Who are your top 3 ACTIVE ACCURATE media reporters re Madeleine?

[ShiningInLuz]

Are you actually looking for UK journalists who know far more about the case than we do but can't print their stories because of media restrictions? Otherwise, you should be looking to the journalists on your home soil.

I am of the opinion that most UK journalists (can't say about Portuguese ones) are way behind on the pool of knowledge amassed by 'amateur' detectives.

Gordon Rayner runs a piece in the Telegraph where the opening paragraph states that we can be sure of only one fact in the MM case, namely that the police were called at 10.14pm on 3 May 2007. Both parts of this are in error.

The provenance of the 10.14 error can be traced back to around 9 Sep 2007 (Pamalam).  It may be earlier but I have not attempted to find when it first surfaced.  The source is said to be the McCanns.  The Times ran with a piece in Sep 2007 saying that around 10.14 or 10.15, a friend went to reception to get the police called.

Quite clearly Mr Rayner is unaware that Matthew Oldfield failed to ensure that the police were called, and that the records show the first call was timed at 10.41.

His 'one fact' take is incorrect, given that the PJ Files can be used to build up a more detailed record of what was going on that day and that night.

Thus I am looking for decent quality, investigative journalists who, when supplied with an accurate dossier of known facts plus relevant questions and the logistics of getting answers to those questions, will attempt to obtain such answers.

I know that the Tapas 9, the Smiths and Berry/Balu are all sitting on pieces of information they do not consider to be important, when in fact they are.

My chances of getting such sources to communicate with me are about zero.

They just might be willing to talk to a journalist with a decent track record for fair reporting.

[Mr Gray]

I am of the opinion that most UK journalists (can't say about Portuguese ones) are way behind on the pool of knowledge amassed by 'amateur' detectives.

Gordon Rayner runs a piece in the Telegraph where the opening paragraph states that we can be sure of only one fact in the MM case, namely that the police were called at 10.14pm on 3 May 2007. Both parts of this are in error.

The provenance of the 10.14 error can be traced back to around 9 Sep 2007 (Pamalam).  It may be earlier but I have not attempted to find when it first surfaced.  The source is said to be the McCanns.  The Times ran with a piece in Sep 2007 saying that around 10.14 or 10.15, a friend went to reception to get the police called.

Quite clearly Mr Rayner is unaware that Matthew Oldfield failed to ensure that the police were called, and that the records show the first call was timed at 10.41.

His 'one fact' take is incorrect, given that the PJ Files can be used to build up a more detailed record of what was going on that day and that night.

Thus I am looking for decent quality, investigative journalists who, when supplied with an accurate dossier of known facts plus relevant questions and the logistics of getting answers to those questions, will attempt to obtain such answers.

I know that the Tapas 9, the Smiths and Berry/Balu are all sitting on pieces of information they do not consider to be important, when in fact they are.

My chances of getting such sources to communicate with me are about zero.

They just might be willing to talk to a journalist with a decent track record for fair reporting.

with respect the part in red is simply your opinion........do you really think SY are incapable of investigating this case properly. I would say the chances of any respected investigative journalists co operating with you are pretty remote

much of the information gathered online is flawed.....we have been told by Harrison that no inferences can be drawn from the alerts......yet you and others draw inference

[Mr Gray]

I am of the opinion that most UK journalists (can't say about Portuguese ones) are way behind on the pool of knowledge amassed by 'amateur' detectives.

Gordon Rayner runs a piece in the Telegraph where the opening paragraph states that we can be sure of only one fact in the MM case, namely that the police were called at 10.14pm on 3 May 2007. Both parts of this are in error.

The provenance of the 10.14 error can be traced back to around 9 Sep 2007 (Pamalam).  It may be earlier but I have not attempted to find when it first surfaced.  The source is said to be the McCanns.  The Times ran with a piece in Sep 2007 saying that around 10.14 or 10.15, a friend went to reception to get the police called.

Quite clearly Mr Rayner is unaware that Matthew Oldfield failed to ensure that the police were called, and that the records show the first call was timed at 10.41.

His 'one fact' take is incorrect, given that the PJ Files can be used to build up a more detailed record of what was going on that day and that night.

Thus I am looking for decent quality, investigative journalists who, when supplied with an accurate dossier of known facts plus relevant questions and the logistics of getting answers to those questions, will attempt to obtain such answers.

I know that the Tapas 9, the Smiths and Berry/Balu are all sitting on pieces of information they do not consider to be important, when in fact they are.

My chances of getting such sources to communicate with me are about zero.

They just might be willing to talk to a journalist with a decent track record for fair reporting.

it would be interesting to see your dossier of known facts...it may well be they are not as factual as you think

[John]

Neither were abducted
In just about every parental abduction there is a custody dispute and its obvious why

A parent can only abduct there own child if there is a custody dispute

Both cases were viewed initially as abductions given what the parents claimed.  Some still claim Joana Cipriano was abducted by her uncle for financial gain, this being just one of the stories told by him to the Portuguese Police.  Sharon Matthews mother claimed she had been abducted but again this was a ruse to elicit financial gain. Baby Daniel Freitas was abducted by his mother again for financial gain according to police. There are many more cases out there, parental abduction is not limited to custody disputes.

Now could we all get back to reviewing reporters.

[ShiningInLuz]

with respect the part in red is simply your opinion........do you really think SY are incapable of investigating this case properly. I would say the chances of any respected investigative journalists co operating with you are pretty remote

much of the information gathered online is flawed.....we have been told by Harrison that no inferences can be drawn from the alerts......yet you and others draw inference

I don't draw inference from the dog alerts.  I know what the facts are surrounding the dog alerts.  And kindly do not divert this thread into yet another dog thread.

As to known facts, the only one I have used to illustrate my answer to Misty is that we know with precision the time of the first call to the GNR.

As it happens we know of the time of the second call to the GNR.

And the time of the call from Silvia Batista's mobile to the GNR.

And the time of the 3 calls from Securitas to the GNR that evening.

And the time of the 2 calls from Gerry to Kate that evening.

From this, a fairly good picture of what was going on that evening can be built up.

At no point have I stated or implied an OG comparison, so please stop deflecting from the thread purpose.

[ShiningInLuz]

it would be interesting to see your dossier of known facts...it may well be they are not as factual as you think

And that adds ... pure speculation and nothing more.

[Mr Gray]

I don't draw inference from the dog alerts.  I know what the facts are surrounding the dog alerts.  And kindly do not divert this thread into yet another dog thread.

As to known facts, the only one I have used to illustrate my answer to Misty is that we know with precision the time of the first call to the GNR.

As it happens we know of the time of the second call to the GNR.

And the time of the call from Silvia Batista's mobile to the GNR.

And the time of the 3 calls from Securitas to the GNR that evening.

And the time of the 2 calls from Gerry to Kate that evening.

From this, a fairly good picture of what was going on that evening can be built up.

At no point have I stated or implied an OG comparison, so please stop deflecting from the thread purpose.

the point of this thread is to find a journalist to send your known facts to in order to further the investigation. It would be interesting to see your known facts to see how factual they are as there is a lot on here and other sites taht simply isnt factual



why not simply send your known facts to all the investigative journalists you know

[Mr Gray]

And that adds ... pure speculation and nothing more.

thats why I used the word "may"

[ShiningInLuz]

the point of this thread is to find a journalist to send your known facts to in order to further the investigation. It would be interesting to see your known facts to see how factual they are as there is a lot on here and other sites taht simply isnt factual



why not simply send your known facts to all the investigative journalists you know

Would you have me send such information to Antonella Lazzeri at the Sun, and Alan Selby and Phil Cardy at the Mirror?

I asked for decent quality, impartial journalists for a reason.

And I don't have the capacity to interact with a large number of journalists.  Indeed, my aim is to interact via just one in British media and just one in Portuguese media (not the English media in Portugal).  I am not going to list the many reasons why.

So do you have anyone who fits the spec or not?

[Mr Gray]

Would you have me send such information to Antonella Lazzeri at the Sun, and Alan Selby and Phil Cardy at the Mirror?

I asked for decent quality, impartial journalists for a reason.

And I don't have the capacity to interact with a large number of journalists.  Indeed, my aim is to interact via just one in British media and just one in Portuguese media (not the English media in Portugal).  I am not going to list the many reasons why.

So do you have anyone who fits the spec or not?

all the decent journalist seem to think the parents are not involved...you could try R D Hall

I think we can be sure bennett has sent the known facts to pretty well everyone already...and probably others too...the journalists are probably sick of seeing them

[ShiningInLuz]

all the decent journalist seem to think the parents are not involved...you could try R D Hall

I think we can be sure bennett has sent the known facts to pretty well everyone already...and probably others too...the journalists are probably sick of seeing them

To quote davel "If civil questions are being asked can we have the courtesy to provide civil answers."

Your reply is propaganda and goading.  I courteously ask you to cease and desist.

If the McCanns 'dunnit' there is but one way they 'dunnit', and evidence to support such a hypothesis is long gone.  That's a 'dunnit and scot-free' hypothesis.

Since I postulated that the McCanns are sitting on valuable information that they don't know has value, it clearly does not fall into the 'dunnit' category.

Either come up with some names of journalists or do the forum a favour and give it a rest.

[Mr Gray]

To quote davel "If civil questions are being asked can we have the courtesy to provide civil answers."

Your reply is propaganda and goading.  I courteously ask you to cease and desist.

If the McCanns 'dunnit' there is but one way they 'dunnit', and evidence to support such a hypothesis is long gone.  That's a 'dunnit and scot-free' hypothesis.

Since I postulated that the McCanns are sitting on valuable information that they don't know has value, it clearly does not fall into the 'dunnit' category.

Either come up with some names of journalists or do the forum a favour and give it a rest.

Louis Theroux is very good but the problem you have is in my opinion why would an established journalist want to work with you
It isn't as simple as coming up with a list of names

I think your idea would have a lot more credibility if it was a list of known facts agreed by and sent by the forum

[ShiningInLuz]

Louis Theroux is very good but the problem you have is in my opinion why would an established journalist want to work with you
It isn't as simple as coming up with a list of names

I think your idea would have a lot more credibility if it was a list of known facts agreed by and sent by the forum

1 The process will be interactive two-way.  Not the simple sending of a list, a one-off one way process.  Hence the need to keep it down to two.

2 Do you really believe this forum could agree a list of known facts?  I don't, so I for one am not going to attempt it.

No journalist names you want to put in the frame?  None that you think of who have been fair, accurate and impartial about the McCanns?

It is an important point if an approach for information is made to the McCanns.

Do you have a single journalist name you consider the McCanns would trust?

[Mr Gray]

1 The process will be interactive two-way.  Not the simple sending of a list, a one-off one way process.  Hence the need to keep it down to two.

2 Do you really believe this forum could agree a list of known facts?  I don't, so I for one am not going to attempt it.

No journalist names you want to put in the frame?  None that you think of who have been fair, accurate and impartial about the McCanns?

It is an important point if an approach for information is made to the McCanns.

Do you have a single journalist name you consider the McCanns would trust?

If the forum couldn't agree it would be because the known facts are not facts
I think the whole thing is a pointless exercise and will go nowhere

[jassi]

1 The process will be interactive two-way.  Not the simple sending of a list, a one-off one way process.  Hence the need to keep it down to two.

2 Do you really believe this forum could agree a list of known facts?  I don't, so I for one am not going to attempt it.

No journalist names you want to put in the frame?  None that you think of who have been fair, accurate and impartial about the McCanns?

It is an important point if an approach for information is made to the McCanns.

Do you have a single journalist name you consider the McCanns would trust?

They seemed to get on quite well with Sandra - until she asked about the dogs