Anything and everything

[VIXTE]

Hi


Does anyone remember someone dying and something to do with a suitcase by the harbour

Racking my brains trying to think if this was connected by forums or papers .
Also the guy who sold his things to search for Madeleine who also died

Yes, at one point a body was found in the sea. But it was a body of an adult.
Also an elderly German man was missing in the area, his body found too

[Redblossom]

Hi


Does anyone remember someone dying and something to do with a suitcase by the harbour

Racking my brains trying to think if this was connected by forums or papers .
Also the guy who sold his things to search for Madeleine who also died

Colin Salkhe

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id340.html

Why do you ask?

[Kazcutt]

Colin Salkhe

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id340.html

Why do you ask?

Just thought about them today but couldn't remember his name .just wanted to see dates he died

[sadie]

It has been proved (how ?) that LC was assaulted in the HQ of the PJ.
The "failure to report" was dismissed.

It was not dismissed.  Why do you keep saying that ?

Amaral got a criminal conviction of 18 months for what amounted to perjury (lying)

[VIXTE]

There was a statement from OC staff I think about a girl who was off work that night but said went to OC club reception at around 9.30-10pm and boyfriend was waiting in the car. Anyone knows who this was?

[sadie]

Pretty offensive stuff, Sadie. You sure you don't work for a tabloid after all >@@(*&)

You should keep all the "the Belgium sighting was definitely Madeleine" self-indulgence to your own dedicated forums/groups.

Please DO NOT put words in my mouth
I have never said that the Belgian sighting was DEFINITELY Madeleine

But the little girl looks like her
She moves like her with similarity in mannerisms imo
She is wearing an expensive kilt and sweater, which fits with my suspect
She has a Moroccan nanny
The place is pertinent, a follow on from The hemp growing area of Zinat in the Rif Mountains, especially when one considers the three sightings together and their drug connections

A lot of pointers, but only observations.  THe little girl looks like Madeleine, but I know I could be wrong.

However, imo, it is Madeleine.  My opinion.

[Redblossom]

Please DO NOT put words in my mouth
I have never said that the Belgian sighting was DEFINITELY Madeleine

<snip>

However, imo, it is Madeleine.  My opinion.

The Belgian authorities have stated it wasnt....good enough for me.....

[Lyall]

Your words Sadie, two days ago.

"Madeleine was in Morocco alright ... and Joana"

"THe Belgium sighting was very interesting too.  Almost certainly Madeleine."

[Cariad]

Please DO NOT put words in my mouth
I have never said that the Belgian sighting was DEFINITELY Madeleine

But the little girl looks like her
She moves like her with similarity in mannerisms imo
She is wearing an expensive kilt and sweater, which fits with my suspect
She has a Moroccan nanny
The place is pertinent, a follow on from The hemp growing area of Zinat in the Rif Mountains, especially when one considers the three sightings together and their drug connections

A lot of pointers, but only observations.  THe little girl looks like Madeleine, but I know I could be wrong.

However, imo, it is Madeleine.  My opinion.

Why on earth would drug runners be touting a kidnapped 4 year old along with them? Especially one that hasn't been disguised at all. Wouldn't it be easier and more straight forward to get a T-shirt printed with "HELLO, I'M A CRIMINAL" ?

[Redblossom]

There was a statement from OC staff I think about a girl who was off work that night but said went to OC club reception at around 9.30-10pm and boyfriend was waiting in the car. Anyone knows who this was?

There you go


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/HAYLEY-CRAWFORD.htm

[VIXTE]

There you go


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/HAYLEY-CRAWFORD.htm

Thank you.. for some reason I had a feeling I read she saw a suspicious car .. never mind.. thanks again!

[TTSOFAFM]

The failure to denounce was dismissed. He signed a document without reading it or inquiring about it, it seems. Luz knows that better than me. I'm not pretending he was not responsible since he was in charge. Not only he got a fine, but he was suspended and as he had quitted the PJ I think he didn't get his pension money for those months.
Call him a criminal is perfectly inept. He was punished, he paid, he should be left in peace.
Who never made an error ?

Inept?  No I think you will find Anne that when posters call Amaral a criminal it is a factual statement.  A criminal is a person who has been found guilty of committing a crime.  Goncalo Amaral was found guilty of a crime so he is a criminal.  He has a record.

Your logic and way of thinking means, that the paedophile who is convicted of sexually molesting children, once his time is served is no longer a criminal.  He is a criminal, he has committed a crime. Maybe the offences are not the same but the basic principles are.  So Anne, Goncalo Amaral is a criminal.

You state 'Who never made an error?'  Again pure hypocrisy from you Anne.  The McCanns made an error of judgement by dining at the Tapas bar, they thought it would be safe and they thought their checks would have been adequate enough to protect their children, yet you Anne along with other people, will not let the McCanns forget about their mistake.  Every day their error of judgement is used as a stick to bash them with.   Every day, some members of this forum post comments that are highly critical of the McCanns. 

Every day, the McCanns have their lives dug over by internet posters who think they are better detectives than those in Scotland Yard and the PJ.  And every day, the fact the the McCanns are not suspected and neither are they persons of interest by both Scotland Yard and the PJ is totally ignored.  Why is that?  Is it because some of you can't accept the fact that the McCanns are NOT responsible for what happened to their daughter?

Some people here, won't accept that the McCanns made an error of judgement, why is that? So the mantra from the supporters of Amaral is we must ignore his criminal record and never mention it, but we beat the McCanns daily for their error of judgement and please remember the McCanns do NOT have a criminal record, unlike Amaral.

[Benita]

Inept?  No I think you will find Anne that when posters call Amaral a criminal it is a factual statement.  A criminal is a person who has been found guilty of committing a crime.  Goncalo Amaral was found guilty of a crime so he is a criminal.  He has a record.

Your logic and way of thinking means, that the paedophile who is convicted of sexually molesting children, once his time is served is no longer a criminal.  He is a criminal, he has committed a crime. Maybe the offences are not the same but the basic principles are.  So Anne, Goncalo Amaral is a criminal.

You state 'Who never made an error?'  Again pure hypocrisy from you Anne.  The McCanns made an error of judgement by dining at the Tapas bar, they thought it would be safe and they thought their checks would have been adequate enough to protect their children, yet you Anne along with other people, will not let the McCanns forget about their mistake.  Every day their error of judgement is used as a stick to bash them with.   Every day, some members of this forum post comments that are highly critical of the McCanns. 

Every day, the McCanns have their lives dug over by internet posters who think they are better detectives than those in Scotland Yard and the PJ.  And every day, the fact the the McCanns are not suspected and neither are they persons of interest by both Scotland Yard and the PJ is totally ignored.  Why is that?  Is it because some of you can't accept the fact that the McCanns are NOT responsible for what happened to their daughter?

Some people here, won't accept that the McCanns made an error of judgement, why is that? So the mantra from the supporters of Amaral is we must ignore his criminal record and never mention it, but we beat the McCanns daily for their error of judgement and please remember the McCanns do NOT have a criminal record, unlike Amaral.

Amen ...

[Wonderfulspam]

Inept?  No I think you will find Anne that when posters call Amaral a criminal it is a factual statement.  A criminal is a person who has been found guilty of committing a crime.  Goncalo Amaral was found guilty of a crime so he is a criminal.  He has a record.

Your logic and way of thinking means, that the paedophile who is convicted of sexually molesting children, once his time is served is no longer a criminal.  He is a criminal, he has committed a crime. Maybe the offences are not the same but the basic principles are.  So Anne, Goncalo Amaral is a criminal.

You state 'Who never made an error?'  Again pure hypocrisy from you Anne.  The McCanns made an error of judgement by dining at the Tapas bar, they thought it would be safe and they thought their checks would have been adequate enough to protect their children, yet you Anne along with other people, will not let the McCanns forget about their mistake.  Every day their error of judgement is used as a stick to bash them with.   Every day, some members of this forum post comments that are highly critical of the McCanns. 

Every day, the McCanns have their lives dug over by internet posters who think they are better detectives than those in Scotland Yard and the PJ.  And every day, the fact the the McCanns are not suspected and neither are they persons of interest by both Scotland Yard and the PJ is totally ignored.  Why is that?  Is it because some of you can't accept the fact that the McCanns are NOT responsible for what happened to their daughter?

Some people here, won't accept that the McCanns made an error of judgement, why is that? So the mantra from the supporters of Amaral is we must ignore his criminal record and never mention it, but we beat the McCanns daily for their error of judgement and please remember the McCanns do NOT have a criminal record, unlike Amaral.

 "fact that the McCanns are NOT responsible for what happened to their daughter?"

Is there any proof of this?

[colombosstogey]

Inept?  No I think you will find Anne that when posters call Amaral a criminal it is a factual statement.  A criminal is a person who has been found guilty of committing a crime.  Goncalo Amaral was found guilty of a crime so he is a criminal.  He has a record.

Your logic and way of thinking means, that the paedophile who is convicted of sexually molesting children, once his time is served is no longer a criminal.  He is a criminal, he has committed a crime. Maybe the offences are not the same but the basic principles are.  So Anne, Goncalo Amaral is a criminal.

You state 'Who never made an error?'  Again pure hypocrisy from you Anne.  The McCanns made an error of judgement by dining at the Tapas bar, they thought it would be safe and they thought their checks would have been adequate enough to protect their children, yet you Anne along with other people, will not let the McCanns forget about their mistake.  Every day their error of judgement is used as a stick to bash them with.   Every day, some members of this forum post comments that are highly critical of the McCanns. 

Every day, the McCanns have their lives dug over by internet posters who think they are better detectives than those in Scotland Yard and the PJ.  And every day, the fact the the McCanns are not suspected and neither are they persons of interest by both Scotland Yard and the PJ is totally ignored.  Why is that?  Is it because some of you can't accept the fact that the McCanns are NOT responsible for what happened to their daughter?

Some people here, won't accept that the McCanns made an error of judgement, why is that? So the mantra from the supporters of Amaral is we must ignore his criminal record and never mention it, but we beat the McCanns daily for their error of judgement and please remember the McCanns do NOT have a criminal record, unlike Amaral.

The difference is, the error of judgement the McCanns made, probably made it possible for the so called pedophile CRIMINAL to take their daughter away in the first place.

With Amaral his crime was simply signing off a document he had not read.

 Gonçalo Amaral, a former coordinator of the PJ's Criminal Investigation Department in Portimão, who was acquitted of the crime of omission of denunciation, was condemned to one and a half years over the crime of false deposition, with a suspended sentence over a similar period.

His CRIME hardly led to anyone being harmed in anyway he did make a mistake his mistake was to TRUST his men, and the same goes for the McCanns their mistake was to TRUST their babysitting routine was going to keep their children SAFE. They BOTH MADE A HUGE ERROR OF JUDGEMENT.

FOR ME BOTH MISTAKES should now be put to rest, but no we are asked to stop bringing up the MISTAKE by the McCanns, but in the same breath we have to keep dragging up a mistake Mr Amaral made.

By the way who has now served his sentence and was NEVER sacked for this as he went on to work with the McCann case.

Its all so silly really it serves no purpose constantly banging on about Mr Amaral. He is not in charge has not been for many years and the great Scotland Yard is on the case. and I agree it is totally pointless in harping on about the McCanns mistake either its done and it cant be undone....

Perhaps we can all agree to let both MISTAKES rest now.

I for one am fed up of reading about both of them.