa May shared Cameron's opinion it seems; "None of us can know what Madeleine's parents...have been going through...the pain...the pressure...We all want to see this beautiful little girl returned to her parents."
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/49may11/SUN2_13_05_2011.htm

She can only be returned if she's alive, so the PJ's suspicions that she died on 3rd May 2007 are not shared by May. She seems sure that the abduction theory is the correct one.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2022, 01:26:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 12:38:51 PM
Theresa May shared Cameron's opinion it seems; "None of us can know what Madeleine's parents...have been going through...the pain...the pressure...We all want to see this beautiful little girl returned to her parents."
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/49may11/SUN2_13_05_2011.htm

She can only be returned if she's alive, so the PJ's suspicions that she died on 3rd May 2007 are not shared by May. She seems sure that the abduction theory is the correct one.
that's because she's a reasonably intelligent woman.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 03, 2022, 01:32:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 03, 2022, 01:26:02 PM
that's because she's a reasonably intelligent woman.

Seems?  Seemed?  Those jolly old semantics again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 02:42:33 PM
Without the agreement of Paul Stephenson, the Met Commissioner the review the McCanns requested couldn't happen. Given that the Home Office agreed to fund it, Stephenson agreed to it going ahead. He said; " Sometimes we need to remind ourselves this is about a vulnerable missing child.

“I am a professional police officer and when you get a request to do something about a vulnerable missing child, you should take that request very seriously."
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/top-cop-vows-no-limit-3375735

Like Cameron and May Stephenson was open about his opinion, which was that Madeleine was a missing child. The actions planned were for Operation Grange to approach the case " It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional, new investigative approaches we would take and which can assist the Portuguese authorities in progressing the matter."

Although Op Grange was looking for new investigative approaches, the mention of the abduction suggests that any new approaches will be related to that scenario.

So the three people who instigated and organised the involvement of the Met seemed to agree on what crime was committed before any work began.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 03, 2022, 02:55:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 02:42:33 PM
Without the agreement of Paul Stephenson, the Met Commissioner the review the McCanns requested couldn't happen. Given that the Home Office agreed to fund it, Stephenson agreed to it going ahead. He said; " Sometimes we need to remind ourselves this is about a vulnerable missing child.

“I am a professional police officer and when you get a request to do something about a vulnerable missing child, you should take that request very seriously."
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/top-cop-vows-no-limit-3375735

Like Cameron and May Stephenson was open about his opinion, which was that Madeleine was a missing child. The actions planned were for Operation Grange to approach the case " It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional, new investigative approaches we would take and which can assist the Portuguese authorities in progressing the matter."

Although Op Grange was looking for new investigative approaches, the mention of the abduction suggests that any new approaches will be related to that scenario.

So the three people who instigated and organised the involvement of the Met seemed to agree on what crime was committed before any work began.

There you go.  "seemed" again
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2022, 03:00:19 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 02:42:33 PM
Without the agreement of Paul Stephenson, the Met Commissioner the review the McCanns requested couldn't happen. Given that the Home Office agreed to fund it, Stephenson agreed to it going ahead. He said; " Sometimes we need to remind ourselves this is about a vulnerable missing child.

“I am a professional police officer and when you get a request to do something about a vulnerable missing child, you should take that request very seriously."
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/top-cop-vows-no-limit-3375735

Like Cameron and May Stephenson was open about his opinion, which was that Madeleine was a missing child. The actions planned were for Operation Grange to approach the case " It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional, new investigative approaches we would take and which can assist the Portuguese authorities in progressing the matter."

Although Op Grange was looking for new investigative approaches, the mention of the abduction suggests that any new approaches will be related to that scenario.

So the three people who instigated and organised the involvement of the Met seemed to agree on what crime was committed before any work began.
Did they all suggest that any review of the case information must discard any evidence that supported a different theory?  If not, what point are you driving at exactly?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 03:04:55 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 03, 2022, 02:55:38 PM
There you go.  "seemed" again

That's what the evidence strongly suggests. The opinions are clear to see and were expressed before OG began, so owe nothing to any early work done by the Met as the opinions pre-dated it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 03, 2022, 03:07:34 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 03, 2022, 03:00:19 PM
Did they all suggest that any review of the case information must discard any evidence that supported a different theory?  If not, what point are you driving at exactly?

The McCanns killed Madeleine and these people had been suckered into thinking otherwise.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 03, 2022, 03:09:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 03:04:55 PM
That's what the evidence strongly suggests. The opinions are clear to see and were expressed before OG began, so owe nothing to any early work done by the Met as the opinions pre-dated it.

They weren't taken in by Amaral you mean?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 03:32:16 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 03, 2022, 03:07:34 PM
The McCanns killed Madeleine and these people had been suckered into thinking otherwise.

That's not something I've said btw, because I don't know what happened, unlike some.

The McCanns claimed their daughter was abducted immediately she disappeared. They used the media at every opportunity to spread that message. They were very persuasive and slowly but surely it became a fact rather than a hypothesis, although there was little or no evidence to support it. The only fact any investigation has uncovered is that Madeleine McCann disappeared on 3rd May 2007 and hasn't been seen since. OG has offered no evidence to support the hypothesis they have spent 15 years investigating. Unless you count the Commissioner's declaration; she wasn't old enough to decide to go off and start a new life. There you have it; the deductions those heading up the Met are capable of making.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 03, 2022, 03:34:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 03:04:55 PM
That's what the evidence strongly suggests. The opinions are clear to see and were expressed before OG began, so owe nothing to any early work done by the Met as the opinions pre-dated it.

And almost 12 years later and millions of pounds and still no answers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 04:23:47 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 03, 2022, 03:34:57 PM
And almost 12 years later and millions of pounds and still no answers.

Questioned at the time; MPA member Jenny Jones has now questioned the wisdom of that decision at a time when funds are short.

She told the Mail on Sunday: ‘The police should not take this case up in this way. It is ludicrous.

‘This could take years and will cost millions. It is very unusual for police to step in like this and it is not an appropriate use of police resources.’

She was proved correct, wasn't she?
https://metro.co.uk/2011/05/15/madeleine-mccann-inquiry-is-ludicrous-waste-of-police-funds-10665/

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 03, 2022, 04:28:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 04:23:47 PM
Questioned at the time; MPA member Jenny Jones has now questioned the wisdom of that decision at a time when funds are short.

She told the Mail on Sunday: ‘The police should not take this case up in this way. It is ludicrous.

‘This could take years and will cost millions. It is very unusual for police to step in like this and it is not an appropriate use of police resources.’

She was proved correct, wasn't she?
https://metro.co.uk/2011/05/15/madeleine-mccann-inquiry-is-ludicrous-waste-of-police-funds-10665/

You would think that, wouldn't you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2022, 05:11:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 03:32:16 PM
That's not something I've said btw, because I don't know what happened, unlike some.

The McCanns claimed their daughter was abducted immediately she disappeared. They used the media at every opportunity to spread that message. They were very persuasive and slowly but surely it became a fact rather than a hypothesis, although there was little or no evidence to support it. The only fact any investigation has uncovered is that Madeleine McCann disappeared on 3rd May 2007 and hasn't been seen since. OG has offered no evidence to support the hypothesis they have spent 15 years investigating. Unless you count the Commissioner's declaration; she wasn't old enough to decide to go off and start a new life. There you have it; the deductions those heading up the Met are capable of making.
You missed out the bit after them using the media at every opportunity and were soon being implicated in their daughter’s death by the very same media.  So, not that persuasive it would seem!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2022, 05:16:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 04:23:47 PM
Questioned at the time; MPA member Jenny Jones has now questioned the wisdom of that decision at a time when funds are short.

She told the Mail on Sunday: ‘The police should not take this case up in this way. It is ludicrous.

‘This could take years and will cost millions. It is very unusual for police to step in like this and it is not an appropriate use of police resources.’

She was proved correct, wasn't she?
https://metro.co.uk/2011/05/15/madeleine-mccann-inquiry-is-ludicrous-waste-of-police-funds-10665/
Has she?  Has the case been closed with the police admitting defeat?  I must have missed that headline.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2022, 05:18:10 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 03, 2022, 03:07:34 PM
The McCanns killed Madeleine and these people had been suckered into thinking otherwise.
McCanns = Masters Of Persuasion and Deception.  Innit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 03, 2022, 05:47:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 04:23:47 PM
Questioned at the time; MPA member Jenny Jones has now questioned the wisdom of that decision at a time when funds are short.

She told the Mail on Sunday: ‘The police should not take this case up in this way. It is ludicrous.

‘This could take years and will cost millions. It is very unusual for police to step in like this and it is not an appropriate use of police resources.’

She was proved correct, wasn't she?
https://metro.co.uk/2011/05/15/madeleine-mccann-inquiry-is-ludicrous-waste-of-police-funds-10665/

She certainly was. When police budgets as well as budgets for every other government department were being slashed OG has been a shocking waste of money.

A government who can be threatened into investigating a case that not even the police believed was their responsibility is not real government at all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 03, 2022, 06:15:46 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 03, 2022, 05:47:30 PM
She certainly was. When police budgets as well as budgets for every other government department were being slashed OG has been a shocking waste of money.

A government who can be threatened into investigating a case that not even the police believed was their responsibility is not real government at all.
Jenny Jones isn’t the police, you do know that don’t you?  What do you think would have been a suitable amount of money to spend on reviewing and reinvestigating the disappearance of a small child?  A pound?  A thousand?  A million maybe?  Should the police have a cap per investigation- spend x and even if you are seemingly making progress then once the money’s spent no more investigating, let the criminals go scot-free?   What do you suggest?   Perhaps you think Madeleine’s disappearance was so well and thoroughly investigated by the PJ that there was no point reviewing it anyway?  Yes, that will be it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 03, 2022, 09:44:03 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 04:23:47 PM
Questioned at the time; MPA member Jenny Jones has now questioned the wisdom of that decision at a time when funds are short.

She told the Mail on Sunday: ‘The police should not take this case up in this way. It is ludicrous.

‘This could take years and will cost millions. It is very unusual for police to step in like this and it is not an appropriate use of police resources.’

She was proved correct, wasn't she?
https://metro.co.uk/2011/05/15/madeleine-mccann-inquiry-is-ludicrous-waste-of-police-funds-10665/

Because of Grange CB is behind bars for a vicious rape.. There are another 5 charges pending... Would you prefer if he was still free
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 03, 2022, 11:34:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 03:04:55 PM
That's what the evidence strongly suggests. The opinions are clear to see and were expressed before OG began, so owe nothing to any early work done by the Met as the opinions pre-dated it.
You've got it wrong yet again.

What the evidence strongly suggests is that three influential people who had access to the scoping exercise commissioned by the previous Home Secretary and were privy to its content, were of a mind to allow a review of all available evidence from all available sources to be given proper professional scrutiny.

Had no investigative opportunities were presented as a result ~ that would have been it.  No further procedures would have occurred and Madeleine's case would have been abandoned yet again.

Had the evidence which resulted from the review been different, Scotland Yard would have followed those investigative possibilities.
But the volume of the evidence which was either new or which had been ignored and/or misunderstood or misinterpreted by original investigators was followed.  And there was a huge volume of it.

You really do appear to have quite a 'thing' about Madeleine McCann being looked for.

Former home secretary Alan Johnson commissioned a scoping exercise by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (Ceop) centre to look at the feasibility of carrying out a review of the case.

This was completed in March last year, but Mr McCann said Mrs May refused to let him and his wife see it because it was "sensitive".

The McCanns, from Rothley, Leicestershire, have written an open letter to Mr Cameron asking for an "independent, transparent and comprehensive" review of all information about Madeleine's disappearance.

They said: "A key piece of the 'jigsaw' could easily have been overlooked and not joined up with another. We have tried in vain to get the authorities in the UK and Portugal to play their part.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-scotland-yard-to-aid-179934
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 03, 2022, 11:41:54 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 03:32:16 PM
That's not something I've said btw, because I don't know what happened, unlike some.

The McCanns claimed their daughter was abducted immediately she disappeared. They used the media at every opportunity to spread that message. They were very persuasive and slowly but surely it became a fact rather than a hypothesis, although there was little or no evidence to support it. The only fact any investigation has uncovered is that Madeleine McCann disappeared on 3rd May 2007 and hasn't been seen since. OG has offered no evidence to support the hypothesis they have spent 15 years investigating. Unless you count the Commissioner's declaration; she wasn't old enough to decide to go off and start a new life. There you have it; the deductions those heading up the Met are capable of making.

If you admit to knowing nothing, why are you so dogmatic in promoting the opinions of those who do lay claims to omniscience?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 03, 2022, 11:48:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 04:23:47 PM
Questioned at the time; MPA member Jenny Jones has now questioned the wisdom of that decision at a time when funds are short.

She told the Mail on Sunday: ‘The police should not take this case up in this way. It is ludicrous.

‘This could take years and will cost millions. It is very unusual for police to step in like this and it is not an appropriate use of police resources.’

She was proved correct, wasn't she?
https://metro.co.uk/2011/05/15/madeleine-mccann-inquiry-is-ludicrous-waste-of-police-funds-10665/

What other criminal cases where there are active and strong evidential leads available to be followed, do you and Ms Jones advocate that properly constituted police investigations should be vetoed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 04, 2022, 12:25:11 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 04:23:47 PM
Questioned at the time; MPA member Jenny Jones has now questioned the wisdom of that decision at a time when funds are short.

She told the Mail on Sunday: ‘The police should not take this case up in this way. It is ludicrous.

‘This could take years and will cost millions. It is very unusual for police to step in like this and it is not an appropriate use of police resources.’

She was proved correct, wasn't she?
https://metro.co.uk/2011/05/15/madeleine-mccann-inquiry-is-ludicrous-waste-of-police-funds-10665/

One wonders how much of those millions has been taken up with FOI requests on each and every aspect of investigation into Madeleine McCann's unsolved case by those who by their actions, prove they hope it never is solved.

SNIP
Dear Home Office,

re: Freedom of Information - A Scoping Report in 2010 by Jim Gamble about the Madeleine McCann case

During 2009 and 2010, there were numerous reports in the British print and TV media about the preparation of a scoping report in connection with a possible review of the Madeleine McCann case. Alan Johnson was the Home Secretary at the time. Some newspapers made reference to the Metropolitan and West Yorkshire police forces having been asked to carry out this scoping exercise, but eventually it was announced that Jim Gamble, former boss of CEOP, was doing it. It is now known that this scoping exercise was used by the Home Office when, after the intervention of News International's then Chief Executive Officer, Ms Rebekah Brooks, the Home Office in conjunction with the then Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, decided to set up Operation Grange, the investigative review into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. This report was not made public and was described in the British press as 'top secret'.

Despite that, on Sky News yesterday (1 Sep 2014) and in several British newspapers within the past 24 hours, it was stated that a persons or persons unknown had 'briefed' Sky News and the press with partial disclosures from this 'top secret' report.

Arising out of the above facts, and notwithstanding that there continues to be an investigation into the facts surrounding Madeleine's disappearance, please answer the following questions:

1. What other persons or organisations or agencies were asked if they could carry out this scoping exercise, before Jim Gamble was approached?

2. On what date was Jim Gamble approached to carry out this exercise?

3. On what date did Jim Gamble complete his report and/or submit it to the Home Secretary?

4. Was any payment made to either CEOP or to Jim Gamble personally for carrying out this report; if so, what was the fee?

5. Is the report marked or treated as confidential?

6. If the report is confidential, has the Home Office authorised partial release of its contents to the media?

7. If it has so authorised such release, (a) who authorised the release of this information and (b) on what date was it authorised?

8. If any release of its contents has not been authorised by the Home Office, (a) has the Home Office begun an enquiry into who leaked this information and (b), if so, on what date did the leak enquiry begin?

9. Specifically, did the Home Office authorise Jim Gamble to disclose some of his report's contents to the media; if so, who authorised this disclosure and on what date was such authority given?

If the 'public interest' test is deemed to apply to any of the above questions, the issue of whether and under what circumstances persons are at liberty to release selected details of a confidential document within an investigation to the media is, it is submitted, manifestly a matter of the public interest.

Yours faithfully,    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/cy/request/this_request_is_about_factual_ma


Is it normal practice for concerned members of the public to tout for money to run personal campaigns or does it smack of abuse of the system?
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.
Donate Now
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 08:47:13 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 04, 2022, 12:25:11 AM
One wonders how much of those millions has been taken up with FOI requests on each and every aspect of investigation into Madeleine McCann's unsolved case by those who by their actions, prove they hope it never is solved.

SNIP
Dear Home Office,

re: Freedom of Information - A Scoping Report in 2010 by Jim Gamble about the Madeleine McCann case

During 2009 and 2010, there were numerous reports in the British print and TV media about the preparation of a scoping report in connection with a possible review of the Madeleine McCann case. Alan Johnson was the Home Secretary at the time. Some newspapers made reference to the Metropolitan and West Yorkshire police forces having been asked to carry out this scoping exercise, but eventually it was announced that Jim Gamble, former boss of CEOP, was doing it. It is now known that this scoping exercise was used by the Home Office when, after the intervention of News International's then Chief Executive Officer, Ms Rebekah Brooks, the Home Office in conjunction with the then Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, decided to set up Operation Grange, the investigative review into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. This report was not made public and was described in the British press as 'top secret'.

Despite that, on Sky News yesterday (1 Sep 2014) and in several British newspapers within the past 24 hours, it was stated that a persons or persons unknown had 'briefed' Sky News and the press with partial disclosures from this 'top secret' report.

Arising out of the above facts, and notwithstanding that there continues to be an investigation into the facts surrounding Madeleine's disappearance, please answer the following questions:

1. What other persons or organisations or agencies were asked if they could carry out this scoping exercise, before Jim Gamble was approached?

2. On what date was Jim Gamble approached to carry out this exercise?

3. On what date did Jim Gamble complete his report and/or submit it to the Home Secretary?

4. Was any payment made to either CEOP or to Jim Gamble personally for carrying out this report; if so, what was the fee?

5. Is the report marked or treated as confidential?

6. If the report is confidential, has the Home Office authorised partial release of its contents to the media?

7. If it has so authorised such release, (a) who authorised the release of this information and (b) on what date was it authorised?

8. If any release of its contents has not been authorised by the Home Office, (a) has the Home Office begun an enquiry into who leaked this information and (b), if so, on what date did the leak enquiry begin?

9. Specifically, did the Home Office authorise Jim Gamble to disclose some of his report's contents to the media; if so, who authorised this disclosure and on what date was such authority given?

If the 'public interest' test is deemed to apply to any of the above questions, the issue of whether and under what circumstances persons are at liberty to release selected details of a confidential document within an investigation to the media is, it is submitted, manifestly a matter of the public interest.

Yours faithfully,    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/cy/request/this_request_is_about_factual_ma


Is it normal practice for concerned members of the public to tout for money to run personal campaigns or does it smack of abuse of the system?
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.
Donate Now

I don't know how responses to FOI requests are funded, but it's difficult to see how the response to the request quoted would affect the costs of Operation Grange. It was addressed to and answered by the Home Office.

Is it relevant to the opinions held by Cameron, May and Stephenson? Possibly. They may have been influenced by the report produced by Jim Gamble, but that was also the opinions of one person.

Whatdotheyknow.com is a website which helps members of the public to submit FOI requests and saves them and the answers in it's database. They need donations because they volunteer their services.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 04, 2022, 09:24:42 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 08:47:13 AM
I don't know how responses to FOI requests are funded, but it's difficult to see how the response to the request quoted would affect the costs of Operation Grange. It was addressed to and answered by the Home Office.

Is it relevant to the opinions held by Cameron, May and Stephenson? Possibly. They may have been influenced by the report produced by Jim Gamble, but that was also the opinions of one person.

Whatdotheyknow.com is a website which helps members of the public to submit FOI requests and saves them and the answers in it's database. They need donations because they volunteer their services.
I thought on here we were of the view that politicians don't always wear their hearts honestly and openly on their sleeves?  Have you not considered the possibility that these High-Ups were merely paying lip service to the McCanns and pretending to be sympathetic but privately harboured huge suspicions which is why they asked for a review in the first place, to try and nail those crafty McCanns once and for all?  I mean, they could have instructed the Met to insert the words "as if the abduction happened in the UK" simply to lull the McCs into a false sense of security, I mean why not?  You entertain other conspiratorial theories without any evidence so surely this one's as good as any?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 04, 2022, 09:44:05 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 08:47:13 AM
I don't know how responses to FOI requests are funded, but it's difficult to see how the response to the request quoted would affect the costs of Operation Grange. It was addressed to and answered by the Home Office.

Is it relevant to the opinions held by Cameron, May and Stephenson? Possibly. They may have been influenced by the report produced by Jim Gamble, but that was also the opinions of one person.

Whatdotheyknow.com is a website which helps members of the public to submit FOI requests and saves them and the answers in it's database. They need donations because they volunteer their services.

Freedom of Information is a statutory service and as such is paid for by the public purse.

Operational personnel costs for responding to organised FOI campaigns don't just swirl around somewhere in the vacuum in some outer ether. 
There is cost.

It is rich that individuals who grudge every farthing spent on a missing child case and who require "funding" for "volunteering" their services disregard the dichotomy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 04, 2022, 10:04:03 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 08:47:13 AM
I don't know how responses to FOI requests are funded, but it's difficult to see how the response to the request quoted would affect the costs of Operation Grange. It was addressed to and answered by the Home Office.

Is it relevant to the opinions held by Cameron, May and Stephenson? Possibly. They may have been influenced by the report produced by Jim Gamble, but that was also the opinions of one person.

Whatdotheyknow.com is a website which helps members of the public to submit FOI requests and saves them and the answers in it's database. They need donations because they volunteer their services.

With reference to the scoping report carried out by Jim Gamble and which you appear to think should have been consigned to Paiva's "not relevant" section of the botched Portuguese 'investigation' despite being commissioned and a lot of investigative time devoted to it as a result ~
Phil Schofield quizzes former detective on why Maddie McCann update took 13 years
This Morning guest Jim Gamble, a child protection officer when Madeleine went missing, said the initial investigation was "bungled"
By Verity Sulway
11:48, 4 Jun 2020

This Morning host Phillip Schofield asked probing questions on Thursday's show as he and co host Holly Willoughby spoke to Jim Gamble, who was the UK's most senior child protection police officer when Madeleine McCann went missing.

It comes as a new suspect has been named in the case, 13 years after Madeleine, then three years old, went missing in Portugal.

Former detective Jim is also the former chief executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre.

Jim explained that the new suspect, an unnamed 43-year-old German man who is currently in prison, is a "very very significant person of interest", with several factors pointing to him being present on the night Maddie disappeared.

Phil asked: "This is substantial stuff here, how come it's taken so long

Jim replied: "The truth is, the beginning of this investigation in my opinion, was bungled.

That's not a direct criticism of the Portuguese police, it's a reflection of the fact these cases are very rare."

He added: "Lots of pieces of information in the beginning, I discovered from the review I carried out, weren't kept together."

Jim said they should have used a different software system to collate the information together, and said "cell dumps", or telephone information, were not properly interrogated at the time.

He said people of interest and leads were not all followed through at the time either.

"Thirteen years, and this is millions and millions of pounds, it's still a missing persons inquiry but it looks like the crucial piece of evidence took place to and pro in a chatroom?" asked Phil.

Jim would not confirm if this was the case, and said it was up to the police to disclose.

"It's the most hopeful I've been in 13 years," said Jim.

Jim said the suspect had committed similar offences, was in proximity at the time, his phone pinged off a cell tower near where Maddie disappeared, and he received a call an hour before Maddie is thought to have vanished.

Shortly after her disappearance, he changed his car registration.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/phil-schofield-quizzes-former-detective-22136928
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 04, 2022, 10:24:29 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 03, 2022, 05:47:30 PM
She certainly was. When police budgets as well as budgets for every other government department were being slashed OG has been a shocking waste of money.

A government who can be threatened into investigating a case that not even the police believed was their responsibility is not real government at all.

Waste of money?   If it were your child I doubt very much if you would say that.   They were given money to pursue their findings.   They had leads to investigate.   If they hadn't had any leads they wouldn't have got the money.  Simple as.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 04, 2022, 10:28:18 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 03, 2022, 10:53:56 AM
There is evidence that suggests Cameron wasn't considering the possibility of parental involvement.

Cameron; "my heart goes out to you both...I cannot imagine the pain you must have experienced...you have been so courageous..." He goes on to say actions by the Met "will help boost efforts in the search for Madeleine".
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/49may11/SUN2_13_05_2011.htm

It seems very clear that Cameron is an admirer of the McCanns and is acting to help them achieve their stated goals; to search for and find their abducted daughter.


So?  Admirer of the McCann's that is a very silly thing to say.   He had sympathy with them,  he had lost a child too remember.   That had nothing at all to do with what action the Police took.    As they said they went right back to the beginning,  thousands of sheets.    Give me an example of how Cameron interfered with the Assessment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 04, 2022, 10:49:37 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 04, 2022, 10:24:29 AM
Waste of money?   If it were your child I doubt very much if you would say that.   They were given money to pursue their findings.   They had leads to investigate.   If they hadn't had any leads they wouldn't have got the money.  Simple as.

That's a logical conclusion you have reached, Lace.  Unfortunately for them, McCann sceptics don't "do" logic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 11:04:19 AM
Jim replied: "The truth is, the beginning of this investigation in my opinion, was bungled.


As I said; one man's opinion.

My conclusion is that there is evidence that the abduction theory wasn't based on evidence, it was opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 11:15:17 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 04, 2022, 10:28:18 AM

So?  Admirer of the McCann's that is a very silly thing to say.   He had sympathy with them,  he had lost a child too remember.   That had nothing at all to do with what action the Police took.    As they said they went right back to the beginning,  thousands of sheets.    Give me an example of how Cameron interfered with the Assessment.

How could the police begin at the beginning when their remit told them what they were investigating?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 04, 2022, 11:21:02 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 11:04:19 AM
Jim replied: "The truth is, the beginning of this investigation in my opinion, was bungled.


As I said; one man's opinion.

My conclusion is that there is evidence that the abduction theory wasn't based on evidence, it was opinion.
Shared by many, and not just McCann supporters but other policing experts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 04, 2022, 11:22:30 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 11:15:17 AM
How could the police begin at the beginning when their remit told them what they were investigating?
Please supply evidence that the police were specifically instructed not to consider any other options but abduction.  Is a remit an order that must not be disobeyed on pain of disciplinary action?  If so please provide evidence of such.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 04, 2022, 11:25:44 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 04, 2022, 11:22:30 AM
Please supply evidence that the police were specifically instructed not to consider any other options but abduction.  Is a remit an order that must not be disobeyed on pain of disciplinary action?  If so please provide evidence of such.

No chance.  There isn't any, because it never happened.

Actually, the whole idea is preposterous.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 04, 2022, 11:38:43 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 04, 2022, 10:24:29 AM
Waste of money?   If it were your child I doubt very much if you would say that.   They were given money to pursue their findings.   They had leads to investigate.   If they hadn't had any leads they wouldn't have got the money.  Simple as.

Yes, a waste of money.

The 'leads' have all lead to total dead-ends.

Quote from: Brietta on November 04, 2022, 10:49:37 AM
That's a logical conclusion you have reached, Lace.  Unfortunately for them, McCann sceptics don't "do" logic.

Logic told me 15 years ago that there simply wasn't an abduction. So it's no mystery to me why the 3 investigative forces still haven't caught the abductor really.

Get back to me when they eventually do though aye.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 01:55:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 04, 2022, 11:22:30 AM
Please supply evidence that the police were specifically instructed not to consider any other options but abduction.  Is a remit an order that must not be disobeyed on pain of disciplinary action?  If so please provide evidence of such.

I'd be more impressed if you were able to supply evidence that my conclusion is wrong, rather than asking me to provide more evidence to support my conclusion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 04, 2022, 01:58:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 01:55:08 PM
I'd be more impressed if you were able to supply evidence that my conclusion is wrong, rather than asking me to provide more evidence to support my conclusion.

How can VS prove a negative?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 04, 2022, 02:42:16 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 01:55:08 PM
I'd be more impressed if you were able to supply evidence that my conclusion is wrong, rather than asking me to provide more evidence to support my conclusion.
Have you heard of the celestial teapot argument? 
You make the assertion, you supply the evidence, that's how it works.   You have intimated that the police were constrained by the High Ups from properly investigating the case - now show your evidence. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 04, 2022, 05:54:08 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 04, 2022, 02:42:16 PM
Have you heard of the celestial teapot argument? 
You make the assertion, you supply the evidence, that's how it works.   You have intimated that the police were constrained by the High Ups from properly investigating the case - now show your evidence.

This didn't happen.  Gunit has no evidence that it did.  Everything has always been pukka.  But she will go on saying otherwise in the vain hope that some fools will believe her.  Although God knows why.

The McCanns are innocent and after fifteen years you might think that this is obvious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 04, 2022, 06:36:56 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 04, 2022, 05:54:08 PM
This didn't happen.  Gunit has no evidence that it did.  Everything has always been pukka.  But she will go on saying otherwise in the vain hope that some fools will believe her.  Although God knows why.

The McCanns are innocent and after fifteen years you might think that this is obvious.
Conspiracists don’t do the obvious, the logical or the plausible I’m afraid.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 06:53:03 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 04, 2022, 11:22:30 AM
Please supply evidence that the police were specifically instructed not to consider any other options but abduction.  Is a remit an order that must not be disobeyed on pain of disciplinary action?  If so please provide evidence of such.

Which police? Every single one who worked on OG or the senior officers who decided how to achieve the investigative aims?

Those aims were set out in OG's remit. I would imagine consequences would follow if other aims were substituted.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 04, 2022, 07:20:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 06:53:03 PM
Which police? Every single one who worked on OG or the senior officers who decided how to achieve the investigative aims?

Those aims were set out in OG's remit. I would imagine consequences would follow if other aims were substituted.
Which police?  All of those involved in Op Grange of course!  What difference does it make which police?  What imaginary consequences do you think there would have been if one of the team came across evidence that strongly suggested Madeleine was not abducted?   Do tell.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 04, 2022, 07:35:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 06:53:03 PM
Which police? Every single one who worked on OG or the senior officers who decided how to achieve the investigative aims?

Those aims were set out in OG's remit. I would imagine consequences would follow if other aims were substituted.
What was the main aim of Operation Grange?   To prove she was abducted?  Because that seems to be your opinion.  In my opinion Operation Grange was set up to investigate what happened to Madeleine in the hope of finding her or her remains and bringing those responsible for her disappearance to justice.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 04, 2022, 08:13:46 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 04, 2022, 02:42:16 PM
Have you heard of the celestial teapot argument? 
You make the assertion, you supply the evidence, that's how it works.   You have intimated that the police were constrained by the High Ups from properly investigating the case - now show your evidence.
Well, there's never been any evidence Maddie was abducted, yet that's what Grange are investigating apparently. There must be some reason for them following that particular line of enquiry. Maybe the MET will reveal their own working one day. Or perhaps Wolters will reveal the concrete evidence. Much now shouldn't it longer be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 09:42:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 04, 2022, 07:20:49 PM
Which police?  All of those involved in Op Grange of course!  What difference does it make which police?  What imaginary consequences do you think there would have been if one of the team came across evidence that strongly suggested Madeleine was not abducted?   Do tell.

You seem sadly uninformed as to how organisations work. I expect the rank and file knew the goals of the investigation and they would be allocated tasks which those in charge wanted carried out. If an individual found something which didn't fit, he or she would raise the matter with his or her superior. It would then cease to be his or her concern. If they pushed for an answer no doubt they would be assured that it had been communicated to those higher up the chain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 04, 2022, 10:25:11 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 04, 2022, 09:42:40 PM
You seem sadly uninformed as to how organisations work. I expect the rank and file knew the goals of the investigation and they would be allocated tasks which those in charge wanted carried out. If an individual found something which didn't fit, he or she would raise the matter with his or her superior. It would then cease to be his or her concern. If they pushed for an answer no doubt they would be assured that it had been communicated to those higher up the chain.
@)(++(*. You really have swallowed the Konspiraloon Kool-Aid haven’t you?  Oh dear.  So as I wrote before you seem convinced Op Grange was set up with the sole purpose of proving an abduction.  £13 million to do that because…?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 04, 2022, 11:04:17 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 04, 2022, 08:13:46 PM
Well, there's never been any evidence Maddie was abducted, yet that's what Grange are investigating apparently. There must be some reason for them following that particular line of enquiry. Maybe the MET will reveal their own working one day. Or perhaps Wolters will reveal the concrete evidence. Much now shouldn't it longer be.

Oh yes there has.   Compelling facts that you are not party to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 09:39:43 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 04, 2022, 10:25:11 PM
@)(++(*. You really have swallowed the Konspiraloon Kool-Aid haven’t you?  Oh dear.  So as I wrote before you seem convinced Op Grange was set up with the sole purpose of proving an abduction.  £13 million to do that because…?

I see no conspiracies, that's your mantra. As I said, you seem to have no idea how hierarchical organisations work.

The only crime OG were investigating was abduction so there was no possibility of proving anything else, was there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 10:27:13 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 09:39:43 AM
I see no conspiracies, that's your mantra. As I said, you seem to have no idea how hierarchical organisations work.

The only crime OG were investigating was abduction so there was no possibility of proving anything else, was there.

There was never anything to prove in that direction.  That had all been done and dusted, not least by The PJ.  It is all now only in the minds of the nastier faction of humanity.

It must be really tiring and depressing when failure is inevitable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2022, 10:33:58 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 09:39:43 AM
I see no conspiracies, that's your mantra. As I said, you seem to have no idea how hierarchical organisations work.

The only crime OG were investigating was abduction so there was no possibility of proving anything else, was there.
If you can't see how what you are proposing suggests a conspiracy to conceal and cover up at the highest level then I really can't help you, but so often I find that conspiracists are beyond help.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 10:44:42 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 05, 2022, 10:33:58 AM
If you can't see how what you are proposing suggests a conspiracy to conceal and cover up at the highest level then I really can't help you, but so often I find that conspiracists are beyond help.

I can hardly believe that this is still going on after fifteen years.  It's a dead duck that went rancid a very long time ago.  It must be hell to live with the smell.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 10:53:36 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 05, 2022, 10:33:58 AM
If you can't see how what you are proposing suggests a conspiracy to conceal and cover up at the highest level then I really can't help you, but so often I find that conspiracists are beyond help.

I don't need your help. thank you. If those setting up and running OG believe in the stranger abduction theory then there's no need for a conspiracy.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2022, 11:14:30 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 10:53:36 AM
I don't need your help. thank you. If those setting up and running OG believe in the stranger abduction theory then there's no need for a conspiracy.
There is, if all the evidence points away from the abduction theory, and let's face it that's what you believe isn't it?  That all the evidence in the files suggests that abduction is the least likely theory?  So, you would have to try and rationalise to yourself why the professionals, ie those tasked with interpreting the evidence have come to a view contrary to your own.  Now, you seem to have decided that the McCanns were so amazingly persuasive as to some how convince all those professionals and high-ups who make these decisions that Madeleine was abducted. So persuasive were the McCanns that all these people's collective critical faculties had completely deserted them, making them utterly blind to the evidence staring them in the face.  So if it's not a conspiracy it's this, which let's face it is utterly bonkers. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 11:39:59 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 05, 2022, 11:14:30 AM
There is, if all the evidence points away from the abduction theory, and let's face it that's what you believe isn't it?  That all the evidence in the files suggests that abduction is the least likely theory?  So, you would have to try and rationalise to yourself why the professionals, ie those tasked with interpreting the evidence have come to a view contrary to your own.  Now, you seem to have decided that the McCanns were so amazingly persuasive as to some how convince all those professionals and high-ups who make these decisions that Madeleine was abducted. So persuasive were the McCanns that all these people's collective critical faculties had completely deserted them, making them utterly blind to the evidence staring them in the face.  So if it's not a conspiracy it's this, which let's face it is utterly bonkers.

Just a couple of points. The decision makers probably got their information where most people got it; the MSM. I don't suppose anyone examined the PJ files in detail. The MSM were busy telling everyone about poor heartbroken Kate and Gerry and the bumbling, inadequate PJ. The evidence doesn't stare anyone in the face, it takes a lot of work to find the anomolies and uncertainties in the files.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 05, 2022, 11:40:22 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 09:39:43 AM
I see no conspiracies, that's your mantra. As I said, you seem to have no idea how hierarchical organisations work.

The only crime OG were investigating was abduction so there was no possibility of proving anything else, was there.

What process do you think Operation Grange should have adopted?

Should they have looked at the torturer Almeida's interim report ... again ... and having come to the same conclusion as to its worthlessness the PJ investigators reached in 2007 ... have another look at it from the beginning again?

How often do you think they should repeat that?

I think it is way beyond time that internet theorists realise they know nothing beyond the machinations of corrupt policemen who were on a mission to add another mother's scalp to their list of patsies.

McCann case detective faces ‘torture’ trial
Steven Swinford and Christopher Thompson Lisbon
Sunday October 14 2007, 1.00am, The Sunday Times
A SENIOR Portuguese detective who interviewed Kate McCann and accused her of being involved in the death of her daughter is facing trial for trying to torture a suspect into confessing.

Leaked court papers reveal that Tavares Almeida is one of three officers accused of beating Virgolino Borges, a railway worker, during nearly eight hours of interrogation.

According to witness testimony the officers bound him with handcuffs behind his back, beat his bare feet with a fence post until it splintered and punched him repeatedly in the stomach, kidneys and back.

Almeida is the second leading detective to be accused of torture. Chief Inspector Goncalo Amaral, the investigation's former co-ordinator, stepped down earlier this month amid separate allegations that he concealed evidence of the torture
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mccann-case-detective-faces-torture-trial-hrm9dvf3msj

The rest is behind a paywall and as they say anyway, is history.  With heroes such as these two look up to is it any wonder the sceptic mantra is so flawed and downright nasty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 05, 2022, 11:45:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 11:39:59 AM
Just a couple of points. The decision makers probably got their information where most people got it; the MSM. I don't suppose anyone examined the PJ files in detail. The MSM were busy telling everyone about poor heartbroken Kate and Gerry and the bumbling, inadequate PJ. The evidence doesn't stare anyone in the face, it takes a lot of work to find the anomolies and uncertainties in the files.

Decision makers would not have used the Levy internet files.

Decision makers would have had access to all the intelligence and evidence from a variety of reliable sources available to them but not to internet bloggers.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 05, 2022, 11:47:43 AM
So, when were the McCanns re-interviewed/questioned by the PJ & interviewed by the MET & the BKA?

When exactly did these all these interviews take place?

No one is able to answer this question because the McCanns simply haven't been interviewed or questioned.
That much is obvious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 05, 2022, 11:50:02 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 10:44:42 AM
I can hardly believe that this is still going on after fifteen years.  It's a dead duck that went rancid a very long time ago.  It must be hell to live with the smell.

It doesn't smell as bad as Kate's clothes did though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 05, 2022, 12:12:47 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 05, 2022, 11:47:43 AM
So, when were the McCanns re-interviewed/questioned by the PJ & interviewed by the MET & the BKA?

When exactly did these all these interviews take place?

No one is able to answer this question because the McCanns simply haven't been interviewed or questioned.
That much is obvious.

Of course not. Why waste time looking at family when the remit is only stranger abduction ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2022, 12:25:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 11:39:59 AM
Just a couple of points. The decision makers probably got their information where most people got it; the MSM. I don't suppose anyone examined the PJ files in detail. The MSM were busy telling everyone about poor heartbroken Kate and Gerry and the bumbling, inadequate PJ. The evidence doesn't stare anyone in the face, it takes a lot of work to find the anomolies and uncertainties in the files.
And...?  My points, all of them, still stand.  Unless you seriously believe that the Met relied on the "MSM" for all their evidence gathering and didn't bother looking at the files?!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 12:34:11 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 05, 2022, 12:12:47 PM
Of course not. Why waste time looking at family when the remit is only stranger abduction ?

There are often signs of a dysfunctional family too, which were never found in the McCann family. Although some of the questions asked of Kate McCann by the PJ confused me.

"Asked whether or not it is true that the twins have difficulty sleeping, that they are restless and that that causes her uneasiness, she did not respond.

40 --- Asked whether or not it is true that at certain times she felt desperate [driven to despair; angered; exasperated] by the attitude of the children and that that left her much disquiet [unease], she did not respond.

41 --- Asked whether or not it is true that in England she was thinking to deliver MADELEINE into the custody [guardianship] of a family member, she did not respond."

Those questions could be interpreted as suggesting that the PJ suspected that the picture of a united happy family which had been painted by the couple might not have been the full story. In fact they suggest that the PJ had reason to think that it wasn't. Where did they get the idea that Kate would have considered relinquishing custody of her eldest daughter, I wonder?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 12:44:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 11:39:59 AM
Just a couple of points. The decision makers probably got their information where most people got it; the MSM. I don't suppose anyone examined the PJ files in detail. The MSM were busy telling everyone about poor heartbroken Kate and Gerry and the bumbling, inadequate PJ. The evidence doesn't stare anyone in the face, it takes a lot of work to find the anomolies and uncertainties in the files.

The Met spent thousands of Pounds getting The Files professionally translated and then didn't read them?  I thought that this is what they were doing during The Review.  Silly me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 12:46:31 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 05, 2022, 11:40:22 AM
What process do you think Operation Grange should have adopted?

Should they have looked at the torturer Almeida's interim report ... again ... and having come to the same conclusion as to its worthlessness the PJ investigators reached in 2007 ... have another look at it from the beginning again?

How often do you think they should repeat that?

I think it is way beyond time that internet theorists realise they know nothing beyond the machinations of corrupt policemen who were on a mission to add another mother's scalp to their list of patsies.

McCann case detective faces ‘torture’ trial
Steven Swinford and Christopher Thompson Lisbon
Sunday October 14 2007, 1.00am, The Sunday Times
A SENIOR Portuguese detective who interviewed Kate McCann and accused her of being involved in the death of her daughter is facing trial for trying to torture a suspect into confessing.

Leaked court papers reveal that Tavares Almeida is one of three officers accused of beating Virgolino Borges, a railway worker, during nearly eight hours of interrogation.

According to witness testimony the officers bound him with handcuffs behind his back, beat his bare feet with a fence post until it splintered and punched him repeatedly in the stomach, kidneys and back.

Almeida is the second leading detective to be accused of torture. Chief Inspector Goncalo Amaral, the investigation's former co-ordinator, stepped down earlier this month amid separate allegations that he concealed evidence of the torture
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mccann-case-detective-faces-torture-trial-hrm9dvf3msj

The rest is behind a paywall and as they say anyway, is history.  With heroes such as these two look up to is it any wonder the sceptic mantra is so flawed and downright nasty.

Birds of a feather?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 12:49:01 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 12:34:11 PM
There are often signs of a dysfunctional family too, which were never found in the McCann family. Although some of the questions asked of Kate McCann by the PJ confused me.

"Asked whether or not it is true that the twins have difficulty sleeping, that they are restless and that that causes her uneasiness, she did not respond.

40 --- Asked whether or not it is true that at certain times she felt desperate [driven to despair; angered; exasperated] by the attitude of the children and that that left her much disquiet [unease], she did not respond.

41 --- Asked whether or not it is true that in England she was thinking to deliver MADELEINE into the custody [guardianship] of a family member, she did not respond."

Those questions could be interpreted as suggesting that the PJ suspected that the picture of a united happy family which had been painted by the couple might not have been the full story. In fact they suggest that the PJ had reason to think that it wasn't. Where did they get the idea that Kate would have considered relinquishing custody of her eldest daughter, I wonder?

This Comment is a disgrace to this Forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 12:57:32 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 05, 2022, 12:25:58 PM
And...?  My points, all of them, still stand.  Unless you seriously believe that the Met relied on the "MSM" for all their evidence gathering and didn't bother looking at the files?!

Do you really believe that the Met examined all the files before the remit was written?

Detective chief inspector Andy Redwood told BBC's Panorama programme that he and his 35-strong team will begin analysing nearly 40,000 documents in what he says is the best opportunity for finding the child, who disappeared on 3 May 2007, just before her fourth birthday.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/24/madeleine-mccann-andy-redwood

Panorama: Madeleine - The Last Hope? BBC One, Wednesday 25 April 2012 at 7.30pm

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 01:05:09 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 12:49:01 PM
This Comment is a disgrace to this Forum.

Should certain evidence not be discussed then? Why do you think the PJ asked those questions?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 01:09:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 01:05:09 PM
Should certain evidence not be discussed then? Why do you think the PJ asked those questions?

What Evidence?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 05, 2022, 01:26:26 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 12:49:01 PM
This Comment is a disgrace to this Forum.

There is certainly a dysfunctional aspect to such statements being made despite the evidence being that the McCanns are a loving and close-knit family.

They would have had to be.  Not even the strongest of families could suffer the horrific experience of the kidnap of a child without being shattered to the core.
 There is a section of society attracted as moths to a flame who feel the need to express themselves unkindly to those suffering such unimaginable trauma in an effort to cause as much added distress as possible.

If such a horror should ever happen again - expect it!
Some people just cannot help themselves.  All we can do is continue to sympathise with the real victims as well as with their detractors. Who I don't think can be aware of how sad and troubled they are proving themselves to be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 05, 2022, 01:38:53 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 12:49:01 PM
This Comment is a disgrace to this Forum.

How so?
Care to explain?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 05, 2022, 01:40:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 01:05:09 PM
Should certain evidence not be discussed then? Why do you think the PJ asked those questions?

One thing certain sure is that the questions were nothing at all to do with the task of doing the day job of looking for and finding Madeleine McCann and what may have become of her.

That boat had sailed months before that according to Amaral/

You are holding a shining light up against the evidence that the 'investigators' seriously hadn't a clue about what they were doing.

They were asking the wrong questions of the wrong people.

Which was proved by the FACT that not one shred of the evidence used to make them persons of interest was substantiated when opened to scrutiny.

But you know all this already.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2022, 01:53:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 12:57:32 PM
Do you really believe that the Met examined all the files before the remit was written?

Detective chief inspector Andy Redwood told BBC's Panorama programme that he and his 35-strong team will begin analysing nearly 40,000 documents in what he says is the best opportunity for finding the child, who disappeared on 3 May 2007, just before her fourth birthday.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/24/madeleine-mccann-andy-redwood

Panorama: Madeleine - The Last Hope? BBC One, Wednesday 25 April 2012 at 7.30pm
Do you really believe that the High Ups told them to investigate an abduction and that despite all the so-called evidence to the contrary in the files that they would subsequently have discovered (and that you have based your own conclusions on), that they carried on with a complete sham investigation at a cost of millions of pounds for many years?  Is that REALLY what you believe????  It certainly seems to be your belief, and based on what evidence exactly? 

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2022, 01:56:21 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 01:05:09 PM
Should certain evidence not be discussed then? Why do you think the PJ asked those questions?
Because they had read Kate's diary and chose to read more into it than was actually meant in the first place I would imagine.  But questions asked by the police are not evidence in of themselves are they? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 03:21:59 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 05, 2022, 01:56:21 PM
Because they had read Kate's diary and chose to read more into it than was actually meant in the first place I would imagine.  But questions asked by the police are not evidence in of themselves are they?

So did Kate write in her diary that she had considered giving Madeliene to another family member to raise? Difficult to misunderstand that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2022, 03:58:51 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 03:21:59 PM
So did Kate write in her diary that she had considered giving Madeliene to another family member to raise? Difficult to misunderstand that.
I very much doubt she wrote that exactly, but she may have written something that some plonker of a Portuguese policeman misinterpreted as that eg: "I'm so knackered with looking after all three kids I've asked mum to have Madeleine for a bit and she's agreed".   I suppose you find it far more believable that Kate wanted to palm Madeleine off on someone else permanently....  *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2022, 04:06:09 PM
Does anyone seriously think that if Kate McCann had written in her diary that she had wanted to give Madeleine away that it would not have found its way into the international newspress as a great big massively damagine headlines, ones that could be proven as true as well, as it would have all been there, in Kate's own hand?  Not to mention being picked over by Amaral in his book?

c'mon people use your noodles.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 05, 2022, 04:10:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 03:21:59 PM
So did Kate write in her diary that she had considered giving Madeliene to another family member to raise? Difficult to misunderstand that.

She did write this ~ "  ... as she addresses her daughter: 'My sweetheart, my darling, my love, my companion. I love you more than anything.

'I'm going to dream that I'm lying by your side – moments I'll always cherish and I long to have again.'"

Only a sick mind could read your interpretation into a mother's distress and only sick minds could release leaks to that effect to the press breaking the law in the process as well as showing total moral bankruptcy in the process.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 05, 2022, 05:27:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 03:21:59 PM
So did Kate write in her diary that she had considered giving Madeliene to another family member to raise? Difficult to misunderstand that.
So did she write it or are you speculating it's true
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 06:15:20 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 12:46:31 PM
Birds of a feather?

Do you no long believe in innocent until proven guilty? The article says ‘accused’ not convicted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 06:18:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 05, 2022, 12:34:11 PM
There are often signs of a dysfunctional family too, which were never found in the McCann family. Although some of the questions asked of Kate McCann by the PJ confused me.

"Asked whether or not it is true that the twins have difficulty sleeping, that they are restless and that that causes her uneasiness, she did not respond.

40 --- Asked whether or not it is true that at certain times she felt desperate [driven to despair; angered; exasperated] by the attitude of the children and that that left her much disquiet [unease], she did not respond.

41 --- Asked whether or not it is true that in England she was thinking to deliver MADELEINE into the custody [guardianship] of a family member, she did not respond."

Those questions could be interpreted as suggesting that the PJ suspected that the picture of a united happy family which had been painted by the couple might not have been the full story. In fact they suggest that the PJ had reason to think that it wasn't. Where did they get the idea that Kate would have considered relinquishing custody of her eldest daughter, I wonder?


I seem to remember that a family member spoke to the authorities about the couple then was annoyed that the information was used by the police. I have often wondered if the information given relates to the questions above?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2022, 06:22:23 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 06:18:24 PM

I seem to remember that a family member spoke to the authorities about the couple then was annoyed that the information was used by the police. I have often wondered if the information given relates to the questions above?
Is there a record of this conversation any where in the files?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 06:30:36 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 12:46:31 PM
Birds of a feather?

I wonder how many investigation outcomes should be questioned because of these officers?

Sky:

'Thousands' of corrupt officers may be in police after vetting failures, watchdog warns
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2022, 06:52:42 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 06:30:36 PM
I wonder how many investigation outcomes should be questioned because of these officers?

Sky:

'Thousands' of corrupt officers may be in police after vetting failures, watchdog warns
Another one who clearly thinks there’s corruption, cover up and conspiracy involved in Operation Grange.  One of you, one day, is going to come up with a rational and plausible explanation as to why this should be the case but until then I won’t hold my breath…
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2022, 07:00:13 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 06:15:20 PM
Do you no long believe in innocent until proven guilty? The article says ‘accused’ not convicted.
You appear to be unaware that Almeida was convicted of torture.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 07:09:33 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 06:15:20 PM
Do you no long believe in innocent until proven guilty? The article says ‘accused’ not convicted.

Amaral was convicted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 05, 2022, 08:04:26 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 07:09:33 PM
Amaral was convicted.

Almeida was convicted.  Amaral was convicted. Everyone knows that.  Denial is merely an example of the duplicity which has hounded Madeleine's case from the word go.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 08:08:57 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 07:09:33 PM
Amaral was convicted.

Not of torture.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 08:10:15 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 05, 2022, 08:04:26 PM
Almeida was convicted.  Amaral was convicted. Everyone knows that.  Denial is merely an example of the duplicity which has hounded Madeleine's case from the word go.

You and I have moved on since then.  Some people never will.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 08:13:38 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 05, 2022, 08:04:26 PM
Almeida was convicted.  Amaral was convicted. Everyone knows that.  Denial is merely an example of the duplicity which has hounded Madeleine's case from the word go.

Apologies and thank you for the correction. I was merely going from the article printed.

The Met have come under sustained pressure to root out the widespread corruption within it. Where do you think the officers recruited to OG came from and, that being the case, how much faith should we put in the investigation itself?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 08:15:56 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 08:10:15 PM
You and I have moved on since then.  Some people never will.

It was Brietta who posted the article. Was Almeida mentioned before then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 08:18:58 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 08:15:56 PM
It was Brietta who posted the article. Was Almeida mentioned before then?

I heard about him a long time ago.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 08:42:52 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 08:18:58 PM
I heard about him a long time ago.

You said you and Brietta had moved on where others hadn’t but it was Brietta who mentioned Almeida which kinda suggests that she hasn’t….moved on that is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 08:52:28 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 08:42:52 PM
You said you and Brietta had moved on where others hadn’t but it was Brietta who mentioned Almeida which kinda suggests that she hasn’t….moved on that is.

In reply to a spurious question from Gunit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2022, 08:53:41 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 08:13:38 PM
Apologies and thank you for the correction. I was merely going from the article printed.

The Met have come under sustained pressure to root out the widespread corruption within it. Where do you think the officers recruited to OG came from and, that being the case, how much faith should we put in the investigation itself?
100%, unless you have any evidence that OG has been compromsed by corruption, bent cops, cover up and conspiracy?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 05, 2022, 08:58:14 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 08:18:58 PM
I heard about him a long time ago.

Unlike others obviously there is nothing wrong with either your long term or short term memory.

From a conversation in 2013
Quote from: ferryman on June 08, 2013, 04:17:23 PM
That is one point you are making.
Another point faith is making is that she implicitly trusts the word of a convicted torture.
And a third point I am making is that the word of a convicted torturer is not to be trusted.
I will make (my) second (the) fourth point: the prosecutors could find no evidence against any of the 3 (former) arguidos.
Reply #263 on: June 08, 2013, 04:30:21 PM Faithlilly
It was you who brought up the subject of Almeida, not I. I was merely perplexed what your post has to do with the fact that the McCanns are quite able to put a positive spin on events, even when they are going against them.
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1745.msg54393#msg54393
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 09:07:26 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 08:52:28 PM
In reply to a spurious question from Gunit.

Nonetheless Brietta brought him up…not Gunit or me but Brietta which suggests she hasn’t moved on as you claimed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 09:13:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 05, 2022, 08:58:14 PM
Unlike others obviously there is nothing wrong with either your long term or short term memory.

From a conversation in 2013
Quote from: ferryman on June 08, 2013, 04:17:23 PM
That is one point you are making.
Another point faith is making is that she implicitly trusts the word of a convicted torture.
And a third point I am making is that the word of a convicted torturer is not to be trusted.
I will make (my) second (the) fourth point: the prosecutors could find no evidence against any of the 3 (former) arguidos.
Reply #263 on: June 08, 2013, 04:30:21 PM Faithlilly
It was you who brought up the subject of Almeida, not I. I was merely perplexed what your post has to do with the fact that the McCanns are quite able to put a positive spin on events, even when they are going against them.
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1745.msg54393#msg54393

Well there you go….how did that slip my mind.

Still doesn’t alter the point I was making to Eleanor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 09:13:47 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 09:07:26 PM
Nonetheless Brietta brought him up…not Gunit or me but Brietta which suggests she hasn’t moved on as you claimed.

Tis difficult to forget some of the horror stories that came out of Portugal at the time.

Whether or not I or Brietta have moved on in your opinion is irrelevant.  Ground Hog Day is a fact of life in this Case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 09:21:13 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 09:13:47 PM
Tis difficult to forget some of the horror stories that came out of Portugal at the time.

Whether or not I or Brietta have moved on in your opinion is irrelevant.  Ground Hog Day is a fact of life in this Case.

Brietta has demonstrably not moved on but I absolutely agree with your Groundhog Day analogy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 09:27:10 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 09:21:13 PM
Brietta has demonstrably not moved on but I absolutely agree with your Groundhog Day analogy.

In Your Opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 05, 2022, 09:48:57 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 09:13:47 PM
Tis difficult to forget some of the horror stories that came out of Portugal at the time.

Whether or not I or Brietta have moved on in your opinion is irrelevant.  Ground Hog Day is a fact of life in this Case.

The mistakes made in the past are emphasised by the evidence led investigation of the here and now. There are those who wish to dwell in the past and have nobody to blame but themselves for their inability to move on from there.

We kept on hoping for Madeleine and moved on over the years buoyed by that.  So we have kept pace with current events as they unfolded even if they may not be unravelling as we had once hoped they would.

But I prefer to continue with hope until it is irrefutably whipped away from me.  But at least my hope is for the good and never would I deliberately behave with the vileness of heart required to wish ill on people already suffering more than flesh and blood could reasonably be expected to bear.

Had I that much malice in my being - I would never utter a word of it - I would be too black burning ashamed.  And I fail to understand how the active sceptics can fail to see how shameful their actions are.  I think that probably epitomises the differences.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 09:55:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 05, 2022, 09:48:57 PM
The mistakes made in the past are emphasised by the evidence led investigation of the here and now. There are those who wish to dwell in the past and have nobody to blame but themselves for their inability to move on from there.

We kept on hoping for Madeleine and moved on over the years buoyed by that.  So we have kept pace with current events as they unfolded even if they may not be unravelling as we had once hoped they would.

But I prefer to continue with hope until it is irrefutably whipped away from me.  But at least my hope is for the good and never would I deliberately behave with the vileness of heart required to wish ill on people already suffering more than flesh and blood could reasonably be expected to bear.

Had I that much malice in my being - I would never utter a word of it - I would be too black burning ashamed.  And I fail to understand how the active sceptics can fail to see how shameful their actions are.  I think that probably epitomises the differences.

The problem here is that they have no shame.  I find this very sad.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 10:28:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 05, 2022, 09:48:57 PM
The mistakes made in the past are emphasised by the evidence led investigation of the here and now. There are those who wish to dwell in the past and have nobody to blame but themselves for their inability to move on from there.

We kept on hoping for Madeleine and moved on over the years buoyed by that.  So we have kept pace with current events as they unfolded even if they may not be unravelling as we had once hoped they would.

But I prefer to continue with hope until it is irrefutably whipped away from me.  But at least my hope is for the good and never would I deliberately behave with the vileness of heart required to wish ill on people already suffering more than flesh and blood could reasonably be expected to bear.

Had I that much malice in my being - I would never utter a word of it - I would be too black burning ashamed.  And I fail to understand how the active sceptics can fail to see how shameful their actions are.  I think that probably epitomises the differences.

Where is your hope when pushing the Brueckner narrative?

It could be argued that it would be less reprehensible to believe that Madeleine had met a much kinder death in an accident than the truly awful fate that some maintain she suffered at the hand’s of such a abhorrent individual as Bruckner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 10:29:50 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 09:27:10 PM
In Your Opinion.

No as evidenced by her own posts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 10:35:20 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 10:29:50 PM
No as evidenced by her own posts.

It is still only your opinion.

I have no desire to be rude to you so I won't be replying again in this instance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 10:47:42 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 10:35:20 PM
It is still only your opinion.

I have no desire to be rude to you so I won't be replying again in this instance.

No problem. It’s okay to agree to disagree.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2022, 11:27:06 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 09:21:13 PM
Brietta has demonstrably not moved on but I absolutely agree with your Groundhog Day analogy.
The people who have “not moved on” are the ones who steadfastly cling on to the notion of the parents’ involvement like it’s still 2007, do you know who I mean?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2022, 11:29:09 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 05, 2022, 10:28:36 PM
Where is your hope when pushing the Brueckner narrative?

It could be argued that it would be less reprehensible to believe that Madeleine had met a much kinder death in an accident than the truly awful fate that some maintain she suffered at the hand’s of such a abhorrent individual as Bruckner.
Completely illogical nonsense again from you.  Will you never stop pushing this spurious and idiotic notion that it is somehow morally corrupt to think that Madeleine was abducted by someone such as Brückner, or that you have the moral high ground for believing the parents covered up an accidental death?  Get a grip woman.  You’re talking utter crap.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 05, 2022, 11:31:58 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 10:35:20 PM
It is still only your opinion.

I have no desire to be rude to you so I won't be replying again in this instance.
No worries, I did it for you.  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 05, 2022, 11:38:34 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 05, 2022, 11:31:58 PM
No worries, I did it for you.  8(0(*

I don't know what to say.  I'm lost for words.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 06, 2022, 12:17:31 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 05, 2022, 11:29:09 PM
Completely illogical nonsense again from you.  Will you never stop pushing this spurious and idiotic notion that it is somehow morally corrupt to think that Madeleine was abducted by someone such as Brückner, or that you have the moral high ground for believing the parents covered up an accidental death?  Get a grip woman.  You’re talking utter crap.

Whatever happened in 2007 is done and cannot be undone.  But if there is evidence revealing what did happen, it is morally indefensible not to interrogate it and if possible bring it to a conclusion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2022, 12:48:46 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 06, 2022, 12:17:31 AM
Whatever happened in 2007 is done and cannot be undone.  But if there is evidence revealing what did happen, it is morally indefensible not to interrogate it and if possible bring it to a conclusion.

This has to be done.  The last thing I want is for Madeleine to be dead.  But if she is then she is.  I have to leave it to The BKA, at least for now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 07:16:16 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 06, 2022, 12:17:31 AM
Whatever happened in 2007 is done and cannot be undone.  But if there is evidence revealing what did happen, it is morally indefensible not to interrogate it and if possible bring it to a conclusion.
Exactly right.  This repeated claim by some on here that those who think CB might be involved in Madeleine’s disappearance are morally deficient is utterly illogical and quite despicable imo.  Clearly it is deflection and says far more about the accusers than the accused imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 08:36:12 AM
The evidence gathered by the PJ didn't include anything suggesting that the crime against Madeleine was stranger abduction and nothing else. Nevertheless OG have spent years investigating just that.

So did they find evidence the PJ had missed? No, because the decision to concentrate on investigating stranger abduction was taken before OG had examined the evidence it had amassed.

Groundhog day has indeed occurred; the Portuguese  police have been denigrated, the Met's praises have been sung and those who have presented the facts have been accused of being nasty. All predictable and very boring, and none of that is relevant or changes the facts.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2022, 08:53:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 08:36:12 AM
The evidence gathered by the PJ didn't include anything suggesting that the crime against Madeleine was stranger abduction and nothing else. Nevertheless OG have spent years investigating just that.

So did they find evidence the PJ had missed? No, because the decision to concentrate on investigating stranger abduction was taken before OG had examined the evidence it had amassed.

Groundhog day has indeed occurred; the Portuguese  police have been denigrated, the Met's praises have been sung and those who have presented the facts have been accused of being nasty. All predictable and very boring, and none of that is relevant or changes the facts.

What Facts?  There are none to support your beliefs so it is pointless trying to deflect, again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 09:14:19 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 08:36:12 AM
The evidence gathered by the PJ didn't include anything suggesting that the crime against Madeleine was stranger abduction and nothing else. Nevertheless OG have spent years investigating just that.

So did they find evidence the PJ had missed? No, because the decision to concentrate on investigating stranger abduction was taken before OG had examined the evidence it had amassed.

Groundhog day has indeed occurred; the Portuguese  police have been denigrated, the Met's praises have been sung and those who have presented the facts have been accused of being nasty. All predictable and very boring, and none of that is relevant or changes the facts.
You've not provided a single scrap of evidence to support your belief that the Met were ordered by the High Ups to concentrate solely on abduction and to ignore any evidence that suggested another crime was committed.  Not one single scrap.  You're right about Groundhog Day though.  "I Got You Babe" woke me up again this morning.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 09:21:36 AM
This conspiracy theory wholly rests on one single phrase from the remit, as if this phrase was carved on tablets and handed to Redwood by God.  IMO the remit writer probably had no idea how significant his or her use of the word "abduction" in the remit would be to the Tin foil Hat brigade.  I mean, for all we know it was a used a tad carelessly as a synonym for the word "disappearance" and could equally have applied to mean that either parent or any of their friends, or extended family members may have been responsible.  As we have no way of knowing this really is a pointless discussion, apart from it has helped shine a light on some of the more conspira loon beliefs of those sceptics amongst us.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 09:52:21 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 06, 2022, 09:14:19 AM
You've not provided a single scrap of evidence to support your belief that the Met were ordered by the High Ups to concentrate solely on abduction and to ignore any evidence that suggested another crime was committed.  Not one single scrap.  You're right about Groundhog Day though.  "I Got You Babe" woke me up again this morning.

I never claimed that 'the Met were ordered by the High Ups to concentrate solely on abduction and to ignore any evidence that suggested another crime was committed'. That's a strawman argument therefore.

I claimed that the Met's decision to concentrate on investigating abduction wasn't based on a new assessment of the evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2022, 09:54:41 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 06, 2022, 09:21:36 AM
This conspiracy theory wholly rests on one single phrase from the remit, as if this phrase was carved on tablets and handed to Redwood by God.  IMO the remit writer probably had no idea how significant his or her use of the word "abduction" in the remit would be to the Tin foil Hat brigade.  I mean, for all we know it was a used a tad carelessly as a synonym for the word "disappearance" and could equally have applied to mean that either parent or any of their friends, or extended family members may have been responsible.  As we have no way of knowing this really is a pointless discussion, apart from it has helped shine a light on some of the more conspira loon beliefs of those sceptics amongst us.

I use Disappearance and Abduction, depending the gist of the conversation.  Either will do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 10:00:33 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 06, 2022, 09:21:36 AM
This conspiracy theory wholly rests on one single phrase from the remit, as if this phrase was carved on tablets and handed to Redwood by God.  IMO the remit writer probably had no idea how significant his or her use of the word "abduction" in the remit would be to the Tin foil Hat brigade.  I mean, for all we know it was a used a tad carelessly as a synonym for the word "disappearance" and could equally have applied to mean that either parent or any of their friends, or extended family members may have been responsible.  As we have no way of knowing this really is a pointless discussion, apart from it has helped shine a light on some of the more conspira loon beliefs of those sceptics amongst us.

If you want to believe that the remit writer was careless feel free. I think they said exactly what they meant.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 10:04:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 09:52:21 AM
I never claimed that 'the Met were ordered by the High Ups to concentrate solely on abduction and to ignore any evidence that suggested another crime was committed'. That's a strawman argument therefore.

I claimed that the Met's decision to concentrate on investigating abduction wasn't based on a new assessment of the evidence.
What was it based on then and who made that decision and why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 10:05:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 10:00:33 AM
If you want to believe that the remit writer was careless feel free. I think they said exactly what they meant.
Of course you would, because you read something conspiratorial into every word (where it suits you) particularly when written or spoken by those who you disagree with or suspect of nefarious doings.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2022, 10:22:15 AM

This is all getting really boring now because there is nothing left to say, other than to yet again to point out what really happened and the fibs being used.

Perhaps The Sceptics are hoping to drive us  all away and leave the field open to their conspiracy theories.  This might be quite a goos idea as they can only get worse and show themselves up even more than they have already done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 11:08:37 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 06, 2022, 10:22:15 AM
This is all getting really boring now because there is nothing left to say, other than to yet again to point out what really happened and the fibs being used.

Perhaps The Sceptics are hoping to drive us  all away and leave the field open to their conspiracy theories.  This might be quite a goos idea as they can only get worse and show themselves up even more than they have already done.

There is nothing left to say because there's nothing to suggest that the decision to investigate an abduction was evidence-based. No fibs were told and no conspiracies were suggested.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2022, 11:29:40 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 11:08:37 AM
There is nothing left to say because there's nothing to suggest that the decision to investigate an abduction was evidence-based. No fibs were told and no conspiracies were suggested.

Rubbish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 06, 2022, 11:36:45 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 11:08:37 AM
There is nothing left to say because there's nothing to suggest that the decision to investigate an abduction was evidence-based. No fibs were told and no conspiracies were suggested.

In time the remit of OG may be more damaging to the parents than anyone. If Brueckner is never charged and OG and it’s corresponding investigations in Portugal and Germany are closed with no result there will always be the question hanging in the air that if the remit had been wider would the case have been solved?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 12:46:27 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 06, 2022, 11:36:45 AM
In time the remit of OG may be more damaging to the parents than anyone. If Brueckner is never charged and OG and it’s corresponding investigations in Portugal and Germany are closed with no result there will always be the question hanging in the air that if the remit had been wider would the case have been solved?

If there is ever an enquiry into OG one of the first questions will surely be why only one possible crime was investigated.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 12:47:30 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 11:08:37 AM
There is nothing left to say because there's nothing to suggest that the decision to investigate an abduction was evidence-based. No fibs were told and no conspiracies were suggested.
Did the Met not conduct a thorough review of all the evidence and identify numerous lines for further investigation?  How would they have done this if not based on evidence?  Perhaps you could explain...?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 12:52:27 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 06, 2022, 11:36:45 AM
In time the remit of OG may be more damaging to the parents than anyone. If Brueckner is never charged and OG and it’s corresponding investigations in Portugal and Germany are closed with no result there will always be the question hanging in the air that if the remit had been wider would the case have been solved?
Wishful thinking dear, wishful thinking (and utterly illogical too).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 01:00:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 12:46:27 PM
If there is ever an enquiry into OG one of the first questions will surely be why only one possible crime was investigated.
What evidence is there that "only one possible crime" was investigated?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 01:08:33 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 06, 2022, 11:36:45 AM
In time the remit of OG may be more damaging to the parents than anyone. If Brueckner is never charged and OG and it’s corresponding investigations in Portugal and Germany are closed with no result there will always be the question hanging in the air that if the remit had been wider would the case have been solved?
And of course if the case is solved and Bruckner found guilty there will always be a question hanging in the air (in the homes of conspiracy theorists at least) that the police stitched up and innocent man and that the parents got off scott-free  *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 06, 2022, 01:15:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 12:46:27 PM
If there is ever an enquiry into OG one of the first questions will surely be why only one possible crime was investigated.

Absolutely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on November 06, 2022, 01:16:22 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 06, 2022, 11:36:45 AM
In time the remit of OG may be more damaging to the parents than anyone. If Brueckner is never charged and OG and it’s corresponding investigations in Portugal and Germany are closed with no result there will always be the question hanging in the air that if the remit had been wider would the case have been solved?

BKA's remit is murder in Madeleine's case, for which there must first have been evidence a murder was committed by a person they have the judicial authority to investigate. HCW has also stated BKA have enough evidence to charge CB with Madeleine's murder. Whatever your opinion of OG, their remit was/is far less exclusive than that of either BKA or PJ.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 01:25:45 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 06, 2022, 01:15:40 PM
Absolutely.
What other possible crimes in relation to this case do you think should have been investigated that weren't then?  List them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 06, 2022, 01:44:57 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 06, 2022, 01:08:33 PM
And of course if the case is solved and Bruckner found guilty there will always be a question hanging in the air (in the homes of conspiracy theorists at least) that the police stitched up and innocent man and that the parents got off scott-free  *%87

Brueckner being found guilty   @)(++(*
That's hilarious. Tell us another.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 06, 2022, 04:16:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 08:36:12 AM
The evidence gathered by the PJ didn't include anything suggesting that the crime against Madeleine was stranger abduction and nothing else. Nevertheless OG have spent years investigating just that.

So did they find evidence the PJ had missed? No, because the decision to concentrate on investigating stranger abduction was taken before OG had examined the evidence it had amassed.

Groundhog day has indeed occurred; the Portuguese  police have been denigrated, the Met's praises have been sung and those who have presented the facts have been accused of being nasty. All predictable and very boring, and none of that is relevant or changes the facts.
So did they find evidence the PJ had missed?

The answer to that quite simply is a resounding "YES".

Madeleine McCann’s parents are said to be “very, very pleased” with Scotland Yard’s review of their daughter’s disappearance, as it emerged detectives have identified “more than a handful of people of interest” in the case.

Detective Chief Superintendent Hamish Campbell said the review, dubbed Operation Grange, has identified “both investigative and forensic opportunities” and said the people of interest could be explored further, if only to be eliminated.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/world/arid-30594808.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 04:52:26 PM
G-Unit claimed that the Met's decision to concentrate on investigating abduction wasn't based on a new assessment of the evidence but refuses to say what was it based on or who made that decision and why.   Therefore I think it’s safe to say she doesn’t really know what she is talking about.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2022, 04:56:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 06, 2022, 04:52:26 PM
G-Unit claimed that the Met's decision to concentrate on investigating abduction wasn't based on a new assessment of the evidence but refuses to say what was it based on or who made that decision and why.   Therefore I think it’s safe to say she doesn’t really know what she is talking about.

I think it might be a bit more serious than that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 06:54:19 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 06, 2022, 04:16:37 PM
So did they find evidence the PJ had missed?

The answer to that quite simply is a resounding "YES".

Madeleine McCann’s parents are said to be “very, very pleased” with Scotland Yard’s review of their daughter’s disappearance, as it emerged detectives have identified “more than a handful of people of interest” in the case.

Detective Chief Superintendent Hamish Campbell said the review, dubbed Operation Grange, has identified “both investigative and forensic opportunities” and said the people of interest could be explored further, if only to be eliminated.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/world/arid-30594808.html

I meant they found nothing to persuade them to settle on abduction as the right crime to investigate before OG began. After it began they kept busy but found nothing of interest over the years. They eliminated Tannerman and some burglars but were unable to find Smithman. Rebelo missed an opportunity there, perhaps.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 07:04:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 06:54:19 PM
I meant they found nothing to persuade them to settle on abduction as the right crime to investigate before OG began. After it began they kept busy but found nothing of interest over the years. They eliminated Tannerman and some burglars but were unable to find Smithman. Rebelo missed an opportunity there, perhaps.
you don’t know what they found, but let’s say you’re right - why did they decide it was an abduction and refuse to entertain any other possibility?  You seem to know an awful lot about it so spill.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 06, 2022, 07:06:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 12:46:27 PM
If there is ever an enquiry into OG one of the first questions will surely be why only one possible crime was investigated.

Let’s hope Colin Sutton would be invited to give evidence.


UK detective refused to head up Madeleine McCann probe because 'Scotland Yard would order him to prove Kate and Gerry were innocent and ignore other leads'
Colin Sutton said he was warned by senior friend in the Met about case in 2010
Friend said he would be told 'who to talk to and what to investigate', he claimed
'Narrow focus' would be to prove Kate, Gerry and Tapas Nine innocent, he said
Spoke on Sky Documentary based on leaked Home Office report that revealed 'turbulent relationship' between McCanns and police in London and Portugal   

By JAMES DUNN FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 00:03, 3 May 2017 | UPDATED: 12:38, 3 May 2017

A detective tipped to head up the Madeleine McCann probe was warned he would be ordered to prove she was abducted and ignore other leads.

Colin Sutton said a high-ranking friend in the Met called him and warned him not to lead the case when Scotland Yard announced it would get involved in 2010.

The source warned that he would be tasked with proving her parents Kate and Gerry were innocent and ignoring any alternatives to the abduction theory, he claims.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4467832/Met-interested-proving-McCann-parents-innocent.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 07:40:38 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 06, 2022, 07:06:56 PM
Let’s hope Colin Sutton would be invited to give evidence.


UK detective refused to head up Madeleine McCann probe because 'Scotland Yard would order him to prove Kate and Gerry were innocent and ignore other leads'
Colin Sutton said he was warned by senior friend in the Met about case in 2010
Friend said he would be told 'who to talk to and what to investigate', he claimed
'Narrow focus' would be to prove Kate, Gerry and Tapas Nine innocent, he said
Spoke on Sky Documentary based on leaked Home Office report that revealed 'turbulent relationship' between McCanns and police in London and Portugal   

By JAMES DUNN FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 00:03, 3 May 2017 | UPDATED: 12:38, 3 May 2017

A detective tipped to head up the Madeleine McCann probe was warned he would be ordered to prove she was abducted and ignore other leads.

Colin Sutton said a high-ranking friend in the Met called him and warned him not to lead the case when Scotland Yard announced it would get involved in 2010.

The source warned that he would be tasked with proving her parents Kate and Gerry were innocent and ignoring any alternatives to the abduction theory, he claims.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4467832/Met-interested-proving-McCann-parents-innocent.html
I wonder how much he was paid for that interview.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 06, 2022, 07:52:24 PM
Colin Sutton verifying to Martin Brunt that he was told that OG would be focused away from the parents.

https://youtu.be/RF7fR0J5HOw

You can’t find what you’re not looking for.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 08:08:45 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 06, 2022, 07:04:08 PM
you don’t know what they found, but let’s say you’re right - why did they decide it was an abduction and refuse to entertain any other possibility?  You seem to know an awful lot about it so spill.

I know there was nothing in the PJ files which pointed to abduction as the crime which had been committed apart from the parent's insistence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 08:13:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 08:08:45 PM
I know there was nothing in the PJ files which pointed to abduction as the crime which had been committed apart from the parent's insistence.
So, no open window, no evidence from the other Tapas members, no sightings of suspicious activity by lurking males around the apartment shortly beforehand, no claimed sightings of Madeleine after the disappearance, no evidence whatseover apart from the parents say-so?  Right you are then.  And you have once again refused to answer who authorised this refusal to investigate anything other than abduction or why.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 08:17:08 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 06, 2022, 07:52:24 PM
Colin Sutton verifying to Martin Brunt that he was told that OG would be focused away from the parents.

https://youtu.be/RF7fR0J5HOw

You can’t find what you’re not looking for.
What should they have been looking for, specifically?  Tell us what you would have done had you been in charge.  How would you have gone about investigating the McCanns, highlighting all the opportunities missed by the PJ to solve this case.  Come on, give us the benefit of your wisdom.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 08:32:52 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 06, 2022, 08:17:08 PM
What should they have been looking for, specifically?  Tell us what you would have done had you been in charge.  How would you have gone about investigating the McCanns, highlighting all the opportunities missed by the PJ to solve this case.  Come on, give us the benefit of your wisdom.

I think it was OG who weren't going to find what they weren't looking for.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 08:43:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 08:32:52 PM
I think it was OG who weren't going to find what they weren't looking for.
That’s what I was asking - what should they have been looking for specifically?  Obviously the PJ missed all the evidence against the McCanns that the Met would have uncovered so what was it?  CCTV?  Secret taped confessions?  Anonymous Tapas Tip Off?  Hitherto unknown witness to the secret body burial?  What?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 06, 2022, 09:31:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 08:08:45 PM
I know there was nothing in the PJ files which pointed to abduction as the crime which had been committed apart from the parent's insistence.

1 The alarm was raised at 10.15pm, but first officers did not arrive in Praia da Luz until 11pm and the disappearance was not taken seriously enough

“This is an unacceptable delay, regardless of what they thought had happened to Madeleine,” says Colin.

“Even if they thought she had innocently wandered off, it should not have taken them 45 minutes to arrive.

“In a missing person case there is a judgment to be made about how it is treated. If it’s a 21-year-old who is missing after being out clubbing, you are not as worried as you would be about a missing three-year-old.

“I would like to think that any police officer who is told a three-year-old girl has gone missing will be instantly taking it extremely seriously.

“The question is do you treat it like a crime scene that needs to be preserved right from the start or is the most likely explanation that she wandered off? The Portuguese police were widely criticised for not sealing off the scene, making it a crime scene.

“But if there is a chance the missing girl could be wandering around lost in the immediate area, then that rightly takes priority. You are prioritising searching the immediate area rather than sealing off the scene.

“If there is sign of a violent struggle or forced entry then it would be different, but that wasn’t the case with Madeleine’s disappearance.

“If there was sign of forced entry, then your thinking starts going down the line of crime rather than just a missing person. But in the absence of any evidence your natural thought is she has wandered off.

“You think, ‘Let’s start looking for her’, rather than thinking of anything as sinister as abduction.

“That would have been the call for the uniformed officers who were first on the scene at the Ocean Club.

“Once she was not found in the immediate area then I would have asked the officers to look for evidence of a crime.

“I can well imagine that the Portuguese police’s initial thoughts were that they were going to find the little girl wandering around in her pyjamas no further than half a mile from the apartment.

“When the searches have proved fruitless I would want to talk to the parents.

“Very quickly there should have been the realisation that this was a crime rather than something more innocent. That should have been realised within 30 minutes, but in Madeleine’s case it clearly wasn’t realised all that quickly.

“It was not taken as seriously as it should have been.”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590


According to Colin Sutton you've got it all entirely wrong yet again.

The parents were right to suspect foul play - again according to Sutton.

Thirty minutes should have been the optimum elapsed time scale before treating the disappearance of a three year old child as a serious incident - once again Sutton's opinion which coincides with that of other child protection experts.  Madeleine had already been missing for longer than that before the first responders arrived on the scene, so her parent's instincts about proper procedures which should have been followed was spot on.

Add to the mix a witness sighting of an unknown man leaving the vicinity carrying a child and I think you've got a situation for checking what CCTV there was and checking vehicular traffic travelling away from the town at night.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 06, 2022, 09:36:06 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 08:08:45 PM
I know there was nothing in the PJ files which pointed to abduction as the crime which had been committed apart from the parent's insistence.
6 Forensic examinations of the McCann apartment were poor and no DNA tests were carried out on Madeleine’s toy Cuddle Cat

“In a case like this, you start by looking where Madeleine was when she was taken.

“She was in her bed, probably clutching her fluffy toy Cuddle Cat. So that’s where the forensics begins. The abductor would have had to pull back the duvet, probably physically remove Cuddle Cat from Madeleine’s arms.

"If the reports are true that no DNA tests were carried out on Cuddle Cat before Kate washed it, that’s astonishing.

“There were photographs of officers in their normal clothes, not even wearing gloves, doing fingerprints. It looks like they just didn’t do a good job.”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590


According to Colin Sutton the lack of attention given to gathering forensic evidence from materials which had been physically close to Madeleine was "astonishing".

What I think is even more astonishing is the fact the police allowed the cleaners to remove Madeleine's bedding to allow it to be washed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 06, 2022, 09:38:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 06, 2022, 08:08:45 PM
I know there was nothing in the PJ files which pointed to abduction as the crime which had been committed apart from the parent's insistence.

5 Lack of information released to public from Portuguese police

“There was no publicising the case from the local police, which is unheard of back home.

“The public assistance in a case like Madeleine’s would have been huge because of the emotive subject - a missing three-year-old girl. It defies belief that they did not publish e-fits once they had them.

“Their lack of PR explains why the McCanns were so pro-active on that front. They were trying to fill the vacuum.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590



The parents did what the police should have done by doing their utmost to publicise Madeleine's disappearance.
were right to suspect foul play.

If the police weren't capable of doing their job ~ somebody had to do it
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 06, 2022, 10:27:54 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 06, 2022, 09:36:06 PM
6 Forensic examinations of the McCann apartment were poor and no DNA tests were carried out on Madeleine’s toy Cuddle Cat

“In a case like this, you start by looking where Madeleine was when she was taken.

“She was in her bed, probably clutching her fluffy toy Cuddle Cat. So that’s where the forensics begins. The abductor would have had to pull back the duvet, probably physically remove Cuddle Cat from Madeleine’s arms.

"If the reports are true that no DNA tests were carried out on Cuddle Cat before Kate washed it, that’s astonishing.

“There were photographs of officers in their normal clothes, not even wearing gloves, doing fingerprints. It looks like they just didn’t do a good job.”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590


According to Colin Sutton the lack of attention given to gathering forensic evidence from materials which had been physically close to Madeleine was "astonishing".

What I think is even more astonishing is the fact the police allowed the cleaners to remove Madeleine's bedding to allow it to be washed.
How dare Colin Sutton criticise the PJ, he obviously doesn’t know what he’s talking about.  Except when he’s saying something that supports the sceptic argument of course, and then he is positively heroic.  *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 06, 2022, 11:01:41 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 06, 2022, 09:36:06 PM
6 Forensic examinations of the McCann apartment were poor and no DNA tests were carried out on Madeleine’s toy Cuddle Cat

“In a case like this, you start by looking where Madeleine was when she was taken.

“She was in her bed, probably clutching her fluffy toy Cuddle Cat. So that’s where the forensics begins. The abductor would have had to pull back the duvet, probably physically remove Cuddle Cat from Madeleine’s arms.

"If the reports are true that no DNA tests were carried out on Cuddle Cat before Kate washed it, that’s astonishing.

“There were photographs of officers in their normal clothes, not even wearing gloves, doing fingerprints. It looks like they just didn’t do a good job.”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590


According to Colin Sutton the lack of attention given to gathering forensic evidence from materials which had been physically close to Madeleine was "astonishing".

What I think is even more astonishing is the fact the police allowed the cleaners to remove Madeleine's bedding to allow it to be washed.

I’ve just watched an interview with Colin Sutton in which he explained how he was misquoted in articles taken from interviews. Shall I post it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 07, 2022, 07:27:44 AM
Colin Sutton's information about the nature of OG was useful, but when he pontificated about other things his lack of knowledge shows. He said;

"The alarm was raised at 10.15pm, but first officers did not arrive in Praia da Luz until 11pm and the disappearance was not taken seriously enough

“This is an unacceptable delay, regardless of what they thought had happened to Madeleine,” says Colin.

Even if they thought she had innocently wandered off, it should not have taken them 45 minutes to arrive."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590

If Sutton had read the files he would know that it didn't take the police 45 minutes to arrive, so that criticism isn't relevant.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2022, 08:16:49 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 07, 2022, 07:27:44 AM
Colin Sutton's information about the nature of OG was useful, but when he pontificated about other things his lack of knowledge shows. He said;

"The alarm was raised at 10.15pm, but first officers did not arrive in Praia da Luz until 11pm and the disappearance was not taken seriously enough

“This is an unacceptable delay, regardless of what they thought had happened to Madeleine,” says Colin.

Even if they thought she had innocently wandered off, it should not have taken them 45 minutes to arrive."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590

If Sutton had read the files he would know that it didn't take the police 45 minutes to arrive, so that criticism isn't relevant.
His “revelations”  on OG was based on his interpretation of what he was allegedly told by an inside source whose role in the Met and in particular Operation Grange (if any) remains unknown to this day.  I’m amazed he’s managed to remain silent on the most recent developments in this case, perhaps he’s been too busy revelling in his elevation to TV star detective  as played by Martin Clunes and doesn’t need the money anymore.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 07, 2022, 08:31:26 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 07, 2022, 07:27:44 AM
Colin Sutton's information about the nature of OG was useful, but when he pontificated about other things his lack of knowledge shows. He said;

"The alarm was raised at 10.15pm, but first officers did not arrive in Praia da Luz until 11pm and the disappearance was not taken seriously enough

“This is an unacceptable delay, regardless of what they thought had happened to Madeleine,” says Colin.

Even if they thought she had innocently wandered off, it should not have taken them 45 minutes to arrive."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590

If Sutton had read the files he would know that it didn't take the police 45 minutes to arrive, so that criticism isn't relevant.

Watch from around 15 minutes when Sutton discusses the Portuguese investigation.

https://youtu.be/sVQ-bMpjik4

Much less scathing than the quotes from the article.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2022, 09:13:04 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 07, 2022, 08:31:26 AM
Watch from around 15 minutes when Sutton discusses the Portuguese investigation.

https://youtu.be/sVQ-bMpjik4

Much less scathing than the quotes from the article.
Row back.  Playing to a different audience.  For money and promotion of a book I might add. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 07, 2022, 10:02:25 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 07, 2022, 08:31:26 AM
Watch from around 15 minutes when Sutton discusses the Portuguese investigation.

https://youtu.be/sVQ-bMpjik4

Much less scathing than the quotes from the article.

He discusses how the media twist what people say to them. At 11.19 he speaks of going to PdL with a newspaper in 2017 and how they misrepresented what he said. Could it have been the article quoted;

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 07, 2022, 10:07:03 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 06, 2022, 09:36:06 PM
6 Forensic examinations of the McCann apartment were poor and no DNA tests were carried out on Madeleine’s toy Cuddle Cat

“In a case like this, you start by looking where Madeleine was when she was taken.

“She was in her bed, probably clutching her fluffy toy Cuddle Cat. So that’s where the forensics begins. The abductor would have had to pull back the duvet, probably physically remove Cuddle Cat from Madeleine’s arms.

"If the reports are true that no DNA tests were carried out on Cuddle Cat before Kate washed it, that’s astonishing.

“There were photographs of officers in their normal clothes, not even wearing gloves, doing fingerprints. It looks like they just didn’t do a good job.”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590


According to Colin Sutton the lack of attention given to gathering forensic evidence from materials which had been physically close to Madeleine was "astonishing".

What I think is even more astonishing is the fact the police allowed the cleaners to remove Madeleine's bedding to allow it to be washed.

It's unbelievable that the bedding was removed and washed.   Thery tested for drugs but they should have tested for skin and hair too using that sticky tape or a vacuum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2022, 10:16:22 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 07, 2022, 10:02:25 AM
He discusses how the media twist what people say to them. At 11.19 he speaks of going to PdL with a newspaper in 2017 and how they misrepresented what he said. Could it have been the article quoted;

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590
By the time of this video CS had found himself an appreciative audience among the online sceptic community.  I reckon he changed his tune  somewhat to pander to that appreciative (and potentially lucrative) demographic. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 07, 2022, 10:19:51 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 07, 2022, 07:27:44 AM
Colin Sutton's information about the nature of OG was useful, but when he pontificated about other things his lack of knowledge shows. He said;

"The alarm was raised at 10.15pm, but first officers did not arrive in Praia da Luz until 11pm and the disappearance was not taken seriously enough

“This is an unacceptable delay, regardless of what they thought had happened to Madeleine,” says Colin.

Even if they thought she had innocently wandered off, it should not have taken them 45 minutes to arrive."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590

If Sutton had read the files he would know that it didn't take the police 45 minutes to arrive, so that criticism isn't relevant.

The 'pick-and-mix' problem which afflicts squirming through the selection process of quotes from a prolific interviewee who very often says the exact opposite of the sceptic mantra they think he adopted makes for amusing reading.

Quite frankly, watching the risible antics as you attempt to adopt the very few utterances from this man acceptable to your prejudices v the myriad of examples where he is in patent disagreement.

Nota Bene
Interviewer  Are there any unsolved cases across the world that you would be interested in tackling?
Colin Sutton  Not now, I am too happy being retired!
But had the Madeline McCann review come my way before retirement I would have stayed to complete that; it is the greatest mystery of our generation, and despite its obvious difficulty I would have been unable to resist the opportunity to try to help solve it.
https://www.crimeandinvestigation.co.uk/article/interview-with-colin-sutton
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 07, 2022, 10:32:58 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 07, 2022, 10:07:03 AM
It's unbelievable that the bedding was removed and washed.   Thery tested for drugs but they should have tested for skin and hair too using that sticky tape or a vacuum.

At the very least anything which had been in known immediate contact with Madeleine should have been bagged for evidence.

Even if the technology wasn't available at the time advances in forensic science might have made a difference as has happened in many cold cases.

Curtains were retained as was the cover from the other single bed in the room.  So Madeleine's bedding had it been retained would not have presented a storage problem.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 07, 2022, 10:53:47 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 07, 2022, 10:16:22 AM
By the time of this video CS had found himself an appreciative audience among the online sceptic community.  I reckon he changed his tune  somewhat to pander to that appreciative (and potentially lucrative) demographic.

I believe Colin Sutton remains active on internet social media with a blog, twitter etc.  I do not believe he has repeated anything which bolsters sceptic paranoia since his initial miscalculation was treated with such ecstasy.

Does his head still adorn a place of honour in another place? or did he join Sandra Felgueiras's decapitation when she got it through to them that she wasn't the sceptic icon they thought she was after all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2022, 11:04:03 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 07, 2022, 10:53:47 AM
I believe Colin Sutton remains active on internet social media with a blog, twitter etc. I do not believe he has repeated anything which bolsters sceptic paranoia since his initial miscalculation was treated with such ecstasy.

Does his head still adorn a place of honour in another place? or did he join Sandra Felgueiras's decapitation when she got it through to them that she wasn't the sceptic icon they thought she was after all.
Probably threatened by the "High-Ups"  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 07, 2022, 11:11:40 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 07, 2022, 11:04:03 AM
Probably threatened by the "High-Ups"  @)(++(*

Not so much "threatened" ~ I think a realisation of the cess pit he had inadvertently stumbled into 😒
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 07, 2022, 11:28:10 AM

Why are people talking about Colin Sutton when there's concrete evidence against the new prime suspect we could be discussing?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 07, 2022, 02:08:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 07, 2022, 10:02:25 AM
He discusses how the media twist what people say to them. At 11.19 he speaks of going to PdL with a newspaper in 2017 and how they misrepresented what he said. Could it have been the article quoted;

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590

Absolutely but no doubt those who disagree will try to besmirch his unblemished reputation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2022, 02:14:27 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 07, 2022, 02:08:02 PM
Absolutely but no doubt those who disagree will try to besmirch his unblemished reputation.
He's just another Rent-A-Gob, wheeled out to pontificate on things that he doesn't have the full picture on.  Very helpful I'm sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 07, 2022, 05:46:04 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 07, 2022, 02:08:02 PM
Absolutely but no doubt those who disagree will try to besmirch his unblemished reputation.
All part  of the game. Innit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2022, 05:52:16 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 07, 2022, 05:46:04 PM
All part  of the game. Innit.
Yes, it’s not as if you or Faithlilly have ever besmirched anyone linked to this case.  Innit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 07, 2022, 06:49:31 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 07, 2022, 05:46:04 PM
All part  of the game. Innit.

Unfortunately for them Sutton’s professional record for nabbing wrong ‘uns speaks for itself.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2022, 07:57:59 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 07, 2022, 06:49:31 PM
Unfortunately for them Sutton’s professional record for nabbing wrong ‘uns speaks for itself.
The Met (ex) officer it’s OK to like (if you’re a sceptic!)   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 07, 2022, 08:01:37 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 07, 2022, 07:57:59 PM
The Met (ex) officer it’s OK to like (if you’re a sceptic!)

Has he nicked The McCanns yet?.  If not why not?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 07, 2022, 08:13:12 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 07, 2022, 08:01:37 PM
Has he nicked The McCanns yet?.  If not why not?

That’s the thing. Sutton, as far as I’m aware, has never said whether he thinks the parents are guilty or innocent. What he has said is that OG was purposely directed away from them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 07, 2022, 08:16:49 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 07, 2022, 08:13:12 PM
That’s the thing. Sutton, as far as I’m aware, has never said whether he thinks the parents are guilty or innocent. What he has said is that OG was purposely directed away from them.

But he's brilliant.  That shouldn't stop him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2022, 08:47:18 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 07, 2022, 08:13:12 PM
That’s the thing. Sutton, as far as I’m aware, has never said whether he thinks the parents are guilty or innocent. What he has said is that OG was purposely directed away from them.
I wonder how much he was paid for that interview…?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 07, 2022, 09:12:33 PM

Perhaps Colin Sutton is only any good when he's told what to do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 07, 2022, 10:31:36 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 07, 2022, 09:12:33 PM
Perhaps Colin Sutton is only any good when he's told what to do.

I think that’s the point…he wasn’t happy being told where to look.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 07, 2022, 10:41:05 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 07, 2022, 10:31:36 PM
I think that’s the point…he wasn’t happy being told where to look.
He wasn’t happy not being offered the job more like.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 07, 2022, 11:33:36 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 07, 2022, 10:31:36 PM
I think that’s the point…he wasn’t happy being told where to look.

He wasn't asked.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 08, 2022, 09:02:52 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 07, 2022, 09:12:33 PM
Perhaps Colin Sutton is only any good when he's told what to do.

If that were the case he would have fitted well into OG.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2022, 09:12:47 AM
Say OG in the course of their reinvestigation into stranger abduction obtained CCTV footage which clearly showed Gerry McCann carrying a small blonde child through the streets at 10pm on the night of the disappearance - is it sceptic belief that the Met would ignore it because it didn’t fit the remit?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 08, 2022, 10:12:27 AM

Manhunt.  Devised by Colin Sutton.  Based on the memoirs of Colin Sutton.

But it might be worth a watch if you take it with a pinch of salt.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 08, 2022, 10:23:08 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 08, 2022, 09:12:47 AM
Say OG in the course of their reinvestigation into stranger abduction obtained CCTV footage which clearly showed Gerry McCann carrying a small blonde child through the streets at 10pm on the night of the disappearance - is it sceptic belief that the Met would ignore it because it didn’t fit the remit?

That simply wouldn't happen, because it's logistically impossible for the McCanns to be involved. So I'm reliably informed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 08, 2022, 10:31:11 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 08, 2022, 09:12:47 AM
Say OG in the course of their reinvestigation into stranger abduction obtained CCTV footage which clearly showed Gerry McCann carrying a small blonde child through the streets at 10pm on the night of the disappearance - is it sceptic belief that the Met would ignore it because it didn’t fit the remit?

There was no such evidence to find, so that question's a bit fanciful.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 08, 2022, 10:41:11 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 07, 2022, 11:33:36 PM
He wasn't asked.

He was being considered.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 08, 2022, 10:42:47 AM
Besides, wouldn't Gerry be 'parading' this child through the streets at 10pm? He couldn't just 'carry' her. He'd have to be 'parading' her, I'm usually told.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2022, 10:48:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 08, 2022, 10:31:11 AM
There was no such evidence to find, so that question's a bit fanciful.
That's beside the point, but of course you are choosing to deflect from the point as it's easier to do.  Had the Met uncovered ANY evidence that clearly pointed at Gerry McCann hiding his daughter's body would the Met simply have ignored it in your view? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2022, 10:50:27 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 08, 2022, 10:41:11 AM
He was being considered.
According to who?  Him?  I wonder why he was overlooked then....?  Don't tellme.... too good at his job and would have had those dastardly mcCanns banged up in a jiffy.  Yep, it's a cover up and conspiracy all right!!!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 08, 2022, 11:45:23 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 08, 2022, 10:48:44 AM
That's beside the point, but of course you are choosing to deflect from the point as it's easier to do.  Had the Met uncovered ANY evidence that clearly pointed at Gerry McCann hiding his daughter's body would the Met simply have ignored it in your view?

There was no evidence giving the kind of clear indication you are speculating about, so you're inventing a scenario which couldn't have happened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 08, 2022, 11:55:00 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 08, 2022, 11:45:23 AM
There was no evidence giving the kind of clear indication you are speculating about, so you're inventing a scenario which couldn't have happened.

You never do this.  Of Course?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2022, 12:13:41 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 08, 2022, 11:45:23 AM
There was no evidence giving the kind of clear indication you are speculating about, so you're inventing a scenario which couldn't have happened.
LOL.  A great get out for you to avoid answering the question.  Given that you believe the Met should have started at the beginning and reinvestigated EVERY theory including the "parents dunnit" theory then it would follow that you think there may have been evidence to find that would help to build a case against them, therefore you must concede that you don't know whether or not such evidence exists to be found.   So let me ask again - do you think that should such clear evidence have been uncovered in the course of their investigation into stranger abduction that the Met would have ignored it as it didn't fit the brief?  Are you going to address this point at last or are you simply going to fudge it once again?  My money's on the latter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2022, 12:18:14 PM
If there was literally no evidence to be found to point to parental involvement as G-Unit has mooted, then why would she have the Met waste time and resources starting at the beginning and reinvestigating the McCanns? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 08, 2022, 12:43:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 08, 2022, 12:13:41 PM
LOL.  A great get out for you to avoid answering the question.  Given that you believe the Met should have started at the beginning and reinvestigated EVERY theory including the "parents dunnit" theory then it would follow that you think there may have been evidence to find that would help to build a case against them, therefore you must concede that you don't know whether or not such evidence exists to be found.   So let me ask again - do you think that should such clear evidence have been uncovered in the course of their investigation into stranger abduction that the Met would have ignored it as it didn't fit the brief?  Are you going to address this point at last or are you simply going to fudge it once again?  My money's on the latter.

If Spams theory, what evidence would you expect the police to be able to find?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 08, 2022, 12:59:40 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 08, 2022, 12:18:14 PM
If there was literally no evidence to be found to point to parental involvement as G-Unit has mooted, then why would she have the Met waste time and resources starting at the beginning and reinvestigating the McCanns?

I don't think there is 'literally no evidence', just that your unrealistic suggestions weren't believable or helpful. There wasn't one piece of evidence that could be found and which showed exactly what had happened.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2022, 01:04:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 08, 2022, 12:59:40 PM
I don't think there is 'literally no evidence', just that your unrealistic suggestions weren't believable or helpful. There wasn't one piece of evidence that could be found and which showed exactly what had happened.
Again, how do you know this?  Again had the Met uncovered ANY evidence that clearly pointed at Gerry McCann hiding his daughter's body would they simply have ignored it in your view?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2022, 02:06:20 PM
Here's another scenario for you to ponder - the Met puts out the appeal on Crimewatch and receives a confidential call from a close personal friend of Kate's telling them that Kate had confided in her that she thinks Gerry harmed Madeleine and may actually have hidden the body without telling her.  Would the police have ignored such a phone call on the basis that it didn't fit with the remit?   Would the police have said to the caller "no, sorry not interested, don't believe you, Madeleine was abducted by a stranger and we can't interview you as the remit won't allow it"?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 08, 2022, 02:49:21 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 08, 2022, 02:06:20 PM
Here's another scenario for you to ponder - the Met puts out the appeal on Crimewatch and receives a confidential call from a close personal friend of Kate's telling them that Kate had confided in her that she thinks Gerry harmed Madeleine and may actually have hidden the body without telling her.  Would the police have ignored such a phone call on the basis that it didn't fit with the remit?   Would the police have said to the caller "no, sorry not interested, don't believe you, Madeleine was abducted by a stranger and we can't interview you as the remit won't allow it"?

This whole idea is ridiculous but there isn't much point in arguing about it as Sceptics just won't have it.

No one actually knows if The McCanns or The Tapas Crew were questioned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2022, 02:53:05 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 08, 2022, 02:49:21 PM
This whole idea is ridiculous but there isn't much point in arguing about it as Sceptics just won't have it.

No one actually knows if The McCanns or The Tapas Crew were questioned.
It's amazing how a whole conspiracy theory can evolve around the use of just one word in a paragraph. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 08, 2022, 03:05:01 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 08, 2022, 02:53:05 PM
It's amazing how a whole conspiracy theory can evolve around the use of just one word in a paragraph.

Whatever it is they think they are doing, it obviously isn't working.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 08, 2022, 04:43:51 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 08, 2022, 03:05:01 PM
Whatever it is they think they are doing, it obviously isn't working.

Do you mean OG? It isn't working as yet, that's for sure.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 08, 2022, 04:48:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 08, 2022, 04:43:51 PM
Do you mean OG? It isn't working as yet, that's for sure.

No, I didn't mean Operation Grange.  I don't have a problem with them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2022, 04:58:39 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 08, 2022, 04:43:51 PM
Do you mean OG? It isn't working as yet, that's for sure.
What do you know about it?   They may well have helped solve a vicious rape and several cases of child abuse actually so something must be working.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 08, 2022, 05:06:29 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 08, 2022, 04:58:39 PM
What do you know about it?   They may well have helped solve a vicious rape and several cases of child abuse actually so something must be working.

Gunit knew very well that I didn't mean Operation Grange.  She's just up to her silly tricks again.  Why she does this is her problem.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2022, 05:24:09 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 08, 2022, 05:06:29 PM
Gunit knew very well that I didn't mean Operation Grange.  She's just up to her silly tricks again.  Why she does this is her problem.
Deflecting as usual, so she is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 08, 2022, 05:58:25 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 08, 2022, 03:05:01 PM
Whatever it is they think they are doing, it obviously isn't working.

But they’ve only had 11 years….give them time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2022, 06:17:53 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 08, 2022, 05:58:25 PM
But they’ve only had 11 years….give them time.
Sceptics have had fifteen years of hating, hurting, harassing and other nasty things beginning with aitch and where has it got them?  Absolutely nowhere.  Saddoes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 08, 2022, 08:57:22 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 08, 2022, 04:48:46 PM
No, I didn't mean Operation Grange.  I don't have a problem with them.


If I was a believer and hoped Madeleine was alive I’d be furious with OG for taking so long to rescue her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2022, 10:13:23 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 08, 2022, 08:57:22 PM

If I was a believer and hoped Madeleine was alive I’d be furious with OG for taking so long to rescue her.
What a childish comment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 07:55:23 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 08, 2022, 06:17:53 PM
Sceptics have had fifteen years of hating, hurting, harassing and other nasty things beginning with aitch and where has it got them?  Absolutely nowhere.  Saddoes.

Fifteen years of reminding people that the case isn't as simple and straitforward as it's sometimes portrayed. The McCanns were not cleared by the Portuguese Judiciary, despite them claiming they were. Their human rights weren't breached, despite them claiming they were. Abduction isn't the only crime which should be considered, despite the McCanns claiming that's what happened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2022, 08:06:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 07:55:23 AM
Fifteen years of reminding people that the case isn't as simple and straitforward as it's sometimes portrayed. The McCanns were not cleared by the Portuguese Judiciary, despite them claiming they were. Their human rights weren't breached, despite them claiming they were. Abduction isn't the only crime which should be considered, despite the McCanns claiming that's what happened.
And all this “reminding” has achieved what exactly?  The McCanns are leading respectable professional and personal lives, they have not been under investigation for 14 years, the police both here and abroad investigating the case seem convinced Madeleine was abducted by a stranger and yet here you (collectively) still are trying your damnedest to convince anyone who crosses your path otherwise.  Why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 08:17:01 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2022, 08:06:38 AM
And all this “reminding” has achieved what exactly?  The McCanns are leading respectable professional and personal lives, they have not been under investigation for 14 years, the police both here and abroad investigating the case seem convinced Madeleine was abducted by a stranger and yet here you (collectively) still are trying your damnedest to convince anyone who crosses your path otherwise.  Why?

That's what I meant.  It isn't working after fifteen years of misery for The McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 09, 2022, 08:25:27 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 07:55:23 AM
Fifteen years of reminding people that the case isn't as simple and straitforward as it's sometimes portrayed. The McCanns were not cleared by the Portuguese Judiciary, despite them claiming they were. Their human rights weren't breached, despite them claiming they were. Abduction isn't the only crime which should be considered, despite the McCanns claiming that's what happened.

Do you realise SY have never had any power to investigate the McCanns or interview them under caution...shows Colin Sutton is an absolute fool
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 08:40:44 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 07:55:23 AM
Fifteen years of reminding people that the case isn't as simple and straitforward as it's sometimes portrayed. The McCanns were not cleared by the Portuguese Judiciary, despite them claiming they were. Their human rights weren't breached, despite them claiming they were. Abduction isn't the only crime which should be considered, despite the McCanns claiming that's what happened.

The arguido Amaral - arguido Tavares - arguido Cristovao were found guilty as charged.

The arguidos Murat - McCann - Healey were never charged with any offence and were exonerated by all charges against them being dropped. 

Didn't you notice?  Tiresomely you pretend not to.

But the fact is - since Murat - McCann - Healey were NEVER CHARGED WITH ANY OFFENCE THE PORTUGUESE AUTHORITIES WERE NEVER REQUIRED TO 'CLEAR' THEM. No charges being laid against them did that for them.

What else is it that you fail understand about Portuguese law? your lack of comprehension matches only the proven ineptitude which caused the PJ of the day to rely on dog indications which proved their irrelevance when the forensic results came back from the lab.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 09:39:14 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 08:40:44 AM
The arguido Amaral - arguido Tavares - arguido Cristovao were found guilty as charged.

The arguidos Murat - McCann - Healey were never charged with any offence and were exonerated by all charges against them being dropped. 

Didn't you notice?  Tiresomely you pretend not to.

But the fact is - since Murat - McCann - Healey were NEVER CHARGED WITH ANY OFFENCE THE PORTUGUESE AUTHORITIES WERE NEVER REQUIRED TO 'CLEAR' THEM. No charges being laid against them did that for them.

What else is it that you fail understand about Portuguese law? your lack of comprehension matches only the proven ineptitude which caused the PJ of the day to rely on dog indications which proved their irrelevance when the forensic results came back from the lab.

Someone should have told their lawyer that they didn't need to be cleared; she seemed very committed to the idea.

already cleared before through the filing dispatch of a criminal investigation
innocent and cleared citizen
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 09:47:15 AM

This is hilarious, if some did but realise.  The Sceptics are as ever on the horns of a dilemma.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 09:51:46 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 09:47:15 AM
This is hilarious, if some did but realise.  The Sceptics are as ever on the horns of a dilemma.

What dilemma?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 09:57:28 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 09:51:46 AM
What dilemma?

Think about it.  Who can you trust to support your weird suppositions without them showing up their own inadequacies and possible involvement?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2022, 10:01:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 09:39:14 AM
Someone should have told their lawyer that they didn't need to be cleared; she seemed very committed to the idea.

already cleared before through the filing dispatch of a criminal investigation
innocent and cleared citizen
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.0
What they didn’t need was to be accused all over again the day after officially being dropped as suspects.   If they weren’t entitled to their human rights being respected on the basis that their lawyer incorrectly claimed thst they’d been cleared (something which only a criminal trial can establish) then that is most unfortunate for them (but manna from heaven to the likes of you and fellow detractors).  At the end of the day the McCanns are not suspects, are not being investigated and the authorities are convinced Madeleine was abducted.  There’s nothing you, your sceptic pals or Amaral can ever say or do that will change those facts.  Nothing.  Yet still you persist.  Why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 10:09:06 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2022, 10:01:24 AM
What they didn’t need was to be accused all over again the day after officially being dropped as suspects.   If they weren’t entitled to their human rights being respected on the basis that their lawyer incorrectly claimed thst they’d been cleared (something which only a criminal trial can establish) then that is most unfortunate for them (but manna from heaven to the likes of you and fellow detractors).  At the end of the day the McCanns are not suspects, are not being investigated and the authorities are convinced Madeleine was abducted.  There’s nothing you, your sceptic pals or Amaral can ever say or do that will change those facts.  Nothing.  Yet still you persist.  Why?

I would like to know that.  But they haven't got anything to go on and never will have.  Not one single thing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 10:14:14 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 09:39:14 AM
Someone should have told their lawyer that they didn't need to be cleared; she seemed very committed to the idea.

already cleared before through the filing dispatch of a criminal investigation
innocent and cleared citizen
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.0

Merely stating the obvious.

Just as obvious as the fact that the trivia you continue to post was superseded in 2019 when Amaral announced via the vehicle of Saunokonoko's podcast that the new kid on the block was a German paedophile serving time for his crimes in a German jail.

Amazing that he was able to categorically declare him (or his alter ego) a patsy despite risibly knowing nothing about the case or evidence gathered short of the titbits sucked up from the dregs of the ever leaking sieve of "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours".

The game is up for McCann sceptics and the death throes are unpleasant to witness from all aspects.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 10:28:35 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 09:57:28 AM
Think about it.  Who can you trust to support your weird suppositions without them showing up their own inadequacies and possible involvement?

My opinion is that the problem is seated in that sceptic thought processes don't allow for independent thought processes to result in any sort of learning curve short of the circle line back to groundhog day.

It is not assimilated to the knowledge banks that Calpol is not an analgesic.

Who cares if the barking dogs mean zilch when the forensics are there and understood.

It is illogical and once that becomes apparent it makes the McCann sceptic belief system really rather weird.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 10:38:30 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2022, 10:01:24 AM
What they didn’t need was to be accused all over again the day after officially being dropped as suspects.   If they weren’t entitled to their human rights being respected on the basis that their lawyer incorrectly claimed thst they’d been cleared (something which only a criminal trial can establish) then that is most unfortunate for them (but manna from heaven to the likes of you and fellow detractors).  At the end of the day the McCanns are not suspects, are not being investigated and the authorities are convinced Madeleine was abducted.  There’s nothing you, your sceptic pals or Amaral can ever say or do that will change those facts.  Nothing.  Yet still you persist.  Why?
Why indeed?

Is there a vested interest in Madeleine's case never being solved.  I think the evidence is quite convincing that there may very well be and I think there could well be a discussion along those lines on its own thread while we await developments in Germany which are outwith our ken at the moment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 10:44:29 AM
Sceptics are certainly becoming more and more desperate.  Relying on a discredited and convicted PJ Detective and  supporting a convicted Rapist and Child Abuser.  And many others who are blatantly fibbing in the process of making money on the back of an abducted child.  This is all seriously sick.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2022, 10:44:58 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 10:38:30 AM
Why indeed?

Is there a vested interest in Madeleine's case never being solved.  I think the evidence is quite convincing that there may very well be and I think there could well be a discussion along those lines on its own thread while we await developments in Germany which are outwith our ken at the moment.
Of course there is - it allows certain "invested" people to keep their online hate and propaganda campaign alive, even though some of them refuse to view it as such.   All the while there is inconclusivity, and an element of doubt about what happened to Madeleine it allows conspiracies to flourish, though actually in this day and age, even a cast iron conviction and "proven without doubt" probably won't stop the hard core element - just look at alex Jones and Richard D Hall, two heroes of sceptic communities worldwide. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 10:48:36 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2022, 10:44:58 AM
Of course there is - it allows certain "invested" people to keep their online hate and propaganda campaign alive, even though some of them refuse to view it as such.   All the while there is inconclusivity, and an element of doubt about what happened to Madeleine it allows conspiracies to flourish, though actually in this day and age, even a cast iron conviction and "proven without doubt" probably won't stop the hard core element - just look at alex Jones and Richard D Hall, two heroes of sceptic communities worldwide.

I think it might be a bit more serious than that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 09, 2022, 11:03:45 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 10:44:29 AM
Sceptics are certainly becoming more and more desperate.  Relying on a discredited and convicted PJ Detective and  supporting a convicted Rapist and Child Abuser.  And many others who are blatantly fibbing in the process of making money on the back of an abducted child.  This is all seriously sick.

Who, specifically, is 'supporting' a convicted rapist & child abuser & what exactly do you mean by 'supporting'?
On the one hand you claim to support Brueckner's right to the presumption of innocence, whilst simultaneously describing those who happen to do so as 'sick' it appears.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 09, 2022, 11:07:01 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2022, 10:44:58 AM
Of course there is - it allows certain "invested" people to keep their online hate and propaganda campaign alive, even though some of them refuse to view it as such.   All the while there is inconclusivity, and an element of doubt about what happened to Madeleine it allows conspiracies to flourish, though actually in this day and age, even a cast iron conviction and "proven without doubt" probably won't stop the hard core element - just look at alex Jones and Richard D Hall, two heroes of sceptic communities worldwide.

What do you mean 'inconclusivity', Wolters has solved the case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 11:09:42 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 09:57:28 AM
Think about it.  Who can you trust to support your weird suppositions without them showing up their own inadequacies and possible involvement?

I do my own research and reach my own conclusions based upon it. I neither need nor crave support. Neither do I crave approval; especially from anonymous people on the internet who are pushing their own agenda and think that bad-mouthing others gives them the moral high ground.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 09, 2022, 11:10:52 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 10:14:14 AM
Merely stating the obvious.

Just as obvious as the fact that the trivia you continue to post was superseded in 2019 when Amaral announced via the vehicle of Saunokonoko's podcast that the new kid on the block was a German paedophile serving time for his crimes in a German jail.

Amazing that he was able to categorically declare him (or his alter ego) a patsy despite risibly knowing nothing about the case or evidence gathered short of the titbits sucked up from the dregs of the ever leaking sieve of "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours".

The game is up for McCann sceptics and the death throes are unpleasant to witness from all aspects.

The game is up.
That's hilarious, but then you do seem to be under the delusion that Brueckner is being charged one day.
Do get back to me when that day arrives won't you. Shouldn't be much longer now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 09, 2022, 11:19:39 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 11:09:42 AM
I do my own research and reach my own conclusions based upon it. I neither need nor crave support. Neither do I crave approval; especially from anonymous people on the internet who are pushing their own agenda and think that bad-mouthing others gives them the moral high ground.

The bad mouthing is the substitute for evidence of abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 11:21:52 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 11:09:42 AM
I do my own research and reach my own conclusions based upon it. I neither need nor crave support. Neither do I crave approval; especially from anonymous people on the internet who are pushing their own agenda and think that bad-mouthing others gives them the moral high ground.

There are not - nor ever have been - two individuals who have been more "bad mouthed" worldwide than Kate and Gerry McCann.

Sceptics like you should really think hard about that before adding to the sceptic created morass of "research" based on personal prejudice never evidence.  Unless it is of the "here's one I made before" sort.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 09, 2022, 11:24:22 AM
The final death throes of the sceptic agenda because it's indisputable that Wolters has solved the case.
He does after all have concrete evidence. If you saw the evidence you'd be in no doubt. Just have faith in Wolters & keep believing because he's going to deliver the goods in 2023. Really, he will.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2022, 11:29:19 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 11:09:42 AM
I do my own research and reach my own conclusions based upon it. I neither need nor crave support. Neither do I crave approval; especially from anonymous people on the internet who are pushing their own agenda and think that bad-mouthing others gives them the moral high ground.
What is the point of your research?  What do you hope to achieve?  You do know that your research is doomed to fail as you have limited access to the full evidence collated in this case don’t you??
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2022, 11:31:19 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 10:48:36 AM
I think it might be a bit more serious than that.
Well I like to give people the benefit of the doubt… 8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 09, 2022, 11:33:20 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 11:21:52 AM
There are not - nor ever have been - two individuals who have been more "bad mouthed" worldwide than Kate and Gerry McCann.

Sceptics like you should really think hard about that before adding to the sceptic created morass of "research" based on personal prejudice never evidence.  Unless it is of the "here's one I made before" sort.

Why should that  be a problem for anyone but themselves ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 09, 2022, 11:34:54 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2022, 11:29:19 AM
What is the point of your research?  What do you hope to achieve?  You do know that your research is doomed to fail as you have limited access to the full evidence collated in this case don’t you??

Well, she doesn't need to see the concrete evidence to know there never was any. Others, not quite as sharp.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 11:51:08 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 11:09:42 AM
I do my own research and reach my own conclusions based upon it. I neither need nor crave support. Neither do I crave approval; especially from anonymous people on the internet who are pushing their own agenda and think that bad-mouthing others gives them the moral high ground.

I am not Anonymous.  But you are.  More double standards from you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 11:51:41 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 11:21:52 AM
There are not - nor ever have been - two individuals who have been more "bad mouthed" worldwide than Kate and Gerry McCann.

Sceptics like you should really think hard about that before adding to the sceptic created morass of "research" based on personal prejudice never evidence.  Unless it is of the "here's one I made before" sort.

Are you saying that you attack and bad mouth people because, in your opinion, people have bad mouthed the McCanns? I wouldn't lower myself personally, but each to their own.

My research is based on evidence and I include quotes and cites.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 09, 2022, 11:54:07 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 11:51:08 AM
I am not Anonymous.  But you are.  More double standards from you.

You might be, how would we know?
 What does it matter anyway - nobody cares ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 09, 2022, 11:54:54 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 09, 2022, 11:33:20 AM
Why should that  be a problem for anyone but themselves ?

I think the idea that the McCanns are bad mouthed world wide is a bit of a stretch aswell.
The people of the North Sentinel Islands will never have even heard of them, or their daughter. Lucky for them really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 12:01:46 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 09, 2022, 11:54:07 AM
You might be, how would we know?
 What does it matter anyway - nobody cares ?

And so are you Anonymous.  I am the one who does't care.

Maureen Eleanor Eccles Lang.  Just in case you missed it on previous occasions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2022, 12:07:41 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 09, 2022, 11:54:07 AM
You might be, how would we know?
 What does it matter anyway - nobody cares ?
you cared enough to log on to this site this morning and ask the question.  Why bother? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 12:10:09 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 12:01:46 PM
And so are you Anonymous.  I am the one who does't care.

Maureen Eleanor Eccles Lang.  Just in case you missed it on previous occasions.

Who is Elena Mitchell? Is she anonymous?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2022, 12:12:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 11:51:41 AM
Are you saying that you attack and bad mouth people because, in your opinion, people have bad mouthed the McCanns? I wouldn't lower myself personally, but each to their own.

My research is based on evidence and I include quotes and cites.
And it has achieved.....what exactly?  Are you writing a book?  Do you think your research is helping anyone or that it may result in "justice 4 Maddie?"  I'm curious to know about these people who set themselves up as serious researchers and what exactly motivates them.  How does one properly research a subject when denied access to large amount of key information?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 12:20:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 12:10:09 PM
Who is Elena Mitchell? Is she anonymous?

My Maiden Name is Mitchell.

Word Press wouldn't accept Eleanor.  But thanks for advertising My Blog.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2022, 12:30:01 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 12:20:40 PM
My Maiden Name is Mitchell.

Word Press wouldn't accept Eleanor.  But thanks for advertising My Blog.
you can put a link to your blog in your forum profile you know. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 12:34:27 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2022, 11:29:19 AM
What is the point of your research?  What do you hope to achieve?  You do know that your research is doomed to fail as you have limited access to the full evidence collated in this case don’t you??

Very limited indeed.

There is a huge gap between 2007 and 2022 of which lay researchers have no information.  That includes the files hidden away by Paiva when he fell heir to the case, full of information he was meant to investigate but which would never have come to light had he not mentioned it in evidence in court.
Which resulted in the trial judge instructing the files he had marked as not relevant to the inquiry be passed to the McCanns.  These files formed part of the information made available to the Met for their review which led to Madeleine's case being reopened.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 12:36:13 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2022, 12:30:01 PM
you can put a link to your blog in your forum profile you know.

Can I?  I didn't know that.  But it's actually doing alright on it's own merit anyway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 09, 2022, 12:47:14 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2022, 12:12:05 PM
And it has achieved.....what exactly?  Are you writing a book?  Do you think your research is helping anyone or that it may result in "justice 4 Maddie?"  I'm curious to know about these people who set themselves up as serious researchers and what exactly motivates them.  How does one properly research a subject when denied access to large amount of key information?

My research has been very revealing.
I long suspected that McCann supporters are an incredibly gullible bunch who'll believe anything. Watching supporters falling for Wolters concrete evidence boast has proven that my suspicions were right.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 12:47:44 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 12:34:27 PM
Very limited indeed.

There is a huge gap between 2007 and 2022 of which lay researchers have no information.  That includes the files hidden away by Paiva when he fell heir to the case, full of information he was meant to investigate but which would never have come to light had he not mentioned it in evidence in court.
Which resulted in the trial judge instructing the files he had marked as not relevant to the inquiry be passed to the McCanns.  These files formed part of the information made available to the Met for their review which led to Madeleine's case being reopened.

We weren't aware of the findings of Oakly International, either, which led to the discarding of the theory that the abductor had been seen by Jane Tanner. OG then publicised the sighting of another man carrying a child, which had been given no urgency by Madeleine's parents.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 09, 2022, 12:52:43 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 12:47:44 PM
We weren't aware of the findings of Oakly International, either, which led to the discarding of the theory that the abductor had been seen by Jane Tanner. OG then publicised the sighting of another man carrying a child, which had been given no urgency by Madeleine's parents.

Even though the Private Dicks they hired had recommended the e-fits of the abductor be released to the public with haste.  Maybe Brueckner would have been caught sooner had they done just that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 12:53:18 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 12:47:44 PM
We weren't aware of the findings of Oakly International, either, which led to the discarding of the theory that the abductor had been seen by Jane Tanner. OG then publicised the sighting of another man carrying a child, which had been given no urgency by Madeleine's parents.

He was walking in the wrong direction.  Or did you miss that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 09, 2022, 01:18:38 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 12:53:18 PM
He was walking in the wrong direction.  Or did you miss that?

It appears the worlds best police force have.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2022, 01:22:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 12:47:44 PM
We weren't aware of the findings of Oakly International, either, which led to the discarding of the theory that the abductor had been seen by Jane Tanner. OG then publicised the sighting of another man carrying a child, which had been given no urgency by Madeleine's parents.
Do you concede thst your so-called research is flawed, based as it is on a quite incomplete knowledge of all the known information regarding this case? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 01:26:38 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2022, 01:22:24 PM
Do you concede thst your so-called research is flawed, based as it is on a quite incomplete knowledge of all the known information regarding this case?

Gunit is a Johnny Come Lately, like quite a few other Sceptics.  They can never hope to catch up.

But it doesn't half make you wonder why they ever got involved, unless it was to deliberately cause disruption.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 02:30:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 01:26:38 PM
Gunit is a Johnny Come Lately, like quite a few other Sceptics.  They can never hope to catch up.

But it doesn't half make you wonder why they ever got involved, unless it was to deliberately cause disruption.

Catch up with who? You're  lot?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 02:34:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 12:47:44 PM
We weren't aware of the findings of Oakly International, either, which led to the discarding of the theory that the abductor had been seen by Jane Tanner. OG then publicised the sighting of another man carrying a child, which had been given no urgency by Madeleine's parents.

Haven't you ever heard of investigators soliciting information for elimination purposes?  If you are unaware that they do so perhaps reveals an obvious inherent flaw in your "research".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 02:45:19 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2022, 01:22:24 PM
Do you concede thst your so-called research is flawed, based as it is on a quite incomplete knowledge of all the known information regarding this case?

The initial flaw in the investigation was to decide what the theory was in the first instance then to attempt to fit the evidence to it.

A basic error which knocked the investigation out of kilter almost guaranteeing abject failure.  Which may or may not have been the intention; however it is a proven method not to locate missing children or to find out what exactly happened to them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 02:51:28 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 01:26:38 PM
Gunit is a Johnny Come Lately, like quite a few other Sceptics.  They can never hope to catch up.

But it doesn't half make you wonder why they ever got involved, unless it was to deliberately cause disruption.

I think they did their best if one spurious petition after another is anything to go buy.  But despite their best efforts and the furious knitting of socks, all that happened was the revelation that there weren't as many of them around as their internet presence would have seemed to indicate.

Proving the adage about "empty vessels".
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 02:51:44 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 02:45:19 PM
The initial flaw in the investigation was to decide what the theory was in the first instance then to attempt to fit the evidence to it.

A basic error which knocked the investigation out of kilter almost guaranteeing abject failure.  Which may or may not have been the intention; however it is a proven method not to locate missing children or to find out what exactly happened to them.

A method followed by OG in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 02:59:27 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 02:30:45 PM
Catch up with who? You're  lot?

I don't have a "lot".  But I do recognise internet posters who know what evidence is and who take cognisance of it.

I am also capable of recognising internet posters who follow false premises and are easily led into making it up as they go along, in tune with the implausible and impossible conspiracy theories their version of "research" has induced them to follow and promote.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 03:10:36 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 02:51:44 PM
A method followed by OG in my opinion.

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it despite all indications proving how unqualified it actually is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2022, 03:30:26 PM
Girl rescued after years in captivity "hardly able to climb stairs"
Anna Noryskiewicz - Yesterday
Berlin — Prosecutors in Germany are holding a mother and grandparents accused of holding the woman's eight-year-old daughter captive in a house in a small German town for almost her entire life. 

There are still many unanswered questions in this case, but the details that have emerged are shocking: The girl was allegedly held in a house in Attendorn, about 20 miles east of Cologne, for almost seven years. After being rescued by police, the girl said she had never seen a forest or a meadow or ridden in a car, according to local newspaper Sauerlandkurier, which cited documents from a regional children's hospital.

Police and the local child protection service searched the home on September 23 and rescued the girl. A medical examination found her to be in relatively good health and she was placed with an emergency foster family.

The public prosecutor's office in Siegen said the child's mother and grandparents were under formal investigation.

Maddie McCann suspect faces new charges in Germany
The girl showed no clear indications of physical abuse or malnutrition, the prosecutor's office said.

"However, the girl has never seen the outside world," senior prosecutor Patrick Baron von Grotthuss told the German news agency DPA. He said the girl is believed to have lived in the house in Attendorn for almost seven years, without ever being allowed to leave. She was able to speak and walk but was "hardly able to climb stairs on her own or overcome uneven ground."

The mother and the grandparents were not providing investigators with any information, officials said.

In 2014, the mother allegedly told the girl's father, from whom she had separated before her daughter's birth, that she wanted to move to Italy with their child. But doubts started to mount that she had gone ahead with that plan, despite her providing a forwarding address in Italy.

In September 2015, the father told the child protection services that he had seen the mother walking around town several times. Questioned by authorities, the grandparents said their daughter had moved to Italy with the child.

The father said letters and gifts he sent to his daughter at the Italian address were all returned unopened.

The child protection services also received anonymous tips that the mother, at least, could be in Attendorn. Recent attempts by authorities to contact the grandparents were rebuffed, and officials were refused access to the house. Police were also not allowed into the house by the grandparents, but the due to an apparent lack of evidence, no search warrant was issued.

Finally, a relative from the maternal side of the family contacted police and said he and his wife had recently visited the relatives in Italy with whom the girl and her mother were supposed to live. The Italian relatives said that neither the mom nor the daughter had ever lived there.

Then the girl's mother was reached by telephone at the grandparents' house in Attendorn, and authorities finally got the search warrant they needed.

The mother and the grandparents face charges of illegal deprivation of liberty and abuse.

Family acquaintances are also being questioned.

The next step, according to von Grotthuss, is to thoroughly evaluate the mental and physical state of the little girl, and he said it was "highly probable" that the mother would also be examined psychiatrically and, if necessary, the other defendants.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/girl-rescued-after-years-in-captivity-hardly-able-to-climb-stairs/ar-AA13Sd5J?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=4d7532cc6e6d486490719f46a2385137
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2022, 03:53:26 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 09, 2022, 01:22:24 PM
Do you concede thst your so-called research is flawed, based as it is on a quite incomplete knowledge of all the known information regarding this case?
And reply came there none.  I assume therefore that G-Unit does not believe her so-called research is compromised by not having all the information available to her.  She and Amaral have alot in common in that respect.  An incomplete knowledge of all the evidence leading to cock-eyed conclusions.  IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2022, 06:18:07 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on November 09, 2022, 02:30:45 PM
Catch up with who? You're  lot?

"Your lot". What does that mean?  But it is dreadful English.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 11, 2022, 07:19:17 AM
Hahahahahahaha!  (&^&
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/11/10/alex-jones-ordered-to-pay-additional-473m-to-sandy-hook-familiesThe despicable piece of excrement still refuses to apologise to the victims’ families though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 11, 2022, 08:13:42 AM
Corrected link... https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/11/10/alex-jones-ordered-to-pay-additional-473m-to-sandy-hook-families (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/11/10/alex-jones-ordered-to-pay-additional-473m-to-sandy-hook-families)

I doubt they'll get paid, 'cause he doesn't have the money... unless some friendly, clueless multi-billionaire stumps up the cash.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 11, 2022, 08:26:43 AM
Quote from: Myster on November 11, 2022, 08:13:42 AM
Corrected link... https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/11/10/alex-jones-ordered-to-pay-additional-473m-to-sandy-hook-families (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/11/10/alex-jones-ordered-to-pay-additional-473m-to-sandy-hook-families)

I doubt they'll get paid, 'cause he doesn't have the money... unless some friendly, clueless multi-billionaire stumps up the cash.
I don’t think the money’s the main issue tbh, as long as AJ is broke and broken that will be his comeuppance and serves as a warning to others spouting such harmful, hateful drivel. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 11, 2022, 09:24:05 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 11, 2022, 08:26:43 AM
I don’t think the money’s the main issue tbh, as long as AJ is broke and broken that will be his comeuppance and serves as a warning to others spouting such harmful, hateful drivel.

I think the main issue is the denial of truth while playing to the appreciative target audience of fellow conspirators.

Successful legal action against these fantasists is long overdue.


Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones has said he now understands it was irresponsible of him to declare the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre a hoax and that he now believes it was “100 percent real”.

Jones made the admission a day after the parents of a six-year-old boy killed in the attack testified about the suffering, death threats and harassment they have endured because of what Jones has trumpeted on his media platforms.

“It was … especially since I’ve met the parents. It’s 100 percent real,” Jones testified at his trial to determine how much he owes for defaming the parents of a six-year-old who was among the 20 students and six educators killed in the 2012 attack at the school in Newtown, Connecticut.

The parents who sued Jones had said a day earlier that an apology would not be enough and that the Infowars host needed to be held accountable for repeatedly spreading falsehoods about the attack.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/8/3/conspiracist-alex-jones-admits-falsehood-of-school-shooting-claim
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 30, 2022, 07:37:48 AM
Amazing story below.  things to note:  the abducted child’s parents never gave up hope and continued to celebrate her birthday in her absence for 50+ years (despite themselves being accused of covering up their daughter’s death), things which some on here and elsewhere have sneered at the McCanns for doing.  Question is, would you have told these parents that their hope was pointless and misplaced, that holding parties for her birthday was pathetic, that they should just accept their child was dead?  I’m guessing probably you would.

Parents find daughter 51 years after her abduction
David Charter, Washington
Wednesday November 30 2022, 12.01am, The Times
Melissa with her mother, Alta Apantenco, and father Jeffrie Highsmith
Melissa with her mother, Alta Apantenco, and father Jeffrie Highsmith
A family who never gave up searching for their daughter after she was abducted by a woman posing as a babysitter 51 years ago have been reunited with her.

The discovery was made after a genealogy website matched her father Jeffrie Highsmith’s DNA to that of three grandchildren he never knew he had.

They are the children of Melanie Brown, who agreed to meet Highsmith and his former partner, Alta Apantenco, after they contacted her with the evidence that she was in fact their long-lost daughter, Melissa Highsmith.

At first she did not believe that they were her parents but, after they mentioned a birthmark on her back, she agreed to take a DNA test. They had an emotional reunion last weekend in Fort Worth, Texas, and a formal police DNA test is under way to confirm the match identified by the 23andMe website.

According to her sisters, Brown now wants to be known as Melissa instead of Melanie and is planning to renew her wedding vows so she can be married under her birth name and have her father walk her down the aisle.

“We found Melissa!” the family posted on Facebook, bringing closure on five decades of heartache, guilt and malicious gossip that they had covered up the death or murder of their daughter.

“Though missing for decades, the family never forgot about Melissa,” they wrote, adding that they had “continued to throw birthday parties for her, including the most recent one in November. That same day, the family found a match in DNA results.”

Fort Worth police said they would investigate whether the woman who brought up Melissa as Melanie was involved in her kidnapping. The statute of limitations for charges has long passed.

Melissa’s mother was working as a waitress in 1971 and was desperate for childcare so she could keep the job she needed to pay her bills after separating from Melissa’s father. She placed an advertisement in a newspaper looking for a babysitter.

A woman who responded agreed to meet her at the restaurant where she worked but she never showed.

The woman called later, saying that she cared for other children. Melissa’s mother arranged for her to pick up her daughter from her shared apartment but the woman then disappeared.

Sharon Highsmith, another daughter of Apantenco, told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram: “She couldn’t risk getting fired. So, she trusted the person who said they’d care for her child.”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on November 30, 2022, 08:47:29 PM
If only the PJ had searched the landfill nearest PDL this mystery may have been solved 15 years ago.

https://metro.co.uk/2022/11/29/quinton-simon-fbi-says-remains-found-in-landfill-belong-to-toddler-17846236/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Angelo222 on November 30, 2022, 09:30:43 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 30, 2022, 07:37:48 AM
Amazing story below.  things to note:  the abducted child’s parents never gave up hope and continued to celebrate her birthday in her absence for 50+ years (despite themselves being accused of covering up their daughter’s death), things which some on here and elsewhere have sneered at the McCanns for doing.  Question is, would you have told these parents that their hope was pointless and misplaced, that holding parties for her birthday was pathetic, that they should just accept their child was dead?  I’m guessing probably you would.

Parents find daughter 51 years after her abduction
David Charter, Washington
Wednesday November 30 2022, 12.01am, The Times
Melissa with her mother, Alta Apantenco, and father Jeffrie Highsmith
Melissa with her mother, Alta Apantenco, and father Jeffrie Highsmith
A family who never gave up searching for their daughter after she was abducted by a woman posing as a babysitter 51 years ago have been reunited with her.

The discovery was made after a genealogy website matched her father Jeffrie Highsmith’s DNA to that of three grandchildren he never knew he had.

They are the children of Melanie Brown, who agreed to meet Highsmith and his former partner, Alta Apantenco, after they contacted her with the evidence that she was in fact their long-lost daughter, Melissa Highsmith.

At first she did not believe that they were her parents but, after they mentioned a birthmark on her back, she agreed to take a DNA test. They had an emotional reunion last weekend in Fort Worth, Texas, and a formal police DNA test is under way to confirm the match identified by the 23andMe website.

According to her sisters, Brown now wants to be known as Melissa instead of Melanie and is planning to renew her wedding vows so she can be married under her birth name and have her father walk her down the aisle.

“We found Melissa!” the family posted on Facebook, bringing closure on five decades of heartache, guilt and malicious gossip that they had covered up the death or murder of their daughter.

“Though missing for decades, the family never forgot about Melissa,” they wrote, adding that they had “continued to throw birthday parties for her, including the most recent one in November. That same day, the family found a match in DNA results.”

Fort Worth police said they would investigate whether the woman who brought up Melissa as Melanie was involved in her kidnapping. The statute of limitations for charges has long passed.

Melissa’s mother was working as a waitress in 1971 and was desperate for childcare so she could keep the job she needed to pay her bills after separating from Melissa’s father. She placed an advertisement in a newspaper looking for a babysitter.

A woman who responded agreed to meet her at the restaurant where she worked but she never showed.

The woman called later, saying that she cared for other children. Melissa’s mother arranged for her to pick up her daughter from her shared apartment but the woman then disappeared.

Sharon Highsmith, another daughter of Apantenco, told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram: “She couldn’t risk getting fired. So, she trusted the person who said they’d care for her child.”

I wonder  *%6^

Did she refuse to cooperate with investigating officers like Kate McCann did while being interviewed?

That my dears is the BIG difference.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 30, 2022, 10:07:26 PM
Quote from: Angelo222 on November 30, 2022, 09:30:43 PM
I wonder  *%6^

Did she refuse to cooperate with investigating officers like Kate McCann did while being interviewed?

That my dears is the BIG difference.
Don’t talk nonsense.  Gerry cooperated with investigating officers, does that mean there’s a big difference between him and Kate? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 30, 2022, 10:12:03 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 30, 2022, 08:47:29 PM
If only the PJ had searched the landfill nearest PDL this mystery may have been solved 15 years ago.

https://metro.co.uk/2022/11/29/quinton-simon-fbi-says-remains-found-in-landfill-belong-to-toddler-17846236/
How exactly?  Your theory if I recall correctly was that Gerry had to dispose of the body as far from Apartment 5a as possible so that when the body was found (which according to you he hoped it would be) the police wouldn’t point the finger at him or Kate  *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 02:03:00 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 30, 2022, 08:47:29 PM
If only the PJ had searched the landfill nearest PDL this mystery may have been solved 15 years ago.

https://metro.co.uk/2022/11/29/quinton-simon-fbi-says-remains-found-in-landfill-belong-to-toddler-17846236/

Child's body thrown in a dumpster?
Well I never, how extraordinary!
Always seemed like a logistical impossibility to me.
How did the bin men not notice?
No,this is fake news.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 06:57:58 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on November 30, 2022, 10:07:26 PM
Don’t talk nonsense.  Gerry cooperated with investigating officers, does that mean there’s a big difference between him and Kate?

Maybe he was more confident than Kate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 01, 2022, 10:12:03 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 06:57:58 AM
Maybe he was more confident than Kate.

Perhaps he decided that no lawyer was going to tell him how to react to the police. Or perhaps it was only Kate who was advise not to answer their questions. Her lawyer did seem concerned about her reaction on 6th September.

At 5pm, we had a fifteen-minute break, which I
spent standing in the corridor outside the
interrogation room. Carlos came over and told me
not to be so definite in some of my answers. [madeleine]
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 10:30:11 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 01, 2022, 10:12:03 AM
Perhaps he decided that no lawyer was going to tell him how to react to the police. Or perhaps it was only Kate who was advise not to answer their questions. Her lawyer did seem concerned about her reaction on 6th September.

At 5pm, we had a fifteen-minute break, which I
spent standing in the corridor outside the
interrogation room. Carlos came over and told me
not to be so definite in some of my answers. [madeleine]

Perhaps if the investigation had concentrated in eliminating sex offenders such as Brueckner from the list, they might have been asking very different questions of very different people and saving the victims of the crime fifteen years of anguish.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 01, 2022, 10:43:06 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 10:30:11 AM
Perhaps if the investigation had concentrated in eliminating sex offenders such as Brueckner from the list, they might have been asking very different questions of very different people and saving the victims of the crime fifteen years of anguish.

Perhaps if the landfill closest to PDL had been searched then the taxpayers of multiple countries would not have been  asked to cough up millions of pounds and euros.

And perhaps if the parents had put their children’s welfare above the need for ‘adult time’…..well you know the rest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 10:44:00 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 10:30:11 AM
Perhaps if the investigation had concentrated in eliminating sex offenders such as Brueckner from the list, they might have been asking very different questions of very different people and saving the victims of the crime fifteen years of anguish.

Well Brueckner didn't do it anyway so I wouldn't worry about it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 11:25:22 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 01, 2022, 10:43:06 AM
Perhaps if the landfill closest to PDL had been searched then the taxpayers of multiple countries would not have been  asked to cough up millions of pounds and euros.

And perhaps if the parents had put their children’s welfare above the need for ‘adult time’…..well you know the rest.

It was a major mistake by Amaral & his team. Mind you, they were being  inundated with bogus sightings of Maddie from Luz to Lahore, plus all the helpful information from psychics the McCanns were keen to share.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 01, 2022, 11:47:50 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 01, 2022, 10:43:06 AM
Perhaps if the landfill closest to PDL had been searched then the taxpayers of multiple countries would not have been  asked to cough up millions of pounds and euros.

And perhaps if the parents had put their children’s welfare above the need for ‘adult time’…..well you know the rest.
So you're holding the PJ jointly responsible for the millions of pounds and euros wasted worldwide on this investigation, interesting....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 01, 2022, 11:50:37 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 01, 2022, 10:12:03 AM
Perhaps he decided that no lawyer was going to tell him how to react to the police. Or perhaps it was only Kate who was advise not to answer their questions. Her lawyer did seem concerned about her reaction on 6th September.

At 5pm, we had a fifteen-minute break, which I
spent standing in the corridor outside the
interrogation room. Carlos came over and told me
not to be so definite in some of my answers. [madeleine]
In essence whether or not you co-operate with the police you're still guilty as sin if your surname is McCann.  we get ya!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 01, 2022, 12:57:02 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 10:30:11 AM
Perhaps if the investigation had concentrated in eliminating sex offenders such as Brueckner from the list, they might have been asking very different questions of very different people and saving the victims of the crime fifteen years of anguish.

Do you consider its a wrap then, there's' still plenty of mileage left in the Madeleine case imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 01, 2022, 12:58:01 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 10:30:11 AM
Perhaps if the investigation had concentrated in eliminating sex offenders such as Brueckner from the list, they might have been asking very different questions of very different people and saving the victims of the crime fifteen years of anguish.

I was discussing why Kate didn't answer the PJ's questions and Gerry did. Quetioning why the questioning was taking place is another discussion altogether imo.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 01:08:46 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 01, 2022, 11:47:50 AM
So you're holding the PJ jointly responsible for the millions of pounds and euros wasted worldwide on this investigation, interesting....

I was rather intrigued by the incompetence of the PJ not initiating appropriate search strategies in the post highlighting that the land fill site hadn't been searched.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 01, 2022, 01:09:00 PM
Arguidos do not have to answer questions.  Especially questions that had already been asked and replied to.  Let us not forget this.  Thank You.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 01:18:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 01, 2022, 12:58:01 PM
I was discussing why Kate didn't answer the PJ's questions and Gerry did. Quetioning why the questioning was taking place is another discussion altogether imo.

Don't you think you might be displaying arrogance as self appointed dictator of what is and what is not discussed on the forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 01:21:41 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 01, 2022, 12:57:02 PM
Do you consider its a wrap then, there's' still plenty of mileage left in the Madeleine case imo.

No no. Brueckner will be charged after the other cases are dealt with.
Late 2023 according to Brietta.
After the Behan rape trial according to Mr Gray.
The BKA are SURE Brueckner is the murderer. There is CONCRETE EVIDENCE Maddie is dead.
It's time sceptics started accepting the truth, according to the gospel of Wolters.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 01:23:18 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 01:21:41 PM
No no. Brueckner will be charged after the other cases are dealt with.
Late 2023 according to Brietta.
After the Behan rape trial according to Mr Gray.
The BKA are SURE Brueckner is the murderer. There is CONCRETE EVIDENCE Maddie is dead.
It's time sceptics started accepting the truth, according to the gospel of Wolters.

....in the absence of anything tangible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 01, 2022, 02:38:17 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 01:18:35 PM
Don't you think you might be displaying arrogance as self appointed dictator of what is and what is not discussed on the forum.

I can see no reason why I shouldn't comment when an apparent response to my post isn't a response at all. I have seen such behaviour described as creating a deflection.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 01, 2022, 02:51:05 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 01, 2022, 01:09:00 PM
Arguidos do not have to answer questions.  Especially questions that had already been asked and replied to.  Let us not forget this.  Thank You.

That may well come into question at some time if Wolters says CB went into 5a, now crime scene photos don't show any open window, under questioning as an arguido we all know Kate refused to answer and the very first question was about the alleged crime scene.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 01, 2022, 03:05:35 PM

Nothing of any note.  The McCanns will never be charged with anything.  But Brueckner well might.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 03:16:39 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 01, 2022, 02:51:05 PM
That may well come into question at some time if Wolters says CB went into 5a, now crime scene photos don't show any open window, under questioning as an arguido we all know Kate refused to answer and the very first question was about the alleged crime scene.

Kate might yet have to take the stand against Brueckner & tell the court how the curtains just blew open.
A decent cross examination would be interesting.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 03:19:15 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 01, 2022, 03:05:35 PM
Nothing of any note.  The McCanns will never be charged with anything.  But Brueckner well might.

Sorry. Not sure which rule my last post breached, so let me explain again.
Brueckner will never be charged with anything in relation to Madeleine's disappearance. That much is blindingly obvious.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 01, 2022, 04:30:09 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 03:16:39 PM
Kate might yet have to take the stand against Brueckner & tell the court how the curtains just blew open.
A decent cross examination would be interesting.

Well that's easy the window was open.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 01, 2022, 04:32:40 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 01, 2022, 10:43:06 AM
Perhaps if the landfill closest to PDL had been searched then the taxpayers of multiple countries would not have been  asked to cough up millions of pounds and euros.

And perhaps if the parents had put their children’s welfare above the need for ‘adult time’…..well you know the rest.

When would the McCann's have dumped Madeleine's body in the bin?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 04:33:23 PM
Quote from: Lace on December 01, 2022, 04:30:09 PM
Well that's easy the window was open.

If it even was open, then maybe Kate opened it. Her prints were on it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 01, 2022, 04:34:45 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 04:33:23 PM
If it even was open, then maybe Kate opened it. Her prints were on it.

Kate looked out of the window.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 04:35:31 PM
Quote from: Lace on December 01, 2022, 04:34:45 PM
Kate looked out of the window.

She never mentioned that to the police.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 01, 2022, 04:35:42 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 04:34:52 PM
Some time after her death?
Unless they put her in there alive, which would be even worse really.

What time would that have been?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on December 01, 2022, 04:36:08 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 04:35:31 PM
She never mentioned that to the police.

Maybe they didn't ask.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 04:43:50 PM
Quote from: Lace on December 01, 2022, 04:36:08 PM
Maybe they didn't ask.

It's alright. She explained away her prints via a book & chat shows.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 05:30:22 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 01, 2022, 02:38:17 PM
I can see no reason why I shouldn't comment when an apparent response to my post isn't a response at all. I have seen such behaviour described as creating a deflection.

Your posts evidence nothing but your bias and antipathy directed towards two people you know nothing about.

I think they are also devoid of common sense as you continue to batter your head against the actual facts of the case while endeavouring to promote the facts as you think they should be.

Neither do you in your posts, reveal even the slightest comprehension of police procedures in a serious crime investigation such as the case of a missing child.

Can you justify your apparent misunderstanding of what "a person of interest" is (aka "arguido" in Portugal).

Your ignorance of what has passed into the history of this case, in tandem with your reluctance as a result to follow what is presently underway in the case, is quite mind boggling.

The main deflection I suggest is the persistent misuse of this "Wandering Off Topic" thread to dishonestly keep up your ceaseless apathetic campaign which is nothing short of a disgrace.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 05:35:08 PM
Quote from: barrier on December 01, 2022, 02:51:05 PM
That may well come into question at some time if Wolters says CB went into 5a, now crime scene photos don't show any open window, under questioning as an arguido we all know Kate refused to answer and the very first question was about the alleged crime scene.

Amaral had to have questions asked about the crime scene.  He hadn't been there to see it for himself - unless you or anyone else can show he had been there.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 01, 2022, 06:44:26 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 05:30:22 PM
Your posts evidence nothing but your bias and antipathy directed towards two people you know nothing about.

I think they are also devoid of common sense as you continue to batter your head against the actual facts of the case while endeavouring to promote the facts as you think they should be.

Neither do you in your posts, reveal even the slightest comprehension of police procedures in a serious crime investigation such as the case of a missing child.

Can you justify your apparent misunderstanding of what "a person of interest" is (aka "arguido" in Portugal).

Your ignorance of what has passed into the history of this case, in tandem with your reluctance as a result to follow what is presently underway in the case, is quite mind boggling.

The main deflection I suggest is the persistent misuse of this "Wandering Off Topic" thread to dishonestly keep up your ceaseless apathetic campaign which is nothing short of a disgrace.

Thank you for your opinions. (Not really; they are nasty and vicious imo). It is, of course, a fact that Kate McCann decined to answers the questions put to her as an arguido and her husband didn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 01, 2022, 08:16:20 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 01, 2022, 06:44:26 PM
Thank you for your opinions. (Not really; they are nasty and vicious imo). It is, of course, a fact that Kate McCann decined to answers the questions put to her as an arguido and her husband didn't.
What IS undeniably nasty and vicious is to still be pointing the finger at the parents of a child who police stongly believe was abducted and murdered by a paedophile 15 years ago.  That’s deeply unpleasant indeed IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 01, 2022, 09:16:54 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 01, 2022, 08:16:20 PM
What IS undeniably nasty and vicious is to still be pointing the finger at the parents of a child who police stongly believe was abducted and murdered by a paedophile 15 years ago.  That’s deeply unpleasant indeed IMO.

Does repeating this mantra achieve anything I wonder? Some supporters seem able to discuss the evidence without resorting to such ploys, you know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 01, 2022, 09:27:52 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 01, 2022, 09:16:54 PM
Does repeating this mantra achieve anything I wonder? Some supporters seem able to discuss the evidence without resorting to such ploys, you know.


Some of us are forced to repeat ourselves when disinformation and sometimes downright fibs reappear over and over again.  I for one am not having it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 09:36:49 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 01, 2022, 06:44:26 PM
Thank you for your opinions. (Not really; they are nasty and vicious imo). It is, of course, a fact that Kate McCann decined to answers the questions put to her as an arguido and her husband didn't.

My opinions are honest ones requiring no input at all from whatever conspiracy theories or theorist are doing the rounds.

Kate McCann was perfectly entitled as an arguido, to refuse to answer questions put to her.

Despite Gerry McCann answering each and every question put to him the Portuguese inquisitor still managed to infringe his rights.
As an arguido he was entitled to see the evidence being used against him.  Despite asking he was not allowed to see the forensic evidence the PJ were using against him and on which the PJ had based their case.

One wonders was that because of all the people in the room he was the only one who might have understood it.

It was certainly subsequently proved that the PJ hadn't a clue what they were on about.

Which brings me back to musing on why the PJ had Brueckner on their radar all those years ago and why they didn't follow it through.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 09:48:06 PM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 01, 2022, 08:16:20 PM
What IS undeniably nasty and vicious is to still be pointing the finger at the parents of a child who police stongly believe was abducted and murdered by a paedophile 15 years ago.  That’s deeply unpleasant indeed IMO.

I think it is something far worse than unpleasant.

We play at "debating" a human life.  The one time little girl who might be a young lady now - has she been allowed to survive.

To suffer from the inability to have some or any inkling about the feelings of her family and all who knew and loved her at this terrible time and still to go out of the way to get the boot in, takes a special type of individual.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 09:52:40 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 01, 2022, 09:16:54 PM
Does repeating this mantra achieve anything I wonder? Some supporters seem able to discuss the evidence without resorting to such ploys, you know.

I know of no-one who hopes against hope for the best outcome for Madeleine McCann to rely on 'mantras'.  The investigation into her disappearance is all evidence based and needs no "ploys" and never has done.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 01, 2022, 10:33:58 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 01, 2022, 09:16:54 PM
Does repeating this mantra achieve anything I wonder? Some supporters seem able to discuss the evidence without resorting to such ploys, you know.
you brought up the subject of “ nasty and vicious” behavior, something that you often claim to be a victim of, I was merely pointing out what nasty and vicious behaviour really looks like -  unlike the McCanns you have never been on the receiving end of it. Count yourself very fortunate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 01, 2022, 10:58:00 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 09:36:49 PM
My opinions are honest ones requiring no input at all from whatever conspiracy theories or theorist are doing the rounds.

Kate McCann was perfectly entitled as an arguido, to refuse to answer questions put to her.

Despite Gerry McCann answering each and every question put to him the Portuguese inquisitor still managed to infringe his rights.
As an arguido he was entitled to see the evidence being used against him.  Despite asking he was not allowed to see the forensic evidence the PJ were using against him and on which the PJ had based their case.

One wonders was that because of all the people in the room he was the only one who might have understood it.

It was certainly subsequently proved that the PJ hadn't a clue what they were on about.

Which brings me back to musing on why the PJ had Brueckner on their radar all those years ago and why they didn't follow it through.

I believe as an arguido Brueckner has the same rights as Madeleine’s parents, to see the evidence against him. Strangely I don’t see you championing his right to fully transparency from the police, in fact quite the opposite.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 01, 2022, 11:02:01 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 01, 2022, 10:58:00 PM
I believe as an arguido Brueckner has the same rights as Madeleine’s parents, to see the evidence against him. Strangely I don’t see you championing his right to fully transparency from the police, in fact quite the opposite.

The German Prosecution is obliged to produce the evidence when someone is charged.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 11:24:42 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 01, 2022, 11:02:01 PM
The German Prosecution is obliged to produce the evidence when someone is charged.

Which is precisely the procedure followed under German jurisdiction in relation to the five crimes with which he has been currently been charged. 

Madeleine's case is still ongoing meaning there is no such requirement to share anything at present.  I think that only if it is decided to charge him, will he and his legal team be given access to the evidence against him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 01, 2022, 11:43:13 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 01, 2022, 11:02:01 PM
The German Prosecution is obliged to produce the evidence when someone is charged.

He is an arguido in Portugal, not Germany, so, like Madeleine’s parents, has a right to hear the evidence against him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 01, 2022, 11:49:45 PM
Quote from: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 11:24:42 PM
Which is precisely the procedure followed under German jurisdiction in relation to the five crimes with which he has been currently been charged. 

Madeleine's case is still ongoing meaning there is no such requirement to share anything at present.  I think that only if it is decided to charge him, will he and his legal team be given access to the evidence against him.

Again he is an arguido in Portugal and therefore should be afforded the same rights as Madeleine’s parents when they were arguidos.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 02, 2022, 01:19:50 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 01, 2022, 08:16:20 PM
What IS undeniably nasty and vicious is to still be pointing the finger at the parents of a child who police stongly believe was abducted and murdered by a paedophile 15 years ago.  That’s deeply unpleasant indeed IMO.

Get back to us if the police ever prove anyone other than the McCanns did it then won't you.
Now longer much be shouldn't it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 02, 2022, 01:21:02 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on November 30, 2022, 08:47:29 PM
If only the PJ had searched the landfill nearest PDL this mystery may have been solved 15 years ago.

https://metro.co.uk/2022/11/29/quinton-simon-fbi-says-remains-found-in-landfill-belong-to-toddler-17846236/

No it wouldn't.   Madeleine lived on and I have a multitude of pointers to that.  All the psychics believe her still alive and I do too.   SY seem to think it possible/likely too, because they are not agreeing with either the German Police or the PJ that she is dead.

There is a strong faction that is making an inordinate amount of noise in an affort to change the publics perception.   They are desperate to have her believed dead it seems.


I wonder why?  There has to be a reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 02, 2022, 01:32:51 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 01, 2022, 03:16:39 PM
Kate might yet have to take the stand against Brueckner & tell the court how the curtains just blew open.
A decent cross examination would be interesting.

With a bit of technical know how you would understand this.

And no, I am not going to go over it all again.   Unless wiped it is all there, on forum, several times
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 02, 2022, 02:02:48 AM
Why has my last post been wiped?   I was about to modify it but found that it was not on forum.

All I wanted to do was add "In my opinion" to it.

If you do release it, please make sure that is added.   


Thank you,
              sadie
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on December 02, 2022, 07:17:21 AM
Quote from: sadie on December 02, 2022, 02:02:48 AM
Why has my last post been wiped?   I was about to modify it but found that it was not on forum.

All I wanted to do was add "In my opinion" to it.

If you do release it, please make sure that is added.   


Thank you,
              sadie
Your post won't have been wiped intentionally, Sadie.  It usually occurs if you refresh the page or you go to a different page then return to your message and find it has disappeared completely.  It's happened to me, and no doubt others, many times in the past and is very frustrating, especially if your post is long and you haven't saved it just in case.  A quirk in the site software, I'm afraid.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 02, 2022, 08:24:51 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 01, 2022, 09:52:40 PM
I know of no-one who hopes against hope for the best outcome for Madeleine McCann to rely on 'mantras'.  The investigation into her disappearance is all evidence based and needs no "ploys" and never has done.

The mantra I'm referring to is accusing others of being insensitive and cruel to the 'poor McCanns'. Discussing the facts of the case means discussing all the facts, not just those their supporters approve of.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 02, 2022, 08:35:02 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 02, 2022, 08:24:51 AM
The mantra I'm referring to is accusing others of being insensitive and cruel to the 'poor McCanns'. Discussing the facts of the case means discussing all the facts, not just those their supporters approve of.
What do you call it when hundreds of people day in day out for many years point the finger at an innocent parent or parents online accusing them of deceit, cover up and complicity in their own child’s disappearance?  Give us three positive words to describe it.  Kind?  Understanding?  Empathetic? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 08:38:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 02, 2022, 08:24:51 AM
The mantra I'm referring to is accusing others of being insensitive and cruel to the 'poor McCanns'. Discussing the facts of the case means discussing all the facts, not just those their supporters approve of.

Facts being the operative word.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 08:47:09 AM
Quote from: Myster on December 02, 2022, 07:17:21 AM
Your post won't have been wiped intentionally, Sadie.  It usually occurs if you refresh the page or you go to a different page then return to your message and find it has disappeared completely.  It's happened to me, and no doubt others, many times in the past and is very frustrating, especially if your post is long and you haven't saved it just in case.  A quirk in the site software, I'm afraid.

It happens to me and then I spit because I forgot to copy it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 02, 2022, 09:34:19 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 08:38:59 AM
Facts being the operative word.
"Facts" can be twisted to suit agendas, I don't think G-Unit quite understands that.   It's not simply discussing facts, it's selecting facts to suit, to present a suspicion or an accusation.  Of course it happens on both sides but for her to pretend that what she is doing is somehow noble or a search for truth is a complete nonsense.   IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 02, 2022, 09:45:26 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 02, 2022, 08:24:51 AM
The mantra I'm referring to is accusing others of being insensitive and cruel to the 'poor McCanns'. Discussing the facts of the case means discussing all the facts, not just those their supporters approve of.

The fact of the "case" against the McCanns is that there isn't one.  There never was one.  Going on all we know - there never will be one except on the fringes of the internet conspiracy theories as promulgated by sceptics who know little about anything.  But reliant on distortions have already hung drawn quartered and hounded Madeleine's parents and all associated with them, based on lies.

The most distasteful and unforgivable aspect of this are the organised campaigns set up specifically to interfere with the concept of actually investigating Madeleine's case with the objective of solving it without fear or favour.

Meanwhile back in the real world.

BKA - SY - and PJ ~ the three investigative authorities tasked with solving Madeleine's case ~ have reiterated the fact that they have no interest in Madeleine's parents (meaning they have been checked and ruled out).

Christian Brueckner is the prime suspect of all three in Madeleine's disappearance.  This revelation is fact based and supported by evidence gathered and built upon over a period of years during which all or any others have been investigated leaving Brueckner as the last man standing as far as the evidence against him dictates.

Speaking for myself, I am content that the facts are that evidence and police procedure are the decisive factor as well as the monumental fight to bring these about.  My "approval" never entered into the equation.

Perhaps you might ponder on your naked prejudices which have always been inimical to anyone even contemplating doing anything to benefit Madeleine McCann and to find out what happened to her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 02, 2022, 09:54:27 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 02, 2022, 08:35:02 AM
What do you call it when hundreds of people day in day out for many years point the finger at an innocent parent or parents online accusing them of deceit, cover up and complicity in their own child’s disappearance?  Give us three positive words to describe it.  Kind?  Understanding?  Empathetic?

There have been veritable industries set up for the sole purpose of deriding the parents.  Probably an illustration of how reputations and people are broken by internet users.

The McCanns have obviously been very tough nuts to crack.  Which makes one wonder about anyone intent on causing them more harm than in 2007 with the intention of breaking them.

It is beyond belief.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 10:04:08 AM
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on December 02, 2022, 09:34:19 AM
"Facts" can be twisted to suit agendas, I don't think G-Unit quite understands that.   It's not simply discussing facts, it's selecting facts to suit, to present a suspicion or an accusation.  Of course it happens on both sides but for her to pretend that what she is doing is somehow noble or a search for truth is a complete nonsense.   IMO.

I think that what Gunit attempts to do is understood by her only too well.  But she isn't very good at it because Truth is alien to her.
Pick your target and go in for the kill.  Truth is irrelevant.  Fortunately her tactics aren't working because truth is all that matters.

Some fifteen years on No Police Force are even remotely considering The McCanns as culpable.  And in so far as this Forum matters, I am in for the long haul.  Ha!  It's been long already, but there are a few more years in me yet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 10:15:09 AM
Quote from: Brietta on December 02, 2022, 09:45:26 AM
The fact of the "case" against the McCanns is that there isn't one.  There never was one.  Going on all we know - there never will be one except on the fringes of the internet conspiracy theories as promulgated by sceptics who know little about anything.  But reliant on distortions have already hung drawn quartered and hounded Madeleine's parents and all associated with them, based on lies.

The most distasteful and unforgivable aspect of this are the organised campaigns set up specifically to interfere with the concept of actually investigating Madeleine's case with the objective of solving it without fear or favour.

Meanwhile back in the real world.

BKA - SY - and PJ ~ the three investigative authorities tasked with solving Madeleine's case ~ have reiterated the fact that they have no interest in Madeleine's parents (meaning they have been checked and ruled out).

Christian Brueckner is the prime suspect of all three in Madeleine's disappearance.  This revelation is fact based and supported by evidence gathered and built upon over a period of years during which all or any others have been investigated leaving Brueckner as the last man standing as far as the evidence against him dictates.

Speaking for myself, I am content that the facts are that evidence and police procedure are the decisive factor as well as the monumental fight to bring these about.  My "approval" never entered into the equation.

Perhaps you might ponder on your naked prejudices which have always been inimical to anyone even contemplating doing anything to benefit Madeleine McCann and to find out what happened to her.

Sadly, Sceptics don't understand that Supporters don't have to approve of The McCanns.  It's not part of the equation. While their hatred of two people that they don't even know is all that matters to them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 02, 2022, 10:28:50 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 10:15:09 AM
Sadly, Sceptics don't understand that Supporters don't have to approve of The McCanns.  It's not part of the equation. While their hatred of two people that they don't even know is all that matters to them.

Why do you lump all sceptics under that banner, I care not for the McCanns, as far as I'm concerned they've lost a child in as yet unclarified  circumstances.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 02, 2022, 10:34:57 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 10:15:09 AM
Sadly, Sceptics don't understand that Supporters don't have to approve of The McCanns.  It's not part of the equation. While their hatred of two people that they don't even know is all that matters to them.

Most supporters do approve of the McCanns though. The clue is in the adjectives used; innocent, anguished etc.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 10:38:45 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 02, 2022, 10:34:57 AM
Most supporters do approve of the McCanns though. The clue is in the adjectives used; innocent, anguished etc.

We care because The McCanns are being constantly and unfairly attacked?  Oh My.  Slap my hand.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 10:42:21 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 02, 2022, 10:34:57 AM
Most supporters do approve of the McCanns though. The clue is in the adjectives used; innocent, anguished etc.

This Comment is a perfect example of a misuse of words.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 02, 2022, 11:00:36 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 10:38:45 AM
We care because The McCanns are being constantly and unfairly attacked?  Oh My.  Slap my hand.

Why these parents though? There is thousands of people being maligned all over social media….cancer sufferers, people with a disability, parents of other missing children, victims of crime…all people deserving of your sympathy and support…why do you defend these particular parents day in day out?

For me it’s not a coincidence that supporters here are all of a certain age and almost exclusively women.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 11:25:21 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 02, 2022, 11:00:36 AM
Why these parents though? There is thousands of people being maligned all over social media….cancer sufferers, people with a disability, parents of other missing children, victims of crime…all people deserving of your sympathy and support…why do you defend these particular parents day in day out?

For me it’s not a coincidence that supporters here are all of a certain age and almost exclusively women.

It was not long after I got my first computer.  I was no longer living in England.  I had spent some nice holidays in Portugal from whence this child disappeared.  I was a bit lonely at the time.  Will that do?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 02, 2022, 11:26:06 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 10:38:45 AM
We care because The McCanns are being constantly and unfairly attacked?  Oh My.  Slap my hand.

I'm sorry, but who decides whether it's fair or unfair to attack the McCanns. I happen to think it's perfectly fair thankyou & I see no good reason why it wouldn't be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 02, 2022, 11:29:23 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 02, 2022, 11:00:36 AM
Why these parents though? There is thousands of people being maligned all over social media….cancer sufferers, people with a disability, parents of other missing children, victims of crime…all people deserving of your sympathy and support…why do you defend these particular parents day in day out?

For me it’s not a coincidence that supporters here are all of a certain age and almost exclusively women.

I can understand the age bit - older people generally  have more time on their hands.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 02, 2022, 12:09:50 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 11:25:21 AM
It was not long after I got my first computer.  I was no longer living in England.  I had spent some nice holidays in Portugal from whence this child disappeared.  I was a bit lonely at the time.  Will that do?


But why these particular parents?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 12:15:42 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 02, 2022, 12:09:50 PM

But why these particular parents?

Did I have to choose?  Any meany minney mo?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on December 02, 2022, 12:42:57 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 12:15:42 PM
Did I have to choose?  Any meany minney mo?

The choice was very limited n'est-ce pas.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on December 02, 2022, 02:01:17 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 02, 2022, 11:26:06 AM
I'm sorry, but who decides whether it's fair or unfair to attack the McCanns. I happen to think it's perfectly fair thankyou & I see no good reason why it wouldn't be.

The same people who decide that everyone who doesn't spend their time wringing their hands and bewailing the McCann's hurt feelings is attacking them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 02, 2022, 02:11:38 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 02, 2022, 11:00:36 AM
Why these parents though? There is thousands of people being maligned all over social media….cancer sufferers, people with a disability, parents of other missing children, victims of crime…all people deserving of your sympathy and support…why do you defend these particular parents day in day out?

For me it’s not a coincidence that supporters here are all of a certain age and almost exclusively women.
and there are thousands of other people the world over who have committed far worse crimes than those you believe the McCanns guilty of who have not been brought to justice but you do seem to have fixated on these two for the last 15 years?  Why so? 
You're a woman and no spring chicken yourself so I don't see the relevance of your last sentence.  Most sceptics on here are grannies as far as I can make out, yourself included!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 02, 2022, 02:16:35 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 02, 2022, 02:01:17 PM
The same people who decide that everyone who doesn't spend their time wringing their hands and bewailing the McCann's hurt feelings is attacking them.
If your real name was known and I and hundreds and thousands of people had spent the last 15 years suggesting online that you'd committed a heinous crime and poring over your every utterance and deed I think maybe then you'd understand but we know you can't imagine being in that situation because you don't do empathy. Strangely though you do view any slight criticism as personal abuse, so maybe you're not as thick skinned as you like to make out. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 02, 2022, 02:23:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on December 02, 2022, 10:34:57 AM
Most supporters do approve of the McCanns though. The clue is in the adjectives used; innocent, anguished etc.
Those adjectives do not denote approval, they denote sympathy or simply making a statement of fact.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 02, 2022, 02:46:02 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 12:15:42 PM
Did I have to choose?  Any meany minney mo?

But you did choose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 02, 2022, 02:52:30 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 02, 2022, 02:46:02 PM
But you did choose.
As did you, people in glass houses....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 04:59:56 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 02, 2022, 02:46:02 PM
But you did choose.

What was going on at the time could hardly be ignored, splashed as it was, all over The Media.

And why should my choice be of any interest to you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 02, 2022, 05:41:23 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 04:59:56 PM
What was going on at the time could hardly be ignored, splashed as it was, all over The Media.

And why should my choice be of any interest to you?

Shouldn’t we all be interested in why others hold the views they do?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 05:55:21 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 02, 2022, 05:41:23 PM
Shouldn’t we all be interested in why others hold the views they do?

It's a bit late for that now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 02, 2022, 05:58:52 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 02, 2022, 05:55:21 PM
It's a bit late for that now.

I disagree.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 02, 2022, 11:58:41 PM
Quote from: Myster on December 02, 2022, 07:17:21 AM
Your post won't have been wiped intentionally, Sadie.  It usually occurs if you refresh the page or you go to a different page then return to your message and find it has disappeared completely.  It's happened to me, and no doubt others, many times in the past and is very frustrating, especially if your post is long and you haven't saved it just in case.  A quirk in the site software, I'm afraid.

Thankyou Myster.   8**8:/:   That could possibly be the reason.  I shall have to try to rememeber to save it another time.   How do you do that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on December 03, 2022, 08:00:05 AM
Quote from: sadie on December 02, 2022, 11:58:41 PM
Thankyou Myster.   8**8:/:   That could possibly be the reason.  I shall have to try to rememeber to save it another time.   How do you do that?
If writing your post directly on site ~ when you think you've completed it to satisfaction... highlight all, then copy and paste it to a simple text editor such as Notepad.  If your on-site post is then lost for some reason, say by refreshing the page or switching to a different page and returning to find it gone, you will have a copy in Notepad to fall back on and add to if necessary.  My method is to write in Notepad first, to get the content, grammar, spelling and formatting correct, then copy and paste it back on site.  Others might use a simpler way that I haven't discovered, but being computer-knowledgeable I'm sure you already know this, Sadie?

Gotta dash... need to load my float with a thousand bottles of whole, skimmed and semi-skimmed ready for devilry before ten.  That sozzled cat of yours isn't getting any of my cream tho'.   See Ya!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on December 05, 2022, 12:00:00 PM
WARNING!!!... only suitable for those of a gullible disposition.  If Ellie (not our own, mind) had shuffled those cards a few more than 26 times, maybe the results would have been super positive and encouraging...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zC-qUp4bSKE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zC-qUp4bSKE)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 05, 2022, 03:28:21 PM
Quote from: Myster on December 05, 2022, 12:00:00 PM
WARNING!!!... only suitable for those of a gullible disposition.  If Ellie (not our own, mind) had shuffled those cards a few more than 26 times, maybe the results would have been super positive and encouraging...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zC-qUp4bSKE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zC-qUp4bSKE)

A bit of a whatnot, isn't it.  And incorrect in certain details.  The rest is supposition picked up from The Media, although not entirely inaccurate when it comes to suggestions of cruelty from certain persons.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on December 17, 2022, 09:38:14 AM
I see that Gary Glitter/Paul Gadd is to be released from prison having served half of his sentence.

Hasn't half stirred up the Daily Mail readership.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 17, 2022, 09:52:37 AM
Quote from: jassi on December 17, 2022, 09:38:14 AM
I see that Gary Glitter/Paul Gadd is to be released from prison having served half of his sentence.

Hasn't half stirred up the Daily Mail readership.

Always puzzled me that his records are banned but yet Phil Spector's (who was jailed for murder) wasn't .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on December 17, 2022, 09:56:41 AM
Quote from: jassi on December 17, 2022, 09:38:14 AM
I see that Gary Glitter/Paul Gadd is to be released from prison having served half of his sentence.

Hasn't half stirred up the Daily Mail readership.

Theres something else in the mail apart from Harry and Meghan ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 17, 2022, 10:17:06 AM
Quote from: barrier on December 17, 2022, 09:52:37 AM
Always puzzled me that his records are banned but yet Phil Spector's (who was jailed for murder) wasn't .
Maybe because Phil Spector did not release records under his own name but produced singles and albums for others.  It would be a bit unfair to ban the Beatles "Let It Be" on the basis that its producer went on to murder don't you think?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 17, 2022, 11:43:07 AM
Quote from: jassi on December 17, 2022, 09:38:14 AM
I see that Gary Glitter/Paul Gadd is to be released from prison having served half of his sentence.

Hasn't half stirred up the Daily Mail readership.

Well he's paid his debt to society now, so I wish him a rock & roll Christmas, but I still don't want to touch him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 24, 2022, 04:41:37 AM

https://www.noradsanta.org/en/

Don't forget Santa.  Over New Zealand at about 9am this morning, my time.  That's 8am your time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on December 24, 2022, 11:32:40 AM
Happy Christmas one and all
(https://twitter.com/chichicrewshop/status/1606459643378573316)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 24, 2022, 02:26:02 PM

Yes, Merry Christian Brueckner everyone. His stockings won't be getting filled again anytime in the foreseeable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 24, 2022, 02:56:01 PM

I totally refuse to be anything other than kind today.  I actually care about all of you and for whatever reason that I can think of.  Or not.  I might actually understand you all better than you think I do.

I am not a religious person, but then I never have thought that religion had much to do with anything.

May your God go with you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 24, 2022, 03:10:54 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on December 24, 2022, 02:26:02 PM
Yes, Merry Christian Brueckner everyone. His stockings won't be getting filled again anytime in the foreseeable.

..... and a Happy Ney Year!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 25, 2022, 08:14:23 AM

I hope you all have a really nice Christmas Day 2022. With hands across the divide, even if only briefly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 25, 2022, 09:10:19 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on December 25, 2022, 08:14:23 AM
I hope you all have a really nice Christmas Day 2022. With hands across the divide, even if only briefly.

It's a terrible shame we are only nice to each other for one day a year. It would be better if we were all really nice to each other 364 days a year, then had one set day where we're all especially nasty. But never mind. We'll just have to make do with things the current way.
Merry Christmas Brueckner & a happy Ney year.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 25, 2022, 03:33:49 PM

Onwards and Upwards.  Most of don't live in the depths of a horror story.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on December 26, 2022, 04:45:02 PM
It seems that loyal supporters of the parents aren’t even worthy of a Facebook Christmas message this year.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on December 26, 2022, 06:34:22 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on December 26, 2022, 04:45:02 PM
It seems that loyal supporters of the parents aren’t even worthy of a Facebook Christmas message this year.
Every year you make a similar catty observation.  Do you know it never even crossed my mind to look for one or even care either way.  You are positively obsessed by their FB page.  Very odd behaviour imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 03, 2023, 05:32:12 PM
Fancy that!  Whole nations of child neglecters!  What have the “never take your eyes off your infant for one second” brigade got to say about this?  They must surely be apoplectic with rage!

https://www.iflscience.com/why-babies-take-a-nap-outside-alone-in-nordic-countries-65946
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on January 04, 2023, 10:50:10 AM

Did anyone have the misfortune of reading about Damien Bendall & the Killamarsh murders?

A whole life tariff was too soft a sentence for him imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on January 04, 2023, 11:32:13 AM

Anyway, I was going to say, Damien Bendall's crimes were so unspeakably depraved that if you have had the misfortune of reading about them then you have my sympathies, & if you haven't read about them, perhaps don't. It's one of the most disturbing murder cases I've ever had the misfortune of reading about. If he'd have been in the U.S he'd have been sent to the chair. I don't often wish ill on people but I hope Damian Bendall gets treated particularly poorly in prison.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on January 04, 2023, 01:13:17 PM
The McCanns' response to their detractor(s)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on January 04, 2023, 06:02:39 PM
Quote from: misty on January 04, 2023, 01:13:17 PM
The McCanns' response to their detractor(s)
Is that the sound of Faithlilly’s gnashing teeth I can hear…?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on January 04, 2023, 06:32:33 PM
Please abide by the rules. Thank you.

Admin
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on January 05, 2023, 10:48:06 AM
There has been some speculation in some quarters of photos maybe featuring Madeleine and CB, should this be even remotely true if CB is trying to hide behind pixelization then it can be defeated.


Child rapist, 50, is jailed for life after police used new technology to finally unpixelate his face in videos he took of himself committing his crimes 17 years ago

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11599137/Evil-child-rapist-jailed-life-unmasked-new-technology.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on January 10, 2023, 04:48:56 PM
An Off-Topic video present for Angelo

https://twitter.com/iRazasdePerros/status/1610722103040540673


See him smile as he gets more handsome, especially when he gets his shades and trilby.   Hope you like him.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on February 01, 2023, 03:09:42 PM
Why the need to drag the twins into it, its a red top so no sleaze bag bringing them into it,(or maybe it is) still its out there so relevant on here .

MADDIE AGONY Heartbreak for Maddie McCann’s family as her younger twin siblings turn 18 today without missing sister being found

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/21234095/heartbreak-maddie-mccann-family-siblings/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 01, 2023, 03:11:47 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 01, 2023, 03:09:42 PM
Why the need to drag the twins into it, its a red top so no sleaze bag bringing them into it,(or maybe it is) still its out there so relevant on here .

MADDIE AGONY Heartbreak for Maddie McCann’s family as her younger twin siblings turn 18 today without missing sister being found

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/21234095/heartbreak-maddie-mccann-family-siblings/

God, it's always heartbreak for the McCanns isn't it, & how my heart bleeds for them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 01, 2023, 03:33:15 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 01, 2023, 03:11:47 PM
God, it's always heartbreak for the McCanns isn't it, & how my heart bleeds for them.

How kind.  Good for you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on February 01, 2023, 03:43:11 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 01, 2023, 03:33:15 PM
How kind.  Good for you.

It's the twins I feel most sorry for. Having to grow up living with Kate & Gerry must be horrific.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on February 01, 2023, 04:24:54 PM
Quote from: barrier on February 01, 2023, 03:09:42 PM
Why the need to drag the twins into it, its a red top so no sleaze bag bringing them into it,(or maybe it is) still its out there so relevant on here .

MADDIE AGONY Heartbreak for Maddie McCann’s family as her younger twin siblings turn 18 today without missing sister being found

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/21234095/heartbreak-maddie-mccann-family-siblings/

I didn't realise they'd got to that age. How time flies
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 01, 2023, 04:30:04 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on February 01, 2023, 03:43:11 PM
It's the twins I feel most sorry for. Having to grow up living with Kate & Gerry must be horrific.

So why did you include The McCanns in your statement of sympathy?  Losing the plot, are you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 01, 2023, 05:06:59 PM
Weren’t some McCann bashers looking forward to this day as they believed the twins (being adults) would leave home and dish the dirt on their evil, murderous parents?  Let’s see what eventuates.  In the meantime I hope they and their parents have a happy day of celebrations.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 01, 2023, 05:15:15 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on February 01, 2023, 05:06:59 PM
Weren’t some McCann bashers looking forward to this day as they believed the twins (being adults) would leave home and dish the dirt on their evil, murderous parents?  Let’s see what eventuates.  In the meantime I hope they and their parents have a happy day of celebrations.

Sixteen years and still all together.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 01, 2023, 06:45:56 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 01, 2023, 05:15:15 PM
Sixteen years and still all together.
Yes, I also remember Faithlilly announcing on Twitter that the McCanns were getting divorced, must be about 10 years ago she revealed that fascinating bit of gossip.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 01, 2023, 11:54:25 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on February 01, 2023, 06:45:56 PM
Yes, I also remember Faithlilly announcing on Twitter that the McCanns were getting divorced, must be about 10 years ago she revealed that fascinating bit of gossip.

This must be a record, given the circumstances.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 13, 2023, 08:56:09 PM
Glitter has been recalled to prison for trying to access the dark web known as "The Onion", prison obviously never worked.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on March 13, 2023, 09:20:29 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 13, 2023, 08:56:09 PM
Glitter has been recalled to prison for trying to access the dark web known as "The Onion", prison obviously never worked.

I thought The Onion was a satirical news outlet?

Ex-Peadophile Shares Tips On How To Make Your Kids Less Attractive

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0nnU71ggro
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 13, 2023, 09:23:55 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 13, 2023, 08:56:09 PM
Glitter has been recalled to prison for trying to access the dark web known as "The Onion", prison obviously never worked.

No surprise there. Prison merely keeps criminals segregated from the general public.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on March 18, 2023, 01:26:32 PM
I don't remember watching this video but it is a very honest and informative one. It starts with part two but when that ends it goes back to part one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbRgQKwNdU0
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on March 18, 2023, 05:49:10 PM
Ben Leyland on his mother, Brenda...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/mar/18/my-mother-troll-of-madeleine-mccann-parents (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/mar/18/my-mother-troll-of-madeleine-mccann-parents)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 18, 2023, 06:18:55 PM
Quote from: Myster on March 18, 2023, 05:49:10 PM
Ben Leyland on his mother, Brenda...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/mar/18/my-mother-troll-of-madeleine-mccann-parents (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/mar/18/my-mother-troll-of-madeleine-mccann-parents)
Gosh that was a sad read, but the thing that puzzles me the most about it is the shitting in the garden compulsion.  TMI.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 18, 2023, 06:38:19 PM
Quote from: Myster on March 18, 2023, 05:49:10 PM
Ben Leyland on his mother, Brenda...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/mar/18/my-mother-troll-of-madeleine-mccann-parents (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/mar/18/my-mother-troll-of-madeleine-mccann-parents)

That was a bit of a shock.  I had forgotten about her.  All rather sad.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 18, 2023, 06:55:09 PM
Quote from: Myster on March 18, 2023, 05:49:10 PM
Ben Leyland on his mother, Brenda...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/mar/18/my-mother-troll-of-madeleine-mccann-parents (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/mar/18/my-mother-troll-of-madeleine-mccann-parents)

A very brave and insightful account.  Well worth reading by some to give them food for thought.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 18, 2023, 07:07:31 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on March 18, 2023, 06:18:55 PM
Gosh that was a sad read, but the thing that puzzles me the most about it is the shitting in the garden compulsion.  TMI.

Yeah, I thought that too.  Certainly not something I've ever contemplated even in extremis.

I was saddened by Ben's account and two issues sprang to mind.
The first was ~ the troll being trolled.  I remember when the blame game was being played on a Leyland thread on the forum that there was a post noting that erstwhile "friends" had viciously turned on her.  That is the first time I have read what was said.
The second was ~ that I hope Ben hasn't set himself up to be targeted.  If he is, I hope he has the strength to treat any such nonsense with the contempt it deserves and ignore it entirely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 18, 2023, 08:51:43 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 18, 2023, 07:07:31 PM
Yeah, I thought that too.  Certainly not something I've ever contemplated even in extremis.

I was saddened by Ben's account and two issues sprang to mind.
The first was ~ the troll being trolled.  I remember when the blame game was being played on a Leyland thread on the forum that there was a post noting that erstwhile "friends" had viciously turned on her.  That is the first time I have read what was said.
The second was ~ that I hope Ben hasn't set himself up to be targeted.  If he is, I hope he has the strength to treat any such nonsense with the contempt it deserves and ignore it entirely.
It’s a brave account and he will probably be lambasted by the Brenda Leyland Appreciation Society.  I suspect many of them supported her because they could relate to her and her issues, and for that I guess we should have some sympathy, these are obviously troubled, damaged people.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 18, 2023, 10:55:44 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on March 18, 2023, 08:51:43 PM
It’s a brave account and he will probably be lambasted by the Brenda Leyland Appreciation Society.  I suspect many of them supported her because they could relate to her and her issues, and for that I guess we should have some sympathy, these are obviously troubled, damaged people.

Before reading Ben's story, I had pretty much arrived at the assessment of "troubled, damaged people".  I think Brenda felt at home in a 'community'.  And there's the pity of it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 18, 2023, 11:07:34 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 18, 2023, 10:55:44 PM
Before reading Ben's story, I had pretty much arrived at the assessment of "troubled, damaged people".  I think Brenda felt at home in a 'community'.  And there's the pity of it.
I just had a look on the #mccann twitter feed for the first time in ages  and apart from a small handful of frothers it’s tumbleweed city.  It looks like 90% of the #mccNn barmpots have finally given up spouting their conspiralunacy and bile which is good news.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 21, 2023, 09:11:21 AM
Sir Mark Rowley is having to face some rough questions just now. An interesting comment he made was that he didn't notice the racism, sexism and mysogyny during his service in the Met between 2011 and 2018. I wonder why? Perhaps it was so deeply ingrained in police culture in general that he thought nothing of it, or it wasn't obvious to him because of his elevated rank or he's just not very observant. It was certainly noticed by those who suffered because of it, both serving police officers and members of the public.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 21, 2023, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 21, 2023, 09:11:21 AM
Sir Mark Rowley is having to face some rough questions just now. An interesting comment he made was that he didn't notice the racism, sexism and mysogyny during his service in the Met between 2011 and 2018. I wonder why? Perhaps it was so deeply ingrained in police culture in general that he thought nothing of it, or it wasn't obvious to him because of his elevated rank or he's just not very observant. It was certainly noticed by those who suffered because of it, both serving police officers and members of the public.
Whilst I have no doubt that the Met is rife with sexism, racism and homophobia I do wonder just how atypical it is of police forces in this country and elsewhere.  The difficulty MR faces now is in addressing these issues without completely de-fanging the police altogether.  I wonder which police force in this country or anywhere else in the world he could model the Met on in order to tackle the problems it faces?  One this is for sure I certainly don't envy his role one bit and believe that without substantial govt investment in recruitment and training he is doomed to fail from the off.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 21, 2023, 09:29:50 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 21, 2023, 09:11:21 AM
Sir Mark Rowley is having to face some rough questions just now. An interesting comment he made was that he didn't notice the racism, sexism and mysogyny during his service in the Met between 2011 and 2018. I wonder why? Perhaps it was so deeply ingrained in police culture in general that he thought nothing of it, or it wasn't obvious to him because of his elevated rank or he's just not very observant. It was certainly noticed by those who suffered because of it, both serving police officers and members of the public.

Probably for all of those reasons.
If he had any sense, he would step down and return to retirement.

Someone who had never served in the Met would be better suited to dealing with the problems, IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 21, 2023, 09:54:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 21, 2023, 09:11:21 AM
Sir Mark Rowley is having to face some rough questions just now. An interesting comment he made was that he didn't notice the racism, sexism and mysogyny during his service in the Met between 2011 and 2018. I wonder why? Perhaps it was so deeply ingrained in police culture in general that he thought nothing of it, or it wasn't obvious to him because of his elevated rank or he's just not very observant. It was certainly noticed by those who suffered because of it, both serving police officers and members of the public.

25 yrs on from McPherson still institutionally racist and the commissioner cant see it, obviously the wrong man for the job.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 21, 2023, 09:57:30 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 21, 2023, 09:54:01 AM
25 yrs on from McPherson still institutionally racist and the commissioner cant see it, obviously the wrong man for the job.
Put yourself up for the job, then you can solve all the Met's problems and the Maddie case in a day too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 21, 2023, 10:01:48 AM
Quote from: jassi on March 21, 2023, 09:29:50 AM
Probably for all of those reasons.
If he had any sense, he would step down and return to retirement.

Someone who had never served in the Met would be better suited to dealing with the problems, IMO
Yeah, put Richard Branson in charge.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 21, 2023, 10:26:47 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on March 21, 2023, 09:57:30 AM
Put yourself up for the job, then you can solve all the Met's problems and the Maddie case in a day too.

You've obviously nothing better to do, put yourself forward.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 21, 2023, 10:27:27 AM
Quote from: jassi on March 21, 2023, 09:29:50 AM
Probably for all of those reasons.
If he had any sense, he would step down and return to retirement.

Someone who had never served in the Met would be better suited to dealing with the problems, IMO

Poisoned chalice per chance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 21, 2023, 10:31:36 AM
In case its bypassed some.

Metropolitan Police is 'institutionally racist, sexist and homophobic' and may have more officers like Couzens and Carrick, review finds

https://news.sky.com/story/metropolitan-police-is-institutionally-racist-sexist-and-homophobic-and-may-have-more-officers-like-couzens-and-carrick-review-finds-12838717
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 21, 2023, 10:42:06 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 21, 2023, 10:26:47 AM
You've obviously nothing better to do, put yourself forward.
Unlike you I don't think I could do a better job than Mark Rowley
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 21, 2023, 10:43:18 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 21, 2023, 10:27:27 AM
Poisoned chalice per chance.

Bound to be, whoever takes it forward. Needs to be some of integrity - a person like Baroness Lawrence, perhaps , who has first hand experience of the Met at its worse.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 21, 2023, 10:46:28 AM
Quote from: jassi on March 21, 2023, 10:43:18 AM
Bound to be, whoever takes it forward. Needs to be some of integrity - a person like Baroness Lawrence, perhaps , who has first hand experience of the Met at its worse.
Why on earth would Baroness Lawrence want such a thankless and impossible role?  Mark Rowley seems like a man with integrity, why not give him a chance to sort things out?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 21, 2023, 10:47:44 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on March 21, 2023, 10:42:06 AM
Unlike you I don't think I could do a better job than Mark Rowley

Well you obviously think a failure is suited, go for it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 21, 2023, 11:01:35 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 21, 2023, 10:47:44 AM
Well you obviously think a failure is suited, go for it.
Go for what?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 21, 2023, 11:02:42 AM
Quote from: jassi on March 21, 2023, 10:43:18 AM
Bound to be, whoever takes it forward. Needs to be some of integrity - a person like Baroness Lawrence, perhaps , who has first hand experience of the Met at its worse.

Speaking of.


Reacting to the report today, the mother of murdered black teenager Stephen Lawrence said it was 'the last chance for the Metropolitan Police to get it right'. 

Doreen Lawrence described the Met as 'rotten to its core', adding that discrimination is 'institutionalised' within Britain's biggest police force.

 'It comes as no surprise to me that the report from Baroness Louise Casey has found that the Metropolitan Police is riddled with deep-seated racism, sexism and homophobia,' the baroness said.

'My suspicion that racism played a critical part in the failure of the Metropolitan Police to properly investigate my son's death in 1993 was borne out by the Macpherson report.

'Since then, despite repeated reassurances that the Metropolitan Police had learned lessons from its failures, discrimination in every form is clearly rampant in its ranks. It is not, and has never been, a case of a few 'bad apples' within the Metropolitan Police.

'It is rotten to the core. Discrimination is institutionalised within the Metropolitan Police and it needs changing from top to bottom. Any reluctance or refusal to accept that institutional racism exists within the police service will mean that any attempt at change is doomed to failure and, the police, yet again, will be letting down our communities.' 


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11884463/Met-Police-chief-Mark-Rowley-denies-Scotland-Yard-institutionally-racist-Casey-report.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 21, 2023, 11:03:04 AM
I'm sensing some hostility towards Mark Rowley on this forum, really can't think why.... *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 21, 2023, 11:19:27 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 21, 2023, 11:02:42 AM
Speaking of.


Reacting to the report today, the mother of murdered black teenager Stephen Lawrence said it was 'the last chance for the Metropolitan Police to get it right'. 

Doreen Lawrence described the Met as 'rotten to its core', adding that discrimination is 'institutionalised' within Britain's biggest police force.

 'It comes as no surprise to me that the report from Baroness Louise Casey has found that the Metropolitan Police is riddled with deep-seated racism, sexism and homophobia,' the baroness said.

'My suspicion that racism played a critical part in the failure of the Metropolitan Police to properly investigate my son's death in 1993 was borne out by the Macpherson report.

'Since then, despite repeated reassurances that the Metropolitan Police had learned lessons from its failures, discrimination in every form is clearly rampant in its ranks. It is not, and has never been, a case of a few 'bad apples' within the Metropolitan Police.

'It is rotten to the core. Discrimination is institutionalised within the Metropolitan Police and it needs changing from top to bottom. Any reluctance or refusal to accept that institutional racism exists within the police service will mean that any attempt at change is doomed to failure and, the police, yet again, will be letting down our communities.' 


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11884463/Met-Police-chief-Mark-Rowley-denies-Scotland-Yard-institutionally-racist-Casey-report.html


So according to the Mail, Rowley is in denial.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 21, 2023, 11:46:39 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 21, 2023, 10:31:36 AM
In case its bypassed some.

Metropolitan Police is 'institutionally racist, sexist and homophobic' and may have more officers like Couzens and Carrick, review finds

https://news.sky.com/story/metropolitan-police-is-institutionally-racist-sexist-and-homophobic-and-may-have-more-officers-like-couzens-and-carrick-review-finds-12838717

If the MP is 'institutionally racist, sexist and homophobic', then it's in it's laws, customs or practices. It will continue to show those results regardless of the attitudes of individual police officers. Simply by complying with and maintaining those practices they are compliant without holding those views themselves. Sky are concentrating on individuals as Rowley is, but the problem is that the institution needs to be changed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 21, 2023, 11:49:08 AM
Quote from: jassi on March 21, 2023, 10:43:18 AM
Bound to be, whoever takes it forward. Needs to be some of integrity - a person like Baroness Lawrence, perhaps , who has first hand experience of the Met at its worse.

Or the author of the report .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 21, 2023, 12:15:44 PM
You'd think a female leader of the Met would help, but when you think of Dick, maybe not
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 21, 2023, 12:22:50 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 21, 2023, 12:15:44 PM
You'd think a female leader of the Met would help, but when you think of Dick, maybe not

With a name like that what did anyone expect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 21, 2023, 02:06:06 PM
It depends which is deciding the met is institutionally racist..and what that actually means. Wasn't there a report recently showing the whole.country is institutionally racist...so the met merely reflectsv the country as a whole. Let's just defund and sacj all the officers and replace then with nice people...not sure how they'll get on tackling some of thevthugs and s..mbags these awful police protect us from
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 21, 2023, 02:55:27 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 21, 2023, 12:15:44 PM
You'd think a female leader of the Met would help, but when you think of Dick, maybe not

Amazing that Ms Dick was able to rise through the ranks of such an 'institutionally racist, sexist and homophobic' organisation.
Staff association for #LGBT+ 🏳️‍🌈 #Metropolitan #Police Officers, Staff, Volunteer Colleagues & Allies -
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClzK9M9XEAAnPRZ?format=jpg&name=900x900)
A police officer got down on one knee and proposed to his boyfriend, right in the middle of the London Pride parade on Saturday. Met Police LGBT Network In a tweet accompanying the heartwarming picture, the Metropolitan police's LGBT Network confirmed "he said yes".

__________________________________________________________________________-

Writing anonymously, for very obvious reasons, a police inspector reveals to the Mail how the force he loves is being crippled by political correctness and the (often dishonest) pursuit of government targets
When he was brought into the station last week, on a charge of stealing from a 94-year-old woman, I had a look at his record. It was a lengthy indictment of the incredible leniency of our courts.

Aged only 23, he had been arrested 80 times and convicted of an incredible 140 offences.

Among his crimes were assault, aggravated burglary, blackmail, theft and possession of Class A and Class B drugs.

His behaviour has long been out of control, showing respect for neither the law nor the rights of others. But despite his lengthy catalogue of offending, he has spent just 12 weeks in prison.

The only lesson he has ever learned is that he has nothing to fear from the courts. No doubt he will receive another ineffectual slap on the wrist the next time he is up before a judge.

__________________________________________________________________________-

Diversity is sacrosanct, its commissars are protected and its influence is all dominant.

So in our training, for instance, just one day a year is devoted to practical instruction in officer safety, dealing with procedures such as correct use of handcuffs, Tasers and batons, or how to put a violent suspect in a van or cell.

Yet the effort devoted to diversity is far greater. We have to carry out two days of diversity training a year at headquarters, another day at our divisions, go through an eight-hour ‘e-learning’ package on our computers and, in our annual performance appraisal forms, show that we have accomplished three separate objectives ‘to raise diversity awareness’.

In addition, during weekly individual meetings with our supervisor, we have to explain what we have done to promote cultural diversity.
                          _____________________________________

The ideology extends to the front line. When visiting a Muslim household, we are instructed to remove our shoes, but I have refused to obey that edict because I believe it is disrespectful to my position as British police officer.

On one occasion, I had to call on a Muslim family and the daughter refused to let me in until I had taken off my boots.

I simply told her that, while on duty, I was not prepared to remove any part of my equipment, footwear included. So she went off to her father to report my non-compliance, only to find he did not object at all to me keeping my boots on.

When I reported this back to the Diversity Unit, the officer implied that I must have intimidated the father, which was nonsense.

This diversity officer was indulging in just the kind of stereotyping he condemns in others, clinging to the belief that every Muslim adheres devotedly to religious custom.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1375009/Political-correctness-crippling-police-force-Gay-Pride-badges-army-medals-out.html


Thing is if you look for something, the chances are you will probably find it.   If you don't look - for example a missing child - the chances are you wont.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 21, 2023, 03:01:00 PM
Making sure the population feels safe from the police would be a start.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 21, 2023, 03:12:09 PM
What does "institutionally racist" etc actually mean?  That it is a generally accepted part of the training, culture and working practice of the Met?  I struggle to see how that is possible in this day and age, though I can fully accept that there are no doubt plenty of racist, misogynistic, homophobic members of the force, just as there are sadly in most professions.   But does that stem from the the proactive recruitment of such individuals and/or the way they are taught and through their working practices?  Is it possible to vet and monitor every single member of any workforce to ensure that they are thoroughly without a racist, sexist thought in their heads?  Is it practical to sack every member of a workforce who indulges in un pc (scuse pun) banter?  I'm not defending these practices, just wondering how this can practically be addressed. To me it's as much a societal issue as it is a specific police issue.  For example: look at the misogynistic, rapey material that young boys are constantly being exposed to online through the likes of Andrew Tate, hardcore porn etc - what hope have we as a society that young boys growing up today exposed to this stuff are going to be respectful of women and not treat them like meat to be used and abused?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 21, 2023, 03:15:55 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 21, 2023, 03:01:00 PM
Making sure the population feels safe from the police would be a start.
The paradox facing Britain's biggest force: The more Met's top brass fixate on wokeness, the more bigoted its officers become, writes former Police and Crime Commissioner ANTHONY STANSFELD
READ: Met is 'institutionally racist, corrupt, misogynistic and homophobic'
By ANTHONY STANSFELD

PUBLISHED: 00:00, 21 March 2023 |

Why has the force so badly lost its way? Part of the answer, I believe, is that too many of those in senior positions are the products of progressive education peddled by woke university courses. They are more concerned with social engineering than with fighting crime.

Politically correct dogma not only weakens their own authority but also distorts vital policies on recruitment and promotion. The Met should, of course, be trying to attract more women and ethnic minorities so its workforce more closely mirrors the make-up of the capital.

But that does not mean that hiring new applicants should descend into a box-ticking exercise in identity politics – as it manifestly has.

In the vacuum created by weak leadership, an inevitable and ugly backlash against the woke agenda has also been allowed to flourish.

That helps to explain a bizarre paradox: the more the Met's top brass fixates on wokeness, the more bigoted much of its workforce becomes.
_______________________________________________________________________

In 1972, Sir Robert Mark became head of the Met on a mission to root out wide- spread corruption.

'A good police force is one that catches more crooks than it employs,' he memorably said when he was appointed.

Sir Robert triumphantly achieved his mission, not least by getting rid of more than 500 corrupt officers, including the heads of the Flying Squad and the Obscene Publications Squad. We need some of that spirit today – otherwise the Met will only sink deeper into the mire.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11883597/ANTHONY-STANSFELD-Mets-brass-fixate-wokeness-bigoted-officers-become.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 21, 2023, 03:26:55 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on March 21, 2023, 03:12:09 PM
What does "institutionally racist" etc actually mean?  That it is a generally accepted part of the training, culture and working practice of the Met?  I struggle to see how that is possible in this day and age, though I can fully accept that there are no doubt plenty of racist, misogynistic, homophobic members of the force, just as there are sadly in most professions.   But does that stem from the the proactive recruitment of such individuals and/or the way they are taught and through their working practices?  Is it possible to vet and monitor every single member of any workforce to ensure that they are thoroughly without a racist, sexist thought in their heads?  Is it practical to sack every member of a workforce who indulges in un pc (scuse pun) banter?  I'm not defending these practices, just wondering how this can practically be addressed. To me it's as much a societal issue as it is a specific police issue.  For example: look at the misogynistic, rapey material that young boys are constantly being exposed to online through the likes of Andrew Tate, hardcore porn etc - what hope have we as a society that young boys growing up today exposed to this stuff are going to be respectful of women and not treat them like meat to be used and abused?

Some bad apples have slipped through the net but not by any means should all the dedicated men and women (and THAT is probably an example of non-PC speak in this day and age) be tarred with the same stick.

Imagine if the good guys weren't there!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 21, 2023, 03:34:01 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 21, 2023, 03:01:00 PM
Making sure the population feels safe from the police would be a start.

Especially women.  Policemen shouldn't be out on their own.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 21, 2023, 03:36:26 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 21, 2023, 03:26:55 PM
Some bad apples have slipped through the net but not by any means should all the dedicated men and women (and THAT is probably an example of non-PC speak in this day and age) be tarred with the same stick.

Imagine if the good guys weren't there!

I think it is more than a few, but its a good place to start by getting rid of them before looking at others.

I don't know how recruits are vetted but clearly it needs to be improved to exclude the racist and misogynistic from being appointed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 21, 2023, 03:37:15 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 21, 2023, 03:34:01 PM
Especially women.  Policemen shouldn't be out on their own.

Not even when they are not on duty?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 21, 2023, 03:39:05 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 21, 2023, 03:26:55 PM
Some bad apples have slipped through the net but not by any means should all the dedicated men and women (and THAT is probably an example of non-PC speak in this day and age) be tarred with the same stick.

Imagine if the good guys weren't there!

Men going up through the ranks become clones.  I saw that happening in Plymouth 40 years ago.  And they all wore the same polyester suits.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 21, 2023, 03:41:49 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 21, 2023, 03:36:26 PM
I think it is more than a few, but its a good place to start by getting rid of them before looking at others.

I don't know how recruits are vetted but clearly it needs to be improved to exclude the racist and misogynistic from being appointed.
I wonder how many start off as role models of propriety and decency, and end up being corrupted or shaped by their experiences in the field
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 21, 2023, 03:52:00 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 21, 2023, 03:37:15 PM
Not even when they are not on duty?

Difficult.  It's often the uniform that gives them the power to stop people.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 21, 2023, 04:01:04 PM
I don't know about the Met but I watched a shocking documentary last night about a murder/suicide that took place in Essex in which the Essex police were notified multiple times of the dangerous and threatening behaviour that an ex-husband was demonstrating towards his family but the police response was wholly inadequate.  They clearly treated it as a domestic argument and didn't recognise the seriousness of the threats despite repeated attempts by the man's ex-partner to get them to find and arrest him.  He eventually set light to his ex mother in law and then himself in front of his ex.  These Met failings towards women are certainly widespread throughout the UK in my opinion. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 21, 2023, 06:38:54 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 21, 2023, 03:52:00 PM
Difficult.  It's often the uniform that gives them the power to stop people.

At one time who would have questioned being pulled over by a police vehicle or someone with a warrant card.  That trust is demonstrably broken with recent high profile cases.  It is a very serious situation indeed for the Met and for the country.  Policing has to be done by consent and that requires trust.  Undoubtedly there are those who have used their position as a licence commit crimes up to murder and very possibly were attracted to recruiting as a police officer as their entry ticket. 
The best that can be said about it is that the situation has been recognised and it is not too late to do something about it.  That alone is going to be a herculean task but quite obviously revolutionary different attitudes to those which have been in force must be applied throughout.  Any alternative is unthinkable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 22, 2023, 08:22:59 AM

The Met will take a long time to recover.  I stopped trusting The Police in general a very long time ago, so it isn't just The Met.  And I was more or less middle class by then.  But I still had the working class fight back mentality.  So instead of being fair game they bit off a bit more than they could chew with me.  And that was a laugh, I must tell you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 22, 2023, 09:33:19 AM
I think breaking it up into more manageable chunks is the only solution.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 22, 2023, 09:39:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 22, 2023, 09:33:19 AM
I think breaking it up into more manageable chunks is the only solution.

Managed by whom?  This has been going on for years so the Top Brass are also suspect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 22, 2023, 10:27:33 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 22, 2023, 09:39:01 AM
Managed by whom?  This has been going on for years so the Top Brass are also suspect.

Different agencies , I suppose.
Anti- Terrorism could go to MI5  or NCA for example. Diplomatic protection ditto.
I don't know the geographical area covered by the Met, but maybe some of that area could go to surrounding forces - not that they don't have their own problems.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 22, 2023, 11:01:04 AM
As none of us really knows very much about the internal machinations and structures of the police I think it's a problem best left to those who know what's what to solve.  I mean, my suggestion would be to get rid of all male police and replace them with black and ethnic minority lesbian police, which should solve all the issues in one fell swoop but I doubt it's very practical. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 22, 2023, 11:18:37 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 22, 2023, 09:39:01 AM
Managed by whom?  This has been going on for years so the Top Brass are also suspect.

It is a culture which I imagine is top down possibly as a result of the implementation of poor recruitment strategies.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 22, 2023, 11:21:53 AM
Quote from: jassi on March 22, 2023, 10:27:33 AM
Different agencies , I suppose.
Anti- Terrorism could go to MI5  or NCA for example. Diplomatic protection ditto.
I don't know the geographical area covered by the Met, but maybe some of that area could go to surrounding forces - not that they don't have their own problems.

In Scotland the reverse strategy has been implemented.  We now have one big "Police Scotland" in operation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 22, 2023, 12:17:39 PM
Quote from: Brietta on March 22, 2023, 11:21:53 AM
In Scotland the reverse strategy has been implemented.  We now have one big "Police Scotland" in operation.

Well yes, for a population of about 6 million.. Is it any less corrupt than before ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 22, 2023, 12:23:35 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 22, 2023, 09:39:01 AM
Managed by whom?  This has been going on for years so the Top Brass are also suspect.

It just seems to me to be easier to make bosses accountable in smaller organisations. I'm also not keen on the concentration on graduate entry. Some very good policepersons are content to do a decent job, while graduates are more likely to concentrate on getting promotion. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 22, 2023, 12:30:08 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 22, 2023, 12:23:35 PM
It just seems to me to be easier to make bosses accountable in smaller organisations. I'm also not keen on the concentration on graduate entry. Some very good policepersons are content to do a decent job, while graduates are more likely to concentrate on getting promotion.
Do you have any evidence for this claim, that people without degrees are less ambitious in the workplace? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 22, 2023, 12:38:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 22, 2023, 12:23:35 PM
It just seems to me to be easier to make bosses accountable in smaller organisations. I'm also not keen on the concentration on graduate entry. Some very good policepersons are content to do a decent job, while graduates are more likely to concentrate on getting promotion.

Presumably the Met has sector commanders, so that span of control is manageable .

Graduate entry is a tricky one. Police officers need to be reasonably well educated even at lower levels but all graduate entry probably wouldn't recruit enough people.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on March 22, 2023, 12:38:22 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 22, 2023, 12:17:39 PM
Well yes, for a population of about 6 million.. Is it any less corrupt than before ?

I actually don't think it was corrupt to begin with.
Not perfect ... but such is the problem with human beings.


Police Scotland ‘not in same area’ to Met over misconduct handling
PA News
    |  |  | Published: 22:10, 21 March 2023 | Updated: 22:12, 21 March 2023

Police Scotland is “not in the same area” as the Metropolitan Police over the handling of misconduct claims, a senior policing figure has said.

Speaking to BBC Scotland’s The Nine on Tuesday, David Kennedy, general secretary of the Scottish Police Federation, said the way we police in Scotland is different to the rest of the UK, following the publication of a damning report into culture and standards at Britain’s biggest force.

Mr Kennedy insisted Police Scotland had a “vigorous” way of dealing with any officer who falls foul of behaviour expected of them.

He said: “Officers will be suspended if it is serious enough, they will go through an investigation – but prior to that would be a criminal investigation and that’s reported to the Crown.”

Mr Kennedy acknowledged the report was “absolutely horrendous”.

He added: “You can’t defend it. What I can say is I don’t think Police Scotland is in the same area as the Metropolitan Police.

“We know the way we police in Scotland is different. We have corroboration in Scotland as well.

“If you go back to the riots in London in 2011, a lot of Scottish police officers who went down to London to work and we know from the reception they got from the members of public they were playing football in the street with youngsters, they were in speaking to shopkeepers who were astounded that the police were actually speaking to them, bringing them cups of tea etc, we know it’s entirely different.”
https://www.kentonline.co.uk/news/national/police-scotland-not-in-same-area-to-met-over-misconduct-handling-84128/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 22, 2023, 12:42:42 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 22, 2023, 12:38:00 PM
Presumably the Met has sector commanders, so that span of control is manageable .

Graduate entry is a tricky one. Police officers need to be reasonably well educated even at lower levels but all graduate entry probably wouldn't recruit enough people.
Can I join the police with no degree?
You don't need a degree to join the police. Many forces offer the Police Constable Degree Apprenticeship (PCDA) entry route which is a mixture of dynamic practical on-the-job learning alongside academic classroom-based theory and learning.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 22, 2023, 03:12:47 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on March 22, 2023, 12:42:42 PM
Can I join the police with no degree?
You don't need a degree to join the police. Many forces offer the Police Constable Degree Apprenticeship (PCDA) entry route which is a mixture of dynamic practical on-the-job learning alongside academic classroom-based theory and learning.

But you do need to be a follow my leader and do as you are told.  I wouldn't have lasted five minutes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 22, 2023, 06:04:02 PM
The Guardian has an interesting piece on this .Comments are worth a read as well.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/mar/21/the-guardian-view-on-the-casey-report-the-met-is-rotting-from-within
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 22, 2023, 09:26:37 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 22, 2023, 06:04:02 PM
The Guardian has an interesting piece on this .Comments are worth a read as well.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/mar/21/the-guardian-view-on-the-casey-report-the-met-is-rotting-from-within

It's a huge problem as people have identified here too. Unless Rowley can accept the fact that it's institutional he's unlikely to be able to deal with it. Imo he has a talent for foot in mouth comments.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 23, 2023, 10:36:49 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 22, 2023, 09:26:37 PM
It's a huge problem as people have identified here too. Unless Rowley can accept the fact that it's institutional he's unlikely to be able to deal with it. Imo he has a talent for foot in mouth comments.

Two enquiries 20 odd yrs apart determine the MET is institutionally racist, so if Rowley can't or won't accept, is he part of the problem or a solution.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 23, 2023, 10:38:17 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 22, 2023, 09:39:01 AM
Managed by whom?  This has been going on for years so the Top Brass are also suspect.

The MET has been criticised for yrs, is there the same in France in relation to a particular force ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 23, 2023, 11:07:06 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 23, 2023, 10:36:49 AM
Two enquiries 20 odd yrs apart determine the MET is institutionally racist, so if Rowley can't or won't accept, is he part of the problem or a solution.

If he can't or won't accept it he becomes part of the problem imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 23, 2023, 11:37:41 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 23, 2023, 10:38:17 AM
The MET has been criticised for yrs, is there the same in France in relation to a particular force ?

Never, in so far as I have seen.  The Gendarmes have always been very polite to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on March 23, 2023, 12:09:03 PM
In sleepy backwater Melrand you're missing all the action re. la retraite pension française...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11830039/France-strikes-Trains-grind-halt-schools-shut-refineries-blockaded-pensions.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11830039/France-strikes-Trains-grind-halt-schools-shut-refineries-blockaded-pensions.html)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 23, 2023, 12:17:19 PM
Quote from: Myster on March 23, 2023, 12:09:03 PM
In sleepy backwater Melrand you're missing all the action re. la retraite pension française...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11830039/France-strikes-Trains-grind-halt-schools-shut-refineries-blockaded-pensions.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11830039/France-strikes-Trains-grind-halt-schools-shut-refineries-blockaded-pensions.html)

Not really.  The Bill for reform has already passed through Parliament.  Macron won.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 23, 2023, 05:41:41 PM

Well I never.  They had a Demonstration in Pontivy's only Car Park this afternoon.  And very jolly it was too.  Or so I am told.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on March 24, 2023, 08:32:37 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 23, 2023, 05:41:41 PM
Well I never.  They had a Demonstration in Pontivy's only Car Park this afternoon.  And very jolly it was too.  Or so I am told.
Crikey!  That's only 16 kilometers away... Next stop 56310.   Woman the barricades!  Lock up yer oak doors!  Put the hairy sausage on alert!

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 24, 2023, 09:14:28 AM
Quote from: Myster on March 24, 2023, 08:32:37 AM
Crikey!  That's only 16 kilometers away... Next stop 56310.   Woman the barricades!  Lock up yer oak doors!  Put the hairy sausage on alert!

The Hairy Sausage is always on alert.  He'd probably lick them half to death and pee on their feet.  That'd larn em.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 24, 2023, 09:45:57 AM
Reports of demonstrators setting Town Hall in Bordeaux on fire.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/france-protest-bordeaux-fire-pension-b2307180.html

The French certainly do their demonstrations  properly - none of this wimpish banner waving.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 24, 2023, 11:19:31 AM
Quote from: jassi on March 24, 2023, 09:45:57 AM
Reports of demonstrators setting Town Hall in Bordeaux on fire.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/france-protest-bordeaux-fire-pension-b2307180.html

The French certainly do their demonstrations  properly - none of this wimpish banner waving.
Vive La Revolution!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 24, 2023, 12:06:46 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 24, 2023, 09:45:57 AM
Reports of demonstrators setting Town Hall in Bordeaux on fire.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/france-protest-bordeaux-fire-pension-b2307180.html

The French certainly do their demonstrations  properly - none of this wimpish banner waving.

Not around here they don't.  But then The Bretons aren't violent and ill mannered people.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 24, 2023, 01:58:18 PM
I don't know what the French are complaining about - I don't get to retirement age until 67, and even then I will probably carry on working beyond that.  67 is still young, retiring at 64 seems like a luxury now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on March 24, 2023, 06:08:51 PM
Delighted to say that I retired at the age of 58  having worked 40+ years for the NHS though wasn't eligible for state pension for a few years after that. Work seems a long time ago now
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 24, 2023, 07:38:55 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 22, 2023, 09:26:37 PM
It's a huge problem as people have identified here too. Unless Rowley can accept the fact that it's institutional he's unlikely to be able to deal with it. Imo he has a talent for foot in mouth comments.
According to the report’s  author:

Casey has left restructure as a last resort if major reform does not occur quickly. She believes in the new leadership team of Sir Mark Rowley, the commissioner who took over in September, and his deputy Dame Lynne Owens, the former head of the National Crime Agency. They are outstanding, she says: “They’re light years away in terms of leadership, their instincts around how to talk to their people, their ability.”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 24, 2023, 09:00:36 PM
Quote from: jassi on March 24, 2023, 06:08:51 PM
Delighted to say that I retired at the age of 58  having worked 40+ years for the NHS though wasn't eligible for state pension for a few years after that. Work seems a long time ago now

I got my pension at 60, but wotked until I was 70. I enjoyed my job and it didn't feel like work. So I've been retired for nine years, widowed for seven. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 25, 2023, 10:03:57 AM

Okay, if you all really want to be bored witless.  I worked until I was 75 because I needed the money.  But only on The Black.  France doesn't like it when retired persons work.  Mind you, The French Pension is light years better than The British Pension.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 25, 2023, 10:49:06 AM
Not sure how accurate it is, but it worth a read imo.

Use of force signals ‘crisis of authority’ as France’s pension battle turns to unrest

https://www.france24.com/en/france/20230324-use-of-force-signals-crisis-of-authority-as-france-s-pension-battle-turns-to-unrest
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 25, 2023, 11:32:14 AM
Quote from: barrier on March 25, 2023, 10:49:06 AM
Not sure how accurate it is, but it worth a read imo.

Use of force signals ‘crisis of authority’ as France’s pension battle turns to unrest

https://www.france24.com/en/france/20230324-use-of-force-signals-crisis-of-authority-as-france-s-pension-battle-turns-to-unrest

It was passed by Parliament.  But one has to wonder how Britain feels about this when Brits have to work until 67.  France should be thanking their lucky stars.

I personally don't know how I feel about it since it has never applied to me.  I remain thankful for The Food Bank living as I do on a British State Pension.  The ordinary Retired French Citizen doesn't have to do this.

In My Opinion there will always be people everywhere just looking for a fight.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: barrier on March 25, 2023, 12:17:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 25, 2023, 11:32:14 AM
It was passed by Parliament.  But one has to wonder how Britain feels about this when Brits have to work until 67.  France should be thanking their lucky stars.

I personally don't know how I feel about it since it has never applied to me.  I remain thankful for The Food Bank living as I do on a British State Pension.  The ordinary Retired French Citizen doesn't have to do this.

In My Opinion there will always be people everywhere just looking for a fight.

It seems to be past the stage of the pension protest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 25, 2023, 12:56:50 PM
Quote from: barrier on March 25, 2023, 12:17:30 PM
It seems to be past the stage of the pension protest.

Most of us don't even know it's going on, let alone what is about.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 25, 2023, 04:32:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 25, 2023, 11:32:14 AM
It was passed by Parliament.  But one has to wonder how Britain feels about this when Brits have to work until 67.  France should be thanking their lucky stars.

I personally don't know how I feel about it since it has never applied to me.  I remain thankful for The Food Bank living as I do on a British State Pension.  The ordinary Retired French Citizen doesn't have to do this.

In My Opinion there will always be people everywhere just looking for a fight.

I understand that Macron forced it though Parliament without allowing a vote on it. That's one of the reasons for the protests.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 25, 2023, 04:53:17 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 25, 2023, 04:32:45 PM
I understand that Macron forced it though Parliament without allowing a vote on it. That's one of the reasons for the protests.

No he didn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 26, 2023, 08:49:25 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 25, 2023, 04:53:17 PM
No he didn't.

His Prime Minister did it technically but he certainly supports her.

Protesters have been emboldened by the government's use of constitutional power to ram through reforms without a vote in the National Assembly.

Mr Macron emphasised his continued backing for his beleaguered prime minister: "She has my confidence to lead this government team."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65037507
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 26, 2023, 09:58:46 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 26, 2023, 08:49:25 AM
His Prime Minister did it technically but he certainly supports her.

Protesters have been emboldened by the government's use of constitutional power to ram through reforms without a vote in the National Assembly.

Mr Macron emphasised his continued backing for his beleaguered prime minister: "She has my confidence to lead this government team."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65037507

There is more to it than that.  But I can't be bothered to explain.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on March 26, 2023, 01:39:20 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on March 26, 2023, 09:58:46 AM
There is more to it than that.  But I can't be bothered to explain.

At least we know it wasn't passed by Parliament. It was forced through.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 26, 2023, 01:53:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on March 26, 2023, 01:39:20 PM
At least we know it wasn't passed by Parliament. It was forced through.

It was passed by a vote in The Upper Chamber by a majority of 70 Plus.  All perfectly legal.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on March 27, 2023, 06:49:36 AM
Pushed through without a full vote...

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/03/16/world/france-pension-vote#france-pension-vote (https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/03/16/world/france-pension-vote#france-pension-vote)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 27, 2023, 08:04:36 AM
Quote from: Myster on March 27, 2023, 06:49:36 AM
Pushed through without a full vote...

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/03/16/world/france-pension-vote#france-pension-vote (https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/03/16/world/france-pension-vote#france-pension-vote)

The New York Times?  This site is inaccessible unless I pay.  Although Why it should be of importance to anyone who doesn't actually live in France and who now has to work until 67 is a bit of a mystery to me.  The Bill has been passed legally through The Upper Chamber and is now in French Law.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on March 27, 2023, 08:48:33 AM
And also signalling the demise of Macron and Borne no doubt...

https://www.reuters.com/video/watch/idOV799116032023RP1 (https://www.reuters.com/video/watch/idOV799116032023RP1)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on March 27, 2023, 09:23:51 AM
Quote from: Myster on March 27, 2023, 08:48:33 AM
And also signalling the demise of Macron and Borne no doubt...

https://www.reuters.com/video/watch/idOV799116032023RP1 (https://www.reuters.com/video/watch/idOV799116032023RP1)

Macron's time is nearly done now.  And what an achievement.  Two measly more years compared to Brits having to work until 67.

I know whose side I am on, probably because I understand what has gone on in France during the last 30 years, which is so much more than anyone else here can say.

Raising this argument was just another sneaky attempt to attack the opinions of a McCann Supporter and somehow make me look stupid when in fact I am anything but.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on March 31, 2023, 03:15:53 PM
Sceptics think grime impressed the FBI...more economy of the truth from what I can see. He may we'll have impressed Rex Stickhouse...one man...but that's it. More sales talk imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on March 31, 2023, 03:22:19 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on March 31, 2023, 03:15:53 PM
Sceptics think grime impressed the FBI...more economy of the truth from what I can see. He may we'll have impressed Rex Stickhouse...one man...but that's it. More sales talk imo

Any sceptics in particular think that, or all of them, perhaps? Did you conduct a survey?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 04, 2023, 11:42:39 AM
Weird sentencing laws in this country - 42 years for shooting a child, yet only community service for raping a 13  year old.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11935437/Fury-man-21-raped-13-year-old-park-walks-free-young-sent-prison.html


One completely over the top and the other totally inadequate - IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2023, 01:23:42 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 04, 2023, 11:42:39 AM
Weird sentencing laws in this country - 42 years for shooting a child, yet only community service for raping a 13  year old.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11935437/Fury-man-21-raped-13-year-old-park-walks-free-young-sent-prison.html


One completely over the top and the other totally inadequate - IMO

JK Rowling, who in 2020 revealed she was “a domestic abuse and sexual assault survivor”, wrote on Twitter: “Progressive Scotland 2023, where a man gets no jail time for raping a 13-year-old girl in a park. Young Scottish men are effectively being told ‘first time’s free’ ”
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 04, 2023, 01:56:05 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 04, 2023, 11:42:39 AM
Weird sentencing laws in this country - 42 years for shooting a child, yet only community service for raping a 13  year old.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11935437/Fury-man-21-raped-13-year-old-park-walks-free-young-sent-prison.html


One completely over the top and the other totally inadequate - IMO

You are missing the point.  The boy was 17 when he committed the offence and jail wasn't an option at the time.

As for the other one, I would lock him up for life. He was a drug running hit man.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on April 04, 2023, 02:19:17 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 04, 2023, 01:56:05 PM
You are missing the point.  The boy was 17 when he committed the offence and jail wasn't an option at the time.

As for the other one, I would lock him up for life. He was a drug running hit man.

And yet the 2 boys who killed  the Bulger  child were put away in institutions for years, so why not for rape of a minor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 04, 2023, 02:34:10 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 04, 2023, 02:19:17 PM
And yet the 2 boys who killed  the Bulger  child were put away in institutions for years, so why not for rape of a minor.

The Law in England is somewhat different to that of Scotland.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2023, 03:00:40 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 04, 2023, 01:56:05 PM
You are missing the point.  The boy was 17 when he committed the offence and jail wasn't an option at the time.

As for the other one, I would lock him up for life. He was a drug running hit man.
Jail absolutely should have been an option. What does this case say to all the 17 year old males in Scotland if not that rape is not that serious a crime?  What does it say to the victim of this crime and her family?  That her ordeal was no big deal?  It’s a disgrace.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2023, 03:03:11 PM
Quote from: jassi on April 04, 2023, 02:19:17 PM
And yet the 2 boys who killed  the Bulger  child were put away in institutions for years, so why not for rape of a minor.
The Bulger crime was, by many degrees, far more serious (particularly as it was a sadistic murder of a child) and that’s not to belittle the suffering of rape victims but is obviously reflected in the terms usually handed out for premeditated murder versus rape.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 04, 2023, 03:10:44 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2023, 03:00:40 PM
Jail absolutely should have been an option. What does this case say to all the 17 year old males in Scotland if not that rape is not that serious a crime?  What does it say to the victim of this crime and her family?  That her ordeal was no big deal?  It’s a disgrace.

Any 17 year old in Scotland committing Rape now could well find that things have changed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2023, 04:00:49 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 04, 2023, 03:10:44 PM
Any 17 year old in Scotland committing Rape now could well find that things have changed.
Really?  Has the law changed there recently?  If so it makes little sense that someone who was 17 only four years ago should be spared prison if he would be imprisoned now were he that age.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2023, 04:08:42 PM
Actually the law in Scotland has recently changed IN FAVOUR of those aged 21 or under who commit crimes, suggesting that because they have “immature brains” they should not be imprisoned.  So anyone committing rape in Scotland now under the age of 21 will almost certainly not go to prison. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on April 04, 2023, 04:13:13 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2023, 04:08:42 PM
Actually the law in Scotland has recently changed IN FAVOUR of those aged 21 or under who commit crimes, suggesting that because they have “immature brains” they should not be imprisoned.  So anyone committing rape in Scotland now under the age of 21 will almost certainly not go to prison.

I should blame whatshername if I was you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2023, 05:14:12 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 04, 2023, 04:13:13 PM
I should blame whatshername if I was you.
I blame the UN who came up with this idea in the first place.  My son is 20 and knows full well what is right and what is wrong, what is acceptable and what is not, what is legal and what isn’t.  If he raped a 13 year old, I’d expect him to go down for a lengthy sentence and I wouldn’t visit him either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on May 28, 2023, 12:24:52 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on April 04, 2023, 04:13:13 PM
I should blame whatshername if I was you.

Yes , because is young 'innocent' David self identified at a 'woman' he could go to a female prison and it would be open day!!

Womens rights are being diminished in open view, by the political hard left, fringe sector of gay community, stone wall in particular with their 'trans' nasty and vicious activism.

It doesn't matter what age the crime is committed it matters what age the person is when it goes to trial. anyone over the age of 16 know what rape is, if not why not?  if they know all about same sex partnerships/ transitioning and gender ID in sex education  classes  at school why not about what is Rape!

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on May 28, 2023, 08:17:35 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2023, 04:08:42 PM
Actually the law in Scotland has recently changed IN FAVOUR of those aged 21 or under who commit crimes, suggesting that because they have “immature brains” they should not be imprisoned.  So anyone committing rape in Scotland now under the age of 21 will almost certainly not go to prison.

And yet, Sturgeon, and now current colleagues, propose giving 16 year olds the right to stand as MPs in the Scottish Parliament.

That's right : high school pupils legislating for the rest of us, including classifying 17-21s as non-adults.

Bit off topic, sorry.

The point is, the legislation on 21s does not make sense.



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 16, 2023, 12:04:18 PM
A plethora of recent video uploads for McCannics' delectation... https://www.youtube.com/@findingmadeleine6167/videos (https://www.youtube.com/@findingmadeleine6167/videos)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 16, 2023, 05:02:40 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 16, 2023, 12:04:18 PM
A plethora of recent video uploads for McCannics' delectation... https://www.youtube.com/@findingmadeleine6167/videos (https://www.youtube.com/@findingmadeleine6167/videos)

  Something to steer well clear of. IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 16, 2023, 05:20:27 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 16, 2023, 05:02:40 PM
  Something to steer well clear of. IMO
As is this forum if recent (non) activity is anything to go by…
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 17, 2023, 11:45:01 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 16, 2023, 05:20:27 PM
As is this forum if recent (non) activity is anything to go by…

The Sceptics are losing the battle, so Supporters don't have to fight back or refute the lies at the moment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 17, 2023, 12:20:54 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 17, 2023, 11:45:01 AM
The Sceptics are losing the battle, so Supporters don't have to fight back or refute the lies at the moment.

Brueckner being charged soon is He?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 17, 2023, 12:58:24 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 16, 2023, 12:04:18 PM
A plethora of recent video uploads for McCannics' delectation... https://www.youtube.com/@findingmadeleine6167/videos (https://www.youtube.com/@findingmadeleine6167/videos)

Hmm, the question is who has suddenly gathered these videos together, at this particular (non) time to publish (push)  them again?



I cannot spend the energy comparing them with the originals to see if there are any changes to the Mccanns detriment, but this sort of "" against the Mccann " changes in previously published videos, reports have happened before..

I do notice that the sound track of the first video, where Kate and Gerry express their side of the case is very poor.   I remember a video of an interview with Sandra Figueiras where the there was a ?deliberate spoiling of the Mccann efforts to put their side by the constant throb of the ?air conditioning.   ?Dirty tricks


How did you find this group, Ret?
 
Did you wonder why they were suddenly republished at such a seemingly non-signifioant time?   Did you check that they were bonafide with no dirty tricks?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 17, 2023, 03:00:50 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 17, 2023, 11:45:01 AM
The Sceptics are losing the battle, so Supporters don't have to fight back or refute the lies at the moment.

What battle would this be ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 17, 2023, 03:11:44 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 17, 2023, 03:00:50 PM
What battle would this be ?

The McCanns didn't do it.

Thanks for asking.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 17, 2023, 06:02:15 PM
Quote from: sadie on June 17, 2023, 12:58:24 PM
Hmm, the question is who has suddenly gathered these videos together, at this particular (non) time to publish (push)  them again?



I cannot spend the energy comparing them with the originals to see if there are any changes to the Mccanns detriment, but this sort of "" against the Mccann " changes in previously published videos, reports have happened before..

I do notice that the sound track of the first video, where Kate and Gerry express their side of the case is very poor.   I remember a video of an interview with Sandra Figueiras where the there was a ?deliberate spoiling of the Mccann efforts to put their side by the constant throb of the ?air conditioning.   ?Dirty tricks


How did you find this group, Ret?
 
Did you wonder why they were suddenly republished at such a seemingly non-signifioant time?   Did you check that they were bonafide with no dirty tricks?
Just surfing for anything new, Sadie, and found the genuine CNN four-parter which I hadn't seen before together with the other new uploads and thought they might be of interest or not to others.  I now see there are three additional videos with R.D.Hall and a tedious statement analysis BShitter continuing their nonsense. Hey-Ho.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 17, 2023, 11:15:17 PM
Quote from: Myster on June 17, 2023, 06:02:15 PM
Just surfing for anything new, Sadie, and found the genuine CNN four-parter which I hadn't seen before together with the other new uploads and thought they might be of interest or not to others.  I now see there are three additional videos with R.D.Hall and a tedious statement analysis BShitter continuing their nonsense. Hey-Ho.

Smooooooth answer.   Worthy of an Ampleforth and Oxford graduate

You didn't notice the three R.D.Hall videos or the bad sound on Kate and Gerrys video then?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on June 18, 2023, 09:36:22 AM
Quote from: sadie on June 17, 2023, 11:15:17 PM
Smooooooth answer.   Worthy of an Ampleforth and Oxford graduate

You didn't notice the three R.D.Hall videos or the bad sound on Kate and Gerrys video then?
Not that old education chestnut again, Sadie... Sigh!

Those three Hall videos were only uploaded several hours after I linked to the earlier group on the FM YouTube site, so no I couldn't have noticed them.

As for the K&G poor sound video, if you mean this one...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwXm7GIq_UA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwXm7GIq_UA)

... It's just extraneous noise of studio staff chatting to each other in the background at a live McCann appeal.  Used to be the same in BBC Crimewatch programmes.  No shenanigans involved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 18, 2023, 09:44:42 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 17, 2023, 03:11:44 PM
The McCanns didn't do it.

Thanks for asking.

What is it you believe the McCanns didn't do & when was it proven they didn't do it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 18, 2023, 10:39:32 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 18, 2023, 09:44:42 AM
What is it you believe the McCanns didn't do & when was it proven they didn't do it?

Not very bright, are you.  No one has to prove they didn't do something.  Or even what it was they didn't do.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 18, 2023, 11:03:58 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 18, 2023, 10:39:32 AM
Not very bright, are you.  No one has to prove they didn't do something.  Or even what it was they didn't do.
Please don’t feed it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 18, 2023, 11:17:34 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 18, 2023, 10:39:32 AM
Not very bright, are you.  No one has to prove they didn't do something.  Or even what it was they didn't do.

Yes, Yes, the McCanns are presumed innocent. But that doesn't mean they didn't do it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 18, 2023, 11:23:23 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 18, 2023, 11:03:58 AM
Please don’t feed it.

You complain that there's nothing to talk about, but when I raise discussion about how we can be certain the McCanns didn't do it, now you want silence again. Funny that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 18, 2023, 02:39:37 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 18, 2023, 11:03:58 AM
Please don’t feed it.

Sorry about that.  But it is rather silly sometimes.

Meanwhile, onwards and upwards.  A break can be quite a relief now and again.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 20, 2023, 07:34:20 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 17, 2023, 11:45:01 AM
The Sceptics are losing the battle, so Supporters don't have to fight back or refute the lies at the moment.

Bearing in mind, of course, that your interpretation of the lack of posts here may not be the correct one.




Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2023, 07:56:01 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 20, 2023, 07:34:20 AM
Bearing in mind, of course, that your interpretation of the lack of posts here may not be the correct one.
There is nothing more to be said that hasn’t been said thousands of times before and I think even you have got tired of “wondering” about it all.  The only member with an appetite to keep on repeating the same tired mantra in reply to the few posts now made on here is the troll.  Until there is a development it’s probably to be expected that forum chatter dries up.  It’s taken a hell of a long time to get to this point but that’s where we are currently.  And yes, Eleanor is right, sceptics are deflated and dwindling (trolls notwithstanding).  IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 20, 2023, 08:47:10 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2023, 07:56:01 AM
There is nothing more to be said that hasn’t been said thousands of times before and I think even you have got tired of “wondering” about it all.  The only member with an appetite to keep on repeating the same tired mantra in reply to the few posts now made on here is the troll.  Until there is a development it’s probably to be expected that forum chatter dries up.  It’s taken a hell of a long time to get to this point but that’s where we are currently.  And yes, Eleanor is right, sceptics are deflated and dwindling (trolls notwithstanding).  IMO.

It is actually quite simple.  Sceptics say the same old stuff and Supporters refute it.  Again and again.

But, of course, Brueckner still has five charges pending, which will be Tried somewhere in Germany, two of which he will almost certainly be found Guilty due to Witnesses and a Police Arrest.  This will happen before his current Sentence runs out.
I am not sure how long this will earn for him, but they are Repeated Offences.  So taking a guess, it could be a further six or seven years, if not longer.

Meanwhile, Madeleine sadly remains on hold.  But The Portuguese Justice System is no longer quite so contemptuous.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 20, 2023, 08:57:43 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 20, 2023, 07:34:20 AM
Bearing in mind, of course, that your interpretation of the lack of posts here may not be the correct one.

The continual sheer and calculated nastiness does absolutely nothing to help.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 20, 2023, 09:34:21 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 20, 2023, 08:47:10 AM
It is actually quite simple.  Sceptics say the same old stuff and Supporters refute it.  Again and again.

But, of course, Brueckner still has five charges pending, which will be Tried somewhere in Germany, two of which he will almost certainly be found Guilty due to Witnesses and a Police Arrest.  This will happen before his current Sentence runs out.
I am not sure how long this will earn for him, but they are Repeated Offences.  So taking a guess, it could be a further six or seven years, if not longer.

Meanwhile, Madeleine sadly remains on hold.  But The Portuguese Justice System is no longer quite so contemptuous.



Fairly minor as these things go so maybe less than that. Rape is the serious one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 20, 2023, 09:50:48 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 20, 2023, 08:57:43 AM
The continual sheer and calculated nastiness does absolutely nothing to help.

They are oblivious to this.  They afford more legal courtesy to a Convicted Rapist and Child Sexual Abuser than to two innocent parents.

There is something very wrong going on in their heads.  But this is sad for them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2023, 10:07:49 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 20, 2023, 09:50:48 AM
They are oblivious to this.  They afford more legal courtesy to a Convicted Rapist and Child Sexual Abuser than to two innocent parents.

There is something very wrong going on in their heads.  But this is sad for them.

How do you know the McCanns are innocent? I mean, sure, they are presumed innocent. But that doesn't mean they didn't do it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2023, 10:10:59 AM

I mean, I don't know if this has escaped supporters attention or not, but the three expert investigative forces are having no joy whatsoever in proving Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger. That could be because she simply wasn't, couldn't it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 20, 2023, 10:21:08 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2023, 10:10:59 AM
I mean, I don't know if this has escaped supporters attention or not, but the three expert investigative forces are having no joy whatsoever in proving Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger. That could be because she simply wasn't, couldn't it.

Is there any possibility that you could say something even remotely intelligent?

No, almost certainly not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2023, 10:28:32 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 20, 2023, 10:21:08 AM
Is there any possibility that you could say something even remotely intelligent?

No, almost certainly not.

How about you explain how you know for certain the McCanns are innocent? Can you do that & explain your working, rather than just saying 'logic', as if it were an intelligent answer.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 20, 2023, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2023, 07:56:01 AM
There is nothing more to be said that hasn’t been said thousands of times before and I think even you have got tired of “wondering” about it all.  The only member with an appetite to keep on repeating the same tired mantra in reply to the few posts now made on here is the troll.  Until there is a development it’s probably to be expected that forum chatter dries up.  It’s taken a hell of a long time to get to this point but that’s where we are currently.  And yes, Eleanor is right, sceptics are deflated and dwindling (trolls notwithstanding).  IMO.

Another opinion. Why, I wonder are at least 3 supporters who post here are now posting elsewhere too? Perhaps the dwindling isn't confined to sceptics?

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2023, 12:15:08 PM

This is just the lull before the forum storm. There will be plenty for us all to talk about when Brueckner is charged. Next spring, according to the latest from Jon Clarke.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2023, 02:00:23 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 20, 2023, 11:49:05 AM
Another opinion. Why, I wonder are at least 3 supporters who post here are now posting elsewhere too? Perhaps the dwindling isn't confined to sceptics?
If people are posting elsewhere then it’s probably  because of the higher quality of discussion that comes without the constant stream of repetitive goady rubbish from pathetic trolls. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 20, 2023, 02:37:20 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2023, 02:00:23 PM
If people are posting elsewhere then it’s probably  because of the higher quality of discussion that comes without the constant stream of repetitive goady rubbish from pathetic trolls.

That will be Websleuths I expect, where the moderation is much more strict.  Not much chance of Sceptics posting there and certainly not Spammy.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2023, 05:14:22 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 20, 2023, 02:37:20 PM
That will be Websleuths I expect, where the moderation is much more strict.  Not much chance of Sceptics posting there and certainly not Spammy.
He wouldn’t last 5 minutes
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2023, 07:25:10 PM
So what is the current topic of choice over on websleuths Anyway?
Am I missing out on anything exciting? Have the sleuths discovered any evidence against Christian Brueckner?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 20, 2023, 08:04:47 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 20, 2023, 07:25:10 PM
So what is the current topic of choice over on websleuths Anyway?
Am I missing out on anything exciting? Have the sleuths discovered any evidence against Christian Brueckner?

Nah, its mostly supposition , speculation and a solid belief in media misinformation.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2023, 08:25:27 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 20, 2023, 08:04:47 PM
Nah, its mostly supposition , speculation and a solid belief in media misinformation.
Why do you bother reading it then?  I’d not bother if I were you and just stick with this forum where the level of discourse is so much more refined  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 21, 2023, 08:25:10 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 20, 2023, 08:25:27 PM
Why do you bother reading it then?  I’d not bother if I were you and just stick with this forum where the level of discourse is so much more refined  @)(++(*

 (&^& (&^& (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2023, 10:16:18 AM
My point has been amply demonstrated by the post above, thanks G-Unit. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 21, 2023, 11:10:12 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2023, 10:16:18 AM
My point has been amply demonstrated by the post above, thanks G-Unit.

Certainly expresses an intriguing thought process though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 21, 2023, 11:19:29 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2023, 08:25:10 AM
(&^& (&^& (&^&

Have you noticed how they all roll forward in unison, come to a dead stop then roll back again to repeat the process again and again and again ... ... 

Fascinating.

Reminds me of something which escapes me for the moment.  But I'll give your message some deep thought and maybe get back to you when I've analysed its true meaning
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2023, 11:26:42 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 21, 2023, 11:19:29 AM
Have you noticed how they all roll forward in unison, come to a dead stop then roll back again to repeat the process again and again and again ... ... 

Fascinating.

Reminds me of something which escapes me for the moment.  But I'll give your message some deep thought and maybe get back to you when I've analysed its true meaning

It suggests hysteria to me.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 21, 2023, 11:31:20 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 21, 2023, 11:19:29 AM
Have you noticed how they all roll forward in unison, come to a dead stop then roll back again to repeat the process again and again and again ... ... 

Fascinating.

Reminds me of something which escapes me for the moment.  But I'll give your message some deep thought and maybe get back to you when I've analysed its true meaning

I wouldn't bother if I were you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 21, 2023, 11:38:46 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 21, 2023, 11:26:42 AM
It suggests hysteria to me.

I found it mind numbingly relaxing.  Should I worry?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 21, 2023, 11:59:59 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2023, 11:31:20 AM
I wouldn't bother if I were you.

I don't think you've quite grasped this discussion forum thingy.

1) one makes a post as you did
2) someone answers your post - as I did

So really it is up to me to decide whether to expand on that or not.  Once you made your post control of it was out of your hands.
If I bother to post regarding it that is nothing to do with you just as it is up to you whether to respond or not 😉
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2023, 12:37:06 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 21, 2023, 11:38:46 AM
I found it mind numbingly relaxing.  Should I worry?

No.  That's fine. 

I personally don't mind a bit of hysteria.  They haven't got anything else these days.

Five Charges awaiting Trial, which will happen eventually.  In fact I bet Brueckner is feeling a bit hysterical.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 21, 2023, 01:21:07 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 21, 2023, 12:37:06 PM
No.  That's fine. 

I personally don't mind a bit of hysteria.  They haven't got anything else these days.

Five Charges awaiting Trial, which will happen eventually.  In fact I bet Brueckner is feeling a bit hysterical.

If he's not - he really should be.  Particularly if he's heard even a small percentage of the conspiracy theories doing the rounds
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 21, 2023, 01:33:17 PM
I just don't understand why everyone hates Christian Brueckner so much.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 21, 2023, 03:16:20 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on June 21, 2023, 01:33:17 PM
I just don't understand why everyone hates Christian Brueckner so much.

It helps to justify certain beliefs; that certain people deserve no consideration or less consideration than others. In some minds, for example, CB has no right to human rights because he has a criminal past. Amaral has no right to an opinion because he's a 'convicted purjurer' so he must lie all the time. It's all very black and white and old-fashioned.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2023, 04:38:59 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2023, 03:16:20 PM
It helps to justify certain beliefs; that certain people deserve no consideration or less consideration than others. In some minds, for example, CB has no right to human rights because he has a criminal past. Amaral has no right to an opinion because he's a 'convicted purjurer' so he must lie all the time. It's all very black and white and old-fashioned.

And The McCanns have No Rights for why?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2023, 04:44:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2023, 03:16:20 PM
It helps to justify certain beliefs; that certain people deserve no consideration or less consideration than others. In some minds, for example, CB has no right to human rights because he has a criminal past. Amaral has no right to an opinion because he's a 'convicted purjurer' so he must lie all the time. It's all very black and white and old-fashioned.
I love that you are explaining this to the troll as if he isn’t the very worst culprit of this kind of black and white thinking on the board.  Utterly hilarious!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2023, 04:51:36 PM
Who here has ever claimed Amaral has no right to an opinion?  He has no right to spread untruths about others in an attempt to cause them harm or to muddy the waters, but an opinion is fine.  Just don’t defame or deliberately mislead is that too much to ask? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on June 21, 2023, 05:31:36 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 21, 2023, 11:19:29 AM
Have you noticed how they all roll forward in unison, come to a dead stop then roll back again to repeat the process again and again and again ... ... 

Fascinating.

Reminds me of something which escapes me for the moment.  But I'll give your message some deep thought and maybe get back to you when I've analysed its true meaning

It sggests that they are organised to me and possibly have a leader


..."And the next mode of attack will be" ...  blah,blah
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 21, 2023, 09:18:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 21, 2023, 04:38:59 PM
And The McCanns have No Rights for why?

I suggest you ask someone who holds that opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 21, 2023, 09:25:30 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2023, 04:51:36 PM
Who here has ever claimed Amaral has no right to an opinion?  He has no right to spread untruths about others in an attempt to cause them harm or to muddy the waters, but an opinion is fine.  Just don’t defame or deliberately mislead is that too much to ask?

He is allowed his opinions. They have been examined in court, and no lies or defamation were detected. Your opinions are merely that also; differing opinions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2023, 11:16:05 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2023, 09:25:30 PM
He is allowed his opinions. They have been examined in court, and no lies or defamation were detected. Your opinions are merely that also; differing opinions.
Perhaps you can provide a cite for “no lies or defamation were detected”.  No, of course you can’t, we’ve been through this several times before haven’t we?  The judge even said in the trial we are not here to determine if what was written in the book is true or words to that effect, which you seem to have conveniently and repeatedly forgotten. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 21, 2023, 11:50:58 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 21, 2023, 11:16:05 PM
Perhaps you can provide a cite for “no lies or defamation were detected”.  No, of course you can’t, we’ve been through this several times before haven’t we?  The judge even said in the trial we are not here to determine if what was written in the book is true or words to that effect, which you seem to have conveniently and repeatedly forgotten.

That was, if you can remember it, because their task was to decide if it mirrored the investigation events and conclusions, which it did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 22, 2023, 06:56:50 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2023, 09:18:30 PM
I suggest you ask someone who holds that opinion.

You obviously do.  That's why I asked.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 07:10:42 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 21, 2023, 11:50:58 PM
That was, if you can remember it, because their task was to decide if it mirrored the investigation events and conclusions, which it did.
So do you now finally accept that the courts did not examine whether or not Amaral’s book contained defamatory and false allegations?   That it was not ever about libel but about whose rights trumped whose?   Incidentally if you can remember it the book did not mirror the investigation’s final conclusions which were that there was a lack of evidence that the McCanns were in any way involved in Madeleine’s disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 22, 2023, 08:29:00 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 22, 2023, 06:56:50 AM
You obviously do.  That's why I asked.

No I don't. Don't assume your biased opinions are facts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 22, 2023, 08:32:36 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 22, 2023, 08:29:00 AM
No I don't. Don't assume your biased opinions are facts.

So my opinions are biased, are they?  What does that say about your opinions?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 09:07:26 AM
All opinions are biased, that’s the very nature of opinions.  “Biased opinions” is a tautology.  In my biased opinion.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 22, 2023, 09:25:06 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 09:07:26 AM
All opinions are biased, that’s the very nature of opinions.  “Biased opinions” is a tautology.  In my biased opinion.  @)(++(*

But not for Gunit, it seems.  Her comment was meant as an insult.  But then I am used to being insulted by those more ignorant than I.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 09:34:07 AM
What I can't quite get my head round is why sceptics will defend CB's rights to the presumption of innocence and are constantly outraged on his behalf but the same people never once expressed an ounce of indignation on behalf of the McCanns when their rights to the presumption of innocence were being trashed in the media and by Amaral.  Of course they trot out lame, victim-blaming excuses to explain their beliefs but the hypocrisy is quite clear for all objective parties to see - they only believe in human rights when it suits them.  They should be honest and say so.  I personally don't give a shit about defending CB's rights because in my opinion he forfeited them when he raped and abused. I know that it's important his rights are observed by those tasked with holding him and judging him but for me personally, nope don't care about him or his rights a jot.   
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on June 22, 2023, 09:44:31 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 09:34:07 AM
What I can't quite get my head round is why sceptics will defend CB's rights to the presumption of innocence and are constantly outraged on his behalf but the same people never once expressed an ounce of indignation on behalf of the McCanns when their rights to the presumption of innocence were being trashed in the media and by Amaral.  Of course they trot out lame, victim-blaming excuses to explain their beliefs but the hypocrisy is quite clear for all objective parties to see - they only believe in human rights when it suits them.  They should be honest and say so.  I personally don't give a shit about defending CB's rights because in my opinion he forfeited them when he raped and abused. I know that it's important his rights are observed by those tasked with holding him and judging him but for me personally, nope don't care about him or his rights a jot.


Simple ..........IMO there was no abduction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 09:49:20 AM
Quote from: kizzy on June 22, 2023, 09:44:31 AM

Simple ..........IMO there was no abduction.
That’s immaterial to anything I have written in my post.  IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 22, 2023, 11:20:32 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 07:10:42 AM
So do you now finally accept that the courts did not examine whether or not Amaral’s book contained defamatory and false allegations?   That it was not ever about libel but about whose rights trumped whose?   Incidentally if you can remember it the book did not mirror the investigation’s final conclusions which were that there was a lack of evidence that the McCanns were in any way involved in Madeleine’s disappearance.

The McCanns accused and Amaral defended. The court decided there was no basis for the accusations. Have you forgotten that the book covered only the period between May 3rd and September 10th 2007? The conclusions you refer to were reached in 2008.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 11:29:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 22, 2023, 11:20:32 AM
The McCanns accused and Amaral defended. The court decided there was no basis for the accusations. Have you forgotten that the book covered only the period between May 3rd and September 10th 2007? The conclusions you refer to were reached in 2008.
Remind me - when was the book published?  If a newspaper published football scores as they stood at 45 minutes rather than after the ref blows his final whistle would that be an accurate reporting of the facts of the match?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 22, 2023, 11:33:17 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 22, 2023, 09:25:06 AM
But not for Gunit, it seems.  Her comment was meant as an insult.  But then I am used to being insulted by those more ignorant than I.

I don't actually care what drives your opinions. I object, however, to being accused of holding opinions which aren't mine, never have been mine and never will be. I agree with and support human rights and think they should apply to every human being; particularly the six absolute human rights.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 22, 2023, 11:36:11 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 11:29:24 AM
Remind me - when was the book published?  If a newspaper published football scores as they stood at 45 minutes rather than after the ref blows his final whistle would that be an accurate reporting of the facts of the match?

What makes you think that a book's date of publication has anything to do with it's contents?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 11:43:19 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 22, 2023, 11:36:11 AM
What makes you think that a book's date of publication has anything to do with it's contents?
It had everything to do with it IMO inasmuch as it peddled an incomplete account of the investigation dressed up as some sort of  definitive account.  That's what makes me think it, hope that's allowed.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 11:45:54 AM
Amaral's book was called "The Truth Of The Lie".  What truth does it purport to reveal and how was Amaral in any position to reveal it when the investigation hadn't come to an end at the point he was booted off?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 22, 2023, 11:49:02 AM

But what about my Human Rights?
I really shouldn't have to put up with people banging on about Amaral all the time. How can anyone be expected to live under such conditions? It's insufferable.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 22, 2023, 12:12:48 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 22, 2023, 11:33:17 AM
I don't actually care what drives your opinions. I object, however, to being accused of holding opinions which aren't mine, never have been mine and never will be. I agree with and support human rights and think they should apply to every human being; particularly the six absolute human rights.
A Portuguese court ruled that Leonora Cipriano was tortured in police custody.
The pj officers claim she threw herself down the stairs which proves they were present when the injuries occurred. I have never heard you or any other anti support her human rights.....what does that meke your claim
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 22, 2023, 12:39:54 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 22, 2023, 12:12:48 PM
A Portuguese court ruled that Leonora Cipriano was tortured in police custody.
The pj officers claim she threw herself down the stairs which proves they were present when the injuries occurred. I have never heard you or any other anti support her human rights.....what does that meke your claim

The only Human Right Gunit understands is her own.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 02:13:35 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on June 22, 2023, 12:12:48 PM
A Portuguese court ruled that Leonora Cipriano was tortured in police custody.
The pj officers claim she threw herself down the stairs which proves they were present when the injuries occurred. I have never heard you or any other anti support her human rights.....what does that meke your claim
false imo
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 22, 2023, 03:34:50 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 02:13:35 PM
false imo

It w.ould make what gunit said about respecting everyones  human rights a lie
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 22, 2023, 06:00:27 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 11:43:19 AM
It had everything to do with it IMO inasmuch as it peddled an incomplete account of the investigation dressed up as some sort of  definitive account.  That's what makes me think it, hope that's allowed.

Your opinion-which carries as much weight as did the McCann's opinion that the book harmed the search for their daughter. Neither can be proved.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 07:00:04 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 22, 2023, 06:00:27 PM
Your opinion-which carries as much weight as did the McCann's opinion that the book harmed the search for their daughter. Neither can be proved.
Are you saying that it is just opinion that the book peddled an incomplete account of the investigation?  Surely that is an incontrovertible fact?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 22, 2023, 08:44:02 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 07:00:04 PM
Are you saying that it is just opinion that the book peddled an incomplete account of the investigation?  Surely that is an incontrovertible fact?

As Amaral said;

Goncalo Amaral – The little girl died in the apartment. Everything is in the book, which is faithful to the investigation until September:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0 page 25

So it was made quite clear by the author which period of time the book covered, and upon which he based his opinions.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 09:02:57 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 22, 2023, 08:44:02 PM
As Amaral said;

Goncalo Amaral – The little girl died in the apartment. Everything is in the book, which is faithful to the investigation until September:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0 page 25

So it was made quite clear by the author which period of time the book covered, and upon which he based his opinions.
yes, he peddled an incomplete account of the investigation, so not my opinion but an actual fact, thanks for confirming.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 23, 2023, 08:30:52 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 22, 2023, 09:02:57 PM
yes, he peddled an incomplete account of the investigation, so not my opinion but an actual fact, thanks for confirming.

But he didn't pretend it was complete, although you accused  him of 'dressing it up as some sort of  definitive account'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 23, 2023, 10:30:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 23, 2023, 08:30:52 AM
But he didn't pretend it was complete, although you accused  him of 'dressing it up as some sort of  definitive account'.

Didn't Amaral write another one.  What did that say?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 23, 2023, 11:48:41 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 23, 2023, 08:30:52 AM
But he didn't pretend it was complete, although you accused  him of 'dressing it up as some sort of  definitive account'.
Did he reference the continuing investigation at all?  Did he acknowledge that the final report confirmed there was a lack of any evidence against the McCanns?  I don't remember that chapter.  His book was as useful as a half time summary of a football match but presented as "The Truth Of The Lie" - what truth did it purport to tell, pray tell? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 23, 2023, 11:52:12 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 23, 2023, 10:30:38 AM
Didn't Amaral write another one.  What did that say?

Is it relevant?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 23, 2023, 12:50:32 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 23, 2023, 11:52:12 AM
Is it relevant?

Obviously not to you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 23, 2023, 05:23:59 PM

Amaral wrote a book that he thought would earn him loads of money because his friend Cristavao had done the same thing.  The Truth never came into this because no one knows what The Truth is.  Amaral thought that he could make his own truth.  He failed miserably, which is what we are now left with.

Amaral is a monster of his own making.  Only fools and horses believe him.  He has no proof, and so he chooses to pervert the course of Justice.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 23, 2023, 05:55:01 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 23, 2023, 05:23:59 PM
Amaral wrote a book that he thought would earn him loads of money because his friend Cristavao had done the same thing.  The Truth never came into this because no one knows what The Truth is.  Amaral thought that he could make his own truth.  He failed miserably, which is what we are now left with.

Amaral is a monster of his own making.  Only fools and horses believe him.  He has no proof, and so he chooses to pervert the course of Justice.

Perfect summation.
This egocentric man has taken people for fools all for his own ends and they are content to allow him to do so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 23, 2023, 06:34:17 PM
The speed with which he turned that book around speaks volumes, cash in quick while the going’s good, all written and ready to hit the book shelves the very minute he’s legslly entitled to publish kerching kerching kerching $$$
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 23, 2023, 06:51:28 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 23, 2023, 05:55:01 PM
Perfect summation.
This egocentric man has taken people for fools all for his own ends and they are content to allow him to do so.

Actually it is a bit more serious.  Although God knows how this happened.  But Portugal didn't integrate at the time of the Two Revolutions.  They just reinvented themselves.  And the Old School returned, of which Amaral was one.
Amaral had colossal debts from unpaid taxes, unpaid mortgages and from robbing is brother.  Which was all proven In Court.  This was a very bad man.

And then along came The McCanns.  What joy that must have been to Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 23, 2023, 06:57:25 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 23, 2023, 11:48:41 AM
Did he reference the continuing investigation at all?  Did he acknowledge that the final report confirmed there was a lack of any evidence against the McCanns?  I don't remember that chapter.  His book was as useful as a half time summary of a football match but presented as "The Truth Of The Lie" - what truth did it purport to tell, pray tell?

The final report couldn't even identify the crime committed. It didn't deter the McCanns from promoting their opinion of the crime committed though. Why shouldn't Amaral promote his opinion?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 23, 2023, 07:24:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 23, 2023, 06:57:25 PM
The final report couldn't even identify the crime committed. It didn't deter the McCanns from promoting their opinion of the crime committed though. Why shouldn't Amaral promote his opinion?

He was supposed to be a Police Detective for God's sake.  Not Jury and Executioner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 23, 2023, 07:28:14 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 23, 2023, 06:57:25 PM
The final report couldn't even identify the crime committed. It didn't deter the McCanns from promoting their opinion of the crime committed though. Why shouldn't Amaral promote his opinion?
I think it’s pretty sick to desciribe the McCanns determined effort to find Madeleine as promoting something as if it was a commercial enterprise but even if that’s what it was it did not defame or accuse anyone in particular, unlike Amaral promoting his money making book of the the notion that the parents sedated their child, hid her body in a freezer and drove around with her 23 day old thawing corpse in the back of the hire car.  If you can’t see the difference between the two “promotions” then you need to go to Specsavers.  IMO.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 23, 2023, 07:46:02 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 23, 2023, 06:57:25 PM
The final report couldn't even identify the crime committed. It didn't deter the McCanns from promoting their opinion of the crime committed though. Why shouldn't Amaral promote his opinion?

Do you not understand who Amaral was?  He was supposed to be solving a crime.  And not telling all and sundry who done it, without proof.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on June 23, 2023, 07:59:10 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 23, 2023, 06:57:25 PM
The final report couldn't even identify the crime committed. It didn't deter the McCanns from promoting their opinion of the crime committed though. Why shouldn't Amaral promote his opinion?
That's quite a stupid post

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 23, 2023, 09:21:07 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on June 23, 2023, 07:28:14 PM
I think it’s pretty sick to desciribe the McCanns determined effort to find Madeleine as promoting something as if it was a commercial enterprise but even if that’s what it was it did not defame or accuse anyone in particular, unlike Amaral promoting his money making book of the the notion that the parents sedated their child, hid her body in a freezer and drove around with her 23 day old thawing corpse in the back of the hire car.  If you can’t see the difference between the two “promotions” then you need to go to Specsavers.  IMO.

Yes Yes. The innocent parents of an abducted child. Innocently doing everything they can to find Madeleine.
Bit strange their determined efforts to find Madeleine didn't involve releasing the Smith E-Fits, but it's probably not important.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 24, 2023, 08:33:52 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 23, 2023, 07:46:02 PM
Do you not understand who Amaral was?  He was supposed to be solving a crime.  And not telling all and sundry who done it, without proof.

Whichever way you look at it Amaral totally botched his job.

On the one hand he utterly failed in his mission a la Leonor when he failed to put Kate into the frame.  And it sure wasn't for the want of trying.

The mother accused of murdering her daughter at a village between Portimão and Lagos, has been released on parole after serving most of her 17-year sentence.
Leonor Cipriano was jailed in 2004 despite her eight-year old daughter Joana disappearing without a trace.
Upon her release, Leonor Cipriano stated her innocence and said she would now focus her efforts on finding her daughter, who she claims was abducted.

Like Madeleine - not a trace of Joana was ever found

On the other hand he has had to break his cover and become transparent in his efforts to interfere with the course of justice still attempting to wreck Madeleine's case.  Definitely another botched job in many ways despite the success of the support he has stirred up for another degenerate and waste of space.

As God made them he matched them, so it is said.   We have witnessed quite a devilish matching taking place here led by a weird man waving mocked up dreadlocked lies and fake images of vehicles in which the police had an interest.  You really couldn't make this up!

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2023, 02:27:17 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 24, 2023, 08:33:52 AM
Whichever way you look at it Amaral totally botched his job.

On the one hand he utterly failed in his mission a la Leonor when he failed to put Kate into the frame.  And it sure wasn't for the want of trying.

The mother accused of murdering her daughter at a village between Portimão and Lagos, has been released on parole after serving most of her 17-year sentence.
Leonor Cipriano was jailed in 2004 despite her eight-year old daughter Joana disappearing without a trace.
Upon her release, Leonor Cipriano stated her innocence and said she would now focus her efforts on finding her daughter, who she claims was abducted.

Like Madeleine - not a trace of Joana was ever found

On the other hand he has had to break his cover and become transparent in his efforts to interfere with the course of justice still attempting to wreck Madeleine's case.  Definitely another botched job in many ways despite the success of the support he has stirred up for another degenerate and waste of space.

As God made them he matched them, so it is said.   We have witnessed quite a devilish matching taking place here led by a weird man waving mocked up dreadlocked lies and fake images of vehicles in which the police had an interest.  You really couldn't make this up!

It wasn't very clever was it.  He won against Leonor because she was just a peasant.  Kate is a very different kettle of fish.

But why is Portugal allowing Amaral to tell all of these lies?  That's what I want to know.

Or perhaps more to the point, why is Amaral doing this?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 24, 2023, 02:39:28 PM
What action would you expect Portugal to take against a private citizen?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2023, 02:49:49 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 24, 2023, 02:39:28 PM
What action would you expect Portugal to take against a private citizen?

Telling lies and interfering with The Course of Justice while trying to prove that Brueckner wasn't there?  What do you think should happen?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2023, 03:23:14 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2023, 02:49:49 PM
Telling lies and interfering with The Course of Justice while trying to prove that Brueckner wasn't there?  What do you think should happen?

But is he , actually, interfering with the course of justice? You keep trotting out that he is, over & over again. But Wolters hasn't complained about him at all. The only time he has mentioned Amaral was to say that he (Amaral) doesn't know what evidence they (the BKA) have. Nothing Amaral can do or say could disrupt the concrete evidence anyway. It's 100% convincing & already enough to charge.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 24, 2023, 03:25:01 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 24, 2023, 02:39:28 PM
What action would you expect Portugal to take against a private citizen?

They could try complaining about him incessantly.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 24, 2023, 04:05:53 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2023, 02:49:49 PM
Telling lies and interfering with The Course of Justice while trying to prove that Brueckner wasn't there?  What do you think should happen?

I can't see he's doing anything illegal.
He is certainly not interfering with the course of justice. Indeed he is having no effect on the police investigation at all.

Therefore I can't see what the State of Portugal can do as he is not breaking any laws.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2023, 06:08:14 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 24, 2023, 04:05:53 PM
I can't see he's doing anything illegal.
He is certainly not interfering with the course of justice. Indeed he is having no effect on the police investigation at all.

Therefore I can't see what the State of Portugal can do as he is not breaking any laws.
Despite his best efforts.  I hope that’s pissing him off big time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on June 24, 2023, 08:31:10 PM
mm
Quote from: jassi on June 24, 2023, 04:05:53 PM
I can't see he's doing anything illegal.
He is certainly not interfering with the course of justice. Indeed he is having no effect on the police investigation at all.

Therefore I can't see what the State of Portugal can do as he is not breaking any laws.

He thinks MM died on 3rd May 2007. Others agree, although not with the date or the place. They are probably all correct. The disagreement is about who was involved and why. No-one knows the answer to that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 24, 2023, 08:31:20 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 24, 2023, 02:27:17 PM
It wasn't very clever was it.  He won against Leonor because she was just a peasant.  Kate is a very different kettle of fish.

But why is Portugal allowing Amaral to tell all of these lies?  That's what I want to know.

Or perhaps more to the point, why is Amaral doing this?

He certainly didn't do it unaided.  There are some in the know then there are the patsies who have allowed themselves to be used.
I too would like to know the whys and wherefores, but I suspect the likes of us never will.  Nor will the patsies.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 24, 2023, 08:36:58 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 24, 2023, 02:39:28 PM
What action would you expect Portugal to take against a private citizen?

He interfered with a PJ investigation.

He broke the secrecy of justice. 

Both allegedly punishable offences.

I expect Portugal to do what it always does when Amaral breaks their laws.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on June 24, 2023, 08:39:37 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2023, 08:31:10 PM
mm
He thinks MM died on 3rd May 2007. Others agree, although not with the date or the place. They are probably all correct. The disagreement is about who was involved and why. No-one knows the answer to that.
Amaral claimed he knows the answer in a bestselling book he called “The Truth Of The Lie”.  You think he was right.  Between you you need to figure out why no one is currently remotely interested in picking up on Amaral’s claims.  Any ideas?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on June 24, 2023, 08:59:49 PM
Quote from: Brietta on June 24, 2023, 08:36:58 PM
He interfered with a PJ investigation.

He broke the secrecy of justice. 

Both allegedly punishable offences.

I expect Portugal to do what it always does when Amaral breaks their laws.


Away with you, he did nothing of the sort  You are simply obsessed with the man
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on June 24, 2023, 09:38:21 PM
Quote from: jassi on June 24, 2023, 08:59:49 PM

Away with you, he did nothing of the sort  You are simply obsessed with the man

Not one iota as much as he is to do harm to the McCanns and their daughter.  It really is some giant of an obsession but what is even worse is that the malign contaminant affects others.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on June 25, 2023, 11:55:38 AM
Quote from: Brietta on June 24, 2023, 09:38:21 PM
Not one iota as much as he is to do harm to the McCanns and their daughter.  It really is some giant of an obsession but what is even worse is that the malign contaminant affects others.

Amaral isn't even very clever, although he appears to think that he is.  He should never have been allowed on that investigation with a Perjury Charge pending.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on July 01, 2023, 06:30:38 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on June 24, 2023, 08:31:10 PM
mm
He thinks MM died on 3rd May 2007. Others agree, although not with the date or the place. They are probably all correct. The disagreement is about who was involved and why. No-one knows the answer to that.

it took a while for that to catch on. Some still living that dream about MBM living with a childless couple with real life   pony, a  unicorn and on tap ice cream and candy .  AND she came to no harm according to K & G... Ouch!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 05, 2023, 08:53:06 AM
Talking of trolls, why has this woman been locked up when so many McCann trolls have done similar or worse?

Sheffield woman Katie Bell who trolled grieving widow jailed
16 hours ago
Katie BellSouth Yorkshire Police
Katie Bell was described by a judge as a "coward"
An online troll who carried out a campaign of abuse against a grieving widow after breaching an order to stop has been jailed for 15 months.

Katie Bell, 27, was given a suspended jail sentence in 2021 for the abusive comments and threats directed at people on social media.

But despite the order, she resumed her behaviour months later.

Jailing her, Recorder Andrew Smith MBE described her as "cowardly", the Sheffield Star reported.

Bell, of Stradbroke Road, Sheffield, pleaded guilty to two breaches of a restraining order, breaching a suspended sentence order and a further charge of malicious communications on Twitter and Instagram.

Police appeal targeted


In a statement read out at Sheffield Crown Court, one of her victims detailed the distress Bell had subjected her to, including comments about her late husband.

Bell posted a number of comments on news articles paying tribute to the woman's husband following his sudden death, including one which said: "Serves him right".

The court was told this took place despite the suspended sentence and a restraining order.

The malicious communication offence related to a number of inflammatory comments she made on the social media pages of various news outlets and police forces, the court was told.

One such comment was made in response to an appeal to find a missing 15-year-old girl published by Merseyside Police in November 2022, under which Bell posted: "Serves her right if she is dead."

Recorder Smith said he did not think there was a risk of her going around "confronting anybody".

He added: "I don't think that's the sort of person you are. You are too cowardly for that, you just sit behind a computer and wind people up."
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 05, 2023, 09:46:25 AM
Bell, of Stradbroke Road, Sheffield, pleaded guilty to two breaches of a restraining order, breaching a suspended sentence order and a further charge of malicious communications on Twitter and Instagram.

That's why she was locked up.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 05, 2023, 10:08:23 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 05, 2023, 09:46:25 AM
Bell, of Stradbroke Road, Sheffield, pleaded guilty to two breaches of a restraining order, breaching a suspended sentence order and a further charge of malicious communications on Twitter and Instagram.

That's why she was locked up.

But she had to be Prosecuted in the first place.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 05, 2023, 10:16:16 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 05, 2023, 09:46:25 AM
Bell, of Stradbroke Road, Sheffield, pleaded guilty to two breaches of a restraining order, breaching a suspended sentence order and a further charge of malicious communications on Twitter and Instagram.

That's why she was locked up.
Yes, she was locked up for continuing her campaign of trolling, most McCann trolls have never so much as received a slap on the wrist despite writing far worse than this woman over a far longer period of time. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 05, 2023, 12:54:44 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on July 05, 2023, 10:16:16 AM
Yes, she was locked up for continuing her campaign of trolling, most McCann trolls have never so much as received a slap on the wrist despite writing far worse than this woman over a far longer period of time.

Has it ever occured to you that despite the continual efforts of McCann supporters to bring these alleged trolls to the attention of the police very few have been found to have broken the law? Maybe it's your opinions which are wrong.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 05, 2023, 01:05:00 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 05, 2023, 12:54:44 PM
Has it ever occured to you that despite the continual efforts of McCann supporters to bring these alleged trolls to the attention of the police very few have been found to have broken the law? Maybe it's your opinions which are wrong.

The McCanns have to do this and they obviously can't be bothered.  Three National Police Forces have said that The McCanns are not involved.  How many more do you want?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 05, 2023, 01:51:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 05, 2023, 12:54:44 PM
Has it ever occured to you that despite the continual efforts of McCann supporters to bring these alleged trolls to the attention of the police very few have been found to have broken the law? Maybe it's your opinions which are wrong.
What “continual efforts” are you talking about?  Maybe you could explain what this particular troll did which was so much worse than what numerous trolls on twitter and FB and newspaper comments pages have been posting about the McCanns for years and years?  I suspect very strongly that you will be unable to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 05, 2023, 01:52:43 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 05, 2023, 01:05:00 PM
The McCanns have to do this and they obviously can't be bothered.  Three National Police Forces have said that The McCanns are not involved.  How many more do you want?
Exactly.  That’s the difference.  The complaint has to come from those bring targeted.  The McCanns have been way too soft on their [ censored word ]s, or perhaps too overwhelmed by the hate to know where to begin.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 05, 2023, 02:02:10 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 05, 2023, 01:05:00 PM
The McCanns have to do this and they obviously can't be bothered.  Three National Police Forces have said that The McCanns are not involved.  How many more do you want?

I'd like for them to show their working. How they were able to reach that conclusion. But that's never going to happen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 05, 2023, 02:03:13 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on July 05, 2023, 01:52:43 PM
Exactly.  That’s the difference.  The complaint has to come from those bring targeted.  The McCanns have been way too soft on their [ censored word ]s, or perhaps too overwhelmed by the hate to know where to begin.

Why bother?  These morons have no proof and never have had so they can't actually do any damage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 05, 2023, 02:07:09 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 05, 2023, 02:03:13 PM
Why bother?  These morons have no proof and never have had so they can't actually do any damage.

I agree that there's no proof against the McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 05, 2023, 06:10:10 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on July 05, 2023, 01:51:24 PM
What “continual efforts” are you talking about?  Maybe you could explain what this particular troll did which was so much worse than what numerous trolls on twitter and FB and newspaper comments pages have been posting about the McCanns for years and years?  I suspect very strongly that you will be unable to.

Have you forgotten the dossier? Handed to the police by the McCann's little helpers and then to the media also.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 05, 2023, 08:13:29 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 05, 2023, 06:10:10 PM
Have you forgotten the dossier? Handed to the police by the McCann's little helpers and then to the media also.

We have a thread on that and various offshoots.  So if that's the best you can come up with you really are on a hiding to nothing.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 05, 2023, 08:52:24 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 05, 2023, 06:10:10 PM
Have you forgotten the dossier? Handed to the police by the McCann's little helpers and then to the media also.
Was that not a one off?  You talk about continual efforts, is a dossier handed in regularly do you know?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 05, 2023, 09:08:05 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on July 05, 2023, 08:52:24 PM
Was that not a one off?  You talk about continual efforts, is a dossier handed in regularly do you know?

There's more than one way to skin a cat. It's a many pronged attack as anyone reading just this forum can see.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 05, 2023, 09:19:25 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 05, 2023, 09:08:05 PM
There's more than one way to skin a cat. It's a many pronged attack as anyone reading just this forum can see.
what paranoid nonsense. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 06, 2023, 08:46:25 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on July 05, 2023, 09:19:25 PM
what paranoid nonsense.

What is paranoid nonsense is speculating that a Portuguese retired policeman is involved in various conspiracies or that a British dog trainer and handler tried to use his last job as a Police Officer for self-promotion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 06, 2023, 09:15:38 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 06, 2023, 08:46:25 AM
What is paranoid nonsense is speculating that a Portuguese retired policeman is involved in various conspiracies or that a British dog trainer and handler tried to use his last job as a Police Officer for self-promotion.

All justified speculation.  Or do you only believe in French Speech for you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 06, 2023, 10:25:57 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 06, 2023, 08:46:25 AM
What is paranoid nonsense is speculating that a Portuguese retired policeman is involved in various conspiracies or that a British dog trainer and handler tried to use his last job as a Police Officer for self-promotion.
Deflection from your paranoid claim that there are continual attempts on this forum to draw the police's attention to the activities of the poor wee sceptics on here. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 06, 2023, 10:40:22 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 06, 2023, 09:15:38 AM
All justified speculation.  Or do you only believe in French Speech for you?

Unjustified imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 06, 2023, 11:06:17 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 06, 2023, 10:40:22 AM
Unjustified imo.

I accept that you have some weird right to unjustified speculation, even though it often borders on Libellous.

Fortunately, the choice between either doesn't rest with you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 06, 2023, 11:09:24 AM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 06, 2023, 10:40:22 AM
Unjustified imo.
Which conspiracy theories wrt to this case do you deem to be justified?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 06, 2023, 11:23:48 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on July 06, 2023, 11:09:24 AM
Which conspiracy theories wrt to this case do you deem to be justified?

The McCanns done it.  Everything else should be banned, according to The Gospel of Gunit.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 06, 2023, 12:40:01 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 06, 2023, 11:23:48 AM
The McCanns done it.  Everything else should be banned, according to The Gospel of Gunit.

I have never said the MCanns 'done it', whatever 'it' is. What the husband did do was give confusing statements which often made no sense and contradicted other witness statements. The wife gave one statement in May and one in September then clammed up and just said 'no comment'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 06, 2023, 12:49:56 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 06, 2023, 12:40:01 PM
I have never said the MCanns 'done it', whatever 'it' is. What the husband did do was give confusing statements which often made no sense and contradicted other witness statements. The wife gave one statement in May and one in September then clammed up and just said 'no comment'.

Your statements often make no sense.

Kate and Gerry always had the right to say, No Comment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on July 06, 2023, 01:21:53 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 06, 2023, 08:46:25 AM
What is paranoid nonsense is speculating that a Portuguese retired policeman is involved in various conspiracies or that a British dog trainer and handler tried to use his last job as a Police Officer for self-promotion.

To whom do you refer?  Cristovao?

Lol ... of course he did!  That's what you do when you are in the job market.  Woof.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: G-Unit on July 06, 2023, 01:33:36 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 06, 2023, 12:49:56 PM
Your statements often make no sense.

Kate and Gerry always had the right to say, No Comment.

Not until they became arguidos they didn't.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 06, 2023, 02:58:46 PM
Quote from: G-Unit on July 06, 2023, 01:33:36 PM
Not until they became arguidos they didn't.

Nonsense.  Even before they were made Arguidos.  What was anyone going to do to them if they refused to comment?  Beat them up?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 06, 2023, 03:10:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 06, 2023, 02:58:46 PM
Nonsense.  Even before they were made Arguidos.  What was anyone going to do to them if they refused to comment?  Beat them up?

How would that work then? Reception call the police to report Maddie missing, then when the GNR & PJ arrive at the scene, the McCanns just stand in silence thereafter? Never even give a statement? That would be a very strange thing for concerned parents to do really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on July 06, 2023, 05:35:07 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on July 06, 2023, 02:58:46 PM
Nonsense.  Even before they were made Arguidos.  What was anyone going to do to them if they refused to comment?  Beat them up?
Probably!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on July 06, 2023, 05:39:56 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on July 06, 2023, 05:35:07 PM
Probably!

That's what I thought.  They had done it before.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 06, 2023, 06:07:18 PM

The moderation here is excessive to say the least.

It appears everyone other than me is allowed to comment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on July 28, 2023, 11:02:18 PM

I really hope Carlee Russell's abductor is found.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on July 31, 2023, 06:34:10 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on July 06, 2023, 06:07:18 PM
The moderation here is excessive to say the least.

It appears everyone other than me is allowed to comment.

That’s why I stopped posting regularly. 

Come over to the Luke Mitchell board. You’ll actually appreciate how over moderated this board is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 01, 2023, 08:15:39 AM
Trolls and those who make libellous accusations about witnesses in this case should be closely moderated, it’s no wonder you two feel so hard done by because trolling and libelling are all you really seem interested in.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Carana on August 05, 2023, 03:38:34 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on June 25, 2023, 11:55:38 AM
Amaral isn't even very clever, although he appears to think that he is.  He should never have been allowed on that investigation with a Perjury Charge pending.


He reminds me of a wannabe Trump in some respects...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 05, 2023, 03:59:58 PM
Quote from: Carana on August 05, 2023, 03:38:34 PM


He reminds me of a wannabe Trump in some respects...

Excepting that Trump has done measurably better than Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 07, 2023, 12:53:50 PM

Nothing at all then.  This Forum appears to have died.  Well, that's okay.  There never was any reason for holding The McCanns accountable.  So that's the end of that.

God alone knows when Brueckner will go on Trial for anything else, although I can't much say that I care.  The BKA will come up with something to keep him locked up which is all that matters to me.

I still don't know if Brueckner had anything to do with this, although Jurisdiction isn't looking good as a get out.  But something will have him living somewhere, so this is just delaying tactics while his Lawyers just clock up a few more dead beats on their books..  Can one blame them?  Everyone is entitled to a Defence.  Especially in Germany.

The most interesting thing is that all of The Sceptics have bailed out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 07, 2023, 01:53:15 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 07, 2023, 12:53:50 PM
Nothing at all then.  This Forum appears to have died.  Well, that's okay.  There never was any reason for holding The McCanns accountable.  So that's the end of that.

God alone knows when Brueckner will go on Trial for anything else, although I can't much say that I care.  The BKA will come up with something to keep him locked up which is all that matters to me.

I still don't know if Brueckner had anything to do with this, although Jurisdiction isn't looking good as a get out.  But something will have him living somewhere, so this is just delaying tactics while his Lawyers just clock up a few more dead beats on their books..  Can one blame them?  Everyone is entitled to a Defence.  Especially in Germany.

The most interesting thing is that all of The Sceptics have bailed out.

Don't you believe it. As soon as there's something worth discussing, I've no doubt we'll be back
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 07, 2023, 02:27:14 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 07, 2023, 01:53:15 PM
Don't you believe it. As soon as there's something worth discussing, I've no doubt we'll be back

So just waiting to slag off The McCanns again.  Okay.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 07, 2023, 07:13:04 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 07, 2023, 12:53:50 PM
Nothing at all then.  This Forum appears to have died.  Well, that's okay.  There never was any reason for holding The McCanns accountable.  So that's the end of that.

God alone knows when Brueckner will go on Trial for anything else, although I can't much say that I care.  The BKA will come up with something to keep him locked up which is all that matters to me.

I still don't know if Brueckner had anything to do with this, although Jurisdiction isn't looking good as a get out.  But something will have him living somewhere, so this is just delaying tactics while his Lawyers just clock up a few more dead beats on their books..  Can one blame them?  Everyone is entitled to a Defence.  Especially in Germany.

The most interesting thing is that all of The Sceptics have bailed out.
If you don’t feed ‘em they stay in their lairs.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 07, 2023, 07:49:16 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on August 07, 2023, 07:13:04 PM
If you don’t feed ‘em they stay in their lairs.

Difficult not to sometimes even after more than sixteen years.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 16, 2023, 06:46:47 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on July 06, 2023, 06:07:18 PM
The moderation here is excessive to say the least.

It appears everyone other than me is allowed to comment.

lol and me. I get warnings every time i pop in... they love it cos it would die and they would be out of a 'job'  8)><(

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 16, 2023, 06:50:24 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 07, 2023, 01:53:15 PM
Don't you believe it. As soon as there's something worth discussing, I've no doubt we'll be back

Maybe not on this forum though. How sad the mods will be when all comes to an end. they should be congratulated on the huge part some of them  played for the demise.

John it can be saved still if you want it to be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 16, 2023, 06:59:21 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 07, 2023, 02:27:14 PM
So just waiting to slag off The McCanns again.  Okay.


I don't know about using the term slagged.

It is worth mentioning that those parents played a huge part in what happened to their daughter. left alone in a strange country at night, claiming she was abducted from her bed, to be horrifically, raped and murdered by CB (according to the popular belief of some on here),and people feel sorry for them the parents?
I find that to be so gross and disgusting. And I do get upset to think what happened to Little Maddie, and ALL who created  a money spinning business from her demise. Just so sickening!

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 22, 2023, 09:27:36 AM

Well now, I have been a bit distracted by The Letby Trial.  That is a real horror story, although I hope something similar happens to Brueckner albeit by individual sentences for Rape and Child Sexual Abuse.  There are some awful people walking the face of Planet Earth.

No, I don't know if he is involved in Madeleine's disappearance.  I just hope that he never goes free again.  He frightens me half to death and France is a bit too close to Portugal, although O'Connor can't half kick up a stink when he doesn't like what is going on outside.  I never stop him barking, boring though it is on occasions.  He sounds like a Rottweiler for such a little thing.  He is my idea of a sleekit beastie with very good teeth.  There is nothing timorous about O'Connor.

But onwards and upwards.  Wolters will get him in the end.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 22, 2023, 09:34:00 AM
Apart from the obvious horror and disgust of the Letby case the interesting thing for me was the lack of any direct evidence of her guilt, just a load of circumstantial evidence.  I absolutely guarantee it won’t be long before there is a whole industry of “Lucy Letby Is Innocent” campaigning going on online, with excuses made for every single piece of evidence that was used against her.  In fact I suspect the troll will be kicking it off on here any day now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 22, 2023, 10:43:22 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on August 22, 2023, 09:34:00 AM
Apart from the obvious horror and disgust of the Letby case the interesting thing for me was the lack of any direct evidence of her guilt, just a load of circumstantial evidence.  I absolutely guarantee it won’t be long before there is a whole industry of “Lucy Letby Is Innocent” campaigning going on online, with excuses made for every single piece of evidence that was used against her.  In fact I suspect the troll will be kicking it off on here any day now.

I followed the whole Letby Trial. and believe me she is guilty.  Some things were not possible by accident and she was the only one who was always present.

But no doubt you are right about what will now follow.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on August 22, 2023, 12:30:39 PM
More luxurious than a Melrand hovel and no dog pee-soaked floor to worry about, but with the disadvantage of being unexpectedly stabbed in the back by Dennehy sometime in the next 50 years...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12431967/Lucy-Letby-kept-apart-inmates-fears-safety-Nurse-placed-24-hour-suicide-watch-segregation-wing-escorted-officers-times-begins-life-term-HMP-Low-Newton.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12431967/Lucy-Letby-kept-apart-inmates-fears-safety-Nurse-placed-24-hour-suicide-watch-segregation-wing-escorted-officers-times-begins-life-term-HMP-Low-Newton.html)

Sentencing remarks...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 22, 2023, 01:27:46 PM

I'm glad someone mentioned Lucy Letby, as I've been eager to point out that.... Lucy Letby was a nurse, & so was Beverly Allitt. Nurses work with doctors. Doctor Harold Shipman was a doctor, & so are the McCanns.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 22, 2023, 01:43:21 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on August 22, 2023, 09:34:00 AM
Apart from the obvious horror and disgust of the Letby case the interesting thing for me was the lack of any direct evidence of her guilt, just a load of circumstantial evidence.  I absolutely guarantee it won’t be long before there is a whole industry of “Lucy Letby Is Innocent” campaigning going on online, with excuses made for every single piece of evidence that was used against her.  In fact I suspect the troll will be kicking it off on here any day now.

She appears to have been found guilty on the balance of probability & not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. But I'm far too busy campaigning for Christian Brueckner's release to be devoting any time to Ms Letby I'm afraid.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 22, 2023, 05:11:10 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 22, 2023, 01:27:46 PM
I'm glad someone mentioned Lucy Letby, as I've been eager to point out that.... Lucy Letby was a nurse, & so was Beverly Allitt. Nurses work with doctors. Doctor Harold Shipman was a doctor, & so are the McCanns.

I can see where you're going with that  .
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 22, 2023, 06:45:20 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 22, 2023, 05:11:10 PM
I can see where you're going with that  .
yes, back under the bridge to share it with the other trolls.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 22, 2023, 06:53:57 PM
Quote from: Myster on August 22, 2023, 12:30:39 PM
More luxurious than a Melrand hovel and no dog pee-soaked floor to worry about, but with the disadvantage of being unexpectedly stabbed in the back by Dennehy sometime in the next 50 years...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12431967/Lucy-Letby-kept-apart-inmates-fears-safety-Nurse-placed-24-hour-suicide-watch-segregation-wing-escorted-officers-times-begins-life-term-HMP-Low-Newton.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12431967/Lucy-Letby-kept-apart-inmates-fears-safety-Nurse-placed-24-hour-suicide-watch-segregation-wing-escorted-officers-times-begins-life-term-HMP-Low-Newton.html)

Sentencing remarks...
Letby and Dennehy will probably be a loved up couple within the year, the pair of sickos.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 23, 2023, 09:26:58 AM

A very few of the Charges were deemed Unproven.  Letby was not convicted of these Charges.  The rest of the Charges were Proven with No Reasonable Doubt.

I was unsure in the beginning, but not unsure at the end as I followed the trial throughout.

Spammy, as usual is mouthing off again with no good reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 23, 2023, 11:16:45 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on August 23, 2023, 09:26:58 AM
A very few of the Charges were deemed Unproven.  Letby was not convicted of these Charges.  The rest of the Charges were Proven with No Reasonable Doubt.

I was unsure in the beginning, but not unsure at the end as I followed the trial throughout.

Spammy, as usual is mouthing off again with no good reason.

I doubt if I have ever read of such calculated evil.  My heart is broken for the innocents she murdered, for the calculated Hell she put their parents and extended families through and for the children and families she condemned to lifetimes of pain and suffering as a direct result of her murderous attacks on tiny, defenceless babies entrusted to her care.

She actually enjoyed the powers she assumed to control and change lives forever through death and injury.  My hope and prayers are with those whose lives her evil has touched.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on August 23, 2023, 12:24:28 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 23, 2023, 11:16:45 AM
I doubt if I have ever read of such calculated evil.  My heart is broken for the innocents she murdered, for the calculated Hell she put their parents and extended families through and for the children and families she condemned to lifetimes of pain and suffering as a direct result of her murderous attacks on tiny, defenceless babies entrusted to her care.

She actually enjoyed the powers she assumed to control and change lives forever through death and injury.  My hope and prayers are with those whose lives her evil has touched.

What about Shipman ?
To my mind his actions were no less evil and its been calculated that he did for 250 of his patients
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 23, 2023, 12:33:42 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 23, 2023, 12:24:28 PM
What about Shipman ?
To my mind his actions were no less evil and its been calculated that he did for 250 of his patients

What about Abortion Clinics & those who attend them? They're responsible for murdering millions of infants, every year, but nobody bats an eyelid about that kind of murder, for some reason. Technically then, all Lucy Letby did was perform some very late abortions. When you look at it that way, her crimes are quite insignificant really, compared to the amount of murders the average abortionist commits every year.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 23, 2023, 03:02:08 PM
Quote from: jassi on August 23, 2023, 12:24:28 PM
What about Shipman ?
To my mind his actions were no less evil and its been calculated that he did for 250 of his patients
Both individuals are depraved but killing day old babies, especially in a manner that causes them pain and suffering is especially evil.  Numbers of victims doesn't increase the amount of evil within you - you kill one person sadistically and cruelly and you are just as evil as someone who kills 100 people sadistically and cruelly IMO, you were just able to get away with it for longer and kill more frequently. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 23, 2023, 03:35:16 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on August 23, 2023, 03:02:08 PM
Both individuals are depraved but killing day old babies, especially in a manner that causes them pain and suffering is especially evil.  Numbers of victims doesn't increase the amount of evil within you - you kill one person sadistically and cruelly and you are just as evil as someone who kills 100 people sadistically and cruelly IMO, you were just able to get away with it for longer and kill more frequently.

Killing day old babies is worse than killing adults then is It?  How so & where is the cut off Point? Is it somehow worse to kill a day old baby than to kill one that's a year old? If you leave the killing until the child turns 16, is that somehow less evil?  I must admit I find this whole morality Idea somewhat confusing. Anyway, most of Shipmans victims were old & senile so perhaps he should have been let off really.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 23, 2023, 04:01:26 PM
Of course people who use these terrible cases to further their puerile, trollish agendas on social media are really pretty despicable too IMO.   Not quite what I'd describe as evil, but there is a sickness there, obviously.  A desire to shock, outrage, upset others for personal amusement.  It's all very sad. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 23, 2023, 04:13:22 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on August 23, 2023, 04:01:26 PM
Of course people who use these terrible cases to further their puerile, trollish agendas on social media are really pretty despicable too IMO.   Not quite what I'd describe as evil, but there is a sickness there, obviously.  A desire to shock, outrage, upset others for personal amusement.  It's all very sad.

I have to wonder what they might do given half a chance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 23, 2023, 04:32:17 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on August 23, 2023, 04:01:26 PM
Of course people who use these terrible cases to further their puerile, trollish agendas on social media are really pretty despicable too IMO.   Not quite what I'd describe as evil, but there is a sickness there, obviously.  A desire to shock, outrage, upset others for personal amusement.  It's all very sad.

They no longer have the power to shock, cause outrage or upset.  Just so predictable. they have become pathetic
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 23, 2023, 05:13:59 PM
Quote from: Brietta on August 23, 2023, 04:32:17 PM
They no longer have the power to shock, cause outrage or upset.  Just so predictable. they have become pathetic
No, they always were pathetic.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 23, 2023, 11:00:49 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on August 22, 2023, 01:27:46 PM
I'm glad someone mentioned Lucy Letby, as I've been eager to point out that.... Lucy Letby was a nurse, & so was Beverly Allitt. Nurses work with doctors. Doctor Harold Shipman was a doctor, & so are the McCanns.

 I thought the Lucy Letby would have her own thread on here...

I do have a weird feeling about her However, I agreed that the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming there doesn't really seem to be 'hard evidence'. By that I mean actual witnesses where air/insulin was being injected by her. If this was a death penalty sentence I would feel very uneasy about it.

I work within the medical profession and can share with you that many Drs and Nurses can be the most arrogant, ignorant, narcissistic people you may come across. the old saying doctors bury their mistakes and the coverups by each other is well known within health industry.

Question: What is the difference between a nurse/ doctor and God Almighty?
Answer- God Almighty doesn't think he is a doctor or nurse.

Apologies if I miss pronouns of God. He just may well be non binary.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 23, 2023, 11:48:54 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 23, 2023, 11:00:49 PM
I thought the Lucy Letby would have her own thread on here...

I do have a weird feeling about her However, I agreed that the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming there doesn't really seem to be 'hard evidence'. By that I mean actual witnesses where air/insulin was being injected by her. If this was a death penalty sentence I would feel very uneasy about it.

I work within the medical profession and can share with you that many Drs and Nurses can be the most arrogant, ignorant, narcissistic people you may come across. the old saying doctors bury their mistakes and the coverups by each other is well known within health industry.

Question: What is the difference between a nurse/ doctor and God Almighty?
Answer- God Almighty doesn't think he is a doctor or nurse.

Apologies if I miss pronouns of God. He just may well be non binary.
As I understand it, it was several doctors who were working alongside Letby who raised concerns about her but who were fobbed off by NHS bureaucrats.  Not all doctors are arrogant, evil b........s much as you would like us believe it to be so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on August 24, 2023, 02:50:12 AM
She revelled in the drama of the collapses she induced. I remember reading that she bathed at least one of her victims & shared sympathy with their parents. Later searching their Facebook pages to check up on her work. One thing that struck me was that when Ms Letby's fling, the male doctor associate, gave evidence against her, she apparently wept & had to leave the courtroom. There was a display of genuine human emotion that hadn't involved unspeakable evil. It seems easy to overlook that this monster is still actually a human being capable of love. Anyway, enough joking around. She really is one of the most nasty pieces of shit I've ever had the displeasure of reading about & may she live a long, miserable life, trapped alone inside a tiny cell. Amen.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on August 24, 2023, 09:36:21 AM
An MoJ muck-raking wagon about to hit the road...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/23/lucy-letby-campaigners-freedom-launch-fundraising-appeal/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/23/lucy-letby-campaigners-freedom-launch-fundraising-appeal/)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 24, 2023, 10:09:01 AM
Quote from: Myster on August 24, 2023, 09:36:21 AM
An MoJ muck-raking wagon about to hit the road...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/23/lucy-letby-campaigners-freedom-launch-fundraising-appeal/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/23/lucy-letby-campaigners-freedom-launch-fundraising-appeal/)

I think we all knew that this would happen.  Something to do with no one seeing her do these things to such small babies.  She just waited until no one was there and it didn't take long anyway.  If not today then tomorrow would do.
However, she was the only one who was always present.  The rest of them were present less than half of the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on August 24, 2023, 10:58:11 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on August 23, 2023, 11:48:54 PM
As I understand it, it was several doctors who were working alongside Letby who raised concerns about her but who were fobbed off by NHS bureaucrats.  Not all doctors are arrogant, evil b........s much as you would like us believe it to be so.

Well said VS.

I'm afraid that for the moment I can no longer bring myself to join in with what passes for the obtuse, ill informed and inherently nasty comment we are exposes to.  I do wish pronouns would ascertain the facts before posting nonsense.  Thank you for keeping the record straight.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on August 24, 2023, 02:50:18 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on August 23, 2023, 11:48:54 PM
As I understand it, it was several doctors who were working alongside Letby who raised concerns about her but who were fobbed off by NHS bureaucrats.  Not all doctors are arrogant, evil b........s much as you would like us believe it to be so.

Please refrain from typing words attributing them to me"

I SAID "I work within the medical profession and can share with you that many Drs and Nurses can be the most arrogant, ignorant, narcissistic people you may come across. "

No mention of me SAYING "all doctors are arrogant, evil b........s"

NO Doubt that is your version of truth and will stick by it. The hard evidence on THIS  thread is THE TRUTH.

"I work within the medical profession and can share with you that many Drs and Nurses can be the most arrogant, ignorant, narcissistic people you may come across. "

I also never said I believe  LL is innocent or had sympathy for her, I was pointing out the dangers of  the death penalty being introduced and this case being based purely on circumstantial evidence, albeit very damming circumstantial evidence.

I will add my two pence by agreeing that ALL those 'managers' who did nothing- should be sacked without 'golden handshake'



Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on August 24, 2023, 05:14:29 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 24, 2023, 02:50:18 PM
Please refrain from typing words attributing them to me"

I SAID "I work within the medical profession and can share with you that many Drs and Nurses can be the most arrogant, ignorant, narcissistic people you may come across. "

No mention of me SAYING "all doctors are arrogant, evil b........s"

NO Doubt that is your version of truth and will stick by it. The hard evidence on THIS  thread is THE TRUTH.

"I work within the medical profession and can share with you that many Drs and Nurses can be the most arrogant, ignorant, narcissistic people you may come across. "

I also never said I believe  LL is innocent or had sympathy for her, I was pointing out the dangers of  the death penalty being introduced and this case being based purely on circumstantial evidence, albeit very damming circumstantial evidence.

I will add my two pence by agreeing that ALL those 'managers' who did nothing- should be sacked without 'golden handshake'
what have arrogant, ignorant,narcissistic doctors got to do with this case?  Why did you feel it necessary to put the boot in to doctors generally?  Have you encountered many (any?) decent, hardworking, knowledgeable doctors? 
No one here was arguing for the death penalty in this case afaik, so don’t know why you brought that up either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 24, 2023, 08:40:11 PM

At least we all seem to  agree about those wretched Managers.  Unbelievable.  Babies could have been saved.  Not only did they attempt to ignore the whole thing, they even threatened the doctors.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on August 25, 2023, 03:18:04 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on August 23, 2023, 11:00:49 PM
I thought the Lucy Letby would have her own thread on here...

I do have a weird feeling about her However, I agreed that the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming there doesn't really seem to be 'hard evidence'. By that I mean actual witnesses where air/insulin was being injected by her. If this was a death penalty sentence I would feel very uneasy about it.

I work within the medical profession and can share with you that many Drs and Nurses can be the most arrogant, ignorant, narcissistic people you may come across. the old saying doctors bury their mistakes and the coverups by each other is well known within health industry.

Question: What is the difference between a nurse/ doctor and God Almighty?
Answer- God Almighty doesn't think he is a doctor or nurse.

Apologies if I miss pronouns of God. He just may well be non binary.

I don't share your opinion on doctors and I've met many..Id be more interested in their opinion of you
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on August 27, 2023, 01:48:52 PM

One of these Managers has bogged off to his home in France.  Absolutely no chance of getting him back from there.  Or should I say Here?  What he did, or failed to do is not an Extraditable Offence.  So any enquiry will probably have to whistle for his excuses.

In fact, I very much doubt that an Enquiry will get anywhere at all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 02, 2023, 12:23:02 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on August 25, 2023, 03:18:04 PM
I don't share your opinion on doctors and I've met many..Id be more interested in their opinion of you

Lets make it personal?... petty name calling still the thing here eh? I thought we were not allowed to make snide remarks- oh only for some.

why not write to these darling doctors for their opinion of me... only because YOU are interested. I am flattered you care.

This list is of the ones who got caught!

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/list_of_erased_doctors_2

open the PDF

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/823514/response/1977990/attach/4/Doctors%20erased%20from%20the%20LRMP%2020%2021.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

Have a nice day.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 02, 2023, 05:44:09 PM
Some doctors got striuck off = proof of what exactly?   That there are thousands still in work,performing amazing life saving / enhancing work = counter evidence of what exactly?  Isn’t this a completely puerile argument, driven by a dislike of two doctors in particular and little else?  This forum is dead in the water and is it any wonder why when the level of discourse is so asinine.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 03, 2023, 01:23:00 PM

Onwards and Upwards, Folks.  Something will happen in a minute.  And then we will see who is left.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 03, 2023, 01:38:27 PM
Yes. Let's just continue to wait patiently & peacefully, until Wolters reveals the concrete evidence. It shouldn't be much longer now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 03, 2023, 02:19:33 PM

Brueckner has had it whatever happens, one way or another.  And so has Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2023, 04:18:12 PM
What’s really rather comical (but also more than a bit sad) is that there is still a tiny handful of diehard sceptics tweeting every day, repeating all the tired out cliches 16 years on.  15 tweets today on #McCann so far, one wonders why they are still bothering?  Who do they think is going to be interested or swayed by their dodgy tweets?  They may reach more people if they don a sandwich board and march up and down Oxford Street all day.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 03, 2023, 07:10:27 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2023, 04:18:12 PM
What’s really rather comical (but also more than a bit sad) is that there is still a tiny handful of diehard sceptics tweeting every day, repeating all the tired out cliches 16 years on.  15 tweets today on #McCann so far, one wonders why they are still bothering?  Who do they think is going to be interested or swayed by their dodgy tweets?  They may reach more people if they don a sandwich board and march up and down Oxford Street all day.

Didn't Tony Bennett try that.  I wonder what happened to him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2023, 08:02:25 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 03, 2023, 07:10:27 PM
Didn't Tony Bennett try that.  I wonder what happened to him.
No idea, but a cursory glance of the cesspit he used to hang out at would suggest that even he and his band of ne’er do wells have all bit given up too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 03, 2023, 08:08:15 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on September 02, 2023, 05:44:09 PM
Some doctors got striuck off = proof of what exactly?   That there are thousands still in work,performing amazing life saving / enhancing work = counter evidence of what exactly?  Isn’t this a completely puerile argument, driven by a dislike of two doctors in particular and little else?  This forum is dead in the water and is it any wonder why when the level of discourse is so asinine.

I was not referring to the McCanns I was carrying on with the thread when I said...
" I work within the medical profession and can share with you that many Drs and Nurses can be the most arrogant, ignorant, narcissistic people you may come across. the old saying doctors bury their mistakes and the coverups by each other is well known within health industry."


The usual suspects  jumped on  for attention with mis quotes and fawning over the ever loving doctors and Nurses... you lot can't handle adult debate or accept others difference of opinion EVEN when evidence is shown .

The ones who are left  made this forum die a death!

except for  our lovable spamekins!!

Yeah I agree with Elenor   sad some people sit online in forums ALL day chatting about McCanns.

I wonder if Little Maddie will turn up after those who stole her and looked after her very well will want to get back to her parents?

If Kate McCann can forgive the 'abductor' then who are you lot to call CB bad names?

ahhh memories fading...

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2023, 09:35:23 PM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on September 03, 2023, 08:08:15 PM
I was not referring to the McCanns I was carrying on with the thread when I said...
" I work within the medical profession and can share with you that many Drs and Nurses can be the most arrogant, ignorant, narcissistic people you may come across. the old saying doctors bury their mistakes and the coverups by each other is well known within health industry."


The usual suspects  jumped on  for attention with mis quotes and fawning over the ever loving doctors and Nurses... you lot can't handle adult debate or accept others difference of opinion EVEN when evidence is shown .

The ones who are left  made this forum die a death!

except for  our lovable spamekins!!

Yeah I agree with Elenor   sad some people sit online in forums ALL day chatting about McCanns.

I wonder if Little Maddie will turn up after those who stole her and looked after her very well will want to get back to her parents?

If Kate McCann can forgive the 'abductor' then who are you lot to call CB bad names?

ahhh memories fading...
@)(++(* *%87
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 04, 2023, 05:25:51 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on September 03, 2023, 09:35:23 PM
@)(++(* *%87

I thought it was you who said that?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 06, 2023, 07:49:25 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on September 03, 2023, 08:08:15 PM
I was not referring to the McCanns I was carrying on with the thread when I said...
" I work within the medical profession and can share with you that many Drs and Nurses can be the most arrogant, ignorant, narcissistic people you may come across. the old saying doctors bury their mistakes and the coverups by each other is well known within health industry."


The usual suspects  jumped on  for attention with mis quotes and fawning over the ever loving doctors and Nurses... you lot can't handle adult debate or accept others difference of opinion EVEN when evidence is shown .

The ones who are left  made this forum die a death!

except for  our lovable spamekins!!

Yeah I agree with Elenor   sad some people sit online in forums ALL day chatting about McCanns.

I wonder if Little Maddie will turn up after those who stole her and looked after her very well will want to get back to her parents?

If Kate McCann can forgive the 'abductor' then who are you lot to call CB bad names?

ahhh memories fading...
What makes you think that your opinion of drs and nurses has any value to other posters here. We all inter act with them...some more than others...I find most doctors and nurses compassionate.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on September 06, 2023, 07:50:03 AM
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on September 03, 2023, 08:08:15 PM
I was not referring to the McCanns I was carrying on with the thread when I said...
" I work within the medical profession and can share with you that many Drs and Nurses can be the most arrogant, ignorant, narcissistic people you may come across. the old saying doctors bury their mistakes and the coverups by each other is well known within health industry."


The usual suspects  jumped on  for attention with mis quotes and fawning over the ever loving doctors and Nurses... you lot can't handle adult debate or accept others difference of opinion EVEN when evidence is shown .

The ones who are left  made this forum die a death!

except for  our lovable spamekins!!

Yeah I agree with Elenor   sad some people sit online in forums ALL day chatting about McCanns.

I wonder if Little Maddie will turn up after those who stole her and looked after her very well will want to get back to her parents?

If Kate McCann can forgive the 'abductor' then who are you lot to call CB bad names?

ahhh memories fading...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 11, 2023, 01:31:09 PM

Anything?  Nothing?  Just checking.

Brückner will go On Trial eventually, somewhere in Germany.  And he will lose on some of those charges, albeit perhaps not quite enough.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 11, 2023, 10:11:55 PM
Has the official Facebook campaign page disappeared?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 12, 2023, 05:50:57 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 11, 2023, 10:11:55 PM
Has the official Facebook campaign page disappeared?

I don't know.  I don't know where to look for it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on September 12, 2023, 07:36:41 AM
Not sure about the Official, but there are a couple of others to eeny-meeny-miny-mo...

https://www.google.com/search?q=facebook+luke+mitchell&client=firefox-b-d&sca_esv=564592924&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj9q8SPtqSBAxXVVEEAHbojBRAQ0pQJegQIAxAC&biw=1547&bih=799&dpr=1.09 (https://www.google.com/search?q=facebook+luke+mitchell&client=firefox-b-d&sca_esv=564592924&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj9q8SPtqSBAxXVVEEAHbojBRAQ0pQJegQIAxAC&biw=1547&bih=799&dpr=1.09)

Meanwhile the self-proclaimed "leading criminologist" is back with another hair-flicking session...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYepLKHqDxk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYepLKHqDxk)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 12, 2023, 07:53:52 AM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 11, 2023, 10:11:55 PM
Has the official Facebook campaign page disappeared?
Don’t worry, it’s still there for you to ridicule and slag off whenever you get bored of supporting a convicted murderer.
https://www.facebook.com/Official.Find.Madeleine.Campaign
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on September 12, 2023, 08:02:05 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on September 12, 2023, 07:53:52 AM
Don’t worry, it’s still there for you to ridicule and slag off whenever you get bored of supporting a convicted murderer.
https://www.facebook.com/Official.Find.Madeleine.Campaign (https://www.facebook.com/Official.Find.Madeleine.Campaign)
Crikey, I must be cracking up!  Thought Lilly was referring to the Scottish IRN BRU home-brewer.  It's this early morning rising that does it.... soz.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 12, 2023, 08:07:31 AM
Quote from: Myster on September 12, 2023, 08:02:05 AM
Crikey, I must be cracking up!  Thought Lilly was referring to the Scottish IRN BRU home-brewer.  It's this early morning rising that does it.... soz.
I think with this forum in terminal decline us few stragglers are probably all going ga-ga or getting there fast  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 12, 2023, 09:47:10 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on September 12, 2023, 08:07:31 AM
I think with this forum in terminal decline us few stragglers are probably all going ga-ga or getting there fast  @)(++(*

I'm not having it, Ga Ga or not.  We will stagger on.  Or at least I will.  Thank you all for your haphazard support.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 12, 2023, 10:04:41 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 12, 2023, 09:47:10 AM
I'm not having it, Ga Ga or not.  We will stagger on.  Or at least I will.  Thank you all for your haphazard support.

The process in Germany at the moment seems interminable for us.  I cannot imagine what it must be like for those whose lives it actually affects.

Whichever way the jurisdiction question pans out in Germany, it won't be over for some time yet ~Brueckner will be tried.  The evidence was there to charge him and is still there to bring him to trial whichever German court is used.

Madeleine's case isn't even at that stage yet so the evidence in her case hasn't even been tested yet.  But it will be.

Just a waiting game which probably won't be decided this year.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: faithlilly on September 12, 2023, 06:19:02 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 12, 2023, 05:50:57 AM
I don't know.  I don't know where to look for it.

Neither do I Eleanor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 12, 2023, 07:15:45 PM
Quote from: Myster on September 12, 2023, 08:02:05 AM
Crikey, I must be cracking up!  Thought Lilly was referring to the Scottish IRN BRU home-brewer.  It's this early morning rising that does it.... soz.

Early morning rising ?  If only  8(8-))
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 12, 2023, 10:38:26 PM
Quote from: faithlilly on September 12, 2023, 06:19:02 PM
Neither do I Eleanor.
Oh dear, if only you were able to read my posts you’d be able to find it again.  Oh well never mind, I don’t suppose the OFM FB page will miss being trolled by you.  Perhaps they blocked you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 14, 2023, 11:17:47 AM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12517041/madeleine-mcann-suspect-christian-brueckner-letters-clear-name.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 14, 2023, 07:36:15 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 14, 2023, 11:17:47 AM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12517041/madeleine-mcann-suspect-christian-brueckner-letters-clear-name.html

Brueckner will be Tried in a Court somewhere in Germany, so I don't really understand what Fulscher is up to,  other than begging for work from other such criminals.  Just how many of them are there?

I have never been a great fan of Germany due to my age, but let's not get my motives wrong.  But I doubt that Germany is that stupid anymore.  This will be done with due attention to The Law.

I am personally not that bothered beyond Due Process.

I am a bit concerned by No Jury.  I am not sure that I entirely trust Judges.  Been there and done that in Portugal.  And I don't know how far Germany has moved on.

The last thing that I want is for Brueckner to be Convicted by Public Opinion because Germany thinks it is a good idea.

But Germany has done no more than state their case.  They now have to prove it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on September 15, 2023, 12:33:47 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 14, 2023, 07:36:15 PM
Brueckner will be Tried in a Court somewhere in Germany, so I don't really understand what Fulscher is up to,  other than begging for work from other such criminals.  Just how many of them are there?

I have never been a great fan of Germany due to my age, but let's not get my motives wrong.  But I doubt that Germany is that stupid anymore.  This will be done with due attention to The Law.

I am personally not that bothered beyond Due Process.

I am a bit concerned by No Jury.  I am not sure that I entirely trust Judges.  Been there and done that in Portugal.  And I don't know how far Germany has moved on.

The last thing that I want is for Brueckner to be Convicted by Public Opinion because Germany thinks it is a good idea.

But Germany has done no more than state their case.  They now have to prove it.

Well said, Elli.

My feelings exactly.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on September 15, 2023, 01:03:57 AM
Quote from: sadie on September 15, 2023, 12:33:47 AM
Well said, Elli.

My feelings exactly.

I think this case would have been wrapped up by now with all the clues facts and pointers if it weren't for the fact that magickally someone is able to destroy evidence and by his charisma convince people what a wonderful guy he is .   He is also extremely rich, something of a genius, has the means to Blackmail some ... and has powerful friends including Royalty and ex prime Ministers

Imo, Justice is being denied to all the missing children of Portugal as listed on earlier pages of this forum.   I forget, were there 7 or 8 children, including Madeleine, who vanished in a few years before Madeleine went ?   

If he dares, this man will strike again, but he knows that he is being watched, so maybe he will bold back.  Let's hope he will desist his urges.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on September 15, 2023, 07:39:00 AM
He wants more cash auf dem Tisch...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12520683/Madeleine-McCann-case-against-paedophile-suspect-Christian-Brueckner-close-collapsing-former-friend-gave-damning-statement-wobbling-threatening-stop-helping-probe.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12520683/Madeleine-McCann-case-against-paedophile-suspect-Christian-Brueckner-close-collapsing-former-friend-gave-damning-statement-wobbling-threatening-stop-helping-probe.html)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 15, 2023, 10:05:05 AM
Also reported in the Independent.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/madeleine-mccann-case-christian-brueckner-b2412087.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 15, 2023, 12:09:59 PM

What's going on? Is there something to talk about now? Has Brueckner been arrested yet?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 19, 2023, 06:02:28 PM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12536267/Madeleine-McCann-suspect-charged-German-prosecutors-separate-sex-offences-committed-Portugal-court-rules-new-blow-Christian-Brueckner.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on September 19, 2023, 06:33:33 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 19, 2023, 06:02:28 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12536267/Madeleine-McCann-suspect-charged-German-prosecutors-separate-sex-offences-committed-Portugal-court-rules-new-blow-Christian-Brueckner.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12536267/Madeleine-McCann-suspect-charged-German-prosecutors-separate-sex-offences-committed-Portugal-court-rules-new-blow-Christian-Brueckner.html)
Sorted!  8((()*/    Put that in yer pipe an' smoke it, FF.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 20, 2023, 10:23:10 AM
Quote from: Myster on September 19, 2023, 06:33:33 PM
Sorted!  8((()*/    Put that in yer pipe an' smoke it, FF.

I suspect it was only ever a delaying tactic.
 
Where was FF.  Sorry, can't spell it.  When Brueckner was convicted of a rape in Germany and perpetrated in Portugal?  Where in fact was Portugal?

The upcoming charges were also committed in Portugal while Amaral was in charge of the appalling conviction of Leonor Cipriano and her brother.

FF has got no chance and he knows it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 20, 2023, 11:41:18 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 20, 2023, 10:23:10 AM
I suspect it was only ever a delaying tactic.
 
Where was FF.  Sorry, can't spell it.  When Brueckner was convicted of a rape in Germany and perpetrated in Portugal?  Where in fact was Portugal?

The upcoming charges were also committed in Portugal while Amaral was in charge of the appalling conviction of Leonor Cipriano and her brother.

FF has got no chance and he knows it.

Definitely a delaying tactic and one which had to be brought into play prematurely by the surprise of indicting five instead of crimes against Madeleine.

Looking around on the internet I remain dumfounded by people who are more than content to back a man like Brueckner because he is suspected of injuring a little girl whose parents they loath and ultimately as a result, her too.  Sad beyong words.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 20, 2023, 08:47:58 PM

Anyway. Enough about Christian Brueckner. He's old news now. Can we talk about Russell Brand's right to the presumption of innocence? It seems rather strange to me that his alleged victims have reported him to the media instead of, y'know, the police.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 21, 2023, 09:25:49 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on September 20, 2023, 08:47:58 PM
Anyway. Enough about Christian Brueckner. He's old news now. Can we talk about Russell Brand's right to the presumption of innocence? It seems rather strange to me that his alleged victims have reported him to the media instead of, y'know, the police.

A repulsive character, but has he done anything illegal ?  I ask this knowing little about him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 21, 2023, 10:43:57 AM
Quote from: jassi on September 21, 2023, 09:25:49 AM
A repulsive character, but has he done anything illegal ?  I ask this knowing little about him.

I never liked the oily cartoon pirate either. Not funny, talentless. One of his alleged offences was having a relationship with a sixteen year old apparently. So no, not illegal & regret isn't rape imo.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 21, 2023, 11:27:02 AM

What is happening to Russell Brand is a disgrace.  Trial by Media and Public Opinion is never a good way to go.

Brueckner, however, has been charged with two counts of sexual abuse of minors and three counts of violent rape.  Wolters is doing all of the talking although it is difficult to know what he has actually said, due to the language barrier.  No one on this forum has said that Brueckner is guilty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on September 21, 2023, 12:23:22 PM
When all else fails produce more documentaries...

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/netflix-amazon-showdown-produce-rival-30989840 (https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/netflix-amazon-showdown-produce-rival-30989840)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2023, 06:33:52 PM
Quote from: jassi on September 21, 2023, 09:25:49 AM
A repulsive character, but has he done anything illegal ?  I ask this knowing little about him.
There is very strong evidence to suggest he raped a woman in the USA.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 21, 2023, 09:39:38 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2023, 06:33:52 PM
There is very strong evidence to suggest he raped a woman in the USA.

I don't believe a word of it. He always struck me as a decent, charming man & most definitely not a greasy letch. This is just an orchestrated take down by the establishment because he spread covid & climate disinformation & opposes ULEZ or something or other.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 22, 2023, 01:43:02 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on September 21, 2023, 06:33:52 PM
There is very strong evidence to suggest he raped a woman in the USA.

Whatever, but that does not make him involved in child abduction or involved in what happened too maddie There is no strong evidence on that
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 22, 2023, 01:47:16 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 20, 2023, 11:41:18 AM
Definitely a delaying tactic and one which had to be brought into play prematurely by the surprise of indicting five instead of crimes against Madeleine.

Looking around on the internet I remain dumfounded by people who are more than content to back a man like Brueckner because he is suspected of injuring a little girl whose parents they loath and ultimately as a result, her too.  Sad beyong words.

I think the post is sadder....why worry what otheres think. spending time to look round internet condemimg what they post. 

They have just the same right of an opinion as you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 22, 2023, 05:15:05 PM
Quote from: kizzy on September 22, 2023, 01:43:02 PM
Whatever, but that does not make him involved in child abduction or involved in what happened too maddie There is no strong evidence on that
@)(++(* I’m pretty sure Russell Brand is a wrong ‘un but I don’t think he abducted “Maddie” - go back to sleep dear.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on September 22, 2023, 06:50:18 PM
Quote from: kizzy on September 22, 2023, 01:47:16 PM
I think the post is sadder....why worry what otheres think. spending time to look round internet condemimg what they post. 

They have just the same right of an opinion as you.

 8((()*/
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 22, 2023, 07:30:48 PM
Quote from: kizzy on September 22, 2023, 01:47:16 PM
I think the post is sadder....why worry what otheres think. spending time to look round internet condemimg what they post. 

They have just the same right of an opinion as you.
I think this post is sadderer, why bother coming out of hibernation just to criticise Brietta for having an opinion about people voicing opinions.
She has the same right of (sic) an opinion as you too.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 23, 2023, 03:15:51 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on September 22, 2023, 05:15:05 PM
@)(++(* I’m pretty sure Russell Brand is a wrong ‘un but I don’t think he abducted “Maddie” - go back to sleep dear.

Whats happened to innocent till proven guilty.

Go back to sleep you say lol..its called having a life ...you should try getting one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2023, 05:51:51 PM
Quote from: kizzy on September 23, 2023, 03:15:51 PM
Whats happened to innocent till proven guilty.

Go back to sleep you say lol..its called having a life ...you should try getting one.
How rude.  I have a very full and active life thanks, and why don’t you tell me why innocent until proven guilty doesnt apply to the McCanns as far as you’re concerned?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on September 23, 2023, 07:20:53 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2023, 05:51:51 PM
How rude.  I have a very full and active life thanks, and why don’t you tell me why innocent until proven guilty doesnt apply to the McCanns as far as you’re concerned?

I have a very full and active life thanks,

Yes, on here you certainly have.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 23, 2023, 08:08:32 PM
Quote from: kizzy on September 23, 2023, 07:20:53 PM
I have a very full and active life thanks,

Yes, on here you certainly have.
This is my 7th post in seven days, plenty of time to lead my full and active life but keep on throwing your silly accusations to deflect from the nonsense in your own posts, it’s quite amusing.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on September 24, 2023, 10:51:37 AM
For anyone who wants to waste 40 minutes of their precious time listening to long-term sceptic, Catalina Lupsa drone on about current events and who, btw, is a member here but hasn't contributed one iota to the discussion...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVfjQrqBp0o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVfjQrqBp0o)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2023, 11:45:55 AM
Quote from: Myster on September 24, 2023, 10:51:37 AM
For anyone who wants to waste 40 minutes of their precious time listening to long-term sceptic, Catalina Lupsa drone on about current events and who, btw, is a member here but hasn't contributed one iota to the discussion...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVfjQrqBp0o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVfjQrqBp0o)

Oh My God, that was Soooo Boring.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2023, 12:44:28 PM
Quote from: Myster on September 24, 2023, 10:51:37 AM
For anyone who wants to waste 40 minutes of their precious time listening to long-term sceptic, Catalina Lupsa drone on about current events and who, btw, is a member here but hasn't contributed one iota to the discussion...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVfjQrqBp0o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVfjQrqBp0o)
Are you quite sure that isn’t Sandra Lean with her hair up, putting on a dodgy accent?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2023, 12:54:02 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2023, 12:44:28 PM
Are you quite sure that isn’t Sandra Lean with her hair up, putting on a dodgy accent?

It could even be Pat Brown.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2023, 04:02:34 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 24, 2023, 12:54:02 PM
It could even be Pat Brown.
I actually find Pat Brown quite entertaining to watch, this woman not so much - I lasted about 3 minutes.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2023, 04:18:05 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2023, 04:02:34 PM
I actually find Pat Brown quite entertaining to watch, this woman not so much - I lasted about 3 minutes.

You didn't miss anything.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on September 24, 2023, 05:04:07 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on September 24, 2023, 04:18:05 PM
You didn't miss anything.
Life is too short to waste on these people who don't have an analytical or logical thought in their heads.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on September 24, 2023, 06:21:05 PM
Quote from: Brietta on September 24, 2023, 05:04:07 PM
Life is too short to waste on these people who don't have an analytical or logical thought in their heads.
What is amusing is the arrogance on display  to think  that anyone would be remotely interested in watching so scruffy tired looking woman in a dressing gown rambing on incoherently about nothing much for 40 minutes. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on September 24, 2023, 07:20:40 PM
Lost a lot of weight, so might be unwell.  She's been going through the original pj files and found some photos of unidentified blood spots on a road somewhere.  What's all that about?...

https://www.youtube.com/live/14RBjhKjw20?si=P2or2-Lq2KsLbFtt&t=208 (https://www.youtube.com/live/14RBjhKjw20?si=P2or2-Lq2KsLbFtt&t=208)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 24, 2023, 08:16:23 PM
Quote from: Myster on September 24, 2023, 07:20:40 PM
Lost a lot of weight, so might be unwell.  She's been going through the original pj files and found some photos of unidentified blood spots on a road somewhere.  What's all that about?...

https://www.youtube.com/live/14RBjhKjw20?si=P2or2-Lq2KsLbFtt&t=208 (https://www.youtube.com/live/14RBjhKjw20?si=P2or2-Lq2KsLbFtt&t=208)

Nope, sorry; I can't cope with any more of her rubbish.  But thanks anyway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on September 24, 2023, 08:16:38 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on September 22, 2023, 05:15:05 PM
@)(++(* I’m pretty sure Russell Brand is a wrong ‘un but I don’t think he abducted “Maddie” - go back to sleep dear.

I'm not so sure..............

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/CA65/production/_131231815_russell-brand-statement.jpg.webp)

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on September 25, 2023, 07:17:00 AM
Quote from: Myster on September 24, 2023, 07:20:40 PM
Lost a lot of weight, so might be unwell.  She's been going through the original pj files and found some photos of unidentified blood spots on a road somewhere.  What's all that about?...

https://www.youtube.com/live/14RBjhKjw20?si=P2or2-Lq2KsLbFtt&t=208 (https://www.youtube.com/live/14RBjhKjw20?si=P2or2-Lq2KsLbFtt&t=208)
The reason: Stomach bypass surgery for reasons stemming back to childhood...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b52-vTqG1r8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b52-vTqG1r8)

(Just give it a miss, Eleanor)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on September 25, 2023, 10:49:51 AM
Quote from: Myster on September 25, 2023, 07:17:00 AM
The reason: Stomach bypass surgery for reasons stemming back to childhood...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b52-vTqG1r8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b52-vTqG1r8)

(Just give it a miss, Eleanor)

I managed five minutes of this one while having watched the entire first one.  I do feel a sense of obligation to at least look at these things.  Being a Moderator doesn't help.  I feel as though I should know what is being said before I start mouthing off.  But there is no logic to this woman, who can't even remember most of what she is talking about.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on October 17, 2023, 09:09:22 AM
Clueless thicktockers need to get out more...

https://www.tiktok.com/@markhemmings53/video/7239407514121506075 (https://www.tiktok.com/@markhemmings53/video/7239407514121506075)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on October 17, 2023, 04:51:08 PM
Quote from: Myster on October 17, 2023, 09:09:22 AM
Clueless thicktockers need to get out more...

https://www.tiktok.com/@markhemmings53/video/7239407514121506075 (https://www.tiktok.com/@markhemmings53/video/7239407514121506075)
He absolutely definitely doesn’t like children?  Methink he doth protest too much.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 19, 2023, 11:00:50 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on October 17, 2023, 04:51:08 PM
He absolutely definitely doesn’t like children?  Methink he doth protest too much.

This doesn't make any sense to me.  But then a lot of this rubbish doesn't.  These people are all on a loser but refuse to accept it.  For them The McCanns have to be guilty or they are stupid morons who can't tell evidence from Dog Poop.  Cue Pat Brown.  The biggest Dog Pooper of them all.  Apart from O'Conner who could beat her by a Dog Poop Mile.  But at least he knows what Dog Poop is.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on October 20, 2023, 07:50:35 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on October 19, 2023, 11:00:50 AM
This doesn't make any sense to me.  But then a lot of this rubbish doesn't.  These people are all on a loser but refuse to accept it.  For them The McCanns have to be guilty or they are stupid morons who can't tell evidence from Dog Poop.  Cue Pat Brown.  The biggest Dog Pooper of them all.  Apart from O'Conner who could beat her by a Dog Poop Mile.  But at least he knows what Dog Poop is.
A bit of advice before you hook up with the local Onion Johnny... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY4IhsCLlrQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY4IhsCLlrQ)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 20, 2023, 10:34:52 AM
Quote from: Myster on October 20, 2023, 07:50:35 AM
A bit of advice before you hook up with the local Onion Johnny... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY4IhsCLlrQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY4IhsCLlrQ)

Good God.  How much more boring can she get?  I think I'll stick with O'Connor.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on October 28, 2023, 07:44:41 AM
Yet another docu in the pipeline covering the same old, same old no doubt...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lW04OU1m7ew&ab_channel=EMProductions (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lW04OU1m7ew&ab_channel=EMProductions)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on October 28, 2023, 11:23:52 AM
Quote from: Myster on October 28, 2023, 07:44:41 AM
Yet another docu in the pipeline covering the same old, same old no doubt...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lW04OU1m7ew&ab_channel=EMProductions (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lW04OU1m7ew&ab_channel=EMProductions)


Looks to be a relatively well edited one so far, but sixteen years too late. The prologue is no longer anything much  a to do with  Madeleine's case since we were introduced to Christian Brueckner a couple of years ago.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on October 29, 2023, 02:31:39 PM

Welp, Websleuths seems to have gone quiet and for more than two days now.  What shall we do?  Will I even survive until Christmas?

It has never been my intention to die of boredom, but things are beginning to look a bit grim.

All I want at the moment is for Brueckner to be locked up for a very long time for what we know he is, while Madeleine sits on the back burner.  So sad for The McCanns, but then it ever was.

What on earth The PJ thought they were doing while this moron rampaged around The Algarve will probably remain a mystery which we are unlikely to get an answer to, ever.  That is where the whole horror story started.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 04, 2023, 09:37:35 AM
An 'Independent' article by David James Smith re. current apology news, the McCanns, Amaral, and online trolling...

https://archive.ph/M4ZoC (https://archive.ph/M4ZoC)

The same journo who interviewed Jeremy Bamber in HMP Full Sutton some years ago.  For anyone interested, his resultant report attached here...
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 04, 2023, 11:44:45 AM
Quote from: Myster on November 04, 2023, 09:37:35 AM
An 'Independent' article by David James Smith re. current apology news, the McCanns, Amaral, and online trolling...

https://archive.ph/M4ZoC (https://archive.ph/M4ZoC)

The same journo who interviewed Jeremy Bamber in HMP Full Sutton some years ago.  For anyone interested, his resultant report attached here...

I don't know if The PJ apologised to Gerry McCann but they jolly well should have done.  And why else would they have wanted to speak to him anyway?

Portugal has done nothing to control the mad ramblings of Goncalo Amaral, most of which have been proved to be lies.  Portugal was not a nice place in those days and I actually saw some of it myself.  The local people were terrified of The Police.  I saw them grovelling over a Horse's Head in the market while being questioned.  I will never forget that horse's head. I can still see it now.  Not the sort of thing your average holiday maker does, I know, but I ever did see things that other people aren't interested  in.  I was there three times and once during The Revolution.  What a half cocked thing that was.  Nothing changed.  No, I wasn't scared.  Them and whose army?  But some of my travelling companions were.

Is it any different now?  Personally, I doubt it.  My husband was there in the 60s on a Royal Navy exercise.  He said that it was dreadful and he wasn't one to pass judgement.

So now it is just an exercise in public relations.  Come to Portugal on holiday, why don't you.  Not on your nellie.  Such a pity. Portugal is a very beautiful place.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 04, 2023, 03:38:28 PM
A very good reason why CB hasn't been charged I'd that Wolters feels he might be able to find the body...a very good reason not to rush
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 04, 2023, 04:54:57 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on November 04, 2023, 03:38:28 PM
A very good reason why CB hasn't been charged I'd that Wolters feels he might be able to find the body...a very good reason not to rush

There isn't a body to be found. Brueckner destroyed the evidence. But he also kept some video evidence.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 05, 2023, 02:21:34 PM
Don't beat around the Busching now, Helge!!!...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12712457/Madeleine-McCann-detectives-suspect-paedophile-Christian-Brueckner-close-collapse-investigation.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12712457/Madeleine-McCann-detectives-suspect-paedophile-Christian-Brueckner-close-collapse-investigation.html)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 05, 2023, 02:59:04 PM
Quote from: Myster on November 05, 2023, 02:21:34 PM
Don't beat around the Busching now, Helge!!!...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12712457/Madeleine-McCann-detectives-suspect-paedophile-Christian-Brueckner-close-collapse-investigation.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12712457/Madeleine-McCann-detectives-suspect-paedophile-Christian-Brueckner-close-collapse-investigation.html)

Just actually put something similar on another thread.

This was reported on back in september..........I can hardly believe anyone would really be surprised though.

MADDIE WORRY Madeleine McCann witness’s ‘bulls**t’ could DESTROY desperate battle for justice – his word ‘means nothing’, cops warned
Sarah HooperIona Cleave
Published: 12:22, 18 Sep 2023Updated: 12:22, 18 Sep 2023
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 05, 2023, 03:07:30 PM
Quote from: Myster on November 05, 2023, 02:21:34 PM
Don't beat around the Busching now, Helge!!!...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12712457/Madeleine-McCann-detectives-suspect-paedophile-Christian-Brueckner-close-collapse-investigation.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12712457/Madeleine-McCann-detectives-suspect-paedophile-Christian-Brueckner-close-collapse-investigation.html)

Oh dear, not good reading for anyone who favours CB as the culprit.

Having said that, it is an unnamed source and the Daily Mail, so probably complete   rubbish
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 05, 2023, 08:54:37 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on November 04, 2023, 03:38:28 PM
A very good reason why CB hasn't been charged I'd that Wolters feels he might be able to find the body...a very good reason not to rush

An excellent reason.

I think the prosecutors have the evidence to proceed and I think they will go for it once the five pending cases are done and dusted.

I think there have been no charges laid regarding Madeleine quite simply because under German law as soon as they are the Defence must be given the files and all the info the prosecution has. They operate a very transparent system of justice and there will be good reason why the prosecution are not sharing at the moment.

Plus there are five serious sex cases to be tried concerning this serial sexual predator.; so those are first in the queue anyway.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2023, 09:42:47 AM

I wonder if anyone has thought of sending in Divers to search that Reservoir.  Possibly somewhere near where Brueckner used to park.

I remember that there was a cursory search years ago, can't remember his name, but it wasn't a very good search.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 06, 2023, 12:13:53 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 05, 2023, 08:54:37 PM
An excellent reason.

I think the prosecutors have the evidence to proceed and I think they will go for it once the five pending cases are done and dusted.

I think there have been no charges laid regarding Madeleine quite simply because under German law as soon as they are the Defence must be given the files and all the info the prosecution has. They operate a very transparent system of justice and there will be good reason why the prosecution are not sharing at the moment.

Plus there are five serious sex cases to be tried concerning this serial sexual predator.; so those are first in the queue anyway.

An excellent reason.


Well, I think you will find that works both ways.

Any case is hard to prove withouta body for any police force.

Including PJ at the beginning.

So strange how you can think it an excellent reason.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 06, 2023, 01:26:12 PM

I am more ready to believe that Brueckner was involved in the Abduction of Madeleine than in her Murder.  It seems to be such a lot of risks to take just to kill that poor child.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 06, 2023, 01:52:55 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 06, 2023, 01:26:12 PM
I am more ready to believe that Brueckner was involved in the Abduction of Madeleine than in her Murder.  It seems to be such a lot of risks to take just to kill that poor child.

And yet, on the face of it, Wolters makes no mention of abduction by CB, only murder.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 06, 2023, 02:00:49 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 06, 2023, 01:52:55 PM
And yet, on the face of it, Wolters makes no mention of abduction by CB, only murder.
He has on occasion refered to.CB abducting Madeleine
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 06, 2023, 02:02:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 06, 2023, 01:26:12 PM
I am more ready to believe that Brueckner was involved in the Abduction of Madeleine than in her Murder.  It seems to be such a lot of risks to take just to kill that poor child.

Yes, I doubt he would abduct her just to murder her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 06, 2023, 02:08:23 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on November 06, 2023, 02:00:49 PM
He has on occasion refered to.CB abducting Madeleine

He has also said that there is still a little hope, & that there's no hope at all. He is sure Brueckner is the murderer. Kind of.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 06, 2023, 03:04:59 PM

Anyway. Brueckner MUST be presumed innocent. As innocent as supporters believe the McCanns are, that's how innocent Brueckner must also be presumed. So let's have no more of this outright libel against Christian Brueckner please. It is against forum rules.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 07, 2023, 02:28:15 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 06, 2023, 03:04:59 PM
Anyway. Brueckner MUST be presumed innocent. As innocent as supporters believe the McCanns are, that's how innocent Brueckner must also be presumed. So let's have no more of this outright libel against Christian Brueckner please. It is against forum rules.

I agree Brueckner must be presumed innocent until he is, may be, found guilty

But there are a hell of a lot of pointers that he could be involved.


I will put it like this:
I wouldn't entrust my child to his safe keeping.


I believe he was paid to abduct Madeleine specifically, who was chosen by somone for her very special bloodline.

I believe that the abductor has made sure that Madeleine was not abused underage and that she still lives
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 07, 2023, 08:02:28 AM
Quote from: sadie on November 07, 2023, 02:28:15 AM
I agree Brueckner must be presumed innocent until he is, may be, found guilty

But there are a hell of a lot of pointers that he could be involved.


I will put it like this:
I wouldn't entrust my child to his safe keeping.


I believe he was paid to abduct Madeleine specifically, who was chosen by somone for her very special bloodline.

I believe that the abductor has made sure that Madeleine was not abused underage and that she still lives
Brueckner would have wanted to indulge himself (as per dark web chats), not pass her on to some fictional saintly bigwig.  Even Freddy Fulscher wouldn't trust him with his dogs, nor Oliver Sternard's missus with her woolly Wolfly!!

Where's your Mr Whippy-loving moggy disappeared to?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 08, 2023, 11:43:43 PM
Quote from: Myster on November 07, 2023, 08:02:28 AM
Brueckner would have wanted to indulge himself (as per dark web chats), not pass her on to some fictional saintly bigwig.  Even Freddy Fulscher wouldn't trust him with his dogs, nor Oliver Sternard's missus with her woolly Wolfly!!

Where's your Mr Whippy-loving moggy disappeared to?

Some wimpish aggresive warlock appears to have taken the ice-cream one

Maybe you will like this one?


https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1551237909629501441
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 09, 2023, 05:36:09 AM
Quote from: sadie on November 08, 2023, 11:43:43 PM
Some wimpish aggresive warlock appears to have taken the ice-cream one

Maybe you will like this one?


https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1551237909629501441 (https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1551237909629501441)
Selfless spaniel... but is that an adopted piglet being fed?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 09, 2023, 12:48:29 PM
Quote from: Myster on November 09, 2023, 05:36:09 AM
Selfless spaniel... but is that an adopted piglet being fed?

I think you are right on the piglet, but that donna look like a spaniel to me.

Sadie was a blue roan cocker spaniel, a beautiful being, but not too much to look at.   When she saw him on the internet, she quite fell in love with your spaniel; she found him quite masterfull - and he looked as though he was protecting you.   Gerroff, he is mine sort of thing

I guess you have lost him  now, but he sure enjoyed those long walks you took him and loved his ' Dad '..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 10, 2023, 01:42:40 AM
Quote from: Myster on November 07, 2023, 08:02:28 AM
Brueckner would have wanted to indulge himself (as per dark web chats), not pass her on to some fictional saintly bigwig.  Even Freddy Fulscher wouldn't trust him with his dogs, nor Oliver Sternard's missus with her woolly Wolfly!!

Where's your Mr Whippy-loving moggy disappeared to?

Ever thought that he might have been provided with some other girls as well as being paid a huge amount of money?    Have you ever wondered where he get the money from to finance his shop in Germany?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 10, 2023, 08:23:15 AM
Quote from: sadie on November 10, 2023, 01:42:40 AM
Ever thought that he might have been provided with some other girls as well as being paid a huge amount of money?    Have you ever wondered where he get the money from to finance his shop in Germany?
Brueckner only paid rent on the kiddy-magnet KIOSK in Brunswick and was evicted when he defaulted according to Richard Bilton. His 'Bank' (that suitcase/bag containing 100,000 Euros allegedly burgled from girlfriend Nicole F's employers) funded the huge ALLEGRO Campervan and 36,000 Euro Neuwegersleben box factory site, with whatever was left over to fritter away on booze in the Madame-Eck Bar.  He was also a prolific pot purveyor.  Therefore no need to trade in kid-napped plunder at all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 10, 2023, 12:04:33 PM
Quote from: Myster on November 10, 2023, 08:23:15 AM
Brueckner only paid rent on the kiddy-magnet KIOSK in Brunswick and was evicted when he defaulted according to Richard Bilton. His 'Bank' (that suitcase/bag containing 100,000 Euros allegedly burgled from girlfriend Nicole F's employers) funded the huge ALLEGRO Campervan and 36,000 Euro Neuwegersleben box factory site, with whatever was left over to fritter away on booze in the Madame-Eck Bar.  He was also a prolific pot purveyor.  Therefore no need to trade in kid-napped plunder at all.

Maybe he bought the Campervan in order to traffic children.   He was quite brazen in saying he smuggled drugs in it.  Then he 'jokingly' said 'and small children'.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 10, 2023, 12:17:21 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 10, 2023, 12:04:33 PM
Maybe he bought the Campervan in order to traffic children.   He was quite brazen in saying he smuggled drugs in it.  Then he 'jokingly' said 'and small children'.

Are there any missing children in particular that you think he might have trafficked, other than Maddie & Joana?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 10, 2023, 11:36:26 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 10, 2023, 12:17:21 PM
Are there any missing children in particular that you think he might have trafficked, other than Maddie & Joana?

Why do you think that a single, simple living, bloke would want such a massive van for him alone?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 10, 2023, 11:39:20 PM
Quote from: Myster on November 10, 2023, 08:23:15 AM
Brueckner only paid rent on the kiddy-magnet KIOSK in Brunswick and was evicted when he defaulted according to Richard Bilton. His 'Bank' (that suitcase/bag containing 100,000 Euros allegedly burgled from girlfriend Nicole F's employers) funded the huge ALLEGRO Campervan and 36,000 Euro Neuwegersleben box factory site, with whatever was left over to fritter away on booze in the Madame-Eck Bar.  He was also a prolific pot purveyor.  Therefore no need to trade in kid-napped plunder at all.

Where did you get all this info from ?   Is it bonafide ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 11, 2023, 12:44:34 AM
Quote from: sadie on November 10, 2023, 11:36:26 PM
Why do you think that a single, simple living, bloke would want such a massive van for him alone?

Maybe he wanted to live in something bigger than that tiny VW. I'm not sure there's anything sinister about that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 11, 2023, 06:54:57 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 10, 2023, 12:04:33 PM
Maybe he bought the Campervan in order to traffic children.   He was quite brazen in saying he smuggled drugs in it.  Then he 'jokingly' said 'and small children'.
... to Dieter Fehlinger, Nicole's vater... https://youtu.be/kXpOBy3QyQ4?si=KvOgVoyQVbJ2AyE_&t=1162 (https://youtu.be/kXpOBy3QyQ4?si=KvOgVoyQVbJ2AyE_&t=1162)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 11, 2023, 01:52:33 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 10, 2023, 12:04:33 PM
Maybe he bought the Campervan in order to traffic children.   He was quite brazen in saying he smuggled drugs in it.  Then he 'jokingly' said 'and small children'.

He was quite brazen in saying he smuggled drugs in it.  Then he 'jokingly' said 'and small children'.

How do you know he said that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 12, 2023, 04:34:41 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 11, 2023, 01:52:33 PM
He was quite brazen in saying he smuggled drugs in it.  Then he 'jokingly' said 'and small children'.

How do you know he said that.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8534831/Madeleine-McCann-suspect-Christian-Brueckners-girlfriend-finally-unmasked.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 12, 2023, 05:32:16 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 10, 2023, 12:04:33 PM
Maybe he bought the Campervan in order to traffic children.   He was quite brazen in saying he smuggled drugs in it.  Then he 'jokingly' said 'and small children'.

I thought that at the time of Madeleine's disappearance he had the grotty little VW camper van.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 13, 2023, 09:47:31 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 12, 2023, 05:32:16 PM
I thought that at the time of Madeleine's disappearance he had the grotty little VW camper van.

He did have the grotty van at the time Madeleine disappeared,  then he bought the flashy one.  His mate said he bragged he could smuggle drugs and children in it.  What were the bathing suits doing in it?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 13, 2023, 11:55:10 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 13, 2023, 09:47:31 AM
He did have the grotty van at the time Madeleine disappeared,  then he bought the flashy one.  His mate said he bragged he could smuggle drugs and children in it.  What were the bathing suits doing in it?

He probably snatched them from a washing line & used them in his private time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 13, 2023, 01:38:08 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 13, 2023, 09:47:31 AM
He did have the grotty van at the time Madeleine disappeared,  then he bought the flashy one.  His mate said he bragged he could smuggle drugs and children in it.  What were the bathing suits doing in it?

Unsubstantiated tittle tattle as far as I can see.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2023, 02:08:02 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 13, 2023, 01:38:08 PM
Unsubstantiated tittle tattle as far as I can see.
@)(++(*. yes, as if a rapist and child abuser would stoop so low as to have young girls swimming costumes in his private motor home.  The very idea of it, it hardly seems likely at all!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 13, 2023, 02:24:27 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2023, 02:08:02 PM
@)(++(*. yes, as if a rapist and child abuser would stoop so low as to have young girls swimming costumes in his private motor home.  The very idea of it, it hardly seems likely at all!

Apparently, the fact that he owned a large motor home is suspicious in itself. He must have bought it with all the dough he got from selling Maddie. Before he bought her back & then murdered her.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 13, 2023, 02:38:35 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 13, 2023, 01:38:08 PM
Unsubstantiated tittle tattle as far as I can see.

In the article quoted, dated 2020, Wolters says he hopes to charge Brueckner in the next two months! So yes. A load of unsubstantiated nonsense.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 13, 2023, 05:47:28 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 13, 2023, 01:38:08 PM
Unsubstantiated tittle tattle as far as I can see.

Exactly
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 13, 2023, 05:48:20 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 13, 2023, 02:38:35 PM
In the article quoted, dated 2020, Wolters says he hopes to charge Brueckner in the next two months! So yes. A load of unsubstantiated nonsense.

Well said ....totally agree
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2023, 07:16:14 PM
It follows then that the Christian Bruckner Supporters Club views all the following as unsubstantiated tittle tattle as it all emanated from the same German documentary

“During a six-day examination of the site where it was found in Germany, they found computer memory sticks with more than 8,000 files, mostly containing pictures and videos of child abuse, which were in a carrier bag buried underneath the body of Brueckner’s dog, the report said.

Spiegel TV said police had also found numerous items of children’s clothing – mostly “small swimsuits” – in the motorhome, even though Bruckener does not have any children”.

Why the hell hasn’t Brückner sued for libel with all these blatant falsehoods being written and told about him?  FF and he could be raking in an absolute fortune with all this libel and slander?!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2023, 07:20:30 PM
Look, there’s even photos of the unsubstantiated tittle tattle in this report
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-denies-any-22204656
I guess Spiegel TV planted them to make a better story, or maybe it was HCW, yes couldn’t possibly be any other explanation why a rapey paedo perv would have such items in his motorhome, no way Jose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 14, 2023, 10:13:55 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2023, 07:20:30 PM
Look, there’s even photos of the unsubstantiated tittle tattle in this report
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-denies-any-22204656
I guess Spiegel TV planted them to make a better story, or maybe it was HCW, yes couldn’t possibly be any other explanation why a rapey paedo perv would have such items in his motorhome, no way Jose.

I hope the German Police have taken DNA samples from the bathing suits,  ah but they are the German Police aren't they unlike the Portuguese Police.

A rope, hair and some clothes from a house where Brueckner, 43, raped an American woman in 2005 didn’t get tested for DNA, leaving him at large until 2017 when he was caught.

What's wrong with the Portuguese Police when it comes to DNA.  The bedding wasn't tested for DNA at 5a which was a very big mistake.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 14, 2023, 10:14:57 AM
Quote from: jassi on November 13, 2023, 01:38:08 PM
Unsubstantiated tittle tattle as far as I can see.

Well isn't it a good job you are not a detective.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 14, 2023, 12:21:34 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 13, 2023, 07:16:14 PM
It follows then that the Christian Bruckner Supporters Club views all the following as unsubstantiated tittle tattle as it all emanated from the same German documentary

“During a six-day examination of the site where it was found in Germany, they found computer memory sticks with more than 8,000 files, mostly containing pictures and videos of child abuse, which were in a carrier bag buried underneath the body of Brueckner’s dog, the report said.

Spiegel TV said police had also found numerous items of children’s clothing – mostly “small swimsuits” – in the motorhome, even though Bruckener does not have any children”.

Why the hell hasn’t Brückner sued for libel with all these blatant falsehoods being written and told about him?  FF and he could be raking in an absolute fortune with all this libel and slander?!

It follows then that the Christian Bruckner Supporters Club views

Oh nooo....not thattt old chestnut.... againnnn.

It makes your post look pathetic......and loose any argument you have.

I couldn't careless about CB ...he is one of many thousands of people like him ....who will get there just deserts

Any comment I make is because I do not believe he has anything to do with what happened to maddie.

You don't know either he has ...unless you have solid proof ... charged even... that he did abduct Maddie.

If not believing CB is involved with Maddie ...makes me a supporter in ur twisted post ...so be it.VS
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 14, 2023, 12:23:03 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 14, 2023, 10:14:57 AM
Well isn't it a good job you are not a detective.

A good job your not either.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 14, 2023, 12:54:55 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 14, 2023, 12:23:03 PM
A good job your not either.

I'm not calling potential evidence 'tittle tattle' am I.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 14, 2023, 04:09:03 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 14, 2023, 10:14:57 AM
Well isn't it a good job you are not a detective.

Detectives follow and evaluate evidence, not gossip.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 14, 2023, 05:45:22 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 14, 2023, 12:21:34 PM
It follows then that the Christian Bruckner Supporters Club views

Oh nooo....not thattt old chestnut.... againnnn.

It makes your post look pathetic......and loose any argument you have.

I couldn't careless about CB ...he is one of many thousands of people like him ....who will get there just deserts

Any comment I make is because I do not believe he has anything to do with what happened to maddie.

You don't know either he has ...unless you have solid proof ... charged even... that he did abduct Maddie.

If not believing CB is involved with Maddie ...makes me a supporter in ur twisted post ...so be it.VS
Spellcheck just had a nervous breakdown.   @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 14, 2023, 05:46:54 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 14, 2023, 04:09:03 PM
Detectives follow and evaluate evidence, not gossip.
The swimming costumes were not gossip, they were found in CB’s campervan and evaluated by the detectives. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 15, 2023, 11:24:28 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 14, 2023, 05:46:54 PM
The swimming costumes were not gossip, they were found in CB’s campervan and evaluated by the detectives.

The swimming costumes were not gossip

But you don't know if they are held as evidence against CB for the abduction of Maddie.

If not they are neither here no there to prove anything in the disappearance of Maddie.

At the moment they are just gossip on a forum.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 15, 2023, 11:41:13 AM
Quote from: kizzy on November 15, 2023, 11:24:28 AM
The swimming costumes were not gossip

But you don't know if they are held as evidence against CB for the abduction of Maddie.

If not they are neither here no there to prove anything in the disappearance of Maddie.

At the moment they are just gossip on a forum.
Nonsense. .  The swimming costumes were discovered by the police in CB’s campervan, fact not gossip.

Just in case you don’t know what gossip means. here is the definition

casual or unconstrained conversation or reports about other people, typically involving details that are not confirmed as being true.
"he became the subject of much local gossip"
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 15, 2023, 11:44:21 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 15, 2023, 11:41:13 AM
Nonsense. .  The swimming costumes were discovered by the police in CB’s campervan, fact not gossip.

Just in case you don’t know what gossip means. here is the definition

casual or unconstrained conversation or reports about other people, typically involving details that are not confirmed as being true.
"he became the subject of much local gossip"

Just got to DNA match the costumes to the missing children.
Do you know of any children abducted in their bathing suits?
There's Renee Hasee I suppose.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 15, 2023, 01:19:26 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 15, 2023, 11:41:13 AM
Nonsense. .  The swimming costumes were discovered by the police in CB’s campervan, fact not gossip.

Just in case you don’t know what gossip means. here is the definition

casual or unconstrained conversation or reports about other people, typically involving details that are not confirmed as being true.
"he became the subject of much local gossip"

Nonsense. .  The swimming costumes were discovered by the police in CB’s campervan, fact not gossip.

Yes...but ...are they anything to do with the abduction of Maddie.

If not its just gossip on here.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 15, 2023, 02:42:44 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 15, 2023, 01:19:26 PM
Nonsense. .  The swimming costumes were discovered by the police in CB’s campervan, fact not gossip.

Yes...but ...are they anything to do with the abduction of Maddie.

If not its just gossip on here.
So are you saying it’s wrong to mention facts pertaining to CB unless it’s proven it links him to Madeleine’s disappearance?  Then let’s shut the whole Madeleine forum down shall we?  It’s all just gossip by your definition, the dogs, Smithman, Calpol, blood spatters, blah blah blah, right? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 15, 2023, 03:47:18 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 15, 2023, 02:42:44 PM
So are you saying it’s wrong to mention facts pertaining to CB unless it’s proven it links him to Madeleine’s disappearance?  Then let’s shut the whole Madeleine forum down shall we?  It’s all just gossip by your definition, the dogs, Smithman, Calpol, blood spatters, blah blah blah, right?


It’s all just gossip by your definition, the dogs, Smithman, Calpol, blood spatters, blah blah blah, right?

Well what you mentioned in your post seems you deem them important factors.

Bit different to swimming costumes
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 15, 2023, 04:20:27 PM

He's a thilfy kinky tight wearing rapey paedophile. I'd be more surprised if they didn't find children's garments in his grotty van.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 15, 2023, 05:28:09 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 15, 2023, 04:20:27 PM
He's a thilfy kinky tight wearing rapey paedophile. I'd be more surprised if they didn't find children's garments in his grotty van.

Do you think it could be added to the charge sheet - 'Found in possession of children's swimwear, owners unknown'?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 15, 2023, 06:19:03 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 15, 2023, 05:28:09 PM
Do you think it could be added to the charge sheet - 'Found in possession of children's swimwear, owners unknown'?

Very Odd, is what I think.  But I doubt that he bought them.  So where did he get them from?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 15, 2023, 06:34:52 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 15, 2023, 06:19:03 PM
Very Odd, is what I think.  But I doubt that he bought them.  So where did he get them from?

Nick them from a washing line or during a burglary. Or  maybe he was friendly with a mother & child who stayed in his van for a time whilst he was at one of the tourist campsites? Such a person might have remained anonymous. Perhaps they just happened to leave some items there. He was outgoing & friendly with fellow camper/travellers  as was shown in the video with the two hitchhikers. There could be a perfectly innocent explanation for why the paedophile rapist had children's swimsuits in his van.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 15, 2023, 06:56:43 PM

Brueckner is a Convicted Paedophile and Rapist and Spammy is beginning to look decidedly suspect.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 15, 2023, 07:21:48 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 15, 2023, 03:47:18 PM

It’s all just gossip by your definition, the dogs, Smithman, Calpol, blood spatters, blah blah blah, right?

Well what you mentioned in your post seems you deem them important factors.

Bit different to swimming costumes
What on earth gave you the impression I deemed the important factors?  I know they’re allverydear to your heart but I don’t ascibe importance to any of them, they’re all just gossip imo  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 15, 2023, 07:25:06 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 15, 2023, 05:28:09 PM
Do you think it could be added to the charge sheet - 'Found in possession of children's swimwear, owners unknown'?
It’s not against the law to own children’s swimwear, however stealing them for the purposes of sexual gratification I’m not quite so sure where the law stands on that.  Anyway, I think that possible misdemeanour is the least of his worries right now.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 15, 2023, 08:35:45 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 15, 2023, 06:56:43 PM
Brueckner is a Convicted Paedophile and Rapist and Spammy is beginning to look decidedly suspect.

You're supposed to be presuming Brueckner & I innocent.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 16, 2023, 11:23:40 AM
Quote from: kizzy on November 15, 2023, 11:24:28 AM
The swimming costumes were not gossip

But you don't know if they are held as evidence against CB for the abduction of Maddie.

If not they are neither here no there to prove anything in the disappearance of Maddie.

At the moment they are just gossip on a forum.

Supposing you were a detective.   CB brags he can smuggle drugs and small children in his camper van and then bathing suits of small girls are found in it.  Would you ignore the findings?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 16, 2023, 12:53:19 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 16, 2023, 11:23:40 AM
Supposing you were a detective.   CB brags he can smuggle drugs and small children in his camper van and then bathing suits of small girls are found in it.  Would you ignore the findings?

What findings? What information can be learned from the children's swimwear? Can they be linked to any abducted children? Doesn't appear so. So he probably stole them from a washing line. How does this advance the Maddie case?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 16, 2023, 01:40:25 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 15, 2023, 07:21:48 PM
What on earth gave you the impression I deemed the important factors?  I know they’re allverydear to your heart but I don’t ascibe importance to any of them, they’re all just gossip imo  @)(++(*

What on earth gave you the impression I deemed the important factors?

Because your the one who mentiond them .....not me.

I mean.....there's a big difference to what you posted... and cozzies

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 16, 2023, 01:41:14 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 16, 2023, 11:23:40 AM
Supposing you were a detective.   CB brags he can smuggle drugs and small children in his camper van and then bathing suits of small girls are found in it.  Would you ignore the findings?


CB brags he can smuggle drugs and small children in his camper van and then bathing suits of small girls are found in it.  Would you ignore the findings?


Exactly what Proof is that he is an abductor..or anything at all to do with Maddie.

He is a peodo......HCW wanted as much on him as he could get....seems he used maddie to do that.

After all he has 5 cases on the go ...doesn't he...

Nothing relating to Maddie though it seems.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 16, 2023, 01:45:14 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 16, 2023, 12:53:19 PM
What findings? What information can be learned from the children's swimwear? Can they be linked to any abducted children? Doesn't appear so. So he probably stole them from a washing line. How does this advance the Maddie case?

How does this advance the Maddie case?

Its not advancing the case at all.


Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 16, 2023, 01:46:23 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 16, 2023, 01:41:14 PM

CB brags he can smuggle drugs and small children in his camper van and then bathing suits of small girls are found in it.  Would you ignore the findings?


Exactly what Proof is that he is an abductor..or anything at all to do with Maddie.

He is a peodo......HCW wanted as much on him as he could get....seems he used maddie to do that.

After all he has 5 cases on the go ...doesn't he...

Nothing relating to Maddie though it seems.

There could be an innocent reason for the bathing suits to be inside CB's camper van,  though I can't think of any.

Depends if they were hidden somewhere.

If the bathing suits are found to have the DNA of children who have gone missing.  Not only in Portugal but everywhere CB has visited then surly that is evidence that he has been trafficking children and could have trafficked Madeleine.

Nothing may come of it, but it certainly shouldn't be ruled out as 'tittle tattle' or nothing to do with Madeleine in my opinion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 16, 2023, 02:11:21 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 16, 2023, 01:46:23 PM
There could be an innocent reason for the bathing suits to be inside CB's camper van,  though I can't think of any.

Depends if they were hidden somewhere.

If the bathing suits are found to have the DNA of children who have gone missing.  Not only in Portugal but everywhere CB has visited then surly that is evidence that he has been trafficking children and could have trafficked Madeleine.

Nothing may come of it, but it certainly shouldn't be ruled out as 'tittle tattle' or nothing to do with Madeleine in my opinion.

Again, name a child who went missing dressed in their bathing suit? Name just one if you can.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 16, 2023, 02:22:46 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 16, 2023, 01:45:14 PM
How does this advance the Maddie case?

Its not advancing the case at all.

It's advancing Lace's imagination.
Let's see if she can turn her attention to listing all these missing children she imagines.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 16, 2023, 02:40:55 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 16, 2023, 01:46:23 PM
There could be an innocent reason for the bathing suits to be inside CB's camper van,  though I can't think of any.

Depends if they were hidden somewhere.

If the bathing suits are found to have the DNA of children who have gone missing.  Not only in Portugal but everywhere CB has visited then surly that is evidence that he has been trafficking children and could have trafficked Madeleine.

Nothing may come of it, but it certainly shouldn't be ruled out as 'tittle tattle' or nothing to do with Madeleine in my opinion.

The only time I would have any interest what so ever in CB .......Is if he was charged as being Maddie's abductor.

Otherwise he is just another peodo.... amongst thousands....
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 16, 2023, 03:19:43 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 16, 2023, 02:40:55 PM
The only time I would have any interest what so ever in CB .......Is if he was charged as being Maddie's abductor.

Otherwise he is just another peodo.... amongst thousands....

Ahhh but what about all the missing children that can be linked to Brueckner? There's loads. I'm going to open a new thread in a moment & list them all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 16, 2023, 05:13:30 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 16, 2023, 01:40:25 PM
What on earth gave you the impression I deemed the important factors?

Because your the one who mentiond them .....not me.

I mean.....there's a big difference to what you posted... and cozzies
No there really isn’t.  All gossip.  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 16, 2023, 05:16:49 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 16, 2023, 01:45:14 PM
How does this advance the Maddie case?

Its not advancing the case at all.
How do you and the troll know?  Do the BKA keep you informed and regularly update you?  Amazing!  The swimming costumes may be significant, or they may only be further evidence of the kind of creep their chief suspect is.  We just don’t know yet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 16, 2023, 06:29:38 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 16, 2023, 05:16:49 PM
How do you and the troll know?  Do the BKA keep you informed and regularly update you?  Amazing! The swimming costumes may be significant, or they may only be further evidence of the kind of creep their chief suspect is.  We just don’t know yet.

How so? Was Maddie wearing one when she disappeared?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: sadie on November 17, 2023, 02:28:03 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 16, 2023, 02:11:21 PM
Again, name a child who went missing dressed in their bathing suit? Name just one if you can.

Rene Hassee IIRC
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 17, 2023, 08:26:32 AM
There were other clothes too -

Germany's Spiegel TV reported that during a six-day search of the site detectives found numerous items of children's clothing, most of them 'small swimsuits' in the motorhome. Brueckner does not have any children.

Interesting to hear what  CB  has to say about the clothing.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 17, 2023, 10:00:35 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 17, 2023, 08:26:32 AM
There were other clothes too -

Germany's Spiegel TV reported that during a six-day search of the site detectives found numerous items of children's clothing, most of them 'small swimsuits' in the motorhome. Brueckner does not have any children.

Interesting to hear what  CB  has to say about the clothing.

Only Brueckner can answer. But he hasn't been charged with possession of children's clothing, so you're never going to find out, leaving you free to fantasise about which missing children they must have been taken from.
Have you got any further than Renee Hasee yet?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 11:59:51 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 16, 2023, 05:16:49 PM
How do you and the troll know?  Do the BKA keep you informed and regularly update you?  Amazing!  The swimming costumes may be significant, or they may only be further evidence of the kind of creep their chief suspect is.  We just don’t know yet.

or they may only be further evidence of the kind of creep their chief suspect is.  We just don’t know yet.

Why do you need further evidence he is a creep ....I thought that had been well established...seems u need more evidence to to convince you.....as if you don't know yet. LOL

How do you and the troll know?

Your insulting remark by the way in your post...seems to me makes you no different.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 12:05:39 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 17, 2023, 08:26:32 AM
There were other clothes too -

Germany's Spiegel TV reported that during a six-day search of the site detectives found numerous items of children's clothing, most of them 'small swimsuits' in the motorhome. Brueckner does not have any children.

Interesting to hear what  CB  has to say about the clothing.

There were other clothes too -

OFGS....What does that prove....were any of those Maddies.   We all ready know he is a Peodo.

None of it proves CB abducted Maddie....None of anything found in the van belonged to Maddie.

No matter what stuff you rake up found in the van has anything to do ...with what happened to Maddie.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 17, 2023, 12:31:07 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 12:05:39 PM

There were other clothes too -

OFGS....What does that prove....were any of those Maddies.   We all ready know he is a Peodo.

None of it proves CB abducted Maddie....None of anything found in the van belonged to Maddie.

No matter what stuff you rake up found in the van has anything to do ...with what happened to Maddie.


What stuff I rake up,   these are facts they were found in CB's van.  How do you know it's nothing to do with Madeleine?
If they get links to missing children from the photo's and clothes then it could shed light on what happened to Madeleine.

Why are you trying to find excuses for this man.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on November 17, 2023, 01:28:06 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 12:05:39 PM

There were other clothes too -

OFGS....What does that prove....were any of those Maddies.   We all ready know he is a Peodo.

None of it proves CB abducted Maddie....None of anything found in the van belonged to Maddie.

No matter what stuff you rake up found in the van has anything to do ...with what happened to Maddie.

This has always been the problem for the German police. They still haven't found positive proof that Bruckner was anywhere near Madeleine, all they appear to have are theories and hearsay evidence of extremely questionable heritage.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 01:36:41 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 17, 2023, 12:31:07 PM

What stuff I rake up,   these are facts they were found in CB's van.  How do you know it's nothing to do with Madeleine?
If they get links to missing children from the photo's and clothes then it could shed light on what happened to Madeleine.

Why are you trying to find excuses for this man.


Why are you trying to find excuses for this man.

Oh pleeeze .......how am I trying to find excuses for a paedo not a man ...a paedo.

What you have posted in your posts....is no proof what so ever CB abducted Maddie.

Its a good job its the wandering off topic thread is all I can say to you L....in your defence.....

so it can be of the topic of maddie...if posters want to make it the CB thread so be it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 01:39:44 PM
Quote from: Admin on November 17, 2023, 01:28:06 PM
This has always been the problem for the German police. They still haven't found positive proof that Bruckner was anywhere near Madeleine, all they appear to have are theories and hearsay evidence of extremely questionable heritage.

They still haven't found positive proof that Bruckner was anywhere near Madeleine, all they appear to have are theories and hearsay evidence of extremely questionable heritage.

Exactly ....I cant understand how posters/people don't get that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 17, 2023, 01:46:31 PM
Quote from: Admin on November 17, 2023, 01:28:06 PM
This has always been the problem for the German police. They still haven't found positive proof that Bruckner was anywhere near Madeleine, all they appear to have are theories and hearsay evidence of extremely questionable heritage.

You know this as fact do you?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 17, 2023, 01:48:24 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 01:36:41 PM

Why are you trying to find excuses for this man.

Oh pleeeze .......how am I trying to find excuses for a paedo not a man ...a paedo.

What you have posted in your posts....is no proof what so ever CB abducted Maddie.

Its a good job its the wandering off topic thread is all I can say to you L....in your defence.....

so it can be of the topic of maddie...if posters want to make it the CB thread so be it.

I have explained how it could be linked to Madeleine you chose to ignore what I posted.   You are very good at ignoring I'll say that for you.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on November 17, 2023, 01:58:49 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 17, 2023, 01:46:31 PM
You know this as fact do you?

It's very obvious from recent events that the Germans are struggling to back up their theories.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Admin on November 17, 2023, 02:00:24 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 17, 2023, 01:48:24 PM
I have explained how it could be linked to Madeleine you chose to ignore what I posted.   You are very good at ignoring I'll say that for you.

You could just as well attempt to link Bruckner with every other missing child case along Portugal's southern coast but in the final analysis only tangible proof counts.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 02:01:57 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 17, 2023, 01:46:31 PM
You know this as fact do you?

Do you know as a fact it isn't true..............if so Id like to see your evidence back up your claim.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 17, 2023, 04:28:43 PM
Quote from: Admin on November 17, 2023, 01:58:49 PM
It's very obvious from recent events that the Germans are struggling to back up their theories.

No it's not they don't want CB to know anything until they are ready and rightly so.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 17, 2023, 04:29:36 PM
Quote from: Admin on November 17, 2023, 02:00:24 PM
You could just as well attempt to link Bruckner with every other missing child case along Portugal's southern coast but in the final analysis only tangible proof counts.

Of course only tangible proof counts.  That is why the Police are investigating.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 17, 2023, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 02:01:57 PM
Do you know as a fact it isn't true..............if so Id like to see your evidence back up your claim.

I don't know what evidence they have and neither do you so it's ridiculous to say they haven't anything to tie CB to the case.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 17, 2023, 05:35:36 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 11:59:51 AM
or they may only be further evidence of the kind of creep their chief suspect is.  We just don’t know yet.

Why do you need further evidence he is a creep ....I thought that had been well established...seems u need more evidence to to convince you.....as if you don't know yet. LOL

How do you and the troll know?

Your insulting remark by the way in your post...seems to me makes you no different.
I think you must have misunderstood.  I don’t need convincing that CB is a creep, of that I am certain.  If he pinches children’s swimming costumes for sexual purposes that only helps to reinforce what was already known.  The swimming costumes may link him to other children who have been molested or abused in PdL, maybe even some of his known victims and may be used in evidence against him.  I hope that is quite clear now?  If you want to call me a troll by the way feel free, it makes absolutely mo odds to me (as I’m sure it doesn’t to the troll to be referred to as such).  ?{)(**
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 17, 2023, 05:36:52 PM
Quote from: Admin on November 17, 2023, 01:28:06 PM
This has always been the problem for the German police. They still haven't found positive proof that Bruckner was anywhere near Madeleine, all they appear to have are theories and hearsay evidence of extremely questionable heritage.
They still keeping you regularly updated then?  Good to know ;-)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 17, 2023, 05:40:10 PM
Quote from: Admin on November 17, 2023, 02:00:24 PM
You could just as well attempt to link Bruckner with every other missing child case along Portugal's southern coast but in the final analysis only tangible proof counts.
Yes, there’s other cases the police *could* link CB to, in Portugal and Germany, even Europe wide given how much he travelled but the only missing child case they are specifically linking him to is Madeleine’s.  There must be a reason,no?  Otherwise why not link him to all the other missing kid cases if evidence is so unimportant to them.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 05:48:50 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 17, 2023, 04:31:00 PM
I don't know what evidence they have and neither do you so it's ridiculous to say they haven't anything to tie CB to the case.

I really think you should let CB go as the abductor....until you know what you have been told is true....or not.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 05:51:26 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 17, 2023, 05:35:36 PM
I think you must have misunderstood.  I don’t need convincing that CB is a creep, of that I am certain.  If he pinches children’s swimming costumes for sexual purposes that only helps to reinforce what was already known.  The swimming costumes may link him to other children who have been molested or abused in PdL, maybe even some of his known victims and may be used in evidence against him.  I hope that is quite clear now?  If you want to call me a troll by the way feel free, it makes absolutely mo odds to me (as I’m sure it doesn’t to the troll to be referred to as such).  ?{)(**

Whatever, doesn't make him the abductor of Maddie though ......does it..
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 05:55:14 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 17, 2023, 05:40:10 PM
Yes, there’s other cases the police *could* link CB to, in Portugal and Germany, even Europe wide given how much he travelled but the only missing child case they are specifically linking him to is Madeleine’s.  There must be a reason,no?  Otherwise why not link him to all the other missing kid cases if evidence is so unimportant to them.

The other kids are not as well known as what Maddie is in the media etc.....or would have got him as much publicity.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 17, 2023, 06:12:24 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 05:51:26 PM
Whatever, doesn't make him the abductor of Maddie though ......does it..
I didn’t say it did, and nor has anyone else as far as I know. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 17, 2023, 06:14:45 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 05:55:14 PM
The other kids are not as well known as what Maddie is in the media etc.....or would have got him as much publicity.
you are missing the point.  If evidence wasn’t important the police could link him to any or all other cases of missing children but they haven’t- why not?  And why all the German police so publicity driven all of a sudden?  How on earth did they manage to solve crimes pre-2020 without linking them all to Christian Bruckner? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 18, 2023, 08:18:52 AM
Quote from: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 05:48:50 PM
I really think you should let CB go as the abductor....until you know what you have been told is true....or not.

Maybe you should let the McCann's go as being involved in the disappearance of their child,  the Police forces involved in the investigation have all said the McCann's are not suspects yet that doesn't stop you does it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Mr Gray on November 18, 2023, 10:32:04 AM
Quote from: kizzy on November 17, 2023, 05:55:14 PM
The other kids are not as well known as what Maddie is in the media etc.....or would have got him as much publicity.
The  Germans solved the DM rape where the PJ failed
They're now prosecuting 5 more where the PJ failed

That's six cases..you'd have to be daft to think the pj were anything but clowns and the BKA superstars
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 18, 2023, 10:49:00 AM
Quote from: Mr Gray on November 18, 2023, 10:32:04 AM
The  Germans solved the DM rape where the PJ failed
They're now prosecuting 5 more where the PJ failed

That's six cases..you'd have to be daft to think the pj were anything but clowns and the BKA superstars

Great. Congratulations to the BKA. Well done to them. The 5 offences have sod all to do with Madeleine's disappearance though. Get back to us when they solve that one.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 18, 2023, 11:04:03 AM

The BKA had Brueckner handed to them on a plate by Busching & Seyferth. If they hadn't grassed him up he'd probably never had been caught. They only solved the Behan rape because they put Brueckner's name, face & previous out there. No super sleuthing involved by BKA.
Anyway, well done them. No joy for them with the Maddie case though. But maybe next year.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 18, 2023, 12:13:39 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 17, 2023, 06:14:45 PM
you are missing the point.  If evidence wasn’t important the police could link him to any or all other cases of missing children but they haven’t- why not?  And why all the German police so publicity driven all of a sudden?  How on earth did they manage to solve crimes pre-2020 without linking them all to Christian Bruckner?

 How on earth did they manage to solve crimes pre-2020 without linking them all to Christian Bruckner?

wELL, it does make you wonder when HCW has sat on concrete evidence for three and a half years that CB abducted Maddie

Yet HCW is no nearer charging him it seems in the near future....or ever.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 18, 2023, 12:16:07 PM
Quote from: Mr Gray on November 18, 2023, 10:32:04 AM
The  Germans solved the DM rape where the PJ failed
They're now prosecuting 5 more where the PJ failed

That's six cases..you'd have to be daft to think the pj were anything but clowns and the BKA superstars

The five cases yes....seems all the publicity and CB face plastered all over the media ..payed of for HCW,
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 18, 2023, 01:12:45 PM

All I want for now is The five Cases dealt with and hopefully for Brueckner to be locked up for a very long time. Sadly, Madeleine will have to wait again.

I still want to know about Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences in Germany.  This could make a vast difference.  Google is not very clear on this.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 18, 2023, 02:27:51 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 18, 2023, 01:12:45 PM
All I want for now is The five Cases dealt with and hopefully for Brueckner to be locked up for a very long time. Sadly, Madeleine will have to wait again.

I still want to know about Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences in Germany.  This could make a vast difference.  Google is not very clear on this.

Yes, I couldn't find that out either.

I'm not bothered what happens to Brueckner regarding these 5 cases, other than he shouldn't be wrongly convicted
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 18, 2023, 02:46:11 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 18, 2023, 01:12:45 PM
All I want for now is The five Cases dealt with and hopefully for Brueckner to be locked up for a very long time. Sadly, Madeleine will have to wait again.

I still want to know about Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences in Germany.  This could make a vast difference.  Google is not very clear on this.

All I want for now is The five Cases dealt with and hopefully for Brueckner to be locked up for a very long time. Sadly, Madeleine will have to wait again.

Agree - If found guilty he should be locked up for a very long time...for the crimes he has done.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 18, 2023, 03:37:07 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 18, 2023, 02:46:11 PM
All I want for now is The five Cases dealt with and hopefully for Brueckner to be locked up for a very long time. Sadly, Madeleine will have to wait again.

Agree - If found guilty he should be locked up for a very long time...for the crimes he has done.

Surely it should depend on what he is found guilty of and sentence should proportionate to crime.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 18, 2023, 03:54:25 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 18, 2023, 01:12:45 PM
All I want for now is The five Cases dealt with and hopefully for Brueckner to be locked up for a very long time. Sadly, Madeleine will have to wait again.

I still want to know about Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences in Germany.  This could make a vast difference.  Google is not very clear on this.

He'll be a free man again before the Maddie case is solved.......IMO
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 18, 2023, 04:22:41 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 18, 2023, 02:27:51 PM
Yes, I couldn't find that out either.

I'm not bothered what happens to Brueckner regarding these 5 cases, other than he shouldn't be wrongly convicted

I find the fact that he doesn't get tested by a jury of his peers but by one solitary judge to be quite appalling in itself. Because of this I refuse to accept the courts verdict in advance. Unless it's not guilty.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 18, 2023, 04:28:32 PM
Quote from: jassi on November 18, 2023, 03:37:07 PM
Surely it should depend on what he is found guilty of and sentence should proportionate to crime.

Well of course.....thanks for pointing that out.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 18, 2023, 04:30:02 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 18, 2023, 03:54:25 PM
He'll be a free man again before the Maddie case is solved.......IMO

Or Dead.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 18, 2023, 04:32:21 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 18, 2023, 04:30:02 PM
Or Dead.

I think we'll all be dead before the case is solved to be honest.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 18, 2023, 04:39:15 PM

Anyway. What do we reckon on his likely sentence? If guilty on all 5 I think 15 to 20 years before parole is likely, given the severity of the crime in the Behan case. He's not quite bad enough to receive life without imo. He isn't Peter Suttclife so they might let him out with supervision when he's about 70 & can't scale drainpipes anymore.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 18, 2023, 04:49:28 PM

Actually, scrap that. I just read that life in Germany means 15 years before parole. They'll have to let him out at some point surely.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 18, 2023, 05:57:18 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 18, 2023, 04:49:28 PM
Actually, scrap that. I just read that life in Germany means 15 years before parole. They'll have to let him out at some point surely.
Preventive detention in German criminal law is a measure regulated by the
German Criminal Code which permits the state to keep dangerous criminal
offenders in – possibly lifelong – governmental custody beyond actual imprisonment in order to protect the public from them.
https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5235/219174412802604216.pdf
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 18, 2023, 06:33:53 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 18, 2023, 05:57:18 PM
Preventive detention in German criminal law is a measure regulated by the
German Criminal Code which permits the state to keep dangerous criminal
offenders in – possibly lifelong – governmental custody beyond actual imprisonment in order to protect the public from them.
https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5235/219174412802604216.pdf

This sounds about right for someone like Brueckner who has already been convicted of Child Sexual Abuse and Rape of elderly women.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 18, 2023, 06:34:46 PM
Quote from: Brietta on November 18, 2023, 05:57:18 PM
Preventive detention in German criminal law is a measure regulated by the
German Criminal Code which permits the state to keep dangerous criminal
offenders in – possibly lifelong – governmental custody beyond actual imprisonment in order to protect the public from them.
https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5235/219174412802604216.pdf

Thanks. I can't see him being too much danger to the public when he's 70. Maybe a long, lonely difficult stay inside a cramped prison cell will somehow rehabilitate him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 18, 2023, 06:37:09 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 18, 2023, 06:33:53 PM
This sounds about right for someone like Brueckner who has already been convicted of Child Sexual Abuse and Rape of elderly women.

He only got 7 years for the rape. If that sentence is anything to go by then 14yrs for the further 2 rapes & couple of years extra thrown in for dropping his trousers in front of an off duty cop & such.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 18, 2023, 07:16:39 PM

Twenty one years for a further Three Rapes, if not more for repeated offences.  And five years for repeated Child Sexual Abuse will take him to nearly Eighty Years old.  And I wouldn't let him loose even then.  But then they don't actually have to.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 18, 2023, 08:13:51 PM

I wouldn't want to live in your jurisdiction. I've seen convicted murderers sentenced to less.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 23, 2023, 07:41:30 AM

Is anything happening, anywhere?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 23, 2023, 09:00:49 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 23, 2023, 07:41:30 AM
Is anything happening, anywhere?
Nothing until February 2024, it seems.  Might as well go hibernate for winter and find something to read... I've heard Shute is pretty good!

Brueckner appears to reveal his darkest secrets after supping a skinful of Wolters Pilsener in Madame Eck's Bar.  "In Lager Veritas".  Maybe if they plied him with a year's supply to be consumed within a week he might confess and this sad, sorry case would finally be brought to a close.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 23, 2023, 10:39:58 AM
Quote from: Myster on November 23, 2023, 09:00:49 AM
Nothing until February 2024, it seems.  Might as well go hibernate for winter and find something to read... I've heard Shute is pretty good!

Brueckner appears to reveal his darkest secrets after supping a skinful of Wolters Pilsener in Madame Eck's Bar.  "In Lager Veritas".  Maybe if they plied him with a year's supply to be consumed within a week he might confess and this sad, sorry case would finally be brought to a close.

In The Wet is my favourite Shute.  I wonder if that is on line somewhere.

As for Brueckner,  I am wondering if he will even offer a Plea.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 23, 2023, 11:29:52 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 23, 2023, 10:39:58 AM
In The Wet is my favourite Shute.  I wonder if that is on line somewhere.

As for Brueckner,  I am wondering if he will even offer a Plea.

I guess much will depend on the strength of the evidence in each case. Some may well be weaker than others and I'm sure the defence will do their best to get acquittals wherever possible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 23, 2023, 12:02:00 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 23, 2023, 10:39:58 AM
In The Wet is my favourite Shute.  I wonder if that is on line somewhere.

As for Brueckner,  I am wondering if he will even offer a Plea.
Probably easiest to read in hardback or paperback versions, second-hand from eBay France or new from some other online retailer.  Or your nearest bookshop in deepest Brittany.

Otherwise "In The Wet" e-book available here... https://www.fadedpage.com/showbook.php?pid=20140305 (https://www.fadedpage.com/showbook.php?pid=20140305)

The Epub download is perhaps the better quality version... just tried it in calibre, a free book reader which I've used for years...

https://calibre-ebook.com/ (https://calibre-ebook.com/)

I also listened (twice over) to the BBC Radio play of "Requiem for a Wren" from your blog and quite enjoyed it!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXvp3NcLLoE&t=1862s&ab_channel=ChestertonRadio (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXvp3NcLLoE&t=1862s&ab_channel=ChestertonRadio)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 23, 2023, 12:11:40 PM
Quote from: Myster on November 23, 2023, 12:02:00 PM
Probably easiest to read in hardback or paperback versions, second-hand from eBay France or new from some other online retailer.  Or your nearest bookshop in deepest Brittany.

Otherwise "In The Wet" e-book available here... https://www.fadedpage.com/showbook.php?pid=20140305 (https://www.fadedpage.com/showbook.php?pid=20140305)

The Epub download is perhaps the better quality version... just tried it in calibre, a free book reader which I've used for years...

https://calibre-ebook.com/ (https://calibre-ebook.com/)

I also listened (twice over) to the BBC Radio play of "Requiem for a Wren" from your blog and quite enjoyed it!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXvp3NcLLoE&t=1862s&ab_channel=ChestertonRadio (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXvp3NcLLoE&t=1862s&ab_channel=ChestertonRadio)

I've already got all of Shute's books and all very battered now.  But not many of them were turned into films, so thanks for The Links.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 26, 2023, 01:57:50 PM
For those interested.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-key-witness-who-31527399


 17:09, 25 Nov 2023

One of the key witnesses in the Madeleine McCann case is being investigated for false evidence over damning claims about key suspect Christian Brückner.

Convicted paedophile and rapist Brückner is suspected by German authorities to have abducted and killed three-year-old Madeleine, who disappeared while holidaying in the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz. Now the probe into Brückner has taken a dramatic turn.

His lawyer Friedrich Fülscher has filed charges, prompting the German investigators to examine whether Helge Büsching gave "unsworn false testimony". The McCann case saw a major lead in 2020 when Brückner was identified as a suspect before being officially named in 2022, with detectives earlier this year seen investigating a site near the Algarve where the German national - currently serving prison time for rape - is known to have spent time.

Büsching is said to have claimed that Brückner confessed to him about his involvement in Madeleine's disappearance, and has since been a cornerstone of the case. He had initially told authorities about video tapes he allegedly stole from Brückner, showing a range of chilling and sickening crimes. These tapes, said to be hidden in a caravan, have never been found.

‌Then in a startling twist, Helge B.'s statement changed in January 2023, where he then claimed the tapes were left in a rural property he once occupied. Now Brückner's lawyer Friedrich Fülscher has challenged Helge Büsching's credibility, citing the inconsistencies in his statements.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 26, 2023, 02:13:53 PM
He is not a credible witness. HB claimed CB said 'She did not scream'. How that fact has been distorted and manipulated by the authorities and media is quite incredible. Desperation springs to mind. It was reported and is a fact that nobody heard screaming the night Madeleine disappeared!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 26, 2023, 02:46:50 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on November 26, 2023, 02:13:53 PM
He is not a credible witness. HB claimed CB said 'She did not scream'. How that fact has been distorted and manipulated by the authorities and media is quite incredible. Desperation springs to mind. It was reported and is a fact that nobody heard screaming the night Madeleine disappeared!

Good point.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 26, 2023, 03:13:37 PM

Why would Madeleine have screamed?  And Yes, the comment was distorted.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 26, 2023, 06:52:29 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on November 26, 2023, 02:13:53 PM
He is not a credible witness. HB claimed CB said 'She did not scream'. How that fact has been distorted and manipulated by the authorities and media is quite incredible. Desperation springs to mind. It was reported and is a fact that nobody heard screaming the night Madeleine disappeared!
I don’t get your point. Are you saying you know for a fact CB never uttered those words to HB?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 27, 2023, 10:02:33 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 26, 2023, 06:52:29 PM
I don’t get your point. Are you saying you know for a fact CB never uttered those words to HB?

I don't think it really matters that Brueckner's lawyers are trying to discredit witnesses. Of course they are because quite simply, it is all they've got to play with in his defence.

And why would associates of Brueckner be paragons of virtue anyway? Highly unlikely.

The clincher will be the evidence which is due to be heard in the five trials scheduled for Feb 2024. If that passes muster and there is no reason to think it won't, Brueckner won't ever be able to scale another wall or enter via another balcony to do what it is he does. He will end out his days behind bars reminiscent of those installed in Luz properties lending weight to the burglary problem they had; not to mention the random sex attacks endemic at the time.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 27, 2023, 11:15:03 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 27, 2023, 10:02:33 AM
I don't think it really matters that Brueckner's lawyers are trying to discredit witnesses. Of course they are because quite simply, it is all they've got to play with in his defence.

And why would associates of Brueckner be paragons of virtue anyway? Highly unlikely.

The clincher will be the evidence which is due to be heard in the five trials scheduled for Feb 2024. If that passes muster and there is no reason to think it won't, Brueckner won't ever be able to scale another wall or enter via another balcony to do what it is he does. He will end out his days behind bars reminiscent of those installed in Luz properties lending weight to the burglary problem they had; not to mention the random sex attacks endemic at the time.



Yes, but dont we know all this ....he is a wrong un awaiting trial in Germany.

How do you work out this will ever prove he is the abductor of Maddie...Maddie who should be the four front of all this.

They will get... if found guilty another burglar/paedo of the street....

I think more would be interested in what happened to Maddie....not whats going to happen to CB.

I think in this case we desperately need a common sense corner B
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 27, 2023, 01:36:32 PM
Quote from: pathfinder73 on November 26, 2023, 02:13:53 PM
He is not a credible witness. HB claimed CB said 'She did not scream'. How that fact has been distorted and manipulated by the authorities and media is quite incredible. Desperation springs to mind. It was reported and is a fact that nobody heard screaming the night Madeleine disappeared!

It depends on how he said it.   If he said it in a knowing way as if he knew she didn't scream such as 'she didn't scream' stated as fact,  then that is quite different to us saying    'funny , she didn't scream'. 

You are forgetting he knew CB very well and would catch on to what he was saying and how he was saying it.

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 27, 2023, 02:46:33 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 27, 2023, 01:36:32 PM
It depends on how he said it.   If he said it in a knowing way as if he knew she didn't scream such as 'she didn't scream' stated as fact,  then that is quite different to us saying    'funny , she didn't scream'. 

You are forgetting he knew CB very well and would catch on to what he was saying and how he was saying it.

It depends on how he said it.

what he was saying and how he was saying it.

And...................

How are you ever going to know fgs
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2023, 04:34:57 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 27, 2023, 02:46:33 PM
It depends on how he said it.

what he was saying and how he was saying it.

And...................

How are you ever going to know fgs
The same way you know the McCanns dunnit I expect ;-)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 27, 2023, 04:55:12 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2023, 04:34:57 PM
The same way you know the McCanns dunnit I expect ;-)

What's your point here.

Is your post suggesting L knows CB done it.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2023, 05:08:39 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 27, 2023, 04:55:12 PM
What's your point here.

Is your post suggesting L knows CB done it.
No, I’m not.  Lace made it clear that she doesn’t know how it was said, nor did she claim that she would ever know, but nevertheless you appeared to be exasperated by her post.  My reply was simply to point out that you appear to “know” stuff about this case (McCanns are involved, CB definitely isn’t etc)  without actually knowing anything for certain at all. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 27, 2023, 05:23:40 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2023, 05:08:39 PM
No, I’m not.  Lace made it clear that she doesn’t know how it was said, nor did she claim that she would ever know, but nevertheless you appeared to be exasperated by her post.  My reply was simply to point out that you appear to “know” stuff about this case (McCanns are involved, CB definitely isn’t etc)  without actually knowing anything for certain at all.

Did she.

She certainly Thinks he said it ......it seems in her post.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 27, 2023, 05:34:37 PM

We do not know the context in which the remark was made.  And Lace never suggested that she did.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 27, 2023, 05:36:45 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 27, 2023, 02:46:33 PM
It depends on how he said it.

what he was saying and how he was saying it.

And...................

How are you ever going to know fgs

In court.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 27, 2023, 06:00:54 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 27, 2023, 05:36:45 PM
In court.

What court ?................... Has CB been charged with abducting Maddie then ....or are you saying he will be.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 27, 2023, 06:17:25 PM

I am going to get cross in a minute if this sniping goes on.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 27, 2023, 06:44:44 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 27, 2023, 06:17:25 PM
I am going to get cross in a minute if this sniping goes on.

Well do you know what court L means.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2023, 07:05:12 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 27, 2023, 06:44:44 PM
Well do you know what court L means.
it means “we will know more about what was said, to whom and how if and when the case comes to court”.  Why you are getting so worked up about this is mystifying.  I would recommend the self-administration of a chill pill.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 27, 2023, 07:12:06 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 27, 2023, 06:17:25 PM
I am going to get cross in a minute if this sniping goes on.

Cross? We haven't even had direct yet.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 27, 2023, 07:31:40 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2023, 07:05:12 PM
it means “we will know more about what was said, to whom and how if and when the case comes to court”.  Why you are getting so worked up about this is mystifying.  I would recommend the self-administration of a chill pill.

 I assure you I am not getting worked up ....

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on November 27, 2023, 11:55:10 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 27, 2023, 11:15:03 AM


Yes, but dont we know all this ....he is a wrong un awaiting trial in Germany.

How do you work out this will ever prove he is the abductor of Maddie...Maddie who should be the four front of all this.

They will get... if found guilty another burglar/paedo of the street....

I think more would be interested in what happened to Maddie....not whats going to happen to CB.

I think in this case we desperately need a common sense corner B

The problem you have is that your hero of the hour has been found guilty of the aggravated rape of an elderly woman and is about to stand trial for a number of serious sexual crimes amongst which are another three vicious rapes and sexual offences against children.

These crimes occurred over an extended period of years.
The children he assaulted did not know him although he did try to drag one away with him; and we know that he was unknown to at least one of the women he is accused of raping; he called her name - he knew who she was.

These are all cases involving a prowling serious sexual deviant and as far as I am concerned, the very tip of the iceberg.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 28, 2023, 09:24:19 AM
Quote from: Brietta on November 27, 2023, 11:55:10 PM
The problem you have is that your hero of the hour has been found guilty of the aggravated rape of an elderly woman and is about to stand trial for a number of serious sexual crimes amongst which are another three vicious rapes and sexual offences against children.

These crimes occurred over an extended period of years.
The children he assaulted did not know him although he did try to drag one away with him; and we know that he was unknown to at least one of the women he is accused of raping; he called her name - he knew who she was.

These are all cases involving a prowling serious sexual deviant and as far as I am concerned, the very tip of the iceberg.

OMG...........obviously from your post contents  you are obsessed with CB....none of it proves he is an abductor.

The fact remains though... no matter what charges CB is facing..... non of them have anything to do with Maddie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 28, 2023, 09:27:07 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 27, 2023, 07:05:12 PM
it means “we will know more about what was said, to whom and how if and when the case comes to court”.  Why you are getting so worked up about this is mystifying.  I would recommend the self-administration of a chill pill.

Thank you for explaining VS I didn't think I would have to go into detail at what I meant by my post.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 28, 2023, 09:28:20 AM
Quote from: kizzy on November 28, 2023, 09:24:19 AM
OMG...........obviously from your post contents  you are obsessed with CB....none of it proves he is an abductor.

The fact remains though... no matter what charges CB is facing..... non of them have anything to do with Maddie.

Obsessed?  He is the prime suspect in the Madeleine case.   This is a forum about the Madeleine case.  We will discuss CB on this forum.  Doesn't mean anyone is obsessed. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 28, 2023, 10:06:05 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 28, 2023, 09:28:20 AM
Obsessed?  He is the prime suspect in the Madeleine case.   This is a forum about the Madeleine case.  We will discuss CB on this forum.  Doesn't mean anyone is obsessed.

Bit ironic to say.....on a off topic thread.

Maybe you should make a CB THREAD L
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 28, 2023, 11:38:30 AM
Quote from: Lace on November 28, 2023, 09:28:20 AM
Obsessed?  He is the prime suspect in the Madeleine case.   This is a forum about the Madeleine case.  We will discuss CB on this forum.  Doesn't mean anyone is obsessed. 

I'm obsessed with Christian Brueckner.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2023, 12:25:57 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 28, 2023, 10:06:05 AM
Bit ironic to say.....on a off topic thread.

Maybe you should make a CB THREAD L
What should we be discussing on this thread then?  The weather? 

It's turned out a bit parky today hasn't it?  My car battery was flat this morning which was a nuisance.  Had to walk to the hairdresser and was 10 minutes late for my appointment.  Currently sat here wrapped in a duvet contemplating my lunch.  I think I will boil an egg. 

How about you? 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 28, 2023, 12:28:12 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2023, 12:25:57 PM
What should we be discussing on this thread then?  The weather? 

It's turned out a bit parky today hasn't it?  My car battery was flat this morning which was a nuisance.  Had to walk to the hairdresser and was 10 minutes late for my appointment.  Currently sat here wrapped in a duvet contemplating my lunch.  I think I will boil an egg. 

How about you?

 (&^&
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Lace on November 28, 2023, 12:29:17 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 28, 2023, 10:06:05 AM
Bit ironic to say.....on a off topic thread.

Maybe you should make a CB THREAD L

 @)(++(*. YOU brought up CB and being obsessed on this thread.

Anyway I'm not here for tit for tat,  annoying.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 28, 2023, 12:50:39 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2023, 12:25:57 PM
What should we be discussing on this thread then?  The weather? 

It's turned out a bit parky today hasn't it?  My car battery was flat this morning which was a nuisance.  Had to walk to the hairdresser and was 10 minutes late for my appointment.  Currently sat here wrapped in a duvet contemplating my lunch.  I think I will boil an egg. 

How about you?

My day is fine. but

Aww poor you... thankfully I haven't been hit by the cost of living crisis yet
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 28, 2023, 12:51:20 PM
Quote from: Lace on November 28, 2023, 12:29:17 PM
@)(++(*. YOU brought up CB and being obsessed on this thread.

Anyway I'm not here for tit for tat,  annoying.

Anyway I'm not here for tit for tat,  annoying

You could have fooled me ....any way stick to your emoji for when all else fails.

An seriously wouldn't it be best to discuss CB when he is actually charged with something to connect him to maddie.

Instead of all the tit for tat we keep reading.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2023, 01:40:24 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 28, 2023, 12:50:39 PM
My day is fine. but

Aww poor you... thankfully I haven't been hit by the cost of living crisis yet
aww?  Poor me?  I’m perfectly fine thanks, just spent £40 on a haircut so save your sympathy for those who are really struggling, there’s a good girl.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2023, 01:43:37 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 28, 2023, 12:51:20 PM
Anyway I'm not here for tit for tat,  annoying

You could have fooled me ....any way stick to your emoji for when all else fails.

An seriously wouldn't it be best to discuss CB when he is actually charged with something to connect him to maddie.

Instead of all the tit for tat we keep reading.
Yes, let’s go back to discussing the Tapas statement anomalies and the dog alerts, far more relevant and interesting than silly old CB who is clearly as innocent as the day is long (as decided by McCann bashers everywhere).
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 28, 2023, 05:39:23 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2023, 01:40:24 PM
aww?  Poor me?  I’m perfectly fine thanks, just spent £40 on a haircut so save your sympathy for those who are really struggling, there’s a good girl.

Oh, soz.....Usually you only have to make hairdressing appointment here if ur a OAP. the duvet and boiled egg didnt help.

But good to here your perfectly fine.and not struggling.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 28, 2023, 05:41:45 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2023, 01:43:37 PM
Yes, let’s go back to discussing the Tapas statement anomalies and the dog alerts, far more relevant and interesting than silly old CB who is clearly as innocent as the day is long (as decided by McCann bashers everywhere).

Yes the dogs ...glad you brought them up.....strange how both experienced dogs got it so wrong.

All there alerts were linked to the mccs .....yet no alerts at other o places/cars etc they searched.

Believing the mccss were involved is not being is not being a mcc basher  its just a case of not believing the mcs version.

So much so ..............CB is not..... going to be charged with the abductor of Maddie.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2023, 06:14:19 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 28, 2023, 05:41:45 PM
Yes the dogs ...glad you brought them up.....strange how both experienced dogs got it so wrong.

All there alerts were linked to the mccs .....yet no alerts at other o places/cars etc they searched.

Believing the mccss were involved is not being is not being a mcc basher  its just a case of not believing the mcs version.

So much so ..............CB is not..... going to be charged with the abductor of Maddie.
@)(++(*. that’s more like it!! Dogs, dogs, dogs, McCanns Dunnit, Dunnit, Dunnit, let’s  return to the golden oldies of sceptic obsession and forget all about the boring old current investigation and chief suspect. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2023, 06:17:14 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 28, 2023, 05:39:23 PM
Oh, soz.....Usually you only have to make hairdressing appointment here if ur a OAP. the duvet and boiled egg didnt help.

But good to here your perfectly fine.and not struggling.
Whattttttt???!  I have a highly skilled professional hairdresser who is booked up weeks in advance, how would I get him to cut my hair without an appointment?  Kidnap him and only let him go once he’d cut my hair??
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2023, 07:11:55 PM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12801307/Madeleine-McCann-suspects-rape-trial-court-date-FINALLY-revealed-German-prosecutors-Christian-Brueckner-face-justice-attacks-women-children.html
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2023, 07:26:34 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 28, 2023, 07:11:55 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12801307/Madeleine-McCann-suspects-rape-trial-court-date-FINALLY-revealed-German-prosecutors-Christian-Brueckner-face-justice-attacks-women-children.html
Excuse me, this is off topic.  We wish to discuss the dog alerts and how the McCanns dunnit because that hasn’t been covered nearly enough on this forum.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2023, 07:31:25 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2023, 07:26:34 PM
Excuse me, this is off topic.  We wish to discuss the dog alerts and how the McCanns dunnit because that hasn’t been covered nearly enough on this forum.

I am sure you will all get back Off Topic again very soon.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 28, 2023, 07:32:23 PM

PS.  Did you like the article?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2023, 10:40:54 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 28, 2023, 07:32:23 PM
PS.  Did you like the article?
No, there wasn’t nearly enough focus on the dog alerts or the Tapas statements, you know, the really relevant stuff.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 29, 2023, 04:11:21 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2023, 10:40:54 PM
No, there wasn’t nearly enough focus on the dog alerts or the Tapas statements, you know, the really relevant stuff.

I'll give my Mate Wolters a bell and tell him to Do something about that.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on November 29, 2023, 08:37:54 AM
Hazel Behan chomping at the bit and raring to go!...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12801765/Christian-Brueckners-Irish-rape-victim-police-protection-Madeleine-McCann.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12801765/Christian-Brueckners-Irish-rape-victim-police-protection-Madeleine-McCann.html)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 29, 2023, 08:51:08 AM
Quote from: Myster on November 29, 2023, 08:37:54 AM
Hazel Behan chomping at the bit and raring to go!...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12801765/Christian-Brueckners-Irish-rape-victim-police-protection-Madeleine-McCann.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12801765/Christian-Brueckners-Irish-rape-victim-police-protection-Madeleine-McCann.html)

No mention of The Dogs again, I see.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 29, 2023, 10:06:06 AM
Quote from: Myster on November 29, 2023, 08:37:54 AM
Hazel Behan chomping at the bit and raring to go!...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12801765/Christian-Brueckners-Irish-rape-victim-police-protection-Madeleine-McCann.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12801765/Christian-Brueckners-Irish-rape-victim-police-protection-Madeleine-McCann.html)

Good for her. Her case has nothing at all to do with Madeleine's disappearance though.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 29, 2023, 10:56:07 AM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 28, 2023, 10:40:54 PM
No, there wasn’t nearly enough focus on the dog alerts or the Tapas statements, you know, the really relevant stuff.

Okay.......you seem intent of rubbishing the dogs/statements etc in numerous posts....as if they are some sort of threat to you.

Reminds me of how the mccs did everything in there power ...to rubbish GA book...they failed.

Before you say it was rubbish.......we don't know that yet do we

The thing is here....the case was shelved because not enough evidence....not no evidence.

Seems to me this case will never be over till it ends...as yet it is still wide open.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: kizzy on November 29, 2023, 10:56:41 AM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 29, 2023, 10:06:06 AM
Good for her. Her case has nothing at all to do with Madeleine's disappearance though.

Exactly....the only connection CB has with Maddie ...is the word Suspect the word the germans labeled him.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 29, 2023, 11:30:03 AM

I am beginning to suspect that The Germans could be right as there is so much rubbishing of what they've got to say.  Although I am sticking with Brueckner for Abduction for the moment.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 29, 2023, 11:31:31 AM
Quote from: kizzy on November 29, 2023, 10:56:41 AM
Exactly....the only connection CB has with Maddie ...is the word Suspect the word the germans labeled him.

Not just 'suspect'. 'Prime Suspect'. As if that's supposed to actually mean anything.  They've been investigating him since 2017, had concrete evidence against him for the past three & half years now & are still no closer to actually charging him. Only booby prizes in the pipeline for Wolters. I guess we'll just have to put up with hearing about that for the next 6 months.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 29, 2023, 11:34:14 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 29, 2023, 11:30:03 AM
I am beginning to suspect that The Germans could be right as there is so much rubbishing of what they've got to say.  Although I am sticking with Brueckner for Abduction for the moment.

Have they said anything of note then? Disclosed any of this overwhelming evidence that wouldn't fail to convince?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on November 29, 2023, 12:58:40 PM
Quote from: Wonderfulspam on November 29, 2023, 11:31:31 AM
Not just 'suspect'. 'Prime Suspect'. As if that's supposed to actually mean anything.  They've been investigating him since 2017, had concrete evidence against him for the past three & half years now & are still no closer to actually charging him. Only booby prizes in the pipeline for Wolters. I guess we'll just have to put up with hearing about that for the next 6 months.

'Prime suspect' sounds better than 'only suspect', or 'latest suspect' - less desperate
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 29, 2023, 05:25:07 PM

Please could we separate the two cases briefly and concentrate on the upcoming Sexual Abuse Trial.

Thank You.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 29, 2023, 05:35:22 PM
Quote from: kizzy on November 29, 2023, 10:56:07 AM
Okay.......you seem intent of rubbishing the dogs/statements etc in numerous posts....as if they are some sort of threat to you.

Reminds me of how the mccs did everything in there power ...to rubbish GA book...they failed.

Before you say it was rubbish.......we don't know that yet do we

The thing is here....the case was shelved because not enough evidence....not no evidence.

Seems to me this case will never be over till it ends...as yet it is still wide open.
Where did I rubbish the dogs/statements??  I ‘m begging for more discussion about the dogs / stagements to deflect from the trivial and irrelevant news of some rapey paedo’s forthcoming trial that no one here is remotely interested in.  So - tell us more about these dog alerts then. It’s been so long since we discussed them I can barely remember what happened…
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on November 29, 2023, 07:00:28 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on November 29, 2023, 05:35:22 PM
Where did I rubbish the dogs/statements??  I ‘m begging for more discussion about the dogs / stagements to deflect from the trivial and irrelevant news of some rapey paedo’s forthcoming trial that no one here is remotely interested in.  So - tell us more about these dog alerts then. It’s been so long since we discussed them I can barely remember what happened…

You know The Dogs are both dead, do you?  Who killed The Dogs?  That's what I want to know.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 29, 2023, 07:12:30 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 29, 2023, 05:25:07 PM
Please could we separate the two cases briefly and concentrate on the upcoming Sexual Abuse Trial.

Thank You.

Yes. In that case, can we have a separate board for concentrating on the upcoming sex abuse trials? Seeing as though they have no connection whatsoever with Madeleine's disappearance.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 29, 2023, 08:48:56 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on November 29, 2023, 07:00:28 PM
You know The Dogs are both dead, do you?  Who killed The Dogs?  That's what I want to know.
I have a pretty good idea…  8(0(*
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 10, 2023, 01:23:21 PM

Does anyone here remember the news story about the 4 boys who died in a house fire whilst their mother was out at Sainsburys? It was in 2021. I read today that she has at last been charged with child abandonment & manslaughter.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on December 18, 2023, 07:31:09 PM
Nothing new, just a sensible discussion for a change, to pass the time... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rM2ptT1thIM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rM2ptT1thIM)

Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on December 19, 2023, 01:31:38 PM
Kate McCann, a Toffeemen supporter like her daughter...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12880441/kate-mccann-everton-bill-kenwright-bond-madeleine-mccann.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12880441/kate-mccann-everton-bill-kenwright-bond-madeleine-mccann.html)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 23, 2023, 07:21:39 AM

https://www.noradsanta.org/en/.

Link to The Norad Website.  If anyone feels like following this.  One Day and One Hour to go before Santa hits somewhere around New Zealand or possibly The South Pole.  I find it quite fascinating, but then I don't have a lot to do.  So seeing all of the countries on Planet Earth flash before your eyes is interesting.  And you can come and go from this Site as you please.  Santa just gets on with it while Rudolf's Red Nose guides the way.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on December 24, 2023, 10:58:53 PM
Merry christmas to all those who continue to read or post here.  (ty6e[
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Parky41 on December 25, 2023, 12:02:48 AM
Seasons greetings. Blessings to all.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on December 25, 2023, 08:55:30 AM

Happy Christmas everyone.  xxxx
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on January 05, 2024, 07:22:18 AM
Set your alarms for a veritable feast of baloney...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwTigT1AFg&ab_channel=CatalinaLupsa (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwTigT1AFg&ab_channel=CatalinaLupsa)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 05, 2024, 10:06:12 PM
Quote from: Myster on January 05, 2024, 07:22:18 AM
Set your alarms for a veritable feast of baloney...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwTigT1AFg&ab_channel=CatalinaLupsa (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwTigT1AFg&ab_channel=CatalinaLupsa)

Sorry, I can't stay awake any longer.  I shall have to watch it tomorrow.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on January 06, 2024, 04:43:16 AM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 05, 2024, 10:06:12 PM
Sorry, I can't stay awake any longer.  I shall have to watch it tomorrow.
Don't bother, Eleanor. Two and a half hours of unmitigated, incredibly boring claptrap. And you thought Aunt Sally Brown was insufferable. Roll on Feb 16th. and beyond.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 06, 2024, 07:36:15 AM
Quote from: Myster on January 06, 2024, 04:43:16 AM
Don't bother, Eleanor. Two and a half hours of unmitigated, incredibly boring claptrap. And you thought Aunt Sally Brown was insufferable. Roll on Feb 16th. and beyond.

Two and a half hours?  Even I don't feel obliged to listen to that.  How does Gonc The Plonk keep on getting away with this?  So much for Freedom of Speech, eh what.  But only in Portugal.

However, how many more sleeps until February the 16th?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 06, 2024, 02:18:01 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 06, 2024, 07:36:15 AM
Two and a half hours?  Even I don't feel obliged to listen to that.  How does Gonc The Plonk keep on getting away with this?  So much for Freedom of Speech, eh what.  But only in Portugal.

However, how many more sleeps until February the 16th?

Hope to be wrong, but I await with interest the procedural ploy to drag out the the trials.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 06, 2024, 04:58:28 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 06, 2024, 02:18:01 PM
Hope to be wrong, but I await with interest the procedural ploy to drag out the the trials.

I don't know what Fulscher thinks he is doing, but it ain't going to work.  Breuckner will be tried.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 06, 2024, 05:33:26 PM
It is important to follow procedure, tiresome though it may seem.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 06, 2024, 09:21:36 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 06, 2024, 04:58:28 PM
I don't know what Fulscher thinks he is doing, but it ain't going to work.  Breuckner will be tried.

I agree 100% with that.

I think previously the defence was playing for time. Basically that is all they have going for them and I think it was hoped that Brueckner would be released pre-trial when his sentence has run its course.
I don't think they had looked beyond Madeleine and the five unrelated charges knocked them off kilter.

It certainly didn't work.
As we have seen Brueckner was not allowed parole when eligible for the simple reason his offences are such that public safety would have been compromised on his release and he had already shown by going on the run previously that he is a flight risk.
So I don't think Fulcher will go for further procedural delays because they are not going to let him out anyway.

I think he will go with the canard already promoted by Amaral that Brueckner has been set up.

I rather like this one.
Based on the 'killing two birds with one stone' idea particularly as Amaral had to break cover to ensure its promotion.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 06, 2024, 10:12:13 PM
Quote from: Brietta on January 06, 2024, 09:21:36 PM
I agree 100% with that.

I think previously the defence was playing for time. Basically that is all they have going for them and I think it was hoped that Brueckner would be released pre-trial when his sentence has run its course.
I don't think they had looked beyond Madeleine and the five unrelated charges knocked them off kilter.

It certainly didn't work.
As we have seen Brueckner was not allowed parole when eligible for the simple reason his offences are such that public safety would have been compromised on his release and he had already shown by going on the run previously that he is a flight risk.
So I don't think Fulcher will go for further procedural delays because they are not going to let him out anyway.

I think he will go with the canard already promoted by Amaral that Brueckner has been set up.

I rather like this one.
Based on the 'killing two birds with one stone' idea particularly as Amaral had to break cover to ensure its promotion.

I also think Fulscher hoped for Breuckner's release before any trial concerning Madeleine.  But now Breuckner will almost certainly have other sentences in place, even if only for indecent exposure to children.

I do also wonder if Fulscher will dare to point the finger in the direction of The McCanns no matter how vague.

Goncalo Amaral is now just a demented embarrassment to Portugal but no one seems prepared to do anything about him, leaving the impression that Portugal is somehow on his side.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on January 07, 2024, 10:13:29 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on January 06, 2024, 10:12:13 PM
I also think Fulscher hoped for Breuckner's release before any trial concerning Madeleine.  But now Breuckner will almost certainly have other sentences in place, even if only for indecent exposure to children.

I do also wonder if Fulscher will dare to point the finger in the direction of The McCanns no matter how vague.

Goncalo Amaral is now just a demented embarrassment to Portugal but no one seems prepared to do anything about him, leaving the impression that Portugal is somehow on his side.

The five forthcoming trials are going to box Fulscher in regarding what reference he can make to anyone other than Brueckner.

The child on the beach didn't just vanish. There were witnesses to the attempted abduction who were on the scene almost immediately the alarm was raised.
The chilling thing is that he actually put his hand on her in an attempt to lead her away.

And what can one say about exposing himself at the fiesta! I think the fact that the policewoman was on hand to arrest him probably went some way towards saving him from serious injury at the hands of irate parents.
But detained en flagrante, held in custody and charged really makes for a slam dunk arrest that will almost certainly result in conviction.

Leading on from Brueckner's 2019 aggravated rape conviction are the three vicious rapes rapes for which he has been charged.

All in all these current charges cover a wide spectrum of alleged offending over many years. Not even the personal animus for the McCanns which drives Amaral would allow for even a rookie cop to dive in with both feet not even holding his nose, in defence of such a reprobate and his lost cause.

The thing is that Brueckner was making hay with his Algarve based crimes throughout the years Amaral was a PJ officer fighting crime in the Algarve. Opposite ends of the spectrum one would have thought.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on January 08, 2024, 07:13:33 AM

Amaral was very good at catching people who weren't guilty, but utterly useless at catching anyone who was.  Tis has long made me wonder.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Wonderfulspam on January 08, 2024, 03:55:13 PM

Oh great. Amaral again. Happy New Year everyone.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: jassi on January 13, 2024, 02:15:46 PM
My youtube sidebar is being inundated with McCann-related videos from a source called True Crime Rocket Science.
I can't be bothered wasting my time viewing  them, but wondered if anyone knew who was behind them ?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on January 13, 2024, 03:11:28 PM
Quote from: jassi on January 13, 2024, 02:15:46 PM
My youtube sidebar is being inundated with McCann-related videos from a source called True Crime Rocket Science.
I can't be bothered wasting my time viewing  them, but wondered if anyone knew who was behind them ?
A self-professed uomo universale, nothing like bumming yourself up!...

https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B00OW1IC44/about (https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B00OW1IC44/about)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on February 02, 2024, 12:07:39 PM
Another disgraced dick bites the dust...

A former Portuguese detective who attacked Madeleine McCann's parents in a Netflix documentary has started a seven-and-a-half year prison sentence.  Paulo Pereira Cristovao, a long-time critic of Kate and Gerry McCann who also angered Madeleine's parents by penning a controversial 2008 book about their daughter's mysterious disappearance, is now behind bars.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13037419/Disgraced-Portuguese-ex-cop-blasted-Madeleine-McCanns-parents-Netflix-doc-begins-seven-year-jail-sentence-losing-bid-overturn-kidnap-burglary-convictions.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13037419/Disgraced-Portuguese-ex-cop-blasted-Madeleine-McCanns-parents-Netflix-doc-begins-seven-year-jail-sentence-losing-bid-overturn-kidnap-burglary-convictions.html)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 02, 2024, 05:04:28 PM
Quote from: Myster on February 02, 2024, 12:07:39 PM
Another disgraced dick bites the dust...

A former Portuguese detective who attacked Madeleine McCann's parents in a Netflix documentary has started a seven-and-a-half year prison sentence.  Paulo Pereira Cristovao, a long-time critic of Kate and Gerry McCann who also angered Madeleine's parents by penning a controversial 2008 book about their daughter's mysterious disappearance, is now behind bars.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13037419/Disgraced-Portuguese-ex-cop-blasted-Madeleine-McCanns-parents-Netflix-doc-begins-seven-year-jail-sentence-losing-bid-overturn-kidnap-burglary-convictions.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13037419/Disgraced-Portuguese-ex-cop-blasted-Madeleine-McCanns-parents-Netflix-doc-begins-seven-year-jail-sentence-losing-bid-overturn-kidnap-burglary-convictions.html)
Oh dear, what another shame.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on February 03, 2024, 12:42:45 PM
Quote from: Myster on February 02, 2024, 12:07:39 PM
Another disgraced dick bites the dust...

A former Portuguese detective who attacked Madeleine McCann's parents in a Netflix documentary has started a seven-and-a-half year prison sentence.  Paulo Pereira Cristovao, a long-time critic of Kate and Gerry McCann who also angered Madeleine's parents by penning a controversial 2008 book about their daughter's mysterious disappearance, is now behind bars.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13037419/Disgraced-Portuguese-ex-cop-blasted-Madeleine-McCanns-parents-Netflix-doc-begins-seven-year-jail-sentence-losing-bid-overturn-kidnap-burglary-convictions.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13037419/Disgraced-Portuguese-ex-cop-blasted-Madeleine-McCanns-parents-Netflix-doc-begins-seven-year-jail-sentence-losing-bid-overturn-kidnap-burglary-convictions.html)

I can't believe Cristovao has been a free man during his appeal process following sentencing in 2019. That explains how he was able to go to Ukraine last year. Why on earth was this freedom permitted?
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Eleanor on February 03, 2024, 02:38:35 PM
Quote from: misty on February 03, 2024, 12:42:45 PM
I can't believe Cristovao has been a free man during his appeal process following sentencing in 2019. That explains how he was able to go to Ukraine last year. Why on earth was this freedom permitted?

God knows.  You could ask the same about Amaral.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Brietta on February 03, 2024, 08:33:24 PM
Quote from: Eleanor on February 03, 2024, 02:38:35 PM
God knows.  You could ask the same about Amaral.

Cristovao was fly enough to write a fictional novel and thus circumvent any delay in gaining access to his ill gotten gains tout de suite.
Conversely Amaral was generally fly enough to avoid criminal indictment and subsequent conviction.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: misty on March 01, 2024, 03:16:47 PM
https://www.kgun9.com/news/local-news/clements-found-guilty-on-all-counts-in-the-murder-retrial-of-isabel-celis

12 years on, Clements found guilty of murder, kidnapping and burglary. Isabel was snatched from her bed in the middle of the night. Defence argued that the father was responsible.
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on April 19, 2024, 07:57:37 AM
Just as crazy, monotonous and long-winded as anything uttered by countless other "psychics" on the case...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScoiUvBNvjM&ab_channel=RevelationTarot (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScoiUvBNvjM&ab_channel=RevelationTarot)

It reminds me of my youth when I visited Gypsy Petulengro in her stripy tent on Blackpool's Promenade and she gazed into her crystal ball to predict I would meet and marry a beautiful, wealthy young woman by the time I was 30... Umpteen years later and I'm still waiting!
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on April 20, 2024, 08:13:34 AM
This will be right up Sadie's alley! Heaven save us from gabby channelers...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDiCu5ypdDQ&ab_channel=RebeccaJoelle (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDiCu5ypdDQ&ab_channel=RebeccaJoelle)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on May 12, 2024, 05:04:38 PM
Treading over Krugel's Hallowed Magic Triangle in PdL again - Bernt Stellander, aka the Hobby Detective/Invisible Man will invite mountebank Danie(l) Krugel back to the Black Rock for another stab at searching for Madeleine's body with his Amazing Quantum Locator Machine!

https://youtu.be/uMtL7P6yDRQ?si=sGYO8OldhLJK09fD&t=4679

Works hands-free, except for Krugel's lefty up to something fishy under his incredible contraption...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jc9EZnto8U
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on May 12, 2024, 05:36:47 PM
BILD journalist Kai Feldhaus rattled him with a couple of searching questions. This one for example...

KF - Kai Feldhaus

BS - Bernt Stellander

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

KF - Did you ever dig yourself at the point that you alerted?   It was a very small area (i.e. Spot 5).

BS - No, you have to read the book... It gets more exciting that way.

KF - OK!  So is that a Yes or a No?

BS - That's obviously a Yes.

KF - But you didn't find anything?

BS - Let's not... just... just... read the book.

So obviously Stellander didn't find anything if he ever dug there at all and now expects everyone to fork out for his fairy tale investigation to find out Why?  Otherwise, why would he state that South African, Danie Krugel will bring his team from South Africa to search again and "Fabel", a black German Shepherd from Sweden (which finds human as opposed other animal bones) was gonna' come here?

https://youtu.be/uMtL7P6yDRQ?si=82sA5O0sU63dPY9r&t=4609 (https://youtu.be/uMtL7P6yDRQ?si=82sA5O0sU63dPY9r&t=4609)
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2024, 06:13:43 PM
It’s simply not worth a moment more of anyone’s time or attention. 
Title: Re: Wandering Off Topic
Post by: Myster on May 12, 2024, 07:11:26 PM
Quote from: Venturi Swirl on May 12, 2024, 06:13:43 PM
It’s simply not worth a moment more of anyone’s time or attention.
Except to Aunt Sally and hundreds, nay thousands of sceptic-tankers.