UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Redblossom on May 15, 2013, 06:28:49 PM
-
Was employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches? As asserted by the poster mo stache, a question i have asked without reply, or is it a myth
-
Was employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches? As asserted by the poster mo stache, a question i have asked without reply, or is it a myth
The scandal, in its own right scandalous enough, is that Levy got hold of this material.
But I don't think he was actually out there in Praia da Luz, no ....
-
Was employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches? As asserted by the poster mo stache, a question i have asked without reply, or is it a myth
The scandal, in its own right scandalous enough, is that Levy got hold of this material.
But I don't think he was actually out there in Praia da Luz, no ....
The files and videos were available to journalists, Levy, as a journalist, got them as did the Sun and others, whats the problem? Scandal? What scandal? is your problem over an hour and a half was produced by Levy from it as opposed to five mins from the Sun? Awwww, you do protest and exaggerate so much of the time,but thank you for saying Mo Stache was wrong that the police used Levy to film in their investigation
8((()*/
Didnt stop you using the video though for some of YOUR scandalous and libellous remarks
8)--))
-
Levy he's one BIG joke @)(++(*
The files weren't released till August the 4th 2008.
It was him that made all the rubbish up about one of the Tapas group breaking a pact.
The 24 photos
Explosive documents left behind by Justine McGuinness
José Socrates, Ricardo Paiva, Lopes da Mota, Clarence Mitchell, Paulo Rebelo, etc, all his buddies, in his dreams!
Correio da Manhã had already serialised extracts from the diary during July 2008 without comment from the McCanns.
-
Levy he's one BIG joke @)(++(*
The files weren't released till August the 4th 2008.
It was him that made all the rubbish up about one of the Tapas group breaking a pact.
The 24 photos
Explosive documents left behind by Justine McGuinness
José Socrates, Ricardo Paiva, Lopes da Mota, Clarence Mitchell, Paulo Rebelo, etc, all his buddies, in his dreams!
Correio da Manhã had already serialised extracts from the diary during July 2008 without comment from the McCanns.
Is it that hard to stay on topic? For you? or at least comment on the op?
-
Levy he's one BIG joke @)(++(*
The files weren't released till August the 4th 2008.
It was him that made all the rubbish up about one of the Tapas group breaking a pact.
The 24 photos
Explosive documents left behind by Justine McGuinness
José Socrates, Ricardo Paiva, Lopes da Mota, Clarence Mitchell, Paulo Rebelo, etc, all his buddies, in his dreams!
Correio da Manhã had already serialised extracts from the diary during July 2008 without comment from the McCanns.
Is it that hard to stay on topic? For you? or at least comment on the op?
ERM, 8-)(--)
-
Levy he's one BIG joke @)(++(*
The files weren't released till August the 4th 2008.
It was him that made all the rubbish up about one of the Tapas group breaking a pact.
The 24 photos
Explosive documents left behind by Justine McGuinness
José Socrates, Ricardo Paiva, Lopes da Mota, Clarence Mitchell, Paulo Rebelo, etc, all his buddies, in his dreams!
Correio da Manhã had already serialised extracts from the diary during July 2008 without comment from the McCanns.
Is it that hard to stay on topic? For you? or at least comment on the op?
ERM, 8-)(--)
you dont have to scratch your head, you can just give your opinion on the Op question, its simple, the question was not about the journalists life and doings, it was a specific one, shouldn't be that hard to manage now should it?
-
Vile fantasist ties to sell 'dynamite' Madeleine McCann pics
Aug 17 2008 Exclusive by James Millbank
Maddie McCann's parents are "devastated and furious" over a cruel bid to cash in on their anguish.
Grasping Duarte Levy demanded £50,000 for photographs he claims implicate Kate and Gerry in their daughter's disappearance.
The 23-stone Frenchman said the "dynamite" pictures showed Kate had changed clothes suspiciously the night Maddie vanished.
Despicable Levy also made the ludicrous claim that the 24 photos he was peddling cast doubt on what Gerry and one of the couple's Tapas 7 pals told Portuguese police.
Levy, who said he had close links to the cops, bragged outrageously: "These photos are a bombshell and will force the Maddie case to be re-opened."
The People refused his offers to sell the pictures - and told the McCanns' spokesman Clarence Mitchell of Levy's preposterous claims.
Mr Mitchell branded Levy "a con man and fantastist".
He said: "Kate and Gerry are angry and upset that he is seeking to make money out of Madeleine - it is a disgrace.
"They are no longer suspects and he should not be trying to tarnish their reputation. We thank The People for exposing this man."
A People investigator met Levy in a Brussels hotel last week. Levy said: "I will sell the photos to the highest bidder. I got hold of them through my contacts."
Levy - who is in his 40s and claims to have homes in Spain, Belgium and London - said he had sold pictures and stories about Maddie for tens of thousands of pounds.
He said his new photos showed doctors Kate and Gerry, both 40, dining with their friends in Praia da Luz the night Maddie, then three, disappeared 15 months ago.
Levy claimed that Kate and one of the Tapas 7 changed their clothes.
He also alleged: "The photos were taken between about 8.10pm and 10.15pm and they show that the time lines made by Gerry McCann and another Tapas 7 friend are wrong.
They are dynamite." Levy cruelly scorned Kate and Gerry's belief that Maddie is still alive. He said: "I believe she died in that room during an accident and then her body was moved to a flat in the town where it was kept in a freezer."
The claim is categorically denied by the McCanns and police produced no evidence to support the theory. Levy said the pictures were taken by a Spanish tourist whose camera was later stolen.
He claimed a police source tipped him off after officers found the camera, which he then bought legally.
Levy also tried to convince The People that a well-known British legal firm offered him 600,000 euros (£512,800) for the photographs.
Bizarrely, he said he refused because the lawyers would not agree to his demand that the police should have copies of the pictures.
He also offered The People recordings he claimed to have of the McCanns' financial backer, double-glazing tycoon Brian Kennedy, in a private meeting with Portuguese police.
Mr Mitchell last night said he did not know if Kate changed her clothes and added: "If she did, so what?" He said: "It is no big deal that Mr Kennedy met the police.
"He is interested in all - aspects of the investigation. He is a very hands-on person."
A friend of the McCanns, of Rothley, Leics, said last night: "They have nothing to hide. It appears the Portuguese police are using Levy to leak negative material."
'Photos of couple are a bombshell...I will sell for highest offer'
http://www.people.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/tm_method=full&objectID=20701105&siteID=93463-name_page.html
-
So no opinion on the OP just cut and paste hatchet jobs to suit, is the truth uncomfortable to you and unable to face for some reason?
8**8:/:
-
So no opinion on the OP just cut and paste hatchet jobs to suit, is the truth uncomfortable to you and unable to face for some reason?
8**8:/:
This, you mean?
Was [Duarte Levy] employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches?
I don't believe that's right, no.
-
So no opinion on the OP just cut and paste hatchet jobs to suit, is the truth uncomfortable to you and unable to face for some reason?
8**8:/:
This, you mean?
Was [Duarte Levy] employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches?
I don't believe that's right, no.
You already said so, why the need to repeat it
DCI and MO Stache need to accept it is wrong as they are the ones willing to let the misinformation sound true, I am sure they are grateful to you though for answering FOR them
8((()*/
-
The bad procedure I saw in the videos is that Silvia Batista (a witness and OC manager) was inside the apartment when Eddie was searching (you can see her legs). The right procedure would be she giving the apartment key and waiting outside. Heri.
-
So no opinion on the OP just cut and paste hatchet jobs to suit, is the truth uncomfortable to you and unable to face for some reason?
8**8:/:
This, you mean?
Was [Duarte Levy] employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches?
I don't believe that's right, no.
It might not be right, he was employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches. But that didn't stop him selling them to the Sun, newspaper. From memory I believe it was around €100,000 not 100% sure but I seem to remember it was an awful lot of money, he got for them.
So answer me this Redblosssom! How did he get his mitts on them?
-
So no opinion on the OP just cut and paste hatchet jobs to suit, is the truth uncomfortable to you and unable to face for some reason?
8**8:/:
This, you mean?
Was [Duarte Levy] employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches?
I don't believe that's right, no.
It might not be right, he was employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches. But that didn't stop him selling them to the Sun, newspaper. From memory I believe it was around €100,000 not 100% sure but I seem to remember it was an awful lot of money, he got for them.
Ah, yes, the scandal is that he got hold of them.
The worse scandal is that he is tampered with them.
-
The bad procedure I saw in the videos is that Silvia Batista (a witness and OC manager) was inside the apartment when Eddie was searching (you can see her legs). The right procedure would be she giving the apartment key and waiting outside. Heri.
So she or her legs were what? As opposed to the legs of Mr Grime Mr Harrison, two PJ officers and the cameraman? Detrimental to the search by the cadaver and blood dog?
>@@(*&)
-
So no opinion on the OP just cut and paste hatchet jobs to suit, is the truth uncomfortable to you and unable to face for some reason?
8**8:/:
This, you mean?
Was [Duarte Levy] employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches?
I don't believe that's right, no.
It might not be right, he was employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches. But that didn't stop him selling them to the Sun, newspaper. From memory I believe it was around €100,000 not 100% sure but I seem to remember it was an awful lot of money, he got for them.
Ah, yes, the scandal is that he got hold of them.
The worse scandal is that he is tampered with them.
Wonder if the Sun had the tampered one's Ferryman?
-
So no opinion on the OP just cut and paste hatchet jobs to suit, is the truth uncomfortable to you and unable to face for some reason?
8**8:/:
This, you mean?
Was [Duarte Levy] employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches?
I don't believe that's right, no.
It might not be right, he was employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches. But that didn't stop him selling them to the Sun, newspaper. From memory I believe it was around €100,000 not 100% sure but I seem to remember it was an awful lot of money, he got for them.
So answer me this Redblosssom! How did he get his mitts on them?
Why would the Sun pay for anything they could get themselves? And what is all this rubbish about how he got his mitts on them? Journalists were entitlled to the DVD and the dogs video
-
So no opinion on the OP just cut and paste hatchet jobs to suit, is the truth uncomfortable to you and unable to face for some reason?
8**8:/:
This, you mean?
Was [Duarte Levy] employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches?
I don't believe that's right, no.
It might not be right, he was employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches. But that didn't stop him selling them to the Sun, newspaper. From memory I believe it was around €100,000 not 100% sure but I seem to remember it was an awful lot of money, he got for them.
Ah, yes, the scandal is that he got hold of them.
The worse scandal is that he is tampered with them.
Wonder if the Sun had the tampered one's Ferryman?
Tampered ones? the sun released about 5 mins, which bit was evilly tampered with and released by the sun
-
So no opinion on the OP just cut and paste hatchet jobs to suit, is the truth uncomfortable to you and unable to face for some reason?
8**8:/:
This, you mean?
Was [Duarte Levy] employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches?
I don't believe that's right, no.
It might not be right, he was employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches. But that didn't stop him selling them to the Sun, newspaper. From memory I believe it was around €100,000 not 100% sure but I seem to remember it was an awful lot of money, he got for them.
So answer me this Redblosssom! How did he get his mitts on them?
Why would the Sun pay for anything they could get themselves? And what is all this rubbish about how he got his mitts on them? Journalists were entitlled to the DVD and the dogs video
Oh, so all the journo's sold them, did they? The bloody ink was hardly dry when he sold them.
Take a read of the s..m fake.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id71.html
Still Joanna Morais, loved him once, I suppose @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
I suspect not.
It's the ones on Moore's site that have been tampered with, the video of the inspection at the villa in particular.
At one time, that showed Eddie playing with cuddle-cat, sniffing it, tossing it in the air and all the rest.
At one time, the background was blurred so you couldn't see the clothes littered about all over the place.
Then it was edited so as to remove the sequence of Eddie playing with the toy.
Then the abovetopsecret site suggested the whole, apparent, "alert" to the toy might have been fabricated by Grime popping the toy into the cupboard after the alert to explain it away rather than explain it.
And at some point, some bright spark (me, as it happens) pointed out that there needed to be some rationale for the inspection at the gym.
That video simply vanished for several weeks.
Then it returned, with the background crystal clear and the clothes littered about all over the place crystal clear.
There is also a shot of Grime putting something (I thought, the toy, but actually a towel) into the cupboard before the alert.
All very strange ...
-
have you a problem with comprehension dci? Any journalist had access to the police files and videos, why would anyone pay anyone for them when they could get them for free? Streuth
-
Having seen the registered copyright stamp on the dog search video's with Levy's name on it I assumed he was the producer of the video. If I am incorrect, I apologies. I don't know why my honest mistake makes others think it was a deliberate ploy to smear anyone or muddy the waters. It saddens me that people take such great pleasure in others misfortune. Maybe if the Portuguese police were humble enough to also admit their mistakes at an early stage of the investigations, they would have gained more respect.
-
Having seen the registered copyright stamp on the dog search video's with Levy's name on it I assumed he was the producer of the video. If I am incorrect, I apologies. I don't know why my honest mistake makes others think it was a deliberate ploy to smear anyone or muddy the waters. It saddens me that people take such great pleasure in others misfortune. Maybe if the Portuguese police were humble enough to also admit their mistakes at an early stage of the investigations, they would have gained more respect.
Mo, you'd really have to go some to smear Levy, and an honest mistake over a fairly trifling detail comes nowhere close.
Please don't worry ...
-
have you a problem with comprehension dci? Any journalist had access to the police files and videos, why would anyone pay anyone for them when they could get them for free? Streuth
If any journalist had access to the videos (dog search footage) why do all roads lead to Levy when aquiring them? Or can you supply the evidence that the dog search video's were obtained from another named journalist?
I wonder if those who have an original copy of the DVD police file, could verify if the dog search video was released to the journalist as Redblossom says?
-
Having seen the registered copyright stamp on the dog search video's with Levy's name on it I assumed he was the producer of the video. If I am incorrect, I apologies. I don't know why my honest mistake makes others think it was a deliberate ploy to smear anyone or muddy the waters. It saddens me that people take such great pleasure in others misfortune. Maybe if the Portuguese police were humble enough to also admit their mistakes at an early stage of the investigations, they would have gained more respect.
Bad assumption, and assumption to converting into fact and throwing in the bad bad PJ let him do it to boot is not on
the original video is five hours long, Levy published an hour and a half, it was his copyright part
-
Having seen the registered copyright stamp on the dog search video's with Levy's name on it I assumed he was the producer of the video. If I am incorrect, I apologies. I don't know why my honest mistake makes others think it was a deliberate ploy to smear anyone or muddy the waters. It saddens me that people take such great pleasure in others misfortune. Maybe if the Portuguese police were humble enough to also admit their mistakes at an early stage of the investigations, they would have gained more respect.
Bad assumption, and assumption to converting into fact and throwing in the bad bad PJ let him do it to boot is not on
It's important to counter-balance damage done to the search for Madeleine by certain PJ personnel (not all) with damage done by British personnel in the investigation too, Martin Grime in particular.
-
the original video is five hours long, Levy published an hour and a half, it was his copyright part
And in his editing, Levy was careful to leave in the important bits, such as extended video shots of boxes of anti-Parkinsonian medication taken by Kate's terminally ill father to control his Parkinson's disease.
A wonderful man, Duarte Levy ...
-
Having seen the registered copyright stamp on the dog search video's with Levy's name on it I assumed he was the producer of the video. If I am incorrect, I apologies. I don't know why my honest mistake makes others think it was a deliberate ploy to smear anyone or muddy the waters. It saddens me that people take such great pleasure in others misfortune. Maybe if the Portuguese police were humble enough to also admit their mistakes at an early stage of the investigations, they would have gained more respect.
Bad assumption, and assumption to converting into fact and throwing in the bad bad PJ let him do it to boot is not on
the original video is five hours long, Levy published an hour and a half, it was his copyright part
And you have never ever assumed something that might have placed another in a bad light? All the PJ aren't "bad bad" but some of them do have a criminal conviction for being "bad bad" on duty. And not all PJ are "bad bad" but some did while the case was under judicial secrecy (is that what it's called? I forget) give journalists information they were not entitled to. I can't help that a few "bad bad" PJ have ruined the entire image of the Portuguese police.
-
have you a problem with comprehension dci? Any journalist had access to the police files and videos, why would anyone pay anyone for them when they could get them for free? Streuth
If any journalist had access to the videos (dog search footage) why do all roads lead to Levy when aquiring them? Or can you supply the evidence that the dog search video's were obtained from another named journalist?
I wonder if those who have an original copy of the DVD police file, could verify if the dog search video was released to the journalist as Redblossom says?
Do wonder but what a waste of time
-
the original video is five hours long, Levy published an hour and a half, it was his copyright part
And in his editing, Levy was careful to leave in the important bits, such as extended video shots of boxes of anti-Parkinsonian medication taken by Kate's terminally ill father to control his Parkinson's disease.
A wonderful man, Duarte Levy ...
Irrelevant
-
Having seen the registered copyright stamp on the dog search video's with Levy's name on it I assumed he was the producer of the video. If I am incorrect, I apologies. I don't know why my honest mistake makes others think it was a deliberate ploy to smear anyone or muddy the waters. It saddens me that people take such great pleasure in others misfortune. Maybe if the Portuguese police were humble enough to also admit their mistakes at an early stage of the investigations, they would have gained more respect.
Bad assumption, and assumption to converting into fact and throwing in the bad bad PJ let him do it to boot is not on
the original video is five hours long, Levy published an hour and a half, it was his copyright part
I have just realised something. How do you acquire copyright if the material is not your work? Do you not have to prove that the material is 'yours' and that you produced it to claim copyright?
-
Having seen the registered copyright stamp on the dog search video's with Levy's name on it I assumed he was the producer of the video. If I am incorrect, I apologies. I don't know why my honest mistake makes others think it was a deliberate ploy to smear anyone or muddy the waters. It saddens me that people take such great pleasure in others misfortune. Maybe if the Portuguese police were humble enough to also admit their mistakes at an early stage of the investigations, they would have gained more respect.
Bad assumption, and assumption to converting into fact and throwing in the bad bad PJ let him do it to boot is not on
the original video is five hours long, Levy published an hour and a half, it was his copyright part
And you have never ever assumed something that might have placed another in a bad light? All the PJ aren't "bad bad" but some of them do have a criminal conviction for being "bad bad" on duty. And not all PJ are "bad bad" but some did while the case was under judicial secrecy (is that what it's called? I forget) give journalists information they were not entitled to. I can't help that a few "bad bad" PJ have ruined the entire image of the Portuguese police.
Irrelevant also
-
the original video is five hours long, Levy published an hour and a half, it was his copyright part
And in his editing, Levy was careful to leave in the important bits, such as extended video shots of boxes of anti-Parkinsonian medication taken by Kate's terminally ill father to control his Parkinson's disease.
A wonderful man, Duarte Levy ...
Irrelevant
To you, obviously.
I don't think we need labour the point why ...
-
Having seen the registered copyright stamp on the dog search video's with Levy's name on it I assumed he was the producer of the video. If I am incorrect, I apologies. I don't know why my honest mistake makes others think it was a deliberate ploy to smear anyone or muddy the waters. It saddens me that people take such great pleasure in others misfortune. Maybe if the Portuguese police were humble enough to also admit their mistakes at an early stage of the investigations, they would have gained more respect.
Bad assumption, and assumption to converting into fact and throwing in the bad bad PJ let him do it to boot is not on
It's important to counter-balance damage done to the search for Madeleine by certain PJ personnel (not all) with damage done by British personnel in the investigation too, Martin Grime in particular.
Pathetic biased agenda driven lies and irrelevant as usual
-
the original video is five hours long, Levy published an hour and a half, it was his copyright part
And in his editing, Levy was careful to leave in the important bits, such as extended video shots of boxes of anti-Parkinsonian medication taken by Kate's terminally ill father to control his Parkinson's disease.
A wonderful man, Duarte Levy ...
Irrelevant
To you, obviously.
I don't think we need labour the point why ...
Yea because unlike you i dont create lies and fantasies
-
have you a problem with comprehension dci? Any journalist had access to the police files and videos, why would anyone pay anyone for them when they could get them for free? Streuth
If any journalist had access to the videos (dog search footage) why do all roads lead to Levy when acquiring them? Or can you supply the evidence that the dog search video's were obtained from another named journalist?
I wonder if those who have an original copy of the DVD police file, could verify if the dog search video was released to the journalist as Redblossom says?
Do wonder but what a waste of time
I don't think it is a waste of time. It's a valid request to all those reading or posting here who have a copy of the DVD to verify if the dog search video was released in the original material to all journalist or not.
-
have you a problem with comprehension dci? Any journalist had access to the police files and videos, why would anyone pay anyone for them when they could get them for free? Streuth
If any journalist had access to the videos (dog search footage) why do all roads lead to Levy when acquiring them? Or can you supply the evidence that the dog search video's were obtained from another named journalist?
I wonder if those who have an original copy of the DVD police file, could verify if the dog search video was released to the journalist as Redblossom says?
Do wonder but what a waste of time
I don't think it is a waste of time. It's a valid request to all those reading or posting here who have a copy of the DVD to verify if the dog search video was released in the original material to all journalist or not.
Write to the pj, mr levy, mr grime, th sun the mirror, and then let us know hey?
But thank you for admitting yu posted a fallacy as a fact anyway see u later
8((()*/
-
have you a problem with comprehension dci? Any journalist had access to the police files and videos, why would anyone pay anyone for them when they could get them for free? Streuth
If any journalist had access to the videos (dog search footage) why do all roads lead to Levy when acquiring them? Or can you supply the evidence that the dog search video's were obtained from another named journalist?
I wonder if those who have an original copy of the DVD police file, could verify if the dog search video was released to the journalist as Redblossom says?
Do wonder but what a waste of time
I don't think it is a waste of time. It's a valid request to all those reading or posting here who have a copy of the DVD to verify if the dog search video was released in the original material to all journalist or not.
Not on mine, Mo. 8)><( But I will re check tomorrow.
Nor on McCannpjfiles as I can see.
-
have you a problem with comprehension dci? Any journalist had access to the police files and videos, why would anyone pay anyone for them when they could get them for free? Streuth
If any journalist had access to the videos (dog search footage) why do all roads lead to Levy when acquiring them? Or can you supply the evidence that the dog search video's were obtained from another named journalist?
I wonder if those who have an original copy of the DVD police file, could verify if the dog search video was released to the journalist as Redblossom says?
Do wonder but what a waste of time
I don't think it is a waste of time. It's a valid request to all those reading or posting here who have a copy of the DVD to verify if the dog search video was released in the original material to all journalist or not.
Write to the pj, mr levy, mr grime, th sun the mirror, and then let us know hey?
That explains it. Your soul has been removed to make room for your sarcasm.
-
have you a problem with comprehension dci? Any journalist had access to the police files and videos, why would anyone pay anyone for them when they could get them for free? Streuth
If any journalist had access to the videos (dog search footage) why do all roads lead to Levy when acquiring them? Or can you supply the evidence that the dog search video's were obtained from another named journalist?
I wonder if those who have an original copy of the DVD police file, could verify if the dog search video was released to the journalist as Redblossom says?
Do wonder but what a waste of time
I don't think it is a waste of time. It's a valid request to all those reading or posting here who have a copy of the DVD to verify if the dog search video was released in the original material to all journalist or not.
Write to the pj, mr levy, mr grime, th sun the mirror, and then let us know hey?
That explains it. Your soul has been removed to make room for your sarcasm.
Scarily pathetic
-
have you a problem with comprehension dci? Any journalist had access to the police files and videos, why would anyone pay anyone for them when they could get them for free? Streuth
If any journalist had access to the videos (dog search footage) why do all roads lead to Levy when acquiring them? Or can you supply the evidence that the dog search video's were obtained from another named journalist?
I wonder if those who have an original copy of the DVD police file, could verify if the dog search video was released to the journalist as Redblossom says?
Do wonder but what a waste of time
I don't think it is a waste of time. It's a valid request to all those reading or posting here who have a copy of the DVD to verify if the dog search video was released in the original material to all journalist or not.
Not on mine, Mo. 8)><( But I will re check tomorrow.
Nor on McCannpjfiles as I can see.
Thank you.
So IF the dog search video is not in the released files/DVD to journalists then that would explain why money was asked to acquire a copy.
-
Speculation speculation which means nothing after all
-
Levy can copyright a film only if he has made it, otherwise it is false.
What do you expect from a conman
-
Levy can copyright a film only if he has made it, otherwise it is false.
What do you expect from a conman
Rubbish from an ignorant, you can copyright your own work from others, if he made a video from an original he can copyright it as his work
-
Levy can copyright a film only if he has made it, otherwise it is false.
What do you expect from a conman
Rubbish from an ignorant, you can copyright your own work from others, if he made a video from an original he can copyright it as his work
That does surprise me Redblossom - as surely that would be a form of plaguarism?
-
Levy can copyright a film only if he has made it, otherwise it is false.
What do you expect from a conman
Rubbish from an ignorant, you can copyright your own work from others, if he made a video from an original he can copyright it as his work
That does surprise me Redblossom - as surely that would be a form of plaguarism?
Of course it's plagiarism!
-
Levy can copyright a film only if he has made it, otherwise it is false.
What do you expect from a conman
Rubbish from an ignorant, you can copyright your own work from others, if he made a video from an original he can copyright it as his work
That does surprise me Redblossom - as surely that would be a form of plaguarism?
Of course it's plagiarism!
Or theft of intellectual property.
-
So no opinion on the OP just cut and paste hatchet jobs to suit, is the truth uncomfortable to you and unable to face for some reason?
8**8:/:
This, you mean?
Was [Duarte Levy] employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches?
I don't believe that's right, no.
It might not be right, he was employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches. But that didn't stop him selling them to the Sun, newspaper. From memory I believe it was around €100,000 not 100% sure but I seem to remember it was an awful lot of money, he got for them.
So answer me this Redblosssom! How did he get his mitts on them?
Why would the Sun pay for anything they could get themselves? And what is all this rubbish about how he got his mitts on them? Journalists were entitlled to the DVD and the dogs video
Entitled to the DVD, yes. I have my doubts about the videos as they would presumably have been covered by the UK / PT agreement concerning maintaining judicial secrecy on police techiques.
-
Levy can copyright a film only if he has made it, otherwise it is false.
What do you expect from a conman
Rubbish from an ignorant, you can copyright your own work from others, if he made a video from an original he can copyright it as his work
That does surprise me Redblossom - as surely that would be a form of plaguarism?
Of course it's plagiarism!
Or theft of intellectual property.
I find it odd that someone would claim copyright on material and know it will be published on the internet for the world to see, if that person is not the rightful copyright owner and producer of the video footage.
-
have you a problem with comprehension dci? Any journalist had access to the police files and videos, why would anyone pay anyone for them when they could get them for free? Streuth
If any journalist had access to the videos (dog search footage) why do all roads lead to Levy when acquiring them? Or can you supply the evidence that the dog search video's were obtained from another named journalist?
I wonder if those who have an original copy of the DVD police file, could verify if the dog search video was released to the journalist as Redblossom says?
Do wonder but what a waste of time
I don't think it is a waste of time. It's a valid request to all those reading or posting here who have a copy of the DVD to verify if the dog search video was released in the original material to all journalist or not.
Write to the pj, mr levy, mr grime, th sun the mirror, and then let us know hey?
That explains it. Your soul has been removed to make room for your sarcasm.
Should that not read sauce? etc.
-
Levy can copyright a film only if he has made it, otherwise it is false.
What do you expect from a conman
Rubbish from an ignorant, you can copyright your own work from others, if he made a video from an original he can copyright it as his work
That does surprise me Redblossom - as surely that would be a form of plaguarism?
Of course it's plagiarism!
Or theft of intellectual property.
The PT authorities released the files and the video, to journalists, how can that be THEFT or plagiarism steady on, doesnt wash
-
That's fairly simple, the information contained in the files are the property of the Ministerio Publico in Portimao. If you use parts of the files, re-publish the material in your own name & claim copyright, then you have stolen intellectual property belonging to the the above mentioned owner.
-
Levy can copyright a film only if he has made it, otherwise it is false.
What do you expect from a conman
Rubbish from an ignorant, you can copyright your own work from others, if he made a video from an original he can copyright it as his work
That does surprise me Redblossom - as surely that would be a form of plaguarism?
Of course it's plagiarism!
Or theft of intellectual property.
The PT authorities released the files and the video, to journalists, how can that be THEFT or plagiarism steady on, doesnt wash
He was off the case October 2nd 2007, files not released till August 4th 2008. He stole the files, from a Portuguese goverment body, for his own financial gain.
-
That's fairly simple, the information contained in the files are the property of the Ministerio Publico in Portimao. If you use parts of the files, re-publish the material in your own name & claim copyright, then you have stolen intellectual property belonging to the the above mentioned owner.
but he didnt claim copyright only on his precis of the 5 hour video, no one has sued him, no idea and not really bothered, it hardly matters
-
Levy can copyright a film only if he has made it, otherwise it is false.
What do you expect from a conman
Rubbish from an ignorant, you can copyright your own work from others, if he made a video from an original he can copyright it as his work
That does surprise me Redblossom - as surely that would be a form of plaguarism?
Of course it's plagiarism!
Or theft of intellectual property.
The PT authorities released the files and the video, to journalists, how can that be THEFT or plagiarism steady on, doesnt wash
The files were never meant to be splashed over the Internet.
Look at any page, you should see a light "watermark" stating: Public Ministry of Portimão, reproduction is forbidden.
Not that anyone has taken any notice.
-
the point was about whether d levy STOLE the dvd contents, he obviously did not, so theft does not
come into it
-
If he put his own name on it & then claimed copyright, he stole it.
-
The files were never meant to be splashed over the Internet.
Look at any page, you should see a light "watermark" stating: Public Ministry of Portimão, reproduction is forbidden.
Not that anyone has taken any notice.
The Public Ministry didn't anticipate the Internet splashing, or did they ?
Anybody would be allowed to have a DVD if justifying the motives. The restriction is not reproducing the content in an article, for example, but using the indirect style, supposing the meaning is carefully respected.
-
Wonder if Gonc is going to be told to explain this;
http://madeleinemccannthetruth.wordpress.com/2012/02/25/cuddle-cat/
Senior PJ officers were troubled by that back in 2008 -
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic1170.html
If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times'
On one of the films, it's possible to see that 'Eddie' sniffs Madeleine's cuddle cat, more than once, bites it, throws it into the air and only after the toy is hidden does he 'mark' it (page 2099). Whys didn't he signal it when he sniffs it on the first time'
http://.....2.forumotion.co.uk/t3283-john-o-connor-speaking-to-marian-finucane-on-rte-on-sunday
I wonder what this means from mccannfiles.
With this amount of information (interviews, inquests, etc.), we pretended to clarify what had happened on the night of May the 3rd, 2007, in the apartment 5A, of the resort named Praia da Luz Ocean Club, and to find any element that could lead to the identification of the author of the facts.
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic1170.html
-
In response to the OP, if Duarte Levy was employed by the PJ to video the dog searches, then why does he appear to have copyright on the video, and references to his website.
One would rather imagine that the video of such a search as part of a high profile investigation would remain as property of the PJ, and confidential until the files were released.
A further point is that at times during the video, another person videoing is noticeable. Perhaps an official police photographer? Who knows.
-
In response to the OP, if Duarte Levy was employed by the PJ to video the dog searches, then why does he appear to have copyright on the video, and references to his website.
One would rather imagine that the video of such a search as part of a high profile investigation would remain as property of the PJ, and confidential until the files were released.
A further point is that at times during the video, another person videoing is noticeable. Perhaps an official police photographer? Who knows.
Do you have proof it was released by DL before the files were?
-
In response to the OP, if Duarte Levy was employed by the PJ to video the dog searches, then why does he appear to have copyright on the video, and references to his website.
One would rather imagine that the video of such a search as part of a high profile investigation would remain as property of the PJ, and confidential until the files were released.
A further point is that at times during the video, another person videoing is noticeable. Perhaps an official police photographer? Who knows.
Do you have proof it was released by DL before the files were?
If Duarte Levy wasn't employed by the PJ to make the videos, he has no right to lay claim to "copyright" of the videos.
I think that's JP's point ...
-
In response to the OP, if Duarte Levy was employed by the PJ to video the dog searches, then why does he appear to have copyright on the video, and references to his website.
One would rather imagine that the video of such a search as part of a high profile investigation would remain as property of the PJ, and confidential until the files were released.
A further point is that at times during the video, another person videoing is noticeable. Perhaps an official police photographer? Who knows.
Do you have proof it was released by DL before the files were?
If Duarte Levy wasn't employed by the PJ to make the videos, he has no right to lay claim to "copyright" of the videos.
I think that's JP's point ...
But thats not the point, the original debate was borne out of someone stating that DL was used by the PJ to video the dogs deployment, extremely unlikely, they had plenty of their own plods for that,whether he put his name copyrighting sections of the full video is a different matter, all been covered on this thread, JP suggests he released it before the files were released to journalists, Id like to see any proof of that, if none, then its just another myth
-
In response to the OP, if Duarte Levy was employed by the PJ to video the dog searches, then why does he appear to have copyright on the video, and references to his website.
One would rather imagine that the video of such a search as part of a high profile investigation would remain as property of the PJ, and confidential until the files were released.
A further point is that at times during the video, another person videoing is noticeable. Perhaps an official police photographer? Who knows.
Do you have proof it was released by DL before the files were?
If Duarte Levy wasn't employed by the PJ to make the videos, he has no right to lay claim to "copyright" of the videos.
I think that's JP's point ...
But thats not the point, the original debate was borne out of someone stating that DL was used by the PJ to video the dogs deployment, extremely unlikely, they had plenty of their own plods for that,whether he put his name copyrighting sections of the full video is a different matter, all been covered on this thread, JP suggests he released it before the files were released to journalists, Id like to see any proof of that, if none, then its just another myth
JP suggests he released it before the files were released to journalists, Id like to see any proof of that, if none, then its just another myth
You are not following chain of cause and effect.
If Levy lays (legitimate!) claim to copyright, then he must have been out there in PdL, making that video.
If Levy was not out there in PdL, making that video, then Levy's claim to "copyright" is fraudulent ...
-
No FM dont move the goalposts just yet
-
No FM dont move the goalposts just yet
Whose goalposts?
Not JP's
-
One would rather imagine that the video of such a search as part of a high profile investigation would remain as property of the PJ, and confidential until the files were released.
***
JPs suggestion that it was not confidential, ie released by DL, before the files were releases needs to be addressed, no one is bothered much about copyright , Im sure if the Pj were they would have done something about it
-
OOOPS!
Searches of the Ocean Club apartments, 31 July 2007
Search of Vista Mar Villa, 02 August 2007
Examination of clothes collected from the Vista Mar Villa, 02 August 2007
Examination of vehicles including the McCanns' Renault Scenic, 06 August 2007
The Eddie and Keela Extended Videos
Thanks to Duarte Levy for providing these extended video versions of Eddie and Keela in action.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id167.html
-
OOOPS!
Searches of the Ocean Club apartments, 31 July 2007
Search of Vista Mar Villa, 02 August 2007
Examination of clothes collected from the Vista Mar Villa, 02 August 2007
Examination of vehicles including the McCanns' Renault Scenic, 06 August 2007
???
Are you trying to say somethng if so, what is it? Do elaborate pls. It must be very important for you to put it in bold and big font.
>@@(*&)
-
One would rather imagine that the video of such a search as part of a high profile investigation would remain as property of the PJ, and confidential until the files were released.
***
JPs suggestion that it was not confidential, ie released by DL, before the files were releases needs to be addressed, no one is bothered much about copyright , Im sure if the Pj were they would have done something about it
No dobut JP will clarify, but I suspect he may have inadvertently omitted the word "not" from his first sentence ...?
In response to the OP, if Duarte Levy was [not]* employed by the PJ to video the dog searches, then why does he appear to have copyright on the video, and references to his website.
*Word in brackets inserted by me ...
-
One would rather imagine that the video of such a search as part of a high profile investigation would remain as property of the PJ, and confidential until the files were released.
***
JPs suggestion that it was not confidential, ie released by DL, before the files were releases needs to be addressed, no one is bothered much about copyright , Im sure if the Pj were they would have done something about it
No dobut JP will clarify, but I suspect he may have inadvertently omitted the word "not" from his first sentence ...?
In response to the OP, if Duarte Levy was [not]* employed by the PJ to video the dog searches, then why does he appear to have copyright on the video, and references to his website.
*Word in brackets inserted by me ...
Because he decided he could? Thought he could? It really doesnt matter. That he did so is in no way evidence that a) he was invited by the police to film the video or b) that he released it before he was given a copy, as were other journalists, in August 2008, when they were released
-
One would rather imagine that the video of such a search as part of a high profile investigation would remain as property of the PJ, and confidential until the files were released.
***
JPs suggestion that it was not confidential, ie released by DL, before the files were releases needs to be addressed, no one is bothered much about copyright , Im sure if the Pj were they would have done something about it
No dobut JP will clarify, but I suspect he may have inadvertently omitted the word "not" from his first sentence ...?
In response to the OP, if Duarte Levy was [not]* employed by the PJ to video the dog searches, then why does he appear to have copyright on the video, and references to his website.
*Word in brackets inserted by me ...
Because he decided he could? Thought he could? It really doesnt matter. That he did so is in no way evidence that a) he was invited by the police to film the video or b) that he released it before he was given a copy, as were other journalists, in August 2008, when they were released
It doesn't matter (to you) that Levy might be making fraudulent claim to copyright.
Yes, I do understand ...
-
You carry on making a song and dance abut copyright, its use or abuse was never the basis of the facts of this debate, so pls stop derailing it,and address the pertinent issues, thanks
Eta and for the record, no I wont lose sleep over someone putting a C mark against a compiled short video out of a 5 hour one, generally released to any journalist, it matters not a single jot in the big picture, you can fret about it though or go report them
Leave you to it seeing as you have loads of time to waste on irrelevant minutae
8((()*/
-
facts of this debate,
You mean there are "facts" in anything you want to "debate"?
-
facts of this debate,
You mean there are "facts" in anything you want to "debate"?
When losing an argument its best for ones own credibility to not resort to disingenous personal jibes
Floors all yours now
8((()*/
-
Is it true that the freelance journalist duarte levy
Was employed by the pt police to video the british dog searches?
No.
Next?
-
What was Grime doing, using the video's to sell the dogs. BEFORE the files were released ?>)()<
-
What was Grime doing, using the video's to sell the dogs. BEFORE the files were released ?>)()<
Good point ...
-
What was Grime doing, using the video's to sell the dogs. BEFORE the files were released ?>)()<
Cite pls, thanks
-
What was Grime doing, using the video's to sell the dogs. BEFORE the files were released ?>)()<
Cite pls, thanks
My pleasure.
25 February 2008
Yorkshire Post
http://eddieandkeela.blogspot.co.uk/2008/02/canine-experts-at-centre-of-jersey-body.html
-
What was Grime doing, using the video's to sell the dogs. BEFORE the files were released ?>)()<
Cite pls, thanks
My pleasure.
25 February 2008
Yorkshire Post
http://eddieandkeela.blogspot.co.uk/2008/02/canine-experts-at-centre-of-jersey-body.html
Where does it say there Mr Grime showed his work in PDL?
-
What was Grime doing, using the video's to sell the dogs. BEFORE the files were released ?>)()<
Cite pls, thanks
My pleasure.
25 February 2008
Yorkshire Post
http://eddieandkeela.blogspot.co.uk/2008/02/canine-experts-at-centre-of-jersey-body.html
Where does it say there Mr Grime showed his work in PDL?
Bungled Jersey child abuse probe branded a '£20million shambles'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1217863/Bungled-Jersey-child-abuse-probe-branded-20million-shambles.html#ixzz2U3Mn84pu
'Grime made a presentation, showing him [Harper] a video of the dog finding the "scent of death" in Kate and Gerry McCann's car,' the detective said.
-
When did mr grime make the presentation?
Ah the Mail, bastion of truth, NOT, if I were you I really wouldnt use ANY tabloid as proof of ANYTHING
mr Harper himself said he was dubious about these dogs but was well impressed after they were deployed, he was one police chief who was told to shut up...the shambles in Jersey were about a cover up, shameful shameless lot, have you not learnt anything in recent times?
The only shambles involve papers like the sun and the mail
DO ask yourself one SINGLE question, if you ever do, nowhere in the history of these dogs and handler have they ever been attacked except for the MCAANN case and the JERSEY case, never before and never after, that should tell you both were likely a cover up and this country has seen MANY of them
Nite nite Late night viewing for you
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--J4GHI62KIE/TVBC9cPTf3I/AAAAAAAAAek/84dnPB1x_Vs/s1600/lennyharperG_228x300.jpg
-
You just keep telling yourself, what you want to hear.
You ask for proof then still deny it. Never mind 8-)(--)
-
You just keep telling yourself, what you want to hear.
You ask for proof then still deny it. Never mind 8-)(--)
you have not provided proof of anything at all, so keep your crazy smileys for yourself basically until you can provide any, cheers big ears
-
There are two issues here:
1. Duarte Levy's claim to copyright of the video (no right the this claim if he didn't make the video himself)
2. The release of the video before the case had been shelved and the files released (seems that he did - in much the same way that Amaral so obviously had access to the files before their release in order to write his book)
-
There are two issues here:
1. Duarte Levy's claim to copyright of the video (no right the this claim if he didn't make the video himself)
2. The release of the video before the case had been shelved and the files released (seems that he did - in much the same way that Amaral so obviously had access to the files before their release in order to write his book)
do provide the proof then chinagirl of DL being guilty of 2
No 1 is negligible and no one cares , well, apart from you, FM et al
-
There are two issues here:
1. Duarte Levy's claim to copyright of the video (no right the this claim if he didn't make the video himself)
2. The release of the video before the case had been shelved and the files released (seems that he did - in much the same way that Amaral so obviously had access to the files before their release in order to write his book)
do provide the proof then chinagirl of DL being guilty of 2
No 1 is negligible and no one cares , well, apart from you, FM et al
See DCI's post above.
-
There are two issues here:
1. Duarte Levy's claim to copyright of the video (no right the this claim if he didn't make the video himself)
2. The release of the video before the case had been shelved and the files released (seems that he did - in much the same way that Amaral so obviously had access to the files before their release in order to write his book)
do provide the proof then chinagirl of DL being guilty of 2
No 1 is negligible and no one cares , well, apart from you, FM et al
See DCI's post above.
Is that a joke? Lol
do quote it if not
-
Why should DCI's post be a joke?