-
Hi. I haven't started a thread for ages now but someone asked recently whether Jane Tanner had seen Madeleine in her pajamas at any time. I thought of the suggestions that the McCanns would take their kids to the play area after high tea.
Have I got the concept correct? To me it seemed like an odd thing to do. Is it good parenting to take the kids there in their pajamas?
-
Hi. I haven't started a thread for ages now but someone asked recently whether Jane Tanner had seen Madeleine in her pajamas at any time. I thought of the suggestions that the McCanns would take their kids to the play area after high tea.
Have I got the concept correct? To me it seemed like an odd thing to do. Is it good parenting to take the kids there in their pajamas?
When the question of whether JT saw MM in her pj's I thought about the play area but then thought maybe I misunderstood as it seems to me a bit odd to bath children, put them in their pj's and then take them to a play park where they're running around and probably getting grubby.
Did they go to play park after 'high tea' before they went back to apartment? But I'm sure I recall in KM's PB (which I don't have to hand) that on 3rd May she contemplated taking children to play park after bathing them and putting them in pj's but all 3 were too tired.
-
When the question of whether JT saw MM in her pj's I thought about the play area but then thought maybe I misunderstood as it seems to me a bit odd to bath children, put them in their pj's and then take them to a play park where they're running around and probably getting grubby.
Did they go to play park after 'high tea' before they went back to apartment? But I'm sure I recall in KM's PB (which I don't have to hand) that on 3rd May she contemplated taking children to play park after bathing them and putting them in pj's but all 3 were too tired.
And it wasn't just the one off, didn't they do this most nights? Did this involve all the Tapas 9 families or was it just thew Paynes and the McCanns?
-
Usually the children played after high tea and before they went back to the apartment to be bathed, put into pyjamas and put to bed. Only Gerry McCann suggested they were bathed and put into their pyjamas before playing.
After dinner at 17.00, they would bath the children and get them ready for the night and play with them for a few moments in the recreation area near the tennis courts, always supervised by the parents.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN.htm
-
Usually the children played after high tea and before they went back to the apartment to be bathed, put into pyjamas and put to bed. Only Gerry McCann suggested they were bathed and put into their pyjamas before playing.
After dinner at 17.00, they would bath the children and get them ready for the night and play with them for a few moments in the recreation area near the tennis courts, always supervised by the parents.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN.htm
Looks like more poor translation
-
Looks like more poor translation
On the other hand it furnished a reason for DP's visit to 5A on 3rd;
Regarding the episode where he spoke to David on the 3rd of May, he says that he was playing tennis at 18:30 when David appeared near the tennis court and asked him if he was going to continue playing. G. said he didn't know because Kate might be needing help to look after the three children, because they intended to bring them to the recreation area after their showers. He thinks that David offered to check if Kate needed help, which he did, and returned minutes later.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-ARGUIDO.htm
-
Usually the children played after high tea and before they went back to the apartment to be bathed, put into pyjamas and put to bed. Only Gerry McCann suggested they were bathed and put into their pyjamas before playing.
After dinner at 17.00, they would bath the children and get them ready for the night and play with them for a few moments in the recreation area near the tennis courts, always supervised by the parents.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN.htm
There is no question that the children were taken out to the play area in their pyjamas and then to bed.
They played after high tea.
Snip
The nearby play area had several small slides and a little playhouse, which our team of kids adored, and after tea we all spent half an hour or so there.
We headed back to our apartments, the kids all tired but happy after their busy day.
madeleine: Kate McCann
-
There is no question that the children were taken out to the play area in their pyjamas and then to bed.
They played after high tea.
Snip
The nearby play area had several small slides and a little playhouse, which our team of kids adored, and after tea we all spent half an hour or so there.
We headed back to our apartments, the kids all tired but happy after their busy day.
madeleine: Kate McCann
They played straight after high tea, then went to their apartments to get ready for bed. Therefore they played in their clothes, not in their pyjamas.
-
There is no question that the children were taken out to the play area in their pyjamas and then to bed.
They played after high tea.
Snip
The nearby play area had several small slides and a little playhouse, which our team of kids adored, and after tea we all spent half an hour or so there.
We headed back to our apartments, the kids all tired but happy after their busy day.
madeleine: Kate McCann
No mention of pyjama's I'm sure you'll provide the necessary cite to that effect.
-
No mention of pyjama's I'm sure you'll provide the necessary cite to that effect.
They played straight after high tea, then went to their apartments to get ready for bed. Therefore they played in their clothes, not in their pyjamas.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11155.msg567092#msg567092
-
Usually the children played after high tea and before they went back to the apartment to be bathed, put into pyjamas and put to bed. Only Gerry McCann suggested they were bathed and put into their pyjamas before playing.
After dinner at 17.00, they would bath the children and get them ready for the night and play with them for a few moments in the recreation area near the tennis courts, always supervised by the parents.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN.htm
Typical Glaswegian! Reminiscent of Rab C Nesbitt!
-
They played straight after high tea, then went to their apartments to get ready for bed. Therefore they played in their clothes, not in their pyjamas.
I can't see it being any other way.
So given JT never entered 5A it's unlikely she observed MM in pj's unless the McCanns took photos and shared. Also due to the stain KM found on MM's pj top on morning of 3rd May? she was wearing a different set in the evening to those she wore earlier in the week?
-
They played straight after high tea, then went to their apartments to get ready for bed. Therefore they played in their clothes, not in their pyjamas.
Good job, only having two pair.
-
Hi. I haven't started a thread for ages now but someone asked recently whether Jane Tanner had seen Madeleine in her pajamas at any time. I thought of the suggestions that the McCanns would take their kids to the play area after high tea.
Have I got the concept correct? To me it seemed like an odd thing to do. Is it good parenting to take the kids there in their pajamas?
Jane Tanner was asked about this during her rog. interview;
4078 “Yes. I think the point they’re trying to make is that you had no knowledge of what Madeleine was supposed to have been wearing when you gave that description”?
The simple answer was 'No', but the answer Jane gave is much more complicated;
Reply “No I think, no because when, I wasn’t there at the table when Kate gave a you know, I think Kate gave everybody else, when she came, you know when everyone was looking for her, they had a description of what to look for but I wasn’t, I was in the room at that point so no I definitely didn’t know what she’d, and I’d never seen her in pyjamas, I’ve never seen Madeleine in pyjamas at home and or anywhere so”.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
-
Jane Tanner was asked about this during her rog. interview;
4078 “Yes. I think the point they’re trying to make is that you had no knowledge of what Madeleine was supposed to have been wearing when you gave that description”?
The simple answer was 'No', but the answer Jane gave is much more complicated;
Reply “No I think, no because when, I wasn’t there at the table when Kate gave a you know, I think Kate gave everybody else, when she came, you know when everyone was looking for her, they had a description of what to look for but I wasn’t, I was in the room at that point so no I definitely didn’t know what she’d, and I’d never seen her in pyjamas, I’ve never seen Madeleine in pyjamas at home and or anywhere so”.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
Is that a 'no' then?
So she didn't get Kate's briefing of description then? Or she did? She was in the room?
-
Is that a 'no' then?
So she didn't get Kate's briefing of description then? Or she did? She was in the room?
Or at the table? Kate told 'everyone else'; does that mean the rest of the group? She didn't tell Emma Knight, Fiona did. So how did Fiona know what Madeleine was wearing? Did Kate tell her at the table or in the room or at the table in the room? Was 'everyone' there except Jane? How does Jane know if she wasn't there. We know they were all at the restaurant table except Jane, but why would Kate tell them what Madeleine was wearing then, before she disappeared?
Jane seemed to suffer a meltdown in response to a very simple question imo. Perhaps she didn't see it as a simple question for some reason?
-
Or at the table? Kate told 'everyone else'; does that mean the rest of the group? She didn't tell Emma Knight, Fiona did. So how did Fiona know what Madeleine was wearing? Did Kate tell her at the table or in the room or at the table in the room? Was 'everyone' there except Jane? How does Jane know if she wasn't there. We know they were all at the restaurant table except Jane, but why would Kate tell them what Madeleine was wearing then, before she disappeared?
Jane seemed to suffer a meltdown in response to a very simple question imo. Perhaps she didn't see it as a simple question for some reason?
Might be one to ask the top sleuth, Gonzo: when did Kate issue this briefing on what Maddie was wearing and who was present?
-
Looks like more poor translation
No that was normal procedure and it only changed on 3 May 2007 - the children not going to the play area after tea. When you look at any case you look at changes in normal routine behaviour. That one stands out as well as a visit at normal bath time.
-
No that was normal procedure and it only changed on 3 May 2007 - the children not going to the play area after tea. When you look at any case you look at changes in normal routine behaviour. That one stands out as well as a visit at normal bath time.
Holiday time surely means being away from "normal routine behaviour" ?
How can routine behaviour be established during one week's holiday?
-
Every evening that was the routine - after high tea straight to play area. But NOT on Thursday then Maddy's gone. That is a good starting point and then you find another unusual happening that evening - an unexpected visit.
First statement omit these important 'changes in normal routine' facts:
Thursday May 3rd 2007
Yesterday, after the daily routine, Madeleine and the twins went to bed at around 7.30. They were in their respective beds.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm
-
Or at the table? Kate told 'everyone else'; does that mean the rest of the group? She didn't tell Emma Knight, Fiona did. So how did Fiona know what Madeleine was wearing? Did Kate tell her at the table or in the room or at the table in the room? Was 'everyone' there except Jane? How does Jane know if she wasn't there. We know they were all at the restaurant table except Jane, but why would Kate tell them what Madeleine was wearing then, before she disappeared?
Jane seemed to suffer a meltdown in response to a very simple question imo. Perhaps she didn't see it as a simple question for some reason?
Kate told Fiona what Madeleine was wearing...Fiona spoke to Jane who told her about seeing a man with a child. Is it really believable that Fiona didn’t ask Jane to describe what the child was wearing, if only to rule her out as being Madeleine ?m
-
Typical Glaswegian! Reminiscent of Rab C Nesbitt!
Och no dear, not typical at all.
Glaswegians never bathe their children nor put them in pyjamas!
Quite posh actually do so!
Must be Kate's posh Liverpudlian influence.
NB.
Rab C is not a typical Glaswegian.
How quaint are your perceptions of Glaswegians!
-
Kate told Fiona what Madeleine was wearing...Fiona spoke to Jane who told her about seeing a man with a child. Is it really believable that Fiona didn’t ask Jane to describe what the child was wearing, if only to rule her out as being Madeleine ?m
We know that Fiona knew because she told Emma Knight. According to Emma this occured before 10:30pm. So at some point between 10:00 and 10:30pm Kate told Fiona what Madeleine was wearing.
-
Every evening that was the routine - after high tea straight to play area. But NOT on Thursday then Maddy's gone. That is a good starting point and then you find another unusual happening that evening - an unexpected visit.
First statement omit these important 'changes in normal routine' facts:
Thursday May 3rd 2007
Yesterday, after the daily routine, Madeleine and the twins went to bed at around 7.30. They were in their respective beds.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm
And that wasn't the only strange change in routine that evening. The McCann children had more physical checks that evening- even though the system was supposed to be 'listen at door'.
David re the after high tea,
then another tapas male has a look around the McCanns bedroom (that is really weird in itself,why do that and not check on the children?), then Gerry noticing (due to a moving door), and finally Kate on noticing (moving door,shutters,window and curtains).
The ONE evening the children had a more physical checks, One disappears!
" How does Jane know if she wasn't there. We know they were all at the restaurant table except Jane, but why would Kate tell them what Madeleine was wearing then, before she disappeared?"
Especially when the McCanns stood on the Oprah show holding up the jammies claiming this is what their friend recognized- who saw the abductor. She saw and recognised the jammies?
Her memory certainly improved over the time...
-
And that wasn't the only strange change in routine that evening. The McCann children had more physical checks that evening- even though the system was supposed to be 'listen at door'.
David re the after high tea,
then another tapas male has a look around the McCanns bedroom (that is really weird in itself,why do that and not check on the children?), then Gerry noticing (due to a moving door), and finally Kate on noticing (moving door,shutters,window and curtains).
The ONE evening the children had a more physical checks, One disappears!
" How does Jane know if she wasn't there. We know they were all at the restaurant table except Jane, but why would Kate tell them what Madeleine was wearing then, before she disappeared?"
Especially when the McCanns stood on the Oprah show holding up the jammies claiming this is what their friend recognized- who saw the abductor. She saw and recognised the jammies?
Her memory certainly improved over the time...
According to Silvia Batista, this is what Jane told the GNR initially;
At some point she translated the statement of one of the ladies who belonged to the group and that she describes as a brunette one. This lady said to the GNR elements, and she (the witness) translated, that she had seen a man on the road who might have carried a child.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm
-
According to Silvia Batista, this is what Jane told the GNR initially;
At some point she translated the statement of one of the ladies who belonged to the group and that she describes as a brunette one. This lady said to the GNR elements, and she (the witness) translated, that she had seen a man on the road who might have carried a child.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm
A very obvious mistranslation... Jane would have said might be carrying the child... Not a child.. Imo
-
IMO the more important word there is 'might'
-
IMO the more important word there is 'might'
Let's not start yet another myth, folks!!!
I don't think 'might' comes into it at all ... Jane is clear on exactly what she saw and she never deviated from that.
From Jane Tanner's statement on 4th May 2007 ...
Meanwhile a man appeared ( * ) carrying a child (**), with a hurried walk, it being this detail together with the fact that the child dressed in pyjamas, without being wrapped up in a blanket, that caught her attention. She only managed to see him from the side, with the child in his arms. She noticed the individual's presence exactly when she had just passed by Gerry and Jez who were talking, having seen this person step off the pavement that borders on the apartment block where they were staying and rapidly cross the road.
The entrance to the apartment building (1) is exactly at the place (street) where the individual appeared from.
___________________________________________________
(**) About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.
As regards these details, she does not know what Madeleine was wearing at the moment of her disappearance, because she did not talk to anyone about this.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm
-
A very obvious mistranslation... Jane would have said might be carrying the child... Not a child.. Imo
What? So carrying a child or not? Like firewood, remember, so.......it was firewood? In pink pyjamas?
-
Hardly a myth if it's in an official statement - IMO
-
Hardly a myth if it's in an official statement - IMO
You forgot to factor in SSD that supporters use whimsically - selective statement dismissal - you know, for backward, buck-toothed, savages translatin' anna listenin' anna writin' all wrong.
-
Let's not start yet another myth, folks!!!
I don't think 'might' comes into it at all ... Jane is clear on exactly what she saw and she never deviated from that.
From Jane Tanner's statement on 4th May 2007 ...
Meanwhile a man appeared ( * ) carrying a child (**), with a hurried walk, it being this detail together with the fact that the child dressed in pyjamas, without being wrapped up in a blanket, that caught her attention. She only managed to see him from the side, with the child in his arms. She noticed the individual's presence exactly when she had just passed by Gerry and Jez who were talking, having seen this person step off the pavement that borders on the apartment block where they were staying and rapidly cross the road.
The entrance to the apartment building (1) is exactly at the place (street) where the individual appeared from.
___________________________________________________
(**) About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.
As regards these details, she does not know what Madeleine was wearing at the moment of her disappearance, because she did not talk to anyone about this.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm
'she saw only her legs'
A definite statement of fact.
'The top was not well seen though there was thought to be another colour involved possibly pink.'
How, when she only saw the child's legs??
-
Hardly a myth if it's in an official statement - IMO
Where in Jane's statement does it say "might"? You posted it was "important".
-
'she saw only her legs'
A definite statement of fact.
'The top was not well seen though there was thought to be another colour involved possibly pink.'
How, when she only saw the child's legs??
Ah ... so you think the abductor was carrying disembodied pyjama clad legs. Interesting.
-
IMO the more important word there is 'might'
Carrying a child that might be the child... Obviously a mistranslation imo
I think Jane was clear the man was carrying a child
-
Ah ... so you think the abductor was carrying disembodied pyjama clad legs. Interesting.
You think it was an abductor,I'm almost certain it wasn't,seems as if OG agree with me.
-
Ah ... so you think the abductor was carrying disembodied pyjama clad legs. Interesting.
I don't think I or Jane Tanner said that. She said she only saw the legs. Why then was she discussing the child's top which she didn't see?
-
Where in Jane's statement does it say "might"? You posted it was "important".
It wasn't in Jane's statement. Read back and see where it came from. Post 24
-
It wasn't in Jane's statement. Read back and see where it came from. Post 24
It's Sylvia Batistas hearsay account of what she thinks Jane said... With 3 or 4 translations thrown in.. But some think it's, accurate
-
How could Jane see the abductor at 21.15 when Matt said he was sure the curtains were closed at 21.30 and Kate found them open etc around 22.00. Did the abductor come back to open them??
-
How could Jane see the abductor at 21.15 when Matt said he was sure the curtains were closed at 21.30 and Kate found them open etc around 22.00. Did the abductor come back to open them??
Translation error , no doubt @)(++(*
-
How could Jane see the abductor at 21.15 when Matt said he was sure the curtains were closed at 21.30 and Kate found them open etc around 22.00. Did the abductor come back to open them??
Schrodinger's Curtains.
-
You think it was an abductor,I'm almost certain it wasn't,seems as if OG agree with me.
ORLY ? Why ?
-
How could Jane see the abductor at 21.15 when Matt said he was sure the curtains were closed at 21.30 and Kate found them open etc around 22.00. Did the abductor come back to open them??
They were really flimsy cheap curtains from the way they blew.
The curtains were closed, but it was a blustery evening and the shutters were open; a sudden gust took them.
Not dificult really alphonse, is it ?
-
The witness disagrees.
00.29.11 4078 'So you weren't, just to clarify what you have said, you weren't conscious of any draught''
Reply 'Yeah'.
4078 'The curtains were drawn and weren't blowing around''
Reply 'Yeah'.
I was there to check, erm, no, no funny sort of smells, no sort of funny draughts, no sort of funny sort of noises, no, erm, nothing that I can think of for that. I mean, it was a complete just a shock out of the blue when, you know, I'd been in and then suddenly somebody's saying Madeleine's missing, there was nothing that made me think, oh'.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm
-
The witness disagrees.
00.29.11 4078 'So you weren't, just to clarify what you have said, you weren't conscious of any draught''
Reply 'Yeah'.
4078 'The curtains were drawn and weren't blowing around''
Reply 'Yeah'.
I was there to check, erm, no, no funny sort of smells, no sort of funny draughts, no sort of funny sort of noises, no, erm, nothing that I can think of for that. I mean, it was a complete just a shock out of the blue when, you know, I'd been in and then suddenly somebody's saying Madeleine's missing, there was nothing that made me think, oh'.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm
Seems that when Matt went earlier, it was before the gusty weather had reached full strength. It might even have been * The Lull before the Storm *
-
Seems that when Matt went earlier, it was before the gusty weather had reached full strength. It might even have been * The Lull before the Storm *
Was the weather gusty? I've seen no mention of that, just that it was cold.
-
Seems that when Matt went earlier, it was before the gusty weather had reached full strength. It might even have been * The Lull before the Storm *
The witness disagrees again.
I'm just thinking more about when we were actually running along the beach and along the err and along the front doing the search and I don't recall it being err particularly windy but as I think we said but last time it was windy enough for us to sail in the afternoon but they didn't necessarily translate it to have been windy in the evening.'
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm
-
Was the weather gusty? I've seen no mention of that, just that it was cold.
The weather patterns on the evening of May 3rd have been shown on here several times .
POST MODIFIED:
Here is one report. Please read the first 4 posts .
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1986.msg63527#msg63527
You will see that 'gusty' is mentioned twice with maximum wind speeds of over 20mph ... and it is mentioned that wind speeds increase in the later evening.
-
The weather patterns on the evening of May 3rd have been shown on here several times .... but despite requests otherwise, they seem to have been deleted.
Perhaps I just cant find them ? But I did ask for them to be kept.
It was definitely gusty in the late evening of May 3rd and it has been discussed several times.
Also weather patterns have been shown for the day before and the day after
Don't give up Sadie. You are not going to be mocked on my watch anymore. I am just sad that I didn't realise what was going on.
-
Don't give up Sadie. You are not going to be mocked on my watch anymore. I am just sad that I didn't realise what was going on.
Hi Elli
Thanks for your support, but I can take a lot of bashing ... am used to it 8)-))). It is the time wasters that annoy me. They know that I am extremely slow.
You will see that I have modified my last post cos' I found some of the missing weather charts, so I am pleased about that.
I am just without energy these days, sleeping a lot of the time. The broken femur 12 months ago ... and ensuing massive traumatic and diabetic problems knocked me about dreadfully.
Yesterday was blue flashing lighted into hospital with chest pains and odd ECG's, but not thought to have been a heart attack, so back home again. The day before I had a fall and it took getting on for half an hour before I could get up. Hubby too old and unwell to manage pulling me up. Shaking all over and bruised swollen knees but fine again now.
The worst problem atm is my degenerating spine. Have lost over 4" in height. I never take pain killers cos they mask the source of the problem, and my belief is to treat the source of the problem and not hide it. Was actually shouting out with pain and afraid to lie down or sit up in bed, so have finally given way and am on minimum pain killers atm.
But the number of probs I have is unbelievable since the trauma from braeking my femur. I am lucky, I guess. Many Octagenerians (Spelling? ... and is there such a word?) die after breaking their femur. Am not a lot of good tho'
Hope you keep well.
sadie x
Please delete this, when you have read it. TY
-
Hi Elli
Thanks for your support, but I can take a lot of bashing ... am used to it 8)-))). It is the time wasters that annoy me. They know that I am extremely slow.
You will see that I have modified my last post cos' I found some of the missing weather charts, so I am pleased about that.
I am just without energy these days, sleeping a lot of the time. The broken femur 12 months ago ... and ensuing massive traumatic and diabetic problems knocked me about dreadfully.
Yesterday was blue flashing lighted into hospital with chest pains and odd ECG's, but not thought to have been a heart attack, so back home again. The day before I had a fall and it took getting on for half an hour before I could get up. Hubby too old and unwell to manage pulling me up. Shaking all over and bruised swollen knees but fine again now.
The worst problem atm is my degenerating spine. Have lost over 4" in height. I never take pain killers cos they mask the source of the problem, and my belief is to treat the source of the problem and not hide it. Was actually shouting out with pain and afraid to lie down or sit up in bed, so have finally given way and am on minimum pain killers atm.
But the number of probs I have is unbelievable since the trauma from braeking my femur. I am lucky, I guess. Many Octagenerians (Spelling? ... and is there such a word?) die after breaking their femur. Am not a lot of good tho'
Hope you keep well.
sadie x
Please delete this, when you have read it. TY
No. No chance of me deleting this. You worked so hard. You might not have been right, but then you never said that you were.
If this Forum is worth anything at all then it owes you some respect because you tried, and worked so hard.
The one thing that has really upset me is how very badly you have been treated. Enough. That is finished now. It won't happen again.
I do hope that you and Malcom are half alright. Love you. Mitch. xxxx
-
Hi Elli
Thanks for your support, but I can take a lot of bashing ... am used to it 8)-))). It is the time wasters that annoy me. They know that I am extremely slow.
You will see that I have modified my last post cos' I found some of the missing weather charts, so I am pleased about that.
I am just without energy these days, sleeping a lot of the time. The broken femur 12 months ago ... and ensuing massive traumatic and diabetic problems knocked me about dreadfully.
Yesterday was blue flashing lighted into hospital with chest pains and odd ECG's, but not thought to have been a heart attack, so back home again. The day before I had a fall and it took getting on for half an hour before I could get up. Hubby too old and unwell to manage pulling me up. Shaking all over and bruised swollen knees but fine again now.
The worst problem atm is my degenerating spine. Have lost over 4" in height. I never take pain killers cos they mask the source of the problem, and my belief is to treat the source of the problem and not hide it. Was actually shouting out with pain and afraid to lie down or sit up in bed, so have finally given way and am on minimum pain killers atm.
But the number of probs I have is unbelievable since the trauma from braeking my femur. I am lucky, I guess. Many Octagenerians (Spelling? ... and is there such a word?) die after breaking their femur. Am not a lot of good tho'
Hope you keep well.
sadie x
Please delete this, when you have read it. TY
It's amazing that.you have coped with all of your medical problems and still manage to post in such a positive and cheerful manner.
Sending my best wishes to you.X
-
I am thinking of you, Sadie and wishing you less pain and discomfort. My mother went through something similar and it was unbearable at times to witness her suffering. I love octogenarians (a person who is between 80 and 89 years old) for many reasons. My father is also one. Sending you love and light. XX
-
Sadie you are an amazing person. You have gone through all that trauma yet you are here still posting, I love all the research you have done, and your photo's of Portugal. Take no notice of those who put you down. Remember we are here to back you up and we will. Love Lace xxxxxxxxxx
-
It's nice to see Sadie's friends offering her their support. Does that mean that they also subscribe to her theory too? Do they all agree that Madeleine had a precious DNA and that she was abducted so someone could breed with her when she was old enough?
-
It's nice to see Sadie's friends offering her their support. Does that mean that they also subscribe to her theory too? Do they all agree that Madeleine had a precious DNA and that she was abducted so someone could breed with her when she was old enough?
What a very sad comment amongst the good wishes.
-
The weather patterns on the evening of May 3rd have been shown on here several times .
POST MODIFIED:
Here is one report. Please read the first 4 posts .
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1986.msg63527#msg63527
You will see that 'gusty' is mentioned twice with maximum wind speeds of over 20mph ... and it is mentioned that wind speeds increase in the later evening.
On the actual Thursday we should have been doing wind surfing and we actually did sailing, because there was no wind.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
Were you there? Faro is 60 miles away from PDL. According to Matt it was not windy when he was searching on the beach. And the beach is a windy spot. People were out on their balconies and I haven't heard one witness that night complaining about gusts!
Let's see your evidence of it being a gusty night in PDL?
-
On the actual Thursday we should have been doing wind surfing and we actually did sailing, because there was no wind.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
Were you there? Faro is 60 miles away from PDL. According to Matt it was not windy when he was searching on the beach. And the beach is a windy spot. People were out on their balconies and I haven't heard one witness that night complaining about gusts!
Let's see your evidence of it being a gusty night in PDL?
How does one sail without wind? Trust me. I have some experience of this.
-
On the actual Thursday we should have been doing wind surfing and we actually did sailing, because there was no wind.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
Were you there? Faro is 60 miles away from PDL. According to Matt it was not windy when he was searching on the beach. And the beach is a windy spot. People were out on their balconies and I haven't heard one witness that night complaining about gusts!
Let's see your evidence of it being a gusty night in PDL?
Maybe there wasn't any gusts of wind in the afternoon. Maybe they need constant wind for sailing? Doesn't mean it wasn't gusty during the night of the 3rd of May does it?
-
It's nice to see Sadie's friends offering her their support. Does that mean that they also subscribe to her theory too? Do they all agree that Madeleine had a precious DNA and that she was abducted so someone could breed with her when she was old enough?
I have my theory Sadie has hers, Sadie respects mine I respect hers. Everyone is allowed to have a theory aren't they?
-
On the actual Thursday we should have been doing wind surfing and we actually did sailing, because there was no wind.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
Were you there? Faro is 60 miles away from PDL. According to Matt it was not windy when he was searching on the beach. And the beach is a windy spot. People were out on their balconies and I haven't heard one witness that night complaining about gusts!
Let's see your evidence of it being a gusty night in PDL?
As I understand it one surfs on the swell of the waves wind or no wind ... vessels which are powered by sail require wind to do so, which makes your interpretation of the witnesses's statement wrong.
If the boats were sailing obviously there was wind which would either moderate or increase later on. Which is what happened according to Kate's experience.
Do you think the PJ didn't check on that? In my opinion not even Amaral in his book or documentary questioned the whooshing curtain, wonder why that was.
-
I have my theory Sadie has hers, Sadie respects mine I respect hers. Everyone is allowed to have a theory aren't they?
Which others are allowed to question, although I get the impression that some think that shouldn't be allowed in all cases.
-
As I understand it one surfs on the swell of the waves wind or no wind ... vessels which are powered by sail require wind to do so, which makes your interpretation of the witnesses's statement wrong.
If the boats were sailing obviously there was wind which would either moderate or increase later on. Which is what happened according to Kate's experience.
Do you think the PJ didn't check on that? In my opinion not even Amaral in his book or documentary questioned the whooshing curtain, wonder why that was.
It's in the files. Rebelo requested the weather records. There is nothing to suggest the PJ coughed up the €300+ to obtain the same.
-
As I understand it one surfs on the swell of the waves wind or no wind ... vessels which are powered by sail require wind to do so, which makes your interpretation of the witnesses's statement wrong.
If the boats were sailing obviously there was wind which would either moderate or increase later on. Which is what happened according to Kate's experience.
Do you think the PJ didn't check on that? In my opinion not even Amaral in his book or documentary questioned the whooshing curtain, wonder why that was.
Kate's experience is that she refused to answer police questions about it. Amaral wouldn't need to comment on whooshing curtains because he concludes that Kate opened the window @)(++(*
Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?
Kate McCann: ‘Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.’
-
It's in the files. Rebelo requested the weather records. There is nothing to suggest the PJ coughed up the €300+ to obtain the same.
Are you saying that was something else the Amaral investigation failed to do?
When one checks the dates it is incredible so many diligences which had to wait until until after Amaral was sacked before being checked out by the investigation.
A bit late in the day and definitely long outside the all important golden hours in a missing child case.
Wasn't the all important provenance of the Smiths' reported visits to restaurants on the night of the 3rd May one of them, when no-one could remember seeing a family of nine?
-
Kate's experience is that she refused to answer police questions about it. Amaral wouldn't need to comment on whooshing curtains because he concludes that Kate opened the window @)(++(*
Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?
Kate McCann: ‘Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.’
You do know that the PJ were not asking any questions at that stage of the proceedings four months down the line which would further the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance.
They had already written Madeleine off as dead by then without a scrap of supporting evidence.
The investigation you are talking about was now centred on the already tried and tested rule of thumb that the mother 'dunnit'. Only this time the rule of law prevailed with the accused having access to a lawyer during questioning whose advice was not to answer questions.
What is it you find extraordinary about a person refusing to answer questions in the full knowledge that to do so would be assisting the PJ in their totally wrong investigation into the wrong case.
The PJ were not investigating what had happened to Madeleine the only investigation they were interested in was investigating Kate.
-
Kate's experience is that she refused to answer police questions about it. Amaral wouldn't need to comment on whooshing curtains because he concludes that Kate opened the window @)(++(*
Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?
Kate McCann: ‘Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.’
I would say Kate would have answered any question that would help but knew these, wouldnt. It's been gone over many times..... Kate was absolutely right not to answer imo...
-
On the actual Thursday we should have been doing wind surfing and we actually did sailing, because there was no wind.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
Were you there? Faro is 60 miles away from PDL. According to Matt it was not windy when he was searching on the beach. And the beach is a windy spot. People were out on their balconies and I haven't heard one witness that night complaining about gusts!
Let's see your evidence of it being a gusty night in PDL?
Ive already posted it. Didn't you read the weather report ? Do read it, purleaze
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1986.msg63527#msg63527
It is entirely possible for mini storms to come alive between calmer periods, particularly at ocean fronting areas.
And I am sure that you have heard of the * Lull before the storm *, a well as * The storm blowing itself out *
PS. I think that you are my favourite sceptic, PF, because altho IMO you are often incorrect, you seem sincere and work very hard following your own route.
I like that. 8((()*/
-
Ive already posted it. Didn't you read the weather report ? Do read it, purleaze
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1986.msg63527#msg63527
It is entirely possible for mini storms to come alive between calmer periods, particularly at ocean fronting areas.
And I am sure that you have heard of the * Lull before the storm *, a well as * The storm blowing itself out *
PS. I think that you are my favourite sceptic, PF, because altho IMO you are often incorrect, you seem sincere and work very hard following your own route.
I like that. 8((()*/
Thank You Sadie. You are not wrong about Pathfinder.
-
Are you saying that was something else the Amaral investigation failed to do?
When one checks the dates it is incredible so many diligences which had to wait until until after Amaral was sacked before being checked out by the investigation.
A bit late in the day and definitely long outside the all important golden hours in a missing child case.
Wasn't the all important provenance of the Smiths' reported visits to restaurants on the night of the 3rd May one of them, when no-one could remember seeing a family of nine?
No, I am saying it was something the Rebelo investigation chose not to do.
Why do you need to twist my words?
-
No, I am saying it was something the Rebelo investigation chose not to do.
Why do you need to twist my words?
You said
"It's in the files. Rebelo requested the weather records. There is nothing to suggest the PJ coughed up the €300+ to obtain the same."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11155.msg567893#msg567893
Please give a succinct explanation why you seem to think I have "twisted" your words in my reply.
-
You said
"It's in the files. Rebelo requested the weather records. There is nothing to suggest the PJ coughed up the €300+ to obtain the same."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11155.msg567893#msg567893
Please give a succinct explanation why you seem to think I have "twisted" your words in my reply.
Because it is obvious you changed it from Rebelo to Amaral. How simple and succinct does it need to be!
-
Which others are allowed to question, although I get the impression that some think that shouldn't be allowed in all cases.
Of course others are allowed to question, or there wouldn't be any debate would there? There is no need for ridicule though.
-
It's nice to see Sadie's friends offering her their support. Does that mean that they also subscribe to her theory too? Do they all agree that Madeleine had a precious DNA and that she was abducted so someone could breed with her when she was old enough?
Sadie is a lovely woman who has been through alot. I don’t agree with her theory and personally find it very far fetched. Sadie knows this but is completely gracious about it and always very supportive of me when I come under attack for saying things some people on here don’t like.
Sadie, wishing you and hubbie well - Happy New Year xx
-
Of course others are allowed to question, or there wouldn't be any debate would there? There is no need for ridicule though.
What ridicule?
-
Ive already posted it. Didn't you read the weather report ? Do read it, purleaze
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1986.msg63527#msg63527
It is entirely possible for mini storms to come alive between calmer periods, particularly at ocean fronting areas.
And I am sure that you have heard of the * Lull before the storm *, a well as * The storm blowing itself out *
PS. I think that you are my favourite sceptic, PF, because altho IMO you are often incorrect, you seem sincere and work very hard following your own route.
I like that. 8((()*/
Faro District weather report. A gentle wind 10 mph at 22:00. The highest winds that day were in the afternoon 2 to 4 (max wind speed 18 mph)
(https://i.ibb.co/qYKwYsn/1578166065807.jpg)
https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/LPFR/date/2007-5-3
-
Faro District weather report. A gentle wind 10 mph at 22:00. The highest winds that day were in the afternoon 2 to 4 (max wind speed 18 mph)
(https://i.ibb.co/qYKwYsn/1578166065807.jpg)
https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/LPFR/date/2007-5-3
A gentle breeze then. Enough to move leaves on trees and extend light flags.
-
A gentle breeze then. Enough to move leaves on trees and extend light flags.
does that mean there could not have been a gust in Luz...did the apt have an open fireplace
-
does that mean there could not have been a gust in Luz...did the apt have an open fireplace
Perhaps the 'abductor' set up a wind machine in the car park, trained on that window.
-
Perhaps the 'abductor' set up a wind machine in the car park, trained on that window.
what an absolutely stupid post...is that what you have been reduced to
-
what an absolutely stupid post...is that what you have been reduced to
*^&*
-
Because it is obvious you changed it from Rebelo to Amaral. How simple and succinct does it need to be!
What nonsense. I have no idea why you have arrived at your conclusion and in my opinion is an illustration of precisely why this case is dogged with the level of superstition it suffers from.
In response to my post asking A.N Other ~ "Do you think the PJ didn't check on that? In my opinion not even Amaral in his book or documentary questioned the whooshing curtain, wonder why that was." you said ...
"It's in the files. Rebelo requested the weather records. There is nothing to suggest the PJ coughed up the €300+ to obtain the same."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11155.msg567893#msg567893
As you know, Amaral was sacked from the investigation on 02 October; the fax which was sent requesting the information about the weather on the 3rd/4th of May 2007 is dated 25 October 2007 which by my arithmetic is when Rebelo was playing catch up with the omissions of the Amaral regime.
I changed nothing in my post and I must still admit to puzzlement over your accusation that I did which I think is spurious to say the least. I replied to your post and I take it my reply did not suit you, but that is no reason to misrepresent what I have actually said.
-
A gentle breeze then. Enough to move leaves on trees and extend light flags.
And strong enough to go sailing in??
-
What's the significance of the sailing thing and the wind / no wind?
-
And strong enough to go sailing in??
Was someone sailing at 10pm?
-
What's the significance of the sailing thing and the wind / no wind?
it seems sceptics such as gunit can prove kate ws lying regarding the curtains whooshing based on the weather informatiom from some palce about 15 miles away
-
What's the significance of the sailing thing and the wind / no wind?
You don't appear to be keeping up with the debate so I'm afraid I can't help you with that.
I suggest you read from http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11155.msg567882#msg567882 to enable you to catch what is going on.
-
it seems sceptics such as gunit can prove kate ws lying regarding the curtains whooshing based on the weather informatiom from some palce about 15 miles away
Thought so, cheers.
-
You don't appear to be keeping up with the debate so I'm afraid I can't help you with that.
I suggest you read from http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11155.msg567882#msg567882 to enable you to catch what is going on.
Put your handbag away, I wasn't asking you.
-
Faro District weather report. A gentle wind 10 mph at 22:00. The highest winds that day were in the afternoon 2 to 4 (max wind speed 18 mph)
(https://i.ibb.co/qYKwYsn/1578166065807.jpg)
https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/LPFR/date/2007-5-3
Seems someones mind was made up regarding the whooshing...
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/WEATHER_CONDITIONS.htm
A very small dingy/ boat with a small sail- no gib can move slowly in and around a small area in a light breeze. I know I have done it!
There is NO physical evidence or proof that the shutters were jemmied, curtains were whooshing as a window was opened by a prep carrying drugs and cleaning equipment for his big abduction night!
None what so ever. Just what Kate says, and... well...
AND experts along with two police forces agree with me! @)(++(*
-
Seems someones mind was made up regarding the whooshing...
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/WEATHER_CONDITIONS.htm
A very small dingy/ boat with a small sail- no gib can move slowly in and around a small area in a light breeze. I know I have done it!
There is NO physical evidence or proof that the shutters were jemmied, curtains were whooshing as a window was opened by a prep carrying drugs and cleaning equipment for his big abduction night!
None what so ever. Just what Kate says, and... well...
AND experts along with two police forces agree with me! @)(++(*
both police forces say the mccanns are not suspects....good to see you support them
-
Schrodinger's Curtains.
Hahahaha! oh Parallel universe- we would all be correct! dead /alive both at the same time!
-
it seems sceptics such as gunit can prove kate ws lying regarding the curtains whooshing based on the weather informatiom from some palce about 15 miles away
Didn't some supporter try to prove there were gusts based on the weather information from some palce 85 kms away?
-
Didn't some supporter try to prove there were gusts based on the weather information from some palce 85 kms away?
do they....i certainly dont...I dont see such trivia as having any importance...no evidence...no suspects ...is what the present investigation says
-
Hahahaha! oh Parallel universe- we would all be correct! dead /alive both at the same time!
thats not what Schrodinger said...perhaps you should read what he said...what he said in a roundabout way is relevant...maddie is either alive or dead...but we wont know until we see her...hope that helps
-
both police forces say the mccanns are not suspects....good to see you support them
Both Police have made it very clear they do not buy the whooshing window abductor story!
As far as we know they have not ruled anything in or out! They are not giving a running commentary.
"thats not what Schrodinger said...perhaps you should read what he said...what he said in a roundabout way is relevant...maddie is either alive or dead...but we wont know until we see her...hope that helps"
Say what? (&^& (&^& (&^&
Never mind the round about way. let us hear YOUR interpretation of the quantum physics/mechanics of the cat.
-
Both Police have made it very clear they do not buy the whooshing window abductor story!
As far as we know they have not ruled anything in or out! They are not giving a running commentary.
"thats not what Schrodinger said...perhaps you should read what he said...what he said in a roundabout way is relevant...maddie is either alive or dead...but we wont know until we see her...hope that helps"
Say what? (&^& (&^& (&^&
Never mind the round about way. let us hear YOUR interpretation of the quantum physics/mechanics of the cat.
SY have cearly stated that however maddie left the apartment she was abducted...thats a fact and its about time you faced it
-
SY have cearly stated that however maddie left the apartment she was abducted...thats a fact and its about time you faced it
The very fact that the child is missing is evidence that she is no longer in the flat. how she left dead or alive we do not know! THAT is the FACTS
-
Was someone sailing at 10pm?
Possibly ... but you are the one who responded to the weather chart in your post, so I think you may have more of an opinion about it than I do.
However there appears to have been at least one mystery yacht which left port at Portimao that night which apparently did not show up at its designated destination https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/119199/Maddie-yacht-mystery showing that it is possible for luxury boats to come and go at will whatever the wind speed and whatever the weather in a land where some deny flimsy curtains can blow in the wind.
-
Possibly ... but you are the one who responded to the weather chart in your post, so I think you may have more of an opinion about it than I do.
However there appears to have been at least one mystery yacht which left port at Portimao that night which apparently did not show up at its designated destination https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/119199/Maddie-yacht-mystery showing that it is possible for luxury boats to come and go at will whatever the wind speed and whatever the weather in a land where some deny flimsy curtains can blow in the wind.
Luxury yachts have motor engines- you just in case there is not enough wind. But then you knew that.
-
Put your handbag away, I wasn't asking you.
I was polite enough to answer you to keep you up to speed, though.
-
Seems someones mind was made up regarding the whooshing...
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/WEATHER_CONDITIONS.htm
A very small dingy/ boat with a small sail- no gib can move slowly in and around a small area in a light breeze. I know I have done it!
There is NO physical evidence or proof that the shutters were jemmied, curtains were whooshing as a window was opened by a prep carrying drugs and cleaning equipment for his big abduction night!
None what so ever. Just what Kate says, and... well...
AND experts along with two police forces agree with me! @)(++(*
No-one who was there at the time ever suggested that the shutters had been jemmied ... t'would have been mightily daft of anyone to make that suggestion when the shutters had been interfered with only by being opened and with no sign of damage otherwise.
-
No-one who was there at the time ever suggested that the shutters had been jemmied ... t'would have been mightily daft of anyone to make that suggestion when the shutters had been interfered with only by being opened and with no sign of damage otherwise.
I like that revisionism; it's necessary for enablers to distance themselves from that most fundamental of mistakes.
You're right, of course, but this means Trish is a liar then?
-
I like that revisionism; it's necessary for enablers to distance themselves from that most fundamental of mistakes.
You're right, of course, but this means Trish is a liar then?
No, it doesn’t mean Trish is a liar unless you insist that everyone who says something that paraphrases or deviates slightly from the original is deliberately lying. Do you insist on that? Probably, because that’s what sceptics like to do.
-
No, it doesn’t mean Trish is a liar unless you insist that everyone who says something that paraphrases or deviates slightly from the original is deliberately lying. Do you insist on that? Probably, because that’s what sceptics like to do.
More revisionism. Keep it going, it's required, isn't it? I understand.
-
More revisionism. Keep it going, it's required, isn't it? I understand.
Yes it is required, it’s what I’m paid for. How else is a girl to keep herself in Louboutins? tw...
-
I like that revisionism; it's necessary for enablers to distance themselves from that most fundamental of mistakes.
You're right, of course, but this means Trish is a liar then?
Well, maybe not a liar as such more of 'making it up' comes to my mind, remember the story. erm the first story that is; cue dramatic music* Kate went to check on the children they were like sitting in the garden like all Uk people do, she saw the shutters were jemmied window was open and Madeleine had disappeared.
other noted it was claimed she was 'snatched from her bed'.
-
Luxury yachts have motor engines- you just in case there is not enough wind. But then you knew that.
If you read the cite provided I think you might find that the type of yacht described (Bayliner) does not rely on sail at all.
(https://imt.boatwizard.com/images/1/16/67/7211667_20191017191952211_1_XLARGE.jpg)
-
More revisionism. Keep it going, it's required, isn't it? I understand.
Carter insists. [according to Davel they spoke to John] Hahahaha!
They kept the parents out of jail away from harmful facing of facts and they got off free. whoo hoo!
Well what about what they did for MBM= nothing. maybe not whoo hoo
-
I like that revisionism; it's necessary for enablers to distance themselves from that most fundamental of mistakes.
You're right, of course, but this means Trish is a liar then?
No it does not as you should know if you have read anything at all about what Gerry's sister said in Glesga parlance.
-
No it does not as you should know if you have read anything at all about what Gerry's sister said in Glesga parlance.
She said it as it was relayed to her by the parents, as she wasn't there! stop trying to re write what is in an interview.
The family have had plenty of interviews to re hash their version (they did with some bits)- they stick by it and it is all on record!
summary of their account:
Jemmied shutters- open window-whooshing curtains MBM Snatched by abductor. MBM could not have left of her own accord.
Re the bayliner - That is the point I was making. Sail boats have sails!!! Larger vessels have motor boats
-
Yes it is required, it’s what I’m paid for. How else is a girl to keep herself in Louboutins? tw...
C'mon, you have to admit that was funny.......
-
C'mon, you have to admit that was funny.......
I wrote it, of course it was funny.
-
I wrote it, of course it was funny.
Yes, but not that, the deleted, hilarious, offensive response.
-
Yes, but not that, the deleted, hilarious, offensive response.
We all laughed!
-
She said it as it was relayed to her by the parents, as she wasn't there! stop trying to re write what is in an interview.
The family have had plenty of interviews to re hash their version (they did with some bits)- they stick by it and it is all on record!
summary of their account:
Jemmied shutters- open window-whooshing curtains MBM Snatched by abductor. MBM could not have left of her own accord.
Re the bayliner - That is the point I was making. Sail boats have sails!!! Larger vessels have motor boats
Kate and Gerry have never claimed the shutter was jemmied your claim that they did is absolutely mistaken.
Regarding the yacht ... you said ... "Luxury yachts have motor engines- you just in case there is not enough wind. But then you knew that."
When you wrote that post in my opinion you didn't know what you were posting about for the simple reason I do not think that you had read the cite provided and were under the assumption sails were involved.
I'm glad you've got it now ... I'm sure some luxury yachts do have sails but I don't think Bayliners do or if they do I've not seen any.
-
Yes, but not that, the deleted, hilarious, offensive response.
Oh that. Yeah, hilarious. PM me if you’re still interested btw.
-
We all laughed!
Is that you and your 42 alternative personalities?
-
Luxury yachts have motor engines- you just in case there is not enough wind. But then you knew that.
Especially motor boats...
-
If you read the cite provided I think you might find that the type of yacht described (Bayliner) does not rely on sail at all.
(https://imt.boatwizard.com/images/1/16/67/7211667_20191017191952211_1_XLARGE.jpg)
Strange when it was introduced to back up a theory it was windy...
-
SY have cearly stated that however maddie left the apartment she was abducted...thats a fact and its about time you faced it
The other salient fact ignored is and its missing from any official statement,"stranger abduction".
Abductio-Leading away/ carrying away.
-
The other salient fact ignored is and its missing from any official statement,"stranger abduction".
Abductio-Leading away/ carrying away.
Redwood mentioned abduction by a, stranger... I really think you are, scraping the barrel there
-
Redwood mentioned abduction by a, stranger... I really think you are, scraping the barrel there
A cite wouldn't go amiss,age and all that the memory can't quite remember you ever placing one.
Redwood ain't all bad he agrees with me in that we're almost certain Tanner never saw no abductor
-
A cite wouldn't go amiss,age and all that the memory can't quite remember you ever placing one.
Redwood ain't all bad he agrees with me in that we're almost certain Tanner never saw no abductor
He certainly did... Its been quoted many times... I'll see if I can dig one up... Remember he also said... Based on the evidence
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/25/madeleine-mccann-yard-case
He unequivocally dismissed the conspiracy theory – promoted by the original Portuguese lead detective Goncalo Amaral – that Madeleine's parents had anything to do with her disappearance.
He said detectives believe Madeleine was abducted in "a criminal act by a stranger
-
If Redwood unequivocally dismisses amarals theory then surely he is officially saying the mccanns are ruled out
-
If Redwood unequivocally dismisses amarals theory then surely he is officially saying the mccanns are ruled out
Did he say that or did a journalist say it? She also said;
The team is also pursuing the line of inquiry that after five years Madeleine might be dead.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/25/madeleine-mccann-yard-case
-
He certainly did... Its been quoted many times... I'll see if I can dig one up... Remember he also said... Based on the evidence
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/25/madeleine-mccann-yard-case
He unequivocally dismissed the conspiracy theory – promoted by the original Portuguese lead detective Goncalo Amaral – that Madeleine's parents had anything to do with her disappearance.
He said detectives believe Madeleine was abducted in "a criminal act by a stranger
First of all thank you for the cite,secondly Redwood never said he subscribes to that theory,he said " detectives believe she was abducted by a stranger,"still I'm sure you'll agree with me that article was from 2012,still nothing concrete to prove Amaral wrong.
-
Did he say that or did a journalist say it? She also said;
The team is also pursuing the line of inquiry that after five years Madeleine might be dead.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/25/madeleine-mccann-yard-case
its in quotation marks.....I think you would have to agree that such a statement would mean afa SY is concerned the mccanns are ruled out......I think everyone including the mccanns accept that maddie may well be dead
-
First of all thank you for the cite,secondly Redwood never said he subscribes to that theory,he said " detectives believe she was abducted by a stranger,"still I'm sure you'll agree with me that article was from 2012,still nothing concrete to prove Amaral wrong.
Ill dig out the actual live video. AS for amaral being proved wrong....an assertion not supported by evidence needs no evidence to refute it....redwood is reported in this article to totally dismiss it
-
its in quotation marks.....I think you would have to agree that such a statement would mean afa SY is concerned the mccanns are ruled out......I think everyone including the mccanns accept that maddie may well be dead
It's not in quotation marks.
-
It's not in quotation marks.
that piece isnt true...perhaps the reporter is part of the conspiracy to protect the mccanns......I think thats pretty strong evidence to show tahts what redwood thinks
"We are in a unique position seeking to draw together the three key strands of information about her disappearance," said Redwood.
He unequivocally dismissed the conspiracy theory – promoted by the original Portuguese lead detective Goncalo Amaral – that Madeleine's parents had anything to do with her disappearance.
Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
Read more
He said detectives believe Madeleine was abducted in "a criminal act by a stranger".
-
It's not in quotation marks.
Desperation!
-
Kate and Gerry have never claimed the shutter was jemmied your claim that they did is absolutely mistaken.
Regarding the yacht ... you said ... "Luxury yachts have motor engines- you just in case there is not enough wind. But then you knew that."
When you wrote that post in my opinion you didn't know what you were posting about for the simple reason I do not think that you had read the cite provided and were under the assumption sails were involved.
I'm glad you've got it now ... I'm sure some luxury yachts do have sails but I don't think Bayliners do or if they do I've not seen any.
My claim is taken from what was said in an interview by Gerry McCanns sister on TV. That does not make me wrong at all.
So was Trish lying about the parents claiming the shutters had been forced? Why would she say that if it was not the story she was told by the parents who were there? Who authorised her to speak to the media even though it is against the law in that country.
Regards the wind and yachts. you made a claim about boats being able to come and go without a wind- I gave a fact about some boats and sail boats have motor engines. So what was the point you were making regarding sail boats coming and going with 'no wind'. The smaller dingy's with sails, as like the MW club, can move with a light breeze.
-
Is that you and your 42 alternative personalities?
No, Just me , my two sisters and mum. I just can't type what Nana Aitken said!
-
No, Just me , my two sisters and mum. I just can't type what Nana Aitken said!
My Uncle Alfie would like to meet your Nana Aitken, maybe over on the Brexit thread. for some lolz.
-
Strange when it was introduced to back up a theory it was windy...
Actually you are entirely wrong.
I was originally asked by another if there was anyone sailing at 10pm. The answer to that was that there was at least one but at least one which was unaccounted for at the time of Madeleine's disappearance.
Therefore the theory being 'backed up' was not entirely the irrelevance of whether or not it was windy but how Madeleine could be abducted from her bed to vanish as completely as she did. Abduction, transport and the means and planning to do so.
She and the other children were very visible in their routine such as when playing in the play area before bedtime.
Snip
The mystery boat had been sailing along the Algarve coast close to Praia da Luz where Madeleine disappeared.
And records show it has previously docked at Barcelona’s Marina Port Vell, next to the Olympic Marina where the Australian woman was spotted.
The Portuguese source said: “It’s possible that the boat went to Barcelona. The yacht left Portimao on the morning of May 4, 2007.
“It left saying it was going to Albufeira in Portugal. It is a legal requirement to give a destination but it did not arrive in Albufeira.
“There were six boats that left Portimao that day. All have been accounted for apart from the Swedish boat.”
In Sweden all vessels measuring over 12 metres (40ft) long must be registered with the Swedish Maritime Administration.
But inquires with their head office in Stockholm yesterday found no record of the yacht.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/119199/Maddie-yacht-mystery
-
My claim is taken from what was said in an interview by Gerry McCanns sister on TV. That does not make me wrong at all.
So was Trish lying about the parents claiming the shutters had been forced? Why would she say that if it was not the story she was told by the parents who were there? Who authorised her to speak to the media even though it is against the law in that country.
Regards the wind and yachts. you made a claim about boats being able to come and go without a wind- I gave a fact about some boats and sail boats have motor engines. So what was the point you were making regarding sail boats coming and going with 'no wind'. The smaller dingy's with sails, as like the MW club, can move with a light breeze.
I reiterate ... Neither Kate of Gerry McCann have ever said that the shutter of Madeleine's room window was 'jemmied'.
They should know. They were there. They said that the window was open and the shutter raised.
-
I reiterate ... Neither Kate of Gerry McCann have ever said that the shutter of Madeleine's room window was 'jemmied'.
They should know. They were there. They said that the window was open and the shutter raised.
You have no idea whether that statement is true or false because you have no way of knowing what they said to people on the phone that night.
-
You have no idea whether that statement is true or false because you have no way of knowing what they said to people on the phone that night.
True, just because there's a tenuous way to explain this apparent miscommunication - gremlins, Scotch language barrier, decrepit telecommunications infrastructure in backward hellhole, 'I said 'Jimmy', not 'Jemmie' - doesn't mean it wasn't said. Why would she say it? Why is this account unreliable, but Jane Tanner's isn't. Pamela Fenn (rip) is a doddering busy body, but Kate's account of this conversation is boilerplate.
Conversely, imagine sceptics having to try to explain if evidence existed that the shutters were jimmy / jemmie / forced.
-
You have no idea whether that statement is true or false because you have no way of knowing what they said to people on the phone that night.
So you acknowledge they may not have said it and also that they cannot be held responsible for anything that other people said they said as you weren’t there to hear it for yourself.
-
True, just because there's a tenuous way to explain this apparent miscommunication - gremlins, Scotch language barrier, decrepit telecommunications infrastructure in backward hellhole, 'I said 'Jimmy', not 'Jemmie' - doesn't mean it wasn't said. Why would she say it? Why is this account unreliable, but Jane Tanner's isn't. Pamela Fenn (rip) is a doddering busy body, but Kate's account of this conversation is boilerplate.
Conversely, imagine sceptics having to try to explain if evidence existed that the shutters were jimmy / jemmie / forced.
Well no matter how those four people (2 in Scotland and 2 in Liverpool) misheard or mangled what they were told they made sure everyone got the message via the media.
It reminds me of how Telecinco mangled the information they were given. Their account of what was in the McCann's police statements was very different from what was actually in those statements.
Kate didn't tell the police "Gerry and I spoke for a couple of minutes and agreed to keep a closer watch over the children." or "I went towards the window and opened the curtains to see if she had climbed up there but I could see no trace of her."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/spanish-tv-station-claims-it-obtained-302312
-
Strange when it was introduced to back up a theory it was windy...
It isn't a theory, Slarti. It is fact.
It was windy and gusty.
-
So you acknowledge they may not have said it and also that they cannot be held responsible for anything that other people said they said as you weren’t there to hear it for yourself.
Nobody can say for sure what was or was not said. The evidence suggests it was said however, as does the lack of correction.
-
Nobody can say for sure what was or was not said. The evidence suggests it was said however, as does the lack of correction.
Consider being one of the first accounts that a clamouring media here - you're going to be pretty sure of your facts. There'll be no room for inaccuracies in this context, as your family are out there searching for a child.
Now consider it's your first time speaking to the media - are you going to ad lib at this point, or are you going to rely on what you've been told?
-
It isn't a theory, Slarti. It is fact.
It was windy and gusty.
Sadie, this is from witnesses that were there. Wednesday was the worst day for weather and Thursday was much better.
"It was a kind of a much warmer day than it had been previously, erm so I guess we were down there about half four-ish, quarter to five, erm and the kids just played on the beach a bit and sort of paddled in the sea a little bit."
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm
"I'm just thinking more about when we were actually running along the beach and along the err and along the front doing the, the search and I don't recall it being err particularly windy."
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm
"On the actual Thursday we should have been doing wind surfing and we actually did sailing, because there was no wind."
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
On 3 May 2007 from nearby weather reports the highest winds were in the afternoon at 18 mph. At 10pm when Kate reported Madeleine to be missing it was a gentle breeze 10 mph.
-
Consider being one of the first accounts that a clamouring media here - you're going to be pretty sure of your facts. There'll be no room for inaccuracies in this context, as your family are out there searching for a child.
Now consider it's your first time speaking to the media - are you going to ad lib at this point, or are you going to rely on what you've been told?
the family paraphrased what they had been told...its a chinese whisper. ....think of stoically and blidly
-
Sadie, this is from witnesses that were there. Wednesday was the worst day for weather and Thursday was much better.
"It was a kind of a much warmer day than it had been previously, erm so I guess we were down there about half four-ish, quarter to five, erm and the kids just played on the beach a bit and sort of paddled in the sea a little bit."
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm
"I'm just thinking more about when we were actually running along the beach and along the err and along the front doing the, the search and I don't recall it being err particularly windy."
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm
"On the actual Thursday we should have been doing wind surfing and we actually did sailing, because there was no wind."
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
On 3 May 2007 from nearby weather reports the highest winds were in the afternoon at 18 mph. At 10pm when Kate reported Madeleine to be missing it was a gentle breeze 10 mph.
Oh come now people there in real time where mistaken.
-
Looks bright and sunny to me at 17:31 on 3 May 2007
(https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/R/1_12_VOLUME_XIIa_Processo_Page_3267.jpg)
Sleeveless
(https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/R/3_12_VOLUME_XIIa_Processo_Page_3268.jpg)
-
Well no matter how those four people (2 in Scotland and 2 in Liverpool) misheard or mangled what they were told they made sure everyone got the message via the media.
It reminds me of how Telecinco mangled the information they were given. Their account of what was in the McCann's police statements was very different from what was actually in those statements.
Kate didn't tell the police "Gerry and I spoke for a couple of minutes and agreed to keep a closer watch over the children." or "I went towards the window and opened the curtains to see if she had climbed up there but I could see no trace of her."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/spanish-tv-station-claims-it-obtained-302312
You see grossly inaccurate reporting in all cases. Re Bamber in the early days the press had the mother down as the family annihilator. At Bamber's trial the judge and lawyers for both sides told the court it was Bamber or his sister and no other possibility existed.
-
You see grossly inaccurate reporting in all cases. Re Bamber in the early days the press had the mother down as the family annihilator. At Bamber's trial the judge and lawyers for both sides told the court it was Bamber or his sister and no other possibility existed.
Are you saying Telecinco read the statements but ignored what they actually said?
-
the family paraphrased what they had been told...its a chinese whisper. ....think of stoically and blidly
They stoically shoehorned in their own version of events at the most crucial moments of their lives to that point.
Or blindly repeated what they'd been told. The 2nd one. That's the answer. The 2nd one.
Predict that, davel.
-
the family paraphrased what they had been told...its a chinese whisper. ....think of stoically and blidly
Paraphrase is to make the original clearer.
-
Paraphrase is to make the original clearer.
that may be the intention but is not always the result
-
that may be the intention but is not always the result
In this case it was never retracted by the family,took Mitchell some time to clarify a stance.
-
In this case it was never retracted by the family.
perhaps they dont feel the need ...its only the sceptics on the net making a fuss
-
Are you saying Telecinco read the statements but ignored what they actually said?
Who's Telecinco?
Think 2 Ronnies: Fork Handles/Four Candles!
-
perhaps they dont feel the need ...its only the sceptics on the net making a fuss
Bothers you it seems.
-
Bothers you it seems.
only in general terms......not simply case specific
i doubt it bothers the mccanns much now
-
perhaps they dont feel the need ...its only the sceptics on the net making a fuss
You see, there's it is, right there. The lack of acknowledgement that a supporter wouldn't need to 'make a fuss', as they are in harness with the official narrative.
-
Consider PF's wit stat where she tells us that her niece visited on 3rd May. We learn from the nieces police rog that she claims she was accompanied by her husband:
1. Did PF think it irrelevant and didn't mention the husband?
2. Did PF mention to the translator the husband but the translator thought it irrelevant?
-
Who's Telecinco?
Think 2 Ronnies: Fork Handles/Four Candles!
The Mirror reported what Telecinco said. I pointed out that they reported things that wern't in Kate's statements. If you don't know what Kate did say, read her statement.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11155.msg568176;topicseen#msg568176
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/spanish-tv-station-claims-it-obtained-302312
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm
-
Actually you are entirely wrong.
I was originally asked by another if there was anyone sailing at 10pm. The answer to that was that there was at least one but at least one which was unaccounted for at the time of Madeleine's disappearance.
Therefore the theory being 'backed up' was not entirely the irrelevance of whether or not it was windy but how Madeleine could be abducted from her bed to vanish as completely as she did. Abduction, transport and the means and planning to do so.
She and the other children were very visible in their routine such as when playing in the play area before bedtime.
Snip
The mystery boat had been sailing along the Algarve coast close to Praia da Luz where Madeleine disappeared.
And records show it has previously docked at Barcelona’s Marina Port Vell, next to the Olympic Marina where the Australian woman was spotted.
The Portuguese source said: “It’s possible that the boat went to Barcelona. The yacht left Portimao on the morning of May 4, 2007.
“It left saying it was going to Albufeira in Portugal. It is a legal requirement to give a destination but it did not arrive in Albufeira.
“There were six boats that left Portimao that day. All have been accounted for apart from the Swedish boat.”
In Sweden all vessels measuring over 12 metres (40ft) long must be registered with the Swedish Maritime Administration.
But inquires with their head office in Stockholm yesterday found no record of the yacht.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/119199/Maddie-yacht-mystery
OK describe the 'sailboat' with sails. sailing along with wind power only! If you can't then you must accept that a motor engine was used to power the boat.
Also, If Gerry's sister made bits up by herself I could concur some kind of conspiracy took place to get a 'story' out there. If the 'jemmied' scenario was an actual statement why are you making such a big thing to play it down- It must be important in some way.
-
OK describe the 'sailboat' with sails. sailing along with wind power only! If you can't then you must accept that a motor engine was used to power the boat.
Also, If Gerry's sister made bits up by herself I could concur some kind of conspiracy took place to get a 'story' out there. If the 'jemmied' scenario was an actual statement why are you making such a big thing to play it down- It must be important in some way.
If Gerrys sister made things up...by herself.....then that by definition is not a conspiracy
-
If Gerrys sister made things up...by herself.....then that by definition is not a conspiracy
By definition it is! she could have been told to big it up for the TV.
She would have no other reason to make it up! However, I still insist and believe this was relayed to her exactly by Gerry McCann's own words.
-
By definition it is! she could have been told to big it up for the TV.
She would have no other reason to make it up! However, I still insist and believe this was relayed to her exactly by Gerry McCann's own words.
no...she cannot form a conspiracy on her own....if you cant understand such a simple fact its a waste of time
-
OK describe the 'sailboat' with sails. sailing along with wind power only! If you can't then you must accept that a motor engine was used to power the boat.
Also, If Gerry's sister made bits up by herself I could concur some kind of conspiracy took place to get a 'story' out there. If the 'jemmied' scenario was an actual statement why are you making such a big thing to play it down- It must be important in some way.
if she made it up by herself that cannot be a conspiracy
-
no...she cannot form a conspiracy on her own....if you cant understand such a simple fact its a waste of time
It would help if you read the post!
She may have been told to big it up bit of drama. < conspiracy!
I am not saying that happened at all. I believe she relayed exactly as she was told by Gerry, her Brother! And this was to produce a window entry /exit by an abductor-making it sound very dramatic!
Otherwise she could have said the door was left unlocked- the kids has wakened previously- MBM mentioned being left alone... but No, that was not in the initial news story.
-
It would help if you read the post!
She may have been told to big it up bit of drama. < conspiracy!
I am not saying that happened at all. I believe she relayed exactly as she was told by Gerry, her Brother! And this was to produce a window entry /exit by an abductor-making it sound very dramatic!
Otherwise she could have said the door was left unlocked- the kids has wakened previously- MBM mentioned being left alone... but No, that was not in the initial news story.
You added.. Big it up.. In your second post..when you were caught out
-
You added.. Big it up.. In your second post..when you were caught out
No I didn't
Quote from: Miss Taken Identity on Today at 07:30:45 PM
By definition it is! she could have been told to big it up for the TV.
She would have no other reason to make it up! However, I still insist and believe this was relayed to her exactly by Gerry McCann's own words.
no...she cannot form a conspiracy on her own....if you cant understand such a simple fact its a waste of time
Taken from your quote- which I cannot edit!
Any chance of apology? no? OK. it is there for all to read!
Davel>"You added.. Big it up.. In your second post..when you were caught out"
Tsk Tsk
-
does that mean there could not have been a gust in Luz...did the apt have an open fireplace
The apartment may well have had an open window on its eastern side, or the parents bedroom patio window on the southern side could have been ajar.
I have read that after nightfall, at the ocean front, the high pressure rolls down towards the sea. After dawn the pressure rises up over land again. So at 10pm the sun had gone down and pressure in the form of wind would be rolling down hill when it hit this wall .
This was the wall with Madeleines window in it. According to PF's wind map, the wind was approaching from the N.N.W Madeleines bedroom window wall faced N.N.W... so a moveable force (the wind rolling down towards the sea), met an immovable barrier *the bedroom wall). It was a totally square on clash. The wind had to take the easiest route through or round the outside of the building
But in my hypothesis of how the whooshing happened:
1) The curtains were cheap light weight and flimsy. We know that from photographs we have seen
2) The abduction had happened and there was a small gap, an opening, in Madeleines window, which the abductor had opened for some purpose
3) For a real draught to form, there had to be an opening on another side of the building. I believe it perfectly probable that the parents had left their bedroom window slightly ajar to cool the bedroom after the heat from the days sun shining into it had made it uncomfotrtably warm. It faced south and no shading balcony above
or,
4) a man left via the parents patio window having heard (or warned) that Kate was coming in, or was aready in.
Perhaps some of you will remember that pre central heating days, we used to us a draw plate at the opening of the fireplace. This was to creat a draught from a relatively small unit of wind coming into the room. The amazing thing was the smaller the gap between the plate and the fireplace surround (within reason) the bigger the draught to spread the matches flame. The drauht was condensed/compressed air, made by forcing a larger volume of slow moving air through a constriction into an acual draught. It moved faster.
There is a scientic name for this phenomena. It is over 60 years since I learned but I think it is called the venturi effect (but then it could be the Berolli effect ... not sure now)
Architects know all about this phenomena and have to factor it in when designing skyscrappers and long walled buildings of size. Winds can get so high in some cities that people cannot cross the street and some vehicles get blown around.
I propose that because,
... of this effect mentioned above
... and the higher pressure north of the building trying to equalise with that south of the building,
... when a gust came, and simultaneously as Kate adjusted the door to a smaller gap, which then narrowed to the optimum size, a sudden draught formed and lifted the flimsy curtains. This was simultaneous with the door slamming to. The easiest route for the wind was thru that open mindow to the lower pressure area to the rear of the building., it had to go left or right or up several storeys ... or thru that little bedroom window. It chose the easiest.
It also needed a gap at the rear of the building to normalise..
There has been speculation that the abductor exited by that route, via the parents patio wimdow ... and also there is a very real likelyhood that the parents patio door had been cracked open in order to cool their bedroom down for sleeping
Remember the wind was coming from N.N.W. and the outside wall was exactly at right angles to that. Perfect situation.
Perfect conditions with the parents bedroom door cracked open, or a side window left open, for such a draft and slamming of the door as Kate describes.
Please do not get all in a fizz; 'tis only a hypotheses. Only a hypotheses, but very plausible, with only the uncertainty about whether the parents patio door, or a rear lounge window, was open, probably to cool the place down
There is something else I need to mention, if I can get round to it.
-
Normal kids routine changed hours before Madeleine was reported to be missing. The children did not go to the play area. This time is crucial to the case because the two witnesses involved disagreed on what actually happened at 18:30 on 3 May 2007. How this episode has never been fully investigated is incompetence at it's best by SY!
-
Normal kids routine changed hours before Madeleine was reported to be missing. The children did not go to the play area. This time is crucial to the case because the two witnesses involved disagreed on what actually happened at 18:30 on 3 May 2007. How this episode has never been fully investigated is incompetence at it's best by SY!
It seems many episodes have not been full investigated eg we are told by a witness that a Mr Christopher Tranmer visited PF on 3rd May leaving at circa 6.30 pm but afaik none of the authorities tasked with investigating have taken a statement from this individual. And yet this was someone that apparently was literally right above 5A only a couple of hours or so before MM disappeared off the face of the earth.
-
"18H30, the time at which he saw DP next to the tennis court. DAVID went to visit KATE and the children and returned close to 19H00." https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm
"He thinks that David offered to check if Kate needed help, which he did, and returned minutes later. Regarding his previous statement where he states that David returned half an hour later around 19:00, he says that he returned to the tennis court after half an hour, as this time frame refers to the second time he returned to the tennis court after getting ready for the game." https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-ARGUIDO.htm
"Kate had a shower which lasted around 5 minutes. After showering, at around 6:30/6:40PM and while she was getting dry, she heard somebody knocking at the veranda door. She wrapped herself in a towel and went to see who it was. This door was closed but not locked as Gerry had left by this door. She confirmed it was David Payne, because he called out and had opened the door slightly. David's visit was to help her to take the children to the recreation area. When David returned from the beach he was with Gerry at the tennis courts, and it was Gerry who asked him to help Kate with taking the children to the recreation area." https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm
DP - Gerry had asked me just to pop in and check everything was alright err with Kate or you know again I can't remember the exact reason.
1485 "Did you open the door, slid door' Or was it already open' Or''
Reply "Err I think it was already open, I think it was already open.
1485 "Did you actually go into the apartment''
Reply "I did.'
1485 "Or did you do the conversation from the door''
Reply "No, definitely was inside the apartment, you know whether it be two or three steps into the apartment or you know however many, but I was definitely in the apartment.'
00:41:00 1485 "Okay, so now what I'm gonna try and ask you to recollect, what everybody was wearing.'
Reply "I'm afraid that is, you know I'm, I cannot recall at all. I know that's, you'd think that'd be an obvious thing to remember, I cannot remember. As I say the, from the children point of view predominantly I can remember the, you know, white, but I couldn't say exactly what they were wearing. Err''
1485 "But could you remember what Kate was wearing for example''
Reply "I can't, no.'
1485 "And did you actually set eyes on each individual child''
Reply "All three children I saw, yeah.'
1485 "And were they standing up' Sitting down''
Reply "Err they were generally standing up, yeah.'
1485 "Did they actually acknowledge you''
Reply "Err oh yeah, you know I'm very sure that if you'd have asked them, you know that evening or the next day they'd all say ah yeah, I popped in. You know I, you know I did know the children very well, we'd all you know, met up many times before err you know I, you know again I'd be playing with Madeleine you know in the, err the play area err you know during that week, you know lifting her up, twizzing her round and everything, I knew her that well, you know, to do that, and as I say err she'd definitely know who I was and certainly, as I say, just to reinforce that she looked very happy.'
1485 "Yeah. Was that the last time you saw Madeleine''
00:42:39 Reply "It was.'
1485 "How many minutes, you said as a matter of minutes and then you went back and then you played tennis.'
Reply "Mm.'
1485 "I'm gonna pin you down and ask you how long you think you were in there for. I know you say minutes.'
Reply "In their apartment, it, it, I'd say three minutes, five maximum.'
1485 "Three to five''
Reply "Yeah.'
https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DAVID-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
So Gerry said it was David's decision to visit the apartment. Kate says it was Gerry who asked David to go. David said it was Gerry who told him to drop in. Kate said the patio door was closed. David said it was open when he entered the apartment but couldn't remember what Kate was wearing. Contradiction after contradiction between the last 3 witnesses who saw Madeleine only hours before she disappeared and it's still not fully investigated &%%6
-
According to the following witness a "breeze" was present on night of 3rd May:
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARIA-M-M-DE-SILVA.htm
-
Post 170 refers to cheap light-weight and flimsy curtains in 5A. In my opinion the window coverings were professionally made with pelmets, tie backs and lined curtains. They look like they were bespoke, not bought off-the-shelf. It would have been a false economy to skimp on the fabric after paying for professionally made curtains.
-
According to the following witness a "breeze" was present on night of 3rd May:
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARIA-M-M-DE-SILVA.htm
" the night was good with a "breeze"", Maria says.
For a local to make a point of saying that in her statement, it must have been significant. Breezes at the sea side tend to be gusty.
Thanks for finding that, Holly.
-
Post 170 refers to cheap light-weight and flimsy curtains in 5A. In my opinion the window coverings were professionally made with pelmets, tie backs and lined curtains. They look like they were bespoke, not bought off-the-shelf. It would have been a false economy to skimp on the fabric after paying for professionally made curtains.
They looked presentable, but the nets were very flimsy as you would expect ... and the way that the curtains hung makes me think they were there more for decoration than for keeping light in or out. They look shoddy; cheap and cheerful, but flimsy
After all:
They had shutters for blocking the light and real privacy
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/08/04/article-1041216-022B288F00000578-343_468x314.jpg)
And let's not forget how Matt described the colour of the light coming thru. With such pale outside liighting they must have been very thin and lightweight.
-
Curtains deffo look flimsy and cheap to me. Nothing in that apartment shrieks “quality” so it would be odd if the curtains were bespoke and expensive. IMO.
-
Curtains deffo look flimsy and cheap to me. Nothing in that apartment shrieks “quality” so it would be odd if the curtains were bespoke and expensive. IMO.
I am always shocked by how cheap and not very cheerful it is. I frequently stayed in Val de Lobo which was gloriously splendid.
-
Curtains deffo look flimsy and cheap to me. Nothing in that apartment shrieks “quality” so it would be odd if the curtains were bespoke and expensive. IMO.
Curtains for those patio doors were never going to be cheap whether made to measure or bought off the shelf. Using flimsy and cheap fabrics would be a false economy in my opinion. It can't be decided from photos either.
-
They looked presentable, but the nets were very flimsy as you would expect ... and the way that the curtains hung makes me think they were there more for decoration than for keeping light in or out. They look shoddy; cheap and cheerful, but flimsy
After all:
They had shutters for blocking the light and real privacy
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/08/04/article-1041216-022B288F00000578-343_468x314.jpg)
And let's not forget how Matt described the colour of the light coming thru. With such pale outside liighting they must have been very thin and lightweight.
And also lets not forget that Matt stated the room had two windows.
'He states that the bedroom has two windows. The twins occupy two cots placed in the middle of the room and Madeleine occupies a bed pushed against the wall, facing the wall which has the two windows that look out onto the outside of the complex.'
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD.htm
-
Curtains for those patio doors were never going to be cheap whether made to measure or bought off the shelf. Using flimsy and cheap fabrics would be a false economy in my opinion. It can't be decided from photos either.
I thought it was the kids bedroom curtains that were being referred to?
-
I thought it was the kids bedroom curtains that were being referred to?
They match the main bedroom curtains so I assume they were bought together. The fabric covered pelmets in three rooms suggest a theme throughout the apartment.
-
They match the main bedroom curtains so I assume they were bought together. The fabric covered pelmets in three rooms suggest a theme throughout the apartment.
Possibly.
The theme being what?
-
Possibly.
The theme being what?
Cheap and nasty I think.
-
And also lets not forget that Matt stated the room had two windows.
'He states that the bedroom has two windows. The twins occupy two cots placed in the middle of the room and Madeleine occupies a bed pushed against the wall, facing the wall which has the two windows that look out onto the outside of the complex.'
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD.htm
TRANSLATION BY ANNA/ALBYM and thanks to them for their considerable efforts in the case
BUT:
1) A non-verbatim statement taken
2) by a person, who speaks a different langusge ... translating what he understood was meant
3) from a man, Matt, who was clearly shocked; it was taken (if "taken" is the word for what happened !) only the day after Madeleine had disappeared.. and the poor bloke had been up half the night and was without doubt shocked and horrifed additionally because he hadn't looked around the corner to check Madeleine.
4) ... and had only been in the ill-lit apartment for a matter of seconds.
Also,
In actual fact that outside length of wall carried on into Matts daughters bedroom, her window and Madeleines were the only windows in the wall, when viewed from outside. Some misunderstanding, do you think ?
5) .... where Matt, the father of the little girl in the room next door to missing Madeleine was concerned that there were only two windows in the wall and it could have been his little one that had been taken.
I say it again:
Some misunderstandings there ? ... do you think ?
Do you think that would hold any water in Court ? ... Spammy ?
-
"He was only in the ill-lit apartment for a matter of seconds"
.....and he could see the twins breathing in their cots!
Enter Kate just half hour later & she can't tell if flat bedclothes were Maddie or not.
-
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD.htm
TRANSLATION BY ANNA/ALBYM and thanks to them for their considerable efforts in the case
BUT:
1) A non-verbatim statement taken
2) by a person, who speaks a different langusge ... translating what he understood was meant
3) from a man, Matt, who was clearly shocked; it was taken (if "taken" is the word for what happened !) only the day after Madeleine had disappeared.. and the poor bloke had been up half the night and was without doubt shocked and horrifed additionally because he hadn't looked around the corner to check Madeleine.
4) ... and had only been in the ill-lit apartment for a matter of seconds.
Also,
In actual fact that outside length of wall carried on into Matts daughters bedroom, her window and Madeleines were the only windows in the wall, when viewed from outside. Some misunderstanding, do you think ?
5) .... where Matt, the father of the little girl in the room next door to missing Madeleine was concerned that there were only two windows in the wall and it could have been his little one that had been taken.
I say it again:
Some misunderstandings there ? ... do you think ?
Do you think that would hold any water in Court ? ... Spammy ?
So Matt made mistakes in his statement because he was sleep-deprived, shocked and horrified? Did he say that or is it an assumption? In my opinion it's an assumption, so the mistakes could be due to other unknown reasons.
-
So Matt made mistakes in his statement because he was sleep-deprived, shocked and horrified? Did he say that or is it an assumption? In my opinion it's an assumption, so the mistakes could be due to other unknown reasons.
You wouldn't have been sleep deprived, shocked and horrified?
-
You wouldn't have been sleep deprived, shocked and horrified?
So all should be lumped together in a stereotypical way one should react.
-
So all should be lumped together in a stereotypical way one should react.
Hardly lumped together. This would have been a normal reaction for a normal person.
-
You wouldn't have been sleep deprived, shocked and horrified?
Possibly, but does that mean I would have made mistakes in my statement? Not necessarily. That's an assumption.
-
Possibly, but does that mean I would have made mistakes in my statement? Not necessarily. That's an assumption.
It's a reasonable possibility
-
So Matt made mistakes in his statement because he was sleep-deprived, shocked and horrified? Did he say that or is it an assumption? In my opinion it's an assumption, so the mistakes could be due to other unknown reasons.
H
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD.htm
TRANSLATION BY ANNA/ALBYM and thanks to them for their considerable efforts in the case
BUT:
1) A non-verbatim statement taken
2) by a person, who speaks a different langusge ... translating what he understood was meant
3) from a man, Matt, who was clearly shocked; it was taken (if "taken" is the word for what happened !) only the day after Madeleine had disappeared.. and the poor bloke had been up half the night and was without doubt shocked and horrifed additionally because he hadn't looked around the corner to check Madeleine.
4) ... and had only been in the ill-lit apartment for a matter of seconds.
Also,
In actual fact that outside length of wall carried on into Matts daughters bedroom, her window and Madeleines were the only windows in the wall, when viewed from outside. Some misunderstanding, do you think ?
5) .... where Matt, the father of the little girl in the room next door to missing Madeleine was concerned that there were only two windows in the wall and it could have been his little one that had been taken.
I say it again:
Some misunderstandings there ? ... do you think ?
Do you think that would hold any water in Court ? ... Spammy ?
Gunit, have you deliberately missed the point?
Trying to take the readers eye off the importance of all the above facts?
Especially that the words are not even Matts, but from some kindly foreign person who tried to help.
Have you deliberately missed the point? 5 of them!
-
H
Gunit, have you deliberately missed the point?
Trying to take the readers eye off the importance of all the above facts?
Especially that the words are not even Matts, but from some kindly foreign person who tried to help.
Have you deliberately missed the point? 5 of them!
I have missed none of your assumptions.
-
I have missed none of your assumptions.
And you are assuming the statements are accurate when theres evidence they are not
Most of Sadies points are facts... Not assumptions
-
And you are assuming the statements are accurate when theres evidence they are not
Most of Sadies points are facts... Not assumptions
1. Non-verbatim statements by UK police;
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ALAN-PIKE.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RICHARD_SCHOFIELD.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANNET-KENNEDY.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KA-LEMc.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PE-PA.htm
So why the fuss about non-verbatim statements taken by the PJ?
2. Who is this man?
3. Not a fact, an assumption.
4. Is this a fact? Did Matt say how long he was in 5A?
5. Not sure what this means?
-
1. Non-verbatim statements by UK police;
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ALAN-PIKE.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RICHARD_SCHOFIELD.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANNET-KENNEDY.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KA-LEMc.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PE-PA.htm
So why the fuss about non-verbatim statements taken by the PJ?
2. Who is this man?
3. Not a fact, an assumption.
4. Is this a fact? Did Matt say how long he was in 5A?
5. Not sure what this means?
Those taken by UK police are taken in English... And written down in English..
-
Those taken by UK police are taken in English... And written down in English..
Then translated for the PJ then translated back from the files?
-
Then translated for the PJ then translated back from the files?
At least they are taken in the persons own language so there is a more accurate record
-
At least they are taken in the persons own language so there is a more accurate record
They are non-verbatim and twice translated, just like the PJ interviews.
-
At least they are taken in the persons own language so there is a more accurate record
The original's ratified and signed by the witness's no room for error,the supposed error only comes because they were released to the public for translation.
-
They are non-verbatim and twice translated, just like the PJ interviews.
You cant get away from th fact that the UK statements were recorded by someone who used english as his /her first language.
Personally, I do not like other peoples interpretations of what a witness said.
and that is without the added translating problem ... there is too much room for error.
Wouldn't stand up in Court ... would it ? It would be torn to shreds.
On reflection: Maybe it would stand up in some PT Courts ?8)@)-)
-
You cant get away from th fact that the UK statements were recorded by someone who used english as his /her first language.
Personally, I do not like other peoples interpretations of what a witness said.
and that is without the added translating problem ... there is too much room for error.
Wouldn't stand up in Court ... would it ? It would be torn to shreds.
On reflection: Maybe it would stand up in some PT Courts ?8)@)-)
I think you need to accept the fact that all the statements taken by the PJ were signed as correct by the witnesses.
-
I think you need to accept the fact that all the statements taken by the PJ were signed as correct by the witnesses.
No, Sadie doesn't. And nor do I.
-
I think you need to accept the fact that all the statements taken by the PJ were signed as correct by the witnesses.
That doesn't mean they are correct. I think you need to accept that errors in the statements are, a perfectly valid possibility
-
No, Sadie doesn't. And nor do I.
True; you can both choose to ignore the facts if you wish.
-
That doesn't mean they are correct. I think you need to accept that errors in the statements are, a perfectly valid possibility
If they're incorrect the witnesses need to explain why they signed them.
-
You cant get away from th fact that the UK statements were recorded by someone who used english as his /her first language.
Personally, I do not like other peoples interpretations of what a witness said.
and that is without the added translating problem ... there is too much room for error.
Wouldn't stand up in Court ... would it ? It would be torn to shreds.
On reflection: Maybe it would stand up in some PT Courts ?8)@)-)
Nothing that is known in the public domain hasn't a hope in hell of being heard in a court in this case imo,one of the reason's Redwood ruled tanner man out of almost certainly being an abductor imo is because of some information known only to the PJ/Og that Tannerman confirmed.
-
If they're incorrect the witnesses need to explain why they signed them.
Probably as they couldn't read them they didn't know they were incorrect
-
True; you can both choose to ignore the facts if you wish.
This is most definitely In Your Opinion.
-
Probably as they couldn't read them they didn't know they were incorrect
They were read back to them in their own language.
-
They were read back to them in their own language.
There's no record of what was read back.. We, dint know how accurate the readback was
-
They were read back to them in their own language.
Doubly translated. Jeez ! And did you say they were READ back to them. They should have been in writing, rather than explained in broken English
Is this what you consider Justice, Gunit ?
-
There's no record of what was read back.. We, dint know how accurate the readback was
The witness spoke, the interpreter repeated what was said to the PJ Officer. At the end the interpreter read out what the PJ Officer typed. If what was written didn't match what was said the witness wouldn't have signed.
-
Doubly translated. Jeez ! And did you say they were READ back to them. They should have been in writing, rather than explained in broken English
Is this what you consider Justice, Gunit ?
You seem to be assuming that the interpreters spoke broken English. Do you have evidence of that?
-
The witness spoke, the interpreter repeated what was said to the PJ Officer. At the end the interpreter read out what the PJ Officer typed. If what was written didn't match what was said the witness wouldn't have signed.
How would they know...what was said matched what was written...Thats all your opinion posted as fact...you are in total denial imo
-
How would they know...what was said matched what was written...Thats all your opinion posted as fact...you are in total denial imo
What a load of rubbish.
-
What a load of rubbish.
and you are obviously in denial too...see if you can add a little more fact to the debte rather than your biased unsubstantaited opinion....facts such as this telegraph article,,,,
inconsistencies in the statements given by the McCanns and the group of friends who were dining with them at the time of Madeleine's disappearance may have been caused by errors in translation, it emerged today.
Madeleine investigation: Full coverage
Madeleine McCann apartment: first picture
Portuguese detectives investigating the case of the missing four-year-old have admitted that they are reassessing the original witness statements to look for inaccuracies in their translation.
"In the early days of the investigation there were dozens of statements being given at what was a very confusing time," a police source said.
"Obviously the police acted in good faith in their selection of translators but given all that has been said about the various contradictions in the versions of events, detectives are now re-examining the possibility that there may have been some problems," he said.
The admission came as police undertake a thorough review of the case under the new head of the inquiry, Portugal's second most senior policeman Paulo Rebelo, 45.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1569143/Madeleine-McCann-Possible-translation-errors.html
-
What a load of rubbish.
so how on earth would the witnesses know taht what was being said to them in english...matched what was written in portuguese...they wouldnt...that is an undenaible fact
-
The witness spoke, the interpreter repeated what was said to the PJ Officer. At the end the interpreter read out what the PJ Officer typed. If what was written didn't match what was said the witness wouldn't have signed.
to correct your obvious misundersatnding......the interpreter did not read back what the PJ Officer typed...you are 100 % wrong...you obviosly dont realise what happened
-
How would they know...what was said matched what was written...Thats all your opinion posted as fact...you are in total denial imo
Are you suggesting that the interpreter deliberately told the witnesses lies about what was written in the statements?
-
to correct your obvious misundersatnding......the interpreter did not read back what the PJ Officer typed...you are 100 % wrong...you obviosly dont realise what happened
"With all formal witness statements, the interview is read over and its contents explained. After having shown their agreement with their statements, the interviewee confirms and signs as accurate the content of the document that follows, conjointly with the "sworn" interpreter, where one is used. This is normal procedure in all formal interviews. In co-signing, the interpreter commits themself legally concerning the accuracy of their translation."
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TRANSLATIONS.htm
-
"With all formal witness statements, the interview is read over and its contents explained. After having shown their agreement with their statements, the interviewee confirms and signs as accurate the content of the document that follows, conjointly with the "sworn" interpreter, where one is used. This is normal procedure in all formal interviews. In co-signing, the interpreter commits themself legally concerning the accuracy of their translation."
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TRANSLATIONS.htm
the PJ officer writes in portuguese...what is read back is not what he has written but a translation in english...thetre is no record of what was read back ...the system is fundamenatlly flawed
-
"With all formal witness statements, the interview is read over and its contents explained. After having shown their agreement with their statements, the interviewee confirms and signs as accurate the content of the document that follows, conjointly with the "sworn" interpreter, where one is used. This is normal procedure in all formal interviews. In co-signing, the interpreter commits themself legally concerning the accuracy of their translation."
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TRANSLATIONS.htm
could you tell me where this statement comes from...who wrote it..looks like someone has just made it up...LOL.....are you under the impression this is an official statement...cite...i think youve been fooled
It's absolutely laughable you use a statement with no provenance to support your view
-
could you tell me where this statement comes from...who wrote it..looks like someone has just made it up...LOL.....are you under the impression this is an official statement...cite...i think youve been fooled
It's absolutely laughable you use a statement with no provenance to support your view
Are you suggesting that the witnesses signed without knowing what was in their statements? Now that is laughable.
-
Are you suggesting that the witnesses signed without knowing what was in their statements? Now that is laughable.
Read the post again.. I'm suggesting nothing but stating quite clearly as, a fact that the statement you quoted to support your argument has no provenance... Yet you continually whinge on about evidence.. That's laughable
-
Are you suggesting that the witnesses signed without knowing what was in their statements? Now that is laughable.
It's an absolute incontrovertible fact
-
It's an absolute incontrovertible fact
The evidence for that is?
-
Read the post again.. I'm suggesting nothing but stating quite clearly as, a fact that the statement you quoted to support your argument has no provenance... Yet you continually whinge on about evidence.. That's laughable
The text I quoted described what happened. Mrs McCann describes the process too;
questions asked in Portuguese and verbally translated into English; answers given in English, translated into Portuguese and typed up by the interviewing officer – was exhausting for everyone. At the end of the interview the statement prepared by the officer would be printed out in Portuguese, verbally translated, on the spot, into English, and then signed by the interviewee.
madeleine by Kate McCann
-
It's an absolute incontrovertible fact
Not according to Kate McCann it isn't. Are you saying she got it wrong? Another laughable idea.
-
Not according to Kate McCann it isn't. Are you saying she got it wrong? Another laughable idea.
According to Kate as I recall..make sure you give your statement in your own language... According to Kate.. There are mistakes in the, statements.. So bad they gave new ones
-
The evidence for that is?
How could they know for sure what was written down when it was in Portuguese... It would be impossible
-
In essence their signature confirms what was read back to them was correct... But there's no record of what that was
-
The text I quoted described what happened. Mrs McCann describes the process too;
questions asked in Portuguese and verbally translated into English; answers given in English, translated into Portuguese and typed up by the interviewing officer – was exhausting for everyone. At the end of the interview the statement prepared by the officer would be printed out in Portuguese, verbally translated, on the spot, into English, and then signed by the interviewee.
madeleine by Kate McCann
That is not the same as the statement you posted... There are major differences ..very important difference
-
Could you point out where Kate says, thus..
. In co-signing, the interpreter commits themself legally concerning the accuracy of their translation."
-
That is not the same as the statement you posted... There are major differences ..very important difference
It's really quite simple;
PJ Officer asks a question in Portuguese.
Interpreter asks witness in their language.
Witness answers.
Interpreter tells PJ Officer what the witness said (in Portuguese)
PJ Officer types that into his computer.
Typed statement (in Portuguese) is printed out.
Interpreter tells witness what it says in the witness's language.
Witness signs it as correct.
Interpreter signs to ratify his/her translation.
-
It's really quite simple;
PJ Officer asks a question in Portuguese.
Interpreter asks witness in their language.
Witness answers.
Interpreter tells PJ Officer what the witness said (in Portuguese)
PJ Officer types that into his computer.
Typed statement (in Portuguese) is printed out.
Interpreter tells witness what it says in the witness's language.
Witness signs it as correct.
Interpreter signs to ratify his/her translation.
Yes, we knew that 12 years ago... Witness, signs a Portuguese statement
-
Yes, we knew that 12 years ago... Witness, signs a Portuguese statement
Which has just been translated for them. By an interpreter who has signed to say their translation was correct.
-
Which has just been translated for them. By an interpreter who has signed to say their translation was correct.
We don't know if the translation is correct... According to Kate there were mistakes. The mccanns had no idea what was written in Portuguese if itsvan accurate translation
-
We don't know if the translation is correct... According to Kate there were mistakes. The mccanns had no idea what was written in Portuguese if itsvan accurate translation
They paid to have the statements translated. They have never claimed that they were inaccurate.
-
They paid to have the statements translated. They have never claimed that they were inaccurate.
Yes they have.. Kate makes the claim in her book.. You know that... I don't see why you are pretending you dont
-
Yes they have.. Kate makes the claim in her book
We were concerned that parts of the statements we had made to the Portuguese police, especially on that first day, might have been lost in translation. We also felt that these accounts were not sufficiently thorough and wanted
to have every detail we could remember registered properly [madeleine]
lost in translation means;
Of a word or words, having lost or lacking the full subtlety of meaning or significance when translated from the original language to another
https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/lost+in+translation
So 'lost in translation' doesn't mean incorrect. It means that the meaning of what was said wasn't quite captured. An example might be saying 'gobsmacked' for example. There's no equivalent word in Portuguese, so something like 'astounded' (espantada) would have to be substituted. There's a subtle difference in meaning and it's lost in translation.
-
We were concerned that parts of the statements we had made to the Portuguese police, especially on that first day, might have been lost in translation. We also felt that these accounts were not sufficiently thorough and wanted
to have every detail we could remember registered properly [madeleine]
lost in translation means;
Of a word or words, having lost or lacking the full subtlety of meaning or significance when translated from the original language to another
https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/lost+in+translation
So 'lost in translation' doesn't mean incorrect. It means that the meaning of what was said wasn't quite captured. An example might be saying 'gobsmacked' for example. There's no equivalent word in Portuguese, so something like 'astounded' (espantada) would have to be substituted. There's a subtle difference in meaning and it's lost in translation.
Kate talks about mistakes and you know it... It's been discussed many times before. Plus... You are, taking one interpretation of lost in translation and assuming that's what Kate meant... I think you know the truth but can't bear to admit it
Unfortunately, in our haste to pass the newstatements on to the PJ, we made the mistake of assuming that the transcripts would be correct and discovered only many months later that these, too, contained inaccuracies
So Kate says these too contained inaccuracies... Meaning the first statements also contained inaccuracies
-
Kate also tells us that when she tried to correct a MISTAKE made by her translator... The translator became very offended
Best to stick to the facts... Trying to bend the truth does your argument no favours
-
Kate also says.
that at every stage of the process the scope for mistakes in translation and misunderstandings was considerable.
-
Kate also tells us that when she tried to correct a MISTAKE made by her translator... The translator became very offended
Best to stick to the facts... Trying to bend the truth does your argument no favours
Well if Kate claims it in her book then it must be true.
She certainly doesn't come across as a massive liar or anything like that.
-
Kate also says.
that at every stage of the process the scope for mistakes in translation and misunderstandings was considerable.
If a person makes accusations they should be able to back them up with factual examples. Mrs McCann has given none.
-
If a person makes accusations they should be able to back them up with factual examples. Mrs McCann has given none.
You claimed Kate had not complained about mistakes... You are obviously wrong so are now saying something else..
It's not up to you to decide what Kate has to do... She's supplied the PJ with the corrections
-
You claimed Kate had not complained about mistakes... You are obviously wrong so are now saying something else..
It's not up to you to decide what Kate has to do... She's supplied the PJ with the corrections
She mentioned one mistake, but didn't say what it was. She says statements given to CRG were supplied to the PJ, but there's nothing in the PJ files to support that. Nothing that Kate said on this subject can be verified.
-
She mentioned one mistake, but didn't say what it was. She says statements given to CRG were supplied to the PJ, but there's nothing in the PJ files to support that. Nothing that Kate said on this subject can be verified.
To whom?
-
She mentioned one mistake, but didn't say what it was. She says statements given to CRG were supplied to the PJ, but there's nothing in the PJ files to support that. Nothing that Kate said on this subject can be verified.
You said kate had never complained of mistakes... You've been proved to be wrong... End of
-
If Kate McCann wanted to cast doubt on the statements made to the PJ she succeeded to the extent that her supporters have accused the PJ or the interpreters of misrepresenting what she and her husband told them.
Her supporters have chosen to believe that the anomolies in their statements were caused by misunderstandings or misinterpretations. They don't know if that's true, of course, but they assume that's what Kate was referring to. She never said what she was referring to, so her supporters are in fact guessing.
Taking just one point, Kate says they left and entered 5A using the main door on May 3rd;
After breakfast they got dressed and left the apartment by the main door.
They entered the apartment by the main door, with the key. She does not know if it was locked, and presumes it was Gerry who opened it. At lunch time they also entered by the same door.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm
Gerry, however, differed;
KATE and the children left by the rear door, he having left by the front door, which he locked with the key, having also closed and locked the rear door from the inside.
After 17H30 they went to the apartment, the deponent having entered by the main door, which he did not lock while he was inside the residence. KATE and the children entered by the rear door, after this had been opened from the inside by the deponent.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm
These differences can't, in my opinion, be explained away by saying there were losses of meaning during translation, mistakes or misunderstandings, but Kate's supporters think they can be imo.
-
If Kate McCann wanted to cast doubt on the statements made to the PJ she succeeded to the extent that her supporters have accused the PJ or the interpreters of misrepresenting what she and her husband told them.
Her supporters have chosen to believe that the anomolies in their statements were caused by misunderstandings or misinterpretations. They don't know if that's true, of course, but they assume that's what Kate was referring to. She never said what she was referring to, so her supporters are in fact guessing.
Taking just one point, Kate says they left and entered 5A using the main door on May 3rd;
After breakfast they got dressed and left the apartment by the main door.
They entered the apartment by the main door, with the key. She does not know if it was locked, and presumes it was Gerry who opened it. At lunch time they also entered by the same door.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm
Gerry, however, differed;
KATE and the children left by the rear door, he having left by the front door, which he locked with the key, having also closed and locked the rear door from the inside.
After 17H30 they went to the apartment, the deponent having entered by the main door, which he did not lock while he was inside the residence. KATE and the children entered by the rear door, after this had been opened from the inside by the deponent.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm
These differences can't, in my opinion, be explained away by saying there were losses of meaning during translation, mistakes or misunderstandings, but Kate's supporters think they can be imo.
I think...based on the evidence...its quite reasonble to think there were errors due to transaltions in the statements. You disagree. Because of the way the statements were taken there is no way we can check. Thats it...Its down to opinion...but the evidence supports mistakes
-
I think...based on the evidence...its quite reasonble to think there were errors due to transaltions in the statements. You disagree. Because of the way the staements were taken there is no way we can check. Thats it...Its down to opinion...but the evidence supports mistakes
Your evidence being Kate McCann's claims? Can you explain how the McCann's statements contradicted each other so clearly then? Both McCanns were quite clear about which door they used on 3rd May, so how could that be the result of error?
-
You seem to be assuming that the interpreters spoke broken English. Do you have evidence of that?
Doubly translated and taken at 11.30am the following morning after Matt had been up a great deal of the night.
I dont know what others think, but I am inclined to doubt that the PJ could have mustered up Portuguese volunteers to take statements whose translation skills were up to muster for legal documents. Can you prove that the translater was up to translating for legal documents?
Maybe a certain lack of translation skills caused the document to be non verbatim, rather than straight from Matts mouth? Difficulty in finding the right word etc. Dunno. Do you ?
So you are happy that it is Justice that such potentially bodged documents have been produced, are you ?
That's your idea of Justice ?
-
What a load of rubbish.
Suggest that you re-asess the points Davel has made and put your thinking cap firmly on your head, please SIL
-
Your evidence being Kate McCann's claims? Can you explain how the McCann's statements contradicted each other so clearly then? Both McCanns were quite clear about which door they used on 3rd May, so how could that be the result of error?
you are mking yet another assumption...my evidence,,,,anything that supports an assertion
translation is not an exact science...mistakes are o be expected
telegraph article from PJ source saying that they were looking at statements again due to the way they were taken
Articel by colin sutton saying there were bound to be mistakes
-
Your evidence being Kate McCann's claims? Can you explain how the McCann's statements contradicted each other so clearly then? Both McCanns were quite clear about which door they used on 3rd May, so how could that be the result of error?
without the original english statements we just dont know...It certainly could be the result of poor translation
-
Suggest that you re-asess the points Davel has made and put your thinking cap firmly on your head, please SIL
I've had 5 years of this propaganda, so plenty of time to think and assess.
I don't need a thinking cap.
My brain works perfectly well without artificial aids.
What colour is your thinking cap, Sadie?
-
I've had 5 years of this propaganda, so plenty of time to think and assess.
I don't need a thinking cap.
My brain works perfectly well without artificial aids.
What colour is your thinking cap, Sadie?
Why dont you read back and re-assess Davels post. No propanganda there; just facts.
BTW, I dont wear hats, except very occasionally a tin one, when the viscious lying propaganda starts flying
Anyway, what's colour got to do with anything ? I am non racist
-
you are mking yet another assumption...my evidence,,,,anything that supports an assertion
translation is not an exact science...mistakes are o be expected
telegraph article from PJ source saying that they were looking at statements again due to the way they were taken
Articel by colin sutton saying there were bound to be mistakes
I thought you knew the difference between evidence and opinions.
-
Doubly translated and taken at 11.30am the following morning after Matt had been up a great deal of the night.
I dont know what others think, but I am inclined to doubt that the PJ could have mustered up Portuguese volunteers to take statements whose translation skills were up to muster for legal documents. Can you prove that the translater was up to translating for legal documents?
Maybe a certain lack of translation skills caused the document to be non verbatim, rather than straight from Matts mouth? Difficulty in finding the right word etc. Dunno. Do you ?
So you are happy that it is Justice that such potentially bodged documents have been produced, are you ?
That's your idea of Justice ?
Matt's 4th May statement appears to have been translated by Angela Morado from the British Consulate.
-
I thought you knew the difference between evidence and opinions.
I do.. It appears you dont
Evidence... Anything which supports an assertion
An opinion from someone well informed can be regarded as evidence
-
Matt's 4th May statement appears to have been translated by Angela Morado from the British Consulate.
Good try.
Well "Angela" begins with "A" , same as "Anna" and "Albym"
Taken from the actual file
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD.htm
52 to 57 Witness statement of Matthew David Oldfield 2007.05.04
TRANSLATION BY ANNA/ALBYM
01-Processo 01 Pages 52 to 57
01_VOLUMEIa_Page_52
If you read it carefully, I think that you will find that Angela was the INTERPRETER [/b]
For the differences between Translating and and Interpreting skills, I suggest the following explains it quite well and we all might benefit by reading it
http://www.languagescientific.com/the-difference-between-translation-and-interpreting/
So you were wrong about Angela being the translator, she was the interpreter, but it was a good try.
As I said before, Anna and/or Albym were the translators
-
Deleted, double posted
-
Misunderstandings in communication are inevitable regardless of the language issues in this case. Remember the two ronnies: four candles and fork handles! 8)--))
-
Misunderstandings in communication are inevitable regardless of the language issues in this case. Remember the two ronnies: four candles and fork handles! 8)--))
And of course the portuguese translator would have written down fork handles in portuguese but repeated back ....what sounded like four candles in english....and fork handles would be confirmed by the english speaker with a signature...if anyone follows that
-
Good try.
Well "Angela" begins with "A" , same as "Anna" and "Albym"
Taken from the actual file
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD.htm
If you read it carefully, I think that you will find that Angela was the INTERPRETER [/b]
For the differences between Translating and and Interpreting skills, I suggest the following explains it quite well and we all might benefit by reading it
http://www.languagescientific.com/the-difference-between-translation-and-interpreting/
So you were wrong about Angela being the translator, she was the interpreter, but it was a good try.
As I said before, Anna and/or Albym were the translators
OK, Angela Morado was the interpreter for Matthew Oldfield and David Payne on 4th May.
-
I do.. It appears you dont
Evidence... Anything which supports an assertion
An opinion from someone well informed can be regarded as evidence
It seems to me there's a wealth of opinion but not one example. Kate McCann began spreading the idea that the PJ's methods were lacking, but despite sharing her opinions she never gave any examples. I can only assume she had none.
The case law of the ECHR suggests that the Portuguese method is acceptable and probably better than in some other European countries. The ECHR, if appealed to, would need evidence of inadequate interpretations also, not opinions.
https://eulita.eu/wp/case-law/
-
It seems to me there's a wealth of opinion but not one example. Kate McCann began spreading the idea that the PJ's methods were lacking, but despite sharing her opinions she never gave any examples. I can only assume she had none.
The case law of the ECHR suggests that the Portuguese method is acceptable and probably better than in some other European countries. The ECHR, if appealed to, would need evidence of inadequate interpretations also, not opinions.
https://eulita.eu/wp/case-law/
No it doesn't... This is all simply about having an Interpreter present during interview and understanding the charges against... Nothing about being ask to sign a statement you don't understand...
-
It seems to me there's a wealth of opinion but not one example. Kate McCann began spreading the idea that the PJ's methods were lacking, but despite sharing her opinions she never gave any examples. I can only assume she had none.
The case law of the ECHR suggests that the Portuguese method is acceptable and probably better than in some other European countries. The ECHR, if appealed to, would need evidence of inadequate interpretations also, not opinions.
https://eulita.eu/wp/case-law/
I am quite shocked by your current attitude. There was a time when it was possible to have a conversation with you. But this no longer applies. And i am sad about that.
-
No it doesn't... This is all simply about having an Interpreter present during interview and understanding the charges against... Nothing about being ask to sign a statement you don't understand...
I can understand why a couple who contradicted each other in their statements might try to cast doubt on the statement taking process in Portugal. I can't understand why they gave no specific examples of how the process misrepresented what they said. Well I can; they have none.
-
I can understand why a couple who contradicted each other in their statements might try to cast doubt on the statement taking process in Portugal. I can't understand why they gave no specific examples of how the process misrepresented what they said. Well I can; they have none.
Who do you feel they owe a detailed explanation to? You?
-
Who do you feel they owe a detailed explanation to? You?
I think some people need to accept that without solid evidence the claims of mistakes and misunderstandings are nothing more than rumours and could be seen as propaganda aimed at discrediting the Portuguese legal system. .
-
I think some people need to accept that without solid evidence the claims of mistakes and misunderstandings are nothing more than rumours and could be seen as propaganda aimed at discrediting the Portuguese legal system. .
I think one has to take a care in relation to loose accusation of disseminating propaganda when a long denied method used by the representatives of the Portuguese Legal System in 2007 was precisely that, in my opinion. Public opinion was tweaked, massaged and manipulated as the Policia Judiciaria broke the law pertaining to an active police investigation by actively leaking to the press.
There should have been as much information emanating from the investigation in 2007 as there is from the current investigation ... and that is nil ... but in fact the 2007 leaks from the investigation came right from the top as confirmed by journalist Sandra Felgueiras in the Netflix documentary whose source was Goncalo Amaral, the case co-ordinator. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12214153
Question 1: What was the evidential basis for each of the stories you wrote in relation to the McCanns, identifying (in each case) precisely the information on which you based each of them?
4: It became apparent in the days after arriving in Praia da Luz that covering the, disappearance of Madeleine McCann was going to be uniquely challenging, Under Portugal’s secrecy of justice laws it is illegal for anyone to publicly discuss the details of an on-going police investigation.
This means even the most senior detectives in charge of an inquiry are not allowed: to speak to the press and the media. Quite frankly this was a ludicrous state of affairs which made covering the story near impossible
19: In their evidence the McCanns. referring to the press in general terms, said that many stories had been "made up" and that they did not believe "police sources" were genuine.
In the case of every story I wrote, the police sources I quoted were genuine.
I had three sources in Portugal who provided me with information.
Two were Portuguese journalists who were in daily contact with the most senior officers investigating Madeieine McCann’s disappearance.
The third was a translator who worked for the Portuguese Police and translating and interpreting in the Portuguese legal system.
WITNESS STATEMENT OF DAVID HAMILTON PILDITCH to the Leveson Inquiry
http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-David-Pilditch.pdf
In my opinion there is indeed a lot of propaganda still doing the rounds the majority of it having its genesis way back in 2007 when Portuguese law was openly flouted by representatives of the Portuguese legal system.
You really couldn't make it up could you.
-
I think some people need to accept that without solid evidence the claims of mistakes and misunderstandings are nothing more than rumours and could be seen as propaganda aimed at discrediting the Portuguese legal system. .
You make a claim that the mccanns, are making a false accusation of mistakes..
Your claim has, zero evidence to support it and is nothing more than guesswork... The very points you criticise others, for. Do you realise how silly your claim makes you look
-
I am quite shocked by your current attitude. There was a time when it was possible to have a conversation with you. But this no longer applies. And i am sad about that.
Best laugh of the year so far.
-
I think some people need to accept that without solid evidence the claims of mistakes and misunderstandings are nothing more than rumours and could be seen as propaganda aimed at discrediting the Portuguese legal system. .
You think Kate who has first hand knowledge of this deliberately told lies to discredit the Portuguese legal system you mean, but have no evidence to back up your accusation.
-
I think one has to take a care in relation to loose accusation of disseminating propaganda when a long denied method used by the representatives of the Portuguese Legal System in 2007 was precisely that, in my opinion. Public opinion was tweaked, massaged and manipulated as the Policia Judiciaria broke the law pertaining to an active police investigation by actively leaking to the press.
There should have been as much information emanating from the investigation in 2007 as there is from the current investigation ... and that is nil ... but in fact the 2007 leaks from the investigation came right from the top as confirmed by journalist Sandra Felgueiras in the Netflix documentary whose source was Goncalo Amaral, the case co-ordinator. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12214153
Question 1: What was the evidential basis for each of the stories you wrote in relation to the McCanns, identifying (in each case) precisely the information on which you based each of them?
4: It became apparent in the days after arriving in Praia da Luz that covering the, disappearance of Madeleine McCann was going to be uniquely challenging, Under Portugal’s secrecy of justice laws it is illegal for anyone to publicly discuss the details of an on-going police investigation.
This means even the most senior detectives in charge of an inquiry are not allowed: to speak to the press and the media. Quite frankly this was a ludicrous state of affairs which made covering the story near impossible
19: In their evidence the McCanns. referring to the press in general terms, said that many stories had been "made up" and that they did not believe "police sources" were genuine.
In the case of every story I wrote, the police sources I quoted were genuine.
I had three sources in Portugal who provided me with information.
Two were Portuguese journalists who were in daily contact with the most senior officers investigating Madeieine McCann’s disappearance.
The third was a translator who worked for the Portuguese Police and translating and interpreting in the Portuguese legal system.
WITNESS STATEMENT OF DAVID HAMILTON PILDITCH to the Leveson Inquiry
http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-David-Pilditch.pdf
In my opinion there is indeed a lot of propaganda still doing the rounds the majority of it having its genesis way back in 2007 when Portuguese law was openly flouted by representatives of the Portuguese legal system.
You really couldn't make it up could you.
Pilditch admits that he had no contact with the Portuguese police; he simply believed Portuguese journalists when they told him they had such contacts.
He certainly had other sources; the McCanns, their family and friends and Clarence Mitchell were regular contributors to his stories.
http://newsoutlines.blogspot.com/2012/01/articles-by-david-pilditch-re-madeleine.html
-
Pilditch admits that he had no contact with the Portuguese police; he simply believed Portuguese journalists when they told him they had such contacts.
He certainly had other sources; the McCanns, their family and friends and Clarence Mitchell were regular contributors to his stories.
http://newsoutlines.blogspot.com/2012/01/articles-by-david-pilditch-re-madeleine.html
So you’re claiming he lied to the Leveson Inquiry when he said his police sources were genuine?
-
So you’re claiming he lied to the Leveson Inquiry when he said his police sources were genuine?
How could he know? His sources weren't police officers.
-
del
-
How could he know? His sources weren't police officers.
So his genuine police sources were feeding him lies then as the McCanns suspected, in your view?
-
So his genuine police sources were feeding him lies then as the McCanns suspected, in your view?
He had no police sources, he relied on Portuguese journalists who said they had police sources.
snip/
The aspect that made the case truly unusual was the wall of silence and lack of guidance to journalists from police both in Portugal and the UK.
31, In the absence of these critical sources or official comment that could be attributed to a named police source or authority, I took steps to obtain the relevant information by the best available route. ~ approached news/TV reporters who had solid contacts within the Portuguese police for information on the investigation and relied on the services of Mr Mitchell as a third party spokesman for Drs McCann.
http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-David-Pilditch.pdf
-
He had no police sources, he relied on Portuguese journalists who said they had police sources.
snip/
The aspect that made the case truly unusual was the wall of silence and lack of guidance to journalists from police both in Portugal and the UK.
31, In the absence of these critical sources or official comment that could be attributed to a named police source or authority, I took steps to obtain the relevant information by the best available route. ~ approached news/TV reporters who had solid contacts within the Portuguese police for information on the investigation and relied on the services of Mr Mitchell as a third party spokesman for Drs McCann.
http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-David-Pilditch.pdf
Then we’re back to him telling lies to the Leveson Inquiry then, is that what you’re saying? What about the source who was a translator working for the police, is that a lie too?
-
Then we’re back to him telling lies to the Leveson Inquiry then, is that what you’re saying? What about the source who was a translator working for the police, is that a lie too?
It's not what I'm saying, the reality is there in his words. He had no police sources. Perhaps he just did what the other journalists did and frequented Hugo Beaty's bar;
Every day there starts the same way shortly after it opens at 9am, with an informal briefing to the foreign Press by a locally resident British woman who normally makes a meagre living acting as an occasional interpreter – for the Policia Judiciaria.
Every morning, the woman – who asked me not to publish her name – goes through the Portuguese tabloids and translates their ever-more febrile articles.
Every afternoon, the foreigners – almost none of whom can speak more than the most basic Portuguese, nor claim a single, genuine source inside the police investigation – recycle the tales for consumers abroad.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/lies-beatings-secret-trials-the-dark-side-of-police-handling-madeleine-case-6622113.html
-
It's not what I'm saying, the reality is there in his words. He had no police sources. Perhaps he just did what the other journalists did and frequented Hugo Beaty's bar;
Every day there starts the same way shortly after it opens at 9am, with an informal briefing to the foreign Press by a locally resident British woman who normally makes a meagre living acting as an occasional interpreter – for the Policia Judiciaria.
Every morning, the woman – who asked me not to publish her name – goes through the Portuguese tabloids and translates their ever-more febrile articles.
Every afternoon, the foreigners – almost none of whom can speak more than the most basic Portuguese, nor claim a single, genuine source inside the police investigation – recycle the tales for consumers abroad.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/lies-beatings-secret-trials-the-dark-side-of-police-handling-madeleine-case-6622113.html
You’re saying he had no police sources, he told Leveson his police sources were genuine and included a police translator. Either you’re mistaken or he’s lying - which is it?
-
Best laugh of the year so far.
The year is in its infancy ... I'm sure there will be plenty more opportunities to have numerous laughs over the coming months should we all be spared to indulge in them 😁
-
You’re saying he had no police sources, he told Leveson his police sources were genuine and included a police translator. Either you’re mistaken or he’s lying - which is it?
He told them who his sources were; two Portuguese journalists and one interpreter. Which of those can be described as 'police sources'?
-
He told them who his sources were; two Portuguese journalists and one interpreter. Which of those can be described as 'police sources'?
Well let’s see, the interpreter interpreted stuff for the police for a start so would have direct access to police statements correct? But you would not say that was a police source? OK then, clearly you believe the man lied to Leveson then.
-
Pilditch admits that he had no contact with the Portuguese police; he simply believed Portuguese journalists when they told him they had such contacts.
He certainly had other sources; the McCanns, their family and friends and Clarence Mitchell were regular contributors to his stories.
http://newsoutlines.blogspot.com/2012/01/articles-by-david-pilditch-re-madeleine.html
Pilditch made absolutely no secret of his sources none of which were illegal and underhand ...
Snip
“In the absence of these critical sources or official comment that could be attributed to a named police source or authority, I took steps to obtain the relevant information by the best available route.
I approached news/TV reporters who had solid contacts within the Portuguese police for information on the investigation and relied on the services of Mr Mitchell as a third party spokesman for Drs McCann.”
WITNESS STATEMENT OF DAVID HAMILTON PILDITCH to the Leveson Inquiry
http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-David-Pilditch.pdf
What Goncalo Amaral did on the other hand was illegal.
-
Pilditch admits that he had no contact with the Portuguese police; he simply believed Portuguese journalists when they told him they had such contacts.
He certainly had other sources; the McCanns, their family and friends and Clarence Mitchell were regular contributors to his stories.
http://newsoutlines.blogspot.com/2012/01/articles-by-david-pilditch-re-madeleine.html
Despite Sandra Felgueiras being involved in reporting on Madeleine's disappearance from the word go using the most impeccable of sources there possibly could be available to her ... I do not think she was one of the informants referred to by Pilditch.
Snip
The relationship between the RTP journalist and Maddie's case has been linked since the first day. Sandra Felgueiras followed this story, was in the Algarve for three months, did long hours of direct and countless «controversial, at the time» interviews with the McCann couple, both in Praia da Luz and in England.
____________________________________________
The dogs gave a signal at the child's parents' room and in the car's trunk at the same time. In view of this evidence, Gonçalo Amaral, the first operational coordinator of the investigation, takes this signaling given by the dogs as an "unequivocal" clue. Maddie had died behind the sofa by accident and her parents had carried her in the trunk of the Renault Scenic minivan.
For this operation performed with the help of dogs to be valid, it must be supported by scientific analysis. Gonçalo Amaral's thesis needs confirmation by the pending analyzes in the Birmingham laboratory. When the preliminary results arrive, the inspector informs Sandra Felgueiras that "there was correspondence to Maddie's DNA". «In 20 possible alleles, five had been detected in the apartment and 17 in the trunk of the car». The journalist confirmed, with coroners, that in view of this result the probability of corresponding to Maddie was viable. "Everyone said yes, that the probability was high."
Sandra Felgueiras advances. «Based on this information, which Gonçalo Amaral gave me, and he knows he did, I trusted him», he says, and gave the news
In July 2008, however, the journalist has access to the process that, until then, was a secret of justice. «When I go to see the preliminary result, which Gonçalo Amaral told me about, and which led him to constitute the McCanns as defendants, I see that the last paragraph said that, despite there being 17 alleles in 20, the sample was so insignificant and small that there were several people in the laboratory with the same genetic identification. Therefore, this evidence could not be considered relevant », he explains. Sandra Felgueiras feels «deeply deceived».
This paragraph was instrumental in undermining everything that had been done before. «At no time did Gonçalo Amaral tell me that the sample was so small and criminally irrelevant», he stresses.
https://www.impala.pt/noticias/portugal-e-o-mundo/sandra-felgueiras-maddie-mccann/
In my opinion a damning statement from Sandra Felgueiras detailing the manner in which the case co-ordinator manipulated and released inaccurate information to suit his own ends and to set the stamp on how Madeleine's case is still viewed by some even at this remove.
-
He had no police sources, he relied on Portuguese journalists who said they had police sources.
snip/
The aspect that made the case truly unusual was the wall of silence and lack of guidance to journalists from police both in Portugal and the UK.
31, In the absence of these critical sources or official comment that could be attributed to a named police source or authority, I took steps to obtain the relevant information by the best available route. ~ approached news/TV reporters who had solid contacts within the Portuguese police for information on the investigation and relied on the services of Mr Mitchell as a third party spokesman for Drs McCann.
http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-David-Pilditch.pdf
I think you are flogging a dead horse here in trying to defend Amaral ... Sandra Felgueiras ????
-
Well let’s see, the interpreter interpreted stuff for the police for a start so would have direct access to police statements correct? But you would not say that was a police source? OK then, clearly you believe the man lied to Leveson then.
A civilian employed by the police isn't a police source.
-
A civilian employed by the police isn't a police source.
In my opinion a journalist primed by the case co-ordinator is a conduit for the opinions of that individual and was cynically used and abused to get the message over.
She realised the depth and reality of that when the case files were released in 2008 ... but being exceptionally good at her job the damage to Madeleine's case by the wrong focus was already accomplished.
In my opinion there is real criminality here both from the individual role and in his official capacity: he spat on his country's constitution in his eagerness to spit on the innocents he had decided (as detailed in his book) were the perpetrators of a heinous crime.
Snip
The McCanns' early success with the press can be put down, in part, to the media experts they found working alongside them. The Mark Warner company, whose holiday apartments they had been staying in, already had a deal with PR company Bell Pottinger. That meant that Alex Woolfall, the company's crisis management head, was in Praia da Luz the day after Madeleine disappeared. When Woolfall left 10 days later, the Foreign Office stepped in. Media handlers arrived from London. They included former Daily Mirror journalist Sheree Dodd and, later, former BBC man Clarence Mitchell. Both Woolfall and Mitchell are remembered by reporters as key and immensely helpful sources as the McCann phenomenon took off.
After they left, however, things started going wrong.
Portuguese newspapers started to publish unsympathetic stories at the end of June.
As Portuguese journalists caught the mood music from police the relationship disintegrated further.
Sandra Felgueiras, a feisty state television journalist obsessed by the family's supposed use of Calpol, became a particular bete noire.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2007/sep/17/mondaymediasection13
The police leaks given to and promulgated by Sandra Felgueiras were wrong and were proved to be wrong but who will ever be able to assess the damage caused by them.
-
A civilian employed by the police isn't a police source.
So when Plditch said his police sources were genuine he’s lying then, according to you.
-
So when Plditch said his police sources were genuine he’s lying then, according to you.
Did he say he was in contact with these police sources?
-
Did he say he was in contact with these police sources?
This is what he said, now point out the lies.
19: In their evidence the McCanns. referring to the press in general terms, said that many stories had been "made up" and that they did not believe "police sources" were genuine.
In the case of every story I wrote, the police sources I quoted were genuine.
I had three sources in Portugal who provided me with information.
Two were Portuguese journalists who were in daily contact with the most senior officers investigating Madeieine McCann’s disappearance.
The third was a translator who worked for the Portuguese Police and translating and interpreting in the Portuguese legal system.
-
Did he say he was in contact with these police sources?
If you would take trouble to read the link I have provided perhaps you would be able to make up your own mind about that.
Snip
21: Despite the barriers thrown up by the Portuguese criminal justice system, I was able to obtain an accurate and truthful insight into on-going developments within the police investigation at that time.
Indeed, by this point in time, one of my contacts was informing me of day-to-day developments as they were taking place and before they were being written about in Portuguese newspapers.
This enabled me to verify the accuracy of the information I was being given.
For example, I was told of a series of operations and searches that would be taking place at particular times and on particular days- and was able to personally witness these events taking place.
http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-David-Pilditch.pdf
-
This is what he said, now point out the lies.
19: In their evidence the McCanns. referring to the press in general terms, said that many stories had been "made up" and that they did not believe "police sources" were genuine.
In the case of every story I wrote, the police sources I quoted were genuine.
I had three sources in Portugal who provided me with information.
Two were Portuguese journalists who were in daily contact with the most senior officers investigating Madeieine McCann’s disappearance.
The third was a translator who worked for the Portuguese Police and translating and interpreting in the Portuguese legal system.
Why would any of those statements be a lie?
-
Why would any of those statements be a lie?
Precisely, Rob.
VS is arguing their veracity, particularly as the quote is from Pilditch's testimony given under oath
-
So when Plditch said his police sources were genuine he’s lying then, according to you.
Why should he be lying? He quoted all kinds of people who could be called 'police sources', and who he thought were 'genuine'.
Portuguese Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa
A British police chief
A British police source
Portuguese police sources
-
Why should he be lying? He quoted all kinds of people who could be called 'police sources', and who he thought were 'genuine'.
Portuguese Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa
A British police chief
A British police source
Portuguese police sources
I doubt anyone really cares
-
Why should he be lying? He quoted all kinds of people who could be called 'police sources', and who he thought were 'genuine'.
Portuguese Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa
A British police chief
A British police source
Portuguese police sources
Did he quote Portuguese Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa as one of his sources or did he merely outline Sousa's role as press officer?
-
Why should he be lying? He quoted all kinds of people who could be called 'police sources', and who he thought were 'genuine'.
Portuguese Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa
A British police chief
A British police source
Portuguese police sources
He was referring specifically to three individuals, two journos and a translator. Clearly he must have been lying then, according to your logic.
-
He was referring specifically to three individuals, two journos and a translator. Clearly he must have been lying then, according to your logic.
That's your logic, not mine. Other sources were mentioned.
http://newsoutlines.blogspot.com/2012/01/articles-by-david-pilditch-re-madeleine.html
-
That's your logic, not mine. Other sources were mentioned.
http://newsoutlines.blogspot.com/2012/01/articles-by-david-pilditch-re-madeleine.html
Normally one would not remark on sources but since you are such a stickler on the subject might I suggest you may find more accuracy in what Pilditch actually said under oath http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-David-Pilditch.pdf in preference to a blog of deleted Express newspaper reports.
-
That's your logic, not mine. Other sources were mentioned.
http://newsoutlines.blogspot.com/2012/01/articles-by-david-pilditch-re-madeleine.html
At Leveson, under oath?
-
Normally one would not remark on sources but since you are such a stickler on the subject might I suggest you may find more accuracy in what Pilditch actually said under oath http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-David-Pilditch.pdf in preference to a blog of deleted Express newspaper reports.
Pilditch makes clear who his three sources in Portugal were, and they weren't policemen.
"In the case of every story I wrote, the police sources I quoted were genuine. I had three sources in Portugal who provided me with information. Two were Portuguese journalists who were in daily contact with the most senior officers investigating Madeieine McCann’s disappearance. The third was a translator who worked for the Portuguese Police and translating and interpreting in the Portuguese legal system."
-
Pilditch makes clear who his three sources in Portugal were, and they weren't policemen.
"In the case of every story I wrote, the police sources I quoted were genuine. I had three sources in Portugal who provided me with information. Two were Portuguese journalists who were in daily contact with the most senior officers investigating Madeieine McCann’s disappearance. The third was a translator who worked for the Portuguese Police and translating and interpreting in the Portuguese legal system."
Why make the claim that other sources were mentioned then?
-
Why make the claim that other sources were mentioned then?
He mentioned many sources in his deleted stories, but it's clear from his Leveson evidence that no PJ officers were briefing him directly.
-
Why make the claim that other sources were mentioned then?
I'd say that is what he was told.
-
Looking again at Pilditch's Leveson evidence he seemed very aware that his stories were in danger of being libellous;
Due to the restrictions of the Portuguese law; anyone who was unhappy about something that had been written or said about them and wished to take legal action would almost certainly have been successful...
Upon filing each story it would have been viewed by the News Editor of the day and a lawyer.
http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-David-Pilditch.pdf
So its seems that either these lawyers give the wrong advice, or their advice was ignored; many, many times.
-
Looking again at Pilditch's Leveson evidence he seemed very aware that his stories were in danger of being libellous;
Due to the restrictions of the Portuguese law; anyone who was unhappy about something that had been written or said about them and wished to take legal action would almost certainly have been successful...
Upon filing each story it would have been viewed by the News Editor of the day and a lawyer.
http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-David-Pilditch.pdf
So its seems that either these lawyers give the wrong advice, or their advice was ignored; many, many times.
Can a claim of libel be made following evidence given under oath?
-
Can a claim of libel be made following evidence given under oath?
Archer gave evidence under oath that was later shown to be untrue and he was sent to prison for perjury.
-
Can a claim of libel be made following evidence given under oath?
Libel was claimed and paid for in February 2008. Leveson took place in 2011. My point is that journalists writing stories on the McCann case in 2007/08 seem to have known at the time that their stories could lead to a libel claim. If they knew then the Express Group lawyers must have known too. So the profits made by the Express Group must have been enormous if it was worth that risk.
-
Libel was claimed and paid for in February 2008. Leveson took place in 2011. My point is that journalists writing stories on the McCann case in 2007/08 seem to have known at the time that their stories could lead to a libel claim. If they knew then the Express Group lawyers must have known too. So the profits made by the Express Group must have been enormous if it was worth that risk.
Actually ... if memory serves me well ... this particular off topic discussion had nothing at all to do with libel. It had all to do with your defence of the indefensible with your denial that the Portuguese police leaked propaganda to the Portuguese press as a matter of course and as their way of getting around the secrecy laws which they should have been defending not blatantly flouting.
We know about it as a result of what happened in Madeleine McCann's case. Just as we know it is a tactic which was used in Joana Cipriano's case.
Goncalo Amaral 'outed' himself when he was caught at it in flagrante delicto resulting in his dismissal from Madeleine's case.
All confirmed chapter and verse in the Netflix documentary by the journalist Sandra Felgueiras who was in Praia da Luz from the day after Madeleine's disappearance and who was used as a conduit throughout by Amaral for such rubbish as 'calpol' and 'the dogs' and any other fantasy which was passing through his febrile brain as he scented another filicide conviction to add to his belt.
Without the energy expended by Amaral providing adverse copy against Madeleine's parents for the Portuguese press one wonders if Madeleine's case might not have had a very different result.
-
Libel was claimed and paid for in February 2008. Leveson took place in 2011. My point is that journalists writing stories on the McCann case in 2007/08 seem to have known at the time that their stories could lead to a libel claim. If they knew then the Express Group lawyers must have known too. So the profits made by the Express Group must have been enormous if it was worth that risk.
"Libel was claimed and paid for in February 2008." Did you cite that? I have not followed the discussion in detail, I'm sorry if you have to repeat yourself.
-
Actually ... if memory serves me well ... this particular off topic discussion had nothing at all to do with libel. It had all to do with your defence of the indefensible with your denial that the Portuguese police leaked propaganda to the Portuguese press as a matter of course and as their way of getting around the secrecy laws which they should have been defending not blatantly flouting.
We know about it as a result of what happened in Madeleine McCann's case. Just as we know it is a tactic which was used in Joana Cipriano's case.
Goncalo Amaral 'outed' himself when he was caught at it in flagrante delicto resulting in his dismissal from Madeleine's case.
All confirmed chapter and verse in the Netflix documentary by the journalist Sandra Felgueiras who was in Praia da Luz from the day after Madeleine's disappearance and who was used as a conduit throughout by Amaral for such rubbish as 'calpol' and 'the dogs' and any other fantasy which was passing through his febrile brain as he scented another filicide conviction to add to his belt.
Without the energy expended by Amaral providing adverse copy against Madeleine's parents for the Portuguese press one wonders if Madeleine's case might not have had a very different result.
We are indeed off topic, largely as a response to this post;
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11155.msg570433#msg570433
We know that Amaral spoke to a journalist because he said he did. Sandra Felgueira also said he gave her information, although it took her a very long time to share that.
British journalists believed that Portuguese journalists were getting information from PJ officers, but none of them could prove it; that's why the McCanns were able to sue Express Group Newspapers.
It seems clear to me that there was leaking going on, and it wasn't all from the PJ. The following Express story, for example, seems to have come from Metodo 3, and it's not truthful and correct;
A MAN resembling suspect Robert Murat tried to snatch a child from the apartment where Madeleine McCann went missing, a new witness has claimed.
A British nanny has told police that she caught the intruder trying to climb through the ground floor window while a baby slept inside.
In a statement to detectives she described him as looking like Murat, 34, who was named as an official suspect after Madeleine vanished on May 3.
The woman, who asked not to be named, had left a baby sleeping in the apartment at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz. She returned and scared off the prowler.
She has given details of the incident in December last year to Metodo 3, the Spanish private detective agency hired by the McCanns, to find their daughter...
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/i-saw-man-like-murat-try-to-kidnap-a-child-26-11-0-t15244.html#p210809
-
"Libel was claimed and paid for in February 2008." Did you cite that? I have not followed the discussion in detail, I'm sorry if you have to repeat yourself.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2008/mar/19/dailyexpress.dailystar
-
We are indeed off topic, largely as a response to this post;
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11155.msg570433#msg570433
We know that Amaral spoke to a journalist because he said he did. Sandra Felgueira also said he gave her information, although it took her a very long time to share that.
British journalists believed that Portuguese journalists were getting information from PJ officers, but none of them could prove it; that's why the McCanns were able to sue Express Group Newspapers.
It seems clear to me that there was leaking going on, and it wasn't all from the PJ. The following Express story, for example, seems to have come from Metodo 3, and it's not truthful and correct;
A MAN resembling suspect Robert Murat tried to snatch a child from the apartment where Madeleine McCann went missing, a new witness has claimed.
A British nanny has told police that she caught the intruder trying to climb through the ground floor window while a baby slept inside.
In a statement to detectives she described him as looking like Murat, 34, who was named as an official suspect after Madeleine vanished on May 3.
The woman, who asked not to be named, had left a baby sleeping in the apartment at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz. She returned and scared off the prowler.
She has given details of the incident in December last year to Metodo 3, the Spanish private detective agency hired by the McCanns, to find their daughter...
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/i-saw-man-like-murat-try-to-kidnap-a-child-26-11-0-t15244.html#p210809
I truly don't think you have checked back far enough to find where the thread went off topic. For example there were at least two prior posts with reference to "propaganda" one of which emanated from your good self.
Mind you maybe 'propaganda' might actually not have been too far off the mark as far as the thread title is concerned as quite a bit of devious tittle tattle has been spread over the years of every aspect of the events of the third.
Many thanks for your link which I think may actually be on topic with "what is the truth?" of the title, which in my opinion has all to do with the lies repeated by Express journalists and printed by the newspaper.
Probably explains why big bucks paid and apologies made for libel.
The link you provided is also in my opinion an absolutely prime example of the well tried and tested art of the PJ propaganda technique of leaking information which has just a vestige of the truth about it but is in effect smoke and mirrors deception.
Didn't you notice there is absolutely nothing in the article attributable to any source whatsoever ...
Snip- a new witness has claimed
- A British nanny has told police ...
- The woman, who asked not to be named ...
- She has given details of the incident in December last year to Metodo 3 ...
- A source linked to Metodo 3 said that the nanny told detectives ...
- She gave a detailed description of the man who the detectives say is identical to Robert Murat, " said the source.
- A Portuguese lorry driver said ...
- A second witness - a Spanish tourist - came forward to claim ...
- Last night a friend insisted she was at the meeting ...
- He said: " ...
- The friend added: ...
Following on from that list of unattributed trash on which you set much store in your post, is the one attributed statement in the whole piece made by the McCann spokesman and reads as follows ...
Last night Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns' official spokesman said the couple had not spoken publicly about Murat or anyone being investigated. They would continue to refuse to comment during the inquiry. He said: "We continue to work closely with Metodo 3 and collectively we are always careful about what detail enters the public domain for operational reasons."
________________________________________________
I believe I'm right in thinking that Metodo 3 operated throughout in the full knowledge of the Policia Judiciaria and shared all relevant information with them ...
Snip
On the 13th of the current year, in the presence of the signatory and inspectors Paulo Ferreira and Ricardo Paiva, a meeting was held, in this department, with Brian Kennedy, the director of the detective company, Francisco Marco and an advisor of this same company, Antonio Jimenez, ex-chief of the Kidnapping Unit of Catalan.
________________________________________________
During the course of this meeting, the director of METODO 3 gave us a small book (attached), with information relative to the disappearance of the minor. This information, as we were told, was received via telephone and that they had already opened a line in Spain, specifically to receive and deal with information.
In this book, written in Spanish, we can analyse three pieces of information:
1. In the first case, we observed that there was report of facts which occurred in August/September of 2006, and which appears to us somewhat extemporaneous, as it cannot now be related to the material under investigation.
2. In the second point, we should remember that the computers of Sergey Malinka were searched and that nothing of suspicion was found there or related to paedophilia.
3. In that which concerns the third point, we are currently carrying out diligences with the intent to confirm or disprove the related information.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRIAN-KENNEDY.htm
-
I truly don't think you have checked back far enough to find where the thread went off topic. For example there were at least two prior posts with reference to "propaganda" one of which emanated from your good self.
Mind you maybe 'propaganda' might actually not have been too far off the mark as far as the thread title is concerned as quite a bit of devious tittle tattle has been spread over the years of every aspect of the events of the third.
Many thanks for your link which I think may actually be on topic with "what is the truth?" of the title, which in my opinion has all to do with the lies repeated by Express journalists and printed by the newspaper.
Probably explains why big bucks paid and apologies made for libel.
The link you provided is also in my opinion an absolutely prime example of the well tried and tested art of the PJ propaganda technique of leaking information which has just a vestige of the truth about it but is in effect smoke and mirrors deception.
Didn't you notice there is absolutely nothing in the article attributable to any source whatsoever ...
Snip- a new witness has claimed
- A British nanny has told police ...
- The woman, who asked not to be named ...
- She has given details of the incident in December last year to Metodo 3 ...
- A source linked to Metodo 3 said that the nanny told detectives ...
- She gave a detailed description of the man who the detectives say is identical to Robert Murat, " said the source.
- A Portuguese lorry driver said ...
- A second witness - a Spanish tourist - came forward to claim ...
- Last night a friend insisted she was at the meeting ...
- He said: " ...
- The friend added: ...
Following on from that list of unattributed trash on which you set much store in your post, is the one attributed statement in the whole piece made by the McCann spokesman and reads as follows ...
Last night Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns' official spokesman said the couple had not spoken publicly about Murat or anyone being investigated. They would continue to refuse to comment during the inquiry. He said: "We continue to work closely with Metodo 3 and collectively we are always careful about what detail enters the public domain for operational reasons."
________________________________________________
I believe I'm right in thinking that Metodo 3 operated throughout in the full knowledge of the Policia Judiciaria and shared all relevant information with them ...
Snip
On the 13th of the current year, in the presence of the signatory and inspectors Paulo Ferreira and Ricardo Paiva, a meeting was held, in this department, with Brian Kennedy, the director of the detective company, Francisco Marco and an advisor of this same company, Antonio Jimenez, ex-chief of the Kidnapping Unit of Catalan.
________________________________________________
During the course of this meeting, the director of METODO 3 gave us a small book (attached), with information relative to the disappearance of the minor. This information, as we were told, was received via telephone and that they had already opened a line in Spain, specifically to receive and deal with information.
In this book, written in Spanish, we can analyse three pieces of information:
1. In the first case, we observed that there was report of facts which occurred in August/September of 2006, and which appears to us somewhat extemporaneous, as it cannot now be related to the material under investigation.
2. In the second point, we should remember that the computers of Sergey Malinka were searched and that nothing of suspicion was found there or related to paedophilia.
3. In that which concerns the third point, we are currently carrying out diligences with the intent to confirm or disprove the related information.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRIAN-KENNEDY.htm
I was speaking of Kate McCann's attempts to discredit the Portuguese Judiciary by suggesting their methods were inadequate. There is no proof that Pilditch was repeating PJ propaganda. He admitted only that he was repeating stories given to him by Portuguese journalists and an interpreter which he thought came from the PJ.
'A source linked to Metodo 3' was quoted in the link I provided, so it was the McCann's PI's who leaked that story, not the PJ imo. Metodo 3 requested a meeting with the PJ and gave them some information, but recieved nothing in return. As they were operating in Spain they were outside Portuguese jurisdiction.
The story I linked to was a work of speculation and fiction.
-
I was speaking of Kate McCann's attempts to discredit the Portuguese Judiciary by suggesting their methods were inadequate. There is no proof that Pilditch was repeating PJ propaganda. He admitted only that he was repeating stories given to him by Portuguese journalists and an interpreter which he thought came from the PJ.
'A source linked to Metodo 3' was quoted in the link I provided, so it was the McCann's PI's who leaked that story, not the PJ imo. Metodo 3 requested a meeting with the PJ and gave them some information, but recieved nothing in return. As they were operating in Spain they were outside Portuguese jurisdiction.
The story I linked to was a work of speculation and fiction.
Sandra Figiurass' statement on netflix that amaral lied to her is pretty damning....the claim that the PJ only read the first paragraph of the FSS report....is also pretty damning of the portuguese investigation. You seem to be in total denial
-
Sandra Figiurass' statement on netflix that amaral lied to her is pretty damning....the claim that the PJ only read the first paragraph of the FSS report....is also pretty damning of the portuguese investigation. You seem to be in total denial
Who is Sandra Figiurass?
-
Who is Sandra Figiurass?
if you dont know you re wasting my time and yours...you obviously cant address the point in the post
-
Archer gave evidence under oath that was later shown to be untrue and he was sent to prison for perjury.
Then had to pay pack a tidy sum with interest.
-
if you dont know you re wasting my time and yours...you obviously cant address the point in the post
I see no reason why I should respond to a poster who doesn't appear to know the names of the people he's posting about.
-
I see no reason why I should respond to a poster who doesn't appear to know the names of the people he's posting about.
Then don't respond.... You know exactly who I am talking about and have made a childish post...the way things are you'll wait 24 hrs for the next post
-
This thread is slightly off topic, but as it evolved the off topic discussion seemed rather too interesting to close it down. The theme of "what is the truth still" is still there in the current discussion. So I'm not disappointed for my original query had been covered sufficiently.
Sandra Felgueiras https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandra_Felgueiras
-
I was speaking of Kate McCann's attempts to discredit the Portuguese Judiciary by suggesting their methods were inadequate. There is no proof that Pilditch was repeating PJ propaganda. He admitted only that he was repeating stories given to him by Portuguese journalists and an interpreter which he thought came from the PJ.
'A source linked to Metodo 3' was quoted in the link I provided, so it was the McCann's PI's who leaked that story, not the PJ imo. Metodo 3 requested a meeting with the PJ and gave them some information, but recieved nothing in return. As they were operating in Spain they were outside Portuguese jurisdiction.
The story I linked to was a work of speculation and fiction.
I am terribly sorry but one of the main problems I find in the substance of your posts is your continually repeated denial when challenged that you didn’t actually say what your original post very clearly says you said.
I pointed out that your link “was a work of speculation and fiction” in the classic tradition of almost all the PJ traducing of the McCann propaganda being released about that time.
You used it as your cite for the claim …
Quote
It seems clear to me that there was leaking going on, and it wasn't all from the PJ. The following Express story, for example, seems to have come from Metodo 3, and it's not truthful and correct;
A MAN resembling suspect Robert Murat tried to snatch a child from the apartment where Madeleine McCann went missing, a new witness has claimed.
A British nanny has told police that she caught the intruder trying to climb through the ground floor window while a baby slept inside.
In a statement to detectives she described him as looking like Murat, 34, who was named as an official suspect after Madeleine vanished on May 3.
The woman, who asked not to be named, had left a baby sleeping in the apartment at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz. She returned and scared off the prowler.
She has given details of the incident in December last year to Metodo 3, the Spanish private detective agency hired by the McCanns, to find their daughter... End Quote
Nothing there regarding your claim against Kate McCann (using the cite you now rubbish … ???) and a total body swerve of the only attributed quote in the whole sorry mish mash of innuendo which happens to be from the McCann spokesman which instead denies categorically that neither Kate McCann nor Metodo 3 had any locus in the leaks which you now claim to be “a work of speculation and fiction”.
Decidedly odd.
However not as odd as another Express journalist picking up on and using information which Metodo 3 had passed to the Judicial Police –
I saw man like Murat try to kidnap a child
Daily Express
From Nick Fagge in Praia da Luz
26 November 2007
Perhaps it would be worth your while to access Nick Fagge’s Leveson testimony which details more than once the sources he used (some of which he shared with Pilditch and no doubt the rest of the guys) during his stints in Praia da Luz for the express as … - In general terms, the articles are based on reports of the case in the Portuguese press,
- information from the wide variety of contacts I was able to develop in Portugal (including Portuguese journalists and members of the community in Praia da Luz)
- and statements provided by the McCanns’ spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, from whom I sought comment for each story I wrote
https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122164429/http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Witness-Statement-of-Nick-Fagge.pdf
You will note that Kate McCann and Metodo 3 are conspicuous only by their absence from these sworn testimonies therefore once again you are promoting your opinion and innuendo as fact without so much as a smidgen of proof for backup.
-
This thread is slightly off topic, but as it evolved the off topic discussion seemed rather too interesting to close it down. The theme of "what is the truth still" is still there in the current discussion. So I'm not disappointed for my original query had been covered sufficiently.
Sandra Felgueiras https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandra_Felgueiras
These things just have a way of taking off, Rob, and I agree with you its a good idea just to let it take its course even loosely (editors permitting) particularly since there is little going on in this board at the moment,
-
I am terribly sorry but one of the main problems I find in the substance of your posts is your continually repeated denial when challenged that you didn’t actually say what your original post very clearly says you said.
I pointed out that your link “was a work of speculation and fiction” in the classic tradition of almost all the PJ traducing of the McCann propaganda being released about that time.
You used it as your cite for the claim …
Quote
It seems clear to me that there was leaking going on, and it wasn't all from the PJ. The following Express story, for example, seems to have come from Metodo 3, and it's not truthful and correct;
A MAN resembling suspect Robert Murat tried to snatch a child from the apartment where Madeleine McCann went missing, a new witness has claimed.
A British nanny has told police that she caught the intruder trying to climb through the ground floor window while a baby slept inside.
In a statement to detectives she described him as looking like Murat, 34, who was named as an official suspect after Madeleine vanished on May 3.
The woman, who asked not to be named, had left a baby sleeping in the apartment at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz. She returned and scared off the prowler.
She has given details of the incident in December last year to Metodo 3, the Spanish private detective agency hired by the McCanns, to find their daughter... End Quote
Nothing there regarding your claim against Kate McCann (using the cite you now rubbish … ???) and a total body swerve of the only attributed quote in the whole sorry mish mash of innuendo which happens to be from the McCann spokesman which instead denies categorically that neither Kate McCann nor Metodo 3 had any locus in the leaks which you now claim to be “a work of speculation and fiction”.
Decidedly odd.
However not as odd as another Express journalist picking up on and using information which Metodo 3 had passed to the Judicial Police –
I saw man like Murat try to kidnap a child
Daily Express
From Nick Fagge in Praia da Luz
26 November 2007
Perhaps it would be worth your while to access Nick Fagge’s Leveson testimony which details more than once the sources he used (some of which he shared with Pilditch and no doubt the rest of the guys) during his stints in Praia da Luz for the express as … - In general terms, the articles are based on reports of the case in the Portuguese press,
- information from the wide variety of contacts I was able to develop in Portugal (including Portuguese journalists and members of the community in Praia da Luz)
- and statements provided by the McCanns’ spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, from whom I sought comment for each story I wrote
https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122164429/http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Witness-Statement-of-Nick-Fagge.pdf
You will note that Kate McCann and Metodo 3 are conspicuous only by their absence from these sworn testimonies therefore once again you are promoting your opinion and innuendo as fact without so much as a smidgen of proof for backup.
The story I quoted was the same one by Nick Fagge and he says;
A source linked to Metodo 3 said that the nanny told detectives she caught a man trying to climb in through a window of apartment 5A - the apartment later occupied by the McCanns.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/i-saw-man-like-murat-try-to-kidnap-a-child-26-11-0-t15244.html#p210809
The story he wrote led to Murat urging the McCanns to stop the smears against him and his girlfriend. As I think the stories came from Metodo 3, I agree with Murat that the McCanns could have stopped them if they had wanted to.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/murat-urges-madeleine-mccann-s-family-to-stop-25-1-t7531.html
-
The story I quoted was the same one by Nick Fagge and he says;
A source linked to Metodo 3 said that the nanny told detectives she caught a man trying to climb in through a window of apartment 5A - the apartment later occupied by the McCanns.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/i-saw-man-like-murat-try-to-kidnap-a-child-26-11-0-t15244.html#p210809
The story he wrote led to Murat urging the McCanns to stop the smears against him and his girlfriend. As I think the stories came from Metodo 3, I agree with Murat that the McCanns could have stopped them if they had wanted to.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/murat-urges-madeleine-mccann-s-family-to-stop-25-1-t7531.html
You appear to be having an argument with yourself ... and if you don't find that confusing I most certainly do.
Or is it your contention that the same lies you sneered at when reported by Nick Fagge become less of a lie by repetition in another source ??
How on earth do you suppose anyone other than the source of the propaganda and lies against the McCanns being leaked to Portuguese journalists by the Judicial Police could possibly have any say in their cessation.
You appear to be in denial of the way in which the press in Portugal was and perhaps for all we know still is manipulated by the PJ.
Perhaps you might like to take issue regarding that with the likes of Portuguese media personalities such as Sandra Felgueiras who I'm sure would be able to put you straight.
-
You appear to be having an argument with yourself ... and if you don't find that confusing I most certainly do.
Or is it your contention that the same lies you sneered at when reported by Nick Fagge become less of a lie by repetition in another source ??
How on earth do you suppose anyone other than the source of the propaganda and lies against the McCanns being leaked to Portuguese journalists by the Judicial Police could possibly have any say in their cessation.
You appear to be in denial of the way in which the press in Portugal was and perhaps for all we know still is manipulated by the PJ.
Perhaps you might like to take issue regarding that with the likes of Portuguese media personalities such as Sandra Felgueiras who I'm sure would be able to put you straight.
The PJ had no interest in the story told by Margaret Hall, so why would they bother leaking it? Even if they did, why would they try to suggest that she identified Murat as the man she saw, and that she found him trying to climb through the front window of 5A?
I think Murat was correct; the source of this story was Metodo 3 and it was designed to focus attention and suspicion on Murat and away from the McCanns. The PJ had no interest in doing that in November 2007.
In my opinion this was pro-McCann propaganda by Metodo 3 and they did nothing to stop it.
-
The PJ had no interest in the story told by Margaret Hall, so why would they bother leaking it? Even if they did, why would they try to suggest that she identified Murat as the man she saw, and that she found him trying to climb through the front window of 5A?
I think Murat was correct; the source of this story was Metodo 3 and it was designed to focus attention and suspicion on Murat and away from the McCanns. The PJ had no interest in doing that in November 2007.
In my opinion this was pro-McCann propaganda by Metodo 3 and they did nothing to stop it.
Oh! come on G, metodo aren't all bad they'll have Madeleine home by Christmas,must be the next one though.
-
The PJ had no interest in the story told by Margaret Hall, so why would they bother leaking it? Even if they did, why would they try to suggest that she identified Murat as the man she saw, and that she found him trying to climb through the front window of 5A?
I think Murat was correct; the source of this story was Metodo 3 and it was designed to focus attention and suspicion on Murat and away from the McCanns. The PJ had no interest in doing that in November 2007.
In my opinion this was pro-McCann propaganda by Metodo 3 and they did nothing to stop it.
It appears you have proved fertile ground for the PJ propaganda trick I described in an earlier post of introducing a smidgen of truth to the particular ‘message’ or tall tales of their invention.
By the way … why did you mention Margaret Hall?
Indeed …- she does exist
- she did work as a nanny
- she did look after a sleeping child in the apartment from which Madeleine vanished a few moths later
- she did have a frightening encounter with a stranger outside the apartment
Where in the cites you have provided is she anything other than the convenient and anonymous coat hook on which to hang a tale of denigration which has manipulated your opinion exactly as it was intended to do all those years ago but which retains its potency and poison still to feed to the unwary.
Margaret Hall’s true story bears little relation to the fictitious nanny’s tale ~ I doubt she had ever set eyes on Robert Murat who doesn’t look remotely like the man who frightened Margaret so and who she described as follows …
Snip
She said the man was aged between 25 - 35 years, with a Mediterranean aspect with tight black curly hair. She is certain that he had a Mediterranean accent, surely Portuguese.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARGARET_HALL.htm
I think that Margaret Hall's statement should have been taken seriously and checked for its relevance or otherwise to the inquiry. According to you the PJ showed no interest in Margaret Hall.
In this instance under discussion though her existence proved its worth to them for the propaganda purposes which you believe to this day and for which there is no provenance but anonymous tittle tattle leaked in recognised fashion into the public domain.
Pity they weren’t as good at the day job of checking out witness statements such as Margaret Hall’s to their conclusion instead of "showing no interest" .
The Judicial Police wouldn’t have used propaganda if it didn’t work and they certainly were/are good at it … you are the proof of their capability of promoting their expertise without the necessity of going to the trouble of having to provide even one iota of proof.
-
The PJ had no interest in the story told by Margaret Hall, so why would they bother leaking it? Even if they did, why would they try to suggest that she identified Murat as the man she saw, and that she found him trying to climb through the front window of 5A?
I think Murat was correct; the source of this story was Metodo 3 and it was designed to focus attention and suspicion on Murat and away from the McCanns. The PJ had no interest in doing that in November 2007.
In my opinion this was pro-McCann propaganda by Metodo 3 and they did nothing to stop it.
this is something you have no evidence for so is...in your words....a complete guess. You are continually guilty of such guesses....have you noticed...speculation and guesswork seem to be your forte
-
The PJ had no interest in the story told by Margaret Hall, so why would they bother leaking it? Even if they did, why would they try to suggest that she identified Murat as the man she saw, and that she found him trying to climb through the front window of 5A?
I think Murat was correct; the source of this story was Metodo 3 and it was designed to focus attention and suspicion on Murat and away from the McCanns. The PJ had no interest in doing that in November 2007.
In my opinion this was pro-McCann propaganda by Metodo 3 and they did nothing to stop it.
Shame hardly anyone’s interested in your opinion isn’t it? Oh well.
-
The PJ had no interest in the story told by Margaret Hall, so why would they bother leaking it? Even if they did, why would they try to suggest that she identified Murat as the man she saw, and that she found him trying to climb through the front window of 5A?
I think Murat was correct; the source of this story was Metodo 3 and it was designed to focus attention and suspicion on Murat and away from the McCanns. The PJ had no interest in doing that in November 2007.
In my opinion this was pro-McCann propaganda by Metodo 3 and they did nothing to stop it.
This thread is certainly becoming interesting.
-
This thread is certainly becoming interesting.
What I find interesting is how some people are suggesting that this story came from the PJ, when Nick Fagge clearly says it came from Metodo 3.
A source linked to Metodo 3 said that the nanny told detectives she caught a man trying to climb in through a window of apartment 5A - the apartment later occupied by the McCanns.
"He was trying to get in through the exact same window which police believe Madeleine's abductors may have used. She gave a detailed description of the man who the detectives say is identical to Robert Murat, " said the source.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/i-saw-man-like-murat-try-to-kidnap-a-child-26-11-0-t15244.html#p210809
-
What I find interesting is how some people are suggesting that this story came from the PJ, when Nick Fagge clearly says it came from Metodo 3.
A source linked to Metodo 3 said that the nanny told detectives she caught a man trying to climb in through a window of apartment 5A - the apartment later occupied by the McCanns.
"He was trying to get in through the exact same window which police believe Madeleine's abductors may have used. She gave a detailed description of the man who the detectives say is identical to Robert Murat, " said the source.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/i-saw-man-like-murat-try-to-kidnap-a-child-26-11-0-t15244.html#p210809
you may find it interesting ....it is simply of no importance whatsoever
-
you may find it interesting ....it is simply of no importance whatsoever
Those who like to lambast the PJ for 'leaking' don't like to accept that pro-McCann propaganda was being fed to the press, but neither can they disprove it.
-
Those who like to lambast the PJ for 'leaking' don't like to accept that pro-McCann propaganda was being fed to the press, but neither can they disprove it.
I like to lambast the Pj for leaking (why the inverted commas?) and I don’t care one way or the other if Metodo 3 were leaking, they were not supposed to be upholders of the law after all.
-
Those who like to lambast the PJ for 'leaking' don't like to accept that pro-McCann propaganda was being fed to the press, but neither can they disprove it.
I dont really care..its of no real importance. Whats imprtant is that maddie is still missing sadly...probably dead....and the mccanns are not being investigated...are not suspects and thers no evidence gainst them....I M O
-
Those who like to lambast the PJ for 'leaking' don't like to accept that pro-McCann propaganda was being fed to the press, but neither can they disprove it.
i dont accept that pro mccann propaganda was being fed to the press...its guesswork and specuation by you...but you dont realise.
-
What I find interesting is how some people are suggesting that this story came from the PJ, when Nick Fagge clearly says it came from Metodo 3.
A source linked to Metodo 3 said that the nanny told detectives she caught a man trying to climb in through a window of apartment 5A - the apartment later occupied by the McCanns.
"He was trying to get in through the exact same window which police believe Madeleine's abductors may have used. She gave a detailed description of the man who the detectives say is identical to Robert Murat, " said the source.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/i-saw-man-like-murat-try-to-kidnap-a-child-26-11-0-t15244.html#p210809
Anyone who knows anything at all about the conduct of Madeleine's case knows that the main source of pejorative propaganda driven leaks directed against her parents and their friends originated from within the ranks of the Judicial Police.
Sandra Felgueiras confirmed that Goncalo Amaral used her and lied to her. Pilditch confirmed under oath that he also received information from police sources which he obviously knows now to be a pack of lies saying that what was written after Madeleine'e disappearance was thought to be true at the time but that "Knowing what we know now, it's a very different picture."
He defends his use of Portugese police sources to stand up stories, saying:
"There must be some plausibility in what a modern police force were telling you in the 21st century in a European country."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/9006683/Leveson-Inquiry-as-it-happened-December-21.html
I think it is very strange that you continue in your defence of the Policia Judicairia when the available evidence points to their duplicity in getting around the secrecy laws by using journalists to disseminate what Mitchell described as black propaganda.
-
you may find it interesting ...as one or two others may....I think its absolutely laughable that you think its interesting....it is simply of no imprtance whatsoever
It certainly had neither importance or relevance to moving even one step forward in finding out what had happened to Madeleine and I think that is indefensible and shameful.
-
Those who like to lambast the PJ for 'leaking' don't like to accept that pro-McCann propaganda was being fed to the press, but neither can they disprove it.
Interestingly enough I believe one of Nick Fagge's contacts might very well have been Duarte Levy who had a very close relationship with Amaral, who according to Morais worked freelance for Derniere Heurre and who claimed copyright on the dog video which he released on the internet. Although how he managed to do that has never quite been explained since it appears to have been Judicial Police property.
Snip
(v) Article dated 3112/2007
This story was based on an article which appeared in the Belgian newspaper, Derniere Heure. I believed the journalist involved had good contacts within the Portuguese judiciary. I did not see the letter referred to, but I did speak to the journalist from Demiere Heure.
https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122164429/http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Witness-Statement-of-Nick-Fagge.pdf
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/amaralinvigo2.jpg)
Levy attending one of Amaral's meetings to denounce the McCanns ~ I believe he is the guy who appears to be distributing himself over two seats? on the front row http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8454.msg422413#msg422413
-
Interestingly enough I believe one of Nick Fagge's contacts might very well have been Duarte Levy who had a very close relationship with Amaral, who according to Morais worked freelance for Derniere Heurre and who claimed copyright on the dog video which he released on the internet. Although how he managed to do that has never quite been explained since it appears to have been Judicial Police property.
Snip
(v) Article dated 3112/2007
This story was based on an article which appeared in the Belgian newspaper, Derniere Heure. I believed the journalist involved had good contacts within the Portuguese judiciary. I did not see the letter referred to, but I did speak to the journalist from Demiere Heure.
https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122164429/http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Witness-Statement-of-Nick-Fagge.pdf
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/amaralinvigo2.jpg)
Levy attending one of Amaral's meetings to denounce the McCanns ~ I believe he is the guy who appears to be distributing himself over two seats? on the front row http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8454.msg422413#msg422413
There was indeed a story in Deniere Heure, and acording to Fagge;
Details of the letter have been leaked through the British diplomatic mission in Brussels to the respected Belgian newspaper Deniere Heure.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-deleted-daily-express-articles-in-chronologica-t247-s220.html#p3654
Did Duarte Levy write the article?
-
There was indeed a story in Deniere Heure, and acording to Fagge;
Details of the letter have been leaked through the British diplomatic mission in Brussels to the respected Belgian newspaper Deniere Heure.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-deleted-daily-express-articles-in-chronologica-t247-s220.html#p3654
Did Duarte Levy write the article?
Did he? Wouldn't that be fun if he did.
I don't understand what has happened to you. You were once upon a time half reasonable.
-
There was indeed a story in Deniere Heure, and acording to Fagge;
Details of the letter have been leaked through the British diplomatic mission in Brussels to the respected Belgian newspaper Deniere Heure.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-deleted-daily-express-articles-in-chronologica-t247-s220.html#p3654
Did Duarte Levy write the article?
On 2 December 2007 Nick Fagge of the Daily Express reported “Madeleine: British Diplomat in Portugal had doubts about McCanns”.
So indeed there is a possibility that he might have ... particularly since everything printed is unattributed and unsubstantiated and that particular article does contain almost all of the shibboleths dear to the sceptic heart.
You just don't appear to have grasped that the main point of the (deleted?) Express articles to which you keep referring ... is that they were deleted because they were libellous and as such were and are nothing more than a tissue of lies.
Just as Amaral failed to find evidence to back up his wild theories I think you have to give consideration to evidencing your assertion that the Policia Judiciaria were not responsible for the release of defamatory information to the Portuguese press concerning Kate and Gerry McCann in particular and others in general.
The first hurdle you have to overcome regarding that is who else had the credibility as the force of law and order in conjunction with motive for blackening the McCann's name; certainly not the culprits of your choosing.
Then you have to overcome the problem that journalists have named the Judicial Police as one of their sources.
-
There was indeed a story in Deniere Heure, and acording to Fagge;
Details of the letter have been leaked through the British diplomatic mission in Brussels to the respected Belgian newspaper Deniere Heure.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-deleted-daily-express-articles-in-chronologica-t247-s220.html#p3654
Did Duarte Levy write the article?
According to xclamation (Joana Morais) Nuno Miguel aka Nuno Miguel Duarte aka Duarte Levy did write the article in La Dernière Heure.
Details are on the following forum..http://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/t19872-british-ambassador-admitted-british-police-had-developed-evidence-against-mccanns
-
Completely off topic but incredible to think that there have been 5 different Prime Ministers in the time Madeleine has been missing.
-
Completely off topic but incredible to think that there have been 5 different Prime Ministers in the time Madeleine has been missing.
And how many home secretaries.... All of whom some believe are prepared to protect two doctors from any criminal charges... Doesn't make a lot of sense does it
-
On 2 December 2007 Nick Fagge of the Daily Express reported “Madeleine: British Diplomat in Portugal had doubts about McCanns”.
So indeed there is a possibility that he might have ... particularly since everything printed is unattributed and unsubstantiated and that particular article does contain almost all of the shibboleths dear to the sceptic heart.
You just don't appear to have grasped that the main point of the (deleted?) Express articles to which you keep referring ... is that they were deleted because they were libellous and as such were and are nothing more than a tissue of lies.
Just as Amaral failed to find evidence to back up his wild theories I think you have to give consideration to evidencing your assertion that the Policia Judiciaria were not responsible for the release of defamatory information to the Portuguese press concerning Kate and Gerry McCann in particular and others in general.
The first hurdle you have to overcome regarding that is who else had the credibility as the force of law and order in conjunction with motive for blackening the McCann's name; certainly not the culprits of your choosing.
Then you have to overcome the problem that journalists have named the Judicial Police as one of their sources.
The only people printing defamatory information in the UK were British journalists. Express newspaper group settled out of court with the McCanns and their friends because they knew the stories didn't have satisfactory sources. When questioned by Leveson the journalists admitted that this was true. I don't think any of them claimed to have contacts in the PJ.
-
The only people printing defamatory information in the UK were British journalists. Express newspaper group settled out of court with the McCanns and their friends because they knew the stories didn't have satisfactory sources. When questioned by Leveson the journalists admitted that this was true. I don't think any of them claimed to have contacts in the PJ.
Do you have a cite for... Don't have satisfactory sources.. They settled because they didn't have evidence to support their claims. We know for a fact from amaral that he thought he could prove his claims
-
The only people printing defamatory information in the UK were British journalists. Express newspaper group settled out of court with the McCanns and their friends because they knew the stories didn't have satisfactory sources. When questioned by Leveson the journalists admitted that this was true. I don't think any of them claimed to have contacts in the PJ.
Martin Brunt made a clear statement if what the Portuguese police believed Re the dna in the car. He told us what the police believed... It turns out he was spot on. So where did this accurate information come from if not from the police..
-
According to xclamation (Joana Morais) Nuno Miguel aka Nuno Miguel Duarte aka Duarte Levy did write the article in La Dernière Heure.
Details are on the following forum..http://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/t19872-british-ambassador-admitted-british-police-had-developed-evidence-against-mccanns
"Within days of Madeleine's disappearance" according to the 'leaks' the propaganda machine had already swung into existence to question her parents!!
That certainly seems to have been of paramount importance to the Policia Judiciaria and indicates the path the investigation was taking with - in my opinion - the resulting neglect of Madeleine who should have been their focus.
-
And how many home secretaries.... All of whom some believe are prepared to protect two doctors from any criminal charges... Doesn't make a lot of sense does it
And there was sufficient evidence to enable the police both here and in Portugal to restart the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance with the focus very firmly fixed on the abductor/s who had taken her.
-
The only people printing defamatory information in the UK were British journalists. Express newspaper group settled out of court with the McCanns and their friends because they knew the stories didn't have satisfactory sources. When questioned by Leveson the journalists admitted that this was true. I don't think any of them claimed to have contacts in the PJ.
I think that is a silly assertion ... please check back and this time actually read the links I have posted and you will find that, yet again, you are wrong.
-
Martin Brunt made a clear statement if what the Portuguese police believed Re the dna in the car. He told us what the police believed... It turns out he was spot on. So where did this accurate information come from if not from the police..
His information was not accurate though.
The police found 3 full matches of Madeleine's DNA;
In the apartment police found one full match (on a window sill) of Madeleine's DNA.
In the hire car there was a partial match and a full match.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1593.msg47419#msg47419
-
I think that is a silly assertion ... please check back and this time actually read the links I have posted and you will find that, yet again, you are wrong.
I can provide a cite. Can you provide any which claim direct contact with any policeman from the PJ?
David Pilditch;
The aspect that made the case truly unusual was the wall of silence and lack of guidance to journalists from police both in Portugal and the UK,
31, In the absence of these critical sources or official comment that could be attributed to a
named police source or authority, I took steps to obtain the relevant information by the best
available route. ~ approached news/TV reporters who had solid contacts within the
Portuguese police for information on the investigation.
http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-David-Pilditch.pdf
-
His information was not accurate though.
The police found 3 full matches of Madeleine's DNA;
In the apartment police found one full match (on a window sill) of Madeleine's DNA.
In the hire car there was a partial match and a full match.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1593.msg47419#msg47419
Not totally accurate but so close I dint see anywhere else it could have come from apart from the police.. There simply is no possible other source... Once again I think you ate in denial
-
Not totally accurate but so close I dint see anywhere else it could have come from apart from the police.. There simply is no possible other source... Once again I think you ate in denial
You can really only think of one source? What about the FSS or the UK police? Who gave 24 Horas this rubbish about Murat, for example;
Detectives searching for Madeleine McCann have told a Portuguese newspaper she WAS at the home of official suspect Robert Murat.
Officers claim traces of the missing four-year-old's hair and body fluids were found in at the Briton's villa.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-489408/Madeleines-DNA-Murats-house-police-claim.html
-
You can really only think of one source? What about the FSS or the UK police? Who gave 24 Horas this rubbish about Murat, for example;
Detectives searching for Madeleine McCann have told a Portuguese newspaper she WAS at the home of official suspect Robert Murat.
Officers claim traces of the missing four-year-old's hair and body fluids were found in at the Briton's villa.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-489408/Madeleines-DNA-Murats-house-police-claim.html
Brunt said the dna evidence had convinced the PJ that Maddie had been in the car... That isn't what the Fss or SY have ever said.. I think you continue to be in total denial
-
Brunt said the dna evidence had convinced the PJ that Maddie had been in the car... That isn't what the Fss or SY have ever said.. I think you continue to be in total denial
Brunt had some incorrect DNA results. He also knew that the McCanns had been made arguido and had fled to the UK. The rest is speculation imo.
I thought he said that the DNA results "Rather explain perhaps why the Portuguese police are so confident in their theory that Madeleine's parents played a part in their daughter's death"
He goes on to say that the full match with Madeleine's DNA found in the hire car is crucial evidence that her body was in that car at least 5 weeks after she disappeared.
There was no full match though, so his speculation wasn't correct.
-
Brunt had some incorrect DNA results. He also knew that the McCanns had been made arguido and had fled to the UK. The rest is speculation imo.
I thought he said that the DNA results "Rather explain perhaps why the Portuguese police are so confident in their theory that Madeleine's parents played a part in their daughter's death"
He goes on to say that the full match with Madeleine's DNA found in the hire car is crucial evidence that her body was in that car at least 5 weeks after she disappeared.
There was no full match though, so his speculation wasn't correct.
How would he know that the PJ were so confident unless a police source had disclosed it...this was 100% accurate
-
And there was sufficient evidence to enable the police both here and in Portugal to restart the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance with the focus very firmly fixed on the abductor/s who had taken her.
They've got nothing to show for it and there's a reason why. Last time I looked it was an investigation into the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann and NOT the abduction of!
-
His information was not accurate though.
The police found 3 full matches of Madeleine's DNA;
In the apartment police found one full match (on a window sill) of Madeleine's DNA.
In the hire car there was a partial match and a full match.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1593.msg47419#msg47419
Who do you think leaked this misreading of the evidence?
-
Brunt had some incorrect DNA results. He also knew that the McCanns had been made arguido and had fled to the UK. The rest is speculation imo.
I thought he said that the DNA results "Rather explain perhaps why the Portuguese police are so confident in their theory that Madeleine's parents played a part in their daughter's death"
He goes on to say that the full match with Madeleine's DNA found in the hire car is crucial evidence that her body was in that car at least 5 weeks after she disappeared.
There was no full match though, so his speculation wasn't correct.
Who told him there was a full match? The FSS? FFS!
-
His information was not accurate though.
The police found 3 full matches of Madeleine's DNA;
In the apartment police found one full match (on a window sill) of Madeleine's DNA.
In the hire car there was a partial match and a full match.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1593.msg47419#msg47419
What you have written comes very close to deception. What Martin Brunt says in that interview is not backed by the results from the labs.
IMO only one full match was found and the other were unconfirmed (they used another word in the report meaning something similar).
-
How would he know that the PJ were so confident unless a police source had disclosed it...this was 100% accurate
What journalists say or write isn't always the truth, it's sometimes opinion.
-
What journalists say or write isn't always the truth, it's sometimes opinion.
Again I think you are in total denial.. What Brunt reported was so close to what the PJ eventually said that realistically it could only have come from the PJ
-
There is absolute proof from Sandra F in the netflx documentary that Amaral was not only leaking to the press but lying too
-
What journalists say or write isn't always the truth, it's sometimes opinion.
Are you seriously trying to argue that the Portuguese police were not responsible for leaks in this case? Why do you feel the need to defend their honour absolutely at every opportunity?
-
Are you seriously trying to argue that the Portuguese police were not responsible for leaks in this case? Why do you feel the need to defend their honour absolutely at every opportunity?
Why not - if that is indeed the case,
Why do you VS - feel the need to defend MCN honor absolutely at every opportunity.
-
Why not - if that is indeed the case,
Why do you VS - feel the need to defend MCN honor absolutely at every opportunity.
It's a matter of defending the truth... Amaral leaked to journalists... No opinion.. A fact... To deny that is denying the truth
-
It's a matter of defending the truth... Amaral leaked to journalists... No opinion.. A fact... To deny that is denying the truth
OK but as yet D- you don't know what the truth is do you.
-
OK but as yet D- you don't know what the truth is do you.
I know amaral leaked to journalists.. That's what's being discussed here.. That's the truth
Yet gunit doesn't want to accept the truth... What does that say for her so called open mind
-
Why not - if that is indeed the case,
Why do you VS - feel the need to defend MCN honor absolutely at every opportunity.
Firstly I don't, and secondly, I don't like to see individuals being unjustly accused or vilified by others and will speak up to say so when I perceive that to be happening. Organisations, especially of public servants like the police, are a different matter and it is right that questions are asked about their performance and failings by those they are there to serve - the public.
-
Firstly I don't, and secondly, I don't like to see individuals being unjustly accused or vilified by others and will speak up to say so when I perceive that to be happening. Organisations, especially of public servants like the police, are a different matter and it is right that questions are asked about their performance and failings by those they are there to serve - the public.
Oh please - GA is vilified for doing his job.
I personally think that is why he was took off the case- but there you are others don't.
but what we do all know- the truth is it was MCN who left the children not GA.
You still don't know if the visit to the play area - was the truth.
-
Firstly I don't, and secondly, I don't like to see individuals being unjustly accused or vilified by others and will speak up to say so when I perceive that to be happening. Organisations, especially of public servants like the police, are a different matter and it is right that questions are asked about their performance and failings by those they are there to serve - the public.
Are the PJ there to serve you ?
-
Oh please - GA is vilified for doing his job.
I personally think that is why he was took off the case- but there you are others don't.
but what we do all know- the truth is it was MCN who left the children not GA.
You still don't know if the visit to the play area - was the truth.
amaral is being criticsied for not doing his job properly,,...fact....and thats the raeson he was taken off the case imo
-
Are you seriously trying to argue that the Portuguese police were not responsible for leaks in this case? Why do you feel the need to defend their honour absolutely at every opportunity?
There was clearly information around which came from within the investigation. Who gave out that information isn't known. It could be members of the PJ or people working with them. There were civilian interpreters, translators and relatives. There were people working for the Prosecutors and the Judges. There were forensic people in Portugal and the UK, and UK policemen in both countries. In my opinion laying the blame for every leak on the PJ is a sign of a mind which is not just closed, but biased also.
-
There was clearly information around which came from within the investigation. Who gave out that information isn't known. It could be members of the PJ or people working with them. There were civilian interpreters, translators and relatives. There were people working for the Prosecutors and the Judges. There were forensic people in Portugal and the UK, and UK policemen in both countries. In my opinion laying the blame for every leak on the PJ is a sign of a mind which is not just closed, but biased also.
Sandra F was quite clear her leak came from amaral... Your refusal to accept that speaks volumes re your claimed impartiality
-
amaral is being criticsied for not doing his job properly,,...fact....and thats the raeson he was taken off the case imo
Not doing his job properly fact - he was removed so we will never know.
Well the fact also is - the mcn certainly wasn't doing their job properly was they.
-
Sandra F was quite clear her leak came from amaral... Your refusal to accept that speaks volumes re your claimed impartiality
Your unquestioning acceptance of what she said speaks volumes to me. When did she discover she had been misinformed? Did she immediately speak out?
-
Are the PJ there to serve you ?
Yes, if I am in their neck of the woods. Fortunately I am never in their neck of the woods!
-
There was clearly information around which came from within the investigation. Who gave out that information isn't known. It could be members of the PJ or people working with them. There were civilian interpreters, translators and relatives. There were people working for the Prosecutors and the Judges. There were forensic people in Portugal and the UK, and UK policemen in both countries. In my opinion laying the blame for every leak on the PJ is a sign of a mind which is not just closed, but biased also.
Who has said EVERY leak came from the PJ? Just a handful is enough to prove that they leak, and are still doing so if the recent interview with Amaral about the German paedo is anything to go by.
-
Your unquestioning acceptance of what she said speaks volumes to me. When did she discover she had been misinformed? Did she immediately speak out?
If she was lying then Amaral has a case of libel against her. Has he denied it publicly at all?
-
Yes, if I am in their neck of the woods. Fortunately I am never in their neck of the woods!
The Police don't exist to provide a service, they exist to enforce the law.
Police;
A body of officers representing the civil authority of government. Police typically are responsible for maintaining public order and safety, enforcing the law, and preventing, detecting, and investigating criminal activities. These functions are known as policing. Police are often also entrusted with various licensing and regulatory activities.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/police
-
Who has said EVERY leak came from the PJ? Just a handful is enough to prove that they leak, and are still doing so if the recent interview with Amaral about the German paedo is anything to go by.
There is one leak in my opinion that can be proved to have originated with a PJ officer; the one that Amaral admitted to and which led to him being removed from the case. Any more?
-
If she was lying then Amaral has a case of libel against her. Has he denied it publicly at all?
Why are you accusing her of lying? She clearly delayed sharing what she says she knew, is that lying?
-
Why are you accusing her of lying? She clearly delayed sharing what she says she knew, is that lying?
Why are you accusing me of accusing her of lying, I did not. Kindly learn to comprehend what you are reading.
-
The Police don't exist to provide a service, they exist to enforce the law.
Police;
A body of officers representing the civil authority of government. Police typically are responsible for maintaining public order and safety, enforcing the law, and preventing, detecting, and investigating criminal activities. These functions are known as policing. Police are often also entrusted with various licensing and regulatory activities.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/police
The police are public servants, enforcing the law is providing service to the public, end of.
-
There is one leak in my opinion that can be proved to have originated with a PJ officer; the one that Amaral admitted to and which led to him being removed from the case. Any more?
so another example of amaral being quite willing to break the law...it begs the question ...if two have been discovered how a many more are there.
-
There is one leak in my opinion that can be proved to have originated with a PJ officer; the one that Amaral admitted to and which led to him being removed from the case. Any more?
Yes, all the ones he didn’t own up to.
-
Why not - if that is indeed the case,
Why do you VS - feel the need to defend MCN honor absolutely at every opportunity.
The McCann's did no wrong unless you can come up with a reliable source which says otherwise but as well as the many confirmed leaks which should have been safeguarded by secrecy laws even material witness's personal mobile phone numbers were given out to Portuguese journalists by the Portuguese police ...
Snip
The reporters had obtained the Tapas Sevens' mobile numbers and that of another witness, so it was apparent that the inquiry had a leak.[50][122][124]
This and later articles in the Portuguese press, invariably followed up in the UK, made several allegations, based on no evidence, which would engulf the McCanns for years on social media.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Madeleine_McCann
-
The McCann's did no wrong unless you can come up with a reliable source which says otherwise but as well as the many confirmed leaks which should have been safeguarded by secrecy laws even material witness's personal mobile phone numbers were given out to Portuguese journalists by the Portuguese police ...
Snip
The reporters had obtained the Tapas Sevens' mobile numbers and that of another witness, so it was apparent that the inquiry had a leak.[50][122][124]
This and later articles in the Portuguese press, invariably followed up in the UK, made several allegations, based on no evidence, which would engulf the McCanns for years on social media.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Madeleine_McCann
I don't think we are on the same page B
-
The Police don't exist to provide a service, they exist to enforce the law.
Police;
A body of officers representing the civil authority of government. Police typically are responsible for maintaining public order and safety, enforcing the law, and preventing, detecting, and investigating criminal activities. These functions are known as policing. Police are often also entrusted with various licensing and regulatory activities.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/police
There is I believe a very strict Portuguese law regarding secrecy for everyone involved in a police investigation ... on one occasion I believe it necessitated the speedy return to Portugal of the case coordinator Rebelo, from England where he was on Madeleine's business to sort out a particularly blatant and damaging violation of that law when information was leaked to the press from the PJ.
Are Police officers in Portugal exempt from breaking the law? Seems so because it kept on happening and no-one was prosecuted for it. Or are they just not terribly adept at detaining the real criminals if they have a convenient patsy available to prosecute using the Portuguese press as their due process? Probably saved a lot of bother ... but in this instance they overstepped their mark I think.
-
I don't think we are on the same page B
I am certain of it. Maybe one day you will catch up.
-
I remember this well when it happened.
“But they are especially furious about the timing of the latest leak, which derailed a planned trip to the European Parliament to call for an improved alert system for missing children.
The couple met advisers last night to discuss their response to the leak of the statements - in which it was revealed that Madeleine, then three, and her brother Sean, then two, were left crying in their holiday apartment the night before Madeleine disappeared”.
So, who apart from the PT police would have had access to the McCanns’ statements and who had the bigger chip on their shoulder to want to release this information to coincide with the McCanns trip to the European Parliament? Hmmm, I wonder...?
-
I am certain of it. Maybe one day you will catch up.
Well its 50 50 - so only one us will
-
If there was only the one leak that Amaral owned up to then why did Ribeiro the PJ director say this?: "There have certainly been leaks but less than what it seems”.
And yes, of course he would try and downplay the leaks but at least he admits there were leaks, unlike G-Unit who won’t!
-
If there was only the one leak that Amaral owned up to then why did Ribeiro the PJ director say this?: "There have certainly been leaks but less than what it seems”.
And yes, of course he would try and downplay the leaks but at least he admits there were leaks, unlike G-Unit who won’t!
There you are then. Ribeiro is denying that his officers were responsible for all the leaks they were accused of. In my opinion some highly publicised leaks were not from the PJ or even from the investigation. The Telecinco claim that it had the McCann's police statements was obviously not correct, because the statements they claimed to have didn't match the actual statements which are in the PJ Files.
Amaral may have been taken off the case, but he was still involved for a while;
Mr Ribeiro revealed that the discredited former chief investigator into the case, Goncalo Amaral, was still helping his successor Paulo Rebelo.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488887/We-DID-leak-stories-press-Madeleine-Portuguese-cop-confesses.html
-
There you are then. Ribeiro is denying that his officers were responsible for all the leaks they were accused of. In my opinion some highly publicised leaks were not from the PJ or even from the investigation. The Telecinco claim that it had the McCann's police statements was obviously not correct, because the statements they claimed to have didn't match the actual statements which are in the PJ Files.
Amaral may have been taken off the case, but he was still involved for a while;
Mr Ribeiro revealed that the discredited former chief investigator into the case, Goncalo Amaral, was still helping his successor Paulo Rebelo.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488887/We-DID-leak-stories-press-Madeleine-Portuguese-cop-confesses.html
Ribeiro is denying his men were responsible for all the leaks... So he is confirming they are responsible for some leaks
-
There you are then. Ribeiro is denying that his officers were responsible for all the leaks they were accused of. In my opinion some highly publicised leaks were not from the PJ or even from the investigation. The Telecinco claim that it had the McCann's police statements was obviously not correct, because the statements they claimed to have didn't match the actual statements which are in the PJ Files.
Amaral may have been taken off the case, but he was still involved for a while;
Mr Ribeiro revealed that the discredited former chief investigator into the case, Goncalo Amaral, was still helping his successor Paulo Rebelo.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488887/We-DID-leak-stories-press-Madeleine-Portuguese-cop-confesses.html
Talk about twisting things to suit your agenda, or are you having so e serious comprehension issues today? No one has claimed the PJ were responsible for ALL leaks. Ribeiro acknowledges his men were responsible for SOME leaks, not just the ONE LEAK as you have claimed. So there YOU are then.
-
Talk about twisting things to suit your agenda, or are you having so e serious comprehension issues today? No one has claimed the PJ were responsible for ALL leaks. Ribeiro acknowledges his men were responsible for SOME leaks, not just the ONE LEAK as you have claimed. So there YOU are then.
The press printed a lot of rubbish, and attributed it to 'police sources'. Some have believed them and have even suggested it was Amaral who was the source. In reality there were all kinds of people spreading all kinds of rumours on both sides. Very little that was printed can be believed therefore.
-
The press printed a lot of rubbish, and attributed it to 'police sources'. Some have believed them and have even suggested it was Amaral who was the source. In reality there were all kinds of people spreading all kinds of rumours on both sides. Very little that was printed can be believed therefore.
its a matter of seperating the wheat from the chaff....at least you have eventyally reuctantly accepted the PJ were leaking
-
its a matter of seperating the wheat from the chaff....at least you have eventyally reuctantly accepted the PJ were leaking
The point I have been making is that the UK journalists weren't getting stories from the PJ, they were getting them from Portuguese journalists. The PJ didn't leak to UK journalists but the McCann camp did, particularly Metodo 3.
-
The point I have been making is that the UK journalists weren't getting stories from the PJ, they were getting them from Portuguese journalists. The PJ didn't leak to UK journalists but the McCann camp did, particularly Metodo 3.
the pj leaked.... to portuguese journalists ..who leaked to uk journalists...so the Pj had no respect for their own law...no surprise.
Do you have any proof the mcCanns leaked information
-
the pj leaked.... to portuguese journalists ..who leaked to uk journalists...so the Pj had no respect for their own law...no surprise.
Do you have any proof the mcCanns leaked information
The problem being that no-one knows which stories came from the PJ and which didn't. I didn't say the McCanns leaked information, but someone did on their behalf.
Where did this story come from?
Hampshire dad is key Madeleine witness
https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/1947035.hampshire-dad-is-key-madeleine-witness/
It wasn't the PJ who leaked Paul Gordon's name to the press in January 2008. They weren't interested in charity collectors at that time. So who found him and gave the story to the press?
-
The problem being that no-one knows which stories came from the PJ and which didn't. I didn't say the McCanns leaked information, but someone did on their behalf.
Where did this story come from?
Hampshire dad is key Madeleine witness
https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/1947035.hampshire-dad-is-key-madeleine-witness/
It wasn't the PJ who leaked Paul Gordon's name to the press in January 2008. They weren't interested in charity collectors at that time. So who found him and gave the story to the press?
We know as a fact the PJ leaked... They've admitted it.. So which stories did the mccanns leak.. Could you provide facts rather than speculation
-
The press printed a lot of rubbish, and attributed it to 'police sources'. Some have believed them and have even suggested it was Amaral who was the source. In reality there were all kinds of people spreading all kinds of rumours on both sides. Very little that was printed can be believed therefore.
While that may be true, it does not excuse the police (including Amaral) who DID leak. You seem to be saying that because others may have leaked then that lets the police off the hook. No it does not.
-
The press printed a lot of rubbish, and attributed it to 'police sources'. Some have believed them and have even suggested it was Amaral who was the source. In reality there were all kinds of people spreading all kinds of rumours on both sides. Very little that was printed can be believed therefore.
In my opinion the problem you have with that one is that the Amarals of this life are really only tiny cogs in a far larger propaganda machine with many legitimate outlets to be used as and when the occasion arises.
All kinds of people are today still banging the same drum they have been beating since 2007 and disseminating precisely the same or much the same falsehoods of yesteryear and I think one has to wonder exactly what the reason for that might be.
To put it more succinctly … cui bono?.
Is it a steady income for them stemming from their careers as media pundits ... or is there something larger than these little people plying their shoddy trade using a little girls name as their cash cow?
Correio da Manhã TV (CMTV) is acting as a vehicle for the untruths these people have been allowed to circulate for years.
Now complete with embellishments which are even more ridiculous than the original falsification particularly as the truth of many matters have been in the public domain since 2008 when Portugal shelved a missing child case and the files were posted on the internet.
One wonders why is it in someone's corporate interest to apparently make such an effort to keep the flame alive on at the best misunderstanding and at the worst totally made up stories dripping with falsehoods and innuendo.
(CMTV) is owned by Cofina which is a Portuguese media conglomerate established in 1995.
Cofina owns Correio da Manhã and Record newspapers and several magazines, including TV Guia. The company also controls free newspapers Destak and Metro.
Now that ... in my opinion ... really is "controlling" the press and I doubt if any couple of private individual could hold a candle to that machine.
Which all goes to show in some measure what the McCanns have been up against over the years.
Perhaps now that they have the British and the Portuguese police onside under the ever watchful eyes of the world we will eventually find out the who and the why of it all.
-
It does make one wonder why the Brit press led by the Murdoch empire along with the state broadcaster the BBC perpetuate a myth about abduction.I wonder if under the watchful eye of the world we'll find out.
-
It does make one wonder why the Brit press led by the Murdoch empire along with the state broadcaster the BBC perpetuate a myth about abduction.I wonder if under the watchful eye of the world we'll find out.
because its not a myth perhaps ...because like myself and others they understand that based on the evidence abduction is by far the most likely reason for maddies disapperance
-
It does make one wonder why the Brit press led by the Murdoch empire along with the state broadcaster the BBC perpetuate a myth about abduction.I wonder if under the watchful eye of the world we'll find out.
a myth: a widely held but false belief or idea
Now prove that abduction is a myth.
-
In my opinion the problem you have with that one is that the Amarals of this life are really only tiny cogs in a far larger propaganda machine with many legitimate outlets to be used as and when the occasion arises.
All kinds of people are today still banging the same drum they have been beating since 2007 and disseminating precisely the same or much the same falsehoods of yesteryear and I think one has to wonder exactly what the reason for that might be.
To put it more succinctly … cui bono?.
Is it a steady income for them stemming from their careers as media pundits ... or is there something larger than these little people plying their shoddy trade using a little girls name as their cash cow?
Correio da Manhã TV (CMTV) is acting as a vehicle for the untruths these people have been allowed to circulate for years.
Now complete with embellishments which are even more ridiculous than the original falsification particularly as the truth of many matters have been in the public domain since 2008 when Portugal shelved a missing child case and the files were posted on the internet.
One wonders why is it in someone's corporate interest to apparently make such an effort to keep the flame alive on at the best misunderstanding and at the worst totally made up stories dripping with falsehoods and innuendo.
(CMTV) is owned by Cofina which is a Portuguese media conglomerate established in 1995.
Cofina owns Correio da Manhã and Record newspapers and several magazines, including TV Guia. The company also controls free newspapers Destak and Metro.
Now that ... in my opinion ... really is "controlling" the press and I doubt if any couple of private individual could hold a candle to that machine.
Which all goes to show in some measure what the McCanns have been up against over the years.
Perhaps now that they have the British and the Portuguese police onside under the ever watchful eyes of the world we will eventually find out the who and the why of it all.
I think anyone in the UK who criticises the Portuguese press is ignoring the fact that the press in the UK is (imo) a national disgrace. If anyone has used Madeleine McCann as a cash cow it's the UK media.
-
I think anyone in the UK who criticises the Portuguese press is ignoring the fact that the press in the UK is (imo) a national disgrace. If anyone has used Madeleine McCann as a cash cow it's the UK media.
Telling it as it is hardly equates with criticising either the Portuguese press or news media and or the business moguls who own it.
If there is a market for it who can blame multi media conglomerates for supplying it both at home in Portugal and throughout the rest of the Portuguese speaking former empire (and no ... I mention - but am not criticising empires ... Britain too used to have one ... and bless! most empires I know of had agendas of expansion as well as absolute emperors at their head).
Perhaps the ever expanding Cofina fits somewhere into that but who knows or perhaps more importantly who cares? If lies are the currency and people who know they are lies are content with that so be it. Apparently Aeschylus summed it up well ...
(https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1231954271p4/990.jpg)
I think there is also a saying about getting the press one deserves. But media purporting to be a news channel which replaces fact with - for example - the fiction that Eddie and Keela were introduced into the equation only after Kate and Gerry had left Portugal just cannot be taken seriously ... or maybe the thought should be "can it?"
-
Telling it as it is hardly equates with criticising either the Portuguese press or news media and or the business moguls who own it.
If there is a market for it who can blame multi media conglomerates for supplying it both at home in Portugal and throughout the rest of the Portuguese speaking former empire (and no ... I mention - but am not criticising empires ... Britain too used to have one ... and bless! most empires I know of had agendas of expansion as well as absolute emperors at their head).
Perhaps the ever expanding Cofina fits somewhere into that but who knows or perhaps more importantly who cares? If lies are the currency and people who know they are lies are content with that so be it. Apparently Aeschylus summed it up well ...
(https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1231954271p4/990.jpg)
I think there is also a saying about getting the press one deserves. But media purporting to be a news channel which replaces fact with - for example - the fiction that Eddie and Keela were introduced into the equation only after Kate and Gerry had left Portugal just cannot be taken seriously ... or maybe the thought should be "can it?"
You seem to be saying that the media shouldn't be expected to have standards because their main aim is to make as much profit as possible. Why did we bother with Leveson, I wonder?
-
I think anyone in the UK who criticises the Portuguese press is ignoring the fact that the press in the UK is (imo) a national disgrace. If anyone has used Madeleine McCann as a cash cow it's the UK media.
Why is the UK press a national disgrace... In your opinion..
Are other national presses far better... Most people realise the sun and the star are something of a joke but surely the more upmarket newspapers, are far from a national disgrace..
Is it because the press now support the mccanns innocence and call amaral a disgraced policeman
-
Why is the UK press a national disgrace... In your opinion..
Are other national presses far better... Most people realise the sun and the star are something of a joke but surely the more upmarket newspapers, are far from a national disgrace..
I assume by 'upmarket' you mean broadsheets such as the Times, Telegraph and Guardian. Why, even after the files were released, did they not print the correct facts?
The Guardian;
10.15pm: Oldfield goes down to the 24-hour reception at the bottom of the hill to raise the alarm. Police are called.
10.30pm: Local police are first to arrive on the scene.
11.10pm: Detectives from the Policia Judiciaria (PJ) arrive having been contacted by police constables.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/madeleine-mccann-case-oh-my-god-i-saw-a-man-05-08--t3647.html
The Telegraph;
A woman who believes she saw Madeleine McCann in Amsterdam shortly after the little girl went missing has accused the police of neglect after they failed to follow up the lead.
Anna Stam said she had spoken to a young girl who called herself "Maddie'' last June and criticised the Portuguese and British police.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/second-sighting-daily-telegraph-07-08-08-t16866.html#p217051
The Times;
When those detectives arrived at 3.30pm on May 4, more than 17 hours after Madeleine’s disappearance, they discovered that dozens of local police, friends and family had traipsed through the room, heavily contaminating the scene. (PJ)
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/stung-by-the-portuguese-men-of-law-times-10-08-08-t3469.html
-
Why is the UK press a national disgrace... In your opinion..
Are other national presses far better... Most people realise the sun and the star are something of a joke but surely the more upmarket newspapers, are far from a national disgrace..
Is it because the press now support the mccanns innocence and call amaral a disgraced policeman
As if the press would dare question the McCanns innocence, given the libel laws.
-
I assume by 'upmarket' you mean broadsheets such as the Times, Telegraph and Guardian. Why, even after the files were released, did they not print the correct facts?
The Guardian;
10.15pm: Oldfield goes down to the 24-hour reception at the bottom of the hill to raise the alarm. Police are called.
10.30pm: Local police are first to arrive on the scene.
11.10pm: Detectives from the Policia Judiciaria (PJ) arrive having been contacted by police constables.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/madeleine-mccann-case-oh-my-god-i-saw-a-man-05-08--t3647.html
The Telegraph;
A woman who believes she saw Madeleine McCann in Amsterdam shortly after the little girl went missing has accused the police of neglect after they failed to follow up the lead.
Anna Stam said she had spoken to a young girl who called herself "Maddie'' last June and criticised the Portuguese and British police.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/second-sighting-daily-telegraph-07-08-08-t16866.html#p217051
The Times;
When those detectives arrived at 3.30pm on May 4, more than 17 hours after Madeleine’s disappearance, they discovered that dozens of local police, friends and family had traipsed through the room, heavily contaminating the scene. (PJ)
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/stung-by-the-portuguese-men-of-law-times-10-08-08-t3469.html
So based on this the Guardian is a national disgrace.... I don't think that is a rational opinion
-
As if the press would dare question the McCanns innocence, given the libel laws.
When, the McCanns have both snuffed it I expect the press & police to be more honest about their opinions.
Most of you here will be pushing up daisies by then.
If there's evidence to support it the press can print... If it's just mud slinging as we see here they cant
-
If there's evidence to support it the press can print... If it's just mud slinging as we see here they cant
There's plenty of evidence imo.
Imo it's bleedin obvious Maddie wasn't abducted for starters.
-
You seem to be saying that the media shouldn't be expected to have standards because their main aim is to make as much profit as possible. Why did we bother with Leveson, I wonder?
I "seem to be saying" nothing of the kind it is what you are saying ... putting words into my mouth yet again ... and on the basis of your posts on the subject the evidence is that you really do not understand what was going on either at Leveson or in Portugal in 2007 as regards the police and the press.
But since you have obviously read my posts with similar comprehension to that with which you have read (if you have) the affirmations by those in the know who presented testimony that Judicial police officers were leaking like a sieve to the press you again show you are in denial of the facts.
What a shame Leveson was a British enquiry which excluded Sandra Felgueiras from testifying.
-
There's plenty of evidence imo.
Imo it's bleedin obvious Maddie wasn't abducted for starters.
Amaral produced what he thought was the evidence that proved the case against the mccanns.... It didn't... Perhaps you think you know more than amaral
-
I "seem to be saying" nothing of the kind it is what you are saying ... putting words into my mouth yet again ... and on the basis of your posts on the subject the evidence is that you really do not understand what was going on either at Leveson or in Portugal in 2007 as regards the police and the press.
But since you have obviously read my posts with similar comprehension to that with which you have read (if you have) the affirmations by those in the know who presented testimony that Judicial police officers were leaking like a sieve to the press you again show you are in denial of the facts.
What a shame Leveson was a British enquiry which excluded Sandra Felgueiras from testifying.
What were you saying then? Please elucidate.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11155.msg571057#msg571057
I have read the evidence given to Leveson and can find nothing which proves that Judicial police officers were leaking like a sieve. If you have seen such proof please copy, paste and provide a cite.
-
So based on this the Guardian is a national disgrace.... I don't think that is a rational opinion
The police weren't called at 10.15, the local police didn't arrive at 10.30 and the PJ didn't arrive at 11.10 on 3rd May 2007. It's a disgrace if people can't rely on the 'upmarket' newspapers to get their facts right.
-
The police weren't called at 10.15, the local police didn't arrive at 10.30 and the PJ didn't arrive at 11.10 on 3rd May 2007. It's a disgrace if people can't rely on the 'upmarket' newspapers to get their facts right.
a national disgrace you claimed...which is plainly totally ridiculous to all sensible people...imo
-
a national disgrace you claimed...which is plainly totally ridiculous to all sensible people...imo
Is it 'sensible' to accept that the UK media don't check their stories and therefore mislead their readers?
-
Is it 'sensible' to accept that the UK media don't check their stories and therefore mislead their readers?
is it a national disgrace that the timings were not totally accurate....I think thats a totally bizarre claim..
I think its a national disgrace that the co ordinator on the case was an arguido and eventuallly convicted of perjury...how accurate was the reporting in the portuguese press...was taht more accurate
-
is it a national disgrace that the timings were not totally accurate....I think thats a totally bizarre claim..
I think its a national disgrace that the co ordinator on the case was an arguido and eventuallly convicted of perjury...how accurate was the reporting in the portuguese press...was taht more accurate
Well if you think it's fine to pay over £2 to read inaccurate stories that's your choice. I prefer to find out the truth and that's not to be found in newspapers in my opinion. I think I'm the 'sensible' one.
-
Well if you think it's fine to pay over £2 to read inaccurate stories that's your choice. I prefer to find out the truth and that's not to be found in newspapers in my opinion. I think I'm the 'sensible' one.
I don't think you are. I don't pay anything to read newspapers.. And I have enough sense to understand that every detail may not be totally accurate. Your idea this makes the Guardian a national disgrace is totally irrational
-
There's plenty of evidence imo.
Imo it's bleedin obvious Maddie wasn't abducted for starters.
And yet you can’t even come close to proving it.
-
I think anyone in the UK who criticises the Portuguese press is ignoring the fact that the press in the UK is (imo) a national disgrace. If anyone has used Madeleine McCann as a cash cow it's the UK media.
Perhaps you’d like to give some examples of news platforms that aren’t a “national disgrace”? Who do you consider has the most accurate press reporting in the world?
-
Well if you think it's fine to pay over £2 to read inaccurate stories that's your choice. I prefer to find out the truth and that's not to be found in newspapers in my opinion. I think I'm the 'sensible' one.
And yet you use cites from newspapers all the time, slight double standard there methinks.
-
And yet you use cites from newspapers all the time, slight double standard there methinks.
Where there's a quote from a named source, yes.
-
Where there's a quote from a named source, yes.
you trust the disgraceful press to quote accurately?? Surely not!!
-
Perhaps you’d like to give some examples of news platforms that aren’t a “national disgrace”? Who do you consider has the most accurate press reporting in the world?
Well?
-
Well?
I have no idea.
-
I have no idea.
Exactly.
-
Exactly.
I have no idea if there are any reliable news platforms or which one in the world is the most accurate, and why should I? It's not something I've thought about because it's not something I care about.
I do have an opinion on the British press because I've seen the virtually unbelievable mess they made of reporting the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
They attacked the PJ unmercifully; they reported an 'abduction' which was only ever an opinion not a fact; they printed unsubstantiated stories they got from unreliable sources on both sides and they repeatedly got the basic (checkable) facts wrong.
They also seriously hampered the investigation in Portugal by printing appeals for 'sightings' which meant the police were bombarded with completely ridiculous claims by people who thought they might have seen Madeleine in the most unlikely places worldwide.
Finally their utter bias was and is clear. Using words like desperate, heartbroken, suffering, devout and brave to describe the McCanns was a clear attempt to persuade people that they were innocent.
There was hardly any objective reporting at all. It isn't the place of the press to decide which crime was committed or who is innocent or guilty, but they didn't care, presumeably because they were making plenty of money.
-
I have no idea if there are any reliable news platforms or which one in the world is the most accurate, and why should I? It's not something I've thought about because it's not something I care about.
I do have an opinion on the British press because I've seen the virtually unbelievable mess they made of reporting the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
They attacked the PJ unmercifully; they reported an 'abduction' which was only ever an opinion not a fact; they printed unsubstantiated stories they got from unreliable sources on both sides and they repeatedly got the basic (checkable) facts wrong.
They also seriously hampered the investigation in Portugal by printing appeals for 'sightings' which meant the police were bombarded with completely ridiculous claims by people who thought they might have seen Madeleine in the most unlikely places worldwide.
Finally their utter bias was and is clear. Using words like desperate, heartbroken, suffering, devout and brave to describe the McCanns was a clear attempt to persuade people that they were innocent.
There was hardly any objective reporting at all. It isn't the place of the press to decide which crime was committed or who is innocent or guilty, but they didn't care, presumeably because they were making plenty of money.
Your post really exposes your absolute bias and lack of objectivity. Based on your obsession with this one case the press are a national disgrace... That's totally irrational.
I read about the helicopter crash... I don't expect ALL the details to be totally accurate... It's not a legal document
-
Your post really exposes your absolute bias and lack of objectivity. Based on your obsession with this one case the press are a national disgrace... That's totally irrational.
I read about the helicopter crash... I don't expect ALL the details to be totally accurate... It's not a legal document
This case is enlightening because the actual facts are available to compare with the 'facts' the newspapers printed. As is the sworn evidence of the journalists who wrote those 'facts'.
That makes it a very good case study of the practices of the press.
-
This case is enlightening because the actual facts are available to compare with the 'facts' the newspapers printed. As is the sworn evidence of the journalists who wrote those 'facts'.
That makes it a very good case study of the practices of the press.
And you have decided they are a national disgrace... Mainly I think because you don't like them being sympathetic to the mccanns. I think that exposes your total lack of objectivity
-
And you have decided they are a national disgrace... Mainly I think because you don't like them being sympathetic to the mccanns. I think that exposes your total lack of objectivity
Casting aspersions on my objectivity is not a satisfactory reply to the evidence I have posted. Only other evidence refuting my claims can do that.
-
Casting aspersions on my objectivity is not a satisfactory reply to the evidence I have posted. Only other evidence refuting my claims can do that.
You have supplied the evidence by referring to the Guardian as a national disgrace for not being totally accurate with timings.... And your feeling that other papers are a national disgrace simply because they believe both SY and the, PJ who say the mccanns arent suspects and are sympathetic towards them. I find your opinion quite laughable
-
You have supplied the evidence by referring to the Guardian as a national disgrace for not being totally accurate with timings.... And your feeling that other papers are a national disgrace simply because they believe both SY and the, PJ who say the mccanns arent suspects and are sympathetic towards them. I find your opinion quite laughable
What is laughable D - is that you don't realize how unsympathetic most people are to the mcns
I personally is more sympathetic to the wrongdoing - they did to Maddie and her brother and sister.
You say they are not suspects - but they haven't been cleared either.
-
What is laughable D - is that you don't realize how unsympathetic most people are to the mcns
I personally is more sympathetic to the wrongdoing - they did to Maddie and her brother and sister.
You say they are not suspects - but they haven't been cleared either.
most people are sympathetic towards the mccanns in my experience...They dont need to be cleared as they havent been charged with anything..
-
You have supplied the evidence by referring to the Guardian as a national disgrace for not being totally accurate with timings.... And your feeling that other papers are a national disgrace simply because they believe both SY and the, PJ who say the mccanns arent suspects and are sympathetic towards them. I find your opinion quite laughable
The fact that you are unable refute my evidence highlights the weakness of your position.
-
The fact that you are unable refute my evidence highlights the weakness of your position.
What evidence. ..that the paper may not be totally accurate.. It may not be... That doesn't make it a national disgrace
-
most people are sympathetic towards the mccanns in my experience...They dont need to be cleared as they havent been charged with anything..
they haven't been charged with anything - but
Madeleine McCann’s parents have not been ruled innocent when it comes to their daughter’s disappearance, a judge in Portugal’s highest court has said.
-
they haven't been charged with anything - but
Madeleine McCann’s parents have not been ruled innocent when it comes to their daughter’s disappearance, a judge in Portugal’s highest court has said.
Someone who has never been charged or tried don't have to be ruled innocent. They simply are.
-
they haven't been charged with anything - but
Madeleine McCann’s parents have not been ruled innocent when it comes to their daughter’s disappearance, a judge in Portugal’s highest court has said.
The last word from the PJ was that they don't know whether Madeleine McCann was abducted or not. Pedro do Carmo said that and he also said all possibilities were still on the table.
-
they haven't been charged with anything - but
Madeleine McCann’s parents have not been ruled innocent when it comes to their daughter’s disappearance, a judge in Portugal’s highest court has said.
There is no such thing as being ruled innocent... That might explain why... LOL
-
The last word from the PJ was that they don't know whether Madeleine McCann was abducted or not. Pedro do Carmo said that and he also said all possibilities were still on the table.
The PJ have said the mccanns are not suspects and there's no evidence against them
-
There is no such thing as being ruled innocent... That might explain why... LOL
LOL so how come they lost - trying to claim libel against GA.
-
LOL so how come they lost - trying to claim libel against GA.
We've been through this before... Basically the SC don't understand ECHR law, and will be corrected... I'm in no hurry...
-
God, will Groundhog Day ever come to an end on here?
-
I have no idea if there are any reliable news platforms or which one in the world is the most accurate, and why should I? It's not something I've thought about because it's not something I care about.
I do have an opinion on the British press because I've seen the virtually unbelievable mess they made of reporting the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
They attacked the PJ unmercifully; they reported an 'abduction' which was only ever an opinion not a fact; they printed unsubstantiated stories they got from unreliable sources on both sides and they repeatedly got the basic (checkable) facts wrong.
They also seriously hampered the investigation in Portugal by printing appeals for 'sightings' which meant the police were bombarded with completely ridiculous claims by people who thought they might have seen Madeleine in the most unlikely places worldwide.
Finally their utter bias was and is clear. Using words like desperate, heartbroken, suffering, devout and brave to describe the McCanns was a clear attempt to persuade people that they were innocent.
There was hardly any objective reporting at all. It isn't the place of the press to decide which crime was committed or who is innocent or guilty, but they didn't care, presumeably because they were making plenty of money.
Hmm, you sound like a conspiracy theorist to me. What you appear to be describing is the behaviour of the tabloid press which rarely rises out of the gutter no matter what country they are from, and therefore are unlikely ever to earn the soubriquet “the pride of the nation” anywhere. Putting them to one side I would say that we have an amazing news media and tradition of news reporting and investigative journalism in this country and to write it all off as a national disgrace because of the occasional minor factual error is utterly ridiculous and absurdly over-emotive. I would suggest standing back and getting some perspective before spleen-venting over nothing much in future.
-
We've been through this before... Basically the SC don't understand ECHR law, and will be corrected... I'm in no hurry...
You hope - mcns won't be in any hurry either IMO.
-
God, will Groundhog Day ever come to an end on here?
Ye know what you mean - no further on since the day Maddie went missing.
-
You hope - mcns won't be in any hurry either IMO.
I think Kate and Gerry will be pleased to have it done and dusted at the ECHR, just as anyone would. But I don't think they will be particularly fussed about the process.
I think their focus will be on the continuing Scotland Yard and Judicial police investigation into Madeleine's case and what that turns up.
-
God, will Groundhog Day ever come to an end on here?
This coming Sunday although its really candlemass day,midway point between the winter solstice and the spring equinox.
-
This coming Sunday although its really candlemass day,midway point between the winter solstice and the spring equinox.
Ah Ha. Something interesting at last. I didn't know that, so thanks.
-
God, will Groundhog Day ever come to an end on here?
If it did what would you do with all that free time you waste on here?
"
We've been through this before... Basically the SC don't understand ECHR law, and will be corrected... I'm in no hurry..."
Many supporters and the press don't get it either. They foolishly think Amaral is going to be in trouble ooh err ...
all the while we, who do understand, know that Amaral will not even be a consideration as the case is against the legal argument from a court session in Portugal. McCanns VS Portugal.
-
If it did what would you do with all that free time you waste on here?
"
We've been through this before... Basically the SC don't understand ECHR law, and will be corrected... I'm in no hurry..."
Many supporters and the press don't get it either. They foolishly think Amaral is going to be in trouble ooh err ...
all the while we, who do understand, know that Amaral will not even be a consideration as the case is against the legal argument from a court session in Portugal. McCanns VS Portugal.
the case will decide whether what amaral said was backed by evidence ....thats how the balance between 8 and 10 is decided
-
This coming Sunday although its really candlemass day,midway point between the winter solstice and the spring equinox.
Off topic, I know, but Phil predicted an early spring - and 70% of the time he's right 100% of the time.
-
Off topic, I know, but Phil predicted an early spring - and 70% of the time he's right 100% of the time.
My Daffodils are in flower as are the Primroses and some Crocus, so maybe.
-
My Daffodils are in flower as are the Primroses and some Crocus, so maybe.
It's a beautiful sunny day here.
Spring seems to have arrived!
No snow so far.........hope I'm not tempting fate.
-
No abductor so far is more to the point... I am 100% certain that I am not tempting fate either. 8(0(*
Account activated - I'll be back to discuss my odds at the appriopriate time.
Cheerio! or &^&*% in English!
Your odds of what? Making any sense? Only choking. Welcome back.
-
“Finishing line”? You’re optimistic.
-
Our £12 million is all on Madeleine McCann being the ONE child to be abducted abroad since Ben Needham. Those odds, remember?
The results of the investigation is all that will determine if my odds make sense.
I only posted because I was e-mailed to activate my account or have it deleted, so I have. I'll be back when the results come in, not before, but thanks for the welcome.
Two months of funding left may suggest we are entering the home straight, or will they give it another lap? @)(++(*
Either way, the moderators will have to wait till then to get a chance to get their claws back into the Monkey again, but time will prove that only mugs ignore the odds, trust me. 8(0(*
It's to good to see you are all still here!
See you all at the finishing line.
&^&*%
Odds of Maddie having been abducted...as opposed to being abducted...(if you dont understand the difference thats why you dont understand the odds) are about 8/10 imo....ie an 80% chance that she was abducted
-
Odds of Maddie having been abducted...as opposed to being abducted...(if you dont understand the difference thats why you dont understand the odds) are about 8/10 imo....ie an 80% chance that she was abducted
Can we see your workings?
-
Can we see your workings?
I've supplied them many times before.... In fact I'm the only person who has... What do you think the odds, are.
I find posters, want to criticise my opinions but are unable to come up with anything themselves .
There are three options... Of course there, are variations on each..
Parental involvement and cover up
Abduction
Woke and wandered followed by accident or abduction
So what, are, your odds
-
That's a first Davel. An admission from you that there is a 20% chance that Kate and Gerry McCann were involved in their daughter's disappearance.
A 20% improvement is better than nothing I suppose. 8((()*/
Am outta here.
Catch you at the finishing line mate. You can show me your workings then.
That'll be a first. %77*
Wrong again monkey... You've forgotten about woke and wandered
-
I've supplied them many times before.... In fact I'm the only person who has... What do you think the odds, are.
I find posters, want to criticise my opinions but are unable to come up with anything themselves .
There are three options... Of course there, are variations on each..
Parental involvement and cover up
Abduction
Woke and wandered followed by accident or abduction
So what, are, your odds
I think your percentages are just a random guess based on your opinions, not on facts.
-
I think your percentages are just a random guess based on your opinions, not on facts.
No based on facts...
What are the odds of the parents being involved... Based on the facts. I think you have a, problem understanding and accepting the relevance of the facts
-
I think your percentages are just a random guess based on your opinions, not on facts.
Two children disappear from their homes
First parents are teachers who have no history of child abuse or criminality
Second. Partner is not the child's parent... Both have a long history of drug abuse and have history of child abuse.
Is the likelihood of parental involvement the same in each case
Let's see if you can answer the question.. I predict you will avoid the question... Not a guess but based on facts
-
No based on facts...
What are the odds of the parents being involved... Based on the facts. I think you have a, problem understanding and accepting the relevance of the facts
A guess based on facts is a guess.
-
A guess based on facts is a guess.
No is not... It's an estimate
-
No is not... It's an estimate
A guess then.
-
Two children disappear from their homes
First parents are teachers who have no history of child abuse or criminality
Second. Partner is not the child's parent... Both have a long history of drug abuse and have history of child abuse.
Is the likelihood of parental involvement the same in each case
Let's see if you can answer the question
Generalisations can be useful, but not reliable. There have been cases where people have raised no suspicions but they have committed crimes.
-
Generalisations can be useful, but not reliable. There have been cases where people have raised no suspicions but they have committed crimes.
I predicted you would avoid the question asked... And you did. I asked if the odds, were the same in each case. You know they are not... That's based on facts not guesswork.
-
I predicted you would avoid the question asked... And you did. I asked if the odds, were the same in each case. You know they are not... That's based on facts not guesswork.
Perhaps those with a 'dodgy' past are more likely to be scrutinised than those who are perceived as respectable, so more likely to be found out.
There's 'give a dog a bad name' which influenced the police in the Jill Dando investigation in my opinion. Then there's Myles Bradbury who hid behind his 'cloak of respectability' to bend hospital rules and regulations and hoodwink parents.
-
Perhaps those with a 'dodgy' past are more likely to be scrutinised than those who are perceived as respectable, so more likely to be found out.
There's 'give a dog a bad name' which influenced the police in the Jill Dando investigation in my opinion. Then there's Myles Bradbury who hid behind his 'cloak of respectability' to bend hospital rules and regulations and hoodwink parents.
You've still failed to answer the question... As I predicted... How clever of me.. I think we all know why you can't answer it
-
You've still failed to answer the question... As I predicted... How clever of me.. I think we all know why you can't answer it
I have answered your question by rejecting the premises on which it is based.
-
I have answered your question by rejecting the premises on which it is based.
It's not based on any premise... It's a simple question with a simple answer. You can't face up to the answer... That's your problem
-
You've still failed to answer the question... As I predicted... How clever of me.. I think we all know why you can't answer it
Jesus, there it is, prowling an obscure, niche internet forum - clairvoyant one-upmanship. An unmistakable trait of the archetypal 20th century oddity - the 'intellectual'.
-
Jesus, there it is, prowling an obscure, niche internet forum - clairvoyant one-upmanship. An unmistakable trait of the archetypal 20th century oddity - the 'intellectual'.
show a little respect General...if gunit wants to refer to my estimate...based on evidence....as guesswork then I need to put her in her place. I knew she wouldnt want to answer the question because by doing so she would prove herself wrong.
-
show a little respect General...if gunit wants to refer to my estimate...based on evidence....as guesswork then I need to put her in her place. I knew she wouldnt want to answer the question because by doing so she would prove herself wrong.
Could be. But how important is it in the context of an infinite, swirling, expanding Cosmos?
Even if dear G-Unit, she of the incongruous username, who is perhaps the least Gangsta of us all, conceded all points unequivocally, what's gained? A hollow, almost meaningless victory over a faceless, (polite and well-informed) internet foe?
If we consider the aggregate intellectual power at our disposal on this simple forum, then cast that against the impact that collective has....it's by no means meaningless or frivolous, as meaning takes many forms and humans take and use meaning disparately and frivolity is similarly nebulous and subjective; but consider a potential impact wider reaching and more profound than we dare to conceive - a single beam of pure light concentrated through the lens of reason and enlightenment, aimed at the darkest corners, searching out injustice, cutting a swathe through the veil of cynicism. There are no bounds. There are no rules. We are the playing field. We are the consciousness. The negative polarity will be irresistibly and irrevocably reversed, swept up and sucked in to the benevolent vortex and carried along with its own momentum. Religion? Meaningless. god? We are god; sentient and omnipotent; a force so overwhelmingly and incalculably compelling that mere mortal devices are rendered meaningless, resonating through every molecule and every mote that has ever existed or ever will.
......here's Tom with the weather.
-
Could be. But how important is it in the context of an infinite, swirling, expanding Cosmos?
Even if dear G-Unit, she of the incongruous username, who is perhaps the least Gangsta of us all, conceded all points unequivocally, what's gained? A hollow, almost meaningless victory over a faceless, (polite and well-informed) internet foe?
If we consider the aggregate intellectual power at our disposal on this simple forum, then cast that against the impact that collective has....it's by no means meaningless or frivolous, as meaning takes many forms and humans take and use meaning disparately and frivolity is similarly nebulous and subjective; but consider a potential impact wider reaching and more profound than we dare to conceive - a single beam of pure light concentrated through the lens of reason and enlightenment, aimed at the darkest corners, searching out injustice, cutting a swathe through the veil of cynicism. There are no bounds. There are no rules. We are the playing field. We are the consciousness. The negative polarity will be irresistibly and irrevocably reversed, swept up and sucked in to the benevolent vortex and carried along with its own momentum. Religion? Meaningless. god? We are god; sentient and omnipotent; a force so overwhelmingly and incalculably compelling that mere mortal devices are rendered meaningless, resonating through every molecule and every mote that has ever existed or ever will.
......here's Tom with the weather.
I didn't read past the, second sentence because I could predict what it would be.
The simple answer is why is anyone posting here... And why is calling me a knob important to you...What is the importance if all this in our ever expanding multiverse... I think I know the answer... Its 42
-
I didn't read past the, second sentence because I could predict what it would be.
The simple answer is why is anyone posting here... And why is calling me a knob important to you...What is the importance if all this in our ever expanding multiverse... I think I know the answer... Its 42
It's something I have to live with. I regret that now, calling you a knob, albeit in jest. I'm rehabilitated.
I see the futility, whereas yesterday, or whichever day I called you a knob, I couldn't.
Seek and ye shall find, knock and the door will be opened......by a sanctimonious KNOB!! AAARGGhhehheeeerrgghhGGHH......it's happening again.
-
It's something I have to live with. I regret that now, calling you a knob, albeit in jest. I'm rehabilitated.
I see the futility, whereas yesterday, or whichever day I called you a knob, I couldn't.
Seek and ye shall find, knock and the door will be opened......by a sanctimonious KNOB!! AAARGGhhehheeeerrgghhGGHH......it's happening again.
im not offended at being called a knob...Im not a snowflake. I can be an asolutely irritating knob at times to those who contradict me...a pain in the arse...a thorn in the side...all those and more
-
im not offended at being called a knob...Im not a snowflake. I can be an asolutely irritating knob at times to those who contradict me...a pain in the arse...a thorn in the side...all those and more
I'm an absolute knob. Goes without saying.
-
Generalisations can be useful, but not reliable. There have been cases where people have raised no suspicions but they have committed crimes.
So basically in your opinion a parent with no previous history of abuse or criminality is equally as likely as a parent with a history of abuse and criminality to be involved in the disappearance of their child?
-
So basically in your opinion a parent with no previous history of abuse or criminality is equally as likely as a parent with a history of abuse and criminality to be involved in the disappearance of their child?
This shows the weakness of the sceptic argument...an inability to accept reality...yet the same sceptics quote alleged
history of abuse by cipriano...and I say alleged....as evidence of her guilt....
-
This shows the weakness of the sceptic argument...an inability to accept reality...yet the same sceptics quote alleged
history of abuse by cipriano...and I say alleged....as evidence of her guilt....
it also suggests that all children are at equally serious risk from their parents whether their parents are law abiding professionals or criminal drop outs. Perhaps all kids should be taken into care to protect them from these monster parents.
-
I'm an absolute knob. Goes without saying.
Knobs perform a valuable function. Do you?
-
It's not based on any premise... It's a simple question with a simple answer. You can't face up to the answer... That's your problem
Here are your premises, chosen by you;
Teachers never harm children.
Steparents are a danger to children.
Parents who take drugs are a danger to children.
Child abuse leads to child harm.
Your question isn't simple at all, it's designed to deliver only one possible answer. I will answer when you prove that your assumptions listed above are actual facts.
-
Knobs perform a valuable function. Do you?
No. I'm quite inadequate in every way. I'm a useless knob.
-
Here are your premises, chosen by you;
Teachers never harm children.
Steparents are a danger to children.
Parents who take drugs are a danger to children.
Child abuse leads to child harm.
Your question isn't simple at all, it's designed to deliver only one possible answer. I will answer when you prove that your assumptions listed above are actual facts.
Do you have cites for Davel making the above statements?
-
Here are your premises, chosen by you;
Teachers never harm children.
Steparents are a danger to children.
Parents who take drugs are a danger to children.
Child abuse leads to child harm.
Your question isn't simple at all, it's designed to deliver only one possible answer. I will answer when you prove that your assumptions listed above are actual facts.
When have I stated any of your assertions.... You are posting absolute rubbish and making things up... Could you provide a cite where I've stated any of those.. You really are struggling.
For clarity... Those, premises, were chosen by you... And I don't subscribe to any of them
Except perhaps child abuse leading to child harm... I think child abuse in itself is, harmful
-
When have I stated any of your assertions.... You are posting absolute rubbish and making things up... Could you provide a cite where I've stated any of those.. You really are struggling.
For clarity... Those, premises, were chosen by you... And I don't subscribe to any of them
Except perhaps child abuse leading to child harm... I think child abuse in itself is, harmful
So you don't think that drug use and step parents are connected to harming children then?
What do you mean by child abuse by the way?
-
So you don't think that drug use and step parents are connected to harming children then?
What do you mean by child abuse by the way?
Notice how you refuse to answer my one question and then expect me to answer your questions. You need to accept your accusations, Re my questions, are false, or provide a cite to support your assertions
-
Notice how you refuse to answer my one question and then expect me to answer your questions. You need to accept your accusations, Re my questions, are false, or provide a cite to support your assertions
I don't really care, Davel, and I'm getting bored. I have no intention of answering your biased question and have given my reasons.
To clarify, the visits to the play area after tea always took place before the children were bathed and dressed in their night attire, not after as the McCanns tried to suggest. So if David Payne didn't visit to see if Kate McCann wanted help to take the children over to the play area, why did he visit?
-
I don't really care, Davel, and I'm getting bored. I have no intention of answering your biased question and have given my reasons.
To clarify, the visits to the play area after tea always took place before the children were bathed and dressed in their night attire, not after as the McCanns tried to suggest. So if David Payne didn't visit to see if Kate McCann wanted help to take the children over to the play area, why did he visit?
for paedo funtime I expect. Isn’t that the subtext here? If it wasn’t for the reasons stated it would have to be something sinister like that, is that what you truly believe? That Kate McCann would invite him in to “play” with her kids?
-
for paedo funtime I expect. Isn’t that the subtext here? If it wasn’t for the reasons stated it would have to be something sinister like that, is that what you truly believe? That Kate McCann would invite him in to “play” with her kids?
What a nasty mind you have!
-
What a nasty mind you have!
No, you’re the one with the nasty insinuations. You’re the one suggesting that both David Payne and Kate McCann lied about his visit. What other possible inference is there, other than that something deeply sinister was going on that had a bearing on Madeleine’s disappearance? I wholeheartedly reject the notion of some parental paedo ring, I bet you don’t!
-
I don't really care, Davel, and I'm getting bored. I have no intention of answering your biased question and have given my reasons.
To clarify, the visits to the play area after tea always took place before the children were bathed and dressed in their night attire, not after as the McCanns tried to suggest. So if David Payne didn't visit to see if Kate McCann wanted help to take the children over to the play area, why did he visit?
I dont beleive you are bored ...i think you realise you are simply losing the argument. You have made things up re what I have postsed and cant substantiate them.
For the record...the evidence shows sexual abuse of children is more likely where children are not with their natural parents. i wasnt really referring to step parents ....more a single mom who has just got a new boyfriend and they are both drug dependant.
There is plenty of circumstantial evidence to support the abduction and the mccanns innocence...you just cant bring yourself to accept it. I think you are not as openminded as you think and you refuse to believe evidence which contradicts your entrenched views...the overwhelming evidence for smoking causing lung cancer beiing agood example...which you refuse to accept...very closed minded
-
I dont beleive you are bored ...i think you realise you are simply losing the argument. You have made things up re what I have postsed and cant substantiate them.
For the record...the evidence shows sexual abuse of children is more likely where children are not with their natural parents. i wasnt really referring to step parents ....more a single mom who has just got a new boyfriend and they are both drug dependant.
There is plenty of circumstantial evidence to support the abduction and the mccanns innocence...you just cant bring yourself to accept it. I think you are not as openminded as you think and you refuse to believe evidence which contradicts your entrenched views...the overwhelming evidence for smoking causing lung cancer beiing agood example...which you refuse to accept...very closed minded
Here is some evidence I found, where does yours come from?
participants who had experienced sexual abuse before the age of 15, only 13.5% identified that the abuse came from their father/stepfather, 30.2% was perpetrated by other male relative, 16.9% by family friend, 15.6% by acquaintance/neighbour, and 15.3% by other known person (ABS, 2005).
https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children
-
Here is some evidence I found, where does yours come from?
participants who had experienced sexual abuse before the age of 15, only 13.5% identified that the abuse came from their father/stepfather, 30.2% was perpetrated by other male relative, 16.9% by family friend, 15.6% by acquaintance/neighbour, and 15.3% by other known person (ABS, 2005).
https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children
What point are you making in relation to the topic of the thread ?
-
Here is some evidence I found, where does yours come from?
participants who had experienced sexual abuse before the age of 15, only 13.5% identified that the abuse came from their father/stepfather, 30.2% was perpetrated by other male relative, 16.9% by family friend, 15.6% by acquaintance/neighbour, and 15.3% by other known person (ABS, 2005).
https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children
you said you were bored...I said I didnt beleive you.....looks like im right as you are responding. What I said was sexual abuse to a child was more likely to come from a step parent rather than a natural parent....your post doesnt address that...this link does...looks like im right again
https://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/stepchildren-family-parents-abuse-0409132?fbclid=IwAR0esWcRPHXlNGAWPo9E1RW__pJQLKDMe7BojZeopHWJdIAAXql-pB902Oc
There is abundant evidence that children living in stepfamilies are more likely to experience sexual abuse
-
you said you were bored...I said I didnt beleive you.....looks like im right as you are responding. What I said was sexual abuse to a child was more likely to come from a step parent rather than a natural parent....your post doesnt address that...this link does...looks like im right again
https://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/stepchildren-family-parents-abuse-0409132?fbclid=IwAR0esWcRPHXlNGAWPo9E1RW__pJQLKDMe7BojZeopHWJdIAAXql-pB902Oc
There is abundant evidence that children living in stepfamilies are more likely to experience sexual abuse
And from the same source (and probably more relevant);
the stepchildren were less likely to be physically injured than the biological children.
-
What point are you making in relation to the topic of the thread ?
Jesus L Jackson, she was asked to verify various points by Davros. How else is she going to do that? Or use your extensive powers effectively for a change and cull the whole Davros / G-Unit conversation. I don't see you questioning the origin of the questions posed in relation to the topic. Come on, a fair crack .
-
And from the same source (and probably more relevant);
the stepchildren were less likely to be physically injured than the biological children.
I think you need to go back to my original statement to see the relevance... The one you claimed you were bored with and wouldnt respond to
-
Jesus L Jackson, she was asked to verify various points by Davros. How else is she going to do that? Or use your extensive powers effectively for a change and cull the whole Davros / G-Unit conversation. I don't see you questioning the origin of the questions posed in relation to the topic. Come on, a fair crack .
Would need to cull monkeys posts Re odds too... Which is what started the whole thing... No problem for me..
-
What point are you making in relation to the topic of the thread ?
Am I being singled out? I'm not the only one off-topic you know.
-
Am I being singled out? I'm not the only one off-topic you know.
The thread topic is ...
"Visits to the play area after tea. What is the truth?"
You have posted ...
"Here is some evidence I found, where does yours come from?
participants who had experienced sexual abuse before the age of 15, only 13.5% identified that the abuse came from their father/stepfather, 30.2% was perpetrated by other male relative, 16.9% by family friend, 15.6% by acquaintance/neighbour, and 15.3% by other known person (ABS, 2005).
https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children "
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11155.msg573566#msg573566
You have been asked to explain what you meant by that post in the context of the thread.
Your misapprehension that that you are being singled out for being "off topic" as a result of being asked to explain your post in context is risible.
But I would still like an answer to my original question ...
"What point are you making in relation to the topic of the thread ?" Thank you.
-
The thread topic is ...
"Visits to the play area after tea. What is the truth?"
You have posted ...
"Here is some evidence I found, where does yours come from?
participants who had experienced sexual abuse before the age of 15, only 13.5% identified that the abuse came from their father/stepfather, 30.2% was perpetrated by other male relative, 16.9% by family friend, 15.6% by acquaintance/neighbour, and 15.3% by other known person (ABS, 2005).
https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children "
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11155.msg573566#msg573566
You have been asked to explain what you meant by that post in the context of the thread.
Your misapprehension that that you are being singled out for being "off topic" as a result of being asked to explain your post in context is risible.
But I would still like an answer to my original question ...
"What point are you making in relation to the topic of the thread ?" Thank you.
I was replying to post #518. I don't know what you mean by 'in relation to the topic of the thread'. I might as well ask you the same question about your post #467.