Summers & Swan - A new book - Looking For Madeleine

[stephen25000]

Quite simply..they could if the evidence supported them..

Yet they spout a theory when no evidence, let alone proof has been produced to show ANYONE other than than the mccanns or their associates entered the apartment.

[Alfred R Jones]

Quite simply..they could if the evidence supported them..

The fact is, both these crappy tomes are still available to purchase in their respective authors' home countries.  As far as I can see there is little the McCanns or Carter-Ruck can do to stop the sale of a book full of unevidenced speculation and distorted facts in either America or Portugal.  I'm sure if Summers and Swan had to come to the conclusion that the McCanns dunnit, they would have got away with publishing such a book in both countries.

[faithlilly]

The fact is, both these crappy tomes are still available to purchase in their respective authors' home countries.  As far as I can see there is little the McCanns or Carter-Ruck can do to stop the sale of a book full of unevidenced speculation and distorted facts in either America or Portugal.  I'm sure if Summers and Swan had to come to the conclusion that the McCanns dunnit, they would have got away with publishing such a book in both countries.

What a disingenuous answer.

The McCanns have used every legal tool at their disposal to stop the sale of both books and it is further suspected that Amaral's book was targeted for litigation at the time it was because he was looking for a publisher in the UK. Now I have heard you supporters say that he would never have found a publisher here willing to publish his accusations of guilt so what makes you think Summers and wife would be any different ?

[Alfred R Jones]

What a disingenuous answer.

The McCanns have used every legal tool at their disposal to stop the sale of both books and it is further suspected that Amaral's book was targeted for litigation at the time it was because he was looking for a publisher in the UK. Now I have heard you supporters say that he would never have found a publisher here willing to publish his accusations of guilt so what makes you think Summers and wife would be any different ?

Firstly, I wasn't answering you, my post was to Davel, so nothing disingenuous there.  Secondly, I have already conceded that Summers and Swan would not get a McCann sceptic book published in this country, but would probably have far more success doing so in America and Portugal, both places where you can freely purchase the crappy tomes of Brown and Amaral.  Now, how about you answer this:  is it inconceivable to you that two intelligent and well-respected authors could thoroughly research this case and sincerely and genuinely come to the conclusion that the McCanns had no hand in their chid's disappearance?  Or do you think that only the fearful, mendacious  and / or moneygrabbing could ever possibly hold that view?

[Brietta]

Faithlilly doesn't do answering questions, Alfred.  Not unless she can twist it to her advantage

Didn't you know?

Absolutely correct, Sadie, I gave up going in circles some time ago and don’t feel I have missed out on a thing.

It is quite remarkable that to date no-one has quoted chapter and verse any glaring inaccuracies in the book.
Personal attacks on the authors don't quite cut it. 

I am sure were there the slightest cause for complaint it would have been leapt on with glee. 

From my reading of it I consider some deeply held myths have been debunked in a matter of fact way … I note that no one has taken up the quill to defend the position on any of that.

[Alfred R Jones]

Absolutely correct, Sadie, I gave up going in circles some time ago and don’t feel I have missed out on a thing.

It is quite remarkable that to date no-one has quoted chapter and verse any glaring inaccuracies in the book.
Personal attacks on the authors don't quite cut it. 

I am sure were there the slightest cause for complaint it would have been leapt on with glee. 

From my reading of it I consider some deeply held myths have been debunked in a matter of fact way … I note that no one has taken up the quill to defend the position on any of that.

Yes, it would be very interesting to read a concise, non-puerile rebuttal of the salient points in the Summers & Swan book, written by an intelligent "sceptic" (if that's not an oxymoron!) but I shan't be holding my breath for such a thing to materialize. 

NB: The pretendy scientist's piss-poor blog on the book is simply not worth serious attention.

[faithlilly]

Firstly, I wasn't answering you, my post was to Davel, so nothing disingenuous there.  Secondly, I have already conceded that Summers and Swan would not get a McCann sceptic book published in this country, but would probably have far more success doing so in America and Portugal, both places where you can freely purchase the crappy tomes of Brown and Amaral.  Now, how about you answer this:  is it inconceivable to you that two intelligent and well-respected authors could thoroughly research this case and sincerely and genuinely come to the conclusion that the McCanns had no hand in their chid's disappearance?  Or do you think that only the fearful, mendacious  and / or moneygrabbing could ever possibly hold that view?

There are only two countries where there is a supposedly large market for a book about this case, the UK and Portugal.  As we have seen with Amaral's book the long, litigious arm of the McCanns certainly extends to there. America, while a feasible location for publication, don't seem particularly interested in the case, a factor I'm sure the authors are aware of.

And in answer to your question what is inconceivable to me is that two intelligent and well respected journalists could thoroughly research this case and not come to the conclusion that the McCanns still have questions to answer about the disappearance of their daughter.

[faithlilly]

Yes, it would be very interesting to read a concise, non-puerile rebuttal of the salient points in the Summers & Swan book, written by an intelligent "sceptic" (if that's not an oxymoron!) but I shan't be holding my breath for such a thing to materialize. 

NB: The pretendy scientist's piss-poor blog on the book is simply not worth serious attention.

No need Alfred. The buying public have voted with their wallets.

It's only you and your ilk still trying to pretend this book is anything other than a badly researched, litigation-averse, disingenuous cut and paste job.

[stephen25000]

No need Alfred. The buying public have voted with their wallets.

It's only you and your ilk still trying to pretend this book is anything other than a badly researched, litigation-averse, disingenuous cut and paste job.

Well said Faithlilly.

 

[Alfred R Jones]

There are only two countries where there is a supposedly large market for a book about this case, the UK and Portugal.  As we have seen with Amaral's book the long, litigious arm of the McCanns certainly extends to there. America, while a feasible location for publication, don't seem particularly interested in the case, a factor I'm sure the authors are aware of.

And in answer to your question what is inconceivable to me is that two intelligent and well respected journalists could thoroughly research this case and not come to the conclusion that the McCanns still have questions to answer about the disappearance of their daughter.

If there was no interest in the case of Madeleine McCann in America it would not have attracted the attention of the likes of Oprah and Vanity Fair magazine, and to a lesser extent those other American meeja whores that we are so familiar with. 

I notice you STILL duck my question.  But, to humour you - why not put together a list of questions you think Summers and Swan should have identified that the McCanns need to answer (not that they need to answer to anyone, least of all to "sceptics" like you!)

[Alfred R Jones]

No need Alfred. The buying public have voted with their wallets.

It's only you and your ilk still trying to pretend this book is anything other than a badly researched, litigation-averse, disingenuous cut and paste job.

Can you give us some examples of how the book is badly-researched?  So, a list of all the glaring errors you have identified as a result of this poor research, plus a list of all the disingenuous misinformation, in your own time please. 

[Wonderfulspam]

Can you give us some examples of how the book is badly-researched?  So, a list of all the glaring errors you have identified as a result of this poor research, plus a list of all the disingenuous misinformation, in your own time please.

Yeah, go on Alf, keep digging at Faith.

Deckchairs.

[Brietta]

Yes, it would be very interesting to read a concise, non-puerile rebuttal of the salient points in the Summers & Swan book, written by an intelligent "sceptic" (if that's not an oxymoron!) but I shan't be holding my breath for such a thing to materialize. 

NB: The pretendy scientist's piss-poor blog on the book is simply not worth serious attention.

I followed the link ... and if people are content to have their intelligence insulted by such an obvious deceit- that is entirely their own decision.
I cannot understand why people allow their opinions to be manipulated by someone telling them what to think.  Why not just buy the book ... read it ... and make up their own minds?

Why is it necessary that someone reads it for them ... then tells them what to think?  Extraordinary behaviour.

[faithlilly]

Oh the irony !!! 

[John]

One fact is beyond dispute (actually, two)

In the official files, Martin Grime gives as his base, his home address in Oxford (naturally, I shan't produce the link, because to give Grime's home address on a public board would be wrong!)

Harrison gives the business address of the (now defunct) National Policing Improvement Agency.

Why is that?

We have just had a response to this question from the man himself and he states categorically that he was a police officer with South Yorkshire Police when he was deployed to Praia da Luz. He adds that this was with the full support of the then Chief Constable.

If Summers and Swan cannot even get the basics right what else have they got wrong?