-
On 10th April 2007 the Sun ran a story "Where were you Mummy?". It was about Spanish TV station Telecinco which was claiming it had the statements the McCanns made to the PJ.
At the time the McCanns were in Brussels to lobby the EU for a missing child alert system. Clarence Mitchell was with them and on his return he said;
"I am not going to confirm or deny the content of any statements Gerry and Kate have made.
"But we are extremely concerned such material, if it is authentic, has apparently been leaked."
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/where-were-you-mummy-the-sun-10-04-2008-t167.html
-
The Telecinco reporter, Nacho Abad, read excerpts from the McCann's statements;
"While we were having breakfast, Maddie said, 'Mummy, why didn't you come when we were crying last night?'
"Gerry and I spoke for a couple of minutes and agreed to keep a closer watch over the children."
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/where-were-you-mummy-the-sun-10-04-2008-t167.html
The Mirror also reported this leak;
In her first interview with Portuguese detectives, Mrs McCann spoke about a conversation she had with Madeleine just that morning.
"While we were having breakfast, Madeleine said: 'Mum, why didn't you come when we were crying last night?'," she told police.
She added: "Gerry and I talked about it for several minutes and decided to watch over the children more carefully at night."
Clarence Mitchell again responded;
"Kate and Gerry have been utterly honest and utterly open with the police and all of their statements from the moment that Madeleine was taken.
"The very fact that the comment from Madeleine is now in the public domain is entirely because they themselves told the police about it at the time.
"It is more than curious that this comment, taken in isolation and out of context, that has been in the police file for some 11 months, should now emerge on the very day that they are in Brussels trying to improve children's welfare and child safety.
"They would be more than interested to know if the Portuguese justice ministry will now demand an internal review of the police investigation to get to the bottom of how this material emerged in the way it has, on the day it has.
"Kate and Gerry have been subjected to leaks and smears from day one and I'm afraid this has all the hallmarks of yet another poor attempt to influence the headlines on the very day that they are seeking to achieve some good in Europe."
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/madeleine-mccann-left-crying-in-bedroom-the-night--t7619.html
-
The PJ reacted by denying that they had leaked any of the statements. Carlos Anjos, the head of the Portuguese police federation, accused Clarence Mitchell of engineering a fight with officers to sabotage a reconstruction of the disappearance.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/portuguese-police-accuse-mccanns-spokesman-14-04-0-t18355.html
There was also, unusually, an official denial'
In a declaration issued yesterday afternoon, the National Directory of the Judiciary explains that it is "entirely false that the contents of the news piece reproduces matter that is part of the inquiry, which is under judicial secrecy". On the other hand, the PJ “cannot fail to lament the baseless intervention of the spokesman, especially at a moment when significant diligences to the investigation were being carried out".
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-repercussions-of-maddie-s-case-on-the-pj-ddn-1-t10685.html
-
The idea that the Mccanns or Mitchell would court such unfavourable news coverage on the eve of their visit to Brussels is just plain crazy IMO.
-
The idea that the Mccanns or Mitchell would court such unfavourable news coverage on the eve of their visit to Brussels is just plain crazy IMO.
Carlos Anjos had a suggestion;
"Mr Mitchell wants to discredit the Policia Judiciaria and invent excuses so the McCanns do not come to Portugal to participate in the reconstruction of the night she disappeared.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/portuguese-police-accuse-mccanns-spokesman-14-04-0-t18355.html
-
Carlos Anjos had a suggestion;
"Mr Mitchell wants to discredit the Policia Judiciaria and invent excuses so the McCanns do not come to Portugal to participate in the reconstruction of the night she disappeared.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/chronological-index-april-2008-t364-s10.html
The PJ had already been roundly discredited by then, they certainly didn’t need any help from Mitchell. Seriously, does it sound more likely than that some spiteful Portuguese cop wanted to stick it to the McCanns?
-
On 10th April 2007 the Sun ran a story "Where were you Mummy?". It was about Spanish TV station Telecinco which was claiming it had the statements the McCanns made to the PJ.
At the time the McCanns were in Brussels to lobby the EU for a missing child alert system. Clarence Mitchell was with them and on his return he said;
"I am not going to confirm or deny the content of any statements Gerry and Kate have made.
"But we are extremely concerned such material, if it is authentic, has apparently been leaked."
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/where-were-you-mummy-the-sun-10-04-2008-t167.html
BTW, you being a stickler for accuracy might like to ponder how the Sun published a story about Madeleine before sh’d ever even set foot in Portugal!
-
The PJ had already been roundly discredited by then, they certainly didn’t need any help from Mitchell. Seriously, does it sound more likely than that some spiteful Portuguese cop wanted to stick it to the McCanns?
Look at the evidence rather than relying on your opinion. If Kate McCann's police statement was in the hands of Telecinco why did they misquote it?
-
Look at the evidence rather than relying on your opinion. If Kate McCann's police statement was in the hands of Telecinco why did they misquote it?
Hmmm, yes it’s not like the press ever get their facts wrong or misquote people is it G-Unit?
-
BTW, you being a stickler for accuracy might like to ponder how the Sun published a story about Madeleine before sh’d ever even set foot in Portugal!
They didn't, I put the wrong year.
-
Hmmm, yes it’s not like the press ever get their facts wrong or misquote people is it G-Unit?
There are three possibilities;
Telecinco misquoted Kate McCann's statement.
The UK press misquoted Telecinco.
Telecinco didn't have Kate McCann's statement.
I assume the PJ checked what Telecinco actually said, and therefore they were quite correct when they publicly stated that;
it is "entirely false that the contents of the news piece reproduces matter that is part of the inquiry
-
They didn't, I put the wrong year.
You don’t say.
-
There are three possibilities;
Telecinco misquoted Kate McCann's statement.
The UK press misquoted Telecinco.
Telecinco didn't have Kate McCann's statement.
I assume the PJ checked what Telecinco actually said, and therefore they were quite correct when they publicly stated that;
it is "entirely false that the contents of the news piece reproduces matter that is part of the inquiry
Sounds like a pretty disingenuous statement from the police to me.
-
Sounds like a pretty disingenuous statement from the police to me.
The PJ publicly refuted the information given by Telecinco because they knew what was in Kate McCann's statement and it wasn't what was reported.
-
The PJ publicly refuted the information given by Telecinco because they knew what was in Kate McCann's statement and it wasn't what was reported.
Kate also knew what was in Kate’s statement presumably.
-
Kate also knew what was in Kate’s statement presumably.
I don't know if she did; it was a year since she gave the statement to the police. If she thought she said what Telefinco reported she was mistaken. She actually told the police;
She reports only one episode where, on the morning of Thursday May 3rd, Madeleine asked the interviewee why she had not come to look in the bedroom when the twins were crying.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm
As to the discussion between the parents; that was never mentioned.
-
I don't know if she did; it was a year since she gave the statement to the police. If she thought she said what Telefinco reported she was mistaken. She actually told the police;
She reports only one episode where, on the morning of Thursday May 3rd, Madeleine asked the interviewee why she had not come to look in the bedroom when the twins were crying.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm
As to the discussion between the parents; that was never mentioned.
What about her 6th September statement?
“Regarding this night she says that none of the children cried, she would have noticed as she was in the room. Regarding the fact that Madeleine on the next morning, Thursday, during breakfast said to both of them that she had been crying and that nobody had come to her room, she presumes that this crying must have been before she and Gerry returned to the apartment. When she asked Madeleine about this however, the child gave no importance to the matter. On this night they also checked on the children every half hour”
-
What about her 6th September statement?
“Regarding this night she says that none of the children cried, she would have noticed as she was in the room. Regarding the fact that Madeleine on the next morning, Thursday, during breakfast said to both of them that she had been crying and that nobody had come to her room, she presumes that this crying must have been before she and Gerry returned to the apartment. When she asked Madeleine about this however, the child gave no importance to the matter. On this night they also checked on the children every half hour”
Telecinco claimed to be reading from Kate McCann's first statement. They also claimed to have Gerry McCann's statement, but nowhere can I find him saying;
"When I arrived at the apartment I was surprised that Kate had taken care of the children and even showered them. I sat with the children and read them a story," Gerry said.
https://www.telecinco.es/elprogramadeanarosa/estremecedor-relato-padres-Maddie_0_627375005.html
Telecinco had information about 3rd May, but if it came from the McCann's police statements they didn't report it correctly, so it's not convincing.
-
And the PJ claim Clarence painted this colourful and innaccurate narrative and gave it to Telecino as some bizarre sort of attempt at blackening the PJ's reputation, rather than that Telecino got hold of statements given by the McCanns and the Tapas group from a leak in the PJ and wove their own titillating narrative to whip up further negative press coverage of the McCanns on the eve of their child alert initiative. You seem to prefer to believe that the PJ (pure as the driven snow) would NEVER leak in such a cynical, spiteful way (despite the fact that by their own boss's admission they were leaking and had leaked). In my view it's pretty obvious that that is precisely what they did.
-
And the PJ claim Clarence painted this colourful and innaccurate narrative and gave it to Telecino as some bizarre sort of attempt at blackening the PJ's reputation, rather than that Telecino got hold of statements given by the McCanns and the Tapas group from a leak in the PJ and wove their own titillating narrative to whip up further negative press coverage of the McCanns on the eve of their child alert initiative. You seem to prefer to believe that the PJ (pure as the driven snow) would NEVER leak in such a cynical, spiteful way (despite the fact that by their own boss's admission they were leaking and had leaked). In my view it's pretty obvious that that is precisely what they did.
It gave the McCanns an excuse to try to refuse to return to Portugal in the event that the PJ insisted, though, didn't it.
Kate and Gerry McCann may refuse to take part in a reconstruction of events surrounding their daughter Madeleine’s disappearance, such is their anger at the information leaked in Portugal this week.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/mccanns-may-refuse-to-attend-reconstruction-12-04--t7187.html
-
It gave the McCanns an excuse to try to refuse to return to Portugal in the event that the PJ insisted, though, didn't it.
Kate and Gerry McCann may refuse to take part in a reconstruction of events surrounding their daughter Madeleine’s disappearance, such is their anger at the information leaked in Portugal this week.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/mccanns-may-refuse-to-attend-reconstruction-12-04--t7187.html
No, they didn't need an excuse because without the cooperation of their fellow holiday makers the reconstitution would not have gone ahead anyway.
-
It gave the McCanns an excuse to try to refuse to return to Portugal in the event that the PJ insisted, though, didn't it.
Kate and Gerry McCann may refuse to take part in a reconstruction of events surrounding their daughter Madeleine’s disappearance, such is their anger at the information leaked in Portugal this week.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/mccanns-may-refuse-to-attend-reconstruction-12-04--t7187.html
Why are you quoting a newspaper article.... From a newspaper you have deemed a national digrace
-
Why are you quoting a newspaper article.... From a newspaper you have deemed a national digrace
Yes, good question, there is also no direct quote in that article to say the McCanns were considering not attending because of the police leak.
-
It gave the McCanns an excuse to try to refuse to return to Portugal in the event that the PJ insisted, though, didn't it.
Kate and Gerry McCann may refuse to take part in a reconstruction of events surrounding their daughter Madeleine’s disappearance, such is their anger at the information leaked in Portugal this week.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/mccanns-may-refuse-to-attend-reconstruction-12-04--t7187.html
You know and I know that Kate and Gerry McCann had already agreed to return to Portugal to take part in a proposed reconstitution.
It is in the files.
Yet you are content to quote from a publication the original of which was withdrawn with others as a result of libellous content ... therefore perpetuating the dissemination of false information for which damages were paid and a front page apology issued as a result of litigation.
In my opinion ... disingenuous to say the least and definitely a trait to beware of in almost each and every post you make.
-
No, they didn't need an excuse because without the cooperation of their fellow holiday makers the reconstitution would not have gone ahead anyway.
I don't think they were able to predict that outcome. The PJ may have decided to go ahead with just the parents.
-
You know and I know that Kate and Gerry McCann had already agreed to return to Portugal to take part in a proposed reconstitution.
It is in the files.
Yet you are content to quote from a publication the original of which was withdrawn with others as a result of libellous content ... therefore perpetuating the dissemination of false information for which damages were paid and a front page apology issued as a result of litigation.
In my opinion ... disingenuous to say the least and definitely a trait to beware of in almost each and every post you make.
If you wish your posts to be given the consideration they undoubtedly deserve I need more information please.
When did the McCanns agree to attend the reconstitution? Please provide a cite.
Which story was withdrawn?
-
I don't think they were able to predict that outcome. The PJ may have decided to go ahead with just the parents.
Perhaps then you could provide a direct quote from either of the McCanns in which they say that the PJ's leaks have made them think twice about attending a reconstitution.
-
Here's a quote from Kate McCann, from her book
"In a meeting seven weeks after Madeleine was taken, Guilhermino Encarnacao had tried to reassure us that the PJ were not trying to portray us in a negative light. "If we really wanted to do that", he said, "we'd release the comment Madeleine made to you the day she disappeared".
All lies of course, as if the PJ would be so cynical and spiteful!!
-
You know and I know that Kate and Gerry McCann had already agreed to return to Portugal to take part in a proposed reconstitution.
It is in the files.
Yet you are content to quote from a publication the original of which was withdrawn with others as a result of libellous content ... therefore perpetuating the dissemination of false information for which damages were paid and a front page apology issued as a result of litigation.
In my opinion ... disingenuous to say the least and definitely a trait to beware of in almost each and every post you make.
Well said, Brie.
I am so glad that you and others are noticing it. At one time I appeared to be the only person aware of the regular altering of facts ... and it felt very uncomfortable to me to have to be the only member to keep pointing this trait out.
Gunit is very clever and one wonders why s/he adds these deceptions to often otherwise frequently clever words ? Is someone pulling your strings, Gunit ?
One also wonders if she has involvement with some of the .........t people on the skeptics world, because with her brain, after the wonderful comprehensive arguments and facts put forward by the supporters, why isn't she seeing the light and modifying her views?
Just wondering!
-
Perhaps then you could provide a direct quote from either of the McCanns in which they say that the PJ's leaks have made them think twice about attending a reconstitution.
Their spokesman spoke;
Their spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "All this nonsense over the last 24 or 36 hours does not in any way endear them to the idea of going back."
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/mccanns-rethink-portugal-return-bbc-12-04-08-t3948.html
-
If you wish your posts to be given the consideration they undoubtedly deserve I need more information please.
When did the McCanns agree to attend the reconstitution? Please provide a cite.
Which story was withdrawn?
I do not require your imprimatur, thank you, I prefer to check out what known facts there are to form my own opinion which is a course of action I highly recommend to you.
-------------------------------------
Public Ministry of Portimao
Case Section
Case 201/07 GALGS
Dear Sir
Public prosecutor
Kate Marie Healy arguida in the case referred to above, having been notified (page 3947) expresses her availability to participate in the reconstruction of the events on the second of the dates suggested, in other words on the 15 and 16th of next May. Her husband, Gerry McCann has also already expressed his availability.
Rogerio Alves
Lawyer
(Sent by email)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm#oa9p139
-
Their spokesman spoke;
Their spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "All this nonsense over the last 24 or 36 hours does not in any way endear them to the idea of going back."
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/mccanns-rethink-portugal-return-bbc-12-04-08-t3948.html
So, no direct quote then, no mention of not attending the reconstitution, many thanks.
-
Question: did the revelation regarding Madeleine's question to her parents regarding their whereabouts the night before harm or help the McCanns' reputation?
-
I do not require your imprimatur, thank you, I prefer to check out what known facts there are to form my own opinion which is a course of action I highly recommend to you.
-------------------------------------
Public Ministry of Portimao
Case Section
Case 201/07 GALGS
Dear Sir
Public prosecutor
Kate Marie Healy arguida in the case referred to above, having been notified (page 3947) expresses her availability to participate in the reconstruction of the events on the second of the dates suggested, in other words on the 15 and 16th of next May. Her husband, Gerry McCann has also already expressed his availability.
Rogerio Alves
Lawyer
(Sent by email)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm#oa9p139
The above is undated, but it must have been written after 1st April 2008 when the decision was taken by the Public Prosecutor to notify the McCanns that their presence was required for the reconstitution. If they didn't want to go then the Telecinco story gave them a motive just 10 days later.
I think you forgot to tell me which story you say was withdrawn?
-
The McCanns could have been easily extradited if they had refused to go, but Rebelo knew he was on a hiding to nothing by then anyway.
He even had to go back to Portugal in the middle of The Rogatory Interviews because The PJ were leaking again. And interestingly before David Payne was interviewed.
-
Perhaps G-Unit would like to explain why, after the leak occurred Gerry McCann was trying to negotiate a new date for the reconstitution, and hadn't by then blown it out of the water, having supposedly engineered the perfect excuse?
Dated 12th May 2008
"Therefore, given the impossibility of postponing the abovementioned audiences [trials] and due to the essentiality of the presence of the undersigned in the reconstruction of which he was now notified for the reconstruction of the facts and on the two above mentioned diligences [the trials], it is requested to your Excellency to start proceedings to set a new date for the making of the reconstruction. Thus, manifesting here the complete availability in the agenda for the days 5 and 6 of June and 19 and 20 of the same month".
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm#oa9p139
-
The McCanns could have been easily extradited if they had refused to go, but Rebelo knew he was on a hiding to nothing by then anyway.
He even had to go back to Portugal in the middle of The Rogatory Interviews because The PJ were leaking again. And interestingly before David Payne was interviewed.
Hardly when they had employed the best extradition lawyers - amongst others that money could buy [fund money]
-
Hardly when they had employed the best extradition lawyers - amongst others that money could buy [fund money]
i think they obviously though they might need them to protect them against the corrupt PJ....Amaral...Almeida....crimonal records and the inept third world portuguese justice system...
-
Well said, Brie.
I am so glad that you and others are noticing it. At one time I appeared to be the only person aware of the regular altering of facts ... and it felt very uncomfortable to me to have to be the only member to keep pointing this trait out.
Gunit is very clever and one wonders why s/he adds these deceptions to often otherwise frequently clever words ? Is someone pulling your strings, Gunit ?
One also wonders if she has involvement with some of the .........t people on the skeptics world, because with her brain, after the wonderful comprehensive arguments and facts put forward by the supporters, why isn't she seeing the light and modifying her views?
Just wondering!
Just wondering as well Sadie how nasty this post is - and why you feel you had a need to post it.
-
i think they obviously though they might need them to protect them against the corrupt PJ....Amaral...Almeida....crimonal records and the inept third world portuguese justice system...
You think - but you don't know the reason do you.
-
You think - but you don't know the reason do you.
I do
-
I do
You don't only people who know are the mcns - the lawers were also employed very early on
Well before they were made suspects
-
You don't only people who know are the mcns - the lawers were also employed very early on
Well before they were made suspects
Yes I do... It's absolutely obvious..
Ben Needham disappeared... Does his grandmother who was looking after him know exactly what happened to him....and has covered it up... What do you think
-
I don't think they were able to predict that outcome. The PJ may have decided to go ahead with just the parents.
That would have been totally useless. And would have denied The McCanns any sort of alibi or verification.
Definitely not on.
-
Yes I do... It's absolutely obvious..
Ben Needham disappeared... Does his grandmother who was looking after him know exactly what happened to him....and has covered it up... What do you think
Nothing it isn't a Ben Needham grandmothers site is it - its what happened to Maddie site
Why feel the need to change the subject D
-
Nothing it isn't a Ben Needham grandmothers site is it - its what happened to Maddie site
Why feel the need to change the subject D
its called an analogy...nothing exists in a vacuum....
some people say the evidence shows the world is flat....i know it isnt..Just as I know the Mccanns are not criminally involved in maddies disappearance....perhaps im wrong and the world is flat...thats another analogy
-
The above is undated, but it must have been written after 1st April 2008 when the decision was taken by the Public Prosecutor to notify the McCanns that their presence was required for the reconstitution. If they didn't want to go then the Telecinco story gave them a motive just 10 days later.
I think you forgot to tell me which story you say was withdrawn?
All of them.
Rather disingenuous of you yet again but thanks for your comment which illustrates that in my opinion the forces bearing inimical hostility towards the McCann family have not tired of taking over every small corner of the internet if it is within their power to do so.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-deleted-daily-express-articles-in-chronologica-t247.html until very recently these could only be read in their archived form because the Express had removed them.
That is no longer the case as it has apparently been taken over and the URL changed to the one linked to by Gunit.
Quite extraordinary indeed.
-
Just wondering as well Sadie how nasty this post is - and why you feel you had a need to post it.
There is nothing wrong with the truth kizzy.
For months/years I wasted valuable time and effort correcting deception and untruths hidden amongst Gunits good bits of posts and requested that she alter her ways .... but to no avail. She still churns out the deception and IMO obviously hasn't a care about the injustice, damage and hurt caused by it.
Such behaviour should be exposed and in BIG letters.
To some of you it appears that it is OK for you to be really horribly nasty to The Mccanns, who let me remind you are innocent ... but when the truth is spoken about one of yours, it's OMG, terrible.
When, if ever, Gunit plays fair then s/he will be treated with respect.
S/he knows what she is doing. it is happening almost every post in certain threads. You only have to read this thread to see any number of such. She is using an age old technique mainly statimg the truth, but the nasty disinformation/ propaganda is seemlessly tucked away in the middle somwhere. That is cheating in my book.
... and it is progressively being exposed, which is a good thing for Justice
There is nothing wrong with the truth Kizzy.
-
All of them.
Rather disingenuous of you yet again but thanks for your comment which illustrates that in my opinion the forces bearing inimical hostility towards the McCann family have not tired of taking over every small corner of the internet if it is within their power to do so.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-deleted-daily-express-articles-in-chronologica-t247.html until very recently these could only be read in their archived form because the Express had removed them.
That is no longer the case as it has apparently been taken over and the URL changed to the one linked to by Gunit.
Quite extraordinary indeed.
The Maddie Case Files has various categories of articles. Those deleted by the Express are here;
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-deleted-daily-express-articles-in-chronologica-t247.html#p3061
Those from other publications which have been deleted are here;
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/articles-deleted-from-the-internet-t2688.html
Those which are not known to have been deleted are here;
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/chronological-indexes-f16/
So not every article I have referenced is a deleted one.
-
There is nothing wrong with the truth kizzy.
For months/years I wasted valuable time and effort correcting deception and untruths hidden amongst Gunits good bits of posts and requested that she alter her ways .... but to no avail. She still churns out the deception and IMO obviously hasn't a care about the injustice, damage and hurt caused by it.
Such behaviour should be exposed and in BIG letters.
To some of you it appears that it is OK for you to be really horribly nasty to The Mccanns, who let me remind you are innocent ... but when the truth is spoken about one of yours, it's OMG, terrible.
When, if ever, Gunit plays fair then s/he will be treated with respect.
S/he knows what she is doing. it is happening almost every post in certain threads. You only have to read this thread to see any number of such. She is using an age old technique mainly statimg the truth, but the nasty disinformation/ propaganda is seemlessly tucked away in the middle somwhere. That is cheating in my book.
... and it is progressively being exposed, which is a good thing for Justice
There is nothing wrong with the truth Kizzy.
What is certain is that no-one can prove that Telecinco had Kate McCanns statement dated 4th May 2007. Their 'quotes' were incorrect and they never produced the originals in their own defence. I wonder why not?
-
What is certain is that no-one can prove that Telecinco had Kate McCanns statement dated 4th May 2007. Their 'quotes' were incorrect and they never produced the originals in their own defence. I wonder why not?
Because they weren’t in court and they’d had their splash with the story and moved onto something else. You give me the impression that you think the McCanns are the most important subject media outlets have to cover.
-
The Maddie Case Files has various categories of articles. Those deleted by the Express are here;
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-deleted-daily-express-articles-in-chronologica-t247.html#p3061
Those from other publications which have been deleted are here;
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/articles-deleted-from-the-internet-t2688.html
Those which are not known to have been deleted are here;
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/chronological-indexes-f16/
So not every article I have referenced is a deleted one.
What came first ... the chicken or the great fat cuckoo taking over internet nest ???
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-deleted-daily-express-articles-in-chronologica-t247.html has in my opinion suffered a take over and is no longer what it was.
-
What is certain is that no-one can prove that Telecinco had Kate McCanns statement dated 4th May 2007. Their 'quotes' were incorrect and they never produced the originals in their own defence. I wonder why not?
could it be that they felt it wasnt important...not important to anyone except a handful of pedants on the net?
-
Because they weren’t in court and they’d had their splash with the story and moved onto something else. You give me the impression that you think the McCanns are the most important subject media outlets have to cover.
According to the Diario de Noticias;
The journalist of Telecinco, Nacho Abad, author of those news which are provoking so much controversy, said that he will answer, today, to the disclaim of the PJ, in his program to be aired around 12h00 – Spanish time.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-repercussions-of-maddie-s-case-on-the-pj-ddn-1-t10685.html
I have seen nothing suggesting that Abad offered any answer. If he truly had evidence to support his story I can't imagine why not.
-
According to the Diario de Noticias;
The journalist of Telecinco, Nacho Abad, author of those news which are provoking so much controversy, said that he will answer, today, to the disclaim of the PJ, in his program to be aired around 12h00 – Spanish time.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-repercussions-of-maddie-s-case-on-the-pj-ddn-1-t10685.html
I have seen nothing suggesting that Abad offered any answer. If he truly had evidence to support his story I can't imagine why not.
so again you believe what you read in the newspapers when it suits you....and rubbish it when it doesnt....it really is quite laughble but at least your inconsistency is consistent
-
so again you believe what you read in the newspapers when it suits you....and rubbish it when it doesnt....it really is quite laughble but at least your inconsistency is consistent
This particular affair was played out in the media, so there's little choice. All the UK media appeared to believe that Telecinco were telling the truth, but their story wasn't reliable or supported by any evidence.
-
According to the Diario de Noticias;
The journalist of Telecinco, Nacho Abad, author of those news which are provoking so much controversy, said that he will answer, today, to the disclaim of the PJ, in his program to be aired around 12h00 – Spanish time.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-repercussions-of-maddie-s-case-on-the-pj-ddn-1-t10685.html
I have seen nothing suggesting that Abad offered any answer. If he truly had evidence to support his story I can't imagine why not.
How hard have you looked?
-
How hard have you looked?
Pretty hard, but feel free to look for yourself. You may find the evidence I can't find.
-
Pretty hard, but feel free to look for yourself. You may find the evidence I can't find.
https://reuters.screenocean.com/record/513090
-
https://reuters.screenocean.com/record/513090
Still no evidence, but well found.
-
i think they obviously though they might need them to protect them against the corrupt PJ....Amaral...Almeida....crimonal records and the inept third world portuguese justice system...
(&^&
-
Still no evidence, but well found.
You claimed Abad had not offered an answer. That was his answer. Unless you are claiming he’s a bare faced liar then it is clear from his answer that the leak did not come from the McCanns or Mitchell.
-
https://reuters.screenocean.com/record/513090
Thank you VS.
The information broadcast by Telecinco could only have come from one source and that is the case files held by the Judicial Police under Secrecy of Justice.
Snip
As the one year anniversary of the day British four year old Madeleine McCann disappeared approaches, the Spanish journalist who obtained controversial transcripts of the little girl's parents interviews with police, says he will never reveal his source. Intense media coverage of the case has sparked lawsuits and a heated debate in the UK over whether Kate and Gerry McCann are to blame for their daughter's disappearance.
Spanish journalist Nacho Abad, who obtained copies of investigator's interviews of Madeleine McCann's parents told Reuters that he will never reveal his source.
"In my opinion, it is not important who provides the information, what it's relevant is whether it is truthful," Abad told Reuters in an interview.
"Its brought me stress, hiding well the copies of the declarations I have, because I am worried about what might happen to them, they are well hidden, in a safe place," he added.
Abad, who works for Spanish talk show 'Ana Rosa Quintana' got access to transcripts of Kate and Gerry McCann's statements to investigators on May 4 last year, a day after their daughters dissapearance.
According to Abad, the transcripts show Kate McCann told police about a conversation she had with Madeleine on the morning she vanished.
"While we were having breakfast, Madeleine said: 'Mum, why didn't you come when we were crying last night?'," she said, according to Abad.
He said she added: "Gerry and I talked about it for several minutes and decided to watch over the children more carefully at night."
Abad, who has closely followed the McCann case said he worked very hard to access the documents as information about the case has been restricted by Portuguese police.
"This has caused an unfavourable environment even for police that have been branded as bad investigators," he said.
"And there is a generalised opinion and generalised criteria based on false information, and the idea here is to gather the correct information so that one can create an opinion. This is what we are trying to do. We are not trying to injure the police or the Mccanns."
Abad plans to continue pursuing confidential information about the case.
"I am worried about them never finding out what happened to Madeleine because, after all, what any journalist wants, or what any spectator wants, is for this story to have a closure, for it to have an ending, to know where Madeleine is at, if she is alive or, if somebody killed her, who did it and have them pay for it." ... ... ...
https://reuters.screenocean.com/record/513090
-
All of them.
Rather disingenuous of you yet again but thanks for your comment which illustrates that in my opinion the forces bearing inimical hostility towards the McCann family have not tired of taking over every small corner of the internet if it is within their power to do so.
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-deleted-daily-express-articles-in-chronologica-t247.html until very recently these could only be read in their archived form because the Express had removed them.
That is no longer the case as it has apparently been taken over and the URL changed to the one linked to by Gunit.
Quite extraordinary indeed.
Not only extraordinary, but extremely sinister too.
Justice goes out of the window, when the facts can be maliciously altered by the FORCES that have the POWER to do such things. Seems there is something mighty upsetting to them about the Madeleine case could bring them down, so they keep deleting and changing facts about the case.
It will be to do with their POWER status and MONEY and illicit systems that have held sway for centuries IMO.
They dont want the people operating and benefitting from their moneymaking systems exposed and the systems closed down, so will do everything in their power to try to disprove thngs, by altering facts on the internet.
The internet may be good in many ways, but it also has the power to be evil
All in my opinion
Universal Micro chipping for us mere plebs in the near future ?
-
Thank you VS.
The information broadcast by Telecinco could only have come from one source and that is the case files held by the Judicial Police under Secrecy of Justice.
Snip
As the one year anniversary of the day British four year old Madeleine McCann disappeared approaches, the Spanish journalist who obtained controversial transcripts of the little girl's parents interviews with police, says he will never reveal his source. Intense media coverage of the case has sparked lawsuits and a heated debate in the UK over whether Kate and Gerry McCann are to blame for their daughter's disappearance.
Spanish journalist Nacho Abad, who obtained copies of investigator's interviews of Madeleine McCann's parents told Reuters that he will never reveal his source.
"In my opinion, it is not important who provides the information, what it's relevant is whether it is truthful," Abad told Reuters in an interview.
"Its brought me stress, hiding well the copies of the declarations I have, because I am worried about what might happen to them, they are well hidden, in a safe place," he added.
Abad, who works for Spanish talk show 'Ana Rosa Quintana' got access to transcripts of Kate and Gerry McCann's statements to investigators on May 4 last year, a day after their daughters dissapearance.
According to Abad, the transcripts show Kate McCann told police about a conversation she had with Madeleine on the morning she vanished.
"While we were having breakfast, Madeleine said: 'Mum, why didn't you come when we were crying last night?'," she said, according to Abad.
He said she added: "Gerry and I talked about it for several minutes and decided to watch over the children more carefully at night."
Abad, who has closely followed the McCann case said he worked very hard to access the documents as information about the case has been restricted by Portuguese police.
"This has caused an unfavourable environment even for police that have been branded as bad investigators," he said.
"And there is a generalised opinion and generalised criteria based on false information, and the idea here is to gather the correct information so that one can create an opinion. This is what we are trying to do. We are not trying to injure the police or the Mccanns."
Abad plans to continue pursuing confidential information about the case.
"I am worried about them never finding out what happened to Madeleine because, after all, what any journalist wants, or what any spectator wants, is for this story to have a closure, for it to have an ending, to know where Madeleine is at, if she is alive or, if somebody killed her, who did it and have them pay for it." ... ... ...
https://reuters.screenocean.com/record/513090
Some people are so keen to believe what they want to believe that they are ignoring the facts imo. Whatever Abad had, it wasn't Kate McCann's statement because her statement didn't include the bolded text above.
-
In my opinion there's no evidence at all that Telecinco had the McCann's statements. Certainly no-one here has been able to find any. Therefore there's no evidence that the PJ leaked their statements.
As to The Maddie Case Files website there have been no changes made to it. Merely some people discovering that it contains far more than the deleted Express stories. It's certainly nothing to do with a conspiracy (how paranoid are some people?)
-
Not only extraordinary, but extremely sinister too.
Justice goes out of the window, when the facts can be maliciously altered by the FORCES that have the POWER to do such things. Seems there is something mighty upsetting to them about the Madeleine case could bring them down, so they keep deleting and changing facts about the case.
It will be to do with their POWER status and MONEY and illicit systems that have held sway for centuries IMO.
They dont want the people operating and benefitting from their moneymaking systems exposed and the systems closed down, so will do everything in their power to try to disprove thngs, by altering facts on the internet.
The internet may be good in many ways, but it also has the power to be evil
All in my opinion
Universal Micro chipping for us mere plebs in the near future ?
(SOUNDBITE) (Spanish) SPANISH JOURNALIST NACHO ABAD SAYING:
"In my opinion, it is not important who provides the information, what it's relevant is whether it is truthful.
In this case there is a lot of untruthful information, a lot speculation.
This has caused an unfavourable environment even for police that have been branded as bad investigators who didn't present the bedroom immediately and has also affected the McCanns who
- It's happen to me that people have stopped me on the street to ask whether they are the assassins-.
And there is a generalised opinion and generalised criteria based on false information, and the idea here is to gather the correct information so that one can create an opinion.
This is what we are trying to do.
We are not trying to injure the Police or the McCanns."
https://reuters.screenocean.com/record/513090
Nacho Abad, journalist for Telecinco strikes me as being a good investigative reporter who seems to have come to some pretty firm conclusions about what was going on in Madeleine's case particularly the misinformation being put about. Which was pretty astute reasoning for someone on the outside looking in at the time before the files were released.
I know in 2017 he claims to have continued investigating Madeleine's case just shortly after the files were released in 2008 at the behest of a police friend ... one wonders if he continued to do so in the ten years between, I would be surprised if he didn't.
-
Some people are so keen to believe what they want to believe that they are ignoring the facts imo. Whatever Abad had, it wasn't Kate McCann's statement because her statement didn't include the bolded text above.
Why are you doing your utmost to convince that the same stable that released the content of Kate's diary to a journalist would have any qualms about releasing the content of Kate's statement to Telecinco journalist Nacho Abad?
With reference to the text I have bolded below ... this is Kate's reaction to just one of the many leaks she and Gerry suffered all of which were in my opinion disastrously detrimental to any pretence of investigating Madeleine's case in preference to having a side swipe at her parents as here ...
Snip
The Portuguese police – both those currently and previously involved in the inquiry – had had our statements for eleven and a half months.
How had this information come to be released – completely illegally, I might add, at the risk of sounding like a cracked record – today of all days, when Gerry and I were in Brussels trying to do something positive for child protection?
The effect it would have was obvious: it would discredit Gerry and me and detract from what we were trying to
achieve. We were gutted.
If you think I’m being paranoid, think on this. In a meeting seven weeks after Madeleine was taken, Guilhermino Encarnação had tried to reassure us that the PJ were not trying to portray us in a negative light.
‘If we really wanted to do that,’ he said, ‘we’d release the comment Madeleine made to you on the day she disappeared.’ Bingo.
madeleine: Kate McCann
-
In my opinion there's no evidence at all that Telecinco had the McCann's statements. Certainly no-one here has been able to find any. Therefore there's no evidence that the PJ leaked their statements.
As to The Maddie Case Files website there have been no changes made to it. Merely some people discovering that it contains far more than the deleted Express stories. It's certainly nothing to do with a conspiracy (how paranoid are some people?)
Apart from the McCanns only the Judicial Police had access to the information leaked to Nacho Abad ... and he is not revealing his source.
But with the Moorov Doctrine in mind my money is firmly on the PJ.
________________________________________
As far as https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-deleted-daily-express-articles-in-chronologica-t247.html is concerned, had I had the foresight to take screen shots of defunct tales which would have proved my point ... that really would have been paranoid.
However I really am grateful to you for alerting me to yet another contaminated source which really does confirm that the internet is subject to abuse and to be doubly wary of everything posted on it ~ particularly 'deleted' items which are resurrected and as such are very open to abuse and manipulation.
-
Some people are so keen to believe what they want to believe that they are ignoring the facts imo. Whatever Abad had, it wasn't Kate McCann's statement because her statement didn't include the bolded text above.
Perhaps he was given the actual transcript of what she said, not the precis’ed version that ended up in the files. Clearly her actual words would have been much more detailed than what appears in those third person accounts.
-
its called an analogy...nothing exists in a vacuum....
some people say the evidence shows the world is flat....i know it isnt..Just as I know the Mccanns are not criminally involved in maddies disappearance....perhaps im wrong and the world is flat...thats another analogy
its called an analogy
Or as Beattie says in the BT advert - an oligy
-
its called an analogy
Or as Beattie says in the BT advert - an oligy
the ad refers to an ology.....from the greek meaning to study as i recall
-
In my opinion there's no evidence at all that Telecinco had the McCann's statements. Certainly no-one here has been able to find any. Therefore there's no evidence that the PJ leaked their statements.
As to The Maddie Case Files website there have been no changes made to it. Merely some people discovering that it contains far more than the deleted Express stories. It's certainly nothing to do with a conspiracy (how paranoid are some people?)
You know what they say about Paranoia. "If you think someone is out to get you then they likely are."
-
Apart from the McCanns only the Judicial Police had access to the information leaked to Nacho Abad ... and he is not revealing his source.
But with the Moorov Doctrine in mind my money is firmly on the PJ.
________________________________________
As far as https://themaddiecasefiles.com/the-deleted-daily-express-articles-in-chronologica-t247.html is concerned, had I had the foresight to take screen shots of defunct tales which would have proved my point ... that really would have been paranoid.
However I really am grateful to you for alerting me to yet another contaminated source which really does confirm that the internet is subject to abuse and to be doubly wary of everything posted on it ~ particularly 'deleted' items which are resurrected and as such are very open to abuse and manipulation.
The Judicial Police did not have access to this information;
"Gerry and I talked about it for several minutes and decided to watch over the children more carefully at night."
-
The Judicial Police did not have access to this information;
"Gerry and I talked about it for several minutes and decided to watch over the children more carefully at night."
VS put it succinctly enough ... http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11196.msg571336#msg571336 and quite frankly you have no idea at all what information was leaked to Nacho Abad but it is known that it could only have come from one of two sources.
There had been a concerted campaign since Madeleine's disappearance by the sources of all the leaks to destroy the McCann's reputation and it seems they had kept the best till last.
Just exactly as Kate had been warned by Guilhermino Encarnação they could.
‘If we really wanted to do that,’ he said, ‘we’d release the comment Madeleine made to you on the day she disappeared.’ Bingo. madeleine: Kate McCann
-
The Judicial Police did not have access to this information;
"Gerry and I talked about it for several minutes and decided to watch over the children more carefully at night."
Circa 50 minutes, between GM and KM checking on the 3rd,wonder how far apart the previous checking was.
-
Circa 50 minutes, between GM and KM checking on the 3rd,wonder how far apart the previous checking was.
Someone else checked in the meantime. The McCann children were not left unchecked for 50 minutes.
-
Someone else checked in the meantime. The McCann children were not left unchecked for 50 minutes.
What did emerge in evidence was that the McCanns didn't 'watch over the children more carefully at night'. According to their friends they did the same as they had done throughout the week; half hourly checks.
-
Someone else checked in the meantime. The McCann children were not left unchecked for 50 minutes.
Maddie was unchecked for 50mins, since Matt didn't see her. Only the twins, allegedly.
-
The Judicial Police did not have access to this information;
"Gerry and I talked about it for several minutes and decided to watch over the children more carefully at night."
How do you know? They had access to the McCanns didn’t they? Why do you think this is something the McCanns definitely would not have said to the police? Is there a verbatim report available of everything they told the police? The statements in the files are woefully short when you consider how long the McCanns were at the police station and when you compare them to the rogs.
-
How do you know? They had access to the McCanns didn’t they? Why do you think this is something the McCanns definitely would not have said to the police? Is there a verbatim report available of everything they told the police? The statements in the files are woefully short when you consider how long the McCanns were at the police station and when you compare them to the rogs.
You're suggesting there were two lots of statements? One lot for the files and another lot for leaking? What a fertile imagination you have.
-
You're suggesting there were two lots of statements? One lot for the files and another lot for leaking? What a fertile imagination you have.
It’s called thinking outside the box. It’s a good question though IMO - why were the McCann statements so short on detail? I’m sure they had much more to say than what was recorded in the third person accounts. Perhaps the leak came from someone who sat in on those interviews or who chatted informally to the McCanns at the station and gave their own version of events to the reporter, to add a bit of colour. I wonder if they got rewarded handsomely for their trouble?
-
It’s called thinking outside the box. It’s a good question though IMO - why were the McCann statements so short on detail? I’m sure they had much more to say than what was recorded in the third person accounts. Perhaps the leak came from someone who sat in on those interviews or who chatted informally to the McCanns at the station and gave their own version of events to the reporter, to add a bit of colour. I wonder if they got rewarded handsomely for their trouble?
It's certainly a wild idea, but in the highly unlikely event that such a thing existed it wasn't a police statement with a file number, Kate McCann's, the interpreter's and the PJ inspector's signature on it.
-
It's certainly a wild idea, but in the highly unlikely event that such a thing existed it wasn't a police statement with a file number, Kate McCann's, the interpreter's and the PJ inspector's signature on it.
I didn’t suggest it was, and nor do I see what is so wildly improbable about it. You after all seem to think it is highly probable that Clarence fed this highly damaging story to the Spanish media, which IMO is a completely mad notion.
-
I didn’t suggest it was, and nor do I see what is so wildly improbable about it. You after all seem to think it is highly probable that Clarence fed this highly damaging story to the Spanish media, which IMO is a completely mad notion.
If it wasn't a police statement then someone lied. Did someone lie to Telecinco or did Telecinco lie to it's audience? It doesn't really matter because either scenario demonstrates that the McCann's police statements were not leaked. That's why the PJ took the unprecedented step, for the one and only time, to issue a public denial. When the files were released it was proved that the PJ were correct and Telecinco were not.
-
If it wasn't a police statement then someone lied. Did someone lie to Telecinco or did Telecinco lie to it's audience? It doesn't really matter because either scenario demonstrates that the McCann's police statements were not leaked. That's why the PJ took the unprecedented step, for the one and only time, to issue a public denial. When the files were released it was proved that the PJ were correct and Telecinco were not.
Your logic is entirely faulty IMO. Have you considered that the PJ lied? Why is it not possible that the PJ did leak and that the leaker offered his own embellishments to the statements which were incorporated in the report?
-
An acknowledgment of multiple leaks, and an explanation of how they may occur, plenty of scope for misinformation to be reported imo
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/mccanns-demand-inquiry-over-leak-808252.html
The Portuguese authorities have insisted they do not brief journalists on the progress of the hunt for Madeleine.
Last August the then-police spokesman in the case, Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa, said the leaks were probably not deliberate.
He told the English-language paper Portugal News: "I believe sometimes things are said at an informal lunch after which a friend tells a friend who knows a journalist.
"But there's no doubt, these leaks do complicate my job."
-
Circa 50 minutes, between GM and KM checking on the 3rd,wonder how far apart the previous checking was.
[/b]
kate and Gerry left the flat for the restaurant at about 8.30pm.
The final check by Kate was at about 10pm when she found Madeleine missing
That is only 1 hour 30 minutes, with the first being by Gerry half an hour after leaving the flat for their meal.
Visual checks:
- 1st check was by Gerry at about 9pm
- 2nd check was by Matt at about 9.30pm (visual for the twins, but not visual for Madeleine ... she was, or should have been, on the bed out of sight around the corner)
- 3rd and final visual check was by Kate at about 10pm.
Madeleine had gone.
THese checks started half an hour after The Mccanns left the flat and were spaced half an hour apart
There was only time for 3 half-hourly checks!
So what do you mean by your comment about "wonder how far apart the previous checking was.
What is also often forgotten is ... that there was an additional 'ear to window' hearing check (aka Butlins hearing checks) by Matt . This was just before Gerrys visual check.
So there were actually 4 checks and they were more frequent than every half hour. Am surprised that so many of you don't remember Matts extra hearing test ... and dont seem to realise that with half hourly check schedule there would only be time for three checks.
-
[/b]
kate and Gerry left the flat for the restaurant at about 8.30pm.
The final check by Kate was at about 10pm when she found Madeleine missing
That is only 1 hour 30 minutes, with the first being by Gerry half an hour after leaving the flat for their meal.
Visual checks:
- 1st check was by Gerry at about 9pm
- 2nd check was by Matt at about 9.30pm (visual for the twins, but not visual for Madeleine ... she was, or should have been, on the bed out of sight around the corner)
- 3rd and final visual check was by Kate at about 10pm.
Madeleine had gone.
THese checks started half an hour after The Mccanns left the flat and were spaced half an hour apart
There was only time for 3 half-hourly checks!
So what do you mean by your comment about "wonder how far apart the previous checking was.
What is also often forgotten is ... that there was an additional 'ear to window' hearing check (aka Butlins hearing checks) by Matt . This was just before Gerrys visual check.
So there were actually 4 checks and they were more frequent than every half hour. Am surprised that so many of you don't remember Matts extra hearing test ... and dont seem to realise that with half hourly check schedule there would only be time for three checks.
Only one visual check on Madeleine,if that was an increase what happened before?.
-
[/b]
kate and Gerry left the flat for the restaurant at about 8.30pm.
The final check by Kate was at about 10pm when she found Madeleine missing
That is only 1 hour 30 minutes, with the first being by Gerry half an hour after leaving the flat for their meal.
Visual checks:
- 1st check was by Gerry at about 9pm
- 2nd check was by Matt at about 9.30pm (visual for the twins, but not visual for Madeleine ... she was, or should have been, on the bed out of sight around the corner)
- 3rd and final visual check was by Kate at about 10pm.
Madeleine had gone.
THese checks started half an hour after The Mccanns left the flat and were spaced half an hour apart
There was only time for 3 half-hourly checks!
So what do you mean by your comment about "wonder how far apart the previous checking was.
What is also often forgotten is ... that there was an additional 'ear to window' hearing check (aka Butlins hearing checks) by Matt . This was just before Gerrys visual check.
So there were actually 4 checks and they were more frequent than every half hour. Am surprised that so many of you don't remember Matts extra hearing test ... and dont seem to realise that with half hourly check schedule there would only be time for three checks.
It's like there was virtually no time left in between checks, isn't it?
-
It's like there was virtually no time left in between checks, isn't it?
Plenty of time to abduct a child.
-
Plenty of time to abduct a child.
It's a mildly amusing, curious paradox (like one of those where you go 'hmm, OK'); sufficient, apparent frequency of checks to demonstrate rigour, but apparently just insufficient enough to permit a window of opportunity, notwithstanding external factors.
-
It's a mildly amusing, curious paradox (like one of those where you go 'hmm, OK'); sufficient, apparent frequency of checks to demonstrate rigour, but apparently just insufficient enough to permit a window of opportunity, notwithstanding external factors.
How long do you think it takes to steal a child? This was well planned.
Oh, I missed you, by the way.
-
There is nothing wrong with the truth kizzy.
For months/years I wasted valuable time and effort correcting deception and untruths hidden amongst Gunits good bits of posts and requested that she alter her ways .... but to no avail. She still churns out the deception and IMO obviously hasn't a care about the injustice, damage and hurt caused by it.
Such behaviour should be exposed and in BIG letters.
To some of you it appears that it is OK for you to be really horribly nasty to The Mccanns, who let me remind you are innocent ... but when the truth is spoken about one of yours, it's OMG, terrible.
When, if ever, Gunit plays fair then s/he will be treated with respect.
S/he knows what she is doing. it is happening almost every post in certain threads. You only have to read this thread to see any number of such. She is using an age old technique mainly statimg the truth, but the nasty disinformation/ propaganda is seemlessly tucked away in the middle somwhere. That is cheating in my book.
... and it is progressively being exposed, which is a good thing for Justice
There is nothing wrong with the truth Kizzy.
There is nothing wrong with the truth Kizzy.
No there isn't - but with all due respect.
until we know what the truth is - no one can be sure of what happened to Maddie.
There is nothing wrong either with not believing the mcns version of events - or that maddie was abducted.
Nothing wrong either if you don't believe the mcns - having no respect or sympathy for them. [as in my case]
-
How long do you think it takes to steal a child? This was well planned.
Oh, I missed you, by the way.
Given the apparent success of this pre-planned abduction, one wonders why this organised gang haven't gone on to abduct any more children in PDL, or Portugal, or anywhere else on the planet.
-
There is nothing wrong with the truth Kizzy.
No there isn't - but with all due respect.
until we know what the truth is - no one can be sure of what happened to Maddie.
There is nothing wrong either with not believing the mcns version of events - or that maddie was abducted.
Nothing wrong either if you don't believe the mcns - having no respect or sympathy for them. [as in my case]
I think we can be sure the patents are not involved... Just as we can say Ben Needhams grandmother isn't involved in Bens disappearance..
I don't think anyone really cares if you have sympathy for the mccanns or not...
-
I think we can be sure the patents are not involved... Just as we can say Ben Needhams grandmother isn't involved in Bens disappearance..
I don't think anyone really cares if you have sympathy for the mccanns or not...
How so?
Has the abductor been caught in either case?
Is there some overwhelming abduction evidence I'm unaware of?
-
Given the apparent success of this pre-planned abduction, one wonders why this organised gang haven't gone on to abduct any more children in PDL, or Portugal, or anywhere else on the planet.
Well, they wouldn't, would they. They picked a bad one with Madeleine. The McCanns fought back.
Any chance of missing you, by the way?
-
How so?
Has the abductor been caught in either case?
Is there some overwhelming abduction evidence I'm unaware of?
Probably.
-
Well, they wouldn't, would they. They picked a bad one with Madeleine. The McCanns fought back.
Any chance of missing you, by the way?
They fought back? What, by burying the abductors E-Fit you mean? Genius, that'll show 'em.
-
They fought back? What, by burying the abductors E-Fit you mean? Genius, that'll show 'em.
More lies and misrepresentation. And you aren't even very good at it. In fact I don't believe that you believe a word that you say.
But it's okay. We all understand loneliness. That is why most of us are here.
-
More lies and misrepresentation. And you aren't even very good at it. In fact I don't believe that you believe a word that you say.
But it's okay. We all understand loneliness. That is why most of us are here.
What have I lied about?
-
More lies and misrepresentation. And you aren't even very good at it. In fact I don't believe that you believe a word that you say.
But it's okay. We all understand loneliness. That is why most of us are here.
Maybe you can point out the 2008 produced efits in their 2011 no stone unturned contradiction of a book? You can't!
-
Maybe you can point out the 2008 produced efits in their 2011 no stone unturned contradiction of a book? You can't!
You can read all about the E-Fits being suppressed in this Daily Mail article, that the McCanns haven't had removed.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478087/Why-Madeleine-McCann-suspect-E-fits-kept-secret-5-years.html
Or maybe I'm just making it up.
-
Maybe you can point out the 2008 produced efits in their 2011 no stone unturned contradiction of a book? You can't!
I don't need to.
-
It's a mildly amusing, curious paradox (like one of those where you go 'hmm, OK'); sufficient, apparent frequency of checks to demonstrate rigour, but apparently just insufficient enough to permit a window of opportunity, notwithstanding external factors.
In my opinion it’s neither amusing, curious or paradoxical.
-
It's a mildly amusing, curious paradox (like one of those where you go 'hmm, OK'); sufficient, apparent frequency of checks to demonstrate rigour, but apparently just insufficient enough to permit a window of opportunity, notwithstanding external factors.
Rubbish !
Sorry but it is total rubbish as I suspect an intelligent guy like you already knows.
-
Mr General, sir!
I checked it out in a similar space and as a limping octogenarian I could have done it in the batting (or so) of an eyelid.
I dont have the measured timings in front of me, but they are, or were, on this forum ... and it was certainly well under 5 minutes to get in, lift shutter open, draw curtains both ways, lift Madeleine from her bed and out again via the front door
There are4 5 lots of 5 minutes available in a half hour slot, so I could have done that 5 times each available half hour.
3 slots available, so I could have abducted Madeleine 3 x 5 = 15 times in the hour and a half available
An able bodied person could have done it more quickly ... especially with accomplices to help.
Soz, Mr General, sir, but I think that you haven't worked it out properly.
Please note: This post somehow got removed, so is now out of order. It should be read before The Gererals post No. 91
-
Given the apparent success of this pre-planned abduction, one wonders why this organised gang haven't gone on to abduct any more children in PDL, or Portugal, or anywhere else on the planet.
HoHoHo!
Cant remember now, but were there 7 or 8 suspected pre-pubescent child abductions in PT before Madeleines disappearance?
And not one that we are aware of since.
I reckon that the global hoo-ha (spelling?) and publicity after Madeleines disappearance has frightened the living daylights out of the abductors .... and they stopped doing it. But they will be back , just like the Phoenix they will rise again.
They are addicted to the wealth and ensuing power that trafficking brings. They will be back and unhappily they will have learned from their mistakes. They will be stronger.
AIMO
-
Mr General, sir!
I checked it out in a similar space and as a limping octogenarian I could have done it in the batting (or so) of an eyelid.
I dont have the measured timings in front of me, but they are, or were, on this forum ... and it was certainly well under 5 minutes to get in, lift shutter open, draw curtains both ways, lift Madeleine from her bed and out again via the front door
There are4 5 lots of 5 minutes available in a half hour slot, so I could have done that 5 times each available half hour.
3 slots available, so I could have abducted Madeleine 3 x 5 = 15 times in the hour and a half available
An able bodied person could have done it more quickly ... especially with accomplices to help.
Soz, Mr General, sir, but I think that you haven't worked it out properly.
Please note: This post somehow got removed, so is now out of order. It should be read before
What? With all those people wandering about at the time??
-
What? With all those people wandering about at the time??
With all those people about it's far more likely Maddie could be spirited away quickly rather than her being able to wander around on her own unnoticed
-
What? With all those people wandering about at the time??
... and these are only the ones who made it to PJ files ... the McCanns and their friends weren't alone in a vacuum, there must have been far more people going about their business than we have ever known about,
The Totman children for example weren't the only ones at the creche so their parents must have been out and about somewhere; other residents and people who were not OC employees might have been finishing their shift and going home.
Mr and Mrs Moyes who were in residence two floors above where Madeleine had been sleeping are among those who never made an appearance in the PJ files ~ nor do we have a clue as to what might have been contained in the statements collected by Mrs Murat.
I think there is potential that collating available and relevant information from those who were out and about around the time Madeleine vanished could hold the key as to what happened to her ... I think that will have been done as far as possible by present police investigators and who knows what may have been turned up.
-
What? With all those people wandering about at the time??
@)(++(*
All these people wandering about at the time? Try a holiday in PdL near 5A, and see just how quiet it is in the evening after dark. Most of the people were the Tapas group checking their children.
Omitting the Tapas group, Jez Wilkins and the Carpenters name ALL these people please Angelo.
And what happened to the possible watcher theory on the balcony opposite, orchestrating an abduction?
-
... and these are only the ones who made it to PJ files ... the McCanns and their friends weren't alone in a vacuum, there must have been far more people going about their business than we have ever known about,
The Totman children for example weren't the only ones at the creche so their parents must have been out and about somewhere; other residents and people who were not OC employees might have been finishing their shift and going home.
Mr and Mrs Moyes who were in residence two floors above where Madeleine had been sleeping are among those who never made an appearance in the PJ files ~ nor do we have a clue as to what might have been contained in the statements collected by Mrs Murat.
I think there is potential that collating available and relevant information from those who were out and about around the time Madeleine vanished could hold the key as to what happened to her ... I think that will have been done as far as possible by present police investigators and who knows what may have been turned up.
4078 'Okay. We will move back then from that check. I am sure you would have already mentioned, but did you see anybody''
Reply 'No'.
00.45.51 4078 'Hear any cars''
Reply 'No. No, I mean, as I say, it was nearly always completely deserted, there was very few people in the resort, erm, you know, you only rarely saw, you know, occasionally people move about on the street and that was mostly during the day, erm, everybody else seemed to sort of eat earlier or, erm, used the baby sitting or whatever service, there were a few people about between and there wasn't really much of a thoroughfare for, erm, for traffic, so nothing that stuck out'.
4078 'In know specifically one of the Portuguese questions was, did you hear footsteps or car doors opening and shutting''
Reply 'No (inaudible)'.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm
-
4078 'Okay. We will move back then from that check. I am sure you would have already mentioned, but did you see anybody''
Reply 'No'.
00.45.51 4078 'Hear any cars''
Reply 'No. No, I mean, as I say, it was nearly always completely deserted, there was very few people in the resort, erm, you know, you only rarely saw, you know, occasionally people move about on the street and that was mostly during the day, erm, everybody else seemed to sort of eat earlier or, erm, used the baby sitting or whatever service, there were a few people about between and there wasn't really much of a thoroughfare for, erm, for traffic, so nothing that stuck out'.
4078 'In know specifically one of the Portuguese questions was, did you hear footsteps or car doors opening and shutting''
Reply 'No (inaudible)'.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm
We already know what Matthew Okdfield said in his witness statements. What we do not know is what others who, like Mr and Mrs Moyes, Dr Totman et al who were there at the time and who might have seen something of interest which might have been picked up on by competent investigators don't appear to have featured at all for consideration.
Too busy choosing perhaps the next damaging leak to the press about their undeclared and unsuspecting prime suspects to bother seeking out possible witnesses ??
I would be very surprised if the initial Scotland Yard scoping exercises didn't pick up on that and rectify the situation much as they did with those whose names they had and those who came forward after the Crimewatch programme for example, those who had been assaulted in their beds by an intruder as children.
-
We already know what Matthew Okdfield said in his witness statements. What we do not know is what others who, like Mr and Mrs Moyes, Dr Totman et al who were there at the time and who might have seen something of interest which might have been picked up on by competent investigators don't appear to have featured at all for consideration.
Too busy choosing perhaps the next damaging leak to the press about their undeclared and unsuspecting prime suspects to bother seeking out possible witnesses ??
I would be very surprised if the initial Scotland Yard scoping exercises didn't pick up on that and rectify the situation much as they did with those whose names they had and those who came forward after the Crimewatch programme for example, those who had been assaulted in their beds by an intruder as children.
Perhaps if Luz is such an obvious hell-hole, the McCanns could have exercised an iota of brain power, and visited somewhere else, in fact anywhere else.
But it appears that in this crime infested epicentre, the McCanns were too thick to take any of numerous simple precautions, such as eating in, locking their door, hiring a nanny, taking their kids to a family friendly restaurant, using the nearby night creche.
Must be someone else's fault.
Anyone else's fault.
-
Perhaps if Luz is such an obvious hell-hole, the McCanns could have exercised an iota of brain power, and visited somewhere else, in fact anywhere else.
But it appears that in this crime infested epicentre, the McCanns were too thick to take any of numerous simple precautions, such as eating in, locking their door, hiring a nanny, taking their kids to a family friendly restaurant, using the nearby night creche.
Must be someone else's fault.
Anyone else's fault.
Sometimes you don’t realise what a hellhole a place is until you get there.
-
Sometimes you don’t realise what a hellhole a place is until you get there.
And even when they got here K&G were still too thick to work it out and take simple precautions?
"the McCanns were too thick to take any of numerous simple precautions, such as eating in, locking their door, hiring a nanny, taking their kids to a family friendly restaurant, using the nearby night creche."
Verily, Verti, you've depicted the McCanns as two utter donkeys!
&%%6
-
Sometimes you don’t realise what a hellhole a place is until you get there.
Well they stayed there long enough - until it suited them to leave that is
-
And even when they got here K&G were still too thick to work it out and take simple precautions?
"the McCanns were too thick to take any of numerous simple precautions, such as eating in, locking their door, hiring a nanny, taking their kids to a family friendly restaurant, using the nearby night creche."
Verily, Verti, you've depicted the McCanns as two utter donkeys!
&%%6
Ive followed the case from day one....and I remember an article where the mccanns told how safe they thought luz was...like an english 1950s seaside town. The mcCanns certainly arent thick. ...you sound very angry..has something upset you today
-
Ive followed the case from day one....and I remember an article where the mccanns told how safe they thought luz was...like an english 1950s seaside town. The mcCanns certainly arent thick. ...you sound very angry..has something upset you today
Read the thread.
Bleedin' obvious.
-
And even when they got here K&G were still too thick to work it out and take simple precautions?
"the McCanns were too thick to take any of numerous simple precautions, such as eating in, locking their door, hiring a nanny, taking their kids to a family friendly restaurant, using the nearby night creche."
Verily, Verti, you've depicted the McCanns as two utter donkeys!
&%%6
I think you’ll find that it’s you who are doing that and are bizarrely twisting reality to make out that my comment said what you think. Kindly stop your mendacious nonsense.
-
I think you’ll find that it’s you who are doing that and are bizarrely twisting reality to make out that my comment said what you think. Kindly stop your mendacious nonsense.
The thread is clear, so readers can decide who is the liar.
You're no Clarence, so stop pretending. No kindly about it.
Laughable. (&^&
-
The thread is clear, so readers can decide who is the liar.
You're no Clarence, so stop pretending. No kindly about it.
Laughable. (&^&
Yes you are.
-
We already know what Matthew Okdfield said in his witness statements. What we do not know is what others who, like Mr and Mrs Moyes, Dr Totman et al who were there at the time and who might have seen something of interest which might have been picked up on by competent investigators don't appear to have featured at all for consideration.
Too busy choosing perhaps the next damaging leak to the press about their undeclared and unsuspecting prime suspects to bother seeking out possible witnesses ??
I would be very surprised if the initial Scotland Yard scoping exercises didn't pick up on that and rectify the situation much as they did with those whose names they had and those who came forward after the Crimewatch programme for example, those who had been assaulted in their beds by an intruder as children.
Matt did all the checks that week (Rachael did none) so he should have a good idea about it. He said it was deserted at night and that is backed up by the lack of witnesses seeing Smithman that night.
-
[/b]
kate and Gerry left the flat for the restaurant at about 8.30pm.
The final check by Kate was at about 10pm when she found Madeleine missing
That is only 1 hour 30 minutes, with the first being by Gerry half an hour after leaving the flat for their meal.
Visual checks:
- 1st check was by Gerry at about 9pm
- 2nd check was by Matt at about 9.30pm (visual for the twins, but not visual for Madeleine ... she was, or should have been, on the bed out of sight around the corner)
- 3rd and final visual check was by Kate at about 10pm.
Madeleine had gone.
THese checks started half an hour after The Mccanns left the flat and were spaced half an hour apart
There was only time for 3 half-hourly checks!
So what do you mean by your comment about "wonder how far apart the previous checking was.
What is also often forgotten is ... that there was an additional 'ear to window' hearing check (aka Butlins hearing checks) by Matt . This was just before Gerrys visual check.
So there were actually 4 checks and they were more frequent than every half hour. Am surprised that so many of you don't remember Matts extra hearing test ... and dont seem to realise that with half hourly check schedule there would only be time for three checks.
Yes we know that. BUT we only have Gerry's word that MBM was in her bed at 9ish.
SO, 8.30> 9.00>9.30 AND 10. Are we bemused they did TWO timelines, and refused a simple reconstruction? it would have been a doddle.
The last known independent sigh of MBM was earlier in the afternoon.
Was here anything out of the ordinary that particular day? well apart from MBM disappearing, it was the only day on that holiday people who never checked on each others kids decided to check and verify the Live Madeleine through out the day and evening- more physical checks in the apartment than normal and... well....she picked that day to disappear.
-
Matt did all the checks that week (Rachael did none) so he should have a good idea about it. He said it was deserted at night and that is backed up by the lack of witnesses seeing Smithman that night.
It is known that quite a few people were around at the time some of whom have given witness statements to that effect ... including persons on foot and persons in vehicles. Then there was the alleged anonymous Irish teenager who seems to have been a chain smoker and I believe there might also have been an alleged anonymous waiter too.
A family of four adults and five children aged - thirteen - twelve - ten - six and four allegedly passed by Smithman ... I think it is more surprising that no-one is on record as remembering a party which included two very young children out and about in the dark and apparently in no great rush to get home.
-
Yes we know that. BUT we only have Gerry's word that MBM was in her bed at 9ish.
SO, 8.30> 9.00>9.30 AND 10. Are we bemused they did TWO timelines, and refused a simple reconstruction? it would have been a doddle.
The last known independent sigh of MBM was earlier in the afternoon.
Was here anything out of the ordinary that particular day? well apart from MBM disappearing, it was the only day on that holiday people who never checked on each others kids decided to check and verify the Live Madeleine through out the day and evening- more physical checks in the apartment than normal and... well....she picked that day to disappear.
Who did two time lines? I am not aware of two timelines by the tapas group. Cite please.
They refused a simple reconstruction? From my memory, at the time a reconstruction was requested by The Mccanns, but refused by Amaral. His grounds were that due to all the media interest, it would be too difficult to do.
Too difficult to do? That seems a weak excuse to me.
-
Who did two time lines? I am not aware of two timelines by the tapas group. Cite please.
They refused a simple reconstruction? From my memory, at the time a reconstruction was requested by The Mccanns, but refused by Amaral. His grounds were that due to all the media interest, it would be too difficult to do.
Too difficult to do? That seems a weak excuse to me.
Three timelines, in fact. Two written on the night by Russell O'Brien on the covers of Madeleine's sticker book and a third typed timeline a few days later.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_3_MAY_07.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2578a.jpg
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2579a.jpg
Do you have a cite for the McCanns asking for a reconstruction?
-
Three timelines, in fact. Two written on the night by Russell O'Brien on the covers of Madeleine's sticker book and a third typed timeline a few days later.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_3_MAY_07.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2578a.jpg
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2579a.jpg
Do you have a cite for the McCanns asking for a reconstruction?
The Portuguese police were divulging very little to the British police and vetoing many of their suggestions – bringing out specialist dogs, for example, or staging a reconstruction.
_______________________________________________
On Monday 4 June, we recorded an appeal to be screened the following evening on Crimewatch ... ... ...
Frustratingly, Crimewatch was not allowed to film a reconstruction of the abduction. This was something we had wanted from the beginning, in the hope that it would encourage potential witnesses to come forward.
madeleine ... Kate McCann
-
The Portuguese police were divulging very little to the British police and vetoing many of their suggestions – bringing out specialist dogs, for example, or staging a reconstruction.
_______________________________________________
On Monday 4 June, we recorded an appeal to be screened the following evening on Crimewatch ... ... ...
Frustratingly, Crimewatch was not allowed to film a reconstruction of the abduction. This was something we had wanted from the beginning, in the hope that it would encourage potential witnesses to come forward.
madeleine ... Kate McCann
[/quote
Easy to say when it was way too late.
Is there any proof the mcns asked for a reconstruction - apart from her book
-
The Portuguese police were divulging very little to the British police and vetoing many of their suggestions – bringing out specialist dogs, for example, or staging a reconstruction.
_______________________________________________
On Monday 4 June, we recorded an appeal to be screened the following evening on Crimewatch ... ... ...
Frustratingly, Crimewatch was not allowed to film a reconstruction of the abduction. This was something we had wanted from the beginning, in the hope that it would encourage potential witnesses to come forward.
madeleine ... Kate McCann
The 'reconstruction' filmed by Crimewatch in 2013 was not filmed using the Tapas bar or apartment 5A. I can see no reason why they couldn't have filmed a similar one in 2007.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ8jmdWlB8Y
-
The Portuguese police were divulging very little to the British police and vetoing many of their suggestions – bringing out specialist dogs, for example, or staging a reconstruction.
_______________________________________________
On Monday 4 June, we recorded an appeal to be screened the following evening on Crimewatch ... ... ...
Frustratingly, Crimewatch was not allowed to film a reconstruction of the abduction. This was something we had wanted from the beginning, in the hope that it would encourage potential witnesses to come forward.
madeleine ... Kate McCann
Well they'd have a job doing that, considering.
-
Even the 2013 Crimewatch didn't actually reconstruct 'the abduction'.
-
Even the 2013 Crimewatch didn't actually reconstruct 'the abduction'.
All they did was tell the McCann's version of events in a different location. 'The abduction' amounted to nothing more than the Tanner sighting.
-
The 'reconstruction' filmed by Crimewatch in 2013 was not filmed using the Tapas bar or apartment 5A. I can see no reason why they couldn't have filmed a similar one in 2007.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ8jmdWlB8Y
The crucial phrase is " ... was not allowed ..."
Quite obviously in 2013 the secrecy law was not in force ... in 2007 it was and it was enforced in some areas even if breaches such as leaks to the press appear to have been tolerated in others.
Snip
... but we were told that this was not possible in either Portugal or Britain because of the judicial secrecy law. We were able to show a pair of pyjamas like Madeleine’s on the programme, which was particularly important since
at the time it had been incorrectly stated in some press reports that her pyjamas were white.
... madeleine ... Kate McCann
-
The crucial phrase is " ... was not allowed ..."
Quite obviously in 2013 the secrecy law was not in force ... in 2007 it was and it was enforced in some areas even if breaches such as leaks to the press appear to have been tolerated in others.
Snip
... but we were told that this was not possible in either Portugal or Britain because of the judicial secrecy law. We were able to show a pair of pyjamas like Madeleine’s on the programme, which was particularly important since
at the time it had been incorrectly stated in some press reports that her pyjamas were white.
... madeleine ... Kate McCann
It's ok, Crimewatch showed them white long sleeve pyjamas Kate was at pains to say Maddie wasn't wearing.
-
Strange how one book a personal account of how the investigation went up to a point and having had its subject examined and been through a court is regarded a crock shite whilst the other another personal account not having seen any inside of a court is seen as the real deal.
-
With all those people about it's far more likely Maddie could be spirited away quickly rather than her being able to wander around on her own unnoticed
I also believe Maddie spirited away.
-
Strange how one book a personal account of how the investigation went up to a point and having had its subject examined and been through a court is regarded a crock shite whilst the other another personal account not having seen any inside of a court is seen as the real deal.
I wonder why you are posting an opinion piece which really has nothing to do with the topic of the thread but is all about you venting your spleen on the McCann family about something entirely different.
One book contained untruths and defamation which were challenged in court and the final result on that is yet to be delivered.
The other told no lies and therefore despite its author being English and resident in England and the book being published in England where libel and defamation laws are taken seriously ... Kate's book 'madeleine' has never been challenged in court.
There exist no grounds to raise a court action since there was no lying or defamation to merit it ... as I am sure was well checked out when it was published.
In my opinion ... nothing at all strange about it when it is given proper consideration since no law was broken.
Which is not the case when the law was broken when a confidential witness statement was leaked to the Spanish media and nothing appears to have been done about it.
-
The crucial phrase is " ... was not allowed ..."
Quite obviously in 2013 the secrecy law was not in force ... in 2007 it was and it was enforced in some areas even if breaches such as leaks to the press appear to have been tolerated in others.
Snip
... but we were told that this was not possible in either Portugal or Britain because of the judicial secrecy law. We were able to show a pair of pyjamas like Madeleine’s on the programme, which was particularly important since
at the time it had been incorrectly stated in some press reports that her pyjamas were white.
... madeleine ... Kate McCann
Britain is not in Portugal's jurisdiction. British police must have forbidden a televised reconstruction then.
-
I wonder why you are posting an opinion piece which really has nothing to do with the topic of the thread but is all about you venting your spleen on the McCann family about something entirely different.
One book contained untruths and defamation which were challenged in court and the final result on that is yet to be delivered.
The other told no lies and therefore despite its author being English and resident in England and the book being published in England where libel and defamation laws are taken seriously ... Kate's book 'madeleine' has never been challenged in court.
There exist no grounds to raise a court action since there was no lying or defamation to merit it ... as I am sure was well checked out when it was published.
In my opinion ... nothing at all strange about it when it is given proper consideration since no law was broken.
Which is not the case when the law was broken when a confidential witness statement was leaked to the Spanish media and nothing appears to have been done about it.
The Truth of the Lie went to the highest court in Portugal and wasn't found to contain lies or defamation. Anyone thinking it's going to be retried is deluding themselves.
-
The Truth of the Lie went to the highest court in Portugal and wasn't found to contain lies or defamation. Anyone thinking it's going to be retried is deluding themselves.
Do you have a link please?
-
Do you have a link please?
I also would like to see that.
-
Britain is not in Portugal's jurisdiction. British police must have forbidden a televised reconstruction then.
How on earth do you make that out?
Madeleine's case was totally within Portuguese jurisdiction. The Crimewatch appeal was filmed in Portugal. So whatever was done had to be in compliance with Portuguese law.
What legal power do you think the British police exercised to forbid a televised reconstruction. None that I can think of.
-
How on earth do you make that out?
Madeleine's case was totally within Portuguese jurisdiction. The Crimewatch appeal was filmed in Portugal. So whatever was done had to be in compliance with Portuguese law.
What legal power do you think the British police exercised to forbid a televised reconstruction. None that I can think of.
Look at the 2013 'reconstruction'. The group were not filmed at the Tapas restaurant, it was somewhere else. 5A wasn't used either and the only street scene wasn't filmed in PdL. It could have been filmed anywhere.
-
Do you have a link please?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.0
-
The Truth of the Lie went to the highest court in Portugal and wasn't found to contain lies or defamation. Anyone thinking it's going to be retried is deluding themselves.
The court never ruled on defamation or on whether the book contained lies... You've failed to provide a cite to support your claim which suggests the only one deluded is yourself
-
Look at the 2013 'reconstruction'. The group were not filmed at the Tapas restaurant, it was somewhere else. 5A wasn't used either and the only street scene wasn't filmed in PdL. It could have been filmed anywhere.
In 2007 Madeleine's case was open and subject to Judicial secrecy law in Portugal.
In 2013 Madeleine's case remained inactive in Portugal the decision having been taken in 2008 to archive her case and no longer was subject to Judicial secrecy law.
Two absolutely different sets of circumstances.
As a 'recognised expert' in all of this why do you persist in posting elementary and in my opinion, misleading errors?
-
In 2007 Madeleine's case was open and subject to Judicial secrecy law in Portugal.
In 2013 Madeleine's case remained inactive in Portugal the decision having been taken in 2008 to archive her case and no longer was subject to Judicial secrecy law.
Two absolutely different sets of circumstances.
As a 'recognised expert' in all of this why do you persist in posting elementary and in my opinion, misleading errors?
So why didn't Crimewatch film the correct locations in 2013?
-
So why didn't Crimewatch film the correct locations in 2013?
Would the ocean club give permission
-
So why didn't Crimewatch film the correct locations in 2013?
Maybe the BBC might be able to answer your query ... as far as I am concerned the Crimewatch programme did what it was required to do in publicising the fact that the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance was open for business and looking for information from anyone who had anything of interest to impart.
What a shame it is that back in 2007 the Judicial Police didn't place the same value on getting information from those who had been in Luz at the time and who might have had valuable information to share with them.
-
Maybe the BBC might be able to answer your query ... as far as I am concerned the Crimewatch programme did what it was required to do in publicising the fact that the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance was open for business and looking for information from anyone who had anything of interest to impart.
What a shame it is that back in 2007 the Judicial Police didn't place the same value on getting information from those who had been in Luz at the time and who might have had valuable information to share with them.
It is a shame, notwithstanding the 1000 doors knocked on during the first week. The whole abduction nonsense could've been put to bed right there and then. Opportunity missed.
-
It is a shame, notwithstanding the 1000 doors knocked on during the first week. The whole abduction nonsense could've been put to bed right there and then. Opportunity missed.
1000s of doors ...did they knock on Mrs Fenns in the apt. above.....seems not
-
The 'reconstruction' filmed by Crimewatch in 2013 was not filmed using the Tapas bar or apartment 5A. I can see no reason why they couldn't have filmed a similar one in 2007.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ8jmdWlB8Y
Especially if they were doing it to jog memories- not shown in Portugal? why would that be then?
Totally misled the public with that trick.
-
1000s of doors ...did they knock on Mrs Fenns in the apt. above.....seems not
Prove it.
-
Prove it.
Laughable... Prove they knocked on 1000s of doors... Who cares... The mccanns are no longer suspects... They are not being investigated by either investigation... It's just a few armchair detectives on the net who don't understand the evidence who think they're still on the radar... Last bit opinion... Rest is fact
-
Laughable... Prove they knocked on 1000s of doors... Who cares... The mccanns are no longer suspects... They are not being investigated by either investigation... It's just a few armchair detectives on the net who don't understand the evidence who think they're still on the radar... Last bit opinion... Rest is fact
You do not know if the McCanns are suspects or not- nothing recent has been released. If they were they wouldn't tell us anyway.
-
You do not know if the McCanns are suspects or not- nothing recent has been released. If they were they wouldn't tell us anyway.
I do know... It's absolutely obvious to all except to the blinkered ones in denial
-
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.0
just highlight the bit where it says the book was truthful and contained no defamation, ta.
-
just highlight the bit where it says the book was truthful and contained no defamation, ta.
or even copyand paste...of course gunit wont because shes posted absolute rubbish
-
The Truth of the Lie went to the highest court in Portugal and wasn't found to contain lies or defamation. Anyone thinking it's going to be retried is deluding themselves.
If the book wasn't defamatory, why did the SC judges need to contemplate the balance between ECHR Articles 8 & 10?
-
If the book wasn't defamatory, why did the SC judges need to contemplate the balance between ECHR Articles 8 & 10?
precisely...gunit seems not to understand the SC judgement
-
just highlight the bit where it says the book was truthful and contained no defamation, ta.
They sued for compensation for damages, not defamation, because they knew they weren't defamed.
-
They sued for compensation for damages, not defamation, because they knew they weren't defamed.
Have you read and understood the judgement... Obviously not. Damages in part for defamation..
Why did the SC refer, to the balance of right to a good name and free speech
Page 02
In order to conclude with the unlawfulness of those behaviours, were considered the respective contents of the book, documentary and interview, and the conflict between freedom of speech and right to good name and reputation of the plaintiffs.
You show a complete lack of knowledge and understanding of the court case
-
They sued for compensation for damages, not defamation, because they knew they weren't defamed.
Can we have the cite now please.
-
Can we have the cite now please.
When I get a cite saying that the book contained 'lies and defamation'. That is opinion, not fact.
-
When I get a cite saying that the book contained 'lies and defamation'. That is opinion, not fact.
No, that’s not how this works. You claimed the court explicitly stated the book contained no lies or defamation, now you prove it.
-
No, that’s not how this works. You claimed the court explicitly stated the book contained no lies or defamation, now you prove it.
You seem to think you're in charge of something. You're not.
-
You seem to think you're in charge of something. You're not.
That's your task.
Is it not?
IMO of course.
-
That's your task.
Is it not?
IMO of course.
You think? @)(++(*
-
You think? @)(++(*
Yes.
I do.
8)--))
-
From page 44 of the original judgement in 2015....http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0
The book conveys the idea that the truth of the investigation is merely formal, while the truth of the author (that would have been met at the end of the line of inquiry that had been followed up to his removal from the case) is the material truth - This book still has a purpose greater. The contribute to the discovery of material truth and the realisation of justice ( ... ) (No. 23) .
There is no doubt that is the proper defendant who calls his condition of former coordinator of the criminal investigation and that through this statute the book, the interview and the documentary distinguish themselves - by qualifying – from the opinion of television commentators, writers or other who gloss about the subject.
But, at least in our view, that same status cannot but mark the limits of the defendant's freedom of expression when compared to the one detained by others. Having been in charge of that investigation as a member of the Judicial Police, the defendant Goncalo Amaral, although retired on 1st July 2008, did not enjoy, on the following July 24, in respect of the results of the criminal investigation released on the 21st of the same month and year, a large and full freedom of expression. This freedom was conditioned by the functions he had, functions that imposed him special duties that traverse the status of retirement, including the duty of reserve.
In this concrete situation, despite the personal reasons that the defendant invokes in the introductory note of the book, the freedom of expression should cede through the imperative of that reserve. It was not what happened and the truth is that on 24 July 2008, barely three days after the release of the the dispatch shelving the investigation for lack of proof, the book was launched, sold with the newspaper's edition and the interview was published.
The time-line displays well the intention to call for the contradictory, in the public domain, the shelving of the investigation, comparing it with the thesis of the previous line of investigation, told as the true one by a person who had been responsible for the same investigation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
You seem to think you're in charge of something. You're not.
I was simply reminding you of the rules of the forum, it’s not as if you have never done the same, being such a stickler for forum protocol.
-
Laughable... Prove they knocked on 1000s of doors... Who cares... The mccanns are no longer suspects... They are not being investigated by either investigation... It's just a few armchair detectives on the net who don't understand the evidence who think they're still on the radar... Last bit opinion... Rest is fact
You didn't prove your assertion that the PJ neglected to knock on dear old Pam's (RIP) door.
-
You didn't prove your assertion that the PJ neglected to knock on dear old Pam's (RIP) door.
Read the post, again.... I didn't state a, fact.. I asked a question
-
Read the post, again.... I didn't state a, fact.. I asked a question
So you admit then that it's just as likely that they did? Why mention it then?
Just show the proof to back your assertion and we'll move on. I can help if you're struggling......waving or drowning?
-
So you admit then that it's just as likely that they did? Why mention it then?
Just show the proof to back your assertion and we'll move on. I can help if you're struggling......waving or drowning?
What we know as a fact is that she did not give her statement till some months later which suggests to me they didnt
-
The Truth of the Lie went to the highest court in Portugal and wasn't found to contain lies or defamation. Anyone thinking it's going to be retried is deluding themselves.
you have stated a fact and not provided a cite....thats because you claim is total rubbish. Nowhere in the judgement does it say the book contained no lies or defamation. Please dont claim your posts are accurate and based on evidence...they are not
-
What we know as a fact is that she did not give her statement till some months later which suggests to me they didnt
Anyway, moving on........
The Sardine Munching imbeciles conducted 1000's of diligences right down to speaking to the rat catcher, but neglected to talk to Pam upstairs.
However, Leicestershire Police spoke to C A Tramner Fenn on May 8th. Verified fact. Did they talk about the football, or the fact that SHE WAS SAT UPSTAIRS WITH AUNTIE PAM?
The only mystery here is that LP didn't bother to tell the PJ that they'd interviewed Carole.
-
From page 44 of the original judgement in 2015....http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0
The book conveys the idea that the truth of the investigation is merely formal, while the truth of the author (that would have been met at the end of the line of inquiry that had been followed up to his removal from the case) is the material truth - This book still has a purpose greater. The contribute to the discovery of material truth and the realisation of justice ( ... ) (No. 23) .
There is no doubt that is the proper defendant who calls his condition of former coordinator of the criminal investigation and that through this statute the book, the interview and the documentary distinguish themselves - by qualifying – from the opinion of television commentators, writers or other who gloss about the subject.
But, at least in our view, that same status cannot but mark the limits of the defendant's freedom of expression when compared to the one detained by others. Having been in charge of that investigation as a member of the Judicial Police, the defendant Goncalo Amaral, although retired on 1st July 2008, did not enjoy, on the following July 24, in respect of the results of the criminal investigation released on the 21st of the same month and year, a large and full freedom of expression. This freedom was conditioned by the functions he had, functions that imposed him special duties that traverse the status of retirement, including the duty of reserve.
In this concrete situation, despite the personal reasons that the defendant invokes in the introductory note of the book, the freedom of expression should cede through the imperative of that reserve. It was not what happened and the truth is that on 24 July 2008, barely three days after the release of the the dispatch shelving the investigation for lack of proof, the book was launched, sold with the newspaper's edition and the interview was published.
The time-line displays well the intention to call for the contradictory, in the public domain, the shelving of the investigation, comparing it with the thesis of the previous line of investigation, told as the true one by a person who had been responsible for the same investigation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah yes. The first judge's claim that Amaral's freedom of expression was limited by his employment, even in retirement. The Appeal Court dismissed her argument;
In effect, and independently of the reasons invoked by the appellant for the publication, it is hardly understandable that an employee, even more a retired one, would have to keep said duties of secrecy and reserve, thus being limited in the exercise of his right to an opinion, concerning the interpretation of facts that were already made public by the judiciary authority, and widely debated (in fact, largely by initiative of the intervenients themselves) in the national and international media.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7153.0
-
Ah yes. The first judge's claim that Amaral's freedom of expression was limited by his employment, even in retirement. The Appeal Court dismissed her argument;
In effect, and independently of the reasons invoked by the appellant for the publication, it is hardly understandable that an employee, even more a retired one, would have to keep said duties of secrecy and reserve, thus being limited in the exercise of his right to an opinion, concerning the interpretation of facts that were already made public by the judiciary authority, and widely debated (in fact, largely by initiative of the intervenients themselves) in the national and international media.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7153.0
Hear, hear.
-
Ah yes. The first judge's claim that Amaral's freedom of expression was limited by his employment, even in retirement. The Appeal Court dismissed her argument;
In effect, and independently of the reasons invoked by the appellant for the publication, it is hardly understandable that an employee, even more a retired one, would have to keep said duties of secrecy and reserve, thus being limited in the exercise of his right to an opinion, concerning the interpretation of facts that were already made public by the judiciary authority, and widely debated (in fact, largely by initiative of the intervenients themselves) in the national and international media.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7153.0
and the cite from the judge confirming no lies or defamation in the book?
-
and the cite from the judge confirming no lies or defamation in the book?
there was a time when those posting opinion as fact without a cite would have the post removed. Gunits claim re lies and defanmation being rebufffed in the SC judgement is a total untruth. in the present climate her post has been allowed to stand but IMO...it speaks volumes re her credibility.
-
and the cite from the judge confirming no lies or defamation in the book?
It was never claimed in court that there were lies or defamation in the book so no judge needed to consider those matters. It was decided that Amaral broke no laws and was just as entitled to express his opinion as the claimants were.
-
It was never claimed in court that there were lies or defamation in the book so no judge needed to consider those matters. It was decided that Amaral broke no laws and was just as entitled to express his opinion as the claimants were.
you claimed..
The Truth of the Lie went to the highest court in Portugal and wasn't found to contain lies or defamation. Anyone thinking it's going to be retried is deluding themselves.
you are now claiming that the judge didnt consider lies or defamation yet your initial claim was the judge found no lies ir defamation....you are contradicting yourself.
you are also deluded if you think the trial was not at least in part a libel trial...what do you thing damage to reputation is if its not defamation
-
Members are reminded to engage in the debate and refrain from name calling.
Admin
-
When I get a cite saying that the book contained 'lies and defamation'. That is opinion, not fact.
You introduced the word lies.
in his book amarla claims eddie found a body under a slab of concrete in Jersey...not true. Amaral aso claimed the dogs help solve 200 cases...not true. So was amaral lying or was he just poorly informed and didnt bother to check his facts...is he therefore a national disgrace as you described the telegraph.
as regards defamation. in the documentaery amaral said in the next 50 mims he would prove maddie died in the apartment and her death was covered up...what is that if its not defamatory
-
in the documentaery amaral said in the next 50 mims he would prove maddie died in the apartment and her death was covered up...what is that if its not defamatory
Shut up. There's people who state they've discovered Bigfoot every day.
You can claim whatever the heck you like within the bounds of local libel laws if someone's willing to pay for it be produced. So what?
-
Members are reminded to engage in the debate and refrain from name calling.
Admin
Just go to the root cause with a DM. No need to warn all us law abiding members.
-
Shut up. There's people who state they've discovered Bigfoot every day.
You can claim whatever the heck you like within the bounds of local libel laws if someone's willing to pay for it be produced. So what?
I don't think you can compare someone claiming they discovered Bigfoot, something that has not been proven to exist, with Madeleine who definitely existed.
Amaral said he could prove Madeleine died in 5a, he couldn't prove that at all.
-
I don't think you can compare someone claiming they discovered Bigfoot, something that has not been proven to exist, with Madeleine who definitely existed.
Amaral said he could prove Madeleine died in 5a, he couldn't prove that at all.
Not the point. He has a right to say aliens beamed her up and he can prove it. Two very separate concepts.
-
Not the point. He has a right to say aliens beamed her up and he can prove it. Two very separate concepts.
So, if someone says they can prove that Bigfoot exists, is this person libelling anyone by saying this no.
If someone says I can prove Madeleine died in 5a, is this person libelling anyone? Yes, as the McCann's say Madeleine was abducted. Amaral is saying they are lying.
If someone says Aliens took Madeleine although sounding like a lunatic is this person libelling anyone, no as the McCann's say Madeleine was abducted.
You can't compare someone saying Bigfoot exists with Madeleine died in 5a.
-
So, if someone says they can prove that Bigfoot exists, is this person libelling anyone by saying this no.
If someone says I can prove Madeleine died in 5a, is this person libelling anyone? Yes, as the McCann's say Madeleine was abducted. Amaral is saying they are lying.
If someone says Aliens took Madeleine although sounding like a lunatic is this person libelling anyone, no as the McCann's say Madeleine was abducted.
You can't compare someone saying Bigfoot exists with Madeleine died in 5a.
Mistaken, rather than lying - IMO
-
there was a time when those posting opinion as fact without a cite would have the post removed. Gunits claim re lies and defanmation being rebufffed in the SC judgement is a total untruth. in the present climate her post has been allowed to stand but IMO...it speaks volumes re her credibility.
Not everyone has opinions posted as fact removed;
snip/
One book contained untruths and defamation which were challenged in court and the final result on that is yet to be delivered.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11196.msg571851#msg571851
-
Mistaken, rather than lying - IMO
No lying IMO
-
So, if someone says they can prove that Bigfoot exists, is this person libelling anyone by saying this no.
If someone says I can prove Madeleine died in 5a, is this person libelling anyone? Yes, as the McCann's say Madeleine was abducted. Amaral is saying they are lying.
If someone says Aliens took Madeleine although sounding like a lunatic is this person libelling anyone, no as the McCann's say Madeleine was abducted.
You can't compare someone saying Bigfoot exists with Madeleine died in 5a.
No he's not. He's saying that he thinks differently.
And I can. I just did. I can say what I like, within the bounds of legality and, in this instance, forum rules.
Davros can continually insist that everyone talks 'rubbish', or 'nonsense'. That's not nice, but he can say that if he likes in real life, if he had the minerals, but alas it's against forum rules. There's a distinction to be drawn.
Free speech must be defended.
-
Not everyone has opinions posted as fact removed;
snip/
One book contained untruths and defamation which were challenged in court and the final result on that is yet to be delivered.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11196.msg571851#msg571851
Kate said this in court...sounds like a challege to me...
She gives as an example the fact that the book accuses her and her husband of being
somehow involved and of faking an abduction. The book smears her and her husband throughout.
-
Shut up. There's people who state they've discovered Bigfoot every day.
You can claim whatever the heck you like within the bounds of local libel laws if someone's willing to pay for it be produced. So what?
The local libel laws in portugal are governed by their commitment to the EU declaration of human rights
-
The local libel laws in portugal are governed by their commitment to the EU declaration of human rights
Thank you. Not for reiterating the information that everyone already knows, but for managing to not start or finish the sentence with a 'rubbish' or 'nonsense'.
-
Thank you. Not for reiterating the information that everyone already knows, but for managing to not start or finish the sentence with a 'rubbish' or 'nonsense'.
I dont use the word nonsense but it seems unfair to blame me for the fact there is so much rubbish posted on this forum...next
-
I dont use the word nonsense but it seems unfair to blame me for the fact there is so much rubbish posted on this forum...next
Well you do post the lion's share, so I have you right.
-
Kate said this in court...sounds like a challege to me...
She gives as an example the fact that the book accuses her and her husband of being
somehow involved and of faking an abduction. The book smears her and her husband throughout.
If that is your logic D - it also smears others including SY.
Yet strangely enough none of them have took any actions to help the mcns IMO
-
Kate said this in court...sounds like a challege to me...
She gives as an example the fact that the book accuses her and her husband of being
somehow involved and of faking an abduction. The book smears her and her husband throughout.
What has that to do with opinions posted as facts?
-
What has that to do with opinions posted as facts?
its to do with the claims being challenged
-
Well you do post the lion's share, so I have you right.
you have the right to post whatever rubbish you wish
-
its to do with the claims being challenged
Well it had nothing to do with my post.
-
Well it had nothing to do with my post.
Yes it did brietta posted..
One book contained untruths and defamation which were challenged in court and the final result on that is yet to be delivered.
and you seem to think this opinion when its fact
-
If that is your logic D - it also smears others including SY.
Yet strangely enough none of them have took any actions to help the mcns IMO
who hasnt taken any action to help the Mccanns ..
SY have said they beleive maddie was abducted....The PJ said theyre not suspects and theres no evidence against them
-
who hasnt taken any action to help the Mccanns ..
SY have said they beleive maddie was abducted....The PJ said theyre not suspects and theres no evidence against them
SY have said Maddie was abducted, not just that they believe such.
They are just a little reluctant to share their water tight abduction evidence with the public & the PJ, who have said they don't know what happened.
But SY are onto it, mark my words, Maddies abductor will be brought to justice any day now.....
-
SY have said Maddie was abducted, not just that they believe such.
They are just a little reluctant to share their water tight abduction evidence with the public & the PJ, who have said they don't know what happened.
But SY are onto it, mark my words, Maddies abductor will be brought to justice any day now.....
the PJ may not know exctly waht happened to Maddie but theyve made it clear the mccanns arent suspects
-
the PJ may not know exctly waht happened to Maddie but theyve made it clear the mccanns arent suspects
That's yesterdays news.
They could be suspects by now, we'd have no way of knowing.
Neither force have said Robert Murat isn't a suspect.
Maybe he's still on the radar then.
The police haven't said I'm not a suspect either, so maybe I am, or you even.
The entire earths population could be suspects, except the McCanns.
-
who hasnt taken any action to help the Mccanns ..
SY have said they beleive maddie was abducted....The PJ said theyre not suspects and theres no evidence against them
Don't move the goal post D - you were referring to TTOTL.
She gives as an example the fact that the book accuses her and her husband of being
somehow involved and of faking an abduction. The book smears her and her husband throughout.
What I said was it smears others as well including SY - yet no one else has taken any action against GA.
Or - tried to get the book banned
mcns had no back up from anyone mentioned in the book
-
Don't move the goal post D - you were referring to TTOTL.
She gives as an example the fact that the book accuses her and her husband of being
somehow involved and of faking an abduction. The book smears her and her husband throughout.
What I said was it smears others as well including SY - yet no one else has taken any action against GA.
Or - tried to get the book banned
mcns had no back up from anyone mentioned in the book
You are making no sense... Who else does the book smear who might take action.
My opinion is the book was, so libellous the mccanns had a clear cut case but the Portuguese court made another of their bizarre decisions... The ECHR will put Portugal and amaral in his place based on the case law I've seen and posted here
-
That's yesterdays news.
They could be suspects by now, we'd have no way of knowing.
Neither force have said Robert Murat isn't a suspect.
Maybe he's still on the radar then.
The police haven't said I'm not a suspect either, so maybe I am, or you even.
The entire earths population could be suspects, except the McCanns.
The PJ have said the mccanns are not suspects
-
Ah yes. The first judge's claim that Amaral's freedom of expression was limited by his employment, even in retirement. The Appeal Court dismissed her argument;
In effect, and independently of the reasons invoked by the appellant for the publication, it is hardly understandable that an employee, even more a retired one, would have to keep said duties of secrecy and reserve, thus being limited in the exercise of his right to an opinion, concerning the interpretation of facts that were already made public by the judiciary authority, and widely debated (in fact, largely by initiative of the intervenients themselves) in the national and international media.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7153.0
Could you comment on the areas I have highlighted, where the judge appears to be saying that Amaral's opinion is the files do not reflect the material truth but his book does?
-
The PJ have said the mccanns are not suspects
But that doesn't mean they didn't do it.
-
But that doesn't mean they didn't do it.
you need to face up to reality...they didnt
-
you need to face up to reality...they didnt
We can't be certain of that.
Lot's of people who dunnit, weren't suspects at one time or other.
Peter Sutcliffe for example, he was a suspect, then he wasn't, then he was again.
The same thing could be happening with the McCanns.
-
We can't be certain of that.
Lot's of people who dunnit, weren't suspects at one time or other.
Peter Sutcliffe for example, he was a suspect, then he wasn't, then he was again.
The same thing could be happening with the McCanns.
I am certain...its plainly obvious...i doubt you have a clear idea about what the parents dun...do you
-
I am certain...its plainly obvious...
How so?
Have you uncovered some abduction evidence?
If so, I'm sure the PJ would love to see it.
Or maybe you're like Sadie, who has all these pointers which she can't share.
-
How so?
Have you uncovered some abduction evidence?
If so, I'm sure the PJ would love to see it.
Or maybe you're like Sadie, who has all these pointers which she can't share.
what is it you think the parents have dun
-
what is it you think the parents have dun
I'm not allowed to say, but there are plenty of pointers.
-
No he's not. He's saying that he thinks differently.
And I can. I just did. I can say what I like, within the bounds of legality and, in this instance, forum rules.
Davros can continually insist that everyone talks 'rubbish', or 'nonsense'. That's not nice, but he can say that if he likes in real life, if he had the minerals, but alas it's against forum rules. There's a distinction to be drawn.
Free speech must be defended.
He is saying the McCann's are lying and that he can prove it. Why do you think he calls his book 'The Truth of the Lie' ?
-
I'm not allowed to say, but there are plenty of pointers.
and im not allowed to say waht I think about you and your theories ....but there are plenty of pointers
-
I'm not allowed to say, but there are plenty of pointers.
No there are not. Just like in the Lindy Chamberlain case there were lots of “pointers” that turned out to be nothing of the sort, just so in this case (though you probably believe she dunnit too).
-
No there are not. Just like in the Lindy Chamberlain case there were lots of “pointers” that turned out to be nothing of the sort, just so in this case (though you probably believe she dunnit too).
Yes, there are.
-
Yes, there are.
If there were the McCanns should have been reconstituted arguidos as soon as the case was reopened. Why weren’t they?
-
If there were the McCanns should have been reconstituted arguidos as soon as the case was reopened. Why weren’t they?
Why are you asking me?
Isn't that a question for the police?
Ask them.
-
Why are you asking me?
Isn't that a question for the police?
Ask them.
It’s a question of you to enable you to engage your brain and use logic.