25 June 2009

Quote of the Day - Looking back on the Madeleine Case

Paris Match – Did you notice anything strange during your stay in the hotel?

Gerry McCann – Absolutely not, we had a very relaxing week. We were in a group of friends, we did plenty of things together, and at such times we don't pay attention to what is happening around us. We didn't see anything suspicious that week.

PM – Do you feel any guilt for having left your children alone on the evening of 3rd May?

Kate McCann – Of course we feel ourselves to blame for being at the restaurant when she disappeared. That will always be there, but the person who broke in and who took Madeleine is the most blameworthy, I think.

GM – We have no doubt, she was targeted.

KM – If we'd had to ask ourselves 'Are they safe?', we would never have left them. We never thought there was a risk. We thought we were being trustworthy and responsible. I did not think of the possibility of anybody breaking in. You never expect someone to come into where you are staying and take your child from her bed. The only reason for our comings and goings, it was in case they woke up.

in Paris Match, 04 September 2007 [no online link]

*Gerry's blog, 04 September 2007, Day 124

Kate and I did our first interview for a French Publication today. Any interviews we do now, of which we only accept a small percentage of bids, focus on the issues that we have faced since Madeleine's abduction.(...)



45 comments:

  1. You never expect someone to come into where you are staying and take your child from her bed. The only reason for our comings and goings, it was in case they woke up.

    xxxxxxxx

    Two points...

    1) How do these holiday homes work? does a cleaner come in daily and change bed sheets like they do in an hotel. If so and the sheets were clean maddie did not go to bed that night this would account for DNA not being found on her pillowslip. Hence the trip to Rothley for maddies DNA...


    2. Quote..

    The only reason for our comings and goings, it was in case they woke up.


    But they had woken up ...madeleine had said to her mother the very same 'yet they still went out and left them. I have no idea if maddie said this or not but I know the reasoning behind it because Mrs fenn had complained about the children crying and Hot Lips Healy had to think of something quick to cover up the fact that they did no checks ....


    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  2. KM – If we'd had to ask ourselves 'Are they safe?', we would never have left them. We never thought there was a risk. We thought we were being trustworthy and responsible. I did not think of the possibility of anybody breaking in. You never expect someone to come into where you are staying and take your child from her bed. The only reason for our comings and goings, it was in case they woke up.
    -----------------------------------

    They chose to leave their 3 little children with no supervision night after night even when their eldest child asked where they were when she and her brother were crying! They left the flat unlocked so their eldest child could get out and go and find them if she woke up crying and wondering where they were again! All we hear in the Press/Media is if they had thought for a second it was unsafe they would never have done it. Seems from reading the extract below they did think about it and for more than a second!

    FIONA PAYNE
    http://the3arguidos.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=26850
    1485
    “I just want to cover a couple of points that you raised”.
    Reply
    “Yeah”.
    1485
    “Just going back to your meal, where you say that Kate spoke about, this is probably a little bit out of synch”.
    Reply
    “Yeah”.
    1485
    “But you said that Kate told you about Madeleine waking up?”
    Reply
    “Yeah”.
    1485
    “And you couldn’t remember, you didn’t, you weren’t sure whether it was the night before?”
    Reply
    “Yeah”.
    1485
    “Or, you know, the night before that?”
    Reply
    “Yeah”.
    1485
    “What were the circumstances regarding her telling you that?”
    Reply
    “She 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”.
    01.15.57
    1485
    “So she asked you what your thoughts were regarding locking?”
    Reply
    “Yeah”.
    1485
    “Did she say whether she had locked or?”
    Reply
    “No, that was the point, I think they said they’d left it, well she’d said she’d left it unlocked”.
    1485
    “Left the patio?”
    Reply
    “And she felt a bit nervous about it but Gerry, Gerry had sort of said ‘Oh it will be fine’, you know. But she was obviously, because it wasn’t something she was quite easy with, that’s the way it came across, you know, but, but Gerry said, you know, ‘It’ll be fine. It’ll be fine’. Because I don’t imagine she would have said anything otherwise if it hadn’t been on her mind. And the fact was she, she, you know, commented on it being really strange that, that Madeleine had said this about waking up and them not being there and she’d mentioned that in the context of that conversation”.
    1485
    “And can you remember exactly what she said that Madeleine had said?”
    Reply
    “Tut, just words such as, erm, ‘Sean and I woke up and we were crying mummy and where were you’”.


    WHAT IS 'trustworthy and responsible' ABOUT THE ABOVE??

    HOW ON EARTH CAN IT EVEN BE CONSIDERED AS WELL WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF RESPONSIBLE PARENTING??

    ReplyDelete
  3. - as per Processo at page 347, statement of a Lady who worked as the General Housekeeper [Governanta Geral] at the time in the Ocean Club

    She stated that the beds being installed in the apartment 5A for the children as well as the changes of bedsheets of the above mentioned children beds were made by service called Child Care, a service that was activated by Mark Warner travel agency. This service, Child Care, is composed of elements who are mainly British and who work in the Ocean Club tourist resort.

    The apartment keys were delivered to the McCanns by the same service.

    The lady also states that during their stay, the cleaning service, like to any other client, is performed on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, the garbish is disposed on Tuesdays and Thursdays, and on Saturday a more thorough cleaning of the apartment is done.

    Before the McCanns check in, the apartment 5A, was thoroughly cleaned by two OC staff cleaning ladies.

    She also states that the cleaning ladies prefer to clean the apartments where children sleep in the morning, the rest of the apartments is cleaned in the afternoon.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Gerry McCann should have gone to Specsavers!

    Didn't he see the motley crew of spotty/ugly/swarthy/menacing/dreadlocked/scruffy/angry* predators lurking around apartment 5a?!


    *Insert other "suspects" here - there have been so many, I can't remember them all!

    ReplyDelete
  5. So Mrs McCann didn't think it was a risk to leave her children alone in the apartment. She thought it was safe.

    When you go on holiday, anywhere, do you put your valuables (passports etc) in a safe or take them with you just in case someone were to break into your apartment/hotel room?

    or

    Do you leave them in the apartment sure in the knowledge that they will be safe? How can you be sure?

    Now tell me Mrs McCann thought it was safe to leave her three babies in an apartment, at night, alone and in the dark.

    Somehow Mrs McCann's statement doesn't make sense to me.

    She claims naivety in one of her interviews but it's hard to imagine that someone who was clearly used to traveling, and a GP to boot, would not know of the potential dangers to children from accidents let alone abduction.

    The thought of a child waking and you not being there would be reason enough to NOT leave your precious children alone. Knowing that Madeleine woke in the night at home, as witnessed by the star chart on the fridge, meant she know there was a possibility of Madeleine waking and wandering. Reason enough to stay home with them.

    I am afraid it's things like this that make you wonder about the whole charade. We can surely be forgiven for our skepticism can we not?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Good morning Joana can you fit this link somewhere , I see the Sun are telling more lies...Yeremis parents have never wanted anything to do with the mccanns. It seems Noddy and Big Ears are hot on the trail of Yeremis abductor and linking this case to madeleines.

    Here we go again....



    http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_14216.shtml



    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  7. Typically Spanish - Spain News : Canarias

    Parents of missing Yeremi Vargas accuse webpages of asking for money using the name of their missing child
    larger | smaller
    By h.b. - Dec 18, 2007 - 4:32 PM
    Missing Yeremi Vargas - Archive Photo EFE
    Missing Yeremi Vargas - Archive Photo EFE
    enlarge photo
    It's nine months since the seven year old boy went missing from Gran Canaria, and the parents have underlined the difference between how they see their case and that of the McCann family

    It’s nine months since seven year old Yeremi Vargas vanished when playing in the street outside his grandmother’s house in Vecindario on Gran Canaria.

    Now his parents have placed a denuncia before the Guardia Civil after discovering that there are webpages on the internet which have been using their son’s picture ‘to ask for money or make money in some way’. The family say they want to make it completely clear that such pages are doing so without their permission. ‘Anything that asks for money and uses data about the disappearance of Yeremi is a fraud’ they say.

    The parents, Ithaisa Suárez and Juan Francisco Vargas say they consider it to be ‘immoral’ that people are trying to sell or raise money on the disappearance of a child.

    The Guardia Civil say they are now investigating the allegations and the web pages to see if a crime has been committed.

    Yeremi’s mother has proved reticent to compare the case of Yeremi with that of Madeleine McCann –
    ‘Her parents have opted for another way, which is fine by us, but we are not looking for such (media) repercussion. They have invited us to go to England to take part in meetings with them and to record a programme, but we have refused. We consider it to be an unnecessary circus which would not bring anything positive in our search for Yeremi’.

    http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_14216.shtml

    ReplyDelete
  8. How have they got away with it.

    PORTUGAL you have made your justice system a laughing stock all over the world. And let a little innocent child down. Wake up go after this pair of evil liars. What is wrong with you.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Speaking of the blanket Kate and Amaral commented about, could it be that the PJ found some fibers(fibres?)
    on the floor, behind the sofa? And never told it?
    There are things that the police never tell.

    Ironside, you are great in observation.
    Keep analysing.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Perhaps there were fibers on Gerry's clothes and subsequentely on Maddie's pyjamas, when she was carried to nearby the church.
    Who knows her body left some in the Scenic.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Maybe the Mccanns thought about the fibres on their clothes, specially on Gerry's.
    Who knows they put a similar blanket on their bed and cried like arabs in front of the GNR.
    In case the PJ would find fibres on their clothes, they would have witnesses that it came from the similar blanket.
    That strange muslim prayers had a goal.
    Gerry had introduced them already , outside, in front of the Ocean Club administration, preparing the GNR to see them on their bed, later.
    Very strange way of suffering, specially for the cold Mccanns,British,unless it had to hide something.

    Joana, a kiss from my cat!

    ReplyDelete
  12. I know this has been said many times before, but...
    just imagine this scenario:
    The parents hired a baby-sitter to stay with the children while then dined, but the said sitter at some point decides to go out for a while, to smoke a fag or a bite to eat or a quick rendez-vous with a sweetheart...and when she comes back one child is missing!
    Or, the parents signed for the child-listening service(if there had been one available in O.Club), but despite this the child still vanishes!
    What do you think the parents would do? They would be taking the sitter or the Resort owners to court in a flash, they would be pointing the finger and shouting neglect from the roof-tops, claiming for punishment and justice, big compensation, etc.
    I have no doubts that the parents, the police and justice system, as well as "Joe Public" would consider the baby-sitter's actions as grosse neglect!
    Now, one must ask, why was it any different for the McCanns? Why, instead of straight-forward neglect, were their actions and choices considered to be "within the bounds of responsible parenting"? Are we all in the "Twilight zone" or something?What about their responsibility? Why were they able to escape charges on this, and, why, to this day we never heard a sincere and inequivocal statement from the McCanns regretting their actions and pleading with people not to leave children on their own EVER?! Why is it only the same wishy-washy response of only regretting not being there "at the moment she was taken",or, "us not being here at the moment increased the risk of it"???

    I wish that someone would have put the two scenarios above to the Mccanns and asked what they would have thought about the sitter's actions and what would they have done about it? I bet they would be singing a very different tune...

    ReplyDelete
  13. in Paris Match, 04 September 2007 [no online link]

    * Gerry's blog, 04 September 2007, Day 124

    *snip* "....Any interviews we do now, of which we only accept a small percentage of bids, focus on the issues that we have faced SINCE Madeleine's abduction..." [my upper-case]

    Gerry McCann's blog entry later on the same day as the Paris Match interview comes as no surprise. They were asked some awkward questions concerning the lead-up to Madeleine's disappearance and they obviously didn't want to risk questions like that again!

    I seem to remember him blogging a similar hasty reassessment after being asked THAT very awkward question by the fearless Sabina Mueller in Germany. If I recall correctly, he wrote in his blog straight after that 'those type' of interviews were no longer productive and they'd decided they were going to withdraw from the media spotlight!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Indeed, looking back, two considerations that bother me since the beginning:
    1- Be that a "sleepy town" in the Algarve or a poppy field in Afghanistan, I - and am sure 99.9% of the people in this world - would have used the FREE nanny service available at the O.Club; NO excuse to turn it down, except insanity or irresponsibility.
    2- From the start, I always though it was risky, at minimum, to invite a media circus into an "abduction" case, especially at that early stage; not only it is counterproductive to the investigation it self, it can easily prompt the "abductor" to hurt the child and worse... as a responsible, caring parent, would you take that risk?

    It’s never too much to repoast:

    "Yeremi’s mother has proved reticent to compare the case of Yeremi with that of Madeleine McCann –
    ‘Her parents have opted for another way, which is fine by us, but we are not looking for such (media) repercussion. They have invited us to go to England to take part in meetings with them and to record a programme, but we have refused. We consider it to be an unnecessary circus which would not bring anything positive in our search for Yeremi’.

    http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_14216.shtml

    ReplyDelete
  15. "PORTUGAL you have made your justice system a laughing stock all over the world. And let a little innocent child down. Wake up go after this pair of evil liars. What is wrong with you."

    I'm not one to praise the Portuguese justice system - and mind you, I'm Portuguese - but hold on - we may have some spineless politicians here but we are not alone in the "laughing stock bunch":
    - Why did you allow your media to be instrumented or at the very least, intimidated by two doctors and their army of lawyers?
    - Where in the world did you ever see a PR spokesman to the PM give up his job to work for a couple who left children on their own?
    - How come a simple documentary can be banned in the UK?
    - What strings are this between the Mccs and Gordon Brown?
    I could go on, but it's irrelevant - let's face it, we are in this together, made look bad by two doctors and their group of tapas friends... but let's see who laughs last... We ARE actually still doing something about it, so back off, Portugal has been insulted enough.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The blanket has to have some meaning as in Tanners first ever "story" we had' she saw a man with what may have been a child wrapped in a PINK blanket. Bundleman was born...so this hazy description became clearer as time went by. But yes I think the blanket plays a part..an important part if GA has chosen to mention it.

    BOD..in her article stated that the evening before they picked their sleeping daughter up from the creche wrapped in a blanket.


    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hello to Joana and all, just back from two weeks holiday, was hoping to come home to news of McCanns having been arrested for the murder of Madeleine, but no such luck YET.
    In the above article, they keep saying "break in" "breaking in", it has been proved there was no break-in.
    Jan

    ReplyDelete
  18. Gerry maintains he never thought there was a risk in leaving the children alone and yet in another interview he maintains they were being watched.

    If they thought they were being watched, why leave the children alone.

    Any normal parents would take the children with them and watch them like hawks.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Interesting, I was watching Maddie's bed and the couple's bed, on Amaral's documentary.
    Maddie's blue blanket is under a white blanket or sheet. When she gets up, you see only a little part of the blue one.
    The crying/praying/arab couple are on their blue blanket, you can see a large part of it.
    According to myself, they did it on purpose, for some reason.
    Probably they needed traces of the blanket on themselves, to innocent them of something or to hide something.
    I believe every second of Amaral's film is extremely important in this story.He is showing something we did no catch yet.
    How important could be that crying like a praying muslim? Not important at all for us but for the PJ, yeaah, another piece of the puzzel.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 'Gerry McCann – Absolutely not, we had a very relaxing week. We were in a group of friends, we did plenty of things together, and at such times we don't pay attention to what is happening around us. We didn't see anything suspicious that week.'

    ----

    Never a truer word was spoken!

    So, when this bunch get together they don't notice what is going on around them - self absorbed in other words.

    Didn't pay any attention either to the children who were around them -ignored their pleas/tears/crying, and locked them away in apartments out of sight!

    I thought the dark days of children being 'seen and not heard' were well and truly over - McCann's and Co. re-invented it- 'NOT SEEN AND NOT HEARD!'

    Isn't it odd though that this group of 9 adults with all the to-ing and fro-ing during that week, back and forth to the creche and the tennis courts etc, in and out of their apartments never noticed any of the VERY MANY strange looking persons who have since been accused of hanging around the McCann apartment, and have been made 'PERSONS OF INTEREST/POSSIBLE SUSPECTS?'

    These people are said to have been hanging around, strange scary looking people, unforgettable looking people, who stood and watched the McCann's apartment, shifty, acting strangely - yet NOT ONE of the McCann party saw anyone at all that looked suspicious or shifty?

    What are the odds of that being so - 9 adults going back and forth day and night, passing McCann apartment on their way to reception, and this club and that club/activity, to the tapas restaurant etc and never seeing any one of the many shifty looking persons?


    I wouldn't waste my money betting on it, that's for sure!

    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  21. Why doesn't anyone comment on the fact that the little girl's bed hadn't even been slept in.
    The photographs taken clearly show this.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "Kate McCann – Of course we feel ourselves to blame for being at the restaurant when she disappeared. That will always be there, but the person who broke in and who took Madeleine is the most blameworthy, I think."

    These poor imitations of parents, these scambags still say that the only danger to the children left on their own is an abductor.
    The fact that they could drown in the bath tub, fall over and hurt themselves, unable to escape in the event of a fire, swallow something and choke, wake up alone and panic etc etc etc does not count.
    And the most amazing of all is that there are a few gullible idiots out there that still support them.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Of course you could look at it in another light if they had not left the children alone night after night and something happened to maddie in the apartment which I believe is the case. How on earth would they have explained the "abduction".

    ReplyDelete
  24. Can someone correct me here if I am wrong. I thought I read that Susan Hubbards daughter played madeleine in the mccanns third rate movie and that the child was afraid by the "abduction" scene.
    She had to be calmed down before they could continue filming. Therefore if this is true and this child who is the same age as maddie screamed when picked up and carried off by a stranger why did maddie not do the same. Mccanns mother said she would have screamed the place down or she was drugged...Both sightings Tanners and Smiths see a very still child.


    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  25. Yes anon it is clear the childs bed has not been slept in, also no DNA found on the pillowslip backs up this fact.


    This also fascinates me the dogs marking under the window.


    9.49 to 10pm: The cadaver dog "marks" an area of the garden immediately below the window.


    What could have been there for the dog to mark this area outside of the apartment...something quickly hidden there when Jez comes to pass and collected later maybe ?3


    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  26. Yes, the little girl's bed had no been slept in, we know.
    That very last scene of Amaral's documentary does not correspond to what the PJ know.
    Amaral could impossibly show us that the child did not die at 9.05 pm but much before.
    He was careful, giving the Mccanns the chance to say she died of an accident.
    But we all know she did not die at 9.05 pm, otherwise there would not have been enough time for the cadaver scent.
    And no time enough to find a hiding place.

    ReplyDelete
  27. "I did not think of the possibility of anybody breaking in. You never expect someone to come into where you are staying and take your child from her bed."

    You are right Kate, this is why the abduction theory was so fantasist.
    Abductors choose crowd places such as busy beachs, popular events or Malls or quite and empty streets, not a hotel room. Unless...the abductor know's in advance that he don't have any risk of being spoted by somebody because the child know him or was deeply sleeping due to any drug.
    Stop asking public donnations to hunt abductors ghosts, look inside your friends group... they are the only ones which fit an abductor perfil for that night, they know Madeleine and they know your rotines.

    ReplyDelete
  28. It seems that Jackson's doctor escaped from his responsibilities.
    He is not the only doctor doing this kind of things.
    British doctors do it too.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Okay. Anybody coming in to babysit someone's children would want to do a headcount before the parents left for the night. If there were 2 breathing children in 5A that night rather than 3, how on earth would Kate be able to run around yelling "They've taken her?" The poor babysitter would think she'd gone mad.

    One Less Witness, I say.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Association with Michael Jackson.
    He stopped breathing, probably caused by a medicine.
    There was a doctor near him who could not save him.
    Probably this doctor gave him that drug.
    And this time it went wrong.
    I thought of Kate checking on the twins, if they were still breathing.
    And Kate, Gerry and Payne are doctors.
    But Jackson choosed for drugs.
    He was an adult and he knew the risks.
    And at least somebody called for an ambulance.
    No eggman running around with Michael in his arms, in the sunny afternoon in California.
    No Jane Tanner around.
    Michael's death could mean painful memories for the Mccanns.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Have The Maccanns started the process to sue Mr Amerel.yet.They have stated in public on television they are going to do this.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Joana, if you have got some time left, could you please interview Amaral, for our sake?
    'We are deadly curious!

    ReplyDelete
  33. The Mccanns still did not start to sue Amaral, as far as I know.
    And they will not do it, of course.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Hi there Rachel, nice that you live in Liverpool.
    Maybe you could do Maddie a favor.
    To warn schools, hospitals,touristic offices, churchs about Amaral's documentary on youtube.
    Thank you!

    ReplyDelete
  35. Absolutely spot on Ironside, an abducted child who scream, shout or cry and not fall asleep on the abductors shoulders.
    Who do the McScams think they are fooling

    ReplyDelete
  36. I already have told people about the documetary. and passed Tony Bennets book around A lot of people in Liverpool do not believe the maccanns and are convinced Madelaine is dead. They do have support. but its very few.

    Will Mr Amerel still be allowed to sue them if they don't sue him please tell me he will.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Thank you, Rachel, also in Maddie's name.
    If I'm not mistaken, Kate comes from Liverpool and the family used to live there before G
    erry got a job in Rothley.
    Rachel, are there many American tv channels in England,like CNN,etc?
    I thought about the possibility of broadcasting Amaral's documentary, directly from the States to the UK, like CNN does.
    Good idea?
    Amaral has to find connections in order to manage it.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I am by no means the first to draw attention to a petition that has been lodged with the British Government, 10 Downing Street, to instigate a review of the handling of the Madeleine Mccann case by British official authorities.

    Therefore I am surprised to see today that only 429 have so far signed the petition. This is open to all British citizens and residents until the end of July.
    http/petitions.no10.gov.uk/Britpolicereview/

    Even if U.K. officials are continuing to investigate the case as many of us believe, still it can reinforce public opinion and hopefully urge a conclusion to this tragic charade.

    Surely, even pro-mccanns have an interest in the case being pursued and would therefore be willing to sign the petition - or would they?

    ReplyDelete
  39. Yes, Joana - good idea interview Amaral.

    It doesn't look like he's going to be invited by Oprah any time soon.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Speaking about the Mccann's documentary,
    the man described "as being a very ugly man",
    and the actor accepted this role.
    Nice for him!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Kate Maccann is from Liverpool her parents still live here. I dont know them, Liverpool is a big city.

    There as far as I know are not many American channels here. but then I do not have sky TV. Anyone with sky answers please.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Forensic checks on Maddie perv's van - The SUN- 27 Jun 2009

    “A VAN used by Maddie McCann suspect Raymond Hewlett will be "ripped apart" in a hunt for clues.
    Private detectives believe forensic checks could provide crucial evidence about the toddler's disappearance.
    A former detective with more than 20 years' experience said: "A single hair or a clothing fibre could provide the breakthrough everyone is so desperate for."”


    Disgusting news- How is that pair of Closeaux allowed to rip apart a Van from somebody which no any official police suspect. The criminal investigation go Mad in Europe, if governments start allowing private detectives to do whatever they have on their mind: The circus still on.
    From that news I focus my attention on that sentence: "A single hair or a clothing fibre could provide the breakthrough everyone is so desperate for."
    Mrs. Closeaux, I think the BREAKTROUGH that you are looking for was founded more then an year ago, in a Renault Scenic, by a big team of experts polices from UK and Portugal. But.... THE FSS DESTROYED THE SAMPLES OR HIDE THEM TO AVOID ANY OTHER LAB TO CHECK THEM AGAIN.
    I hope you don’t count with FSS to check whatever you find because they are very unprofessional and very incompetent.
    I’m also very surprised with that pair of Closeaux. They are more elastic then the Spider Man ( They travel a lot in a very few time), they are more clever then Sherlock Holmes and Watson ( they find a suspect in less then a minute just by a dreaming convenience) and they are Self Made Man, Experts on everything ( INVESTIGATION, ENQUIRYS , AND AT COLLECTING AND HANDOVER FORENSIC EVIDENCES). European Country’ s... please look at that pair and learn how to save public money: THEY ARE ONLY TWO AND THEY DUE EVERYTHING. In Portugal, last summer, it was a huge team with experts on every subject to hand and collect the samples, which the SUN criticised with a single word INCOMPETENCE, and know...surprising me... no questions made by that journalist, no doubts about how that samples are collected and who collect them. Thank you SUN fore your beautiful peace of news. I will be not surprised if next week you open the morning with a front page news printed in huge black, or red: “HIRED COPS FIND MADDIE TRACES ON PERVERT VAN”. Of-course you should omit that the FSS was in charged of the results and how big was the sample.

    WHAT IS ABSOLUTLY TRUE FOR ME is that they don’t have any other paedophile in the same condition as Hewlett, very ill and already convicted by other crimes on his pass. He is the perfect scapegoat then... Lets to insist, lets to torture him and his family, maybe they accept our deal, maybe we are lucky that time, maybe the story works, maybe.....after all the girl is dead and nothing can bring her to life again. Maybe the public get tired about the story, maybe they give-up and we enter the glory stage of fame to be the first pair of Closeaux to solve a crime which a huge team of experts from two Country’s did not solved.
    MAYBE...WE DON’T GIVE UP BECAUSE WE ARE ALL WAITING FOR THE BIG NEWS ABOUT AMARAL GOING TO COURT SUED BY THE MCCANN’S AND THE RE- OPENING CASE TO CLARIFY ALL THE INCONSISTENCES.
    Well done team SUN/CLOSEAUX.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I'm adding my name to the list of people who've said they would very much like to see Joana (and astro, if possible) interview Dr Gonçalo Amaral.

    Who better than Joana & astro to ask the questions that are on many of our minds!

    Obrigada.

    ReplyDelete
  44. And what about an interview with Clarence?
    Ask him why the scenes with "Kate", on their documentary, was not shown?
    Why(on the documentary) did they forget to put a better photo of the street in dark, vieuw to the apartment, the photo still with the used lamps in 2007?
    The dark photo comes short after one of the detective talks, at the beginning.
    Is he happy with his salary?

    ReplyDelete
  45. Yeah, Joana, we want Gonçalo!
    we want Gonçalo!
    we want Gonçalo!

    ReplyDelete