Author Topic: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review  (Read 34088 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline gilet

Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #60 on: May 31, 2013, 11:55:02 PM »

So your proof is several self-serving passages from Kate's own book and of course she has never written a lie, has she ?

M'lud exhibit one for the prosecution, a passage from Madeleine by Kate McCann claiming cadaver scent lasts for no more than 30 days.
Have I quoted about the dogs?  No. so your comment is meaningless.  By the way, Kate McCann's book has been on sale in Portugal for a good couple of years now.  It has not been banned, there are no legal writs imposed on the book or Kate McCann so I take it that what she has written is the truth and not libellous, unlike someone's book.  You know the one, I am referring to, the book where the author pens in the forward that by releasing all the facts about the case in his book, he knows that it will hinder the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

The point I was making with regard to the dogs is that Kate was untruthful in her tome when she suggested cadaver scent lasted 30  days therefore everything she has written must also be approached with caution and verified independently.

As to the subject of litigation, unlike the McCanns, most ordinary people don't have a fund to bankroll them if they choose to sue and I would very much doubt libel lawyers such as Duarte undertake work on a CFA basis.

As to hindering the investigation, isn't that what Kate was warned she would be doing by not answering those pesky 48 questions ?

But there is a very, very big difference between Kate's refusal and Amaral's determination to go ahead with his book.

The former was an action done openly with total disregard for the fact that he was potentially damaging the search. It was deliberate and selfish to satisfy his honour and his bank manager.

With regard to Kate being warned that her refusal to answer the questions could damage the search then the situation is different. Being fully aware that she was not responsible for the disappearance of her child she would have known (unlike the police officer who was warning/threatening her) that her action in refusing to answer questions was not damaging the case as they were irrelevant questions which did not relate to an abductor but to herself.


icabodcrane

  • Guest
Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #61 on: May 31, 2013, 11:55:32 PM »
Ex-cops highly critical of the PJ include-
Mike Hames - ex SY Commander who set up the paedophilia unit
Dai Davies ex-cop and head of security at Royal Palaces
Desmond Thomas ex head of CID Hampshire police

and others.

Lots of people are critical of the Portugueses investigation  (  me included ) 

This thread,  though,  is concerned with the Madeleine Fund,  and critisism of it

We reached the point where the haste with which the Fund was set up,  and it's stated objectives from so very early on  (  little more than a week after Madeleine disappeared )  were being debated

Let's not get distracted

Offline Benice

Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #62 on: May 31, 2013, 11:57:58 PM »

And you wonder why trust broke down between the Tapas members and the Police.  I always thought the reason for people being made arguidos was so that the police could ask suspects questions that could incriminate them.  Trying to get someone to confess to passing a child through a window is pretty incriminating to me.

After sitting there for 8 hours, then hearing that, it is enough to stress any person out.

So your proof is several self-serving passages from Kate's own book and of course she has never written a lie, has she ?

M'lud exhibit one for the prosecution, a passage from Madeleine by Kate McCann claiming cadaver scent lasts for no more than 30 days.

It wasn't her claim or her opinion  - she was quoting the opinion of someone else who was experienced re sniffer dogs.   Lying doesn't come into it. 

 
   


The notion that innocence prevails over guilt – when there is no evidence to the contrary – is what separates civilization from barbarism.    Unfortunately, there are remains of barbarism among us.    Until very recently, it headed the PJ in Portimão. I hope he was the last one.
                                               Henrique Monteiro, chief editor, Expresso, Portugal

Offline Faithlilly

Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #63 on: May 31, 2013, 11:58:58 PM »
I would point out that Kate McCann cancelled what would have been only her second interview with police on the 11th of May on the grounds of her 'wellbeing' 

Actually it was Alan Pike who asked for Kate's interview to be postponed for a few days.  She had sat in the waiting room for 8 hours waiting to be interviewed.  She was then told to go home and come back the next day.  Finally when Gerry returned he told her of what had happened during Mat Oldfield's interview.

Quote
I sat in the waiting area for eight hours before I was told that it was now too late for me to be interviewed and I should go home and come back the next day. Gerry was there for thirteen hours. When he finally returned to the apartment he related how Matt had been almost hysterical during his interview. Gerry had heard him shouting and crying. Apparently, it had been put to Matt that he’d handed Madeleine out through the window to a third party. It was like something out of Life on Mars. Alan Pike was concerned about my wellbeing and asked for my rescheduled interview to be postponed for a few days. The PJ couldn’t have considered it all that important: it was 6 September before I was interviewed again.

McCann, Kate (2011-05-12). Madeleine (pp. 123-124). Random House UK. Kindle Edition.

And you wonder why trust broke down between the Tapas members and the Police.  I always thought the reason for people being made arguidos was so that the police could ask suspects questions that could incriminate them.  Trying to get someone to confess to passing a child through a window is pretty incriminating to me.

After sitting there for 8 hours, then hearing that, it is enough to stress any person out.

So your proof is several self-serving passages from Kate's own book and of course she has never written a lie, has she ?

M'lud exhibit one for the prosecution, a passage from Madeleine by Kate McCann claiming cadaver scent lasts for no more than 30 days.

And the actual evidence is that there is no record of any further interview being done till September. But don't let that fact spoil your little dig will you.

The PJ were making a complete pigs ear of the case and the McCanns who were at the heart of it recognised that. UK journalists and former police who were in PDL also recognised the same facts about the incompetent PJ search and yet you cannot understand that the parents of a child who were witnessing this incompetence would want to do EVERYTHING including using others to help. Shame on you.

What former police ? John Stalker who thought the McCanns and their friends were hiding something or perhaps MWT who's media company had close ties with the McCanns ? As for journalists, that'd swear black was white if it made for good copy.

Among others, yes.

All builds up a picture, which was available in images as well on video and in photo form.

There are the "forensic" people who didn't even wear forensic protective gear. Even Grime who should have known better was utterly casual in this respect when working with the PJ.

There are reports of the borders not being closed, searches not being co-ordinated properly by the police.

Trying to pretend that the PJ did a wonderful job is insane. They did not.

Reports ? From where ? The tabloid press ?

The PJ made mistakes as every police force carrying out a major inquiry do but that doesn't make the great majority of the work done worthless. Madeleine, due to a lack of proper checking, if abducted, had been missing for almost an hour before the alarm was raised. That most precious measure of time, golden hour, was lost before the GNR or PJ had even heard Madeleine's name and whose fault was that  ?
'She ( Kate) did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying 'Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or', erm, 'or locking it and, you know, finding that we're not there and the door's locked if she woke up', because Madeleine had woken up, what I thought was the night before. Erm, tut, and it was in that context really, just asking, you know, what I thought. So it was obviously something that was on her mind a bit, huh'.

registrar

  • Guest
Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #64 on: May 31, 2013, 11:59:05 PM »
two days into the search - hands in pockets

and Murat right amongst them



a picture says more than a thousand words


Icar - this picture irks you a tad - does it not?

Offline gilet

Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #65 on: May 31, 2013, 11:59:40 PM »


The sceptics seem unable to accept the effect that such massive trauma and stress has on human beings - and expect the McCanns to have been completely unaffected by what had happened.  imo.

We're individuals, not substitutable beings like in communist regime. So please consider putting an end to this ludicrous Manichaean bipartition of the humanity into sceptics and... not sceptics.

There is nothing in Benice's post which relates to good or evil. Your pompous use of the term Manichaean is utterly superfluous.

Are you really suggesting that these people who are unable to show the slightest empathy towards the fear, panic and desperation that a parent of a missing child would feel are not McCann sceptics?

It is farcical to try to pretend that this inability to empathise with the McCanns does not stem from a deep seated belief that they are guilty of harming their child.


Offline Faithlilly

Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #66 on: June 01, 2013, 12:01:49 AM »

So your proof is several self-serving passages from Kate's own book and of course she has never written a lie, has she ?

M'lud exhibit one for the prosecution, a passage from Madeleine by Kate McCann claiming cadaver scent lasts for no more than 30 days.
Have I quoted about the dogs?  No. so your comment is meaningless.  By the way, Kate McCann's book has been on sale in Portugal for a good couple of years now.  It has not been banned, there are no legal writs imposed on the book or Kate McCann so I take it that what she has written is the truth and not libellous, unlike someone's book.  You know the one, I am referring to, the book where the author pens in the forward that by releasing all the facts about the case in his book, he knows that it will hinder the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

The point I was making with regard to the dogs is that Kate was untruthful in her tome when she suggested cadaver scent lasted 30  days therefore everything she has written must also be approached with caution and verified independently.

As to the subject of litigation, unlike the McCanns, most ordinary people don't have a fund to bankroll them if they choose to sue and I would very much doubt libel lawyers such as Duarte undertake work on a CFA basis.

As to hindering the investigation, isn't that what Kate was warned she would be doing by not answering those pesky 48 questions ?

But there is a very, very big difference between Kate's refusal and Amaral's determination to go ahead with his book.

The former was an action done openly with total disregard for the fact that he was potentially damaging the search. It was deliberate and selfish to satisfy his honour and his bank manager.

With regard to Kate being warned that her refusal to answer the questions could damage the search then the situation is different. Being fully aware that she was not responsible for the disappearance of her child she would have known (unlike the police officer who was warning/threatening her) that her action in refusing to answer questions was not damaging the case as they were irrelevant questions which did not relate to an abductor but to herself.

You keep telling yourself that Gilet. Your support of the McCanns will still be strong but your betrayal of Madeleine will be immeasurable.
'She ( Kate) did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying 'Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or', erm, 'or locking it and, you know, finding that we're not there and the door's locked if she woke up', because Madeleine had woken up, what I thought was the night before. Erm, tut, and it was in that context really, just asking, you know, what I thought. So it was obviously something that was on her mind a bit, huh'.

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #67 on: June 01, 2013, 12:02:53 AM »

There are reports of the borders not being closed
Which borders, if you please ? Schengen ones ?

Offline gilet

Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #68 on: June 01, 2013, 12:04:03 AM »
I would point out that Kate McCann cancelled what would have been only her second interview with police on the 11th of May on the grounds of her 'wellbeing' 

Actually it was Alan Pike who asked for Kate's interview to be postponed for a few days.  She had sat in the waiting room for 8 hours waiting to be interviewed.  She was then told to go home and come back the next day.  Finally when Gerry returned he told her of what had happened during Mat Oldfield's interview.

Quote
I sat in the waiting area for eight hours before I was told that it was now too late for me to be interviewed and I should go home and come back the next day. Gerry was there for thirteen hours. When he finally returned to the apartment he related how Matt had been almost hysterical during his interview. Gerry had heard him shouting and crying. Apparently, it had been put to Matt that he’d handed Madeleine out through the window to a third party. It was like something out of Life on Mars. Alan Pike was concerned about my wellbeing and asked for my rescheduled interview to be postponed for a few days. The PJ couldn’t have considered it all that important: it was 6 September before I was interviewed again.

McCann, Kate (2011-05-12). Madeleine (pp. 123-124). Random House UK. Kindle Edition.

And you wonder why trust broke down between the Tapas members and the Police.  I always thought the reason for people being made arguidos was so that the police could ask suspects questions that could incriminate them.  Trying to get someone to confess to passing a child through a window is pretty incriminating to me.

After sitting there for 8 hours, then hearing that, it is enough to stress any person out.

So your proof is several self-serving passages from Kate's own book and of course she has never written a lie, has she ?

M'lud exhibit one for the prosecution, a passage from Madeleine by Kate McCann claiming cadaver scent lasts for no more than 30 days.

And the actual evidence is that there is no record of any further interview being done till September. But don't let that fact spoil your little dig will you.

The PJ were making a complete pigs ear of the case and the McCanns who were at the heart of it recognised that. UK journalists and former police who were in PDL also recognised the same facts about the incompetent PJ search and yet you cannot understand that the parents of a child who were witnessing this incompetence would want to do EVERYTHING including using others to help. Shame on you.

What former police ? John Stalker who thought the McCanns and their friends were hiding something or perhaps MWT who's media company had close ties with the McCanns ? As for journalists, that'd swear black was white if it made for good copy.

Among others, yes.

All builds up a picture, which was available in images as well on video and in photo form.

There are the "forensic" people who didn't even wear forensic protective gear. Even Grime who should have known better was utterly casual in this respect when working with the PJ.

There are reports of the borders not being closed, searches not being co-ordinated properly by the police.

Trying to pretend that the PJ did a wonderful job is insane. They did not.

Reports ? From where ? The tabloid press ?

The PJ made mistakes as every police force carrying out a major inquiry do but that doesn't make the great majority of the work done worthless. Madeleine, due to a lack of proper checking, if abducted, had been missing for almost an hour before the alarm was raised. That most precious measure of time, golden hour, was lost before the GNR or PJ had even heard Madeleine's name and whose fault was that  ?

Video reports, news reports, longer articles all testify to the incompetence of the PJ. There are clear failures to follow up things in the files. Rebelo is reported to have been appalled at the state the case was in when Amaral was dismissed. And so on.

Thanks though, for admitting that the PJ were making mistakes.

It is precisely because of those mistakes that the parents would have wanted to involve anyone who might be able to help.

It is the fact that certain posters here cannot understand and accept that the fear and desperation on the part of the parents of the missing child at the heart of the case on seeing those mistakes by the police that you refer to which makes their posts rather bizarre.

Everyone can see the mistakes. Every person with an ounce of empathy can understand what such mistakes would do to a traumatised parent.

Certain posters here seem utterly blind to that reality.

Offline gilet

Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #69 on: June 01, 2013, 12:04:58 AM »
Ex-cops highly critical of the PJ include-
Mike Hames - ex SY Commander who set up the paedophilia unit
Dai Davies ex-cop and head of security at Royal Palaces
Desmond Thomas ex head of CID Hampshire police

and others.

Thank you.

I knew there were many, many instances of real experts whose views of the PJ in action led them to report that they were appalled.

Offline Benice

Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #70 on: June 01, 2013, 12:05:58 AM »
And the actual evidence is that there is no record of any further interview being done till September. But don't let that fact spoil your little dig will you.

The PJ were making a complete pigs ear of the case and the McCanns who were at the heart of it recognised that. UK journalists and former police who were in PDL also recognised the same facts about the incompetent PJ search and yet you cannot understand that the parents of a child who were witnessing this incompetence would want to do EVERYTHING including using others to help. Shame on you.

What former police ? John Stalker who thought the McCanns and their friends were hiding something or perhaps MWT who's media company had close ties with the McCanns ? As for journalists, that'd swear black was white if it made for good copy.

What part did John Stalker play in the case.  Did he ever meet the McCanns or interview them?  If not his opinion is no more relevant than anyone else who was not part of the investigation.




The notion that innocence prevails over guilt – when there is no evidence to the contrary – is what separates civilization from barbarism.    Unfortunately, there are remains of barbarism among us.    Until very recently, it headed the PJ in Portimão. I hope he was the last one.
                                               Henrique Monteiro, chief editor, Expresso, Portugal

Offline TTSOFAFM

Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #71 on: June 01, 2013, 12:07:23 AM »
Back to the OP then.  It is highly understandable why the Fund was created and why they applied for the Trademark.  Some people in this world have no hesitation in cashing in on another person's tragic circumstances in order to make money.

If I remember rightly a certain blogger, bought and sold websites as a profit, with regards to this case.

In the tragic death of Amy Winehouse a man on hearing about the Amy Winehouse Foundation, bought the doman and even registered a company.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3767972/Rat-hijacked-Amy-Winehouse-site.html#comment-rig

Some people want to help, others want to cash in.  The parents of Madeleine McCann would have been advised about all of this and they did what they did in order to protect the official fund they were setting up.

And as for the comment the Official Fund can't be compared with those three funds I quoted, please tell me why not?  Why can't those funds be questioned?  Surely not to question a fund that is less transparent than the Official Find Madeleine Fund, does speak volumes to me.  It makes me think that others can do what they want as long as they are anti-McCann.  Whilst those that support the family and support the Official Fund should come under scrutiny and be questioned about their motives.

Offline gilet

Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #72 on: June 01, 2013, 12:07:43 AM »
Ex-cops highly critical of the PJ include-
Mike Hames - ex SY Commander who set up the paedophilia unit
Dai Davies ex-cop and head of security at Royal Palaces
Desmond Thomas ex head of CID Hampshire police

and others.

Lots of people are critical of the Portugueses investigation  (  me included ) 

This thread,  though,  is concerned with the Madeleine Fund,  and critisism of it

We reached the point where the haste with which the Fund was set up,  and it's stated objectives from so very early on  (  little more than a week after Madeleine disappeared )  were being debated

Let's not get distracted

Exactly.

The incompetence of the PJ in the very first few hours and days of the case was probably a very, very significant factor in determining that the McCanns would seek and accept offers of help from whereever they might emerge and the fact that people were immediately donating money without being asked also meant that the putting of the fund on a proper basis was essential.

More recent cases have shown that money starts to pour in literally hours after such events.


AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #73 on: June 01, 2013, 12:10:53 AM »

There is nothing in Benice's post which relates to good or evil. Your pompous use of the term Manichaean is utterly superfluous.

Are you really suggesting that these people who are unable to show the slightest empathy towards the fear, panic and desperation that a parent of a missing child would feel are not McCann sceptics?

It is farcical to try to pretend that this inability to empathise with the McCanns does not stem from a deep seated belief that they are guilty of harming their child.
"Pompous" such a common word and moreover such a terribly vulgar mental perception ? Are you suggesting you position yourself above good and evil ?
What are you doing with your imagination capacity, Gilet ? No imagination, no empathy...

Offline gilet

Re: Criticism of the Find Madeleine Fund and Review
« Reply #74 on: June 01, 2013, 12:11:30 AM »

So your proof is several self-serving passages from Kate's own book and of course she has never written a lie, has she ?

M'lud exhibit one for the prosecution, a passage from Madeleine by Kate McCann claiming cadaver scent lasts for no more than 30 days.
Have I quoted about the dogs?  No. so your comment is meaningless.  By the way, Kate McCann's book has been on sale in Portugal for a good couple of years now.  It has not been banned, there are no legal writs imposed on the book or Kate McCann so I take it that what she has written is the truth and not libellous, unlike someone's book.  You know the one, I am referring to, the book where the author pens in the forward that by releasing all the facts about the case in his book, he knows that it will hinder the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

The point I was making with regard to the dogs is that Kate was untruthful in her tome when she suggested cadaver scent lasted 30  days therefore everything she has written must also be approached with caution and verified independently.

As to the subject of litigation, unlike the McCanns, most ordinary people don't have a fund to bankroll them if they choose to sue and I would very much doubt libel lawyers such as Duarte undertake work on a CFA basis.

As to hindering the investigation, isn't that what Kate was warned she would be doing by not answering those pesky 48 questions ?

But there is a very, very big difference between Kate's refusal and Amaral's determination to go ahead with his book.

The former was an action done openly with total disregard for the fact that he was potentially damaging the search. It was deliberate and selfish to satisfy his honour and his bank manager.

With regard to Kate being warned that her refusal to answer the questions could damage the search then the situation is different. Being fully aware that she was not responsible for the disappearance of her child she would have known (unlike the police officer who was warning/threatening her) that her action in refusing to answer questions was not damaging the case as they were irrelevant questions which did not relate to an abductor but to herself.

You keep telling yourself that Gilet. Your support of the McCanns will still be strong but your betrayal of Madeleine will be immeasurable.

I find that remark extremely offensive.

If you cannot see the difference then I feel nothing but sorrow for you.

But you have no right whatsoever to act so pompously as to accuse me of betraying Madeleine McCann whilst you endorse the posts which show no empathy whatsoever with her or her family.